• Welcome to the General Discussion forum for UAD users!

    Please note that this forum is user-run, although we're thrilled to have so much contribution from Drew, Will, and other UA folks!

    Feel free to discuss both UAD and non-UAD related subjects!

    1) Please do not post technical issues here. Please use our UAD Support Forums instead.

    2) Please do not post complaints here. Use the Unrest Forum instead. They have no place in the the General Discussion forum.

    Threads posted in the wrong forum will be moved, so if you don't see your thread here anymore, please look in the correct forum.

    Lastly, please be respectful.

Bounce to Disk with plug-ins

George Axon

New Member
Does anyone know if there is an advantage to doing bounce to disk in real time or off-line while using UAD plugs? I'm using Logic 7.1

George
 

gcarbon

Member
George,

I tend to get random pops and such when bouncing in 7.1, so I do it in real time. Apparently UAD has fixed this for the release of 3.9 (coming soon).


Gene
 
Hi George,

In general (unfortunately) there is a hearable difference between
offline and realtime bouncing.
So, in any case, unless you're really in a hurry you should
choose \"realtime\" in favour of a better sound.
 

gcarbon

Member
Sebastion1,

Can you back this up or this just opinion? I've read coutless threads on OSX Audio's forum as well as Apple's own Logic Pro/Express forum that state otherwise.
A lot of the threads included UAD and Powercore as a topic. Many well know and respected engineers and Apple Technicians explained that:
(the gist)
One of the primary differences between real time and off line bounce is the fact the during off line bounce, Logic \"let's go\" of all it's drivers (midi+audio)and let's your computer do what it does best....calculate 1's and 0's. Real time bounce is just like a usual running session, so it uses everything that Logic normally needs to operate. That being the case, Logic has a higher chance of something going \"wrong\" while doing a real time bounce than an off line bounce because there are more variables in a real time bounce.

Unfortunately, I have had the opposite experience (hence my original post) and always do my final mix downs in real time. UAd states the 3.9 will solve my issue.

Now, when the forums brought up \"sound quality\" between the two, the debate always ended with (and I agree with this) \"digital is digital is digital...period\". If that doesn't mean anything to you...they went to on to say something to the effect of...\"when using the same plug in during a offline bounce and a real time bounce, the result will be the same since DSP plugs are based on algorhythms (1's and 0's) and not tubes which are dynamic and can range in sound more often than not.
Basically, because of the design of analog gear, there almost always will be a difference in sound quality because (again) there are many more variables that effect ananlog gear like individual circutry and tubes.

Keep in mind guys...I don't clain to be an expert in this. I just did some extensive research about this a while back and this is the info that I found. It could be WAY off base, but I really thought about all the points that were brought up in each thread and took into consideration who was posting and made my own decision.

Faithful to analog...but live in a digital world,
Gene
 

Ashermusic

Active Member
gcarbon said:
Sebastion1,

Can you back this up or this just opinion? I've read coutless threads on OSX Audio's forum as well as Apple's own Logic Pro/Express forum that state otherwise.
A lot of the threads included UAD and Powercore as a topic. Many well know and respected engineers and Apple Technicians explained that:
(the gist)
One of the primary differences between real time and off line bounce is the fact the during off line bounce, Logic "let's go" of all it's drivers (midi+audio)and let's your computer do what it does best....calculate 1's and 0's. Real time bounce is just like a usual running session, so it uses everything that Logic normally needs to operate. That being the case, Logic has a higher chance of something going "wrong" while doing a real time bounce than an off line bounce because there are more variables in a real time bounce.

Unfortunately, I have had the opposite experience (hence my original post) and always do my final mix downs in real time. UAd states the 3.9 will solve my issue.

Now, when the forums brought up "sound quality" between the two, the debate always ended with (and I agree with this) "digital is digital is digital...period". If that doesn't mean anything to you...they went to on to say something to the effect of..."when using the same plug in during a offline bounce and a real time bounce, the result will be the same since DSP plugs are based on algorhythms (1's and 0's) and not tubes which are dynamic and can range in sound more often than not.
Basically, because of the design of analog gear, there almost always will be a difference in sound quality because (again) there are many more variables that effect ananlog gear like individual circutry and tubes.

Keep in mind guys...I don't clain to be an expert in this. I just did some extensive research about this a while back and this is the info that I found. It could be WAY off base, but I really thought about all the points that were brought up in each thread and took into consideration who was posting and made my own decision.

Faithful to analog...but live in a digital world,
Gene
Good post, GCarbon.

I have done both for yeaars and I have to say that problem rate has been about the same. The advantage is that if there are anomalies in a realtime bounce you hear it as it happens so you can abort. With offline you cannot hear it until playback and of course you want to play it back to make sure it is fine so that kind of takes away the time saving advantage. So most of the time I do a realtime bounce.

However, in Logic 7.1 exporting "All Tracks to Audio", "Track to Audio", and "Region to Audio", which are really creating permanent Freeze Tracks are all working flawlessly here.
 

gcarbon

Member
ashermusic,

do you do a lot of automation? i thought \"track to audio\" did not do automation.

is that true?

gcarbon
 

Ashermusic

Active Member
gcarbon said:
ashermusic,

do you do a lot of automation? i thought "track to audio" did not do automation.

is that true?

gcarbon
Yes and yes.

I am old fashioned in my work flow. To me automation comes just before the mix.
I compose and arrange my virtual instrument parts along with any vocals or real players I may have. Then I convert everything to audio so I can mix audio tracks only which is a help as I can release all of the virtual instruments and some of the plug-ins I have used so I have lots of cpu power for the mix. Also audio tracks do not seem to lose as much vitality when their level is reduced as virtual instruments do. (Please let us not revisit that whole argument!)

Then I automate, add more of my wonderful UAD-1 plug-ins and mix away.
 
gcarbon,

I don't care about 0s and 1s, I've done some tests and
I could HEAR the difference with any kind of material right away.
Of course, the difference is small but nevertheless hearable,
similar to a Mix done \"in the box\" compared to external summing.

I thought this is a well known fact, other engineers I've talked to
experienced the same...
 

gcarbon

Member
are you really saying that \"in the box\" (or digital) summing vs. external (or analog) summing is similar to off line vs real time bounce?

that's insane, but hey....you're the master of your world. if you hear a difference...than you hear a difference, but calling it a \"well know fact\" is hardly the case. they wouldn't have offline bounce in every major music application if it was.


as i'm sure you've heard a million times. \"trust your ears\". if it sounds right...it is. if you hear a difference, then there is. i don't. and more posters concerning this issue don't hear a difference than do.

the majority is what i'm banking on.

gcarbon
 

Ashermusic

Active Member
sebastian1 said:
gcarbon,

I don't care about 0s and 1s, I've done some tests and
I could HEAR the difference with any kind of material right away.
Of course, the difference is small but nevertheless hearable,
similar to a Mix done "in the box" compared to external summing.

I thought this is a well known fact, other engineers I've talked to
experienced the same...
Sebastion, there is obviously indeed a difference between analog and in the box summing obviously as you are adding elctronics to the equation with all the attendant plusses and minuses of that. If I understand correctly that you are saying however that there is an audible difference sonically in an offline and realtime bounce in Logic then I am sorry even though you "don't care about 0s and 1s", waveforms are defined by math, and since they are not travelling through different signal paths I seriously doubt that you can identify which is which in a blind test. (I just tried again to make sure and I cannot.)

You are free of course to continue to believe that you can.
 

mersisblue

Active Member
sebastian1 said:
gcarbon,

I don't care about 0s and 1s, I've done some tests and
I could HEAR the difference with any kind of material right away.
Of course, the difference is small but nevertheless hearable,
similar to a Mix done "in the box" compared to external summing.

I thought this is a well known fact, other engineers I've talked to
experienced the same...
what he ment is the difference is similar '

and what he ment by not caring about 1's and 0's
he doesnt need to understand the process as long as he can hear the sonic difference between the 2 ...which he said he has and has made his choice
 

UAJames

Universal Audio
UA Official
Technically, if the audio engine was designed correctly, there should be no difference at all between a realtime/faster than realtime bounce. They do (or I guess, *should* do) the exact same thing. Rather than process x number of samples at a specific rate (realtime) it will process x number of samples as fast as it possibly can...it's the same processing function. However, as I am sure all of you know, CPUs running at full speed don't always run as reliably as they should and, especially with audio, if a process gets a wrong or unexpected value, a glitch/noise/etc can occur. Now, enter in the UAD-1 (or any similar DSP card for that matter) that has it's own set of calculations and data transfer to do and you have another variable in the equation. The UAD-1 driver will support faster than realtime rendering, however, it's still possible that if a transfer doesn't get where it needs to go right at the exact time or if something gets in the way, etc, etc, you can also get a glitch. This is one reason why in AMD-8131 machines this is more of a problem. So I always recommend just doing a realtime bounce, since you'll probably check the offline bounce for glitches anyway. So actually in that case, doing an offline bounce actually takes more time. ;) ... besides, I hear it sounds better too 8)
 

XYZ

Member
No need to trust your ears or argue for your opinion. Do a Real time, to a non-real time, invert the phase on one, sum them at zero gain, and wala. If you get all zeros, there is no difference [I ran this Test with Digital Performer--all zeros].

This is also one of the tests of a good DAW. I used this technique to test automatic delay compensation to see if it was sample accurate.
 
UAD Bundle Month
Top