no, it never seemed to do as well in terms of latency and crackles as the Fireface driver generally (mostly from experience in Reaper), which is why the only reason I use Asio 4 ALL is to test my ability to use multiple soundcards at once (in case my tracks ever get that complicated, lol). And that part of ASIO 4 ALL is really cool. But I like the way that I can get very low latency and no crackles or artifacts with the Fireface driver.
I want to be clear, my issue with Ableton is really only due to obsession with synthesizers that put out ridiculous harmonics. I'm pretty sure that there are very few guitar sounds that would be impacted.
Some guy in a company called Quik Quak (David J. Hoskins) made a little synth quite awhile ago, that a guy named Luftrum did some sounds for; I hadn't heard about it, and there's not been much development of it, but its fairly unique in its approach. Glass Viper is what its called, and it uses mixture of custom drawn waveforms that modulate via graphical control points.
"...
Glass Viper is a synthesizer with unique waveform shaping, which has a deep and
natural sense of movement. Going beyond analogue simulation, into a truly organic
sound, from simple old synths to grungy filthy basses, or delicate pianos to strange
unnatural film effects.
Instead of taking a sample or oscillator and applying just filters and FX techniques,
Glass Viper bends the actual shape of its waveforms through a series of moving
control points. Up to four of these swirling and changing sounds can be layered
together to create a huge range of instruments. Glass Viper allows you to really
shake things up with a deep, natural sense of movement.
..."
And since Luftrum doesn't mess around, I got a demo of that synth. That was what made me notice this issue. Simultaneous with this I had just gotten really into higher end EQ VSTs, and was filtering off all but the very top end of the sounds coming out of it.
It could be more of a routing issue than I'm aware of. I could be failing to reproduce the combination of fader settings. If someone wanted to experience this without synths, get the sound of a ride cymbal and route it to a few tracks, with some slight Enhancer type delays. The shimmer in my other DAWs is a little more 3D than in Ableton.
Hey brother, I think I have the answer for you.
I still feel the majority of it is hype, but there ARE DAW's that handle things differently. I actually beta test for a few DAW companies. When people say "this sounds different in this DAW than this one" there are a few things that come to mind.
Some DAW's literally have things going on behind the scenes that may alter things. If you are not totally watching what is going on, you will definitely hear a difference because there IS one. But it's *usually* not due to drivers or interface etc. I'll give you a few examples...
DAW sound differences: Some DAW software has eq, console emulation and other goodies running on their tracks. Sometimes they are disabled by default, other times enabled. Even though enabled and unaltered, the signal is passing through these things. So there is always a possibility that something can sound different and your ears aren't playing tricks on you.
Pan Laws: Some DAW software has pan law control. This is HUGE for altering sound because it raises or lowers volume based on the pans used. Cakewalk SONAR has this option and it has surprised many people. They record with one pan law setting, update to a new version of SONAR that has different pan laws, and they wonder why their material may sound different.
Remember, volume will always sell you. Even with plugin demonstrations. A good example here, just about all the UAD plugin demo's suck. Whoever they hired to do that stuff, they should hire me. I'll do one pass for free to show how good I can make their shit sound...then they owe me big time.
The problem with their current demo's? They always boost volume.
When volume is boosted, several new things come into play that your ears and brain are surprised about. One, is volume shock value. Two is when things are louder, you hear more frequencies. When people mix albums too low, they miss certain frequencies that are not as audible. This is why there are guidelines to mixing volumes.
The above said, if one DAW to another exercises some sort of built in limiting or some sort of plugin enabled etc, you are going to notice "something". So you're not totally going crazy.
The other thing, which I will never agree with anyone on no matter who they are.....there is a placebo effect as well as hype that many are buying into. High end interfaces usually maintain all sample rates. You may notice little things here and there....but nothing will stick out blatantly. In the case of some VSTi's...some people say they can hear differences when they are rendered, but can't hear anything when the synth is playing in real time. Craig Anderton, who has written many books and is also a good audio engineer, has said countless times that he can hear differences in VSTi modules once they are printed and rendered.
Me personally, I've never heard it. I've got some really good stuff. In my other studio we even have the legendary Apogee. I don't hear differences with the higher sample rates. You're going to hear it if you are not recording sonic instruments. Those recording jazz, orchestral or anything that isn't sonic are probably going to notice a difference. The more sonic stuff you record, the more you are actually degrading the sound.
You metal heads are probably not going to hear higher sample rate differences unless you have a cheaper interface or a DAW that is coloring the sound...or even an interface that is coloring the sound. Interfaces like the Octopre and others, have compression, limiting, eq possibilities....the list is endless. Guys like me that think as I do are just trying to tell you guys that may be hobby guys, don't sweat this stuff. If you are a pro and think these huge sample rates make a difference, run your business how you see fit.
I like to consider myself a serious musician and engineer. I got a pretty awesome client list and have worked with some killer people. I try not to name drop because...well, there's no reason to ever be a dick and try to win an argument that way. It doesn't matter anyway. Admin M@ summed it up perfectly. I actually just posted something nearly identical to his on a recording forum where people are so worried about stuff they shouldn't be worried about...they miss the obvious. That's a discussion for a different time.
ASIO4ALL: It was just a driver that was released to help Windows Vista assist in ASIO latency issues because there were so many audio issues with Vista when it first came out. I still use those drivers to this day on all my little test computers that run Realtek sound cards. I've never had a problem with ASIO4ALL using it on XP, Vista and Win 7. It just fools your cheap interface into thinking it is ASIO instead of MME.
Your running ASIO4ALL with Fireface is definitely not recommended, but I can understand why you did it. The rule of thumb is...any interface that has it's own ASIO driver, you should always run that. I've never seen a case where ASIO4ALL worked better than the actual driver for an interface. Now, if it was a faulty driver...there is a possibility. But you should always stick with the manufacturer driver for anything ASIO unless instructed to do otherwise.
Anyway, at the end of the day....some people will hear a difference in this stuff...some will not, and some will THINK they do based on spending obnoxious amounts of money...so they feel "I know it has to be different". Whatever works best is what you use. However, never be naive to the fact that it is WAY too easy to buy into the hype we have in this industry. Seriously...some of it is out of control and actually quite sad.
