Without any filtering the difference is already pretty obvious to me
1 Like
…too many simple reasons and pretty much all these individual subjective perceptions caused by momentary snapshops and feelings agains facts, as ess also mentions…
while in that comparison, u compare 44.1 k stereo, sometimes 16 bit, on the ot against 48 k mono, autonormalized, always 24 bit on the dt…and if u still really see any further need to compare them, turn off/x out ot’s insert fx slots first, cause even when turned to zero, they’re still on/in the signal chain…
not to mention that the master track function must also be off/clean and perceived loudness can fooltrap anybody, besides the fact that ot has quite some various crossingpoints where proper gainstaging could get lost along the way and that there are indeed two different converter equasions at work…
meanwhile i can assure u, in any realworld scenario and treated properly, u get out what u feed it with, on both of them…and also on the m:s…
nobody’s crazy or we all are, as u prefer…
just too many thoughts mixed and mangled with too many feelings…
instead of endless arguing loops, let’s better work with what we’ve got in front of us…
no time for doubts, time for fresh ideas…
1 Like
I must be living in a different reality 
…we all live in bubbles…and each has it’s very own rules of perception vs reality…
agree to dissagree respectfully, remains of the big lessons, we all still gotto learn how to get better with…
1 Like
If you know what you do, fucking converters or tiny difference in sound"quality" doesn’t matter imo
1 Like
Dead horse has been beaten so many times.
There are too many variables to make this sound quality assumption. Same samples being used ? No filtering or fx or anything etc etc. ? Same 100% exact volume when A/Bing ?
I could go on. So yeah what @reeloy says
2 Likes
You mention some very interesting things there. Reminds me of simulation theory and the double slit experiment (quantum mechanics).