="http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=87812&highlight=Logic+Audio" target="_blank"> http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=87812&hi ghlight=Logic+Audio >> >>The overwhemingly want is a sleek plaing field that's not clunky, and more >>like Pro Tools and Nuendo. How about some of the slick right-mouse clicking >>features found in Nuendo? Not to mention all of it's menu driven editing..Logic >>audio is not in this leauge at all. When they should be. >> >>But, as long as Logic & DP Continue down their Midi first/Audio secondary<br
/> >>mind-set, then both will continue to lose market share. Both Apps new complete >>re-write from scratch. I thought I never say this but, Apple should scrap >>this versio of Logic 7.x and go build off Sountrack Pro with the addition >>of Final-Cut Pro, which would yield a Nuendo like app..That would be worth >>$900.00 bucks. >>Just to clarify. You ask what I don't like about Logic? The answers can >be >>found in SoundTrack Pro sleek modern, but powerful audio editing. If Apple >>decides to join Final cut and Sountrack together, and start phasing out >Logic(Vintage)7.x, >>then that along would increase market excitement ten-fold. >> >>But,to keep applying bandaids for an antequated ,but powerful midi-audio >>sequencer is ludacris at best. At it's core, it's a Midi sequencer first >>and a audio recorder second. That combination does not sit well today. Most >>of us want a serious, sleek audio engine first, with a good sequencer..That's >>all.. Yes, I know that there folks like you, and me, who have dedicated >Sequencing >>machines, b
ing the time I've been using it. >>> >>>Have you been following the updates over the last couple of years? First >> >>>they added a ton of good to great FX and instrument plugins and some new >> >>>features. Then they went back and did some UI cleanup, audio engine >>>remodeling and bug fixing. What exact additional features do you desire? >> >>>What, exactly, do you find missing? What part of the current audio track >> >>>editing or waveform editing don't you like? >>> >>>Regarding MSWindows - I understand that's an issue for some folks >>>(particularly those who didn't switch when Logic went OSX-only), but >>>really, this is not an issue for everyone. It's kinda late in the game > >>>to still be complaining about that, either switch to OSX (a very good >>>OS) or give up on Logic and know that just because you gave up doesn't > >>>mean it hasn't improved tremendously and people aren't using and liking >> >>>the current version - it's a much better program on OSX today than it >>>was on MSWindows four years ago, or however long it's been. For that >>>matter it's a much better program on OSX today than it was on MacOS 9. > >>>I'm no fan of either OS 9 or MSWindows for my own OS snob reasons, but > >>>OSX doesn't suck too badly (high compliment). >>> >>>At
/> >> >>>does it sound good. Yes to both. In fact it exceeds what I need. At this >> >>>point I really appreciate the power on my studio desktop. >>> >>>Again, there are other systems that also work well. A lot of folks like >> >>>Nuendo/Cubase, the new Cubase looks great. The new Digital Performer >>>also looks great, Etc. If my needs were different I'd still be using >>>PARIS - it does a lot, just falls short with MIDI and has a few other >>>limitations, but within those limitations it's a very usable system. >>> >>>Cheers, >>> -Jamie >>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com >>> >>> >>>LaMont wrote: >>>> Hey Jamie good points. I think most if not all former users wnat Logic >>Audio >>>> to survive. I certainly do, But, :) we want on our terms. we like apps >>that >>>> we run on both platforms. That way, should one platform oushines the >other, >>>> no problem, just get the CD/DVD out and load away:) >>>> >>>> Seriously, I don;t know is on the minds of Emagic and their love affair >>with >>>> that very dated interface, AND audio editing.. What Gives!!! If Apple >>can >>>> develope a great audio editor in Soundrack Pro, WHY NOT LOGIC!!.. I think >>>> that one feature item is what really keeping folks from forking over >the >>>> Bucks for a Mac, then logic audio. Do they (emagic) know how to implement >>>> an modern audioeditor?? OR , are so arrogant, that just continue to snub >>>> their noses to anybody who keeps suggesting that their interface looks >>like >>>> a dated science project. Even their fellow one time German Daw partner, >>Magix >>>> (Samplitude & Sequioa) have implemented mixer skins that are visually >>appealing.Giveing >>>> their apps a pro look. Looks count. Okay, I digress. It just sickens >me >>to >>>> know end as to why they (Apple-Emagic) won't take the bull (Digedesign) >>by >>>> the horns and bring out -once and for all.A Complete-Re-write of Logic >>Audio. >>>> New interface, New Audio engine, new audio editor..very polished..???? >>Is >>>> that too much to ask??? Sheeeshhhh.. >>>> They have Apogee, now, give us (hosessitting on the fence) a reason to >>fork >>>> over 900.00 bucks.. I's their call.. >>>> >>>> Meanwhile, Pre-orders of Cubase4 and Sonar 6 are on steroids. And with >>a >>>> new rumor of a new PLE & M-powered on the horizon, Apple, is starting >>to >>>> look like the minor leagues of Pro Audio, when they were expected to >become >>>> THE PRO-Tools Killer!!! >>>> What happend?? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >>>>> You're probably right that Logic lost some users when the program went >> >>>>> Mac-only. OTOH, some folks switched to OSX and learned to appreciate >>the >>>> >>>>> change.<br
Deej......out > > > > > > > > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f53e9@linux... > > Using Cubase SX as a standalone FX processor for Paris only: > > > > I set the latency in my RME control panel to 1024 so I could add send VST > FX > > to Paris auxes without having too much latency (predelay) in a reverb > while > > not stressing the Cubase VST engine to the point of getting dropouts > during > > processing when using my dualcore 4400 CPU on lots of tracks being > processed > > thru Paris insert
Increasing the buffers in SX results in more latency *per > > > plugin*.........and inversely, decreasing the buffers results in less. > For > > > my particular rig/CPU capabilities, 1024 seems to be the magic number > for > > > achieving a very simple means of latency compensation using Paris and > > UAD-1 > > > plugins without having to stream all tracks in a project from Cubase to > > > Paris in order to process them with VST plugins with zero latency in > > Paris. > > > Doing this is very time consuming and mixing on two DAWs, even with the > > > incredible flexibility, it just such a hassle sometimes that I just sit > > > there an look at it and don't want to go there sometimes. Another cool > > thing > > > is, so far, my testing shows that Drumagog is exhibiting the same > latency > > in > > > Cubase SX as the UAD-1 plugins. This *may* be indicitave of a *set > latency > > > increment* that may apply to all VST plugins. That may not be such a big > > > deal since Paris handles VST plugins pretty easliy, but I'm running Win > ME > > > on my Paris rig and some more recent VST plugins only run on XP. This > > gives > > > me a means of using these plugs in Paris with a known (and simple) > latency > > > increment to work with. > > > > > > I have processed a kick drum with Drumagog in the first Cubase insert, > the > > > Neve 1073 in the second one and the Fairchild in the third one and > sliding > > > the Paris track 3 x 50ms. No audible flamming when running a parallel > copy > > > of th
ff, but it's working with no audible latency. To compensate for the 512 sample buffer latency between Paris and Cubase SX, slide the Paris track to be compensated to the left using editor buttons 10ms and 1ms. then in the Native plugins secion, insert Sampleslide at 48 samples. Now you're sample accurate between Cubase and Paris on the track you want to process Take two tracks side by side (I'm using kicks). Now open up a UAD-1 plugin on the track in SX and enable the insert from Paris through Cubase SX. Highlight the track in Paris and slide it to the left by 50ms and increase the Sampleslide increment by 770 samples. You can create a series of presets using these calculations called 1 x plug, 2 x plugs, etc. and just open up the on you want to use in Sampleslide, remembering that your incremental nudge in Paris is 50ms. I use 50ms because it's easy to remember as opposed to something that would get me within 30 or so samples but require nudging a bunch of different ms buttons in the Paris editor. This is all I'm going to do tonight. I'll do some exact calculations later this week because I'm sure that there are certain sample latencies per UAD plugin in SX and if a rough estimate (say 33ms/1470 samples) is applied to a large number of plugs, the latency might drift off into the ms range and cause sloppy flamming/phasing. I'm very close here and I'm going to give Tom Freeman a call at UA this week and get the skinny on the latency differences between these plugins if I can so we can get anal retentive about this. I wish I could report some kind of major breakthrough. I thought I had it for a second there, but using this method, we can definitely do some things we can't do with UAD-1 plugs in Paris, like automate the plugins and use VST and outboard processors across Paris submixes, plus the incremental nudges are much smaller using this method of compensation so it may be a bit easier to use Paris fader automation while processing with UAD-1 plugs. Anyway.....I'll post more when I know more. Deej "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:4520641a$<a h
tton accessible to anyone >> age >>> 5 to 95. >>> >>> Dedric >>> >>> On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont" >>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level of audio >>>> editing, >>>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks like >>>> Apple is heading there without them. >>>> >>>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading the >> Logic >>>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this true? >>>> >>>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2 >>>> _re >>>> storation >>> >> >Thanks DJ, Let me know how it goes. Where did you get the Mobo? I'd like to get one If I can. respect Nappy "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: >Nappy, > >Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to get Paris >to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that someone >here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris. >Deej > >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux... >> >> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support Dual >core >> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual core >> cpu's >> that may run with PARIS? >> >> respect >> Nappy > >?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????? You're kidding right?? "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: >If you've been fllowing my torturous Xperamentin thread........it looks like >all of my grief about the latency compensation issues with nudging/slipping >Paris tracks may be solved by using the UAD-1 Delaycomp in "Cubase" as the >first insert on the channel that is processing the Paris track. The first >UAD-1 compensation increment seems to cover the native latency, then >subsequent incremental adjustments cover the plugins. Just adjust it per >plugin and the track stays in phase. Also, Drumagog seems to have the exact >same latency as a single UAD-1 plugin so on a kick, I can just insert the >UAD-1 delaycomp, adjust it to compensate for two UAD-1 plugins (one for >buffer latency, the other for Drumagog), insert Drumagog in the next slot >and the kick track locks to the rest of the drum tracks that aren't being >processed. >Now Paris automation can be used without having to worry about the track >being nudged and the plugin automation features can be used. > >This is too easy......there's gotta be a catch. > >;o) > > >DJ, not to prey ino your $$financials, but, since 1998 or 99, I know that you;re inversted some serious dough into your studio gear. Are you really saying that 7k or 8k is out of your $$range?? "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: >Hi La Mont. I appreciate your post......really.....and I'm not really a PT >hater per se. I think it sounds very good. I just cannot financially justify >it and I do my experimentation on my own time. It's really not slowing thing >down as far as billable hours are concerned......and it interests me. > >I've got a scenario working here wherein I can apply VST reverbs/external >processors in Cubase SX to individual Paris channels channels on any Paris >submix and return them via an aux on any Paris submix I want. This Paris aux >will function globally so applying an external hardware reverb is no longer >tied to a single Paris submix.......basically I have defeated the submix >limitation for auxes in Paris now whether using Cubase SX as a standalone >processor for inserts and auxes (this involves some minor manual latency >compensation and I'm getting this sussed right now) or using it as a >playback engine into Paris in which case Cubase handles the latency on it's >own. > >I'll post up the routing scenario for the auxes in a little while. > >Cheers, >Deej > >"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451ffd48$1@linux... >> >> Hey DJ, I know you're just experimenting. But, this law called the Law of >> Diminishing Returns". :) >> >> How much has all of your testing cost you in time which is $$$$$ >> ??? >> After a while, you have to just conceed and go with a proven solution that >> works. >> I have suggested to you that a PTHD 2axcel would be great. he Axcel 2 has >> tons of DSP power and it stable and sounds great. >> And considering that you don't need a $$expensive workstaion to run it on, >> but of course, just like Paris, if you have he power, then it would >benifit >> you running native (RTAS) plugins. >> >> Lokk, I know this is a Pro-Tools bashing forum, but it really is a total >> working solutions, that works right.. >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: >> >Wellll......it gets even wierder and it appears to be an issue with >Cubase >> >SX. The latency of the individual plugins seems to change at random after >> >adding another one in a channel. Closing the project and re-opening it >puts >> >the latency back where it should go, sorta', but the more plugins you >add, >> >the less accurate the Paris fixed increments become so the Cubase fixed >> >increments appear to be shifting more drastically as more plugins are >> >added........at least at lower buffer settings. I sorta' halfway >expected >> >this and may go back to the larger and seemingly more stable 1024 buffer >> >settings. Chasing latency increments around like this is no better than >> just >> >using the UAD-1 cards in Paris and chasing Sampleslide around. >> > >> >Well........back to the lab. >> > >> >;o) >> > >> >"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f5c8e@linux... >> >> OK.........this is cool. It appears that by lowering my buffers in my >> RME >> >> control panel from 1024 to 512, the latency in increments in Paris can >> be >> >> adjusted in 25ms increments per plugin rather than 50ms. Makes sense, >> but >> >I >> >> sometimes don't expect things to make sense with Paris and it's screwy >> >> millisecond increments so this is a welcome revelation. I'm just using<br /
> >> my >> >> ears at this point, not doing any actual bounces in order to achieve >> >*exact* >> >> sample accuracy between tracks, but if I'm close enough that I don't >hear >> >> any flamming/phasing, then I'm happy so far. I'm going to have to try >> this >> >> on a project with heavy track count to see if things start sounding >sloppy >> >> though. My 4400 x 2 dual core is handling these chores nicely in Cubase >> at >> >> 512ms latency. That seems to be the break point on my system. I'll be >> >> getting my head around exactly how I want to configure Cubase sends >with >> >> Paris auxes in this particular working scenario tomorrow. >> >> >> >> Deej >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f53e9@linux... >> >> > Using Cubase SX as a standalone FX processor for Paris only: >> >> > >> >> > I set the latency in my RME control panel to 1024 so I could add send >> >VST >> >> FX >> >> > to Paris auxes without having too much latency (predelay) in a reverb >> >> while >> >> > not stressing the Cubase VST engine to the point of getting dropouts >> >> during >> >> > processing when using my dualcore 4400 CPU on lots of tracks being >> >> processed >> >> > thru Paris inserts. >> >> > >> >> > InCubase SX, create a mono input and output bus >> >> > Add a mono track and assign this bus to the input and output >> >> > Patch a Paris ADAT I/O to an RME ADAT I/O >> >> > Add an audio track to a Paris channel and set up an external insert >> on >> >> this >> >> > track >> >> > Route the Paris ADAT I/O that is interfacing with the RME I/O to the >> >> inserts >> >> > on that channel in the virtual patchbay. >> >> > In Cubase SX, enable monitoring with FX on the audio channel you will >> be >> >> > using to process the Paris track >> >> > Insert a UAD-1 plugin on the Cubase audio channel and enable it for >> >> > processing. >> >> > Slide the Paris audio track back (to the left) by 50ms and hit play >> >> > The track will be looped through the Cubase audio channel and the >UAD-1 >> >> > processor without audible flamming/phasing >> >> > Add another UAD-1 plugin to the Cubase insert rack on this channel >and >> >> slide >> >> > the Paris track back another 50 ms >> >> > The Paris track should still play back without flamming/phasing and >> now >> >it >> >> > is being processed by two plugins. >> >> > >> >> > Basically, what I *think* I've found here is a way to compensate >Paris >> >> > tracks by a known (and small-50ms) increment *per UAD-1 plugin* >without >> >> > having to chase it around with Sampleslide while giving Cubase SX >enough >> >> > buffer to keep from choking down while processing audio in real time >> as >> >a >> >> > standalone processor. >> >> > >> >> > Increasing the buffers in SX results in more latency *per >> >> > plugin*.........and inversely, decreasing the buffers results in >less. >> >For >> >> > my particular rig/CPU capabilities, 1024 seems to be the magic number >> >for >> >> > achieving a very simple means of latency compensation using Paris and >> >> UAD-1 >> >> > plugins without having to stream all tracks in a project from Cubase >> to >> >> > Paris in order to process them with VST plugins with zero latency in >> >> Paris. >> >> > Doing this is very time consuming and mixing on two DAWs, even with >> the >> >> > incredible flexibility, it just such a hassle sometimes that I just >> sit >> >> > there an look at it and don't want to go there sometimes. Another >cool >> >> thing >> >> > is, so far, my testing shows that Drumagog is exhibiting the same >> >latency >> >> in >> >> > Cubase SX as the UAD-1 plugins. This *may* be indicitave of a *set >> >latency >> >> > increment* that may apply to all VST plugins. That may not be such a >> big >> >> > deal since Paris handles VST plugins pretty easliy, but I'm running >> Win >> >ME >> >> > on my Paris rig and some more recent VST plugins only run on XP. This >> >> gives >> >> > me a means of using these plugs in Paris with a known (and simple) >> >latency >> >> > increment to work with. >> >> > >> >> > I have processed a kick drum with Drumagog in the first Cubase >insert, >> >the >> >> > Neve 1073 in the second one and the Fairchild in the third one and >> >sliding >> >> > the Paris track 3 x 50ms. No audible flamming when running a parallel >> >copy >> >> > of the track unprocessed. >> >> > >> >> > Also, a very generous Parisite offered to loan me 3 x EDS cards and >> an >> >IF >> >> > 442 today and another smart Parisite may have just come up with a >> >solution >> >> > to getting multiple ADAT cards happening reliably with multiple MECs >> so >> >me >> >> > an Igor are gonna' be in the lab next weekend with the beakers >bubbling. >> >> > >> >> > ;o) >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >Yeah.......read my last post. Man, for a second I thought I'd pulled off a miracle. The thing that makes this kind of experimentiation really screwy is that at times Cubase will behave inconsistently, and inconsistently for the better. I have actually had Cubase SX latency compensation working on Paris tracks that were being streamed into Cubase. It was like it was seeing the incoming signal and applying a lookahead to the processing. then it would quit doing this and the latency would return, so all I can say is that interfacing two DAWs like this which would normally behave in predictable ways creates a scenario where either or both of them may behave in an unpredictable way. Send me your PT HD rig over here and I'll shut up. ;o) "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:4520816b$1@linux... > > ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? > ????????? > You're kidding right?? > > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >If you've been fllowing my torturous Xperamentin thread........it looks > like > >all of my grief about the latency compensation issues with nudging/slipping > >Paris tracks may be solved by using the UAD-1 Delaycomp in "Cubase" as the > >first insert on the channel that is processing the Paris track. The first > >UAD-1 compensation increment seems to cover the native latency, then > >subsequent incremental adjustments cover the plugins. Just adjust it per > >plugin and the track stays in phase. Also, Drumagog seems to have the exact > >same latency as a single UAD-1 plugin so on a kick, I can just insert the > >UAD-1 delaycomp, adjust it to compensate for two UAD-1 plugins (one for > >buffer latency, the other for Drumagog), insert Drumagog in the next slot > >and the kick track locks to the rest of the drum tracks that aren't being > >processed. > >Now Paris automation can be used without having to worry about the track > >being nudged and the plugin automation features can be used. > > > >This is too easy......there's gotta be a catch. > > > >;o) > > > > > > >I found it on EBay about 6 months ago. I've been looking for another one. they can be had, but not cheap. I saw a new on the other day advertized for $120.00. Do a google
search. T hey are out there. Deej "Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:452080d4$1@linux... > > Thanks DJ, > Let me know how it goes. > Where did you get the Mobo? I'd like to get one If I can. > > respect > Nappy > > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >Nappy, > > > >Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to get Paris > >to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that someone > >here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris. > >Deej > > > >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux... > >> > >> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support Dual > >core > >> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual core > >> cpu's > >> that may run with PARIS? > >> > >> respect > >> Nappy > > > > >It is right now. "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:45208299$1@linux... > > DJ, not to prey ino your $$financials, but, since 1998 or 99, I know that > you;re inversted some serious dough into your studio gear. Are you really > saying that 7k or 8k is out of your $$range?? > > > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >Hi La Mont. I appreciate your post......really.....and I'm not really a > PT > >hater per se. I think it sounds very good. I just cannot financially justify > >it and I do my experimentation on my own time. It's really not slowing thing > >down as far as billable hours are concerned......and it interests me. > > > >I've got a scenario working here wherein I can apply VST reverbs/external > >processors in Cubase SX to individual Paris channels channels on any Paris > >submix and return them via an aux on any Paris submix I want. This Paris > aux > >will function globally so applying an external hardware reverb is no longer > >tied to a single Paris submix.......basically I have defeated the submix > >limitation for auxes in Paris now whether using Cubase SX as a standalone > >processor for inserts and auxes (this involves some minor manual latency > >compensation and I'm getting this sussed right now) or using it as a > >playback engine into Paris in which case Cubase handles the latency on it's > >own. > > > >I'll post up the routing scenario for the auxes in a little while. > > > >Cheers, > >Deej > > > >"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451ffd48$1@linux... > >> > >> Hey DJ, I know you're just experimenting. But, this law called the Law > of > >> Diminishing Returns". :) > >> > >> How much has all of your testing cost you in time which is $$$$$ > >> ??? > >> After a while, you have to just conceed and go with a proven solution > that > >> works. > >> I have suggested to you that a PTHD 2axcel would be great. he Axcel 2 > has > >> tons of DSP power and it stable and sounds great. > >> And considering that you don't need a $$expensive workstaion to run it > on, > >> but of course, just like Paris, if you have he power, then it would > >benifit > >> you running native (RTAS) plugins. > >> > >> Lokk, I know this is a Pro-Tools bashing forum, but it really is a total > >> working solutions, that works right.. > >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >> >Wellll......it gets even wierder and it appears to be an issue with > >Cubase > >> >SX. The latency of the individual plugins seems to change at random after > >> >adding another one in a channel. Closing the project and re-opening it > >puts > >> >the latency back where it should go, sorta', but the more plugins you > >add, > >> >the less accurate the Paris fixed increments become so the Cubase fixed > >> >increments appear to be shifting more drastically as more plugins are > >> >added........at least at lower buffer settings. I sorta' halfway > >expected > >> >this and may go back to the larger and seemingly more stable 1024 buffer > >> >settings. Chasing latency increments around like this is no better than > >> just > >> >using the UAD-1 cards in Paris and chasing Sampleslide around. > >> > > >> >Well........back to the lab. > >> > > >> >;o) > >> > > >> >"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f5c8e@linux... > >> >> OK.........this is cool. It appears that by lowering my buffers in > my > >> RME > >> >> control panel from 1024 to 512, the latency in increments in Paris > can > >> be > >> >> adjusted in 25ms increments per plugin rather than 50ms. Makes sense, > >> but > >> >I > >> >> sometimes don't expect things to make sense with Paris and it's screwy > >> >> millisecond increments so this is a welcome revelation. I'm just using > >> my > >> >> ears at this point, not doing any actual bounces in order to achieve > >> >*exact* > >> >> sample accuracy between tracks, but if I'm close enough that I don't > >hear > >> >> any flamming/phasing, then I'm happy so far. I'm going to have to try > >> this > >> >> on a project with heavy track count to see if things start sounding > >sloppy > >> >> though. My 4400 x 2 dual core is handling these chores nicely in Cubase > >> at > >> >> 512ms latency. That seems to be the break point on my system. I'll > be > >> >> getting my head around exactly how I want to configure Cubase sends > >with > >> >> Paris auxes in this particular working scenario tomorrow. > >> >> > >> >> Deej > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f53e9@linux... > >> >> > Using Cubase SX as a standalone FX processor for Paris only: > >> >> > > >> >> > I set the latency in my RME control panel to 1024 so I could add > send > >> >VST > >> >> FX > >> >> > to Paris auxes without having too much latency (predelay) in a reverb > >> >> while > >> >> > not stressing the Cubase VST engine to the point of getting dropouts > >> >> during > >> >> > processing when using my dualcore 4400 CPU on lots of tracks being > >> >> processed > >> >> > thru Paris inserts. > >> >> > > >> >> > InCubase SX, create a mono input and output bus > >> >> > Add a mono track and assign this bus to the input and output > >> >> > Patch a Paris ADAT I/O to an RME ADAT I/O > >> >> > Add an audio track to a Paris channel and set up an external insert > >> on > >> >> this > >> >> > track > >> >> > Route the Paris ADAT I/O that is interfacing with the RME I/O to > the > >> >> inserts > >> >> > on that channel in the virtual patchbay. > >> >> > In Cubase SX, enable monitoring with FX on the audio channel you > will > >> be > >> >> > using to process the Paris track > >> >> > Insert a UAD-1 plugin on the Cubase audio channel and enable it for > >> >> > processing. > >> >> > Slide the Paris audio track back (to the left) by 50ms and hit play > >> >> > The track will be looped through the Cubase audio channel and the > >UAD-1 > >> >> > processor without audible flamming/phasing > >> >> > Add another UAD-1 plugin to the Cubase insert rack on this channel > >and > >> >> slide > >> >> > the Paris track back another 50 ms > >> >> > The Paris track should still play back without flamming/phasing and > >> now > >> >it > >> >> > is being processed by two plugins. > >> >> > > >> >> > Basically, what I *think* I've found here is a way to compensate > >Paris > >> >> > tracks by a known (and small-50ms) increment *per UAD-1 plugin* > >without > >> >> > having to chase it around with Sampleslide while giving Cubase SX > >enough > >> >> > buffer to keep from choking down while processing audio in real time > >> as > >> >a > >> >> > standalone processor. > >> >> > > >> >> > Increasi
ng the buffers in SX results in more latency *per > >> >> > plugin*.........and inversely, decreasing the buffers results in > >less. > >> >For > >> >> > my particular rig/CPU capabilities, 1024 seems to be the magic number > >> >for > >> >> > achieving a very simple means of latency compensation using Paris > and > >> >> UAD-1 > >> >> > plugins without having to stream all tracks in a project from Cubase > >> to > >> >> > Paris in order to process them with VST plugins with zero latency > in > >> >> Paris. > >> >> > Doing this is very time consuming and mixing on two DAWs, even with > >> the > >> >> > incredible flexibility, it just such a hassle sometimes that I just > >> sit > >> >> > there an look at it and don't want to go there sometimes. Another > >cool > >> >> thing > >> >> > is, so far, my testing shows that Drumagog is exhibiting the same > >> >latency > >> >> in > >> >> > Cubase SX as the UAD-1 plugins. This *may* be indicitave of a *set > >> >latency > >> >> > increment* that may apply to all VST plugins. That may not be such > a > >> big > >> >> > deal since Paris handles VST plugins pretty easliy, but I'm running > >> Win > >> >ME > >> >> > on my Paris rig and some more recent VST plugins only run on XP. > This > >> >> gives > >> >> > me a means of using these plugs in Paris with a known (and simple) > >> >latency > >> >> > increment to work with. > >> >> > > >> >> > I have processed a kick drum with Drumagog in the first Cubase > >insert, > >> >the > >> >> > Neve 1073 in the second one and the Fairchild in the third one and > >> >sliding > >> >> > the Paris track 3 x 50ms. No audible flamming when running a parallel > >> >copy > >> >> > of the track unprocessed. > >> >> > > >> >> > Also, a very generous Parisite offered to loan me 3 x EDS cards and > >> an > >> >IF > >> >> > 442 today and another smart Parisite may have just come up with a > >> >solution > >> >> > to getting multiple ADAT cards happening reliably with multiple MECs > >> so > >> >me > >> >> > an Igor are gonna' be in the lab next weekend with the beakers > >bubbling. > >> >> > > >> >> > ;o) > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >I got mine last month--I'm counting on you keeping us posted so I can build mine in yer footsteps... :) Got a 7 slot Mamga to go with it, but that's it so far... "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: >I found it on EBay about 6 months ago. I've been looking for another one. >they can be had, but not cheap. I saw a new on the other day advertized for >$120.00. Do a google search. T hey are out there. > >Deej > > >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:452080d4$1@linux... >> >> Thanks DJ, >> Let me know how it goes. >> Where did you get the Mobo? I'd like to get one If I can. >> >> respect >> Nappy >> >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: >> >Nappy, >> > >> >Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to get >Paris >> >to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that >someone >> >here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris. >> >Deej >> > >> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux... >> >> >> >> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support Dual >> >core >> >> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual >core >> >> cpu's >> >> that may run with PARIS? >> >> >> >> respect >> >> Nappy >> > >> > >> > >James my concerns are not for MAxc user, I could care less about aMac user, I do care about Windows users. However, Even if Logic Audio were $499.00 that sill could not convince a user like DJ to buy a Mac. Get the Point.. And, yes Nuendo is $500.00 but better than Logic 7.x with all it's virual instruments. Nuendo, is an all-around better Audio/mixng/Editing/Vst host DAW period. This is not just my opinion, but to most DAW users. Logic is losing the popularity constest. Just because hey have their faithfull user (erroding), does not mean that they are gaining market-share. Logic is dated, stale, stale to look at, and no engineer would want to cut(track a band) a session using it. he arrange page is aaudioediting nightmare.. Mark my words, Logic will be a throw-in app for Music Macs. My hope is for a mature Sountrack Pro/With Final cut Pro DAW from Apple. That product can compete with the Pro Tools, Nuendo's/SX, Samplitudes, Sequoia, and now even Sonar. "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >Apple is a fortune 50 company with billions of dollars behind it. I don't >think Apple or Logic are going to fail any time soon. Logic will, and has >improved over time. Apple could make more money if they had a PC version >again, but it doesn't much matter to Mac users and their are millions of >us. I think the biggest problem with Logic is the $999.00 price, if it were >$499.00, and continued to improve, a lot more people would be using it. > > >There is no perfect DAW, they all need work. Is Nuendo $1,500.00 better >than Logic? Before you answer that, maybe you should try the latest version >of Logic on a new Mac with Symphony. Then I think you would really know. > Logic 5.5 is a vary old version. It's all subjective, different strokes >for different fokes. Jamie and others here are examples of people that really >like Logic and are able to do serious work with Logic, so I don't think it's >dyeing. Logic and Apple are only going to get better with time. By the >way Logic and SoundTrack are supposed to work together, like Vegas and Acid. > >Hey, it's always good to have choices. > >James > >"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote: >> >>Hey Dedric, >>I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi they continue >>down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will die off >>if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry.. >> >>Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the game now. >>Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting most >>of their cardsinto IPODS. >> >>I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or more so >>Sony Vegas Pro. >> >> >>Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market that >>>will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio. They have >>>Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro as soon >>>as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the "pro" >>>moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting user. >>>;-) >>> >>>Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and >>>Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still). Even >>PT >>>isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually hate >>to >>>see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry as a whole. >>> >>>The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology... making >>>what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to anyone >>age >>>5 to 95. >>> >>>Dedric >>> >>>On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont" >>><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level of audio >>>> editing, >>>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks like >>>> Apple is heading there without them. >>>> >>>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading the >>Logic >>>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this true? >>>> >>>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2_re >>>> storation >>> >> >Since you are a fan, are you ever going to like this one--heck, it's fun just to pick it up... :) "Ed" <AskMe@email.com> wrote: >Thanks for the link... I am such a devoted Beatles fan, since the >sixties.... >I ordered this book... Hundred bucks, but the information could be >priceless... > > > >"Gary Flanigan" <gary_flangian@ce9.uscourts.gov> wrote in message >news:451beb1f$1@linux... >> >> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote: >>>Are you talking about the big Mark Lewisohn book with all the details of >> >>>each session? >> >> No, this is a completely new book, listing all the equipment, how it was >> used, etc. Really an incredible effort. The form factor of the book is >> the size of a box of 2" multitrack tape, and it weighs about 12 po
>> Nappy >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >The leaves are absolutely psychedelic right now between here and there. It's about as amazing as I've ever seen. Don't forget your camera. ;o) "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message news:452085be$1@linux... > > The word "roadtrip" is starting to come to mind... > > :) > > > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >It will certainly be cool if we can get dualliecores working with Paris. > >Those XP 4800's are pretty cheap these days. > > > >"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message > >news:452084a7$1@linux... > >> > >> I got mine last month--I'm counting on you keeping us posted so I can > >build > >> mine in yer footsteps... :) Got a 7 slot Mamga to go with it, but that's > >> it so far... > >> > >> > >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >> >I found it on EBay about 6 months ago. I've been looking for another > one. > >> >they can be had, but not cheap. I saw a new on the other day advertized > >> for > >> >$120.00. Do a google search. T hey are out there. > >> > > >> >Deej > >> > > >> > > >> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:452080d4$1@linux... > >> >> > >> >> Thanks DJ, > >> >> Let me know how it goes. > >> >> Where did you get the Mobo? I'd like to get one If I can. > >> >> > >> >> respect > >> >> Nappy > >> >> > >> >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >> >> >Nappy, > >> >> > > >> >> >Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to > get > >> >Paris > >> >> >to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that > >> >someone > >> >> >here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris. > >> >> >Deej > >> >> > > >> >> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux... > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support > >> Dual > >> >> >core > >> >> >> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual > >> >core > >> >> >> cpu's > >> >> >> that may run with PARIS? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> respect > >> >> >> Nappy > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2384628,00.html Anyone know the guy who did this? Wonder what he used. DCThis will be my first time building a PC so I'll be following in your footsteps. Keep me posted. I'm no longer afraid of the darkside. respect Nappy "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: >I found it on EBay about 6 months ago. I've been looking for another one. >they can be had, but not cheap. I saw a new on the other day advertized for >$120.00. Do a google search. T hey are out there. > >Deej > > >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:452080d4$1@linux... >> >> Thanks DJ, >> Let me know how it goes. >> Where did you get the Mobo? I'd like to get one If I can. >> >> respect >> Nappy >> >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: >> >Nappy, >> > >> >Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to get >Paris >> >to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that >someone >> >here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris. >> >Deej >> > >> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux... >> >> >> >> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support Dual >> >core >> >> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual >core >> >> cpu's >> >> that may run with PARIS? >> >> >> >> respect >> >> Nappy >> > >> > >> > >No problem Nappy. We'll get you there, once we figure out where "there" is. ;O) "Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45209917$1@linux... > > This will be my first time building a PC so I'll be following in your footsteps. > Keep me posted. I'm no longer afraid of the darkside. > > respect > Nappy > > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >I found it on EBay about 6 months ago. I've been looking for another one. > >they can be had, but not cheap. I saw a new on the other day advertized > for > >$120.00. Do a google search. T hey are out there. > > > >Deej > > > > > >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:452080d4$1@linux... > >> > >> Thanks DJ, > >> Let me know how it goes. > >> Where did you get the Mobo? I'd like to get one If I can. > >> > >> respect > >> Nappy > >> > >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >> >Nappy, > >> > > >> >Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to get > >Paris > >> >to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that > >someone > >> >here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris. > >> >Deej > >> > > >> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux... > >> >> > >> >> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support > Dual > >> >core > >> >> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual > >core > >> >> cpu's > >> >> that may run with PARIS? > >> >> > >> >> respect > >> >> Nappy > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for the UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and yet others are being processed with outboard gear. Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and everything sounds appropriately PHAT!!! I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying them into Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris. Just a matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and there. Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is very handy. I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very well. On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral. G'nite all. ;o)Hey Dedric! I have older versions of Logic, but I'm not running Logic at this time. I have kept up with, to some degree, the development of logic. I've been reading the Logic NG for some time, and a lot of the bugs have been fixed. There was a lot of mad Logic users for a while, especially when they started to make changes to the interface. Some people liked it the way it was, hummmmm! I've just been reading about Logic and Symphony. It looks like a killer combination, but time will tell. From what I gather, the drivers are working well. Obviously the latency thing is a plus if it all turns out to be true. I think Logic is still a serious contender for DAW software. Logic is still a good option for many, with it's PT and new third party hardware options, such as DSP cards. It took apple time to get the right people in place for the internal Logic team, some people came from Opcode. I think Logic will now improve. My point was it's not fair to pick a part Logic and Macs when your reference is a 3 to 4 year old version of Logic and an 8 year old Mac. That's ridiculous! There has been a lot of improvements to Logic and Macs. I think the current state of the art, first hand experience and honesty would reveal a different conclusion. Logic and Macs are not dead, they are still prevalent in many studios. Logic will improve over time, as all DAWs do. I doubt Logic will ever be top dog, but so what. That position will be held by PT, and Steinberg second for a long time to come. In the end, the best DAW is a vary subjective matter. To each his own. There is a lot of software out there to choose from, I'm glad we have choices, other wise we'd all sound the same. Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!! James Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >Hey James - are you using Logic with Symphony? How do you like Symphony - >thoughts? Seems like a great interface and a perfect complement to Logic, >but I know a few people were skeptical of Apogee's ability to deliver the >driver end, if there is such a concern with core audio. > >Dedric > >On 10/1/06 5:39 PM, in article 452051c3$1@linux, "James McCloskey" ><excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> Apple is a fortune 50 company with billions of dollars behind it. I don't >> think Apple or Logic are going to fail any time soon. Logic will, and has >> improved over time. Apple could make more money if they had a PC version >> again, but it doesn't much matter to Mac users and their are millions of >> us. I think the biggest problem with Logic is the $999.00 price, if it were >> $499.00, and continued to improve, a lot more people would be using it. >> >> >> There is no perfect DAW, they all need work. Is Nuendo $1,500.00 better >> than Logic? Before you answer that, maybe you should try the latest version >> of Logic on a new Mac with Symphony. Then I think you would really know. >> Logic 5.5 is a vary old version. It's all subjective, different strokes >> for different fokes. Jamie and ot
s whats happening. >> >> >>Chris >> >> >>Chas. Duncan wrote
exible)... >>> >>>Anyway -- ain't there some kind of battery lurking on that board >>>somewhere? Could that thing have bonked (what a surprise, right?)? >>> >>>Thing is -- this box just keeps on ticking, and mostly all I've done >>>with this over the last five years is record and mix and record and >>>mix etc. Would hate to junk it over some mino
soft managed to beat Apple to preemptive multitasking and >>> dynamic memory allocation. Apple stagnated with failed development of >>> OS9 replacement technology, had to transition to the PowerPC processor >>> family, and all that gave Microsoft an opening to kludge their way past >>> MacOS, albeit in a very wobbly way, with Wi95 - just add more bailing >>> wire and ignore the blue screen of death. >>> >>> Oh BTW, along the way Microsoft pushed out their partner IBM who ended >>> up with OS2, which began to dry on the vine. IBM is another big story >>> but I'll condense it into saying that they screwed things up
>>> Not content to compete on merits, Microsoft also sucked with flat out >>> illegal business practices, some of which they were finally tried and >>> convicted of, but they were saved from any real consequences for their >>> criminal activities by a change in government. >>> >>> Fairly disgusted with both Apple and Microsoft on several levels, >>> including inability to innovate and inability to transcend OS problems >>>from the past, plus unethical business practices that were not >>> particularly great for consumers, I worked on a NeXT computer for a >>> while and always kept an Amiga workhorse or two around. Later I also put >>> BeOS on my old Wi98 box, wow, much better! >>> >>> After spinning their wheels for years, Apple finally decided to buy >>> their way out of their predicament. Choosing be
;>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> I think it's a rumor. I do think, IF the day comes that >>>>>> Microsoft drops >>>>> MS >>>>>> Office for the Mac it will happen but not right away. My bet is >>>>>> Apple >>>> has >>>>>> a version of OSX and some kind of open Office project that will >>>>>> run on >>>> a >>>>>> PC in their labs that Microsoft is well a where of. It's a cold >>>>>> war approach. It keeps everybody playing nice. (Where is >>>>>> Claris/Apple works?) >>>>>> >>>>>> Apple didn't jump to Intel on a whim, or over night, it was a >>>>>> five year >>>>> process. >>>>>> It was calculated, it was planned. It was a contingency plan, >>>>>> Apple got screwed around by Motorola for years. I sold StarMax >>>>>> systems back in the day, and I spoke to the top brass about >>>>>> OEMing the left over MOBOs. They told me that they were going to >>>>>> get even with Apple, they were mad as h
gt;>> running. That was the draw back of Mac OS back then, and Win 95 had >>>> that one advantage because of the dynamically allocated memory. >>>> >>>> Mac OS was sleeker, more elegant, easier to use back in the 90s and >>>> still is to day. That's why Microsoft keeps trying to copy Apple. >>>> >>>> May be it's all just a right brain, left brain thing. Or may be it's >>>> that Microsoft creates software that is inferior, has bugs, has lots >>>> of problems, and it keeps you IT guys working, and that's why you >>>> love MS and hate Apple. >>>> >>>> James >>>> >>>> &gt
the connector on the mobo with one I had off an old brd, spliced a used connector onto the pwr supply side, so far so good. Just thought I'd share my grief and fix with others. Rob > and looky looky what I found. Mmmmm.......Bar BQ!! "Robert Arsenault" <studiomanitou@gmail.com> wrote in message news:45250c0c@linux... > Everything is frozen solid, no mouse , keybrd, hard reset needed. Also, > Paris has been flaky for the past month or so, all kinds of digital pops, > I'm working, all of a sudden, graphic display on all 3 monitors goes to > gibberish, need to hard reset. Re-seated all cards,ram, IDE cables, cleaned > MEC /EDS connectors, re-imaged my OS drive. > Then I noticed during tonight's crash that the LEDs on the front of the 442 > were dimming in and out = bad pwr supply. So I decide to swap the pwr supply > and looky looky what I found. > > I have a long session booked for this evening so decide to try a fix. Ended > up replacing the connector on the mobo with one I had off an old brd, > spliced a used connector onto the pwr supply side, so far so good. > > Just thought I'd share my grief and fix with others. > Rob > > >What a bunch we are here! That explains it. DJ,I want you to know I've got a ton of respect for you,and I think what you're doing in your studio is very creative. It truly makes my head spin,and I think I'm a pretty smart guy. Keep your note on this whole process I may go your way in the end,who knows. I like to keep a open mind. Thanks for blazing t trail for us all! respect Nappy<
> I like to keep a open mind. Thanks for blazing t trail for us all! > > respect > Nappy > > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote: > >June 29 1950 here. > > > >;o) > > > >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:4524b796$1@linux... > >> > >> Martin, > >> We think alot alike,maybe it because we are about the same age;with in > >days! > >> I think? I was born 4 July 1956,you the 3rd of July if I remember > >correctly? > &
y > >> >> "DJ" <<a href=
rent MECs. This is likely due to the latency between > EDS > >> >>>cards > >> >>>> > > causing a trainwreck with the clocking. > >> >>>> > > This will not be an issue to those who are not wanting to have > >> >>>> > > plugin > >> >>>> > > automation in SX. As long as SX is not slaving to the Paris > >> >>>> > > timeline, > >> >>>> the > >> >>>> > > audio passes through the audio interface on Cubase and back to > >Paris > >> >>>> with > >> >>>> > no > >> >>>> > > problem. If, however, you want to automate plugin parameters, > you > >> >> will > >> >>>> > need > >> >>>> > > both machines timeline synced so that you can write automation > >data > >> >> to > >> >>>> > > Cubase SX. > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> > > I am hoping to solve this problem by sending Paris ADAT sync > to > >> a > >> >> JL > >> >>>> > Cooper > >> >>>> > > Datasync II unit which converts ADAT timecode to MTC and then > >> >>>> > > slaving > >> >>>> > Cubase > >> >>>> > > SX to incoming MTC form the Datasync II. > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> > > Thank goodness for yet another kludge. I thought I had finally > >> >>>succeeded > >> >>>> > in > >> >>>> > > accomplishing everything I started out to do and there was this > >> > >> >>>> > > sudden > >> >>>> > > realization that my life would have no further purpose. > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> > > ;o) > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >&
gt; > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >Nuendo and Cubase share the same audio engine.. "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >It looks cool. Control room features are nice, but the word is, i
t's the >same old Cubase audio engine, not the Nuendo audio engine: ( > > >Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>Thought some of you that use Cubase or Nuendo with Paris or on its' own >>might be interested in this if you haven't upgraded yet, etc. I took the >>Nuendo users' offer to get it for $199 (separate license/dongle) to run >on a >>VST System link slave PC, though I'm enjoying the new features enough it >has >>superceded Nuendo 3.2 temporarily on my main system. >> >>C4 adds drag and drop inserts (to and from any chan
nel, or the library). >>Very handy, and a much needed addition. There is an extensive >>library/preset capability to C4 to greatly speed up saving and loading >>presets for plugins, channels, VSTi's, mixers, etc. >> >>One of the biggest new and unsung features is the Media Bay (and Sound >>Frame, and Loop browser) which accesses all media on your system, catalogs >>it by type and allows you to search, filter, drag and drop relevant files >>into your project - there is of course a preview for audio files, in >>addition to the ability to preview in context (e.g. project plays back, >>audio file plays in time, time stretched to match the project tempo - cool >>for loops that are cut to measure boundaries, not as useful for free form >>vocal tracks, etc). Sound Frame and the Loop browser are just versions >of >>Media Bay with filters for audio and loops enabled, respectively. Not >>overly different, but perhaps saves a step over turning on
filters in Media >>Bay. >> >>The sequencer engine has been rewritten from what I understand. C4 feels >>more tightly integrated than Nuendo 3.2. It runs really well (not without >>some bugs still, of course). >> >>C4 adds VST3.0 support, and new built in VST3 plugins. The new plugins >with >>are actually very good - new EQs, compressors, expander, gate, chorus, >>delays, etc. They will operate in mono, stereo or multichannel depending >on >>the channel format they are inserted on (the delays and chorus are not >>multichannel unfortunately). Btw, a 5.1 instance of the multiband comp >eats >>up a lot of cpu power. The new VSTi's are also very good - Halion One is >a >>rompler based on the Motif to some degree - no editing, but has quite a >few >>useful presets. The other VSTi's are quite nice and creative and stand >up >>well along side the Raptures and Absynths of the soft synth world (albeit >>not as versatile as either of these). >> >>C4 adds the Control Room that is already in Nuendo 3.2 - a great feature >for >>mixerless setups, esp. with key commands for switching between speaker >>configs (multichannel, stereo, mono, etc), 4 different monitor outputs, >dim, >>talkback, monitor source selects, studio configs for headphone mixes, etc. >> >>Instrument tracks are a quick way to add a VSTi with a track directly in >the >>project window (doesn't use the VSTi rack). The only downside is only a >>single stereo out is used. The VSTi rack still supports full multi-output >>VSTi's, but adds a dropdown list on a button next to each insert to select >>which outputs are enabled - easing the clutter of VSTi outputs in the mixer. >> >>That's enough for now. fwiw... >> >>Dedric >> >> >WOW. You juiced it right off the motherboard !LaMont
>>> >>>It looks cool. Control room features are nice, but the word is, it's the >>>same old Cubase audio engine, not the Nuendo audio engine: ( >>> >>> >>>Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>Thought some of you that use Cubase or Nuendo with Paris or on its' own >>>>might be interested in this if you haven't upgraded yet, etc. I took >the >>>>Nuendo users' offer to get it for $199 (separate license/dongle) to run >>>on a >>>>VST System link slave PC, though I'm enjoying the new features enough >it >>>has >>>>superceded Nuendo 3.2 temporarily on my main system. >>>> >>>>C4 adds drag and drop inserts (to and from any channel, or the library). >>>>Very handy, and a much needed addition. There is an extensive >>>>library/preset capability to C4 to greatly speed up saving and loading >>>>presets for plugins, channels, VSTi's, mixers, etc. >>>> >>>>One of the biggest new and unsung features is the Media Bay (and Sound >>>>Frame, and Loop browser) which accesses all media on your system, catalogs >>>>it by type an
d allows you to search, filter, drag and drop relevant files >>>>into your project - there is of course a preview for audio files, in >>>>addition to the ability to preview in context (e.g. project plays back, >>>>audio file plays in time, time stretched to match the project tempo - >cool >>>>for loops that are cut to measure boundaries, not as useful for free form >>>>vocal tracks, etc). Sound Frame and the Loop browser are just versions >>>of >>>>Media Bay with filters for audio and loops enabled, respectively. Not >>>>overly different, but perhaps saves a step over turning on filters in >Media >>>>Bay. >>>> >>>>The sequencer engine has been rewritten from what I understand. C4 feels >>>>more tightly integrated than Nuendo 3.2. It runs really well (not without >>>>some bugs still, of course). >>>> >>>>C4 adds VST3.0 support, and new built in VST3 plugins. The new plugins >>>with >>>>are actually very good - new EQs, compressors, expander, gate, chorus, >>>>delays, etc. They will operate in mono, stereo or multichannel depending >>>on >>>>the channel format they are inserted on (the delays and chorus are not >>>>multichannel unfortunately). Btw, a 5.1 instance of the multiband comp >>>eats >>>>up a lot of cpu power. The new VSTi's are also very good - Halion One >>is >>>a >>>>rompler based on the Motif to some degree - no editing, but has quite >a >>>few >>>>useful presets. The other VSTi's are quite nice and creative and stand >>>up >>>>well along side the Raptures and Absynths of the soft synth world (albeit >>>>not as versatile as either of these). >>>> >>>>C4 adds the Control Room that is already in Nuendo 3.2 - a great feature >>>for >>>>mixerless setups, esp. with key commands for switching between speaker >>>>configs (multichannel, stereo, mono, etc), 4 different monitor outputs, >>>dim, >>>>talkback, monitor source selects, studio configs for headphone mixes, >etc. >>>> >>>>Instrument tracks are a quick way to add a VSTi with a track directly >in >>>the >>>>project window (doesn't use the VSTi rack). The only downside is only >>a >>>>single stereo out is used. The VSTi rack still supports full multi-output >>>>VSTi's, but adds a dropdown list on a button next to each insert to select >>>>which outputs are enabled - easing the clutter of VSTi outputs in the >mixer. >>>> >>>>That's enough for now. fwiw... >>>> >>>>Dedric >>>> >>>> >>> >> >are we talking bit rate or sample rate? i no longer
ank">studiomanitou@gmail.com> wrote: >That raises a question that you might be able to answer for me Mark. Is >there a way to keep my Paris box hooked up to my home network for easy file >transfers but not have it hooked up to the web at all? I'm kinda green when >it comes to networking...!! > >Rob A > > >"Mark McDermott" <mark@stateofwail.com> wrote in message >news:4524273d$1@linux... >> >> Ed, >> >> The Vista OS completely changes the manner in which applications run on >> the >> operating system (in a protected space), breaking at least half of the >> apps >> that are out there today. The printing and scanning subsystems are totally >> new and most of the bi-directional communications that are available in >> these >> types of devices completely breaks Vista. >> >> However, PARIS 4.0 should run on Vista just fine! ;-) >> >> I suggest not even attempting as it will be a total waste of time. Stick >> with XP (or Mac OS 9.2) for PARIS. Disconnect the machine from the >> Internet >> and strip out all of the unnecessary Windows tasks. >> >> MHO, >> >> Mark >> >> "Ed" <AskMe@email.com> wrote: >>>With the multiple computers in my home network I decided to take the >>>splurge >> >>>and install the Vista RC1 on one of my computers that is just kinda >>>sitting >> >>>there... I gotta say, I like it. Been playing with it off and on for >>>about >> >>>2 weeks now... It does have quite a few software/driver issues still. >> From >>>what I hear, it's many times better than the last beta release. AND IT'S >> so >>>much secure than virii cancerous XP. Here's a nice little article about >> >>>Vista. >>> >>> http://news.com.com/Piecing+together+Windows+Vista/2009-1016 _3-6050105.html?tag=st.ref.goo >>> >>>Anyway, has anyone taken the time to try Vista RC1 with Paris? >>>I searched around this newsgroup and can't really find anyone commenting >> or >>>stating they tried. But my outlook data is limited and only goes back a >> few >>>months... I am positive I am going to upgrade to Vista when it's >>>released... at least on my notebooks... cause I really hate XP! Sure >>>would >> >>>be nice to get Paris working on a secure OS... anyone? >>> >>> >> > >Man!! Ty. I'm glad you made it back.. But, soemthing does not smell right. "Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote: > >I did some dates with Will D in South Africa (Johannesburg & Durban). It was >an amazing trip and though we were there to work, I was able to take in a >few sites....the home of Nelson Mandela in Soweto, The Apartheid Museum and >an animal reserve. > >The flight was 17 hours, and going there went without incident, but coming >home proved quite disturbing. Abou
/> [binary]<br
DxgcHCcjGKrxapY [binary]
naeuc1qz4+zyEf3T/KszTt39lLtD42nkYxUy3G [binary]