ector units on the chips. So is there _any_ advantage to an app coded >>>>in 64 bits other than RAM access? Second, considering that only a handful >>>>of converters (in either direction) can even pas 20 bits of meaningful >>data, >>>>why on earth would I _want_ DSP to be done on words larger than 32 bit >>float? >>>> >>>>Maybe I'm missing something really really simple here, but I know, uh, >>a >>>>little bit about computers, and I just don't understand the hype. >>>> >>>>OK, one thing. The 64 bit kernel in Server 2003 deals with multiple cores/processors >>>>much more gracefully, but even then the developer of the DAW will have >>to >>>>be ready to take advantage of that. >>>> >>>>TCB >>>> >>>>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote: >>>>>Hi Lamont, >>>>> >>>>>The only thing preventing any 64 bit advancement at this point the 3rd >>> >>>>>party software and hardware manufacturers to write 64 bit driver and > >>>>>program support. The host applications need to come first. There is >>>>>nothing close to a fully 64 bit audio app on any platform. All the >>>>>plug-ins in Sonar are 32 bit and running in a shell to function in a >64 >>>> >>>>>bit. All with anywhere from 5 to 10% resource hit. The plug-ins do get >>> >>>>>the benefit of address a full 4 gigs but in most case are performing >no >>>> >>>>>better and in some cases far worse with this method. >>>>>Hardware developers right now do not have completely 64 bit coded >>>>>drivers. In most cases they played with them enough so that they would >>> >>>>>install and function in a 64 bit OS and thats about it. >>>>>ASIO is still 32 bit, VST is still 32 bit. There is supposedly 64 bit >> >>>>>available in the VST spec but not in ASIO AFAIK though no one is doing >>> >>>>>anything with it. >>>>> >>>>>All of the main host programs run on 64 bit OS es just fine. >>>>>32 bit apps like Cubendo, Reaper, Sonar, Samplitude all run great on > >>>>>Windows 64 bit pro and can address up to 4 gigs of ram. But runs no >>>>>better CPU performance wise than 32 bit XP. Windows 64 pro is basically >>>> >>>>>just a stripped down Server 2003 64. But its more than likely gonna >>>>>suffer a quiet death like Windows ME did. >>>>>All of these except Nuendo will install correctly in Vista 64. but with >>>> >>>>>the current bottle necks in Vista and the unfinished audio WaveRT driver >>>> >>>>>spec don't expect very good performance out of it anytime soon. >>>>> >>>>>Sonar 32 bit no better than the 64 bit version ina 64 bit OS. The >>>>>supposed benefit is you can use address beyond 4 gigs. Of course all >of >>>> >>>>>the VSTi in Sonar and all the
3rd party ones are 32 bit and they all > >>>>>still bottom out using Sonar's bit bridge at 4 gigs soooo. >>>>> >>>>>The blame for this lies with all the parties. MS for not getting >>>>>development resources out to companies faster. Companies for using that >>>> >>>>>as an excuse to be lazy in there development. >>>>> >>>>>Supposedly Steinyha are planning on Nuendo being 64 bit and finally >>>>>making it so it can handle 4 or more core properly. But who knows. >>>>>Every sense who ever in Germany decided to bail and cash in or whatever >>>> >>>>>and sold to Pinnacle they have been in Chaos. Just before that point > >>>>>they were the most innovative and revolutionary company in the native >> >>>>>audio software world and basically made the pro-audio sound card >>>>>business outside be what it is today. There is not a single audio >>>>>software that basically owes its very current existence to Steinberg > >>>>>innovations. But now who knows what their future is. Yamaha I think will >>>> >>>>>hold on to them as long as possible and keep em going. Steinberg need >>to >>>> >>>>>get back in focus soon before they loose too much more ground. I'm not >>> >>>>>sure who if anybody is actually steering the ship at this if anybody. >> >>>>>They need to get back their creative direction and fast. All the >>>>>copycats are circling around them like vultures at this point. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Chris >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>LaMont wrote: >>>>>> Thanks Thad.. So, if I have Server 2003 (64) that's a true 64 bit OS?? >>>>I do >>>>>> have a legit copy of Server 2003 (64 bit).. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Haven't we gone over this already? There's minimal advantage to running >>>>>> a >>>>>>> 64 bit OS for audio. The '64 bits' are integer bits, so the real advantages >>>>>>> are in the ability to address file space and RAM larger than a 32 >bit >>>>OS. >>>>>>> The floating point processing (all that matters for audio) has been >>>64 >>>>bits >>>>>>> or more (or less in parallel, which is usually where you get the real >>>>bump) >>>>>>> for years now. Some people report incremental improvements using the >>>>64 >>>>>> bit >>>>>>> version of XP but I'll bet you hash brownies to has browns that's >because >>>>>>> M$oft is trickling their Server 2003 tech into XP 64 so it has better >>>>memory >>>>>>> management. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you're interested, XP 64 and Vista 64 are pretty much 64 bit through >>>>>> and >>>>>>> through. I don't know about driver support, but at the OS level. Cakewalk >>>>>>> has a '64 bit audio engine' which since it's floating point can be >>used >>>>>> on >>>>>>> 32 bit versions of XP.<
br /> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bottom line, unless you want to run more than 3 GB of RAM I don't >think >>>>>> 64 >>>>>>> bit operating systems make much difference. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> TCB >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> I know apple has stated that they will be 64 OXS in October 07, when >>>>can >>>>>>> expect >>>>>>>> MS to give us a true 64 bit OS ..? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2) When acan we expect the current DAW's to recode in 64 bit , rather >>>>than >>>>>>>> 32 bit. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I read somewhere on Nuendo.com that that they (Steinberg) thinks >32 >>>>bit >>>>>>> is >>>>>>>> enough and that 64 bit is not needed. But, they are exploring the >>feasability >>>>>>>> of going 64 bit. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Meanwhile, the hardware market keeps advancing with newer faster >stuff. >>>>>>> most >>>>>>>> of us are already 64 bit compatible. Only waiting for an WIn os and >>>>64 >>>>>> bit >>>>>>>> DAW to take full advantage of our current workstations.. >>>>>>>> We kkep porrign money into a 32 bit system trying to make a 32 bit >>>OS >>>>faster, >>>>>>>> but we are only seeeing marginal returns. What gives?? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think it's time to put on the brakes and just let the Hardware, >>software >>>>>>>> companies come to an agreement . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm sitting on the fence from here on. I'm still looking into Digital >>>>mixers, >>>>>>>> but that's it.. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>Chris Ludwig >>>>> >>>>>ADK Pro Audio >>>>>(859) 635-5762 >>>>>www.adkproaudio.com >>>>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com >>>> >>> >> >"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote: > >But you can't _record_ that. You can if you go out of the Mytek (or whatever's) analog outs to tape or another digital machine's analog in's... if that 2nd machine is clocked to the Mytek (or whatever's) clock, then it could preceiveably result in a higher-quality 2-track file. >Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of >an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy >in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the worst) Oh, I'm not running down the RME stuff... I LOVE my Multifaces (Multifascia?). Are there better convertors? Apparently... though I don't know if a Mytek or Benchmark are among those. >and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark. So >what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with >infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same >file as the original. So why do it? To improve upon a convertor that may have a more jittery clock? I guess if he's going out of an RME's analog outs to 2-track tape, and he's hearing a difference with the Mytek's output, then that difference would be translated to tape. >Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter >is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter, >it can't any more than tape can have a head misaligned. What I said was that you can get jitter upon recording... that jitter you're stuck with - you can't get rid of it; and then you can also get additional jitter at playback.... if you're finding that using a different clock or set of convertors on playback improves things - that could be the reason it's doing so... you're eliminating or lessening the amount of playback jitter. >Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful, >will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better >will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME? I have no idea - frankly I'm surprised that someone's finding a better convertor set than RME stuff at any price point south of the super-ultra top-end gear. I'm just giving Dimi the benefit of the doubt for the sake of the current discussion. >I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly it >would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because >even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way on >other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row? The idea isn't that it's an "effect" that can be enhanced with cascading several of a given convertors, the idea is that it's (again, theoretically, assuming there IS an improvement that's being heard) kind of a sonic Windex that can remove grime in the form of artifacts created by jitter... using Windex (the non- sonic kind LOL) can only get a glass so clean, right? I mean if there's something embedded in the glass, Windex can't get that out, so if there's record-end jitter embedded in the source, you can't remove it, but playback-end jitter can be minimized or possibly even eliminated. >Will we get >incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth' with >each pass? Nope, you can only get the glass so clean... if there are newly- embedded jitter artifacts on a rendered file and you pass it through another stage, you can't get it any cleaner. We're not talking about rendering it more than once, we're talking about the one & only rendering of the final mix to a two- track file prior to mastering. Unless I'm misunderstanding something here. Neilwireline wrote: > The AM track is very VERY cool, as it by istelf is a very clear and powerful > SW compressor, but add to the flavor the tape emulator (which is as accurate > a tape emulation design as I've encounter yet...smokes anything offered for > digi or others...) Thanks. I use Samplitude v9 so I was curious. I often find am-track to be a little heavy handed or hard to control, so I go to the UAD-1 as a first choice. Or maybe it just seems to run out of headroom really fast? I should spend more time with it. What I can't figure out is how the old SPITFISH works much better than the new one in Samplitude! GrahamNeil thats nice post... So regarding mytek versus RME there is a big big difference. RME is good until you hear something better. My Lavry DA sounds fantastic ! So the most importanty conclusion if some other aggree here is that a very good da and ad clocked by the same jitter minimal clock can produce a BETTER sounding stereofile than just the rendered Paris or Cubase file. Do we agree here ? Cheers, Dimitrios "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote: > >"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote: >> >>But you can't _record_ that. > >You can if you go out of the Mytek (or whatever's) analog outs >to tape or another digital machine's analog in's... if that 2nd >machine is clocked to the Mytek (or whatever's) clock, then it >could preceiveably result in a higher-quality 2-track file. > >>Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of >>an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy >>in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the worst) > >Oh, I'm not running down the RME stuff... I LOVE my Multifaces >(Multifascia?). Are there better convertors? Apparently... >though I don't know if a Mytek or Benchmark are among those. > >>and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark. So >>what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with >>infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same >>file as the original. So why do it? > >To improve upon a convertor that may have a more jittery clock? >I guess if he's going out of an RME's analog outs to 2-track >tape, and he's hearing a difference with the Mytek's output, >then that difference would be translated to tape. > >>Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter >>is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter, >>it can't any more than tape can have a head misaligned. > >What I said was that you can get jitter upon recording... that >jitter you're stuck with - you can't get rid of it; and then you >can also get additional jitter at playback.... if you're finding >that using a different clock or set of convertors on playback >improves things - that could be the reason it's doing so... >you're eliminating or lessening the amount of playback jitter. > >>Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful, >>will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better >>will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME? > >I have no idea - frankly I'm surprised that someone's finding a >better convertor set than RME stuff at any price point south of >the super-ultra top-end gear. I'm just giving Dimi the benefit >of the doubt for the sake of the current discussion. > >>I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly it >>would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because >>even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way on >>other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row? > >The idea isn't that it's an "effect" that can be enhanced with >cascading several of a given convertors, the idea is that it's >(again, theoretically, assuming there IS an improvement that's >being heard) kind of a sonic Windex that can remove grime in the >form of artifacts created by jitter... using Windex (the non- >sonic kind LOL) can only get a glass so clean, right? I mean if >there's something embedded in the glass, Windex can't get that >out, so if there's record-end jitter embedded in the source, you >can't remove it, but playback-end jitter can be minimized or >possibly even eliminated. > > >>Will we get >>incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth' >with >>each pass? > >Nope, you can only get the glass so clean... if there are newly- >embedded jitter artifacts on a rendered file and you pass it >through another stage, you can't get it any cleaner. >We're not talking about rendering it more than once, we're >talking about the one & only rendering of the final mix to a two- >track file prior to mastering. > >Unless I'm misunderstanding something here. > > >NeilI'll agree with you if by saying: "a BETTER sounding stereofile than just the rendered Paris or Cubase file" you mean the actual final mix two-buss rendering or out-routed file AS IT'S BEING CREATED. IOW, you're in an active mixdown, going from your Multitrack files, through your 2-buss & either rendering it to disk, or routing the L&R out through your convertors into another device (tape, in your case) that will record the 2-track mixdown. If you're talking about an ALREADY-EXISTING 2-track mixdown that already has jitter embedded in it, then no, you're not going to be able to get rid of that. You could, in theory (by using a good or well-clocked convertor to play that back as opposed to a poorly-clocked convertor) eliminate any MORE jitter from entering the picture, but that's about it. Neil "Dimitrios" <musurgio@ote.......> wrote: > >Neil thats nice post... >So regarding mytek versus RME there is a big big difference. >RME is good until you hear something better. >My Lavry DA sounds fantastic ! >So the most importanty conclusion if some other aggree here is that a very >good da and ad clocked by the same jitter minimal clock can produce a BETTER >s
float? >>>>> >>>>>Maybe I'm missing something really really simple here, but I know, uh, >>>a >>>>>little bit about computers, and I just don't understand the hype. >>>>> >>>>>OK, one thing. The 64 bit kernel in Server 2003 deals with multiple cores/processors >>>>>much more gracefully, but even then the developer of the DAW will have >>>to >>>>>be ready to take advantage of that. >>>>> >>>>>TCB >>>>> >>>>>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote: >>>>>>Hi Lamont, >>>>>> >>>>>>The only thing preventing any 64 bit advancement at this point the 3rd >>>> >>>>>>party software and hardware manufacturers to write 64 bit driver and >> >>>>>>program support. The host applications need to come first. There is > >>>>>>nothing close to a fully 64 bit audio app on any platform. All the >>>>>>plug-ins in Sonar are 32 bit and running in a shell to function in a >>64 >>>>> >>>>>>bit. All with anywhere from 5 to 10% resource hit. The plug-ins do get >>>> >>>>>>the benefit of address a full 4 gigs but in most case are performing >>no >>>>> >>>>>>better and in some cases far worse with this method. >>>>>>Hardware developers right now do not have completely 64 bit coded >>>>>>drivers. In most cases they played with them enough so that they would >>>> >>>>>>install and function in a 64 bit OS and thats about it. >>>>>>ASIO is still 32 bit, VST is still 32 bit. There is supposedly 64 bit >>> >>>>>>available in the VST spec but not in ASIO AFAIK though no one is doing >>>> >>>>>>anything with it. >>>>>> >>>>>>All of the main host programs run on 64 bit OS es just fine. >>>>>>32 bit apps like Cubendo, Reaper, Sonar, Samplitude all run great on >> >>>>>>Windows 64 bit pro and can address up to 4 gigs of ram. But runs no > >>>>>>better CPU performance wise than 32 bit XP. Windows 64 pro is basically >>>>> >>>>>>just a stripped down Server 2003 64. But its more than likely gonna > >>>>>>suffer a quiet death like Windows ME did. >>>>>>All of these except Nuendo will install correctly in Vista 64. but with >>>>> >>>>>>the current bottle necks in Vista and the unfinished audio WaveRT driver >>>>> >>>>>>spec don't expect very good performance out of it anytime soon. >>>>>> >>>>>>Sonar 32 bit no better than the 64 bit version ina 64 bit OS. The >>>>>>supposed benefit is you can use address beyond 4 gigs. Of course all >>of >>>>> >>>>>>the VSTi in Sonar and all the 3rd party ones are 32 bit and they all >> >>>>>>still bottom out using Sonar's bit bridge at 4 gigs soooo. >>>>>> >>>>>>The blame for this lies with all the parties. MS for not getting >>>>>>development resources out to companies faster. Companies for using that >>>>> >>>>>>as an excuse to be lazy in there development. >>>>>> >>>>>>Supposedly Steinyha are planning on Nuendo being 64 bit and finally > >>>>>>making it so it can handle 4 or more core properly. But who knows. >>>>>>Every sense who ever in Germany decided to bail and cash in or whatever >>>>> >>>>>>and sold to Pinnacle they have been in Chaos. Just before that point >> >>>>>>they were the most innovative and revolutionary company in the native >>> >>>>>>audio software world and basically made the pro-audio sound card >>>>>>business outside be what it is today. There is not a single audio >>>>>>software that basically owes its very current existence to Steinberg >> >>>>>>innovations. But now who knows what their future is. Yamaha I think >will >>>>> >>>>>>hold on to them as long as possible and keep em going. Steinberg need >>>to >>>>> >>>>>>get back in focus soon before they loose too much
duncan.com" target="_blank">graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message news:467aeb33@linux... > http://www.uaudio.com/ > > LA-3A and a Neve 88RS Channel Strip. Interesting... > > GrahamFor me Cubase was a no-brainer. I have used it since the '80s for midi. It is not perfect, but I'm afraid nothing is. I used Logic for a time at a place I worked but it kind of bugged me too. I guess we should be thankful we have so many choices, compared to the way Adobe has a virtual monopoly in the graphics area. wireline wrote: > Don't know yet, really...I have demo'd several different DAWs as of late, > and what I'm finding is they all really fall short...I don't like some of > the limitations imposed by DAW A, the lack of sample accurate editing in > DAW B, the sound of DAW PT, etc... > > Money aside, I'd be all over a RADAR, my SOundtracs bonsole, and a buttload > of hardware in a heartbeat...I really don't need any more MIDI than a simple > clock to align the occassional drum machine...too complicated (!) > > All in all, the reason I'm so displeased with Samp is the holier than thou > attitude taken lately by developers...its like they are jamming certain questionable > things down the userbase's throat, and totally ignoring essentially crippling > bugs... > > I'm using 9-11 (appropriate, huh?)... maybe the roaylty Gods will be kind > and send me the cash for a 48K RADAR, but until they do I'm pretty well stuck > where I am, DAW wise...I can migrate to and from 7.23, 8.31, and 9.11... > > Mainly I miss the ability to write (either directly or via the message board) > to the developers and get an intellegent and reasonably sane response - those > days are looooong gone. > > Curious, why are you planning to move from Sam and where to? I am up to > Sam 8, but switched back to Cubase because I need MIDI often and Sam let > me down once too often in sessions with MIDI. I'll still use it for dialog > and CDs, but I am fed up w/ it on music. >> and monitoring off the playback heads if it was an analog deck and making > final mix decisions based on what the tape was telling me. Arrrggghhhh!!!!......I meant the "repro head". "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message news:467d47ad@linux... > Bill, > > The bottom line of all this is to reduce jitter as much as possible at all > stages of the recording process. Jitter creates a lot of the *digital > harshness* and midrange/low end flabbyness/wierdness that everyone > complains about. To that end, as far as Paris is concerned, an external > clock source makes quite an improvement. I tried to use the Paris D/A's to > mix and was going crazy trying to nail the mid frequencies. I finally took > my mix down to Catcusfire's studio in Taos (remember Andy?) and played it > back through a Cranesong HEDD and discovered that there was nothing wrong > with the mids, it was the D/A converters I was using (Paris on Paris > clock). Not long afterwards, MikeClaytor came to Durango and brought a > Benchmark DAC-1 and we patched it into a mix and the difference was very > obvious. Not long after that I got a Lucid GenX 6 and clocked my entire > system to it. The A/D and D/A conversion (D/A's that I was using for > processors on inserts) improved as well and the system, overall, exhibited > more clarity, depth /better imaging. I would strongly recommend an > external clock for any Paris user. > > As far as Cubase goes, I'm clocking my RME hardware to the BNC output of a > Mytek Stereo A/D. I think the RME hardware reclocks everything it sees to > it's own internal clock, but I'm not sure exactly how they do this. At any > rate, I am happy with whqat I'm getting from the 24 RME AD/DA's I've got > here whether they are being clocked by the Mytek or whether the Mytek > clock is being reclocked to the RME clock. I am still monitoring > everyghing from the Benchmark DAC-1 and if I was recording to tape or > something like a Masterlink, I'd be using the DAC-1 outputs to send the > 2bus to the recorder and monitoring off the playback heads if it was an > analog deck and making final mix decisions based on what the tape was > telling me. As far as digital goes, I would not be making final tweak > decisions by monitoring off the D/A's of the mix deck because I could be > certain that whatever the DAC-1 was feeding the digital recorder would be > what I''d (supposedly) end up with as the final product and the digital > deck's D/A's probably wouldn't be up to the level of the DAC-1's D/A > converters. > > Deej > > "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:467d3c4b@linux... >>I have not finished reading this thread because it seems moot, but in case >>anyone else has not mentioned this obvious point, Dimitiros, the only way >>to get a better in the box mix with converters is to use better A-D. >> >> Dimitrios wrote: >>> Hi, &gt
> >>>> graphs and flow charts.you know, visual aids that provide an >>>> opportunity > >>>> for interpretation. >>>> >>>> To discourage the idea, the Center for American Progress >>>> <http://www.americanprogress.org/>(CAP-whatever that's supposed to be) > >>>> prepared a sort of makeshift cost/benefit analysis >>>> < http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF& b=913099>for > >>>> deporting millions of illegal aliens. >>>> >>>> Hmm.I wonder what they determined?? Surprise, surprise, surprise.the > cost >>>> is astronomical. In fact, according to CAP, the solution is cost >>>> prohibitive. >>>> >>>> [extracted from the report linked below] >>>> >>>> "Using publicly available data, we estimate the costs of a mass >>>> deportation effort to be at least $206 billion over five years ($41.2 > >>>> billion annually), and could be as high as $230 billion or more. >>>> Spending > >>>> $41.2 billion annually would exceed the entire budget of the Department > >>>> of Homeland Security for FY 2006 ($34.2 billion) and more than double > the >>>> annual cost of military operations in Afghanistan ($16.8 billion)." >>>> >>>> http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2005/07/27/new-study-deportin g-illegal-aliens-will-cost-41-billion-a-year-do-they-take-am erican-express/ >>>> I could go on and you could go on, but really... what's the point in > >>>> google warring? >>>> Which leads me to believe if life here gets tougher for the illegals, > >>>> they'll pack up and go home or at least a portion of them will, without > >>>> blasting more tax payer money at the problem. I hate that it's come to > >>>> trying to close off our borders but how much money down the tube and > how >>>> many terrorist bombs is it really going to take for that to sink in? >>>> Will there be a gaping hole in the low end jobs? I'd expect it. Will > it >>>> blow apart our economy. I think we'll certainly feel it in >>>> goods/services > >>>> but the big question lies in will the spending in the medical expenses > >>>> and free rides in the country outweigh it, andd how does our legal low > >>>> end applicants play into that? How many of our legal jobless will >>>> suddenly find they CAN get a job to help feed themselves and family, > and >>>> better their circumstances? This isn't about Arabs, Mexicans or any >>>> other > >>>> cultures. It's about responsibility to our house and ourselves and >>>> those > >>>> around us. Perhaps others just see responsibility in a different way > than >>>> I do. >>>> >>>> Now the crux of this conversation lies here. Do you think we should all > >>>> pony up for free health care or not? The rest is semantics, numbers >>>> playing and guess work and I say this to anyone that wants to mandate > >>>> more of my paycheck out of me and my family's hands: If you want to pay > >>>> for it, go right ahead. Vote yourself into a nice expensive money pit > >>>> volunteer 'program'. Just don't get the idea that I want to pay for > it >>>> too, or that I won't fight it the whole way. Don't mistake that I am > not >>>> a compassionate man, or have heart or ability to help my >>>> dudes/dudettes. > >>>> I think years of taking a hand here really ought to say plenty about > that >>>> spirit, and things not generally public knowledge about me. I don't >>>> mind > >>>> giving. But I want to give smart. >>>> >>>> What I won't do is hand out to make ppl dependant so that I/my >>>> family/my > >>>> friends/my community have to continue the payments and they have to >>>> stay > >>>> enslaved to a 'care' system that doesn't teach them to do for >>>> themselves > >>>> if they are able. If they are not, that needs to be handled differently > >>>> per case. And, if they've snuck into my house and are eating my >>>> family's > >>>> food why on God's green earth would I hand them something else out of > my >>>> house bank account? >>>> >>>> > >>>> > Ideally we should start by designing a working system for citizens. > We >>>> > can and should address the immigration issue separately. >>>> > >>>> >>>> My point is that it is not a separate issue, but linked. We may just > have >
of their goods and what > >>>> they can >>>> >> pay us for producing them. That's right.. right back where we are > >>>> now. Those >>>> >> that have will not have for long because those that don't will take > >>>> it away >>>> >> through gov't mandate and the law of economics. The average Joe >>>> gets > >>>> screwed >>>> >> again. We'll pay for the poor through taxes, then again through the > >>>> health >>>> >> care overages we'll have to provide post gov't supplement. Any fool > >>>> can look >>>> >> at social security (hah, what a misnomer) and see what will happen. > >>>> I've >>>> >> been paying my life on a fund that I'm likely to never collect >>>> upon. > >>>> I'm not >>>> >> willing to add another to that list. Entitlement is crap and it >>>> doesn't work >>>> >> for any length of time before becoming corruption. >>>> >> >>>> >> Sorry man, I don't see this working. But it's a nice thought. We've > >>>> got to >>>> >> start dealing with our border and overpopulation problems because > so >>>> many >>>> >> things are a result of this root issue. >>>> >> >>>> >> AA >>>> >> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude >>>> <mailto:know-spam@not_here.dude>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Exactly Deej. I can tell you right now first hand experience that > >>>> the >>>> >>>> 'govt' >>>> >>>> way is to beat down the vendor to the lowest denominator, then > hold >>>> the >>>> >>>> payment as long as you possibly can. Let's not even get into the >>>> >>>> 'entitlement' problems or running away any decent health care >>>> worker >>>> >>>> because >>>> >>>> of govt mandates. >>>> >>>> Does the current health system need work? Absolutely. Do we need > >>>> the fed >>>> >>>> gov't doing it? NO. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> AA >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com <http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com>> > >>>> wrote in message news:467556c0$1@linux... >>>> >>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net <mailto:jjdpro@ameritech.net>> > >>>> wrote in message >>>> >>>>> news:4674c045$1@linux... >>>> >>>>>> The reason for the new film SICKO.. I really don't under stand > >>>> those >>>> >>> who >>>> >>>>>> say >>>> >>>>>> they don;t want a national health care system. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> It's not until the current medical/Insurance system reams you > and >>>> yours >>>> >>>>>> then >>>> >>>>>> do you 'see why it's needed'. But knoowwww The Gove will do a > >>>> even wost >>>> >>>>>> job. >>>> >>>>>> That Bull-Shit!! At least, the bill will get paid.. Ok, I can > >>>> hear >>>> >>>>>> someone >>>> >>>>>> saying by who?? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> The reason that these doctors are not taking Medicare patients > is >>>> >>>>> because >>>> >>>>> the government runs it in such a wonderful way. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >> >Thanks guys. :) I'll get your checks in the mail soon as I get paid next friday . . . Sarah "Gantt Kushner" <ganttmann@comcast.net> wrote in message news:467c9eeb$1@linux... > > I agree and I concur. > > Simultaneously. > > Everyone should own this CD! > > Gantt > > "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>I know this has been done, but... >> >>If you haven't got this CD GET IT! Mine arrived this week after much >>procrastinating >>and I just gave it a first listen and I've got to say, despite the rave > reviews >>it already received here, I have been blown away. It's really really >>*really* >>good. >> >>At track eleven I looked at the stereo, noted track eleven on the display >>and thought "Oh no, it CAN'T be over!". Fortunately there were still three >>tracks to go. Admittedly it's a 14 track disk running only 45 odd minutes, >>and it probably sits nicely at that length, but the songs are all >>relatively >>short. This however keeps the disk alive throughout. >> >>New ideas are thrown up constantly, and it is always interesting and yet >>always appealing. I have confidence it will survive many listens, and yet >>is amazing from the first. Timing tricks, unexpected yet comfortable chord >>changes, wonderful harmonies and performances, and from what I could tell >>on the little boom box that scored the first play, an excellent production >>and sound quality. >> >>I won't go on and on, but I could. If you've been wondering about buying >>this, get it. I can't wait to play it to my friends. >> >>Cheers, >>Kim. >An STD? sorry . . . S "DC" <dc@spammersinjail.com> wrote in message news:467c9c17$1@linux... >
; sorry . . . > > S > > "DC" <dc@spammersinjail.com> wrote in message news:467c9c17$1@linux... >> >> "John" <no@No.com> wrote: >>> >>>I bet you could have traded Paris for them. hehe >> >> >> The question is what she would give you in return.... >> >> DC >> > >Yeah, never get into a gross out contest with a nurse . . . tends to backfire. Last night I manually released an 87-year-old's impacted bowel, took my gloves off, and went to dinner. :) I'm on a medical unit and I bet there's at le
l.com> wrote in message news:467c9c17$1@linux... >>> >>> "John" <no@No.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>I bet you could have traded Paris for them. hehe >>> >>> >>> The question is what she would give you in return.... >>> >>> DC >>> >> >> > >Neil, that's an interesting point. I usually run everything in the -10 range, I guess, but I wonder if there is a best way to do it. Should the master be at 0 and the individuals much lower, or the individuals high and the master down or what? Or does it make any difference at all as long as they don't clip? I've never seen any data on that. Neil wrote: > Lamont, those DiMakina tunes you heard recently (and you said > you liked - thank you again, BTW) were all in the low-20's to > low 30's in track count. No weirdness there. > > It's all about ga
@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:467be825@linux... >> Now Guys..Really now. >> Do you realy think this goverment has the capacity and wherewithall to >> achieve >> said list of DJ's?? >> >> Aren't you guys the ones who are always saying that the Gove can't run a >> national health care system? How can they effectivly pull off this off?? >> >> >> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote: >>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:467b3fb6@linux... >>>> Deportation is not necessary. If we spent $100 mill putting Americans >> who >>>> hire illegals in jail, in short order there would be no jobs and the >>>> illegals would have to go home (unless of course we put them all on >>>> welf
ith an >>> employer >>> That employer must withhold taxes and provide a basic medical insurance >>> policy.-the employer is basically the workers sponsor at this point and >> is >>> reaponsible for him/her. >>> Employees must purchase vehicle insurance. >>> Worker receives a Worker-guest card that entitles them to basic >>> (rudimentary) medical services under employers medical insurance policy. >>> worker can buy supplemental healthcare which will be only good as long as >>> his/her status is legimate. >>> Worker can change jobs just like any American citizen. >>> Worker-guest card is forfeit upon leaving job and new "ttransitional " >>> card >>> is issued - good for two weeks. >>> Workers can only receive social services with proof of >>> employment/worker-guest card or temporary "unexp
is the reason for that new Brett Michaels > reality show? I mean, come ON. > > At some point, when the girls and the premise (and the star) are all > that lame and stupid, it doesn't even matter that they have boobs. > Brett?? Hello??? 1991 called, and while they don't actually want you > back, they would also like you to leave. > > Please, please, PLEEEEEAAASSSSE stop this reality crap!!!!!! Give us > shows with writing by writers. Enough of this garbage. > > pabWhat's a happen with new EDS reverb project? It will be someday at all?That's right. They did not mean Africans, asians or even the natives of this land..Sad really sad.. Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote: >Hi jeff, >Sadly I think they only wanted it to read.. > >"Give me your European tired, your European poor, >Your European huddled masses yearning to breathe free, >The wretched refuse of your teeming European shore...." > >Chris > > >Jeff Hoover wrote: >> Bill L wrote: >>> Actually I think we ought to invite any who want citizenship and can >>> speak some English to take an IQ and an aptitude test. Any with an IQ >>> over 120 and a good aptitude score, if they have a clean legal record >>> and a record of steady employment, should be offered citizenship. The >>> rest should be refused citizenship and should be sent back. We can >>> use more able, intelligent people. Who says we should not pick the >>> top applicants just like a company does. That's how we can make our >>> country stronger. >> >> "Give me your tired, your poor, >> Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, >> The wretched refuse of your teeming shore...." >> >> Nah, that was so 20th century... >> >> >> ;-) >> >> Jeff > >-- >Chris Ludwig >ADK >chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com> >www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/> >(859) 635-5762Hello all, Which would give me the biggest bang for the buck? and a mackie question. I'm pretty content with using my Mackie 1604vlz preamps as instrument inputs (using channel inserts as outputs to my 8-in card) and a PreSonus Eureka for vocal inputs direct to the 8-in card. I don't record but a few tracks at a time and only one vox at a time. Mostly overdubbing individual parts and harmonies. 1. Mackie - I was told to use the channel inserts for the outputs instead of the direct outs (channel 1-8) because of less noise. I leave the 1/4" TS line half way in all the time so that I can still solo the mackie channel for trim adjustment only. Do you think I'm getting the best signal, ie, least amount of circuit noise and full signal at the first detent? It sounds OK to me. btw - I use Paris's warmth, fullness, depth, space and efx's to achieve most everything since I don't have any external processors. 2. DAC or Clock - I've got a simple system. One MEC with two 8-in cards and a two card EDS with one C16. All black face, classic. I've had this system since 1997-8 running 3.0 on XP. Chuck has said that the Paris clock is decent but I'm reading many of you hear a clarity when using an external clock and or a DAC. I'm a bit concerned when using a clock that the MEC sample lite goes to 48k, but I guess I could live with it. Would an external clock make a significant difference on a 1-MEC system or would a DAConverter help clear up any muddyness or harshness more? Thanks guys and gals for your expert opinions and real world analysis on this. Wayne CarsonAnyone know some good sites for impulses to use in SIR ? I am really impressed with the PCM90 drum impulses on a snare with some PSP Vintage Warmer on it. SweetI'm very happy with the Sytek I have, and it doesn't have any of the Burr-Brown channels. I think it _is_ pretty much straight wire with gain, but it's that kind of pre done right. It seems to marry up with almost any mic, so I tend to choose it when I want a fast preamp. So when I want lots of the transient of the source, meaning drum overheads, acoustic geetars, percussion (tambourines and triangles seem to like the Sytek a lot), sometimes snare drum. I haven't tracked any significant vocals since I got it, but it will be interesting if and in what cases I prefer it to the DVC. Anyway, a damn fine preamp for less than $200 per channel. Unlike a lot of pres in that price range I have no problem plugging the fanciest mic I can beg, borrow, or rent into it. TCB "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote: >It's been a while since I've used mine. I had forgotten how much I like this >preamp. It's not the most expensive pre out there by any stretch but so >what???......it's a killer box and though it's described as a "straight wire >with gain" kinda' circuit, there is something sweet to it. It's just got >something going on with it that makes me smile. Sounds good on just about >any source...even U87's. I find that I don't much like U87's with solid >state preamps, but it works with the Sytek. > >Deej > >Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier. I've been _very_ busy chasing girls and playing golf. <br /
and..Sad really sad.. >> >> >> >> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote: >>>Hi jeff, >>>Sadly I think they only wanted it to read.. >>> >>>"Give me your European tired, your European poor, >>>Your European huddled masses yearning to breathe free, >>>The wretched refuse of your teeming European shore...." >>> >>>Chris >>> >>> >>>Jeff Hoover wrote: >>>> Bill L wrote: >>>>> Actually I think we ought to invite any who want citizenship and can >> >>>>> speak some English to take an IQ and an aptitude test. Any with an IQ >> >>>>> over 120 and a good aptitude score, if they have a clean legal record >> >>>>> and a record of steady employment, should be offered citizenship. The >> >>>>> rest should be refused citizenship and should be sent back. We can >>>>> use more able, intelligent people. Who says we should not pick the >>>>> top applicants just like a company does. That's how we can make our >> >>>>> country stronger. >>>> >>>> "Give me your tired, your poor, >>>> Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, >>>> The wretched refuse of your teeming shore...." >>>> >>>> Nah, that was so 20th century... >>>> >>>> >>>> ;-) >>>> >>>> Jeff >>> >>>-- >>>Chris Ludwig >>>ADK >>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com> >>>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/> >>>(859) 635-5762 >> > >"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.ne> wrote: >You know and I know, how the poor whites and blacks were exploited in the >Veitam war. With middle class and upper middle where not sending their sons >to war.. No different today.. One problem, it's bullshit. http://www.stolenvalor.com/ Read it and discover that the vietnam soldier was the most highly educated group ever to serve. They have had the highest success in life, the fewest mental problems, and the lowest drug addiction of any veterans in the 20th century. The idea that the rich and connected all got out of vietnam and only poor whites and blacks ended up there, is a lie. Read that book and get hip. It may open up a whole new world for you... DC"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote: >Heck, most americans are not adding any value to days.. Truthe be told, most >don;pt even pay taxes .. Nonsense. Everyone I know pays about 30% of their income in taxes, not counting sales tax. DCLoopholes..???Write offs.??? "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: > >"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote: > >>Heck, most americans are not adding any value to days.. Truthe be told, >most >>don;pt even pay taxes .. > >Nonsense. Everyone I know pays about 30% of their income in taxes, not >counting sales tax. > >DC >No, that's bull-shitt..!!! You don;t wha you're talking about.. Please..Did you see Oliver Stone's movie?? I peersonally know of many of my relatives( African Americans) poor who got drafted and there where numerous whites sending their sons to college to avoid the draft , and send to canada.. That's truth.. So, you can keep you most educated BS facts..!! "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: > >"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.ne> wrote: > >>You know and I know, how the poor whites and blacks were exploited in the >>Veitam war. With middle class and upper middle where not sending their >sons >>to war.. No different today.. > > >One problem, it's bullshit. > >http://www.stolenvalor.com/ > >Read it and discover that the vietnam soldier was the most highly educated >group ever to serve. They have had the highest success in life, the fewest >mental problems, and the lowest drug addiction of any veterans in the >20th century. > >The idea that the rich and connected all got out of vietnam and only >poor whites and blacks ended up there, is a lie. > >Read that book and get hip. It may open up a whole new world for you... > >DC > >LaMont, With all due respect, your friends and relatives are hardly a sample size of which to base considering everything else BS. Here's another perspective as well that seems fairly balanced: http://www.rcnv.org/rcnv/archives/2003/militarydemographics. htm My guess is you personally know more of your own demographic, therefore a disproportionate amount of your demographic appears to be singled out in comparison to the much smaller circle of any other demographic which you might associate. As Nappy says Respect, JH > No, that's bull-shitt..!!! You don;t wha you're talking about.. > Please..Did you see Oliver Stone's movie?? > > I peersonally know of many of my relatives( African Americans) p
/z20cd27f5d957Hn9i778mnnn7m [binary]
r /> [binary]
MZf56YtnzR3InOO46io6mVkp2rT/L38D [binary]
drives, no waiting. I believe you hold down "option" on boot and it gives you the choice. pabright, remembering more of it now.... FreakQ was the one that would foul up on the lo pass band.. I think. Jeez. Old age sucks, heh... PC Freebies was the one Chuck said to not install. AA "Mark" <mark47366@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:468035cb$1@linux... >I think PC Freebies was the problem - although right now just for >troubleshooting, I also removed FreakQ, I did previously have that running >with no problem. > > > > "PaulN" <pn@nospam.com> wrote in message news:467fcd01$1@linux... >> >> My experience is that "PC Freebies" is the culpret. I had all kinds of >> weirdness >> going on until I uninstalled them. >> >> >> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote: >>>FreakQ is the one that seemed to cause the most issues I believe, and it >> >>>seemed like there was a little 3 pack that had something in it that >>>created >> >>>issues, name escapes me at the moment. Define "all" of them that you >>>installed and I can likely pick the one out. >>> >>>AA >>> >>>"Mark" <sharonaloveslife@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>news:467fb883$1@linux... >>>>I had installed all of the skunkworks plugs - I removed all but the >>>>eventiter and the mods. >>>> >>>> I really love the plugs and as time permits, I'll start adding them in >> >>>> again until I isolate which one was causing the problem on my computer. >>>> >>>> >>>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote in message >>>> news:467ea667@linux... >>>>>I hadn't seen that reaction yet, but I think some of the skunkworks >>>>>plugs >> >>>>>were deemed too buggy and it was suggested to not install them. Which >> of >>>>>them did you have installed? >>>>> >>>>> AA >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Mark" <sharonaloveslife@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:467e51e8@linux... >>>>>>I sure appreciate all the helpful tips posted here