EDS >>8in card >>8out card >>ADAT card >>(2) C16 >> >>It's running Par
Re: Vista Upgrades Available for Download -- WARNING!
>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote: >>> Ted, If I remember right, rendered files were never in dispute, as Brian >> T >>> did a 10th generation render and it still canceled out. What was in dispute >>> was disk bounce in 3.0 versues spdif bounce in 3.0. Sakis held the position >>> that disk bounce in 3.0 was not as accurate as spdif bounce. >>> Rod >>> "Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote: >>>> I just recently started rendering files with native plugins >>>> after testing the rendered against the edited original and >>>> flippin
with or without plugins - >>>> were as accurate as bounced files. So far so good. >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> >>As I have listened (not with any great detail mind you) I have not noticed a difference from the rendered files. I was a bit apprehensive as I have always taked the "real time" approach to printing stems. Obviously, from a time consumption stand point it can't be beat. Tyrone EK Sound <ask_me@nospam.net> wrote: >A SPDIF bounce would put Word Clock into the fray... A disc bounce would >use the Paris internal clock and not make use of any external clock. If >you had a really high quality clock source, it may make a noticeable >difference with a SPDIF bounce. > >David. > >Cujo wrote: >> Hmm, now I am curious, does anyone else hear a diff? >> Is the SPDIF file more open and clear? >> >> >> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam