| PARIS & XP-How Well Does it Work? [message #64866] |
Thu, 23 February 2006 13:52  |
Gary Flanigan
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
f 1176's
> and
>> >> recorded the returns to a stereoi pair of Paris tracks. Placing them
> side
>> >by
>> >> side, they are exactly lined up on the timeline and the only reason
> they
>> >> won't phase cancel is becau
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: PARIS & XP-How Well Does it Work? [message #64915 is a reply to message #64907] |
Fri, 24 February 2006 15:08  |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ef="mailto:442f799b@linux..." target="_blank">442f799b@linux...
> >>> >> Doesn't seem to matter whether the ASIO direct monitoring is on or
> >off
> >>> in
> >>> >> totalmix and what's really wierd is it doesn't seem to matter
whether
> >>> or
> >>> >not
> >>> >> Cubase SX is even timeline synced. Apparently, it's seeing the
incoming
> >>> >> audio (and I would assume the clock associated with it) and the PDC
> >in
> >>> SX
> >>> >is
> >>> >> automatically playing the audio ahead in time by the amount of
delay
> >>it's
> >>> >> automatically compensating. I know this sounds impossible, but it
> seems
> >>> to
> >>> >> be happening.........errrr.........well it actually *is happening.
> >I
> >>just
> >>> >> checked it by processing a pair of kic tracks trrough a pair of
1176's
> >>> and
> >>> >> recorded the returns to a stereoi pair of Paris tracks. Placing
them
> >>side
> >>> >by
> >>> >> side, they are exactly lined up on the timeline and the only reason
> >>they
> >>> >> won't phase cancel is because the processed tracks are now louder,
> >>having
> >>> >> been processed by the 1176's.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> This is so strange.........I think I may need to go to sleep and
wake
> >>> up
> >>> >in
> >>> >> the morning and see if this was some kind of hallucination.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >>> >> news:442f73f8@linux...
> >>> >> > I tried this about a year ago and then blew it off because it
didn't
> >>> >seem
> >>> >> to
> >>> >> > be working. Just for the hell of it, I just did it again.
Basically,
> >>> in
> >>> >a
> >>> >> > nutshell, what appears to be happening......and get this......I
> can
> >>> take
> >>> >> > track from Paris, create an insert through an ADAT I/O, send this
> >>signal
> >>> >> > from the ADAT output of paris to an ADAT input of an RME card.
Now
> >I
> >>> >open
> >>> >> > Cubase SX and create an audio channel and set the channel's ADAT
> >I/O
> >>> to
> >>> >> the
> >>> >> > RME input that is receiving the ADAT signal from the Paris insert
> >>send.
> >>> >> Then
> >>> >> > I set this Cubase audio channel output to send through an adat
output
> >>> >> which
> >>> >> > is connected to the Paris insert return. Next I drop a UAD-1 1176
> >(or
> >>> >> > whatever) in the insert slot of the Cubase channel, making sure
> that
> >>> >ASIO
> >>> >> > direct monitoring is disabled in Cubase SX but *enabled* in the
> RME
> >>> HDSP
> >>> >> > Totalmix applet (not sure yet if this makes any
difference.....I'll
> >>> know
> >>> >> > more as I experiment with it. When I hit play on the Paris
transport,
> >>> >> Paris
> >>> >> > sends ADAT sync to Cubase and the applications lock up their
> >>timelines
> >>> >and
> >>> >> > play back in sync. The thing that is blowing me away is that
> >>apparently,
> >>> >> the
> >>> >> > Cubase PDC *sees* this incoming timecode and actually plays back
> >the
> >>> >audio
> >>> >> > that is being processed through the UAD-1 plugin sample
> >>> >> > accurately....effectively providing plugin delay compensation of
> >>UAD-1
> >>> >> > plugins in Paris.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Since it didn't work a year ago, I'm wondering why it's working
> now.
> >>> >Maybe
> >>> >> > it has something to do with leaving the ASIIO direct monitoring
> >>enabled
> >>> >in
> >>> >> > Totalmix, but not in SX......or maybe it was just a bug in the SX
> >>PDC.
> >>> >I'm
> >>> >> > going to play around with this some more, but it sure is cool to
> >be
> >>> able
> >>> >> to
> >>> >> > insert a Pultec and an 1176 on a drum track that is being
streamed
> >>from
> >>> >> > Paris. It will also (theoretically) be possible to bus an entire
> >>Paris
> >>> >> drum
> >>> >> > submix to soimething like a stereo Fairchild and return it to a
> >>stereo
> >>> >> pair
> >>> >> > of Paris tracks.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > This would be a nice way to keep the mix in Paris, but to still
> >>process
> >>> >> > certain tracks with UAD processors if needed.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Hmmmm.........
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >>> >> > news:442f665c@linux...
> >>> >> > > I've been A/B'ing some mixes here, comparing the sonics of
flying
> >>> the
> >>> >> > tracks
> >>> >> > > across the digital matrix from Cubase SX to Paris and having a
> >>bunch
> >>> >of
> >>> >> > > UAD-1 plugins inserted as opposed to inserting analogue gear
into
> >>> a
> >>> >> > straight
> >>> >> > > Paris mix. I'm definitely leaning toward the Paris/analogue
mix.
> >>Even
> >>> >> with
> >>> >>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: PARIS & XP-How Well Does it Work? [message #64917 is a reply to message #64898] |
Fri, 24 February 2006 16:32 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;Avalon
> >>> >> > > 737, Meek VC-1, Forssell CS-1 and Focusrite RED7 channel strips
> >do
> >>> a
> >>> >> good
> >>> >> > > job inserted on tracks, plus there's an SPL Transient designer
> >for
> >>> >kick,
> >>> >> > an
> >>> >> > > SPL de-esser and an old TL Audio tube EQ here. Patching this
stuff
> >>> >into
> >>> >> a
> >>> >> > > mix just seems to bring it to life in a way I'm not hearing in
> >a
> >>> >hybrid
> >>> >> > mix.
> >>> >> > > Add the Paris plugs and it's a pretty decent mix arsenal. If I
> >sold
> >>> 3
> >>> >x
> >>> >> > > UAD-1 cards and my HDSP 9652's, I could likely afford another
> nice
> >>> >> > > compressor or two.........maybe an ELOP or something.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Actually, I really wouldn't mind having two more Distressors.
> I
> >may
> >>> >just
> >>> >> > do
> >>> >> > > this. The only thing I'm gonna miss is instant recall, but
hell,
> >>I've
> >>> >> got
> >>> >> > a
> >>> >> > > damn digital camera around here somewhere.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > I think I've given the monster hybrid DAW thing a fair chance.
> >It
> >>> >sounds
> >>> >> > > good, but I'm just not sold on it. I've worked my ass off
putting
> &
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: PARIS & XP-How Well Does it Work? [message #65149 is a reply to message #65144] |
Sat, 04 March 2006 06:09 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
l like your missing out,
or
>>>>
>>>>your
>>>>
>>>>>getting left behind. When BT left, a lot of people went with him so
to
>>>>
>>>>speak.
>>>>
>>>>>For the others that are going to switch, if you got to go, Ok, but don't
>>>>>drag people away with you by knocking Paris. We need to encourage
>>>>>people
>>>>>to stick around. This NG is shrinking!
>>>>>I remember vary well a certain somebody, who I will leave unnamed;
)
>>>
>>> raved
>>>
>>>>>about Nuendo for months on end. Now that certain somebody is not so
>>>>>sure
>>>>>that Nuendo is better sounding than Paris! ; ) A couple of guys here
>>>
>>> that
>>>
>>>>>thought Nuendo was the answer to Paris are now questioning Nuendo.
Some
>>>>>times other stuff just sounds different, and initially perceived as
>>>>>being
>>>>>better. Of course paris was left behind feature wise, and some people
>>>
>>> love
>>>
>>>>>the whiz-bang of all that. Others prefer the capabilities and the
>>>>>working
>>>>>methods of newer software. There will always be something to come out
>>>
>>> that
>>>
>>>>>will be more slick than Paris. Paris is still pretty slick and vary
>>>>>useable.
>>>>>When combined with a second DAW for effect processing, Paris becomes
>>>>>vary
>>>>>hard to beat.
>>>>>
>>>>>Many Paris commercial studio owners have expressed that they have, or
>>>>>are
>>>>>considering going with PT because it's "The industry standard". Many
>>>>>feel
>>>>>that if they don't jump to PT that they are losing business. For some
>>>
>>> people
>>>
>>>>>this is the case, and they need to do what they need to do. However,
it
>>>>>really should be based on the quality of the end result, not the
>>>>>equipment
>>>>>you use.
>>>>>
>>>>>Everybody has different needs. For most project studios, there is
>>>>>really
>>>>>no need for an expensive system like PT, or 2K for Nuendo, plus the
cost
>>>>>of hardware. If your in a major market like N.Y., L.A., N
|
|
|
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
