| Whoa! That's gorgeous! [message #75867] |
Sat, 11 November 2006 17:17  |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
couple years (1 card/MEC/24-8 in/out on a dedicated
>>>MAC
>>>>>>>G4
>>>>>>>>Quicksilver
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Whoa! That's gorgeous! [message #75874 is a reply to message #75872] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 10:16  |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hat I'm going to do sort of a light "mastering" or pre-
mastering on... I'll render the 2-buss mix down a 32-bit/88.2k,
then use Ozone on either the 2-buss mix itself (in this case)
or the master module of the stems mix in those instances.
>Why even start recording a such a high rate, when the 24/32
>sounds great?
Because I am a complete & utter moron, apparently... I know
that more people have been getting into using this particular
samplerate lately, but it seems the vast majority of people who
don't use Pro-Tools are dead-set against going above 44.1 (or
sometimes 48k), while a lot of pepole using PT are going for
96k and some are apparently starting to use 88.2k - a couple of
posts ago in this thread I answered your above question on the
samplerate already... unless you're asking something different
now, and I don't get what you mean?
NeilWhile I agree that the same things could be done with native DSP code, if
the only way to get a John Bowen synth is to buy a Pulsar, because Bowen
prefers copy protection to size of potential market, then that's that. I
was worried about stability but if that is taken care of then I'm in.
I also think it's odd that people will pay absurd amounts of money for esoteric
analog recording hardware (mics, pres, cables, EQs, comps) when if even one
of the links in the chain is subpar, even the quality of power in the building,
can 86 those thousands of dollars spent. But that makes perfect sense, in
contrast to buying an esoteric DSP card that only sounds a bit better than
the native apps (the NI Prophet sounds very good, the Creamware Prophet sounds
sick). Isn't that a strange double standard?
None of which means I might not be cursing the day I ordered a Pulsar, but
seeing the number of people there using the gear makes me somewhat optomistic.
I just think it's odd that the pursuit of superior sound is fine when it's
tube amps and vintage limiters, but it's silly when it's a DSP synth.
TCB
Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>HI Dj and Neil,
>It's sadly amusing to see that Creamware's way of doing things hasn't
>changed at all sense I dealt with them years ago. Some of the user
>responses you all got are are hilarious in their denial of facts.
>Any of the effects ava
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Whoa! That's gorgeous! [message #75878 is a reply to message #75874] |
Sun, 12 November 2006 13:41 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
you do)
>>>>>
>>>>>If the answer is no...dump them ASAP
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Do you mean if the answer is "yes", dump them ASAP? Or do you
>>>>mean if the answer is "no" I should dump using 88.2k ASAP?
>>>>
>>>>Frankly I don't know if using the Pulsar for summing would make
>>>>up for the sonic hit I would take at 44.1k - I can use Paris
>>>>for summing right now & NOT have to take the hit to
>>>>downconvert, though I have to go out through several Analog
>>>>submixes to do this. My idea with the Pulsar was
>>>>essentially: "What if I can sum in the digital domain via DSP;
>>>>and if so, would that sound better than what I can do right
>>>>now?" At this point I still can't find out, however, due to the
>>>>inability of the Pulsar stuff to work at 88.2k.
>>>>
>>>>If you want to see the minor shitstorm that Deej & I started
>>>>over on the Pulsar forum over this issue, go here:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.planetz.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=20885
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>Chris Ludwig
>>ADK
>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>(859) 635-5762
>Nice Drum sound ... great attack and balance. Thanks for posting it!
"DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>There's a "Mixtravaganza" kinda thing happening over at 3dB forum. I figured
>I'd bite and compare my mix to other *proper* mixes and see if there was
any
>audible sonic horribleness with the *improper* scenario I'm using wherein
>I'm taking files that are processed in Cubase SX at 32 bit float, truncated
>over Paris ADAT, then summed in Paris at 24 bit, then IDR'ed in Wavelab
to
>16 bit, then further mangled to MP3.
>
>I'm thinking I'm not going to think twice about this any more, ever.
>
>Thanks to Neil for hosting this:
>http://saqqararecords.com/MiscAudio/animixsugar1.mp3
>
>;o)
>Deej
>
>Simon, I read something about this in "the mixing engineer's handbook'.
Got me curious now, I'll have to check that out.
Think it was -3dB avg
Rob
<Simon hexagometer (at) gmx.net> wrote in message news:457d8136$1@linux...<
|
|
|
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
