Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76146 is a reply to message #76145] |
Sat, 18 November 2006 18:43   |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
, Nuendo, Cubase 4 and Sequoia all behaved exactly the same way in
this
>test - which tells me they are handling the LSB's the same way. When data
>is summed to groups, there will be quantization noise below -136dB. This
>is completely normal for any native DAW and they all are subject to it.
>As you might read in the thread my conclusion was that we proved digital
>audio theory exists - e.g. no uncharted territory, no digital audio frontiers,
>no bugs in Nuendo. yeeha. But that's what I get for second guessing talented
>developers. ;-)
>
>Fwiw, to take it a step further, Samplitude/Sequoia and Nuendo handle overs,
>or "into the red" identically. I checked that too a while back after the
>reports of extra headroom, etc in Samplitude. Believe me, I've tried hard
>to find where any differences might appear, not just noticeable differences,
>but any differences at the lowest levels, but it seems the major native
DAW
>players are making the same decisions when it comes to truncation, etc,
and
>there really aren't that many to make. In my tests, dither really wasn't
>an issue (I turned it off in all DAWs I tested just to test with pure truncation).
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76147 is a reply to message #76146] |
Sat, 18 November 2006 19:00 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Regards,
>Dedric
>
>"LaMOnt" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Dedric, check out this post from our dear friend Fredo: Neundo Moderator:
>>Explaining how Steingberg's audio engine works. Note the trade-offs..Meaning,
>>Steinberg's way of coding an audio-engine 32bit float is different than
>say
>>Magix Samplitude:
>>
>>Fredo
>>Administrative Moderator
>>
>>
>>Joined: 29 Dec 2004
>>Posts: 4213
>>Location: Belgium
>> Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:33 pm Post subject:
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------
>>
>>I think I see where the problem is.
>>In my scenario's I don't have any track that goes over 0dBfs, but I have
>>always lowered one channel to compensate with another.
>>So, I never whent over the 0dB fs limit.
>>
>>Here's the explanation:
>>
>>As soon as you go over 0dB, technically you are entering the domain of
distortion.
>>
>>In a 32bit FP mixer, that is not the case since there is unlimited headroom.
>>
>>
>>Now follow me step by step please - read this slow and make sure you understand
>>-
>>
>>At the end of each "stage", there is an adder (a big calculator) which
adds
>>all the numbers from the individual tracks that are routed to this "adder".
>>
>>The numbers are kept in the 80-bit registers and then brought back to 32bit
>>float.
>>This process of bringing back the numbers from 80-bit (and more) to 32bit
>>is kept to an absolute minimum.
>>This adding/bringing back to 32bit is done at 3 places: After a plugin
slot
>>(VST-specs for all plugin manufacturers) - Group Tracks and Master Tracks.
>>
>>
>>Now, as soon as you boost the volume above 0dB, you get more than 32bits.
>>Stay below 0dB and you will stay below 32 bits.
>>When the adders dump their results, the numbers are brought back from any
>>number of bits (say 60bit) to 32 bit float.
>>These numbers are simply truncated which results in distortion; that's
the
>>noise/residue you find way down low.
>>There is an algortithm that protects us from additive errors - so these
>errors
>>can never come into the audible range.
>>So, as soon as you go over 0dB, you will see these kind of artifacts.
>>
>>It is debatable if this needs to be dithered or not. The problem -still
>is-
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76149 is a reply to message #76146] |
Sat, 18 November 2006 20:02 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
the mix engine as software in either
>a
>>
>>>native DAW
>>>or a digital mixer, from the hardware that translates the audio to something
>>
>>>we hear,
>>>but that's what is required when comparing summing. The hardware can
>>>significantly change
>>>what we hear, so comparing digital mixers really isn't of as much interest
>>
>>>as comparing native
>>>DAWs in that respect - unless you are looking to buy one of course.
>>>
>>>Even though I know you think manufacturers are trying to add something
>to
>>
>>>give them an edge, I am 100%
>>>sure that isn't the case - rather they are trying to add or change as
little
>>
>>>as possible in order to give
>>>them the edge. Their end of digital audio isn't about recreating the
past,
>>
>>>but improving upon it.
>>>As we've discussed and agreed before, the obsession with recreating
>>>"vintage" technology is as much
>>>fad as it is a valuable creative asset. There is no reason we shouldn't
>>
>>>have far superior hardware and software EQs and comps
>>>than 20, 30 or 40 years ago. No reason at all, other than market demand,
>>
>>>but the majority of software, and new
>>>hardware gear on the market has a vintage marketing tagline with it.
>>>Companies will sell any bill of
>>>goods if customers will buy it.
>>>
>>>There's nothing unique about the summing in Nuendo, Cubase, Sequoia/Samp,
>>>or Sonar, and it's pretty safe to include Logic and DP in that list as
>well.
>>
>>>One of the reasons I test
>>>these things is to be sure my DAW isn't doing something wrong, or something
>>
>>>I don't know about.
>>>
>>>Vegas - I use it for video conversions and have never done any critical
>>
>>>listening tests with it. What I have heard
>>>briefly didn't sound any different. It certainly looks plain vanilla
>>>though. What you are describing is exactly
>>>what I would say about the GUIs of each of those apps, not that it means
>>
>>>anything. Just interesting.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76151 is a reply to message #76149] |
Sat, 18 November 2006 20:51 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;Dedric
>>>
>>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:458c82fd$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Dedric, my simple test is simple..
>>>> Using the same audio interface, with the same stereo file..null-ed to
>>
>>>> zero..No
>>>> eq, for fx. Master fader on zero..
>>>>
>>>> Nuendo, Pro-Tools -Mpowered(native)... yields a sonic difference that
>>I
>>>> have
>>>> referenced before.. The sound coming from PT-M has a nice top end ,
where
>>>> as Neundo has a nice flatter sound quality.
>>>> Same audio interface. M-audio 410..Using Mackies & Blue-Sky pro monitors..
>>>>
>>>> Same test at the big room..PT-HD & Neundo Logic Audio(macG5-Dual) Using
>>
>>>> the
>>>> 192 interface.
>>>> Same results..But adding Logic audio's sound ..(Broad, thick)
>>>>
>>>> Somethings going on.
>>>>
>>>> Chucks post about how paris handles audio is a theory..Only Edmund can
>>
>>>> truly
>>>> give us the goods on what's really what..
>>>>
>>>> I disagree that manufactuers don;t set out o put a sonic print on their
>>
>>>> products.
>>>> I think they do.
>>>>
>>>> I have been fortunate to work on some digital mixers and I can tell
you
>>
>>>> that
>>>> each one has their own sound. The Sony Dmx-100 was modeled after SSL
>4000g
>>>> (like it's Big Brother).And you what? That board (Dmx-100) sound very
>>warm
>>>> and it's eq tries to behave and sound just like an SSL.. Unlike he Yamaha
>>>> Dm2000(version 1.x) which has a very Clean, neutral sound..However,
some
>>>> complained that it was tooo Vanila and thus, Yamaha add a version 2.0
>>
>>>> which
>>>> added Vintage type Eq's, modeled analog input gain saturation fx too
>give
>>>> the user a choice Btw Clean and Neutral vs sonic Character.
>>>>
>>>> So, if digital conoles can be given a sonic character, why not a software
>>>> mixer?
>>>> The truth is, there are some folks who want a neutral mixer and then
>there
>>>> are others who want a sonic footprint imparted. and these can be coded
>>in
>>>> the digital realm.
>>>> The apllies with the manufactuers. They too have their vision on what
>>They
>>>> think and want their product to sound.
>>>>
>>>> I love reading on gearslutz the posts from Plugin developers and their
>>
>>>> interpretations
>>>> and opinions about what makes their Neve 1073 Eq better and what goes
>>into
>>>> making their version sound like it does.. Each Developer has a different
>>>> vision as
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76154 is a reply to message #76151] |
Sat, 18 November 2006 22:44 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
or costing
>>
>>>>>$15k,
>>>>
>>>>>so what they
>>>>>lack in actual synthesis capabilities, they make up with EQ and effects
>>>> on
>>>>>the output. That's been the case
>>>>>for years, at least since we had effects on synths at least. But even
>>
>>>>>with
>>>>
>>>>>modern synths such as the Fantom,
>>>>>Tritons, etc, which are great synths all around, of course the coolest,
>>>>
>>>>>widest and biggest patches
>>>>>will make the biggest impression - so in come the EQs, limiters, comps,
>>>>
>>>>>reverbs, chorus, etc. The best
>>>>>way to find out if a synth is really good is to bypass all effects and
>>see
>>>>
>>>>>what happens. Most are pretty
>>>>>good these days, but about half the time, there are presets that fall
>>>>>completely flat in fx bypass.
>>>>>
>>>>>DAWs aren't designed to put a sonic fingerprint on a sound the way synths
>>>>
>>>>>are - they are designed
>>>>>to *not* add anything - to pass through what we create as users, with
>>no
>>>>
>>>>>alteration (or as little as possible)
>>>>>beyond what we add with intentional processing (EQ, comps, etc).
>>>>>Developers
>>>>
>>>>>would find no pride
>>>>>in hearing that their DAW sounds anything different than whatever is
>being
>>>>
>>>>>played back in it,
>>>>>and the concept is contrary to what AES and IEEE proceedings on the
issue
>>>>
>>>>>propose in general
>>>>>digital audio discussions, white papers, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>>What ID ended up doing with Paris (at least from what I gather per Chuck's
>>>>
>>>>>findings - so correct me if I'm missing part of the equation Chuck),
>>>>>is drop the track gain by 20dB or so, then added it back at the master
>>
>>>>>buss
>>>>
>>>>>to create the effect of headroom (probably
>>>>>because the master buss is really summing on the card, and they have
>more
>>>>
>>>>>headroom there than on the tracks
>>>>>where native plugins might be used). I don't know if Paris passed 32-bit
>>>>
>>>>>float files to the EDS card, but sort of
>>>>>doubt it. I think Chuck has clarified this at one point, but don't
recall
>>>>
>>>>>the answer.
>>>>>
>>>>>Also what Paris did is use a greater bit depth on the hardware than
>>>>>ProTools
>>>>
>>>>>did - at the time PT was just
>>>>>bring Mix+ systems to market, or they had been out for a year or two
>(if
>>>> I
>>>>>have my timeline right) - they
>>>>>were 24-bit fixed all the way through. Logic and Cubase were native
>DAWs,
>>>>
>>>>>but native was still too slow
>>>>>to compete with hardware hybrids. Paris trumped them all by running
>
>>>>>32-bit
>>>>
>>>>>float natively (not new really, but
>>>>>better than sticking to 24-bit) and 56 or so bits in hardware instead
>>of
>>>>
>>>>>going to Motorola DSPs at 24.
>&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76158 is a reply to message #76154] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 06:38 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>>>>decent emulation (with convolution, dynamic EQ functions,
>>>>>>>etc). For sake of not eating up all cpu processing, that could likely
>>>>
>>>>>>>only
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>surface as is a built in EQ, which
>>>>>>>no one wants universally in summing, and anyone can add at will already.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So it hasn't happened yet and isn't likely to as it detours from the
>>
>>>>>>>basic
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>tenant of audio recording - recreate what comes in as
>>>>>>>accurately as possible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What Digi did in recoding their summing engine was try to recover
some
>>>>>>>of the damage done by the 24-bit buss in Mix systems. Motorola 56k
>dsps
>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>24-bit fixed point chips and I think
>>>>>>>the new generation (321?) still is, but they use double words now
for
>>>>>>>48-bits). And though plugins could process at 48-bit by
>>>>>>>doubling up and using upper and lower 24-bit words for 48-bit outputs,
>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>buss
>>>>>>>between chips was 24-bits, so they had to dither to 24-bits after
every
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>plugin. The mixer (if I recall correctly) also
>>>>>>>had a 24-bit buss, so what Digi did is to add a dither stage to the
>>
>>>>>>>mixer
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>prevent this
>>>>>>>constant truncation of data. 24-bits isn't enough to cover summing
>>for
>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>than a few tracks without
>>>>>>>losing information in the 16-bit world, and in the 24-bit world some
>>>>>>>information will be lost, at least at the lowest levels.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Adding a dither stage (though I think they did more than that - perhaps
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>implement a 48-bit double word stage as well),
>>>>>>>simply smoothed over the truncation that was happening, but it didn't
>>>>
>>>>>>>solve
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>the problem, so with HD
>>>>>>>they went to a double-word path - throughout I believe, including
the
>>>> path
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>between chips. I believe the chips
>>>>>>>are still 24-bit, but by doubling up the processing (yes at a cost
>of
>>>>
>>>>>>>twice
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>the overhead), they get a 48-bit engine.
>>>>>>>This not only provided better headroom, but greater resolution. Higher
>>>>>> bit
>>>>>>>depths subdivide the amplitude with greater resolution, and that's
>>>>>>>really where we get the definition of dynamic range - by lowering
the
>>>>
>>>>>>>signal
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>to quantization noise ratio.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>With DAWs that use 32-bit floating point math all the way through,
>the
>>>>
>>>>>>>only
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>reason for altering the summing
>>>>>>>is by error, and that's an error that would actually be hard to make
>>and
>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>past a very basic alpha stage of testing.
>>>>>>>There is a small difference in fixed point math and floating point
>math,
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>at least a theoretical difference in how it affects audio
>>>>>>>in certain cases, but not necessarily in the result for calculating
>>gain
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>either for the same audio file. Where any differences might show
up
>>is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>complicated, and I believe only appear at levels below 24-bit (or
in
>>>>>>>headroom with tracks pushed beyond 0dBFS), or when/if
>>>>>>>there areany differences in where each amplitude level is quantized.
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76168 is a reply to message #76147] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 12:26 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ring summing. The hardware can
>>significantly change
>>what we hear, so comparing digital mixers really isn't of as much interest
>
>>as comparing native
>>DAWs in that respect - unless you are looking to buy one of course.
>>
>>Even though I know you think manufacturers are trying to add something
to
>
>>give them an edge, I am 100%
>>sure that isn't the case - rather they are trying to add or change as little
>
>>as possible in order to give
>>them the edge. Their end of digital audio isn't about recreating the past,
>
>>but improving upon it.
>>As we've discussed and agreed before, the obsession with recreating
>>"vintage" technology is as much
>>fad as it is a valuable creative asset. There is no reason we shouldn't
>
>>have far superior hardware and software EQs and comps
>>than 20, 30 or 40 years ago. No reason at all, other than market demand,
>
>>but the majority of software, and new
>>hardware gear on the market has a vintage marketing tagline with it.
>>Companies will sell any bill of
>>goods if customers will buy it.
>>
>>There's nothing unique about the summing in Nuendo, Cubase, Sequoia/Samp,
>>or Sonar, and it's pretty safe to include Logic and DP in that list as
well.
>
>>One of the reasons I test
>>these things is to be sure my DAW isn't doing something wrong, or something
>
>>I don't know about.
>>
>>Vegas - I use it for video conversions and have never done any critical
>
>>listening tests with it. What I have heard
>>briefly didn't sound any different. It certainly looks plain vanilla
>>though. What you are describing is exactly
>>what I would say about the GUIs of each of those apps, not that it means
>
>>anything. Just interesting.
>>
>>That's one reason I listen eyes closed and double check with phase
>>cancellation tests and FFTs - I am
>>influenced creatively by the GUI to some degree. I actually like Cubase
>4's
>>GUI better than Nuendo 3.2,
>>though there are only slight visual differences (some workflow differences
>
>>are a definite improvement for me though).
>>
>>ProTools' GUI always made me want to write one dimensional soundtracks
in
>
>>mono for public utilities, accounting offices
>>or the IRS while reading my discreet systems analysis textbook - it was
>also
>>grey. ;-)
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dedric
>>
>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:458c82fd$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Dedric, my simple test is simple..
>>> Using the same audio interface, with the same stereo file..null-ed to
>
>>> zero..No
>>> eq, for fx. Master fader on zero..
>>>
>>> Nuendo, Pro-Tools -Mpowered(native)... yields a sonic difference that
>I
>>> have
>>> referenced before.. The sound coming from PT-M has a nice top end , where
>>> as Neundo has a nice flatter sound quality.
>>> Same audio interface. M-audio 410..Using Mackies & Blue-Sk
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76170 is a reply to message #76168] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 14:18 |
Morgan
Messages: 133
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;at Lynn Fuston's
>>>>D/A converter shootout - when do you lock to external clock and incur
>the
>>>
>>>>resulting jitter,
>>>>and when do you trust the internal clock - and if you do lock externally,
>>>
>>>>how good is the PLL
>>>>in the slave device? These issues can cause audible changes in the top
>>> end
>>>>that have nothing to do
>>>>with the software itself. If you say that PTHD through the same converter
>>>
>>>>output as Nuendo (via? RME?
>>>>Lynx?) using the same master clock, sounds different playing a single
>
>>>>audio
>>>
>>>>file, then I take your word
>>>>for it. I can't tell you why that is happening - only that an audible
>>>>difference really shouldn't happen due
>>>>to the software alone - not with a single audio file, esp. since I've
>
>>>>heard
>>>
>>>>and seen PTHD audio cancel with
>>>>native DAWs. Just passing a single 16 or 24 bit track down the buss
>to
>>> the
>>>>output driver should
>>>>be, and usually is, completely transparent, bit for bit.
>>>>
>>>>The same audio file played through the same converters should only sound
>>>
>>>>different if something in
>>>>the chain is different - be it clocking, gain or some degree of
>>>>unintended,
>>>
>>>>errant dsp processing. Every DAW should
>>>>pass a single audio file without altering a single bit. That's a basic
>
>>>>level
>>>
>>>>of accuracy we should always
>>>>expect of any DAW. If that accuracy isn't there, you can be sure a heavy
>>>
>>>>mix will be altered in ways you
>>>>didn't intend, even though you would end up mixing with that factor in
>
>>>>place
>>>
>>>>(e.g. you still mix for what
>>>>you want to hear regardless of what the platform does to each audio track
>>> or
>>>>channel).
>>>>
>>>>In fact you should be able to send a stereo audio track out SPDIF or
>>>>lightpipe to another DAW, record it
>>>>bring the recorded file back in, line them up to the first bit, and have
>>>
>>>>them cancel on and inverted phase
>>>>test. I did this with Nuendo and Cubase 4 on separate machines just
to
>>> be
>>>>sure my master clocking and
>>>>slave sync was accurate - it worked perfectly.
>>>>
>>>>Also be sure there isn't a variation in the gain even by 0.1 dB between
>>> the
>>>>two. There shouldn't
>>>>and I wouldn't expect there to be one. Also could PT be set for a
>>>>different
>>>
>>>>pan law? Shouldn't make a
>>>>difference even if comparing two mono panned files to their stereo
>>>>interleaved equivalent, but for sake
>>>>of completeness it's worth checking as well. A variation in the output
>>>
>>>>chain, be it drivers, audio card
>>>>card, or converters would be the most likely culprit here.
>>>>
>>>>The reason DAW manufacturers wouldn't add any sonic "character"
>>>>intentionally is that the
>>>>ultimate goal from day one with recording has been to accurately reproduce
>>>
>>>>what we hear.
>>>>We developed a musical penchant for sonic character because the hardware
>>>
>>>>just wasn't accurate,
>>>>and what it did often sent us down new creative paths - even if by force
>>> -
>>>>and we decided it was
>>>>preferred that way.
>>>>
>>>>Your point about what goes into the feature presets to sell synths is
>
>>>>right
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76171 is a reply to message #76170] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 15:10 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>>
>>>>for sure, but synths are about
>>>>character and getting that "perfect piano" or crystal clear bell pad,
>or
>>> fat
>>>>punchy bass without spending
>>>>a mint on development, adding 50G onboard sample libraries, or costing
>
>>>>$15k,
>>>
>>>>so what they
>>>>lack in actual synthesis capabilities, they make up with EQ and effects
>>> on
>>>>the output. That's been the case
>>>>for years, at least since we had effects on synths at least. But even
>
>>>>with
>>>
>>>>modern synths such as the Fantom,
>>>>Tritons, etc, which are great synt
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76173 is a reply to message #76170] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 14:22 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ent than whatever is
being
>>>
>>>>played back in it,
>>>>and the concept is contrary to what AES and IEEE proceedings on the issue
>>>
>>>>propose in general
>>>>digital audio discussions, white papers, etc.
>>>>
>>>>What ID ended up doing with Paris (at least from what I gather per Chuck's
>>>
>>>>findings - so correct me if I'm missing part of the equation Chuck),
>>>>is drop the track gain by 20dB or so, then added it back at the master
>
>>>>buss
>>>
>>>>to create the effect of headroom (probably
>>>>because the master buss is really summing on the card, and they have
more
>>>
>>>>headroom there than on the tracks
>>>>where native plugins might be used). I don't know if Paris passed 32-bit
>>>
>>>>float files to the EDS card, but sort of
>>>>doubt it. I think Chuck has clarified this at one point, but don't recall
>>>
>>>>the answer.
>>>>
>>>>Also what Paris did is use a greater bit depth on the hardware than
>>>>ProTools
>>>
>>>>did - at the time PT was just
>>>>bring Mix+ systems to market, or they had been out for a year or two
(if
>>> I
>>>>have my timeline right) - they
>>>>were 24-bit fixed all the way through. Logic and Cubase were native
DAWs,
>>>
>>>>but native was still too slow
>>>>to compete with hardware hybrids. Paris trumped them all by running
>>>>32-bit
>>>
>>>>float natively (not new really, but
>>>>better than sticking to 24-bit) and 56 or so bits in hardware instead
>of
>>>
>>>>going to Motorola DSPs at 24.
>>>>The onboard effects were also a step up from anything out there, so the
>>> demo
>>>>did sound good.
>>>>I don't recall which, but one of the demos, imho, wasn't so good (some
>>>>sloppy production and
>>>>vocals in spots, IIRC), so I only listened to it once. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>Coupled with the gain drop and buss makeup, this all gave it a "headroom"
>>> no
>>>>one else had. With very nice
>>>>onboard effects, Paris jumped ahead of anything else out there easily,
>and
>>>
>>>>still respectably holds its' own today
>>>>in that department.
>>>>
>>>>Most demos I hear (when I listen to them) vary in quality, usually not
>so
>>>
>>>>great in some area. But if a demo does
>>>>sound great, then it at least says that the product is capable of at
>
>>>>least
>>>
>>>>that level of performance, and it can
>>>>only help improve a prospective buyer's impression of it.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Dedric
>>>>
>>>>"LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:458c14c0$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric good post..
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I have PT-M-Powered/M-audio 410 interface for my laptop and
>it
>>>
>>>>> has
>>>>> that same sound (no eq, zero fader) that HD does. I know their use
the
>>>
>>>>> same
>>>>> 48 bit fix mixer. I load up the same file in Nuendo (no eq, zero
>>>>> fader)..results.
>>>>> different sonic character.
>>>>>
>>>>> PT having a top end touch..Nuendo, nice smooth(flat) sound. And I'm
>just
>>>>> taking about a stereo wav file nulled with no eq..nothing
>>>>> ..zilch..nada..
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, there are devices (keyboards, dum machines) on the market today
>
>>>>> that
>>>>> have a Master Buss Compressor and EQ set to on with the top end notched
>>>
>>>>> up.
>>>>> Why? because it gives their product an competitive advantageover the
>>>>> competition..
>>>>> Ex: Yahama's Motif ES, Akai's MPC 1000, 2500, Roland's Fantom.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, why would'nt a DAW manufactuer code in an extra (ooommf) to make
>
>>>>> their
>>>>> DAW sound better. Especially, given the "I hate Digtal Summing" crowd?
>>>
>>>>> And,
>>>>> If I'm a DAW manufactuer, what would give my product a sonic edge over
>>> the
>>>>> competition?
>>>>>
>>>&g
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76178 is a reply to message #76170] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 18:28 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>>>>> for sound results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Of course it is *possible* to do this, but only if the DAW has a
>>>>>>specific
>>>>>
>>>>>>sound shaping purpose
>>>>>>beyond normal summing/mixing. Users talk about wanting developers
to
>>> add
>>>>> a
>>>>>>"Neve sound" or "API sound" option to summing engines,
>>>>>>but that's really impractical given the amount of dsp required to make
>>> a
>>>>>
>>>>>>decent emulation (with convolution, dynamic EQ functions,
>>>>>>etc). For sake of not eating up all cpu processing, that could likely
>>>
>>>>>>only
>>>>>
>>>>>>surface as is a built in EQ, which
>>>>>>no one wants universally in summing, and anyone can add at will already.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So it hasn't happened yet and isn't likely to as it detours from the
>
>>>>>>basic
>>>>>
>>>>>>tenant of audio recording - recreate what comes in as
>>>>>>accurately as possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What Digi did in recoding their summing engine was try to recover some
>>>>>>of the damage done by the 24-bit buss in Mix systems. Motorola 56k
dsps
>>>>> are
>>>>>>24-bit fixed point chips and I think
>>>>>>the new generation (321?) still is, but they use double words now for
>>>>>>48-bits). And though plugins could process at 48-bit by
>>>>>>doubling up and using upper and lower 24-bit words for 48-bit outputs,
>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>>buss
>>>>>>between chips was 24-bits, so they had to dither to 24-bits after every
>>>>>
>>>>>>plugin. The mixer (if I recall correctly) also
>>>>>>had a 24-bit buss, so what Digi did is to add a dither stage to the
>
>>>>>>mixer
>>>>> to
>>>>>>prevent this
>>>>>>constant truncation of data. 24-bits isn't enough to cover summing
>for
>>>>> more
>>>>>>than a few tracks without
>>>>>>losing information in the 16-bit world, and in the 24-bit world some
>>>>>>information will be lost, at least at the lowest levels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Adding a dither stage (though I think they did more than that - perhaps
>>>>>
>>>>>>implement a 48-bit double word stage as well),
>>>>>>simply smoothed over the truncation that was happening, but it didn't
>>>
>>>>>>solve
>>>>>
>>>>>>the problem, so with HD
>>>>>>they went to a double-word path - throughout I believe, including the
>>> path
>>>>>
>>>>>>between chips. I believe the chips
>>>>>>are still 24-bit, but by doubling up the processing (yes at a cost
of
>>>
>>>>>>twice
>>>>>
>>>>>>the overhead), they get a 48-bit engine.
>>>>>>This not only provided better headroom, but greater resolution. Higher
>>>>> bit
>>>>>>depths subdivide the amplitude with greater resolution, and that's
>>>>>>really where we get the definition of dynamic range - by lowering the
>>>
>>>>>>signal
>>>>>
>>>>>>to quantization noise ratio.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>With DAWs that use 32-bit floating point math all the way through,
the
>>>
>>>>>>only
>>>>>
>>>>>>reason for altering the summing
>>>>>>is by error, and that's an error that would actually be hard to make
>and
>>>>> get
>>>>>>past a very basic alpha stage of testing.
>>>>>>There is a small difference in fixed point math and floating point
math,
>>>>> or
>>>>>>at least a theoretical difference in how it affects audio
>>>>>>in certain cases, but not necessarily in the result for calculating
>gain
>>>>> in
>>>>>>either for the same audio file. Where any differences might show up
>is
>>>>>
>>>>>>complicated, and I believe only appear at levels below 24-bit (or in
>>>>>>headroom with tracks pushed beyond 0dBFS), or when/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76180 is a reply to message #76179] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 18:33 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;>>
>>>>>>were never asked to sum beyond 24-bits,
>>>>>>at least not on the upper end of the dynamic range, so everything that
>>>
>>>>>>could
>>>>>
>>>>>>represent 24-bits accurately would cancel. The only ones
>>>>>>that didn't were ones that had a different bit depth and/or gain
>>>>>>structure
>>>>>
>>>>>>whether hybrid or native
>>>>>>(e.g. Paris' subtracting 20dB from tracks and adding it to the buss).
>>> In
>>>>>
>>>>>>this case, PTHD cancelled (when I tested it) with
>>>>>>Nuendo, Samplitude, Logic, etc because the impact of the 48-bit fixed
>>> vs.
>>>>>
>>>>>>32-bit float wasn't a factor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>When trying other tests, even when adding and subtracting gain, Nuendo,
>>>>>
>>>>>>Sequoia and Sonar cancel - both audibly and
>>>>>>visually at inaudible levels, which only proves that one isn't making
>>> an
>>>>>
>>>>>>error when calculating basic gain. Since a dB is well defined,
>>>>>>and the math to add gain is simple, they shouldn't. The fact that
they
>>>>> all
>>>>>>use 32-bit float all the way through eliminates a difference
>>>>>>in data structure as well, and this just verifies that. There was
a
>
>>>>>>time
>>>>>
>>>>>>that supposedly Logic (v3, v4?) was partly 24-bit, or so the rumor
went,
>>>>>>but it's 32-bit float all
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76181 is a reply to message #76179] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 19:26 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
the way through now just as Sonar,
>>>>>>Nuendo/Cubase,
>>>>>
>>>>>>Samplitude/Sequoia, DP, Audition (I presume at least).
>>>>>>I don't know what Acid or Live use. Saw promotes a fixed point engine,
>>>>> but
>>>>>>I don't know if it is still 24-bit, or now 48 bit.
>>>>>>That was an intentional choice by the developer, but he's the only
one
>>> I
>>>>>
>>>>>>know of that stuck with 24-bit for summing
>>>>>>intentionally, esp. after the Digi Mix system mixer incident.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Long answer, but to sum up, it is certainly physically *possible* for
>>> a
>>>>>
>>>>>>developer to code something differently intentionally, but not
>>>>>>in reality likely since it would be breaking some basic fixed point
>or
>>>>>>floating point math rules. Where the differences really
>>>>>>showed up in the past is with PT Mix systems where the limitation was
>>>
>>>>>>really
>>>>>
>>>>>>significant - e.g. 24 bit with truncation at several stages.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That really isn't such an issue anymore. Given the differences in
>>>>>>workflow,
>>>>>
>>>>>>missing something in workflow or layout differences
>>>>>>is easy enough to do (e.g. Sonar doesn't have group and busses the
way
>>>>>>Nuendo does, as it's outputs are actually driver outputs,
>>>>>>not software busses, so in Sonar, busses are actually outputs, and
sub
>>>>>>busses are actually busses in Nuendo. There are no,
>>>>>>or at least I haven't found the equivalent of a Nuendo group in Sonar
>>> -
>>>>> that
>>>>>>affects the results of some tests (though not basic
>>>>>>summing) if not taken into account, but when taken into account, they
>>> work
>>>>>
>>>>>>exactly the same way).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So at least when talking about apps with 32-bit float all the way
>>>>>>through,
>>>>>
>>>>>>it's safe to say (since it has been proven) that summing isn't different
>>>>>
>>>>>>unless
>>>>>>there is an error somewhere, or variation in how the user duplicates
>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>same mix in two different apps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Imho, that's actually a very good thing - approaching a more consistent
>>>>>
>>>>>>basis for recording and
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I've found a workaround!!!! [message #76182 is a reply to message #76181] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 18:54 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
mixing from which users can make all
>>>>>>of the decisions as to how the final product will sound and not be
>>>>>>required
>>>>>
>>>>>>to decide when purchasing a pricey console, and have to
>>>>>>focus their business on clients who want "that sound". I believe we
>are
>>>>>
>>>>>>actually closer to the pure definition of recording now than
>>>>>>we once were.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I the answer is yes, then,the real task is to discover or rather
>>>>>>> un-cover
>>>>>>> what's say: Motu's vision of summing, versus Digidesign, versus
>>>>>>> Steinberg
>>>>>>> and so on..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's under the hood. To me and others,when Digi re-coded their
>>>>>>> summing
>>>>>>> engine, it was obvious that Pro Tools has an obvious top end (8k-10k)
>>>>>
>>>>>>> bump.
>>>>>>> Where as Steinberg's summing is very neutral.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>Hi Neil,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Jamie is right. And you aren't wacked out - you are thinking this
>>>>>>>>through
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>in a reasonable manner, but coming to the wrong
>>>>>>>>conclusion - easy to do given how confusing digital audio can be.
>
>>>>>>>>Each
>>>>>>> word
>>>>>>>>represents an amplitude
>>>>>>>>point on a single curve that is changing over time, and can vary
with
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>speed up to the Nyquist frequency (as Jamie described).
>>>>>>>>The complex harmonic content we hear is actually the frequency
>>>>>>>>modulation
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>a single waveform,
>>>>>>>>that over a small amount of time creates the sound we translate -
>we
>>>
>>>>>>>>don't
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>really hear a single sample at a time,
>>>>>>>>but thousands of samples at a time (1 sample alone could at most
>>>>>>>>represent
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>single positive or negative peak
>>>>>>>>of a 22,050Hz waveform).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>If one bit doesn't cancel, esp. if it's a higher order bit than number
>>>>> 24,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>you may hear, and will see that easily,
>>>>>>>>and the higher the bit in the dynamic range (higher order) the more
>>>>>>>>audible
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the difference.
>>>>>>>>Since each bit is 6dB of dynamic range, you can extrapolate how "loud"
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>bit's impact will be
>>>>>>>>if there is a variation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Now, obviously if we are talking about 1 sample in a 44.1k rate song,
>>>>> then
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>it simply be a
>>>>>>>>click (only audible if it's a high enough order bit) instead of an
>>>>>>>>obvious
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>musical difference, but that should never
>>>>>>>>happen in a phase cancellation test between identical files higher
>
>>>>>>>>than
>>>>>>> bit
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76185 is a reply to message #76181] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 19:21 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;>>>>>>the same start point, sample
>>>>>>>>accurately, and both are the same set of sample words at each sample
>>>>>>>>point,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>bit for bit, and one is phase inverted,
>>>>>>>>they will cancel through all 24 bits. For two files to cancel
>>>>>>>>completely
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>for the duration of the file, each and every bit in each word
>>>>>>>>must be the exact opposite of that same bit position in a word at
>the
>>>>> same
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>sample point. This is why zooming in on an FFT
>>>>>>>>of the full difference file is valuable as it can show any differences
>>>>> in
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the lower order bits that wouldn't be audible. So even if
>>>>>>>>there is no audible difference, the visual followup will show if
the
>>> two
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>files truly cancel even a levels below hearing, or
>>>>>>>>outside of a frequency change that we will perceive.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>When they don't cancel, usually there will be way more than 1 bit
>>>>>>>>difference - it's usually one or more bits in the words for
>>>>>>>>thousands of samples. From a musical standpoint this is usually
in
>>> a
>>>>>>>>frequency range (low freq, or high freq most often) - that will
>>>>>>>>show up as the difference between them, and that usually happens
due
>>> to
>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>form of processing difference between the files,
>>>>>>>>such as EQ, compression, frequency dependant gain changes, etc. That
>>> is
>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>>I believe you are thinking through, but when
>>>>>>>>talking about straight summing with no gain change (or known equal
>
>>>>>>>>gain
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>changes), we are only looking at linear, one for one
>>>>>>>>comparisons between the two files' frequency representations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>>>Dedric
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> The tests I did were completely blank down to -200 dB (far below
>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> last
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> bit). It's safe to say there is no difference, even in
>>>>>>>>>>> quantization noise, which by technical rights, is considered
below
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> level
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> of "cancellation" in such tests.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not necessarily talking about just the first bit or the
>>>>>>>>>> last bit, but also everything in between... what happens on bit
>>>>&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76186 is a reply to message #76185] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 19:48 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>>>>> #12, for example? Everything on bit #12 should be audible, but
>>>>>>>>>> in an a/b test what if thre are differences in what bits #8
>>>>>>>>>> through #12 sound like, but the amplutide is stll the same on
>>>>>>>>>> both files at that point, you'll get a null, right? Extrapolate
>>>>>>>>>> that out somewhat & let's say there are differences in bits #8
>>>>>>>>>> through #12 on sample points 3, 17, 1,000, 4,523, 7,560, etc,
>>>>>>>>>> etc through 43,972... Now this is breaking things down well
>>>>>>>>>> beyond what I think can be measured, if I'm not mistaken (I
>>>>>>>>>> dn't know of any way we could extract JUST that information
>>>>>>>>>> from each file & play it back for an a/b test; but would not
>>>>>>>>>> that be enough to have to "null-able" files that do actually
>>>>>>>>>> sound somewhat different?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess what I'm saying is that since each sample in a musical
>>>>>>>>>> track or full song file doesn't represent a pure, simple set of
>>>>>>>>>> content like a sample of a sine wave would - there's a whole
>>>>>>>>>> world of harmonic structure in each sample of a song file, and
>>>>>>>>>> I think (although I'll admit - I can't "prove") that there is
>>>>>>>>>> plenty of room for some variables between the first bit & the
>>>>>>>>>> last bit while still allowing for a null test to be successful.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No? Am I wacked out of my mind?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>Glad you are liking it Thad. After all my cheerleading and then Neil's
experience, I've sorta been dreading what would happen next and I've been
having dreams of my lurching through cobblestoned streets in a Carpathian
mountain village muttering guturally while being pursued by an enraged mob
of Parisites dressed as impoverished Bavarian elves, waving torches and
brandishing axes and pitchforks.
;o)
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:458d9913$1@linux...
>
> Hey all,
>
> This should be taken with some grains of salt, which if you remember are
> quite a bit larger than the ticks on a 100 mm fader using a 14 bit MIDI
> stream,
> but so far I'm really knocked out by the Creamware card. Keep in mind that
> it's been shown here that I'm deaf, not a 'pro,' and can't hear the
> difference
> between different brands of USB flash drives. I use a PNY when some people
> claim the SanDisks are punchier. The big problem I had with the CW gear
> before
> was stability, and it's only been a day but so far absolutely rock solid.
> 'Cause I'm deaf I only use 44.1 so I don't have clocking issues.
>
> I remembered the synths as being spectacular and they are much better than
> I remember. Frankly I don't think I've heard digital synthesis done
> better,
> with the possible exception of the OASYS PCI card, but I think I'd still
> give the CW gear the edge. Keep in mind I've owned a fair amount of
> Waldorf,
> Access, Nord, and Clavia gear over the years. There's no reason why it
> should
> sound better than native, DSP code is DSP code, and I wonder if maybe it's
> precisely because the gear is a little old that it sounds so good.
> Expectations
> were a little lower back then. In any case, they clearly went for sonic
> quality
> over polyphony with the synths. The Prophet is absolutely killer, the
> wavetable
> synths spit out psycho bells that are to die for, the minimoog is ripping.
> The B3 is very nice as well, and it can do thin and cheesey as well as it
> does big and crushing which I like because I tend to use organ sounds as
> minor decoration.
>
> The software has also gotten easier to use. I'd say it would make it a lot
> easier if someone had a bit of experience with modular synths, but I
> managed
> to get everything running and making noises without reading the manual.
> I'll
> have to get to that soon. I think it will be a minor hassle to get used to
> running the Scope environment while using Live/SX and I'm not sure how I'm
> going to bounce tracks to audio when I start hitting the wall on the DSP
> on the Scope board. Probably just run one of the ADAT outputs to one of
> the
> ADAT inputs. Having the big display and being able to use keyboard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76187 is a reply to message #76186] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 19:59 |
JeffH
Messages: 307
Registered: October 2007
Location: Wamic, OR
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
> shortcuts
> to switch virtual desktops will help a good bit.
>
> Which also brings up the one complaint I have about the CW card, the DSPs
> do get chewed up pretty quickly and they don't seem too smart. That is, if
> I open up a Prophet the DSP load goes up even when it's not doing
> anything.
> Most native plugs these days only take resources when they have something
> to do. I'm quite sure I could use two 14 DSP cards without trying too
> hard.
> Again, it will just involve a little time learning to manage the workflow
> and I'm willing to do that for synths and f/x this good.
>
> Paired up with a UAD card it's a damned impressive system. I might spring
> for another one of each, using the UAD for vintage type f/x and the CW for
> mixing and synths. I gotta say, it's a pretty enjoyable, creative
> combination.
>
>
> Now that I like it, we'll see CW out of business soon.
>
> TCBoops
hey, I know most of you guys are not Punk fans but you should still check
out
The Shods. They were one of Boston's biggest around the turn of the century.
Fantastic song writing killer harmonies and playing. They toured with the
Bostones and Weezer ripped em off. They have since pretty much split due
to the lead man's MS.
I am putting out their back catalog starting with their F#ck Off MCA album
Bamboozled, which I recorded on my 1"machine and Mackie board way back.8
buss
Here is the link:
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum? id=209035538&s=143441
They and I can use the support!
The Thanks for nuthin' CD is up against their will and they are receiving
no $$ from it yet,The crossover cable may be important, but most modern NIC cards are auto
sensing so they'll work out what cable is being used and adjust
appropriately.
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Neil" <OIUIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:458d4915$1@linux...
>
> Mike, Martin's right about the Windoze netowrking Wizard... I
> did this recently between two PC's & it took mere moments to get
> the software set up. Well, mere minutes, anyway.
>
> Make sure you get the right kind of cable to run between the
> two 'puters, though! It's GOT to be labeled as a "Crossover
> Cable". They're generally about 30 bucks for a ten or twelve
> footer. BTW, if you haven't gotten a card for the PC yet, Best
> Buy has them for $39 for the PCI cards - a little bit less than
> I've seen them at other retailers.
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Thank you very very much all!!!
>>Merry Christmas.
>>MR
>>
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:458ce4ef$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Hey Mike! On the Mac, go to help on the menu bar at the top and type
> in
>>"networking"
>>> or "networking a PC and a Mac". It should all be there, just scroll
>>> down
>>> for the answers.
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >I've got a Mac G4 (OSX 10.4) and a PC running Windows 98SE and Paris.
> I
>>> >want to be able to move .wav files made on the G4 over to Paris, and
> from
>>> >Paris back over to the Mac --if I want to apply FX there that I cannot
> in
>>> >Paris. As I understand it, the G4 has an ethernet card built in. I
>>assume
>>> >that I have to get a NIC card for the PC. Do I need to get some sort
> of
>>> >software for each machine so that the PC will see the Mac and vice
>>> >versa?
>>> >This is totally new territory. I wish it was as simple as plugging in
> a
>>> >cable between two boxes, but I fear it is not...
>>> >Thanks much,
>>> >MR
>>> >
>>> >
>>> ><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
>>> ><HTML><HEAD>
>>> ><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>>> >charset=3Diso-8859-1">
>>> ><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1555" name=3DGENERATOR>
>>> ><STYLE></STYLE>
>>> ></HEAD>
>>> ><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
>>> ><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I've got a Mac G4 (OSX 10.4) and a PC
> =
>>> >running=20
>>> >Windows 98SE and Paris. I want to be able to move .wav files made =
>>> >on the=20
>>> >G4 over to Paris, and from Paris back over to the Mac --if I want to
> =
>>> >apply FX=20
>>> >there that I cannot in Paris. As I understand it, the G4 has an =
>>> >ethernet=20
>>> >card built in. I assume that I have to get a NIC card for the PC. =
>>> >Do I=20
>>> >need to get some sort of software for each machine so that the PC will
> =
>>> >see the=20
>>> >Mac and vice versa? This is totally new territory. I wish it =
>>> >was as=20
>>> >simple as plugging in a cable between two boxes, but I fear it is=20
>>> >not...</FONT></DIV>
>>> ><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks much,</FONT></DIV>
>>> ><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>MR</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76188 is a reply to message #76187] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 20:09 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>>
>I love it cujo!!..Good work. The band is smokin. I'll get acopy this holliday
weekend..
LAMont
"cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote:
>
>oops
>
>hey, I know most of you guys are not Punk fans but you should still check
>out
>The Shods. They were one of Boston's biggest around the turn of the century.
>Fantastic song writing killer harmonies and playing. They toured with the
>Bostones and Weezer ripped em off. They have since pretty much split due
>to the lead man's MS.
>
>I am putting out their back catalog starting with their F#ck Off MCA album
>Bamboozled, which I recorded on my 1"machine and Mackie board way back.8
>buss
>
>Here is the link:
> http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum? id=209035538&s=143441
>
>They and I can use the support!
>The Thanks for nuthin' CD is up against their will and they are receiving
>no $$ from it yet,I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop. I've been working on songs for the
past few hours again and it's a devilishly enjoyable system. This is all
on my own electronic stuff. The CW gear might fade into the background a
bit if I start mixing Mold Monkies tunes, but then again it might not. I
can see the delays and reverbs on the CW card being useful in that context.
Thanks for doing the ranger work on this one. I was talking once to a Yale
computer person about a very young free software project I was using in production.
He said an early adopter was a person who crossed the bridge first, but that
I was ploughing straight through the river in a shitty old jeep. I took that
as a compliment though I don't think it was intended as one. You did the
jeep work on this one and I appreciate it.
TCB
"DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>Glad you are liking it Thad. After all my cheerleading and then Neil's
>experience, I've sorta been dreading what would happen next and I've been
>having dreams of my lurching through cobblestoned streets in a Carpathian
>mountain village muttering guturally while being pursued by an enraged mob
>of Parisites dressed as impoverished Bavarian elves, waving torches and
>brandishing axes and pitchforks.
>
>;o)
>
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:458d9913$1@linux...
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> This should be taken with some grains of salt, which if you remember are
>> quite a bit larger than the ticks on a 100 mm fader using a 14 bit MIDI
>> stream,
>> but so far I'm really knocked out by the Creamware card. Keep in mind
that
>> it's been shown here that I'm deaf, not a 'pro,' and can't hear the
>> difference
>> between different brands of USB flash drives. I use a PNY when some people
>> claim the SanDisks are punchier. The big problem I had with the CW gear
>> before
>> was stability, and it's only been a day but so far absolutely rock solid.
>> 'Cause I'm deaf I only use 44.1 so I don't have clocking issues.
>>
>> I remembered the synths as being spectacular and they are much better
than
>> I remember. Frankly I don't think I've heard digital synthesis done
>> better,
>> with the possible exception of the OASYS PCI card, but I think I'd still
>> give the CW gear the edge. Keep in mind I've owned a fair amount of
>> Waldorf,
>> Access, Nord, and Clavia gear over the years. There's no reason why it
>> should
>> sound better than native, DSP code is DSP code, and I wonder if maybe
it's
>> precisely because the gear is a little old that it sounds so good.
>> Expectations
>> were a little lower back then. In any case, they clearly went for sonic
>> quality
>> over polyphony with the synths. The Prophet is absolutely killer, the
>> wavetable
>> synths spit out psycho bells that are to die for, the minimoog is ripping.
>> The B3 is very nice as well, and it can do thin and cheesey as well as
it
>> does big and crushing which I like because I tend to use organ sounds
as
>> minor decoration.
>>
>> The software has also gotten easier to use. I'd say it would make it a
lot
>> easier if someone had a bit of experience with modular synths, but I
>> managed
>> to get everything running and making noises without reading the manual.
>> I'll
>> have to get to that soon. I think it will be a minor hassle to get used
to
>> running the Scope environment while using Live/SX and I'm not sure how
I'm
>> going to bounce tracks to audio when I start hitting the wall on the DSP
>> on the Scope board. Probably just run one of the ADAT outputs to one of
>> the
>> ADAT inputs. Having the big display and being able to use keyboard
>> shortcuts
>> to switch virtual desktops will help a good bit.
>>
>> Which also brings up the one complaint I have about the CW card, the DSPs
>> do get chewed up pretty quickly and they don't seem too smart. That is,
if
>> I open up a Prophet the DSP load goes up even when it's not doing
>> anything.
>> Most native plugs these days only take resources when they have something
>> to do. I'm quite sure I could use two 14 DSP cards without trying too
>> hard.
>> Again, it will just involve a little time learning to manage the workflow
>> and I'm willing to do that for synths and f/x this good.
>>
>> Paired up with a UAD card it's a damned impressive system. I might spring
>> for another one of each, using the UAD for vintage type f/x and the CW
for
>> mixing and synths. I gotta say, it's a pretty enjoyable, creative
>> combination.
>>
>>
>> Now that I like it, we'll see CW out of business soon.
>>
>> TCB
>
>well, thanks ;o).............but as is always the case with just about
anything, there was an ancient predecessor......in this case, our Greek
compadre, Dimitrios. He's been using this system for years and had it not
been for him, neither one of us might be grinnin' right now. I've got a free
IRQ and I'm seriously considering getting a 4th card m'self. If I do, it's
likely to be a "pro" version. The more DSP, the better, especially with this
platform. I'm not a synth guy, but these synths are nice. I like the
aggressive character that seems present in every one I have tried so far.
It's like no matter how much you scoop your velocity curve, it still seems
to want to knock down a wall.
Cheers,
Deej
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:458dbe99$1@linux...
>
> I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop. I've been working on songs for the
> past few hours again and it's a devilishly enjoyable system. This is all
> on my own electronic stuff. The CW gear might fade into the background a
> bit if I start mixing Mold Monkies tunes, but then again it might not. I
> can see the delays and reverbs on the CW card being useful in that
> context.
>
>
> Thanks
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76189 is a reply to message #76188] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 20:30 |
JeffH
Messages: 307
Registered: October 2007
Location: Wamic, OR
|
Senior Member |
|
|
for doing the ranger work on this one. I was talking once to a Yale
> computer person about a very young free software project I was using in
> production.
> He said an early adopter was a person who crossed the bridge first, but
> that
> I was ploughing straight through the river in a shitty old jeep. I took
> that
> as a compliment though I don't think it was intended as one. You did the
> jeep work on this one and I appreciate it.
>
> TCB
>
> "DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>>Glad you are liking it Thad. After all my cheerleading and then Neil's
>>experience, I've sorta been dreading what would happen next and I've been
>
>>having dreams of my lurching through cobblestoned streets in a Carpathian
>
>>mountain village muttering guturally while being pursued by an enraged mob
>
>>of Parisites dressed as impoverished Bavarian elves, waving torches and
>
>>brandishing axes and pitchforks.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:458d9913$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Hey all,
>>>
>>> This should be taken with some grains of salt, which if you remember are
>>> quite a bit larger than the ticks on a 100 mm fader using a 14 bit MIDI
>
>>> stream,
>>> but so far I'm really knocked out by the Creamware card. Keep in mind
> that
>>> it's been shown here that I'm deaf, not a 'pro,' and can't hear the
>>> difference
>>> between different brands of USB flash drives. I use a PNY when some
>>> people
>>> claim the SanDisks are punchier. The big problem I had with the CW gear
>
>>> before
>>> was stability, and it's only been a day but so far absolutely rock
>>> solid.
>>> 'Cause I'm deaf I only use 44.1 so I don't have clocking issues.
>>>
>>> I remembered the synths as being spectacular and they are much better
> than
>>> I remember. Frankly I don't think I've heard digital synthesis done
>>> better,
>>> with the possible exception of the OASYS PCI card, but I think I'd still
>>> give the CW gear the edge. Keep in mind I've owned a fair amount of
>>> Waldorf,
>>> Access, Nord, and Clavia gear over the years. There's no reason why it
>
>>> should
>>> sound better than native, DSP code is DSP code, and I wonder if maybe
> it's
>>> precisely because the gear is a little old that it sounds so good.
>>> Expectations
>>> were a little lower back then. In any case, they clearly went for sonic
>
>>> quality
>>> over polyphony with the synths. The Prophet is absolutely killer, the
>
>>> wavetable
>>> synths spit out psycho bells that are to die for, the minimoog is
>>> ripping.
>>> The B3 is very nice as well, and it can do thin and cheesey as well as
> it
>>> does big and crushing which I like because I tend to use organ sounds
> as
>>> minor decoration.
>>>
>>> The software has also gotten easier to use. I'd say it would make it a
> lot
>>> easier if someone had a bit of experience with modular synths, but I
>>> managed
>>> to get everything running and making noises without reading the manual.
>
>>> I'll
>>> have to get to that soon. I think it will be a minor hassle to get used
> to
>>> running the Scope environment while using Live/SX and I'm not sure how
> I'm
>>> going to bounce tracks to audio when I start hitting the wall on the DSP
>>> on the Scope board. Probably just run one of the ADAT outputs to one of
>
>>> the
>>> ADAT inputs. Having the big display and being able to use keyboard
>>> shortcuts
>>> to switch virtual desktops will help a good bit.
>>>
>>> Which also brings up the one complaint I have about the CW card, the
>>> DSPs
>>> do get chewed up pretty quickly and they don't seem too smart. That is,
> if
>>> I open up a Prophet the DSP load goes up even when it's not doing
>>> anything.
>>> Most native plugs these days only take resources when they have
>>> something
>>> to do. I'm quite sure I could use two 14 DSP cards without trying too
>
>>> hard.
>>> Again, it will just involve a little time learning to manage the
>>> workflow
>>> and I'm willing to do that for synths and f/x this good.
>>>
>>> Paired up with a UAD card it's a damned impressive system. I might
>>> spring
>>> for another one of each, using the UAD for vintage type f/x and the CW
> for
>>> mixing and synths. I gotta say, it's a pretty enjoyable, creative
>>> combination.
>>>
>>>
>>> Now that I like it, we'll see CW out of business soon.
>>>
>>> TCB
>>
>>
>Actually Fredo never said Steinberg's way of coding 32-bit was different,
he just said he didn't know how Sonar would cancel below -144dB in the same
test case *unless* it was handled differently - just a supposition on his
part. The truth is, both apps responded identically in every test I've thrown
at them. The difference is that Sonar's definition of busses is one level
lower than Nuendo's, so duplicating the test required figuring that out (basically
Sonar doesn't seem to have groups per se, and output "busses" are really
just driver output assignments, not true busses, where Nuendo has busses
that can be assigned to outputs; Sonar has some form of sub-busses (can't
recall the name) that act the same as Nuendo's main busses - semantics, but
it makes Nuendo more flexible with routing, grouping, etc). So when using
the same buss routing (e.g. a sub-buss to another sub-buss), Sonar produced
the exact same result.
Also Fredo's post is about what happens when you clip a channel or buss -
that isn't a normal mixing condition since it creates distortion and that's
where he stated that a 64-bit engine would (he is assuming) provide greater
headroom.
Regarding 64-bit in general, check into some comments from Joe Bryan of UA
and a few others. Just having 64-bits doesn't automatically mean audio engines
will sound "better" (or different) but there may be some processing tradeoffs.
The real advantage I look forward to is a 64-bit app and OS (not the same
as 64-bit audio engine of course) to enable addressing more than 2G (really
3G or so) for sample libraries.
Regards,
Dedric
"LaMont" <jjppro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>But, Fredo explains that Steinberg's way of coding a 32 bit audio engine
is
>different than say Cakewalk..And explained the trade-offs and decisions
that
>are made to achieve what a developer thinks is good audio.
>
>And, Why would I(if I were a DAW devloper) want my audio engine to sound
>like my competitors? I would not..This is where the trade-off decisions
come
>from.
>
>However, it was interesting to rad wen he stated that 'all whill be fixed
>(aka: no trade-offs) when Seinberg goes native 64bit.
>
>That says to me that they (Steinberg) knows that their 32bit audio engine
>is not wide enough to handle loads of audio, with vstis, plugins, without
>introducing or trading-off sound quality..Interesting.
>
>"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>
>>I was part of that thread (kdm) and did those tests - I actually took them
>>a step further than Jake or Fredo. As you can see I incorrectly thought
>>there was something in the group summing process, but it was just my boneheaded
>>interpretation of output data (using a small sample section for FFT rather
>>than the full file mainly). :-((
>>
>>What Fredo is talking about is when you go over 0dBFS what happens to the
>>"over" data, and the references to truncation are in that case, which isn't
>>normal for mixing. This is the same decision every native DAW developer
>>has to make.
>>
>>We were actually discussing what happens when you sum to a group vs. summing
>>to the main bus, without overs. I did my test with all files summing to
>>-20dB, so there was no chance of pushing the upper limits of 32-bit float's
>>truncation back down to 24-bits. And I actually simplified it by using
>two
>>copies of the same file (just as Fredo did), one phase inverted, both sample
>>aligned. They cancelled to below 24 bits just as expected, and just as
>they
>>should. The varia
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76190 is a reply to message #76186] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 20:40 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
tions below 24 bits that I saw (and thought were above
>>24-bits at one point) are correlation of lower frequencies when gain and
>>equivalent reduction are introduced (which is what Chuck stated that Paris
>>does up front on every track). That really doesn't impact the audio itself
>>since data below -136dB is quantization noise for 24-bit audio.
>>
>>Sonar, Nuendo, Cubase 4 and Sequoia all behaved exactly the same way in
>this
>>test - which tells me they are handling the LSB's the same way. When data
>>is summed to groups, there will be quantization noise below -136dB. This
>>is completely normal for any native DAW and they all are subject to it.
>
>>As you might read in the thread my conclusion was that we proved digital
>>audio theory exists - e.g. no uncharted territory, no digital audio frontiers,
>>no bugs in Nuendo. yeeha. But that's what I get for second guessing talented
>>developers. ;-)
>>
>>Fwiw, to take it a step further, Samplitude/Sequoia and Nuendo handle overs,
>>or "into the red" identically. I checked that too a while back after the
>>reports of extra headroom, etc in Samplitude. Believe me, I've tried hard
>>to find where any differences might appear, not just noticeable differences,
>>but any differences at the lowest levels, but it seems the major native
>DAW
>>players are making the same decisions when it comes to truncation, etc,
>and
>>there really aren't that many to make. In my tests, dither really wasn't
>>an issue (I turned it off in all DAWs I tested just to test with pure truncation).
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dedric
>>
>>"LaMOnt" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Dedric, check out this post from our dear friend Fredo: Neundo Moderator:
>>>Explaining how Steingberg's audio engine works. Note the trade-offs..Meaning,
>>>Steinberg's way of coding an audio-engine 32bit float is different than
>>say
>>>Magix Samplitude:
>>>
>>>Fredo
>>>Administrative Moderator
>>>
>>>
>>>Joined: 29 Dec 2004
>>>Posts: 4213
>>>Location: Belgium
>>> Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:33 pm Post subject:
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------
>>>
>>>I think I see where the problem is.
>>>In my scenario's I don't have any track that goes over 0dBfs, but I have
>>>always lowered one channel to compensate with another.
>>>So, I never whent over the 0dB fs limit.
>>>
>>>Here's the explanation:
>>>
>>>As soon as you go over 0dB, technically you are entering the domain of
>distortion.
>>>
>>>In a 32bit FP mixer, that is not the case since there is unlimited headroom.
>>>
>>>
>>>Now follow me step by step please - read this slow and make sure you understand
>>>-
>>>
>>>At the end of each "stage", there is an adder (a big calculator) which
>adds
>>>all the numbers from the individual tracks that are routed to this "adder".
>>>
>>>The numbers are kept in the 80-bit registers and then brought back to
32bit
>>>float.
>>>This process of bringing back the numbers from 80-bit (and more) to 32bit
>>>is kept to an absolute minimum.
>>>This adding/bringing back to 32bit is done at 3 places: After a plugin
>slot
>>>(VST-specs for all plugin manufacturers) - Group Tracks and Master Tracks.
>>>
>>>
>>>Now, as soon as you boost the volume above 0dB, you get more than 32bits.
>>>Stay below 0dB and you will stay below 32 bits.
>>>When the adders dump their results, the numbers are brought back from
any
>>>number of bits (say 60bit) to 32 bit float.
>>>These numbers are simply truncated which results in distortion; that's
>the
>>>noise/residue you find way down low.
>>>There is an algortithm that protects us from additive errors - so these
>>errors
>>>can never come into the audible range.
>>>So, as soon as you go over 0dB, you will see these kind of artifacts.
>>>
>>>It is debatable if this needs to be dithered or not. The problem -still
>>is-
>>>that it is very difficult to dither in a Floating Point environment.
>>>Fact remains that the error shouldn't be bigger than 2 to 3 LSB's.
>>>
>>>Is this a problem?
>>>In real world applictations: NO.
>>>In scientific -unrealistic- tests (forcing the erro ): YES.
>>>
>>>The alternative is having a Fixed point mixer, where you already would
>be
>>>in trouble as soon as you boost one channel over 0dBfs. (or merge two
files
>>>that are @ 0dB)
>>>Also, this problem will be pretty much gone as soon as we switch to the
>>64
>>>bit engine.
>>>
>>>
>>>For the record, the test where Jake hears "music" as residue must be flawed.
>>>You should hear noise/distortion from square waves.
>>>
>>>HTH
>>>
>>>Fredo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>>>>I can't tell you why you hear ProTools differently than Nuendo using
a
>>
>>>>single file.
>>>>There isn't any voodoo in the software, or hidden character enhancing
>dsp.
>>>
>>>>I'll see if
>>>>I can round up an M-Powered system to compare with next month.
>>>>
>>>>For reference, everytime I open Sequoia I think I might hear a broader,
>>>
>>>>clean,
>>>>and almost flat (spectrum, not depth) sound, but I don't - it's the same
>>>as
>>>>Nuendo, fwiw.
>>>>Also I don't think what I was referring to was a theory from Chuck -
>I
>>>
>>>>believe that was what he
>>>>discovered in the code.
>>>>
>>>>Di
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76191 is a reply to message #76185] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 21:39 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gital mixers all have different preamps and converters. Unless you
>are
>>>
>>>>bypassing every
>>>>EQ and converter and going digital in and out to the same converter when
>>>
>>>>comparing, it would be hard
>>>>to say the mix engine itself sounds different than another mixer, but
>taken
>>>
>>>>as a whole, then
>>>>certainly they may very well sound different. In addition, hardware
digital
>>>>mixers may use a variety of different paths between the I/O, channel
>>>>processing, and summing,
>>>>though most are pretty much software mixers on a single chip or set of
>>dsps
>>>
>>>>similar to ProTools,
>>>>with I/O and a hardware surface attached.
>>>>
>>>>I know it may be hard to separate the mix engine as software in either
>>a
>>>
>>>>native DAW
>>>>or a digital mixer, from the hardware that translates the audio to something
>>>
>>>>we hear,
>>>>but that's what is required when comparing summing. The hardware can
>
>>>>significantly change
>>>>what we hear, so comparing digital mixers really isn't of as much interest
>>>
>>>>as comparing native
>>>>DAWs in that respect - unless you are looking to buy one of course.
>>>>
>>>>Even though I know you think manufacturers are trying to add something
>>to
>>>
>>>>give them an edge, I am 100%
>>>>sure that isn't the case - rather they are trying to add or change as
>little
>>>
>>>>as possible in order to give
>>>>them the edge. Their end of digital audio isn't about recreating the
>past,
>>>
>>>>but improving upon it.
>>>>As we've discussed and agreed before, the obsession with recreating
>>>>"vintage" technology is as much
>>>>fad as it is a valuable creative asset. There is no reason we shouldn't
>>>
>>>>have far superior hardware and software EQs and comps
>>>>than 20, 30 or 40 years ago. No reason at all, other than market demand,
>>>
>>>>but the majority of software, and new
>>>>hardware gear on the market has a vintage marketing tagline with it.
>>>>Companies will sell any bill of
>>>>goods if customers will buy it.
>>>>
>>>>There's nothing unique about the summing in Nuendo, Cubase, Sequoia/Samp,
>>>>or Sonar, and it's pretty safe to include Logic and DP in that list as
>>well.
>>>
>>>>One of the reasons I test
>>>>these things is to be sure my DAW isn't doing something wrong, or something
>>>
>>>>I don't know about.
>>>>
>>>>Vegas - I use it for video conversions and have never done any critical
>>>
>>>>listening tests with it. What I have heard
>>>>briefly didn't sound any different. It certainly looks plain vanilla
>
>>>>though. What you are describing is exactly
>>>>what I would say about the GUIs of each of those apps, not that it means
>>>
>>>>anything. Just interesting.
>>>>
>>>>That's one reason I listen eyes closed and double check with phase
>>>>cancellation tests and FFTs - I am
>>>>influenced creatively by the GUI to some degree. I actually like Cubase
>>>4's
>>>>GUI better than Nuendo 3.2,
>>>>though there are only slight visual differences (some workflow differences
>>>
>>>>are a definite improvement for me though).
>>>>
>>>>ProTools' GUI always made me want to write one dimensional soundtracks
>>in
>>>
>>>>mono for public utilities, accounting offices
>>>>or the IRS while reading my discreet systems analysis textbook - it was
>>>also
>>>>grey. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Dedric
>>>>
>>>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:458c82fd$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric, my simple test is simple..
>>>>> Using the same audio interface, with the same stereo file..null-ed
to
>>>
>>>>> zero..No
>>>>> eq, for fx. Master fader on zero..
>>>>>
>>>>> Nuendo, Pro-Tools -Mpowered(native)... yields a sonic difference that
>>>I
>>>>> have
>>>>> referenced before.. The sound coming from PT-M has a nice top end ,
>where
>>>>> as Neundo has a nice flatter sound quality.
>>>>> Same audio interface. M-audio 410..Using Mackies & Blue-Sky pro monitors..
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76192 is a reply to message #76189] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 21:03 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>>>>
>>>>> Same test at the big room..PT-HD & Neundo Logic Audio(macG5-Dual) Using
>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>> 192 interface.
>>>>> Same results..But adding Logic audio's sound ..(Broad, thick)
>>>>>
>>>>> Somethings going on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chucks post about how paris handles audio is a theory..Only Edmund
can
>>>
>>>>> truly
>>>>> give us the goods on what's really what..
>>>>>
>>>>> I disagree that manufactuers don;t set out o put a sonic print on their
>>>
>>>>> products.
>>>>> I think they do.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have been fortunate to work on some digital mixers and I can tell
>you
>>>
>>>>> that
>>>>> each one has their own sound. The Sony Dmx-100 was modeled after SSL
>>4000g
>>>>> (like it's Big Brother).And you what? That board (Dmx-100) sound very
>>>warm
>>>>> and it's eq tries to behave and sound just like an SSL.. Unlike he
Yamaha
>>>>> Dm2000(version 1.x) which has a very Clean, neutral sound..However,
>some
>>>>> complained that it was tooo Vanila and thus, Yamaha add a version 2.0
>>>
>>>>> which
>>>>> added Vintage type Eq's, modeled analog input gain saturation fx too
>>give
>>>>> the user a choice Btw Clean and Neutral vs sonic Character.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if digital conoles can be given a sonic character, why not a software
>>>>> mixer?
>>>>> The truth is, there are some folks who want a neutral mixer and then
>>there
>>>>> are others who want a sonic footprint imparted. and these can be coded
>>>in
>>>>> the digital realm.
>>>>> The apllies with the manufactuers. They too have their vision on what
>>>They
>>>>> think and want their product to sound.
>>>>>
>>>>> I love reading on gearslutz the posts from Plugin developers and their
>>>
>>>>> interpretations
>>>>> and opinions about what makes their Neve 1073 Eq better and what goes
>>>into
>>>>> making their version sound like it does.. Each Developer has a different
>>>>> vision as to what the Neve 1073 should sound like. And yet they all
>sound
>>>>> good , but slightly different.
>>>>>
>>>>> You stated that you use Vegas. Well as you know, Vegas has a very generic
>>>>> sound..Just plain and simple. But, i bet you can tell the difference
>>>on
>>>>> your system when you play that same file in Neundo (No, fx, eq,
>>>>> null-edzerro)..
>>>>> ???
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Lamont - what is the output chain you are using for each app when
>>>>>>comparing
>>>>>
>>>>>>the file in Nuendo
>>>>>>vs ProTools? On the same PC, I presume (and is this PT HD or M-Powered?)?
>>>>>>Since these can't use the same output driver, you would have to depend
>>>on
>>>>>
>>>>>>the D/A being
>>>>>>the same, but clocking will be different unless you have a master clock,
>>>>> and
>>>>>>both interfaces
>>>>>>are locking with the same accuracy. This was one of the issues that
>>came
>>>>> up
>>>>>>at Lynn Fuston's
>>>>>>D/A converter shootout - when do you lock to external clock and incur
>>>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>resulting jitter,
>>>>>>and when do you trust the internal clock - and if you do lock externally,
>>>>>
>>>>>>how good is the PLL
>>>>>>in the slave device? These issues can cause audible changes in the
>top
>>>>> end
>>>>>>that have nothing to do
>>>>>>with the software itself. If you say that PTHD through the same converter
>>>>>
>>>>>>output as Nuendo (via? RME?
>>>>>>Lynx?) using the same master clock, sounds different playing a single
>>>
>>>>>>audio
>>>>>
>>>>>>file, then I take your word
>>>>>>for it. I can't tell you why that is happening - only that an audible
>>>>>>difference really shouldn't happen due
>>>>>>to the software alone - not with a single audio file, esp. since I've
>>>
>>>>>>heard
>>>>>
>>>>>>and seen PTHD audio cancel with
>>>>>>native DAWs. Just passing a single 16 or 24 bit track down the buss
>>>to
>>>>> the
>>>>>>output driver should
>>>>>>be, and usually is, completely transparent, bit for bit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The same audio file played through the same converters should only
sound
>>>>>
>>>>>>different if something in
>>>>>>the chain is different - be it clocking, gain or some degree of
>>>>>>unintended,
>>>>>
>>>>>>errant dsp processing. Every DAW should
>>>>>>pass a single audio file without altering a single bit. That's a basic
>>>
>>>>>>level
>>>>>
>>>>>>of accuracy we should always
>>>>>>expect of any DAW. If that accuracy isn't there, you can be sure a
>heavy
>>>>>
>>>>>>mix will be altered in ways you
>>>>>>didn't intend, even though you would end up mixing with that factor
>in
>>>
>>>>>>place
>>>>>
>>>>>>(e.g. you still mix for what
>>>>>>you want to hear regardless of what the platform does to each audio
>track
>>>>> or
>>>>>>channel).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In fact you should be able to send a stereo audio track out SPDIF or
>>>>>>lightpipe to another DAW, record it
>>>>>>bring the recorded file back in, line them up to the first bit, and
>have
>>>>>
>>>>>>them cancel on and inverted phase
>>>>>>test. I did this with Nuendo and Cubase 4 on separate machines just
>>to
>>>>> be
>>>>>>sure my master clocking and
>>>>>>slave sync was accurate - it worked perfectly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Also be sure there isn't a variation in the gain even by 0.1 dB between
>>>>> the
>>>>>>two. There shouldn't
>>>>>>and I wouldn't expect there to be one. Also could PT be set for a
>>>>>>different
>>>>>
>>>>>>pan law? Shouldn't make a
>>>>>>difference even if comparing two mono panned files to their stereo
>>>>>>interleaved equivalent, but for sake
>>>>>>of completeness it's worth checking as well. A variation in the output
>>>>>
>>>>>>chain, be it drivers, audio card
>>>>>>card, or converters would be the most likely culprit here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The reason DAW manufacturers wouldn't add any sonic "character"
>>>>>>intentionally is that the
>>>>>>ultimate goal from day one with recording has been to accurately reproduce
>>>>>
>>>>>>what we hear.
>>>>>>We developed a musical penchant for sonic character because the hardware
>>>>>
>>>>>>just wasn't accurate,
>>>>>>and what it did often sent us down new creative paths - even if by
force
>>>>> -
>>>>>>and we decided it was
>>>>>>preferred that way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Your point about what goes into the feature presets to sell synths
is
>>>
>>>>>>right
>>>>>
>>>>>>for sure, but synths are about
>>>>>>character and getting that "perfect piano" or crystal clear bell pad,
>>>or
>>>>> fat
>>>>>>punchy bass without spending
>>>>>>a mint on development, adding 50G onboard sample libraries, or costing
>>>
>>>>>>$15k,
>>>>>
>>>>>>so what they
>>>>>>lack in actual synthesis capabilities, they make up with EQ and effects
>>>>> on
>>>>>>the output. That's been the case
>>>>>>for years, at least since we had effects on synths at least. But even
>>>
>>>>>>with
>>>>>
>>>>>>modern synths such as the Fantom,
>>>>>>Tritons, etc, which are great synths all around, of course the coolest,
>>>>>
>>>>>>widest and biggest patches
>>>>>>will make the biggest impression - so in come the EQs, limiters, comps,
>>>>>
>>>>>>reverbs, chorus, etc. The best
>>>>>>way to find out if a synth is really good is to bypass all effects
and
>>>see
>>>>>
>>>>>>what happens. Most are pretty
>>>>>>good these days, but about half the time, there are presets that fall
>>>>>>completely flat in fx bypass.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>DAWs aren't designed to put a sonic fingerprint on a sound the way
synths
>>>>>
>>>>>>are - they are designed
>>>>>>to *not* add anything - to pass through what we create as users, with
>>>no
>>>>>
>>>>>>alteration (or as little as possible)
>>>>>>beyond what we add with intentional processing (EQ, comps, etc).
>>>>>>Developers
>>>>>
>>>>>>would find no pride
>>>>>>in hearing that their DAW sounds anything different than whatever is
>>being
>>>>>
>>>>>>played back in it,
>>>>>>and the concept is contrary to what AES and IEEE proceedings on the
>issue
>>>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76194 is a reply to message #76192] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 21:23 |
JeffH
Messages: 307
Registered: October 2007
Location: Wamic, OR
|
Senior Member |
|
|
br />
>>>>>>Also what Paris did is use a greater bit depth on the hardware than
>
>>>>>>ProTools
>>>>>
>>>>>>did - at the time PT was just
>>>>>>bring Mix+ systems to market, or they had been out for a year or two
>>(if
>>>>> I
>>>>>>have my timeline right) - they
>>>>>>were 24-bit fixed all the way through. Logic and Cubase were native
>>DAWs,
>>>>>
>>>>>>but native was still too slow
>>>>>>to compete with hardware hybrids. Paris trumped them all by running
>>
>>>>>>32-bit
>>>>>
>>>>>>float natively (not new really, but
>>>>>>better than sticking to 24-bit) and 56 or so bits in hardware instead
>>>of
>>>>>
>>>>>>going to Motorola DSPs at 24.
>>>>>>The onboard effects were also a step up from anything out there, so
>the
>>>>> demo
>>>>>>did sound good.
>>>>>>I don't recall which, but one of the demos, imho, wasn't so good (some
>>>>>>sloppy production and
>>>>>>vocals in spots, IIRC), so I only listened to it once. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Coupled with the gain drop and buss makeup, this all gave it a "headroom"
>>>>> no
>>>>>>one else had. With very nice
>>>>>>onboard effects, Paris jumped ahead of anything else out there easily,
>>>and
>>>>>
>>>>>>still respectably holds its' own today
>>>>>>in that department.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Most demos I hear (when I listen to them) vary in quality, usually
not
>>>so
>>>>>
>>>>>>great in some area. But if a demo does
>>>>>>sound great, then it at least says that the product is capable of
at
>>>
>>>>>>least
>>>>>
>>>>>>that level of performance, and it can
>>>>>>only help improve a prospective buyer's impression of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:458c14c0$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dedric good post..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I have PT-M-Powered/M-audio 410 interface for my laptop
and
>>>it
>>>>>
>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>> that same sound (no eq, zero fader) that HD does. I know their use
>>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>> 48 bit fix mixer. I load up the same file in Nuendo (no eq, zero
>>>>>>> fader)..results.
>>>>>>> different sonic character.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PT having a top end touch..Nuendo, nice smooth(flat) sound. And I'm
>>>just
>>>>>>> taking about a stereo wav file nulled with no eq..nothing
>>>>>>> ..zilch..nada..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now, there are devices (keyboards, dum machines) on the market today
>>>
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> have a Master Buss Compressor and EQ set to on with the top end notched
>>>>>
>>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>> Why? because it gives their product an competitive advantageover
the
>>>>>>> competition..
>>>>>>> Ex: Yahama's Motif ES, Akai's MPC 1000, 2500, Roland's Fantom.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, why would'nt a DAW manufactuer code in an extra (ooommf) to make
>>>
>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>> DAW sound better. Especially, given the "I hate Digtal Summing" crowd?
>>>>>
>>>>>>> And,
>>>>>>> If I'm a DAW manufactuer, what would give my product a sonic edge
>over
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> competition?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We live in the "louder is better" audio world these days, so a DAW
>>that
>>>>>
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> catch my attention 'sonically" will probaly will get the sell. That's
>>>>> what
>>>>>>> happend to me back in 1997 when I heard Paris. I was floored!!! Still
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> this day, nothing has floored me like that "Road House Blues Demo"
>>I
>>>
>>>>>>> heard
>>>>>>> on Paris.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Was it the hardware ? was it the software. I remember talking with
>>
>>>>>>> Edmund
>>>>>>> at the 2000 winter Namm, and told me that he & Steve set out to
>>>>>>> reproduce
>>>>>>> the sonics of big buck analog board (eq's) and all.. And, summing
>was
>>>>> a
>>>>>>> big
>>>>>>> big issue for them because they (ID) thought that nobody has gotten
>>>>>>> it(summing)
>>>>>>> right. And by right, they meant, behaved like a console with a wide
>>>lane
>>>>>>> for all of those tracks..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:458be8d5$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Okay...
>>>>>>>>> I guess what I'm saying is this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Is it possible that diferent DAW manufactuers "code" their app
>>>>>>>>> differently
>>>>>>>>> for sound results.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Of course it is *possible* to do this, but only if the DAW has a
>>>>>>>>specific
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>sound shaping purpose
>>>>>>>>beyond normal summing/mixing. Users talk about wanting developers
>>to
>>>>> add
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>"Neve sound" or "API sound" option to summing engines,
>>>>>>>>but that's really impractical given the amount of dsp required to
>make
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>decent emulation (with convolution, dynamic EQ functions,
>>>>>>>>etc). For sake of not eating up all cpu processing, that could likely
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>only
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>surface as is a built in EQ, which
>>>>>>>>no one wants universally in summing, and anyone can add at will already.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So it hasn't happened yet and isn't likely to as it detours from
the
>>>
>>>>>>>>basic
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>tenant of audio recording - recreate what comes in as
>>>>>>>>accurately as possible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>What Digi did in recoding their summing engine was try to recover
>some
>>>>>>>>of the damage done by the 24-bit buss in Mix systems. Motorola 56k
>>dsps
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>24-bit fixed point chips and I think
>>>>>>>>the new generation (321?) still is, but they use double words now
>for
>>>>>>>>48-bits). And though plugins could process at 48-bit by
>>>>>>>>doubling up and using upper and lower 24-bit words for 48-bit outputs,
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>buss
>>>>>>>>between chips was 24-bits, so they had to dither to 24-bits after
>every
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>plugin. The mixer (if I recall correctly) also
>>>>>>>>had a 24-bit buss, so what Digi did is to add a dither stage to the
>>>
>>>>>>>>mixer
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>prevent this
>>>>>>>>constant truncation of data. 24-bits isn't enough to cover summing
>>>for
>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>than a few tracks without
>>>>>>>>losing information in the 16-bit world, and in the 24-bit world some
>>>>>>>>information will be lost, at least at the lowest levels.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Adding a dither stage (though I think they did more than that - perhaps
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>implement a 48-bit double word stage as well),
>>>>>>>>simply smoothed over the truncation that was happening, but it didn't
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>solve
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the problem, so with HD
>>>>>>>>they went to a double-word path - throughout I believe, including
>the
>>>>> path
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>between chips. I believe the chips
>>>>>>>>are still 24-bit, but by doubling up the processing (yes at a cost
>>of
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>twice
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the overhead), they get a 48-bit engine.
>>>>>>>>This not only provided better headroom, but greater resolution.
Higher
>>>>>>> bit
>>>>>>>>depths subdivide the amplitude with greater resolution, and that's
>>>>>>>>really where we get the definition of dynamic range - by lowering
>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>signal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>to quantization noise ratio.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>With DAWs that use 32-bit floating point math all the way through,
>>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>only
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>reason for altering the summing
>>>>>>>>is by error, and that's an error that would actually be hard to make
>>>and
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>past a very basic alpha stage of testing.
>>>>>>>>There is a small difference in fixed point math and floating point
>>math,
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>at least a theoretical difference in how it affects audio
>>>>>>>>in certain cases, but not necessarily in the result for calculating
>>>gain
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>either for the same audio file. Where any differences might show
>up
>>>is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>complicated, and I believe only appear at levels below 24-bit (or
>in
>>>>>>>>headroom with tracks pushed beyond 0dBFS), or when/if
>>>>>>>>there areany differences in where each amplitude level is quantized.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Obviously there can be differences if the DAW has to use varying
bit
>>>>>>>>depths
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>throughout a single summing path to accomodate hardware
>>>>>>>>as well as software summing, since there may be truncation or rounding
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>along
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the way, but that impacts the lowest bit
>>>>>>>>level, and hence - spacial reproduction, reverb tails perhaps, and
>>>>>>>>"depth",
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>not the levels most music so the differences are most
>>>>>>>>often more subtle than not. But most modern DAWs have eliminated
>those
>>>>&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76196 is a reply to message #76194] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 21:32 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
th to add gain is simple, they shouldn't. The fact that
>>they
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>use 32-bit float all the way through eliminates a difference
>>>>>>>>in data structure as well, and this just verifies that. There was
>>a
>>>
>>>>>>>>time
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>that supposedly Logic (v3, v4?) was partly 24-bit, or so the rumor
>>went,
>>>>>>>>but it's 32-bit float all the way through now just as Sonar,
>>>>>>>>Nuendo/Cubase,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Samplitude/Sequoia, DP, Audition (I presume at least).
>>>>>>>>I don't know what Acid or Live use. Saw promotes a fixed point engine,
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>I don't know if it is still 24-bit, or now 48 bit.
>>>>>>>>That was an intentional choice by the developer, but he's the only
>>one
>>>>> I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>know of that stuck with 24-bit for summing
>>>>>>>>intentionally, esp. after the Digi Mix system mixer incident.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Long answer, but to sum up, it is certainly physically *possible*
>for
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>developer to code something differently intentionally, but not
>>>>>>>>in reality likely since it would be breaking some basic fixed point
>>>or
>>>>>>>>floating point math rules. Where the differences really
>>>>>>>>showed up in the past is with PT Mix systems where the limitation
>was
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>really
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>significant - e.g. 24 bit with truncation at several stages.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>That really isn't such an issue anymore. Given the differences in
>>>>>>>>workflow,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>missing something in workflow or layout differences
>>>>>>>>is easy enough to do (e.g. Sonar doesn't have group and busses the
>>way
>>>>>>>>Nuendo does, as it's outputs are actually driver outputs,
>>>>>>>>not software busses, so in Sonar, busses are actually outputs, and
>>sub
>>>>>>>>busses are actually busses in Nuendo. There are no,
>>>>>>>>or at least I haven't found the equivalent of a Nuendo group in Sonar
>>>>> -
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>affects the results of some tests (though not basic
>>>>>>>>summing) if not taken into account, but when taken into account,
they
>>>>> work
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>exactly the same way).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So at least when talking about apps with 32-bit float all the way
>
>>>>>>>>through,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>it's safe to say (since it has been proven) that summing isn't different
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>unless
>>>>>>>>there is an error somewhere, or variation in how the user duplicates
>>>the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>same mix in two different apps.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Imho, that's actually a very good thing - approaching a more consistent
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>basis for recording and mixing from which users can make all
>>>>>>>>of the decisions as to how the final product will sound and not be
>>>>>>>>required
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>to decide when purchasing a pricey console, and have to
>>>>>>>>focus their business on clients who want "that sound". I believe
>we
>>>are
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>actually closer to the pure definition of recording now than
>>>>>>>>we once were.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>>>Dedric
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I the answer is yes, then,the real task is to discover or rather
>>>>>>>>> un-cover
>>>>>>>>> what's say: Motu's vision of summing, versus Digidesign, versus
>>>>>>>>> Steinberg
>>>>>>>>> and so on..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What's under the hood. To me and others,when Digi re-coded their
>>
>>>>>>>>> summing
>>>>>>>>> engine, it was obvious that Pro Tools has an obvious top end (8k-10k)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> bump.
>>>>>>>>> Where as Steinberg's summing is very neutral.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>Hi Neil,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Jamie is right. And you aren't wacked out - you are thinking this
>>>>>>>>>>through
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>in a reasonable manner, but coming to the wrong
>>>>>>>>>>conclusion - easy to do given how confusing digital audio can be.
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Each
>>>>>>>>> word
>>>>>>>>>>represents an amplitude
>>>>>>>>>>point on a single curve that is changing over time, and can vary
>>with
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>speed up to the Nyquist frequency (as Jamie described).
>>>>>>>>>>The complex harmonic content we hear is actually the frequency
>>>>>>>>>>modulation
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>a single waveform,
>>>>>>>>>>that over a small amount of time creates the sound we translate
>-
>>>we
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>don't
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>really hear a single sample at a time,
>>>>>>>>>>but thousands of samples at a time (1 sample alone could at most
>>>>>>>>>>represent
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>single positive or negative peak
>>>>>>>>>>of a 22,050Hz waveform).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>If one bit doesn't cancel, esp. if it's a higher order bit than
>number
>>>>>>> 24,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>you may hear, and will see that easily,
>>>>>>>>>>and the higher the bit in the dynamic range (higher order) the
more
>>>>>>>>>>audible
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>the difference.
>>>>>>>>>>Since each bit is 6dB of dynamic range, you can extrapolate how
>"loud"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>bit's impact will be
>>>>>>>>>>if there is a variation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Now, obviously if we are talking about 1 sample in a 44.1k rate
>song,
>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>it simply be a
>>>>>>>>>>click (only audible if it's a high enough order bit) instead of
>an
>>>>>>>>>>obvious
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>musical difference, but that should never
>>>>>>>>>>happen in a phase cancellation test between identical files higher
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>than
>>>>>>>>> bit
>>>>>>>>>>24, unless there are clock sync problems,
>>>>>>>>>>driver issues, or the DAW is an early alpha version. :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>By definition of what DAWs do during playback and record, every
>audio
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>stream
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>has the same point in time (judged by the timeline)
>>>>>>>>>>played back sample accurately, one word at a time, at whatever
>sample
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>rate
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>we are using. A phase cancellation test uses that
>>>>>>>>>>fact to compare two audio files word for word (and hence bit for
>>bit
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>since
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>each bit of a 24-bit word would
>>>>>>>>>>be at the same bit slot in each 24-bit word). Assuming they are
>>
>>>>>>>>>>aligned
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>the same start point, sample
>>>>>>>>>>accurately, and both are the same set of sample words at each sample
>>>>>>>>>>point,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>bit for bit, and one is phase inverted,
>>>>>>>>>>they will cancel through all 24 bits. For two files to cancel
>>>>>>>>>>completely
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>for the duration of the file, each and every bit in each word
>>>>>>>>>>must be the exact opposite of that same bit position in a word
at
>>>the
>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>sample point. This is why zooming in on an FFT
>>>>>>>>>>of the full difference file is valuable as it can show any differences
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>the lower order bits that wouldn't be audible. So even if
>>>>>>>>>>there is no audible difference, the visual followup will show if
>>the
>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>files truly cancel even a levels below hearing, or
>>>>>>>>>>outside of a frequency change that we will perceive.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>When they don't cancel, usually there will be way more than 1 bit
>>>>>>>>>>difference - it's usually one or more bits in the words for
>>>>>>>>>>thousands of samples. From a musical standpoint this is usually
>>in
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>frequency range (low freq, or high freq most often) - that will
>>>>>>>>>>show up as the difference between them, and that usually happens
>>due
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>form of processing difference between the files,
>>>>>>>>>>such as EQ, compression, frequency dependant gain changes, etc.
>That
>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>>>>I believe you are thinking through, but when
>>>>>>>>>>talking about straight summing with no gain change (or known equal
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>gain
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>changes), we are only looking at linear, one for one
>>>>>>>>>>comparisons between the two files' frequency representations.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>Dedric
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The tests I did were completely blank down to -200 dB (far
below
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> last
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bit). It's safe to say there is no difference, even in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> quantization noise, which by technical rights, is considered
>>below
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> level
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of "cancellation" in such tests.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not necessarily talking about just the first bit or the
>>>>>>>>>>>> last bit, but also everything in between... what happens on
bit
>>>>>>>>>>>> #12, for example? Everything on bit #12 should be audible, but
>>>>>>>>>>>> in an a/b test what if thre are differences in what bits #8
>>>>>>>>>>>> through #12 sound like, but the amplutide is stll the same on
>>>>>>>>>>>> both files at that point, you'll get a null, right? Extrapolate
>>>>>>>>>>>> that out somewhat & let's say there are differences in bits
#8
>>>>>>>>>>>> through #12 on sample points 3, 17, 1,000, 4,523, 7,560, etc,
>>>>>>>>>>>> etc through 43,972... Now this is breaking things down well
>>>>>>>>>>>> beyond what I think can be measured, if I'm not mistaken (I
>>>>>>>>>>>> dn't know of any way we could extract JUST that information
>>>>>>>>>>>> from each file & play it back for an a/b test; but would not
>>>>>>>>>>>> that be enough to have to "null-able" files that do actually
>>>>>>>>>>>> sound somewhat different?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76197 is a reply to message #76196] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 21:38 |
JeffH
Messages: 307
Registered: October 2007
Location: Wamic, OR
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>>>>>>>>>>> I guess what I'm saying is that since each sample in a musical
>>>>>>>>>>>> track or full song file doesn't represent a pure, simple set
>of
>>>>>>>>>>>> content like a sample of a sine wave would - there's a whole
>>>>>>>>>>>> world of harmonic structure in each sample of a song file, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think (although I'll admit - I can't "prove") that there is
>>>>>>>>>>>> plenty of room for some variables between the first bit & the
>>>>>>>>>>>> last bit while still allowing for a null test to be successful.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No? Am I wacked out of my mind?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>"DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>Glad you are liking it Thad. After all my cheerleading and
>then Neil's experience, I've sorta been dreading what would
>happen next
Well, my experience has now changed... I finished the install
of the Pulsar card into the same PC as is running my Paris rig
WinME machine,and it gave me some shit at first (driver loaded
fine, but the install files didn't want to run.... kinda like
that guy over on the Pulsar forum), anyway, finally got it to
install, and once it did it went smoothly from there.
This thing is running fine AND.... (wait for it) CLOCKING
PERFECTLY AT 88.2K!!! Yes, sir, I can get it to clock via both
S/Mux (lightpipe) OR Word Clock, and no it doesn't register
88.2k on the readout, it says "96k", but I get not one but TWO
little red lock lights (one for each lightpipe input perhaps?).
Now, considering it's working now, perhaps my problems with
this card on the other machine had more to do with two ASIO
drivers being present... it seems weird that even with one of
them disabled (the RME's) this card would act up, but perhaps
there was some kind of conflict nonetheless - I dunno. Or maybe
it just likes WinME better than XP.
In any event, yep, I can back Deej & Thad up on the stability
- at least on this current setup I've got... I've been trying
various plugins & whatnot & overloading the DSP's (not
purposely, just from dicking around & trying different plugs at
once), and it gives me caution messages, but hasn't crashed
once. As for the sound? Too early to tell if it's going to
improve my situation in the limited capacity I'm able to use
it for what I'm trying to accomplish, but do far I can tell you
that the sound certainly sucketh not.
Yea, verily.
I'll tell you this much, though... if you're looking to do some
serious plug-in insertion counts on this stuff, then don't dick
around, get the Pro Card... YMMV, but that's my advice.
NeilThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C726E5.A3FF91F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm glad every one is getting somewhere. I'm a little stumped at this =
moment.
I have most of my plugs authorized manually now. I have been
reading the manual and futzing around but can't seem to get the
ADAT routing or XTC working with SX2 on the same comp. Cubase has the =
list of
plugs from Scope but they won't start up. They do in Scope though. The =
ADAT
modules (2) don't show up in VST Connections in Cubase nor does the =
SPDIF. =20
Creamware MIDI and analog does though. I dragged the ADAT modules onto =
the=20
Routing Window along with the MIDI modules in Scope. I even connected =
the ADAT=20
wires to the STM 1632 in and out just to see. I've booted Scope first =
but no change=20
in Cubase. It isn't seeing the hardware.
Any suggestions Deej, Neil or Thad?
Tom
Where's Dimitrios when you need him?!!!
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C726E5.A3FF91F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm glad every one is getting =
somewhere. I'm=20
a little stumped at this moment.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have most of my plugs authorized =
manually=20
now. I have been</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>reading the manual and futzing around =
but can't=20
seem to get the</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>ADAT routing or XTC working with SX2 on =
the same=20
comp. Cubase has the list of</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>plugs from Scope but they won't start =
up. =20
They do in Scope though. The ADAT</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>modules (2) don't show up in=20
VST Connections in Cubase nor does the SPDIF. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Creamware MIDI and analog does =
though. =20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I dragged the ADAT modules onto=20
the </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Routing Window along with the=20
MIDI modules </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>in</FONT> <FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Scope. </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I even =
connected the=20
ADAT </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>wires to the STM 1632 in and out just =
to see. =20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I've booted Scope first but no change =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>in Cubase. It isn't seeing the=20
hardware.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any suggestions Deej, Neil or =
Thad?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Where's Dimitrios when you need=20
him?!!!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C726E5.A3FF91F0--"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>I'm glad every one is getting somewhere. I'm a little stumped at this =
>moment.
>
>I have most of my plugs authorized manually now. I have been
>reading the manual and futzing around but can't seem to get the
>ADAT routing or XTC working with SX2 on the same comp. Cubase
has the list of plugs from Scope but they won't start up.
Yeah, you have to enable them manually - sucks, huh? First of
all, make sure XTC mode is enabled in Pulsar...
"Set"/"Settings"/"Global" submenu drop-down), then go into your
Plugin Information window in SX & manually click on all the
brown highlighted Pulsar plugins (or just the ones you want to
try out for now), then close that window & they'll all of a
sudden appear & be available for insertion under the XTC plugin
folder. Unless Deej knows a quicker way, this is how you gotta
do it.
They do in Scope though. The =
>ADAT
>modules (2) don't show up in VST Connections in Cubase nor does the =
>SPDIF. =20
>Creamware MIDI and analog does though. I dragged the ADAT modules onto
=
>the=20
>Routing Window along with the MIDI modules in Scope. I even connected =
>the ADAT=20
>wires to the STM 1632 in and out just to see. I've booted Scope first =
>but no change=20
>in Cubase. It isn't seeing the hardware.
Are you selecting the Scope ASIO driver as the master driver in
Cubase (Device Setup/VST Audiobay/then select the Scope driver
as the master off to the upper right of that window - Deej had
to help me with this the first time... I was stumped on this
one, too.)
Then make sure you refresh your connections under VST Inputs &
VST Outputs before you cloe that out... they all SHOULD show up
in your connection options at that time.
Neil" Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-
Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-
Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Ho-Hoooooooo!"
"OK, that was great... now let's get one of those just for
backup."
ROFL!!!!!!!!
I loved it.
Neil
"DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>That is really funny!! Thanks Gene. Merry christmas.
>
>;o)
>
>"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
>news:458d6028$1@linux...
>>
>> This has been posted several places, but just in case you missed it.
>> The Santa Sessions - Dailey Associates
>>
>> HO, HO, HO
>>
>> http://xmas.daileyads.com/
>>
>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C726F0.70FC7BF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hey Neil,
I finally got ADATs, XTC and MIDI functioning (no crashes)
with Scope not even running. That's step one for my implementation
of the hardware. Once all was set the XTC seemed to be like a regular
VST plugin. It has become RME plus. Once I get this into the
control room I'll listen to the audio and really put it through some =
paces.
I am getting closer and closer. Thanks for the help!
Tom
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:458d736f$1@linux...
"DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>Ohhhhhh!!!!! Sorry. I was thinking WC. I have used the cheapo HOSA =
cables
>with mine. They actually were more secure because they didn't have =
that
big=20
>adapter on the end that overlaps the brackets on the PCI slots.
>
>worked just fine.
Just got back from G.C. - got the "Live Wires" ones, which were
still 30 bucks for the length I needed, but are a little more
robust than the flimsy ones for not all that much less $.
Neil
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C726F0.70FC7BF0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hey Neil,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I finally got ADATs, XTC and MIDI =
functioning (no=20
crashes)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>with Scope not even running. =
That's step one=20
for my implementation</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>of the hardware. Once all was set =
the XTC=20
seemed to be like a regular</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>VST plugin. It has become RME =
plus. =20
Once I get this into the</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>control room I'll listen to the audio =
and really=20
put it through some paces.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am getting closer and closer. =
</FONT><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks for the help!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Neil" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:OIUOIU@OIU.com">OIUOIU@OIU.com</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:458d736f$1@linux">news:458d736f$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>"DJ"=
<<A=20
href=3D"mailto:nowayjose@dude.net">nowayjose@dude.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>>Ohhhhhh!!!!! Sorry. I was thinking WC. I have used the =
cheapo=20
HOSA cables<BR><BR>>with mine. They actually were more secure =
because=20
they didn't have that<BR>big <BR>>adapter on the end that overlaps =
the=20
brackets on the PCI slots.<BR>><BR>>worked just =
fine.<BR><BR>Just got=20
back from G.C. - got the "Live Wires" ones, which were<BR>still 30 =
bucks for=20
the length I needed, but are a little more<BR>robust than the flimsy =
ones for=20
not all that much less $.<BR><BR>Neil</BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C726F0.70FC7BF0--This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C726F0.C0C4D4C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hey Neil,
I finally got ADATs, XTC and MIDI functioning (no crashes)
with Scope not even running. That's step one for my implementation
of the hardware. Once all was set the XTC seemed to work like regular
VSTi plugins. It has become RME plus. Once I get this into the
control room I'll listen to the audio and really put it through some =
paces.
I am getting closer and closer. Thanks for the help!
Tom
"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:458dfa7a$1@linux...
"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>I'm glad every one is getting somewhere. I'm a little stumped at =
this =3D
>moment.
>
>I have most of my plugs authorized manually now. I have been
>reading the manual and futzing around but can't seem to get the
>ADAT routing or XTC working with SX2 on the same comp. Cubase
has the list of plugs from Scope but they won't start up.
Yeah, you have to enable them manually - sucks, huh? First of
all, make sure XTC mode is enabled in Pulsar...
"Set"/"Settings"/"Global" submenu drop-down), then go into your
Plugin Information window in SX & manually click on all the
brown highlighted Pulsar plugins (or just the ones you want to
try out for now), then close that window & they'll all of a
sudden appear & be available for insertion under the XTC plugin
folder. Unless Deej knows a quicker way, this is how you gotta
do it.=20
They do in Scope though. The =3D
>ADAT
>modules (2) don't show up in VST Connections in Cubase nor does the =
=3D
>SPDIF. =3D20
>Creamware MIDI and analog does though. I dragged the ADAT modules =
onto
=3D
>the=3D20
>Routing Window along with the MIDI modules in Scope. I even =
connected =3D
>the ADAT=3D20
>wires to the STM 1632 in and out just to see. I've booted Scope =
first =3D
>but no change=3D20
>in Cubase. It isn't seeing the hardware.
Are you selecting the Scope ASIO driver as the master driver in
Cubase (Device Setup/VST Audiobay/then select the Scope driver
as the master off to the upper right of that window - Deej had
to help me with this the first time... I
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system [message #76198 is a reply to message #76197] |
Sun, 19 November 2006 22:14 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
was stumped on this
one, too.)
Then make sure you refresh your connections under VST Inputs &
VST Outputs before you cloe that out... they all SHOULD show up
in your connection options at that time.
Neil
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C726F0.C0C4D4C0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hey Neil,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I finally got ADATs, XTC and MIDI =
functioning (no=20
crashes)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>with Scope not even running. =
That's step one=20
for my implementation</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>of the hardware. Once all was set =
the XTC=20
seemed to work like regular</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>VSTi plugins. It has become RME =
plus. =20
Once I get this into the</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>control room I'll listen to the audio =
and really=20
put it through some paces.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am getting closer and closer. =
</FONT><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks for the help!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Neil" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:IOUOIU@OIU.com">IOUOIU@OIU.com</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:458dfa7a$1@linux">news:458dfa7a$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>"Tom=
Bruhl"=20
<<A href=3D"mailto:arpegio@comcast.net">arpegio@comcast.net</A>> =
wrote:<BR>><BR>><BR>>I'm glad every one is getting =
somewhere. =20
I'm a little stumped at this =3D<BR>>moment.<BR>><BR>>I have =
most of my=20
plugs authorized manually now. I have been<BR>>reading the =
manual and=20
futzing around but can't seem to get the<BR>>ADAT routing or XTC =
working=20
with SX2 on the same comp. Cubase<BR>has the list of plugs from =
Scope=20
but they won't start up.<BR><BR>Yeah, you have to enable them manually =
-=20
sucks, huh? First of<BR>all, make sure XTC mode is enabled in=20
Pulsar...<BR>"Set"/"Settings"/"Global" submenu drop-down), then go =
into=20
your<BR>Plugin Information window in SX & manually click on all=20
the<BR>brown highlighted Pulsar plugins (or just the ones you want =
to<BR>try=20
out for now), then close that window & they'll all of a<BR>sudden =
appear=20
& be available for insertion under the XTC plugin<BR>folder. =
Unless Deej=20
knows a quicker way, this is how you gotta<BR>do it. =
<BR><BR><BR><BR> =20
They do in Scope though. The =3D<BR>>ADAT<BR>>modules (2) =
don't show=20
up in VST Connections in Cubase nor does the =3D<BR>>SPDIF.=20
=3D20<BR>>Creamware MIDI and analog does though. I dragged =
the ADAT=20
modules onto<BR>=3D<BR>>the=3D20<BR>>Routing Window along with =
the MIDI=20
modules in Scope. I even connected =3D<BR>>the =
ADAT=3D20<BR>>wires to=20
the STM 1632 in and out just to see. I've booted Scope first=20
=3D<BR>>but no change=3D20<BR>>in Cubase. It isn't seeing =
the=20
hardware.<BR><BR>Are you selecting the Scope ASIO driver as the master =
driver=20
in<BR>Cubase (Device Setup/VST Audiobay/then select the Scope =
driver<BR>as the=20
master off to the upper right of that window - Deej had<BR>to help me =
with=20
this the first time... I was stumped on this<BR>one, too.)<BR><BR>Then =
make=20
sure you refresh your connections under VST Inputs &<BR>VST =
Outputs before=20
you cloe that out... they all SHOULD show up<BR>in your connection =
options at=20
that time.<BR><BR>Neil</BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C726F0.C0C4D4C0--Guitar players, watch this video!
http://www.scratchpadusa.com/page/page/3983305.htm
JamesMy guitars aren't for show - I play them, and I dig the scratches. :) Too
much Willie Nelson in my blood or something.... (not quite that bad tho')
happy holidays all, !,
-Carl
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:458e1b6c$1@linux...
>
> Guitar players, watch this video!
>
> http://www.scratchpadusa.com/page/page/3983305.htm
>
> JamesMerry Christmas Beatles fans!
Here are some studio over dubs. There is a rumor that Bernard Purdie actually
Played the drum over dubs on some of the beatles tracks??? Supposedly he
has made that claim. Anyways, here they are: http://shamraybass.com/5-1/
JamesMerry Christmas to all!
JamesThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C7273D.7F892090
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0018_01C7273D.7F892090"
------=_NextPart_001_0018_01C7273D.7F892090
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Merry Christmas to all of you from Norway!
Erling
------=_NextPart_001_0018_01C7273D.7F892090
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.3020" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV align=3Dcenter><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial size=3D2>Merry=20
Christmas to all of you from Norway!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV align=3Dcenter><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV align=3Dcenter><IMG alt=3D"" hspace=3D0=20
src=3D"cid:001001c72735$1dbfd690$0300000a@Erling1" align=3Dbaseline =
border=3D0><IMG=20
alt=3D"" hspace=3D0 src=3D"cid:001101c72735$1dc24790$0300000a@Erling1" =
align=3Dbaseline=20
border=3D0><IMG alt=3D"" hspace=3D0 =
src=3D"cid:001201c72735$1dc24790$0300000a@Erling1"=20
align=3Dbaseline border=3D0><IMG alt=3D"" hspace=3D0=20
src=3D"cid:001001c72735$1dbfd690$0300000a@Erling1" align=3Dbaseline =
border=3D0></DIV>
<DIV align=3Dcenter><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV align=3Dcenter><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV align=3Dcenter><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV align=3Dcenter><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Erling</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_0018_01C7273D.7F892090--
------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C7273D.7F892090
Content-Type: image/gif;
name="ansanta3.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <001001c72735$1dbfd690$0300000a@Erling1>
R0lGODlhoACdAPQAAP/////MzJmZzGaZmWZmmTNmmTMzZgAzZgAAZjMAZjMA M2YAMwECA8wAAP8A
AP9mAP+ZAP//AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAACH/C05F
VFNDQVBFMi4wAwHo/wAh+QQJPAAMACwAAAAAoACdAAAF/iAiikxpnmiqrmzr vnAsz+8oFoWjOyTt
/8CgcIhC7I5IB4FAbDqfUJgxSXUMBNGsdusrTKtUQkFc4JrP3G9VBOYx0fB4 EJGgHu6HkpqKyMv/
gC17bgZFg0gIgYqLekmJKmxtCAaPjJZmkTs9KwcGOWCbl6JPmZoxlIgjDQsK o65EhzNemhG1EUar
r7o+az6dPAi2bK27xS6lpj9GCBDBt0YLxtKQh5XKI7VsDcTT08g6IzIP4yYi ts/g3d5V59Yr5IbC
X+7qroPmz7cnDzM28/T1LH3DxixYJX4vEDIYgSjgKIapSsgLlfAEMoC6Gmjc GMhfKmvmws2JKG2j
SZNw/r6Bo6hH5EhNGF2dnMlxyxp8+mDAk9FwGs2fDVawPEbiHk5hWvbEFAW0 adByAAAMpQYxmTOc
S1+uLOm06UIEUaNOtehxq55szZ61UJhiZwo1WRl17Qo2rNS4Zc2efTaULdu2 hkrFXTQX5Vu7d4na
gLnJH8a/MpxlS6bLsVMWdcOO/VrWMRrJwtI9HIHYBk2iYrM6nuKZBWTINWxM 5mEPse27J2PjXb3S
n2vYa8fB8zd7cxwRt22reupkNevW+6BcvUqZUebkygdHdg7MN6Zzs2lfuo49 e3Puq00Ah9UOLiCw
FsuXNx7D+TLoCtfrdOv4CP0nYsUnH3YuAWFfdzZ0/kTSGXVV4tiAt/0XmH3P JcgFcEqlFGBLAXQY
gD8QbthPatwhqF0Wi4m2BXIkiuAhWAi8aMN8J+qRXQ/zXNKeiiheN8KLYnko JGkR+kBeauVU9x5o
t/AYhVipDfmjkDISqZmR8zXi5B+yhVfjDKlJReWHMY7ZIXIxsigVDWoWudAR cghXTpc5JqVZmWbm
SaaYZDq4HYFabnkcNnwp2Zxmeia6Z5kOAtBPmyK6pwhWjzwXBYxT6mnDmJkS qZ1JPjron3UWvllq
EyzimaeLfSaamYQnpWrRqIDo55x0rFKJp6pkvqgriTD85JJgKOjXxHoUSljD qoyaySivnrrgVRH+
/n2JSbLWQqLoh866imQL087aW3SLYKssZrx2y2mfm864VLhzEnruiubOq22V q+l65F2ysnBZYOBl
e2m9ApM1Y2mb7knju/DOmQ1B4xGcSIG67RvhwQNSzEBXQl0FwcebyMmlxGh+ CenCdlmccij/vsXD
w6fC8RfJKRupcqoYq8wvChxDAkzABQcxc70I23wyv7tivHKDj8wlFEzyLDI0 hcnVGGqyUqqptFSF
MUctY+64NalzgNZHI8I5W2lbYU/3pILYTxjbSFE3Wx3i3dix7TOtUh8DzEJV I+C1FHgXblfX1Lit
Xq3xLlbUxTUpdrThIbb8NZyVBfw3pCLkJojO/pTj/RNmipO7JFaiqdmwgKG3 HtZpbWP+yghpodMo
16vb6PrusO9taCA7TfeweC0Jbvmcu7s+E7qlM14E0IJu3LPByVO+fOzRRxza 79JP31L1hfduSPOz
V0U8z4hvDL7o4n/tnSuwSbpC1w2sb71hLr+MVLFyc8n3/IWxn+Hw5zImqaUE cBtPtcAVQAGyL3Li
ksz7jJEhBjbQgRAiYKCm8zGQrWOB/qKfRjAoH88FSn980ZguHCGtrpGwhNcT jAGtFTQjkQ99c3nh
bS5jlPaoR2ToqqHpDEasF1xQh4cDykA4I7AJDoEtTJJfCLuCxB0Ki4WocmJz NMc9HDrldfVD/uIV
b4jAR2lxCI4Jz/kASL8qAoAmS1zLdqCTRTr9b4pHfOFM4uiC/jExZjQQDkKO go47sjGHDgxjVPZ4
D9dcg46o4iIILZjH6jnFKI58JCBhMR0+xEWEGwGfEquRlDOe54RdNAEoR2jJ MSJCIz3a5A8SaIJe
tFCEomTkSmACy4GpEAjGOsQaU7BKRSpvj+BIofEGN4dKyfKJ2DOkF12YxLxZ EVSsac8yOWmfr0AB
WbY8ZDFDuTaTLFKXKJSgBiVXPGx9M4h8nOY4WQnGS2ZCeNlYJ7paRLDPgAaT 8pwnKJWClqvokx7k
IZkQayBJxhBToKscSEHzCUHSuCOhJPtM/j7UOMnuQXQu5quWbDpX0TsVAW3m SklBqHOTpn3UnipZ
yR73qDuxPEUjGO3m6STYBpm+VFgx9SldlpmyWN3omRrVZk8R9NNY9XSZMDWn ZmiC0tEMS5gfIWlE
Q9qZwvjjJEWdSdHUEVRPKjSkyZwISL8q1amKtTSX8ONF0LrUukKtPTA1DVjD uteaMcKPc1rJ8OxK
WFps9BmjZGtfbbrHlTnEYDsqLGFDgg+txsoyVL2T51610LhFBjxNsmt/qIBT yqYFqhtxDlD46jWk
9q0+fOHoGkB7T8tQdjmpVe1PStPLx75jZrc4LW8cIQxhDNWyuV1NU1bGTN8e Y6MTu2wa/oNr0FUq
U6+r9atz2WQhkE70FiIEmmJ369jtNoEuaDFu1x4GM9QKC67mPa89oRteOrmX vCaNb0Vu2RTMrjWF
D6PLWPX7myGeoKnSNYi8qDhgAgcyoBAlzkgZXF4H+wAyL7VPwCh8JQuLw4jF NBfMOPwtDz/Bqwpt
AHLxm18TRyGx9Vqlm1ycBmw1dcY01gKCgfI9+OZ4Czu+Xk1L/OMsBNmEPU5M kX15ZAg2bskoYmyT
ocyl1DTZXlQ2kGZ33KAsf0Y5L8Wxl+0EORFObk1jvtbCLHtmMac5li/E8puN JkA5z7mZbc6Yne/M
TdDd6Zd8Hps7A70LpxG6GN479CuOdqdomeSu0Uzp754h/eLsdpbS8sWmdjFt ieS6mdOnyxKorSOf
S49aGQQC9Km/jFJVr1rNSDPlq/2ZrFmXq9a27giucy2HQfO617v+9aB0KmyV UqjYxr4Vsunl62WT
4ticcTaucD1paROR2NZ+drCzPe30cFvaIQAAIfkECR4ADAAsAAAAAKAAnQAA Bf4gIopMaZ5oqq5s
675wLM/vKBaFozsk7f/AoHCIQuyOSAeBQGw6n1CYMUl1DATRrHbrK0yrVEJB XOCaz9xvVQTmMdHw
eBCRoB7uh5KaisjL/4Ate24GRYNICIGKi3pJiSpsbQgGj4yWZpE7PSsHBjlg m5eiT5maMZSIIw0L
CqOuRIczXpoRtRFGq6+6Pms+nTwItmytu8UupaY/RggQwbdGC8bSkIeVyiO1 bA3E09PIOiMyD+Mm
IrbP4N3eVefWK+SGwl/u6q6D5s+3Jw8zNvP09Sx9w8YsWCV+LxAyGIEo4CiG qUrIC5XwBDKAuhpo
3BjIXypr5sLNiShto0mTcP6+gaOoR+RITRhdnZzJccsafPpgwJPRcBrNnw1W sDxG4h5OYVr2xBQF
tGnQcgAADKUGMZkznEtfrizptOlCBFGjTrXocauebM2etVCYYmcKNVkZde0K NqzUuGXNnn02lC3b
toZKxV00F+Vbu3eJ2oC5yR/GvzKcZUumy7FTFnXDjv1a1jEaycLSPRyB2AZN omKzOp7imQVkyDVs
TOZhD7Htuydj41290p9r2GvHwfM3e3McEbdtq3rqZDXr1vugXL1KmVHm5MoH R3YOzDemc7NpX7qO
PXtz7qtNAIfVDi4gsBbLlzcew/ky6ArX63Tr+Aj9J2LFJx92LgFhX3c2dP5E 0hl1VeLYgLf9F5h9
zyXIBXBKpRRgSwF0GIA/EG7YT2rcIahdFouJtgVyJIrgIVgIvGjDfCfqkV0P 81zSnoooXjfCi2J5
KCRpEfpAXmrlVPceaLfwGIVYqQ35o5AyEqmZkfM14uQfsoVX4wypSUXlhzGO 2SFyMbIoFQ1qFrnQ
EXIIV06XOSalWZlm5kmmmGQ6uB2BWm55HDZ8KdmcZnomumeZDgLQT5siuqcI Vo88FwWMU+ppw5iZ
EqmdST466J91Fr5ZahMs4pmni30mmpmEJ6Vq0aiA6OecdKxSiaeqZL6oK4kw /OSSYCjo18R6FEpY
w6qMmskor5664FUR/v59iUmy1kKi6IfOuopkC9PO2lt0i2CrLGa8dstpn5vO uFS4cxJ67ormzqtt
lavpeuRdsrJwWWDgZXtpvQKTNWNpm+5J47vwzpkNQeMRnEiBuu0b4cEDUsxA V0JdBcHHm8jJpcRo
fgnpwnZZnHIo/77Fw8OnwvEXySkbqXKqGKvMLwocQwJMwAUHMXO9CNt8Mr+7 Yrxyg4/MJRRM8iwy
NIXJ1RhqslKqqbRUhTFHLWPuuDWpc4DWRyPCOVtpW2FP96SC2E8Y20hRN1sd 4t3Yse0zrVIfA8xC
VSPgtRR4F25X19S4rV6t8S5W1MU1KXa04SG2/DWclQX8N6Qi5CaIzv6U4/0T ZoqTuyRWoqnZsICh
tx7WaW1j/soIaaHTKNer2+j67rDvbWggO033sHgtCW75nLu7PhO6pTNeBNCC btyzwclTvnzs0Ucc
2u/ST99S9YX3bkjzs1dFPM+Ibwy+6OJ/7Z0rsEm6QtcNrG+9YS6/jFSxcnPJ 9/yFsZ/h8OcyJqml
BHAbT7XAFUABsi9y4pLM+4yRIQY20IEQImCgpvMxkK1jgf6in0YwKB/PBUp/ fNGYLhwhra6RsITX
E4wBg5YS8qFvLi+8zWWM0h71iCxOVCHWCy6Yw8MBZSCcoWEU2MIk+YWwK0XU obBY6JAm/u+JTnld
/Yo4RRsisDLEaf4S904gwi1ycSZIXEv56HRFALowimi8h06kJrKjoKONKqAf Bs0IgDhS8W3SsOKC
sIhDATrFKK7xxnT4EJcyjrB6R6yGQzp2wjGawJF8VF4XEaERhyTQBL1ooQjB R5NIZKJzg5uGsQ5x
vjw6EpJoBEcKjZfKemAolIQkYh8zeTgpgoo17aHlJBeHPTxeEpMz8eUjSwnM bAhDg7ZEl/mih0ya
IGYuVRFeNqA5TLK0wxH0qKY4G6AUtFyFm93cy/aqFc5xlnEg5twmBNNpkXyE Z5Du7No0wRYSWtaS
niJoBnVu0rR8NiVFjETj9ehpMAm2YSUGFZZKYFIYJT4EaKxkp/4/I5pRcFS0 cwydkIM6yk9kIrQ3
pvzockIqBZJ+hGT7RCFfsOkPdEazpS99qE4fakdURrKmNu1G/8iykuHt9KiI eJg8fmqahbK0paCZ
KFJBYRB8+DRWlmlfOoe6EPCIcaf9oYJGCFKQWzAzq6MLKVerOlCeevWUlunn cjZiH+891YfPK2uJ
kupMeR50rr9cjdPuWgN7TgyrjomnWR05y6bqjbCfEwk2FbvRrmDUsY+F7Azo gpZndk2pKUSmZmlA
l6r6tTApfJg4R0tMC/4Vs4dk63TGOVq3ACeiiJXtaUXLWkCSEbfklI1w89lb 3/52nPYJWESLKzeT
YgtmwC1usP5oSrLgAjeo0i0BU8113cFmN7IU6i5tv+tK8Zo3uBZ1yHmDIt4G kVe754UvcPslXcBe
95i41Vp2GxTfEmgRucrZb2ra+wiEvdNi6Q3kna7r3oz5E0QESrCCS5PPIjlQ hb1FcGVLCyj72eup
k2vRg0FXGhSELmbvjdcLp0LiFqVYNwI0Tr1ebLQWR/hEdqXxdkKMtg/nTsds MlcTgAJkIXiXCGkt
MhBybDQiK3nJP2ZTVJL8ZB8cTxkrM2GVrfxaLN/on1uOQVNENKKyhRnKv6wZ lpJzZiOP9WgmU1tY
2jwHHlvtQXahs4HkE+fVkFnPkbnxiYQM6DUvDcVBvFWhDWTEtPRITtGLZnSy Hu3oSNeZQtK0j6Vh
Mem3YHrTnP50QyENaiFgy9OaLjWqRN04Vqs6yK7mTPFI/Wqo0npOs051rTt2 alvrete5bg2GeR3r
UhPaXsU2dq+BTa9OM/tat372s0MAACH5BAkeAAwALAAAAACgAJ0AAAX+YFEg JMmcaKqubOu+cCzP
dB2XpKPvDmL/wKBwSFzleEidr8hsOp8xAiFJVRag2Kz2JxhUv72teLwVEQpT 6mF9oCaW5Lg8SECA
TSdDPQmf+/8tB3Z3LIM8fYCJgIZVeCpHO46Kk2MIBoxUko98iJSeTpBUBQYH MZmfqE0KCw04SJY0
mDuptEGsPRG5EYYIVzWyPZ21wy0Kwbo5pEHAmsTOKQvHuxB2wjIlmdbPtQoN 0jjLuhGN2+WDJOKO
D+suDykIu/DxfOXPvPLxK+ws7ifwCNTiyWpWzxMkHNpulNDlbyDBgokwlUDR 7xc6SdgOgfvToKPH
ehL7VIw10UgojXH+PKpUue1kQn4jX+DLmGTLypsfWzJ6KQQfspNhSpJsgbNo A3NItMyUtySkUBgk
AADoY7TqUXuvgsR89C/gLhQHESqUKtWEVav2dgIZuZUBjlx9QomFioBs2bNn sUZq11ZfC4RwXCmZ
6yKqXWF4WTrb+ZRB3yKABxMuVPewC6uAifFKt9ZvYYSSN34u+xInDrtTG086 Jw5ukX2UQQfLTJfn
SsOoUfOUw1rgQ60mZQP+DaRjidzIifPuPXed8yfDZ9Nught58k+b47nGUjH6 cOUkrYsviz1S669N
KnaP/H332PHi+0z9w5hzJfbfiRyHH/+d1DlyTfYcFJFJ194P1fH+R9Z0lbmn n0QRCdZegwgqSFoJ
AWQYgCMUkgEhP7zt5dZ+llk0HkIa1oVAiqeRJsY94FUi4ojX2VBZbhhqmGJZ LN6Y2hbn+GSQiD7i
WOFhOOioY5IslvWfUkq0FqMWh/hzooNWkrZhakouuaKSKlYGZZRwqRYikfE5 GBgJGYbZ5Ztg3ojl
L+b5BseAHlaZJZJYzudPm1zCKSig5GEBY5lTGqonjQsqdsOFPXbJpKCnzamQ Eg39pIhaYJG20gy4
fQlnjmwO2qClMmGzpplaxMQYWCQUdY1horbJIpgpvsnqMsO98BiQnKZQFVSQ emmrpG3WuiR1E2rz
a3rvHLTCsKn+8kiproO2yUSzid6HaDPU/pUam8NtiG223f7FLaqGSgluuIVc WKSWXn637IPrsguK
b2WygNZn8+r2JUI4TsZrvn/gSQIEDDNlTV5cBZxci/yJNqsP+e663Fu7hOEv vCTGx6eFP5qYscUR
uuvxtP/CKrGT8p6a5pExc6vCs1mgU+aMKuDV0IUT57hhyAtqrK7A694sB2wN yUVUYkVSPOnQzZYI
qnU2p4AzE0xvktXHZ6UZKsFInhiL2NNp9jXLYZPstpHhYY1xNTJs/ZoRryCW 2Nt8F0pDKxLPvXIL
dm9BD9hF9a24wU8Dfl0OvZ5QONd/rc32SopnjiQMt0UtuE/+6NVyOOIeaW66 n6Rj7qJbZPo2zIep
N3C65g9X1SHrOgNk9CJ5X6b67HwTdNZT1Ti8nWOTA2l5z78Db6FqPhcymJSe rdZ77M6TrElildeZ
j2YS+n5T9hZelVhH3YeGStdupYMp6eS/ff5V6Q9O0SSw6ey+NirF7/b5UFnU YjjWMfudoHn+gw8A
PyPA1zGsYUzh2QFLl0D+zC+ADawFYJAhQARW0C7zy4m6lve68wRogh78IFku KJOa0MI560nHQBhg
FRWiZoEtzOAATeCQqtjwhtHDYGiEkTwA8cEoPwQixHLYuuM55hO/GkjiVNiR FQaRibiwTyqe1cPx
2TCE9Cv+zCG+la4tbK2L/fsiC4WYxbS9UIx586JUZBe/NWJRGppCHvsS8Rig IKCG5AvhpV5BPYh4
LY5TPB0Y0UeXbPTLkMJqRSaQOLtFhrF+RNLXJ4xzj8HgBHiLvEEVfFVERXgE IQX8oxw1Z0k26lBr
hjyl/lKpyjTeUDxVBCEYXSnB+0GShqdEBgeD8UkApNCSOLljL30JSZUsBS6R iFXbrIjMT0kvb7sq
JSWcCRevSKSa4LzkiPggw1++gJvTiCAiwynIiJFTi+a83EVkw4lasnOJ48zE T0IXz0g68yZAiaY0
72mUpn3BYdTQJC3saTtgCJSgRQkoIb/Vz56VAGpg6AH+RJ1Jk4POkp8V5eRF 8RKkjkoHmfS8w6rK
SAyO4oCks2TGyQqU0WhWVAadQwhmQCfRmvpUOteLgTY9YRrAGEV/ufupUjWy s2DYYKiTiKhRi4qo
eSxVqTFlaTwbOtXbpPMf0mxESjMKOpD66qbD+05O5wk4en60gGStqoOgStS0 DqeoAz2qMKFZT1Tq
DqR7vCkwofadCFiSKd68qzPbpx2FQiSEw2kNZLvJlOgxTrCNAyPHdDY/fHgT n5itAThzt5DJNpah
yQytDcJJWrYS9qWgBZFqUcBOh80zrxslnNboWot7gvW2uL2n0mYrvtq6S7Hh rB5xmQfRhdhJra2E
AW/+e7tRjrb1ZNxbLueqC9OMFVS75+Qua7MGXnWhVrziLW+8poLewbZXvY/w FHdR+F747im47KQt
ettq33mdd5Fk0S96b1fewP23oahpyIAJXOCXjSuvCUKOW+5S3VDZt2nxm3Bu fAu3C//MeRqemGYD
5+HgOHg88dWePckmtxID7MQLOloCd+fiEZFXxs6jcY3dKytQRdhtKNtxDOBF EqKhTcjF6TG+moVk
Iii5CFds8mql6tjYSvlvxXQsj29y5SB0zmpCaFmXV2tk1FnkwIwcM81qZKM5 flfNQOjPmoMLZyEE
bU4BG6k46zwDpAVZJlfS8pVPFbmzmY3PCLpxbV5vJuguK9q8FIsxonvC5EWT TauTbtqBUlXpTFN6
Qi/Oj6e3BWoTi3rUkOm0yzaN6iUXetWnbnWiH61qWRdZ1Kp5tK05XeqH1HrX oY41r0sNbFMLuzaa
fnWxk31ZujBb2cvOma6jDZ1pU5tZx772tUMAACH5BAk8AAwALAAAAACgAJ0A AAX+YFEgJMmcaKqu
bOu+cCzPdB2XpKPvDmL/wKBwSFzleEidr8hsOp8xAiFJVRag2Kz2JxhUv72t eLwVEQpT6mF9oCaW
5Lg8SECATSdDPQmf+/8tB3Z3LIM8fYCJgIZVeCpHO46Kk2MIBoxUko98iJSe TpBUBQYHMZmfqE0K
Cw04SJY0mDuptEGsPRG5EYYIVzWyPZ21wy0Kwbo5pEHAmsTOKQvHuxB2wjIl mdbPtQoN0jjLuhGN
2+WDJOKOD+suDykIu/DxfOXPvPLxK+ws7ifwCNTiyWpWzxMkHNpulNDlbyDB gokwlUDR7xc6SdgO
gfvToKPHehL7VIw10UgojXH+PKpUue1kQn4jX+DLmGTLypsfWzJ6KQQfspNh SpJsgbNoA3NItMyU
tySkUBgkAADoY7TqUXuvgsR89C/gLhQHESqUKtWEVav2dgIZuZUBjlx9QomF ioBs2bNnsUZq11Zf
C4RwXCmZ6yKqXWF4WTrb+ZRB3yKABxMuVPewC6uAifFKt9ZvYYSSN34u+xIn DrtTG086Jw5ukX2U
QQfLTJfnSsOoUfOUw1rgQ60mZQP+DaRjidzIifPuPXed8yfDZ9Nught58k+b 47nGUjH6cOUkrYsv
iz1S669NKnaP/H332PHi+0z9w5hzJfbfiRyHH/+d1DlyTfYcFJFJ194P1fH+ R9Z0lbmnn0QRCdZe
gwgqSFoJAWQYgCMUkgEhP7zt5dZ+llk0HkIa1oVAiqeRJsY94FUi4ojX2VBZ bhhqmGJZLN6Y2hbn
+GSQiD7iWOFhOOioY5IslvWfUkq0FqMWh/hzooNWkrZhakouuaKSKlYGZZRw qRYikfE5GBgJGYbZ
5Ztg3ojlL+b5BseAHlaZJZJYzudPm1zCKSig5GEBY5lTGqonjQsqdsOFPXbJ pKCnzamQEg39pIha
YJG20gy4fQlnjmwO2qClMmGzpplaxMQYWCQUdY1horbJIpgpvsnqMsO98BiQ nKZQFVSQemmrpG3W
uiR1E2rza3rvHLTCsKn+8kiproO2yUSzid6HaDPU/pUam8NtiG223f7FLaqG SgluuIVcWKSWXn63
7IPrsguKb2WygNZn8+r2JUI4TsZrvn/gSQIEDDNlTV5cBZxci/yJNqsP+e66 3Fu7hOEvvCTGx6eF
P5qYscURuuvxtP/CKrGT8p6a5pExc6vCs1mgU+aMKuDV0IUT57hhyAtqrK7A 694sB2wNyUVUYkVS
POnQzZYIqnU2p4AzE0xvktXHZ6UZKsFInhiL2NNp9jXLYZPstpHhYY1xNTJs /ZoRryCW2Nt8F0pD
KxLPvXILdm9BD9hF9a24wU8Dfl0OvZ5QONd/rc32SopnjiQMt0UtuE/+6NVy OOIeaW66n6Rj7qJb
ZPo2zIepN3C65g9X1SHrOgNk9CJ5X6b67HwTdNZT1Ti8nWOTA2l5z78Db6Fq PhcymJSerdZ77M6T
rElildeZj2YS+n5T9hZelVhH3YeGStdupYMp6eS/ff5V6Q9O0SSw6ey+NirF 7/b5UFnUYjjWMfud
oHn+gw8APyPA1zGsYUzh2QFLl0D+zC+ADawFYJAhQARW0C7zy4m6lvciBJ0n QBP04AfJckGZ1CQO
RnPOetIxEAZYZYWoWaALM2golJHEBA6pCg5zGD0MhkYYyYvN7kDFB6MMkYgQ 22HrjueYbaUtBr8a
SOJW2BEWFlGKuLD+DygiVzcjRgIBOBliCOlXmEN8K121YRzhrsGJ8eEwhHSs 0xXxJUcstjFvdpSK
7OLXQjNKQ1PIY59F+ujHEb7ihuTDI134QD0CMXIIzEDjFk+3RvRNkhP96qEP i2CcTDhxdp1kY/2I
pK+LwTEGxrnHYNKIyjXeoAq+SiLA8PBKsCGkgJpUId9SaUgJVq8nczsQETyy EA4GI5AgFE8XQWhL
MPKwimNM2oi6pZKZODNWdlRhKnFiTWPej1knO9XfmPkTuJwxmEKk5jg/Jb28 7UqX6jqZboyAOKZ4
RSLzDKgqR0RJRL4onfv0z1O6CZd/1lGg1YzWQCp5n3wlFFYLEhb+M/8hG07A E6ItI2gm2tnKg31H
N55sRYk+2oqbAOWdLAUpPWlS0IX10opkO8xt5AnO4QHjnTItyktf8ZObZrNI ppEn4GJqGjD0IKjd
pGkj9EdFSiQoqV7caAmgdkR7MhUvHb3DqoxKoNxgNauxxAFYqZrJdArGqWcs yLzOKsjOIQQzoBsq
XPcqnes1cjU+iilSXQoYo+gvd3xNrEZ2Fgwb4HOMGbVhVJUa1buaxmEcVaxi 2UpWqy6UmZStrGVv
M42LgHOqb4Ur6EL3V4gYB4qEHY5dTbvUt1LVnapFFGth8FhFOA6tsS1scIeH DGd69S26260iISKu
0M72l6n0J2b+R2uc9mmnpHIdrGE3KI4QShcu0bskc6+BUp/mTh7zw8c/ozhe yDr3st+KgHfLFA/2
tpdZ5bXddOsLNeoapbX3nZVZMRNftUJVhEqjSG9BMlcCI9fAUE1wgLc1YNu5 S7YQPeaEMdlg/U63
PeME8IZNBNvt1jZj3BtxJZDTyXT+V8UwZLFMtQljABUshQemZ42Xc1HJ5hjB O/aQnBDxY0cFGYZm
KnJaj+wJJasUdUymz1cFSqsoL+IuBw6Vlf0QMJDOC7tbPpvc1pigyIY5xtqD Z04ndmYuv+x0S2yz
JckXZznnrMxuG6WdI0Q0tO1ZJ1n7c0G+KOht2LfQzwgpohN2Da9F02KrjXZ0 KioTaUljB0k3sfTr
ggZkTRvkSmD2NCjgE2pRQ6bPZjY1YNfsN1WvGjCrc/WrlSnrTTWr1p6dEK5z TetdS1nXvl4EsIP9
614TG0DDPrabA61sITcl2c1WyrNvHW0kU7vaFYU2tu+cn217uwUhAAAh+QQJ HgAMACwAAAAAoACd
AAAF/mBRICTJnGiqrmzrvnAsz3Qdl6Sj7w5i/8CgcEhc5XhIna/IbDqfMQIh SVUWoNis9icYVL+9
rXi8FREKU+phfaAmluS4PEhAgE0nQz0Jn/v/LQd2dyyDPH2AiYCGVXgqRzuO ipNjCAaMVJKPfIiU
nk6QVAUGBzGZn6hNCgsNOEiWNJg7qbRBrD0RuRGGCFc1sj2dtcMtCsG6OaRB wJrEzikLx7sQdsIy
JZnWz7UKDdI4y7oRjdvlgyTijg/rLg8pCLvw8Xzlz7zy8SvsLO4n8AjU4slq Vs8TJBzabpTQ5W8g
wYKJMJVA0e8XOknYDoH706Cjx3oS+1SMNdFIKI1x/jyqVLntZEJ+I1/gy5hk y8qbH1syeikEH7KT
YUqSbIGzaANzS
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I've found a workaround!!!! [message #76200 is a reply to message #76182] |
Mon, 20 November 2006 01:51 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/DtedBZDXSf FyTnSC660S+OdNsq
/eYKAfqli76Qp0Pdx1JPiNV5bvKDbF2xXRd61sMu9rGT3etUP3vUza72taO2 7XAne0AAACH/C0dJ
RkNPTm5iMS4wAgEADgoAAgADAAAAAAAAAAAACnNhbjJhLkdJRgAAOw==
------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C7273D.7F892090--This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C72716.E6077280
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Merry Christmas to all ! ! !
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C72716.E6077280
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Merry Christmas to all ! ! =
!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C72716.E6077280--Hey Aaron! You were asking about a Windows keyboard on a Mac. I just tried
out a new Microsoft wireless keyboard and F12 does two things. If I tap
it quickly, it launches or closes Dashboard, if I press and hold, it will
open and close the CD drawer. If I press and hold Alt and F12 It opens and
closes the bottom DVD drawer.
I knew that I had done this before, but I couldn't remember how. Anyways,
I hope this helps.
They had these on sale a Office Depot with a wireless optical mouse for $20.00.
A nice basic keyboard with some multimedia buttons.
Now I just have to figure out how to get the multi media transport buttons
to work on my Mac, also the email button. The volume and mute work great.
James
"Aaron Allen" <AA@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>OK, so I've figured out that I can use my Dell keyboard on a Mac G4 Dual
system....
>what I can't figure out is what keystrokes to get the CD tray to eject,
LOL...
>
>so Mac gurus.. how's that happen w/o the eject key (non-Mac keyboard)? using
>a mac keyboard isn't really optional as I need, for space reasons, to use
>a KVM and only one keyboard and mouse. This model Mac has no eject on the
>computer itself.
>
>AAHoly shit ! Just the harmonies are worth the download. SCHWING !!
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Merry Christmas Beatles fans!
>
>Here are some studio over dubs. There is a rumor that Bernard Purdie actually
>Played the drum over dubs on some of the beatles tracks??? Supposedly he
>has made that claim. Anyways, here they are: http://shamraybass.com/5-1/
>
>Jamesand to you too !
"erlilo" <erlilo@nospamonline.no> wrote:
>
>
>
>------=_NextPart_001_0018_01C7273D.7F892090
>
>Merry Christmas to all of you from Norway!
>
>
>
>
>
>Erling
>------=_NextPart_001_0018_01C7273D.7F892090
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.3020" name=3DGENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY>
><DIV align=3Dcenter><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><FONT =
>face=3DArial size=3D2>Merry=20
>Christmas to all of you from Norway!</FONT></DIV>
><DIV align=3Dcenter><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV align=3Dcenter><IMG alt=3D"" hspace=3D0=20
>src=3D"cid:001001c72735$1dbfd690$0300000a@Erling1" align=3Dbaseline =
>border=3D0><IMG=20
>alt=3D"" hspace=3D0 src=3D"cid:001101c72735$1dc24790$0300000a@Erling1" =
>align=3Dbaseline=20
>border=3D0><IMG alt=3D"" hspace=3D0 =
>src=3D"cid:001201c72735$1dc24790$0300000a@Erling1"=20
>align=3Dbaseline border=3D0><IMG alt=3D"" hspace=3D0=20
>src=3D"cid:001001c72735$1dbfd690$0300000a@Erling1" align=3Dbaseline =
>border=3D0></DIV>
><DIV align=3Dcen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system..FX ?? How good are they [message #76230 is a reply to message #76198] |
Mon, 20 November 2006 16:35 |
|
|
, Thad and Neil have said I will take the FX =
plugins with a grain
of salt to see if they were worth the extra cash. I like the UAD, =
some Paris plugs
and a few natives alot. If these compliment those that's great. I =
really needed the Pro card=20
for it's hardware and soft synths. =20
I'll report back when I have something valuable to add.
Tom
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote in message =
news:45949c8d$1@linux...
http://scope.creamware.de/scope_fx.htm
will be very interested to hear about it if so
AA=20
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_00A7_01C72B18.3B73C200
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This is a Project card. The reverb is =
excellent as=20
is the Vinco. .Opimqaster and PysQ are good mastering tools, IMO, but =
then=20
again, so are the UA mastering tools. That reverb is going to burn =
through a bit=20
of DSP resources, but it's every bit as good as many hardware units I've =
heard.=20
If someone was looking for a reverb and it was the choice between this =
and a=20
standalone box of some sort, this card, be a contencer ,just for the=20
reverb..</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Tom Bruhl" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:arpegio@comcast.net">arpegio@comcast.net</A>> wrote =
in message=20
<A href=3D"news:4594ba78@linux">news:4594ba78@linux</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi Aaron,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have the Pro card which =
includes the FX=20
bundle. I've been tweaking my system</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>without listening up to this =
point. I think=20
within one week I'll finally</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>have it installed to replace the old =
AMD=20
1.4. That's when the true testing</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>will come into play.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Based on what Dimitrios, Thad and =
Neil have said=20
I will take the FX plugins with a grain</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>of salt to see if they were worth the =
extra=20
cash. I like the UAD, some Paris plugs</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>and a few natives alot. If =
these compliment=20
those that's great. I really needed the Pro card </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>for </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>it's hardware=20
and soft synths. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'll report back when I have =
something valuable=20
to add.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Aaron Allen" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:know-spam@not_here.dude">know-spam@not_here.dude</A>> =
wrote=20
in message <A=20
href=3D"news:45949c8d$1@linux">news:45949c8d$1@linux</A>...</DIV><A=20
=
href=3D"http://scope.creamware.de/scope_fx.htm">http://scope.creamware.de=
/scope_fx.htm</A><BR><BR>will=20
be very interested to hear about it if so<BR><BR><BR>AA =
<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE ></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_00A7_01C72B18.3B73C200--Yeah, this looks like the same thing as their "Mix & Master
Pack", which I also have... this is another problem with the
Creamware stuff - they have a couple of different names for
every product, and it's confusing (can't help their marketing
efforts any, either); it's like they decided to rename their
entire product line, but never dropped the old names, either.
Anyway, yes, to me this looks like the exact same thing as what
they now call their Mix & Master Pack, and IMO, YMMV, etc, some
of the FX are useful, and some of 'em are total crap... or more
accurately, some are useful, some are crap, some don't seem to
do much of anything at all and so you have to wonder: "why
bother even writing this plugin?". I noticed in one of the
Pulsar forum threads the other day where someone mentioned that
you have to get the Vinco compressor in the red before it does
anything. I didn't find that to be the case, but then I haven't
tried it on low-level signals (and maybe they were
exaggerating a bit).
Also, Aaron, what they mention on that page you liked to (down
at the bottom of the page) with regard to the list
of "plugins", well some of 'em ain't exactly plugins!. I'll
paste that list in & run through it in the order they mention
the items (my comments in parenthesis below):
*MasterVerb Pro (a pretty nice-sounding reverb, IMO. Not raving
about it, necessarily, but it sucketh not).
*Optimaster (this is something like Izotope's Ozone... a Multi-
EFX mastering app. It's got a Compressor, a limiter, expander,
all multi-band (3 bands). It's not as versatile as Ozone, and
doesn't have a stereo spread section (or a reverb, but that
would be your "MasterVerb", above), but it sounds pretty good,
I think - very smooth. The limiter is either totally incapable
of brickwaling, or I haven't figured out how to get it there,
because I've had to adjust the master level down to avoid overs
even when using this. It has a bunch of presets (not all of the
plugins do), some of which seem pretty useful as starting
points. I wouldn't want to run a Mastering house using this
application, so their choice of name may be stretching things a
bit, but if you want to strap something nice & smooth & clear-
sounding/uncolored across your Pulsar mixer's 2-buss, then this
would be the one to use).
*Vinco Vintage Compressor (a one-trick pony dead-on (at least
as far as I can tell from what I've run through it so far)
emulation of an 1176, but cleaner - maybe a little
less "attitude". I've never found the '76's to be all that
useful, personally, but for those who lust after them, his
one's not a bad clone at all.
*PSY-Q (Totally fuckin' useless attempt at a stereo spread
modifer... as I think I pointed out before, this thing has
about two degress of variance before it starts chewing the hell
out of your signal & barfing up something almost vaguely
resembling music. A waste of code, IMO). Want a killer stereo
spread modifier? Get the one that comes in Ozone instead. It's
the only good one I've heard since the Bedini B.A.S.E.
*Surroundmixer STM-48s
*Production Mixer STM-2448
*Inline Mixer STM-1632
(OK, absolutely NONE of these are really plugins... they're
MIXERS, one of which you have to have in your routing window &
be able to route signals through it in order to actually MIX -
or sum - anything!
See, the routing window works something like this... you drop
in a module that represents where your signal is coming from,
then you drop in a mixer module - you pick the smallest mixer
you really need, because the bigger the mixer, the more DSP
power it takes - then you drop in a module that represents
where you want your signal to go FROM the mixer, and in a very
small nutshell, that's it. The different modules get connected
very much like how you do it in Paris' virtual patchbay.
The part about "where your signal is coming from" could mean a
hardware input (ADAT/Analog/SPDIF/AES) or it could mean a
software/ASIO input (like for example if you were running
Cubase or Nuendo or whatnot & you had a 36-channel mix going on
& you wanted to run each channel individually through the
Pulsar DSP mixer, you'd drop in an "ASIO Source" module, do a
couple other things that I don't want to get into right now,
and connect tha module to the mixer in your routing window...
now if it's a 32-channel mix you couldn't use the "1632" mixer
mentioned above, because you'd be four channels short, so you'd
have to select the 48-channel mixer to get all those channels
individually. The part about "where you want your signal to go
to FROM the mixer" is similar... do you want it to go to analog
outs? Straight to somewhere on the hard disk? Back into your
native app on 2 new tracks so you can keep the mixes in the
same project? A combination of Analog outs for monitoring
purposes, lightpipe outs to your Alesis Masterlink, and also
straight to the hard disk for a backup copy, all at once? You
can do this, too.
*MasterVerb Classic (seems to me like the same basic algo's as
the MasterVerb, but without as much control and a different
GUI - haven't messed with it enough to be able to tell if it
sounds much different or not)
*Compressor, Limiter, Gate, Expander, (plain-vanilla dynamics
plugs without any form of coloration or attitude whatsover...
great if that's what you want, *YAWN* if it's not.)
*Parametric EQ, 4-Pole, HighCut Filter, LowCut Filter,
(OK, I THOUGHT I was going to go in the order they mentioned
it, but these needed to be grouped together... these are all
the same basic EQ plugin, and the only reason I think they make
them "separate" plugins is to give you the choice to conserve
DSP if you only need one band (hi cut or lo cut, for example) -
again, if there was a way to get more plain than plain
vanilla... how about a soy-based vanilla? - then that would be
the way to describe these plugins. Looking for a nice phat Neve-
ish, phasey, smeary, analog EQ... y'aint gonna find it here,
al. Phase-linear - I'm guessing - to the point of: "Is it even
ON?" is the game here. Clean? Yep. Musical? Nope.
*Filter, Chorus, 4-Tap, Chorus, Flanger, Phaser, Delay, Dual
Delay, AutoPan, AutoWah, Distortion, Dither/Shaper, Early
Reflector, Harmonic Chorus/Flanger, Multitap Delay, Overdrive,
Pitch Shifter, Resonator, RingModulator, Tremolo
I haven't used ANY of the delays yet, but most of the
modulation EFX all appear to be cut from the same mold, in the
manner of the different EQ plugs - most of the mod EFX are
pretty funky, and something I wouldn't use, so I can't really
comment much on these. The dither has quite a few settings,
some of which sound OK, and some of which sound like crap...
there's about ninetymillion dither/noise-shaping algos out
there now, so I'm not even sure what some of the presets
represent! Anyway, to sum it all up, this batch above
represents really about 4 total plugin's (Delay, Modulation,
Dither, and Distortion) that happen to be broken up into a
number of sub-applets for probably both convenience and
conservation of DSP... can't blame 'em for that.
This above3 lsit of stuff, as far as I can tell (unless I'm
missing something somewhere) is identical to what you'd get if
you select their Mix & Master pack as the software option
if you order either the "Home" card ($450-ish with 3 DSP chips)
or the "Project" card ($750-ish with 6 DSP chips)... Thad got a
special they have for the "Professional" card ($1,250-ish with
14 DSP chps) wherein if you buy that card you get both the Mix
& Master pack PLUS the Synths & Samplers pack (which I know
nothing about since I don't have that software bundle).
Argh... tired of typing now - will fill you in on the confusing
differences between the names of the cards (both new AND old/yet
continuing to be referenced in their own literature), and the
different i/o options you have to pick from later on.
Neil"DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>
>
>This is a Project card. The reverb is excellent as is the
Vinco. =
>.Opimqaster and PysQ are good mastering tools, IMO,
Man, you and I sure differ on the PsyQ!
lolYOU made it on there... give yourself a little pat on the
back.
:)
"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote:
>
>ooops
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Best-CDs-of-2006/lm/R2VNONOBMWCPON/ref =cm_lm_srch_fvlm_col_3/102-4434074-1512128
>
>Richie Furay made it on here :)
>
>Done in Paris of course...
>
>
>"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote:
>>
>>Richie Furay made it on here :)
>>
>>Done in Paris of course...
>Hey man.that's the "only" EQ I've ever heard that can model the old PT
siytem flourescent mix bus. Don't you want your recordings to sound "Pro?"
;oD
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45952aeb$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>This is a Project card. The reverb is excellent as is the
> Vinco. =
>>.Opimqaster and PysQ are good mastering tools, IMO,
>
> Man, you and I sure differ on the PsyQ!
>
> lolhttp://knuttz.net/hosted_pages/Core-3-Trio-20061228I listened to most of the tunes, Chuck... pretty fun stuff!
Neil
>
>haha.
>
>After trying to figure out how to start a musical diary, I copped on way
>to late to the blog revolution and started using an incredible piece of
open
>source software known as wordpress.
>
>youchill.com is where I will post bit by bit, for better or for worse, every
>song I have ever recorded, along with some details. I decided to do this
>after speaking with one of my oldest friends one night, and agreeing that,
>even though it is a terrible cliche, that music literally saved our lives
>:-)
>
>I don't really have any new music per se as all i do now is noodle around
>on the piano, while computers crash, hard drives die, and plugins get de-authorized
>under mysterious circumstances. Everything I will post is circa 99 or earlier.
>
>I guess most of what I record could be considered alternative music, because
>I can't sing and I can't play. haha But I do think that there are bits
>and pieces of obviously recognizable influences.
>
>ChuckJust found this cool little program:
http://www.hermannseib.com/english/savihost.htm
It enables VSTi to run standalone. Also has recording and
mixing/looping modes. And its freeware!
- Paul Artola
Ellicott City, MarylandHi Aaron,
My Paris rig (home project studio) is the same as I use for all my stuff
including email and known trusted interenet sites like banking. I put on
SP2 and no conflicts. I'm not considering Vista at this point in time. The
only problem I've had with XP since 2003 is the HP and I turn it off when
running Paris. Sorry, I'm so late with the post. Been busy. Have a great
new year. Wayne
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
news:45709d8c@linux...
>
> I'm blowing out my rig here and installing everything new. In the next few
> I'll be at SP1a. I've never put SP2 on my paris rig, never had a reason to
> and things like firewall and DEP made me nervous.
>
> I already have it back up and running with the required 3 displays, 2 EDS
> cards, SBS 7 slot and a few PCI cards (USB, 1394, NIC, etc...). I want to
> keep this build simple and to the point and put the UAD/VSTi thing of on
> another machine so I'm more concerned about stability than things taking
> away CPU time (xp1900+, Asus A7s333). The heavy lifting for virtuals will
> be on the other box, yet to be built. Probably will also use a crossover
> cable to feed tracks back and forth as necessary. Machine will not ever
> touch internet.
>
> I wanted to poll the group on one thing:
> Has anyone found a reason that they -should- install Service Pack 2 to
> Paris for?
>
> AA
>No luck...
Are you sure the link is right?
Don
"Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:9ijap2pv8sar50bj8r7as4kihj5fqaj9m8@4ax.com...
> Just found this cool little program:
> http://www.hermannseib.com/english/savihost.htm
>
> It enables VSTi to run standalone. Also has recording and
> mixing/looping modes. And its freeware!
>
> - Paul Artola
> Ellicott City, Maryland
>Thanks for checking it out Neil!
Chuck
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>I listened to most of the tunes, Chuck... pretty fun stuff!
>
>Neil
>
>
>
>>
>>haha.
>>
>>After trying to figure out how to start a musical diary, I copped on way
>>to late to the blog revolution and started using an incredible piece of
>open
>>source software known as wordpress.
>>
>>youchill.com is where I will post bit by bit, for better or for worse,
every
>>song I have ever recorded, along with some details. I decided to do this
>>after speaking with one of my oldest friends one night, and agreeing that,
>>even though it is a terrible cliche, that music literally saved our lives
>>:-)
>>
>>I don't really have any new music per se as all i do now is noodle around
>>on the piano, while computers crash, hard drives die, and plugins get de-authorized
>>under mysterious circumstances. Everything I will post is circa 99 or earlier.
>>
>>I guess most of what I record could be considered alternative music, because
>>I can't sing and I can't play. haha But I do think that there are bits
>>and pieces of obviously recognizable influences.
>>
>>Chuck
>Presonus HP4. 4 headphone out jacks. Just a little electonic noise
coloration but simple. Plenty of boost. I take Paris 3-4 out (monitor)
into it. All headphone outs are the same mix, ie, Paris L/R. About $100
bucks at GC.
Wayne
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45916adf$1@linux...
>
> What' everyone doing for their headphone setups? I need something
> inexpensive
> that will hit at least 4 headphones and Behringer is out. What are you
> guys
> using?It's http://www.hermannseib.com/english/vsthost.htm
It's a freeware VST host. It has no/lo overhead and I have been using it
for about a year. I'm also basing some code for stuff I'm working on it.
Also, while you are there, check out the 'virtual slavery' suite. It's a
way to steal audio from a VST plug in paris and get it over to the VST host
with 0 latency.
Chuck
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>No luck...
>
>Are you sure the link is right?
>
>Don
>
>
>"Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:9ijap2pv8sar50bj8r7as4kihj5fqaj9m8@4ax.com...
>> Just found this cool little program:
>> http://www.hermannseib.com/english/savihost.htm
>>
>> It enables VSTi to run standalone. Also has recording and
>> mixing/looping modes. And its freeware!
>>
>> - Paul Artola
>> Ellicott City, Maryland
>>
>
>Looking for a new hobby? Check out this video:
http://www.jet-man.com/actuel.html
JamesRod,
What format are BFD's samples? It's been a while ago, but I created some DFH
to Drumagog "gog" banks by dragging a bunch of DFH samples into Drumagog and
I'm almost certain Drumagog did all the work of organizing the different
levels and velocities. DFH samples are regular .wav files. I'd have to sit
down and go through it again to remember the details, but I seem to remember
being pleasantly surprised at how easy it was to create my own gog banks.
You might send Rim at Drumagog an email also. He's one the most helpful guys
out there.
Tony
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system..FX ?? How good are they [message #76232 is a reply to message #76230] |
Mon, 20 November 2006 17:44 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ays to sample BFD with all the
> layers and alternate strokes that I find my self needing for it not to
> sound
> fake.
> Rod
> "Neil" <IUOI@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>Rod, kinda surprised that as a drummer, you just don't snag
>>a few samples off your own kit & load them into D-Gog & forget
>>about the BFD altogether...
>>
>>...anyway, what about just looping your MIDI out to your MIDI
>>input & have D-gog trigger BFD that way??
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Hey DJ...did you say you were triggering BFD from a live snare track via
>>Drumagog
>>>with asio, in the same computer??? I'm trying to get this to happen, and
>>>I'm not quit sure how to go about it. Any pointers would be appreciated.
>>>I've got Drumagog 3 Pro that spits out midi notes, but I can only select
>>>my hardware midi outs. How do I get it to go to BFD internally.
>>>thanks
>>>Rod
>>
>Tony, I've done that also, with the DFH stuff. The BFD samples are all embedded
in a data file that only plays in BFD.
Rod
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>Rod,
>
>What format are BFD's samples? It's been a while ago, but I created some
DFH
>to Drumagog "gog" banks by dragging a bunch of DFH samples into Drumagog
and
>I'm almost certain Drumagog did all the work of organizing the different
>levels and velocities. DFH samples are regular .wav files. I'd have to sit
>down and go through it again to remember the details, but I seem to remember
>being pleasantly surprised at how easy it was to create my own gog banks.
>You might send Rim at Drumagog an email also. He's one the most helpful
guys
>out there.
>
>Tony
>
>
>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote in message news:4594823c$1@linux...
>>
>> I thought of that (midi out to midi in) but that seems WAY too easy. I
>> thought
>> DJ could come up with a much more exciting way to do it.
>> I just want to use some of the room and overhead sounds that are available
>> in BFD to experiment with layering in under my own tracks, for ambience.
>> I do this with other samples already, but thought BFD might provide some
>> nice stuff, and I'm getting too lazy these days to sample BFD with all
the
>> layers and alternate strokes that I find my self needing for it not to
>> sound
>> fake.
>> Rod
>> "Neil" <IUOI@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Rod, kinda surprised that as a drummer, you just don't snag
>>>a few samples off your own kit & load them into D-Gog & forget
>>>about the BFD altogether...
>>>
>>>...anyway, what about just looping your MIDI out to your MIDI
>>>input & have D-gog trigger BFD that way??
>>>
>>>Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Hey DJ...did you say you were triggering BFD from a live snare track
via
>>>Drumagog
>>>>with asio, in the same computer??? I'm trying to get this to happen,
and
>>>>I'm not quit sure how to go about it. Any pointers would be appreciated.
>>>>I've got Drumagog 3 Pro that spits out midi notes, but I can only select
>>>>my hardware midi outs. How do I get it to go to BFD internally.
>>>>thanks
>>>>Rod
>>>
>>
>
>Neil, tried the cable...it "sort of works" but not good enough for my taste.
The midi slop makes the samples fire too inconsistantly to sound tight. I'd
have to do too much editing after the fact.
Rod
"Neil" <OIUOI@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>I thought of that (midi out to midi in) but that seems WAY too easy. I
thought
>>DJ could come up with a much more exciting way to do it.
>
>I have no doubt that he could. Try A CABLE, though - it might
>actually get you being able to work on this TONIGHT!
>
>lolTwo quick points. If you believe 'insanely great' you clearly never used 7.5.3
or the first release of OS X. which as far as I can tell had to download
the entire BSD source to run a single security patch. Second, my primary
area of expertise is networking, not Windows administration, so I'll have
a job as long as computers are networked, regardless of OS. However, in the
corporate world that pretty much means Windows/Office/Outlook on the desktops,
and in our case a combination of Windows, linux, and Solaris in the server
room. If I had to manage 60 desktops that were all OS X machines it would
be AT LEAST as difficult and time consuming as managing our XP boxes. Say
what you will about MSoft, and I say plenty, but they at least give us the
tools to manage patches and application upgrades, volume licenses for software,
and mail/user/domain changes from a central location. I also have imaging
tools to move out multiple machines, XP boot CDs for search and rescue, and
so on.
With some pain and suffering I could switch to linux desktops and I think
in the long run things would be easier, save that my users would give up
Outlook only after a bitter and deadly (for me) struggle. Unix was designed
precisely for central management and such. OS X networks, though, I see people
with a lot of CDs stacked up at their workstations, not the kind of central
control I need.
Lastly. Visionary? Cerf invented TCP, Stallman Emacs, Torvalds the X86 linux
kernel, Andreesen took Mosaic and brought it to the world. What is Jobs'
visionary achievement? The handle on the Mac? I always did like that handle
. . .
TCB
TCB
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>I dunno Thad. Even when I didn't choose Macs, even when MacOS sucked, I
>though "insanely great" was a much more inspiring mantra than the mere
>"a computer on every desk." It seems to me Jobs pushed for quality,
>sometimes, and at times when the biggest competitor was happy with good
>enough. At critical moments Jobs was at the helm for major leaps at
>Apple, when the biggest competition was content to milk backwards
>compatibility to the stone age.
>
>No vague handwaving can somehow make every OS identical, every computer
>identical, every company identical or history vanish into sameness. In
>fact, choice is good and Apple has, despite some wrong turns here and
>there, done some things very right with OSX.
>
>Granted OSX is not open source (past Darwin and a ton of apps). Granted
>it will never pay your bills (doesn't need heavy duty administration
>like you're used to). Granted, you can't cobble together your own OSX
>hardware. So I expect your endearing and committed grumbling will
>continue whenever the subject of Apple comes up.
>
>Did Jobs change the world? Along the way, he did have a hand in some big
>things. On the down side he made some poor choices and may have crossed
>the line with stock options. Gates? Probably best at accelerating the
>commoditization of the industry, but worse as a destroyer of competition
>leading to criminal indictments and a major MAJOR, uh, wrist slapping.
>The free software and academic folks? Big contributions as you say.
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>TCB wrote:
>> Hmmmm, I scrolled back a few pages and find the following from one James
McCloskey
>> Esq. regarding Windows Vista
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>> Adolph Gates and the MS software Nazi's strike again!
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>> I have said myself some unkind things about El Presidente For Life Estebahn
>> Jobs, but in none of them have I ever called him Adolf Jobs or even Steve
>> Mussolini. So even before I begin I'm reminded of a phrase that includes
>> the words pot, kettle, and black.
>>
>> That said, in addition to the things Lamont mentioned I have two problems
>> with Steve Jobs. First, it's his relentless emphasis on what I call 'Apple
>> Exceptionalism,' the belief that somehow something inside an Apple OS
or
>> piece of hardware is mystically better than anything else. They're not,
it's
>> just a computer and an operating system, there's nothing special about
it
>> at all. Some people do special things with them, but some people do special
>> things with gardening tools, others with saxophones, and still others
with
>> computers running Windows believe it or not. The whole [grammatically
incorrect]
>> Think Different campaign only made that worse.
>>
>> The second thing I can't stand about Steve Jobs is the whole 'visionary
who
>> changed the world' thing. Neither he, nor Gates, nor any of the people
trotted
>> out as visionaries were anything close to it. The real visionaries in
the
>> world of computing are people like Marc Andreesen and Jamie Zawinski who
>> in essence made the web usable by normal people. Vinton Cerf is a visionary.
>> Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman are visionaries, no matter how much
>> they can't stand each other. My old friend Stephan Sprenger, who wrote
an
>> SGI app that would do morphing DSP on audio files, but it was so complex
>> in 1993 that to morph a piece of audio would take 18 hours and if you
didn't
>> like the results you'd have to change one parameter and try again the
next
>> day. That's passion and vision and caring. The person who probably fits
that
>> description best at Apple was/is Woz. Compared to Woz Jobs is the carny
barker,
>> the marketing stooge, the actor. But because he gets on stage and flashes
>> an iPod nano he's something special. To me that diminishes the accomplishments
>> of the true visionaries.
>>
>> But I never called him Adolf Jobs, just for the record.
>>
>> TCB
>>
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>>> HI,
>>>> To me this more than ever a time for the Linux folks to setup. I dislike
>>>> Microsoft and Apple pretty much equally. Given the chance Jobs be as
big
>>>> as bully and buffoon as Gates. This would be a great time for higher
end
>>>> niche type companies to really look into Linux support. I think they
>>>> would greatly benefit from it big time at this point. Allot less
>>>> politics involved then in the Windows and Apple world and much more
>>>> quality of the end product. Some companies might be hit by that hard
if
>>>> they have Windows or OSX centric code base like Cakewalk or Magix.
>>>> Sense Apple have "borrowed" a UNIX/BSD core and MS have reinvented
>>>> windows 3.1 with the shell that looks like OSX why not just go directly
>>>> to Linux and cut out the retarded middle men. Glad Steinberg do their
>>
>>>> base development for Cubase and Nuendo in a Linux environment. Don't
>>>> forget they had a fully functional version on Nuendo back when Be OS
was
>>>> around. Worked great with my RME Digi968 card.
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>> Why do so many people dislike Steve Jobs so much? Have you ever considered
>>> what he did for the (PC) Personal Computer industry, and how it has benefitted
>>> all of us?
>>>
>>> Chris, do you call Steve Jobs a bully because you heard the rumors that
>> he
>>> was a tuff boss, that he was anal about his vision and the direction
of
>> the
>>> company he started? Can you really blame him? I think his feud with
John
>>> Sculley has now proven that Steve Jobs was right. Scully, along with
Gil
>>> Amelio, ran Apple in to the ground. It wasn't until Steve Jobs came
back
>>> to Apple that Apple started to prosper again.
>>>
>>> Had it all been left up to IBM, at best we might have expensive IBM terminals
>>> in business. Had it been left to Microsoft, you might be still typing
command
>>> lines in DOS 2007. (Dumb Operating System 2007)
>>>
>>> The PC industry certainly wouldn't be where it is today, if it wasn't
for
>>> Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak.
>>>
>>> I don't get the disregard.
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>>> TCB wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> And this doesn't even touch on the incredible PITA it will be to organize
>>>>> and maintain a Vista corporate/educational environment. It's ugly,
trust
>>>>> me.
>>>>>
>>>>> But there are two things that will work against this. First, the corporate
>>>>> client who at some point will simply say 'no mas' and stick with XP.
That's
>>>>> pretty much the plan in my office. Second is what I've been saying
all
>>> along,
>>>>> which is that the OS doesn't really matter anymore. Google, YouTube,
MySpace.
>>>>> That's what people want from their computers and they can be provided
>> on
>>>>> a wide range of operating systems. A third potential dark horse is
that
>>> much
>>>>> of the DRM is an attempt by MSoft to force the content providers to
funnel
>>>>> all of their content via MSoft authentication. Sony, Warner Brothers,
>> Comcast,
>>>>> and a host of other content providers, bandwidth sellers, and hardware/software
>>>>> vendors with deep pockets have an interest in seeing this not happen.
>>
>>>>> I was really scared when tech cratered in 2001 that it would become
a
>> MSoft
>>>>> world, simply because nobody could afford to fight them. But thanks
to
>>> some
>>>>> people waking up and the massive amount of money (and breathtaking
profit
>>>>> margins) finally being generated by internet advertising that's not
the
>>> case.
>>>>> MSoft had its nose bloodied severely at the outset of the console war,
>>> until
>>>>> Sony decided it would do the nice thing and blow itself to bits. Apple
>>> essentially
>>>>> owns the consumer downloaded audio market, which bloodied both MSoft
and
>>>>> Sony noses. And, closest to my heart, after tech cratered the _real_
free
>>>>> software projects, Apache, Perl, the kernel, Debian, Gnome, etc. kept
>> right
>>>>> on going just like they had before. They didn't need sleezy VC money
in
>>> 1995
>>>>> and they don't need it now, and they don't need MSoft either.
>>>>>
>>>>> TCB
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Chris Ludwig
>>>> ADK
>>>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>>> www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>>> (859) 635-5762
>>I figured there was a catch. Bummer.
Tony
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote in message news:4595664a$1@linux...
>
> Tony, I've done that also, with the DFH stuff. The BFD samples are all
> embedded
> in a data file that only plays in BFD.
> Rod
> "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>>Rod,
>>
>>What format are BFD's samples? It's been a while ago, but I created some
> DFH
>>to Drumagog "gog" banks by dragging a bunch of DFH samples into Drumagog
> and
>>I'm almost certain Drumagog did all the work of organizing the different
>
>>levels and velocities. DFH samples are regular .wav files. I'd have to sit
>
>>down and go through it again to remember the details, but I seem to
>>remember
>
>>being pleasantly surprised at how easy it was to create my own gog banks.
>
>>You might send Rim at Drumagog an email also. He's one the most helpful
> guys
>>out there.
>>
>>Tony
>>
>>
>>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>>news:4594823c$1@linux...
>>>
>>> I thought of that (midi out to midi in) but that seems WAY too easy. I
>
>>> thought
>>> DJ could come up with a much more exciting way to do it.
>>> I just want to use some of the room and overhead sounds that are
>>> available
>>> in BFD to experiment with layering in under my own tracks, for ambience.
>>> I do this with other samples already, but thought BFD might provide some
>>> nice stuff, and I'm getting too lazy these days to sample BFD with all
> the
>>> layers and alternate strokes that I find my self needing for it not to
>
>>> sound
>>> fake.
>>> Rod
>>> "Neil" <IUOI@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Rod, kinda surprised that as a drummer, you just don't snag
>>>>a few samples off your own kit & load them into D-Gog & forget
>>>>about the BFD altogether...
>>>>
>>>>...anyway, what about just looping your MIDI out to your MIDI
>>>>input & have D-gog trigger BFD that way??
>>>>
>>>>Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Hey DJ...did you say you were triggering BFD from a live snare track
> via
>>>>Drumagog
>>>>>with asio, in the same computer??? I'm trying to get this to happen,
> and
>>>>>I'm not quit sure how to go about it. Any pointers would be
>>>>>appreciated.
>>>>>I've got Drumagog 3 Pro that spits out midi notes, but I can only
>>>>>select
>>>>>my hardware midi outs. How do I get it to go to BFD internally.
>>>>>thanks
>>>>>Rod
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>You missed my point, which is that "insanely great" is just a better
attitude for development efforts. Also, the old MacOS, any version, was
never that elegant as I've said many times. It had some great ideas on
top but some problems in the foundation. I was never a big fan of some
of the early Mac OS design decisions, even when I was writing for
MacWEEK, MacUser, etc. With OSX, Apple transcended the old baggage for
the better.
Also, clearly the first release of OSX wasn't as good as the latest
release. No disagreement there, and no surprise either. Do you remember
the first release of MSWindows? Appalling. The first release of AmigaOS?
Major stability problems. I could go on...
OSX has its share of networking admin tools. Some folks seem to think
they're pretty OK. You don't use it so I wouldn't expect you to be an
expert. I'm glad you like the tools you do use, you may as well enjoy
what you spend time doing. But if you want to know more about what is
available for OSX, google "osx network admin tools." For example:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/
http://homepage.mac.com/duling/halfdozen/
http://mac.softpedia.com/get/Network-Admin/Apple-OS-X-Server -Admin-Tools-10-4-7.shtml
http://www.samspublishing.com/library/content.asp?b=Mac_OS_X _Unleashed&seqNum=189&rl=1
The chip you carry about OSX doesn't seem to be shared by a lot of folks
on slashdot, although I'm sure you have some company. No one tool is
right for everyone, and no tool is perfect. I would feel most
comfortable asking you for Linux advice, and perhaps MSWindows advice
but I think you have a blind spot about OSX. To hear you tell it, OSX is
practically unusable and should be avoided, whereas I use it every day
and can report a good user experience even with heavy media production
demands. Note that I certainly don't claim OSX is perfect (I have some
criticisms), but it seems the best option for what I do at the moment.
As I mentioned about Jobs, he was at the top spot when difficult Apple
course changes were made, and made successfully. He managed to negotiate
agreements with reticent record companies to create a commercial music
download service when no one else could pull that off. He also started
NeXT, which made great progress when Apple and MicroSoft were bogged
down. BTW Tim Berners-Lee wrote the first World Wide Web server and
browser with a NeXT box. http://www.thocp.net/biographies/berners_lee.html
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
TCB wrote:
> Two quick points. If you believe 'insanely great' you clearly never used 7.5.3
> or the first release of OS X. which as far as I can tell had to download
> the entire BSD source to run a single security patch. Second, my primary
> area of expertise is networking, not Windows administration, so I'll have
> a job as long as computers are networked, regardless of OS. However, in the
> corporate world that pretty much means Windows/Office/Outlook on the desktops,
> and in our case a combination of Windows, linux, and Solaris in the server
> room. If I had to manage 60 desktops that were all OS X machines it would
> be AT LEAST as difficult and time consuming as managing our XP boxes. Say
> what you will about MSoft, and I say plenty, but they at least give us the
> tools to manage patches and application upgrades, volume licenses for software,
> and mail/user/domain changes from a central location. I also have imaging
> tools to move out multiple machines, XP boot CDs for search and rescue, and
> so on.
>
> With some pain and suffering I could switch to linux desktops and I think
> in the long run things would be easier, save that my users would give up
> Outlook only after a bitter and deadly (for me) struggle. Unix was designed
> precisely for central management and such. OS X networks, though, I see people
> with a lot of CDs stacked up at their workstations, not the kind of central
> control I need.
>
> Lastly. Visionary? Cerf invented TCP, Stallman Emacs, Torvalds the X86 linux
> kernel, Andreesen took Mosaic and brought it to the world. What is Jobs'
> visionary achievement? The handle on the Mac? I always did like that handle
> . . .
>
> TCB
>
> TCB
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>> I dunno Thad. Even when I didn't choose Macs, even when MacOS sucked, I
>
>> though "insanely great" was a much more inspiring mantra than the mere
>> "a computer on every desk." It seems to me Jobs pushed for quality,
>> sometimes, and at times when the biggest competitor was happy with good
>
>> enough. At critical moments Jobs was at the helm for major leaps at
>> Apple, when the biggest competition was content to milk backwards
>> compatibility to the stone age.
>>
>> No vague handwaving can somehow make every OS identical, every computer
>
>> identical, every company identical or history vanish into sameness. In
>> fact, choice is good and Apple has, despite some wrong turns here and
>> there, done some things very right with OSX.
>>
>> Granted OSX is not open source (past Darwin and a ton of apps). Granted
>
>> it will never pay your bills (doesn't need heavy duty administration
>> like you're used to). Granted, you can't cobble together your own OSX
>> hardware. So I expect your endearing and committed grumbling will
>> continue whenever the subject of Apple comes up.
>>
>> Did Jobs change the world? Along the way, he did have a hand in some big
>
>> things. On the down side he made some poor choices and may have crossed
>
>> the line with stock options. Gates? Probably best at accelerating the
>> commoditization of the industry, but worse as a destroyer of competition
>
>> leading to criminal indictments and a major MAJOR, uh, wrist slapping.
>> The free software and academic folks? Big contributions as you say.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>> TCB wrote:
>>> Hmmmm, I scrolled back a few pages and find the following from one James
> McCloskey
>>> Esq. regarding Windows Vista
>>>
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>
>>> Adolph Gates and the MS software N
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system..FX ?? How good are they [message #76233 is a reply to message #76232] |
Mon, 20 November 2006 18:58 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
azi's strike again!
>>>
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>
>>> I have said myself some unkind things about El Presidente For Life Estebahn
>>> Jobs, but in none of them have I ever called him Adolf Jobs or even Steve
>>> Mussolini. So even before I begin I'm reminded of a phrase that includes
>>> the words pot, kettle, and black.
>>>
>>> That said, in addition to the things Lamont mentioned I have two problems
>>> with Steve Jobs. First, it's his relentless emphasis on what I call 'Apple
>>> Exceptionalism,' the belief that somehow something inside an Apple OS
> or
>>> piece of hardware is mystically better than anything else. They're not,
> it's
>>> just a computer and an operating system, there's nothing special about
> it
>>> at all. Some people do special things with them, but some people do special
>>> things with gardening tools, others with saxophones, and still others
> with
>>> computers running Windows believe it or not. The whole [grammatically
> incorrect]
>>> Think Different campaign only made that worse.
>>>
>>> The second thing I can't stand about Steve Jobs is the whole 'visionary
> who
>>> changed the world' thing. Neither he, nor Gates, nor any of the people
> trotted
>>> out as visionaries were anything close to it. The real visionaries in
> the
>>> world of computing are people like Marc Andreesen and Jamie Zawinski who
>>> in essence made the web usable by normal people. Vinton Cerf is a visionary.
>>> Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman are visionaries, no matter how much
>>> they can't stand each other. My old friend Stephan Sprenger, who wrote
> an
>>> SGI app that would do morphing DSP on audio files, but it was so complex
>>> in 1993 that to morph a piece of audio would take 18 hours and if you
> didn't
>>> like the results you'd have to change one parameter and try again the
> next
>>> day. That's passion and vision and caring. The person who probably fits
> that
>>> description best at Apple was/is Woz. Compared to Woz Jobs is the carny
> barker,
>>> the marketing stooge, the actor. But because he gets on stage and flashes
>>> an iPod nano he's something special. To me that diminishes the accomplishments
>>> of the true visionaries.
>>>
>>> But I never called him Adolf Jobs, just for the record.
>>>
>>> TCB
>>>
>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>>>> HI,
>>>>> To me this more than ever a time for the Linux folks to setup. I dislike
>>>>> Microsoft and Apple pretty much equally. Given the chance Jobs be as
> big
>>>>> as bully and buffoon as Gates. This would be a great time for higher
> end
>>>>> niche type companies to really look into Linux support. I think they
>
>>>>> would greatly benefit from it big time at this point. Allot less
>>>>> politics involved then in the Windows and Apple world and much more
>
>>>>> quality of the end product. Some companies might be hit by that hard
> if
>>>>> they have Windows or OSX centric code base like Cakewalk or Magix.
>
>>>>> Sense Apple have "borrowed" a UNIX/BSD core and MS have reinvented
>>>>> windows 3.1 with the shell that looks like OSX why not just go directly
>>>>> to Linux and cut out the retarded middle men. Glad Steinberg do their
>>>>> base development for Cubase and Nuendo in a Linux environment. Don't
>
>>>>> forget they had a fully functional version on Nuendo back when Be OS
> was
>>>>> around. Worked great with my RME Digi968 card.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris
>>>>>
>>>> Why do so many people dislike Steve Jobs so much? Have you ever considered
>>>> what he did for the (PC) Personal Computer industry, and how it has benefitted
>>>> all of us?
>>>>
>>>> Chris, do you call Steve Jobs a bully because you heard the rumors that
>>> he
>>>> was a tuff boss, that he was anal about his vision and the direction
> of
>>> the
>>>> company he started? Can you really blame him? I think his feud with
> John
>>>> Sculley has now proven that Steve Jobs was right. Scully, along with
> Gil
>>>> Amelio, ran Apple in to the ground. It wasn't until Steve Jobs came
> back
>>>> to Apple that Apple started to prosper again.
>>>>
>>>> Had it all been left up to IBM, at best we might have expensive IBM terminals
>>>> in business. Had it been left to Microsoft, you might be still typing
> command
>>>> lines in DOS 2007. (Dumb Operating System 2007)
>>>>
>>>> The PC industry certainly wouldn't be where it is today, if it wasn't
> for
>>>> Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak.
>>>>
>>>> I don't get the disregard.
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> TCB wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> And this doesn't even touch on the incredible PITA it will be to organize
>>>>>> and maintain a Vista corporate/educational environment. It's ugly,
> trust
>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But there are two things that will work against this. First, the corporate
>>>>>> client who at some point will simply say 'no mas' and stick with XP.
> That's
>>>>>> pretty much the plan in my office. Second is what I've been saying
> all
>>>> along,
>>>>>> which is that the OS doesn't really matter anymore. Google, YouTube,
> MySpace.
>>>>>> That's what people want from their computers and they can be provided
>>> on
>>>>>> a wide range of operating systems. A third potential dark horse is
> that
>>>> much
>>>>>> of the DRM is an attempt by MSoft to force the content providers to
> funnel
>>>>>> all of their content via MSoft authentication. Sony, Warner Brothers,
>>> Comcast,
>>>>>> and a host of other content providers, bandwidth sellers, and hardware/software
>>>>>> vendors with deep pockets have an interest in seeing this not happen.
>>>>>> I was really scared when tech cratered in 2001 that it would become
> a
>>> MSoft
>>>>>> world, simply because nobody could afford to fight them. But thanks
> to
>>>> some
>>>>>> people waking up and the massive amount of money (and breathtaking
> profit
>>>>>> margins) finally being generated by internet advertising that's not
> the
>>>> case.
>>>>>> MSoft had its nose bloodied severely at the outset of the console war,
>>>> until
>>>>>> Sony decided it would do the nice thing and blow itself to bits. Apple
>>>> essentially
>>>>>> owns the consumer downloaded audio market, which bloodied both MSoft
> and
>>>>>> Sony noses. And, closest to my heart, after tech cratered the _real_
> free
>>>>>> software projects, Apache, Perl, the kernel, Debian, Gnome, etc. kept
>>> right
>>>>>> on going just like they had before. They didn't need sleezy VC money
> in
>>>> 1995
>>>>>> and they don't need it now, and they don't need MSoft either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TCB
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Chris Ludwig
>>>>> ADK
>>>>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>>>> www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>>>> (859) 635-5762
>Congrats John! You do great work.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
John Macy wrote:
> Richie Furay made it on here :)
>
> Done in Paris of course...Do you knows guitar combo Rath-amp Retro 20?Is it good for recording blues-rock,
hard rock?
thanks
zmoraAwesome dude, thanks for getting back to me. Did you encounter any snags
with SP2 DEP and Paris.exe, and what log in priv's do you log in with?
Happy New Year bro'
Thanks!
AA
"Wayne Carson" <carson_wayne@msn.com> wrote in message
news:4595505d@linux...
> Hi Aaron,
>
> My Paris rig (home project studio) is the same as I use for all my stuff
> including email and known trusted interenet sites like banking. I put on
> SP2 and no conflicts. I'm not considering Vista at this point in time.
> The only problem I've had with XP since 2003 is the HP and I turn it off
> when running Paris. Sorry, I'm so late with the post. Been busy. Have a
> great new year. Wayne
>
>
>
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
> news:45709d8c@linux...
>>
>> I'm blowing out my rig here and installing everything new. In the next
>> few I'll be at SP1a. I've never put SP2 on my paris rig, never had a
>> reason to and things like firewall and DEP made me nervous.
>>
>> I already have it back up and running with the required 3 displays, 2 EDS
>> cards, SBS 7 slot and a few PCI cards (USB, 1394, NIC, etc...). I want to
>> keep this build simple and to the point and put the UAD/VSTi thing of on
>> another machine so I'm more concerned about stability than things taking
>> away CPU time (xp1900+, Asus A7s333). The heavy lifting for virtuals will
>> be on the other box, yet to be built. Probably will also use a crossover
>> cable to feed tracks back and forth as necessary. Machine will not ever
>> touch internet.
>>
>> I wanted to poll the group on one thing:
>> Has anyone found a reason that they -should- install Service Pack 2 to
>> Paris for?
>>
>> AA
>>
>
>I'm not finding anything under virtual slavery.... could you be more
specific at what you're alluding to chuck?
AA
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote in message news:45955a57$1@linux...
>
> It's http://www.hermannseib.com/english/vsthost.htm
>
> It's a freeware VST host. It has no/lo overhead and I have been using it
> for about a year. I'm also basing some code for stuff I'm working on it.
>
> Also, while you are there, check out the 'virtual slavery' suite. It's a
> way to steal audio from a VST plug in paris and get it over to the VST
> host
> with 0 latency.
>
> Chuck
>
>
> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>No luck...
>>
>>Are you sure the link is right?
>>
>>Don
>>
>>
>>"Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:9ijap2pv8sar50bj8r7as4kihj5fqaj9m8@4ax.com...
>>> Just found this cool little program:
>>> http://www.hermannseib.com/english/savihost.htm
>>>
>>> It enables VSTi to run standalone. Also has recording and
>>> mixing/looping modes. And its freeware!
>>>
>>> - Paul Artola
>>> Ellicott City, Maryland
>>>
>>
>>
>Well I try not to allude so much these days :-)
But about 3/4 down the page I posted you will find the following:
VSTHost Slavery Suite
It was just a little question in a forum... "Is there a way to route the
output of vsthost to Kristal Audio engine? And without latency?" that triggered
the addition of a slave mode to VSTHost. And since I got a rather bad taste
of humor, it got the above title.
When started with the parameter /slave, VSTHost goes into Slave Mode and
waits for a Master to control it. The first (and currently only) master is
a VST(i) plugin that can be embedded into any VST Host program (even another
instance of VSTHost), called Legree. It comes as an effect and as a VSTi,
since there are hosts that accept only effects, hosts that only accept VSTis,
and of course hosts that accept both.
You can download Legree here (.zip file, 85K).
Current version: 1.02
You can download the current documentation for the VSTHost Slavery Suite
here (.pdf file, 171K).
Chuck
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>I'm not finding anything under virtual slavery.... could you be more
>specific at what you're alluding to chuck?
>
>AA
>
>"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote in message news:45955a57$1@linux...
>>
>> It's http://www.hermannseib.com/english/vsthost.htm
>>
>> It's a freeware VST host. It has no/lo overhead and I have been using
it
>> for about a year. I'm also basing some code for stuff I'm working on
it.
>>
>> Also, while you are there, check out the 'virtual slavery' suite. It's
a
>> way to steal audio from a VST plug in paris and get it over to the VST
>> host
>> with 0 latency.
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>No luck...
>>>
>>>Are you sure the link is right?
>>>
>>>Don
>>>
>>>
>>>"Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:9ijap2pv8sar50bj8r7as4kihj5fqaj9m8@4ax.com...
>>>> Just found this cool little program:
>>>> http://www.hermannseib.com/english/savihost.htm
>>>>
>>>> It enables VSTi to run standalone. Also has recording and
>>>> mixing/looping modes. And its freeware!
>>>>
>>>> - Paul Artola
>>>> Ellicott City, Maryland
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>OK, now as promised I'll continue where I left off: Clarifying
their product nomenclatures & i/o options...
First of all, the question I had was: "Is it Creamware, is it
Scope, or is it Pulsar?" These guys have a marketing/branding
nightmare going on, really. I guess I started calling it
Pulsar, because two of the cards bear (or BORE) that name. No
one on the Pulsar forum corrected me or was confused by this,
so I guess the terms are more or less swappable. Confusing, but
swappable.
So you basically have three sets of choices to make:
1.) Which card you want (which basically means ONLY "how much
DSP power do you want?", because all the cards interface the
same way & do the same things).
2.) Which i/o options you want with the card you chose, IF you
chose something besides the entry-level card? (the Project card
& the Professional Card can take any of the three i/o
options- I'll fill in more in this regard shortly)
3.) Which software pack do you want included with the card, IF
you bought either the Project or Pro Cards? Mix & Master, or
Synths & Samplers? (While there is currently a special wherein
if you buy the big card you get both packs included, I don't
know how long this will going on - normally this a choice
between one & the other on these two cards, as I understand it.
Now, going into further detail for each of the three sets of
choices metioned above:
1.) Which card do you want?
a.) "Home" Card? (~$450, and has 3 DSP chips)
b.) "Project" Card ($~750, and has 6 DSP chips)
c.) "Professional" card (~$1,250 and has 14 DSP chips)
For the sake of less confusion, ignore the names LunaII, Pulsar
II, and PowerPulsar that also show up on their websites... they
are NOT different cards or card options! Those are simply the
FORMER names of the Home, Project, and Professional cards, in
that order (think Black Paris / Blue Paris lol).
2.) Which i/o setup do you want?
If you get the "Home" Card, there's only one i/o setup... it
says "up to 12" i/o's but I don't know where they get that -
maybe that's if you add on an extender card, but from what I
can tell it's just a stereo analog i/o & a stereo digital i/o &
a MIDI i/o on that card.
If you get either the {Project, or the Pro card, THEN you have
to choose between the following i/o options
a.) "Classic i/o"
b.) "Plus i/o"
c.) "Z-link i/o"
Here's a link that gives you details on the differences between
them (scroll down to the bottom half of that page):
http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/scope-cards/project/
The i/o options are the same for the Project & Pro cards
NOW... BE WARNED: the "Classic" & "Plus" i/o's can be used with
hardware you (most likely) already have - it's straight-ahead
analog & digiblah inzies & outsies, but the "Z-Link" has to
have another piece of their hardware in order to make full use
of the 28 total i/o's... the "Z-Link" i/o set is designed to
work with one of THESE:
http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/io/a16-ultra/
They have more hardware like sync plates to clock externally
through, and DSP booster cards with no i/o's, but those are the
basic/foundation platforms & options I've listed above.
To sum it all up:
If you're going with just one card, my advice would be don't
even fucking bother with the "Home" card - if you want to throw
away 450 bucks, just send it to me and at least I'll send you a
birthday & christmas card in return. In my experience with the
6-DSP Project card, the 3-DSP Home card won't do much at all
for you - even at the lower sample rates... you MIGHT be able
to sum a few channels & insert a couple of plugins, but that
would be about the limit - ALSO, again if you're going with
just one card (at least to start) the Plugins that come with
the Home card are fairly scant... IOW, if you wanted the Mix &
Master or Synths & Samplers pack & bought them separately along
with a Home card, you'd be almost up the price of the 6-DSP
Project card, which comes with your choice of either of those
to begin with, plus has 3 more chips... see what I mean?
Just make your first choice an educated one because like I've
said, these people don't know their own product as well as they
should, and also don't really stand behind it, either.
NeilI'm now the proud 'toe in the water' owner of a Pulsar II running Scope 3.1
with 3 (shows 4 in scope meter though?) DSP chips and using the 'classic'
interface.. LOL
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:4595c47c$1@linux...
>
> OK, now as promised I'll continue where I left off: Clarifying
> their product nomenclatures & i/o options...
>
> First of all, the question I had was: "Is it Creamware, is it
> Scope, or is it Pulsar?" These guys have a marketing/branding
> nightmare going on, really. I guess I started calling it
> Pulsar, because two of the cards bear (or BORE) that name. No
> one on the Pulsar forum corrected me or was confused by this,
> so I guess the terms are more or less swappable. Confusing, but
> swappable.
>
> So you basically have three sets of choices to make:
>
> 1.) Which card you want (which basically means ONLY "how much
> DSP power do you want?", because all the cards interface the
> same way & do the same things).
> 2.) Which i/o options you want with the card you chose, IF you
> chose something besides the entry-level card? (the Project card
> & the Professional Card can take any of the three i/o
> options- I'll fill in more in this regard shortly)
> 3.) Which software pack do you want included with the card, IF
> you bought either the Project or Pro Cards? Mix & Master, or
> Synths & Samplers? (While there is currently a special wherein
> if you buy the big card you get both packs included, I don't
> know how long this will going on - normally this a choice
> between one & the other on these two cards, as I understand it.
>
> Now, going into further detail for each of the three sets of
> choices metioned above:
>
> 1.) Which card do you want?
> a.) "Home" Card? (~$450, and has 3 DSP chips)
> b.) "Project" Card ($~750, and has 6 DSP chips)
> c.) "Professional" card (~$1,250 and has 14 DSP chips)
>
> For the sake of less confusion, ignore the names LunaII, Pulsar
> II, and PowerPulsar that also show up on their websites... they
> are NOT different cards or card options! Those are simply the
> FORMER names of the Home, Project, and Professional cards, in
> that order (think Black Paris / Blue Paris lol).
>
> 2.) Which i/o setup do you want?
>
> If you get the "Home" Card, there's only one i/o setup... it
> says "up to 12" i/o's but I don't know where they get that -
> maybe that's if you add on an extender card, but from what I
> can tell it's just a stereo analog i/o & a stereo digital i/o &
> a MIDI i/o on that card.
>
> If you get either the {Project, or the Pro card, THEN you have
> to choose between the following i/o options
>
> a.) "Classic i/o"
> b.) "Plus i/o"
> c.) "Z-link i/o"
>
> Here's a link that gives you details on the differences between
> them (scroll down to the bottom half of that page):
>
> http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/scope-cards/project/
>
> The i/o options are the same for the Project & Pro cards
>
> NOW... BE WARNED: the "Classic" & "Plus" i/o's can be used with
> hardware you (most likely) already have - it's straight-ahead
> analog & digiblah inzies & outsies, but the "Z-Link" has to
> have another piece of their hardware in order to make full use
> of the 28 total i/o's... the "Z-Link" i/o set is designed to
> work with one of THESE:
>
> http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/io/a16-ultra/
>
>
> They have more hardware like sync plates to clock externally
> through, and DSP booster cards with no i/o's, but those are the
> basic/foundation platforms & options I've listed above.
>
> To sum it all up:
> If you're going with just one card, my advice would be don't
> even fucking bother with the "Home" card - if you want to throw
> away 450 bucks, just send it to me and at least I'll send you a
> birthday & christmas card in return. In my experience with the
> 6-DSP Project card, the 3-DSP Home card won't do much at all
> for you - even at the lower sample rates... you MIGHT be able
> to sum a few channels & insert a couple of plugins, but that
> would be about the limit - ALSO, again if you're going with
> just one card (at least to start) the Plugins that come with
> the Home card are fairly scant... IOW, if you wanted the Mix &
> Master or Synths & Samplers pack & bought them separately along
> with a Home card, you'd be almost up the price of the 6-DSP
> Project card, which comes with your choice of either of those
> to begin with, plus has 3 more chips... see what I mean?
>
> Just make your first choice an educated one because like I've
> said, these people don't know their own product as well as they
> should, and also don't really stand behind it, either.
>
>
> Neilthat's some nice stuff Chuck. I definitely hear some influencing going on,
one sounded very Doors and I just dug it man.
Keep posting them, I'm listening as I work on figuring out this Pulsar
thang...
AA
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote in message news:45943a7f$1@linux...
>
> haha.
>
> After trying to figure out how to start a musical diary, I copped on way
> to late to the blog revolution and started using an incredible piece of
> open
> source software known as wordpress.
>
> youchill.com is where I will post bit by bit, for better or for worse,
> every
> song I have ever recorded, along with some details. I decided to do this
> after speaking with one of my oldest friends one night, and agreeing that,
> even though it is a terrible cliche, that music literally saved our lives
> :-)
>
> I don't really have any new music per se as all i do now is noodle around
> on the piano, while computers crash, hard drives die, and plugins get
> de-authorized
> under mysterious circumstances. Everything I will post is circa 99 or
> earlier.
>
> I guess most of what I record could be considered alternative music,
> because
> I can't sing and I can't play. haha But I do think that there are bits
> and pieces of obviously recognizable influences.
>
> Chuck
>got it. Sorry, a little off tonight, cold meds must be messing with me.
AA
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote in message news:4595bb31$1@linux...
>
> Well I try not to allude so much these days :-)
>
> But about 3/4 down the page I posted you will find the following:
>
> VSTHost Slavery Suite
> It was just a little question in a forum... "Is there a way to route the
> output of vsthost to Kristal Audio engine? And without latency?" that
> triggered
> the addition of a slave mode to VSTHost. And since I got a rather bad
> taste
> of humor, it got the above title.
>
> When started with the parameter /slave, VSTHost goes into Slave Mode and
> waits for a Master to control it. The first (and currently only) master is
> a VST(i) plugin that can be embedded into any VST Host program (even
> another
> instance of VSTHost), called Legree. It comes as an effect and as a VSTi,
> since there are hosts that accept only effects, hosts that only accept
> VSTis,
> and of course hosts that accept both.
>
> You can download Legree here (.zip file, 85K).
> Current version: 1.02
>
> You can download the current documentation for the VSTHost Slavery Suite
> here (.pdf file, 171K).
>
> Chuck
>
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>I'm not finding anything under virtual slavery.... could you be more
>>specific at what you're alluding to chuck?
>>
>>AA
>>
>>"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote in message news:45955a57$1@linux...
>>>
>>> It's http://www.hermannseib.com/english/vsthost.htm
>>>
>>> It's a freeware VST host. It has no/lo overhead and I have been using
> it
>>> for about a year. I'm also basing some code for stuff
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system..FX ?? How good are they [message #76234 is a reply to message #76233] |
Mon, 20 November 2006 18:13 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'm working on
> it.
>>>
>>> Also, while you are there, check out the 'virtual slavery' suite. It's
> a
>>> way to steal audio from a VST plug in paris and get it over to the VST
>
>>> host
>>> with 0 latency.
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>>
>>>
>>> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>>No luck...
>>>>
>>>>Are you sure the link is right?
>>>>
>>>>Don
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:9ijap2pv8sar50bj8r7as4kihj5fqaj9m8@4ax.com...
>>>>> Just found this cool little program:
>>>>> http://www.hermannseib.com/english/savihost.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> It enables VSTi to run standalone. Also has recording and
>>>>> mixing/looping modes. And its freeware!
>>>>>
>>>>> - Paul Artola
>>>>> Ellicott City, Maryland
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>Neil,
That is one of my favorite ng posts EVER.
Chuck
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>OK, now as promised I'll continue where I left off: Clarifying
>their product nomenclatures & i/o options...
>
>First of all, the question I had was: "Is it Creamware, is it
>Scope, or is it Pulsar?" These guys have a marketing/branding
>nightmare going on, really. I guess I started calling it
>Pulsar, because two of the cards bear (or BORE) that name. No
>one on the Pulsar forum corrected me or was confused by this,
>so I guess the terms are more or less swappable. Confusing, but
>swappable.
>
>So you basically have three sets of choices to make:
>
>1.) Which card you want (which basically means ONLY "how much
>DSP power do you want?", because all the cards interface the
>same way & do the same things).
>2.) Which i/o options you want with the card you chose, IF you
>chose something besides the entry-level card? (the Project card
>& the Professional Card can take any of the three i/o
>options- I'll fill in more in this regard shortly)
>3.) Which software pack do you want included with the card, IF
>you bought either the Project or Pro Cards? Mix & Master, or
>Synths & Samplers? (While there is currently a special wherein
>if you buy the big card you get both packs included, I don't
>know how long this will going on - normally this a choice
>between one & the other on these two cards, as I understand it.
>
>Now, going into further detail for each of the three sets of
>choices metioned above:
>
>1.) Which card do you want?
> a.) "Home" Card? (~$450, and has 3 DSP chips)
> b.) "Project" Card ($~750, and has 6 DSP chips)
> c.) "Professional" card (~$1,250 and has 14 DSP chips)
>
>For the sake of less confusion, ignore the names LunaII, Pulsar
>II, and PowerPulsar that also show up on their websites... they
>are NOT different cards or card options! Those are simply the
>FORMER names of the Home, Project, and Professional cards, in
>that order (think Black Paris / Blue Paris lol).
>
>2.) Which i/o setup do you want?
>
>If you get the "Home" Card, there's only one i/o setup... it
>says "up to 12" i/o's but I don't know where they get that -
>maybe that's if you add on an extender card, but from what I
>can tell it's just a stereo analog i/o & a stereo digital i/o &
>a MIDI i/o on that card.
>
>If you get either the {Project, or the Pro card, THEN you have
>to choose between the following i/o options
>
> a.) "Classic i/o"
> b.) "Plus i/o"
> c.) "Z-link i/o"
>
>Here's a link that gives you details on the differences between
>them (scroll down to the bottom half of that page):
>
> http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/scope-cards/project/
>
>The i/o options are the same for the Project & Pro cards
>
>NOW... BE WARNED: the "Classic" & "Plus" i/o's can be used with
>hardware you (most likely) already have - it's straight-ahead
>analog & digiblah inzies & outsies, but the "Z-Link" has to
>have another piece of their hardware in order to make full use
>of the 28 total i/o's... the "Z-Link" i/o set is designed to
>work with one of THESE:
>
>http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/io/a16-ultra/
>
>
>They have more hardware like sync plates to clock externally
>through, and DSP booster cards with no i/o's, but those are the
>basic/foundation platforms & options I've listed above.
>
>To sum it all up:
>If you're going with just one card, my advice would be don't
>even fucking bother with the "Home" card - if you want to throw
>away 450 bucks, just send it to me and at least I'll send you a
>birthday & christmas card in return. In my experience with the
>6-DSP Project card, the 3-DSP Home card won't do much at all
>for you - even at the lower sample rates... you MIGHT be able
>to sum a few channels & insert a couple of plugins, but that
>would be about the limit - ALSO, again if you're going with
>just one card (at least to start) the Plugins that come with
>the Home card are fairly scant... IOW, if you wanted the Mix &
>Master or Synths & Samplers pack & bought them separately along
>with a Home card, you'd be almost up the price of the 6-DSP
>Project card, which comes with your choice of either of those
>to begin with, plus has 3 more chips... see what I mean?
>
>Just make your first choice an educated one because like I've
>said, these people don't know their own product as well as they
>should, and also don't really stand behind it, either.
>
>
>Neil"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>that's some nice stuff Chuck. I definitely hear some influencing going on,
>one sounded very Doors and I just dug it man.
>Keep posting them, I'm listening as I work on figuring out this Pulsar
>thang...
Hey Aaron, if you need some help figuring out the Pulsar stuff
tonite, gimme a call: 915-FIVE-EIGHT-FIVE-3806, I might be able
to walk you through some stuff... I'm doing some VERY tedious
drum editing right now and could use an excuse to take a break
LOL!
So WHICH card did you get? Did you pick up an older one (I
noticed your other post... less DSP's and an older software
pack?)?
NeilThe New York Times goes into mourning....Well thanks, Chuckster; but I must ask why is it one of your
favorites?
I mean, it's just a summary of some stuff that was (I thought)
confusing, and that I was trying to make clearer for the peeps,
since I know some folks here have had some questions on this
Pulsar kit.
Neil
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>
>Neil,
>
>That is one of my favorite ng posts EVER.
>
>Chuck
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>OK, now as promised I'll continue where I left off: Clarifying
>>their product nomenclatures & i/o options...
>>
>>First of all, the question I had was: "Is it Creamware, is it
>>Scope, or is it Pulsar?" These guys have a marketing/branding
>>nightmare going on, really. I guess I started calling it
>>Pulsar, because two of the cards bear (or BORE) that name. No
>>one on the Pulsar forum corrected me or was confused by this,
>>so I guess the terms are more or less swappable. Confusing, but
>>swappable.
>>
>>So you basically have three sets of choices to make:
>>
>>1.) Which card you want (which basically means ONLY "how much
>>DSP power do you want?", because all the cards interface the
>>same way & do the same things).
>>2.) Which i/o options you want with the card you chose, IF you
>>chose something besides the entry-level card? (the Project card
>>& the Professional Card can take any of the three i/o
>>options- I'll fill in more in this regard shortly)
>>3.) Which software pack do you want included with the card, IF
>>you bought either the Project or Pro Cards? Mix & Master, or
>>Synths & Samplers? (While there is currently a special wherein
>>if you buy the big card you get both packs included, I don't
>>know how long this will going on - normally this a choice
>>between one & the other on these two cards, as I understand it.
>>
>>Now, going into further detail for each of the three sets of
>>choices metioned above:
>>
>>1.) Which card do you want?
>> a.) "Home" Card? (~$450, and has 3 DSP chips)
>> b.) "Project" Card ($~750, and has 6 DSP chips)
>> c.) "Professional" card (~$1,250 and has 14 DSP chips)
>>
>>For the sake of less confusion, ignore the names LunaII, Pulsar
>>II, and PowerPulsar that also show up on their websites... they
>>are NOT different cards or card options! Those are simply the
>>FORMER names of the Home, Project, and Professional cards, in
>>that order (think Black Paris / Blue Paris lol).
>>
>>2.) Which i/o setup do you want?
>>
>>If you get the "Home" Card, there's only one i/o setup... it
>>says "up to 12" i/o's but I don't know where they get that -
>>maybe that's if you add on an extender card, but from what I
>>can tell it's just a stereo analog i/o & a stereo digital i/o &
>>a MIDI i/o on that card.
>>
>>If you get either the {Project, or the Pro card, THEN you have
>>to choose between the following i/o options
>>
>> a.) "Classic i/o"
>> b.) "Plus i/o"
>> c.) "Z-link i/o"
>>
>>Here's a link that gives you details on the differences between
>>them (scroll down to the bottom half of that page):
>>
>> http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/scope-cards/project/
>>
>>The i/o options are the same for the Project & Pro cards
>>
>>NOW... BE WARNED: the "Classic" & "Plus" i/o's can be used with
>>hardware you (most likely) already have - it's straight-ahead
>>analog & digiblah inzies & outsies, but the "Z-Link" has to
>>have another piece of their hardware in order to make full use
>>of the 28 total i/o's... the "Z-Link" i/o set is designed to
>>work with one of THESE:
>>
>>http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/io/a16-ultra/
>>
>>
>>They have more hardware like sync plates to clock externally
>>through, and DSP booster cards with no i/o's, but those are the
>>basic/foundation platforms & options I've listed above.
>>
>>To sum it all up:
>>If you're going with just one card, my advice would be don't
>>even fucking bother with the "Home" card - if you want to throw
>>away 450 bucks, just send it to me and at least I'll send you a
>>birthday & christmas card in return. In my experience with the
>>6-DSP Project card, the 3-DSP Home card won't do much at all
>>for you - even at the lower sample rates... you MIGHT be able
>>to sum a few channels & insert a couple of plugins, but that
>>would be about the limit - ALSO, again if you're going with
>>just one card (at least to start) the Plugins that come with
>>the Home card are fairly scant... IOW, if you wanted the Mix &
>>Master or Synths & Samplers pack & bought them separately along
>>with a Home card, you'd be almost up the price of the 6-DSP
>>Project card, which comes with your choice of either of those
>>to begin with, plus has 3 more chips... see what I mean?
>>
>>Just make your first choice an educated one because like I've
>>said, these people don't know their own product as well as they
>>should, and also don't really stand behind it, either.
>>
>>
>>Neil
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C72BC0.7A2F1690
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I finally have got a few things running in this new Cubase setup.
AMD 4800+. Here is a little rambling about it's power.
Check this out!
I have 12 tracks playing 12 different instruments in Cubase through =
Kontakt. All native.
Basses, violins, pianos, harps, bassoons, pads, guitars you name it. =
Using at peak points
45 voices. CPU peaks at =
20%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!=
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
90 voices I am assuming 40%. 180 voices? 80%? This may be the limit =
give or take.
Not gonna be a problem with anything anymore. I am in heaven and I =
can't even hear a note.
Meters are jumping around on all parts but no worries in the CPU =
department.
I'm thinking that extra gig of Ram (3 gig total) might just be the final =
final on this rig.
I also know that I have another 10 synths I can add from Creamware to =
bolster
this with virtually no hit to the CPU but some to RAM of course. Nutz =
I'm telling ya, just nutz!
Sounds will never be the problem again. Power will never be an issue. =
Granted Kontakt
has onboard native effects that will suck a little more juice. Oh, so I =
can only get 150 voices.
Jeez, before I was struggling along with 48 total using two Roland =
samplers.
____________________________________________________________ __
Okay I changed a few things and got 80 voices and 16 tracks running. =
The CPU peaked at 22%.
Obviously voice numbers are less demanding as compared to sample size =
and
processing of actual synth engines. These are all samples with nothing =
extra happening.
I'll be sleeping well tonight. Dreaming about the next synths to load =
in.
T. as in B.
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C72BC0.7A2F1690
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I finally have got a few things running =
in this new=20
Cubase setup.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>AMD 4800+. Here is a little =
rambling=20
about it's power.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>Check this=20
out!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>I have 12 =
tracks playing 12=20
different instruments in Cubase through Kontakt. All =
native.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>Basses, =
violins, pianos,=20
harps, bassoons, pads, guitars you name it. Using at peak=20
points</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 =
size=3D2>45 voices. CPU peaks=20
at=20
20%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!=
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>90 voices I =
am assuming=20
40%. 180 voices? 80%? This may be the limit give or =
take.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 =
size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>Not gonna be =
a problem with=20
anything anymore. I am in heaven and I can't even hear a=20
note.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>Meters are =
jumping around=20
on all parts but no worries in the CPU department.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>I'm thinking =
that extra gig=20
of Ram (3 gig total) might just be the final final on this=20
rig.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>I also know =
that I have=20
another 10 synths I can add from Creamware to bolster</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>this with =
virtually no hit=20
to the CPU but some to RAM of course. Nutz I'm telling ya, just=20
nutz!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 =
size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>Sounds will =
never be the=20
problem again. Power will never be an issue. Granted=20
Kontakt</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>has onboard =
native effects=20
that will suck a little more juice. Oh, so I can only get 150=20
voices.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>Jeez, before =
I was=20
struggling along with 48 total using two Roland =
samplers.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000=20
size=3D2> ____________________________________________________________ __ </=
FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>Okay I =
changed a few things=20
and got 80 voices and 16 tracks running. The CPU peaked =
at=20
22%.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>Obviously =
voice numbers are=20
less demanding as compared to sample size and</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>processing of =
actual synth=20
engines. These are all samples with nothing extra =
happening.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 =
size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#800000 size=3D2>I'll be =
sleeping well=20
tonight. Dreaming about the next synths to load in.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>T. as in B.</DIV></FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C72BC0.7A2F1690--less DSP's and an older software
> pack?)?
Yup, that's exactly what I did. It's the Pulsar II I think. I got it in the
interests of testing it's summing and some synth action, and if I really
like it I'll get a newer card. The latency on this older one is higher, but
for this purpose I really didn't care. If I get a newer one to go with it,
the latency will then drop to the newer one's settings.
Something you might wanna note Neil is that using this and the 3.1 software,
88200 shows up as an option in the sampling rate.
AA
"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:4595d664$1@linux...
>
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>that's some nice stuff Chuck. I definitely hear some influencing going on,
>
>>one sounded very Doors and I just dug it man.
>>Keep posting them, I'm listening as I work on figuring out this Pulsar
>>thang...
>
> Hey Aaron, if you need some help figuring out the Pulsar stuff
> tonite, gimme a call: 915-FIVE-EIGHT-FIVE-3806, I might be able
> to walk you through some stuff... I'm doing some VERY tedious
> drum editing right now and could use an excuse to take a break
> LOL!
>
> So WHICH card did you get? Did you pick up an older one (I
> noticed your other post... less DSP's and an older software
> pack?)?
>
> Neilwell then, happy geekyear to you sir. ain't nuthin' better than
smooth sailing and not a cloud in sight.
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 03:13:28 -0500, "Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net>
wrote:
>I finally have got a few things running in this new Cubase setup.
>AMD 4800+. Here is a little rambling about it's power.
>
>Check this out!
>
>I have 12 tracks playing 12 different instruments in Cubase through Kontakt. All native.
>Basses, violins, pianos, harps, bassoons, pads, guitars you name it. Using at peak points
>45 voices. CPU peaks at 20%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>90 voices I am assuming 40%. 180 voices? 80%? This may be the limit give or take.
>
>Not gonna be a problem with anything anymore. I am in heaven and I can't even hear a note.
>Meters are jumping around on all parts but no worries in the CPU department.
>I'm thinking that extra gig of Ram (3 gig total) might just be the final final on this rig.
>I also know that I have another 10 synths I can add from Creamware to bolster
>this with virtually no hit to the CPU but some to RAM of course. Nutz I'm telling ya, just nutz!
>
>Sounds will never be the problem again. Power will never be an issue. Granted Kontakt
>has onboard native effects that will suck a little more juice. Oh, so I can only get 150 voices.
>Jeez, before I was struggling along with 48 total using two Roland samplers.
> ____________________________________________________________ __
>Okay I changed a few things and got 80 voices and 16 tracks running. The CPU peaked at 22%.
>Obviously voice numbers are less demanding as compared to sample size and
>processing of actual synth engines. These are all samples with nothing extra happening.
>
>I'll be sleeping well tonight. Dreaming about the next synths to load in.
>T. as in B.
>
>
>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>http://www.polesoft.com/refer.htmlHi Neil,
Take a step back and read your post as if you were someone interested in
purchasing a pulsar system.
There is a ton of useful information in your post, and the style is pretty
damn funny in my opinion.
It reminds me of the good old days :-)
Chuck
"Neil;" <IOOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>Well thanks, Chuckster; but I must ask why is it one of your
>favorites?
>I mean, it's just a summary of some stuff that was (I thought)
>confusing, and that I was trying to make clearer for the peeps,
>since I know some folks here have had some questions on this
>Pulsar kit.
>
>Neil
>
>
>"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>>
>>Neil,
>>
>>That is one of my favorite ng posts EVER.
>>
>>Chuck
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>OK, now as promised I'll continue where I left off: Clarifying
>>>their product nomenclatures & i/o options...
>>>
>>>First of all, the question I had was: "Is it Creamware, is it
>>>Scope, or is it Pulsar?" These guys have a marketing/branding
>>>nightmare going on, really. I guess I started calling it
>>>Pulsar, because two of the cards bear (or BORE) that name. No
>>>one on the Pulsar forum corrected me or was confused by this,
>>>so I guess the terms are more or less swappable. Confusing, but
>>>swappable.
>>>
>>>So you basically have three sets of choices to make:
>>>
>>>1.) Which card you want (which basically means ONLY "how much
>>>DSP power do you want?", because all the cards interface the
>>>same way & do the same things).
>>>2.) Which i/o options you want with the card you chose, IF you
>>>chose something besides the entry-level card? (the Project card
>>>& the Professional Card can take any of the three i/o
>>>options- I'll fill in more in this regard shortly)
>>>3.) Which software pack do you want included with the card, IF
>>>you bought either the Project or Pro Cards? Mix & Master, or
>>>Synths & Samplers? (While there is currently a special wherein
>>>if you buy the big card you get both packs included, I don't
>>>know how long this will going on - normally this a choice
>>>between one & the other on these two cards, as I understand it.
>>>
>>>Now, going into further detail for each of the three sets of
>>>choices metioned above:
>>>
>>>1.) Which card do you want?
>>> a.) "Home" Card? (~$450, and has 3 DSP chips)
>>> b.) "Project" Card ($~750, and has 6 DSP chips)
>>> c.) "Professional" card (~$1,250 and has 14 DSP chips)
>>>
>>>For the sake of less confusion, ignore the names LunaII, Pulsar
>>>II, and PowerPulsar that also show up on their websites... they
>>>are NOT different cards or card options! Those are simply the
>>>FORMER names of the Home, Project, and Professional cards, in
>>>that order (think Black Paris / Blue Paris lol).
>>>
>>>2.) Which i/o setup do you want?
>>>
>>>If you get the "Home" Card, there's only one i/o setup... it
>>>says "up to 12" i/o's but I don't know where they get that -
>>>maybe that's if you add on an extender card, but from what I
>>>can tell it's just a stereo analog i/o & a stereo digital i/o &
>>>a MIDI i/o on that card.
>>>
>>>If you get either the {Project, or the Pro card, THEN you have
>>>to choose between the following i/o options
>>>
>>> a.) "Classic i/o"
>>> b.) "Plus i/o"
>>> c.) "Z-link i/o"
>>>
>>>Here's a link that gives you details on the differences between
>>>them (scroll down to the bottom half of that page):
>>>
>>> http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/scope-cards/project/
>>>
>>>The i/o options are the same for the Project & Pro cards
>>>
>>>NOW... BE WARNED: the "Classic" & "Plus" i/o's can be used with
>>>hardware you (most likely) already have - it's straight-ahead
>>>analog & digiblah inzies & outsies, but the "Z-Link" has to
>>>have another piece of their hardware in order to make full use
>>>of the 28 total i/o's... the "Z-Link" i/o set is designed to
>>>work with one of THESE:
>>>
>>>http://www.infinitevortex.com/creamware/io/a16-ultra/
>>>
>>>
>>>They have more hardware like sync plates to clock externally
>>>through, and DSP booster cards with no i/o's, but those are the
>>>basic/foundation platforms & options I've listed above.
>>>
>>>To sum it all up:
>>>If you're going with just one card, my advice would be don't
>>>even fucking bother with the "Home" card - if you want to throw
>>>away 450 bucks, just send it to me and at least I'll send you a
>>>birthday & christmas card in return. In my experience with the
>>>6-DSP Project card, the 3-DSP Home card won't do much at all
>>>for you - even at the lower sample rates... you MIGHT be able
>>>to sum a few channels & insert a couple of plugins, but that
>>>would be about the limit - ALSO, again if you're going with
>>>just one card (at least to start) the Plugins that come with
>>>the Home card are fairly scant... IOW, if you wanted the Mix &
>>>Master or Synths & Samplers pack & bought them separately along
>>>with a Home card, you'd be almost up the price of the 6-DSP
>>>Project card, which comes with your choice of either of those
>>>to begin with, plus has 3 more chips... see what I mean?
>>>
>>>Just make your first choice an educated one because like I've
>>>said, these people don't know their own product as well as they
>>>should, and also don't really stand behind it, either.
>>>
>>>
>>>Neil
>>
>Where's the proof that he was executed? No public hanging, public good quality
video? Anything?
"DC" <dc@saddaminhell.com> wrote:
>
>The New York Times goes into mourning....And without it being in public, they could edit anything and make it
look real while he is on an island with hookers, a tivo and a personal chef.
Trust but verify !
John
John wrote:
> Where's the proof that he was executed? No public hanging, public good quality
> video? Anything?
>
> "DC" <dc@saddaminhell.com> wrote:
>> The New York Times goes into mourning....
>yeah...OK Rush
it's getting old..what a douchebag you are ...keep on topic.
DC" <dc@saddaminhell.com> wrote:
>
>The New York Times goes into mourning....I listen to contemporary CD's - jazz, rock, R&B, C&W, you name it - and hear
beautiful, bright snare drums that make my RTA bounce around in the 16K -
20K range. I can't make that happen without a ton of EQ. I usually use
a Crown CM-200 (electret condenser, kinda like an SM-57, but flatter and
cleaner to my ear) on snare, but I've tried a Neumann KM-84 and I still
need to crank the EQ to get that sound. Is that just what it takes? Are
there snare drums that naturally generate higher harmonics than most? Is
it something to do w/ the drum head? I've had the priviledge of recording
some pretty great drummers, but I still need to reach for the EQ to get
THAT snare sound!
Any thoughts?
Thanks, and HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!
GanttWhat the hell is this!?
Bad enough that you cross the line of decency in a childish,
name calling hissy fit; even worse that you don't have the balls
to post under your real name.
I would normally not give this kind of thing the time of day,
especially if it were aimed at me, but your reaction to someone
else's differing Political slant is pathetic, and needs to be called so.
Ted
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm loving this Pulsar system..FX ?? How good are they [message #76236 is a reply to message #76235] |
Mon, 20 November 2006 20:13 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ke Philly Joe Jones--fast and loud. Like so many Monday
morning geopolitical quarterbacks who played a game or two of Risk back in
the day, they have supported every militarily aggressive move by the US or
Israel that I can recall. When it became obvious that Miller had been supremely
duped and the war wasn't going well, they VERY VERY slowly came around to
the moderately critical stance they have now. Even today, with the exception
of the honest Paul Krugman, the editorial page is relentlessly pro-war in
that neo-dem, we have to look 'tough on security' kind of way.
As for Saddam, few alive were more deserving of the walk down that plank
and the snap of the neck. But anyone who aided, abetted, and bankrolled his
crimes against humanity (that would include anyone who paid US income taxes
in the 1980's, among many others) should pause to think a bit as well.
TCBYeah after the first debacle wherein I tried to run the card on
the same Machine as my Cubase rig, the "rep" checked with
Creamware & mentioned that on older versions of the software,
it reported 88.2k as an option... I asked him: "well, then how
about seeing if they can send me one of THOSE verisons?", and
there was some issue with that - perhaps it wouldn't work with
the new hardware or something like that; so I then I pointed
out that if their idea of moving forward was to drop a
samplerate that some people DO use, but keep a samplerate like
32k that nobody on the planet uses anymore, then that's not
very encouraging, either. lol
Neil
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
> less DSP's and an older software
>> pack?)?
>
>Yup, that's exactly what I did. It's the Pulsar II I think. I got it in
the
>interests of testing it's summing and some synth action, and if I really
>like it I'll get a newer
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 14 01:04:35 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.23253 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
