Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » FX-teleport-tested_4U_Working !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: FX-teleport-tested_4U_Working ! [message #66450 is a reply to message #66440] |
Mon, 10 April 2006 08:06   |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
car....
>
>AA
>
I am WiFi and it works fine for remote desktop, but I hate using the trackpad.
A mouse is OK but I like faders more. For my “Car Mixes”, I have Line-In
on my car stereo so I’m all set. Just need to try it. For FM I wonder what
the latency would be like if I ISDN my Paris output to the Princeton University
Radio station and do the mix live over the air? :-)
gI certainly am no mastering specialist, but FWIW, I've gotten what I think
are good results mastering right in Paris; fades, song sequences -the whole
10 yards. Typically I use the Ren Comp and EQ on track inserts, with
Chuck's Nolimit on the master output. If you use just native plugs in
Paris, you could insert a frequency analyzer of your choice before (and now
that I think of it, after, the plugs). I also use a plug called "RMS Buddy"
to keep an eye on... RMS. It ain't Bob Ludwig, but it ain't 800.00 an hour
either.
Cheers,
MR
"CJG" <grimmark@telia.com> wrote in message news:44569600$1@linux...
>
> Hello
> What would You guys recommend? Buying the Waves Mastering + analyzer or
Peak
> XT with the included Mastering suite? Any experience?
> Thanks
> CJGThese speakers from Tannoy
http://www.tannoy.com/Precision8D
Have a DIP switch for dealing with the desktop extended-baffle
phenomenon. I understand it works quite well.
And these:
http://www.tannoy.com/Default.asp?Id=7060
Are totally programmable with shelving and other EQ to dial out this
problem with a high degree of precision.
I am not ready to upgrade yet, so I will lose the desk instead. I also
feel that an acoustic f
|
|
|
|
| Re: FX-teleport-tested_4U_Working ! [message #66453 is a reply to message #66450] |
Mon, 10 April 2006 08:31 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
over twice the size orchestral
sample library as I can in Nuendo - that's a difference between splitting an
orchestral project into two or three separate projects with submixing in
Nuendo 3, and running at 6-12ms latency; or running everything I need, and
more, in Samplitude at 1.5ms without breaking a sweat. I need to test this
more to qualify it better, but at this point, I'm seriously considering
Sam/Sequoia for composing, even with the somewhat smaller feature set for
midi, composing and VSTi's. I love Nuendo's capabilities, but this is
becoming a serious limitation for me. I am sensing it's a limitation for
you also DJ.
Maybe it isn't our dual cores after all DJ. I was thinking the same as you
and was seriously disappointed with performance in Nuendo. RME drivers also
don't work well at low latency in Nuendo (e.g. One VSTi at 64 samples is all
I can run, vs. a full orchestral set, Stormdrum and probably a half dozen
soft synths in Samplitude). There are obvious differences in how the two
apps manage audio - I can't run nearly the plugin count in Samplitude as
Nuendo at high latency, but over twice that of Nuendo at low latency. For
large mixes running at 12-23ms, Nuendo wins hands down. At 3ms and lower,
Samplitude dusts Nuendo in both plugins and VSTi's.
Keep this to the forum for the moment. I want to sort out the reasons
before it gets out too far, so if anyone has ideas, or can confirm or deny,
please feel free to chime in.
Regards,
Dedric
On 5/2/06 4:53 PM, in article 4457e44d$1@linux, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> I like everything about it except that it is native and subject to all of
> the pitfalls of native systems when put under extreme duress. I built a PC
> over the Xmas holidays with an XP 4200 dualcore CPU thinking this would give
> me enough horsepower to negate buffer issues. Not a chance. Load this thing
> up with VSTi's and plugins at low-to moderate track counts and the buffers
> still need to be set higher than I'd like. My goal was to be able to keep
> latency at 1.5ms. I'll likely be relegating this DAW to other duties and
> building a dual/dualcore Opteron system if my needs begin to justify it.
> Check out the Opteron systems that are mentioned on the Nuendo forum. Those
> monsters are the minimum spec for achieving performance on par with a Paris
> system at 1.5ms latencies.
>
> Deej
>
> "Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:4457bc89$1@linux...
>>
>> Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also
> considering
>> the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
>>
>> I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike about
>> the app.
>>
>> Thanks!
>
>Dedric,
Does Samplitude have plugin delay compensation? I'm likeluy going back to
tracking and mixing in Paris. I'll be using my SX machine as a VSTi host for
tracking them as audio files directly to Paris (I do very little midi here
anyway) and I'll occasionally use the Cubase editor. Mostly I'll be using SX
as a standalone processor for UAD-1 plugins, sending and returning Paris
tracks through SX tracks with Drumagog and UAD-1 plugs in active monitor
mode. This uses less CPU resources than streaming the tracks and I've been
able to achieve adequate plugin counts at 1.5ms this way.
I was even beta testing Drumagog
|
|
|
|
| Re: FX-teleport-tested_4U_Working ! [message #66454 is a reply to message #66453] |
Mon, 10 April 2006 10:01 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
BFD for a while and this worked well when
sending/returning Paris tracks through SX channels with Drumagog inserted
while firing BFD drum samples. It also worked well in Cubase SX at 1.5ms
latency. It's an awesome thing. I wasn't asked to for and NDA so I doubt if
Rim would mind me discussing this here. I had to drop out because things got
too busy here so it's been a while since I checked in on this. When this app
is ready for prime time, it's going to be nothing short of amazing, and it
sounds amazing right now as long as you can operate at 1.5ms. Just having
all the kicks and snares in BFD available in Drumagog is a dream come true.
My next project mix will be done this way.....mixing in Paris with hardware
and/or UAD-1 plugins inserted in both Paris and SX.
If Samplitude has good PDC, I might think about switching since 1.5ms
latency is a must. Right now, I'm even thinking about bumping up my CPU to a
dual core 4800 just for a power boost.
Deej
on "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
news:C07D75B9.77C%dterry@keyofd.net...
> DJ and Tyrone (and others), there may be more to this story of why
> Nuendo/Cubase won't manage high VSTi counts at low latency. It may be a
> Nuendo/Cubase 3.x issue (memory management problems I am guessing).
>
> For example, I can run Samplitude 8.11 (demo) at about 1.5ms (doesn't use
> ASIO buffers to increase latency) and run over twice the size orchestral
> sample library as I can in Nuendo - that's a difference between splitting
an
> orchestral project into two or three separate projects with submixing in
> Nuendo 3, and running at 6-12ms latency; or running everything I need,
and
> more, in Samplitude at 1.5ms without breaking a sweat. I need to test
this
> more to qualify it better, but at this point, I'm seriously considering
> Sam/Sequoia for composing, even with the somewhat smaller feature set for
> midi, composing and VSTi's. I love Nuendo's capabilities, but this is
> becoming a serious limitation for me. I am sensing it's a limitation for
> you also DJ.
>
> Maybe it isn't our dual cores after all DJ. I was thinking the same as
you
> and was seriously disappointed with performance in Nuendo. RME drivers
also
> don't work well at low latency in Nuendo (e.g. One VSTi at 64 samples is
all
> I can run, vs. a full orchestral set, Stormdrum and probably a half dozen
> soft synths in Samplitude). There are obvious differences in how the two
> apps manage audio - I can't run nearly the plugin count in Samplitude as
> Nuendo at high latency, but over twice that of Nuendo at low latency. For
> large mixes running at 12-23ms, Nuendo wins hands down. At 3ms and lower,
> Samplitude dusts Nuendo in both plugins and VSTi's.
>
> Keep this to the forum for the moment. I want to sort out the reasons
> before it gets out too far, so if anyone has ideas, or can confirm or
deny,
> please feel free to chime in.
>
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> On 5/2/06 4:53 PM, in article 4457e44d$1@linux, "DJ"
> <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>
> > I like everything about it except that it is native and subject to all
of
> > the pitfalls of native systems when put under extreme duress. I built a
PC
> > over the Xmas holidays with an XP 4200 dualcore CPU thinking this would
give
> > me enough horsepower to negate buffer issues. Not a chance. Load this
thing
> > up with VSTi's and plugins at low-to moderate track counts and the
buffers
> > still need to be set higher than I'd like. My goal was to be able to
keep
> > latency at 1.5ms. I'll likely be relegating this DAW to other duties and
> > building a dual/dualcore Opteron system if my needs begin to justify it.
> > Check out the Opteron systems that are mentioned on the Nuendo forum.
Those
> > monsters are the minimum spec for achieving performance on par with a
Paris
> > system at 1.5ms latencies.
> >
> > Deej
> >
> > "Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:4457bc89$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also
> > considering
> >> the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
> >>
> >> I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike
about
> >> the app.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >
> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: FX-teleport-tested_4U_Working ! [message #66456 is a reply to message #66454] |
Mon, 10 April 2006 10:35 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ut I would hope
that isn't the case.
I've also heard recently that Nuendo is faster under Win2K than WinXP, but
that was only one user's account, and no info on plugins, VSTi's, or actual
numbers. Something to try, or consider perhaps.
Regards,
Dedric
On 5/2/06 9:33 PM, in article 445825c7@linux, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> Dedric,
>
> Does Samplitude have plugin delay compensation? I'm likeluy going back to
> tracking and mixing in Paris. I'll be using my SX machine as a VSTi host for
> tracking them as audio files directly to Paris (I do very little midi here
> anyway) and I'll occasionally use the Cubase editor. Mostly I'll be using SX
> as a standalone processor for UAD-1 plugins, sending and returning Paris
> tracks through SX tracks with Drumagog and UAD-1 plugs in active monitor
> mode. This uses less CPU resources than streaming the tracks and I've been
> able to achieve adequate plugin counts at 1.5ms this way.
>
> I was even beta testing Drumagog BFD for a while and this worked well when
> sending/returning Paris tracks through SX channels with Drumagog inserted
> while firing BFD drum samples. It also worked well in Cubase SX at 1.5ms
> latency. It's an awesome thing. I wasn't asked to for and NDA so I doubt if
> Rim would mind me discussing this here. I had to drop out because things got
> too busy here so it's been a while since I checked in on this. When this app
> is ready for prime time, it's going to be nothing short of amazing, and it
> sounds amazing right now as long as you can operate at 1.5ms. Just having
> all the kicks and snares in BFD available in Drumagog is a dream come true.
> My next project mix will be done this way.....mixing in Paris with hardware
> and/or UAD-1 plugins inserted in both Paris and SX.
>
> If Samplitude has good PDC, I might think about switching since 1.5ms
> latency is a must. Right now, I'm even thinking about bumping up my CPU to a
> dual core 4800 just for a power boost.
>
> Deej
>
>
> on "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
> news:C07D75B9.77C%dterry@keyofd.net...
>> DJ and Tyrone (and others), there may be more to this story of why
>> Nuendo/Cubase won't manage high VSTi counts at low latency. It may be a
>> Nuendo/Cubase 3.x issue (memory management problems I am guessing).
>>
>> For example, I can run Samplitude 8.11 (demo) at about 1.5ms (doesn't use
>> ASIO buffers to increase latency) and run over twice the size orchestral
>> sample library as I can in Nuendo - that's a difference between splitting
> an
>> orchestral project into two or three separate projects with submixing in
>> Nuendo 3, and running at 6-12ms latency; or running everything I need,
> and
>> more, in Samplitude at 1.5ms without breaking a sweat. I need to test
> this
>> more to qualify it better, but at this point, I'm seriously considering
>> Sam/Sequoia for composing, even with the somewhat smaller feature set for
>> midi, composing and VSTi's. I love Nuendo's capabilities, but this is
>> becoming a serious limitation for me. I am sensing it's a limitation for
>> you also DJ.
>>
>> Maybe it isn't our dual cores after all DJ. I was thinking the same as
> you
>> and was seriously disappointed with performance in Nuendo. RME drivers
> also
>> don't work well at low latency in Nuendo (e.g. One VSTi at 64 samples is
> all
>> I can run, vs. a full orchestral set, Stormdrum and probably a half dozen
>> soft synths in Samplitude). There are obvious differences in how the two
>> apps manage audio - I can't run nearly the plugin count in Samplitude as
>> Nuendo at high latency, but over twice that of Nuendo at low latency. For
>> large mixes running at 12-23ms, Nuendo wins hands down. At 3ms and lower,
>> Samplitude dusts Nuendo in both plugins and VSTi's.
>>
>> Keep this to the forum for the moment. I want to sort out the reasons
>> before it gets out too far, so if anyone has ideas, or can confirm or
> deny,
>> please feel free to chime in.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> On 5/2/06 4:53 PM, in article 4457e44d$1@linux, "DJ"
>> <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I like everything about it except that it is native and subject to all
> of
>>> the pitfalls of native systems when put under extreme duress. I built a
> PC
>>> over the Xmas holidays with an XP 4200 dualcore CPU thinking this would
> give
>>> me enough horsepower to negate buffer issues. Not a chance. Load this
> thing
>>> up with VSTi's and plugins at low-to moderate track counts and the
> buffers
>>> still need to be set higher than I'd like. My goal was to be able to
> keep
>>> latency at 1.5ms. I'll likely be relegating this DAW to other duties and
>>> building a dual/dualcore Opteron system if my needs begin to justify it.
>>> Check out the Opteron systems that are mentioned on the Nuendo forum.
> Those
>>> monsters are the minimum spec for achieving performance on par with a
> Paris
>>> system at 1.5ms latencies.
>>>
>>> Deej
>>>
>>> "Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:4457bc89$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also
>>> considering
>>>> the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
>>>>
>>>> I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike
> about
>>>> the app.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>A funny story..........years ago, when we were living in Austin, we lived in
a small
|
|
|
|
| Re: FX-teleport-tested_4U_Working ! [message #66467 is a reply to message #66448] |
Mon, 10 April 2006 17:10 |
Edna Sloan
Messages: 304
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"_blank">4458337b@linux, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> Dedric,
>
> I've got a buddy with a studio in Midland TX who is a Samp guru. I'll do
> some investigation into it's capabilities. He's as much a Samp fanatic as I
> am a Parisite. Don't Mark Wilson and Bill Lorentzen use Samp as well? I
> thought I had seen posts about it from them.
>
> Deej
>
>
>
> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
> news:C07D86DE.785%dterry@keyofd.net...
>> DJ,
>>
>> Samplitude 8 does have PDC.
>>
>> I have Sequoia 8 coming later this week or next and will run more thorough
>> tests with it. I want to find out why it seems to be limited to a
> marginal
>> bump in plugin counts (VST, not VSTi) even at higher latency/VIP buffer
>> settings (assuming I am interpreting their affect on resources, and
>> interaction with ASIO buffers correctly).
>>
>> However, for what you are doing, Sam would probably be a 2X increase in
>> plugin counts at 1.5ms over SX 3.x, maybe more (assuming SX has the same
>> apparent limitation as Nuendo 3.x). I would suggest trying the Samplitude
>> 8.11 demo to see if it will run I/O through plugins the way you do with
> SX.
>> Samplitude seems to be optimized with RME hardware, so it runs very well
> on
>> my system. It may not be as efficient with Lynx or others, but I would
> hope
>> that isn't the case.
>>
>> I've also heard recently that Nuendo is faster under Win2K than WinXP, but
>> that was only one user's account, and no info on plugins, VSTi's, or
> actual
>> numbers. Something to try, or consider perhaps.
>>
>> Regards,
>> DedricShame ;-) Thanks for commenting anyway.
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>It can't be done unless someone knows a prog
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Aug 05 22:23:23 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07744 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
