Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Intel developing next-generation Power Mac
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61943 is a reply to message #61942] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 07:55   |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
r />
>Well there is some other bad news on the Intel Mac front, Windows probably
>won't run as fast on a Intel Mac because there will be no hardware BIOS
on
>the the mother board for Windows. This means the bios will have to be software
>emulation. There is some info about a product here: http://www.macwindows.com/
>
>I wonder if there will be a way to flash the chips to be able to run other
>OSs???
>
>James>"Crop circles are Chuck Norris' way of telling the world that >sometimes
corn needs to lie the fuck down. "
Upuntil this moment these was something missing in my knowledge base. It was
such an elusive *knowing* , has now been fulfilled and now I'm going to have
to incorporate this into my online identity somehow.
Thank you.
"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
news:43c6b940$1@linux...
>
> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
>
> :)Always glad to help :)
By the way, here is Chuck's responce:
http://www.chucknorris.com/html/events.aspx
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>"Crop circles are Chuck Norris' way of telling the world that >sometimes
>corn needs to lie the fuck down. "
>
>Upuntil this moment these was something missing in my knowledge base. It
was
>such an elusive *knowing* , has now been fulfilled and now I'm going to
have
>to incorporate this into my online identity somehow.
>
>Thank you.
>
>"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
>news:43c6b940$1@linux...
>>
>> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
>>
>> :)
>
>From what I remember, the virtual scribble strip for the 1884 had a decent
size font and cell dividers. I didn't care for that either when I owned
it, but it was far better than the one that comes with the US2400. Imagine
trying to squeeze 24 channels of info into a single monitor's width. The
font size is around 10pts, with no distinction between cells. I haven't
experienced any lags, other than the solo issue that I mentioned. I don't
think this is much of an issue with low bandwidth midi commands though.
My Mackie was running through a USB Mdisport 8x8 anyway. They didn't even
bother to make the US2400 USB2. It's USB1.1, which seems to be fine.
BTW, I see that the FW1884 is a totally different unit than when I bought
it (which was pretty soon after it was released). It now has working drivers,
fader expanders, and better Steinberg support. It even ships with Cubase
LE now. Very cool. Looks like Tascam initially didn't plan on even supporting
Steinberg, but wound up in bed with them.
-Chris
"Mark McCurdy" <mark@mccurdy.net> wrote:
>Nice to hear. I came REAL close to getting this one but instead bought
the
>FW1884 which I love. I was worried about the USB latency. I'm assuming
you
>really haven't experienced any?
>
>I think you have the same faders that I have on my FW1884 and they rock!
>Like you said they make some solid gear. I do wish it had the scribble strip
>all though the on screen scribble strip has really worked fine for me.
>
>
>
>
>
>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote in message news:43c680b5$1@linux...
>>
>> My US2400 arrived two days ago and yesterday I got Cubase SL3 installed.
>> Here is what I think about the unit, and how it works with Cubase:
>>
>> For my needs, this thing kicks major ass. The build quality is solid,
>> with
>> all the buttons, faders, and knobs feeling like pro level stuff.
>> Construction
>> is at least as good as the Mackie, if not better. The lack of a weighted
>> flywheel for jog/shuttle isn't a problem. While not as nice as the
>> Mackie,
>> the wheel has a decent feel and is still usable. I'll talk about the
most
>> obvious difference between this unit and a Mackie first, the missing LED
>> scri
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61944 is a reply to message #61943] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 08:00 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
bble strips. This is probably what will be a deal breaker for some.
>> For me, it's OK since I am usually under 24 channels anyway, often with
>> tracks consolidated into groups. For folks who often run more than 24
>> channels,
>> you might want to bite the bullet and go for the Mackie with extender(s).
>> There are two reasons that I wouldn't want to use this unit for large
>> channel
>> count projects. The first is that the virtual scribble strips are
>> worthless.
>> The strip is sized to fit on a single monitor, and the resulting font
>> required
>> to fit all 24 channels is super small. I'm only 36 years old, but my
>> young
>> eyes can't read it at an arms length. It also has no grid structure or
>> numbers.
>> This is basically what you see on screen:
>>
>> kick snare OH L OH R bass DI bass mic gtr disto gtr crunch keys 1
alt
>> keys lead vox bak vox vox comp harmony solo... etc.
>>
>> OK, can anyone tell me what's on channel 12, in less than 5 seconds?
The
>> second issue is the way the bank button works in Cubase SL/SX3. If you
>> have
>> say 28 channel strips, banking up doesn't change the physical faders to
>> channels
>> 25 and up. It instead makes faders 1-24 now equal software channels 5
>> through
>> 28. The original 24 channels are now in different locations, which is
>> quite
>> confusing without a usable scribble strip. The workaround I see for this
>> is to always work with multiples of 24 channels in the software. This
>> way,
>> when you bank up, you are changing all the physical faders to a totally
>> new
>> assignment. So here is what I plan to do to make it work for me: I will
>> make a default project, with 24 audio channels and 24 midi channels.
Bank
>> 1 will always be my audio tracks. Bank 2 will always be my midi/VSTi
>> channels.
>> I now only need two rows of masking tape under my faders to label the
>> project.
>> Toggling between banks simply "toggles" between my top label and my bottom
>> one. I will manage the project so that these numbers won't change. For
>> example, If I add a VSTi, I get a new VSTi audio channel. I just need
to
>> delete one of the unused midi channels to keep my numbers in multiples
of
>> 24. This will keep the software channels from ever sliding left or right
>> on the faders.
>>
>> Again, I am speaking for Cubase implementation only, functions differ
from
>> app to app. As far as working with Cubase, if it had not been for the
>> latest
>> firmware update, this unit would be going back to the store right now.
>> Disregard
>> any older comments found on the web about this unit's compatibility with
>> Steinberg. The initial release of the unit didn't even include Steinberg
>> support. It wasn't until the latest firmware that the channel strip/EQ
>> control
>> function was implemented, which is an important feature to me. I like
to
>> have quick access to EQ with tactile control, even if it is only the
>> native
>> Steinberg channel EQ. For me, I can do a better job EQ'ing with knobs
on
>> a crappy EQ than a mouse on a good EQ. Having instant access to all of
>> the
>> parameters is essential to me. I'll draw the analogy to playing a
>> drumbeat
>> versus programming one. The one I play is always going to be better.
I
>> like to "play" an EQ. For this reason, my Steinberg EQ gets used more
>> often
>> than my UAD ones. The EQ is implemented very well on the US2400. Gain,
>> freq, and bandwidth are grouped together for each of the four EQ sections
>> and are labeled on the US2400. The LED's for gain and freq work like
a
>> virtual
>> pointer, but for bandwidth, the LED's "fan out" to show wide or narrow
>> bandwidths.
>> Four separate knobs control EQ on/off. Any clockwise movement of the
knob
>> turns the EQ on. Any counterclockwise movement turns it off. All LED's
>> are lit for on, none for off.
>>
>> My unit didn't ship with the latest firmware, so I had to update it.
This
>> was a pretty easy process. Now pretty much everything works as expected.
>> Documentation for the implementation is pretty lame though. Instead of
>> releasing an updated manual, there are three errata versions to the
>> original
>> manual. Some of them have mistakes in them, which are corrected in the
>> latest
>> document. Tascam doesn't really make it easy to get a hold of all the
>> errata
>> documents either. The most important one though, is the release notes
>> readme
>> file for the version 1.31 firmware update which can be downloaded from
the
>> US2400 page.
>>
>> Other than the scribble strip issue, for which I have a workaround that
>> satisfies
>> me, I only have one other real complaint. The solo function is pretty
>> slow.
>> Pressing solo on the Mackie controller results in the tracks being
>> instantly
>> soloed, but on the US2400 there is about a 1 second lag where you hear
the
>> other
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61946 is a reply to message #61943] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 10:09 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
r />
>>
>>
>
>I must have no sense of humor cuz I didn't find one of em funny... I'm such
a lamer.
"Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:43c6dd2d@linux...
> Now THAT was !@#$%* hilarious!!
> Thanks for the laughs.
> MR
>
> "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
> news:43c6b940$1@linux...
>>
>> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
>>
>> :)
>
>More articles that might answer some questions.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10794396/from/RS.3/
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/
James
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>I'll bet you hash brownies to has browns this can be taken care of by using
>a different bootloader like GRUB.
>
>TCB
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Well there is some other bad news on the Intel Mac front, Windows probably
>>won't run as fast on a Intel Mac because there will be no hardware BIOS
>on
>>the the mother board for Windows. This means the bios will have to be
software
>>emulation. There is some info about a product here: http://www.macwindows.com/
>>
>>I wonder if there will be a way to flash the chips to be able to run other
>>OSs???
>>
>>James
>Yeah, I always wanted the acoustics and reverberation of the 747 crapper on
my vocals; )
You Just gotta get this one!
http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2006/AudioEase-Jumbo-Je t-Acoustics.html
I can imagine being able to use this.
I guess if your doing sound for motion pictures???
JamesVery nice. I laughed very hard.
Jimmy
"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
news:43c6b940$1@linux...
>
> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
>
> :)Good stuff!
"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
news:43c6b940$1@linux...
>
> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
>
> :)I've personally frozen a good amount of them, and it works. On the other
hand, I watched Tank wrangle an unruly drive by bending it (!!) over the
edge of a counter when it didn't want to boot... 'while' it was spinning
up.. and then it booted. Sickest thing I've ever seen done to a drive, LOL !
AA
"Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:43c6d9db@linux...
> Hay Aaron,
> Thanks man, I was thinking I might give the freezer cure a try -but I
> hadn't
> heard the part about the bags -makes good sense. I was reading about
> folks
> dropping drives from some prescibed distance. But somehow, freezing seems
> slightly more genteel :-)
> MR
>
>
> "Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
> news:43c5e62e@linux...
>> Mike,
>> If you still have those drives, stuff them in the freezer in sleds for an
>> hour. Put some silica gel bags on them to keep out moisture. Take them
>> straight from the freezer to the PC, see what you might be able to
> salvage.
>> If the bearings are giving out, this will give you a window to nab some
> data
>> back.
>> Rinse, repeat as needed until the drive gives out.
>>
>> AA
>>
>>
>> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:43c58240@linux...
>> > I'm sorry I can't be of much help. Several months ago I "lost" 2 80gb
>> > MAXTOR drives. I'm pretty sure its a hardware issue (though if I'm
> wrong
>> > I
>> > may try the software David recommended.) I just wanted to let you know
>> > that
>> > my thoughts are with you. Its a major domo drag.
>> > May the road rise up to me you.
>> > MR
>> >
>> >
>> > "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
>> > news:43c55fcf$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> Was working on a project last night and Paris kinda crashed with a
>> > "failure
>> >> to calculate overview" and when I tried to save, got a disk read
>> >> error.
>> >>
>> >> I rebooted and now it asks if I want for format the drive, that it is
>> > unformatted.
>> >>
>> >> A pretty recent WD 80 gig with light use. I really need some stuff
>> >> off
>> > it.
>> >>
>> >> Ideas????
>> >>
>> >> TIA
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>I can tell you that Vegas 4 won't do it :)
BSOD every time, I gave it up after a while and just sync'd one of the other
10 or so PC's I had laying around at the time.
AA
"Chas. Duncan" <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote in message
news:cn9ds1l7ku0mjs36duia58a4cevvl39kj3@4ax.com...
>
> I did this for several years, as did many others... I ran Cubase out
> to an RME card slaved to incoming ADAT timecode from Paris... Worked
> okay for a while -- and this was on an 800Mhz Athlon with maybe 256
> RAM... I'm sure you could work something out -- you'll need an extra
> soundcard in there, obviously... I mean, something other than Paris.
> Then you pipe the output back to your MEC in whatever form --S'Pdif,
> adat, analogue, whatever -- for monitoring in Paris. I never tried
> this on one computer under XP, by the way. Probably would be at least
> as good or better. My set-up now is Paris on 98SE sending ADAT sync
> to another computer running Cubase SX3 (under XP, of course)... Works
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61948 is a reply to message #61946] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 10:05 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
eed to get the specifics again. My Paris pro is history. Anyone got these ?
Thanks,
DeejThese?
http://web.archive.org/web/20050305055653/www.myparispro.com /XP.asp
Cheers,
Kim.
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Need to get the specifics again. My Paris pro is history. Anyone got these
?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Deej
>
>I've just got around to installing wormhole2 on my machine and can report
that running Nuendo and Paris together seems to be a workable solution to
Nuendo (Steinberg) functionality plus Paris sound. I have tested with a full
32 ch Nuendo mix with many many plugs including UAD stuff and sending via 8
groups to Paris. It definitely works. I'm thinking the more channels into
Paris - the merrier - so still have to see what the outer limits are. My
machine (XP) is a P4 3.2g on ASUS mb.
Note - I'm not trying to run the 2 programs in sync (yet - I imagine there
are large latency issues) just trying to get Paris sound out of Nuendo.
David.
"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
news:43c73721$1@linux...
>I can tell you that Vegas 4 won't do it :)
> BSOD every time, I gave it up after a while and just sync'd one of the
> other 10 or so PC's I had laying around at the time.
> AA
>
>
> "Chas. Duncan" <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote in message
> news:cn9ds1l7ku0mjs36duia58a4cevvl39kj3@4ax.com...
>>
>> I did this for several years, as did many others... I ran Cubase out
>> to an RME card slaved to incoming ADAT timecode from Paris... Worked
>> okay for a while -- and this was on an 800Mhz Athlon with maybe 256
>> RAM... I'm sure you could work something out -- you'll need an extra
>> soundcard in there, obviously... I mean, something other than Paris.
>> Then you pipe the output back to your MEC in whatever form --S'Pdif,
>> adat, analogue, whatever -- for monitoring in Paris. I never tried
>> this on one computer under XP, by the way. Probably would be at least
>> as good or better. My set-up now is Paris on 98SE sending ADAT sync
>> to another computer running Cubase SX3 (under XP, of course)... Works
>> okay for my needs these days.
>>
>> Short answer is -- yes. (but the long answer is at least...
>> longer...)
>>
>> -- good luck -- Chas
>>
>>
>> On 13 Jan 2006 04:43:17 +1000, "Pete Ruthenburg"
>> <ruthenburg@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So is anyone doing this.I'm assuming on the same computer you
>>>couldn't run them at the same time;although I remember running
>>>Studio Vision synced to Paris on the same comp back in the day.
>>>
>>> I'm wanting to get more midi and vsti stuff happening,but at
>>>this point I don't want to spend the buck on an extra computer
>>>and interface it with my Paris comp.I don't want to venture into
>>>DJ LAND(echo,echo,echo) ;)I love ya Deej and all,but don't want
>>>to deal with all that right now.
>>>
>>> So could I get some stuff happening in Cubase then bounce it
>>>and bring it into Paris for audio and mixing?Anyone doing this?
>>>
>>>THanks,
>>>Pete
>>
>
>Funny???.......hell man.....there's nothing funny about it. This is serious
stuff.
"justcron" <pachinko@hydrorecords.com> wrote in message
news:43c7028b@linux...
> I must have no sense of humor cuz I didn't find one of em funny... I'm
such
> a lamer.
>
> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:43c6dd2d@linux...
> > Now THAT was !@#$%* hilarious!!
> > Thanks for the laughs.
> > MR
> >
> > "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
> > news:43c6b940$1@linux...
> >>
> >> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
> >>
> >> :)
> >
> >
>
>Kim.....thanks but I'm getting a dead link here.
Deej
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:43c73cb5@linux...
>
>
> These?
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20050305055653/www.myparispro.com /XP.asp
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >Need to get the specifics again. My Paris pro is history. Anyone got
these
> ?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >
>Deej,
Try this link
http://homepage.mac.com/osxlover/ParisFAQs/parisonxp.html
Jeff
DJ wrote:
> Kim.....thanks but I'm getting a dead link here.
>
> Deej
>
> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:43c73cb5@linux...
>
>>
>>These?
>>
>> http://web.archive.org/web/20050305055653/www.myparispro.com /XP.asp
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Kim.
>>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Need to get the specifics again. My Paris pro is history. Anyone got
>
> these
>
>>?
>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>Or... try this! ;o)
-----------------------------
Making PARIS freaking fly on Windows XP
This page contains just about everything you'll need to successfully migrate
PARIS to XP. You should be aware that PARIS XP drivers were not produced
by Intelligent Devices or E-MU. Intelligent Devices and E-MU Do not and
will not support problems with XP drivers or software installations running
on XP!.
The XP Drivers were written by an insanely talented programming guru type
named Chris Thoman. Lot's of other people were involved testing. The drivers
are released as DonationWare. It's fairly obvious to me that Chris's primary
motivation on this project had nothing to do with money. Since the drivers
appear to work flawlessly when installed according to the directions, I would
be extremely disappointed if anyone running an XP installation didn't reward
Chris for his efforts by making a donation. Face it, his motivation may
not have been financial - but there's nothing wrong with showing him that
we are all willing to support his efforts with our wallets. 100% of donations
go directly to Chris.
The rest of the page contains a lot of scary disclaimers about PARIS under
XP. Most of these stem from the fact that the drivers are a third party
product. You may also have witnessed months worth of posts about Crash on
Exit and be really wary about proceeding, or wonder to yourself if it's worth
it to even try. Below are some quotes from PARIS users running on XP. The
names have changed to protect the innocent.
Gerry Fallgood, Noshville TN Writes: This is working 100% on my 8 EDS1000,
(4)MEC, (4)442, 17 MEC expansion card, multi C-16, word clocked system. As
ugly as a Paris setup gets, and this is solid for me. Zero crashes on exit.
Mo
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61952 is a reply to message #61948] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 12:20 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
other than posting your problem to
www.greatidea.com/webnews/ .
* These drivers are being provided by a group of PARIS users. You must
agree that you will NEVER, EVER contact EMU-Ensoniq for support on these
drivers. If they don't work there is no option other than posting your problem
to www.greatidea.com/webnews/
* These drivers are being provided by a group of PARIS users. You must
agree NEVER, EVER to contact Intelligent Devices for support on these drivers.
If they don't work there is no option other than posting your problem to
www.greatidea.com/webnews/
* BE AWARE that if you begin experiencing problems with PARIS after installing
these drivers and do contact EMU or ID they will disavow support because
you are now running PARIS on an unsupported operating system. There is no
option other than posting your problem to www.greatidea.com/webnews/
* BE AWARE that even if you do post a problem to www.greatidea.com/webnews/
there is absolutely no Guarantee that we can provide a remedy.
With all that in mind (and I don't mean to scare you!), if you want to proceed
here are the steps you'll need to take:
1. Decide which version of XP to use: XP Home is the best value and can be
purchased as an upgrade from Win9X for under $100.
SUMMARY: USE XP HOME XP VERSION, BUT DO A FRESH INSTALL!
There are two possible reasons why you would choose XP Professional.
* If you need multi processor (multi CPU) support
* if you need or want your XP box to be able to join a Windows 2000 or
NT domain
Since most of us don't require these features, the value choice is pretty
clear to me, choose XP Home. It's most definitely not "crippleware" as suggested
on some sites.
2. Decide which Disk Format to use for our disks: Here you have a choice
between NTFS and FAT32.
SUMMARY : System Drive NTFS, Audio Drives FAT32
Here's what NTFS has to offer.
* File Security: Access rights can be assigned to files and directories,
allowing users full access, partial access or no access at all to data on
the hard disk. I doubt you would need this.
* Encryption: NTFS can automatically encrypt and decrypt file data as
it is read and written to the disk. It's doubtful that anyone running PARIS
would need this, and the performance hit is huge.
* Disk compression: File and directory compression can be performed
without using any third party software, which saves space, while still allowing
for transparent access and operation to the user. Theoretically you could
format one of your volumes as NTFS, enable compression and store backups
in compressed format. Personal experience leads me to believe that the .paf
and .wav formats do not compress by a high enough factor to make this worthwhile
* Support for large hard disks: We're talking very large. Try a theoretical
limit of 16 Exabytes, and up to 2 Terabytes.
As we don't really need these features the choice to run FAT32 on audio volumes
seems like a good one. On the system drive it's probably a good idea to
run NTFS because the XP installer doesn't support FAT32 drive volumes greater
than 32GB. Drives added after the initial install (like our audio drive)
can be formatted to any size.
3. Optimizing your XP install: There are tons of great resources out there.
One I like is http://www.tweakxp.com/tweakxp/performance_tweaks.asp. Keep
in mind that for most people XP and PARIS will work well right out of the
box. There's no need to go for the jugular when tweaking your machine.
In general I would recommend that you simply work with your system for a
while and figure out if it meets your needs in a stock configuration. I'm
a big fan of KISS (Keep it simple), and hardcore tweaking can make things
harder to debug later
SUMMARY: Try the system out before you tweak. If it works for you, leave
it alone :-)
4. Install the PARIS XP drivers: Download the PARIS BETA 3 Driver It's a
really good idea to print out the install directions and follow them exactly,
crossing off each step as you complete it. Many problems reported by users
come from improper driver installation.
SUMMARY: Follow the driver installation directions!
5. PARIS Pro 3.0 users: If you plan on installing Paris 3.0, you will need
to update the PACE InterLok drivers before installing the Paris 3.0 software.
The latest version of these drivers is available on the Internet at:
http://www.paceap.com/dldrvr.html Do not install PARIS 3.0 before you update
the PACE DRIVERS!!!.
SUMMARY: Update PACE Drivers before you install the PARIS 3.0 application!
6. Install the PARIS application: When you install the PARIS application
it's a really good idea to write down the path the installer is installing
the application to now, especially if you are changing the location, or
are installing an older version of PARIS. You'll need this info for the
next step.
SUMMARY: Know thy path and write it down.
7. Install the PARIS XP Effects Subsystem: This one is fairly straightforward.
Download the installer and run it. The installer suggests an installation
path for PARIS 3.0. If you are running an older version of PARIS, or have
installed PARIS to an alternate directory then you will need to enter the
correct path. Here's the rub - if you get this path wrong it's just not
going to work. The best strategy is to know exactly where the PARIS executable
is, and to get the path right :-) This version of the subsystem is 1.05
(minimum version). Check the myparispro.com site from time to time to ensure
that you always have the latest subsystem.
SUMMARY: Know the path to the PARIS executable on your system before you
install the subsystem!
8. The moment of truth - Starting the PARIS app: For the vast majority of
people this is just going to work. For those with Matrox Video Cards (especially
multi head) there may be problems. Don't worry - there are solutions :-)
The single biggest problem reported by users is ERROR 7/7. This means that
the hardware is not functioning correctly, even though XP shows it as "functioning
correctly.
The primary cause of ERROR 7/7 is the PARIS card sharing an interrupt with
a video card. Use The System Information tool located on Accessories/ System
Tools/ System information and determine if your PARIS cards are sharing IRQs
with a video card. If this is the case, and you are getting an Error 7/7
on launch you will need to rectify this. This is done through resource allocation
in the BIOS of your PC. There are far too many BIOS variations for me to
offer specifics on this, so if you don't know how to do it post your questions
to www.greatidea.com/webnews/ with your specific motherboard and somebody
with a similar config can probably help you.
9. New Effects: I get a lot of questions about running my new effects under
PARIS XP. If you followed all the instructions and have the latest PARIS
XP Effects Subsystem then all the new effects. I don't recommend running
the "simple" example plug-ins under any version of Windows and have actually
removed them from the site.
10. New Stuff In the subsystem: The new effects subsystem adds some plug-ins
to your system. The plug-ins it adds are intended to support other new plug-ins
in the future. There's nothing stopping you from using the mono and stereo
high res meters that are included with the subsystem, or from using the two
wires plugs. I'm not going to talk a lot about these plugs other than to
say that neither the meters nor wires is "finished". They include only enough
to act as building blocks for other plugs I will be releasing later.if my arms weren't strapped behind my back i'd type something
clever...man, this is killing my nose.
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:27:08 -0700, "Miguel Vigil" <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:
>> so then i'm not crazy that my 2.4 single processor p4 can run more 96k
>
>
>nah, you is just crazy
>
>
>El Loco
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:febcs19m570d8gsnu1iap4h089ql6fl7pp@4ax.com...
>> so then i'm not crazy that my 2.4 single processor p4 can run more 96k
>> tracks, vsti instruments and plugins than my g4 at 48k...phew.
>>
>> On 12 Jan 2006 03:09:26 +1000, "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >A few weeks back someone posted that Pete Leoni had a roughly 2 Ghz
>Celeron
>> >system outperforming top flight G5 systems. The Mac faithful scoffed, I
>chimed
>> >in that there were good technical reasons why this might be true. For
>that
>> >I was alternately called a M$oft zealout and a free software
>zealot--clearly
>> >far too biased to take all THAT seriously. A brainwashed zombie peddling
>> >urban myths of the platform irrational.
>> >
>> >Flash forward a bit, and now it's not nut job Thad and his brainwashed
>urban
>> >M$oft/linux pablum talking about performance, it's Steve Jobs! And we're
>> >hearing that Intel chips will be "2X-5X" faster than the G5s! So, let's
>see,
>> >a 2 Ghz Cele outperforming a dual quad 2 Ghz PPC seems, well, right in
>line
>> >with El Presidente for Life Estebahn Jobs is saying on stage at Mac
>World.
>> >
>> >
>> >So then, did the PPC chips suck? If they do someone sold Sony the
>railroad
>> >right of way under Lake Superior since they're using a massivly parallel
>> >version of it in the most important product they've launched in a decade,
>> >the PS. Oh, and they're all over the place in cars, network switches, and
>> >so on. I guessed kernel changes on OS X, though others (perhaps
>unintentionally)
>> >raised hideously bad compilers as another pony in the race.
>> >
>> >So everyone takes back that brainwashed, urban myth stuff now that Steve
>> >agrees with me, right?
>>
>better yet, round up all the fw800 g4's (mine included) and just give
them those for free. think of all the good will that will be
generated by the freebies.
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:18:30 -0700, "Shlomo bin Villepin"
<Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61953 is a reply to message #61952] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 11:59 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net" target="_blank">animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I think this is the key to winning the war on terror. Since we know they
>like Macs, instead of bombing the freedom fighters, we could offer them new
>G5's if they will respect Roe v Wade and promise not to kill us.
>
>
>"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
>news:BFEBBD72.312%dterry@keyofd.net...
>> Actually I think al-Quaeda uses Macs/OSX (seriously).
>>
>> They are quite fond of the iLife suite apparently. Great for making
>> training DVDs, cataloguing photos from sightseeing trips, iMovie is
>Osama's
>> favorite for making those inspiring home videos, and finally iWeb for
>> creating blogs for support groups, including hair care in the sometimes
>> harsh Afghan mountains.
>>
>> On 1/12/06 8:43 AM, in article 43c66b16$1@linux, "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Sorry, I forgot one. The Red Sox suck and they use Red Hat.
>> >
>> > "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Jesus uses OSX to count souls.
>> >> Osama uses XP to plan attacks.
>> >> George Bush uses an Etch-a-Sketch to defend us against attacks.
>> >>
>> >> Discuss.
>> >
>>
>my vocals already sound like that all by demselves...maybe this will
make me sound...good.
On 13 Jan 2006 13:21:56 +1000, "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
>Yeah, I always wanted the acoustics and reverberation of the 747 crapper on
>my vocals; )
>
>You Just gotta get this one!
>
> http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2006/AudioEase-Jumbo-Je t-Acoustics.html
>
>I can imagine being able to use this.
>
>I guess if your doing sound for motion pictures???
>
>Jameshey michele,
congrats on the new baby thing. start saving stuff for that
grandchild. ;o)
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:50:44 -0500, Michele Hobbs
<michelehobbs@comcast.net> wrote:
>Hey LaMont, thanks for askin'!
>
>Wow, I haven't posted here in awhile. I should probably let everyone
>know that I had my first child, a baby boy named Cedric, on Nov. 11.
>Everyone is fine. Tired, but fine. Kids are great! Now, if I could
>just make my way back downstairs to my gear...
>
>
>Stickin' with my "old" G5 for now,
>-Michele Hobbs
>
>
>
>LaMont wrote:
>
>> Hey (new) Mommy!!! Happy New Year!! How's the baby and hubby? I hope all is
>> well.
>> LaMont
>>
>> Michele Hobbs <michelehobbs@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>They're still not porting to the Windows platform. I don't think you'll
>>
>>
>>>be able to open XP and run Digital Performer. They're porting to run on
>>
>>
>>>Intel hardware...big difference.
>>>
>>>-Michele Hobbs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>LaMont wrote:
>>>
>>>>What other choice do they have? Motu has hedged their life on Apple. they
>>>>have to try and keep up as best as possible.
>>>>
>>>>It's funny, a company that is sworn to not port over it's Digital Performer
>>>>over to the ewindows platform is actually doing just that..
>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2006/MOTU-Intel-Mac-Dri vers.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>Both my stick and external HDD show up as the same thing on all my computers
Don
"RZ" <pearlmusic@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:43c681e0@linux...
> FWIW; I have a usb card reader for a digital camera that appears as a
> drive on my computer. I can read and write files to it.
>
> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:43c5808c$1@linux...
>>
>> I wasn't sure how to describe this in the subject heading...
>>
>> I've been on a bit of a project to get myself a DVD player to use as an
>> MP3
>> player for the main stereo. To save myself the trouble of setting up a
>> media
>> computer. Anyhow I was going to just buy a cheapo DVD player and be done
>> with it...
>>
>> ...but I got to the store and this DVD recorder caught my eye. It was
>> only
>> $180 (no doubt that's not the cheap in the states but it's pretty good
>> here)
>> and what I particularily liked was that it has a firewire and a USB port
>> on the front. Unfortunately nowhere in the manual does it tell you what
>> you
>> can plug in to the USB port. I think the firewire only works with DV
>> cameras.
>> I already tested the USB port with a USB memory stick and it worked
>> perfectly.
>>
>> What I'm wondering is, is there a difference between the driver for a USB
>> memory stick and a USB hdd. I had a feeling that I'd heard somewhere that
>> they both appear on your computer as the same device type.
>>
>> I'm trying to work out whether the fact that the USB stick works means
>> inherantly
>> that a USB hdd will work, or whether I'm going to have to try one.
>>
>> If I can get this box to play MP3's off a USB hdd I'll be stoked.
>>
>> Maybe I'm just going to have to buy an external USB case and try my
>> luck...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Kim.
>
>Already? We're just trying to figure out college for this one!
Thanks Rick,
-Michele
rick wrote:
> hey michele,
>
> congrats on the new baby thing. start saving stuff for that
> grandchild. ;o)
>
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:50:44 -0500, Michele Hobbs
> <michelehobbs@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Hey LaMont, thanks for askin'!
>>
>>Wow, I haven't posted here in awhile. I should probably let everyone
>>know that I had my first child, a baby boy named Cedric, on Nov. 11.
>>Everyone is fine. Tired, but fine. Kids are great! Now, if I could
>>just make my way back downstairs to my gear...
>>
>>
>>Stickin' with my "old" G5 for now,
>>-Michele Hobbs
>>
>>
>>
>>LaMont wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hey (new) Mommy!!! Happy New Year!! How's the baby and hubby? I hope all is
>>>well.
>>>LaMont
>>>
>>>Michele Hobbs <michelehobbs@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>They're still not porting to the Windows platform. I don't think you'll
>>>
>>>
>>>>be able to open XP and run Digital Performer. They're porting to run on
>>>
>>>
>>>>Intel hardware...big difference.
>>>>
>>>>-Michele Hobbs
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>LaMont wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>What other choice do they have? Motu has hedged their life on Apple. they
>>>>>have to try and keep up as best as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's funny, a company that is sworn to not port over it's Digital Performer
>>>>>over to the ewindows platform is actually doing just that..
>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2006/MOTU-Intel-Mac-Dri vers.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>Thanks Doug,
Time IS flying...I can't believe how different he looks now at 9 weeks.
He doesn't look like the same baby that I brought home from the hospital.
-Michele
Doug Wellington wrote:
> "Michele Hobbs" <michelehobbs@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>Wow, I haven't posted here in awhile. I should probably let everyone know
>>that I had my first child, a baby boy named Cedric, on Nov. 11. Everyone
>>is fine. Tired, but fine. Kids are great! Now, if I could just make my
>>way back downstairs to my gear...
>
>
> Congrats! My daughter (age 14) is now taller than my wife, and my "baby"
> boy is about to turn eleven! Time flies. Don't put anything off when it
> comes to your kids, or you'll be singing "Cats in the Cradle"...
>
> --
> -Doug (Kids are better than gear anyway...!) :-)
>
> http://www.dougwellington.com
> http://www.parisfaqs.com
>
>Thanks! I wonder when he'll be able to help in the studio?:-)
If he became a musician/producer type, that would be great, but I'm not
gonna force it.
James McCloskey wrote:
> Hey Michele! Congratulations on the new baby!
>
> James
>
>
> Michele Hobbs <michelehobbs@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>Hey LaMont, thanks for askin'!
>>
>>Wow, I haven't posted here in awhile. I should probably let everyone
>>know that I had my first child, a baby boy named Cedric, on Nov. 11.
>>Everyone is fine. Tired, but fine. Kids are great! Now, if I could
>>just make my way back downstairs to my gear...
>>
>>
>>Stickin' with my "old" G5 for now,
>>-Michele Hobbs
>>
>>
>>
>>LaMont wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hey (new) Mommy!!! Happy New Year!! How's the baby and hubby? I hope all
>
> is
>
>>>well.
>>>LaMont
>>>
>>>Michele Hobbs <michelehobbs@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>They're still not porting to the Windows platform. I don't think you'll
>>>
>>>
>>>>be able to open XP and run Digital Performer. They're porting to run
>
> on
>
>>>
>>>>Intel hardware...big difference.
>>>>
>>>>-Michele Hobbs
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>LaMont wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>What other choice do they have? Motu has hedged their life on Apple.
>
> they
>
>>>>>have to try and keep up as best as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's funny, a company that is sworn to not port over it's Digital Performer
>>>>>over to the ewindows platform is actually doing just that..
>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2006/MOTU-Intel-Mac-Dri vers.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>Help
DonAnyone know? I'm playing with xp installs and did a new one last night
but did the wrong order so I gotta fix it tonight but I'm wondering what
that error means. Anyone ?Try puppies, they change in about an hour.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61959 is a reply to message #61952] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 15:54 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
nstalling
> these drivers and do contact EMU or ID they will disavow support because
> you are now running PARIS on an unsupported operating system. There is no
> option other than posting your problem to www.greatidea.com/webnews/
>
> * BE AWARE that even if you do post a problem to
www.greatidea.com/webnews/
> there is absolutely no Guarantee that we can provide a remedy.
>
> With all that in mind (and I don't mean to scare you!), if you want to
proceed
> here are the steps you'll need to take:
>
> 1. Decide which version of XP to use: XP Home is the best value and can be
> purchased as an upgrade from Win9X for under $100.
>
> SUMMARY: USE XP HOME XP VERSION, BUT DO A FRESH INSTALL!
>
> There are two possible reasons why you would choose XP Professional.
>
> * If you need multi processor (multi CPU) support
>
> * if you need or want your XP box to be able to join a Windows 2000 or
> NT domain
>
> Since most of us don't require these features, the value choice is
pretty
> clear to me, choose XP Home. It's most definitely not "crippleware" as
suggested
> on some sites.
>
>
> 2. Decide which Disk Format to use for our disks: Here you have a choice
> between NTFS and FAT32.
>
> SUMMARY : System Drive NTFS, Audio Drives FAT32
>
> Here's what NTFS has to offer.
>
> * File Security: Access rights can be assigned to files and
directories,
> allowing users full access, partial access or no access at all to data on
> the hard disk. I doubt you would need this.
>
> * Encryption: NTFS can automatically encrypt and decrypt file data as
> it is read and written to the disk. It's doubtful that anyone running
PARIS
> would need this, and the performance hit is huge.
>
> * Disk compression: File and directory compression can be performed
> without using any third party software, which saves space, while still
allowing
> for transparent access and operation to the user. Theoretically you could
> format one of your volumes as NTFS, enable compression and store backups
> in compressed format. Personal experience leads me to believe that the
..paf
> and .wav formats do not compress by a high enough factor to make this
worthwhile
>
> * Support for large hard disks: We're talking very large. Try a
theoretical
> limit of 16 Exabytes, and up to 2 Terabytes.
>
> As we don't really need these features the choice to run FAT32 on audio
volumes
> seems like a good one. On the system drive it's probably a good idea to
> run NTFS because the XP installer doesn't support FAT32 drive volumes
greater
> than 32GB. Drives added after the initial install (like our audio drive)
> can be formatted to any size.
>
> 3. Optimizing your XP install: There are tons of great resources out
there.
> One I like is http://www.tweakxp.com/tweakxp/performance_tweaks.asp.
Keep
> in mind that for most people XP and PARIS will work well right out of the
> box. There's no need to go for the jugular when tweaking your machine.
> In general I would recommend that you simply work with your system for a
> while and figure out if it meets your needs in a stock configuration. I'm
> a big fan of KISS (Keep it simple), and hardcore tweaking can make things
> harder to debug later
>
> SUMMARY: Try the system out before you tweak. If it works for you, leave
> it alone :-)
>
> 4. Install the PARIS XP drivers: Download the PARIS BETA 3 Driver It's a
> really good idea to print out the install directions and follow them
exactly,
> crossing off each step as you complete it. Many problems reported by
users
> come from improper driver installation.
>
> SUMMARY: Follow the driver installation directions!
>
> 5. PARIS Pro 3.0 users: If you plan on installing Paris 3.0, you will need
> to update the PACE InterLok drivers before installing the Paris 3.0
software.
> The latest version of these drivers is available on the Internet at:
> http://www.paceap.com/dldrvr.html Do not install PARIS 3.0 before you
update
> the PACE DRIVERS!!!.
>
> SUMMARY: Update PACE Drivers before you install the PARIS 3.0 application!
>
> 6. Install the PARIS application: When you install the PARIS application
> it's a really good idea to write down the path the installer is installing
> the application to now, especially if you are changing the location, or
> are installing an older version of PARIS. You'll need this info for the
> next step.
>
> SUMMARY: Know thy path and write it down.
>
> 7. Install the PARIS XP Effects Subsystem: This one is fairly
straightforward.
> Download the installer and run it. The installer suggests an installation
> path for PARIS 3.0. If you are running an older version of PARIS, or have
> installed PARIS to an alternate directory then you will need to enter the
> correct path. Here's the rub - if you get this path wrong it's just not
> going to work. The best strategy is to know exactly where the PARIS
executable
> is, and to get the path right :-) This version of the subsystem is 1.05
> (minimum version). Check the myparispro.com site from time to time to
ensure
> that you always have the latest subsystem.
>
> SUMMARY: Know the path to the PARIS executable on your system before you
> install the subsystem!
>
> 8. The moment of truth - Starting the PARIS app: For the vast majority of
> people this is just going to work. For those with Matrox Video Cards
(especially
> multi head) there may be problems. Don't worry - there are solutions :-)
> The single biggest problem reported by users is ERROR 7/7. This means
that
> the hardware is not functioning correctly, even though XP shows it as
"functioning
> correctly.
>
> The primary cause of ERROR 7/7 is the PARIS card sharing an interrupt with
> a video card. Use The System Information tool located on Accessories/
System
> Tools/ System information and determine if your PARIS cards are sharing
IRQs
> with a video card. If this is the case, and you are getting an Error 7/7
> on launch you will need to rectify this. This is done through resource
allocation
> in the BIOS of your PC. There are far too many BIOS variations for me to
> offer specifics on this, so if you don't know how to do it post your
questions
> to www.greatidea.com/webnews/ with your specific motherboard and somebody
> with a similar config can probably help you.
>
> 9. New Effects: I get a lot of questions about running my new effects
under
> PARIS XP. If you followed all the instructions and have the latest PARIS
> XP Effects Subsystem then all the new effects. I don't recommend running
> the "simple" example plug-ins under any version of Windows and have
actually
> removed them from the site.
>
> 10. New Stuff In the subsystem: The new effects subsystem adds some
plug-ins
> to your system. The plug-ins it adds are intended to support other new
plug-ins
> in the future. There's nothing stopping you from using the mono and
stereo
> high res meters that are included with the subsystem, or from using the
two
> wires plugs. I'm not going to talk a lot about these plugs other than to
> say that neither the meters nor wires is "finished". They include only
enough
> to act as building blocks for other plugs I will be releasing later.> I an running 2 EDS cards so what is was thinking was to 8 out on
> one card and 8 out on the other, but I would think there would
> be an easier way.
You could use the Paris auxes to create stem mixes if you didn't want to fly
16 individual tracks to an external mixer..
;o)
"Dominic" <bertstudio@aol.com> wrote in message news:43c7bbe7$1@linux...
>
> Looking for help mixing with PARIS outside the box.
> How do you have it set up? What I was originally thinking was
> to "external out" each channel but that would only get me 8 outs.
> I an running 2 EDS cards so what is was thinking was to 8 out on
> one card and 8 out on the other, but I would think there would
> be an easier way.
>
> Your advice would be greatly appreciated.
> Thanx DominicThanks much for the info David.I haven't gotten into Wormhole yet
,but I plan to checl it out.So using wormhole your not using a
souncard of some kind for Nuendo into Paris,is that correct?Your
just doing it in the computer?
Thanks again,
Pete
"espresso" <audio@espressodigital.com> wrote:
>I've just got around to installing wormhole2 on my machine and can report
>that running Nuendo and Paris together seems to be a workable solution to
>Nuendo (Steinberg) functionality plus Paris sound. I have tested with a
full
>32 ch Nuendo mix with many many plugs including UAD stuff and sending via
8
>groups to Paris. It definitely works. I'm thinking the more channels into
>Paris - the merrier - so still have to see what the outer limits are. My
>machine (XP) is a P4 3.2g on ASUS mb.
>Note - I'm not trying to run the 2 programs in sync (yet - I imagine there
>are large latency issues) just trying to get Paris sound out of Nuendo.
>
>David.
>
>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>news:43c73721$1@linux...
>>I can tell you that Vegas 4 won't do it :)
>> BSOD every time, I gave it up after a while and just sync'd one of the
>> other 10 or so PC's I had laying around at the time.
>> AA
>>
>>
>> "Chas. Duncan" <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote in message
>> news:cn9ds1l7ku0mjs36duia58a4cevvl39kj3@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> I did this for several years, as did many others... I ran Cubase out
>>> to an RME card slaved to incoming ADAT timecode from Paris... Worked
>>> okay for a while -- and this was on an 800Mhz Athlon with maybe 256
>>> RAM... I'm sure you could work something out -- you'll need an extra
>>> soundcard in there, obviously... I mean, something other than Paris.
>>> Then you pipe the output back to your MEC in whatever form --S'Pdif,
>>> adat, analogue, whatever -- for monitoring in Paris. I never tried
>>> this on one computer under XP, by the way. Probably would be at least
>>> as good or better. My set-up now is Paris on 98SE sending ADAT sync
>>> to another computer running Cubase SX3 (under XP, of course)... Works
>>> okay for my needs these days.
>>>
>>> Short answer is -- yes. (but the long answer is at least...
>>> longer...)
>>>
>>> -- good luck -- Chas
>>>
>>>
>>> On 13 Jan 2006 04:43:17 +1000, "Pete Ruthenburg"
>>> <ruthenburg@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So is anyone doing this.I'm assuming on the same computer you
>>>>couldn't run them at the same time;although I remember running
>>>>Studio Vision synced to Paris on the same comp back in the day.
>>>>
>>>> I'm wanting to get more midi and vsti stuff happening,but at
>>>>this point I don't want to spend the buck on an extra computer
>>>>and interface it with my Paris comp.I don't want to venture into
>>>>DJ LAND(echo,echo,echo) ;)I love ya Deej and all,but don't want
>>>>to deal with all that right now.
>>>>
>>>> So could I get some stuff happening in Cubase then bounce it
>>>>and bring it into Paris for audio and mixing?Anyone doing this?
>>>>
>>>>THanks,
>>>>Pete
>>>
>>
>>
>
>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here. The
Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb to
the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound great
with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out there.
I'm a newbie at this stuff.
thanky,
DeejGet the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become a serious
delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs, various
emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only ones
to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and the PSPs.
I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that I could
get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
TCB
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
The
>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
to
>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound great
>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out th
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61960 is a reply to message #61942] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 15:02 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ere.
>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>
>thanky,
>
>Deej
>
>Thad, what are the characteristics that make or break a delay for you?
-Chris
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>Get the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become a serious
>delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs, various
>emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only ones
>to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and the
PSPs.
>I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that I
could
>get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
>
>TCB
>
>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>The
>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>to
>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound great
>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out there.
>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>
>>thanky,
>>
>>Deej
>>
>>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
---=_linux43c7ca76
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
The
>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
to
>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound great
>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out there.
>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>
>thanky,
>
>Deej
>
42 is a little smoother sound with more high-end and some additional programming
flexibility. I like both units. The PSP plugs do get fairly close.
Lately I have been putting ColorTone Pro in the feedback loop of the built
in echo plug in DP (Any clean
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61961 is a reply to message #61959] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 15:08 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
echo plug will do). Using “Spaceytape” , an
impulse from the Roland, you can get a dead-on emulation of tape-based echo.
With a "41" impulse, it gets very close to the 41.
g
---=_linux43c7ca76
Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="Lexicon_PCM41DigitalDelay_s.jpg"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Lexicon_PCM41DigitalDelay_s.jpg"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---=_linux43c7ca76--Although they are no longer in production, I've been really happy with the
Line6 Echo pro rack unit. Should be able to find a used one on ebay. Many
different delays.
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
The
>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
to
>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound great
>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out there.
>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>
>thanky,
>
>Deej
>
>Hmmmm.....now that I think of it, couldn't a sony V55 or an Ensoniq DP4 be
set up to operate as 4 x independent delays?
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43c7c55f$1@linux...
> I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
> multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
The
> Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
to
> the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
great
> with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
> MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
> about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
> good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
> difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
there.
> I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>
> thanky,
>
> Deej
>
>Due to my rather insane routing matrix, when I'm mixing, all panning (tracks
and aux FX) are being done in Paris. This necessitates my using analog gear
for delays on auxes. The PCM 41's look pretty affordable....the 442's look
pretty ridiculously expensive. There are *lots* of Ensoniq DP4's on EBay
these days. This looks like it might be something very useful in my
particular situation.
Last night, after mixing one song, it too me about 30 minutes to catalog the
settings I was using on all of the my analog gear I had patched in to the
mix once I got it right.....but it sure did do a nice job of things.
If I could usePSP, or other native plugins on the Paris auxes, I'd do it in
a heartbeat. Do you think this might be possible using Wormhole from a
separate computer? I've got my old Cubase DAW mobo/CPU and 2G RAM sitting
around here
I know there would be a little latency, but on an ux effect, I'm
wondering.......
What do you think?
Deej
"gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:43c7ca76$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
> >multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
> The
> >Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
> to
> >the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
great
> >with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
> >MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
> >about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
> >good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
> >difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
there.
> >I'm a newbie at this stuff.
> >
> >thanky,
> >
> >Deej
> >
> 42 is a little smoother sound with more high-end and some additional
programming
> flexibility. I like both units. The PSP plugs do get fairly close.
>
> Lately I have been putting ColorTone Pro in the feedback loop of the built
> in echo plug in DP (Any clean echo plug will do). Using "Spaceytape" , an
> impulse from the Roland, you can get a dead-on emulation of tape-based
echo.
> With a "41" impulse, it gets very close to the 41.
> gI love the PSP's, too. I also have a TC D2 in my standard mix setup on an
external aux. Also usually a Paris delay on an aux.
"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>
>Thad, what are the characteristics that make or break a delay for you?
>
>-Chris
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>Get the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become a serious
>>delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs, various
>>emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only ones
>>to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and the
>PSPs.
>>I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that I
>could
>>get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>>The
>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>>to
>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
great
>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
there.
>>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>>
>>>thanky,
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>
>>
>#1 is sonics for sure. I'll tolerate a lot of hassle for good sonics. Every
now and then I still hook up an impedence changer and run a track through
my Moog delay which is grittier than a lot of well maintained tape delays.
#2 would be the rough category of "usability" which for analog gear is mostly
about how easy it is to patch things in and so forth. That's only because
I'm lazy and will not use gear that's difficult to deal with most of the
time, above-mentioned Moog situations notwithstanding. However, a Space Echo
is so noisy and so picky that it gets frustrating after a while.
Mind you, when I pick a delay I want it to have a sound. When I hear a ducked
stereo delay with one side at sixteenths and one at quarters I scream, "Ack,
barf, *&#*@(*! it sounds like a *&#*@#( Larry Carlton record from 1986! Turn
that #*&(@*(&ing thing off now before I throw something." To me a great delay
is one that adds to the sound above and beyond just being repeats. Check
out a Scientest Wins the World Cup if you want to hear more of what I'm talking
about.
What makes the PSP 84 (the primary one I use) so amazing is that it kills
on every category. The delay itself sound "clean but analog" when vanilla,
like maybe an Akai rackmount unit that's clean and well maintained. Delay
time will sync to the host if you want and can be set to pretty odd meters
if you want, so it's not just straight eights and such. Then, it has a switchable
filter (hp, bp, lp) that can, oh the simple genius of it, be applied to the
whold signal path, the effected signal path, or the feedback loop. Then,
be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that can take
modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop follower?
You're kidding, right? I mean, if the Russians would have had this delay
in 1950 we'd be choking down cheap vodka and calling each other "comrade"
today, right? But I'm not even done. There's a drive knob to make things
dirtier if you want and a usable if unspectacular reverb. Finally, and this
should have appeard earlier, it *acts* like an analog delay. Turn up the
feedback really high and it builds up noise in the feedback loop. Set a high
pass filter with LFO mod in it and the filter resonance builds up in the
loop as well. change the filter to LP in real time and you have what amounts
to a synth sound created by a mod matrix, noise generator, and a filter.
All of this and it can also be a very nice simple great sounding host synced
delay? Damned impressive if you ask me.
That answer the question? The Moog is amazing in a guitar rig as well.
TCB
"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>
>Thad, what are the characteristics that make or break a delay for you?
>
>-Chris
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>Get the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become a serious
>>delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs, various
>>emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only ones
>>to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and the
>PSPs.
>>I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that I
>could
>>get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>>The
>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>>to
>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
great
>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61964 is a reply to message #61961] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 16:26 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
>> Thanks for the laughs.
>> MR
>>
>> "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
>> news:43c6b940$1@linux...
>>>
>>> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
>>>
>>> :)
>>
>>
>
>Thad, I don't quite understand what you mean here:
"Then, be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that
can take modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop
follower?"
Could you explain more? Mind, you, I am a very vanilla guy when it comes
to delays. That why I was asking. I generally use any old host-app delay
for clean stuff, and my rack mount DOD R-880 analog for dirtier, darker,
vibier stuff. I too used to own a vintage tube echoplex, but couldn't justify
the clunkiness and hassle for what I was getting.
-Chris
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>#1 is sonics for sure. I'll tolerate a lot of hassle for good sonics. Every
>now and then I still hook up an impedence changer and run a track through
>my Moog delay which is grittier than a lot of well maintained tape delays.
>#2 would be the rough category of "usability" which for analog gear is mostly
>about how easy it is to patch things in and so forth. That's only because
>I'm lazy and will not use gear that's difficult to deal with most of the
>time, above-mentioned Moog situations notwithstanding. However, a Space
Echo
>is so noisy and so picky that it gets frustrating after a while.
>
>Mind you, when I pick a delay I want it to have a sound. When I hear a ducked
>stereo delay with one side at sixteenths and one at quarters I scream, "Ack,
>barf, *&#*@(*! it sounds like a *&#*@#( Larry Carlton record from 1986!
Turn
>that #*&(@*(&ing thing off now before I throw something." To me a great
delay
>is one that adds to the sound above and beyond just being repeats. Check
>out a Scientest Wins the World Cup if you want to hear more of what I'm
talking
>about.
>
>What makes the PSP 84 (the primary one I use) so amazing is that it kills
>on every category. The delay itself sound "clean but analog" when vanilla,
>like maybe an Akai rackmount unit that's clean and well maintained. Delay
>time will sync to the host if you want and can be set to pretty odd meters
>if you want, so it's not just straight eights and such. Then, it has a switchable
>filter (hp, bp, lp) that can, oh the simple genius of it, be applied to
the
>whold signal path, the effected signal path, or the feedback loop. Then,
>be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that can
take
>modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop follower?
>You're kidding, right? I mean, if the Russians would have had this delay
>in 1950 we'd be choking down cheap vodka and calling each other "comrade"
>today, right? But I'm not even done. There's a drive knob to make things
>dirtier if you want and a usable if unspectacular reverb. Finally, and this
>should have appeard earlier, it *acts* like an analog delay. Turn up the
>feedback really high and it builds up noise in the feedback loop. Set a
high
>pass filter with LFO mod in it and the filter resonance builds up in the
>loop as well. change the filter to LP in real time and you have what amounts
>to a synth sound created by a mod matrix, noise generator, and a filter.
>All of this and it can also be a very nice simple great sounding host synced
>delay? Damned impressive if you ask me.
>
>That answer the question? The Moog is amazing in a guitar rig as well.
>
>TCB
>
>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>
>>Thad, what are the characteristics that make or break a delay for you?
>>
>>-Chris
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Get the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become a serious
>>>delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs, various
>>>emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only ones
>>>to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and the
>>PSPs.
>>>I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that
I
>>could
>>>get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
>>>
>>>TCB
>>>
>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>>>The
>>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>>>to
>>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
>great
>>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>>>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>>>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>>>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>>>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
>there.
>>>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>>>
>>>>thanky,
>>>>
>>>>Deej
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Is that sarcasm I sense Thad? ;>)
Tony
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43c7be72$1@linux...
>
> www.tomshardware.com, where brainwashed, braindamaged, reactionary
> M$oft/Debian
> types like me go to find out what's happening in the wonderful world of
> computer
> hardware, has a story about the new Macs.
>
> http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/01/12/how_different_are_the_new_ intel-based_macs/
>
> It includes interesting things about the chipset (looks like 945), the EFI
> question (doesn't look like much of an issue), and some discussion about
> the hardware end. The bottom line is that putting XP or GNU\Linux on your
> Intel box from Apple will be trivial. Some brainwashed moron around here
> mentioned probably as simple as changing the bootloader, and it appears
> he's
> right, amazing enough considering that he drools out of one side of his
> mouth
> most of the time and when he sees a car he points to it and yells "machine
> horsie" to his home care specialists. Getting OS X running on your home
> brew
> PC, though, looks trickier. Getting the core OS to boot is probably just
> an issues of an afternoon of assembly programming by a top programmer to
> convince OS X that it's booting on the right hardware, but after that we
> get into questions of drivers and such and things get murkier. We should
> have that machine horsie guy check into it a little more, but if he stops
> throwing his oatmeal at the wall and soiling his Depends long enough to
> investigate
> it wouldn't surprise me at all if he came back and said that as long as
> the
> home brew PC stuck to the same chipset as the Apple Intel boxes one might
> have a pretty good shot.
>
> TCBdigi cam em, then store the photos as web ready jpegs.
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:48:45 -0700, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Due to my rather insane routing matrix, when I'm mixing, all panning (tracks
>and aux FX) are being done in Paris. This necessitates my using analog gear
>for delays on auxes. The PCM 41's look pretty affordable....the 442's look
>pretty ridiculously expensive. There are *lots* of Ensoniq DP4's on EBay
>these days. This looks like it might be something very useful in my
>particular situation.
>
>Last night, after mixing one song, it too me about 30 minutes to catalog the
>settings I was using on all of the my analog gear I had patched in to the
>mix once I got it right.....but it sure did do a nice job of things.
>
>If I could usePSP, or other native plugins on the Paris auxes, I'd do it in
>a heartbeat. Do you think this might be possible using Wormhole from a
>separate computer? I've got my old Cubase DAW mobo/CPU and 2G RAM sitting
>around here
>
>I know there would be a little latency, but on an ux effect, I'm
>wondering.......
>
>What do you think?
>
>Deej
>
>"gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
>news:43c7ca76$1@linux...
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>> >multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>> The
>> >Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>> to
>> >the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
>great
>> >with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>> >MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>> >about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>> >good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>> >difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
>there.
>> >I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>> >
>> >thanky,
>> >
>> >Deej
>> >
>> 42 is a little smoother sound with more high-end and some additional
>programming
>> flexibility. I like both units. The PSP plugs do get fairly close.
>>
>> Lately I have been putting ColorTone Pro in the feedback loop of the built
>> in echo plug in DP (Any clean echo plug will do). Using "Spaceytape" , an
>> impulse from the Roland, you can get a dead-on emulation of tape-based
>echo.
>> With a "41" impulse, it gets very close to the 41.
>> g
>I have two very different delays in my guitar rack. One is an old Ibanez
AD202. This 70's device uses bucket brigade technology and works as both
a delay and (unintentionally) a low pass filter. Great for Keith Richards
typs stuff.
The other is a Symmetrix 606, which is a very flexible, clean and transparent
piece. Love it.DJ,
I just sent you an email.
I want to do this but I'm having a brainfart trying to do it.
-Will
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> I an running 2 EDS cards so what is was thinking was to 8 out on
>> one card and 8 out on the other, but I would think there would
>> be an easier way.
>
>You could use the Paris auxes to create stem mixes if you didn't want to
fly
>16 individual tracks to an external mixer..
>
>;o)
>
>"Dominic" <bertstudio@aol.com> wrote in message news:43c7bbe7$1@linux...
>>
>> Looking for help mixing with PARIS outside the box.
>> How do you have it set up? What I was originally thinking was
>> to "external out" each channel but that would only get me 8 outs.
>> I an running 2 EDS cards so what is was thinking was to 8 out on
>> one card and 8 out on the other, but I would think there would
>> be an easier way.
>>
>> Your advice would be greatly appreciated.
>> Thanx Dominic
>
>I have three units that I've been playing with lately for delays. I have a
Line-6 Echo Pro in the rack that I use all the time, especially for the
analog synth. I use an expression pedal plugged into it so that I can
manipulate the echos in real time. I have a Kurzweil KSP-8 that is a great
all-around effects unit - with the ADAT module, I can use that for eight
channels. The delays are pretty clean, but you can add a lot of other
effects to the signal chains with this unit to change things around. And I
also have an Eventide 4000 that is just plain sick! Wish I could afford an
Orville or an H8000A to get the surround looping/delays...
--
-Doug
http://www.dougwellington.com
http://www.parisfaqs.comMichele,
> Time IS flying...I can't believe how different he looks now at 9 weeks.
Yeah... Crazy, huh? Pretty soon he'll be walking, and you'll start putting
the fragile stuff up higher and higher... ;-) I used to have a clay beer
stein that I got from Germany. It was my favorite tea cup. One day, I had
it brewing on the counter - it was about a foot back from the edge mind
you - but somehow my son managed to get up on tip-toes and hook his finger
around the handle and pull... Wow, let me tell you, I'm glad it had been
sitting there a while and wasn't still boiling! Poor kid, he got hit with a
half litre of hot water, the cup crashed into pieces at his feet, and his
parents came running in a panic... Of course, I'm sitting there saying to
myself, "my son!...my cup!...my son...!" alternately upset that he broke my
favorite cup, but freaked out that he might have gotten burned. Luckily
there was no physical damage to Alex, but the cup was done for. At the same
time, I think it was a good lesson learned - he never just pulled anything
off the counter again - so it was worth the price of the cup...
> He doesn't look like the same baby that I brought home from the hospital.
Is he sleeping through the night? Lost all the hair on the back of his head
yet? It'll probably grow back before he's one...
:-)
--
-Doug
http://www.dougwellington.com
http://www.parisfaqs.comNothing better than a Lex Prime Time for fattening vocals... A studio
I worked at years ago had a few... awesome, but noisy. Wish I had
some here!
David.
DJ wrote:
> I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
> multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here. The
> Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb to
> the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound great
> with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
> MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
> about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
> good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
> difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out there.
> I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>
> thanky,
>
> Deej
>
>I know some guys who really like the old Roland SDE-1000/3000 delays.
They're pretty popular though and might be hard to find. ? If it's just
simple delay stuff, I would think almost any old Alesis, DigiTech, Yamaha,
etc. multi-effects unit would work. I haven't used a hardware delay for
years. I used to have an MXR analog pedal delay that I loved on guitar
(circa 1981). Sold it in the mid 90's when people were paying stupid prices
for "vintage" guitar pedals. I think I tripled my investment on that and
some original Electro Harmonix stuff.
Tony
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43c7c55f$1@linux...
> I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
> multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
> The
> Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
> to
> the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
> great
> with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
> MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
> about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
> good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
> difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
> there.
> I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>
> thanky,
>
> Deej
>
>Thanks for the warning...I can see little Cedric asking for a puppy when
he gets older. Too bad his parents are allergic. I think a pet would
be nice.
John wrote:
> Try puppies, they change in about an hour. They were so small and now
> 55 lbs for the lab at 8 months. Still a baby brain though. hehe
> Congrats too !!!
>
> Michele Hobbs wrote:
>
>> Thanks Doug,
>>
>> Time IS flying...I can't believe how different he looks now at 9
>> weeks. He doesn't look like the same baby that I brought home from
>> the hospital.
>>
>> -Michele
>>
>> Doug Wellington wrote:
>>
>>> "Michele Hobbs" <michelehobbs@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wow, I haven't posted here in awhile. I should probably let
>>>> everyone know that I had my first child, a baby boy named Cedric, on
>>>> Nov. 11. Everyone is fine. Tired, but fine. Kids are great! Now,
>>>> if I could just make my way back downstairs to my gear...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61966 is a reply to message #61960] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 16:39 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>> wrote in message news:43c7a577@linux...
> Anyone know? I'm playing with xp installs and did a new one last night
> but did the wrong order so I gotta fix it tonight but I'm wondering what
> that error means. Anyone ?I have a MoFX, too, and use it a lot--I love the momentary buttons for screwing
things up :)
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>I've had both the pedal version and the rack mount. I wound up switching
to
>the Moog for live and the native for recording.
>
>Another hardware unit to look at, Deej, though everyone will look at you
>funny and people around here might sniff, is the Electrix MoFX. Easy to
work
>with as tap tempo delays and two in mono might be cool because you'd never
>tap them quite exactly the same tempo.
>
>TCB
>
>"Paul" <pn@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>Although they are no longer in production, I've been really happy with
the
>>Line6 Echo pro rack unit. Should be able to find a used one on ebay. Many
>>different delays.
>>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>>The
>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>>to
>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
great
>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
there.
>>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>>
>>>thanky,
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>
>>
>Terminal MPS here...:)
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>Justin,
>
>Normal people, like you, are born with an "Incredibly Stupid Stuff
>Inhibition" lobe in their brains. Some of us, unfortunately, are lacking
>this area and have a condition known as "Monty Python Syndrome". Those of
us
>living with MPS find this kind of stuff hilarious, where normal people just
>think it's, well . . . stupid. ;>)
>
>Tony
>
>
>"justcron" <pachinko@hydrorecords.com> wrote in message
>news:43c7028b@linux...
>>I must have no sense of humor cuz I didn't find one of em funny... I'm
>>such a lamer.
>>
>> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:43c6dd2d@linux...
>>> Now THAT was !@#$%* hilarious!!
>>> Thanks for the laughs.
>>> MR
>>>
>>> "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
>>> news:43c6b940$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
>>>>
>>>> :)
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>Speaking of MPS...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61968 is a reply to message #61964] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 15:47 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
speak.
;o)
"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
news:43c80b4b$1@linux...
>
> I have a MoFX, too, and use it a lot--I love the momentary buttons for
screwing
> things up :)
>
>
> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
> >
> >I've had both the pedal version and the rack mount. I wound up switching
> to
> >the Moog for live and the native for recording.
> >
> >Another hardware unit to look at, Deej, though everyone will look at you
> >funny and people around here might sniff, is the Electrix MoFX. Easy to
> work
> >with as tap tempo delays and two in mono might be cool because you'd
never
> >tap them quite exactly the same tempo.
> >
> >TCB
> >
> >"Paul" <pn@nospam.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>Although they are no longer in production, I've been really happy with
> the
> >>Line6 Echo pro rack unit. Should be able to find a used one on ebay.
Many
> >>different delays.
> >>
> >>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to
soundstage
> >>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
> >>The
> >>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a
reverb
> >>to
> >>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
> great
> >>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
> >>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm
thinking
> >>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a
pretty
> >>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
> >>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
> there.
> >>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
> >>>
> >>>thanky,
> >>>
> >>>Deej
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>AMD Athlon 64 FX60 1GHz FSB Socket 939 Dual Core Processor - Retail
· 2.6GHz
· 90 nm Toledo
· 2 x 1MB L2 Cache
Your Price $1399
Just Release! In Stock and Ready to ShipHi DJ...please tell us all how to do this....
"> >
> >You could use the Paris auxes to create stem mixes if you didn't want to
> fly
> >16 individual tracks to an external mixer..
> >
> >;o)
> >
> >"Dominic" <bertstudio@aol.com> wrote in message news:43c7bbe7$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Looking for help mixing with PARIS outside the box.
> >> How do you have it set up? What I was originally thinking was
> >> to "external out" each channel but that would only get me 8 outs.
> >> I an running 2 EDS cards so what is was thinking was to 8 out on
> >> one card and 8 out on the other, but I would think there would
> >> be an easier way.
> >>
> >> Your advice would be greatly appreciated.
> >> Thanx Dominic
> >
> >
>Yeah, that's been a really wierd trend these days with highend computer hardware.
It wasn't too long ago that the top of the line chip was $200, the day after
it was released. The same thing goes for video cards. My 128MB GeForce
card was top of the line 3 years ago at $300. Now high end cards can go
for >$1000.
-Chris
"AA" <AA@nospam.web> wrote:
>
>
>AMD Athlon 64 FX60 1GHz FSB Socket 939 Dual Core Processor - Retail
>· 2.6GHz
>· 90 nm Toledo
>· 2 x 1MB L2 Cache
>
>Your Price $1399
>Just Release! In Stock and Ready to ShipAll you need is a quad socket 939 mainboard and you're good to go!! ;-)
David.
AA wrote:
> AMD Athlon 64 FX60 1GHz FSB Socket 939 Dual Core Processor - Retail
> · 2.6GHz
> · 90 nm Toledo
> · 2 x 1MB L2 Cache
>
> Your Price $1399
> Just Release! In Stock and Ready to ShipTurns out it was because in XP I installed the scherzo drivers the wrong
way. Instead of running setup.exe I pointed the driver to the vxds.
Bad boy !
Thanks,
John
Ed wrote:
> Usually means the computer isn't recognizing the EDS card. Try to re-seat
> it, or use a different PCI slot...
>
>
> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43c7a577@linux...
>
>>Anyone know? I'm playing with xp installs and did a new one last night
>>but did the wrong order so I gotta fix it tonight but I'm wondering what
>>that error means. Anyone ?
>
>
>Hmmmmm..........guys???..........major brain fart here, likely caused by
...........well.......nevermind what, I simply fucked up. This is actually
not possible to my knowlefdge without routing the track from the Paris
insert sends into a summing device. Using the auxes is just a dead end
because you would still have to patch the insert sends to L & R Paris auxes
and since you can't sum patch points on the aux module, what's the use in
that?
Now back to the CR. Big mix to do, lots of acoustic instruments, with track
counts in low 20's for the most part..........14 songs and needs to be
finished in two weeks. This wouldn't be a problem except I have a day job
that is very busy these days and some evenings I'm just too fried to feel
like firing up the beast and going to work all night (though that's what's
happening right now).
If I think of a workaround for this, I'll post it up here.
Sorry...........false hope sucks........I know.
Deej
tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote in message news:43c83675$1@linux...
> Hi DJ...please tell us all how to do this....
> "> >
> > >You could use the Paris auxes to create stem mixes if you didn't want
to
> > fly
> > >16 individual tracks to an external mixer..
> > >
> > >;o)
> > >
> > >"Dominic" <bertstudio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:43c7bbe7$1@linux...
> > >>
> > >> Looking for help mixing with PARIS outside the box.
> > >> How do you have it set up? What I was originally thinking was
> > >> to "external out" each channel but that would only get me 8 outs.
> > >> I an running 2 EDS cards so what is was thinking was to 8 out on
> > >> one card and 8 out on the other, but I would think there would
> > >> be an easier way.
> > >>
> > >> Your advice would be greatly appreciated.
> > >> Thanx Dominic
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>This is a 'very' cool unit. The noise specs kinda killed me though it's
possible there was something wrong with the unit I played around a bit on.
AA
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43c7d275$1@linux...
>
> I've had both the pedal version and the rack mount. I wound up switching
> to
> the Moog for live and the native for recording.
>
> Another hardware unit to look at, Deej, though everyone will look at you
> funny and people around here might sniff, is the Electrix MoFX. Easy to
> work
> with as tap tempo delays and two in mono might be cool because you'd never
> tap them quite exactly the same tempo.
>
> TCB
>
> "Paul" <pn@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>Although they are no longer in production, I've been really happy with the
>>Line6 Echo pro rack unit. Should be able to find a used one on ebay. Many
>>different delays.
>>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>>The
>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>>to
>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
>>>great
>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
>>>there.
>>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>>
>>>thanky,
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>
>>
>Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating around
the web recently?
I think this could be his drummer!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421Hello folks,
I'm driving myself crazy trying to get Wavelab 4.0 to recognize the Paris
hardware in Win98se and have yet to succeed. As I mentioned in a post
earlier this week, at one time, I was using Paris to monitor Wavelab using
the updated ASIO drivers (the 40 kb one, not the later 64kb one), but not
now. My memory fails me as to when I first started having problems and I
have tried to undo everything that may have contributed to the lack of
communication between the two programs.
I noticed in my Multimedia Properties/Devices/Midi Devices and Instruments
Tab, that Paris Midi OUT states "Status: Driver is enabled but inactive due
to an unknown problem"
Could this be the problem with Wavelab's inability to to see the Paris
hardware?
Like I said, it once worked. And short of file corruption/replacement or a
hardware malfunction, I am clueless as to what could be the cause. I guess
it's time to start looking at other soundcards for Wavelab stuff.
Thanks for any input,
Edric"Edric" <seboriah@juno.com> wrote:
>Hello folks,
>I'm driving myself crazy trying to get Wavelab 4.0 to recognize the Paris
>hardware in Win98se and have yet to succeed. As I mentioned in a post
>earlier this week, at one time, I was using Paris to monitor Wavelab using
>the updated ASIO drivers (the 40 kb one, not the later 64kb one), but not
>now. My memory fails me as to when I first started having problems and I
>have tried to undo everything that may have contributed to the lack of
>communication between the two programs.
>
>I noticed in my Multimedia Properties/Devices/Midi Devices and Instruments
>Tab, that Paris Midi OUT states "Status: Driver is enabled but inactive
due
>to an unknown problem"
>
>Could this be the problem with Wavelab's inability to to see the Paris
>hardware?
>
>Like I said, it once worked. And short of file corruption/replacement or
a
>hardware malfunction, I am clueless as to what could be the cause. I guess
>it's time to start looking at other soundcards for Wavelab stuff.
>Thanks for any input,
>Edric
>
This was a long time ago for me so don’t hold me to it.
I think the trick was to:
1. Install only the original Paris ASIO driver.
2. Open WaveLab and pick the original Paris ASIO driver. (This worked but
with long latency.
3. Save any file from WaveLab.
4. Remove the old ASIO driver and install the updated ASIO driver.
5. Restart WaveLab.
gThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_05F3_01C6189E.74C00B00
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Man! Nice sounding set to boot.
Saaaaweeeeet ! ! !
"gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message =
news:43c8808c$1@linux...
Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating =
around
the web recently?
I think this could be his drummer!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3D158186772210402142 1
------=_NextPart_000_05F3_01C6189E.74C00B00
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>Man! Nice sounding set to =
boot.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Saaaaweeeeet ! ! !</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"gene lennon" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com">glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com</A>&g=
t;=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:43c8808c$1@linux">news:43c8808c$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>Reme=
mber=20
the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating =
around<BR>the web=20
recently?<BR>I think this could be his drummer!<BR><BR><A=20
=
href=3D" http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3D158186772210402142 1">ht=
tp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3D1581867722104021421</A><BR></BLOC=
KQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_05F3_01C6189E.74C00B00--holy krupa....
Tom Bruhl wrote:
> Man! Nice sounding set to boot.
>
> Saaaaweeeeet ! ! !
>
> "gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com
> <mailto:glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com>> wrote in message
> news:43c8808c$1@linux...
>
> Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist
> floating around
> the web recently?
> I think this could be his drummer!
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421OMG!!! Wow!
"gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating around
>the web recently?
>I think this could be his drummer!
>
>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421
>Well, I was right... it didn't recognize the EDS card... lol.
Glad ya got it working... I am currently acquiring a copy (purchase) of
Studio To Go! I read an article of this full studio, I think in the mid
west somewhere, that completely nix'd their pro-tools and windows software
and converted everything to Linux, using these programs and apparently they
are doing just fine. So I want to get a copy (this runs off a CD, so no
uninstall of windows is necessary).. put it on my laptop and play with it...
Of course Linux is true muti-tasking and I hope these people keep up the
support for linux, because it is the way to go. This is a tweaked Debian
they say... and it has a lot of good reviews.
http://www.ferventsoftware.com/
If anyone is interested.
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43c8526b@linux...
> Turns out it was because in XP I installed the scherzo drivers the wrong
> way. Instead of running setup.exe I pointed the driver to the vxds.
> Bad boy !
> Thanks,
> John
>
> Ed wrote:
> > Usually means the computer isn't recognizing the EDS card. Try to
re-seat
> > it, or use a different PCI slot...
> >
> >
> > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43c7a577@linux...
> >
> >>Anyone know? I'm playing with xp installs and did a new one last night
> >>but did the wrong order so I gotta fix it tonight but I'm wondering what
> >>that error means. Anyone ?
> >
> >
> >Those kids could never be in the same band. The drummer plays with too much
feeling :-) OMG!
"gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating around
>the web recently?
>I think this could be his drummer!
>
>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421
>He can play Chick Webb in the movie, about the right size. He may have to
tone his skills down a bit though. That kid is going to be President one
day.
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>OMG!!! Wow!
>
>
>"gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>
>>Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating around
>>the web recently?
>>I think this could be his drummer!
>>
>>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421
>>
>I also have not quite understood ASIO...Must PARIS be up and running for
another app to recognize PARIS inputs thru ASIO ??.....
"Edric" <seboriah@juno.com> wrote in message news:43c883d6@linux...
> Hello folks,
> I'm driving myself crazy trying to get Wavelab 4.0 to recognize the Paris
> hardware in Win98se and have yet to succeed. As I mentioned in a post
> earlier this week, at one time, I was using Paris to monitor Wavelab using
> the updated ASIO drivers (the 40 kb one, not the later 64kb one), but not
> now. My memory fails me as to when I first started having problems and I
> have tried to undo everything that may have contributed to the lack of
> communication between the two programs.
>
> I noticed in my Multimedia Properties/Devices/Midi Devices and Instruments
> Tab, that Paris Midi OUT states "Status: Driver is enabled but inactive
due
> to an unknown problem"
>
> Could this be the problem with Wavelab's inability to to see the Paris
> hardware?
>
> Like I said, it once worked. And short of file corruption/replacement or a
> hardware malfunction, I am clueless as to what could be the cause. I guess
> it's time to start looking at other soundcards for Wavelab stuff.
> Thanks for any input,
> Edric
>
>I was checking out Sound on Sound recently and noticed that they have tons
of useful information on various sequencer packages: Cubase, Logic, DP
etc... You folks are probably already aware of this digital chocolate box.
But, for those that aren't: http://www.soundonsound.com/articles.
The links are in a little green box down the right side of the page.
I was reading quite a few of the Logic articles. While I found lots of
helpful Logic tips, the articles contained great info on recording and
mixing "in general." You'll need to subscribe to read the latest articles,
but material that is at least eight months old is "free." Pretty tasty.
MRhey rod,
love my STT-1. use it pretty much as my go to pre. sounds great on bass,
vocals, percussion, room mic and just about everything you put through it.
probably the best thing is, their customer service is exceptional. you have
a problem, call them up and your talking to the guy who built the thing,
really nice guys.
if you have a colored pre, then this will fit in perfect.
michael bliss
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>Anybody have one of these??? Opinions??
>RodVery tasty playing. And smart enough to be wearing ear protectors.
Cheers
-Jamie
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61969 is a reply to message #61968] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 17:31 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
gene lennon wrote:
> Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating around
> the web recently?
> I think this could be his drummer!
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421
>OMG, how do you find this stuff? Would you mind posting this information
more regularly. I realize now that I suffer from MPS. Truth be told, I am
capable of spontaneously mimicking a small white rabbit with big teeth. Its
like a tic.
MR
"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
news:43c80c3c$1@linux...
>
> Speaking of MPS...
>
> http://www.blogjam.com/neil_armstrong/
>
>
>
> "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote:
> >
> >Terminal MPS here...:)
> >
> >
> >"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
> >>Justin,
> >>
> >>Normal people, like you, are born with an "Incredibly Stupid Stuff
> >>Inhibition" lobe in their brains. Some of us, unfortunately, are lacking
> >
> >>this area and have a condition known as "Monty Python Syndrome". Those
> of
> >us
> >>living with MPS find this kind of stuff hilarious, where normal people
> just
> >
> >>think it's, well . . . stupid. ;>)
> >>
> >>Tony
> >>
> >>
> >>"justcron" <pachinko@hydrorecords.com> wrote in message
> >>news:43c7028b@linux...
> >>>I must have no sense of humor cuz I didn't find one of em funny... I'm
> >
> >>>such a lamer.
> >>>
> >>> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:43c6dd2d@linux...
> >>>> Now THAT was !@#$%* hilarious!!
> >>>> Thanks for the laughs.
> >>>> MR
> >>>>
> >>>> "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:43c6b940$1@linux...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>Wow! Amazing! He'll have a stellar career for sure.
On 1/13/06 10:39 PM, in article 43c8808c$1@linux, "gene lennon"
<glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
> Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating around
> the web recently?
> I think this could be his drummer!
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421
>I agree. This kid is a natural human being.......the other kid seemed more
machine-like..but hey, he's still just a kid. Still, I remember when
Charlie Sexton was burning it up back in the late 70's. Little guy, big
talent, big chops, but with finesse.
;o)
"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote in message news:43c91a1c$1@linux...
>
> Those kids could never be in the same band. The drummer plays with too
much
> feeling :-) OMG!
>
> "gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
> >
> >Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating
around
> >the web recently?
> >I think this could be his drummer!
> >
> >http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421
> >
>Nice catch Gene, totally enjoyed watching that kid. Inspiring to see.
AA
"gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:43c8808c$1@linux...
>
> Remember the video of the 12-year-old monster rock guitarist floating
> around
> the web recently?
> I think this could be his drummer!
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1581867722104021421
>I don't mean to come off as hard, but using the Paris hardward( if you get
it to work) does not get you the Paris sound. To be honest, the sound is
very generic at best..
Just save yourselve's a lot of grief and get you Asio/MME audio card to use
with Wavelab.
LAMont
"tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote:
>I also have not quite understood ASIO...Must PARIS be up and running for
>another app to recognize PARIS inputs thru ASIO ??.....
>"Edric" <seboriah@juno.com> wrote in message news:43c883d6@linux...
>> Hello folks,
>> I'm driving myself crazy trying to get Wavelab 4.0 to recognize the Paris
>> hardware in Win98se and have yet to succeed. As I mentioned in a post
>> earlier this week, at one time, I was using Paris to monitor Wavelab using
>> the updated ASIO drivers (the 40 kb one, not the later 64kb one), but
not
>> now. My memory fails me as to when I first started having problems and
I
>> have tried to undo everything that may have contributed to the lack of
>> communication between the two programs.
>>
>> I noticed in my Multimedia Properties/Devices/Midi Devices and Instruments
>> Tab, that Paris Midi OUT states "Status: Driver is enabled but inactive
>due
>> to an unknown problem"
>>
>> Could this be the problem with Wavelab's inability to to see the Paris
>> hardware?
>>
>> Like I said, it once worked. And short of file corruption/replacement
or a
>> hardware malfunction, I am clueless as to what could be the cause. I guess
>> it's time to start looking at other soundcards for Wavelab stuff.
>> Thanks for any input,
>> Edric
>>
>>
>
>Man, he borders on the mythic.
MR
"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message news:43c7366c@linux...
> I've personally frozen a good amount of them, and it works. On the other
> hand, I watched Tank wrangle an unruly drive by bending it (!!) over the
> edge of a counter when it didn't want to boot... 'while' it was spinning
> up.. and then it booted. Sickest thing I've ever seen done to a drive, LOL
!
> AA
>
>
> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:43c6d9db@linux...
> > Hay Aaron,
> > Thanks man, I was thinking I might give the freezer cure a try -but I
> > hadn't
> > heard the part about the bags -makes good sense. I was reading about
> > folks
> > dropping drives from some prescibed distance. But somehow, freezing
seems
> > slightly more genteel :-)
> > MR
> >
> >
> > "Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
> > news:43c5e62e@linux...
> >> Mike,
> >> If you still have those drives, stuff them in the freezer in sleds for
an
> >> hour. Put some silica gel bags on them to keep out moisture. Take them
> >> straight from the freezer to the PC, see what you might be able to
> > salvage.
> >> If the bearings are giving out, this will give you a window to nab some
> > data
> >> back.
> >> Rinse, repeat as needed until the drive gives out.
> >>
> >> AA
> >>
> >>
> >> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:43c58240@linux...
> >> > I'm sorry I can't be of much help. Several months ago I "lost" 2
80gb
> >> > MAXTOR drives. I'm pretty sure its a hardware issue (though if I'm
> > wrong
> >> > I
> >> > may try the software David recommended.) I just wanted to let you
know
> >> > that
> >> > my thoughts are with you. Its a major domo drag.
> >> > May the road rise up to me you.
> >> > MR
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:43c55fcf$1@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> Was working on a project last night and Paris kinda crashed with a
> >> > "failure
> >> >> to calculate overview" and when I tried to save, got a disk read
> >> >> error.
> >> >>
> >> >> I rebooted and now it asks if I want for format the drive, that it
is
> >> > unformatted.
> >> >>
> >> >> A pretty recent WD 80 gig with light use. I really need some stuff
> >> >> off
> >> > it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Ideas????
> >> >>
> >> >> TIA
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>The Time works 2290 is my favorite, followed by Waves Super Tap,Paris's Long
Delay and Tap Delay are very cool as well..
LaMont
"Jorsi" <studios@greennet.gl> wrote:
>I really like TC 2290
>
>Jorsi
>
>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> skrev i en meddelelse
>news:43c7c55f$1@linux...
>> I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>> multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>> The
>> Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>> to
>> the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
>> great
>> with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>> MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>> about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>> good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>> difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
>> there.
>> I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>
>> thanky,
>>
>> Deej
>>
>>
>
>Dang, the whole reason I bought Paris was so I could mix in the box...:)
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Hmmmmm..........guys???..........major brain fart here, likely caused by
>..........well.......nevermind what, I simply fucked up. This is actually
>not possible to my knowlefdge without routing the track from the Paris
>insert sends into a summing device. Using the auxes is just a dead end
>because you would still have to patch the insert sends to L & R Paris auxes
>and since you can't sum patch points on the aux module, what's the use in
>that?
>
>Now back to the CR. Big mix to do, lots of acoustic instruments, with track
>counts in low 20's for the most part..........14 songs and needs to be
>finished in two weeks. This wouldn't be a problem except I have a day job
>that is very busy these days and some evenings I'm just too fried to feel
>like firing up the beast and going to work all night (though that's what's
>happening right now).
>
>If I think of a workaround for this, I'll post it up here.
>Sorry...........false hope sucks........I know.
>
>Deej
>
>
>
>tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote in message news:43c83675$1@linux...
>> Hi DJ...please tell us all how to do this....
>> "> >
>> > >You could use the Paris auxes to create stem mixes if you didn't want
>to
>> > fly
>> > >16 individual tracks to an external mixer..
>> > >
>> > >;o)
>> > >
>> > >"Dominic" <bertstudio@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:43c7bbe7$1@linux...
>> > >>
>> > >> Looking for help mixing with PARIS outside the box.
>> > >> How do you have it set up? What I was originally thinking was
>> > >> to "external out" each channel but that would only get me 8 outs.
>> > >> I an running 2 EDS cards so what is was thinking was to 8 out on
>> > >> one card and 8 out on the other, but I would think there would
>> > >> be an easier way.
>> > >>
>> > >> Your advice would be greatly appreciated.
>> > >> Thanx Dominic
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>Hey Chris,
The modulation source in the 84 can be either the mulit-shape LFO (like),
the envolope follower, or both. Envelope followers take the strength of the
incoming signal and use it as a mod source. So, for example, delay feedback
could be less for louder signals or filter resonance could be greater on
louder singals. It's a pretty intuitive mod source once you've used it a
bit.
TCB
"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>
>Thad, I don't quite understand what you mean here:
>
>"Then, be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that
>can take modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop
>follower?"
>
>Could you explain more? Mind, you, I am a very vanilla guy when it comes
>to delays. That why I was asking. I generally use any old host-app delay
>for clean stuff, and my rack mount DOD R-880 analog for dirtier, darker,
>vibier stuff. I too used to own a vintage tube echoplex, but couldn't justify
>the clunkiness and hassle for what I was getting.
>
>-Chris
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>#1 is sonics for sure. I'll tolerate a lot of hassle for good sonics. Every
>>now and then I still hook up an impedence changer and run a track through
>>my Moog delay which is grittier than a lot of well maintained tape delays.
>>#2 would be the rough category of "usability" which for analog gear is
mostly
>>about how easy it is to patch things in and so forth. That's only because
>>I'm lazy and will not use gear that's difficult to deal with most of the
>>time, above-mentioned Moog situations notwithstanding. However, a Space
>Echo
>>is so noisy and so picky that it gets frustrating after a while.
>>
>>Mind you, when I pick a delay I want it to have a sound. When I hear a
ducked
>>stereo delay with one side at sixteenths and one at quarters I scream,
"Ack,
>>barf, *&#*@(*! it sounds like a *&#*@#( Larry Carlton record from 1986!
>Turn
>>that #*&(@*(&ing thing off now before I throw something." To me a great
>delay
>>is one that adds to the sound above and beyond just being repeats. Check
>>out a Scientest Wins the World Cup if you want to hear more of what I'm
>talking
>>about.
>>
>>What makes the PSP 84 (the primary one I use) so amazing is that it kills
>>on every category. The delay itself sound "clean but analog" when vanilla,
>>like maybe an Akai rackmount unit that's clean and well maintained. Delay
>>time will sync to the host if you want and can be set to pretty odd meters
>>if you want, so it's not just straight eights and such. Then, it has a
switchable
>>filter (hp, bp, lp) that can, oh the simple genius of it, be applied to
>the
>>whold signal path, the effected signal path, or the feedback loop. Then,
>>be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that can
>take
>>modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop follower?
>>You're kidding, right? I mean, if the Russians would have had this delay
>>in 1950 we'd be choking down cheap vodka and calling each other "comrade"
>>today, right? But I'm not even done. There's a drive knob to make things
>>dirtier if you want and a usable if unspectacular reverb. Finally, and
this
>>should have appeard earlier, it *acts* like an analog delay. Turn up the
>>feedback really high and it builds up noise in the feedback loop. Set a
>high
>>pass filter with LFO mod in it and the filter resonance builds up in the
>>loop as well. change the filter to LP in real time and you have what amounts
>>to a synth sound created by a mod matrix, noise generator, and a filter.
>>All of this and it can also be a very nice simple great sounding host synced
>>delay? Damned impressive if you ask me.
>>
>>That answer the question? The Moog is amazing in a guitar rig as well.
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>
>>>Thad, what are the characteristics that make or break a delay for you?
>>>
>>>-Chris
>>>
>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Get the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become a
serious
>>>>delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs, various
>>>>emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only
ones
>>>>to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and the
>>>PSPs.
>>>>I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that
>I
>>>could
>>>>get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
>>>>
>>>>TCB
>>>>
>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to soundstage
>>>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass here.
>>>>The
>>>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a reverb
>>>>to
>>>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
>>great
>>>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old sony
>>>>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm thinking
>>>>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a pretty
>>>>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>>>>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
>>there.
>>>>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>>thanky,
>>>>>
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Nuendo (and SX) needs a soundcard - asio compliant. I normally use the Paris
asio driver when I'm using Nuendo as I only do mixes and edits, as the
latency is pretty high ( I record in Paris). This is a problem when using
Nuendo and Paris together obviously. So for this excercise I just used a
generic asio driver with the onboard soundcard to run Nuendo - hey it
worked, but I now that I've 'proved' the idea I'm going to get either a
Tascam FW1884 to run with Nuendo ( and then Wormhole to Paris) or one of the
M-Audio roducts so that I have an option to bring in Protools sessions and
remain compatible with the rest of the world - something I find a need for
more and more lately.
To answer your question specifically - yes there are no external audio or
digital connections using Wormhole - just open up the 2 programs, setup as
many instances of the plug in each program as you need and you're good to
go. Note: you must run 'silent' tracks of audio in Paris to receive signal -
don't know why - just following Dimitrios' directions.
Cheers,
David.
"Pete Ruthenburg" <ruthenburg@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:43c7c308$1@linux...
>
> Thanks much for the info David.I haven't gotten into Wormhole yet
> ,but I plan to checl it out.So using wormhole your not using a
> souncard of some kind for Nuendo into Paris,is that correct?Your
> just doing it in the computer?
>
> Thanks again,
> Pete
>
> "espresso" <audio@espressodigital.com> wrote:
> >I've just got around to installing wormhole2 on my machine and can report
>
> >that running Nuendo and Paris together seems to be a workable solution to
>
> >Nuendo (Steinberg) functionality plus Paris sound. I have tested with a
> full
> >32 ch Nuendo mix with many many plugs including UAD stuff and sending via
> 8
> >groups to Paris. It definitely works. I'm thinking the more channels into
>
> >Paris - the merrier - so still have to see what the outer limits are. My
>
> >machine (XP) is a P4 3.2g on ASUS mb.
> >Note - I'm not trying to run the 2 programs in sync (yet - I imagine
there
>
> >are large latency issues) just trying to get Paris sound out of Nuendo.
> >
> >David.
> >
> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
> >news:43c73721$1@linux...
> >>I can tell you that Vegas 4 won't do it :)
> >> BSOD every time, I gave it up after a while and just sync'd one of the
>
> >> other 10 or so PC's I had laying around at the time.
> >> AA
> >>
> >>
> >> "Chas. Duncan" <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote in message
> >> news:cn9ds1l7ku0mjs36duia58a4cevvl39kj3@4ax.com...
> >>>
> >>> I did this for several years, as did many others... I ran Cubase out
> >>> to an RME card slaved to incoming ADAT timecode from Paris... Worked
> >>> okay for a while -- and this was on an 800Mhz Athlon with maybe 256
> >>> RAM... I'm sure you could work something out -- you'll need an extra
> >>> soundcard in there, obviously... I mean, something other than Paris.
> >>> Then you pipe the output back to your MEC in whatever form --S'Pdif,
> >>> adat, analogue, whatever -- for monitoring in Paris. I never tried
> >>> this on one computer under XP, by the way. Probably would be at least
> >>> as good or better. My set-up now is Paris on 98SE sending ADAT sync
> >>> to another computer running Cubase SX3 (under XP, of course)... Works
> >>> okay for my needs these days.
> >>>
> >>> Short answer is -- yes. (but the long answer is at least...
> >>> longer...)
> >>>
> >>> -- good luck -- Chas
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 13 Jan 2006
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61974 is a reply to message #61966] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 19:07 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
suggestions what would be a good quality (and low-cost,
> if that exists anywhere) soundcard with converters on par with the Paris
> converters?
>
> Thanks again,
> Edric
> Edric <seboriah@juno.com> wrote in message news:43c883d6@linux...
>
>>Hello folks,
>>I'm driving myself crazy trying to get Wavelab 4.0 to recognize the Paris
>>hardware in Win98se and have yet to succeed. As I mentioned in a post
>>earlier this week, at one time, I was using Paris to monitor Wavelab using
>>the updated ASIO drivers (the 40 kb one, not the later 64kb one), but not
>>now. My memory fails me as to when I first started having problems and I
>>have tried to undo everything that may have contributed to the lack of
>>communication between the two programs.
>>
>>I noticed in my Multimedia Properties/Devices/Midi Devices and Instruments
>>Tab, that Paris Midi OUT states "Status: Driver is enabled but inactive
>
> due
>
>>to an unknown problem"
>>
>>Could this be the problem with Wavelab's inability to to see the Paris
>>hardware?
>>
>>Like I said, it once worked. And short of file corruption/replacement or a
>>hardware malfunction, I am clueless as to what could be the cause. I guess
>>it's time to start looking at other soundcards for Wavelab stuff.
>>Thanks for any input,
>>Edric
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762Ugg,
I heard a little stiry on NPR the other day on how Nikon would be phasing
out
film cameras buy the end of the year, made me think how close that is to
the audio world.
One photographer in the story compared digtial to writing a letterusing a
ball point pen and film would be like using a fountain pen. I kind of liek
the comparison. Actually he was saying how digital was great for many uses,
getting news photos in to print ASAP an what not, but that film was still
better for more artistic ventures.
I looked on the NPR site but could not find the story.Try the EMU 0404
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Edric" <seboriah@juno.com> wrote in message news:43c9c587@linux...
> Thanks for the replies.
> Gene, Actually my problem is getting Paris hardware to show up in the
> Wavelab Preferences dialog box. I'll give what you said a try,
> nevertheless.
> Thanks.
>
> Tonehouse,
> In my experience in the past, you do not have to have Paris running for
> Wavelab to use the MEC outputs. In fact, I don't think can use both
> applications running at the same time.
>
> Lamont,
> I agree with you about just throwing in the towel and buying another card.
> To be honest, the only reason I'm trying to get Paris to work with Wavelab
> again is to save myself a few bucks and not buy another card.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions what would be a good quality (and
> low-cost,
> if that exists anywhere) soundcard with converters on par with the Paris
> converters?
>
> Thanks again,
> Edric
> Edric <seboriah@juno.com> wrote in message news:43c883d6@linux...
>> Hello folks,
>> I'm driving myself crazy trying to get Wavelab 4.0 to recognize the Paris
>> hardware in Win98se and have yet to succeed. As I mentioned in a post
>> earlier this week, at one time, I was using Paris to monitor Wavelab
>> using
>> the updated ASIO drivers (the 40 kb one, not the later 64kb one), but not
>> now. My memory fails me as to when I first started having problems and I
>> have tried to undo everything that may have contributed to the lack of
>> communication between the two programs.
>>
>> I noticed in my Multimedia Properties/Devices/Midi Devices and
>> Instruments
>> Tab, that Paris Midi OUT states "Status: Driver is enabled but inactive
> due
>> to an unknown problem"
>>
>> Could this be the problem with Wavelab's inability to to see the Paris
>> hardware?
>>
>> Like I said, it once worked. And short of file corruption/replacement or
>> a
>> hardware malfunction, I am clueless as to what could be the cause. I
>> guess
>> it's time to start looking at other soundcards for Wavelab stuff.
>> Thanks for any input,
>> Edric
>>
>>
>
>I saw a similar story, but they, (Nikon), said they were still going to
manufacture the high end cameras.
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.co
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61975 is a reply to message #61969] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 19:14 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
m> wrote in message
news:43c9e88b$1@linux...
>
> Ugg,
> I heard a little stiry on NPR the other day on how Nikon would be phasing
> out
> film cameras buy the end of the year, made me think how close that is to
> the audio world.
> One photographer in the story compared digtial to writing a letterusing a
> ball point pen and film would be like using a fountain pen. I kind of liek
> the comparison. Actually he was saying how digital was great for many
> uses,
> getting news photos in to print ASAP an what not, but that film was still
> better for more artistic ventures.
>
> I looked on the NPR site but could not find the story.
>I see PSP have a new plugin called PSP 608 MultiDelay. Have someone tested
it?
Erling
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> skrev i melding news:43c97ec6$1@linux...
>
> Hey Chris,
>
> The modulation source in the 84 can be either the mulit-shape LFO (like),
> the envolope follower, or both. Envelope followers take the strength of
> the
> incoming signal and use it as a mod source. So, for example, delay
> feedback
> could be less for louder signals or filter resonance could be greater on
> louder singals. It's a pretty intuitive mod source once you've used it a
> bit.
>
> TCB
>
> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>
>>Thad, I don't quite understand what you mean here:
>>
>>"Then, be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that
>>can take modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop
>>follower?"
>>
>>Could you explain more? Mind, you, I am a very vanilla guy when it comes
>>to delays. That why I was asking. I generally use any old host-app delay
>>for clean stuff, and my rack mount DOD R-880 analog for dirtier, darker,
>>vibier stuff. I too used to own a vintage tube echoplex, but couldn't
>>justify
>>the clunkiness and hassle for what I was getting.
>>
>>-Chris
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>#1 is sonics for sure. I'll tolerate a lot of hassle for good sonics.
>>>Every
>>>now and then I still hook up an impedence changer and run a track through
>>>my Moog delay which is grittier than a lot of well maintained tape
>>>delays.
>>>#2 would be the rough category of "usability" which for analog gear is
> mostly
>>>about how easy it is to patch things in and so forth. That's only because
>>>I'm lazy and will not use gear that's difficult to deal with most of the
>>>time, above-mentioned Moog situations notwithstanding. However, a Space
>>Echo
>>>is so noisy and so picky that it gets frustrating after a while.
>>>
>>>Mind you, when I pick a delay I want it to have a sound. When I hear a
> ducked
>>>stereo delay with one side at sixteenths and one at quarters I scream,
> "Ack,
>>>barf, *&#*@(*! it sounds like a *&#*@#( Larry Carlton record from 1986!
>>Turn
>>>that #*&(@*(&ing thing off now before I throw something." To me a great
>>delay
>>>is one that adds to the sound above and beyond just being repeats. Check
>>>out a Scientest Wins the World Cup if you want to hear more of what I'm
>>talking
>>>about.
>>>
>>>What makes the PSP 84 (the primary one I use) so amazing is that it kills
>>>on every category. The delay itself sound "clean but analog" when
>>>vanilla,
>>>like maybe an Akai rackmount unit that's clean and well maintained. Delay
>>>time will sync to the host if you want and can be set to pretty odd
>>>meters
>>>if you want, so it's not just straight eights and such. Then, it has a
> switchable
>>>filter (hp, bp, lp) that can, oh the simple genius of it, be applied to
>>the
>>>whold signal path, the effected signal path, or the feedback loop. Then,
>>>be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that can
>>take
>>>modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop
>>>follower?
>>>You're kidding, right? I mean, if the Russians would have had this delay
>>>in 1950 we'd be choking down cheap vodka and calling each other "comrade"
>>>today, right? But I'm not even done. There's a drive knob to make things
>>>dirtier if you want and a usable if unspectacular reverb. Finally, and
> this
>>>should have appeard earlier, it *acts* like an analog delay. Turn up the
>>>feedback really high and it builds up noise in the feedback loop. Set a
>>high
>>>pass filter with LFO mod in it and the filter resonance builds up in the
>>>loop as well. change the filter to LP in real time and you have what
>>>amounts
>>>to a synth sound created by a mod matrix, noise generator, and a filter.
>>>All of this and it can also be a very nice simple great sounding host
>>>synced
>>>delay? Damned impressive if you ask me.
>>>
>>>That answer the question? The Moog is amazing in a guitar rig as well.
>
>>>
>>>TCB
>>>
>>>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Thad, what are the characteristics that make or break a delay for you?
>>>>
>>>>-Chris
>>>>
>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Get the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become a
> serious
>>>>>delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs,
>>>>>various
>>>>>emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only
> ones
>>>>>to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and the
>>>>PSPs.
>>>>>I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that
>>I
>>>>could
>>>>>get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>>
>>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to
>>>>>>soundstage
>>>>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass
>>>>>>here.
>>>>>The
>>>>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a
>>>>>>reverb
>>>>>to
>>>>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
>>>great
>>>>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old
>>>>>>sony
>>>>>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm
>>>>>>thinking
>>>>>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a
>>>>>>pretty
>>>>>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's the
>>>>>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are out
>>>there.
>>>>>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>thanky,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Cool delay to be sure, but not much like the PSP84. More of a clean and complex
multi-tap. Very nice though.
TCB
> wrote:
>I see PSP have a new plugin called PSP 608 MultiDelay. Have someone tested
>it?
>
>Erling
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> skrev i melding news:43c97ec6$1@linux...
>>
>> Hey Chris,
>>
>> The modulation source in the 84 can be either the mulit-shape LFO (like),
>> the envolope follower, or both. Envelope followers take the strength of
>> the
>> incoming signal and use it as a mod source. So, for example, delay
>> feedback
>> could be less for louder signals or filter resonance could be greater
on
>> louder singals. It's a pretty intuitive mod source once you've used it
a
>> bit.
>>
>> TCB
>>
>> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>
>>>Thad, I don't quite understand what you mean here:
>>>
>>>"Then, be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix
that
>>>can take modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop
>>>follower?"
>>>
>>>Could you explain more? Mind, you, I am a very vanilla guy when it comes
>>>to delays. That why I was asking. I generally use any old host-app delay
>>>for clean stuff, and my rack mount DOD R-880 analog for dirtier, darker,
>>>vibier stuff. I too used to own a vintage tube echoplex, but couldn't
>>>justify
>>>the clunkiness and hassle for what I was getting.
>>>
>>>-Chris
>>>
>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>#1 is sonics for sure. I'll tolerate a lot of hassle for good sonics.
>>>>Every
>>>>now and then I still hook up an impedence changer and run a track through
>>>>my Moog delay which is grittier than a lot of well maintained tape
>>>>delays.
>>>>#2 would be the rough category of "usability" which for analog gear is
>> mostly
>>>>about how easy it is to patch things in and so forth. That's only because
>>>>I'm lazy and will not use gear that's difficult to deal with most of
the
>>>>time, above-mentioned Moog situations notwithstanding. However, a Space
>>>Echo
>>>>is so noisy and so picky that it gets frustrating after a while.
>>>>
>>>>Mind you, when I pick a delay I want it to have a sound. When I hear
a
>> ducked
>>>>stereo delay with one side at sixteenths and one at quarters I scream,
>> "Ack,
>>>>barf, *&#*@(*! it sounds like a *&#*@#( Larry Carlton record from 1986!
>>>Turn
>>>>that #*&(@*(&ing thing off now before I throw something." To me a great
>>>delay
>>>>is one that adds to the sound above and beyond just being repeats. Check
>>>>out a Scientest Wins the World Cup if you want to hear more of what I'm
>>>talking
>>>>about.
>>>>
>>>>What makes the PSP 84 (the primary one I use) so amazing is that it kills
>>>>on every category. The delay itself sound "clean but analog" when
>>>>vanilla,
>>>>like maybe an Akai rackmount unit that's clean and well maintained. Delay
>>>>time will sync to the host if you want and can be set to pretty odd
>>>>meters
>>>>if you want, so it's not just straight eights and such. Then, it has
a
>> switchable
>>>>filter (hp, bp, lp) that can, oh the simple genius of it, be applied
to
>>>the
>>>>whold signal path, the effected signal path, or the feedback loop. Then,
>>>>be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that can
>>>take
>>>>modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop
>>>>follower?
>>>>You're kidding, right? I mean, if the Russians would have had this delay
>>>>in 1950 we'd be choking down cheap vodka and calling each other "comrade"
>>>>today, right? But I'm not even done. There's a drive knob to make things
>>>>dirtier if you want and a usable if unspectacular reverb. Finally, and
>> this
>>>>should have appeard earlier, it *acts* like an analog delay. Turn up
the
>>>>feedback really high and it builds up noise in the feedback loop. Set
a
>>>high
>>>>pass filter with LFO mod in it and the filter resonance builds up in
the
>>>>loop as well. change the filter to LP in real time and you have what
>>>>amounts
>>>>to a synth sound created by a mod matrix, noise generator, and a filter.
>>>>All of this and it can also be a very nice simple great sounding host
>>>>synced
>>>>delay? Damned impressive if you ask me.
>>>>
>>>>That answer the question? The Moog is amazing in a guitar rig as well.
>>
>>>>
>>>>TCB
>>>>
>>>>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Thad, what are the characteristics that make or break a delay for you?
>>>>>
>>>>>-Chris
>>>>>
>>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Get the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become
a
>> serious
>>>>>>delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs,
>>>>>>various
>>>>>>emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only
>> ones
>>>>>>to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and
the
>>>>>PSPs.
>>>>>>I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that
>>>I
>>>>>could
>>>>>>get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to
>>>>>>>soundstage
>>>>>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass
>>>>>>>here.
>>>>>>The
>>>>>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a
>>>>>>>reverb
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do sound
>>>>great
>>>>>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old
>>>>>>>sony
>>>>>>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm
>>>>>>>thinking
>>>>>>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a
>>>>>>>pretty
>>>>>>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's
the
>>>>>>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are
out
>>>>there.
>>>>>>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>thanky,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has no
pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699) &
Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other than
Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that served
the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was revolutionary.
AND That's the point..
Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that naitive's
are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even more,
it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to Pro
standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to an
PT HD system.
There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap between
PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
-The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer. This
would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their SX-1
was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based DAW,
we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer faster
Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough already..I
say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing up
a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they sink
another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it that
Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is ,
PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were them,
I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market of
Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your current
offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say 3-15k
would do it..
Okay end of rant..LaMontI dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs are
so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
faster?
The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
There's no real cure for that. :^)
It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five year
wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into more
laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
Intel, pick your best time for the transition.
If you want to make music using OSX right away there are plenty of PPC
choices that work today, all the way up to the quad PowerMac which has
more muscle than you probably need. Available now and they'll continue
to work after the Intel transition.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
LaMont wrote:
> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>
> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has no
> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>
> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699) &
> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other than
> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>
> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that served
> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was revolutionary.
> AND That's the point..
>
> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that naitive's
> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even more,
> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to Pro
> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to an
> PT HD system.
> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap between
> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>
> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer. This
> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their SX-1
> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>
> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based DAW,
> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer faster
> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough already..I
> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>
>
> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing up
> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they sink
> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it that
> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is ,
> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>
>
> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were them,
> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>
> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market of
> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your current
> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say 3-15k
> would do it..
> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>Hi LaMont,
I've wondered about this, too. It seems that any company that has tried
this has failed to some extent, either in marketing the product or
bringing it to full capability (um, I think Emu-soniq failed on both
accounts). I'm scraping my brain to recall other efforts (Creamware?
Soundscape? One other that I can't remember).
I really liked the Paris concept...it was like working with a tape deck
with the capability of editing on a computer...probably one of the only
low-latency monitoring software solutions, and with a controller to
boot! Too bad that it wasn't developed further...could you imagine
Paris with mixers beyond 16 tracks, surround sound capability,
automation of everything, VST2/AU plug-in support, better file
management and midi capability like Logic, DP or Cubase? Wow!!
OTOH, I think we have it pretty good with these fast Macs/PC's.
Powercores and UAD cards are pretty nice, too.
I really don't see the Apple situation as a fiasco as much as it is
business as usual. Seems like Apple is always releasing something that
developers need time to react to (Can you say Audio Units? What..no
more floppy drives?). I'll just do what I've always done...sit back,
wait and enjoy the system that I have now.
-Michele Hobbs
LaMont wrote:
> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>
> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has no
> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>
> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699) &
> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other than
> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>
> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that served
> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was revolutionary.
> AND That's the point..
>
> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that naitive's
> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even more,
> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to Pro
> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to an
> PT HD system.
> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap between
> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>
> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer. This
> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their SX-1
> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>
> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based DAW,
> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer faster
> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough already..I
> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>
>
> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing up
> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they sink
> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it that
> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is ,
> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>
>
> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were them,
> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>
> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market of
> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your current
> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say 3-15k
> would do it..
> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>What about Creamware?
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:43c9fa54$1@linux...
>
> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>
> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has no
> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>
> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(69
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61978 is a reply to message #61959] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 22:22 |
Chris Wargo
Messages: 45
Registered: November 2005
|
Member |
|
|
the point..
>
> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
naitive's
> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
more,
> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to Pro
> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to an
> PT HD system.
> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap
between
> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>
> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the
capability
> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
This
> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
SX-1
> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>
> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based DAW,
> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer
faster
> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
already..I
> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress
again..:)
>
>
> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing up
> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
sink
> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it
that
> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is ,
> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>
>
> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little
software
> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
them,
> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>
> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market of
> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
current
> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
3-15k
> would do it..
> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>For me, it seems to be the ultimate delay-plugin after testing the demo a
bit.
Haven't tested the PSP84 yet, so I must have some testing with it too before
buying. I see, it's the same price on both.
Erling
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> skrev i melding news:43c9f779$1@linux...
>
> Cool delay to be sure, but not much like the PSP84. More of a clean and
> complex
> multi-tap. Very nice though.
>
> TCB
>
>> wrote:
>>I see PSP have a new plugin called PSP 608 MultiDelay. Have someone tested
>
>>it?
>>
>>Erling
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> skrev i melding news:43c97ec6$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Hey Chris,
>>>
>>> The modulation source in the 84 can be either the mulit-shape LFO
>>> (like),
>>> the envolope follower, or both. Envelope followers take the strength of
>
>>> the
>>> incoming signal and use it as a mod source. So, for example, delay
>>> feedback
>>> could be less for louder signals or filter resonance could be greater
> on
>>> louder singals. It's a pretty intuitive mod source once you've used it
> a
>>> bit.
>>>
>>> TCB
>>>
>>> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Thad, I don't quite understand what you mean here:
>>>>
>>>>"Then, be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix
> that
>>>>can take modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and
>>>>envelop
>>>>follower?"
>>>>
>>>>Could you explain more? Mind, you, I am a very vanilla guy when it
>>>>comes
>>>>to delays. That why I was asking. I generally use any old host-app
>>>>delay
>>>>for clean stuff, and my rack mount DOD R-880 analog for dirtier, darker,
>>>>vibier stuff. I too used to own a vintage tube echoplex, but couldn't
>
>>>>justify
>>>>the clunkiness and hassle for what I was getting.
>>>>
>>>>-Chris
>>>>
>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>#1 is sonics for sure. I'll tolerate a lot of hassle for good sonics.
>
>>>>>Every
>>>>>now and then I still hook up an impedence changer and run a track
>>>>>through
>>>>>my Moog delay which is grittier than a lot of well maintained tape
>>>>>delays.
>>>>>#2 would be the rough category of "usability" which for analog gear is
>>> mostly
>>>>>about how easy it is to patch things in and so forth. That's only
>>>>>because
>>>>>I'm lazy and will not use gear that's difficult to deal with most of
> the
>>>>>time, above-mentioned Moog situations notwithstanding. However, a Space
>>>>Echo
>>>>>is so noisy and so picky that it gets frustrating after a while.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mind you, when I pick a delay I want it to have a sound. When I hear
> a
>>> ducked
>>>>>stereo delay with one side at sixteenths and one at quarters I scream,
>>> "Ack,
>>>>>barf, *&#*@(*! it sounds like a *&#*@#( Larry Carlton record from 1986!
>>>>Turn
>>>>>that #*&(@*(&ing thing off now before I throw something." To me a great
>>>>delay
>>>>>is one that adds to the sound above and beyond just being repeats.
>>>>>Check
>>>>>out a Scientest Wins the World Cup if you want to hear more of what I'm
>>>>talking
>>>>>about.
>>>>>
>>>>>What makes the PSP 84 (the primary one I use) so amazing is that it
>>>>>kills
>>>>>on every category. The delay itself sound "clean but analog" when
>>>>>vanilla,
>>>>>like maybe an Akai rackmount unit that's clean and well maintained.
>>>>>Delay
>>>>>time will sync to the host if you want and can be set to pretty odd
>>>>>meters
>>>>>if you want, so it's not just straight eights and such. Then, it has
> a
>>> switchable
>>>>>filter (hp, bp, lp) that can, oh the simple genius of it, be applied
> to
>>>>the
>>>>>whold signal path, the effected signal path, or the feedback loop.
>>>>>Then,
>>>>>be still my already quickly beating heart, it has a mod matrix that can
>>>>take
>>>>>modulation from a mix of the (mutli-shape) LFO *and* and envelop
>>>>>follower?
>>>>>You're kidding, right? I mean, if the Russians would have had this
>>>>>delay
>>>>>in 1950 we'd be choking down cheap vodka and calling each other
>>>>>"comrade"
>>>>>today, right? But I'm not even done. There's a drive knob to make
>>>>>things
>>>>>dirtier if you want and a usable if unspectacular reverb. Finally, and
>>> this
>>>>>should have appeard earlier, it *acts* like an analog delay. Turn up
> the
>>>>>feedback really high and it builds up noise in the feedback loop. Set
> a
>>>>high
>>>>>pass filter with LFO mod in it and the filter resonance builds up in
> the
>>>>>loop as well. change the filter to LP in real time and you have what
>
>>>>>amounts
>>>>>to a synth sound created by a mod matrix, noise generator, and a
>>>>>filter.
>>>>>All of this and it can also be a very nice simple great sounding host
>
>>>>>synced
>>>>>delay? Damned impressive if you ask me.
>>>>>
>>>>>That answer the question? The Moog is amazing in a guitar rig as well.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>>
>>>>>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thad, what are the characteristics that make or break a delay for you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Get the PSP Audio delays. If you're as into dub as I am you become
> a
>>> serious
>>>>>>>delay snob. I've owned Echoplexes, Space Echoes, Akai rack analogs,
>
>>>>>>>various
>>>>>>>emulated analogs, no names I saw on Ebay, and a Moog pedal. The only
>>> ones
>>>>>>>to survive are the Moog pedal (for live playing with my guitar) and
> the
>>>>>>PSPs.
>>>>>>>I own the 42 and 84 and wish, oh wish and wish and wish and wish that
>>>>I
>>>>>>could
>>>>>>>get one into my live guitar rig without using a laptop.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>I've been experimenting with using mono delays on the auxes to
>>>>>>>>soundstage
>>>>>>>>multiple tracks in a mix. I'm really liking what's coming to pass
>
>>>>>>>>here.
>>>>>>>The
>>>>>>>>Paris delays work very nicely for this, but if I also am adding a
>
>>>>>>>>reverb
>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>the aux, I run out of DSP DPQ (thought the l\non-liner verbs do
>>>>>>>>sound
>>>>>great
>>>>>>>>with the mono delays for this purpose. Anyway, I can set up my old
>
>>>>>>>>sony
>>>>>>>>MU-R201 to function as a pair of independent mono delays.and I'm
>>>>>>>>thinking
>>>>>>>>about getting another analog delay. I see the Lexicon 41's FS at a
>
>>>>>>>>pretty
>>>>>>>>good price. I also see the Lexi 42's at a ridiculous price. What's
> the
>>>>>>>>difference in these two boxes and what other good delay boxes are
> out
>>>>>there.
>>>>>>>>I'm a newbie at this stuff.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>thanky,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>I have a bunch of DX and VST plugs some are M > S, some are S > S and
some have Mono in the label additionally. I'm crashing all the time
when I use them.
I often have mono channels I want to treat. Can I use both M > S and S
> S plugs on the mono channels or not? I'm trying to find the reason
for the crashes but don't know what is and isn't allowed. I also have
chainer and spinaudio wrapper. So what's the skinny? What works for
both Mono and Stereo scenarios please? THANKS
True or false?
Don't mix DX and VSTs on the same channel ?
Don't mix M>S and S>S(with stereo unchecked) vsts ?
Don't use S>S vsts with stereo unchecked ?Hey Lamont,
I think you hit it when you mentioned the Mackie or Yamaha integrated system
possibilities. Both these companies have the muscle to do big things. The
01X seems like the first step in that direction. And the DBX is way cool
with the UAD cards, but much pricier. WE should expect not a hardware based
DAW, but an integrated hard/software solution. That leaves room for
expansion and upgrades.
Too bad Samplitude (Magix) can't play with these big boys.
On the other hand if you become one of the analog summing converts, then it
all reverts back to the good old days with a mixer. Back in the '90s I
bought a 16 channel API mixer for $11,000 and parted it out, because noone
wanted a mixer that size. I would love to have that now. It would be the
perfect DAW mixer.
Bill
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:43c9fa54$1@linux...
>
> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>
> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has no
> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>
> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699) &
> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
> than
> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about
> Soundscape..
>
> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
> served
> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
> revolutionary.
> AND That's the point..
>
> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
> naitive's
> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
> more,
> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to Pro
> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to an
> PT HD system.
> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap
> between
> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>
> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the
> capability
> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editi
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61980 is a reply to message #61978] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 00:37 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
h.net> wrote in message news:43c9fa54$1@linux...
>>
>> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>
>> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has
no
>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>
>> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
&
>> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
>> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
>than
>> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about
>Soundscape..
>>
>> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
>served
>> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
>revolutionary.
>> AND That's the point..
>>
>> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
>> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
>naitive's
>> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
>more,
>> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
Pro
>> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to
an
>> PT HD system.
>> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap
>between
>> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>
>> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the
>capability
>> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
>> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
>This
>> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
>SX-1
>> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
>> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
>> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>
>> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
DAW,
>> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer
>faster
>> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
>already..I
>> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress
>again..:)
>>
>>
>> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
up
>> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
>sink
>> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it
>that
>> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
>> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is
,
>> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>>
>>
>> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little
>software
>> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
>> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
>them,
>> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>
>> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
of
>> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
>current
>> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
>3-15k
>> would do it..
>> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>
>
>A curiosity question - why do you not consider Nuendo, Logic etc, "pro
DAWs"? Let's look back a bit - DAWs of any nature weren't considered "pro"
when first offering an alternative to tape and a $500,000 console.
Technology advances, ProTools becomes more and more popular, and the name
sticks - it's now "pro". Then Paris, which was not considered pro when
Ensoniq first launched it, caught on in a small community and by Paris
users, it is considered "pro". Just a semantics question perhaps, but it
does make me wonder if each market that finds the tool they like, considers
it "pro" because it works for them. I know of no standard to define the
term outside of what that tool does for one's income.
Anyway, other dedicated dsp systems: Pyramix (www.merging.com). Soundscape
- still popular in Europe I believe (http://www.sydec.be/).
I think as others are pointing out, the cost and risk of developing
dedicated dsp is the real issue - faster computers are making the concept
obsolete to a large market of users, at least for the most part.
In the video world, streaming full resolution, uncompressed HD video still
requires dedicated processing for high speed work (Blackmagic, Canopus, Avid
cards, etc), and production houses that require full realtime effects
require it (render times not acceptible - e.g. Broadcast, networks where
deadlines are very tight, large commercial production houses, etc - many use
high end $100k+ systems for that, with no more effects or editing capability
than Final Cut Pro, Vegas or Avid Express, but eliminating render times).
However, even that market is changing, granted from the small production
house up, not yet in the broadcast world. The limitations of native there
are how well a native system can support full resolution high quality video
(cpu/disk load, speed, etc), not the actual editing software's functionality
or "professional" image. So in audio, if one can stream 100 tracks of audio
with full, quality processing and effects, including outboard (more than I
could do with my Paris rig), and it earns 100% of one's income, is that not
"pro"? It's more than I was doing in studios with 2" tape and only 24
tracks to work with. :-)
Committing to dedicated DSP is costly and very likely (these days) a short
term investment - that's why no one has jumped in to do it. Mark my words,
Digidesign is building their native holdings for a reason. Eventually they
too will be offering a dual/quad quad core native system with 64-bit
processing and as much power as and HD3 rig. They've already made an old
technology (motorola dsp) hang on for years after it has been superceded by
better dsp solutions (custom asic, or even video graphics chips - UAD, and
whatever the new generic dsp system is - can't recall the name).
Just my .02
Regards,
Dedric
On 1/15/06 1:31 AM, in article 43c9fa54$1@linux, "LaMont"
<jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>
> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has no
> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>
> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699) &
> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other than
> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>
> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that served
> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
> revolutionary.
> AND That's the point..
>
> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that naitive's
> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even more,
> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to Pro
> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to an
> PT HD system.
> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap between
> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>
> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer. This
> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their SX-1
> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>
> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based DAW,
> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer faster
> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
> already..I
> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>
>
> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing up
> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they sink
> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it that
> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is ,
> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>
>
> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were them,
> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>
> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market of
> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your current
> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say 3-15k
> would do it..
> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>Hey Jaimie,
Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2) very
expensive.. think about it..??
At least with a DSP based sytem, you know what you have, and the native cpu
is a secondary issue. Plus, low latency, better i/o integration in a pro
enviorment.. The sad truth with moast if not all native solutios is that
it has forced a big$$$ third party solutions market, inwhic native users
are going back to purchase , talk back units, better than average converters..All
to chase the dsp systems way of working..in the end, the native person does
not realize that they have spent just as much, if not more than they could've
gotten with a dsp based DAW.
Having used nuendo sice it's inception (2000, ),logic audio, Ican with hesitation,
that it takes a lot of $$$ to bring those apps up to pro specs, and truth
be known, steinbergs way of integrating hardware leaves a lot to be desired..
Take care,
Lamont
take care
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>I dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs are
>so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
>faster?
>
>The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
>on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
>There's no real cure for that. :^)
>
>It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five year
>wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
>choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
>starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
>
>Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into more
>laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
>The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
>Intel, pick your best time for the transition.
>
>If you want to make music using OSX right away there are plenty of PPC
>choices that work today, all the way up to the quad PowerMac which has
>more muscle than you probably need. Available now and they'll continue
>to work after the Intel transition.
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>LaMont wrote:
>> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>
>> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has
no
>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>
>> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
&
>> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
>> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
than
>> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>>
>> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
served
>> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was revolutionary.
>> AND That's the point..
>>
>> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
>> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that naitive's
>> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
more,
>> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
Pro
>> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to
an
>> PT HD system.
>> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap between
>> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>
>> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
>> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
>> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
This
>> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
SX-1
>> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
>> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
>> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>
>> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
DAW,
>> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer faster
>> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough already..I
>> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>>
>>
>> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
up
>> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
sink
>> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it
that
>> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
>> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is
,
>> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>>
>>
>> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
>> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
>> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
them,
>> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>
>> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
of
>> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
current
>> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
3-15k
>> would do it..
>> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>Hey Dedric,
The reason I dont consider nuendo/sx as pro is beacause, it's only software..To
get that and any native base app to pro standards in a day/out studio situation
will cost you: Control surface unit, good converters, monitoring/talk back
unit, and lets not forget the blazing cpu thatsd needed for low-latency,
big toime plugins..
I'm not saying, that pro can't use natives, we do..It;s just like BrianT's
nuendo system(s)..He manning his nuendo systems using theEuphonics system
5 system..can we say, that will and does take his system to a new level??
But, we all know, thtats what BT demands from a system..
mt point in the post was not ask a question "where is the development for
the 5-10k crowd?? Sure digi is covering the high end, with their new mixer
controllers both offering great monitoring ,talkback, and tight software
integration..I ca'nt believe that in the year 2006, no manufacture can com
out with a cheaper solution than digi??...
takecare..
lamont
dric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>A curiosity question - why do you not consider Nuendo, Logic etc, "pro
>DAWs"? Let's look back a bit - DAWs of any nature weren't considered "pro"
>when first offering an alternative to tape and a $500,000 console.
>Technology advances, ProTools becomes more and more popular, and the name
>sticks - it's now "pro". Then Paris, which was not considered pro when
>Ensoniq first launched it, caught on in a small community and by Paris
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61981 is a reply to message #61980] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 00:09 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>users, it is considered "pro". Just a semantics question perhaps, but it
>does make me wonder if each market that finds the tool they like, considers
>it "pro" because it works for them. I know of no standard to define the
>term outside of what that tool does for one's income.
>
>Anyway, other dedicated dsp systems: Pyramix (www.merging.com). Soundscape
>- still popular in Europe I believe (http://www.sydec.be/).
>
>I think as others are pointing out, the cost and risk of developing
>dedicated dsp is the real issue - faster computers are making the concept
>obsolete to a large market of users, at least for the most part.
>
>In the video world, streaming full resolution, uncompressed HD video still
>requires dedicated processing for high speed work (Blackmagic, Canopus,
Avid
>cards, etc), and production houses that require full realtime effects
>require it (render times not acceptible - e.g. Broadcast, networks where
>deadlines are very tight, large commercial production houses, etc - many
use
>high end $100k+ systems for that, with no more effects or editing capability
>than Final Cut Pro, Vegas or Avid Express, but eliminating render times).
>
>However, even that market is changing, granted from the small production
>house up, not yet in the broadcast world. The limitations of native there
>are how well a native system can support full resolution high quality video
>(cpu/disk load, speed, etc), not the actual editing software's functionality
>or "professional" image. So in audio, if one can stream 100 tracks of audio
>with full, quality processing and effects, including outboard (more than
I
>could do with my Paris rig), and it earns 100% of one's income, is that
not
>"pro"? It's more than I was doing in studios with 2" tape and only 24
>tracks to work with. :-)
>
>Committing to dedicated DSP is costly and very likely (these days) a short
>term investment - that's why no one has jumped in to do it. Mark my words,
>Digidesign is building their native holdings for a reason. Eventually they
>too will be offering a dual/quad quad core native system with 64-bit
>processing and as much power as and HD3 rig. They've already made an old
>technology (motorola dsp) hang on for years after it has been superceded
by
>better dsp solutions (custom asic, or even video graphics chips - UAD, and
>whatever the new generic dsp system is - can't recall the name).
>
>Just my .02
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>On 1/15/06 1:31 AM, in article 43c9fa54$1@linux, "LaMont"
><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>
>> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has
no
>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>
>> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
&
>> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
>> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
than
>> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>>
>> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
served
>> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
>> revolutionary.
>> AND That's the point..
>>
>> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
>> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that naitive's
>> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
more,
>> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
Pro
>> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to
an
>> PT HD system.
>> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap between
>> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>
>> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
>> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
>> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
This
>> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
SX-1
>> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
>> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
>> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>
>> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
DAW,
>> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer faster
>> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
>> already..I
>> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>>
>>
>> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
up
>> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
sink
>> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it
that
>> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
>> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is
,
>> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>>
>>
>> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
>> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
>> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
them,
>> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>
>> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
of
>> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
current
>> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
3-15k
>> would do it..
>> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>
>Lamont wrote:
> Hey Jaimie,
>
> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2) very
> expensive.. think about it..??
Both native and DSP-based can be expensive. Native can be much less
expensive though, if budget is limited. For example, on the low end a
Mac Mini comes with Garage Band and you can do a lot with that and an
inexpensive Firewire or USB i/o box for a total cost of less than $1000.
Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
(what I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
discussion).
There are DSP-based systems out there that come with their own
mixer/burner/software in a table-top format without requiring a
computer. They cost as much or more as a native system with a fast
computer. If you want to get off of the computer upgrade cycle, they're
available and they do what they do pretty well. But they aren't
particularly upgradable and upgradability is a big draw for
computer-based systems.
Computer-based systems that include separate DSP cards have some of the
advantages and upgrade costs of native systems and some of the
disadvantages and limitations of dedicated, non-computer-based systems.
PARIS illustrates the disadvantages very well.
I bought an Intel computer for PARIS and bought an OS upgrade along the
way. A few years later I bought a faster G4 computer for PARIS and it
was a noticable improvement. I also bought an upgrade for the PARIS
software which added useful new features and some unfinished, broken
features. It was nice to be able to upgrade but it did cost money just
as a native system would have. I was limited to the PARIS hardware
running on OS9, and the developers dropped support.
PARIS would never get faster better, it was what it was. For me, the
freeze point in development stopped just short of what I needed. Close,
but forever short. So I sold it.
Meanwhile CPUs had gotten much, much faster and having separate DSP for
the DAW had lost much of its advantage. I switched to a native system
running on the same G4 computer I had purchased for PARIS, but using
native software along with a new i/o box and a better operating system.
The transition did not cost a lot overall and the sale of PARIS pretty
much covered it.
I did live on the bleeding edge for a while, though, with the transition
to OSX and I had to try several Firewire interfaces to find a solid system.
After a few years I upgraded to a new computer but kept the software and
i/o box I was already using. I sold the previous computer, so the
upgrade cost was not high. I upgraded the native software and computer
OS several times and the increase in capability was worth the upgrade
costs, just as it would have been with a DSP based system.
If I had to buy from scratch today, I'd either pick up a Quad PowerMac
or save a bunch of money and get a dual G5 PowerMac, add extra RAM and
HD, Digital Performer or Logic, a Firewire i/o box or two and some third
party plugins. That system would probably last for the next ten years.
Even if I added a 24 moving fader controller it would be well under 10K.
Again, what I do and what you do may be different so your mileage may vary.
My current 2.5GHZ dual G5 is fast enough that I don't feel the need to
upgrade it for audio production. It could go for the next decade with
slowing me down.
However if I decide to upgrade it at some point for animation or video
production, the audio side will come along for the ride at no extra cost.
> At least with a DSP based sytem, you know what you have, and the native cpu
> is a secondary issue.
With the speed of CPUs today, why tie yourself to a hardware-limited DSP
system. If the company you buy it from is in business in five years, the
cost to upgrade a system like that could be much higher than just buying
a newer, faster computer.
And when you buy a newer, faster computer you are upgrading everything
that runs on it, all your plugins, virtual instruments, even other
software (graphics, animation, video editing, software development,
whatever else you do), in one shot.
Plus, low latency, better i/o integration in a pro
> enviorment..
This is your best argument. But latency is not an issue in my current
setup. My i/o box has direct monitoring. Even if I monitor through Logic
the latency is low enough that it hasn't been a problem.
The i/o integration is fine, I have 18 analog inputs and 16 analog
outputs plus stereo digital i/o directly patchable through my DAW
software and also routable from the i/o box's monitoring software. If I
need more i/o I can plug in another Firewire i/o box.
I run my system with a mouse and a jog/shuttle wheel add-on. I can get
moving fader controllers from at least four different manufacturers
which is tempting, but since I only really used the jog/shuttle part of
the PARIS controller I haven't needed that. Plus I've grown used to the
precision and (believe it or not) speed of mixing with the mouse.
The sad truth with moast if not all native solutios is that
> it has forced a big$$$ third party solutions market, inwhic native users
> are going back to purchase , talk back units, better than average converters..All
> to chase the dsp systems way of working..in the end, the native person does
> not realize that they have spent just as much, if not more than they could've
> gotten with a dsp based DAW.
A native system will be more flexible, you'll have more developers to
choose from to enhance your system, and if one of the developers goes
under, your system will not hit a dead end.
Over the last decade I've spent way less than, for example, a ProTools
system would have cost and am getting, I think, comparable results.
> Having used nuendo sice it's inception (2000, ),logic audio, Ican with hesitation,
> that it takes a lot of $$$ to bring those apps up to pro specs, and truth
> be known, steinbergs way of integrating hardware leaves a lot to be desired..
A Quad PowerMac with extra RAM and HD, MOTU Digital Performer, a MOTU
Firewire i/o box or two and some third party plugins...even a 24 moving
fader controller and you're well under 10K.
It all comes down to individual needs and preferences, so I'm not really
saying you're wrong for what you're looking for. But for what I'm
looking for, a native system is pretty compelling.
OTOH, had PARIS MIDI support been better, had they hung around long
enough to support OSX and AU plugins, I'd still be using PARIS. Even
with the limitation of 44.1 or 48 sampling.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> Take care,
> Lamont
> take care
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>>I dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs are
>
>
>>so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
>>faster?
>>
>>The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
>>on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
>>There's no real cure for that. :^)
>>
>>It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five year
>
>
>>wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
>>choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
>>starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
>>
>>Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into more
>
>
>>laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
>>The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
>>Intel, pick your best time for the transition.
>>
>>If you want to make music using OSX right away there are plenty of PPC
>>choices that work today, all the way up to the quad PowerMac which has
>>more muscle than you probably need. Available now and they'll continue
>>to work after the Intel transition.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>LaMont wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>>
>>>Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has
>
> no
>
>>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>>
>>>I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
>
> &
>
>>>Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
>>>results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
>
> than
>
>>>Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>>>since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>>>
>>>My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
>
> served
>
>>>the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was revolutionary.
>>> AND That's the point..
>>>
>>>Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
>>>other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that naitive's
>>>are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
>
> more,
>
>>>it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
>
> Pro
>
>>>standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to
>
> an
>
>>>PT HD system.
>>>There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap between
>>>PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>>
>>>Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>>>-The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
>>>to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
>>>in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>>>to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
>
> This
>
>>>would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
>
> SX-1
>
>>>was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
>>>first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>>>I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
>>>DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>>
>>>As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
>
> DAW,
>
>>>we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer faster
>>>Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough already..I
>>>say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>>>
>>>
>>>I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>>>about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>>>I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
>
> up
>
>>>a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>>>list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
>
> sink
>
>>>another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>>>So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it
>
> that
>
>>>Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
>>>how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is
>
> ,
>
>>>PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>>>
>>>
>>>Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
>>>support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
>>>a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
>
> them,
>
>>>I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>>
>>>Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
>
> of
>
>>>Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
>
> current
>
>>>offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
>
> 3-15k
>
>>>would do it..
>>>Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>>
>
>"Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need what
I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this discussion)."
Agreed.. :)
But, the rest of your post illustrates my points. Some Producer buddies of
mine in town, were having this same discusion about amonth or so ago. They
are all Mac user, with a few giga machines. The consesus for us all is that
we have grown tired of the "upgrade" syndrome that, for one forces the non-computer
music guy to become so entrenched with personal computer technology, that
they can't focus on music..At the end of the conversation, we all agreed
that having a system like Pro-Tools HD would "serve" us best with out having
to "think" or stay on the CPU upgrade "teadmill" if you will. I've been on
that treadmill since 97,and as I look back on how many great working system
setups I've detroyed due becuase I was trying to play the CPU sped game.
I've lost decnet paying mixng and production jobs becuase my systems were
not as stable as I had them before I "upgraded" to a faster cpu and OS..
I one of our suites we still have PT Mix cube running on a G4(450) OS9 that's
rock solid stable.. One of my Paris setup still has Win 98se..Stable stable
stable:)
2 staff producers went chasing the Apple speed dream , from Dual 867s to
Dual G5(2.5s) on OSX..Man, the agony and frustrations on their faces due
to the fact that they had serious deadlines. That's what spurred our conversations
about it's either PTHD or a slotion with DM2000/02r96 with Nuendo/PT Radar
with the yammy difital mixer.. Each set up cost. But, we demand a solid working
system, that you do not have to make execues to yourself and the client..
Dedric may have said it best when he st
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61982 is a reply to message #61969] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 00:11 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ated that doing a dedicated dsp system
manybe a daughting task$$ Or so they say.. Stuff coming out of China (Phonic
firewire) mixers as well as microphones and other products are astounding
deals. Just maybe the solution I'm after will come from China?
LaMont
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Lamont wrote:
>> Hey Jaimie,
>>
>> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
very
>> expensive.. think about it..??
>
>Both native and DSP-based can be expensive. Native can be much less
>expensive though, if budget is limited. For example, on the low end a
>Mac Mini comes with Garage Band and you can do a lot with that and an
>inexpensive Firewire or USB i/o box for a total cost of less than $1000.
>
>Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
>(what I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>discussion).
>
>There are DSP-based systems out there that come with their own
>mixer/burner/software in a table-top format without requiring a
>computer. They cost as much or more as a native system with a fast
>computer. If you want to get off of the computer upgrade cycle, they're
>available and they do what they do pretty well. But they aren't
>particularly upgradable and upgradability is a big draw for
>computer-based systems.
>
>Computer-based systems that include separate DSP cards have some of the
>advantages and upgrade costs of native systems and some of the
>disadvantages and limitations of dedicated, non-computer-based systems.
>PARIS illustrates the disadvantages very well.
>
>I bought an Intel computer for PARIS and bought an OS upgrade along the
>way. A few years later I bought a faster G4 computer for PARIS and it
>was a noticable improvement. I also bought an upgrade for the PARIS
>software which added useful new features and some unfinished, broken
>features. It was nice to be able to upgrade but it did cost money just
>as a native system would have. I was limited to the PARIS hardware
>running on OS9, and the developers dropped support.
>
>PARIS would never get faster better, it was what it was. For me, the
>freeze point in development stopped just short of what I needed. Close,
>but forever short. So I sold it.
>
>Meanwhile CPUs had gotten much, much faster and having separate DSP for
>the DAW had lost much of its advantage. I switched to a native system
>running on the same G4 computer I had purchased for PARIS, but using
>native software along with a new i/o box and a better operating system.
>The transition did not cost a lot overall and the sale of PARIS pretty
>much covered it.
>
>I did live on the bleeding edge for a while, though, with the transition
>to OSX and I had to try several Firewire interfaces to find a solid system.
>
>After a few years I upgraded to a new computer but kept the software and
>i/o box I was already using. I sold the previous computer, so the
>upgrade cost was not high. I upgraded the native software and computer
>OS several times and the increase in capability was worth the upgrade
>costs, just as it would have been with a DSP based system.
>
>If I had to buy from scratch today, I'd either pick up a Quad PowerMac
>or save a bunch of money and get a dual G5 PowerMac, add extra RAM and
>HD, Digital Performer or Logic, a Firewire i/o box or two and some third
>party plugins. That system would probably last for the next ten years.
>Even if I added a 24 moving fader controller it would be well under 10K.
>Again, what I do and what you do may be different so your mileage may vary.
>
>My current 2.5GHZ dual G5 is fast enough that I don't feel the need to
>upgrade it for audio production. It could go for the next decade with
>slowing me down.
>
>However if I decide to upgrade it at some point for animation or video
>production, the audio side will come along for the ride at no extra cost.
>
>
>> At least with a DSP based sytem, you know what you have, and the native
cpu
>> is a secondary issue.
>
>With the speed of CPUs today, why tie yourself to a hardware-limited DSP
>system. If the company you buy it from is in business in five years, the
>cost to upgrade a system like that could be much higher than just buying
>a newer, faster computer.
>
>And when you buy a newer, faster computer you are upgrading everything
>that runs on it, all your plugins, virtual instruments, even other
>software (graphics, animation, video editing, software development,
>whatever else you do), in one shot.
>
>
>Plus, low latency, better i/o integration in a pro
>> enviorment..
>
>This is your best argument. But latency is not an issue in my current
>setup. My i/o box has direct monitoring. Even if I monitor through Logic
>the latency is low enough that it hasn't been a problem.
>
>The i/o integration is fine, I have 18 analog inputs and 16 analog
>outputs plus stereo digital i/o directly patchable through my DAW
>software and also routable from the i/o box's monitoring software. If I
>need more i/o I can plug in another Firewire i/o box.
>
>I run my system with a mouse and a jog/shuttle wheel add-on. I can get
>moving fader controllers from at least four different manufacturers
>which is tempting, but since I only really used the jog/shuttle part of
>the PARIS controller I haven't needed that. Plus I've grown used to the
>precision and (believe it or not) speed of mixing with the mouse.
>
>
>The sad truth with moast if not all native solutios is that
>> it has forced a big$$$ third party solutions market, inwhic native users
>> are going back to purchase , talk back units, better than average converters..All
>> to chase the dsp systems way of working..in the end, the native person
does
>> not realize that they have spent just as much, if not more than they could've
>> gotten with a dsp based DAW.
>
>A native system will be more flexible, you'll have more developers to
>choose from to enhance your system, and if one of the developers goes
>under, your system will not hit a dead end.
>
>Over the last decade I've spent way less than, for example, a ProTools
>system would have cost and am getting, I think, comparable results.
>
>
>> Having used nuendo sice it's inception (2000, ),logic audio, Ican with
hesitation,
>> that it takes a lot of $$$ to bring those apps up to pro specs, and truth
>> be known, steinbergs way of integrating hardware leaves a lot to be desired..
>
>A Quad PowerMac with extra RAM and HD, MOTU Digital Performer, a MOTU
>Firewire i/o box or two and some third party plugins...even a 24 moving
>fader controller and you're well under 10K.
>
>It all comes down to individual needs and preferences, so I'm not really
>saying you're wrong for what you're looking for. But for what I'm
>looking for, a native system is pretty compelling.
>
>OTOH, had PARIS MIDI support been better, had they hung around long
>enough to support OSX and AU plugins, I'd still be using PARIS. Even
>with the limitation of 44.1 or 48 sampling.
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>
>> Take care,
>> Lamont
>> take care
>>
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs are
>>
>>
>>>so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
>>>faster?
>>>
>>>The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
>>>on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
>>>There's no real cure for that. :^)
>>>
>>>It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five year
>>
>>
>>>wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
>>>choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
>>>starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
>>>
>>>Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into more
>>
>>
>>>laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
>>>The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
>>>Intel, pick your best time for the transition.
>>>
>>>If you want to make music using OSX right away there are plenty of PPC
>>>choices that work today, all the way up to the quad PowerMac which has
>>>more muscle than you probably need. Available now and they'll continue
>>>to work after the Intel transition.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>LaMont wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>>>
>>>>Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has
>>
>> no
>>
>>>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>>>
>>>>I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
>>
>> &
>>
>>>>Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield
pro
>>>>results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
>>
>> than
>>
>>>>Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>>>>since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>>>>
>>>>My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
>>
>> served
>>
>>>>the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was revolutionary.
>>>> AND That's the point..
>>>>
>>>>Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
>>>>other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
naitive's
>>>>are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
>>
>> more,
>>
>>>>it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
>>
>> Pro
>>
>>>>standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to
>>
>> an
>>
>>>>PT HD system.
>>>>There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap
between
>>>>PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>>>
>>>>Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>>>>-The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
>>>>to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
>>>>in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>>>>to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
>>
>> This
>>
>>>>would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
>>
>> SX-1
>>
>>>>was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
>>>>first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>>>>I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
>>>>DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>>>
>>>>As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
>>
>> DAW,
>>
>>>>we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer
faster
>>>>Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
already..I
>>>>say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>>>>about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>>>>I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
>>
>> up
>>
>>>>a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>>>>list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
>>
>> sink
>>
>>>>another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>>>>So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it
>>
>> that
>>
>>>>Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
>>>>how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean
is
>>
>> ,
>>
>>>>PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for
HD..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
>>>>support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not
even
>>>>a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
>>
>> them,
>>
>>>>I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>>>
>>>>Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
>>
>> of
>>
>>>>Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
>>
>> current
>>
>>>>offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
>>
>> 3-15k
>>
>>>>would do it..
>>>>Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>>>
>>
>>Some of the newer vst plugs were coded for the asio2 standard, which does
not always translate well into Paris..
LaMOnt
John <no@no.com> wrote:
>I have a bunch of DX and VST plugs some are M > S, some are S > S and
>some have Mono in the label additionally. I'm crashing all the time
>when I use them.
>
>I often have mono channels I want to treat. Can I use both M > S and S
> > S plugs on the mono channels or not? I'm trying to find the reason
>for the crashes but don't know what is and isn't allowed. I also have
>chainer and spinaudio wrapper. So what's the skinny? What works for
>both Mono and Stereo scenarios please? THANKS
>
>
>True or false?
>
>Don't mix DX and VSTs on the same channel ?
>
>Don't mix M>S and S>S(with stereo unchecked) vsts ?
>
>Don't use S>S vsts with stereo unchecked ?I'd like to use some high quality converters in lieu of the 24 bit AD PARIS
converters. I presume that if one uses say, the Lavry Blue converters and
send the output to PARIS through the ADAT card, the result would be a truncation
to 20 bits. So the only way to actually get 24 bit input is to use the MEC's
SP/DIF? As I have two MECs, that would give me four channels, which I guess
is better than none. Whatever came of the additional 24 bit input cards
someone here was trying to make?
Any other ideas? I would pay a lot for a 24 bit ADAT card. :)"Lamont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2) very
>expensive.. think about it..??
But you don't have to play it. Do you change the way you work every two
years, or does the percieved need change? Did you need 64 tracks of audio
last year and all of a sudden need 96 tracks? Is the new uberhog reverb
really that much better that you need a new computer every two years?
I used to be caught up in the speed race myself. Upgrading from a 800 MHz
processor, to a 900, to a 1200, etc. It all seems pretty silly now. I stopped
at an Athlon XP1400+ and life has been sweet ever since. I get the 24 tracks
of 24/44.1 audio and 7-8 plugs that I need. My computer hasn't crashed in
over 3 years. When I was running Paris, I had problems on a daily basis.
Life has been productive and sweet since going native.
-ChrisLaMont wrote:
> "Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need what
> I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this discussion)."
>
> Agreed.. :)
> But, the rest of your post illustrates my points.
Not really. I think we agree about a few things but when it comes to
drawing an overall conclusion about the value of native systems, it
looks like we disagree. Based on our different needs and experiences.
All the systems I moved on from did NOT cover everything I need,
including PARIS; another card-based system for which I wrote the
documentation; and tape-based systems before that.
The native system I have now is the closest yet to meeting my needs, and
even exceeding them in some areas. Although I'd still appreciate a few
bug fixes. There's also room for GUI improvements as always. That could
also be said about DSP systems, though.
Bottom line, CPU speed is NOT holding this system back. I don't need to
buy a faster computer. Although if I should decide to buy a faster
computer to meet the needs of another application, that would also give
me free extra power for my DAW - a synergy not available in a DSP-locked
system.
I AM encouraged that upgrades come periodically, third party options are
available and the system is developed and supported. These are pluses,
not minuses.
There are sometimes hiccups from having multiple developers involved, a
bug in one product could possibly affect another - so it pays to do
research before deciding what to use and actually communicate with
developers. If your needs lie on the bleeding edge, then some amount of
R&D is necessary to find out for yourself what will work and what won't,
and reporting bugs can help get them fixed.
I think we agree that it's important to know the tools. It does take
time and care whether you're using a 2" tape machine, a DSP system or a
native system. Know what you want, know your tools, do the maintainence,
have a backup system.
Or just rent time at someone else's studio and focus only on playing. :^)
In general admin on a Mac is pretty simple and largely automated. BTW, I
did not find Wi95/98 to be a particularly stable computing experience.
Or OS9, for that matter. Glad those days are gone. YMMV.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> Some Producer buddies of
> mine in town, were having this same discusion about amonth or so ago. They
> are all Mac user, with a few giga machines. The consesus for us all is that
> we have grown tired of the "upgrade" syndrome that, for one forces the non-computer
> music guy to become so entrenched with personal computer technology, that
> they can't focus on music..At the end of the conversation, we all agreed
> that having a system like Pro-Tools HD would "serve" us best with out having
> to "think" or stay on the CPU upgrade "teadmill" if you will. I've been on
> that treadmill since 97,and as I look back on how many great working system
> setups I've detroyed due becuase I was trying to play the CPU sped game.
> I've lost decnet paying mixng and production jobs becuase my systems were
> not as stable as I had them before I "upgraded" to a faster cpu and OS..
> I one of our suites we still have PT Mix cube running on a G4(450) OS9 that's
> rock solid stable.. One of my Paris setup still has Win 98se..Stable stable
> stable:)
>
> 2 staff producers went chasing the Apple speed dream , from Dual 867s to
> Dual G5(2.5s) on OSX..Man, the agony and frustrations on their faces due
> to the fact that they had serious deadlines. That's what spurred our conversations
> about it's either PTHD or a slotion with DM2000/02r96 with Nuendo/PT Radar
> with the yammy difital mixer.. Each set up cost. But, we demand a solid working
> system, that you do not have to make execues to yourself and the client..
>
> Dedric may have said it best when he stated that doing a dedicated dsp system
> manybe a daughting task$$ Or so they say.. Stuff coming out of China (Phonic
> firewire) mixers as well as microphones and other products are astounding
> deals. Just maybe the solution I'm after will come from China?
> LaMont
>
>
>
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>>Lamont wrote:
>>
>>>Hey Jaimie,
>>>
>>>Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>>>Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>
> very
>
>>>expensive.. think about it..??
>>
>>Both native and DSP-based can be expensive. Native can be much less
>>expensive though, if budget is limited. For example, on the low end a
>>Mac Mini comes with Garage Band and you can do a lot with that and an
>>inexpensive Firewire or USB i/o box for a total cost of less than $1000.
>>
>>Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
>>(what I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>
>
>>discussion).
>>
>>There are DSP-based systems out there that come with their own
>>mixer/burner/software in a table-top format without requiring a
>>computer. They cost as much or more as a native system with a fast
>>computer. If you want to get off of the computer upgrade cycle, they're
>
>
>>available and they do what they do pretty well. But they aren't
>>particularly upgradable and upgradability is a big draw for
>>computer-based systems.
>>
>>Computer-based systems that include separate DSP cards have some of the
>
>
>>advantages and upgrade costs of native systems and some of the
>>disadvantages and limitations of dedicated, non-computer-based systems.
>
>
>>PARIS illustrates the disadvantages very well.
>>
>>I bought an Intel computer for PARIS and bought an OS upgrade along the
>
>
>>way. A few years later I bought a faster G4 computer for PARIS and it
>>was a noticable improvement. I also bought an upgrade for the PARIS
>>software which added useful new features and some unfinished, broken
>>features. It was nice to be able to upgrade but it did cost money just
>>as a native system would have. I was limited to the PARIS hardware
>>running on OS9, and the developers dropped support.
>>
>>PARIS would never get faster better, it was what it was. For me, the
>>freeze point in development stopped just short of what I needed. Close,
>
>
>>but forever short. So I sold it.
>>
>>Meanwhile CPUs had gotten much, much faster and having separate DSP for
>
>
>>the DAW had lost much of its advantage. I switched to a native system
>>running on the same G4 computer I had purchased for PARIS, but using
>>native software along with a new i/o box and a better operating system.
>
>
>>The transition did not cost a lot overall and the sale of PARIS pretty
>>much covered it.
>>
>>I did live on the bleeding edge for a while, though, with the transition
>
>
>>to OSX and I had to try several Firewire interfaces to find a solid system.
>>
>>After a few years I upgraded to a new computer but kept the software and
>
>
>>i/o box I was already using. I sold the previous computer, so the
>>upgrade cost was not high. I upgraded the native software and computer
>>OS several times and the increase in capability was worth the upgrade
>>costs, just as it would have been with a DSP based system.
>>
>>If I had to buy from scratch today, I'd either pick up a Quad PowerMac
>>or save a bunch of money and get a dual G5 PowerMac, add extra RAM and
>>HD, Digital Performer or Logic, a Firewire i/o box or two and some third
>
>
>>party plugins. That system would probably last for the next ten years.
>>Even if I added a 24 moving fader controller it would be well under 10K.
>
>
>>Again, what I do and what you do may be different so your mileage may vary.
>>
>>My current 2.5GHZ dual G5 is fast enough that I don't feel the need to
>>upgrade it for audio production. It could go for the next decade with
>>slowing me down.
>>
>>However if I decide to upgrade it at some point for animation or video
>>production, the audio side will come along for the ride at no extra cost.
>>
>>
>>
>>>At least with a DSP based sytem, you know what you have, and the native
>
> cpu
>
>>>is a secondary issue.
>>
>>With the speed of CPUs today, why tie yourself to a hardware-limited DSP
>
>
>>system. If the company you buy it from is in business in five years, the
>
>
>>cost to upgrade a system like that could be much higher than just buying
>
>
>>a newer, faster computer.
>>
>>And when you buy a newer, faster computer you are upgrading everything
>>that runs on it, all your plugins, virtual instruments, even other
>>software (graphics, animation, video editing, software development,
>>whatever else you do), in one shot.
>>
>>
>>Plus, low latency, better i/o integration in a pro
>>
>>>enviorment..
>>
>>This is your best argument. But latency is not an issue in my current
>>setup. My i/o box has direct monitoring. Even if I monitor through Logic
>
>
>>the latency is low enough that it hasn't been a problem.
>>
>>The i/o integration is fine, I have 18 analog inputs and 16 analog
>>outputs plus stereo digital i/o directly patchable through my DAW
>>software and also routable from the i/o box's monitoring software. If I
>
>
>>need more i/o I can plug in another Firewire i/o box.
>>
>>I run my system with a mouse and a jog/shuttle wheel add-on. I can get
>>moving fader controllers from at least four different manufacturers
>>which is tempting, but since I only really used the jog/shuttle part of
>
>
>>the PARIS controller I haven't needed that. Plus I've grown used to the
>
>
>>precision and (believe it or not) speed of mixing with the mouse.
>>
>>
>>The sad truth with moast if not all native solutios is that
>>
>>>it has forced a big$$$ third party solutions market, inwhic native users
>>>are going back to purchase , talk back units, better than average converters..All
>>>to chase the dsp systems way of working..in the end, the native person
>
> does
>
>>>not realize that they have spent just as much, if not more than they could've
>>>gotten with a dsp based DAW.
>>
>>A native system will be more flexible, you'll have more developers to
>>choose from to enhance your system, and if one of the developers goes
>>under, your system will not hit a dead end.
>>
>>Over the last decade I've spent way less than, for example, a ProTools
>>system would have cost and am getting, I think, comparable results.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Having used nuendo sice it's inception (2000, ),logic audio, Ican with
>
> hesitation,
>
>>>that it takes a lot of $$$ to bring those apps up to pro specs, and truth
>>>be known, steinbergs way of integrating hardware leaves a lot to be desired..
>>
>>A Quad PowerMac with extra RAM and HD, MOTU Digital Performer, a MOTU
>>Firewire i/o box or two and some third party plugins...even a 24 moving
>
>
>>fader controller and you're well under 10K.
>>
>>It all comes down to individual needs and preferences, so I'm not really
>
>
>>saying you're wrong for what you're looking for. But for what I'm
>>looking for, a native system is pretty compelling.
>>
>>OTOH, had PARIS MIDI support been better, had they hung around long
>>enough to support OSX and AU plugins, I'd still be using PARIS. Even
>>with the limitation of 44.1 or 48 sampling.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Take care,
>>>Lamont
>>>take care
>>>
>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs are
>>>
>>>
>>>>so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
>
>
>>>>faster?
>>>>
>>>>The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61983 is a reply to message #61980] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 00:14 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>
>>>>on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
>>>>There's no real cure for that. :^)
>>>>
>>>>It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five year
>>>
>>>
>>>>wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
>>>>choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
>
>
>>>>starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
>>>>
>>>>Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into more
>>>
>>>
>>>>laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
>
>
>>>>The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
>
>
>>>>Intel, pick your best time for the transition.
>>>>
>>>>If you want to make music using OSX right away there are plenty of PPC
>
>
>>>>choices that work today, all the way up to the quad PowerMac which has
>
>
>>>>more muscle than you probably need. Available now and they'll continue
>
>
>>>>to work after the Intel transition.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>-Jamie
>>>>http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>LaMont wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>>>>
>>>>>Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has
>>>
>>>no
>>>
>>>
>>>>>pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>>>>
>>>>>I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
>>>
>>>&
>>>
>>>>>Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield
>
> pro
>
>>>>>results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
>>>
>>>than
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>>>>>since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>>>>>
>>>>>My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
>>>
>>>served
>>>
>>>
>>>>>the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was revolutionary.
>>>>>AND That's the point..
>>>>>
>>>>>Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
>>>>>other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
>
> naitive's
>
>>>>>are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
>>>
>>>more,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
>>>
>>>Pro
>>>
>>>
>>>>>standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to
>>>
>>>an
>>>
>>>
>>>>>PT HD system.
>>>>>There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap
>
> between
>
>>>>>PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>>>>
>>>>>Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>>>>>-The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the capability
>>>>>to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
>>>>>in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>>>>>to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
>>>
>>> This
>>>
>>>
>>>>>would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
>>>
>>>SX-1
>>>
>>>
>>>>>was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
>>>>>first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>>>>>I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
>>>>>DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>>>>
>>>>>As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
>>>
>>>DAW,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer
>
> faster
>
>>>>>Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
>
> already..I
>
>>>>>say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>>>>>about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>>>>>I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
>>>
>>>up
>>>
>>>
>>>>>a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>>>>>list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
>>>
>>>sink
>>>
>>>
>>>>>another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>>>>>So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it
>>>
>>>that
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
>>>>>how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean
>
> is
>
>>>,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for
>
> HD..
>
>>>>>
>>>>>Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
>>>>>support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not
>
> even
>
>>>>>a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
>>>
>>>them,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>>>>
>>>>>Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
>>>
>>>of
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
>>>
>>>current
>>>
>>>
>>>>>offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
>>>
>>>3-15k
>>>
>>>
>>>>>would do it..
>>>>>Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>Good Points Chris:) Still, my initial point was concerning about the lack
of mid-level pro DSP based DAWs. Digi's answer to my question (HD2 Axcel/
with Control 24..Slew of plugs) 25k..!! I know this setup works well,but
we are talking about 25k :) Surely, there must be a manufacturer that can
deliver a simular product for less?? LaMont
"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>
>"Lamont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>>Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>>Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2) very
>>expensive.. think about it..??
>
>But you don't have to play it. Do you change the way you work every two
>years, or does the percieved need change? Did you need 64 tracks of audio
>last year and all of a sudden need 96 tracks? Is the new uberhog reverb
>really that much better that you need a new computer every two years?
>
>I used to be caught up in the speed race myself. Upgrading from a 800 MHz
>processor, to a 900, to a 1200, etc. It all seems pretty silly now. I
stopped
>at an Athlon XP1400+ and life has been sweet ever since. I get the 24 tracks
>of 24/44.1 audio and 7-8 plugs that I need. My computer hasn't crashed
in
>over 3 years. When I was running Paris, I had problems on a daily basis.
> Life has been productive and sweet since going native.
>
>-Chris
>Hi Lamont,
> The reason I dont consider nuendo/sx as pro is beacause, it's only
> software..
That in fact proves my point - "pro" has become much more of a personal
perception driven by marketing and peer pressure than the actual definition.
For example in another industry, to some video houses, a $50,000 Avid rig
may not be pro compared to a $200,000 Quantel system, but both will do much
the same thing - deliver professional results - with differences that may be
key for the specific user (broadcast vs. post, etc), but not the definition
of "pro" in general.
Saying software isn't "pro" is missing the point of being a pro. Pro is
about getting paid for what you do because you deliver quality results and
products that someone else is willing to pay for. In another post you said
that Chinese products offer an astounding value for the money. To me that's
a rather astounding paradox to your definition. They are a good
cost/performance ratio, but it is contradictory to say that Nuendo isn't pro
and a C1 mic is, in the same breath. I haven't heard a Chinese mic that
compared to what I would consider, and choose as a "pro" mic (whether higher
end "pro" from Lawson, Blue or Neumann, or a mid-grade Audio Technica).
Yes, it takes converters, etc, to augment Nuendo for use in various
situations, but the same is true of ProTools (ProTools isn't much good
without an I/O box). Just because Digi sells it as one package doesn't make
it pro. And you have an expensive upgrade path - much more than upgrade PCs
every couple of years. I've done the math on this many times (including
comparing UAD-1 cards to the TDM equivalents in terms of plugin counts per
dollar - UAD-1 cards win easily).
I use my Nuendo rig and many other software, and hardware tools day in and
day out producing media for a variety of professional clients in a very
professional setting. We have office/studio space in the world headquarters
for one of our main clients. Should I tell them that since I don't have
ProTools and a Euphonix or Neve console (yet) to make it look bigger and
costs them more than it needs to does that make us less pro? No. Attitude
and quality product delivery are what make us pro. Maybe Nuendo doesn't
work for you, aor maybe you haven't decided to make it work for you, but it
does work for a lot of other "professionals" like myself.
Manufacturers and marketing departments define the line between Pro and
Consumer when they add one feature or part that costs more than they believe
they can sell to the average consumer, so they almost haphazardly label it
"Pro" and double the price. We then blindly adopt that as the "pro"
standard and thumb our noses at consumer gear.
It really irritates me when people arrogantly define pro as what they, or
someone else has based on how expensive (e.g. Over a randomly chosen
pricepoint) and popular it is, and non-pro as anything that isn't all of the
above. That just isn't fair, objective, or pro in my book.
It is sad that the media and arts production industry has increasingly come
to define the word "pro" by how much it costs to buy rather than the quality
of the product. Anyone ever see "Gigli" or heard of Britney Spears? I rest
my case. ;-)
Regards,
Dedric
Echo Media Group, LLC
On 1/15/06 11:22 AM, in article 43ca84bf$1@linux, "Lamont"
<jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
> Hey Dedric,
>
> The reason I dont consider nuendo/sx as pro is beacause, it's only
> software..To
> get that and any native base app to pro standards in a day/out studio
> situation
> will cost you: Control surface unit, good converters, monitoring/talk back
> unit, and lets not forget the blazing cpu thatsd needed for low-latency,
> big toime plugins..
>
> I'm not saying, that pro can't use natives, we do..It;s just like BrianT's
> nuendo system(s)..He manning his nuendo systems using theEuphonics system
> 5 system..can we say, that will and does take his system to a new level??
> But, we all know, thtats what BT demands from a system..
> mt point in the post was not ask a question "where is the development for
> the 5-10k crowd?? Sure digi is covering the high end, with their new mixer
> controllers both offering great monitoring ,talkback, and tight software
> integration..I ca'nt believe that in the year 2006, no manufacture can com
> out with a cheaper solution than digi??...
> takecare..
> lamont
>
>
>
>
> dric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>> A curiosity question - why do you not consider Nuendo, Logic etc, "pro
>> DAWs"? Let's look back a bit - DAWs of any nature weren't considered "pro"
>> when first offering an alternative to tape and a $500,000 console.
>> Technology advances, ProTools becomes more and more popular, and the name
>> sticks - it's now "pro". Then Paris, which was not considered pro when
>> Ensoniq first launched it, caught on in a small community and by Paris
>> users, it is considered "pro". Just a semantics question perhaps, but it
>> does make me wonder if each market that finds the tool they like, considers
>> it "pro" because it works for them. I know of no standard to define the
>> term outside of what that tool does for one's income.
>>
>> Anyway, other dedicated dsp systems: Pyramix (www.merging.com). Soundscape
>> - still popular in Europe I believe (http://www.sydec.be/).
>>
>> I think as others are pointing out, the cost and risk of developing
>> dedicated dsp is the real issue - faster computers are making the concept
>> obsolete to a large market of users, at least for the most part.
>>
>> In the video world, streaming full resolution, uncompressed HD video still
>> requires dedicated processing for high speed work (Blackmagic, Canopus,
> Avid
>> cards, etc), and production houses that require full realtime effects
>> require it (render times not acceptible - e.g. Broadcast, networks where
>> deadlines are very tight, large commercial production houses, etc - many
> use
>> high end $100k+ systems for that, with no more effects or editing capability
>> than Final Cut Pro, Vegas or Avid Express, but eliminating render times).
>>
>> However, even that market is changing, granted from the small production
>> house up, not yet in the broadcast world. The limitations of native there
>> are how well a native system can support full resolution high quality video
>> (cpu/disk load, speed, etc), not the actual editing software's functionality
>> or "professional" image. So in audio, if one can stream 100 tracks of audio
>> with full, quality processing and effects, including outboard (more than
> I
>> could do with my Paris rig), and it earns 100% of one's income, is that
> not
>> "pro"? It's more than I was doing in studios with 2" tape and only 24
>> tracks to work with. :-)
>>
>> Committing to dedicated DSP is costly and very likely (these days) a short
>> term investment - that's why no one has jumped in to do it. Mark my words,
>> Digidesign is building their native holdings for a reason. Eventually they
>> too will be offering a dual/quad quad core native system with 64-bit
>> processing and as much power as and HD3 rig. They've already made an old
>> technology (motorola dsp) hang on for years after it has been superceded
> by
>> better dsp solutions (custom asic, or even video graphics chips - UAD, and
>> whatever the new generic dsp system is - can't recall the name).
>>
>> Just my .02
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> On 1/15/06 1:31 AM, in article 43c9fa54$1@linux, "LaMont"
>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>>
>>> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there has
> no
>>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>>
>>> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
> &
>>> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield pro
>>> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
> than
>>> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>>> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>>>
>>> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
> served
>>> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
>>> revolutionary.
>>> AND That's the point..
>>>
>>> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your only
>>> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
>>> naitive's
>>> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
> more,
>>> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
> Pro
>>> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to
> an
>>> PT HD system.
>>> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap between
>>> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>>
>>> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>>> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the
>>> capability
>>> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing found
>>> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>>> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
> This
>>> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
> SX-1
>>> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
>>> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>>> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very cool
>>> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>>
>>> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
> DAW,
>>> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer faster
>>> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
>>> already..I
>>> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>>> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>>> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
> up
>>> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>>> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
> sink
>>> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>>> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is it
> that
>>> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate jsut
>>> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean is
> ,
>>> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for HD..
>>>
>>>
>>> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little software
>>> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not even
>>> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
> them,
>>> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>>
>>> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
> of
>>> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
> current
>>> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
> 3-15k
>>> would do it..
>>> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>>
>>
>So what works in the pain in the ass recording system?
LaMOnt wrote:
> Some of the newer vst plugs were coded for the asio2 standard, which does
> not always translate well into Paris..
> LaMOnt
> John <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>>I have a bunch of DX and VST plu
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61991 is a reply to message #61959] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 08:08 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
that get's in the way of truly getting the most out of what you already
have. And I still catch bad bouts of it myself ;-)
-Chris
"LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Good Points Chris:) Still, my initial point was concerning about the lack
>of mid-level pro DSP based DAWs. Digi's answer to my question (HD2 Axcel/
>with Control 24..Slew of plugs) 25k..!! I know this setup works well,but
>we are talking about 25k :) Surely, there must be a manufacturer that can
>deliver a simular product for less?? LaMont
>
>
>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>
>>"Lamont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>>>Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
very
>>>expensive.. think about it..??
>>
>>But you don't have to play it. Do you change the way you work every two
>>years, or does the percieved need change? Did you need 64 tracks of audio
>>last year and all of a sudden need 96 tracks? Is the new uberhog reverb
>>really that much better that you need a new computer every two years?
>>
>>I used to be caught up in the speed race myself. Upgrading from a 800
MHz
>>processor, to a 900, to a 1200, etc. It all seems pretty silly now. I
>stopped
>>at an Athlon XP1400+ and life has been sweet ever since. I get the 24
tracks
>>of 24/44.1 audio and 7-8 plugs that I need. My computer hasn't crashed
>in
>>over 3 years. When I was running Paris, I had problems on a daily basis.
>> Life has been productive and sweet since going native.
>>
>>-Chris
>>
>Maybe we should start a gearsluttery support group, although I think we
would only "support" our own addiction.
A quad dual core board would really be nice. There's your $10k next gen DAW
- 1.5ms latency on pretty much everything (possible less with Lynx cards, or
so I hear - 0.7ms?).
You can already buy preconfigured DAW PCs, but in a year or two, we'll be
looking at 5 or so different DAW manufacturers - all of them former PC
builders, offering fully rackable, single enclosure solutions with your
choice of Apogee, Mytek, Lynx, RME, etc. ADDA, software system of your
choice, soft synth and plugin bundles, large widescreen LCD, with options
for controller/keyboard combos. Dedicated systems will be scrambling to
offer equally flexible and cross compatible solutions.
Dedric
On 1/15/06 5:16 PM, in article 43cad7d5$1@linux, "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na>
wrote:
> 900% more to get a 2% performance increase. Gearsluttery is a bad disease
> IMHO that get's in the way of truly getting the most out of what you already
> have. And I still catch bad bouts of it myself ;-)
>
> -Chris
>
> "LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>> Good Points Chris:) Still, my initial point was concerning about the lack
>> of mid-level pro DSP based DAWs. Digi's answer to my question (HD2 Axcel/
>> with Control 24..Slew of plugs) 25k..!! I know this setup works well,but
>> we are talking about 25k :) Surely, there must be a manufacturer that can
>> deliver a simular product for less?? LaMont
>>
>>
>> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>
>>> "Lamont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>>>> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
> very
>>>> expensive.. think about it..??
>>>
>>> But you don't have to play it. Do you change the way you work every two
>>> years, or does the percieved need change? Did you need 64 tracks of audio
>>> last year and all of a sudden need 96 tracks? Is the new uberhog reverb
>>> really that much better that you need a new computer every two years?
>>>
>>> I used to be caught up in the speed race myself. Upgrading from a 800
> MHz
>>> processor, to a 900, to a 1200, etc. It all seems pretty silly now. I
>> stopped
>>> at an Athlon XP1400+ and life has been sweet ever since. I get the 24
> tracks
>>> of 24/44.1 audio and 7-8 plugs that I need. My computer hasn't crashed
>> in
>>> over 3 years. When I was running Paris, I had problems on a daily basis.
>>> Life has been productive and sweet since going native.
>>>
>>> -Chris
>>>
>>
>Am I hearing you right? Sounds like you're looking for an upgrade path that
will provide you with relitively stable systems along the way. If that's
the case, I hear you. Upgrading and having to shake out the bugs, when the
clock is ticking, is a DRAG.
Nice thread.
MR
"LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:43ca95c4$1@linux...
>
> "Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need what
> I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
discussion)."
>
> Agreed.. :)
> But, the rest of your post illustrates my points. Some Producer buddies of
> mine in town, were having this same discusion about amonth or so ago. They
> are all Mac user, with a few giga machines. The consesus for us all is
that
> we have grown tired of the "upgrade" syndrome that, for one forces the
non-computer
> music guy to become so entrenched with personal computer technology, that
> they can't focus on music..At the end of the conversation, we all agreed
> that having a system like Pro-Tools HD would "serve" us best with out
having
> to "think" or stay on the CPU upgrade "teadmill" if you will. I've been on
> that treadmill since 97,and as I look back on how many great working
system
> setups I've detroyed due becuase I was trying to play the CPU sped game.
> I've lost decnet paying mixng and production jobs becuase my systems were
> not as stable as I had them before I "upgraded" to a faster cpu and OS..
> I one of our suites we still have PT Mix cube running on a G4(450) OS9
that's
> rock solid stable.. One of my Paris setup still has Win 98se..Stable
stable
> stable:)
>
> 2 staff producers went chasing the Apple speed dream , from Dual 867s to
> Dual G5(2.5s) on OSX..Man, the agony and frustrations on their faces due
> to the fact that they had serious deadlines. That's what spurred our
conversations
> about it's either PTHD or a slotion with DM2000/02r96 with Nuendo/PT Radar
> with the yammy difital mixer.. Each set up cost. But, we demand a solid
working
> system, that you do not have to make execues to yourself and the client..
>
> Dedric may have said it best when he stated that doing a dedicated dsp
system
> manybe a daughting task$$ Or so they say.. Stuff coming out of China
(Phonic
> firewire) mixers as well as microphones and other products are astounding
> deals. Just maybe the solution I'm after will come from China?
> LaMont
>
>
>
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
> >
> >Lamont wrote:
> >> Hey Jaimie,
> >>
> >> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off
cheap.
> >> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
> very
> >> expensive.. think about it..??
> >
> >Both native and DSP-based can be expensive. Native can be much less
> >expensive though, if budget is limited. For example, on the low end a
> >Mac Mini comes with Garage Band and you can do a lot with that and an
> >inexpensive Firewire or USB i/o box for a total cost of less than $1000.
> >
> >Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
> >(what I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>
> >discussion).
> >
> >There are DSP-based systems out there that come with their own
> >mixer/burner/software in a table-top format without requiring a
> >computer. They cost as much or more as a native system with a fast
> >computer. If you want to get off of the computer upgrade cycle, they're
>
> >available and they do what they do pretty well. But they aren't
> >particularly upgradable and upgradability is a big draw for
> >computer-based systems.
> >
> >Computer-based systems that include separate DSP cards have some of the
>
> >advantages and upgrade costs of native systems and some of the
> >disadvantages and limitations of dedicated, non-computer-based systems.
>
> >PARIS illustrates the disadvantages very well.
> >
> >I bought an Intel computer for PARIS and bought an OS upgrade along the
>
> >way. A few years later I bought a faster G4 computer for PARIS and it
> >was a noticable improvement. I also bought an upgrade for the PARIS
> >software which added useful new features and some unfinished, broken
> >features. It was nice to be able to upgrade but it did cost money just
> >as a native system would have. I was limited to the PARIS hardware
> >running on OS9, and the developers dropped support.
> >
> >PARIS would never get faster better, it was what it was. For me, the
> >freeze point in development stopped just short of what I needed. Close,
>
> >but forever short. So I sold it.
> >
> >Meanwhile CPUs had gotten much, much faster and having separate DSP for
>
> >the DAW had lost much of its advantage. I switched to a native system
> >running on the same G4 computer I had purchased for PARIS, but using
> >native software along with a new i/o box and a better operating system.
>
> >The transition did not cost a lot overall and the sale of PARIS pretty
> >much covered it.
> >
> >I did live on the bleeding edge for a while, though, with the transition
>
> >to OSX and I had to try several Firewire interfaces to find a solid
system.
> >
> >After a few years I upgraded to a new computer but kept the software and
>
> >i/o box I was already using. I sold the previous computer, so the
> >upgrade cost was not high. I upgraded the native software and computer
> >OS several times and the increase in capability was worth the upgrade
> >costs, just as it would have been with a DSP based system.
> >
> >If I had to buy from scratch today, I'd either pick up a Quad PowerMac
> >or save a bunch of money and get a dual G5 PowerMac, add extra RAM and
> >HD, Digital Performer or Logic, a Firewire i/o box or two and some third
>
> >party plugins. That system would probably last for the next ten years.
> >Even if I added a 24 moving fader controller it would be well under 10K.
>
> >Again, what I do and what you do may be different so your mileage may
vary.
> >
> >My current 2.5GHZ dual G5 is fast enough that I don't feel the need to
> >upgrade it for audio production. It could go for the next decade with
> >slowing me down.
> >
> >However if I decide to upgrade it at some point for animation or video
> >production, the audio side will come along for the ride at no extra cost.
> >
> >
> >> At least with a DSP based sytem, you know what you have, and the native
> cpu
> >> is a secondary issue.
> >
> >With the speed of CPUs today, why tie yourself to a hardware-limited DSP
>
> >system. If the company you buy it from is in business in five years, the
>
> >cost to upgrade a system like that could be much higher than just buying
>
> >a newer, faster computer.
> >
> >And when you buy a newer, faster computer you are upgrading everything
> >that runs on it, all your plugins, virtual instruments, even other
> >software (graphics, animation, video editing, software development,
> >whatever else you do), in one shot.
> >
> >
> >Plus, low latency, better i/o integration in a pro
> >> enviorment..
> >
> >This is your best argument. But latency is not an issue in my current
> >setup. My i/o box has direct monitoring. Even if I monitor through Logic
>
> >the latency is low enough that it hasn't been a problem.
> >
> >The i/o integration is fine, I have 18 analog inputs and 16 analog
> >outputs plus stereo digital i/o directly patchable through my DAW
> >software and also routable from the i/o box's monitoring software. If I
>
> >need more i/o I can plug in another Firewire i/o box.
> >
> >I run my system with a mouse and a jog/shuttle wheel add-on. I can get
> >moving fader controllers from at least four different manufacturers
> >which is tempting, but since I only really used the jog/shuttle part of
>
> >the PARIS controller I haven't needed that. Plus I've grown used to the
>
> >precision and (believe it or not) speed of mixing with the mouse.
> >
> >
> >The sad truth with moast if not all native solutios is that
> >> it has forced a big$$$ third party solutions market, inwhic native
users
> >> are going back to purchase , talk back units, better than average
converters..All
> >> to chase the dsp systems way of working..in the end, the native person
> does
> >> not realize that they have spent just as much, if not more than they
could've
> >> gotten with a dsp based DAW.
> >
> >A native system will be more flexible, you'll have more developers to
> >choose from to enhance your system, and if one of the developers goes
> >under, your system will not hit a dead end.
> >
> >Over the last decade I've spent way less than, for example, a ProTools
> >system would have cost and am getting, I think, comparable results.
> >
> >
> >> Having used nuendo sice it's inception (2000, ),logic audio, Ican with
> hesitation,
> >> that it takes a lot of $$$ to bring those apps up to pro specs, and
truth
> >> be known, steinbergs way of integrating hardware leaves a lot to be
desired..
> >
> >A Quad PowerMac with extra RAM and HD, MOTU Digital Performer, a MOTU
> >Firewire i/o box or two and some third party plugins...even a 24 moving
>
> >fader controller and you're well under 10K.
> >
> >It all comes down to individual needs and preferences, so I'm not really
>
> >saying you're wrong for what you're looking for. But for what I'm
> >looking for, a native system is pretty compelling.
> >
> >OTOH, had PARIS MIDI support been better, had they hung around long
> >enough to support OSX and AU plugins, I'd still be using PARIS. Even
> >with the limitation of 44.1 or 48 sampling.
> >
> >Cheers,
> > -Jamie
> > http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> Take care,
> >> Lamont
> >> take care
> >>
> >> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>I dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs are
> >>
> >>
> >>>so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
>
> >>>faster?
> >>>
> >>>The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
>
> >>>on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
> >>>There's no real cure for that. :^)
> >>>
> >>>It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five year
> >>
> >>
> >>>wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
> >>>choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
>
> >>>starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
> >>>
> >>>Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into more
> >>
> >>
> >>>laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
>
> >>>The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
>
> >>>Intel, pick your best time for the transition.
> >>>
> >>>If you want to make music using OSX right away there are plenty of PPC
>
> >>>choices that work today, all the way up to the quad PowerMac which has
>
> >>>more muscle than you probably need. Available now and they'll continue
>
> >>>to work after the Intel transition.
> >>>
> >>>Cheers,
> >>> -Jamie
> >>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>LaMont wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
> >>>>
> >>>>Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there
has
> >>
> >> no
> >>
> >>>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
> >>>>
> >>>>I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k),
DP(699)
> >>
> >> &
> >>
> >>>>Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield
> pro
> >>>>results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture
other
> >>
> >> than
> >>
> >>>>Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6
years
> >>>>since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about
Soundscape..
> >>>>
> >>>>My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product
that
> >>
> >> served
> >>
> >>>>the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
revolutionary.
> >>>> AND That's the point..
> >>>>
> >>>>Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your
only
> >>>>other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
> naitive's
> >>>>are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP
DAW..Even
> >>
> >> more,
> >>
> >>>>it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
> >>
> >> Pro
> >>
> >>>>standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come to
> >>
> >> an
> >>
> >>>>PT HD system.
> >>>>There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap
> between
> >>>>PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
> >>>>
> >>>>Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
> >>>>-The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the
capability
> >>>>to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing
found
> >>>>in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the
capabilities
> >>>>to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
> >>
> >> This
> >>
> >>>>would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
> >>
> >> SX-1
> >>
> >>>>was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU
product
> >>>>first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
> >>>>I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very
cool
> >>>>DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
> >>>>
> >>>>As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
> >>
> >> DAW,
> >>
> >>>>we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer
> faster
> >>>>Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
> already..I
> >>>>say this and I work
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61994 is a reply to message #61991] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 07:57 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
you with relitively stable systems along the way. If that's
>the case, I hear you. Upgrading and having to shake out the bugs, when the
>clock is ticking, is a DRAG.
>
>Nice thread.
>MR
>
>
>
>"LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:43ca95c4$1@linux...
>>
>> "Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
what
>> I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>discussion)."
>>
>> Agreed.. :)
>> But, the rest of your post illustrates my points. Some Producer buddies
of
>> mine in town, were having this same discusion about amonth or so ago.
They
>> are all Mac user, with a few giga machines. The consesus for us all is
>that
>> we have grown tired of the "upgrade" syndrome that, for one forces the
>non-computer
>> music guy to become so entrenched with personal computer technology, that
>> they can't focus on music..At the end of the conversation, we all agreed
>> that having a system like Pro-Tools HD would "serve" us best with out
>having
>> to "think" or stay on the CPU upgrade "teadmill" if you will. I've been
on
>> that treadmill since 97,and as I look back on how many great working
>system
>> setups I've detroyed due becuase I was trying to play the CPU sped game.
>> I've lost decnet paying mixng and production jobs becuase my systems were
>> not as stable as I had them before I "upgraded" to a faster cpu and OS..
>> I one of our suites we still have PT Mix cube running on a G4(450) OS9
>that's
>> rock solid stable.. One of my Paris setup still has Win 98se..Stable
>stable
>> stable:)
>>
>> 2 staff producers went chasing the Apple speed dream , from Dual 867s
to
>> Dual G5(2.5s) on OSX..Man, the agony and frustrations on their faces due
>> to the fact that they had serious deadlines. That's what spurred our
>conversations
>> about it's either PTHD or a slotion with DM2000/02r96 with Nuendo/PT Radar
>> with the yammy difital mixer.. Each set up cost. But, we demand a solid
>working
>> system, that you do not have to make execues to yourself and the client..
>>
>> Dedric may have said it best when he stated that doing a dedicated dsp
>system
>> manybe a daughting task$$ Or so they say.. Stuff coming out of China
>(Phonic
>> firewire) mixers as well as microphones and other products are astounding
>> deals. Just maybe the solution I'm after will come from China?
>> LaMont
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Lamont wrote:
>> >> Hey Jaimie,
>> >>
>> >> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off
>cheap.
>> >> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>> very
>> >> expensive.. think about it..??
>> >
>> >Both native and DSP-based can be expensive. Native can be much less
>> >expensive though, if budget is limited. For example, on the low end a
>> >Mac Mini comes with Garage Band and you can do a lot with that and an
>> >inexpensive Firewire or USB i/o box for a total cost of less than $1000.
>> >
>> >Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
>> >(what I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>>
>> >discussion).
>> >
>> >There are DSP-based systems out there that come with their own
>> >mixer/burner/software in a table-top format without requiring a
>> >computer. They cost as much or more as a native system with a fast
>> >computer. If you want to get off of the computer upgrade cycle, they're
>>
>> >available and they do what they do pretty well. But they aren't
>> >particularly upgradable and upgradability is a big draw for
>> >computer-based systems.
>> >
>> >Computer-based systems that include separate DSP cards have some of the
>>
>> >advantages and upgrade costs of native systems and some of the
>> >disadvantages and limitations of dedicated, non-computer-based systems.
>>
>> >PARIS illustrates the disadvantages very well.
>> >
>> >I bought an Intel computer for PARIS and bought an OS upgrade along the
>>
>> >way. A few years later I bought a faster G4 computer for PARIS and it
>> >was a noticable improvement. I also bought an upgrade for the PARIS
>> >software which added useful new features and some unfinished, broken
>> >features. It was nice to be able to upgrade but it did cost money just
>> >as a native system would have. I was limited to the PARIS hardware
>> >running on OS9, and the developers dropped support.
>> >
>> >PARIS would never get faster better, it was what it was. For me, the
>> >freeze point in development stopped just short of what I needed. Close,
>>
>> >but forever short. So I sold it.
>> >
>> >Meanwhile CPUs had gotten much, much faster and having separate DSP for
>>
>> >the DAW had lost much of its advantage. I switched to a native system
>> >running on the same G4 computer I had purchased for PARIS, but using
>> >native software along with a new i/o box and a better operating system.
>>
>> >The transition did not cost a lot overall and the sale of PARIS pretty
>> >much covered it.
>> >
>> >I did live on the bleedi
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61997 is a reply to message #61990] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 08:19 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;This is your best argument. But latency is not an issue in my current
>> >setup. My i/o box has direct monitoring. Even if I monitor through Logic
>>
>> >the latency is low enough that it hasn't been a problem.
>> >
>> >The i/o integration is fine, I have 18 analog inputs and 16 analog
>> >outputs plus stereo digital i/o directly patchable through my DAW
>> >software and also routable from the i/o box's monitoring software. If
I
>>
>> >need more i/o I can plug in another Firewire i/o box.
>> >
>> >I run my system with a mouse and a jog/shuttle wheel add-on. I can get
>> >moving fader controllers from at least four different manufacturers
>> >which is tempting, but since I only really used the jog/shuttle part
of
>>
>> >the PARIS controller I haven't needed that. Plus I've grown used to the
>>
>> >precision and (believe it or not) speed of mixing with the mouse.
>> >
>> >
>> >The sad truth with moast if not all native solutios is that
>> >> it has forced a big$$$ third party solutions market, inwhic native
>users
>> >> are going back to purchase , talk back units, better than average
>converters..All
>> >> to chase the dsp systems way of working..in the end, the native person
>> does
>> >> not realize that they have spent just as much, if not more than they
>could've
>> >> gotten with a dsp based DAW.
>> >
>> >A native system will be more flexible, you'll have more developers to
>> >choose from to enhance your system, and if one of the developers goes
>> >under, your system will not hit a dead end.
>> >
>> >Over the last decade I've s
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61998 is a reply to message #61991] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 09:23 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
pent way less than, for example, a ProTools
>> >system would have cost and am getting, I think, comparable results.
>> >
>> >
>> >> Having used nuendo sice it's inception (2000, ),logic audio, Ican with
>> hesitation,
>> >> that it takes a lot of $$$ to bring those apps up to pro specs, and
>truth
>> >> be known, steinbergs way of integrating hardware leaves a lot to be
>desired..
>> >
>> >A Quad PowerMac with extra RAM and HD, MOTU Digital Performer, a MOTU
>> >Firewire i/o box or two and some third party plugins...even a 24 moving
>>
>> >fader controller and you're well under 10K.
>> >
>> >It all comes down to individual needs and preferences, so I'm not really
>>
>> >saying you're wrong for what you're looking for. But for what I'm
>> >looking for, a native system is pretty compelling.
>> >
>> >OTOH, had PARIS MIDI support been better, had they hung around long
>> >enough to support OSX and AU plugins, I'd still be using PARIS. Even
>> >with the limitation of 44.1 or 48 sampling.
>> >
>> >Cheers,
>> > -Jamie
>> > http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Take care,
>> >> Lamont
>> >> take care
>> >>
>> >> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>I dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs
are
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
>>
>> >>>faster?
>> >>>
>> >>>The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
>>
>> >>>on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
>> >>>There's no real cure for that. :^)
>> >>>
>> >>>It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five
year
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
>> >>>choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
>>
>> >>>starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
>> >>>
>> >>>Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into
more
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
>>
>> >>>The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
&
|
|
|
|
| Polls and voting (was Re: Intel developing next-generation PowerMac) [message #62002 is a reply to message #61997] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 08:49 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
SP based DAWs. Digi's answer to my question (HD2 Axcel/
>>with Control 24..Slew of plugs) 25k..!! I know this setup works well,but
>>we are talking about 25k :) Surely, there must be a manufacturer that can
>>deliver a simular product for less?? LaMont
>>
>>
>>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Lamont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>>>>Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>very
>>>>expensive.. think about it..??
>>>
>>>But you don't have to play it. Do you change the way you work every two
>>>years, or does the percieved need change? Did you need 64 tracks of audio
>>>last year and all of a sudden need 96 tracks? Is the new uberhog reverb
>>>really that much better that you need a new computer every two years?
>>>
>>>I used to be caught up in the speed race myself. Upgrading from a 800
>MHz
>>>processor, to a 900, to a 1200, etc. It all seems pretty silly now.
I
>>stopped
>>>at an Athlon XP1400+ and life has been sweet ever since. I get the 24
>tracks
>>>of 24/44.1 audio and 7-8 plugs that I need. My computer hasn't crashed
>>in
>>>over 3 years. When I was running Paris, I had problems on a daily basis.
>>> Life has been productive and sweet since going native.
>>>
>>>-Chris
>>>
>>
>Hey Dedric,
Great outlook towards the future of DAWs. As I'm reading you view, which
is totaly realistic, I start feeling like I'm getting back on the PC/Mac
Treadmill again.
My view or wish would be a system like the Mackie DXB/ DM2000/Nuendo with
an integrated 48,64,128 track 24/192 recorder..All in one unit. With a customeized
OS (OSX or Win64,Karsyn (Neko sys)..Since this Mixer supports up to 4 UAD
cards as well as Vst plugs, flexibility is at hand..
I us the PC to record midi(back the MPC), so having an integrated midi sequencer
is not a biggie(for me)..
I'd pay for an almost closed system descibed above in a heart beat. Off the
treadmill, and back to work..
You're right, we may need gearslut recovery site for sure.:)
Take care..
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>Maybe we should start a gearsluttery support group, although I think we
>would only "support" our own addiction.
>
>A quad dual core board would really be nice. There's your $10k next gen
DAW
>- 1.5ms latency on pretty much everything (possible less with Lynx cards,
or
>so I hear - 0.7ms?).
>
>You can already buy preconfigured DAW PCs, but in a year or two, we'll be
>looking at 5 or so different DAW manufacturers - all of them former PC
>builders, offering fully rackable, single enclosure
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62003 is a reply to message #61990] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 09:58 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
solutions with your
>choice of Apogee, Mytek, Lynx, RME, etc. ADDA, software system of your
>choice, soft synth and plugin bundles, large widescreen LCD, with options
>for controller/keyboard combos. Dedicated systems will be scrambling to
>offer equally flexible and cross compatible solutions.
>
>Dedric
>
>On 1/15/06 5:16 PM, in article 43cad7d5$1@linux, "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na>
>wrote:
>
>> 900% more to get a 2% performance increase. Gearsluttery is a bad disease
>> IMHO that get's in the way of truly getting the most out of what you already
>> have. And I still catch bad bouts of it myself ;-)
>>
>> -Chris
>>
>> "LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Good Points Chris:) Still, my initial point was concerning about the
lack
>>> of mid-level pro DSP based DAWs. Digi's answer to my question (HD2 Axcel/
>>> with Control 24..Slew of plugs) 25k..!! I know this setup works well,but
>>> we are talking about 25k :) Surely, there must be a manufacturer that
can
>>> deliver a simular product for less?? LaMont
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62004 is a reply to message #62003] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 09:01 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
>>>
>>> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Lamont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off
cheap.
>>>>> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>> very
>>>>> expensive.. think about it..??
>>>>
>>>> But you don't have to play it. Do you change the way you work every
two
>>>> years, or does the percieved need change? Did you need 64 tracks of
audio
>>>> last year and all of a sudden need 96 tracks? Is the new uberhog reverb
>>>> really that much better that you need a new computer every two years?
>>>>
>>>> I used to be caught up in the speed race myself. Upgrading from a 800
>> MHz
>>>> processor, to a 900, to a 1200, etc. It all seems pretty silly now.
I
>>> stopped
>>>> at an Athlon XP1400+ and life has been sweet ever since. I get the
24
>> tracks
>>>> of 24/44.1 audio and 7-8 plugs that I need. My computer hasn't crashed
>>> in
>>>> over 3 years. When I was running Paris, I had problems on a daily basis.
>>>> Life has been productive and sweet since going native.
>>>>
>>>> -Chris
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Hey Dedric,
First, I just completed mixing an entire album usnig Nuendo/RME. The clients
like it very much. So, I knwoo how to make Nuendo work.. To me , Neundo/SX
makes you work harder for projects over 50 tracks in R & B music.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62005 is a reply to message #61998] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 09:07 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Much easier to mix in Paris & Pro Tools. And, there is a difference in sound..
My interpretation as "Pro" DAW, starts a "total System Package". Meaning
software 7 Hardware from a given manufacturer that will allow limitless i/o,
patchbay functionality.
I'm not saying that Nuendo is not a Pro Product,it is, just liek Logic Audio,
DP, Sonar,Samplitude, SX,Vegas..I own all execpt, samplitude & sonar, and
I get great results from each.
However, do I feel that without some fader package, upgraded onverters, off
shelf DSP cards, the experience and workflow suffers greatly.
My origanl post was only to point out that since Paris demise, no other manufacture
has brought to market a "Total Solution" package for the mid ground. Yes
we have the software like Nuendo, but, what about matching some hardware
with it, and a SPec'd system (Mac/PC) that's sold as a Package.
Now we only have LE, and all the naitives. You'releft to piece-mill a package
yourself. But, It's been my experience as a DAW consultant/Builder, that
wayy too much time is spent on specing and little time working..
Say what you want about about Digi, they sell a package. note: Most studio
are still running the old PT Mix system. hey, it works with just a Mac G4
of some kind.. So, you don't have to upgrade to HD.. But, Hey their new mixer
controllers are terrific!! but expensive :) Still, they have a system that
works well if you foller their specs to the letter.
Again, I'm not saying that my Nuendo setup is not stable ,it is. It (Nuendo)
shuts down only when I'm done workinging in it. That's saying alot about
the Software.. But, VSt2 as it stands today, is very clumsy in handling i/o
integration. Now, to some bigitime Nuendo users who have an SSL, Trident
console front-ending their rig, then it's mute point, but to those who are
mixing ITB, it's a major pain..
LaMont
rry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>Hi Lamont,
>
>> The reason I dont consider nuendo/sx as pro is beacause, it's only
>> software..
>
>That in fact proves my point - "pro" has become much more of a personal
>perception driven by marketing and peer pressure than the actual definition.
>For example in another industry, to some video houses, a $50,000 Avid rig
>may not be pro compared to a $200,000 Quantel system, but both will do much
>the same thing - deliver professional results - with differences that may
be
>key for the specific user (broadcast vs. post, etc), but not the definition
>of "pro" in general.
>
>Saying software isn't "pro" is missing the point of being a pro. Pro is
>about getting paid for what you do because you deliver quality results and
>products that someone else is willing to pay for. In another post you said
>that Chinese products offer an astounding value for the money. To me that's
>a rather astounding paradox to your definition. They are a good
>cost/performance ratio, but it is contradictory to say that Nuendo isn't
pro
>and a C1 mic is, in the same breath. I haven't heard a Chinese mic that
>compared to what I would consider, and choose as a "pro" mic (whether higher
>end "pro" from Lawson, Blue or Neumann, or a mid-grade Audio Technica).
>
>Yes, it takes converters, etc, to augment Nuendo for use in various
>situations, but the same is true of ProTools (ProTools isn't much good
>without an I/O box). Just because Digi sells it as one package doesn't
make
>it pro. And you have an expensive upgrade path - mu
|
|
|
|
| the Today report - was:Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62028 is a reply to message #61946] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 14:39 |
steve the artguy
Messages: 308
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ut Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>>>>> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
>>> up
>>>>> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>>>>> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
>>> sink
>>>>> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>>>>> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is
> it
>>> that
>>>>> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate
> jsut
>>>>> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean
> is
>>> ,
>>>>> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for
> HD..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little
> software
>>>>> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not
> even
>>>>> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
>>> them,
>>>>> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
>>> of
>&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: the Today report - was:Re: Intel developing next-generation PowerMac [message #62029 is a reply to message #62028] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 14:08 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>>> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
>>> current
>>>>> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
>>> 3-15k
>>>>> would do it..
>>>>> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>LaMont, I agree that a PT system delivers the goods. But you have to admit
that they have less flexibility than a native system, no? Is it your experience
that you can't get equal performance out of a native system? In terms of
track count/plugs or stability?
I see your point that Digi designs and tests complete systems. If you follow
their lead, you are working with a system where all the hardware and drivers
play nicely together on a computer that has been run through the paces in
terms of chipset compatibility and processing power. However, you can (at
least in theory) get that from VAR companies like Chatillon, ADK, Wave Digital,
et al, who will build you a "Nuendo Computer" with known good hardware and
support the entire system. A system like this will still cost much less
than any Digi rig and IMHO will likely be equally reliable. Crashes still
happen on a digi-approved rig.
If there were another DSP system maker to enter the market, there is nothing
to say that they would even venture into total system integration. Ensoniq/Emu
never made any chipset/mobo/videocard suggestions, which caused more than
a few of us here a lot of grief. If it weren't for this newsgroup, I would
have bailed on Paris much sooner. I don't run a commercial studio anymore,
but when I did, I was using Paris. I had a lot of problems with my system,
through a few different host computer itterations. There were many times
I had to shut a session down due to technical issues. I guess this is at
the root of why I don't think that a DSP package system is any mo
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62030 is a reply to message #61994] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 15:56 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
re pro than
a native system built up with hardware from several manufacturers. My frankenstein
Cubase rig is rock solid.
-Chris
PS, I will be a charter member of the gear addicts help group when it gets
going.
"Neve EQ will not solve the world's problems, Neve EQ will not solve the
world's problems..." ;-)
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Hey Chris,
>Great Post :)..But, you have to agree that although PT HD/Mix systems are
>expensive, they deliver big time, with great i/o flexibility to integrate
>hardware. If you purchase or build the spec'd digi ssytem, then you are
assured
>maximun results. But, you'll pay for it $$$$$ :)
>LaMont
>
>
>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>
>>It's already been said in other responses which I agree with. I don't
think
>>DSP DAWs are nescesary anymore, and I don't think it makes sense to try
>to
>>develop a competeing system to PT. Digi keeps the model going to keep
thier
>>stranglehold on a closed system that needs to be completely overhauled
(i.e.,
>>repurchased) every 4-5 years. I don't think that there is anything inherently
>>pro about DSP DAWs other than the perception. I agree that the cost of
>owning
>>a native system can approach a PT rig, but I think that is a matter of
paying
>>900% more to get a 2% performance increase. Gearsluttery is a bad disease
>>IMHO that get's in the way of truly getting the most out of what you already
>>have. And I still catch bad bouts of it myself ;-)
>>
>>-Chris
>>
>>"LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Good Points Chris:) Still, my initial point was concerning about the lack
>>>of mid-level pro DSP based DAWs. Digi's answer to my question (HD2 Axcel/
>>>with Control 24..Slew of plugs) 25k..!! I know this setup works well,but
>>>we are talking about 25k :) Surely, there must be a manufacturer that
can
>>>deliver a simular product for less?? LaMont
>>>
>>>
>>>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"Lamont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>>>>>Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>>very
>>>>>expensive.. think about it..??
>>>>
>>>>But you don't have to play it. Do you change the way you work every
two
>>>>years, or does the percieved need change? Did you need 64 tracks of
audio
>>>>last year and all of a sudden need 96 tracks? Is the new uberhog reverb
>>>>really that much better that you need a new computer every two years?
>>>>
>>>>I used to be caught up in the speed race myself. Upgrading from a 800
>>MHz
>>>>processor, to a 900, to a 1200, etc. It all seems pretty silly now.
>I
>>>stopped
>>>>at an Athlon XP1400+ and life has been sweet ever since. I get the 24
>>tracks
>>>>of 24/44.1 audio and 7-8 plugs that I need. My computer hasn't crashed
>>>in
>>>>over 3 years. When I was running Paris, I had problems on a daily basis.
>>>> Life has been productive and sweet since going native.
>>>>
>>>>-Chris
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Great Points again.!! "Neve EQ will not solve the world's problems, Neve EQ
will not solve the
world's problems..." ;-)"
Lol!!!!
To be honest Chris, my PAris problems were attributed to trying to stay up
with BrianT's contant upgrading.(God Bless his genius).:)
Before all this XP & Paris integration, Win 98seME was solid as a rock for
me on a PC that I made.. I mean 1-20 hours work days, no problems. This PC
never seen the light of the Internet, just a Paris PC, that's all. BUT,
it's when I got on the MOBO,CPU,video, Chip-set, XP/PAris upgrade path, things
got out of wack and less stable. That's when I started using Nuendo more
and more, but did not care for the sonics like I Paris.
"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>
>LaMont, I agree that a PT system delivers the goods. But you have to admit
>that they have less flexibility than a native system, no? Is it your experience
>that you can't get equal performance out of a native system? In terms of
>track count/plugs or stability?
>
>I see your point that Digi designs and tests complete systems. If you follow
>their lead, you are working with a system where all the hardware and drivers
>play nicely together on a computer that has been run through the paces in
>terms of chipset compatibility and processing power. However, you can (at
>least in theory) get that from VAR companies like Chatillon, ADK, Wave Digital,
>et al, who will build you a "Nuendo Computer" with known good hardware and
>support the entire system. A system like this will still cost much less
>than any Digi rig and IMHO will likely be equally reliable. Crashes still
>happen on a digi-approved rig.
>
>If there were another DSP system maker to enter the market, there is nothing
>to say that they would even venture into total system integration. Ensoniq/Emu
>never made any chipset/mobo/videocard suggestions, which caused more than
>a few of us here a lot of grief. If it weren't for this newsgroup, I would
>have bailed on Paris much sooner. I don't run a commercial studio anymore,
>but when I did, I was using Paris. I had a lot of problems with my system,
>through a few different host computer itterations. There were many times
>I had to shut a session down due to technical issues. I guess this is at
>the root of why I don't think that a DSP package system is any more pro
than
>a native system built up with hardware from several manufacturers. My frankenstein
>Cubase rig is rock solid.
>
>-Chris
>
>PS, I will be a charter member of the gear addicts help group when it gets
>going.
>"Neve EQ will not solve the world's problems, Neve EQ will not solve the
>world's problems..." ;-)
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Hey Chris,
>>Great Post :)..But, you have to agree that although PT HD/Mix systems are
>>expensive, they deliver big time, with great i/o flexibility to integrate
>>hardware. If you purchase or build the spec'd digi ssytem, then you are
>assured
>>maximun results. But, you'll pay for it $$$$$ :)
>>LaMont
>>
>>
>>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>
>>>It's already been said in other responses which I agree with. I don't
>think
>>>DSP DAWs are nescesary anymore, and I don't think it makes sense to try
>>to
>>>develop a competeing system to PT. Digi keeps the model going to keep
>thier
>>>stranglehold on a closed system that needs to be completely overhauled
>(i.e.,
>>>repurchased) every 4-5 years. I don't think that there is anything inherently
>>>pro about DSP DAWs other than the perception. I agree that the cost of
>>owning
>>>a native system can approach a PT rig, but I think that is a matter of
>paying
>>>900% more to get a 2% performance increase. Gearsluttery is a bad disease
>>>IMHO that get's in the way of truly getting the most out of what you already
>>>have. And I still catch bad bouts of it myself ;-)
>>>
>>>-Chris
>>>
>>>"LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Good Points Chris:) Still, my initial point was concerning about the
lack
>>>>of mid-level pro DSP based DAWs. Digi's answer to my question (HD2 Axcel/
>>>>with Control 24..Slew of plugs) 25k..!! I know this setup works well,but
>>>>we are talking about 25k :) Surely, there must be a manufacturer that
>can
>>>>deliver a simular product for less?? LaMont
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>"Lamont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off
cheap.
>>>>>>Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>>>very
>>>>>>expensive.. think about it..??
>>>>>
>>>>>But you don't have to play it. Do you change the way you work every
>two
>>>>>years, or does the percieved ne
|
|
|
|
| the Today report - was:Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62031 is a reply to message #62028] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 16:15 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ed change? Did you need 64 tracks of
>audio
>>>>>last year and all of a sudden need 96 tracks? Is the new uberhog reverb
>>>>>really that much better that you need a new computer every two years?
>>>>>
>>>>>I used to be caught up in the speed race myself. Upgrading from a 800
>>>MHz
>>>>>processor, to a 900, to a 1200, etc. It all seems pretty silly now.
>
>>I
>>>>stopped
>>>>>at an Athlon XP1400+ and life has been sweet ever since. I get the
24
>>>tracks
>>>>>of 24/44.1 audio and 7-8 plugs that I need. My computer hasn't crashed
>>>>in
>>>>>over 3 years. When I was running Paris, I had problems on a daily basis.
>>>>> Life has been productive and sweet since going native.
>>>>>
>>>>>-Chris
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Good points Dedric :)
"(never liked the editing workflow either - something
about it seems archaic, a la Avid, rather than intuitive)."
I agree with here. There is nothing that compares to Nuendo's/SX editing.
When I'm working in Nuendo, I have to admit that I smile, when it's editing
time. They(Steinberg) really put's the "I" in "intuitive". Easy, yet very
powerful..My favorite editor for any project. PT is kinda wiered and archaic.
Their "smart" tool is confusing at first, nothing like Paris, which has to
be one the fastest smoothest editors ever.But, I have to admit, once you
knwo hoe PT's editing is done, it's very powerful!! indeed..
I pray and hope that your are right about the future of VST. We sure can
use a shot in that direction..Take care.LaMont
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>To me having to switch between apps for midi or audio is a limitation I'm
>trying to get away from - having both together greatly increases my
>productivity and creativity, so that's the draw with Nuendo, and significant
>negative for ProTools (never liked the editing workflow either - something
>about it seems archaic, a la Avid, rather than intuitive).
>
>Spec'ing and building DAW systems is no big deal for me, as I am sure for
>you and most people here, so maybe we are in the minority. Sure, the time
>spent doing so gets to be a drag - I'm with you there, but it's worth it
to
>me and my company. Upgrading a ProTools rig for similar functionality would
>cost me many times more - just doesn't make sense unless money is of little
>concern.
>
>As far as managing I/O - I agree that is a limitation with native rigs due
>to the layer of ASIO and external I/O hardware in terms of simplicity -
>functionality is there. Getting around Totalmix routing, for example, on
>top of Nuendo routing, and still not having a simple solution for
>push-button rerouting can be a pain, but once a system is set, it can be
>workable.
>
>Nuendo's control room in 3.2 is a big step in the right direction (sure
|
|
|
|
| Re: the Today report - was:Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62034 is a reply to message #62031] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 15:33 |
justcron
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t lost interest when I realized I
>would have to use their mixer - e.g. Back to the joy of routing between
DAWs
>just to get one plugin in the chain. Not a time saver for me, so that makes
>it a deal breaker.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>On 1/15/06 8:51 PM, in article 43cb0a4b$1@linux, "LaMont"
><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey Dedric,
>>
>> First, I just completed mixing an entire album usnig Nuendo/RME. The clients
>> like it very much. So, I knwoo how to make Nuendo work.. To me , Neundo/SX
>> makes you work harder for projects over 50 tracks in R & B music.
>>
>> Much easier to mix in Paris & Pro Tools. And, there is a difference in
sound..
>>
>> My interpretation as "Pro" DAW, starts a "total System Package". Meaning
>> software 7 Hardware from a given manufacturer that will allow limitless
i/o,
>> patchbay functionality.
>>
>> I'm not saying that Nuendo is not a Pro Product,it is, just liek Logic
Audio,
>> DP, Sonar,Samplitude, SX,Vegas..I own all execpt, samplitude & sonar,
and
>> I get great results from each.
>>
>> However, do I feel that without some fader package, upgraded onverters,
off
>> shelf DSP cards, the experience and workflow suffers greatly.
>>
>> My origanl post was only to point out that since Paris demise, no other
>> manufacture
>> has brought to market a "Total Solution" package for the mid ground. Yes
>> we have the software like Nuendo, but, what about matching some hardware
>> with it, and a SPec'd system (Mac/PC) that's sold as a Package.
>>
>> Now we only have LE, and all the naitives. You'releft to piece-mill a
package
>> yourself. But, It's been my experience as a DAW consultant/Builder, that
>> wayy too much time is spent on specing and little time working..
>>
>> Say what you want about about Digi, they sell a package. note: Most studio
>> are still running the old PT Mix system. hey, it works with just a Mac
G4
>> of some kind.. So, you don't have to upgrade to HD.. But, Hey their new
mixer
>> controllers are terrific!! but expensive :) Still, they have a system
that
>> works well if you foller their specs to the letter.
>>
>> Again, I'm not saying that my Nuendo setup is not stable ,it is. It (Nuendo)
>> shuts down only when I'm done workinging in it. That's saying alot about
>> the Software.. But, VSt2 as it stands today, is very clumsy in handling
i/o
>> integration. Now, to some bigitime Nuendo users who have an SSL, Trident
>> console front-ending their rig, then it's mute point, but to those who
are
>> mixing ITB, it's a major pain..
>> LaMont
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> rry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>> Hi Lamont,
>>>
>>>> The reason I dont consider nuendo/sx as pro is beacause, it's only
>>>> software..
>>>
>>> That in fact proves my point - "pro" has become much more of a personal
>>> perception driven by marketing and peer pressure than the actual definition.
>>> For example in another industry, to some video houses, a $50,000 Avid
rig
>>> may not be pro compared to a $200,000 Quantel system, but both will do
much
>>> the same thing - deliver professional results - with differences that
may
>> be
>>> key for the specific user (broadcast vs. post, etc), but not the
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62035 is a reply to message #62030] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 15:38 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
definition
>>> of "pro" in general.
>>>
>>> Saying software isn't "pro" is missing the point of being a pro. Pro
is
>>> about getting paid for what you do because you deliver quality results
and
>>> products that someone else is willing to pay for. In another post you
said
>>> that Chinese products offer an astounding value for the money. To me
that's
>>> a rather astounding paradox to your definition. They are a good
>>> cost/performance ratio, but it is contradictory to say that Nuendo isn't
>> pro
>>> and a C1 mic is, in the same breath. I haven't heard a Chinese mic that
>>> compared to what I would consider, and choose as a "pro" mic (whether
higher
>>> end "pro" from Lawson, Blue or Neumann, or a mid-grade Audio Technica).
>>>
>>> Yes, it takes converters, etc, to augment Nuendo for use in various
>>> situations, but the same is true of ProTools (ProTools isn't much good
>>> without an I/O box). Just because Digi sells it as one package doesn't
>> make
>>> it pro. And you have an expensive upgrade path - much more than upgrade
>> PCs
>>> every couple of years. I've done the math on this many times (including
>>> comparing UAD-1 cards to the TDM equivalents in terms of plugin counts
per
>>> dollar - UAD-1 cards win easily).
>>>
>>> I use my Nuendo rig and many other software, and hardware tools day in
and
>>> day out producing media for a variety of professional clients in a very
>>> professional setting. We have office/studio space in the world headquarters
>>> for one of our main clients. Should I tell them that since I don't have
>>> ProTools and a Euphonix or Neve console (yet) to make it look bigger
and
>>> costs them more than it needs to does that make us less pro? No. Attitude
>>> and quality product delivery are what make us pro. Maybe Nuendo doesn't
>>> work for you, aor maybe you haven't decided to make it work for you,
but
>> it
>>> does work for a lot of other "professionals" like myself.
>>>
>>> Manufacturers and marketing departments define the line between Pro and
>>> Consumer when they add one feature or part that costs more than they
believe
>>> they can sell to the average consumer, so they almost haphazardly label
>> it
>>> "Pro" and double the price. We then blindly adopt that as the "pro"
>>> standard and thumb our noses at consumer gear.
>>>
>>> It really irritates me when people arrogantly define pro as what they,
or
>>> someone else has based on how expensive (e.g. Over a randomly chosen
>>> pricepoint) and popular it is, and non-pro as anything that isn't all
of
>> the
>>> above. That just isn't fair, objective, or pro in my book.
>>>
>>> It is sad that the media and arts production industry has increasingly
come
>>> to define the word "pro" by how much it costs to buy rather than the
quality
>>> of the product. Anyone ever see "Gigli" or heard of Britney Spears?
I
>> rest
>>> my case. ;-)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>> Echo Media Group, LLC
>>>
>>> On 1/15/06 11:22 AM, in article 43ca84bf$1@linux, "Lamont"
>>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hey Dedric,
>>>>
>>>> The reason I dont consider nuendo/sx as pro is beacause, it's only
>>>> software..To
>>>> get that and any native base app to pro standards in a day/out studio
>>>> situation
>>>> will cost you: Control surface unit, good converters, monitoring/talk
>> back
>>>> unit, and lets not forget the blazing cpu thatsd needed for low-latency,
>>>> big toime plugins..
>>>>
>>>> I'm not saying, that pro can't use natives, we do..It;s just like BrianT's
>>>> nuendo system(s)..He manning his nuendo systems using theEuphonics system
>>>> 5 system..can we say, that will and does take his system to a new level??
>>>> But, we all know, thtats what BT demands from a system..
>>>> mt point in the post was not ask a question "where is the development
>> for
>>>> the 5-10k crowd?? Sure digi is covering the high end, with their new
mixer
>>>> controllers both offering great monitoring ,talkback, and tight software
>>>> integration..I ca'nt believe that in the year 2006, no manufacture can
>> com
>>>> out with a cheaper solution than digi??...
>>>> takecare..
>>>> lamont
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> dric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>> A curiosity question - why do you not consider Nuendo, Logic etc, "pro
>>>>> DAWs"? Let's look back a bit - DAWs of any nature weren't considered
>> "pro"
>>>>> when first offering an alternative to tape and a $500,000 console.
>>>>> Technology advances, ProTools becomes more and more popular, and the
>> name
>>>>> sticks - it's now "pro". Then Paris, which was not considered pro
when
>>>>> Ensoniq first launched it, caught on in a small community and by Paris
>>>>> users, it is considered "pro". Just a semantics question perhaps,
but
>> it
>>>>> does make me wonder if each market that finds the tool they like, considers
>>>>> it "pro" because it works for them. I know of no standard to define
>> the
>>>>> term outside of what that tool does for one's income.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, other dedicated dsp systems: Pyramix (www.merging.com). Soundscape
>>>>> - still popular in Europe I believe (http://www.sydec.be/).
>>>>>
>>>>> I think as others are pointing out, the cost and risk of developing
>>>>> dedicated dsp is the real issue - faster computers are making the concept
>>>>> obsolete to a large market of users, at least for the most part.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the video world, streaming full resolution, uncompressed HD video
>> still
>>>>> requires dedicated processing for high speed work (Blackmagic, Canopus,
>>>> Avid
>>>>> cards, etc), and production houses that require full realtime effects
>>>>> require it (render times not acceptible - e.g. Broadcast, networks
where
>>>>> deadlines are very tight, large commercial production houses, etc -
many
>>>> use
>>>>> high end $100k+ systems for that, with no more effects or editing
>>>>> capability
>>>>> than Final Cut Pro, Vegas or Avid Express, but eliminating render times).
>>>>>
>>>>> However, even that market is changing, granted from the small production
>>>>> house up, not yet in the broadcast world. The limitations of native
>> there
>>>>> are how well a native system can support full resolution high quality
>> video
>>>>> (cpu/disk load, speed, etc), not the actual editing software's
>>>>> functionality
>>>>> or "professional" image. So in audio, if one can stream 100 tracks
of
>> audio
>>>>> with full, quality processing and effects, including outboard (more
than
>>>> I
>>>>> could do with my Paris rig), and it earns 100% of one's income, is
that
>>>> not
>>>>> "pro"? It's more than I was doing in studios with 2" tape and only
24
>>>>> tracks to work with. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Committing to dedicated DSP is costly and very likely (these days)
a
>> short
>>>>> term investment - that's why no one has jumped in to do it. Mark my
>> words,
>>>>> Digidesign is building their native holdings for a reason. Eventually
>> they
>>>>> too will be offering a dual/quad quad core native system with 64-bit
>>>>> processing and as much power as and HD3 rig. They've already made
an
>> old
>>>>> technology (motorola dsp) hang on for years after it has been superceded
>>>> by
>>>>> better dsp solutions (custom asic, or even video graphics chips - UAD,
>> and
>>>>> whatever the new generic dsp system is - can't recall the name).
>>>>>
>>>>> Just my .02
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/15/06 1:31 AM, in article 43c9fa54$1@linux, "LaMont"
>>>>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there
>> has
>>>> no
>>>>>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
>>>> &
>>>>>> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield
>> pro
>>>>>> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture
other
>>>> than
>>>>>> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6
years
>>>>>> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about
>>>>>> Soundscape..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product
that
>>>> served
>>>>>> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
>>>>>> revolutionary.
>>>>>> AND That's the point..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your
>> only
>>>>>> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
>>>>>> naitive's
>>>>>> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
>>>> more,
>>>>>> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up
to
>>>> Pro
>>>>>> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come
>> to
>>>> an
>>>>>> PT HD system.
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62038 is a reply to message #61983] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 18:23 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
>>>>>> already..I
>>>>>> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress
>>>>>> again..:)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>>>>>> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>>>>>> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
>>>> up
>>>>>> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00
Orginal
>>>>>> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if
they
>>>> sink
>>>>>> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>>>>>> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is
>> it
>>>> that
>>>>>> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate
>> jsut
>>>>>> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean
>> is
>>>> ,
>>>>>> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for
>> HD..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little
>> software
>>>>>> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not
>> even
>>>>>> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
>>>> them,
>>>>>> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
>>>> of
>>>>>> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than
your
>>>> current
>>>>>> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along
say
>>>> 3-15k
>>>>>> would do it..
>>>>>> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>This would be my idea of an optimized productivity scenario if I was using
Nuendo and had the budget.
http://www.arbitermt.co.uk/nuendo/products/idcontroller.htm
A bit pricey, but definitely specific to the application and with a moose
of a DAW running the software and DSP, a nice rack of Myteks or Lavry's for
tracking and patching external processors, and a decent summing box, I might
be convinced to jump ship.
;o)
"LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>"Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need what
>I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this discussion)."
>
>Agreed.. :)
>But, the rest of your post illustrates my points. Some Producer buddies
of
>mine in town, were having this same discusion about amonth or so ago. They
>are all Mac user, with a few giga machines. The consesus for us all is that
>we have grown tired of the "upgrade" syndrome that, for one forces the non-computer
>music guy to become so entrenched with personal computer technology, that
>they can't focus on music..At the end of the conversation, we all agreed
>that having a system like Pro-Tools HD would "serve" us best with out having
>to "think" or stay on the CPU upgrade "teadmill" if you will. I've been
on
>that treadmill since 97,and as I look back on how many great working system
>setups I've detroyed due becuase I was trying to play the CPU sped game.
>I've lost decnet paying mixng and production jobs becuase my systems were
>not as stable as I had them before I "upgraded" to a faster cpu and OS..
>I one of our suites we still have PT Mix cube running on a G4(450) OS9 that's
>rock solid stable.. One of my Paris setup still has Win 98se..Stable stable
>stable:)
>
>2 staff producers went chasing the Apple speed dream , from Dual 867s to
>Dual G5(2.5s) on OSX..Man, the agony and frustrations on their faces due
>to the fact that they had serious deadlines. That's what spurred our conversations
>about it's either PTHD or a slotion with DM2000/02r96 with Nuendo/PT Radar
>with the yammy difital mixer.. Each set up cost. But, we demand a solid
working
>system, that you do not have to make execues to yourself and the client..
>
>Dedric may have said it best when he stated that doing a dedicated dsp system
>manybe a daughting task$$ Or so they say.. Stuff coming out of China (Phonic
>firewire) mixers as well as microphones and other products are astounding
>deals. Just maybe the solution I'm after will come from China?
>LaMont
>
>
>
>
>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>>Lamont wrote:
>>> Hey Jaimie,
>>>
>>> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>>> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>very
>>> expensive.. think about it..??
>>
>>Both native and DSP-based can be expensive. Native can be much less
>>expensive though, if budget is limited. For example, on the low end a
>>Mac Mini comes with Garage Band and you can do a lot with that and an
>>inexpensive Firewire or USB i/o box for a total cost of less than $1000.
>>
>>Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
>>(what I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>
>>discussion).
>>
>>There are DSP-based systems out there that come with their own
>>mixer/burner/software in a table-top format without requiring a
>>computer. They cost as much or more as a native system with a fast
>>computer. If you want to get off of the computer upgrade cycle, they're
>
>>available and they do what they do pretty well. But they aren't
>>particularly upgradable and upgradability is a big draw for
>>computer-based systems.
>>
>>Computer-based systems that include separate DSP cards have some of the
>
>>advantages and upgrade costs of native systems and some of the
>>disadvantages and limitations of dedicated, non-computer-based systems.
>
>>PARIS illustrates the disadvantages very well.
>>
>>I bought an Intel computer for PARIS and bought an OS upgrade along the
>
>>way. A few years later I bought a faster G4 computer for PARIS and it
>>was a noticable improvement. I also bought an upgrade for the PARIS
>>software which added useful new features and some unfinished, broken
>>features. It was nice to be able to upgrade but it did cost money just
>>as a native system would have. I was limited to the PARIS hardware
>>running on OS9, and the developers dropped support.
>>
>>PARIS would never get faster better, it was what it was. For me, the
>>freeze point in development stopped just short of what I needed. Close,
>
>>but forever short. So I sold it.
>>
>>Meanwhile CPUs had gotten much, much faster and having separate DSP for
>
>>the DAW had lost much of its advantage. I switched to a native system
>>running on the same G4 computer I had purchased for PARIS, but using
>>native software along with a new i/o box and a better operating system.
>
>>The transition did not cost a lot overall and the sale of PARIS pretty
>>much covered it.
>>
>>I did live on the bleeding edge for a while, though, with the transition
>
>>to OSX and I had to try several Firewire interfaces to find a solid system.
>>
>>After a few years I upgraded to a new computer but kept the software and
>
>>i/o box I was already using. I sold the previous computer, so the
>>upgrade cost was not high. I upgraded the native software and computer
>>OS several times and the increase in capability was worth the upgrade
>>costs, just as it would have been with a DSP based system.
>>
>>If I had to buy from scratch today, I'd either pick up a Quad PowerMac
>>or save a bunch of money and get a dual G5 PowerMac, add extra RAM and
>>HD, Digital Performer or Logic, a Firewire i/o box or two and some third
>
>>party plugins. That system would probably last for the next ten years.
>>Even if I added a 24 moving fader controller it would be well under 10K.
>
>>Again, what I do and what you do may be different so your mileage may vary.
>>
>>My current 2.5GHZ dual G5 is fast enough that I don't feel the need to
>>upgrade it for audio production. It could go for the next decade with
>>slowing me down.
>>
>>However if I decide to upgrade it at some point for animation or video
>>production, the audio side will come along for the ride at no extra cost.
>>
>>
>>> At least with a DSP based sytem, you know what you have, and the native
>cpu
>>> is a secondary issue.
>>
>>With the speed of CPUs today, why tie yourself to a hardware-limited DSP
>
>>system. If the company you buy it from is in business in five years, the
>
>>cost to upgrade a system like that could be much higher than just buying
>
>>a newer, faster computer.
>>
>>And when you buy a newer, faster computer you are upgrading everything
>>that runs on it, all your plugins, virtual instruments, even other
>>software (graphics, animation, video editing, software development,
>>whatever else you do), in one shot.
>>
>>
>>Plus, low latency, better i/o integration in a pro
>>> enviorment..
>>
>>This is your best argument. But latency is not an issue in my current
>>setup. My i/o box has direct monitoring. Even if I monitor through Logic
>
>>the latency is low enough that it hasn't been a problem.
>>
>>The i/o integration is fine, I have 18 analog inputs and 16 analog
>>outputs plus stereo digital i/o directly patchable through my DAW
>>software and also routable from the i/o box's monitoring software. If I
>
>>need more i/o I can plug in another Firewire i/o box.
>>
>>I run my system with a mouse and a jog/shuttle wheel add-on. I can get
>>moving fader controllers from at least four different manufacturers
>>which is tempting, but since I only really used the jog/shuttle part of
>
>>the PARIS controller I haven't needed that. Plus I've grown used to the
>
>>precision and (believe it or not) speed of mixing with the mouse.
>>
>>
>>The sad truth with moast if not all native solutios is that
>>> it has forced a big$$$ third party solutions market, inwhic native users
>>> are going back to purchase , talk back units, better than average converters..All
>>> to chase the dsp systems way of working..in the end, the native person
>does
>>> not realize that they have spent just as much, if not more than they
could've
>>> gotten with a dsp based DAW.
>>
>>A native system will be more flexible, you'll have more developers to
>>choose from to enhance your system, and if one of the developers goes
>>under, your system will not hit a dead end.
>>
>>Over the last decade I've spent way less than, for example, a ProTools
>>system would have cost and am getting, I think, comparable results.
>>
>>
>>> Having used nuendo sice it's inception (2000, ),logic audio, Ican with
>hesitation,
>>> that it takes a lot of $$$ to bring those apps up to pro specs, and truth
>>> be known, steinbergs way of integrating hardware leaves a lot to be desired..
>>
>>A Quad PowerMac with extra RAM and HD, MOTU Digital Performer, a MOTU
>>Firewire i/o box or two and some third party plugins...even a 24 moving
>
>>fader controller and you're well under 10K.
>>
>>It all comes down to individual needs and preferences, so I'm not really
>
>>saying you're wrong for what you're looking for. But for what I'm
>>looking for, a native system is pretty compelling.
>>
>>OTOH, had PARIS MIDI support been better, had they hung around long
>>enough to support OSX and AU plugins, I'd still be using PARIS. Even
>>with the limitation of 44.1 or 48 sampling.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Take care,
>>> Lamont
>>> take care
>>>
>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs are
>>>
>>>
>>>>so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
>
>>>>faster?
>>>>
>>>>The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
>
>>>>on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
>>>>There's no real cure for that. :^)
>>>>
>>>>It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five year
>>>
>>>
>>>>wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
>>>>choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
>
>>>>starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
>>>>
>>>>Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into more
>>>
>>>
>>>>laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
>
>>>>The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
>
>>>>Intel, pick your best time for the transition.
>>>>
>>>>If you want to make music using OSX right away there are plenty of PPC
>
>>>>choices that work today, all the way up to the quad PowerMac which has
>
>>>>more muscle than you probably need. Available now and they'll continue
>
>>>>to work after the Intel transition.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>LaMont wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>>>>
>>>>>Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there
has
>>>
>>> no
>>>
>>>>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>>>>
>>>>>I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
>>>
>>> &
>>>
>>>>>Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield
>pro
>>>>>results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
>>>
>>> than
>>>
>>>>>Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>>>>>since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about Soundscape..
>>>>>
>>>>>My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
>>>
>>> served
>>>
>>>>>the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
revolutionary.
>>>>> AND That's the point..
>>>>>
>>>>>Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your
only
>>>>>other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
>naitive's
>>>>>are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
>>>
>>> more,
>>>
>>>>>it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
>>>
>>> Pro
>>>
>>>>>standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come
to
>>>
>>> an
>>>
>>>>>PT HD system.
>>>>>There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap
>between
>>>>>PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>>>>
>>>>>Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>>>>>-The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the
capability
>>>>>to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing
found
>>>>>in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>>>>>to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
>>>
>>> This
>>>
>>>>>would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
>>>
>>> SX-1
>>>
>>>>>was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU product
>>>>>first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>>>>>I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very
cool
>>>>>DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>>>>
>>>>>As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
>>>
>>> DAW,
>>>
>>>>>we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer
>faster
>>>>>Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
>already..I
>>>>>say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress again..:)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>>>>>about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>>>>>I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
>>>
>>> up
>>>
>>>>>a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>>>>>list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
>>>
>>> sink
>>>
>>>>>another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>>>>>So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is
it
>>>
>>> that
>>>
>>>>>Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate
jsut
>>>>>how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean
>is
>>>
>>> ,
>>>
>>>>>PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for
>HD..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little
software
>>>>>support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not
>even
>>>>>a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
>>>
>>> them,
>>>
>>>>>I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>>>>
>>>>>Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>>>Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
>>>
>>> current
>>>
>>>>>offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
>>>
>>> 3-15k
>>>
>>>>>would do it..
>>>>>Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>A friend of mine needs a dirt cheap digital piano. Of course it needs to
sound and feel fantastic. ;oP
I'm looking even cheaper than things like Roland RD-150's and stuff. I see
Casio make some hammer action stuff now. Yes yes I know, it's a Casio, but
surely they must have improved haven't they? ;o)
I'm hoping someone here has come across some magical gem in the more consumer
price ranged keyboards which happens to sound great and have some half decent
action. Sound is probably more important than action in this case.
Cheers,
Kim.ID would be cool, even if it looks like a psychedelic video switching mixer
from the 70's, but the reviews on functionality and increased productivity
are rather convincing. Price is a bit steep though.
One of these wouldn't be bad either:
http://www.euphonix.com/post/products/system_5-mc/system_5-m c.htm
Or maybe,
http://www.euphonix.com/post/products/mc/mc.htm
That's Nuendo on screen in both links.
This one still gets my vote for geek heaven and client wow factor:
http://www.smartav.net/images/E72Splash1-1024x768.jpg
BTW - I'm guessing that if Steinberg gets the 64 bit update right with a 64
bit full audio path, summing boxes could be just another color in the tool
palette, but far from necessary, and likely less spacious and clear, but
that's more optimism than guarantee.
I would like to hear Sonar 5 in full 64-bit glory to see if 64-bit (assuming
Cakewalk isn't blowing smoke) lives up the paper specs on the concept, but
I'm hesitant to buy into the hype until proven sonically.
Regards,
Dedric
On 1/15/06 10:45 PM, in article 43cb24d5$1@linux, "Deej"
<hdfajkl@hjkal.buzzz> wrote:
>
> This would be my idea of an optimized productivity scenario if I was using
> Nuendo and had the budget.
>
> http://www.arbitermt.co.uk/nuendo/products/idcontroller.htm
>
> A bit pricey, but definitely specific to the application and with a moose
> of a DAW running the software and DSP, a nice rack of Myteks or Lavry's for
> tracking and patching external processors, and a decent summing box, I might
> be convinced to jump ship.
>
> ;o)
>
>
>
> "LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>> "Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need what
>> I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>> discussion)."
>>
>> Agreed.. :)
>> But, the rest of your post illustrates my points. Some Producer buddies
> of
>> mine in town, were having this same discusion about amonth or so ago. They
>> are all Mac user, with a few giga machines. The consesus for us all is that
>> we have grown tired of the "upgrade" syndrome that, for one forces the
>> non-computer
>> music guy to become so entrenched with personal computer technology, that
>> they can't focus on music..At the end of the conversation, we all agreed
>> that having a system like Pro-Tools HD would "serve" us best with out having
>> to "think" or stay on the CPU upgrade "teadmill" if you will. I've been
> on
>> that treadmill since 97,and as I look back on how many great working system
>> setu
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62041 is a reply to message #62038] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 19:37 |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294
Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
:Meta@Dimensional.com" target="_blank">Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Lamont wrote:
>>>> Hey Jaimie,
>>>>
>>>> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off cheap.
>>>> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>> very
>>>> expensive.. think about it..??
>>>
>>> Both native and DSP-based can be expensive. Native can be much less
>>> expensive though, if budget is limited. For example, on the low end a
>>> Mac Mini comes with Garage Band and you can do a lot with that and an
>>> inexpensive Firewire or USB i/o box for a total cost of less than $1000.
>>>
>>> Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
>>> (what I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>>
>>> discussion).
>>>
>>> There are DSP-based systems out there that come with their own
>>> mixer/burner/software in a table-top format without requiring a
>>> computer. They cost as much or more as a native system with a fast
>>> computer. If you want to get off of the computer upgrade cycle, they're
>>
>>> available and they do what they do pretty well. But they aren't
>>> particularly upgradable and upgradability is a big draw for
>>> computer-based systems.
>>>
>>> Computer-based systems that include separate DSP cards have some of the
>>
>>> advantages and upgrade costs of native systems and some of the
>>> disadvantages and limitations of dedicated, non-computer-based systems.
>>
>>> PARIS illustrates the disadvantages very well.
>>>
>>> I bought an Intel computer for PARIS and bought an OS upgrade along the
>>
>>> way. A few years later I bought a faster G4 computer for PARIS and it
>>> was a noticable improvement. I also bought an upgrade for the PARIS
>>> software which added useful new features and some unfinished, broken
>>> features. It was nice to be able to upgrade but it did cost money just
>
>>> as a native system would have. I was limited to the PARIS hardware
>>> running on OS9, and the developers dropped support.
>>>
>>> PARIS would never get faster better, it was what it was. For me, the
>>> freeze point in development stopped just short of what I needed. Close,
>>
>>> but forever short. So I sold it.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile CPUs had gotten much, much faster and having separate DSP for
>>
>>> the DAW had lost much of its advantage. I switched to a native system
>>> running on the same G4 computer I had purchased for PARIS, but using
>>> native software along with a new i/o box and a better operating system.
>>
>>> The transition did not cost a lot overall and the sale of PARIS pretty
>
>>> much covered it.
>>>
>>> I did live on the bleeding edge for a while, though, with the transition
>>
>>> to OSX and I had to try several Firewire interfaces to find a solid system.
>>>
>>> After a few years I upgraded to a new computer but kept the software and
>>
>>> i/o box I was already using. I sold the previous computer, so the
>>> upgrade cost was not high. I upgraded the native software and computer
>
>>> OS several times and the increase in capability was worth the upgrade
>>> costs, just as it would have been with a DSP based system.
>>>
>>> If I had to buy from scratch today, I'd either pick up a Quad PowerMac
>
>>> or save a bunch of money and get a dual G5 PowerMac, add extra RAM and
>
>>> HD, Digital Performer or Logic, a Firewire i/o box or two and some third
>>
>>> party plugins. That system would probably last for the next ten years.
>
>>> Even if I added a 24 moving fader controller it would be well under 10K.
>>
>>> Again, what I do and what you do may be different so your mileage may vary.
>>>
>>> My current 2.5GHZ dual G5 is fast enough that I don't feel the need to
>
>>> upgrade it for audio production. It could go for the next decade with
>>> slowing me down.
>>>
>>> However if I decide to upgrade it at some point for animation or video
>
>>> production, the audio side will come along for the ride at no extra cost.
>>>
>>>
>>>> At least with a DSP based sytem, you know what you have, and the native
>> cpu
>>>> is a secondary issue.
>>>
>>> With the speed of CPUs today, why tie yourself to a hardware-limited DSP
>>
>>> system. If the company you buy it from is in business in five years, the
>>
>>> cost to upgrade a system like that could be much higher than just buying
>>
>>> a newer, faster computer.
>>>
>>> And when you buy a newer, faster computer you are upgrading everything
>
>>> that runs on it, all your plugins, virtual instruments, even other
>>> software (graphics, animation, video editing, software development,
>>> whatever else you do), in one shot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Plus, low latency, better i/o integration in a pro
>>>> enviorment..
>>>
>>> This is your best argument. But latency is not an issue in my current
>>> setup. My i/o box has direct monitoring. Even if I monitor through Logic
>>
>>> the latency is low enough that it hasn't been a problem.
>>>
>>> The i/o integration is fine, I have 18 analog inputs and 16 analog
>>> outputs plus stereo digital i/o directly patchable through my DAW
>>> software and also routable from the i/o box's monitoring software. If I
>>
>>> need more i/o I can plug in another Firewire i/o box.
>>>
>>> I run my system with a mouse and a jog/shuttle wheel add-on. I can get
>
>>> moving fader controllers from at least four different manufacturers
>>> which is tempting, but since I only really used the jog/shuttle part of
>>
>>> the PARIS controller I haven't needed that. Plus I've grown used to the
>>
>>> precision and (believe it or not) speed of mixing with the mouse.
>>>
>>>
>>> The sad truth with moast if not all native solutios is that
>>>> it has forced a big$$$ third party solutions market, inwhic native users
>>>> are going back to purchase , talk back units, better than average
>>>> converters..All
>>>> to chase the dsp systems way of working..in the end, the native person
>> does
>>>> not realize that they have spent just as much, if not more than they
> could've
>>>> gotten with a dsp based DAW.
>>>
>>> A native system will be more flexible, you'll have more developers to
>>> choose from to enhance your system, and if one of the developers goes
>>> under, your system will not hit a dead end.
>>>
>>> Over the last decade I've spent way less than, for example, a ProTools
>
>>> system would have cost and am getting, I think, comparable results.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Having used nuendo sice it's inception (2000, ),logic audio, Ican with
>> hesitation,
>>>> that it takes a lot of $$$ to bring those apps up to pro specs, and truth
>>>> be known, steinbergs way of integrating hardware leaves a lot to be
>>>> desired..
>>>
>>> A Quad PowerMac with extra RAM and HD, MOTU Digital Performer, a MOTU
>>> Firewire i/o box or two and some third party plugins...even a 24 moving
>>
>>> fader controller and you're well under 10K.
>>>
>>> It all comes down to individual needs and preferences, so I'm not really
>>
>>> saying you're wrong for what you're looking for. But for what I'm
>>> looking for, a native system is pretty compelling.
>>>
>>> OTOH, had PARIS MIDI support been better, had they hung around long
>>> enough to support OSX and AU plugins, I'd still be using PARIS. Even
>>> with the limitation of 44.1 or 48 sampling.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Take care,
>>>> Lamont
>>>> take care
>>>>
>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I dunno. Why lock into developing a new DSP system when native CPUs are
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> so fast now (fast enough for tons of tracks/plugins) and just getting
>>
>>>>> faster?
>>>>>
>>>>> The folks on gearslutz will always be chasing ways to spend more money
>>
>>>>> on their systems (no matter what systems they have, native or DSP).
>>>>> There's no real cure for that. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> It's true the Mac Intel transition will take time. It's not a five year
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> wait, though. Over the next six months there will likely be software
>
>>>>> choices for audio production that run on both Intel and PPC, probably
>>
>>>>> starting with Logic around March/April as a $50 upgrade, so they say.
>>>>>
>>>>> Over the next year the Mac Intel hardware choices will expand into more
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> laptop and desktop choices as Intel's series of chips hit the market.
>>
>>>>> The roadmap is pretty much known at this point. If you want to go with
>>
>>>>> Intel, pick your best time for the transition.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to make music using OSX right away there are plenty of PPC
>>
>>>>> choices that work today, all the way up to the quad PowerMac which has
>>
>>>>> more muscle than you probably need. Available now and they'll continue
>>
>>>>> to work after the Intel transition.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> LaMont wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Guys, Some thoughts:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anyone noticed that since our beloved Paris DAW($2700list)there
> has
>>>>
>>>> no
>>>>
>>>>>> pro DAW for under 10k??? Why??
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know we have the Cubases ($499) Nuendo's ($1,500), Logic(1k), DP(699)
>>>>
>>>> &
>>>>
>>>>>> Sonar($400). There are all very good naitive systems that will yield
>> pro
>>>>>> results. However, I can't belive thatthere is not one manufacture other
>>>>
>>>> than
>>>>
>>>>>> Digidesign that want's to producer a DSP based DAW?? It's almost 6 years
>>>>>> since the plug was pulled on Paris! Yes, I did not forget about
>>>>>> Soundscape..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My Point in this post is to bring to ligh that Paris was a product that
>>>>
>>>> served
>>>>
>>>>>> the "Middle ground" studio. Now, looking back, it's price point was
> revolutionary.
>>>>>> AND That's the point..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Today, if you're shelling out at least 10k for a PT HD system, your
> only
>>>>>> other alternative is do a naitive system..Again, I'm not saying that
>> naitive's
>>>>>> are bad, but we all know that there's nothing like a cool DSP DAW..Even
>>>>
>>>> more,
>>>>
>>>>>> it's a knwon fact that, if you wew to build your naitive system up to
>>>>
>>>> Pro
>>>>
>>>>>> standards (AD/DA converters,mixer,DSP FX cards) you'd actually come
> to
>>>>
>>>> an
>>>>
>>>>>> PT HD system.
>>>>>> There has to be a manufactuer that will stand up and fill in the gap
>> between
>>>>>> PT HD & the Naitives. Any company has the balls??
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Today my dream DAW would come from Mackie:
>>>>>> -The MAckie DBX digital mixer (Dual touch screens)that also had the
> capability
>>>>>> to record up to 128 24/96 audio tracks. Using the same cool editing
> found
>>>>>> in their earlier Hard disk recorder MDR2496. The mix has the capabilities
>>>>>> to add up to 3or 4 UAD cards, as well as third party FX for the mixer.
>>>>
>>>> This
>>>>
>>>>>> would be a ground breaking product. Even though Tascam tried it, their
>>>>
>>>> SX-1
>>>>
>>>>>> was cool, but was too limited. Actualy, the SA-1 was a Ensoniq/EMU
>>>>>> product
>>>>>> first, then made it's was over to Tascam..I digress..
>>>>>> I still hoping that the Yamaha/Steinberg marrige would yield a very
> cool
>>>>>> DM2000 metts Nuendo or 02R-96 meets Cubase sx . All in one units..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As things stands now in our current state of Personal computers based
>>>>
>>>> DAW,
>>>>
>>>>>> we really have not had any ground breaking technology save for newer
>> faster
>>>>>> Cpus.. Inwhich, I for one am tired of chasing the speed demon.Enough
>> already..I
>>>>>> say this and I work as a IT Network Consultant.. Okay :) i digress
>>>>>> again..:)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess this post grew out of neverending post over on www.gearslutz.com
>>>>>> about Ribbon mics, Summing buss's, 5k mics, 4k pre-amps, 4k converters..
>>>>>> I'm thinking, why do I want to keep sinking good money into "dressing
>>>>
>>>> up
>>>>
>>>>>> a naitive DAW to try to sound as good as Paris does for (2,700.00 Orginal
>>>>>> list)??? Those guys, bless their hearts are into dreaming that if they
>>>>
>>>> sink
>>>>
>>>>>> another 5-10k in analoge summing gear, tey will have that magic ssound..
>>>>>> So, I'm thinkink, 'Why have we gone backwards in this dAW game?? Is
> it
>>>>
>>>> that
>>>>
>>>>>> Digi has such a strangle hold on the industry,that they can dictate
> jsut
>>>>>> how much cool stuff reaches the lowered of the spectrum. What I mean
>> is
>>>>
>>>> ,
>>>>
>>>>>> PT LE is just enough to get frustrated to only dream and save up for
>> HD..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, we have this Apple fiasco..New machines, with new CPUS, little
> software
>>>>>> support. do they really think that thisi was good move now?? I'm not
>> even
>>>>>> a current Mac owner and I agonise for MAc lovers and users. If I were
>>>>
>>>> them,
>>>>
>>>>>> I would not upgrade for at leat 3-4 years. I digress again ..:) Sorry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, calling on all new and current manufactures..You a vast market
>>>>
>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>>> Pro users and studios that needs more juice and pro features than your
>>>>
>>>> current
>>>>
>>>>>> offereing, but we don;t want to spend 20k for it.. Soemthing along say
>>>>
>>>> 3-15k
>>>>
>>>>>> would do it..
>>>>>> Okay end of rant..LaMont
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>I just bought one of these for my kid for Christmas.
http://www.musiciansfriend.com/srs7/g=key/search/detail/base _pid/702217/
94.00 USD. The Piano is quite decent. Forget the action, there is
none.
The piano sounds like you paid 800.00.
Turn off the FX.
DC
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>A friend of mine needs a dirt cheap digital piano. Of course it needs to
>sound and feel fantastic. ;oP
>
>I'm looking even cheaper than things like Roland RD-150's and stuff. I see
>Casio make some hammer action stuff now. Yes yes I know, it's a Casio, but
>surely they must have improved haven't they? ;o)
>
>I'm hoping someone here has come across some magical gem in the more consumer
>price ranged keyboards which happens to sound great and have some half decent
>action. Sound is probably more important than action in this case.
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.hey Dedric, a friend of mine has upgrade to Sonar5 and we can hear the difference
form version 4. Version 4 sound was very balnd , vanillia if you will. version
5 mix summing sounds very wide, with more dept than version 4..So, they did
soemthing.
Note: That's what I think Nuendos/SX weak point. in theory,their 32bit floating
point mixer/summing bus was to allow for more audio options up and down the
audio bandwdith, but, things(mixes) start to fall apart at a certain point.
32bit float is great for plugins, limited for summming with high track counts.
LaMont
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>ID would be cool, even if it looks like a psychedelic video switching mixer
>from the 70's, but the reviews on functionality and increased productivity
>are rather convincing. Price is a bit steep though.
>
>One of these wouldn't be bad either:
>
> http://www.euphonix.com/post/products/system_5-mc/system_5-m c.htm
>
>Or maybe,
>
>http://www.euphonix.com/post/products/mc/mc.htm
>
>That's Nuendo on screen in both links.
>
>This one still gets my vote for geek heaven and client wow factor:
>
>http://www.smartav.net/images/E72Splash1-1024x768.jpg
>
>
>BTW - I'm guessing that if Steinberg gets the 64 bit update right with a
64
>bit full audio path, summing boxes could be just another color in the tool
>palette, but far from necessary, and likely less spacious and clear, but
>that's more optimism than guarantee.
>
>I would like to hear Sonar 5 in full 64-bit glory to see if 64-bit (assuming
>Cakewalk isn't blowing smoke) lives up the paper specs on the concept, but
>I'm hesitant to buy into the hype until proven sonically.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>On 1/15/06 10:45 PM, in article 43cb24d5$1@linux, "Deej"
><hdfajkl@hjkal.buzzz> wrote:
>
>>
>> This would be my idea of an optimized productivity scenario if I was using
>> Nuendo and had the budget.
>>
>> http://www.arbitermt.co.uk/nuendo/products/idcontroller.htm
>>
>> A bit pricey, but definitely specific to the application and with a moose
>> of a DAW running the software and DSP, a nice rack of Myteks or Lavry's
for
>> tracking and patching external processors, and a decent summing box, I
might
>> be convinced to jump ship.
>>
>> ;o)
>>
>>
>>
>> "LaMont " <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> "Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
what
>>> I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of this
>>> discussion)."
>>>
>>> Agreed.. :)
>>> But, the rest of your post illustrates my points. Some Producer buddies
>> of
>>> mine in town, were having this same discusion about amonth or so ago.
They
>>> are all Mac user, with a few giga machines. The consesus for us all is
that
>>> we have grown tired of the "upgrade" syndrome that, for one forces the
>>> non-computer
>>> music guy to become so entrenched with personal computer technology,
that
>>> they can't focus on music..At the end of the conversation, we all agreed
>>> that having a system like Pro-Tools HD would "serve" us best with out
having
>>> to "think" or stay on the CPU upgrade "teadmill" if you will. I've been
>> on
>>> that treadmill since 97,and as I look back on how many great working
system
>>> setups I've detroyed due becuase I was trying to play the CPU sped game.
>>> I've lost decnet paying mixng and production jobs becuase my systems
were
>>> not as stable as I had them before I "upgraded" to a faster cpu and OS..
>>> I one of our suites we still have PT Mix cube running on a G4(450) OS9
that's
>>> rock solid stable.. One of my Paris setup still has Win 98se..Stable
stable
>>> stable:)
>>>
>>> 2 staff producers went chasing the Apple speed dream , from Dual 867s
to
>>> Dual G5(2.5s) on OSX..Man, the agony and frustrations on their faces
due
>>> to the fact that they had serious deadlines. That's what spurred our
>>> conversations
>>> about it's either PTHD or a slotion with DM2000/02r96 with Nuendo/PT
Radar
>>> with the yammy difital mixer.. Each set up cost. But, we demand a solid
>> working
>>> system, that you do not have to make execues to yourself and the client..
>>>
>>> Dedric may have said it best when he stated that doing a dedicated dsp
system
>>> manybe a daughting task$$ Or so they say.. Stuff coming out of China
(Phonic
>>> firewire) mixers as well as microphones and other products are astounding
>>> deals. Just maybe the solution I'm after will come from China?
>>> LaMont
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Lamont wrote:
>>>>> Hey Jaimie,
>>>>>
>>>>> Athough native cpus are fast, don't think that you are getting off
cheap.
>>>>> Playing the speed keep up game every 2 years is 1) not productive..2)
>>> very
>>>>> expensive.. think about it..??
>>>>
>>>> Both native and DSP-based can be expensive. Native can be much less
>>>> expensive though, if budget is limited. For example, on the low end
a
>>>> Mac Mini comes with Garage Band and you can do a lot with that and an
>>>> inexpensive Firewire or USB i/o box for a total cost of less than $1000.
>>>>
>>>> Productivity is a matter of finding a system that does what you need
>>>> (what I need may not be what you need and that could be the root of
this
>>>
>>>> discussion).
>>>>
>>>> There are DSP-based systems out there that come with their own
>>>> mixer/burner/software in a table-top format without requiring a
>>>> computer. They cost as much or more as a native system with a fast
>>>> computer. If you want to get off of the computer upgrade cycle, they're
>>>
>>>> available and they do what they do pretty well. But they aren't
>>>> particularly upgradable and upgradability is a big draw for
>>>> computer-based systems.
>>>>
>>>> Computer-based systems that include separate DSP cards have some of
the
>>>
>>>> advantages and upgrade costs of native systems and some of the
>>>> disadvantages and limitations of dedicated, non-computer-based systems.
>>>
>>>> PARIS illustrates the disadvantages very well.
>>>>
>>>> I bought an Intel computer for PARIS and bought an OS upgrade along
the
>>>
>>>> way. A few years later I bought a faster G4 computer for PARIS and it
>>>> was a noticable improvement. I also bought an upgrade for the PARIS
>>>> software which added useful new features and some unfinished, broken
>>>> features. It was nice to be able to upgrade but it did cost money just
>>
>>>> as a native system would have. I was limited to the PARIS hardware
>>>> running on OS9, and the developers dropped support.
>>>>
>>>> PARIS would never get faster better, it was what it was. For me, the
>>>> freeze point in development stopped just short of what I needed. Close,
>>>
>>>> but forever short. So I sold it.
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile CPUs had gotten much, much faster and having separate DSP
for
>>>
>>>> the DAW had lost much of its advantage. I switched to a native system
>>>> running on the same G4 computer I had purchased for PARIS, but using
>>>> native software along with a new i/o box and a better operating system.
>>>
>>>> The transition did not cost a lot overall and the sale of PARIS pretty
>>
>>&
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon May 18 02:34:28 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07200 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
