Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75812 is a reply to message #75802] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 11:53   |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
g a real profit and not
> loses on plugins.
> So what gives..??
>
>
> c Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>On 12/2/06 9:31 AM, in article 45719c34$1@linux, "LaMont"
>><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> They recently interviewd the UAD guys and the big question was put to
> them:
>>> 'Why not add more power to the card"?
>>>
>>> UAD: answer was : Because they could not find a "cost-effective "DSp
>>> that
>>> would not raise the price of the card???
>>
>>UA is a very small company. This is the same necessity of survival that
>>has locked Digidesign into using Motorola dsps that are far from cutting
>>edge.
>>
>>It's very expensive to change course completely with dsp or cpu based
>>development, or start from scratch without $5,000,000 in development
>>budget
>>and base a product around a higher end dsp, *and* expect it to pay for
>>itself.
>>
>>Joe Bryan addressed this in an interview with Sound on Sound a year or two
>>ago. They didn't have a ton of capital at startup, so the card had to be
>>affordable to sell enough to pay for itself, and feasible for a limited
>>development team. Fairlight has taken a more expensive development route
>>with the CC-1. That's probably part of the reason they are only bundling
> it
>>with Dream systems, and selling different track counts/processing
>>capability
>>levels as licenses at different price points - to ensure they make up the
>>heavy development cost.
>>
>>I'm not trying to defend UA other than understanding their business model.
>>But imho, too many users seem to blame companies for trying to run a
>>profitable business when the same users are making equally biased
>>decisions
>>for exactly the same reason: wanting cheaper more capable products in
>>order
>>to spend less and make more; or buy marketing hype because xyz producer
> made
>>a hit record with that gear.
>>
>>I do agree the vintage gear craze is absurd beyond belief. To me there
> is
>>some great character and quality in some vintage gear, but not all has the
>>quality available today. There is way too much "follow the leader" bad
>>engineering going on, and companies are all to happy to appeal to whatever
>>sells.
>>
>>Dedric
>>
>I know,
I was also thinking that you might have to get yourself a Lunchbox or you will die..!
Cheers,
TC
DJ wrote:
> This is the easiest way to get in trouble that I can think of short of
> buying into a NEVE P
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75815 is a reply to message #75812] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 12:03 |
Carl Amburn
Messages: 214
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;> that
>>>> would not raise the price of the card???
>>>
>>>UA is a very small company. This is the same necessity of survival that
>>>has locked Digidesign into using Motorola dsps that are far from cutting
>>>edge.
>>>
>>>It's very expensive to change course completely with dsp or cpu based
>>>development, or start from scratch without $5,000,000 in development
>>>budget
>>>and base a product around a higher end dsp, *and* expect it to pay for
>>>itself.
>>>
>>>Joe Bryan addressed this in an interview with Sound on Sound a year or
two
>>>ago. They didn't have a ton of capital at startup, so the card had to
be
>>>affordable to sell enough to pay for itself, and feasible for a limited
>>>development team. Fairlight has taken a more expensive development route
>>>with the CC-1. That's probably part of the reason they are only bundling
>> it
>>>with Dream systems, and selling different track counts/processing
>>>capability
>>>levels as licenses at different price points - to ensure they make up
the
>>>heavy development cost.
>>>
>>>I'm not trying to defend UA other than understanding their business model.
>>>But imho, too many users seem to blame companies for trying to run a
>>>profitable business when the same users are making equally biased
>>>decisions
>>>for exactly the same reason: wanting cheaper more capable products in
>>>order
>>>to spend less and make more; or buy marketing hype because xyz producer
>> made
>>>a hit record with that gear.
>>>
>>>I do agree the vintage gear craze is absurd beyond belief. To me there
>> is
>>>some great character and quality in some vintage gear, but not all has
the
>>>quality available today. There is way too much "follow the leader" bad
>>>engineering going on, and companies are all to happy to appeal to whatever
>>>sells.
>>>
>>>Dedric
>>>
>>
>
>I've heard from a friend that the BlueBird is nice (on female vox). Anyone tried that one?
I've also been looking at these:
http://www.rotundrascal.com/Custom%20Microphones.htm
and these:
http://www.oktavamod.com
Anyone used any of those?
Cheers,
TC
Jeff hoover wrote:
> No...but that's one I've thought about putting in the arsenal (one
> available on Craigslist locally). The guy I'm working with right likes
> his sound best out of a (gulp!) Behringer B2 pro!
>
> Whatever gets the sound.
>"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4571cb6a@linux...
>> With hundreds of articulations required for a score, there isn't a single
>> box that I could use to run a full complement. And what I could load into
>> a
>> current PC/Mac will usually only account for about 30 seconds of scoring
>> in
>> one style/tempo.
>
> Wow, really? I need to hear one of your scores. Clearly we're having
> different experiences. What libraries do you use?
I'm using East West's Quantum Leap Symphonic XP library at the moment: 38G
total. For some things
I then add Symphonic Choirs at 35G (just one section (e.g. sopranos) uses
most of my free Ram).
Then factor in Stormdrum, Kontakt 2, Absynth, and numerous other VSTi's for
more varied, or modern/cinematic uses
and it adds up really fast. EW actually recommends up to 8 PCs for their
platinum library (24-bit).
The composers I've chatted with a few times in LA use 300 track templates
for composing, mutliple
PCs and a large number of outboard samplers/synths - usually 50-100 inputs.
Alth
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75816 is a reply to message #75815] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 12:14 |
AlexPlasko
Messages: 211
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ough I'm not anywhere
near that scale of outboard gear, I can see, and feel the need to greatly
expand my rig in my work more and more now.
I'm getting ready to put together a rather involved and dynamic piece for a
new demo - I'll email you a link when it's done.
> Heh. My timpani and horns are very good about not dropping out, (that is,
> ever since that one Logic bug was finally fixed, grrrr!) and they all live
> happily on one box.
>
That really depends on the percussionist though. Some guys are more
reliable than others, esp. if they are former
rock drummers. ;-) Hey, the trumpet player fell asleep during my
wedding....didn't even take a timpani roll to
get him to drop out. He did come back for the recessional though. :-)
With a larger templates I use up most of my Ram, and since one of the
crescendo Fr.Horn instruments I use is actually a mod-wheel dynamic
crossfade of three sample sets,
as are the timpani modwheel crossfade instruments, they tend to suck down
any remaining ram and cpu power very fast
when a lot of other instruments are loaded and running.
> I used to sync via SMPTE to a BetaCamSP deck. Now I run the video in
> Logic, too, as Quicktime. Very slick, SMPTE offset, automatic scene
> detection, import/export audio from the video. I've also used Soundtrack
> Pro in a similar way, but much prefer to compose in Logic. Either way,
> it's all on one box.
Apple has video down cold - H.264 is a superb codec, but sadly doesn't work
with Nuendo(PC- too bad).
AVI works fine but I've never been happy with compression and size vs.
quality tradeoffs.
Inline video in Nuendo actually works very well - Quicktime MJpeg works well
here though better when encoded with Vegas
than Quicktime Pro oddly. (I usually run a compressed 320x240 window in
Nuendo locally just for sync and spotting).
I also have a PC sync'd via System Link running full screen DV (720x480)
MJpeg (Quicktime playback in Cubase 4) -
looks quite good for client previews (not as clear as HD or external
monitored DV, but it works well). I'm planning to add a system
running the new Decklink HDMI PCIe card for full res HD playback to an HD
LCD TV fairly soon - for eye candy mainly.
It's pretty stunning what we can accomplish with a single computer now
though. More power and flexibility is necessary for some
things, but there is a ton of great music that can be produced with even
just a laptop.
Regards,
Dedric
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>>> It's really convenient to do it all on one fast, capable box in the
>>> studio. Less bailing wire, duct tape and magic incantations needed to
>>> hold it all together. :^)
>>>
>>> Almost no administration time needed.
>>>
>>>
>>>> BTW - speaking of intense animation, probably old news, but there's an
>>>> HD
>>>> video online from Animusic - I like some of their other work better,
>>>> but fun
>>>> all the same:
>>>> http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/hd/animusic2dvd.html
>>> Clever stuff. I saw another one of those a while back that also
>>> impressed me.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>I don't think Powercore has been hacked either, but it's a stock Motorola
56k chipset.
It's hard to hack low level code on a proprietary processing card (i.e
though it's just a graphics card
the processing code isn't run of the mill OS code even if it's C++ or
whatever).
It's way easier to hack an OS that has SDKs galore
floating around and so more holes in it than applications.
I really think their business model was "we ain't got a mint to fund this
puppy so what works for $500k max,
marketing and payroll included?"
As DJ said, there may be something significant on the horizon from them
anyway. Having built
hardware in a slightly larger tech company, I can attest to the approach
they are taking as making complete sense
for their size and market. We ran had 50 employees and only $1.2 mil in
annual revenue (over 10 years ago) to fund everything
we did - there were no shoot for the moon high end projects or redesigns
just because customers wanted bigger, better and faster.
We had to make what we had work, sell and pay for itself.
UA has made a huge impact on that market without even being the most
well-heeled of the dsp developers.
Imho, kudos to them and I hope the next product is even more successful than
the UAD-1 has been.
Wouldn't it be a hoot if they signed a deal with Fairlight to use the CC-1
platform, or Clearspeed cards? Being the supposed
equivalent of 8 HD Accel cards, the CC-1 could be about 16-20 times the
power of a UAD-1 (rough guess - I ran the numbers last
week, but don't remember exactly). I have no idea how the Clearspeed would
translate. Both are probably left field musings though.
Regards,
Dedric
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:4571c8a4$1@linux...
>
> Good Post Dedric ..
>
> There was this debate (last year) on gearslutz about the UAD card issue
> and
> it was an overwhelming fact that most of the users would gladly pay "more"
> money for a "faster" DSP card..
>
> And to be honest, I think I would galdly pay more for the UAD if it had
> more
> horsepower than he current model(s).
>
> Soemthing not quite rig
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75817 is a reply to message #75816] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 12:16 |
Carl Amburn
Messages: 214
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ht in UAD land with concernng the UAD powered
> plugins
> business model. Factor in this :
>
> -Their plugins have never been hacked, nor iare being sold on the black
> market.
>
> So, unlike other Plugin manufactuers, their seeing a real profit and not
> loses on plugins.
> So what gives..??
>
>
> c Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>On 12/2/06 9:31 AM, in article 45719c34$1@linux, "LaMont"
>><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> They recently interviewd the UAD guys and the big question was put to
> them:
>>> 'Why not add more power to the card"?
>>>
>>> UAD: answer was : Because they could not find a "cost-effective "DSp
>>> that
>>> would not raise the price of the card???
>>
>>UA is a very small company. This is the same necessity of survival that
>>has locked Digidesign into using Motorola dsps that are far from cutting
>>edge.
>>
>>It's very expensive to change course completely with dsp or cpu based
>>development, or start from scratch without $5,000,000 in development
>>budget
>>and base a product around a higher end dsp, *and* expect it to pay for
>>itself.
>>
>>Joe Bryan addressed this in an interview with Sound on Sound a year or two
>>ago. They didn't have a ton of capital at startup, so the card had to be
>>affordable to sell enough to pay for itself, and feasible for a limited
>>development team. Fairlight has taken a more expensive development route
>>with the CC-1. That's probably part of the reason they are only bundling
> it
>>with Dream systems, and selling different track counts/processing
>>capability
>>levels as licenses at different price points - to ensure they make up the
>>heavy development cost.
>>
>>I'm not trying to defend UA other than understanding their business model.
>>But imho, too many users seem to blame companies for trying to run a
>>profitable business when the same users are making equally biased
>>decisions
>>for exactly the same reason: wanting cheaper more capable products in
>>order
>>to spend less and make more; or buy marketing hype because xyz producer
> made
>>a hit record with that gear.
>>
>>I do agree the vintage gear craze is absurd beyond belief. To me there
> is
>>some great character and quality in some vintage gear, but not all has the
>>quality available today. There is way too much "follow the leader" bad
>>engineering going on, and companies are all to happy to appeal to whatever
>>sells.
>>
>>Dedric
>>
>If you want to follow the insanity of my virtual audio routing oddesy I offer
up the following link...
noise.youchill.com
Thanks
Chuckthanks chuck. great way to keep tabs on development
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote in message news:4571e946$1@linux...
>
> If you want to follow the insanity of my virtual audio routing oddesy I
> offer
> up the following link...
>
> noise.youchill.com
>
> Thanks
> ChuckI picked up a pair of Bluebirds recently, and haven't had a
chance to check 'em out on voice yet... I do have some piano
files you can hear them with in comparison to some 414's -
it'll give you little bit of an idea of what they sound like
if you're familair with the 414B-ULS's sound.
Scroll down a bit in these threads, maybe on the next page by
now, and you'll the subject line mentioning where I posted
these files, the liks are therein.
Neil
TC <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote:
>I've heard from a friend that the BlueBird is nice (on female vox). Anyone
tried that
>one?
>
>I've also been looking at these:
>
>http://www.rotundrascal.com/Custom%20Microphones.htm
>
>and these:
>
>http://www.oktavamod.com
>
>
>Anyone used any of those?
>
>Cheers,
>
>TC
>
>
>Jeff hoover wrote:
>> No...but that's one I've thought about putting in the arsenal (one
>> available on Craigslist locally). The guy I'm working with right likes
>> his sound best out of a (gulp!) Behringer B2 pro!
>>
>> Whatever gets the sound.
>>Jeff hoover <jkhoover@excite.com> wrote:
>No...but that's one I've thought about putting in the arsenal (one
>available on Craigslist locally).
Jeff, I may be selling one of mine (I have two & have never
found a the need to use two at once) gotta cover a bit of the
costs of my recent gear sluttage, so if you don't end up
getting that one locally, let me know & we'll probably be able
to work something out.
NeilYeah, that's why you say "UP TO 'x' number of hours".
Now if you do some single singer/songwriter guy with his
acoustic guitar & it takes you fifteen minutes to set up two
mics & get tones & he knocks it out of the park on the
first take, and you want to tell him: "Man you did a great job,
I'm gonna cut you some slack & only charge you two hundred
since we got done so fast" then that's totally up to you...
never hurts to have someone be enthusiastic about recommending
you because you gave 'em a good deal, too. Same thing with the
big package, but in that circumstance I'd guess you'd be more
likely to have bands go OVER the time alloted, rather than get
done sooner - the whole pont of the package pricing is that it
gives someone an idea of what they can get for their money...
if someone's not familiar with working in the studio, they have
NO clue about how few or how many hours it takes to get
something done, so just saying "my hourly rate is 'x'" only
gives someone a competitive comparison of your price vs.
someone else's... it still doesn't tell them what they can
expect to acomplish.
Neil
"brandon" <a@a.com> wrote:
>
>Wow Niel, thanks for the help.
>So my only last question is when they buy the single song package
>and they only use 2 1/2 hours are they still obligated to the whole $300?
>Same question applies to the other packages.
>
>Thanks,
>b
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>You can do whatever you want in terms of pricing... the idea
>>is that you're simply giving the client a discount for the
>>block of time vs. what they
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75820 is a reply to message #75817] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 12:36 |
AlexPlasko
Messages: 211
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s are very good about not dropping out, (that is,
>>> ever since that one Logic bug was finally fixed, grrrr!) and they all live
>>> happily on one box.
>>>
>> That really depends on the percussionist though. Some guys are more
>> reliable than others, esp. if they are former
>> rock drummers. ;-) Hey, the trumpet player fell asleep during my
>> wedding....didn't even take a timpani roll to
>> get him to drop out. He did come back for the recessional though. :-)
>>
>> With a larger templates I use up most of my Ram, and since one of the
>> crescendo Fr.Horn instruments I use is actually a mod-wheel dynamic
>> crossfade of three sample sets,
>> as are the timpani modwheel crossfade instruments, they tend to suck down
>> any remaining ram and cpu power very fast
>> when a lot of other instruments are loaded and running.
>>
>>> I used to sync via SMPTE to a BetaCamSP deck. Now I run the video in
>>> Logic, too, as Quicktime. Very slick, SMPTE offset, automatic scene
>>> detection, import/export audio from the video. I've also used Soundtrack
>>> Pro in a similar way, but much prefer to compose in Logic. Either way,
>>> it's all on one box.
>>
>> Apple has video down cold - H.264 is a superb codec, but sadly doesn't work
>> with Nuendo(PC- too bad).
>> AVI works fine but I've never been happy with compression and size vs.
>> quality tradeoffs.
>> Inline video in Nuendo actually works very well - Quicktime MJpeg works well
>> here though better when encoded with Vegas
>> than Quicktime Pro oddly. (I usually run a compressed 320x240 window in
>> Nuendo locally just for sync and spotting).
>> I also have a PC sync'd via System Link running full screen DV (720x480)
>> MJpeg (Quicktime playback in Cubase 4) -
>> looks quite good for client previews (not as clear as HD or external
>> monitored DV, but it works well). I'm planning to add a system
>> running the new Decklink HDMI PCIe card for full res HD playback to an HD
>> LCD TV fairly soon - for eye candy mainly.
>>
>> It's pretty stunning what we can accomplish with a single computer now
>> though. More power and flexibility is necessary for some
>> things, but there is a ton of great music that can be produced with even
>> just a laptop.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>>> It's really convenient to do it all on one fast, capable box in the
>>>>> studio. Less bailing wire, duct tape and magic incantations needed to
>>>>> hold it all together. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> Almost no administration time needed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW - speaking of intense animation, probably old news, but there's an
>>>>>> HD
>>>>>> video online from Animusic - I like some of their other work better,
>>>>>> but fun
>>>>>> all the same:
>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/hd/animusic2dvd.html
>>>>> Clever stuff. I saw another one of those a while back that also
>>>>> impressed me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>Thanks for the info, Dedric. So the difference between running on one
box or multiple boxes comes down to not only the speed/RAM/HD access of
the box but the plugin set you choose. My plugin set is happy on my G5,
your set is not happy on your AMD.
Over time that distinction will melt away, as computers continue gaining
power.
It's also interesting to see plugin designers coming up with algorithmic
emulations, which have reduced RAM requirements, as opposed to straight
sample-based approaches. We'll see more of this down the road.
I'll have to check out your setup sometime. Is EWQLSO a tedious way to
orchestrate? I find GPO very performance oriented and reasonably quick
to use, in addition to its efficient use of RAM/CPU.
I also keep a violin handy when I need complete control of articulation. :^)
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
PS. The groom was also a Mac user, although not exclusively. :^)
Dedric Terry wrote:
> Jamie,
>
> My system is an AMD X2 (dual core) with 2G of Ram and am planning to bump to
> 4G soon. EWQLSO uses NI's Kompakt player and I have the system pretty well
> tweaked for this.
>
> More ram will buy me a little more space to load instruments, and a few more
> voices, but latency, disk streaming and cpu power also becomes an issue with
> these libraries at a point.
>
> GPO is a great set - I used it for quite a while before moving to EWQLSO,
> and it would run fully loaded on my system I am sure (haven't used it since
> getting the X2). I also have Kirk Hunter's Emerald, though I only use it
> infrequently for a more unique sound (and where I don't need the depth of
> EWQL). There is a significant difference between the amount of processing
> (cpu, ram and disk) required between GPO and EWQSOL. Where GPO might have a
> single Marcato sample for Violins 1, EWQLSO will have 8 variations depending
> on what phrasing is required.
>
> Regarding 300 track templates, no I don't use that many yet, but the need is
> there - I just haven't taken, or had the time to start setting it up. That
> is really borne out of the necessity of having quick access to what you
> might use most to minimize loading and setup times, esp. for guys scoring
> for weekly TV. Even with the 60-100 mid tracks I might use on a short
> piece, setup really gets tedious and time consuming.
>
>
> Running the numbers for example:
>
> Just for orchestra with EWQLSO, each subsection may have 30 articulations or
> more, then you have roughly 10-12 subsections/instruments (Vlns 1 & 2,
> Violas, Cellos, Basses, Trumpets, Trombones, Fr. Horns, Clarinets, Oboes,
> Flutes, percussion, solo instruments, etc) - right there are 300+ midi
> tracks to access each individually. Less common articulations may be loaded
> only as needed (one doesn't often need a Psycho minor 3rd half step run up
> ;-).
>
> Then add in several VSTi's on a slave PC, outboard synths/samplers, etc -
> all that you want accessible simply by enabling a track and selecting a
> preset/patch, and you have a very large template.
>
> I also frequently run a config similar to what you are describing for many
> projects with no problem. I can load up, for example, Kontakt 2, Stormdrum,
> Intakt, 4-5 instances of Rapture (imho, one of the best soft synths on the
> market), 2 instances of Absynth, plugins, audio tracks, and never push the
> system.
>
> ...but just load up the full orchestra and she starts whinin' about union
> regulations and demandin' double scale. ;-)
>
> East West's 8 PC recommendation is probably based on each being a 3GHz
> Pentium or comparable system with 2G ram each minimum, given the timeframe
> of the manual, and that is for the 24-bit Platinum edition that has 3 mic
> positions for each instrument, including 5.1 surround samples - cutting that
> to 4 core duos is possible. Spreading out any such larger library (even 16
> bit stereo samples with one mic position) into just four sections makes it
> easier and faster to manage loading since each PC can be loading its'
> section at the same time when starting the session, and each can run at
> lower latency because it isn't pushed to the limit.
>
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> PS: the trumpet player was a Mac user... lol ;-)
>
> On 12/2/06 10:05 PM, in article 45725893@linux, "Jamie K"
> <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Dedric, what is your cpu configuration (dual or single) and speed?
>> How much RAM do you have?
>>
>> It sounds like your setup is more RAM starved for sample space, and
>> shouldn't necessarily be CPU starved for processing. Can you set the
>> dis
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75821 is a reply to message #75820] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 12:39 |
Carl Amburn
Messages: 214
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
k streaming for more efficient RAM usage?
>>
>> Large libraries shouldn't need to be in RAM all at once. I run the NI
>> stuff you listed and a bunch of other Audio Unit plugins, including some
>> pretty large sample sets, and it's no prob here. Granted I don't run the
>> EW stuff and if you're right about EW, I'm glad I don't.
>>
>> I have 2.5 GB RAM at present and it's been enough so far for some fairly
>> large arrangements. Other than the sample-based plugs, some AUs are
>> synths that depend more on CPU power than RAM and they run fine in large
>> projects as well, with the G5 muscle. Plus live instrument tracks and
>> copious FX plugins, no sweat, one box.
>>
>> What's with 8 PCs recommended to run the EW plugs? If it's just samples,
>> that's way overkill for CPU power, assuming they're talking about
>> current boxes.
>>
>> If it's RAM limitations, then A) sample libraries shouldn't have to run
>> completely in RAM, and B) current machines have a lot of RAM support
>> available to buffer samples - for example 16GB on current MacPro boxes,
>> which should be plenty o' RAM for sample buffering.
>>
>> If it's an HD i/o speed bottleneck for streaming samples, how about
>> adding more SATA cards/drives?
>>
>> I also wonder about the use of 300 tracks. A real orchestra doesn't have
>> 300 sections. It doesn't even have 300 individual players.
>>
>> Are you using 300 tracks on your stuff? I'm not. Shoot me if I do, the
>> music would get lost in the overproduction.
>>
>> Maybe the folks you talked to are just trying to save time preloading a
>> lot of plugins they won't necessarily use, that's a choice I guess. But
>> it'd be quicker and waste less resources to work out the arrangement
>> with fewer plugins (but still plenty). And then add what's needed to
>> refine, if anything. I'm not going to fault them for using outboard
>> samplers, that just shows they've been around a while, have a lot
>> invested in that setup, and it works for them. But anyone starting now
>> wouldn't likely go that route.
>>
>> BTW, GPO switches articulations/sample sets on the fly and runs very
>> efficiently. Big ensembles, small footprint.
>>
>> Sorry to hear about the trumpet player at your wedding, are you sure it
>> wasn't an EW plugin? ;^) I'm really looking forward to hearing your demo
>> piece!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>> PS. You're right about laptops, next laptop I get I'll evaluate for
>> using the plugins at live shows. It should be as fast or faster than my
>> G5, although with less RAM expansion and HD flexibility.
>>
>>
>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4571cb6a@linux...
>>>>> With hundreds of articulations required for a score, there isn't a single
>>>>> box that I could use to run a full complement. And what I could load into
>>>>> a
>>>>> current PC/Mac will usually only account for about 30 seconds of scoring
>>>>> in
>>>>> one style/tempo.
>>>> Wow, really? I need to hear one of your scores. Clearly we're having
>>>> different experiences. What libraries do you use?
>>> I'm using East West's Quantum Leap Symphonic XP library at the moment: 38G
>>> total. For some things
>>> I then add Symphonic Choirs at 35G (just one section (e.g. sopranos) uses
>>> most of my free Ram).
>>> Then factor in Stormdrum, Kontakt 2, Absynth, and numerous other VSTi's for
>>> more varied, or modern/cinematic uses
>>> and it adds up really fast. EW actually recommends up to 8 PCs for their
>>> platinum library (24-bit).
>>> The composers I've chatted with a few times in LA use 300 track templates
>>> for composing, mutliple
>>> PCs and a large number of outboard samplers/synths - usually 50-100 inputs.
>>> Although I'm not anywhere
>>> near that scale of outboard gear, I can see, and feel the need to greatly
>>> expand my rig in my work more and more now.
>>>
>>> I'm getting ready to put together a rather involved and dynamic piece for a
>>> new demo - I'll email you a link when it's done.
>>>
>>>> Heh. My timpani and horns are very good about not dropping out, (that is,
>>>> ever since that one Logic bug was finally fixed, grrrr!) and they all live
>>>> happily on one box.
>>>>
>>> That really depends on the percussionist though. Some guys are more
>>> reliable than others, esp. if they are former
>>> rock drummers. ;-) Hey, the trumpet player fell asleep during my
>>> wedding....didn't even take a timpani roll to
>>> get him to drop out. He did come back for the recessional though. :-)
>>>
>>> With a larger templates I use up most of my Ram, and since one of the
>>> crescendo Fr.Horn instruments I use is actually a mod-wheel dynamic
>>> crossfade of three sample sets,
>>> as are the timpani modwheel crossfade instruments, they tend to suck down
>>> any remaining ram and cpu power very fast
>>> when a lot of other instruments are loaded and running.
>>>
>>>> I used to sync via SMPTE to a BetaCamSP deck. Now I run the video in
>>>> Logic, too, as Quicktime. Very slick, SMPTE offset, automatic scene
>>>> detection, import/export audio from the video. I've also used Soundtrack
>>>> Pro in a similar way, but much prefer to compose in Logic. Either way,
>>>> it's all on one box.
>>> Apple has video down cold - H.264 is a superb codec, but sadly doesn't work
>>> with Nuendo(PC- too bad).
>>> AVI works fine but I've never been happy with compression and size vs.
>>> quality tradeoffs.
>>> Inline video in Nuendo actually works very well - Quicktime MJpeg works well
>>> here though better when encoded with Vegas
>>> than Quicktime Pro oddly. (I usually run a compressed 320x240 window in
>>> Nuendo locally just for sync and spotting).
>>> I also have a PC sync'd via System Link running full screen DV (720x480)
>>> MJpeg (Quicktime playback in Cubase 4) -
>>> looks quite good for client previews (not as clear as HD or external
>>> monitored DV, but it works well). I'm planning to add a system
>>> running the new Decklink HDMI PCIe card for full res HD playback to an HD
>>> LCD TV fairly soon - for eye candy mainly.
>>>
>>> It's pretty stunning what we can accomplish with a single computer now
>>> though. More power and flexibility is necessary for some
>>> things, but there is a ton of great music that can be produced with even
>>> just a laptop.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's really convenient to do it all on one fast, capable box in the
>>>>>> studio. Less bailing wire, duct tape and magic incantations needed to
>>>>>> hold it all together. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Almost no administration time needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW - speaking of intense animation, probably old news, but there's an
>>>>>>> HD
>>>>>>> video online from Animusic - I like some of their other work better,
>>>>>>> but fun
>>>>>>> all the same:
>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/hd/animusic2dvd.html
>>>>>> Clever stuff. I saw another one of those a while back that also
>>>>>> impressed me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>howdy stranger.
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 23:36:42 -0600, Brian Carter
<bricrter@skedaddlemindspring.com> wrote:
>
> So, Hi! Jeez... it's just been too damned long since I've posted here. I've been over on the
>Ampex Mailing List. Most of my projects have been analog for the past year or so; around here
>(Nashville) there's still quite a market for that, apparently. PARIS still saves my bacon sometimes
>though, especially considering I'm running 2" 16-track most of the time. Sometimes, a little SMPTE
>and a few PARIS tracks can really get you out of a jam.
>
> So the other week I did my first all-digital project in several months (a mixdown).
>Unfortunately I had my OSX/ OS 9 hard drive crash on me, killing my PACE install, and had to go to
>ID for a re-authorization. I was back up and running in a few days. (I have a separate hard drive
>with OS 9 only on it, and PARIS was running from that in demo mode.)
>
> Anyway, this brought back a few memories, so I thought I'd drop in. Glad to see Chuck, DJ,
>and many others still here hanging around. I'm still here, and I'm still using PARIS. I'll try to
>check in more often....
>
>bc
>
>
> PS: Interesting project you've got going there with the VST app rewire-type thing, Chuck!just make sure that if you do the package to allow enough time for
final mixing. just because they've bought 20 hours of time doesn't
mean that 19 of them is for tracking. you'll have editing (at
whatever level of fixing is needed) and at least 2 hours (and that's
cutting it close) per song for mixing. hopefully the songs will be
similar in nature and one final mix will serve as a template for the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75835 is a reply to message #75831] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 14:06 |
Carl Amburn
Messages: 214
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
oaudio.com" target="_blank">chrisl@adkproaudio.comOops. Sorry 'bout that little mixup, but thanks for the word. Sounds pretty
cool.
TCB
TC <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote:
>
>Hi Thad,
>
>Torry here (TC), I'm the guy who bought your RME stuff from you a couple
years back..
>
>That was me who bought the Orange Tiny Terror (I almost typed "Tiny Tim"
:-), unless
>Don did also.
>
>I bought this on site after trying it in the store, but it was one of those
"wow" moments,
>I was
>not shopping for amps at the time.
>
>It sounds fabulous. Warm, big, smooth. We a/b'd it with a larger Orange
head (can't
>remember the model) through
>a Mesa 4x12, and it sounded noticeable fatter than it's larger sibling.
>
>Tons of gain, but not ugly, harmonics and overtones come through nicely.
It reminds
>me a bit of an older modded Fender Reverb
>that we once rented for the studio.
>
>The cleans are nice. It probably won't match a AC30 for that, but still
very usable.
>
>Plus Side:
>
>3 knobs, easy as pie to get a great sound.
>It's the size of a small lunch box or camcorder case.
>Carrying bag.
>7 or 15 watt output.
>Price is excellent
>It's quite a bit louder than you would expect
>
>Down Side:
>
>It's a single channel. (I bought two of them for gigging with an ABY switch).
>Might be hard to get at this point (I bought the only one that came in and
ordered the
>2nd one).
>
>At one point I was going to get a Zvex Nano
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75836 is a reply to message #75835] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 14:22 |
AlexPlasko
Messages: 211
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
for the studio, but running
this in 7watt
>mode gives me more options,
>plus I can actually gig with it. I'm very happy.
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>TC
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At the price
>
>TCB wrote:
>> Hey Don,
>>
>> A friend is thinking of picking up one of those small Orange Class A amps.
>> I think you posted you got one. Could you write up a quick opinion/recommendation/warning
>> for me? I'll pass it on to him.
>>
>> TCB http://www.richardthompson-music.com/audio/I_Agree_With_Pat_ Metheny.mp3Hey Neil,
Maybe I didn't understand exactly what you are trying to remove.
If you can simply smooth over the click's higher frequency modulation on the
note waveform, you can remove a short click
without damaging the note itself. Where this obviously may not work, or
becomes much more difficult
is if the two share high frequency content, as it sounds like they might -
e.g. the click is increasing the amplitude
of high freq. content within the waveform (headphone click track bleed, room
noise, etc). It can be done this way, but it can be difficult.
If it's an ooh, or oh, you would have a significant lower frequency content
in the note, where the click would
(likely) have shaper transients, but that doesn't sound like the case here.
The only alternatives to doing this in Cubase or other editor is to use
something like Samplitude's spectral cleaning.
Regards,
Dedric
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:4576f5f1$1@linux...
>
> Deej, exactly, but can you do this in the Wave Editor window?
> I can do this outside the window, but not inside it... should I
> be able to do it inside as well?
>
> BTW, the phase-flip or silence thing won't work in this
> instance, as the two clicks are within a sung note (which is
> also why Dedric's idea of pencil-drawing down the waveform won't
> work either, becasue all that would do is decrease the amplitude
> of that portion of the note, alnog with the click, since the
> click is actually softer than the prevailing amplitude of the
> note itself).
>
> Neil
>
>
> "DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>>Hi Neil,
>>
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75840 is a reply to message #75836] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 14:46 |
Carl Amburn
Messages: 214
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
br />
> playbacks
> maximum attenuation.
>
> Preset 6
> Description: Submix on SPDIF at -6 dB. As Preset 1, plus submix of all
> playbacks
> on SPDIF.
>
> Preset 7
> Description: Submix on SPDIF at -6 dB. As Preset 1, plus submix of all
> inputs
> and playbacks on SPDIF.
>
> Preset 8
> Description: Panic. As Preset 4, but playback channels muted too (no
> output
> signal).
>
>
> Preset Banks
> Instead of a single preset, all eight presets can be stored and loaded at
> once. This is done via
> Menu File, Save All Presets as and Open All Presets (file suffix .mpr).
> After
> the loading the
> presets can be activated by the preset buttons. In case the presets have
> been renamed (see
> chapter 26.11), these names will be stored and loaded too.
>
>
>
> The preset buttons can get meaningful names in the same way. Move the
> mouse
> above a preset button, a right mouse click will bring up the dialog box.
> Note that the name shows up as tool tip only, as soon as the mouse stays
> above the preset button.
>
> The preset button names are not stored in the preset files, but globally
> in the registry, so won't change when loading any file or saving any state
> as preset. But loading a preset bank (see chapter 26.8) the names will be
> updated.
>
>
>
> set fader to zero
>
>
>
> When you want to set the fader to exactly 0 dB, this can be difficult,
> depending
> on the mouse configuration. Move the fader close to the 0 position and now
> press the Shift-key. This activates the fine-mode, which stretches the
> mouse
> movements by a factor of 8. In this mode, a gain setting accurate to 0.1
> dB is no problem at all.
>
>
>
> set multiple channels
>
>
>
> Often signals are stereo, i. e. a pair of two channels. It is therefore
> helpful to be able to make the routing settings for two channels at once.
>
>
> Press the Ctrl-key and click into the routing window of 'Out 3' with the
> key pressed. The routing list pops up with a checkmark at '3+4'. Click
> onto
> 'Analog'. Now, channel 4 has already been set to 'Analog' as well.
>
>
>
> shortcut keys
>
>
> F12, the cpu and disk meter
>
> #toggle Matrix view
> X
>
> #toggle visible or not for Input, Playback, Output, Submix
> I, P, O, S
>
> #Fader
> Set to 0 dB Ctrl-click faders
> Set to -6dB for hardware outputs Ctrl-click faders
> Center pans Ctrl-click pans
> Fine Control Shift-drag
>
>
> #Stereo
> Set faders pairwise in fine mode Shift-Alt
> Move faders or pans in stereo Alt-drag
> Faders jump to 0 dB pair-wise Ctrl-Alt-drag
>
>
> #Presets.........
> Set Preset to default Ctrl-click on preset button
> Load preset Alt-preset_number
>
> #level meter setup dialog
> F2
>
> #preferences
> F3
>
> #toggle Mute Master
> M
>
> #toggle mixer view
> T
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75846 is a reply to message #75840] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 16:41 |
neil[1]
Messages: 164
Registered: October 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
They're out till "sometime after christmas" though...I had the same idea..rats.
Rod
"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>Hi guys,
>Do you remember a few months ago we were discussing the new Beatles book
>that had just been released?
>Well I can't remember where to get it from, and my wife want's to get it
for
>me for Christmas.
>Any recollections, please.
>TIA
>--
>Martin Harrington
>www.lendanear-sound.com
>
>It is an amazing book.
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>www.recordingthebeatles.com
>They're out till "sometime after christmas" though...I had the same idea..rats.
>
>Rod
>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>Hi guys,
>>Do you remember a few months ago we were discussing the new Beatles book
>
>>that had just been released?
>>Well I can't remember where to get it from, and my wife want's to get it
>for
>>me for Christmas.
>>Any recollections, please.
>>TIA
>>--
>>Martin Harrington
>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>
>>
>What kind of speaker cab are you running with it?
I bought one on EBay the other day and it should get here today.
Looking forward to checking it out.
Hope I like it as much as your do.
TC <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote:
>
>Hi Thad,
>
>Torry here (TC), I'm the guy who bought your RME stuff from you a couple
years back..
>
>That was me who bought the Orange Tiny Terror (I almost typed "Tiny Tim"
:-), unless
>Don did also.
>
>I bought this on site after trying it in the store, but it was one of those
"wow" moments,
>I was
>not shopping for amps at the time.
>
>It sounds fabulous. Warm, big, smooth. We a/b'd it with a larger Orange
head (can't
>remember the model) through
>a Mesa 4x12, and it sounded noticeable fatter than it's larger sibling.
>
>Tons of gain, but not ugly, harmonics and overtones come through nicely.
It reminds
>me a bit of an older modded Fender Reverb
>that we once rented for the studio.
>
>The cleans are nice. It probably won't match a AC30 for that, but still
very usable.
>
>Plus Side:
>
>3 knobs, easy as pie to get a great sound.
>It's the size of a small lunch box or camcorder case.
>Carrying bag.
>7 or 15 watt output.
>Price is excellent
>It's quite a bit louder than you would expect
>
>Down Side:
>
>It's a single channel. (I bought two of them for gigging with an ABY switch).
>Might be hard to get at this point (I bought the only one that came in and
ordered the
>2nd one).
>
>At one point I was going to get a Zvex Nano for the studio, but running
this in 7watt
>mode gives me more options,
>plus I can actually gig with it. I'm very happy.
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>TC
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At the price
>
>TCB wrote:
>> Hey Don,
>>
>> A friend is thinking of picking up one of those small Orange Class A amps.
>> I think you posted you got one. Could you write up a quick opinion/recommendation/warning
>> for me? I'll pass it on to him.
>>
>> TCB..........spawn of UC Berkley post grad dept?
;o)
|
|
|
|
| Re: cubase 2.0 vst instrument rendering question [message #75847 is a reply to message #75846] |
Fri, 10 November 2006 15:55 |
Carl Amburn
Messages: 214
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"DC" <dc@spammersingradschool.org> wrote in message news:457912f2$1@linux...
>
> Seen this?
>
> Click on the page and it generates an essay for you. A different one each
> time,
> and none make any sense. Hilarious.
>
> http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo
>
> Where's my degree dammit?
>
> DC
>Ditto...
PSW has the writers on one of the forums and the additional isights they're
sharing are very cool
Don
"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
news:45796652$1@linux...
>
>
> It is an amazing book.
>
>
>
> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>www.recordingthebeatles.com
>>They're out till "sometime after christmas" though...I had the same
>>idea..rats.
>>
>>Rod
>>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>Hi guys,
>>>Do you remember a few months ago we were discussing the new Beatles book
>>
>>>that had just been released?
>>>Well I can't remember where to get it from, and my wife want's to get it
>>for
>>>me for Christmas.
>>>Any recollections, please.
>>>TIA
>>>--
>>>Martin Harrington
>>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>>
>>>
>>Aaron,
You can contact my keyboard/guitar player (doug at mindsearstudio dot com)
and he'll be glad to answer any questions. He plays one with our band
Standing Hampton (www.standinghampton.com). We play 60 plus gigs a year and
as far as I know, he's had no problems. As with all modeling systems, it
won't convert the die hard tone junkies, but for versatility, and rig
simplification, it's killer. I personally think it does a decent job of
emulating different guitars.
Tony
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
news:4578fe97@linux...
>
> Wondering if these make the cool giggin' guitar they appear to be (looking
> at starting a 2 man ac gtr act).
>
> Anyone got one/use one/played one/heard one?
>
>
> Mucho Gracias
> AA
>Hi Paul,
I've played it through a mesa 4x12, and my custom built 4x12/celstion cab, but I've been wanting to go THD for the last few months.
I'm going to be getting 2 THD 2x12 cabs when they are back in stock again from the dealer.
Basically with the Radial ABY I'll be able to switch channels or combine both amps at once, and size wise it will still be smaller than a marshall head and 4x12, and much easier to carry around.
The day I tried the Orange I traded my Marshall JMP-1/Mesa 2:100 live setup and got the two Oranges and a Les Paul Studio. I've also got an AC30 that I record with.
I also want to build or get an iso box for the THD cab for recording, which should work pretty well with the Orange. I've got an AxeTrak, but it's hard to get anything
but that "small speaker, closed mic" sound with it. It works well for some things though, but you've got no play with it, as it's all fixed position.
I've been looking at these options:
http://www.amptone.com/diyisobox.htm
http://www.vocalbooth.com/products/ampboxes.html
Cheers,
TC
Paul wrote:
> What kind of speaker cab are you running with it?
> I bought one on EBay the other day and it should get here today.
> Looking forward to checking it out.
> Hope I like it as much as your do.The Variax 700 acoustic (not to be confused with the 700 electric, Line
6 has a confusing model numbering system) has been great for solo gigs.
Sounds very good through the PA, better than the Ovation I previously
used for that. I've gotten good use out of the alternate tuning features
and multiple guitar models. Appreciate the on-board compressor. It's the
only Li
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun May 10 08:55:20 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04770 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
