Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » My last act of desperation to stay with Paris
|
|
|
|
| Re: My last act of desperation to stay with Paris [message #78456 is a reply to message #78455] |
Mon, 15 January 2007 21:19   |
Amuse
Messages: 90
Registered: February 2006
|
Member |
|
|
/>
>
>"RiverLake Farms" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote in message
>news:45d0745e@linux...
>> Thanks Aaron. It has its own IRQ, not shared. The EDS was detected,
as I
>> got the "found new hardware, multimedia audio controller" thing. However,
>> it didn't want to accept the scherzo as a driver - I had to manually force
>> it to accept it, as per instructions for manual installation. It did
then
>> put it in system devices and says its working properly. I also have the
>> midi driver in DM under sound. I might try changing the pci slot, its
now
>> in slot one, and a different video card.
>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>> news:45cffaaa$1@linux...
>>> 1/1 means the software doesn't recognize a usable hardware set. Check
IRQ
>>> sharing, make sure that you see the EDS in the hardware list correctly,
>>> and make sure the connection from the MEC to the EDS is all good. Be
very
>>> sure of these things, and be methodical and you'll find it.
>>>
>>> AA
>>>
>>> "RiverLake Farms" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote in message
>>> news:45cfef8b@linux...
>>>>I attemted to move Paris to an older AMD based computer, to free up my
P4
>>>>for VSTis. I went thru the installation as outlined for 3.0 under XP,
>>>>although I didn't get the scherzo installed til last. Anyway, now I
am
>>>>getting the failure to load Paris engine, error 1/1, which as far as
I
>>>>can find out means that Paris is not finding the scherzo driver. There
>>>>are no conflicts showing in device manager, and the scherzo is listed
in
>>>>System Devices as "working." Video card (G400 matrox) is on an irq by
>>>>itself. Anyone have any hints as to what I can try?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00C6_01C74E80.7ABCC340
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry... Aaron...
I didn't mean tape as in tape it was actually a protools rig.
--=20
Thanks,
Brandon=20
"Aar
|
|
|
|
| Re: My last act of desperation to stay with Paris [message #78502 is a reply to message #78454] |
Tue, 16 January 2007 22:49 |
Paul Artola
Messages: 161
Registered: November 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
of
>Neil's intentions as to his methodology in these mixes. I'm going to leave
>it at that Personally, I liked Neil's mixes and I don't find anything
>objectionable about Cubase 4 sonically. I have recently been getting a bit
>of time on a Digi 002 system as well and this sounds good too, but I don't
>thing it sounds any better/worse than Cubase. The secret is in the sauce
and
>my sauce is integrating outboard gear and 4 x UAD-1 cards.
>
>Regards,
>
>Deej
>
Thanks Deej-
I too liked Neil's mixes, and very much appreciated his contributions, which
I thanked him for each time I posted a response to them. I find myself, as
I listen
to mixes by anyone, separating out the choices that the engineer has made
-
levels, panning, dynamic and temporal options and EQ - from the sound of
the
platform itself. Maybe I'm deluding myself? Does 30 years of voicing and
tuning
pianos for the likes of Leonard Bernstein, Gonzala Rubalcaba and Chick Corea-
trying to interpret their subjective descrptions and turn them into meanigful
results- develop a different way of listening? I honestly have no idea. All
I know
is that "presence" and "3-dimensionality" are real to me. I also know that
we have
no current way of quantifying same.
>The secret is in the sauce and my sauce is integrating outboard gear and
4 x UAD-1 cards.
I'm in the exact same place. Thanks for taking the time to contribute.
Ted
PS FWIW - I blew the budget doing the "Audiophile thing" years ago
&
I would say Neil's (and your) skill in engineering far surpasses mine
&
Oh - I'm a PK too : )I agree with you. Too much emphasis on the 1975 sound. The industry has gotten
behind the "old" guard Engineers and their wants.
Me, I like the New sound of digital and all of it's possibilities. However,
If I'm hired get a certain sound, i go for it. But, I'm a fan a fan of the
new wide open sound..
Dedric, it seems that the music industry is in a spriraling motion of perpetual
back tracking. Classic Rock, 1970 R & B...
We are not moving forward...
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>The thing is - I've never been 100% sold on "the record sound" - some
>aspects are good, but to me it usually sounds like a creative approximation
>of what a band sounds like, rather than an uncanny representation. Glue
is
>fine creatively, but it doesn't exist in the real world, which is what
>recording was original intended to capture.
>
>Imho, because of the stargazing factor among engineers (copy the
>"hitmakers"), what used to be a limitation in the goal of reproducing a
>performance (noise, nonlinear phase, crosstalk, saturation, harmonic
>distortion) has become a vintage fad.
>
>I say use what works creatively, but not because it's "that sound" or
>someone says you need it, but because "that sound" happens to be the one
you
>personally want to make a specific recording more enjoyable. Let's keep
the
>creativity in art rather than trying to duplicate what xyz famous engineer
>did. Certainly learn new techniques, but also learn the real reasons behind
>them - including knowing when these happen by intent, by default, by
>accident, or simply by limitation (i.e. because there was no other option).
>
>Imho, the best
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed May 13 23:44:58 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02796 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
