Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » PING: Dave @ EK Sound
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: PING: Dave @ EK Sound [message #59981 is a reply to message #59980] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 16:11   |
![jef knight[1] is currently offline](/theme/PARIS_Forum_Template/images/offline.png "jef knight[1] is currently offline")
jef knight[1]
Messages: 201
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ething with a bit more horsepower if this becomes a reality.
>
>
>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Sometimes they both get
>really pissed, make this huge crackling noise then after a big *POP*, all
my
>screens will completely black out and both machines will reboot into the
>bios. Those are such precious and memorable moments for me.
ROTFL!!!
And I'm still not sure if you're serious or not... I suspect you are, except
maybe the last sentence...
Cheers,
Kim.IMHO, the Folcrom style summing device is the best way to go because of the
versatility. The "sound" of any passive summing box comes from the makeup
gain stage, which the Folcrom gives you control over. I'm not familiar with
the topologies of all the units out there, but I would prefer passive summing
to any boxes that might use true summing amplifiers (as opposed to makeup
gain stages). Again, this is for the versatility. The fact that Mix A sounds
better on Box Z doesn't hold much water to me, because I think that this
will change from mix to mix. Asking the question "which summing box is the
best" is akin to asking the question "which microphone preamp is the best".
Sometimes its a transformerless dual servo, sometimes its a sloppy opamp
with input and output iron.
Justin from Rolls has been on a bunch of web groups talking about his design.
It really is a box full of resistors and switches, nothing else. However,
it is well thought out with all the potential impedance and cross talk issues
worked out. Fortunately for us, that's all we need to do our summing. More
parts don't necessarily make a better product. There are some passive designs
out there for free, some good, some bad. Justin being a cool guy has even
given advice to folks building their own. Fred Forsell also has some designs
posted on his website. It might be a good place to start, but there are
a couple of known issues with his designs.
http://www.forsselltech.com/summing_buss_schematics.htm
I guess what I am ultimately saying is that I would think very carefully
before plopping down $2-3K for a summing box. If I weren't willing or able
to do the research and build my own, I'd buy a Roll mixer. Just my $0.02.
-Chris
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>FWIW the D2B came up sounding pretty average on the DAW Summing test. Of
>course this is on
|
|
|
|
| Re: PING: Dave @ EK Sound [message #59982 is a reply to message #59981] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 16:23 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ly one test under one set of conditions. I for one put
it
>down near the bottom of my favourite mixes. Of course much depends on which
>D/A's were used, and which A/D's were used in converting back, and how they
>were clocked (was the A/D picking up the sound at a moment "between" samples,
>or on a sample?).
>
>I'm interested to hear that your colleague is raving about them though.
I'd
>be sure to listen myself though before diving in, and do a blind A/B if
possible.
>The mix I heard lacked clarity through most of the range, seeming especially
>unresponsive in both top and bottom end... if I remember correctly. I
know
>it was on my least favourites in blind testing, and I was honestly expecting
>it to come out well above a standard Protools system.
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.
>
>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>One of my colleagues here who has a fairly hefty PTHD system just send
me
>an
>>e-mail with some pretty positive raving about how the D2B opens up the
>>soundstage. We will be *doing lunch*later this week and I'll be gioving
>this
>>a listen.
>>
>>I've been wondering if this D2B might be the magic bullet for putting a
>>native system on the same sonic footing as Paris. I may have just picked
>up
>>a pretty big client with ongoing work involving composing original music
>for
>>video. This clients sells *lots* of videos so it's got the makings of being
>>one of those situations that I've been hoping for with steady work. I just
>>got the call about this last night. I'm glad I haven't yet ordered the
parts
>>for the new computer. I may be needing to upgrade to Nuendo and to build
>>something with a bit more horsepower if this becomes a reality.
>>
>>
>>
>Was just about ready to buy me an RME card for my Cubase box (running VSTi's)
to slave to Paris via adat sync, and I thought I'd
try my Dakota with the latest incarnation of Cubase SX before kissing the
Dak a final goodbye, and, well... IT SYNC'D.
Time and time again, all day. Most solid sync yet.
Boy, what a christmas present!!
Is it a dream?, or will I wake up next to that soak of a drummer again??Trust me, I know what SMP means. Read what I said, it's in no way incompatible
with what these (marketing boilerplate) articles say.
TCB
"A Mac User 2" <no@nottoday.com> wrote:
>
>Phil Schiller explains in an interview in 2001, near the end of the article.
>
>http://news.com.com/2100-1040-254554.html
>
>Mac OSX uses symmetric multiprocessing. Here is information from 2002.
>Look for the line that says, "Mac OS X features symmetric multiprocessing,
>enabling the operating system itself, as well as applications, to take full
>advantage of dual processors for dramatic performance gains."
>
>http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2002/jan/28pmg4.html
>
>
>Here's an article all the way back in 2000 talking about symmetric multiprocessing
>on a Mac.
>
>http://www.macobserver.com/editorial/2000/08/02.1.shtml
>
>
>
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: PING: Dave @ EK Sound [message #59984 is a reply to message #59982] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 17:41 |
Rod Lincoln
Messages: 883
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
te:
>>>>
>>>>I agree completely. OSX was a big left turn, too. That spinning pizza
>>>is
>>>>just completely unacceptable. They crash if they don't have enough ram.
>>>>They're extremely slow compared to a PC (which will change when they
use
>>>>PC chips). And, they are very expensive for what the hardware and software
>>>>are really worth.
>>>>
>>>>They had a really nice, simple, clean OS with OS8-9. They saved a lot
>>of
>>>>money not having to develop an OS from the ground up by going with UNIX,
>>>>but they lost most of what made Apple wonderful and unique, too.
>>>>
>>>>Just my 2 cents. :)
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>
>>>
>>>Mike, what you should do, is actually us Mac OSX for some time before
commenting
>>>on it. It is obvious to me, that you are repeating the same ignorant
stuff
>>>some other ignorant PC user told you, or you read in a PC biased article.
>>> What is unbelievable is the ignorance PC users have about the Mac, and
>>the
>>>fact that they perpetuate the same ignorant bull shit. A lot of PC users
>>>talk about the Mac like they know what they're talking about, when in
fact,
>>>they have no idea what they are talking about!
>>>
>>>Go use a Mac G5 with OSX everyday for a year, then you'd have the right
>>and
>>>knowledge to tell people that the Mac sucks, but, that isn't what you'd
>>be
>>>saying. I don't think you would give up your XP box right away because
>>there
>>>would be some proprietary software you wouldn't want to give up, although
>>>you could run XP on your Mac. What would happen is you would end up using
>>>your Mac for 90% of your computing, and you would start to think that
XP
>>>is more of a PITA to use.
>>>
>>>Why would you use a Mac over your PC??? Because it is hassle free computing,
>>>it's fast and it just works! It is a more pleasurable experience. You
>>don't
>>>have to be a security administrator, worms and other viruses are not so
>>much
>>>an issue. Pop ups, spy-ware, are not much of an issue either. You don't
>>>have to tweak and fuss with your computer to get it to work. PC guys
are
>>>constantly trouble shooting and tweaking their computers. It is amazing
>>>to me that there is supposed to be standardized hardware for a PC, but
>a
>>>lot of it doesn't work with out trouble shooting, that is such a hassle.
>>> The amount of buggy software sold retail for the PC amazes me. All
the
>>>B.S. PC users must put up without much complaint, simply amazes me. A
>lot
>>>of time is lost on trying to debug and get PCs to work. For the most
part,
>>>the hassle factor doesn't exist with a Mac.
>>>
>>>
>>> A Mac, works differently than a PC, once you understand how a Mac works,
>>>then you will understand why Mac users are somewhat fanatical. I'll put
>>>it this way, Mac users are fanatical about their Macs, because they've
>used
>>>PCs, and know a Mac is better. I personally use both platforms and have
>>>for years. I use XP and 2000 for what I have to, and I use a Mac for
the
>>>other 80% of my computing. The Mac is simply less headaches. It is less
>>>time consuming, and time is money. PC users always talk about how much
>>cheaper
>>>a PC is than a Mac because of the hardware cost. It's not cheaper when
>>you
>>>figure in time, the time to build, administrate, trouble shoot, bug fix,
>>>down load drivers and patches. You guy's talk about band-aids and patches,
>>>Microsoft software has more holes in it than a sieve.
>>>
>>>When PC users start Mac bashing, Mac users just shake their heads, we've
>>>heard the lies for so long we usually have to just turn and walk away.
>
>>The
>>>guys that are brain washed are zealot PC users that re
|
|
|
|
| Re: PING: Dave @ EK Sound [message #59993 is a reply to message #59984] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 18:00 |
jef knight[1]
Messages: 201
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;>>>>
> >>>>>connected.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>news:43964ef0@linux...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>ok i'll try that.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>but won't that mean its not getting direct pure lock from big
ben??
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>"Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_editout_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>news:43964cf4@linux...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>House sync line only required for 3 interfaces and up, you
> >>>>>>>>>don't need it.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Loop out of the first MEC to the second, do not route
> >>>>>>>>>directly to the second MEC from the Big Ben. Ignore
> >>>>>>>>>termination for now.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Make sure that the adat modules are selected in the patchbay.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>David.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Jeremy Luzier wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>man i am stumped!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>its like the adat modules in mec 2 aren't even there... i can't
> >
> > get
> >
> >>>>>>>>audio in
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>or out of them.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>but the digi settings say "sync".
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>i don't get it. 44k or 48k doesn't matter.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>HEY!!!!! isn't there something you have to put in the cfg file
to
> >>>
> >>>make
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>>>>external clock work right????? maybe that's it!!!!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>now if i could just search this newsgroup that would be great!!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>anybody
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>out
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>there know what to put in the cfg file??
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>housesync=1
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>???
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>jeremy
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>news:43964737@linux...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>yea.... ok.... sorry.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>Paris on 98se.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>2 Mecs 3 cards.
> >>>>>>>>>>>Mec 1 has 8in, 8out, 1 adat.
> >>>>>>>>>>>Mec 2 has 2 adat.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>Nuendo 3 and Sx 3 on XP.
> >>>>>>>>>>>1 Digi 9652
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>Big ben is sending wordclock to digi9652 and both mecs... 3
> >
> > apogee
> >
> >>>>>>>>cables
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>going from 3 outs on ben to each input... terminating with a T
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>>>>>75ohm
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>wordclock terminator at the input of all.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>like i said... everything looks good on RME DIGI Settings...
> >
> > clock
> >
> >>>>>>>mode
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>is
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>set to word clock, sync ref says word, all adats say sync,
spdif
> >
> > in
> >
> >>>>>is
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>dead
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>set on 44.1 and not moving.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>i turned off both mecs and still no go.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>i am gonna try to re-connect the adat cables and the word cable
> >
> > to
> >
> >>>>>>>mec2.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>>news:439630e8$1@linux...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>ok so everything LOOKS good... no problems according to big
> >
> > ben...
> >
> >>>>>>>all
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>lights look good.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>Paris LOOKS happy too. Both Mecs set to "Word". Optical lock
> >>>>>
> >>>>>lights
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>are
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>on
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>for all adat modules.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>everything looks good on 9652 also... green word clock light
is
> >
> > on
> >
> >>>>>>>and
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>everything reads correctly on the settings panel... everything
> >
> > is
> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>synced...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>clock mode is set to word clock and sync ref says Word.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>problem... i don't get any audio from 9652 adat 9-24. 9-24 is
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>connecting
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>to
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>Mec #2(submix 2) modules. when i put a file in submix 2 i
hear
> >>>>>
> >>>>>it...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>but
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>in
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>live mode i hear nothing from nuendo. everything is fine on
> >
> > adat
> >
> >>>>>1-8
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>connected to Mec 1 (submix 1).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>i am at 44.1
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>any suggestions?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>Jeremy
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>emy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>news:43961ff1@linux...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>news:43961fa4$1@linux...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>does anyone have a big ben in use along with paris... or
paris
> >>>
> >>>and
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>SX/nuendo?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>the apogee site says to terminate with a T and a terminator
at
> >>>
> >>>the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>input,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>when the device recieving WC has only In and Out.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Does this method work with Paris??
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Jeremy
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>
> >
> >Of course, Neil, I'm sorry.
And a cowbell.
TCB
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>Thad... Can't believe you left out the lava lamp.
>
>:)
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>You're almost there. You still need
>>
>>- a ferret (two or even three would be better, but one will do, especially
>>if it's a vintage ferret)
>>
>>- an eight ball (for that LA 80's drum sound)
>>
>>- Pele
|
|
|
|
| Re: PING: Dave @ EK Sound [message #59994 is a reply to message #59981] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 18:05 |
audioguy_nospam_
Messages: 60
Registered: June 2005
|
Member |
|
|
poster (for inspiration)
>>
>>and you should be good.
>>
>>"Greg Bratton" <gregb@seedfaith.org> wrote:
>>>In about a week, I will have completed buying (everything) I think I need
>>
>>>for a real project studio.
>>>
>>>I have:
>>>
>>>Paris 442 + IF2 w/ C16
>>>Mackie 14ch board
>>>Electric Guitars
>>>Acoustic Guitars
>>>Bass Guitar
>>>Guitar Port
>>>Korg N5ex
>>>Drum Soundfont
>>>Cakewalk Sonar
>>>AT4033 Condenser Mic
>>>Isolation Booth (for vocals, acoustics)
>>>Various audio programs (Soundforge, CD Arch)
>>>A slow Pent IV that has seemed to be fast enough to work with all of this
>>>
>>>and will soon have:
>>>
>>>A nice set of reference monitors.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>My question is, I consider myself more of an artist than a producer,
>>>however....what else do I need???
>>>
>>>My current system is:
>>>1. I program the drums in Sonar using my drum soundfont I like....
>>>2. I add any keyboard tracks in sonar...(piano, organ)
>>>3. With three clicks at the beginning, I import and line up those tracks
>>one
>>>at a time into Paris
>>>4. Usually just record the Bass Guitar direct to Paris
>>>5. I add my Guitar tracks with Guitar Port
>>>6. I record my live tracks in the Iso booth (C16 with long cable is handy
>>
>>>here)
>>>7. I mix down in Paris using mostly the included effects
>>>8. I render out and master in Soundforge
>>>9. I burn CD in CD Architect
>>>
>>>
>>>And hopefully, with the new reference speakers, the CDs will sound good.
>>>
>>>However, when I read the posts on here, I hardly know what a lot of the
>>
>>>equipment I hear talked about even is.
>>>
>>>What I need to know is, is there an area in my studio or process that
is
>>
>>>missing that could take me to the next level?
>>>If you inherited this studio, what would you add/change to it?
>>>
>>>I know some of it is based on music styles/personal preferences, however,
>>is
>>>there something here that I am obviously overlooking?
>>>
>>>Thank you for taking the time to read and respond!
>>>Greg Bratton
>>>
>>>
>>
>Great repository of information. Glad to have it available.
David
On 6-Dec-2005, John <no@no.com> wrote:
> http://www.kfocus.com/paris/ has my updated notes including my latest
> win98 setup info. If anyone needs th
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: PING: Dave @ EK Sound [message #60035 is a reply to message #60014] |
Tue, 08 November 2005 10:07 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s if needed
> >>>
> >>>Thanks, David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>SP stands for "Service Pack". SP1 is better for Paris generally, less
> >>>>background crap going on. Definitely optimize windows, it will make a
> >>>>big difference. Do you use this box for anything other than Paris?
> >>>>
> >>>>As for copying the files over, first try recording some stuff on the
> >>>>OS drive with the FAT drive disconnected to see if some of your
> >>>>problems go away. The performance should be a bit less, but if it
> >>>>seems more stable, tha FAT drives may be causing the problem.
> >>>>
> >>>>The files should be able to be copied from FAT to NTFS with no
> >>>>trouble. If it does become an issue, you can network two computers
> >>>>and drag the files over the network, but I don't think you will have
> >>>>to go that far.
> >>>>
> >>>>David.
> >>>>
> >>>>David P. wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Not sure what Sp 1 is? Is this the version # where would I find this?
> >>>
> >>>I haven't
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>tweaked the system since reinstalling XP but I had on the previous
> >
> > install.I
> >
> >>>>>think that I will pick up another harddrive and take my 2 audio
drives
> >>>
> >>>out.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>DO you think that there will be any problems when I put the fat32
> >
> > drives
> >
> >>>>>in and copy everything over to the main audio drive?
> >>>>>David P
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Formatting to NTFS would wipe the drive clean, so it would be a good
> >>>>>>idea to drag all the files to another drive before formatting. Are
> >>>>>>you running XP SP1 or SP2? Have you tweaked the OS to shut off all
> >>>>>>non essential services and fluff?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>David.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>DAVID P wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>can't I change these other fat32 drives to ntfs without formating
and
> >>>>>
> >>>>>do I
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>have to worry about losing data. My power suppy is 400 watts.I did
a
> >>>
> >>>complete
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>Paris install with the subsytem as well. I forgot to mention
earlier
> >>>
> >>>that
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>when I started having the problems that I was being prompted to
enter
> >>>>>
> >>>>>a new
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>record path when trying to do overdubs.
> >>>>>>>Thanks, David P
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Some thoughts below:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >
> >Dear DJ,
Up to three Pulsars can be used on same computer.
Each Pulsar can have either the "classic interface" which has 16 Adat I/O
2spdif channels I/O two channels of analog in/out and one midi in out thru.
There is also the "ADAT" version which has 24 Adat I/O and two midi in out
thru.
So a combination of thr
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed May 20 07:46:06 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01887 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
