Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Need some bass?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87876 is a reply to message #87873] |
Tue, 10 July 2007 12:30   |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
r />
Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>Neil & Lamont: did either of you take the ProTools challenge and test
>whether you could hear the difference between in the box Waves SSL plugs
>and summing vs. SSL channels and summing? It may surprise you.
>
>So put your money where your mouth is, so to speak, and take the test.
>Then post your scores. I double dare you.
>
>Neil wrote:
>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Boutique is only Boutique because it's the buzz phrase of the
>>> day. Over priced old gear and newer versions of an old piece
>>> of gear is all that it is.
>>
>> I guess I can both agree with you & disagree with you on this
>> point, depending on which piece of gear is the subject of
>> conversation at the moment - I have a few pieces of high-end
>> or "boutique" equipment that I think are worth every penny
>> I paid for them (Chandler TG-2, Soundelux E251-C come to mind)
>> while there are others that are great, but you have to
>> wonder "do they REALLY need to charge that much for that?"
>> I think vintage gear is in another category... that's driven
>> strictly by availability, as, if you're looking to buy a 1073,
>> for example, there are only so many for sale at any given time.
>> Try making an offer of a grand to anyone selling one of those &
>> see if anyone takes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87891 is a reply to message #87889] |
Tue, 10 July 2007 16:17 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
>
> Now THAT's the way rock should be played (and sung), innit?
>
> "Adelaide" is not too bad, either.
>
> Neil"Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Hey Neil
>I stumbled on these guys a little while ago. I thought the same thing:
"ah,
>melody." Definately pop, but its got some 'nards too.
The more I hear it, the more I'm diggn' that snare
in "Godspeed". It's like audio heroin to me.
NeilHey Lamont - I'm familiar with (though haven't used) the URS
stuff. I don't think the SSL comp is what I'm after... I know
you like that one, you said, but I've used 'em before (the
actual console versions) and I've never felt it to be very
useful beyond the 4-to-1 at fairly gentle threshhold settings.
Yeah they sound really good in that range, but it's not the
sound I'm after. The other thing (the tape sim) i've not seen
before - have you tried it yet?
I DO think i might be on to something here, though... trying a
new 2-buss setup using Ozone followed by Voxengo's Elephant...
I'm gaining right about 2- 2 1/2 db RMS & PRMS over just the
Ozone settings without adding any perceptible distortion...
i'll post a clip once I play with this a bit more if I think I
might have something that's "in the zone". :D
Elephant can process internally at up to four times the
samplerate (or 2x at 88.2k & higher), and I'm thinking that
might be what's enabling it to be cleaner!
Neil
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>I see where you are going,sonically.
>
>Have you seen these two products?
>
>http://www.ursplugins.com
>http://www.anamodaudio.com This may add too much color and take away some
>top end ..Mybe not..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:<
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87893 is a reply to message #87873] |
Tue, 10 July 2007 16:38 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
he mids & above
>>that I don't like - to me it's not a "good" kind of
>>distortion, it's a raspy kind of distortion, and it has nothing
>>to do with fatness or width or anything like that - in fact,
>>IMO it takes away from that. Quite the opposite of what
>>stemming can add.
>>
>>>For Me: Hard to do (ITB) with Nuendo/SX..Easy to do with Paris..Best with
>>>(any DAW) stemmed out to a Analog Mixer. Let's face face it, for Rock
and
>>>R&B, third order distortion (harmonics) are in order. Somehow Paris and
>>Apogee
>>>adds the secord and third order (Harmonics).. Prism, Myteks,RME and the
>>like
>>>don't and that's cool for Post, Film/video work.
>>
>>FYI, Prisms are some of the convertors that mastering guys are
>>using, along with the Lavry Gold's, to slam the shit out of in
>>order to get that extra couple of db's... I've exchanged a
>>series of e-mails with one of the tech support guys at Lavry
>>and he says that the Golds have a certain kind of soft-
>>saturation circuitry that the Blue series doesn't have, and it
>>gives them that characteristic. Apparently some of the Prisms
>>have a similar kinda thing goin' on.
>>
>>>But, Rock, R&B and the liek
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87894 is a reply to message #87887] |
Tue, 10 July 2007 16:39 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
needs to be phatt ..Needs some
>>>color, needs some Distortion.
>>
>>Color, yes, some even-numbered harmonics, perhaps, but i'm still
>>opting for that clarity & dimension up top - to me that's what
>>gives it the sense of space/air/whatever you want to call
>>it...you start dirtying that up & you lose that. I'll find a
>>way to get there... maybe next I'll try 2 or 3 compressors in
>>series, analog ones across the 2-buss; gentle on the first,
>>then hitting each one after that a little bit harder so that
>>you're not having to clamp down the dynamics so much in each
>>stage - maybe that'll get me there with no detectable
>>distortion or loss of depth/space. I really only need a couple
>>more db's RMS to be 100% competitive in terms of perceived
>>volume levels with something like the tune we're talking about,
>>and that's a fully-mastered cut! If I can do that & still
>>maintain the sonic integrity of what I'm after, then I think
>>i'll be able to deliver a product that's going to be damn hard
>>to find anywhere else.
>>
>>Neil
>Can anyone tell me how to install the Tube Driver vO.961 I have a Mac G4
Steve"Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> wrote:
>
>Can anyone tell me how to install the Tube Driver vO.961 I have a Mac G4
Steve, it's probably PC-only, but
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87900 is a reply to message #87876] |
Tue, 10 July 2007 17:40 |
Paul Braun
Messages: 391
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"LaMont" <jdpro@funk.com> wrote:
>>
>>Ok.. Neil, I think you hit your Sonic Nirvana. Very clear, but with in
>>your
>>face volume.
>>
>>I still dig the Anberlin Mix. I like it's use of stero delays and verbs.
>>As for the Mastering, the top end distorion, i think makes for the overall
>>sound of the mix. It's not overly distorted, rather very smooth distorted
>>which , to me makes the mix sound well. I like good distortion. A little
>>dirt is good for a mix in that genre.
>
> Hey I'm not dissing the mix, I really like that Anberlin mix,
> too - it's great work & has got some cool stuff going on - all
> I'm sayin' is that for my personal taste I don't like the
> distortion in it. It's almost like if you were to plunk an
> exciter across a mix & just set it on "max" lol but it's
> not as smooth as an exciter either, ya know?
>
> Anyway - my sonic nirvana - yeah, I may have found it. Super-
> competitive volume AND clarity too!
>
> NeilWell, I use CoolEdit (older version) to convert most things... I also have
Batch Converter by Sonic Foundry. But there are many programs out there to
convert a .wav to a.mp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87922 is a reply to message #87910] |
Tue, 10 July 2007 22:42 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
is it time
>> for (Them DAW manufactuers) to go 64 bit.
>>
>> Well, the article featured most of the heavey hitters in the industry (RME,
>> M-Audio, Native Instruments, Steingberg, Cakewalk, Lynx .
>>
>> As far as 64 bit in the DAW most , except Cakewalk, feels that it's not
>> needed.
>> But, you get the feeling that they say this because of the work involved.
>> Secondly, They're not impreesed(except Cakewalk) with Microsoft's new built-in
>> audio hooks (WaveRT).. RME stated thay would stay with ASIO, and Not Adopt
>> the Vista standard..
>>
>> OK. Rant:
>> When Apple completly re-coded their OS witha NEW Audio engine standard
>> AUDIO-Units.
>> At that time, ASIO, WMD & MAS where the NAtive standards, but Apple went
>> their own way. So what did the Developers do...They started coding their
>> apps, plugins, audio interfaces with Auduo-Unit drivers.
>>
>> Now, that Microsoft is proposing the same thing, these very same companies
>> are balking. Why? Even with Lower latency and less pull on the CPU,like
>> Apple's
>> Audio Unit design, their balking.
>>
>> Next point:
>> To all of those who state the only useful purpose for 64 bit is to break
>> the 4 gig memory limitation (for Samplers) in Bull!
>>
>> The problem is that the DAWS are all using 32 bit coding. #2 bit apps on
>> a 64 bit os and processor will only get you marginal gain
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87936 is a reply to message #87922] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 07:32 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ng 3rd party
>>audio
>>>>> applications or protocols for the Mac purely because they have a direct
>>>>> vested interest in their own, and in selling more Macs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Developers adopted AU and Core Audio because they had to in order to
>>survive
>>>>> - most of them already had Mac products they would simply lose if they
>>>>> didn't. Notice that some developers that didn't have Mac support,
never
>>>>> moved to AU (Voxengo for one; Algorithmix, etc). It was a forced decision
>>>>> since VST, ASIO, etc had been dropped, just as Logic 5/PC was - if
it
>>>>> doesn't make money for Apple, it is unceremoniously canned. With Vista,
>>>>> VST, ASIO, WDM all still work, so developers aren't buying Microsoft's
>>pitch
>>>>> to move to their own internal driver/protocol. I believe at least
one
>>of
>>>>> the developers in that article expressed reservations over trusting
>their
>>>>> product to a
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87937 is a reply to message #87922] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 07:40 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
protocol (WaveRT) that was held by an OS developer that
>>had
>>>> no
>>>>> direct interest in professional audio (sound familiar now? They've
>learned
>>>>> from the Apple experience, and past Microsoft experience - DirectX
for
>>one).
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the moral of the story is that pro audio is best handled by
>>>>> developers in that market, not companies more interested in selling
>>>>> operating systems, home computers, and/or iToys.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> Sometimes You guys kill me with your anti Mac/Apple opinions. When
MS
>>goes
>>>> proprietary you guys call it a standard, and you accept it. If Apple
>>does
>>>> it, it's a problem. AU is a ground up rewrite of their audio software
>>system.
>>>> They did it to improve audio on Mac OS. I don't like that they dropped
>>>> VST support in some of their software, but you still have other choices
>>on
>>>> a Mac to use VSTs, including your favorites from Steinberg. Many new
>>plugin
>>>> development companies showed up because the new AU format created new
>>>> opportunities
>>>> for start ups. It's all good.
>>>>
>>>> By the way, read this: http://www.voxengo.com/press/114/
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/7/07 9:16 AM, in article 46e16b5e$1@linux, "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Okay fam, I just read a very interesting article in July's 07 SOS
(Sound
>>>> On
>>>>>> Sound -What The Devlopers Think) about the state of
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87941 is a reply to message #87936] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 09:02 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
when they start developing their apps
>for
>>>that new design, or do they wait until they release their app, then forward
>>>the SDKs... ;-)
>>>
>>>Just don't assume that because I include Apple in a general discussion
>that
>>>I'm bashing Macs. Let's also not poo poo Steinberg just because ASIO
and
>>>VST weren't developed by Apple. They really did make native DAWs a reality
>>>(moreso than Emagic or MOTU if we look at the life of ASIO and VST vs.
>MAS
>>>or whatever Emagic's shortlived driver was called - I should remember...).
>>>Steinberg is far from perfect, but that doesn't make Apple the sudden
>>>defender of the pro audio world by default. ;-)
>>>
>>>If you are a Mac audio user (or PC user facing the sad reality that is
>>>Vista), fear the iPhone.... fear Garageband.... ;-)
>>>
>>>Ideally we really need an OS developed "for" audio/video alone, not home
>>>movies, not downloading mp3s, not posting pics of the family vacation.
>
>>But
>>>that opens up a whole other can of worms. I guess the worms we have are
>>as
>>>good as it gets, at least until they are all used up trying to catch bigger
>>>fish.
>>>
>>>James - I think your link supports my comment that Vista sucks (if Aleksey,
>>>who was never going to port to OSX, now is, things are looking grim for
>>MS
>>>and PC DAW users...). ;-)) (yes, I said it, and yes I believe it - it
looks
>>>cool, but ... well I'll save the list for another day). I'm just hoping
>>>Nuendo 4 rocks on the Mac, so at least I have a backup. (I still think
>>it
>>>sucks that with Macs I have to buy average hardware at premium prices
when
>>I
>>>could build a much more robust, higher end DAW for 20-30% less).
>>>
>>>Oh, btw - in that link Aleksey talks about fixing a /3GB switch bug -
that
>>>was yours truly that found that bug (cool of Aleksey to fix it so quickly;
>>>not so cool of MS to make Vista the next stop in the roadmap to 64 bit
>and
>>>where we would have no more need for it).
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Dedric
>>>
>>>On 9/7/07 10:40 AM, in article 46e17f14$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>><excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>> I read the article a while back, and I think there are multiple sides
>>to
>>>>> this:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1 - Vista isn't great for low latency audio. WaveRT is still, afaik,
>>just
>>>> a
>>>>> marketing feature, not proven in reality for pro audio.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2 - Cakewalk has staked their marketing on 64-bit in order to attempt
>>to
>>>>> separate themselves from the market. Reality is (or so it seems from
>>tests
>>>>> I've seen), there is little advantage for the audio engine, and for
>the
>>>> OS,
>>>>> memory access is the main advantage. 64-bit apps in a 64-bit OS can
>>gain
>>>>> some performance gains, but so far that appears to be minimal).
>>>>>
>>>>> 3 - Apple hasn't really worked for, or to the advantage of DAW/audio
>>>>> developers, e
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87944 is a reply to message #87941] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 11:04 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
oon pictures. The guy was an arrogant pompous
ass, and he was wrong. That was over seventeen years ago, that thinking
was bullheaded and ignorant back then and it still is today! I've heard
this slam on apple for years along with all the other stupid stuff like their
going out of business.
Dedric, your comment insinuates that Apple is a toy company that does not
make serious computers, that is a slam. Apple products are not toys. Right
now Mac OSX is a more serious OS for audio and video than Vista is. When
Apple releases the next major release of Logic, it will be a serious contender,
it won't be a toy. You could even get some serious work done with GarageBand,
even though it's a consumer product. Is there multi track music production
software in Vista?
As far as a OS that is geared for audio or video, I would say most Mac users
are satisfied and feel there is no reason to have a proprietary completely
dedicated computer. Because of physics, there will always be some kind of
latency, but it's already livable.
Yes, Apple hardware is too expensive, but you get what you pay for. I don't
know how many times I've heard on this board and others that somebody is
on there second or third MOBO or power supply in a year because they burn
up. I know the story about the FW port on your 5-7 year old G4. The other
day Dave was talking about how great Glyph is. The service he got was great,
and product was in warranty. I was a dealer for them at one time, and I
think they are a good company, but I think their products are over priced.
Nobody thinks anything of it, but when it comes to Apple you guys bitch
about how over priced they are. You guys wouldn't think twice about dropping
3K on a single mic pre, but the thought of dropping 3K on a computer, the
core center of your studio is unthinkable. Even if Apple computers were
the same price as PCs somebody would bitch that they couldn't get a replacement
MOBO for $20.00 at 7-11. This will never end. I still say Apple makes high
quality stuff, you have to look at what you are really getting for the money.
You get what you pay for.
>
>On 9/7/07 9:16 AM, in article 46e16b5e$1@linux, "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> Okay fam, I just read a very interesting article in July's 07 SOS (Sound
On
>> Sound -What The Devlopers Think) about the state of MS Vista AND is it
time
>> for (Them DAW manufactuers) to go 64 bit.
>>
>> Well, the article featured most of the heavey hitters in the industry
(RME,
>> M-Audio, Native Instruments, Steingberg, Cakewalk, Lynx .
>>
>> As far as 64 bit in the DAW most , except Cakewalk, feels that it's not
>> needed.
>> But, you get the feeling that they say this because of the work involved.
>> Secondly, They're not impreesed(except Cakewalk) with Microsoft's new
built-in
>> audio hooks (WaveRT).. RME stated thay would stay with ASIO, and Not Adopt
>> the Vista standard..
>>
>> OK. Rant:
>> When Apple completly re-coded their OS witha NEW Audio engine standard
>> AUDIO-Units.
>> At that time, ASIO, WMD & MAS where the NAtive standards, but Apple went
>> their own way. So what did the Developers do...They started coding their
>> apps, plugins, audio interfaces with Auduo-Unit drivers.
>>
>> Now, that Microsoft is proposing the same thing, these very same companies
>> are balking. Why? Even with Lower latency and less pull on the CPU,like
>> Apple's
>> Audio Unit design, their balking.
>>
>> Next point:
>> To all of those who state the only useful purpose for 64 bit is to break
>> the 4 gig memory limitation (for Samplers) in Bull!
>>
>> The problem is that the DAWS are all using 32 bit coding. #2 bit apps
on
>> a 64 bit os and processor will only get you marginal gains...But, A True
>> 64 DAW/App using a 64 bit CPU,64 bit plugins
>> we we see astouding gains in performance.
>>
>> I'll
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87950 is a reply to message #87944] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 12:09 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s more than enough..Then there are the power users like
>> myself
>>>> where are song tracking session can reach upwards to 90 plus (before
>>>> editing)
>>>> with power hungry plugins, and low latency for those running ITB.
>>>>
>>>> All in all, the power "Native" daw user does not want to go over to
HD-TDM.
>>>> They want it all(Power) natively. They wan t Pro Tools Power in Natively..
>>>>
>>>> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> One question, Dedric. Why do we need an OS dedicated to audio/video
>>>>> production?
>>>>> XP or OS X + software + quality audio interface gives me a 48 track
digital
>>>>> studio in my living room. What's missing from that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, if you want to try it out Ubuntu Studio is actually shipping.
I
>> haven't
>>>>> installed it but we just got 20 dual processor dual core Dell workstations
>>>>> into my office and I just might try one of them with it for kicks .I guess I'm making progress. any ideas are welcome...
"Chris Lang" <yo@yo.yo> wrote:
>
>I'm excited to have 48 tracks here, soon, but:
>
>I get the dreaded 1/1 error. I've checked all my connections.
>3 EDS cards in a Magma chassis, plugged to the interface which
>is in the bottom PCI slot of my new Athlon 64. MEC connected
>diretly to the master EDS card.
>
>I noticed that my PC gave each EDS card its own IRQ. Does IRQ
>even matter anymore on these newer machines? It seems like
>there is plenty to go around.
>
>Any ideas are welcome. Thanks!!
>
>ChrisWherever did you get the idea I use workarounds or that native is a
workaround? I simply said Totalmix was a less elegant solution to
accomplish monitoring, but clearly stated that ProTools holds the advantage
in large tracking sessions.
How many people here read a few lines, guess the rest, and hit reply? ;-))
Btw, I'm doing post for a film, several corporate docs (international
clients, not local stuff), all in Nuendo - works perfectly. I wouldn't say
a native DAW is optimal for a live 30-40 input tracking session, with
monitor feeds to musicians, but I know guys doing it daily.
ProTools doesn't have a reputation for absolute stability, so let's not talk
about "peace of mind". My rig never fails me and keeps me busy 6-7 days a
week, so I guess that would be called a pretty solid "peace of mind".
Dedric
On 9/7/07 8:07 PM, in article 46e203c7$1@linux, "LaMont"
<jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
> However, what kinda price do you put on "piece of mind". Work arounds, Total
> mix?? Yikes!!
>
> How much does, "it just works" cost?? :)
>
> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>> Lamont - you might want to add up the equivalent plugin counts on a HD accel
>> card and compare it to, for example, a UAD-1. The cost is more than double
>> per plugin compared to a UAD-1, with PCs and all hardware factored
>> in/balanced off. So, who's hoodwinking who? ;-)
>>
>> Digi has no interest in preventing you from spending too much money. Just
>> compare the cost of a TDM plugin to a native version - same plugin - Waves,
>> UAD, etc. Then add not only the cost of an Accel card, I/O, but also the
>> computer, peripherals, conversion add ons that aren't included in PT, etc.
>>
>> When doing price comparisons I've never spec'd a PT rig under about $12k
>> that equaled what I do with my $1700 Core 2, RME interfaces and Nuendo.
>>
>> If you are tracking 40+ live tracks, then yes, native's latency may become
> a
>> disadvantage depending on what you need to monitor. A PT rig will give
> you
>> near zero latency monitoring, but much the same can be done with RME
>> totalmix, Cuemix etc, though not as elegantly for sure.
>>
>> However, for production, scoring, editing, sound design, and many mixing
>> scenarios, etc - it's hard to justify the extra cost for PT HD per plugin,
>> or per track. It is significantly higher than native, easily.
>>
>> Btw - you should check out the track count mix Brian posted on the Nuendo
>> forum recently
>> ( http://forum.nuendo.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=13740&pos tdays=0&postorder=a
>> sc&start=300).
>>
>> I really doubt you could come close to matching it with PTHD for the cost.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> On 9/7/07 4:59 PM, in article 46e1d7ca$1@linux, "LaMont"
>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Good points Thad,
>>>
>>> I guess the point of view(s)from the so called "High-End" is that we've
> been
>>> sold some hardware updates with the promise of vastly superior perfomance
>>> results.
>>>
>>> We've been told we just wait until we get an 64 bit OS to go along with
> yur
>>> new 64 bit cpu and those new video cards. Then , you guys will have vastly
>>> superior performance greater than TDM.
>>>
>>> Well, again, we've been dupped,hood winked.. Bamboozeled :)
>>>
>>> Truth is : The average Native Power DAW user has spent the equivlent to
> an
>>> Pro Tools HD setup. AND, the funny thing is, this kind of user will keep
>>> on chasing that elussive "Native" faster Than Pro Tools Rig&q
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87951 is a reply to message #87936] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 13:00 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
uot; not realizing
>>> that he or she has spent "WAY" more say over 15k in a native solution.
>>>
>>> That's the frustration: And as James M has stated onm any occasions,
>>> they(DAW
>>> manufacturing companies) only really care about is the Bed Room user.
> with
>>> products 8 & 2 channels channels at a time with chessy at best on board
>>> pre-amps.
>>>
>>> Suprisingly: The Computer makers (DELL, Apple, HP, Gateway, etc) have
> been
>>> great to our community. Today we can purchase a very fast dual-core
>>> intel/AMD
>>> for $500.00 bucks...then add a nother drive $100.00 bucks or less..instant
>>> DAW..
>>>
>>> Another source of frustration fro th eso called high-end, is again the
> hype
>>> aroudn so called hardware devices that's supposed to free up cpu
>>> resources.ie.
>>> UAD.. To this day I have purchased a single UAD Card due te fact that
> it
>>> does not free up any resources , but rather adds overhead. Read: Big
> Dongle.
>>> As well as the Tc-powercore..
>>>
>>> God Bless Steigberg Cakewalk ,& Samplitude for re-writting their code
> from
>>> scratch to take advantage of the Win 2000/XP platform. With their wrok,
>>> native DAW work would still be in the slow, third world midi-based land
> of
>>> Emagic and MOtu..
>>>
>>> So, whatdo we do..Do we continue to invest in Native rigs like BrianT(4-dual
>>> core ) Opterons(Do the Math).. Scary.. Now, do you realize that a Pro
> Tools
>>> HD 1accel cost under 5k..Another 16 hundred for i/o..Boom your into no
> excuse
>>> land. HD2 accel..street with 192 I/O around $9600.00.. 128 tracks..with
>>> rediculous amount of plugin power..End of story..
>>>
>>> Oh yeah. You can run the above protool rigs on an G4-500-700,800.?????
>>>
>>>
>>> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well, LaMont, I'll go back to my tried and true response. Native users
> really
>>>> want the power of [Pro Tools HD/SSL 9k/fill in blank] natively. Well,
> I
>>> really
>>>> want
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87952 is a reply to message #87951] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 13:14 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
to bang Scarlett Johansson but all the wanting it in the world won't
>>>> make it so.
>>>>
>>>> Don't take this too personally but I get a little sick of the 'power
> users'
>>>> simultaneously turning their noses up at the 'bedroom studio' market
> segment
>>>> while at the same time wanting everything in native land to be cheap,
> super
>>>> powerful, and easy to use. If the crap that us 'bedroom' guys use can't
>>> get
>>>> it done, well since you're so power user go off and spend a few million
>>> on
>>>> a Neve desk and a boatload of fancy hardware. Good on ya. It also hacks
>>> me
>>>> off that the 'bedroom studio' computer geeks like me spent nearly a decade
>>>> getting our noses bloody and doing the ditch digging to help get nativeland
>>>> working only to be told that we don't know what the hell we're talking
> about.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just sayin'
>>>>
>>>> TCB
>>>>
>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thad, you are talkign about 2 different market segments. The 'Bedroom"
>>> type
>>>>> who 48 tracks is more than enough..Then there are the power users like
>>> myself
>>>>> where are song tracking session can reach upwards to 90 plus (before
>>>>> editing)
>>>>> with power hungry plugins, and low latency for those running ITB.
>>>>>
>>>>> All in all, the power "Native" daw user does not want to go over to
> HD-TDM.
>>>>> They want it all(Power) natively. They wan t Pro Tools Power in Natively..
>>>>>
>>>>> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One question, Dedric. Why do we need an OS dedicated to audio/video
>>>>>> production?
>>>>>> XP or OS X + software + quality audio interface gives me a 48 track
> digital
>>>>>> studio in my living room. What's missing from that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, if you want to try it out Ubuntu Studio is actually shipping.
> I
>>> haven't
>>>>>> installed it but we just got 20 dual processor dual core Dell
>>>>>> workstations
>>>>>> into my office and I just might try one of them with it for kicks .Pro Tools HD is extremly stable. My Nuendo rig is stable as well. But, Pro
Toosl is a complete "on stop" shop solution.
And, if you were to purchase a system these days, Digi throws in around 10-15k
of the good
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87953 is a reply to message #87952] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 13:33 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
plugins for Free.
It all comes downs to this: The native way will always have you on the promise
of more power the better treadmill. Read: System updates..$$$$$$
Pro Tools , yes out the gate is expensive, but you can run it on a very modest
Mac or PC. Your're not on the Native upgrad bandwagon. Yes, you are stuck
with with Digi...But, you ca have your choice in I/O..(Lynx, Apogee, Prism)..
I guarantee you the Native is way more expensive in the long run, than a
Pro Tools HD 3Acell rig..
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>Wherever did you get the idea I use workarounds or that native is a
>workaround? I simply said Totalmix was a less elegant solution to
>accomplish monitoring, but clearly stated that ProTools holds the advantage
>in large tracking sessions.
>
>How many people here read a few lines, guess the rest, and hit reply? ;-))
>
>Btw, I'm doing post for a film, several corporate docs (international
>clients, not local stuff), all in Nuendo - works perfectly. I wouldn't
say
>a native DAW is optimal for a live 30-40 input tracking session, with
>monitor feeds to musicians, but I know guys doing it daily.
>
>ProTools doesn't have a reputation for absolute stability, so let's not
talk
>about "peace of mind". My rig never fails me and keeps me busy 6-7 days
a
>week, so I guess that would be called a pretty solid "peace of mind".
>
>Dedric
>
>On 9/7/07 8:07 PM, in article 46e203c7$1@linux, "LaMont"
><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> However, what kinda price do you put on "piece of mind". Work arounds,
Total
>> mix?? Yikes!!
>>
>> How much does, "it just works" cost?? :)
>>
>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>> Lamont - you might want to add up the equivalent plugin counts on a HD
accel
>>> card and compare it to, for example, a UAD-1. The cost is more than
double
>>> per plugin compared to a UAD-1, with PCs and all hardware factored
>>> in/balanced off. So, who's hoodwinking who? ;-)
>>>
>>> Digi has no interest in preventing you from spending too much money.
Just
>>> compare the cost of a TDM plugin to a native version - same plugin -
Waves,
>>> UAD, etc. Then add not only the cost of an Accel card, I/O, but also
the
>>> computer, peripherals, conversion add ons that aren't included in PT,
etc.
>>>
>>> When doing price comparisons I've never spec'd a PT rig under about $12k
>>> that equaled what I do with my $1700 Core 2, RME interfaces and Nuendo.
>>>
>>> If you are tracking 40+ live tracks, then yes, native's latency may become
>> a
>>> disadvantage depending on what you need to monitor. A PT rig will give
>> you
>>> near zero latency monitoring, but much the same can be done with RME
>>> totalmix, Cuemix etc, though not as elegantly for sure.
>>>
>>> However, for production, scoring, editing, sound design, and many mixing
>>> scenarios, etc - it's hard to justify the extra cost for PT HD per plugin,
>>> or per track. It is significantly higher than native, easily.
>>>
>>> Btw - you should check out the track count mix Brian posted on the Nuendo
>>> forum recently
>>> ( http://forum.nuendo.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=13740&pos tdays=0&postorder=a
>>> sc&start=300).
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87955 is a reply to message #87941] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 13:47 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, LaMont, I'll go back to my tried and true response. Native users
>> really
>>>>> want the power of [Pro Tools HD/SSL 9k/fill in blank] natively. Well,
>> I
>>>> really
>>>>> want to bang Scarlett Johansson but all the wanting it in the world
won't
>>>>> make it so.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't take this too personally but I get a little sick of the 'power
>> users'
>>>>> simultaneously turning their noses up at the 'bedroom studio' market
>> segment
>>>>> while at the same time wanting everything in native land to be cheap,
>> super
>>>>> powerful, and easy to use. If the crap that us 'bedroom' guys use can't
>>>> get
>>>>> it done, well since you're so power user go off and spend a few million
>>>> on
>>>>> a Neve desk and a boatload of fancy hardware. Good on ya. It also hacks
>>>> me
>>>>> off that the 'bedroom studio' computer geeks like me spent nearly a
decade
>>>>> getting our noses bloody and doing the ditch digging to help get nativeland
>>>>> working only to be told that we don't know what the hell we're talking
>> about.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just sayin'
>>>>>
>>>>> TCB
>>>>>
>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thad, you are talkign about 2 different market segments. The 'Bedroom"
>>>> type
>>>>>> who 48 tracks is more than enough..Then there are the power users
like
>>>> myself
>>>>>> where are song tracking session can reach upwards to 90 plus (before
>>>>>> editing)
>>>>>> with power hungry plugins, and low latency for those running ITB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All in all, the power "Native" daw user does not want to go over to
>> HD-TDM.
>>>>>> They want it all(Power) natively. They wan t Pro Tools Power in Natively..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One question, Dedric. Why do we need an OS dedicated to audio/video
>>>>>>> production?
>>>>>>> XP or OS X + software + quality audio interface gives me a 48 track
>> digital
>>>>>>> studio in my living room. What's missing from that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, if you want to try it out Ubuntu Studio is actually shipping.
>> I
>>>> haven't
>>>>>>> installed it but we just got 20 dual processor dual core Dell
>>>>>>> workstations
>>>>>>> into my office and I just might try one of them with it for kicks"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
news:C30741D4.C813%dterry@keyofd.net...
> In real world use, XP and OSX are fine, and maybe there wouldn't be much
> to
> gain from a dedicated system beyond enhanced stability or just consistency
> perhaps (thought that isn't really an issue on my XP systems), but my
> thinking is drivers could be tighter and general media streaming wouldn't
> be
> subject to normal OS interaction, but I could be wrong.
>
> I guess your last question really depends on the reality of what would or
> wouldn't be gained by a dedicated OS. Hard to say, but as long as we work
> with commercial OSs that are geared towards a wide range of uses, it is
> clear that we will always wonder what we might be missing. Along these
> lines though, I think it's only fair that we question the efficiency of
> hardware that is based on a 30 year old legacy model (IRQs, etc).
>
> Dedric
>
All I would like to do is to be able to run Cubase 4 on a dual socket Quad
Core mobo with something like 4GB RAM and be able to use my UAD-1 cards as
well. I know Cubase isn't able to utilize the Dual quads yet but I would be
quite happy to run win XP from now on if it could utilize these.
Unfortunately, I don't think that will be the case, which is the reason that
when I decide to make some kind of quantum leap, it may be to a Mac.My son recorded some tracks on a mac with paris. I want to mix them on my
ibm machime the mac is not available. The hard drive is in a removable bay
and was formatted to fat32 in the mac. Can I just plug it into my ibm drawer
and go. Can I loose anything by trying. Sorry for the simple ? He would want
to strangle me if I lost anything :^) Thanks JimThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_003E_01C7F198.6
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87956 is a reply to message #87955] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 13:57 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
EA09850
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://www.proxl.nl/cms/Products/VstNotesXL/
John recommended this in an earlier thread.=20
It doth RAWQUE!!!
Just get your digital camera, take a pic of your outboard settings to a =
flash drive and import it into the notepad proggie. the all it takes is =
to open the VST plugin and your whole outboard rack settings are sitting =
there staring at you.
Even though John can be a butthead sometimes, he's sometimes a very cool =
butthead.
;oD
------=_NextPart_000_003E_01C7F198.6EA09850
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 6.00.6000.16525" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><A href=3D"http://www.proxl.nl/cms/Products/VstNotesXL/"><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>http://www.proxl.nl/cms/Products/VstNotesXL/</FONT></A></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>John recommended this in an earlier =
thread.=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It doth RAWQUE!!!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just get your digital camera, take a =
pic of your=20
outboard settings to a flash drive and import it into the notepad =
proggie. the=20
all it takes is to open the VST plugin and your whole outboard rack =
settings are=20
sitting there staring at you.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Even though John can be a butthead =
sometimes, he's=20
sometimes a very cool butthead.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>;oD</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_003E_01C7F198.6EA09850--Nevermind. Got it.
"Chris Lang" <yo@yo.yo> wrote:
>
>I guess I'm making progress. any ideas are welcome...
>
>
>"Chris Lang" <yo@yo.yo> wrote:
>>
>>I'm excited to have 48 tracks here, soon, but:
>>
>>I get the dreaded 1/1 error. I've checked all my connections.
>>3 EDS cards in a Magma chassis, plugged to the interface which
>>is in the bottom PCI slot of my new Athlon 64. MEC connected
>>diretly to the master EDS card.
>>
>>I noticed that my PC gave each EDS card its own IRQ. Does IRQ
>>even matter anymore on these newer machines? It seems like
>>there is plenty to go around.
>>
>>Any ideas are welcome. Thanks!!
>>
>>Chris
>Its out of first card out to in of second card. Out of second card to in of
third card. out of third card to in of first card.
Makeke sure all word clocks are connected across.
Theses cables are flaky so once they work dont move them.
cheers
Herm
>
>OK, I'll try to be clear:
>
>With 2 EDS cards, you do a criss-cross with the provided "x"
>cables. The instructions are pretty vague when it comes to
>more than two cards.
>
>With three cards, you chain the output from one card to the
>input of the next card in line. Got it.
>
>Now, do you run a cable from the output of the last card in your chain back
>to the input of your first, master EDS card???
>This is where the instructions are vague.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Chris
>
>On 9/7/07 8:06 PM, in article 46e20390$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
<excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>> I think the moral of the story is that pro audio is best handled by
>> developers in that market, not companies more interested in selling
>> operating systems, home computers, and/or iToys.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
> Dedric, your comment insinuates that Apple is a toy company that does not
> make serious computers, that is a slam. Apple products are not toys. Right
You are right, it might insinuate that, but it wasn't intended to be a jab
at Macs, but just a reference to the consumer/entertainment level apps that
are at the forefront of Apple's marketing - they aren't sub-par apps for
what they do - but they are home/entertainment apps when compared to
workplace apps like Photoshop, Nuendo/ProTools, Final Cut Pro, etc, so let's
not kid ourselves that Apple is intent on marketing a Mac to the average
CompUsa or BestBuy shopper based on Final Cut Pro's gaussian blur rendering
speed, or the number of instances of Kontakt Logic can run. Neither is
Microsoft.
No, Macs are not toys, and Apple does a good job of putting together a
complete package with useful and nicely designed apps for the
home/entertainment user, and can be useful in the workplace as well.
But, James, you are overly sensitive to any mention of Macs and always
assume it's negative. Try to l
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87959 is a reply to message #87955] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 15:09 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
et="_blank">yo@yo.yo> wrote:
>>>
>>>I'm excited to have 48 tracks here, soon, but:
>>>
>>>I get the dreaded 1/1 error. I've checked all my connections.
>>>3 EDS cards in a Magma chassis, plugged to the interface which
>>>is in the bottom PCI slot of my new Athlon 64. MEC connected
>>>diretly to the master EDS card.
>>>
>>>I noticed that my PC gave each EDS card its own IRQ. Does IRQ
>>>even matter anymore on these newer machines? It seems like
>>>there is plenty to go around.
>>>
>>>Any ideas are welcome. Thanks!!
>>>
>>>Chris
>>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>I guarantee you the Native is way more expensive in the long run, than a
>Pro Tools HD 3Acell rig..
Well, that's just bullshit Lamont, because I can guarantee you
- whether you choose to believe it or not - that I've not spent
$20k-$25k on Native-related upgrades, hardware reconfigs, etc
since HD3 came out. And my shit is competitive, if not better
than what can be cranked out on an HD system - you've heard it
yourself and said as much.
Frankly, I don't even see how you could get CLOSE to the cost of
an HD system in the Native Realm unless you went with MADI for
hardware & Nuendo or Samplitude (the most expensive Native apps
to my knowledge) on the soft side.
Neil"DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote:
>It's working now???.........awwww......c'mon....let me help you fix it.
No shit! I was gonna give him some bullshit advice that
would've NEVER worked, under ANY circumstances, knowing that if
his system it wasn't working now, me giving him advice that
would've still not made it work would have at least gotten him
no further behind than where he already was... perfect, yes?
LOL
:D"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>Don't take this too personally but I get a little sick of the 'power users'
>simultaneously turning their noses up at the 'bedroom studio' market segment
>while at the same time wanting everything in native land to be cheap, super
>powerful, and easy to use. If the crap that us 'bedroom' guys use can't
get
>it done, well since you're so power user go off and spend a few million
on
>a Neve desk and a boatload of fancy hardware. Good on ya. It also hacks
me
>off that the 'bedroom studio' computer geeks like me spent nearly a decade
>getting our noses bloody and doing the ditch digging to help get nativeland
>working only to be told that we don't know what the hell we're talking about.
Good points, all, Thadster.
Native Neil"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>However, what kinda price do you put on "piece of mind". Work arounds, Total
>mix?? Yikes!!
What's wrong with Totalmix? It's essentially a zero-latency
monitoring application... if you look at it primarily from that
perspective, then chances are, yer cool.
NeilWow. You are awesome. And so clever.
No shit! I was gonna give him some bullshit advice that
>would've NEVER worked, under ANY circumstances, knowing that if
>his system it wasn't working now, me giving him advice that
>would've still not made it work would have at least gotten him
>no further behind than where he already was... perfect, yes?
>with fat32 format...yes.
no you shouldn't loose anything. i take paris tracks into logic pro.
On 8 Sep 2007 13:32:44 +1000, "jim drago" <jamesd@prospect.k12.or.us>
wrote:
>
>My son recorded some tracks on a mac with paris. I want to mix them on my
>ibm machime the mac is not available. The hard drive is in a removable bay
>and was formatted to fat32 in the mac. Can I just plug it into my ibm drawer
>and go. Can I loose anything by trying. Sorry for the simple ? He would want
>to strangle me if I lost anything :^) Thanks Jimthat just made me fell dirty and happy all over...
thanks
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007 14:27:34 -0700, "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com>
wrote:
>Mama's got a squeeze-box.
>
>S
>
>
>"Rob Arsenault" <mani1147athotmaildotcom> wrote in message
>news:46e15789$1@linux...
>> Thanks Sarah, actually, it is my understanding that for it to be Cajun, it
>> would need a squeaky old squeeze-box in there...!!!
>>
>>
>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message
>> news:46e10803$1@linux...
>>> Wow, sounds great. And those guys are hot. But if it's bluegrass in
>>> French doesn't that make it Cajun? :)
>>>
>>> S
>>>
>>>
>>> "Rob Arsenault" <mani2 at nbnet dot nb.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:46e0b6bd@linux...
>>>> Hi guys and gals, here is cut off my latest project, bluegrass in
>>>> French.
>>>> Artist by the name of Paul Hebert out of eastern Canada.
>>>>
>>>> Tracked and Mixed entirely in Paris.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.studiomanitou.com/mp3demo/BonjourBonheur.mp3
>>>>
>>>> Rob
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>That is the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me and on my birtday too
!I got a Who concert dvd for my birthday yesterday. yay
Mama's got a squeeze box
She wears on her chest
And when Daddy comes home
He never gets no rest
'Cause she's playing all night
And the music's all right
Mama's got a squeeze box
Daddy never sleeps at night
Well the kids don't eat
And the dog can't sleep
There's no escape from the music
In the whole damn street
'Cause she's playing all night
And the music's all right
Mama's got a squeeze box
Daddy never sleeps at night
She goes in and out and in and out and in and out and in and out
She's playing all night
And the music's all right
Mama's got a squeeze box
Daddy never sleeps at night
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87960 is a reply to message #87950] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 15:16 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
She goes, squeeze me, come on and squeeze me
Come on and tease me like you do
I'm so in love with you
Mama's got a squeeze box
Daddy never sleeps at night
She goes in and out and in and out and in and out and in and out
'Cause she's playing all night
And the music's all right
Mama's got a squeeze box
Daddy never sleeps at nightI'm trying to get my dynamics under control and my kick is causing me the
largest problem. My goal is a crest factor of 14 for my overall mix and
right now it's more like 20. When I use various compressers / limiters /
eqs etc to control the dynamics it is killing the low freq thump. Does anyone
have tips on how to control this wild kick drum without hosing up the tone?
ThanksI'm just working on this individual kick channel and not the master bus currently.
It's just the kick that is killing me.Hey Rob
Freakin' hot band. The mix is great. I've noticed that Paris mixes have a
sort of "bias" towards a sort of "round" low midrangy end of things -in a
nice warm way. But its tough for me to get a nice sheen on the top end.
You nailed it.
Yee ha!
MR
"Rob Arsenault" <mani2 at nbnet dot nb.ca> wrote in message
news:46e0b6bd@linux...
> Hi guys and gals, here is cut off my latest project, bluegrass in French.
> Artist by the name of Paul Hebert out of eastern Canada.
>
> Tracked and Mixed entirely in Paris.
>
> http://www.studiomanitou.com/mp3demo/BonjourBonheur.mp3
>
> Rob
>
>Have you tried a mulitband compressor?
I like to use the WaveArts Multi on my drums, I sometimes use it to compress
the low mids(150hz - 600hz) and expand both the lows(usually below 80hz)
and high mids(3khz - 6khz).
Then I'll add a little limiting to give some control to the what is happening
with the expander. This gives my kick or toms more punch and attack without
crowding or muddying the mix. Also, this technique can bring out the toms
without bringing more cymbal bleed into the mix.
Good Luck!
"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>I'm trying to get my dynamics under control and my kick is causing me the
>largest problem. My goal is a crest factor of 14 for my overall mix and
>right now it's more like 20. When I use various compressers / limiters
/
>eqs etc to control the dynamics it is killing the low freq thump. Does
anyone
>have tips on how to control this wild kick drum without hosing up the tone?
>
>ThanksHi LaMont...downloaded the files...both of them...Which one did you use?
...how did you"unzip" those "rar" files? Did you have to buy a utility?
"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote in message news:46e078f0$1@linux...
>
> http://antress.myweb.hinet.net/
>
> Hase anyone seenthese new free plugins? The Graphics are Hot!! I'm getting
> ready to check them out.. Let me know what you all think..MAN!!!heh heh
Check this out...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=VCIyzNISw1Q
That's just soooo cool...
DCGet the free 7 zip
http://www.7-zip.org/
http://antress.myweb.hinet.net/ModernPack/ModernPlugins.rarHey.. go to http://www.rarlab.com/download.htm to download Winrar to open
file, then run the setup exe file..
"tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote:
>Hi LaMont...downloaded the files...both of them...Which one did you use?
>..how did you"unzip" those "rar" files? Did you have to buy a utility?
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote in message news:46e078f0$1@linux...
>>
>> http://antress.myweb.hinet.net/
>>
>> Hase anyone seenthese new free plugins? The Graphics are Hot!! I'm getting
>> ready to check them out.. Let me know what you all think..MAN!!!
>
>Total mix is cool, but do I want to look a another mixer app while I'm working?
For me no.. Why can't total mix just Morph in with the DAW mixer? Just one
mixer with same funtionality. Neil, the same you feel about using 2 computers
, the one being for sum mixing..
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>However, what kinda price do you put on "piece of mind". Work arounds,
Total
>>mix?? Yikes!!
>
>What's wrong with Totalmix? It's essentially a zero-latency
>monitoring application... if you look at it primarily from that
>perspective, then chances are, yer cool.
>
>Neil
>Hey Man,
look, ask those guys on Nuendo.com how they spent on their Native PC rigs,
you'd be shocked.. Plus, and I'm speaking of myself as well..As soon as AMD
or Intel inroduces another new whiz bang chip, say 8 core or 16 core processors,
we jump and rebuild our etire systems.. Yes, at first it SEEMS not that expensive...But,
If really honest and do the math from the time you Native...You'd be shocked
at you , Me and others have spent with trying to reach that Native Nirvana..
In the time I started using Nuendo (2002), I have upgraded 4 times.
The PC DAW builders including myself, was happy as well the music store outlets,
and Like James M states the Manufacturers who know they have the elusive
bait with the Native user market..
Let's not even talk about lost productivity with reiventing your Pc every
2 years..Chasing and waiting on DAW maufactuers to Catch up with the new
hardware offerings.. This is the very scenario that prompted me to start
this thread..
we just spec'ed out a new PT HD 3 for another room at the studio..Sweetwater
rep go t back with us with a price of 25K with a slew of top of the line
plugs. But, just for discussion sake, I personally don;t need a PT 3HD, a
HD2accel wol dmore than do..128 tracks, really flexible mixer and routing..nero
zero latency for say with I/O 14-15k...And this can run on a 500 pc an or
old mac ..
I'm not saying that PT is the bell end all, but rather just making point
as to how much is the real TCO -Total Cost Of Ownership of staying with
high-end Native.
It's big bucks for them..So, like the commercial states: You can pay me now,
Or you can Pay me later..
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>I guarantee you the Native is way more expensive in the long run, than
a
>>Pro Tools HD 3Acell rig..
>
>Well, that's just bullshit Lamont, because I can guarantee you
>- whether you choose to believe it or not - that I've not spent
>$20k-$25k on Native-related upgrades, hardware reconfigs, etc
>since HD3 came out. And my shit is competitive, if not better
>than what can be cranked out on an HD system - you've heard it
>yourself and said as much.
>Frankly, I don't even see how you could get CLOSE to the cost of
>an HD system in the Native Realm unless you went with MADI for
>hardware & Nuendo or Samplitude (the most expensive Native apps
>to my knowledge) on the soft side.
>
>NeilOkay last night i gotta chance to play with these plugins. All I can say WOW!!
And I can't believe that their Free!!
This comapny deserves a donation as these plugins can hang withthe big boys
in their perspective catagory.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87961 is a reply to message #87956] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 15:38 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
Here are my Favs so far:
-The Spacer. This verb and delay are incredidle!! Warm, phatt..
-Turbo Analog..This has to be the easiest and best sounding coloring plug
there is..
-All of the vintage plugs are nice. Especialy the Neve emulations.
-The Module edition plugs, Painkiller,Painter,Booster, Bouncer. Are GREAT!!
Man, where did these guys come form??
-The Black Dragon(Looks like Pultec) nice...Smooth..
-The CS1 (Channel Strip ) very nice.
-The Moderen Stereo Eq..Man, I got tears in my eyes ...
-For the DXB 160 fans..they have a nice one..nice graphics as well.
Hey, these are some of the best plugins out there. They are full of color
do to the fact that they trying to emulate vintage recording hardware.. Job
well done.
If you like like I do , make a donation..Support this company..
** Note: The thig that so striking about these plugins is that , you can
hear them work as soon as you insert them on a track..
"tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote:
>Hi LaMont...downloaded the files...both of them...Which one did you use?
>..how did you"unzip" those "rar" files? Did you have to buy a utility?
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote in message news:46e078f0$1@linux...
>>
>> http://antress.myweb.hinet.net/
>>
>> Hase anyone seenthese new free plugins? The Graphics are Hot!! I'm getting
>> ready to check them out.. Let me know what you all think..MAN!!!
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:46e292c5$1@linux...
>
> That is the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me and on my birtday
> too
> !
How cool. Happy birthday dude!!!!.
http://www.mtv.com/photos/?fid=1511739&photoID=1803027
;o)I just tried Voxengo Elephant on one of my stereo bounces. It didn't do
anything to it but make it louder........no skewing of the EQ where the VOX
bites your head off, the LF pops your drivers aganst the far wall of the CR
and the HF didn't remind me of a room full of shieking eels.
Credit card has been implemented.
;o)You need an SPL Transient Designer.
http://mercenary.com/spltrde2.html
You need it now.......immediately........pronto!!!
It's your birthday. Spend money.
;o)
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:46e29614$1@linux...
>
> I'm trying to get my dynamics under control and my kick is causing me the
> largest problem. My goal is a crest factor of 14 for my overall mix and
> right now it's more like 20. When I use various compressers / limiters /
> eqs etc to control the dynamics it is killing the low freq thump. Does
> anyone
> have tips on how to control this wild kick drum without hosing up the
> tone?
>
> ThanksOK......so Vista sucks right now.
My question is, I guess, is there a platform right now that will allow me to
run my 4 x UAD-1 cards and 3 x RME cards on a dual socket quad core system
with more than 2G of RAM?
Steinberg doesn't really have their apps optomized for 64 bit or dual socket
quad core CPU's on windows or OSX, right?
UAD has 64 bit drivers as does RME now and both have PCIe cards to access
the higher bandwidth available, or I can spend $2k and purchase a GE Fanuc
(formerly SBS) PCI>PCIe expansion chassis that is 64 bit capable and will
hold all 7 of my RME and UAD-1 cards.
All I really would like to be able to do is to implement 4G RAM on my DAW
for now.
Could I just buy and run XP64 and achieve this or will the Steinberg app
bottleneck the implementation of more than 2G (or require me to use the 3G
switch-which I could do with XP 32 anyway)?
Also, once Cubase/Nuendo becomes capable of working with 64 bit and dual
socket Quads, if I'm a windows user, I'm going to have to run Vista anyway
since XP (64 or 32) doesn't support dual quads, right?
It seems to me that until Steinberg gets it shit together (if you're talking
about Cub-endo), we Steinyheads are just pissin in the wind having these
discussions."TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:46e1c65d$1@linux...
>
> Well, LaMont, I'll go back to my tried and true response. Native users
> really
> want the power of [Pro Tools HD/SSL 9k/fill in blank] natively. Well, I
> really
> want to bang Scarlett Johansson but all the wanting it in the world won't
> make it so.
............and whoda' thunk that gawky little thing would end up being such
a hottie when she debuted in the Horse Whisperer?
>
> Don't take this too personally but I get a little sick of the 'power
> users'
> simultaneously turning their noses up at the 'bedroom studio' market
> segment
> while at the same time wanting everything in native land to be cheap,
> super
> powerful, and easy to use. If the crap that us 'bedroom' guys use can't
> get
> it done, well since you're so power user go off and spend a few million on
> a Neve desk and a boatload of fancy hardware. Good on ya. It also hacks me
> off that the 'bedroom studio' computer geeks like me spent nearly a decade
> getting our noses bloody and doing the ditch digging to help get
> nativeland
> working only to be told that we don't know what the hell we're talking
> about.
Ya know, I just dug up a big pile of those old Home Recording magazines when
cleaning out an old closet. I've been segregating them from the rest of my
audio porn (which, with the exception of a few issues) will soon be
relegated to the shredder to make excelsiorlike material for igniting
kindling in our big fireplace since it's getting cold here now at night (mid
40's is the norm-trees are turning already)
Those HR mags are still a good read because they talk about how do do
something instead of how warm tubes sound..Guess I'll never be a power suer
since every time I open HR, I actually learn something I didn't know, even
after almost 10 years at this.
Hmmmm.......well.........so much for my OT rant
;o)just wtf is wrong with it.? are you trying for equality of every hit?
tonality? level? is it mushy? clicky? what? are you trying to have
it sit with the bass...mix...?
On 8 Sep 2007 22:33:48 +1000, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>
>I'm just working on this individual kick channel and not the master bus currently.
> It's just the kick that is killing me.deej, you have to find a level of....oh yeah and just be happy. or
fucking spend the money for the big shit.
On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:48:25 -0600, "DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _
net> wrote:
>OK......so Vista sucks right now.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87969 is a reply to message #87950] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 20:28 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
used will thread to any core then all the programs will do a good job.
The majority of PC and Mac plugins especially VSTi do not scale well
past 2 cores. Some will not go past 2 cores at all.
> UAD has 64 bit drivers as does RME now and both have PCIe cards to access
> the higher bandwidth available, or I can spend $2k and purchase a GE Fanuc
> (formerly SBS) PCI>PCIe expansion chassis that is 64 bit capable and will
> hold all 7 of my RME and UAD-1 cards.
>
The UAD as well a all the DSP processer cards and firewire devices
drivers are written so that all their communication gets forced int to
one CPU/thread. This part of the reason UAD/TC, etc have problems on
machines with more and more cores. Not sure if it something they can get
around.
> All I really would like to be able to do is to implement 4G RAM on my DAW
> for now.
>
> Could I just buy and run XP64 and achieve this or will the Steinberg app
> bottleneck the implementation of more than 2G (or require me to use the 3G
> switch-which I could do with XP 32 anyway)?
>
All 32 bit apps that large memory address aware will upwards of 4 gigs
range in XP64.
You can free up more memory in XP 32 but not while using the UADs. Some
motherboards will start to allocate ram down to almost 2.75 gigs with
more than 1 UAD. Most current ones top out at the 3 gig mark though.
XP64 might be a good temporary move for now if you don't want to start
investing in lots of new hardware. In most cases you get equivalent
latency performance with XP64 as you do with XP32. If you really want to
operate at very low latencies then you will wasting your time using UADs
or anything similar. Anyhting below 3 ms and they pretty much shit the
bed and the more cards you add the more trouble you got. If you oly use
the UAD during the mixing stage then you are normally OK.
All of the plug ins currently available on both platforms have a 32bit
barrier to deal with. Some will let you load up memory to what ever the
barrier is on the host app. Some older ones will bottom out at around
1.7 gig regardless of what the host app can do.
> Also, once Cubase/Nuendo becomes capable of working with 64 bit and dual
> socket Quads, if I'm a windows user, I'm going to have to run Vista anyway
> since XP (64 or 32) doesn't support dual quads, right?
>
Nuendo and Cubase will have 64 bit and Vista 'optimized" versions
available by the end of the year last time is discussed it with anybody
there they are still on track. The Multi-Core efficenty issues I got a
feeling will take longer. It will be be a big recoding I think for that.
> It seems to me that until Steinberg gets it shit together (if you're talking
> about Cub-endo), we Steinyheads are just pissin in the wind having these
> discussions.
>
All of the DAW apps have these issues or something simular so no matter
who you go too you will have these kinda of frustrations. I still think
Steinberg have the best overall GUI and concepts in the biz. They are
not good at making financial decisions though thats for sure. I think is
Yamaha wasn't there to have save their ass they would have gone under.
Steinberg lost allot of ground when some of the CEO types decided they
wanted to retire and sell em off to the first bidder. Up until Yamaha
they were in total development limbo.
..
Chris
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762Hey DJ, since I work on the DM 2000 frequently and hightly recommend as as
first rate mixer, DAW controller (Nuendo, SX, PT, Logic and Sonar). Highly
flexible routing. Some of the best on board Mic Pre-amp (Full bodied..non
color) you will find.
-8 SPX1000's..
-96 channels @ 96k..
To the point... YES to all of you questions...
Now, Since you run SX, and since Yammy own steinberg, the hooks bw the DM
and SX are deep.. Very Deep.
So, deep that your DAW options are many...:
-DAW RME 9652..into DM-2000...(via adat
-DAW-Firwire....Into DM 2000.(M-Lan firewire
-DAW RME MADI...DM 2000 MADi..Right now expesive. But, yammy is developing
their own cheaper madi interface for the DM..
-Version 2 software introduces their analog modeling fx..Nice..However, they
replace the 8 verbs ..
Bootom line ..Great move.. The combo of Nuendo/SX withthe DM 2000 is at top
of the DAW pile..HOWEVER!!! :)
There's competition from Tascam.. Yes Tascam.. for a saving sof 15k .. You
can get the Tascam DM 4800..Killer unit.. ZGood Pre's (24) Nice Eq..comps/gates
on eevry channel..
Very DAW controll (SX/Nuendo, Logic, Pro Tools, Sonar
Can be used with your RME's..via adat...OR via their 32 i/o Firwire card..$around
5k..
So there you have it..
"DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote:
>If I bought one of these, I would need it to do the following:
>
>Provide me 24 AD/DA converters for tracking and interfacing outboard gear
at
>mixdown while allowing the summing of ADAT inputs from my 3 x RME HDSP
>9652's plus an additional 8 x stereo AES I/O for interfacing my digital
>outboard gear and Mytek stereo AD/DA's
>....so I would need simultaneous access at mixdown to:
>
>24 analog I/O
>
>48 ADAT I/O (I really would only need the ADAT inputs for input streaming
to
>sum in the DM2000.
>
>8 x AES I/O
>
>80 total I/O
>
>Is it possible to configure a DM 2000 like this? Do I even need the RME
>cards...IOW....can the DM2000 function as an audio interface like the Tascam
>DM4800 does?
>
>I'm seriously entertaining the idea of getting a large digital mixer. If
I
>had something like the DM2000, I could lose all sorts of stuff, like my
>Furman HDS-16 system, a digital patchbay, a Houston controller, a Multiface
>PCI system, two RME ADI8-DS units and I could also sacrifice a few outboard
>preamps if the DM2000's pres are as good as I hear and te AD/DA converters
>are good as well.
>
>How would I spec something like this out?
>
>Dave????........anyone???
>
>Thanks,
>
>Deej
>
>
>
>
>
>
>HI DJ,
DJ wrote:
> If I bought one of these, I would need it to do the following:
>
> Provide me 24 AD/DA converters for tracking and interfacing outboard gear at
> mixdown while allowing the summing of ADAT inputs from my 3 x RME HDSP
> 9652's plus an additional 8 x stereo AES I/O for interfacing my digital
> outboard gear and Mytek stereo AD/DA's
> .....so I would need simultaneous access at mixdown to:
>
> 24 analog I/O
>
> 48 ADAT I/O (I really would only need the ADAT inputs for input streaming to
> sum in the DM2000.
>
> 8 x AES I/O
>
> 80 total I/O
>
You can use up to 6 cards in the DM so something like this would work.
2 xMY8-AE96
4x MY16-AT
> Is it possible to configure a DM 2000 like this? Do I even need the RME
> cards...IOW....can the DM2000 function as an audio interface like the Tascam
> DM4800 does?
>
>
It has a forewore option but liek the Tascam it is usless and buggy.
Limited I/O, High latency.
> I'm seriously entertaining the idea of getting a large digital mixer. If I
> had something like the DM2000, I could lose all sorts of stuff, like my
> Furman HDS-16 system, a digital patchbay, a Houston controller,
Depending on how extensively you use the Houston the DM-2000 iwill be
very limited in comparison.
> a Multiface
> PCI system, two RME ADI8-DS units and I could also sacrifice a few outboard
> preamps if the DM2000's pres are as good as I hear and te AD/DA converters
> are good as well.
>
Do you want the 48 ADAT to be going to/from the computer? The RME Madi
PCI card is still the most logical way to to do this IMHO.
> How would I spec something like this out?
>
> Dave????........anyone???
>
> Thanks,
>
> Deej
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Chris
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkpro
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87971 is a reply to message #87969] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 21:00 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
he cost of
>> an HD system in the Native Realm unless you went with MADI for
>> hardware & Nuendo or Samplitude (the most expensive Native apps
>> to my knowledge) on the soft side.
>>
>> Neil
>>
>
>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762Hey Chris, the Sudio with the DM 2000 has 48 adat channels (Pro Tools HD)
going to the Mac-DAW..Works and sound great.
P.S.
You can hear the differnce in when Suming via the DM versus via Digi 192s
and RME 9552..
Take a look.. http://www.lamourrecording.com/
Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>HI DJ,
>
>
>DJ wrote:
>> If I bought one of these, I would need it to do the following:
>>
>> Provide me 24 AD/DA converters for tracking and interfacing outboard gear
at
>> mixdown while allowing the summing of ADAT inputs from my 3 x RME HDSP
>> 9652's plus an additional 8 x stereo AES I/O for interfacing my digital
>> outboard gear and Mytek stereo AD/DA's
>> .....so I would need simultaneous access at mixdown to:
>>
>> 24 analog I/O
>>
>> 48 ADAT I/O (I really would only need the ADAT inputs for input streaming
to
>> sum in the DM2000.
>>
>> 8 x AES I/O
>>
>> 80 total I/O
>>
>
>You can use up to 6 cards in the DM so something like this would work.
>2 xMY8-AE96
>4x MY16-AT
>
>
>> Is it possible to configure a DM 2000 like this? Do I even need the RME
>> cards...IOW....can the DM2000 function as an audio interface like the
Tascam
>> DM4800 does?
>>
>>
>It has a forewore option but liek the Tascam it is usless and buggy.
>Limited I/O, High latency.
>
>> I'm seriously entertaining the idea of getting a large digital mixer.
If I
>> had something like the DM2000, I could lose all sorts of stuff, like my
>> Furman HDS-16 system, a digital patchbay, a Houston controller,
>Depending on how extensively you use the Houston the DM-2000 iwill be
>very limited in comparison.
>
>> a Multiface
>> PCI system, two RME ADI8-DS units and I could also sacrifice a few outboard
>> preamps if the DM2000's pres are as good as I hear and te AD/DA converters
>> are good as well.
>>
>Do you want the 48 ADAT to be going to/from the computer? The RME Madi
>PCI card is still the most logical way to to do this IMHO.
>
>> How would I spec something like this out?
>>
>> Dave????........anyone???
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Deej
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Chris
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>ADK
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87973 is a reply to message #87969] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 21:31 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ed out a new PT HD 3 for another room at the studio..Sweetwater
>> rep go t back with us with a price of 25K with a slew of top of the line
>> plugs. But, just for discussion sake, I personally don;t need a PT 3HD,
a
>> HD2accel wol dmore than do..128 tracks, really flexible mixer and routing..nero
>> zero latency for say with I/O 14-15k...And this can run on a 500 pc an
or
>> old mac ..
>>
>> I'm not saying that PT is the bell end all, but rather just making point
>> as to how much is the real TCO -Total Cost Of Ownership of staying with
>> high-end Native.
>>
>>
>> It's big bucks for them..So, like the commercial states: You can pay me
now,
>> Or you can Pay me later..
>>
>>
>>
>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I guarantee you the Native is way more expensive in the long run, than
>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>> Pro Tools HD 3Acell rig..
>>>>
>>> Well, that's just bullshit Lamont, because I can guarantee you
>>> - whether you choose to believe it or not - that I've not spent
>>> $20k-$25k on Native-related upgrades, hardware reconfigs, etc
>>> since HD3 came out. And my shit is competitive, if not better
>>> than what can be cranked out on an HD system - you've heard it
>>> yourself and said as much.
>>> Frankly, I don't even see how you could get CLOSE to the cost of
>>> an HD system in the Native Realm unless you went with MADI for
>>> hardware & Nuendo or Samplitude (the most expensive Native apps
>>> to my knowledge) on the soft side.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>
>>
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>ADK
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>(859) 635-5762John, you a couple of options..
-Compress..EQ..hard work,,but works
-Use Transien Plugin like waves Transient plus..Nice http://www.waves.com/Content.aspx?id=286
-Voxengo (2 plugins) LowF Punch and Tranmodder http://www.voxengo.com/product/lfpunch/
www.voxengo.com/product/tmodder/
LAstly and my Fav option: Use drummgog..Locate a the good Bass drum sample..
Boom..Job done.. :)
"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>I'm trying to ge
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87990 is a reply to message #87976] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 08:12 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
y head around this direct monitoring thing. I've been =
>trying all=20
>morning to find some sort of explanation that made sense. The RME =
>site has=20
>some info, but how the heck does a piece of software, on top of a piece
=
>of=20
>software LOWER the latency (Total Mix "on top of" Cubase for =
>example)?? Is=20
>the best way to think about it to conceptualize Total Mix as functioning
=
>like an=20
>external mix board: a pre-recorded track from Cubase is routed to an =
>input on=20
>the mix board and the signal to be recorded is bussed to a monitor =
>out? I=20
>don't know why this is so difficult for me to grasp -probably over =
>thinking=20
>it.... (or maybe not enough Scotch?)</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>MR</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
>Mike, if you're drinking Scotch at 3:00 in the afternoon, figuring out
direct monitoring is not your real problem.
But if that was just a joke, then look at it like this: certain sound
cards/boxes have a built in simple digital mixer, which routes the
incoming signals various ways at the same time as it sends it to Cubase,
Logic, etc. Because DAWs cannot yet avoid latency in inputting,
processing and outputting a signal, this is the only effective way for a
soundcard/box to give no-latency monitoring. Just think of it as a mixer.
Mike R. wrote:
> Man, I'm so used to Paris that I've not really had to wrap my head
> around this direct monitoring thing. I've been trying all morning to
> find some sort of explanation that made sense. The RME site has some
> info, but how the heck does a piece of software, on top of a piece of
> software LOWER the latency (Total Mix "on top of" Cubase for example)??
> Is the best way to think about it to conceptualize Total Mix as
> functioning like an external mix board: a pre-recorded track from Cubase
> is routed to an input on the mix board and the signal to be recorded is
> bussed to a monitor out? I don't know why this is so difficult for me
> to grasp -probably over thinking it.... (or maybe not enough Scotch?)
> Thanks.
> MRHey Bill,
Thanks for the reply -and the thought. Your post and LaMont's were very
helpful.
MR
"Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:46e442b6@linux...
> Mike, if you're drinking Scotch at 3:00 in the afternoon, figuring out
> direct monitoring is not your real problem.
>
> But if that was just a joke, then look at it like this: certain sound
> cards/boxes have a built in simple digital mixer, which routes the
> incoming signals various ways at the same time as it sends it to Cubase,
> Logic, etc. Because DAWs cannot yet avoid latency in inputting,
> processing and outputting a signal, this is the only effective way for a
> soundcard/box to give no-latency monitoring. Just think of it as a mixer.
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87993 is a reply to message #87990] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 08:45 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
the BIG picture, will
pay
> dividends and put them in a new NATIVE standard,with near zero 1.6 ms DAW
> level, on their 8 & 16 core Personal computers(Macs)using the Apogee
Symphony
> setup.
>
> I'm aproud Paris owner and user(even Today) along with Nuendo, Pro Tools
> and even Logic (PC!@#$)..
>
> My heart is telling me that as far as the Native race, Apple is going to
> win out. Even with some issues with core-auio., when they go 64 bit OS and
> follwoing their APPS (Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro 8). Their strategic
partnership
> with Apogee makes for an force to be reckoned with.
>
> Then again, there's always Digidesign. Who has the lion share of the Pro
> Auio market.
>
>
> Ensuring that they not only have grreat work flow, but great sound I/O..
>
> Sorry for the long response.
>
> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Man, I'm so used to Paris that I've not really had to wrap my head around
> >this direct monitoring thing. I've been trying all morning to find some
> >sort of explanation that made sense. The RME site has some info, but how
> >the heck does a piece of software, on top of a piece of software LOWER
the
> >latency (Total Mix "on top of" Cubase for example)?? Is the best way to
> >think about it to conceptualize Total Mix as functioning like an external
> >mix board: a pre-recorded track from Cubase is routed to an input on the
> mix
> >board and the signal to be recorded is bussed to a monitor out? I don't
> >know why this is so difficult for me to grasp -probably over thinking
it....
> >(or maybe not enough Scotch?)
> >Thanks.
> >MR
> >
> >
> ><!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 6.00.2800.1555" name=3DGENERATOR>
> ><STYLE></STYLE>
> ></HEAD>
> ><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> ><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Man, I'm so used to Paris that I've not
> =
> >really had=20
> >to wrap my head around this direct monitoring thing. I've been =
> >trying all=20
> >morning to find some sort of explanation that made sense. The RME =
> >site has=20
> >some info, but how the heck does a piece of software, on top of a piece
> =
> >of=20
> >software LOWER the latency (Total Mix "on top of" Cubase for =
> >example)?? Is=20
> >the best way to think about it to conceptualize Total Mix as functioning
> =
> >like an=20
> >external mix board: a pre-recorded track from Cubase is routed to an =
> >input on=20
> >the mix board and the signal to be recorded is bussed to a monitor =
> >out? I=20
> >don't know why this is so difficult for me to grasp -probably over =
> >thinking=20
> >it.... (or maybe not enough Scotch?)</FONT></DIV>
> ><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks.</FONT></DIV>
> ><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>MR</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
> >
> >
>Lamont -
On 9/9/07 12:57 PM, in article 46e4422b$1@linux, "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Mike..Direct Monitoring is very important if your running a Native based DAW..
> Right now on Nunendo.com there's a Big discusion with high-end users Like
> Brian T and others along with Steinberg as why they can't can't achive near
> zero talking .5ms-1.5(rountrip)(latency with the current technology-high
> speed dual-dual core processors.
>
That has to do with scaling on multiple processors, not the driver, or the
direct monitoring concept or implementation. I'll address the reasons why
ProTools and Paris have lower latency, but where you pay the price for it in
another reply to Mike's post.
> We thought that by now we'd be using 64 bit everything(OS,DAW, Plugins..etc)
> but, most of DAW companies have not figured it out or liek Steinberg, have
> balked on a complete re-write of the ASIO /VST code. Now, today they Steinberg
> realizes it's behind..Way behind.
>
Lamont - you might want to scroll back through the forum a bit and read
where Chris Ludwig said that ASIO still runs a bit lower latency and more
efficiently than other drivers (Core audio comparable to WDM with Sonar, but
ASIO having lower cpu overhead for the same latency). Apogee uses Core
audio, and the last comment I read from a DAW builder wasn't overly
impressed with the Symphony solution. ASIO and VST aren't way behind
anything. Research a little better please.
> Apple: Apple who owns Logic Audio decide 4 years ago , to forgo the current
> 24bit,32 bit float coding techniques of today, and start fresh with a fresh
> 64 bit OS, along with a fresh 64 bit Pro Audio/Video app with 64 bit plugins.
> Yes,they've(Apple) taken some PR hits in the last couple of years, but I
> think their decision to take a step back..look at the BIG picture, will pay
> dividends and put them in a new NATIVE standard,with near zero 1.6 ms DAW
> level, on their 8 & 16 core Personal computers(Macs)using the Apogee Symphony
> setup.
I am almost posit
|
|
|
|
| Re: Need some bass? [message #87994 is a reply to message #87982] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 09:16 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ive Logic is still a 32-bit float audio engine, which is
completely independant of a 64-bit OS (memory/data handling, application
coding). In SOS Joe Bryan of Univ. Audio stated that there are
disadvantages to 64-bit audio esp. for plugins, not just a blanket more bits
are better.
Also, regarding the 1.6ms round trip, Steinberg's VSL2020 interface has/had
0.7ms latency years ago, and if you can find one, it still does - that's
ASIO. Lynx cards are also running slightly lower latency than RME on some
systems (Nuendo, Cubase, etc) and can achieve 1.5ms roundtrip (probably less
than another 0.1ms for converters). With Samplitude/Sequoia, RME runs lower
than Lynx.
>
> My heart is telling me that as far as the Native race, Apple is going to
> win out. Even with some issues with core-auio., when they go 64 bit OS and
> follwoing their APPS (Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro 8). Their strategic partnership
> with Apogee makes for an force to be reckoned with.
I wouldn't jump so fast. Certainly Apple has the advantage of the whole
package in house, but read the above paragraphs before proclaiming
Apogee/Apple as the current king of low latency. The Apogee system was one
I have watched in considering a Mac at some point mainly to see if it had
any better performance than an RME or Lynx system, being a Core audio
system, but so far that doesn't seem to be bearing out in reality, just in
marketing.
Dedric
>
> Then again, there's always Digidesign. Who has the lion share of the Pro
> Auio market.
>
>
> Ensuring that they not only have grreat work flow, but great sound I/O..
>
> Sorry for the long response.
>
> "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Man, I'm so used to Paris that I've not really had to wrap my head around
>> this direct monitoring thing. I've been trying all morning to find some
>> sort of explanation that made sense. The RME site has some info, but how
>> the heck does a piece of software, on top of a piece of software LOWER the
>> latency (Total Mix "on top of" Cubase for example)?? Is the best way to
>> think about it to conceptualize Total Mix as functioning like an external
>> mix board: a pre-recorded track from Cubase is routed to an input on the
> mix
>> board and the signal to be recorded is bussed to a monitor out? I don't
>> know why this is so difficult for me to grasp -probably over thinking it....
>> (or maybe not enough Scotch?)
>> Thanks.
>> MR
>>
>>
>> <!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 6.00.2800.1555" name=3DGENERATOR>
>> <STYLE></STYLE>
>> </HEAD>
>> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
>> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Man, I'm so used to Paris that I've not
> =
>> really had=20
>> to wrap my head around this direct monitoring thing. I've been =
>> trying all=20
>> morning to find some sort of explanation that made sense. The RME =
>> site has=20
>> some info, but how the heck does a piece of software, on top of a piece
> =
>> of=20
>> software LOWER the latency (Total Mix "on top of" Cubase for =
>> example)?? Is=20
>> the best way to think about it to conceptualize Total Mix as functioning
> =
>> like an=20
>> external mix board: a pre-recorded track from Cubase is routed to an =
>> input on=20
>> the mix board and the signal to be recorded is bussed to a monitor =
>> out? I=20
>> don't know why this is so difficult for me to grasp -probably over =
>> thinking=20
>> it.... (or maybe not enough Scotch?)</FONT></DIV>
>> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks.</FONT></DIV>
>> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>MR</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>>
>>
>Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>Lamont -
>
>On 9/9/07 12:57 PM, in article 46e4422b$1@linux, "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> Mike..Direct Monitoring is very important if your running a Native based
DAW..
>> Right now on Nunendo.com there's a Big discusion with high-end users Like
>> Brian T and others along with Steinberg as why they can't can't achive
near
>> zero talking .5ms-1.5(rountrip)(latency with the current technology-high
>> speed dual-dual core processors.
>>
>That has to do with scaling on multiple processors, not the driver, or the
>direct monitoring concept or implementation. I'll address the reasons why
>ProTools and Paris have lower latency, but where you pay the price for it
in
>another reply to Mike's post.
>
>> We thought that by now we'd be using 64 bit everything(OS,DAW, Plugins..etc)
>> but, most of
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun May 17 23:22:34 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.27938 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
