Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Other Daw choices ?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73844 is a reply to message #73842] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 10:11   |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
he
Paris Fire Station. I believe now, like many things he told me, it was just
lies to keep me pacified, until they could sell off all their inventory of
Paris hardware.
I find it kind of funny that Malcolm Toft joined Ted Fletchers company after
that and EMU OEMed their mic pres for the new EMU hardware. I want to think
I made that connection.
If you really want this product, you can make it happen by calling manufactures
and telling them what you want, just pick wisely! If you get enough people
to call over time things will happen. The price is another story.
Many years ago, I told the drum hardware designer at Alesis, that I wanted
a drum module with dry drum sounds so I could effect them the way I wanted
in the studio. I also told them that I wanted a built in effect processor
for live use and studio work. I also wanted more triggers, more outputs,
headphone output with volume knob, and a audio in put so I could practice
to music. To my surprise, they built it in the DM PRO drum module.
I made many suggestions to Greg Mackie that became products. Only problem
was, the ideas were bastardize, sliced and diced in to multiple products
and they charged three to four times more than I suggested for each product.
These companies want to slice and dice every thing and make big bucks.
If you want it all it's an expensive add on. I've talked to many of them
as a dealer, they think they can make more money selling little recording
boxes to bedroom guitar players or DJs. They think and their marketing data
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73845 is a reply to message #73844] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 10:56 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
shows that they can make more money selling the little boxes than big DAWs.
The attitude is, if you want to play in the big time, you'll go with PT,
SX, or Nuendo with third party hardware. Nobody really wants to go up against
PT because it's already established in the market.
The other issue is hardware becoming obsolete too quickly. Building DSPs
in to a system is a bit of a risk. They think native systems are good enough,
and that is what most people want, and if they need more, like systems with
DSPs, that PT already fills that Pro end of the market.
However if enough people talk to these companies, something will happen.
That's my 0.02
James
"Neil" <OIUOIU@.com> wrote:
>
>Been researching this one a bit...
>
>http://www.tcelectronic.com/Default.asp?Id=7618
>
>Seems pretty good, has onboard DSP, taking a load off your
>CPU... has a nice monitoring interface - simpler than TotalMix,
>coupla mic inputs & DI's, as well, BUT... only has 4 balanced
>analog i/o's... so you gotta buy 4 of 'em to do 16 channels
>pure. ALSO... no BNC/word clock... WTF? Trying to get
>prorietary on us with a unit like THIS!!!??? We have to ONLY
>use these together with each other? Can't sync anything-digital-
>else???
>
>Handy, nice for "semiprosumer" applications, but another
>opportunity to really go after the pro market wasted, IMO -
>they have the technology, they have the tinker toy set, they
>just didn't "go pro" with it... Paris didn't either at the
>time, and neither did Emu with their 1812/1212, etc - although
>the onboard DSP & good convertors plus a few other features
>coulda got them there. Is everyone afraid of alsihad? Is that
>it? Is that why all things like this come out as small-time
>entrants targeted at price po
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73847 is a reply to message #73845] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 11:11 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ox with 16 channels in & out, throw in a
>couple of d.i./mic pres & lightpipe/SPDIF ports if you want,
>but really what the world needs is more single-box 16 channel
>interfaces.. with 16 channels of pure analog i/o. Don't be
>afraid of going a full rack space long & 2 rack spaces deep,
>fer pete's sakes! Not everything has to be a single-space
>and/or a half-racker!
>*** It should have on-board DSP effects - like the TC unit or
>the new/soon to be discontinued EMU stuff, for example.
>price as sucky ones - yes, you can.
>*** It should have an ASIO driver that can allow for up to 16
>channels/submixes of passive analog summing (or if not that, at
>least DSP summing through something other than the PC's CPU)
>your box & return to 2 new channels in the DAW app - if you can
>do onboard DSP EFX, you can do onboard summing, too, yes sir
>you KNOW you can!
>***Throw in a copy of CubaseLE if you wanna... no need for a
>complete/full-out app like SX or Nuendo - people can indeed buy
>that separately if they want.
>*** MIDI i/o... duh.
>***Absolutely make it expandable to be able to easily link 2
>or more if someone needs more than 16 analog i/o's at once.
>Encourages people to buy another if they ever want to go that
>route anyway.
>***It should be PCI-based, not Firewire or USB. One card.
>Expansion units can be Firewired together via ports on the
>units themselves, and routed through the same card. Maybe allow
>for a max of 2 units per card to keep costs down... anyone
>needing more than 32 analog i/o's at once will no doubt be in a
>situation where they can go with PCI expansion chassis anyway.
>
>Price point should be ~$1,200 to $1,500, street.
>
>Can you imagine how many of these they could - and more
>importantly WOULD - sell?
>
>I think it can be done for that price point - I mean look at
>various units like the EMu 1812, the TC unit I just linked to
>above, and the RME Multiface... all those units have various &
>sundry of the features I mentioned for around HALF that price
>(Multiface has 8 analog i/o's, plus other digital options, &
>word clock, but no onboard DSP... Emu & TC units have half-ass
>versions of less i/o's and one has no word clock, but both DO
>have DSP EFX) how hard would it be to incorporate all of these
>features I mentioned for twice to slightly more than twice the
>price?
>
>I think the 16-minimum channels of straight-up analog i/o is the
>biggest feature set that's missing from a lot of the half-
>rack half-asses out there... you can do a full rock/pop/country
>band with 16 in's - not a big huge major-label-type session<
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73848 is a reply to message #73841] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 11:22 |
Deadmeat
Messages: 32
Registered: September 2005
|
Member |
|
|
br />
>with top & bottom snare mics; front, back & outfront kick mics,
>plus ambient room mics & a PZM taped to the wall or the
>drummer's T-Shirt, plus five channels of bass & 19 channels of
>guitar amp mics, but then the people who are doing those are
>MOSTLY (not all, but) MOSTLY on PT systems anyway, or if
>something like what I'm discussing were available, they could
>just buy TWO of these units. My point is, if something like
>this were available, with ONE unit, and no fucking around
>trying to lightpipe & wordclock all kinds of digicrap together,
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73851 is a reply to message #73845] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 11:38 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
tar 2a (or Piano Lo/Keys Right)
>14.) Guitar 2b (or Piano Hi/Keys Left)
>15.) Scratch Vox
>16.) Cowbell
>
>Want to spot-mic your toms, too? OK, maybe only use 1 guitar
>for the basic trax & drop the cowbell if you need to & you
>can't stereo submix your toms into to two channels, but you
>get the idea, right? With 16 pure analog i/o you don't have to
>lightpipe or SPDIF anything in, you can use all your "BOOTEEK"
>mic pres like your Massenbergs & your Chandlers & your Great
>Rivers, etc - none of which come with digital i/o's - and still
>have a GREAT setup for a full-on basic tracking session!
>
>Then after you track all your basics, you've got your DSP-no-
>latency 'verb for the vocalist to hear as he's doing his real
>takes, and DSP summing for mixdown time, just like Gay Paree
>without the fucking mimes & the cats & the 17-day wait to
>reauthorize like the poor couple of sonsofbitches who we've
>seen posting the last few days; and just like PTHD, but without
>being trapped into the endless cycle of "spend more than I
>muthafuckin' have, spend more than I muthafucking have again
>two years later"...
>
>... so why hasn't somebody done this? THIS is the market we're
>all in, right? Those features at that price point? Wouldn't we
>all pay it? Tomorrow, first thing in the morning? Wouldn't
>about at least a quarter million other people that we don't
>even know about do the same? And it can be done (obviously,
>look at the half-assed feature sets at half the price that if
>combined, could add up to this type of unit at that price
>point!).
>
>So why? WHY hasn't anyone done this?
>
><Rant off>Cool. Yep, hold down the letter "c" when starting up.
Tony
"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:454a307d$1@linux...
>
> Thanks for the offer,luckily I just found my copy.
> Could you remind me hold to boot from the disk?
> respect
> Nappy
>
>
> "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>>Nappy,
>>
>>I'm pretty sure I could "hook you up". I'll look tonight when I get home.
>
>>If sending it out tomorrow by regular mail is soon enough, email your
>>address to tony at standinghampton.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73853 is a reply to message #73847] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 11:35 |
animix
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
d 24bit Adat light pipe I/O and 16 SP/DIFs.
> Later at a NAMM show, I talked Max in to walking with me over to see Malcolm
>Toft MTA and Rick Nafi at Presonus, about OEMing their mic pres. Max's
though
>that Mic pres might be too subjective. He told me for quite some time after
>that, that they were considering building it and said several times stated
>that it was discussed in their internal meetings. He even called it the
>Paris Fire Station. I believe now, like many things he told me, it was
just
>lies to keep me pacified, until they could sell off all their inventory
of
>Paris hardware.
>
>I find it kind of funny that Malcolm Toft joined Ted Fletchers company after
>that and EMU OEMed their mic pres for the new EMU hardware. I want to think
>I made that connection.
>
>If you really want this product, you can make it happen by calling manufactures
>and telling them what you want, just pick wisely! If you get enough people
>to call over time things will happen. The price is another story.
>
>Many years ago, I told the drum hardware designer at Alesis, that I wanted
>a drum module with dry drum sounds so I could effect them the way I wanted
>in the studio. I also told them that I wanted a built in effect processor
>for live use and studio work. I also wanted more triggers, more outputs,
>headphone output with volume knob, and a audio in put so I could practice
>to music. To my surprise, they built it in the DM PRO drum module.
>
>I made many suggestions to Greg Mackie that became products. Only problem
>was, the ideas were bastardize, sliced and diced in to multiple products
>and they charged three to four times more than I suggested for each product.
> These companies want to slice and dice every thing and make big bucks.
>If you want it all it's an expensive add on. I've talked to many of them
>as a dealer, they think they can make more money selling little recording
>boxes to bedroom guitar players or DJs. They think and their marketing
data
>shows that they can make more money selling the little boxes than big DAWs.
>
>
>The attitude is, if you want to play in the big time, you'll go with PT,
>SX, or Nuendo with third party hardware. Nobody really wants to go up against
>PT because it's already established in the market.
>
>The other issue is hardware becoming obsolete too quickly. Building DSPs
>in to a system is a bit of a risk. They think native systems are good enough,
>and that is what most people want, and if they need more, like systems with
>DSPs, that PT already fills that Pro end of the market.
>
>However if enough people talk to these companies, something will happen.
>
>That's my 0.02
>
>James
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@.com> wrote:
>>
>>Been researching this one a bit...
>>
>>http://www.tcelectronic.com/Default.asp?Id=7618
>>
>>Seems pretty good, has onboard DSP, taking a load off your
>>CPU... has a nice monitoring interface - simpler than TotalMix,
>>coupla mic inputs & DI's, as well, BUT... only has 4 balanced
>>analog i/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73854 is a reply to message #73851] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 12:01 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
o's... so you gotta buy 4 of 'em to do 16 channels
>>pure. ALSO... no BNC/word clock... WTF? Trying to get
>>prorietary on us with a unit like THIS!!!??? We have to ONLY
>>use these together with each other? Can't sync anything-digital-
>>else???
>>
>>Handy, nice for "semiprosumer" applications, but another
>>opportunity to really go after the pro market wasted, IMO -
>>they have the technology, they have the tinker toy set, they
>>just didn't "go pro" with it... Paris didn't either at the
>>time, and neither did Emu with their 1812/1212, etc - although
>>the onboard DSP & good convertors plus a few other features
>>coulda got them there. Is everyone afraid of alsihad? Is that
>>it? Is that why all things like this come out as small-time
>>entrants targeted at price points in the home recording level
>>only?
>>
>>As the subject line says: Close, but no cigar.
>>
>>Here's the thing... Yeah there are other options like MADI
>>units that can get you 1,569,878,760,000 channels of i/o, but
>>who needs that much, and then you also need a half dozen
>>lightpipe interfaces, and stringing all that shit together &
>>making it hum is mickey-mouse, too, IMO.
>>
>>Someone needs to developthe following:
>>
>>***A superb convertor box with 16 channels in & out, throw in a
>>couple of d.i./mic pres & lightpipe/SPDIF ports if you want,
>>but really what the world needs is more single-box 16 channel
>>interfaces.. with 16 channels of pure analog i/o. Don't be
>>afraid of going a full rack space long & 2 rack spaces deep,
>>fer pete's sakes! Not everything has to be a single-space
>>and/or a half-racker!
>>*** It should have on-board DSP effects - like the TC unit or
>>the new/soon to be discontinued EMU stuff, for example.
>>price as sucky ones - yes, you can.
>>*** It should have an ASIO driver that can allow for up to 16
>>channels/submixes of passive analog summing (or if not that, at
>>least DSP summing through something other than the PC's CPU)
>>your box & return to 2 new channels in the DAW app - if you can
>>do onboard DSP EFX, you can do onboard summing, too, yes sir
>>you KNOW you can!
>>***Throw in a copy of CubaseLE if you wanna... no need for a
>>complete/full-out app like SX or Nuendo - people can indeed buy
>>that separately if they want.
>>*** MIDI i/o... duh.
>>***Absolutely make it expandable to be able to easily link 2
>>or more if someone needs more than 16 analog i/o's at once.
>>Encourages people to buy another if they ever want to go that
>>route anyway.
>>***It should be PCI-based, not Firewire or USB. One card.
>>Expansion units can be Firewired together via ports on the
>>units themselves, and routed through the same card.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73855 is a reply to message #73854] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 13:42 |
Don Nafe
Messages: 1206
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Maybe allow
>>for a max of 2 units per card to keep costs down... anyone
>>needing more than 32 analog i/o's at once will no doubt be in a
>>situation where they can go with PCI expansion chassis anyway.
>>
>>Price point should be ~$1,200 to $1,500, street.
>>
>>Can you imagine how many of these they could - and more
>>importantly WOULD - sell?
>>
>>I think it can be done for that price point - I mean look at
>>various units like the EMu 1812, the TC unit I just linked to
>>above, and the RME Multiface... all those units have various &
>>sundry of the features I mentioned for around HALF that price
>>(Multiface has 8 analog i/o's, plus other digital options, &
>>word clock, but no onboard DSP... Emu & TC units have half-ass
>>versions of less i/o's and one has no word clock, but both DO
>>have DSP EFX) how hard would it be to incorporate all of these
>>features I mentioned for twice to slightly more than twice the
>>price?
>>
>>I think the 16-minimum channels of straight-up analog i/o is the
>>biggest feature set that's missing from a lot of the half-
>>rack half-asses out there... you can do a full rock/pop/country
>>band with 16 in's - not a big huge major-label-type session
>>with top & bottom snare mics; front, back & outfront kick mics,
>>plus ambient room mics & a PZM taped to the wall or the
>>drummer's T-Shirt, plus five channels of bass & 19 channels of
>>guitar amp mics, but then the people who are doing those are
>>MOSTLY (not all, but) MOSTLY on PT systems anyway, or if
>>something like what I'm discussing were available, they could
>>just buy TWO of these units. My point is, if something like
>>this were available, with ONE unit, and no fucking around
>>trying to lightpipe & wordclock all kinds of digicrap together,
>>you could do basic tracks that looked like:
>>
>>1.) Kick
>>2.) Snare Top
>>3.) Snare Bottom
>>4.) HiHat
>>5.) OH-Right
>>6.) OH-Left
>>7.) Drum Room/Ambient Right
>>8.) Drum Room/Ambient Left
>>9.) Bass D.I.
>>10.) Bass mic'ed
>>11.) Guitar 1a
>>12.) Guitar 1b
>>13.) Guitar 2a (or Piano Lo/Keys Right)
>>14.) Guitar 2b (or Piano Hi/Keys Left)
>>15.) Scratch Vox
>>16.) Cowbell
>>
>>Want to spot-mic your toms, too? OK, maybe only use 1 guitar
>>for the basic trax & drop the cowbell if you need to & you
>>can't stereo submix your toms into to two channels, but you
>>get the idea, right? With 16 pure analog i/o you don't have to
>>lightpipe or SPDIF anything in, you can use all your "BOOTEEK"
>>mic pres like your Massenbergs & your Chandlers & your Great
>>Rivers, etc - none of which come with digital i/o's - and still
>>have a GREAT setup for a full-on basic tracking session!
>>
>>Then after you track all your basics, you've got your DSP-no-
>>latency 'verb for the vocalist to hear as he's doing his real
>>takes, and DSP summing for mixdown time, just like Gay Paree
>>without the fucking mimes & the cats & the 17-day wait to
>>reauthorize like the poor couple of sonsofbitches who we've
>>seen posting the last few days; and just like PTHD, but without
>>being trapped into the endless cycle o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73860 is a reply to message #73841] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 14:33 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
rdware designer at Alesis, that I wanted
>>a drum module with dry drum sounds so I could effect them the way I wanted
>>in the studio. I also told them that I wanted a built in effect processor
>>for live use and studio work. I also wanted more triggers, more outputs,
>>headphone output with volume knob, and a audio in put so I could practice
>>to music. To my surprise, they built it in the DM PRO drum module.
>>
>>I made many suggestions to Greg Mackie that became products. Only problem
>>was, the ideas were bastardize, sliced and diced in to multiple products
>>and they charged three to four times more than I suggested for each product.
>> These companies want to slice and dice every thing and make big bucks.
>
>>If you want it all it's an expensive add on. I've talked to many of them
>>as a dealer, they think they can make more money selling little recording
>>boxes to bedroom guitar players or DJs. They think and their marketing
>data
>>shows that they can make more money selling the little boxes than big DAWs.
>>
>>
>>The attitude is, if you want to play in the big time, you'll go with PT,
>>SX, or Nuendo with third party hardware. Nobody really wants to go up
against
>>PT because it's already established in the market.
>>
>>The other issue is hardware becoming obsolete too quickly. Building DSPs
>>in to a system is a bit of a risk. They think native systems are good
enough,
>>and tha
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73862 is a reply to message #73861] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 15:18 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ic.com/Default.asp?Id=7618
>>>
>>>Seems pretty good, has onboard DSP, taking a load off your
>>>CPU... has a nice monitoring interface - simpler than TotalMix,
>>>coupla mic inputs & DI's, as well, BUT... only has 4 balanced
>>>analog i/o's... so you gotta buy 4 of 'em to do 16 channels
>>>pure. ALSO... no BNC/word clock... WTF? Trying to get
>>>prorietary on us with a unit like THIS!!!??? We have to ONLY
>>>use these together with each other? Can't sync anything-digital-
>>>else???
>>>
>>>Handy, nice for "semiprosumer" applications, but another
>>>opportunity to really go after the pro market wasted, IMO -
>>>they have the technology, they have the tinker toy set, they
>>>just didn't "go pro" with it... Paris didn't either at the
>>>time, and neither did Emu with their 1812/1212, etc - although
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73863 is a reply to message #73862] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 15:16 |
animix
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>>the onboard DSP & good convertors plus a few other features
>>>coulda got them there. Is everyone afraid of alsihad? Is that
>>>it? Is that why all things like this come out as small-time
>>>entrants targeted at price points in the home recording level
>>>only?
>>>
>>>As the subject line says: Close, but no cigar.
>>>
>>>Here's the thing... Yeah there are other options like MADI
>>>units that can get you 1,569,878,760,000 channels of i/o, but
>>>who needs that much, and then you also need a half dozen
>>>lightpipe interfaces, and stringing all that shit together &
>>>making it hum is mickey-mouse, too, IMO.
>>>
>>>Someone needs to developthe following:
>>>
>>>***A superb convertor box with 16 channels in & out, throw in a
>>>couple of d.i./mic pres & lightpipe/SPDIF ports if you want,
>>>but really what the world needs is more single-box 16 channel
>>>interfaces.. with 16 channels of pure analog i/o. Don't be
>>>afraid of going a full rack space long & 2 rack spaces deep,
>>>fer pete's sakes! Not everything has to be a single-space
>>>and/or a half-racker!
>>>*** It should have on-board DSP effects - like the TC unit or
>>>the new/soon to be discontinued EMU stuff, for example.
>>>price as sucky ones - yes, you can.
>>>*** It should have an ASIO driver
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73868 is a reply to message #73859] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 16:20 |
Ted Gerber
Messages: 705
Registered: January 2009
|
Senior Member |
|
|
stem. Instead of recreating an
> 1176, what if you could recreate a whole Neve series 80 console, Calrec,
> Trident, Neotek, or the sound of an Ampex, Studer, or MCI recorder. Isn't
> this what SCS did???
>
> Lets get started on the next Paris system.
>
> Ok, who'd like to dedicate their life to this, please raise their hand.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.c
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73871 is a reply to message #73853] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 16:37 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
e THIS!!!??? We have to ONLY
>>>> use these together with each other? Can't sync anything-digital-
>>>> else???
>>>>
>>>> Handy, nice for "semiprosumer" applications, but another
>>>> opportunity to really go after the pro market wasted, IMO -
>>>> they have the technology, they have the tinker toy set, they
>>>> just didn't "go pro" with it... Paris didn't either at the
>>>> time, and neither did Emu with their 1812/1212, etc - although
>>>> the onboard DSP & good convertors plus a few other features
>>>> coulda got them there. Is everyone afraid of alsihad? Is that
>>>> it? Is that why all things like this come out as small-time
>>>> entrants targeted at price points in the home recording level
>>>> only?
>>>>
>>>> As the subject line says: Close, but no cigar.
>>>>
>>>> Here's the thing... Yeah there are other options like MADI
>>>> units that can get you 1,569,878,760,000 channels of i/o, but
>>>> who needs that much, and then you also need a half dozen
>>>> lightpipe interfaces, and stringing all that shit together &
>>>> making it hum is mickey-mouse, too, IMO.
>>>>
>>>> Someone needs to developthe following:
>>>>
>>>> ***A superb convertor box with 16 channels in & out, throw in a
>>>> couple of d.i./mic pres & lightpipe/SPDIF ports if you want,
>>>> but really what the world needs is more single-box 16 channel
>>>> interfaces.. with 16 channels of pure analog i/o. Don't be
>>>> afraid of going a full rack space long & 2 rack spaces deep,
>>>> fer pete's sakes! Not everything has to be a single-space
>>>> and/or a half-racker!
>>>> *** It should have on-board DSP effects - like the TC unit or
>>>> the new/soon to be discontinued EMU stuff, for example.
>>>> price as sucky ones - yes, you can.
>>>> *** It should have an ASIO driver that can allow for up to 16
>>>> channels/submixes of passive analog summing (or if not that, at
>>>> least DSP summing through something other than the PC's CPU)
>>>> your box & return to 2 new channels in the DAW app - if you can
>>>> do onboard DSP EFX, you can do onboard summing, too, yes sir
>>>> you KNOW you can!
>>>> ***Throw in a copy of CubaseLE if you wanna... no need for a
>>>> complete/full-out app like SX or Nuendo - people can indeed buy
>>>> that separately if they want.
>>>> *** MIDI i/o... duh.
>>>> ***Absolutely make it expandable to be able to easily link 2
>>>> or more if someone needs more than 16 analog i/o's at once.
>>>> Encourages people to buy another if they ever want to go that
>>>> route anyway.
>>>> ***It should be PCI-based, not Firewire or USB. One card.
>>>> Expansion units can be Firewired together via ports on the
>>>> units themselves, and routed through the same card. Maybe allow
>>>> for a max of 2 units per card to keep costs down... anyone
>>>> needing more than 32 analog i/o's at once will no doubt be in a
>>>> situation where they can go with PCI expansion chassis anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Price point should be ~$1,200 to $1,500, street.
>>>>
>>>> Can you imagine how many of these they could - and more
>>>> importantly WOULD - sell?
>>>>
>>>> I think it can be done for that price point - I mean look at
>>>> various units like the EMu 1812, the TC unit I just linked
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73872 is a reply to message #73854] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 16:42 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
to
>>>> above, and the RME Multiface... all those units have various &
>>>> sundry of the features I mentioned for around HALF that price
>>>> (Multiface has 8 analog i/o's, plus other digital options, &
>>>> word clock, but no onboard DSP... Emu & TC units have half-ass
>>>> versions of less i/o's and one has no word clock, but both DO
>>>> have DSP EFX) how hard would it be to incorporate all of these
>>>> features I mentioned for twice to slightly more than twice the
>>>> price?
>>>>
>>>> I think the 16-minimum channels of straight-up analog i/o is the
>>>> biggest feature set that's missing from a lot of the half-
>>>> rack half-asses out there... you can do a full rock/pop/country
>>>> band with 16 in's - not a big huge major-label-type session
>>>> with top & bottom snare mics; front, back & outfront kick mics,
>>>> plus ambient room mics & a PZM taped to the wall or the
>>>> drummer's T-Shirt, plus five channels of bass & 19 channels of
>>>> guitar amp mics, but then the people who are doing those are
>>>> MOSTLY (not all, but) MOSTLY on PT systems anyway, or if
>>>> something like what I'm discussing were available, they could
>>>> just buy TWO of these units. My point is, if something like
>>>> this were available, with ONE unit, and no fucking around
>>>> trying to lightpipe & wordclock all kinds of digicrap together,
>>>> you could do basic tracks that looked like:
>>>>
>>>> 1.) Kick
>>>> 2.) Snare Top
>>>> 3.) Snare Bottom
>>>> 4.) HiHat
>>>> 5.) OH-Right
>>>> 6.) OH-Left
>>>> 7.) Drum Room/Ambient Right
>>>> 8.) Drum Room/Ambient Left
>>>> 9.) Bass D.I.
>>>> 10.) Bass mic'ed
>>>> 11.) Guitar 1a
>>>> 12.) Guitar 1b
>>>> 13.) Guitar 2a (or Piano Lo/Keys Right)
>>>> 14.) Guitar 2b (or Piano Hi/Keys Left)
>>>> 15.) Scratch Vox
>>>> 16.) Cowbell
>>>>
>>>> Want to spot-mic your toms, too? OK, maybe only use 1 guitar
>>>> for the basic trax & drop the cowbell if you need to & you
>>>> can't stereo submix your toms into to two channels, but you
>>>> get the idea, right? With 16 pure analog i/o you don't have to
>>>> lightpipe or SPDIF anything in, you can use all your "BOOTEEK"
>>>> mic pres like your Massenbergs & your Chandlers & your Great
>>>> Rivers, etc - none of which come with digital i/o's - and still
>>>> have a GREAT setup for a full-on basic tracking session!
>>>>
>>>> Then after you track all your basics, you've got your DSP-no-
>>>> latency 'verb for the vocalist to hear as he's doing his real
>>>> takes, and DSP summing for mixdown time, just like Gay Paree
>>>> without the fucking mimes & the cats & the 17-day wait to
>>>> reauthorize like the poor couple of sonsofbitches who we've
>>>> seen posting the last few days; and just like PTHD, but without
>>>> being trapped into the endless cycle of "spend more than I<
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73886 is a reply to message #73868] |
Wed, 11 October 2006 21:46 |
audioguy_editout_
Messages: 249
Registered: December 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
; >> >> more submixes, natively, but with the same sound characteristics as
> >> >> the
> >> > EDS
> >> >> subs, or...
> >> >> 2) using the same technology, a virtual Paris mix bus, which uses
the
> >> > emaulation
> >> >> of the EDS alongside the code from the Paris OS to basically allow a
> >> >> Paris
> >> >> mix bus, using something like rewire, to plug in to a native app.
> >> >>
> >> >> I believe the talk was inspired by Matthew Craig's efforts in
creating
> >> >> the
> >> >> VST Paris EQ, which does basically this same thing, emulating the
EDS
> >> > functionality
> >> >> and hence generating pretty much identical output to the same audio
> > going
> >> >> through the card itself.
> >> >>
> >> >> This would sure sort out the issues if anybody with enough knowhow
and
> >> > dedication
> &
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73891 is a reply to message #73886] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 05:41 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
br />
>> >> >> There was talk some time ago (oh how the years wander on...) of
>> > somebody
>> >> >> making an EDS chip emulator, which would then allow various
>> >> >> possibilities,
>> >> >> which one would assume would include:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 1) a "Virtual" EDS card driver which emulates all the functionality
> of
>> > an
>> >> >> EDS card down to the last bit, and hence plugs right into Paris
>> > allowing
>> >> >> more submixes, natively, but with the same sound characteristics as
>> >> >> the
>> >> > EDS
>> >> >> subs, or...
>> >> >> 2) using the same technology, a virtual Paris mix bus, which uses
> the
>> >> > emaulation
>> >> >> of the EDS alongside the code from the Paris OS to basically allow
>> >> >> a
>> >> >> Paris
>> >> >> mix bus, using something like rewire, to plug in to a native app.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I believe the talk was inspired by Matthew Craig's efforts in
> creating
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> VST Paris EQ, which does basically this same thing, emulating the
> EDS
>> >> > functionality
>> >> >> and hence generating pretty much identical output to the same audio
>> &
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73898 is a reply to message #73897] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 08:09 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hat there wasn't
enough room in the d8b to add drives, so I made the mistake of saying, make
it rack mounted, some thing like the Magma expansion chassis. He said that
the rack mounted DAW idea was interesting to him. They put out the MDM later
for about 6K, as aposed to building it in and keeping the projected price
of the d8b, which was my suggestion. I also suggested making a rack mount
that you could put more FX cards in, give you more I/O, and external hard
drives and a CD burner. I suggested the CD burner with mastering/authorering
software. When I suggested a SCSI port or a FireWire port, he thought I
was crazy. I thought adding a PCI SCSI card and having a port on the back
of the d8b made a lot of sence. FW hadn't made it's way in to audio products
at that time. I made other suggestions they used over the years.
James
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Thanks James. Very informative..
>
>As I'm reading your post, I staring at a picture (color- hi res) of the
Mackie
>x200 digital mixer. It's goregeous!!.. My wish is that they (Mackie) could
>integrate their hd recorder inside of this unit. Say 96-128 track version..
>
>
>That would be sweettt!!!
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>About six years ago or so, I spoke to Max M. about them building a two
or
>>three space rack with 16 mic pres on combo connecters with 16 inserts,
16
>>out put and 16 channels of 24 bit Adat light Pipe I/O, and 16 24bit SP/DIF
>>I/Os. I tried to convince EMU that Paris would be a more complete and
professional
>>system with mic pres with inserts and 24bit Adat light pipe I/O and 16
SP/DIFs.
>> Later at a NAMM show, I talked Max in to walking with me over to see Malcolm
>>Toft MTA and Rick Nafi at Presonus, about OEMing their mic pres. Max's
>though
>>that Mic pres might be too subjective. He told me for quite some time
after
>>that, that they were considering building it and said several times stated
>>that it was discussed in their internal meetings. He even called it the
>>Paris Fire Station. I believe now, like many things he told me, it was
>just
>>lies to keep me pacified, until
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73901 is a reply to message #73896] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 08:18 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;***It should be PCI-based, not Firewire or USB. One card.
>>>Expansion units can be Firewired together via ports on the
>>>units themselves, and routed through the same card. Maybe allow
>>>for a max of 2 units per card to keep costs down... anyone
>>>needing more than 32 analog i/o's at once will no doubt be in a
>>>situation where they can go with PCI expansion chassis anyway.
>>>
>>>Price point should be ~$1,200 to $1,500, street.
>>>
>>>Can you imagine how many of these they could - and more
>>>importantly WOULD - sell?
>>>
>>>I think it can be done for that price point - I mean look at
>>>various units like the EMu 1812, the TC unit I just linked to
>>>above, and the RME Multiface... all those units have various &
>>>sundry of the features I mentioned for around HALF that price
>>>(Multiface has 8 analog i/o's, plus other digital options, &
>>>word clock, but no onboard DSP... Emu & TC units have half-ass
>>>versions of less i/o's and one has no word clock, but both DO
>>>have DSP EFX) how hard would it be to incorporate all of these
>>>features I mentioned for twice to slightly more than twice the
>>>price?
>>>
>>>I think the 16-minimum channels of straight-up analog i/o is the
>>>biggest feature set that's missing from a lot of the half-
>>>rack half-ass
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73902 is a reply to message #73898] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 08:23 |
fernando
Messages: 15
Registered: October 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
es out there... you can do a full rock/pop/country
>>>band with 16 in's - not a big huge major-label-type session
>>>with top & bottom snare mics; front, back & outfront kick mics,
>>>plus ambient room mics & a PZM taped to the wall or the
>>>drummer's T-Shirt, plus five channels of bass & 19 channels of
>>>guitar amp mics, but then the people who are doing those are
>>>MOSTLY (not all, but) MOSTLY on PT systems anyway, or if
>>>something like what I'm discussing were available, they could
>>>just buy TWO of these units. My point is, if something like
>>>this were available, with ONE unit, and no fucking around
>>>trying to lightpipe & wordclock all kinds of digicrap together,
>>>you could do basic tracks that looked like:
>>>
>>>1.) Kick
>>>2.) Snare Top
>>>3.) Snare Bottom
>>>4.) HiHat
>>>5.) OH-Right
>>>6.) OH-Left
>>>7.) Drum Room/Ambient Right
>>>8.) Drum Room/Ambient Left
>>>9.) Bass D.I.
>>>10.) Bass mic'ed
>>>11.) Guitar 1a
>>>12.) Guitar 1b
>>>13.) Guitar 2a (or Piano Lo/Keys Right)
>>>14.) Guitar 2b (or Piano Hi/Keys Left)
>>>15.) Scratch Vox
>>>16.) Cowbell
>>>
>>>Want to spot-mic your toms, too? OK, maybe only use 1 guitar
>>>for the basic trax & drop the cowbell if you need to & you
>>>can't stereo submix your toms into to two channels, but you
>>>get the idea, right? With 16 pure analog i/o you don't have to
>>>lightpipe or SPDIF anything in, you can use all your "BOOTEEK"
>>>mic pres like your Massenbergs & your Chandlers & your Great
>>>Rivers, etc - none of which come with digital i/o's - and still
>>>have a GREAT setup for a full-on basic tracking session!
>>>
>>>Then after you track all your basics, you've got your DSP-no-
>>>latency 'verb for the vocalist to hear as he's doing his real
>>>takes, and DSP summing for mixdown time, just like Gay Paree
>>>without the fucking mimes & the cats & the 17-day wait to
>>>reauthorize like the poor couple of sonsofbitches who we've
>>>seen posting the last few days; and just like PTHD, but without
>>>being trapped into the endless cycle of "spend more than I
>>>muthafuckin' have, spend more than I muthafucking have again
>>>two years later"...
>>>
>>>... so why hasn't somebody done this? THIS is the market we're
>>>all in, right? Those features at that price point? Wouldn't we
>>>all pay it? Tomorrow, first thing in the morning? Wouldn't
>>>about at least a quarter million other people that we don't
>>>even know about do the same? And it can be done (obviously,
>>>look at the half-assed feature sets at half the price that if
>>>combined, could add up to this type of unit at that price
>>>po
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73908 is a reply to message #73905] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 09:58 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
his personal SSL..?
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>That was one of about 20 suggestions I gave the morning they showed the
d8b
>for the first time. I said since there is a computer MOBO in the d8b, why
>not add HDs, a CDR and DAW software. He made the excuse that there wasn't
>enough room in the d8b to add drives, so I made the mistake of saying, make
>it rack mounted, some thing like the Magma expansion chassis. He said that
>the rack mounted DAW idea was interesting to him. They put out the MDM
later
>for about 6K, as aposed to building it in and keeping the projected price
>of the d8b, which was my suggestion. I also suggested making a rack mount
>that you could put more FX cards in, give you more I/O, and external hard
>drives and a CD burner. I suggested the CD burner with mastering/authorering
>software. When I suggested a SCSI port or a FireWire port, he thought I
>was crazy. I thought adding a PCI SCSI card and having a port on the back
>of the d8b made a lot of sence. FW hadn't made it's way in to audio products
>at that time. I made other suggestions they used over the years.
>
>James
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Thanks James. Very informative..
>>
>>As I'm reading your post, I staring at a picture (color- hi res) of the
>Mackie
>>x200 digital mixer. It's goregeous!!.. My wish is that they (Mackie) could
>>integrate their hd recorder inside of this unit. Say 96-128 track version..
>>
>>
>>That would be sweettt!!!
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>About six years ago or so, I spoke to Max M. about them building a two
>or
>>>three space rack with 16 mic pres on combo connecters with 16 inserts,
>16
>>>out put and 16 channels of 24 bit Adat light Pipe I/O, and 16 24bit SP/DIF
>>>I/Os. I tried to convince EMU that Paris would be a more complete and
>professional
>>>system with mic pres with inserts and 24bit Adat light pipe I/O and 16
>SP/DIFs.
>>> Later at a NAMM show, I talked Max in to walking with me over to see
Malcolm
>>>Toft MTA and Rick Nafi at Presonus, about OEMing their mic pres. Max's
>>though
>>>that Mic pres might be too subjective. He told me for quite some time
>after
>>>that, that they were considering building it and said several times stated
>>>that it was discussed in their internal meetings. He even called it the
>>>Paris Fire Station. I believe now, like many things he told me, it was
>>just
>>>lies to keep me pacified, until they could sell off all their inventory
>>of
>>>Paris hardware.
>>>
>>>I find it kind of funny that Malcolm Toft joined Ted Fletchers company
>after
>>>that and EMU OEMed their mic pres for the new EMU hardware. I want to
>think
>>>I m
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73913 is a reply to message #73903] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 11:02 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ever want to go that
>>>>route anyway.
>>>>***It should be PCI-based, not Firewire or USB. One card.
>>>>Expansion units can be Firewired together via ports on the
>>>>units themselves, and routed through the same card. Maybe allow
>>>>for a max of 2 units per card to keep costs down... anyone
>>>>needing more than 32 analog i/o's at once will no doubt be in a
>>>>situation where they can go with PCI expansion chassis anyway.
>>>>
>>>>Price point should be ~$1,200 to $1,500, street.
>>>>
>>>>Can you imagine how many of these they could - and more
>>>>importantly WOULD - sell?
>>>>
>>>>I think it can be done for that price point - I mean look at
>>>>various units like the EMu 1812, the TC unit I just linked to
>>>>above, and the RME Multiface... all those units have various &
>>>>sundry of the features I mentioned for around HALF that price
>>>>(Multiface has 8 analog i/o's, plus other digital options, &
>>>>word clock, but no onboard DSP... Emu & TC units have half-ass
>>>>versions of less i/o's and one has no word clock, but both DO
>>>>have DSP EFX) how hard would it be to incorporate all of these
>>>>features I mentioned for twice to slightly more than twice the
>>>>price?
>>>>
>>>>I think the 16-minimum channels of straight-up analog i/o is the
>>>>biggest feature set that's missing from a lot of the half-
>>>>rack half-asses out there... you can do a full rock/pop/country
>>>>band with 16 in's - not a big huge major-label-type session
>>>>with top & bottom snare mics; front, back & outfront kick mics,
>>>>plus ambient room mics & a PZM taped to the wall or the
>>>>drummer's T-Shirt, plus five channels of bass & 19 channels of
>>>>guitar amp mics, but then the people who are doing those are
>>>>MOSTLY (not all, but) MOSTLY on PT systems anyway, or if
>>>>something like what I'm discussing were available, they could
>>>>just buy TWO of these units. My point is, if something like
>>>>this were available, with ONE unit, and no fucking around
>>>>trying to lightpipe & wordclock all kinds of digicrap together,
>>>>you could do basic tracks that looked like:
>>>>
>>>>1.) Kick
>>>>2.) Snare Top
>>>>3.) Snare Bottom
>>>>4.) HiHat
>>>>5.) OH-Right
>>>>6.) OH-Left
>>>>7.) Drum Room/Ambient Right
>>>>8.) Drum Room/Ambient Left
>>>>9.) Bass D.I.
>>>>10.) Bass mic'ed
>>>>11.) Guitar 1a
>>>>12.) Guitar 1b
>>>>13.) Guitar 2a (or Piano Lo/Keys Right)
>>>>14.) Guitar 2b (or
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73914 is a reply to message #73908] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 11:07 |
animix
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Piano Hi/Keys Left)
>>>>15.) Scratch Vox
>>>>16.) Cowbell
>>>>
>>>>Want to spot-mic your toms, too? OK, maybe only use 1 guitar
>>>>for the basic trax & drop the cowbell if you need to & you
>>>>can't stereo submix your toms into to two channels, but you
>>>>get the idea, right? With 16 pure analog i/o you don't have to
>>>>lightpipe or SPDIF anything in, you can use all your "BOOTEEK"
>>>>mic pres like your Massenbergs & your Chandlers & your Great
>>>>Rivers, etc - none of which come with digital i/o's - and still
>>>>have a GREAT setup for a full-on basic tracking session!
>>>>
>>>>Then after you track all your basics, you've got your DSP-no-
>>>>latency 'verb for the vocalist to hear as he's doing his real
>>>>takes, and DSP summing for mixdown time, just like Gay Paree
>>>>without the fucking mimes & the cats & the 17-day wait to
>>>>reauthorize like the poor couple of sonsofbitches who we've
>>>>seen posting the last few days; and just like PTHD, but without
>>>>being trapped into the endless cycle of "spend more than I
>>>>muthafuckin' have, spend more than I muthafucking have again
>>>>two years later"...
>>>>
>>>>... so why hasn't somebody done this? THIS is the market we're
>>>>all in, right? Those features at that price point? Wouldn't we
>>>>all pay it? Tomorrow, first thing in the morning? Wouldn't
>>>>about at least a quarter million other people that we don't
>>>>even know about do the same? And it can be done (obviously,
>>>>look at the half-assed feature sets at half the price that if
>>>>combined, could add up to this type of unit at that price
>>>>point!).
>>>>
>>>>So why? WHY hasn't anyone done this?
>>>>
>>>><Rant off>
>>>
>>
>ROLF!
Gotta go try micing my drum throne now...
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
John Macy wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCzW4fVRViIUh, I meant to type ROTFL ...laughing too hard to type straight. Thanks
for the link, John. I feel better now that the cloak of mystery has been
lifted!
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
Jamie K wrote:
>
> ROLF!
>
> Gotta go try micing my drum throne now...
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
> John Macy wrote:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCzW4fVRViII had been using the fxpansion 3.3, but Paris in XP doesn't seem to want to
let it work properly. Does anyone else have this issue. has anyone used the
spin audio wrapper? Is the wrapper in Sonar the same as the fxpansion?"lamont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Man!!...James,you were ahead of your time..you are right about SSC's design
>of paris. I recall that heeeee told me at namm 2ooo that Paris was designed
>after his personal SSL..?
I think it was a custom Helios midas, thus the Paris gold GUI. I think Deej
can tell you exactly what it was.
Hey LaMont, speaking of crazy old consoles, check out this thread about Flickinger
consoles. Read what Steve Albini has to say about them. We have a studio
with one of these about thirty five minutes away from us. Might be interesting
to cut some stuff on it. It might be a great choice to model for our new
super Paris system, coming out SOON! : )
http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/mv/msg/4418/0/0/0 /
James
>
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>That was one of about 20 suggestions I gave the morning they showed the
>d8b
>>for the first time. I sai
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73915 is a reply to message #73914] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 11:09 |
animix
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
d since there is a computer MOBO in the d8b,
why
>>not add HDs, a CDR and DAW software. He made the excuse that there wasn't
>>enough room in the d8b to add drives, so I made the mistake of saying,
make
>>it rack mounted, some thing like the Magma expansion chassis. He said
that
>>the rack mounted DAW idea was interesting to him. They put out the MDM
>later
>>for about 6K, as aposed to building it in and keeping the projected price
>>of the d8b, which was my suggestion. I also suggested making a rack mount
>>that you could put more FX cards in, give you more I/O, and external hard
>>drives and a CD burner. I suggested the CD burner with mastering/authorering
>>software. When I suggested a SCSI port or a FireWire port, he thought
I
>>was crazy. I thought adding a PCI SCSI card and having a port on the back
>>of the d8b made a lot of sence. FW hadn't made it's way in to audio products
>>at that time. I made other suggestions they used over the years.
>>
>>James
>>
>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Thanks James. Very informative..
>>>
>>>As I'm reading your post, I staring at a picture (color- hi res) of the
>>Mackie
>>>x200 digital mixer. It's goregeous!!.. My wish is that they (Mackie) could
>>>integrate their hd recorder inside of this unit. Say 96-128 track version..
>>>
>>>
>>>That would be sweettt!!!
>>>
>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>About six years ago or so, I spoke to Max M. about them building a two
>>or
>>>>three space rack with 16 mic pres on combo connecters with 16 inserts,
>>16
>>>>out put and 16 channels of 24 bit Adat light Pipe I/O, and 16 24bit
SP/DIF
>>>>I/Os. I tried to convince EMU that Paris would be a more complete and
>>professional
>>>>system with mic pres with inserts and 24bit Adat light pipe I/O and 16
>>SP/DIFs.
>>>> Later at a NAMM show, I talked Max in to walking with me over to see
>Malcolm
>>>>Toft MTA and Rick Nafi at Presonus, about OEMing their mic pres. Max's
>>>though
>>>>that Mic pres might be too subjective. He told me for quite some time
>>after
>>>>that, that they were considering building it and said several times stated
>>>>that it was discussed in their internal meetings. He even called it
the
>>>>Paris Fire Station. I believe now, like many things he told me, it was
>>>just
>>>>lies to keep me pacified, until they could sell off all their inventory
>>>of
>>>>Paris hardware.
>>>>
>>>>I find it kind of funny that Malcolm Toft joined Ted Fletchers company
>>after
>>>>that and EMU OEMed their mic pres for the new EMU hardware. I want to
>>think
>>>>I made that connection.
>>>>
>>>>If you really want this product, you can make it happen by calling manufactures
>>>>and telling them what you want, just pick wisely! If you get enough
people
>>>>to call over time things will happen. The price is another story.
>>>>
>>>>Many years ago, I told the drum hardware designer at Alesis, that I wanted
>>>>a drum module with dry drum sounds so I could effect them the way I wanted
>>>>in the studio. I also told them that I wanted a built in effect processor
>>>>for live use and studio work. I also wanted more triggers, more outputs,
>>>>headphone output with volume knob, and a audio in put so I could practice
>>>>to music. To my surprise, they built it in the DM PRO drum module.
>>>>
>>>>I made many suggestions to Greg Mackie that became products. Only problem
>>>>was, the ideas were bastardize, sliced and diced in to multiple products
>>>>and they charged three to four times more than I suggested for each product.
>>>> These companies want to slice and dice every thing and make big bucks.
>>>
>>>>If you want it all it's an expensive add on. I've talked to many of
them
>>>>as a dealer, they think they can make more money selling little recording
>>>>boxes to bedroom guitar players or DJs. They think and their marketing
>>>data
>>>>shows that they can make more money selling the little boxes than big
>DAWs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The attitude is, if you want to play in the big time, you'll go with
PT,
>>>>SX, or Nuendo with third party hardware. Nobody really wants to go up
>>against
>>>>PT because it's already established in the market.
>>>>
>>>>The oth
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73916 is a reply to message #73913] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 11:11 |
animix
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
er issue is hardware becoming obsolete too quickly. Building
DSPs
>>>>in to a system is a bit of a risk. They think native systems are good
>>enough,
>>>>and that is what most people want, and if they need more, like systems
>>with
>>>>DSPs, that PT already fills that Pro end of the market.
>>>>
>>>>However if enough people talk to these companies, something will happen.
>>>>
>>>>That's my 0.02
>>>>
>>>>James
>>>>
>>>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Been researching this one a bit...
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.tcelectronic.com/Default.asp?Id=7618
>>>>>
>>>>>Seems pretty good, has onboard DSP, taking a load off your
>>>>>CPU... has a nice monitoring interface - simpler than TotalMix,
>>>>>coupla mic inputs & DI's, as well, BUT... only has 4 balanced
>>>>>analog i/o's... so you gotta buy 4 of 'em to do 16 channels
>>>>>pure. ALSO... no BNC/word clock... WTF? Trying to get
>>>>>prorietary on us with a unit like THIS!!!??? We have to ONLY
>>>>>use these together with each other? Can't sync anything-digital-
>>>>>else???
>>>>>
>>>>>Handy, nice for "semiprosumer" applications, but another
>>>>>opportunity to really go after the pro market wasted, IMO -
>>>>>they have the technology, they have the tinker toy set, they
>>>>>just didn't "go pro" with it... Paris didn't either at the
>>>>>time, and neither did Emu with their 1812/1212, etc - although
>>>>>the onboard DSP & good convertors plus a few other features
>>>>>coulda got them there. Is everyone afraid of alsihad? Is that
>>>>>it? Is that why all things like this come out as small-time
>>>>>entrants targeted at price points in the home recording level
>>>>>only?
>>>>>
>>>>>As the subject line says: Close, but no cigar.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here's the thing... Yeah there are other options like MADI
>>>>>units that can get you 1,569,878,760,000 channels of i/o, but
>>>>>who needs that much, and then you also need a half dozen
>>>>>lightpipe interfaces, and stringing all that shit together &
>>>>>making it hum is mickey-mouse, too, IMO.
>>>>>
>>>>>Someone needs to developthe following:
>>>>>
>>>>>***A superb convertor box with 16 channels in & out, throw in a
>>>>>couple of d.i./mic pres & lightpipe/SPDIF ports if you want,
>>>>>but really what the world needs is more single-box 16 channel
>>>>>interfaces.. with 16 channels of pure analog i/o. Don't be
>>>>>afraid of going a full rack space long & 2 rack spaces deep,
>>>>>fer pete's sakes! Not everything has to be a single-space
>>>>>and/or a half-racker!
>>>>>*** It should have on-board DSP effects - like the TC unit or
>>>>>the new/soon to be discontinued EMU stuff, for example.
>>>>>price as sucky ones - yes, you can.
>>>>>*** It should have an ASIO driver t
|
|
|
|
| Re: Other Daw choices ? [message #73918 is a reply to message #73915] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 11:19 |
fernando
Messages: 15
Registered: October 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
coincedences about 3 or 4 times a year and this one
>>> takes the cake. I call them brief religious experiences. Wild !
>>"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote:
>
>
>Anyone try the Chandler plug in Paris yet?
>
Not in Paris, but the demo in Pro Tools. I will pick it up. Not a bread-and-butter
item but very nice on bass, drums and things that can use a little attitude.
I will use it as a UAD-1176 alternative.
GeneHey Aaron...Yeah..it was a most excellent way to start my Friday. I don't
think I'll ever be able to play the "Lookatmelookatmelookatme" lick again.
Maybe that's a good thing. ;-)
Rod
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>...beautiful. Hey Rod, didja get a look at this one?
>AA
>
>
>"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
>news:454a94ba$1@linux...
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCzW4fVRViI
>
>I have felt the same way about the Peter Criss *blicka* for years.
AA
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:454b52b7$1@linux...
>
> Hey Aaron...Yeah..it was a most excellent way to start my Friday. I don't
> think I'll ever be able to play the "Lookatmelookatmelookatme" lick again.
> Maybe that's a good thing. ;-)
> Rod
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>...beautiful. Hey Rod, didja get a look at this one?
>>AA
>>
>>
>>"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
>>news:454a94ba$1@linux...
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCzW4fVRViI
>>
>>
>Hi if If I clock from mytek aes out to Pulsar AES in and lt pulsar get its
clock from aes is this the same as if mytek's out bnc would gt connevted
to pulsar wordclock in bnc ?
Note that mytek as outputs clock only same as with its bnc out.
Thanks
Regards,
DImitriosSeveral years ago, we had the developers of what was to become Radar
in the studio here. They were asking about features we would like to
see etc. We got talking and discovered that one of the guys was
living in the house my parents built and I lived in as a kid in
Vancouver. Pretty wild indeed!
David.
John wrote:
> So, Dale Bradley decides to buy my C16. Yay. Turns out he's from Eugene
> Oregon. Hey, I lived there once on Sherwood Place. Turns out he has a
> brother on Sherwood Place. Hey, my landlord's name was Bradley.
>
> His DAD was my landlord for 4 years from 88 to 92 and it's his brothers
> house and are great people! FAWK !
>
> I have these amazing coincedences about 3 or 4 times a year and this one
> takes the cake. I call them brief religious experiences. Wild !This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C6FF4F.5AE38FC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
JS,
I called them once and that seemed to speed things up.
Tom
"JLS" <jens.sundbo@NOSPAMvkbb.no> wrote in message =
news:454afd59@linux...
"JLS" < >I have bought 3.0 and is trying to a get the license.
> I sent them a mail 10 days ago and still no response.
>
> Are they usually that slow?
>
> Their website says 7 days.
>
> JS
Now it's 12 days.
No response.....
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C6FF4F.5AE38FC0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>JS,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I called them once and that seemed to =
speed things=20
up.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"JLS" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:jens.sundbo@NOSPAMvkbb.no">Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 05 11:22:53 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.35983 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
