Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » virus protection
|
|
| Re: virus protection [message #93774 is a reply to message #93773] |
Thu, 20 December 2007 11:38   |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
rums when mixing.
> I may say that frequency wise Paris is not super stable and always trying
> to use compressors to overcome...
> Anyone else sharing these findings ?
> Regards,
> Dimitrios
>
> "Mike Audet" <mike@..> wrote:
> >
> >Hi All,
> >
> >I've been working on a mono-band version of the multiband compressor so
> that
> >we could use less dsp when there is just one offending band. This will
> be
> >great for compressing just the lows or as a deesser.
> >
> >I've got the mono version working, and I should have the stereo version
> finished
> >soon. The mono version allows 4 instances, compared to two instances for
> >the full multi band.
> >
> >I've been investigating the DC offset issues in the crossover. It seems
> >that whenever any PARIS eq is set to a narrow band and at a low
frequency,
> >it generates some DC offset. I've tried putting various DC offset
filters
> >before and after the EQ, but they don't seem to help.
> >
> >If anyone out there is skilled in DSP math and has some ideas for how to
> >filter this better, I would love to hear from you. As of right now, I'm
> >out of ideas on how to fix this. Not that it is a huge big deal. I'm
getting
> >1% DC offset measurements by just tweaking the settings to minimize the
> >effects.
> >
> >Anyway, I just thought I'd check in and let everyone know I'm not dead.
> >
> >All the best,
> >
> >Mike
>Betcha that's directly related to
|
|
|
|
| Re: virus protection [message #93775 is a reply to message #93774] |
Thu, 20 December 2007 13:12 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
the distortion reaction being different
from ME/98 to XP/2000 as well. If anyone knows how to reach Chris Thoman, he
may know the answer to that.
AA
"tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote in message news:47b9e87f@linux...
> Yes Dinitrios ,thats what I reflected in my earlier message. The EQ has
> been
> screwed up since the XP conversion.." low frequency artifacts"..call it DC
> offset if you like...DC offset is an easy thing to get rid of anyhow,takes
> about 10 seconds in Wavelab,,
> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:47b8d34d$1@linux...
>>
>> Hi Mike !
>> Nice you are still on boat !!!
>> We count on your findings here !
>> Regarding these quirks with eq , yes maybe these are XP oriented.
>> Based on some tests I did there was at least one band on EQ (the lowest)
>> that was acting differently under XP than under Me.
>> This was confirmed by other users.
>> Another thing that confuses me is some frequency bumps around 500 hz or
>> so coming from the eq especially noticable with drums when mixing.
>> I may say that frequency wise Paris is not super stable and always trying
>> to use compressors to overcome...
>> Anyone else sharing these findings ?
>> Regards,
>> Dimitrios
>>
>> "Mike Audet" <mike@..> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hi All,
>> >
>> >I've been working on a mono-band version of the multiband compressor so
>> that
>> >we could use less dsp when there is just one offending band. This will
>> be
>> >great for compressing just the lows or as a deesser.
>> >
>> >I've got the mono version working, and I should have the stereo version
>> finished
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: virus protection [message #93776 is a reply to message #93774] |
Thu, 20 December 2007 14:32 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>soon. The mono version allows 4 instances, compared to two instances for
>> >the full multi band.
>> >
>> >I've been investigating the DC offset issues in the crossover. It seems
>> >that whenever any PARIS eq is set to a narrow band and at a low
> frequency,
>> >it generates some DC offset. I've tried putting various DC offset
> filters
>> >before and after the EQ, but they don't seem to help.
>> >
>> >If anyone out there is skilled in DSP math and has some ideas for how to
>> >filter this better, I would love to hear from you. As of right now, I'm
>> >out of ideas on how to fix this. Not that it is a huge big deal. I'm
> getting
>> >1% DC offset measurements by just tweaking the settings to minimize the
>> >effects.
>> >
>> >Anyway, I just thought I'd check in and let everyone know I'm not dead.
>> >
>> >All the best,
>> >
>> >Mike
>>
>
>Now where's my damn latency list?
:-)
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:47b9b0e5$1@linux...
>
> DJ and other Paris users,
> After contacting again Faderworks author about PDC although he did not
> refuse
> to work on a REAL PDC plugin program for Paris !! he is not sure if enouph
> people would buy that !
> Instead he promised to update faderworks with this brilliant idea !!!
> There will be an extra latency page where we will be ble to put every
> plugin
> with its name and latency (typed from the bginning) meaning that you will
> have to do thia once and type for all your vst/dx and eds plugins their
> latencies
> (VSTSPY can detect vst latencies for you !) and have a ON/OFF button on
> each
> of them.
> So verytime you put a plugin, for instance UAD1 nigel then you just push
> the ON button
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: virus protection [message #93779 is a reply to message #93773] |
Thu, 20 December 2007 16:17 |
Kim
Messages: 1246
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
my final mixes (Paris mixdown) and (create a stereo audio
file .wav) from the audio window and drop them into Wavelab to check the DC
offset and do any gain up/down balancing with other final mixes (my cheap
man's CD finalize tool). I generally find very little offset and some none
at all during this process. Is this what you are referring to or are you
saying to run each individual track in Wavelab to remove any DC offset and
convert them back to .pafs and then begin mixing? Wouldn't this be
cumbersome?
Also, you mention that you avoiding using boost or cut on the bass because
of artifacts. Did you mean on the EQ trim or anywhere in the graphic EQ?
Since many of us are XP users it can make a difference knowing what you
meant since the bass is a tough instrument to EQ in the first place and we
may be complicating or making it worse with EQ. I went with BT's
recommendation to crank the trim on bass . . . but he was on Win98, if I
recall correctly. But, Brian also stated on the DVD, that Paris was a bit
mushy in the low to low/mid area so maybe it's been there all along.
Concerning DC offset, Mike Audet said he encountered it with a narrow band
EQ at a low frequency. Sounds like there might be some correlation between
the two.
Anyhow, I'm just happy to learn so much from this group. It helps me on
every mix I do!!! Have a great day.
Wayne
"tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote in message news:47b9e87f@linux...
> Yes Dinitrios ,thats what I reflected in my earlier message. The EQ has
> been
> screwed up since the XP conversion.." low frequency artifacts"..call it DC
> offset if you like...DC offset is an easy thing to get rid of anyhow,takes
> about 10 seconds in Wavelab,,
> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:47b8d34d$1@linux...
>>
>> Hi Mike !
>> Nice you are still on boat !!!
>> We count on your findings here !
>> Regarding these quirks with eq ,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: virus protection [message #93844 is a reply to message #93774] |
Fri, 21 December 2007 23:14 |
Deej
Messages: 130
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;was going to the graveyard, was it in the early '90ties? Micro$$
>>would get monopoly problems with the gouvernment if Mac lost that
>>fight, so Micro$$$ was spitting millions of $ into the Macfirm, just
>>to be sure it would survive. I don't know yet, if Micro$$$ still is
>>one of the MAC owners.
>>
>>Erling
>>
>>On 20 Feb 2008 17:53:31 +1000, "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>>>>Companies are not all the same; only limited by money from doing
>>>>evil.
>>>
>>>True, to an extent. Apple are certainly not beyond both ends, and to an
> extent
>>>it always depends on who dealt with the area which involves you.
>>>
>>>>ps having said all that... DAMN I hate online platform arguments!
>>>>I mean who really cares?
>>>
>>>Well that was more or less my point. I mean we seem to have reached a
>>>point
>>>in many of these arguments just perpetuate. I just wanted to point out
> that
>>>no company is beyond doing good or bad.
>>>
>>>I tend to think we should put our efforts here into the specifics of the
>>>user experience in the O.S. moreso than the underlying politics, which
> belongs
>>>on General one would think.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Kim.
>I think Google is a little too smart for either of those purchases.
TCB
"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:47bc74e5$1@linux...
>>
>> Here's what Jobs had to say about MS.
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upzKj-1HaKw&feature=relat ed
>
>That's one of the funniest and most juvenile comments I've every heard from
>a CEO.
>Ah, the Jobs/Gates family
|
|
|
|
| Re: virus protection [message #93845 is a reply to message #93844] |
Sat, 22 December 2007 00:50 |
steve the artguy
Messages: 308
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
feud - will it ever end? Well eventually,
>morbidly speaking...
>or when Google takes them both over....
>
>>
>> More Jobs
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1R-jKKp3NA&NR=1
>>
>>
>> erlilo <erling.lovik@lyse.net> wrote:
>>>It seems noone here seems to remember what's happeing when Mac nearly
>>>was going to the graveyard, was it in the early '90ties? Micro$$
>>>would get monopoly problems with the gouvernment if Mac lost that
>>>fight, so Micro$$$ was spitting millions of $ into the Macfirm, just
>>>to be sure it would survive. I don't know yet, if Micro$$$ still is
>>>one of the MAC owners.
>>>
>>>Erling
>>>
>>>On 20 Feb 2008 17:53:31 +1000, "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>>>>>Companies are not all the same; only limited by money from doing
>>>>>evil.
>>>>
>>>>True, to an extent. Apple are certainly not beyond both ends, and to
an
>> extent
>>>>it always depends on who dealt with the area which involves you.
>>>>
>>>>>ps having said all that... DAMN I hate online platform arguments!
>>>>>I mean who really cares?
>>>>
>>>>Well that was more or less my point. I mean we seem to have reached a
>>>>point
>>>>in many of these arguments just perpetuate. I just wanted to point out
>> that
>>>>no company is beyond doing good or bad.
>>>>
>>>>I tend to think we should put our efforts here into the specifics of
the
>>>>user experience in the O.S. moreso than the underlying politics, which
>> belongs
>>>>on General one would think.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>Kim.
>>
>That line from gates is a fictional line from the movie "Pirates of Silicon
Valley". the truth is Apple licensed the rights from Xerox for one million
dollars worth of Apple common stock, which Xerox sold about a year later
for around 16 million. It's too bad the Xerox executives had poor vision,
had they held that stock it would be worth a lot more today. Xerox under
utilized that technology. The Xerox executives under estimated the value
of the technology. Apple developed the raw technology in to a very useable
GUI with color. When the Xerox executives saw what Apple did with the technology,
they wanted to sue Apple, but it was too late.
What did Microsoft pay for the technology? Xerox created the basic technology,
Apple licensed the technology and developed it
|
|
|
|
| Re: virus protection [message #93862 is a reply to message #93845] |
Sat, 22 December 2007 07:17 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;> unethical about it. Apple records filed another frivolous law suit
against
>>>> Apple computer. I do not believe the results of that suit were disclosed,
>>>> however it sounds like Apple Computer did Ok.
>>>>
>>>> By the way, wasn't this about Vista? Vista still sucks; )
>>>>
>>>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>>>> Come now ... if we're talking ethical standards riddle me 2 things,
early
>>>>
>>>>> history:
>>>>>
>>>>> How did the Apple Lisa get it's name?
>>>>> Who fired Steve Jobs, and why was he pushed out of the Apple Lisa project?
>>>>>
>>>>> The funny thing about humanity and ethics is they usually leave the
room
>>>> to
>>>>> make more space for money and greed when the word 'corporate' gets
>>>>> involved.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, I'm not sayin Gates is a saint (or Ballmer), hardly that, but
it's
>>>>
>>>>> rather obvious that Apple doesn't mind strong arming folks either.
Let's
>>>>
>>>>> take iTunes. Apple and Apple Records had an agreement. One conveniently
>>>>
>>>>> forgotten by Jobs that he later got to pay for. Jobs will tell you
he
>> saved
>>>>
>>>>> the record business. I bet the fat cats on boards at labels have a
>>>>> different
>>>>
>>>>> song. (On the other end, the Zune is a failure IMO) My perspective
is
>>>>> different than both those parties. Everybody has their truth.
>>>>> But to say Apple or MS either one are ethical is a tall order, and
it's
>>>>
>>>>> strictly a matter of power to push the smaller ones around. MS just
has
>>>> more
>>>>> power.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just a little levity.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--B_3286462641_32891092
Content-type: text/plain;
charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Basically, with most modern Intel and AMD machines, osx works straight out
of the box.Of course it helps if you have a video card that is supported by
Apple, and use sata drives, including DVD drives.
There are many documented uses on celerons etc, and a great deal of
notebooks too.
The best site for information is www.insanelymac.com and go to the forums.
This is my setup, and I'm only using an Nvidia 7300 card with 128 mg ram.
Hardware Overview:
Machine Name: Mac
Machine Model: P35-DS3L ...This series board is
recognised as being one of the most compatible
Processor Name: Intel® Core(TM)2 CPU 6600 @
Processor Speed: 2.4 GHz
Total Number Of Cores: 2
L2 Cache (per processor): 4 MB
Processor Features: FPU VME DE PSE TSC MSR PAE MCE CX8 APIC SEP MTRR
PGE MCA CMOV PAT PSE36 CLFSH DS ACPI MMX FXSR SSE SSE2 SS HTT TM SSE3 MON
DSCPL VMX EST TM2 SSSE3 CX16 TPR PDCM
Memory: 2 GB
Bus Speed: 1.07 GHz
Boot ROM Version: Hack.88Z.int.0sh.061193037 (Award Software
International, Inc.)
On 21/02/08 5:08 PM, in article 47bd0746$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
<excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Martin Harrington <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>> Sorry James..
>>
>> Not meaning to get personal, Sorry for that.
>>
>> Yes, I do run Leopard on PC hardware, and it runs floorlessly BTW, but I
> was
>> running Vista, and my Business machine at home is running Vista.
>>
>> I have no complaints really with it...except it's a bit of a memory hog,
> but
>> I really like the way that OSX functions..it all works, pretty much without
>> extra plugins...still needs some though.
>>
>> Vista is still a little kludgey and when running a few intense programs
>> together, really bogs down, where leopard seems to fly with the same
>> hardware... Go figure.
>>
>> I run Pro Tools in my studio, and that runs way more stably on Tiger, (no
>> Leopard drivers yet), than it ever did on XP, although I haven't got round
>> to getting many OSX plugins yet.
>&
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun May 10 14:10:14 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 1.31419 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
