Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Big Ben and DAC1
| Big Ben and DAC1 [message #87946] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 11:50  |
Wayne Carson
 Messages: 86 Registered: June 2007
|
Member |
|
|
ing 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 c
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: rich on Thu, 12 July 2007 11:30
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: Neil on Fri, 13 July 2007 19:05
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: Nil on Sat, 14 July 2007 15:38
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: Neil on Sun, 15 July 2007 08:26
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: DJ on Sun, 15 July 2007 09:34
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: DJ on Sun, 15 July 2007 23:19
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: TCB on Fri, 13 July 2007 07:45
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: Bill L on Wed, 11 July 2007 19:41
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: Bill L on Fri, 13 July 2007 05:08
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: DJ on Fri, 13 July 2007 05:52
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
|
 |
|
Re: Big Ben and DAC1
By: DJ on Wed, 11 July 2007 20:59
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 05 20:47:14 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00573 seconds
|