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
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #87949 is a reply to message #87946] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 12:09  |
|
|
00.00 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 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 i
Gantt Kushner
Gizmo Recording Company
Silver Spring, MD
www.gizmorecording.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #87954 is a reply to message #87946] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 13:43 |
BradLyons
Messages: 36
Registered: July 2007
|
Member |
|
|
>>> 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" 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.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #87968 is a reply to message #87946] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 19:41 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ore)
--
Martin Harrington
Lend An Ear Sound
Sydney, Australia
0414 913 247That;s what I'm running LaMont.
Nuendo 3 and PT M-Powered 7.3.1 with a 400 GB System drive and 2 400 Gb
USB/Fire wire drives for data, 1 for audio & 1 for Video--
Martin Harrington
Lend An Ear Sound
Sydney, Australia
0414 913 247If 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,
DeejHi DJ,
DJ wrote:
> OK......so Vista sucks right now.
>
Yes
> 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?
>
No. You can sort of on a MAC but will be way more expensive. Nothing to
do with it being a Mac either. Your talking about buying all new PCI-e
versions of all your hardware and then buying a new PCI-e to PCI-e
expansion chassis to but the stuff in. I have yet to see any of the SBS
or Magma PCI to PCI-e chassis work reliably. The best PCI-e to PCI
expansion chassis I've used is by Cyclone.
http://www.cyclone.com/products/pci_express_expansion_system s.php
> Steinberg doesn't really have their apps optomized for 64 bit or dual socket
> quad core CPU's on windows or OSX, right?
>
They work fine on up to 4 CPU. past that they tend to scale weird. The
only program I've seen scale well to 8 cores is Reaper. On a MAC
programs scale no better or worse than on PC. As long as all the plugins
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #87970 is a reply to message #87946] |
Wed, 11 July 2007 20:59 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
audio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762Hi Lamont,
The vast majority of people that make a living using Nuendo, Cubase or
another app for that matter do not upgrade their systems that often.
The vast majority of people who waste bandwidth on Steinies, Cakewalk's
and even DUC are at best enthusiasts on par with DIY gamer kids.
But thats mainly the companies fault for not managing their forums better.
Chris
LaMont wrote:
> 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 t
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #87978 is a reply to message #87949] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 00:21 |
Wayne Carson
Messages: 86
Registered: June 2007
|
Member |
|
|
. If you can't tell, I want one of these guys for the TV
> station very badly.
>
>
> Larry Upton
> KPBS TV/FM
> San Diego
Thanks Larry. Just in case you're in the market right now...........
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=14015 4099899&indexURL=6&photoDisplayType=2#ebayphotohosti ng
;o)Should read "Chris Ludwig"....sorry Chris.--
Martin Harrington
Lend An Ear Sound
Sydney, Australia
0414 913 247"DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote in message
news:46e2f0f8@linux...
>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)
>
Holy****!!!..this thing is quite amazing when chained in series after the
UAD-1 Precision Limiter.
WOW!! Even acoustic based material sounds very dynamic. this is sick. I
swore I'd never give in to the loudness wars because it always scooter****ed
the sound, but Elephant doesn't do that.This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00A1_01C7F288.52C3B4A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A MADI system doesn't have enough I/O for my needs but it's a real PITA =
tracking using6 separate RME cards on two different computers because =
the drivers do not allow the cards to sum to one card. I've been racking =
my brain trying to figure out a way to get the I/O I need here to sum =
into a single pair of outputs by physically routing them.
Computer #1 (slave system)
RME HDSP 9632:
ADAT I/O > Frontier Apache I/O 1 (Sending VSTi audio to master DAW)
HDSP 9632 Spdif out > RME Multiface Spdif in
RME Multiface=20
ADAT I/O > Frontier Apache I/O 2 (Sending VSTi audio to master DAW )
Multiface Spdif out > RME HDSP 9652 Spdif in on master DAW
Computer #2 (Master system)
RME HDSP 9652 #1
ADAT I/O 1 > #1 RME ADI8-DS Main
ADAT I/O 2 > #1 RME ADI8-DS Aux
ADAT I/O 3> ADI4-DD (connected to AES I/O of Quantec Yardstick, Lexicon =
PCM-91, Roland R-880 and Sony V-77)
RME HDSP 9652 #1 Spdif out > RME HDSP 9652 #2 Spdif in
RME HDSP 9652 #2
ADAT I/O 1 >#2 RME ADI8-DS Main
ADAT I/O 2 >#2 RME ADI8-DS-Aux
ADAT I/O 3> Frontier Apache I/O 3 (receiving VSTi audio from slave DAW)
RME HDSP 9652 #2 Spdif out > RME HDSP 9652 #3 Spdif in
RME HDSP 9652 #3
ADAT I/O 1 > RME ADI8-DD Main (connected to AES of Mytek Stereo AD/DA, =
POD Pro XT, TC D-2, DAT machine=20
ADAT I/O 2 > RME ADI8-DD Aux " " =
" " "
ADAT I/O 3 > Frontier Apache I/O 4 (receiving VSTi audio from slave DAW)
RME HDSP 9652 #3 Spdif out > Benchmark DAC-1
This way I would have 16 channels of ADAT streaming from the slave =
(sampler) to the Master DAW patched through the Apache and other digital =
devices I have here would be patched into the Apache points 5-12 and =
could then be interfaced with either DAW as needed for utility purposes.
This would hopefully be a workaround of the "separate card" limitation =
in Totalmix and allow me to route the various channels of each card to =
it's Spdif out and then cascade the spdif outputs to the spdif inputs of =
each successive card with them all cumulating in card #3 of the Master =
DAW.
I "think" this should work as long as the all cards are properly clocked =
and the master and slave DAWs are set to the same buffers and synced up
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #87996 is a reply to message #87984] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 11:08 |
Wayne Carson
Messages: 86
Registered: June 2007
|
Member |
|
|
o 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 positive 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.
The disadvantage is, processing power, space, bandwidth, and the fact that
they and their hardware are not ready for 64bit yet, just wait.
>
>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.
The Steinberg VSL 2020 was a 32 ch. Adat card, The Symphony system is 1.7
ms. analog to analog. With Symphony it's 192 simultaneous audio ch. at 1.7
MS. To minimize what Symphony can do is not right.
>>
>> 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
Well Dedric, since Apogee's claims are false and nothing more than marketing
hype, maybe a lawsuit is in order.
>
>>
>> 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>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Its so weird, as I guess the Steinway group is noting,
> that these DAWs can't get the latency down to Paris/Pro Tools levels. Paris
> was doing it with what has to be, by now, a pretty low tech card.
> MR
Mike - The reason Paris, Protools, and Soundscape/Mixtreme achieve lower
latency than software DAWs (Nuendo, Logic, Sonar, DP, etc) is that these are
direct hardware systems, not unlike a digital mixer a la DM2000 etc. The
downside, is that you can't run native applications or plugins directly on
the hardware itself, and you are limited to what the hardware manufacturer
and any 3rd parties develop specifically for it - the technology is also
frozen in time and keeping pace with technological advancements (better
processors, faster memory, and even better quality I/O is nearly impossible
and still maintain backwards compatibility - just ask PT Mix to HD
upgraders). Paris only ran it's own mixer and EDS plugins on the EDS cards,
but VST plugins are still native, and subject to internal latency and cpu
overhead. Hence we only had 16 tracks per EDS card. 100 tracks on a native
rig is nothing now.
My general DAW pros and cons response:
Though pretty much everyone here knows most of there, here is my take on all
of this since it's been discussed in part in different threads recently,
just because I'm bored, and hate to see misinformation distributed in pieces
here and there.....
HYBRID-HARDWARE (PT, Paris, Sydec/Soundscape):
The advantage to a hardware system is of course, lower latency and running
plugins on the hardware at lower latency (e.g. tracking with plugins).
The disadvantage is the systems are always proprietary (e.g. more costly,
including plugins), fixed processing capability (you have to add more DSP
cards to run more plugins, add more I/O, etc), and usually older technology.
ProTools is still using Motorola DSP chips, which are fine, but they are
ganging a dozen or so together to create processing, and you must divide
that dsp between the mixer, I/O and plugins. The plugin counts are about
half that for Universal Audio plugins vs. the exact same plugins on a UAD-1
card (e.g. the cost is twice, or more, per plugin to run on a TDM system vs.
a native system).
Despite what others say, the cost is in fact significantly higher with a
proprietary system unless you are happy with the fixed plugin load you can
achieve, I/O count, etc. If you want to expand, you have to upgrade, and
that is quite expensive. Digi's trade in program seems to be a decent deal,
but it's still quite expensive to get 64 tracks and a decent sized mix, not
counting the computer, which if you want to run anything nati
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #87997 is a reply to message #87996] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 11:30 |
rich
Messages: 22
Registered: July 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
ve, needs to be
somewhat decent.
NATIVE:
One advantage to native is it is quite inexpensive to expand and upgrade,
and you choose your software, I/O card, I/O hardware, etc. Plugins are
usually 1/2 that of their TDM counterparts, or less. For the cost of an HD
card, you can build/buy two dual quad PCs or Macs and one of either will run
a higher plugin and track count than a single HD card (I've done the math on
this several times, so don't listen to the marketing hype: a single HD card
supports up to 96 simultaneous tracks at 44.1/48k - I can run that with
plugins on every track on my Nuendo rig - low latency, though I don't recall
how low I dropped it).
Hardware interface cards don't run the main DAW mixer or plugins locally -
they just pass I/O streams between the DAW software and outside world, so
there is a layer of drivers (ASIO, WDM, Coreaudio) between the hardware and
DAW.
The downside to native is latency in monitoring during tracking (whether
live monitoring for recording bands, or tracking VSTis, etc). During mixing
this isn't a big deal. Of course with faster cpus, you can run a more
complicated project (more I/O, more plugins), while maintaining low latency,
but as noted in a previous response there are multicore scaling issues with
Nuendo and Cubase at the moment preventing making use of the full potential
of dual quad cores, or to a lesser degree, dual dual cores.
There are tradeoffs both ways that extend far beyond the latency issue:
ProTools for composing/production just isn't happening for anyone I know.
It's a cool system, so I'm not knocking it in the least, just stating that
like anything, thinking it's the end-all be-all, or worse, proclaiming that
publicly is shortsighted, and a disservice to users considering the two
options (native or hardware). The reason higher end users are going native,
and the reason I'm running native, is that it affords me a significantly
more flexible and cost effective upgrade and compatibility path, and the
software I can use is significantly more powerful than any hybrid-hardware
solution, bar none. Anyone that says one (hardware or native) is ultimately
better than the other for any use either hasn't done their homework, or is
selling something. :-)
Use what works best for you of course, be it Paris, ProTools, Soundscape,
Nuendo, DP, Cubase, Logic, Sonar, Live, Reaper; Mac or PC; or a console and
tape. In the end, what we can accomplish now with very little investment is
incredible, no matter how you look at it.
Regards,
Dedric
On 9/9/07 5:07 PM, in article 46e452e6@linux, "Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Hey LaMont
> Thanks for the reply. Very helpful. I appreciate the overview on the state
> of the DAW world. Its so weird, as I guess the Steinway group is noting,
> that these DAWs can't get the latency down to Paris/Pro Tools levels. Paris
> was doing it with what has to be, by now, a pretty low tech card.
> MR
>
> "LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote in message news:46e4422b$1@linux...
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> Yes, in Paris we have been spoiled with the best DAW latency in the
> business.
>> But, you know the Paris story. And, most folk are hell bent on a Native
> based
>> solution that can topple Pro Tools and Paris mixing and routing power..
>>
>> Having said all of that, the best way (Like BrianT) states to achieve near
>> -zero latency in a native DAW is to add a mixer(analog or Digital) . This
>> would ensure absolutly no latency when tracking. Inthe case of BrianT ,
> his
>> facily uses a Euphonix System 5 mixers(2)..Which Btw does(System 5) most
>> of EQing and Compression chores. So the strain to have the DAW do
> everthing
>> is minimal.
>>
>> Products like Total Mix (RME) Cue mix (Motu) address the Native DAW
> latency
>> issue by incorporating so clever Mixer routing "outside " of the DAW. In
>> other words, acting as an Digital Mixer with in a PC/MAC , yet able to
> route
>> audio to and fro to the Native App..
>>
>> Today Apoggee is claming 1.6 ms latency(round trip) when using it's
> Symphony
>> PCI-E cards. Daisy chaining them up to 96 channels each way (192) total.
>> This a hugh leap in native Land. This put the user back into the Paris ,
>> Pro Tools realm of flexibily ..
>>
>> http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/symphony_performance.p hp
>>
>> The Apogee solution is not cheap by know means..
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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'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>
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88000 is a reply to message #87996] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 12:03 |
BradLyons
Messages: 36
Registered: July 2007
|
Member |
|
|
I
> did spend money. Heh.
>
> S
>
>
> "DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote in message
> news:46e2f1b8@linux...
>> 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?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
>James - my comments on Symphony are simply that the reviews I've read simply
counter Lamont's claims that it is leading the audio interface market with
lower latency than anything else. 1.6ms roundtrip is great, but only if it
is reality under realistic loading - I'm all for it, and the more interfaces
running sub 2ms, or better, sub 1ms the better. No one said it's a bad
interface, or subpar than anything else, just that it isn't necessarily some
remarkable breakthrough technology.
Let's keep the facts straight and refrain from blindly defending anything
that relates to Apple (though this was specifically in response to a
poster's comments, not Apogee, Symphony, or Apple). The VSL2020 comparison
was purely to point out that low latency interfaces aren't breakthrough
technology - even RME and Lynx haven't completely reached the level of low
latency the 2020 did, regardless of I/O config.
I'm all for a great interface from Apogee, for the Mac, and for Logic. As
Jamie often states, competition is good for all. I don't want to be locked
into anything, whether it's ProTools or Nuendo, PC or Mac, RME or Apogee.
Please, yet again, don't jump to conclusions and assume that everyone is out
to trash anything remotely related to Apple, 3rd party providers, etc.
James, there is often more to my comments than you might like to believe -
it seems far too easy for you to jump on me assuming I'm somehow slandering
Apple, and it's getting really old. Give it a rest.
I have to be honest, my tolerance level for the defensiveness and lack of
technical backing for the many tech debates here is wearing quite thin. I
like you guys and generally enjoy conversing here, but I'm sure we all have
better things to do than wade through constantly flip-flopping hyperbole,
misinformation, and replies made with no intent of reading the involved
post, much less understanding the poster's point of view.
Dedric
On 9/9/07 3:14 PM, in article 46e4624b$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
<excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> 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 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.
>
> That's a bit of a blanket statement, most are not impressed because of the
> price of Synphony, not the performance.
>
>>
>>> 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 positive 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.
>
> The disadvantage is, processing power, space, bandwidth, and the fact that
> they and their hardware are not ready for 64bit yet, just wait.
>
>>
>> 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.
>
> The Steinberg VSL 2020 was a 32 ch. Adat card, The Symphony system is 1.7
> ms. analog to analog. With Symphony it's 192 simultaneous audio ch. at 1.7
> MS. To minimize what Symphony can do is not right.
>
>>>
>>> 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
>
> Well Dedric, since Apogee's claims are false and nothing more than marketing
> hype, maybe a lawsuit is in order.
>
>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>> m
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88001 is a reply to message #87980] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 12:07 |
BradLyons
Messages: 36
Registered: July 2007
|
Member |
|
|
ix
>>>> 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 what are you talking about ??
Asio may be the best for Native PC da users, but certainly not for mac users.
All in all , with ASIO getting long winded, Asio has gotten old, and they
Steinberg has not figured out how to fix the routing(Mixer) issuses that
will put it on par with Pro Tool's software controlled hardware.
Your argument about HD plugins is valid, but Digi is throwing the kitchen
sink these days with new purchases, not just trade-ins. Suffice it to say,
when you purchase a new HD rig, you won't need to make many Plugin Purchases
anytime soon.
I totally disagre with you about Native being a Cheaper upgrade path. Since
1999, most semi and high end users have upgraded their systems at least 4
-5 times.. With the intent of gaining more power. Even today, We sterinberg
users are still on the upgrade war path with the wholo core2 dual, 8 core..yada
yada..How much do you think it cost ?? what's the real TCO??
If I'm honest, I'll tell I have spent over 6K over the last 5 years, not
counting software..And thats being kind.
With evey mention of a new Processor, comes the dream of Zero lantency for
the Native. Now, we know our pre-64 bit cpu investments over that last couple
of years has been a sham..
Sure we can run a few more plugins, but that's about it..
To me and my circle of producers and engineers, all have or will be going
Pro Tool HD.. Depending on the needs, HD 2 acell seems to be the popular
choice. Maybe your circle of music friend are going Native, not mine..and
these guys are heavey hitters in he game.
I'm not the biggest fan of Pro Tools(AkA Slo-tools), but it has the buzz
all the way down to M-powered, LE..to mix(plus).
I truly believe Native can compete with a DSP based system (for Commerical
based studios) withthe inclusion of a mixer.
It's funny, a lot of Pro Tools based studios haveimplemented a Mixer. Why??
Like the Nuendo forum discusion pointed out: It seems(like always) that we
have different needs. The ITB guys need near or closest to zero latency as
possible. Where as the guys who just edits and mix , run their daw at 1024
and care about zero latency.
I think in the future, it would best(for all) to say what application you
work in before making statements or suggestions to anyone. Because everyone
has differnt studio, workflow needs.
Dedric, you mainly work in Post, where as I work in a more commercial studio.
Our needs and opinions will be vastly different.
That's he problem with these kinds of dscusions in forums. You have a ITB,
one room dude, running abelton live( nothing wrong with that), telling dude
who works at a facility that abelton live would be good for them ..
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 addre
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88025 is a reply to message #88001] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 22:16 |
Wayne Carson
Messages: 86
Registered: June 2007
|
Member |
|
|
at is best for the original poster.
>>>
>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Neil,I use PT M-Powered at home. HD 3 at the studio(s) where I work in. I
do own HD software. Just have not settled on the converters.
HD is a more flexible routing solution for studios that need to integrate
hardware, easily with minimal latency. I'm sorry, but HD is one Hell of a
Digital Mixer.Even BrianT will say so.
Paris's patch bay was on it's way..Nuendo/SX okay.. To be honest, I think
that tehr guys who invented VST never imagined that engineers,, not msuicians,
but engineers would get so invloved with Wanting to integrated their Hardware
into Cubase.
This ahs thrown them for a complet loop(Steinberg).VST by it's very definition,
Virtual STudio Technology,was meant to be jsut that..Virtual. Software only..
Not, adding Hardware devices.
It will remains to be scene if they pull it off without dedicated Hardware.
Personally Ilove DSP based systems. If Paris were to make a comaback , even
under another name company, I'd jump in a heart beat..
Now that Lynx's have the digi mod , that migh be the way I'll go.
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Okay..But, but my point was to answer the statement about
>>crappy music being made in so called pro facilities. crappy
>>clients coming in with crappy music can happen at level of
>>studio.
>>Big buck facility,does not ensure top quality product.
>
>Everybody here knows this much: you can make great music with
>crap gear & crap music with great gear. Ideally, if you can
>make great music with great gear, then every now & then you get
>the right blend of luck & skill on both sides of the glass, and
>everything gels just right. As far as crappy clients go, you
>CAN do some degree of turd-polishing. Look, this is life,
>sometimes shit just is a waste of time - bad music, bad
>players, bad gear, bad engineers... this is probably the
>majority of what gets recorded! lol
>
>We're talking about practical applications & I think that's
>what Dedric is trying to say, as well. PTHD is NOT the solution
>for everybody. I've said here before that if I had a fully-
>commercial facility, I'd absolutely have an HD rig, but really
>for the following reasons:
>1.) Ease of Compatibilty with other facilities.
>2.) Plain & simple marketing - people want PT? OK, fine, I've
>got PT! No need to convince someone otherwise until they get in
>there & you can show 'em the difference if you want.
>
>That's it! No other reason! I do think the HD convertors sound
>very good (while the 888's sounded like ass), but there are
>other good-sounding convertors, as well. IOW, there is no sonic-
>specific reason to go with HD, in my view. None.
>
>BTW, I find it ironic that you espouse PT so much as
>being the "pro" solution, and talk down to those who do not
>agree with you, when you yourself DO NOT OWN IT!!! You have an
>LE system, do you not? Big fucking difference between the HD-
>196 convertors & whateverthefuck you're using in your LE rig!
>
>You DO tend to make some empirical statements without really
>thinking about it, ya know.
>
>Neil"DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote:
>Thanks for the heads up on this one..........see???...you can do something
>right after all, but I'm gonna be skeptical until I comnpare this to
>something I've done on an SSL
With an original FC-670 strapped aross the 2-buss, I presume?
:)Hey everyone!
I haven't been to the group in a while and was just checking back in to make
sure everything was still cool. It's good to see the familiar names are
still hanging around.
I changed day jobs last March and between that, the family, and the band
gigging all the time, I just haven't had a lot of time to keep up with
things here. My new day gig is building and helping to design Atomic Force
Microscopes. The head guy is an old music buddy of mine and he knew I was
good with gadgets and had a background in tinkering, and decided to make me
an offer I couldn't refuse. Here's a link to the company if anyone is
interested in just what the hell an Atomic Force Microscope is:
www.novascan.com
In other news, my band, Standing Hampton, just finished our first CD.
Several of the songs started out in PARIS, but were then re-recorded and
mixed in DP when I switched over. I miss the sound of PARIS, but the need
for "modern" plug-in handling, virtual instruments, etc. was just too great
for me. The bulk of the tracks were recorded in DP 5 on my dual 2Ghz G5. Our
keyboard player recorded his tracks on his Nuendo rig and they were then
flown into DP for mixing. The mastering was done by Discmakers where we had
the CD manufactured. Our band plays high energy classic rock covers and we
were always being asked if we had a CD, so we decided to put something out
to sell at gigs, etc. It's definitely "old school" rock. The description we
use is "Power pop rock at it's seveties-eightiesest". ;>) Anyway, if anyone
wants to check it out, you can listen to snippets at iTunes, CD Baby and
Digstation.com. Just do a search for "Standing Hampton" / "Brace Yourself"
or you can get there from our web site at www.standinghampton.com.
I'll try to check in more often now that my life's slowed down a little
again. I always enjoy the company here and I'm glad the place is still going
strong!
Later,
TonyTony Benson <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>Hey everyone!Hey everyone!
I haven't been to the group in a while and was just checking back in to make
sure everything was still cool. It's good to see the familiar names are
still hanging around.
>I changed day jobs last March and between that, the family, and >the band
>gigging all the time, I just haven't had a lot of time to keep >up with
>things here. My new day gig is building and helping to design >Atomic Force
>Microscopes.
Tony, that's one of the coolest thing I can imagine. Congratulations.
-stevegot em...thanks LaMont.
On 10 Sep 2007 04:21:20 +1000, "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Do ou right mouse click on the link? Maybe too many peole are downloading..
>
>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>i would if i could get it to download properly. it keeps quitting at
>>different points anywh
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88026 is a reply to message #88025] |
Thu, 12 July 2007 22:24 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ere from 1/2 mb to 13.5 mb.
>>
>>On 9 Sep 2007 12:17:37 +1000, "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameriech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Hey.. Has anyone else tried ou these plugins? http://antress.myweb.hinet.net/
>>>
>>>See my post reply on my findings.. Would like your opinions..hey are free
>>>, give them a try...Thanks
>>>
>>hey tony,
welcome back though i was hoping the AFM was a new retro all metal
squirt gun...
rick
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 02:47:45 -0500, Tony Benson
<tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>Hey everyone!
>
>I haven't been to the group in a while and was just checking back in to make
>sure everything was still cool. It's good to see the familiar names are
>still hanging around.
>
>I changed day jobs last March and between that, the family, and the band
>gigging all the time, I just haven't had a lot of time to keep up with
>things here. My new day gig is building and helping to design Atomic Force
>Microscopes. The head guy is an old music buddy of mine and he knew I was
>good with gadgets and had a background in tinkering, and decided to make me
>an offer I couldn't refuse. Here's a link to the company if anyone is
>interested in just what the hell an Atomic Force Microscope is:
>
>www.novascan.com
>
>In other news, my band, Standing Hampton, just finished our first CD.
>Several of the songs started out in PARIS, but were then re-recorded and
>mixed in DP when I switched over. I miss the sound of PARIS, but the need
>for "modern" plug-in handling, virtual instruments, etc. was just too great
>for me. The bulk of the tracks were recorded in DP 5 on my dual 2Ghz G5. Our
>keyboard player recorded his tracks on his Nuendo rig and they were then
>flown into DP for mixing. The mastering was done by Discmakers where we had
>the CD manufactured. Our band plays high energy classic rock covers and we
>were always being asked if we had a CD, so we decided to put something out
>to sell at gigs, etc. It's definitely "old school" rock. The description we
>use is "Power pop rock at it's seveties-eightiesest". ;>) Anyway, if anyone
>wants to check it out, you can listen to snippets at iTunes, CD Baby and
>Digstation.com. Just do a search for "Standing Hampton" / "Brace Yourself"
>or you can get there from our web site at www.standinghampton.com.
>
>I'll try to check in more often now that my life's slowed down a little
>again. I always enjoy the company here and I'm glad the place is still going
>strong!
>
>Later,
>
>Tony
> http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt_top.jsp?news_id=ap-d8 rikq680&Hmmm.......I was wondering why I was seeing Santa rosa 2220's on EBay for
$275.00 over the weekend. I'm still going to hold off on building the
perfect beast until I see what Cubase comes up with as far as being able to
scale with dual quads. I'm thinking a Tyan S2915 mobo with a pair of 3G quad
core Barcelona's and 16G RAM running on Vista by sometime next summer. I
sure hope this puts a dent in Intels ascendancy. I still remember the"rpre
athlon" days when Intel had us all bent over and was screwing us for every
penny. I paid around $2k for my first Paris DAW with an Intel Pentium 200MHZ
CPU.
Hooray for AMD.
;o)
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:46e55ce0$1@linux...
>
> http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt_top.jsp?news_id=ap-d8 rikq680&Two of them...in series. You gotta emulate an RNC with these if you're onna
be cutting edge.
;o)
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:46e4e3dc$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote:
>>Thanks for the heads up on this one..........see???...you can do something
>
>>right after all, but I'm gonna be skeptical until I comnpare this to
>>something I've done on an SSL
>
> With an original FC-670 strapped aross the 2-buss, I presume?
>
> :)I guess this means you won't be buying a Mac, but what if it had AMDs in it?
; )
"DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote:
>Hmmm.......I was wondering why I was seeing Santa rosa 2220's on EBay for
>$275.00 over the weekend. I'm still going to hold off on building the
>perfect beast until I see what Cubase comes up with as far as being able
to
>scale with dual quads. I'm thinking a Tyan S2915 mobo with a pair of 3G
quad
>core Barcelona's and 16G RAM running on Vista by sometime next summer. I
>sure hope this puts a dent in Intels ascendancy. I still remember the"rpre
>athlon" days when Intel had us all bent over and was screwing us for every
>penny. I paid around $2k for my first Paris DAW with an Intel Pentium 200MHZ
>CPU.
>
>Hooray for AMD.
>
>;o)
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:46e55ce0$1@linux...
>>
>> http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt_top.jsp?news_id=ap-d8 rikq680&
>
>Lamont - instead of just replying to your latest post, I've copied sections
from a couple of posts to address at once, then leave the topic alone for
now:
On 9/9/07 6:59 PM, in article 46e4970f$1@linux, "LaMont"
<jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
> I guess we are back to our usuall disagreement about wha's considered Pro.
> That's fine, you can call pro anything you like..I'll refrain form such
> terms..But,
> I will use terms as Comercial and Project..even pro project studios. To me,
> jsut because a person has his PC/Mac in a office building does not make him
> comerical. There are certain indusry tools you must have to be considered
> commerical. Even you have high-end clients.
Usual disagreement? Okay.... My point has simply been that working in a
large studio doesn't make you more knowledgeable than someone who owns their
own music/audio business. We were talking about native vs. hardware hybrid,
not commercial vs. project studio. Commercial is a broad description.
Project has a part time/semi-pro connotation, but that's beside the point...
just fyi.
Also, be careful - your comments at times come across as condescending. It
puts you in a position of someday having to really back it up with a serious
level of credibility. Maybe not what you intended.
> Your needs and my needs are vastly different> I really need at least 32
> channels
> of I/O for tracking..
Great - the more the merrier. :-)) 32+ is fine for tracking bands, etc.
.... wouldn't be enough for my work though, oddly enough. I run 48 now and
will be doubling that in the very near future. :-)) No, it isn't a pissing
match at all - just having a little fun with the notion that I/O count was a
distinction between our needs. I'm also pointing out that technical
requirements and knowledge aren't directly related to the size of a console,
inputs, etc. I know the point you were making - you track bands, I don't -
the differences in needs are obvious, but the technical differences and
requirements aren't as diverse as you might think. I need studios like
yours to track in from time to ti
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88036 is a reply to message #87979] |
Fri, 13 July 2007 05:08 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
make a directory called "neocon" and that didn't work out at all...
What happened when you tried to make a directory
called: "iamaonetrickponyglobalwarmingliberalranter" ???
Anything?
Got any more political posts ready to go for me?
:)
NeilThat's a shame. Hope he went peacefully.
Neil
Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>Come back soon, Joe. We need ya.
>
>steve the artguy wrote:
>> Jazz Great Joe Zawinul Dies at 75
>>
>> By VERONIKA OLEKSYN – 2 hours ago
>>
>> VIENNA, Austria (AP) — Joe Zawinul, the jazz keyboardist who soared to
fame
>> as one of the creators of jazz-rock fusion with the band Weather Report,
>> has died, a hospital official said. He was 75.
>>
>> Zawinul died early Tuesday, a spokeswoman for Vienna's Wilhelmina Clinic
>> said, without giving details. He had been hospitalized since last month
and
>> suffered from a rare form of skin cancer, said Risa Zincke, his manager,
>> according to the Austria Press Agency.
>>
>> Zawinul won acclaim for his keyboard work on chart-topping Miles Davis
albums
>> such as "In A Silent Way" and "Bitches Brew," and was a leading force
behind
>> the so-called "Electric Jazz" movement.
>>
>> In 1970, Zawinul and saxophonist Wayne Shorter founded Weather Report
and
>> produced a series of albums including "Heavy Weather," "Black Market,"
"I
>> Sing the Body Electric," and the Grammy-winning live recording "8:30."
>>
>> He is credited with bringing the electric piano and synthesizer into the
>> jazz mainstream, but was frustrated by the lack of respect for electric
keyboards
>> and new technology among jazz purists.
>>
>> "There is no difference between a Stradivarius or a beautiful synthesizer
>> sound," Zawinul told Jazziz magazine earlier this year. "People make a
big
>> mistake in putting down electronic music. Yes, it's been misused and abused,
>> but that's true of every music.
>>
>> "There is nothing wrong with electronic music as long as you're putting
some
>> soul behind the technology."
>>
>> Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer praised Zawinul's "unpretentious
way
>> of dealing with listeners" and said he wasn't "blinded by superficialities."
>>
>> Born in 1932, Zawinul grew up in a working-class family during World War
>> II in the Austrian capital. He played accordion on the streets to make
money
>> and received classical piano training as a child prodigy at the Vienna
Conservatory.
>> In the postwar years, he grew interested in American jazz, playing in
a dance
>> band that included the future Austrian President Thomas Klestil and making
>> a name for himself on the local jazz scene in bands led by saxophonist
Hans
>> Koller and others.
>>
>> "One thing about Viennese musicians, they can really groove, more than
even
>> the German bands can," Zawinul said in a 2007 Downbeat magazine interview.
>> "It's something in our nature, perhaps. We're cosmopolitan and interracial
>> — Czech, Slavic, Hungarian, Romanian, Bulgarian, Turkish a little bit."
>>
>> In 1959, Zawinul emigrated to the United States on a scholarship to study
>> at the Berklee School of Music in Boston, but left to join Maynard Ferguson's
>> big band. He next landed a gig with Dinah Washington; his funky piano
can
>> be heard on her 1959 hit "What a Diff'rence a Day Made."
>>
>> Zawinul rose to international fame after joining alto saxophonist Cannonball
>> Adderley's band in 1961. During his nine-year stint with the band, he
composed
>> such tunes as "Walk Tall," "Country Preacher," and most notably the gospel-influenced,
>> soul-jazz anthem "Mercy, Mercy, Mercy," his first important recording
on
>> electric piano, which climbed the pop charts and won a Grammy for Adderley.
>>
>> In the late '60s, Zawinul recorded with Davis' studio band, His tune "In
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88037 is a reply to message #88036] |
Fri, 13 July 2007 05:52 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;> a Silent Way" served as the title track for the trumpeter's first foray
into
>> the electric arena. Zawinul's composition "Pharoah's Dance" was featured
>> on Davis' groundbreaking 1970 jazz-rock fusion album "Bitches Brew," which
>> won Davis a 1970 Grammy for best jazz performance, large group or soloist
>> with large group.
>>
>> Weather Report enjoyed its biggest commercial success with the 1977 album
>> "Heavy Weather" which featured Zawinul's catchy tune "Birdland," which
became
>> one of the most recognizable jazz hits of the '70s after it was also recorded
>> by Maynard Ferguson and the vocal group Manhattan Transfer.
>>
>> After Weather Report broke up in 1986, Zawinul went on to form The Zawinul
>> Syndicate, which brought together a global village of musicians who recorded
>> such albums as the Grammy-nominated "My People" (1996) and "World Tour"
(1998).
>>
>> Associated Press Writer Charles J. Gans in New York contributed to this
report.
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:46e75617$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote:
>>I really don't think you are supposed to be able to do this
>>with Cubase. Isn't this some kind of exclusive
> Nuendo "feature"?...Well,
>>nonetheless, I'm doing it.
>
> No, it's a hardware thang, not Cubase-Nuendo thing... in fact,
> it's in the Multiface manual - remember we were talking about
> this once over the phone? And I also posted the info here once
> for somebody else a few months back. I've tested it, but
> personally I haven't had to do it yet on an actual session
> because I run the stuff through my 2nd Multiface that I don't
> need to show up in the headphone mix like a 2nd bass amp mic or
> direct stream, a triggered kick or snare signal if I've also
> got mics on 'em, ALL toms (since you get plenty of toms in the
> OH's), etc. etc.
>
> Good for you for figuring it out though! If you need 576 inputs
> to all be routed through the headphones, now you can do it!
>
> :D lol
>
> Actually, How many inputs are youse guys all using for full
> band tracking? I've got 16 analog & 8 lightpipe (plus 2 stereo
> SPDIF that are useless to me since I have no preamps with a
> SPDIF output), and I've yet to use all of 'em at once, and I
> always have at least two bass signal & at least two mics on
> each guitar & sometimes a scratch vox. Now in the case of
> someone like Deej who has 15 mics on each banjo, dobro, &
> washboard I can see where he'd need more :) but 16 analogs,
> plus 4 lightpipe usually gits 'er done for me. Anyone?
>
> Neil
I'm using 26 AD/DA's here. That's enough for me.
;:)Martin... my apologies if I've asked you this before, but I
happened to stray across a radio spin of Kylie's "Love at First
Sight" the other day, and I think I remember that you worked on
that, right?
Did you work on the vocal sessions and/or do you know or recall
what the signal chain was? Specifically I really like the
treatment of the chorus parts that go "'Cause baby when I
heard you, For the first time I knew, We were meant to be as
one.....". The harmonies there sound absolutely HEAVENLY! :D
and there's a certain something different about each of the
voices in that section too, vs the lead part - it almost sounds
like the old trick for some female voices of slowing down
analog tape by a quarter or half-step to track the voice,
giving it a certain kind of formant countour when played back
at normal speed. Not saying that's what it is, just saying it
has some of those same kind of characteristics.
Hadn't heard ths song in awhile & I know I always liked the
vox on it, but it really just became more apparent, not having
heard it in some time. So....
Dish it! lol Signal chain? Processing?
Neil"DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote:
>I'm using 26 AD/DA's here. That's enough for me.
Why do you need so many cards, then? Is it for the external EFX
routing & such?
Neil"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>SX 4 has a transient designer type plug-in but I haven't had a chance to
check
>it out yet. I will say this, for the money the voxengo stuff is usually
spectacular.
I agree, and the only negative thing I can say about the
Voxengo Transient thang (Transmodder)is that it really can't be
used on cymbals, IMO - not if you're running all the drums
including the OH's through a subgroup, anyway. Although if you
want to run all the drums through a submix group EXCEPT for
cymbals, and THEN insert the Transmodder over that... Yummmm!
lol
Can't really use it on the 2-buss, either, since obviously
cymbals have to run through that as well. If anyone's found a
Transmodder setting that DOES work on the 2-buss lemme know!
Thadster, let us know when you have a chance to check out the
C4 TransDesigner! Is it also an application that can be
obtained sparately from somewhere, do you know?
NeilNeil wrote:
> Jamie K
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88048 is a reply to message #87984] |
Fri, 13 July 2007 07:45 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
mber
>from years past.
>The first one is about an early digital session I was evolved in. It was
>in 1978. If you have any interest in music industry history, you may find
>it interesting.
>
>A direct link to the blog is:
>http://tinyurl.com/2co5kv
>
>The main website is:
>http://www.genelennon.com/
>
>Gene.
>Never mind
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:46ebd3d9$1@linux...
> Hi all
>
> I was just wondering if this card is worth buying....got a line on one for
> $100
>
> thanks
>
> Don
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>You should hear the sheen at 1GHZ sample rate. WOW And when it's played
>back through your FM radio where they smash the dynamics so much that it's
>one huge smear of spectral shit, then you know all your hard work and money
>was worth it.
Thing is, is doesn't cost you any more work OR money once
you're in Native-land. Yeah, there is still SOME hardware that
doesn't do 88.2k... like for example I wish my Presonus Central
Station would (it does 96k, though, just not 88.2), so I could
eliminate one more analog signal path between the convertors &
the monitors; but, it's so clean that I can't even say that it
would really matter much. As an aside, that little unit has
probably been one of the best purchases I've made for my
setup - I especially like the remote for it; having the
talkback switch, mic & monitor level right there on the desktop
is great - I used to have to set up a -57 on one of those
little desktop stands & use a spare pre & turn the gain up &
down when talking. In that scenario, sometimes it was simpler
to just yell back & forth lol
>One of our FM stations has such a bad sound that it's totally unlistenable
>for me. I don't know what they fuck they are doing but it is simply horrible.
> And it's classic rock so I'm wanting to listen but they are just smearing
>every part of the music that previously existed into one bit tunnel of goo.
> Anyone else got radio stations that seriously destroy the sound ?
ABSOLUTELY! We have one here that does it. There's a wide
variance in signal quality between any number of the radio
stations here, a few sound OK and a couple sound like utter
crap, but none of 'em realy sound as good as what you hear in a
lot of major markets, either. Every time I travel somewhere
else it becomes even more apparent - like I was in LA a few
weeks ago, and even on the cheezy factory stereo in my Hyundai
rental car, KLOS sounded great.
NeilKewl stuff, Geno! Enjoyable read.
Neil
"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>Some of you may remember the home page from my beloved website (screenshot
>attached). A few months ago, under pressure, I rebuilt it as a standard
self-promotion
>site.
>
>I never had any reason to bring it up here, but… I decided to start a Blog
>page. I though I would write down a few music industry stories that I remember
>from years past.
>The first one is about an early digital session I was evolved in. It was
>in 1978. If you have any interest in music industry history, you may find
>it interesting.
>
>A direct link to the blog is:
>http://tinyurl.com/2co5kv
>
>The main website is:
>http://www.genelennon.com/
>
>Gene.
>"DJ" <animix _ at _ animas _ dot _ net> wrote:
>I'm not sure that it sounds that much better when it's downsampled, but
I'm
>sure hearing a silkier top end at 88.2 than at 44.1 on my RME ADI8-DS units.
Thing is...
a.) NOW you know.
b.) Another thing to remember when considering your
statement "not sure that it sounds that much better when it's
downsampled" is this - your statement seems to indicate that it
DOES sound SOMEWHAT better (even if not "MUCH" better). It's
like I've said before... how much money have we all spent on
incremental gains in one aspect or another?
IOW - you want to get this or that mic or preamp because it
will sound SOMEWHAT better than what I've got now. You want to
drop a grand or two on a Mytek or Benchmark D/A convertors set
because it will make my monitoring sound a little
clearer/cleaner. You drop a few hundred on a Porkpie snare
because it's just "that much" more articulate than the snare
you've got. Or even something as inexpensive as hearing an
Audix i5 and deciding that you like it much better than a -57
on a guitar cab, and so you go ahead & drop 89 bucks on one.
These are examples of how we all go for, or have gone for,
incremental gains - not even necessarily huge ones - and will
spend anywhere from tens of dollars to thousands of dollars to
do so. 88.2k represents an incremental gain you can have without
costing you a dime.
c.) And finally... if it doesn't exist in your initial file
(the raw, indiviual track files), then you absolutely know for
certain that NOT ONE ASPECT of what doesn't exist there can
exist in the final file... whether it be a higher-frequency
content abve 22k - the lower harmonics of which may be
perceived, but ONLY if they exist in the first file - or a more
accurate representation of a given sound to begin with,
multiplied by ALL the sounds on there, which could translate to
a more accurate representation of the entire amalgam of sounds,
all the way down the conversion spectrum, to 44.1 wav, to mp3
at whatever bitstream rate the end user is listeneing to it on.
It's not about WOW THAT'S FUCKING WAY HUGE AMOUNTS BETTER when
you listen to the end result at two-track-dithered-down-44.1,
it's about being "incrementally better" - noticeably better.
What if it's only (if you could put a number on it) five
percent better? Ten percent better? Personally I think it's
more than that, but every little sonic improvement you can get,
makes a difference, yes?
NeilDear Mike ,
congrats !!
I really believe that this effort is of great impotance for all us Paris
users and I do really appreciatte that as all of us I guess !
Please do not stop doing whats you doing and I am here to support and help
if possible and buy of course if something will come out !
Can you please try if possible update the eventiter as maybe help sort out
a kind of aliasing sound crackling in some high frequencies can occur especially
with guitar sounds that are frequency limited ?!!
Also could you cahnge (maybe that is easier !!) the freak eq to be able TO
CHOOSE the frequencies / ???
Can you do a sample delay plugin for eds ??
Just to compensate if needed when you don't use and DX or VST.
Thats for now and keep up the great work !!!
Thanks again.
Dimitrios
"tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote:
>I was out of town and missed the zip file No Limit Update..Can someone
>direct me to it.? Thanks
>
>"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>Heh.. you guys remember "drum drops" ?
ROFL!!! YES!!! The very first recording of my own material that
I ever did was using Drum Drops! I didn't have a turntable at
the time, so I asked a friend of mine to record the DD record
onto a cassette or me, and there was one cut that worked well
for a couple of songs I wanted to do, but it wasn't long enough
so I recorded THAT cassette onto another cassette, stopped,
cued-up the 2nd cassette (by playing back near the end & just
hitting "stop") to my best guess at where a new entry point
could be, backed up the first one, played into a few bars &
started the 2nd cassette again in record (all this manually,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88153 is a reply to message #88092] |
Sun, 15 July 2007 20:44 |
audioguy_editout_
Messages: 249
Registered: December 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>about machines for home users?
Both.
No, you were making an ignorant blanket statement that Mac cost 40-50% more
that PCs. Looking for a fair comparison. So make a fair comparison, and
compare a new Mac to a new Dell or HP. You won't because you know your wrong.
>
>Maybe if you were a little less enamoured with the world of the great Apple
>and a little more in touch
>with the fact that it's a business to make a profit off of people buying
it
>hook line and sinker just like you, then you would see it for what it is
-
>hardware and software. That's it. Not the world's greatest discovery since
>fire and bread. Just a product sold to make money.
I see it as more than just hardware and software, because it is more than
just hardware and software, but you don't get that. You also don't get that
the hardware and software are higher end. Some people get that.
>
>Why is it so many Mac users can't seem to have an objective discussion?
>Answer that honestly before
>you go calling anyone else a Mac basher. Mac users here aren't the only
>ones I deal with - seems to be a disease of
>defensiveness you get when you buy one, but it's uncanny, seriously uncanny
>and sad. That's how monopolies and bully
>companies are built - blindly loyal customers. Be careful, you may get what
>you never wished for.
>
Why do you and others here bash the Mac as soon as there is a discussion?
it's unnecessary. Personally I would prefer that we change the discussion!
But hey, throw some more gas on the fire. Keep making insults and make
sure you get personal. Monopolies and bullies? Open your eyes and look
at your beloved Microsoft! There is a long history there. Apple started
this whole thing by innovating and creating. All Microsoft can do is copy,
steal, and bully. Get real! who's a blindly loyal customer? I use both,
how about you?
>Yet again, for the 11234098340th time you didn't read what I (or anyone
>else) writes and you assume we are bashing. We try to have logical
>discussions here, but you take everything as a slight on your beloved Apple.
>This alone makes me want to avoid Apple products like the plague. You've
>pretty much dominated the computer discussions here that used to be useful,
>but not so much anymore. Every computer discussion gets turned into an
>Apple advertisement, so yes, we will defend our points of view, but only
>because we get inundated by your Apple mantra every time the words PC, Mac,
>Apple, microsoft or computer come up in a thread.
>
No, I know your bashing, and others here also know your bashing, but they
choose to stay out of it. No, every-time any thing mac is mentioned you
and a few others that don't even have much experience with current Macs,
take pot shots, spew untruths, and get down right insulting, like you are
right now!
>Why don't you go to
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88157 is a reply to message #88153] |
Sun, 15 July 2007 23:19 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
rts below each
>> for
>>>> us
>>>>> to compare.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/20/07 11:56 PM, in article 46f35d11$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dedric, you say that a Mac cost 40-50% more, I don't think that is
>>>>>> accurate
>>>>>> if your talking about off the shelve computers. It's these kind of
>> blanket
>>>>>> statements that make me want to set things strait. Here 's the
>>>>>> challenge,
>>>>>> go price the same configuration from Dell and HP. Let see how far
off
>>>> the
>>>>>> pricing is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's start at the top, these are Apple's standard configurations.
>> The
>>>> only
>>>>>> thing I've changed is the processors. By the way, Dell just came
out
>>>> with
>>>>>> 3.2 GHz machines this week, so stick to the 3.0 GHzs. I'm sure Apple
>>>> will
>>>>>> be upgrading processor speeds soon. I think they won't be as far
off
>>>> as
>>>>>> you think they are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $2499.00 or $59.00 a month
>>>>>> Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon "Woodcrest" processors
>>>>>
>>>>> Woodcrest 2.66GHz: 2 x $721 = $1442
>>>>>
>>>>> MSI 5000X dual socket 771 Server board (2xPCIe, 2xPCI-X, 1xPCI): $400
>>>>>
>>>>> Antec 550W power supply: $100
>>>>>
>>>>> Coolermaster case: $60
>>>>>
>>>>>> 1GB memory (667MHz DDR2 fully-buffered DIMM ECC)
>>>>> Crucial DDR667 1G (2x512): $34.99
>>>>>
>>>>>> NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT graphics with 256MB memory
>>>>> $70 (middle of the price range between Chaintech and EVGA or Asus)
>>>>>
>>>>>> 250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200-rpm hard drive1
>>>>> Seagate SATA 3Gb/s, 250G: $80 (Hitachi: $67)
>>>>>
>>>>>> 16x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>>> Plextor 18x burn, DL, CD/DVD burner: $40
>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple Keyboard and Mighty Mouse
>>>>> Basic keyboard and mouse: $30
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mac OSX and a software bundle including iLife '08
>>>>>
>>>>> WinXP Pro: $139 (builder/OEM price)
>>>>>
>>>>> Total separate parts price: $2326
>>>>>
>>>>> I went higher on the drive, DVD writer and memory than I believe
>>>>> MacPros
>>>> do,
>>>>> so you could take another $75-$100 off the final price. The video
card
>>>> is
>>>>> mid-range so that should be comparable, if not also a little higher
>>>>> than
>>>> a
>>>>> Mac Pro's card. The motherboard I chose also has 5 PCI/e/X slots vs.
>> 3
>>>> on
>>>>> the Mac Pro.
>>>>>
>>>>> So the Mac Pro isn't far off the same PC system, but it would still
be
>&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88158 is a reply to message #88116] |
Mon, 16 July 2007 00:32 |
|
|
gt;>>> useful to know what make/model memory, drives, and motherboard are
in
>> use
>>>>> (the latter being unknown/custom retrofitted with the OS dongle chip).
>>>>>
>>>>> Also a head to head comparison of the same app (Nuendo 4 might be the
>>>>> first/best choice for that) running performance tests on the same
>>>>> hardware,
>>>>> OSX vs. WinXP would be quite informative.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $3,298.00
>>>>>> Two 3.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon "Woodcrest" processors
>>>>>> 1GB memory (667MHz DDR2 fully-buffered DIMM ECC)
>>>>>> NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT graphics with 256MB memory
>>>>>> 250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200-rpm hard drive1
>>>>>> 16x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>>>> Apple Keyboard and Mighty Mouse
>>>>>> Mac OSX and a software bundle including iLife '08
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $3,997.00
>>>>>> Two 3.0 Quad-core intel Xeon
>>>>>> 1GB memory (667MHz DDR2 fully-buffered DIMM ECC)
>>>>>> NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT graphics with 256MB memory
>>>>>> 250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200-rpm hard drive1
>>>>>> 16x double-layer SuperDrive
Gantt Kushner
Gizmo Recording Company
Silver Spring, MD
www.gizmorecording.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big Ben and DAC1 [message #88214 is a reply to message #88153] |
Mon, 16 July 2007 18:36 |
BradLyons
Messages: 36
Registered: July 2007
|
Member |
|
|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|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 05 19:04:07 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.77865 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
