Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
| OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72511] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 15:48  |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
do you desire?
>
>>What, exactly, do you find missing? What part of the current audio track
>
>>editing or waveform editing don't you like?
>>
>>Regarding MSWindows - I understand that's an issue for some folks
>>(particularly those who didn't switch when Logic went OSX-only), but
>>really, this is not an issue for everyone. It's kinda late in the game
>>to still be complaining about that, either switch to OSX (a very good
>>OS) or give up on Logic and know that just because you gave up doesn't
>>mean it hasn't improved tremendously and people aren't using and liking
>
>>the current version - it's a much better program on OSX today than it
>>was on MSWindows four years ago, or however long it's been. For that
>>matter it's a much better program on OSX today than it was on MacOS 9.
>>I'm no fan of either OS 9 or MSWindows for my own OS snob reasons, but
>>OSX doesn't suck too badly (high compliment).
>>
>>At this point I'm OK with seeing the development team continue to
>>optimize Logic for OSX as they continue to rewrite and update code. If
>>there's a problem I can complain to a single company to fix it - as I
>>did when the Apple rep came to town earlier this year. Whether that had
>
>>anything to do with it or not, the bugs I complained about got fixed.
>>
>>I would like to see Emapple continue the process of moving things from
>>the Environment and into the Arrange window. The manual control in the
>>Environment is powerful, but
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72512 is a reply to message #72511] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 16:41  |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
some of that could be made easier and put
>>into the Arrange. It's not a prob for me, I know my way around the
>>Environment enough to do what I need to do but it would help with the
>>learning curve for new users to keep up that trend - they've already
>>done some things toward that end.
>>
>>I do like that I can arrange multiple mixer windows however I want them,
>
>>size the Arrange window to fit, add a transport and I have a really good
>
>>view of the project on my 24" widescreen monitor. Views are automatic
>>and I sometimes use multiple views to arrange windows for different
>>tasks, but for the most part one view and a big monitor is golden.
>>They've improved things tremendously by letting users drag plugins
>>around on the GUI and allowing whole racks of FX to be saved and
>>recalled. I would say the interface is not "dated" so much as "really,
>>efficient." I'd hate to see them lose that efficiency in an effort to be
>
>>glitzier.
>>
>>The color scheme is OK with me but I can see where you might like to
>>have control over that. When the color scheme hacks came out for PARIS
I
>
>>thought they were interesting but there again, I was OK with the color
>>scheme for PARIS.
>>
>>The main questions for me are does it do what I need, within budget, and
>
>>does it sound good. Yes to both. In fact it exceeds what I need. At this
>
>>point I really appreciate the power on my studio desktop.
>>
>>Again, there are other systems that also work well. A lot of folks like
>
>>Nuendo/Cubase, the new Cubase looks great. The new Digital Performer
>>also looks great, Etc. If my needs were different I'd still be using
>>PARIS - it does a lot, just falls short with MIDI and has a few other
>>limitations, but within those limitations it's a very usable system.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72516 is a reply to message #72512] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 17:52 |
justcron
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
>>> change
>>>>> it's course Sooooooon, Logic will go the way of Studio Vision and so
>will
>>>>> Digital Performer.
>>>>> Unless Apple starts packaging Logic Pro with every dual Mac(thrown
in),
>>> I
>>>>> cant really see them making any market penatration.
>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Heh. Yeah, they sit out NAMM sometimes. Apple didn't exhibit at Winter
>>>
>>>>>> NAMM when I covered it for MacWEEk a zillion years ago. I dinged 'em
>>> for
>>>>>> it in the mag. The director of music marketing over there was a bit
>
>>>>>> miffed. Whatever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fact is, Logic has had several updates this year already, including
>
>>>>>> fixing some moldy bugs that HAD to go. It has finally gotten to the
>
>>>>>> point where I can actually recommend it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The feature set is deep and, frankly, amazing. The included collection
>>>
>>>>>> of usable and good to great sounding plugins is much appreciated.
On
>>> a
>>>>>> dual G5 it's very efficient and capable of way more tracks, FX and
>soft
>>>>>> synths than even my most overproduced excess would need. The current
>>>
>>>>>> improvements in stability makes it a workhorse around here. The support
>>>>>> for both Intel and PowerPC Macs will be extra nice when I get a fast
>>>
>>>>>> Intel Mac laptop in a few months (holding out for the 64 bit chip).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now that Logic supports the quad boxes, it's just showing off. Naturally
>>>>>> there are a few more things the Logic team can do to improve it here
>>> and
>>>>>> there, but rumors of its demise are more than a bit premature, folks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Taking nothing away from the other programs which have also been
>>>>>> improving lately - and good thing, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72517 is a reply to message #72511] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 18:14 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>>>>
>>>>>> LaMont wrote:
>>>>>>> Wow!
>>>>>>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I'm afraid that if Logic Audio does do something Radical Soon (Winter
>>>>>>>> Namm2007) there toast..<
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Apple wasn't even on the list of NAMM xhbitors, last I looked.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451e02f1$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>> Hi Jamie,
>>>>>>>>> While I'm happy that Logic audio is still in existence, It's really
>>>>> losing
>>>>>>>>> ground in the DAW market share, as well as Digital Performer. Hummm
>>>>> ...I
>>>>>>>>> wonder why??
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Could it be that by closing it's door to the Windows platform,
pretty
>>>>>>>> sealed
>>>>>>>>> their fate???
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since Apple gave Intel-mac user's Boot-Camp, they should stop this
>>> charade
>>>>>>>>> and go back to supporting Both Mac OSX and Windows.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I Love Logic Audio, but when Mr Jobs closed it's doors for us Windows
>>>>>>>> users,
>>>>>>>>> I stopped using the product.
>>>>>>>>> Now, it the Pro Audio production game, logic has lost a lot of
it's
>>>>>>>> luster.
>>>>>>>>> Mac users are using Pro Tools 7x midi sequencer these days.
>>>>>>>>> And, I still say that Logic's main problem is that their Programme
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72519 is a reply to message #72511] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 18:29 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
you that for my needs Logic and OSX have developed into
>>>>> impressive working tools. They've earned a spot here.
>>>>>
>>>>> DP is nice, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Lamont wrote:
>>>>>> Hey Jamie,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can feel your un-dying love and loyalty to Logic.:) However, I'm
>only
>>>> stating
>>>>>> my opinion from the trenches from both small and large studios.
>>>>>> When you talk to producers or programmers today and ask about Logic
>>audio,
>>>>>> they all answer with "Yeah, I know Logic is cool, BUT....Always the
>>But..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They, Logic are on an deserted Island these days. Not supporting
the
>>>> Windows
>>>>>> Platform was a major mistake. And I'm affraid, that If Apple does
not
>>>> change
>>>>>> it's course Sooooooon, Logic will go the way of Studio Vision and
so
>>will
>>>>>> Digital Performer.
>>>>>> Unless Apple starts packaging Logic Pro with every dual Mac(thrown
>in),
>>>> I
>>>>>> cant really see them making any market penatration.
>>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Heh. Yeah, they sit out NAMM sometimes. Apple didn't exhibit at Winter
>>>>
>>>>>>> NAMM when I covered it for MacWEEk a zillion years ago. I dinged
'em
>>>> for
>>>>>>> it in the mag. The director of music marketing over there was a bit
>>
>>>>>>> miffed. Whatever.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fact is, Logic has had several updates this year already, including
>>
>>>>>>> fixing some moldy bugs that HAD to go. It has finally gotten to the
>>
>>>>>>> point where I can actually recommend it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The feature set is deep and, frankly, amazing. The included collection
>>>>
>>>>>>> of usable and good to great sounding plugins is much appreciated.
>On
>>>> a
>>>>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72520 is a reply to message #72517] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 18:35 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> dual G5 it's very efficient and capable of way more tracks, FX and
>>soft
>>>>>>> synths than even my most overproduced excess would need. The current
>>>>
>>>>>>> improvements in stability makes it a workhorse around here. The support
>>>>>>> for both Intel and PowerPC Macs will be extra nice when I get a fast
>>>>
>>>>>>> Intel Mac laptop in a few months (holding out for the 64 bit chip).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now that Logic supports the quad boxes, it's just showing off. Naturally
>>>>>>> there are a few more things the Logic team can do to improve it here
>>>> and
>>>>>>> there, but rumors of its demise are more than a bit premature, folks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Taking nothing away from the other programs which have also been
>>>>>>> improving lately - and good thing, too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LaMont wrote:
>>>>>>>> Wow!
>>>>>>>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I'm afraid that if Logic Audio does do something Radical Soon
(Winter
>>>>>>>>> Namm2007) there toast..<
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Apple wasn't even on the list of NAMM xhbitors, last I looked.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451e02f1$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jamie,
>>>>>>>>>> While I'm happy that Logic audio is still in existence, It's really
>>>>>> losing
>>>>>>>>>> ground in the DAW market share, as well as Digital Performer.
Hummm
>>>>>> ...I
>>>>>>>>>> wonder why??
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Could it be that by closing it's door to the Windows platform,
>pretty
>>>>>>>>> sealed
>>>>>>>>>> their fate???
>>>>>>>>>>
>>&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72521 is a reply to message #72516] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 18:36 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>>>>>>> Since Apple gave Intel-mac user's Boot-Camp, they should stop
this
>>>> charade
>>>>>>>>>> and go back to supporting Both Mac OSX and Windows.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I Love Logic Audio, but when Mr Jobs closed it's doors for us
Windows
>>>>>>>>> users,
>>>>>>>>>> I stopped using the product.
>>>>>>>>>> Now, it the Pro Audio production game, logic has lost a lot of
>it's
>>>>>>>>> luster.
>>>>>>>>>> Mac users are using Pro Tools 7x midi sequencer these days.
>>>>>>>>>> And, I still say that Logic's main problem is that their Programmers
>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> beholden to that 1994 GUI. By todays standards, it just does not
>>play.
>>>>>>>>> Even
>>>>>>>>>> Cakewalk Sonar looks more profesional.! Yikes!! Man, what a F....in
>>>>>> waste
>>>>>>>>>> in what is still thee best sequencer in the world..But, when you
>>stop
>>>>>>>>> evolving,
>>>>>>>>>> you die.. I'm afraid that if Logic Audio does do something Radical
>>>> Soon
>>>>>>>>> (Winter
>>>>>>>>>> Namm2007) there toast..
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bright-Side: They are struck this monumental joint agreement with
>>>> Apogee
>>>>>>>>>> with the those PCI-E cards and Firewire interface. Nice. Problem:
>>>> Apogee
>>>>>>>>>> does not know how to write good drivers, at least firewire drivers.
>>>>>>>>> Soundtrack
>>>>>>>>>> Pro looks and runs and behaves like a modern pro DAW app should
>>run.
>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>> hope
>>>>>>>>>> and proay that we are looking at the the Future of Logic Audio/via
>>>>>>>>> Soundtrack
>>>>>>>>>> Pro..Pleaseeee... :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/24742
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Finally. Doesn't matter for me (dual processor) but for those
>who
>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> been using quad boxes this is a welcome update.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not that Logic is likely
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72523 is a reply to message #72519] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 19:00 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
; -Jamie
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>
>Hey Dedric,
I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi they continue
down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will die off
if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the game now.
Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting most
of their cardsinto IPODS.
I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or more so
Sony Vegas Pro.
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market that
>will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio. They have
>Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro as soon
>as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the "pro"
>moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting user.
>;-)
>
>Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still). Even
PT
>isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually hate
to
>see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry as a whole.
>
>The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology... making
>what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to anyone
age
>5 to 95.
>
>Dedric
>
>On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont"
><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level of audio
>> editing,
>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks like
>> Apple is heading there without them.
>>
>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading the
Logic
>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this true?
>>
>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2_re
>> storation
>James back in 1999, most of us here were running AMD Thunderbirds 800,900,1000,
1200 mghz speed processors that cost not more than 600 bucks to build. We
were not running PIII intels. Too old and too slow..
Yet, Apple was telling us all how a G4-500 was the fastest personal computer
on the planet. I should have one hat I got back in 1999..
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Hey LaMont! Your comparing a G4 500 MHz machine up against a 2.8 GHz PC???
> That's not a fair comparison, the G4 500 MHz is almost 8 years old, try
>1999!!! Why don't you compare it to a PC from 1999!!!, then tell us how
>Macs suck and how Steve Jobs is a big lier about performance. That machine
>will stand up to a 1GHz pentium III or standard 1 GHz P 4 and beat them.
>
>
>You can buy G4 500 on ebay for under $100.00 all day long. It's not a fair
>comparison.
>
>James
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameriech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Hey Jamie, I preety much know tha you have no problems nor resevations
on
>>logic audio. However, to answer your question
>>
>>"Then they went back and did some UI cleanup, audio engine remodeling and
>>bug fixing. What exact additional features do you desire? What, exactly,
>>do you find miss
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72527 is a reply to message #72511] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 20:09 |
gene lennon
Messages: 565
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ut not everyone..
>>
>>Note: My Last version of Logic on windows 5.5 was and sill is smokin!!
Very
>>stable runing on an AMD Xp2800 machine with M-audio cards using the EASI
>>drivers. My windows version out performed my G4-500, and our Studios Dual867
>>G4(so musch for the Mac hype). On a PC, I can run full (say 20plus vstis)
>>on a given session with about 50 audio tracks..with verbs. The macs would
>>choke everytime we tried doing soemthing like that..
>>
>>Now, with Intel dual cores)Logic can run some serious amount of plugins.Hummm..
>>Even Quad G5 can't run with Intel Macs.. Mac Hype all the way to PC land..
>>My point, Pc's have always ran Logic better than nay Mac. I should know,
>>I run both..
>>
>>Same with Mac OSX..Nice OS, but very very Bloated. More bloated than WinXP.
>>To me and others, Windows outperforms OSX on most DAWS..Especialy Pro-Tools..It's
>>not even a funny.
>>Now that we are all running PCs (Intels & Amds), we can all have the great
>>performance that only Steve JObs promised us. ":)
>>
>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Well Emapple HAVE been rewriting Logic, it's improved significantly
>>>dur
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72530 is a reply to message #72527] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 21:15 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
update code. If
>
>>>there's a problem I can complain to a single company to fix it - as I
>>>did when the Apple rep came to town earlier this year. Whether that had
>>
>>>anything to do with it or not, the bugs I complained about got fixed.
>>>
>>>I would like to see Emapple continue the process of moving things from
>
>>>the Environment and into the Arrange window. The manual control in the
>
>>>Environment is powerful, but some of that could be made easier and put
>
>>>into the Arrange. It's not a prob for me, I know my way around the
>>>Environment enough to do what I need to do but it would help with the
>>>learning curve for new users to keep up that trend - they've already
>>>done some things toward that end.
>>>
>>>I do like that I can arrange multiple mixer windows however I want them,
>>
>>>size the Arrange window to fit, add a transport and I have a really good
>>
>>>view of the project on my 24" widescreen monitor. Views are automatic
>>>and I sometimes use multiple views to arrange windows for different
>>>tasks, but for the most part one view and a big monitor is golden.
>>>They've improved things tremendously by letting users drag plugins
>>>around on the GUI and allowing whole racks of FX to be saved and
>>>recalled. I would say the interface is not "dated" so much as "really,
>
>>>efficient." I'd hate to see them lose that efficiency in an effort to
be
>>
>>>glitzier.
>>>
>>>The color scheme is OK with me but I can see where you might like to
>>>have control over that. When the color scheme hacks came out for PARIS
>I
>>
>>>thought they were interesting but there again, I was OK with the color
>
>>>scheme for PARIS.
>>>
>>>The main questions for me are does it do what I need, within budget, and
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72532 is a reply to message #72530] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 22:25 |
gene lennon
Messages: 565
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
>>>>>
>>>>> For my part I had zero interest in Logic until it went to OSX. So from
>>
>>>>> my perspective, dropping MSWindows support was a non-issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seriously, the Mac is no deserted Island. Programs that run on OSX
are
>>
>>>>> useful tools in a usable and reasonably advanced environment. Programs
>>
>>>>> that run on Linux or MSWindows can be useful tools, too. Use what you
>>
>>>>> prefer.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never lost any sleep fretting over what this or that other studio
>>
>>>>> uses. I use whatever fits my needs, preferences and budget. Right now
>>
>>>>> that's Logic on OSX (along with some other stuff), in the past it has
>>
>>>>> been other programs on other systems. In the future it may be something
>>>>
>>>>> else. It's not about blindly following, I evaluate and choose for myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> Having been watching this industry for more than a few years, I can
>tell
>>>>
>>>>> you that every product comes with a "but." I hate to break it to you
>>but
>>>>
>>>>> there is no perfect product. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> It's up to each of us to determine if a particular product does what
>>we
>>>>
>>>>> need. If you have specific questions about Logic or OSX, feel free
to
>>
>>>>> ask and I'll try to answer based on what I do with my system these
days.
>>>>
>>>>> I can tell you that for my needs Logic and OSX have developed into
>>>>> impressive working tools. They've earned a spot here.
>>>>>
>>>>> DP is nice, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Lamont wrote:
>>>>>> Hey Jamie,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can feel your un-dying love and loyalty to Logic.:) However, I'm
>only
>>>> stating
>>>>>> my opinion from the trenches from both small and large studios.
>>>>>> When you talk to producers or programmers today and ask about Logic
>>audio,
>>>>>> they all answer with "Yeah, I know Logic is cool, BUT....Always the
>>But..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They, Logic are on an deserted Island these days. Not supporting
the
>>>> Windows
>>>>>> Platform was a major mistake. And I'm affraid, that If Apple does
not
>>>> change
>>>>>> it's course Sooooooon, Logic will go the way of Studio Vision and
so
>>will
>>>>>> Digital Performer.
>>>>>> Unless Apple starts packaging Logic Pro with every dual Mac(thrown
>in),
>>>> I
>>>>>> cant really see them making any market penatration.
>>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Heh. Yeah, they sit out NAMM sometimes. Apple didn't exhibit at Winter
>>>>
>>>>>>> NAMM when I covered it for MacWEEk a zillion years ago. I dinged
'em
>>>> for
>>>>>>> it in the mag. The director of music marketing over there was a bit
>>
>>>>>>> miffed. Whatever.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fact is, Logic has had several updates this year already, including
>>
>>>>>>> fixing some moldy bugs that HAD to go. It has finally gotten to the
>>
>>>>>>> point where I can actually recommend it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The feature set is deep and, frankly, amazing. The included collection
>>>>
>>>>>>> of usable and good to great sounding plugins is much appreciated.
>On
>>>> a
>>>>>>> dual G5 it's very efficient and capable of way more tracks, FX and
>>soft
>>>>>>> synths than even my most overproduced excess would need. The current
>>>>
>>>>>>> improvements in stability makes it a workhorse around here. The support
>>>>>>> for both Intel and PowerPC Macs wil
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72533 is a reply to message #72532] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 22:35 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
l be extra nice when I get a fast
>>>>
>>>>>>> Intel Mac laptop in a few months (holding out for the 64 bit chip).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now that Logic supports the quad boxes, it's just showing off. Naturally
>>>>>>> there are a few more things the Logic team can do to improve it here
>>>> and
>>>>>>> there, but rumors of its demise are more than a bit premature, folks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Taking nothing away from the other programs which have also been
>>>>>>> improving lately - and good thing, too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LaMont wrote:
>>>>>>>> Wow!
>>>>>>>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I'm afraid that if Logic Audio does do something Radical Soon
(Winter
>>>>>>>>> Namm2007) there toast..<
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Apple wasn't even on the list of NAMM xhbitors, last I looked.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451e02f1$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jamie,
>>>>>>>>>> While I'm happy that Logic audio is still in existence, It's really
>>>>>> losing
>>>>>>>>>> ground in the DAW market share, as well as Digital Performer.
Hummm
>>>>>> ...I
>>>>>>>>>> wonder why??
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Could it be that by closing it's door to the Windows platform,
>pretty
>>>>>>>>> sealed
>>>>>>>>>> their fate???
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since Apple gave Intel-mac user's Boot-Camp, they should stop
this
>>>> charade
>>>>>>>>>> and go back to supporting Both Mac OSX and Windows.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I Love Logic Audio, but when Mr Jobs closed it's doors for us
Windows
>>>>>>>>> users,
>>>>>>>>>> I stopped using the product.
>>>>>>>>>> Now, it the Pro Audio production game, logic has lost a lot of
>it's
>>>>>>>>> luster.
>>>>>>>>>> Mac users are using Pro Tools 7x midi sequencer these days.
>>>>>>>>>> And, I still say that Logic's main problem is that their Programmers
>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> beholden to that 1994 GUI. By todays standards, it just does not
>>play.
>>>>>>>>> Even
>>>>>>>>>> Cakewalk Sonar looks more profesional.! Yikes!! Man, what a F....in
>>>>>> waste
>>>>>>>>>> in what is still thee best sequencer in the world..But, when you
>>stop
>>>>>>>>> evolving,
>>>>>>>>>> you die.. I'm afraid that if Logic Audio does do something Radical
>>>> Soon
>>>>>>>>> (Winter
>>>>>>>>>> Namm2007) there toast..
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bright-Side: They are struck this monumental joint agreement with
>>>> Apogee
>>>>>>>>>> with the those PCI-E cards and Firewire interface. Nice. Problem:
>>>> Apogee
>>>>>>>>>> does not know how to write good drivers, at least firewire drivers.
>>>>>>>>> Soundtrack
>>>>>>>>>> Pro looks and runs and behaves like a modern pro DAW app should
>>run.
>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>> hope
>>>>>>>>>> and proay that we are looking at the the Future of Logic Audio/via
>>>>>>>>> Soundtrack
>>>>>>>>>> Pro..Pleaseeee... :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/24742
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Finally. Doesn't matter for me (dual processor) but for those
>who
>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> been using quad boxes this is a welcome update.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not that Logic is likely to out of juice on two processors, but
>>I'm
>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>>>>>> it's fun to watch all the CPU meters moving. :^)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>
>Hey DJ, I know you're just experimenting. But, this law called the Law of
Diminishing Returns". :)
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72534 is a reply to message #72533] |
Sat, 16 September 2006 23:17 |
gene lennon
Messages: 565
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
How much has all of your testing cost you in time which is $$$$$
???
After a while, you have to just conceed and go with a proven solution that
works.
I have suggested to you that a PTHD 2axcel would be great. he Axcel 2 has
tons of DSP power and it stable and sounds great.
And considering that you don't need a $$expensive workstaion to run it on,
but of course, just like Paris, if you have he power, then it would benifit
you running native (RTAS) plugins.
Lokk, I know this is a Pro-Tools bashing forum, but it really is a total
working solutions, that works right..
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>Wellll......it gets even wierder and it appears to be an issue with Cubase
>SX. The latency of the individual plugins seems to change at random after
>adding another one in a channel. Closing the project and re-opening it puts
>the latency back where it should go, sorta', but the more plugins you add,
>the less accurate the Paris fixed increments become so the Cubase fixed
>increments appear to be shifting more drastically as more plugins are
>added........at least at lower buffer settings. I sorta' halfway expected
>this and may go back to the larger and seemingly more stable 1024 buffer
>settings. Chasing latency increments around like this is no better than
just
>using the UAD-1 cards in Paris and chasing Sampleslide around.
>
>Well........back to the lab.
>
>;o)
>
>"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f5c8e@linux...
>> OK.........this is cool. It appears that by lowering my buffers in my
RME
>> control panel from 1024 to 512, the latency in increments in Paris can
be
>> adjusted in 25ms increments per plugin rather than 50ms. Makes sense,
but
>I
>> sometimes don't expect things to make sense with Paris and it's screwy
>> millisecond increments so this is a welcome revelation. I'm just using
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72535 is a reply to message #72527] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 00:07 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
my
>> ears at this point, not doing any actual bounces in order to achieve
>*exact*
>> sample accuracy between tracks, but if I'm close enough that I don't hear
>> any flamming/phasing, then I'm happy so far. I'm going to have to try
this
>> on a project with heavy track count to see if things start sounding sloppy
>> though. My 4400 x 2 dual core is handling these chores nicely in Cubase
at
>> 512ms latency. That seems to be the break point on my system. I'll be
>> getting my head around exactly how I want to configure Cubase sends with
>> Paris auxes in this particular working scenario tomorrow.
>>
>> Deej
>>
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f53e9@linux...
>> > Using Cubase SX as a standalone FX processor for Paris only:
>> >
>> > I set the latency in my RME control panel to 1024 so I could add send
>VST
>> FX
>> > to Paris auxes without having too much latency (predelay) in a reverb
>> while
>> > not stressing the Cubase VST engine to the point of getting dropouts
>> during
>> > processing when using my dualcore 4400 CPU on lots of tracks being
>> processed
>> > thru Paris inserts.
>> >
>> > InCubase SX, create a mono input and output bus
>> > Add a mono track and assign this bus to the input and output
>> > Patch a Paris ADAT I/O to an RME ADAT I/O
>> > Add an audio track to a Paris channel and set up an external insert
on
>> this
>> > track
>> > Route the Paris ADAT I/O that is interfacing with the RME I/O to the
>> inserts
>> > on that channel in the virtual patchbay.
>> > In Cubase SX, enable monitoring with FX on the audio channel you will
be
>> > using to process the Paris track
>> > Insert a UAD-1 plugin on the Cubase audio channel and enable it for
>> > processing.
>> > Slide the Paris audio track back (to the left) by 50ms and hit play
>> > The track will be looped through the Cubase audio channel and the UAD-1
>> > processor without audible flamming/phasing
>> > Add another UAD-1 plugin to the Cubase insert rack on this channel and
>> slide
>> > the Paris track back another 50 ms
>> > The Paris track should still play back without flamming/phasing and
now
>it
>> > is being processed by two plugins.
>> >
>> > Basically, what I *think* I've found here is a way to compensate Paris
>> > tracks by a known (and small-50ms) increment *per UAD-1 plugin* without
>> > having to chase it around with Sampleslide while giving Cubase SX enough
>> > buffer to keep from choking down while processing audio in real time
as
>a
>> > standalone processor.
>> >
>> > Increasing the buffers in SX results in more latency *per
>> > plugin*.........and inversely, decreasing the buffers results in less.
>For
>> > my particular rig/CPU capabilities, 1024 seems to be the magic number
>for
>> > achieving a very simple means of latency compensation using Paris and
>> UAD-1
>> > plugins without having to stream all tracks in a project from Cubase
to
>> > Paris in order to process them with VST plugins with zero latency in
>> Paris.
>> > Doing this is very time consuming and mixing on two DAWs, even with
the
>> > incredible flexibility, it just such a hassle sometimes that I just
sit
>> > there an look at it and don't want to go there sometimes. Another cool
>> thing
>> > is, so far, my testing shows that Drumagog is exhibiting the same
>latency
>> in
>> > Cubase SX as the UAD-1 plugins. This *may* be indicitave of a *set
>latency
>> > increment* that may apply to all VST plugins. That may not be such a
big
>> > deal since Paris handles VST plugins pretty easliy, but I'm running
Win
>ME
>> > on my Paris rig and some more recent VST plugins only run on XP. This
>> gives
>> > me a means of using these plugs in Paris with a known (and simple)
>latency
>> > increment to work with.
>> >
>> > I have processed a kick drum with Drumagog in the first Cubase insert,
>the
>> > Neve 1073 in the second one and the Fairchild in the third one and
>sliding
>> > the Paris track 3 x 50ms. No audible flamming when running a parallel
>copy
>> > of the track unprocessed.
>> >
>> > Also, a very generous Parisite offered to loan me 3 x EDS cards and
an
>IF
>> > 442 today and another smart Parisite may have just come up with a
>solution
>> > to getting multiple ADAT cards happening reliably with multiple MECs
so
>me
>> > an Igor are gonna' be in the lab next weekend with the beakers bubbling.
>> >
>> > ;o)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>Does anyone here have any recommendations for LED stage lighting?
So far of the ones I've run across, these seem most interesting:
http://www.elationlighting.com/product.asp?ProductIDNumber=1 345&cat=LED%20Lighting
http://www.americandj.com/product.asp?ProductIDNumber=1558&a mp;cat=L.E.D.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72536 is a reply to message #72527] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 00:02 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
w.chauvetlighting.com/system/fixtures/colorsplash196.html" target="_blank"> http://www.chauvetlighting.com/system/fixtures/colorsplash19 6.html
http://www.centerstagelighting.com/cgi-bin/online/webapi.cgi ?sc=010&pid=coolcan64&lg=&mt=
Does anyone have any experience with these or others?
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.comHi La Mont. I appreciate your post......really.....and I'm not really a PT
hater per se. I think it sounds very good. I just cannot financially justify
it and I do my experimentation on my own time. It's really not slowing thing
down as far as billable hours are concerned......and it interests me.
I've got a scenario working here wherein I can apply VST reverbs/external
processors in Cubase SX to individual Paris channels channels on any Paris
submix and return them via an aux on any Paris submix I want. This Paris aux
will function globally so applying an external hardware reverb is no longer
tied to a single Paris submix.......basically I have defeated the submix
limitation for auxes in Paris now whether using Cubase SX as a standalone
processor for inserts and auxes (this involves some minor manual latency
compensation and I'm getting this sussed right now) or using it as a
playback engine into Paris in which case Cubase handles the latency on it's
own.
I'll post up the routing scenario for the auxes in a little while.
Cheers,
Deej
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451ffd48$1@linux...
>
> Hey DJ, I know you're just experimenting. But, this law called the Law of
> Diminishing Returns". :)
>
> How much has all of your testing cost you in time which is $$$$$
> ???
> After a while, you have to just conceed and go with a proven solution that
> works.
> I have suggested to you that a PTHD 2axcel would be great. he Axcel 2 has
> tons of DSP power and it stable and sounds great.
> And considering that you don't need a $$expensive workstaion to run it on,
> but of course, just like Paris, if you have he power, then it would
benifit
> you running native (RTAS) plugins.
>
> Lokk, I know this is a Pro-Tools bashing forum, but it really is a total
> working solutions, that works right..
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
> >Wellll......it gets even wierder and it appears to be an issue with
Cubase
> >SX. The latency of the individual plugins seems to change at random after
> >adding another one in a channel. Closing the project and re-opening it
puts
> >the latency back where it should go, sorta', but the more plugins you
add,
> >the less accurate the Paris fixed increments become so the Cubase fixed
> >increments appear to be shifting more drastically as more plugins are
> >added........at least at lower buffer settings. I sorta' halfway
expected
> >this and may go back to the larger and seemingly more stable 1024 buffer
> >settings. Chasing latency increments around like this is no better than
> just
> >using the UAD-1 cards in Paris and chasing Sampleslide around.
> >
> >Well........back to the lab.
> >
> >;o)
> >
> >"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f5c8e@linux...
> >> OK.........this is cool. It appears that by lowering my buffers in my
> RME
> >> control panel from 1024 to 512, the latency in increments in Paris can
> be
> >> adjusted in 25ms increments per plugin rather than 50ms. Makes sense,
> but
> >I
> >> sometimes don't expect things to make sense with Paris and it's screwy
> >> millisecond increments so this is a welcome revelation. I'm just using
> my
> >> ears at this point, not doing any actual bounces in order to achieve
> >*exact*
> >> sample accuracy between tracks, but if I'm close enough that I don't
hear
> >> any flamming/phasing, then I'm happy so far. I'm going to have to try
> this
> >> on a project with heavy track count to see if things start sounding
sloppy
> >> though. My 4400 x 2 dual core is handling these chores nicely in Cubase
> at
> >> 512ms latency. That seems to be
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72537 is a reply to message #72534] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 00:35 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
the break point on my system. I'll be
> >> getting my head around exactly how I want to configure Cubase sends
with
> >> Paris auxes in this particular working scenario tomorrow.
> >>
> >> Deej
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f53e9@linux...
> >> > Using Cubase SX as a standalone FX processor for Paris only:
> >> >
> >> > I set the latency in my RME control panel to 1024 so I could add send
> >VST
> >> FX
> >> > to Paris auxes without having too much latency (predelay) in a reverb
> >> while
> >> > not stressing the Cubase VST engine to the point of getting dropouts
> >> during
> >> > processing when using my dualcore 4400 CPU on lots of tracks being
> >> processed
> >> > thru Paris inserts.
> >> >
> >> > InCubase SX, create a mono input and output bus
> >> > Add a mono track and assign this bus to the input and output
> >> > Patch a Paris ADAT I/O to an RME ADAT I/O
> >> > Add an audio track to a Paris channel and set up an external insert
> on
> >> this
> >> > track
> >> > Route the Paris ADAT I/O that is interfacing with the RME I/O to the
> >> inserts
> >> > on that channel in the virtual patchbay.
> >> > In Cubase SX, enable monitoring with FX on the audio channel you will
> be
> >> > using to process the Paris track
> >> > Insert a UAD-1 plugin on the Cubase audio channel and enable it for
> >> > processing.
> >> > Slide the Paris audio track back (to the left) by 50ms and hit play
> >> > The track will be looped through the Cubase audio channel and the
UAD-1
> >> > processor without audible flamming/phasing
> >> > Add another UAD-1 plugin to the Cubase insert rack on this channel
and
> >> slide
> >> > the Paris track back another 50 ms
> >> > The Paris track should still play back without flamming/phasing and
> now
> >it
> >> > is being processed by two plugins.
> >> >
> >> > Basically, what I *think* I've found here is a way to compensate
Paris
> >> > tracks by a known (and small-50ms) increment *per UAD-1 plugin*
without
> >> > having to chase it around with Sampleslide while giving Cubase SX
enough
> >> > buffer to keep from choking down while processing audio in real time
> as
> >a
> >> > standalone processor.
> >> >
> >> > Increasing the buffers in SX results in more latency *per
> >> > plugin*.........and inversely, decreasing the buffers results in
less.
> >For
> >> > my particular rig/CPU capabilities, 1024 seems to be the magic number
> >for
> >> > achieving a very simple means of latency compensation using Paris and
> >> UAD-1
> >> > plugins without having to stream all tracks in a project from Cubase
> to
> >> > Paris in order to process them with VST plugins with zero latency in
> >> Paris.
> >> > Doing this is very time consuming and mixing on two DAWs, even with
> the
> >> > incredible flexibility, it just such a hassle sometimes that I just
> sit
> >> > there an look at it and don't want to go there sometimes. Another
cool
> >> thing
> >> > is, so far, my testing shows that Drumagog is exhibiting the same
> >latency
> >> in
> >> > Cubase SX as the UAD-1 plugins. This *may* be indicitave of a *set
> >latency
> >> > increment* that may apply to all VST plugins. That may not be such a
> big
> >> > deal since Paris handles VST plugins pretty easliy, but I'm running
> Win
> >ME
> >> > on my Paris rig and some more recent VST plugins only run on XP. This
> >> gives
> >> > me a means of using these plugs in Paris with a known (and simple)
> >latency
> >> > increment to work with.
> >> >
> >> > I have processed a kick drum with Drumagog in the first Cubase
insert,
> >the
> >> > Neve 1073 in the second one and the Fairchild in the third one and
> >sliding
> >> > the Paris track 3 x 50ms. No audible flamming when running a parallel
> >copy
> >> > of the track unprocessed.
> >> >
> >> > Also, a very generous Parisite offered to loan me 3 x EDS cards and
> an
> >IF
> >> > 442 today and another smart Parisite may have just come up with a
> >solution
> >> > to getti
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72539 is a reply to message #72536] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 01:02 |
gene lennon
Messages: 565
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The disappointing part is that even if you
don't use a VST plugin on the insert, and even if you are using an outboard
FX processor, you will still have to compensate for latency unfortunately
due to the buffers. If your goal is to just be able to use an outboard FX
processor to cross submixes and your Cubase DAW has the mojo to run at 64k
buffers (1.5ms) the this would probably be of some use to you, but higher
buffers in SX will induce audible latency as low as 3ms (and I hear it
clearly at 1.5 ms) so anyway........
In the Paris patchbay, assign a pair of I/O to an aux send/return. It can be
on any submix that you have a corresponding analog or digital I/O on a
native DAW running Cubase SX so that they can be crosspatched.
In Cubase SX create a stereo input and output bus for the I/O that you will
be interfacing with the Paris I/O.
Then create an FX channel in SX and in the audio channel you will be using
toi send/return the audio from the Paris track, add this FX as a send
effect, enable it and crank it
That's really all there is to it. You can further control the send/return
levels by using th Paris aux controls.
I'm done for the day. I was hoping for something a little more elegant but
in Paris world, that's impossible when it comes to latency compensation
unfortunately.
Deej......out
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f53e9@linux...
> Using Cubase SX as a standalone FX processor for Paris only:
>
> I set the latency in my RME control panel to 1024 so I could add send VST
FX
> to Paris auxes without having too much latency (predelay) in a reverb
while
> not stressing the Cubase VST engine to the point of getting dropouts
during
> processing when using my dualcore 4400 CPU on lots of tracks being
processed
> thru Paris inserts.
>
> InCubase SX, create a mono input and output bus
> Add a mono track and assign this bus to the input and output
> Patch a Paris ADAT I/O to an RME ADAT I/O
> Add an audio track to a Paris channel and set up an external insert on
this
> track
> Route the Paris ADAT I/O that is interfacing with the RME I/O to the
inserts
> on that channel in the virtual patchbay.
> In Cubase SX, enable monitoring with FX on the audio channel you will be
> using to process the Paris track
> Insert a UAD-1 plugin on the Cubase audio channel and enable it for
> processing.
> Slide the Paris audio track back (to the left) by 50ms and hit play
> The track will be looped through the Cubase audio channel and the UAD-1
> processor without audible flamming/phasing
> Add another UAD-1 plugin to the Cubase insert rack on this channel and
slide
> the Paris track back another 50 ms
> The Paris track should still play back without flamming/phasing and now it
> is being processed by two plugins.
>
> Basically, what I *think* I've found here is a way to compensate Paris
> tracks by a known (and small-50ms) increment *per UAD-1 plugin* without
> having to chase it around with Sampleslide while giving Cubase SX enough
> buffer to keep from choking down while processing audio in real time as a
> standalone processor.
>
> Increasing the buffers in SX results in more latency *per
> plugin*.........and inversely, decreasing the buffers results in less. For
> my particular rig/CPU capabilities, 1024 seems to be the magic number for
> achieving a very simple means of latency compensation using Paris and
UAD-1
> plugins without having to stream all tracks in a project from Cubase to
> Paris in order to process them with VST plugins with zero latency in
Paris.
> Doing this is very time consuming and mixing on two DAWs, even with the
> incredible flexibility, it just such a hassle sometimes that I just sit
> there an look at it and don't want to go there sometimes. Another cool
thing
> is, so far, my testing shows that Drumagog is exhibiting the same latency
in
> Cubase SX as the UAD-1 plugins. This *may* be indicitave of a *set latency
> increment* that may apply to all VST plugins. That may not be such a big
> deal since Paris handles VST plugins pretty easliy, but I'm running Win ME
> on my Paris rig and some more recent VST plugins only run on XP. This
gives
> me a means of using these plugs in Paris with a known (and simple) latency
> increment to work with.
>
> I have processed a kick drum with Drumagog in the first Cubase insert, the
> Neve 1073 in the second one and the Fairchild in the third one and sliding
> the Paris track 3 x 50ms. No audible flamming when running a parallel copy
> of the track unprocessed.
>
> Also, a very generous Parisite offered to loan me 3 x EDS cards and an IF
> 442 today and another smart Parisite may have just come up with a solution
> to getting multiple ADAT cards happening reliably with multiple MECs so me
> an Igor are gonna' be in the lab next weekend with the beakers bubbling.
>
> ;o)
>
>
>Well, I pulled out Hotel Calif. and here's the breakdown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72541 is a reply to message #72519] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 01:58 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
> <A =
>href=3D"news:451de55b$1@linux">news:451de55b$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>Here=
>'s a=20
> couple more:<BR><BR>Rolling Stones: It's only rock and=20
> roll<BR><BR>acoustic 10 o clock electric 1 right rhythm<BR>electric 2
=
>right=20
> lead<BR><BR>electric 3 left electric 4 right<BR><BR>5 freaking guitars
=
>
> !!<BR><BR><BR><BR>Neil Young........Old Man<BR><BR>Guitar panned 90%=20
> left<BR>Vocal center, more verb in right<BR>Bass center<BR>Piano =
>center very=20
> quiet<BR><BR>banjo comes in left<BR>slide guitar with nice reverb =
>center=20
> mono<BR><BR>Stereo vocal harmonies<BR><BR><BR>Share your own !! =20
>Thanks</BLOCKQUOTE>
><DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
>and=20
>you?<BR><A=20
>href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
>.html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
>Thanks for the comments.
Annoyingly there's only two songs up there at the moment. I have two more
I keep trying to load but Myspace won't load them. Not sure why. I've tried
twice now. First time it came back with errors. This time it's still processing...
But it is astounding how the Paris sound can shine through so much. Especially
I guess on something like that which is barely mixed, and hence has few other
plugs and effects, it's very easy to hear that overall Paris thing in the
sound.
And I do love that. ;o)
Cheers,
Kim.
"Mike R." <emarenot@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Hey Kim,
>Nice work. Revolution of the Mind stayed with me throughout the day. Also
>nifty was how clear the Paris sound came through. Man, it was like cool
>water on my ears.
>Cheers,
>MR
>
>"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:451df184$1@linux...
>>
>>
>> For anyone who wants to check out some tunes from your favourite newsgroup
>> host, please check out:
>>
>> http://www.myspace.com/drschnauberg
>>
>> I'm in the midst of a work ethic/method revolution, where I try and
>produce
>> songs within the space of only a couple of hours. All these tunes are
>recorded
>> mostly on my GNX-4 looper, then transferred to Paris and vocals and solos
>> are added. It's usually about a 2-2.5 hour turnaround for a complete song.
>>
>> And yes some of the recording methods are dodgy... yes I need to get
a
>pop
>> filter for the mic, and yes the harmonies in Revision need work, but hey,
>> it's music, I'm getting it done quickly, and I'm having fun, and I think
>> the vibe is there. :o)
>>
>> Tell me what you think...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Kim.
>
>I've been playing around with a 28 track mix using the routing scenarios I
have been yakking about here. I don't think it's my imagination when I say
that keeping the audio in Paris during playback and routing it through
inserts to/from Cubase SX produces a much larger sounding mix than just
streaming the tracks from SX to Paris channels and summing them there. I
have no idea why, but the sound is just HUGE when working this way and my
latency compensation scenario is working pretty reliably when using 512k
buffers. I've done enough mixes streaming from SX to Paris to know the sonic
footprint. Though I liked it, there was something about it that was *similar
to, but less than* an ITB Paris mix. Keeping the tracks in Paris anl looping
them through the inserts and back is retaining more of the Paris mojo to my
ears. At 512k buffers, the first native plugin will require a 50ms nudge in
Paris whereas adding more will add less than 50 ms. Three VST plugins on a
drum track works best with 65ms adjustment in Paris. In any event, it's not
hard to work this way really once you get your head around it and the sonic
advantages are huge.........and routing any Paris channel you want to any
hardware or VST processor you want is a nice scenario as well.
I thought I had just wasted a lot of time and bandwidth until I got into
this a bit on a full mix. It may just be worth the effort.
Deej
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:452030fd$1@linux...
> Follow the routing instructions for setting up paris to work with inserts
in
> SX that I previously posted. The disappointing part is that even if you
> don't use a VST plugin on the insert, and even if you are using an
outboard
> FX processor, you will still have to compensate for latency unfortunately
> due to the buffers. If your goal is to just be able to use an outboard FX
> processor to cross submixes and your Cubase DAW has the mojo to run at 64k
> buffers (1.5ms) the this would probably be of some use to you, but higher
> buffers in SX will induce audible latency as low as 3ms (and I hear it
> clearly at
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72550 is a reply to message #72539] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 05:55 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
use the plugin automation in SX as they process Paris tracks. This is not
possible to do when using UAD-1 plugins in Paris so that's an advantageous
scenario, even if it is still necessary to manually compensate for latency
in Paris using nudge/slide
Deej.
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:45203ebc@linux...
> I've been playing around with a 28 track mix using the routing scenarios I
> have been yakking about here. I don't think it's my imagination when I say
> that keeping the audio in Paris during playback and routing it through
> inserts to/from Cubase SX produces a much larger sounding mix than just
> streaming the tracks from SX to Paris channels and summing them there. I
> have no idea why, but the sound is just HUGE when working this way and my
> latency compensation scenario is working pretty reliably when using 512k
> buffers. I've done enough mixes streaming from SX to Paris to know the
sonic
> footprint. Though I liked it, there was something about it that was
*similar
> to, but less than* an ITB Paris mix. Keeping the tracks in Paris anl
looping
> them through the inserts and back is retaining more of the Paris mojo to
my
> ears. At 512k buffers, the first native plugin will require a 50ms nudge
in
> Paris whereas adding more will add less than 50 ms. Three VST plugins on a
> drum track works best with 65ms adjustment in Paris. In any event, it's
not
> hard to work this way really once you get your head around it and the
sonic
> advantages are huge.........and routing any Paris channel you want to any
> hardware or VST processor you want is a nice scenario as well.
>
> I thought I had just wasted a lot of time and bandwidth until I got into
> this a bit on a full mix. It may just be worth the effort.
>
> Deej
>
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:452030fd$1@linux...
> > Follow the routing instructions for setting up paris to work with
inserts
> in
> > SX that I previously posted. The disappointing part is that even if you
> > don't use a VST plugin on the insert, and even if you are using an
> outboard
> > FX processor, you will still have to compensate for latency
unfortunately
> > due to the buffers. If your goal is to just be able to use an outboard
FX
> > processor to cross submixes and your Cubase DAW has the mojo to run at
64k
> > buffers (1.5ms) the this would probably be of some use to you, but
higher
> > buffers in SX will induce audible latency as low as 3ms (and I hear it
> > clearly at 1.5 ms) so anyway........
> >
> > In the Paris patchbay, assign a pair of I/O to an aux send/return. It
can
> be
> > on any submix that you have a corresponding analog or digital I/O on a
> > native DAW running Cubase SX so that they can be crosspatched.
> >
> > In Cubase SX create a stereo input and output bus for the I/O that you
> will
> > be interfacing with the Paris I/O.
> >
> > Then create an FX channel in SX and in the audio channel you will be
using
> > toi send/return the audio from the Paris track, add this FX as a send
> > effect, enable it and crank it
> >
> > That's really all there is to it. You can further control the
send/return
> > levels by using th Paris aux controls.
> >
> > I'm done for the day. I was hoping for something a little more elegant
but
> > in Paris world, that's impossible when it comes to latency compensation
> > unfortunately.
> >
> > Deej......out
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451f53e9@linux...
> > > Using Cubase SX as a standalone FX processor for Paris only:
> > >
> > > I set the latency in my RME control panel to 1024 so I could add send
> VST
> > FX
> > > to Paris auxes without having too much latency (predelay) in a reverb
> > while
> > > not stressing the Cubase VST engine to the point of getting dropouts
> > during
> > > processing when using my dualcore 4400 CPU on lots of tracks being
> > processed
> > > thru Paris inserts.
> > >
> > > InCubase SX, create a mono input and output bus
> > > Add a mono track and assign this bus to the input and output
> > > Patch a Paris ADAT I/O to an RME ADAT I/O
> > > Add an audio track to a Paris channel and set up an external insert on
> > this
> > > track
> > > Route the Paris ADAT I/O that is interfacing with the RME I/O to the
> > inserts
> > > on that channel in the virtual patchbay.
> > > In Cubase SX, enable monitoring with FX on the audio channel you will
be
> > > using to process the Paris track
> > > Insert a UAD-1 plugin on the Cubase audio channel and enable it for
> > > processing.
> > > Slide the Paris audio track back (to the left) by 50ms and hit play
> > > The track will be looped through the Cubase audio channel and the
UAD-1
> > > processor without audible flamming/phasing
> > > Add another UAD-1 plugin to the Cubase insert rack on this channel and
> > slide
> > > the Paris track back another 50 ms
> > > The Paris track should still play back without flamming/phasing and
now
> it
> > > is being processed by two plugins.
> > >
> > > Basically, what I *think* I've found here is a way to compensate Paris
> > > tracks by a known (and small-50ms) increment *per UAD-1 plugin*
without
> > > having to chase it around with Sampleslide while giving Cubase SX
enough
> > > buffer to keep from choking down while processing audio in real time
as
> a
> > > standalone processor.
> > >
> > >
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72559 is a reply to message #72529] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 07:55 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
be aware that if you have an old restore and you change something
> drastic like motherboard.. it may cause problems... I try to restore with
> just the OS, paris and plugins... and that's it... AV and all those other
> goodies is best left for a clean install....
>
>
> "JCampbell" <campbell1745@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:451d4cf5$1@linux...
>> Thanks for weighing in. Looks like I'm in for a re-install. My Paris
>> configuration was perfect
>> before the clone process. So, Acronis may be the culprit or, maybe like
>> scott v, I should have tried Ghost.
>> Or it could have been pilot error. Like it usually is 8>)
>>
>> I'll be going the route you suggested, Aaron.
>>
>> cheers, Jim
>>
>>
>>
>> Aaron Allen wrote:
>>> sounds like you may have your effect subsystem (XP) drivers set up wrong.
>>> Uninstall (if you installed) and be VERY diligent about the paths when
>>> you install again. Reboot after EVERY move. Uninstall, reboot. Install,
>>> reboot. Fire up Paris.
>>> Workin'?
>>> AA
>>>
>>> "JCampbell" <campbell1745@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>> news:451c19d2@linux...
>>>> I cloned my system disk using Acronis and that part was smooth.
>>>> Actually, pretty straight forward. (I'm on XP pro Sp2).
>>>>
>>>> I had to re-install my Unitor8 Mkll (usb). Ok, no big deal even though
>>>> the install process makes about as much sense
>>>> as a monkey on crack. (Maybe I'm on crack and don't know it.)
>>>>
>>>> Now the good part... clicking on the Paris Pro icon causes an immediate
>>>> shutdown and re-boot. After re-boot,
>>>> there's one of those microshaft error boxes saying the computer has
>>>> recovered from a serious malfunction or whatever.
>>>>
>>>> Before I go trying to do a complete re-install of Paris does anyone have
>>>> a bit of advise on a possible
>>>> alternative to a complete re-install? I'm using 1 MEC, 1 C-16, and 2
>>>> cards, Intel Mobo & CPU. This set up has been stable for
>>>> years. Then again I don't do much heavy editing and tracking.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks very much, Jim
>The two other new tunes have just appeared...
....finally...
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Thanks for the comments.
>
>Annoyingly there's only two songs up there at the moment. I have two more
>I keep trying to load but Myspace won't load them. Not sure why. I've tried
>twice now. First time it came back with errors. This time it's still processing...
>
>But it is astounding how the Paris sound can shine through so much. Especially
>I guess on something like that which is barely mixed, and hence has few
other
>plugs and effects, it's very easy to hear that overall Paris thing in the
>sound.
>
>And I do love that. ;o)
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.
>
>"Mike R." <
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72562 is a reply to message #72541] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 08:19 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ref="mailto:1@linux..." target="_blank">1@linux...
> Me too Deej
>
> Don
>
> ps. thanks for the help this afternoon...amazing what two great minds can
> accomplish
>
>
>
> "Rob Arsenault" <mani2@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:45205a45@linux...
> > Good stuff DJ.., I'm watchin with very closely, im also doin the double
> > DAW shuffle but on a smaller scale. Please do give us a detailed
breakdown
> > once you get her all figured out.
> >
> > Rob
> >
> >
> > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4520555f$1@linux...
> >> If you've been fllowing my torturous Xperamentin thread........it looks
> >> like
> >> all of my grief about the latency compensation issues with
> >> nudging/slipping
> >> Paris tracks may be solved by using the UAD-1 Delaycomp in "Cubase" as
> >> the
> >> first insert on the channel that is processing the Paris track. The
first
> >> UAD-1 compensation increment seems to cover the native latency, then
> >> subsequent incremental adjustments cover the plugins. Just adjust it
per
> >> plugin and the track stays in phase. Also, Drumagog seems to have the
> >> exact
> >> same latency as a single UAD-1 plugin so on a kick, I can just insert
the
> >> UAD-1 delaycomp, adjust it to compensate for two UAD-1 plugins (one for
> >> buffer latency, the other for Drumagog), insert Drumagog in the next
slot
> >> and the kick track locks to the rest of the drum tracks that aren't
being
> >> processed.
> >> Now Paris automation can be used without having to worry about the
track
> >> being nudged and the plugin automation features can be used.
> >>
> >> This is too easy......there's gotta be a catch.
> >>
> >> ;o)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support Dual core
cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual core
cpu's
that may run with PARIS?
respect
NappyYou were running Paris on a multiprocessor Intel rig and the c-16 worked?
That's great news. I wonder if it would run on the new core duo?
Deej
"Ed" <AskMe@email.com> wrote in message news:45205c77@linux...
> Ummm... not a 64bit, but I ran a Pent III Dual processor on windows 2000
for
> many years...
> I know there were issues with the AMD. I reported my findings/useage to
> Brian T when he was asking and taking a inventory of what works.... so
there
> was no problem on the Pentium side...
>
>
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:451de9d9@linux...
> > I'm going to make a serious attempt to get Paris to work on a Gigabyte
> > K8NS
> > Ultra 939 mobo with an AMD 64 4200 x 2 CPU. So far, to knowledge,
running
> > Paris on dual processors hasn't been achieved with a working C-16
> > scenario..
> > There was a tool released by AMD a while back that *might* change this
> > scenario, though I have no idea if it will..........but nothing
> > ventured..........
> >
> > To my knowledge, the problem was with the C-16 not responding. I'm too
> > busy
> > here to tear down my Paris rig and drag an EDS card and a MEC out of the
> > snakepit and into my workshop. I don't have any spares. All I would need
> > is
> > an EDS card. An IF 442 would be nice, but I've got an IF 2 I could use
> > here
> > if necessary and I can liberate one of my C-16's without screwing the
> > pooch.
> >
> > Call me if you're up for loaning me an EDS card/442 for a few days. If I
> > can
> > get this to happen, I'll document it and we can put in in our bag of
> > tricks.
> > 970-375-7081.
> >
> > Deej
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>Nope. None of us know quite waht to expect though I do know that Matt was
working on a reverb algo from one of the Ensoniq hardware processors. Maybe
other stuff too.
Deej
"Ed" <AskMe@email.com> wrote in message news:45206823@linux...
> So what's the news????
> Did I miss something???
>
>
>
> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:451bc037$1@linux...
> >
> > Hi to all.
> > Thats good news for us Parisians.
> > Matt Craig has contacted me about his reverb and some other goodies !!!
> > and
> > he told me some things that are only good news.
> > I will leave it up to him to decide when an what to announce.
> > Happy Paris to everyone.
> > Regards,
> > Dimitrios
>
>Nappy,
Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to get Paris
to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that someone
here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris.
Deej
"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux...
>
> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support Dual
core
> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual core
> cpu's
> that may run with PARIS?
>
> respect
> NappyHi Chris,
I don't have Sequoia 9 yet, but the word on the forum has been that only the
hybrid engine uses more than one core/cpu - e.g. the "classic" engine is
still single core. I haven't been clear on whether 9.x will add extended
multi-cpu support in either mode not. Have you guys been testing it
already?
Dedric
On 10/1/06 9:21 AM, in article 451fdb36@linux, "Chris Ludwig"
<chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
> Hi Dedric,
> From what I've found out so far.
>
> Samplitude/Sequoia 9 now support 4 CPU finally. Of course Dual CPUs have
> been common for 4/5 years and dual cores for 2 years. Better late than
> never :)
>
> Cubase4/ Nuendo 3 = 8 Cores/CPUs
> Sonar 5/6 = 4 cpus
> Ableton Live 6 = 2cpus
> PT 7.1 LE = 2 cpus
> Vegas 7 = 4 cpus
> Wavelab = 2 cpus
> audition = ummm i think only one still
> Acid "Pro" = still 1 but I think next version to match V7 will be multi/
>
> Pro tools is last thing I would consider if I had a tight school budget . :)
>
> The audio market is very fast with support for current technology and
> formats and is very responsive to customers about adding them. The video
> market is quite the opposite. Most of the video companies still haven't
> figured out that a sound blaster isn't "Pro".
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
>
> Dedric Terry wrote:
>
>> Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market that
>> will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio. They have
>> Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro as soon
>> as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the "pro"
>> moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting user.
>> ;-)
>>
>> Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>> Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still). Even PT
>> isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually hate to
>> see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry as a whole.
>>
>> The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology... making
>> what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to anyone age
>> 5 to 95.
>>
>> Dedric
>>
>> On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont"
>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level of audio
>>> editing,
>>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks like
>>> Apple is heading there without them.
>>>
>>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading the Logic
>>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this true?
>>>
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72563 is a reply to message #72534] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 08:40 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2_
>>> re
>>> storation
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>Hey James - are you using Logic with Symphony? How do you like Symphony -
thoughts? Seems like a great interface and a perfect complement to Logic,
but I know a few people were skeptical of Apogee's ability to deliver the
driver end, if there is such a concern with core audio.
Dedric
On 10/1/06 5:39 PM, in article 452051c3$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
<excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Apple is a fortune 50 company with billions of dollars behind it. I don't
> think Apple or Logic are going to fail any time soon. Logic will, and has
> improved over time. Apple could make more money if they had a PC version
> again, but it doesn't much matter to Mac users and their are millions of
> us. I think the biggest problem with Logic is the $999.00 price, if it were
> $499.00, and continued to improve, a lot more people would be using it.
>
>
> There is no perfect DAW, they all need work. Is Nuendo $1,500.00 better
> than Logic? Before you answer that, maybe you should try the latest version
> of Logic on a new Mac with Symphony. Then I think you would really know.
> Logic 5.5 is a vary old version. It's all subjective, different strokes
> for different fokes. Jamie and others here are examples of people that really
> like Logic and are able to do serious work with Logic, so I don't think it's
> dyeing. Logic and Apple are only going to get better with time. By the
> way Logic and SoundTrack are supposed to work together, like Vegas and Acid.
>
> Hey, it's always good to have choices.
>
> James
>
> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Dedric,
>> I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi they
>> continue
>> down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will die off
>> if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
>>
>> Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the game now.
>> Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting most
>> of their car
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72569 is a reply to message #72562] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 13:58 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
unds.
>>
>>
>> http://www.recordingthebeatles.com/
>>
>
>It will certainly be cool if we can get dualliecores working with Paris.
Those XP 4800's are pretty cheap these days.
"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
news:452084a7$1@linux...
>
> I got mine last month--I'm counting on you keeping us posted so I can
build
> mine in yer footsteps... :) Got a 7 slot Mamga to go with it, but that's
> it so far...
>
>
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
> >I found it on EBay about 6 months ago. I've been looking for another one.
> >they can be had, but not cheap. I saw a new on the other day advertized
> for
> >$120.00. Do a google search. T hey are out there.
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >
> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:452080d4$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Thanks DJ,
> >> Let me know how it goes.
> >> Where did you get the Mobo? I'd like to get one If I can.
> >>
> >> respect
> >> Nappy
> >>
> >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
> >> >Nappy,
> >> >
> >> >Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to get
> >Paris
> >> >to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that
> >someone
> >> >here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris.
> >> >Deej
> >> >
> >> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support
> Dual
> >> >core
> >> >> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual
> >core
> >> >> cpu's
> >> >> that may run with PARIS?
> >> >>
> >> >> respect
> >> >> Nappy
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>The word "roadtrip" is starting to come to mind...
:)
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>It will certainly be cool if we can get dualliecores working with Paris.
>Those XP 4800's are pretty cheap these days.
>
>"John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
>news:452084a7$1@linux...
>>
>> I got mine last month--I'm counting on you keeping us posted so I can
>build
>> mine in yer footsteps... :) Got a 7 slot Mamga to go with it, but that's
>> it so far...
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>> >I found it on EBay about 6 months ago. I've been looking for another
one.
>> >they can be had, but not cheap. I saw a new on the other day advertized
>> for
>> >$120.00. Do a google search. T hey are out there.
>> >
>> >Deej
>> >
>> >
>> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:452080d4$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> Thanks DJ,
>> >> Let me know how it goes.
>> >> Where did you get the Mobo? I'd like to get one If I can.
>> >>
>> >> respect
>> >> Nappy
>> >>
>> >> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>> >> >Nappy,
>> >> >
>> >> >Yes. This mobo supports dual core CPU's. I'm going to be trying to
get
>> >Paris
>> >> >to work with dual core CPU's in the next few days. I just heard that
>> >someone
>> >> >here had success using an Intel MP rig with Paris.
>> >> >Deej
>> >> >
>> >> >"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:45207bd2@linux...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I know that the Gigabyte K8NS Ultra has recomended,do they support
>> Dual
>> >> >core
>> >> >> cpu's? If not can someone recomend a Motherboard that supports Dual
>> >core
>> >> >> cpu's
>> >> >> that may run with PARIS?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> respect
>> >>
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72571 is a reply to message #72569] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 15:01 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hers here are examples of people that
really
>> like Logic and are able to do serious work with Logic, so I don't think
it's
>> dyeing. Logic and Apple are only going to get better with time. By the
>> way Logic and SoundTrack are supposed to work together, like Vegas and
Acid.
>>
>> Hey, it's always good to have choices.
>>
>> James
>>
>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Dedric,
>>> I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi they
>>> continue
>>> down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will die
off
>>> if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
>>>
>>> Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the game
now.
>>> Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting
most
>>> of their cardsinto IPODS.
>>>
>>> I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or more
so
>>> Sony Vegas Pro.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>> Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market
that
>>>> will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio. They
have
>>>> Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro as
soon
>>>> as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the "pro"
>>>> moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting
user.
>>>> ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>>>> Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still).
Even
>>> PT
>>>> isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually hate
>>> to
>>>> see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry as
a whole.
>>>>
>>>> The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology... making
>>>> what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to anyone
>>> age
>>>> 5 to 95.
>>>>
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont"
>>>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level of
audio
>>>>> editing,
>>>>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks
like
>>>>> Apple is heading there without them.
>>>>>
>>>>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading
the
>>> Logic
>>>>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this true?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2
>>>>> _re
>>>>> storation
>>>>
>>>
>>
>A different kind of drum machine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99TIWqCoDh8&mode=related& amp;search=DJ, Can you explain a bit more how Cubase is helping you and what roles it
and Paris are playing? Is there extra hardware involved? Thanks.
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for
the
>UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks
>being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and
yet
>others are being processed with outboard gear.
>
>Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and everything
>sounds appropriately PHAT!!!
>
>I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying them
into
>Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris. Just a
>matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and there.
>Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is very handy.
>
>I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very well.
>
>On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral.
>
>G'nite all.
>
>;o)
>
>Is there any benefit to this setup for non UAD1 people?
"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>DJ, Can you explain a bit more how Cubase is helping you and what roles
it
>and Paris are playing? Is there extra hardware involved? Thanks.
>
>"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for
>the
>>UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks
>>being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and
>yet
>>others are being processed with outboard gear.
>>
>>Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and everything
>>sounds appropriately PHAT!!!
>>
>>I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying them
>into
>>Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris. Just
a
>>matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and there.
>>Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is very handy.
>>
>>I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very well.
>>
>>On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral.
>>
>>G'nite all.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>Hey DJ
Could you walk us idiots through the process i.e. "assign a pair of I/O to
the aux/send return" etc
for example what modules in the paris patch bay are used to do this and
exactly how are they routed...
I realise this is second nature to you, but as you found out on Sunday some
of us (especially me) are still new to/or intimidated by the paris patch
bay and the relationship of all it's components to each other....make sense?
If you would, just post this "paris patchbay for dummies" with your latest
latency findings
It would be greatly appreciated
Thanks
DOn
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4520b451@linux...
>I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for
>the
> UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks
> being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and
> yet
> others are being processed w
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72575 is a reply to message #72511] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 17:09 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Dedric,
>>>> I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi they
>>>> continue
>>>> down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will die
>off
>>>> if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
>>>>
>>>> Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the game
>now.
>>>> Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting
>most
>>>> of their cardsinto IPODS.
>>>>
>>>> I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or more
>so
>>>> Sony Vegas Pro.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>> Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market
>that
>>>>> will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio. They
>have
>>>>> Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro
as
>soon
>>>>> as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the "pro"
>>>>> moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting
>user.
>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>>>>> Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still).
>Even
>>>> PT
>>>>> isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually
hate
>>>> to
>>>>> see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry as
>a whole.
>>>>>
>>>>> The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology... making
>>>>> what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to anyone
>>>> age
>>>>> 5 to 95.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>&
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72578 is a reply to message #72535] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 18:12 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
is that Apple will release a vrsion
of OS-x for any PC?? Is this true. If it is, wonderful.. Also, that DEll
and Hp are signed on to become OEM vendors.Offering a user to either have
Windows or OS-x as their prefered OS.???
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
> > Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!!
>
>Oh great, now I'm going to have nightmares! ;^)
>
>It will be interesting to see what refinements end up in future versions
>of Logic. I'm personally glad it's already come so far, and is now not
>only feature-rich but much more reliable. The hardware and OS it runs on
>is plenty fast and reasonably elegant.
>
>I'm glad we have choices, too. For anyone who wants Nuendo, Pro Tools or
>is limited to running on MSWindows, clearly you should not buy Logic.
>Apple will be OK without your money.
>
>Of course it _would_ be great if Logic were multi-platform but the
>reality is that ain't gonna happen.
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>James McCloskey wrote:
>> Hey Dedric! I have older versions of Logic, but I'm not running Logic
at
>> this time. I have kept up with, to some degree, the development of logic.
>> I've been reading the Logic NG for some time, and a lot of the bugs have
>> been fixed. There was a lot of mad Logic users for a while, especially
when
>> they started to make changes to the interface. Some people liked it the
>> way it was, hummmmm!
>>
>> I've just been reading about Logic and Symphony. It looks like a killer
>> combination, but time will tell. From what I gather, the drivers are
working
>> well. Obviously the latency thing is a plus if it all turns out to be
true.
>> I think Logic is still a serious contender for DAW software. Logic is
still
>> a good option for many, with it's PT and new third party hardware options,
>> such as DSP cards. It took apple time to get the right people in place
for
>> the internal Logic team, some people came from Opcode. I think Logic
will
>> now improve.
>>
>> My point was it's not fair to pick a part Logic and Macs when your reference
>> is a 3 to 4 year old version of Logic and an 8 year old Mac. That's ridiculous!
>> There has been a lot of improvements to Logic and Macs. I think the
current
>> state of the art, first hand experience and honesty would reveal a different
>> conclusion. Logic and Macs are not dead, they are still prevalent in
many
>> studios. Logic will improve over time, as all DAWs do. I doubt Logic
will
>> ever be top dog, but so what. That position will be held by PT, and Steinberg
>> second for a long time to come. In the end, the best DAW is a vary subjective
>> matter. To each his own.
>>
>> There is a lot of software out there to choose from, I'm glad we have
choices,
>> other wise we'd all sound the same.
>>
>> Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!!
>>
>> James
>>
>>
>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>> Hey James - are you using Logic with Symphony? How do you like Symphony
>> -
>>> thoughts? Seems like a great interface and a perfect complement to Logic,
>>> but I know a few people were skeptical of Apogee's ability to deliver
the
>>> driver end, if there is such a concern with core audio.
>>>
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> On 10/1/06 5:39 PM, in article 452051c3$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Apple is a fortune 50 company with billions of dollars behind it. I
don't
>>>> think Apple or Logic are going to fail any time soon. Logic will, and
>> has
>>>> improved over time. Apple could make more money if they had a PC version
>>>> again, but it doesn't much matter to Mac users and their are millions
>> of
>>>> us. I think the biggest problem with Logic is the $999.00 price, if
it
>> were
>>>> $499.00, and continued to improve, a lot more people would be using
it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is no perfect DAW, they all need work. Is Nuendo $1,500.00 better
>>>> than Logic? Before you answer that, maybe you should try the latest
version
>>>> of Logic on a new Mac with Symphony. Then I think you would really
know.
>>>> Logic 5.5 is a vary old version. It's all subjective, different strokes
>>>> for different fokes. Jamie and others here are examples of people that
>> really
>>>> like Logic and are able to do serious work with Logic, so I don't think
>> it's
>>>> dyeing. Logic and Apple are only going to get better with time. By
the
>>>> way Logic and SoundTrack are supposed to work together, like Vegas and
>> Acid.
>>>> Hey, it's always good to have choices.
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>> Hey Dedric,
>>>>> I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi they
>>>>> continue
>>>>> down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will die
>> off
>>>>> if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
>>>>>
>>>>> Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the game
>> now.
>>>>> Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting
>> most
>>>>> of their cardsinto IPODS.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or more
>> so
>>>>> Sony Vegas Pro.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market
>> that
>>>>>> will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72582 is a reply to message #72578] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 20:10 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
l tell. From what I gather, the drivers are working
>>well. Obviously the latency thing is a plus if it all turns out to be
true.
>> I think Logic is still a serious contender for DAW software. Logic is
>still
>>a good option for many, with it's PT and new third party hardware options,
>>such as DSP cards. It took apple time to get the right people in place
>for
>>the internal Logic team, some people came from Opcode. I think Logic will
>>now improve.
>>
>>My point was it's not fair to pick a part Logic and Macs when your reference
>>is a 3 to 4 year old version of Logic and an 8 year old Mac. That's ridiculous!
>> There has been a lot of improvements to Logic and Macs. I think the current
>>state of the art, first hand experience and honesty would reveal a different
>>conclusion. Logic and Macs are not dead, they are still prevalent in many
>>studios. Logic will improve over time, as all DAWs do. I doubt Logic
will
>>ever be top dog, but so what. That position will be held by PT, and Steinberg
>>second for a long time to come. In the end, the best DAW is a vary subjective
>>matter. To each his own.
>>
>>There is a lot of software out there to choose from, I'm glad we have choices,
>>other wise we'd all sound the same.
>>
>>Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!!
>>
>>James
>>
>>
>>Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>Hey James - are you using Logic with Symphony? How do you like Symphony
>>-
>>>thoughts? Seems like a great interface and a perfect complement to Logic,
>>>but I know a few people were skeptical of Apogee's ability to deliver
the
>>>driver end, if there is such a concern with core audio.
>>>
>>>Dedric
>>>
>>>On 10/1/06 5:39 PM, in article 452051c3$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>><excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Apple is a fortune 50 company with billions of dollars behind it. I
>don't
>>>> think Apple or Logic are going to fail any time soon. Logic will, and
>>has
>>>> improved over time. Apple could make more money if they had a PC version
>>>> again, but it doesn't much matter to Mac users and their are millions
>>of
>>>> us. I think the biggest problem with Logic is the $999.00 price, if
>it
>>were
>>>> $499.00, and continued to improve, a lot more people would be using
it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is no perfect DAW, they all need work. Is Nuendo $1,500.00 better
>>>> than Logic? Before you answer that, maybe you should try the latest
>version
>>>> of Logic on a new Mac with Symphony. Then I think you would really
know.
>>>> Logic 5.5 is a vary old version. It's all subjective, different strokes
>>>> for different fokes. Jamie and others here are examples of people that
>>really
>>>> like Logic and are able to do serious work with Logic, so I don't think
>>it's
>>>> dyeing. Logic and Apple are only going to get better with time. By
>the
>>>> way Logic and SoundTrack are supposed to work together, like Vegas and
>>Acid.
>>>>
>>>> Hey, it's always good to have choices.
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey Dedric,
>>>>> I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi they
>>>>> continue
>>>>> down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will die
>>off
>>>>> if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
>>>>>
>>>>> Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the game
>>now.
>>>>> Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting
>>most
>>>>> of their cardsinto IPODS.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or more
>>so
>>>>> Sony Vegas Pro.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market
>>that
>>>>>> will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio. They
>>have
>>>>>> Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro
>as
>>soon
>>>>>> as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the "pro"
>>>>>> moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting
>>user.
>>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>>>>>> Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still).
>
>>Even
>>>>> PT
>>>>>> isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually
>hate
>>>>> to
>>>>>> see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry as
>>a whole.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology...
making
>>>>>> what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to anyone
>>>>> age
>>>>>> 5 to 95.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont"
>>>>>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level of
>>audio
>>>>>>> editing,
>>>>>>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks
>>like
>>>>>>> Apple is heading there without them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading
>>the
>>>>> Logic
>>>>>>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this true?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2
>>>>>>> _re
>>>>>>> storation
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Just a few thoughts regarding your experiment: It's a global setting in SX
where you can adjust fixed latency. (I don't remember the exact dialog-box
right now). And I think that the latency compensation in SX also is trying
to compensate the latency from Cubase to Paris. (It was 15 samples or so too
early on my system). Try to disconnect any other outboard-units from SX, and
see if it gets any more stable
Bjorn R
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4520b451@linux...
> I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for
the
> UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks
> being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and
yet
> others are being processed with outboard gear.
>
> Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and
everything
> sounds appropriately PHAT!!!
>
> I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying them
into
> Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris. Just a
> matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and there.
> Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is very handy.
>
> I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very well.
>
> On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral.
>
> G'nite all.
>
> ;o)
>
>I think it's a rumor. I do think, IF the day comes that Microsoft drops MS
Office for the Mac it will happen but not right away. My bet is Apple has
a version of OSX and some kind of open Office project that will run on a
PC in their labs that Microsoft is well a where of. It's a cold war approach.
It keeps everybody playing nice. (Where is Claris/Apple works?)
Apple didn't jump to Intel on a whim, or over night, it was a five year process.
It was calculated, it was planned. It was a contingency plan, Apple got
screwed around by Motorola for years. I sold StarMax systems back in the
day, and I spoke to the top brass about OEMing the left over MOBOs. They
told me that they were going to get even with Apple, they were mad as hell
at Apple. They took a 90 million dollar charge when Apple dropped the cloning
thing. For years, Motorola got around to Apples needs when Motorola got
around to Apples needs.
IBM started to treat Apple the same way in recent years. I think IBM found
out about Apple's work with Intel. IBM opened their Fishkill Plant with
big fanfare. There were a lot of press releases about the IBM/Apple G5,
and how IBM built a new state of the art plant for this processor. Steve
Jobs announced that with in a year they would be a 3GHZ with the G5, and
stated that IBM said so. It never happened. Apple had looked at IBM's road
map, the G5 spec-ed out good. The problems that were supposed to be fixed
in the second generation did not happen. Heat and power consumption were
big issues, that's why G5's never made it in to a lap top. IBM could not
deliver a faster, cooler, less power hungry processor. Apple had to do something,
or get left in the dust. I think the relationship also broke down. after
all the IBM fanfare, they started to say publicly that Apple was only a small
part of their business and was not important to them.
From what Steve Jobs said, Apple looked at Intel's road map as far as processor
performance and it was clear to him that it was the best choice. He sees
things that you and I don't get to see. Apples top hardware designer retired
at that time, so having Intel help Apple with MOBO design was a win, win
situation. Apple knows Intel is going to rock in to the future. I'm sure
Apple is also working with AMD, but I think they signed an exclusive with
Intel. When that's up, I think you'll see Apple AMD machines also. You
may also see A
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72583 is a reply to message #72582] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 20:55 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
pple IBM machines in the future, but I think it depends on
IBM, and price/proformance.
As long as MS plays nice with Apple I don't think you will see OSX on PC
hardware, but again anything is possible. Apple makes too much money on
hardware and they would lose hardware sales if they did this. Not a smart
business plan for Apple. There would be too much cost to support all of
the PC hardware out there. If they sold an OS version with out support they
might be able to make some money, but it would still hurt hardware sales.
If they ever get their hard ware closer to the end user cost of PC hardware,
it might be more possible. I don't think that will happen any time soon,
besides they will never get anywhere near the cost to build your own PC.
Besides, you can already hack the OSX and run it on a PC. I think it
would just hurt Apple.
What I'd like to see, is lower hardware prices from Apple, and the ability
to run any Windows PC software on Mac OSX. That would be a lot better solution.
Mac users really don't want the Windows viruses on our Macs! Apple is a
hardware and software company, I think they would like you to buy both from
them.
Although, if the gloves ever come off, and the average guy finds out the
truth that Mac OSX is less expensive and easier to deal with and does the
same things, Microsoft will have some serious competition on the computing
home front.
Mac OSX on a PC would be a bad thing for Microsoft, and MS would definitely
try to stop it. Apple is doing fine, and I think that nobody really wants
to poison the well they all drink from.
That's my take on it.
Any thing is possible, only time will tell.
James
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Hey Jamie,
>
>I dont know about the "Ain't going to happen. Let's take a look.
>They dump the IMB-Motorola Processor(Thank God) for some real power(Intel's)..
>That one event opened up "Pandora's Box) into Microsoft all over again :)
>
>Thus, it was inevitable that running windows on a Mac would soon follow
and
>it happened (fast) I might add..BootCamp and other hacked versions..
>
>Being that there are more windows users in the world, how many Ipods would
>you say were Windows version of IPods versus Mac Ipods?? Itunes is the prefered
>media player on both Macs and Window PCs.
>I really do think it's only a matter of time before we a cross-platform
of
>Logic.
>
>Question: James M or Jamie.. The big rumor is that Apple will release a
vrsion
>of OS-x for any PC?? Is this true. If it is, wonderful.. Also, that DEll
>and Hp are signed on to become OEM vendors.Offering a user to either have
>Windows or OS-x as their prefered OS.???
>
>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!!
>>
>>Oh great, now I'm going to have nightmares! ;^)
>>
>>It will be interesting to see what refinements end up in future versions
>
>>of Logic. I'm personally glad it's already come so far, and is now not
>>only feature-rich but much more reliable. The hardware and OS it runs on
>
>>is plenty fast and reasonably elegant.
>>
>>I'm glad we have choices, too. For anyone who wants Nuendo, Pro Tools or
>
>>is limited to running on MSWindows, clearly you should not buy Logic.
>>Apple will be OK without your money.
>>
>>Of course it _would_ be great if Logic were multi-platform but the
>>reality is that ain't gonna happen.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>James McCloskey wrote:
>>> Hey Dedric! I have older versions of Logic, but I'm not running Logic
>at
>>> this time. I have kept up with, to some degree, the development of logic.
>>> I've been reading the Logic NG for some time, and a lot of the bugs
have
>>> been fixed. There was a lot of mad Logic users for a while, especially
>when
>>> they started to make changes to the interface. Some people liked it
the
>>> way it was, hummmmm!
>>>
>>> I've just been reading about Logic and Symphony. It looks like a killer
>>> combination, but time will tell. From what I gather, the drivers are
>working
>>> well. Obviously the latency thing is a plus if it all turns out to be
>true.
>>> I think Logic is still a serious contender for DAW software. Logic
is
>still
>>> a good option for many, with it's PT and new third party hardware options,
>>> such as DSP cards. It took apple time to get the right people in place
>for
>>> the internal Logic team, some people came from Opcode. I think Logic
>will
>>> now improve.
>>>
>>> My point was it's not fair to pick a part Logic and Macs when your reference
>>> is a 3 to 4 year old version of Logic and an 8 year old Mac. That's
ridiculous!
>>> There has been a lot of improvements to Logic and Macs. I think the
>current
>>> state of the art, first hand experience and honesty would reveal a different
>>> conclusion. Logic and Macs are not dead, they are still prevalent in
>many
>>> studios. Logic will improve over time, as all DAWs do. I doubt Logic
>will
>>> ever be top dog, but so what. That position will be held by PT, and
Steinberg
>>> second for a long time to come. In the end, the best DAW is a vary subjective
>>> matter. To each his own.
>>>
>>> There is a lot of software out there to choose from, I'm glad we have
>choices,
>>> other wise we'd all sound the same.
>>>
>>> Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!!
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>> Hey James - are you using Logic with Symphony? How do you like Symphony
>>> -
>>>> thoughts? Seems like a great interface and a perfect complement to
Logic,
>>>> but I know a few people were skeptical of Apogee's ability to deliver
>the
>>>> driver end, if there is such a concern with core audio.
>>>>
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> On 10/1/06 5:39 PM, in article 452051c3$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple is a fortune 50 company with billions of dollars behind it.
I
>don't
>>>>> think Apple or Logic are going to fail any time soon. Logic will,
and
>>> has
>>>>> improved over time. Apple could make more money if they had a PC version
>>>>> again, but it doesn't much matter to Mac users and their are millions
>>> of
>>>>> us. I think the biggest problem with Logic is the $999.00 price, if
>it
>>> were
>>>>> $499.00, and continued to improve, a lot more people would be using
>it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no perfect DAW, they all need work. Is Nuendo $1,500.00 better
>>>>> than Logic? Before you answer that, maybe you should try the latest
>version
>>>>> of Logic on a new Mac with Symphony. Then I think you would really
>know.
>>>>> Logic 5.5 is a vary old version. It's all subjective, different strokes
>>>>> for different fokes. Jamie and others here are examples of people
that
>>> really
>>>>> like Logic and are able to do serious work with Logic, so I don't think
>>> it's
>>>>> dyeing. Logic and Apple are only going to get better with time. By
>the
>>>>> way Logic and SoundTrack are supposed to work together, like Vegas
and
>>> Acid.
>>>>> Hey, it's always good to have choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> James
>>>>>
>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Hey Dedric,
>>>>>> I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi they
>>>>>> continue
>>>>>> down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will die
>>> off
>>>>>> if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the
game
>>> now.
>>>>>> Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting
>>> most
>>>>>> of their cardsinto IPODS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or
more
>>> so
>>>>>> Sony Vegas Pro.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market
>>> that
>>>>>>> will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio.
They
>>> have
>>>>>>> Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro
>as
>>> soon
>>>>>>> as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the
"pro"
>>>>>>> moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting
>>> user.
>>>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>>>>>>> Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still).
>
>>> Even
>>>>>> PT
>>>>>>> isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually
>hate
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry
as
>>> a whole.
>>>>>>> The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology...
>making
>>>>>>> what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to
anyone
>>>>>> age
>>>>>>> 5 to 95.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont"
>>>>>>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level
of
>>> audio
>>>>>>>> editing,
>>>>>>>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks
>>> like
>>>>>>>> Apple is heading there without them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading
>>> the
>>>>>> Logic
>>>>>>>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this
true?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2
>>>>>>>> _re
>>>>>>>> storation
>>>
>OK.....here goes,
In Cubase SX, make sure you have Constrain Latency Compensation
enabled.......then go to.............
Devices>VST Connections>Inputs (create mono or4 stereo input busses and
assign them to your Native inputs)
> Outputs (create mono or4 stereo
output busses and assign them to your Native outputs)
> Group/FX > Add/FX> (decide which
effect you want to use, add it and then assign it to the
appropriate output bus)
Make sure that monitoring with effects button is enabled on t
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72584 is a reply to message #72582] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 22:14 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
he channel you
are using to process the Paris audio tracks.
Now.....in order for this to work you must physically patch the your Paris
ins to yout native interface outs in order to get the two systems looping
audio between them.
The mix template routing between my two work stations is as
follows........YMMV
Paris Submix 1-Drums (usually)
Using RME HDSP 9652 Card #1 bussing to Paris Submix 1 and 2
Cubase CH 1>RME 1 ADAT 1-1 in/out > Paris CH 1
Cubase CH 2>RME 1 ADAT 1-2 in/oout > Paris CH 2
Cubase CH 3>RME 1 ADAT 1-3 in/out > Paris CH 3
Cubase CH 4>RME 1 ADAT 1-4 in/out > Paris CH 4
Cubase CH 5>RME 1 ADAT 1-5 in/out > Paris CH 5
Cubase CH 6>RME 1 ADAT 1-6 in/out > Paris CH 6
Cubase CH 7>RME 1 ADAT 1-7 in/out > Paris CH 7
Cubase CH 8>RME 1 ADAT 1-8 in/out > Paris CH 8
Cubase CH 9>RME 1 ADAT 2-9 in/out > Paris CH 9
Cubase CH 10>RME 1 ADAT 2-10 in/out > Paris CH 10
Cubase CH 11>RME 1 ADAT 2-11 in/out > Paris CH 11
Cubase CH 12>RME 1 ADAT 2-12 in/out > Paris CH 12
Cubase CH 13>RME 1 ADAT 2-13 in/out > Paris CH 13
Cubase CH 14>RME 1 ADAT 2-14 in/out > Paris CH 14
Cubase ST CH 15L/ Stereo Group 1 L> RME 1 ADAT 2-15 in/out > Paris CH 15
Cubase ST CH 15R/ Stereo Group 1 R> RME 1 ADAT 2-16 in/out > Paris CH 16
Paris Submix #2
Cubase CH 16>RME 1 ADAT 3-17 in/out > Paris CH 1
Cubase CH 17>RME 1 ADAT 3-18 in/out > Paris CH 2
Cubase CH 18>RME 1 ADAT 3-19 in/out > Paris CH 3
Cubase CH 19>RME 1 ADAT 3-20 in/out > Paris CH 4
Cubase CH 20>RME 1 ADAT 3-21 in/out > Paris CH 5
Cubase CH 21>RME 1 ADAT 3-22 in/out > Paris CH 6
Cubase CH 22>RME 1 ADAT 3-23 in/out > Paris CH 7
Cubase CH 23>RME 1 ADAT 3-24 in/out > Paris CH 8
Using RME HDSP 9652 Card #2 bussing to Paris Submix 2 AND 3
Cubase CH 24>RME 2 ADAT 1-1 in/out > Paris CH 9
Cubase CH 25>RME 2 ADAT 1-2 in/out > Paris CH 10
Cubase CH 26>RME 2 ADAT 1-3 in/out > Paris CH 11
Cubase CH 27>RME 2 ADAT 1-4 in/out > Paris CH 12
Cubase CH 28>RME 2 ADAT 1-5 in/out > Paris CH 13
Cubase CH 29>RME 2 ADAT 1-6 in/out > Paris CH 14
Cubase CH 30>RME 2 ADAT 1-7 in/out > Paris CH 15
Cubase CH 31>RME 2 ADAT 1-8 in/out > Paris CH 16
Paris Submix #3
Cubase CH 32>RME 2 ADAT 2-9 in/out > Paris CH 1
Cubase CH 33>RME 2 ADAT 2-10 in/out > Paris CH 2
Cubase CH 34>RME 2 ADAT 2-11 in/out > Paris CH 3
Cubase CH 35>RME 2 ADAT 2-12 in/out > Paris CH 4
Cubase CH 36>RME 2 ADAT 2-13 in/out > Paris CH 5
Cubase CH 37>RME 2 ADAT 2-14 in/out > Paris CH 6
Cubase CH 38>RME 2 ADAT 2-15 in/out > Paris CH 7
Cubase CH 39>RME 2 ADAT 2-16 in/out > Paris CH 8
Cubase to Paris submix 3 aux routing
Cubase CH 40>Stereo 2 L RME 2 ADAT 2-17 in/out > Paris Aux 1 L
Cubase CH >Stereo 2 R RME 2 ADAT 3-18 in/out > Paris Aux 1R
Cubase CH 41>Stereo 3 L RME 2 ADAT 3-19 in/out > Paris Aux 2 L
Cubase CH >Stereo 3 L RME 2 ADAT 3-20 in/out > Paris Aux 2 R
Cubase CH 42>Stereo 4 L RME 2 ADAT 3-21 in/out > Paris Aux 3 L
Cubase CH >Stereo 4 R RME 2 ADAT 3-22 in/out > Paris Aux 3 R
Cubase CH 43>Stereo 5 L RME 2 ADAT 3-23 in/out > Paris Aux 4 L
Cubase CH >Stereo 5 R RME 2 ADAT 3-24 in/out > Paris Aux 4 L
Cubase to Paris Submix 4 aux routing
Cubase CH 44>Stereo 7 L RME Multiface ADAT 1 in/out > Paris Aux 1 L
Cubase CH >Stereo 7 R RME Multiface ADAT 2 in/out > Paris Aux 1 R
Cubase CH 45>Stereo 8 L RME Multiface ADAT 3 in/out > Paris Aux 2 L
Cubase CH >Stereo 8 L RME Multiface ADAT 4 in/out > Paris Aux 2 R
Cubase CH 46>Stereo 9 L RME Multiface ADAT 5 in/out > Paris Aux 3 L
Cubase CH >Stereo 9 R RME Multiface ADAT 6 in/out > Paris Aux 3 R
Cubase CH 47>Stereo 6 L RME Multiface ADAT 7 in/out > Paris Aux 4 L
Cubase CH >Stereo 6 L RME Multiface ADAT 8 in/out > Paris Aux 4 R
Now go into the Paris virtual patchbay and patch the MEC module I/O that
you wish to process in Cubase SX to the corresponding Paris channels in the
insert module. In your mixer window, set EDS insert for that channel to
External and the Native insert to whatever of the sampleslide presets you
want , then nudge the paris track the appropriate increment (see my earlier
post).
Next, patch the I/O that you want to interface with the cubase send FX to
the FX sends and returns and set you Paris aux that will be receiving the
processed signal from the Cubase SX send to External.
Make sure your native interface is properly clocked to Paris via ADAT sync
(if you want to be able to automate plugins) and hit play on the Paris
transport. Your tracks should now be sending to Cubase SX and should be
hitting the VST plugins and returning to Paris via the inserts/ auxes.
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4521aa36$1@linux...
> Ok then,
>
> My nudge increments and Sampleslide presets are as follows with the
buffers
> set to 512 on my audio machine
>
> For buffer latency compensation nudge 10 + 1 left and then apply 48
samples
> in Sampleslide.
>
> For one UAD-1 plugin nudge 10 + 1 + 50 and then apply 818 samples in
> Sampleslide
>
> For two UAD-1 plugins nudge 10 + 1 + 100 and the apply 1588 samples in
> Sampleslide
>
> For three UAD-1 plugins nudge 10 + 1 + 100 + 50 and then apply 2358
samples
> in Sampleslide
>
> For four UAD-1 plugins nudge 10 + 1 + 100 + 100 and then apply 3128
samples
> in Sampleslide
>
> That's as many as I've ever used on a track so far. This has not been
> measured by bouncing and comparing the files yet. It is strictly my ears
> listening for flamming/phasing but it sounds *very* tight on my rig.
>
> As far as routing to auxes is concerned, that going to take some serious
> explaining and will take me a while to type it up. I don't have the time
> right now but I'll try to get to it tonight. It will only work in Cubase
SX
> in version 3 with external hardware, but VST hardware should be able to be
> applied as a send effect in Cubase Sx to the Paris track you're processing
> in Cubase. I'll get to it when I have a bit ot *typing time* It will also
> likely involve nudging the Paris track and compensating with Sampleslide
as
> well on the track you're processing. I'll have to check.
>
> Stay tuned,
>
> Deej
>
> "Chris Lang" <yo@yo.yo> wrote in message news:452141e4$1@linux...
> >
> > Thanks in advance DJ, whenever you get around to it.
> >
> > I have the tools you mention, but have not even come close
> > to using them simultaneously.
> >
> > peace,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
> > >No sweat...
> > >
> > >
> > >"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4521045d@linux...
> > >> I'll have to get back to this thread tonight.Today's already the
Monday
> >
> > >> from
> > >> hell and it's only 6:00 AM.
> > >>
> > >> ;o)
> > >>
> > >> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:4520ff8c@linux...
> > >>> Hey DJ
> > >>>
> > >>> Could you walk us idiots through the process i.e. "assign a pair of
> I/O
> >
> > >>> to
> > >>> the aux/send return" etc
> > >>>
> > >>> for example what modules in the paris patch bay are used to do this
> and
> > >>> exactly how are they routed...
> > >>>
> > >>> I realise this is second nature to you, but as you found out on
Sunday
> > >> some
> > >>> of us (especially me) are still new to/or intimidated by the paris
> patch
> > >>> bay and the relationship of all it's components to each
other....make
> > >> sense?
> > >>>
> > >>> If you would, just post this "paris patchbay for dummies" with your
> > >> latest
> > >>> latency findings
> > >>>
> > >>> It would be greatly appreciated
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>>
> > >>> DOn
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4520b451@linux...
> > >>> >I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge
increments
> > for
> > >>> >the
> > >>> > UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris
> tracks
> > >>> > being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS
FX
> > and
> > >>> > yet
> > >>> > others are being processed with outboard gear.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and
> > >>> > everything
> > >>> > sounds appropriately PHAT!!!
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying
> > them
> > >>> > into
> > >>> > Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris.
> Just
> >
> > >>> > a
> > >>> > matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and
> > >>> > there.
> > >>> > Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is
very
> > >> handy.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very
well.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > G'nite all.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > ;o)
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>Thanks Bjorn,
I'll look around for this. I am having a bit of minor instability that could
very well be the fact that I'm digitally interfacing a number of external
hardware FX, but I''m getting this under control by experimenting with my
boot sequence.
Appreciated,
DJ
"BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:4521cf2a@linux...
> Just a few thoughts regarding your experiment: It's a global setting in SX
> where you can adjust fixed latency. (I don't remember the exact dialog-box
> right now). And I think that the latency compensation in SX also is trying
> to compensate the latency from Cubase to Paris. (It was 15 samples or so
too
> early on my system). Try to disconnect any other outboard-units from SX,
and
> see if it gets any more stable
>
> Bjorn R
>
>
>
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4520b451@linux...
> > I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for
> the
> > UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks
> > being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and
> yet
> > others are being processed with outboard gear.
> >
> > Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and
> everything
> > sounds appropriately PHAT!!!
> >
> > I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying them
> into
> > Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris. Just a
> > matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and there.
> > Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is very
handy.
> >
> > I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very well.
> >
> > On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral.
> >
> > G'nite all.
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> >
>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C6E68C.BB07D360
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well, I spent some more time with this comp and think
it can sound very good on drum overheads. It seems to
need a DX/VST pad inserted to allow the inputs to stay clean.
After doing so it got controllable and the auto setting (the fastest
one) was great for the track I worked with. =20
Overall I would say it sounds somewhat like a La2a with control. It has =
that
color to it to my ear even though it's not a tube device. It is faster
but less forgiving. On overheads it takes some tweaking. I will
be checking it out on a mix soon. I only have nine days left.
I'm getting more interested in the Waves SSL plugs now. It's between
$569 for a UAD Flexi-pak, $600+ for Waves SSL 4000 or $1,500 for the SSL
Duende. Right now I'm leaning toward the Waves.
Anyone know if Paris will even work with it?
Tom
"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote in message =
news:451b6b13$1@linux...
I tried the Neve 33609 comp/limiter on overheads. I hadn't read the =
manual=20
so I missed some of the key features. I switched to a 1176 and got =
better results.
Now that I have read the manual, I think the auto settings (program =
dependent=20
attack/release times) might be the ticket. There is no attack time =
control so that=20
really made it hard to use with overheads for me. The headroom switch =
combined=20
with the auto settings will be what I experiment with tomorrow. =20
I'm guessing it wouldn't be a well rounded Mastering comp either. =
Great=20
for that colored sound though. I'll give it another go tomorrow on
overheads and on a mix. I'm planning on learning it before I dis it.
At this stage I'd say the SSL 2 bus comp would be better for me I =
think.
Too bad I can't get that in software or can I?
Tom
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C6E68C
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72586 is a reply to message #72584] |
Sun, 17 September 2006 23:38 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
tent=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Well, I spent some more time with this =
comp and=20
think</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>it can sound very good on drum =
overheads. It=20
seems to</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>need a DX/VST pad inserted to allow the =
inputs to=20
stay clean.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>After doing so it got controllable and =
the auto=20
setting (the fastest</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>one) was great for the track I worked =
with. =20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Overall I would say it =
sounds somewhat like a=20
La2a with control. It has that</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>color to it to my ear even though it's =
not a tube=20
device. It is faster</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>but less forgiving. On overheads =
it takes=20
some tweaking. I will</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>be checking it out on a mix soon. =
I only have=20
nine days left.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm getting more interested in the =
Waves SSL plugs=20
now. It's between</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>$569 for a UAD Flexi-pak, $600+ for =
Waves SSL 4000=20
or $1,500 for the SSL</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Duende. Right now =
I'm leaning=20
toward the Waves.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyone know if Paris will even work =
with=20
it?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Tom Bruhl" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:arpegio@comcast.net">arpegio@comcast.net</A>> wrote =
in message=20
<A href=3D"news:451b6b13$1@linux">news:451b6b13$1@linux</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I tried the Neve 33609 =
comp/limiter on=20
overheads. I hadn't read the manual </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>so I </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>missed some=20
of the key features. I switched to a 1176 and got better =
results.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Now that I have read the manual, I =
think the auto=20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>settings (program dependent =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>attack/release times) might be the =
ticket. =20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>There is no attack time control so =
</FONT><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>that </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>really made it hard to use with =
</FONT><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>overheads for me. The headroom switch =
combined=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>with the auto settings </FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>will be what I experiment with tomorrow. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm guessing </FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial size=3D2>it=20
wouldn't be a well rounded Mastering </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>comp=20
either. Great </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>for that </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>colored=20
sound though. I'll give it another go tomorrow on</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>overheads and on a mix. =
I'm planning=20
on learning it before I dis it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>At this stage I'd say the SSL 2 bus comp would be better for me I =
think.</DIV>
<DIV>Too bad I can't get that in software or can I?</DIV>
<DIV>Tom</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE ></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C6E68C.BB07D360--I love their interfaces and colors. I would definitely go for a Paris theme
of this black and blue. Didn't someone do one a while back? Thanks Gene
!
"gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>http://www.sonalksis.com/index.php?section_id=99This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_002B_01C6E6D5.76AB05E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Uad-1 users,
I've never tried changing those. Is there different
buffer setting or anything else that helps us with
Paris on XP?
I was using one instance of the 60933 and a Cambridge EQ.
I guess the 60933 doesn't totally max out the card.
But when I closed Paris I got a message I've never seen
before. Something like: "Program # 867443880 can't be
found to close." Then the same thing over and over with a new=20
number as I click them away. I just shut down but wonder if I=20
maxed the UAD-1 out so much that it caused this?.
Tom
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_002B_01C6E6D5.76AB05E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi Uad-1 users,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I've never tried changing those. =
Is there=20
different</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>buffer setting or anything else that =
helps us=20
with</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paris on XP?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was using one instance of the 60933 =
and a=20
Cambridge EQ.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I guess the 60933 doesn't totally max =
out the=20
card.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But when I closed Paris I got a =
message I've=20
never seen</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>before. Something like: "Program =
# 867443880=20
can't be</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>found to close." Then the same =
thing over and=20
over with a new </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>number </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>as I click=20
them away. I just shut down but wonder if I </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>maxed </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>the UAD-1 out=20
so much that it caused this?.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_002B_01C6E6D5.76AB05E0--I just saw on Gearslutz that teh EMI limiter is coming to VST.
Anyone know anymore?HI Dedric,
Just got it the other day and haven't much time to test it . Guess I
wasn't using the Hybrid. Coders sure do get lazy with this stuff. :)
Chris
Dedric Terry wrote:
>Hi Chris,
>
>I don't have Sequoia 9 yet, but the word on the forum has been that only the
>hybrid engine uses more than one core/cpu - e.g. the "classic" engine is
>still single core. I haven't been clear on whether 9.x will add extended
>multi-cpu support in either mode not. Have you guys been testing it
>already?
>
>Dedric
>
>On 10/1/06 9:21 AM, in article 451fdb36@linux, "Chris Ludwig"
><chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Hi Dedric,
>>From what I've found out so far.
>>
>>Samplitude/Sequoia 9 now support 4 CPU finally. Of course Dual CPUs have
>>been common for 4/5 years and dual cores for 2 years. Better late than
>>never :)
>>
>>Cubase4/ Nuendo 3 = 8 Cores/CPUs
>>Sonar 5/6 = 4 cpus
>>Ableton Live 6 = 2cpus
>>PT 7.1 LE = 2 cpus
>>Vegas 7 = 4 cpus
>>Wavelab = 2 cpus
>>audition = ummm i think only one still
>>Acid "Pro" = still 1 but I think next version to match V7 will be multi/
>>
>>Pro tools is last thing I would consider if I had a tight school budget . :)
>>
>>The audio market is very fast with support for current technology and
>>formats and is very responsive to customers about adding them. The video
>>market is quite the opposite. Most of the video companies still haven't
>>figured out that a sound blaster isn't "Pro".
>>
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market that
>>>will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio. They have
>>>Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro as soon
>>>as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the "pro"
>>>moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting user.
>>>;-)
>>>
>>>Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>>>Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still). Even PT
>>>isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually hate to
>>>see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry as a whole.
>>>
>>>The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology... making
>>>what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to anyone age
>>>5 to 95.
>>>
>>>Dedric
>>>
>>>On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont"
>>><jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level of audio
>>>>editing,
>>>>look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks like
>>>>Apple is heading there without them.
>>>>
>>>>I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading the Logic
>>>>Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this true?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2_
>>>>re
>>>>storation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762To those of you who are into this kind of thing, I'm getting ready to make
a contribution to Kinky Friedman's gubernatorial campaign in Texas. Why
would I do this if I live in Colorado, you ask? Well, if you're into
*pratctical*, border control (as well as an open mind on a few other things)
I think he's come up with the best I've seen so far and though lots of folks
write this guy off as a joke, he's no joke IMHO. I think the pols in
Washington could learn a few things from this guy but first, he's gotta' be
put into a position where they can't ignore him. Governor of Texas works
pretty good for this kinda' thing.
http://www.kinkyfriedman.com/index.html
I'm gonna buy one of his talking action figures and set it right next to my
DAC-1. He's an Independent, which is another thing I like about him. guys
like this may seem over the top, but I think we could use a few folks in our
system who break the current molds.Whatcha gotta do is put a 700 mile fence along a 2000 mile border. Right
? heheSo this will limit my electormagnetic interference?
;oP
"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
news:4522703e$1@linux...
>
>
> I just saw on Gearslutz that teh EMI limiter is coming to VST.
> Anyone know anymore?I sorta liked his idea of having a 10 milliuon dollar kitty that would be
committed to a Mexican general. Tell the general that at the end of a year,
he will get the money, but it will be proportionately reduced by $10,000.00
for each illegal alien that is apprehended in the vicinity of the Mexico/
Texas during that year.
Problem solved.
;o)
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:452285f2$1@linux...
>
> Whatcha gotta do is put a 700 mile fence along a 2000 mile border. Right
> ? heheThanks James. Good Post... "They took a 90 million dollar charge when Apple
dropped the cloning thing. For years, Motorola got around to Apples needs
when Motorola got around to Apples needs."
WOW!! Amazing..
Question: Before Windows OS got msutherd with viruses (1999-current), what
was Mac user's excues then for not using Windows?
Thanks..
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I think it's a rumor. I do think, IF the day comes that Microsoft drops
MS
>Office for the Mac it will happen but not right away. My bet is Apple has
>a version of OSX and some kind of open Office project that will run on a
>PC in their labs that Microsoft is well a where of. It's a cold war approach.
> It keeps everybody playing nice. (Where is Claris/Apple works?)
>
>Apple didn't jump to Intel on a whim, or over night, it was a five year
process.
> It was calculated, it was planned. It was a contingency plan, Apple got
>screwed around by Motorola for years. I sold StarMax systems back in the
>day, and I spoke to the top brass about OEMing the left over MOBOs. They
>told me that they were going to get even with Apple, they were mad as hell
>at Apple. They took a 90 million dollar charge when Apple dropped the cloning
>thing. For years, Motorola got around to Apples needs when Motorola got
>around to Apples needs.
>
> IBM started to treat Apple the same way in recent years. I think IBM found
>out about Apple's work with Intel. IBM opened their Fishkill Plant with
>big fanfare. There were a lot of press releases about the IBM/Apple G5,
>and how IBM built a new state of the art plant for this processor. Steve
>Jobs announced that with in a year they would be a 3GHZ with the G5, and
>stated that IBM said so. It never happened. Apple had looked at IBM's
road
>map, the G5 spec-ed out good. The problems that were supposed to be fixed
>in the second generation did not happen. Heat and power consumption were
>big issues, that's why G5's never made it in to a lap top. IBM could not
>deliver a faster, cooler, less power hungry processor. Apple had to do
something,
>or get left in the dust. I think the relationship also broke down. after
>all the IBM fanfare, they started to say publicly that Apple was only a
small
>part of their business and was not important to them.
>
>From what Steve Jobs said, Apple looked at Intel's road map as far as processor
>performance and it was clear to him that it was the best choice. He sees
>things that you and I don't get to see. Apples top hardware designer retired
>at that time, so having Intel help Apple with MOBO design was a win, win
>situation. Apple knows Intel is going to rock in to the future. I'm sure
>Apple is also working with AMD, but I think they signed an exclusive with
>Intel. When that's up, I think you'll see Apple AMD machines also. You
>may also see Apple IBM machines in the future, but I think it depends on
>IBM, and price/proformance.
>
>As long as MS plays nice with Apple I don't think you will see OSX on PC
>hardware, but again anything is possible. Apple makes too much money on
>hardware and they would lose hardware sales if they did this. Not a smart
>business plan for Apple. There would be too much cost to support all of
>the PC hardware out there. If they sold an OS version with out support
they
>might be able to make some money, but it would still hurt hardware sales.
> If they ever get their hard ware closer to the end user cost of PC hardware,
>it might be more possible. I don't think that will happen any time soon,
>besides they will never get anywhere near the cost to build your own PC.
> Besides, you can already hack the OSX and run it on a PC. I think it
>would just hurt Apple.
>
>What I'd like to see, is lower hardware prices from Apple, and the ability
>to run any Windows PC software on Mac OSX. That would be a lot better solution.
> Mac users really don't want the Windows viruses o
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72588 is a reply to message #72586] |
Mon, 18 September 2006 00:40 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t. Apple is doing fine, and I think that nobody really wants
>to poison the well they all drink from.
>
>That's my take on it.
>
>Any thing is possible, only time will tell.
>
>James
>
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Hey Jamie,
>>
>>I dont know about the "Ain't going to happen. Let's take a look.
>>They dump the IMB-Motorola Processor(Thank God) for some real power(Intel's)..
>>That one event opened up "Pandora's Box) into Microsoft all over again
:)
>>
>>Thus, it was inevitable that running windows on a Mac would soon follow
>and
>>it happened (fast) I might add..BootCamp and other hacked versions..
>>
>>Being that there are more windows users in the world, how many Ipods would
>>you say were Windows version of IPods versus Mac Ipods?? Itunes is the
prefered
>>media player on both Macs and Window PCs.
>>I really do think it's only a matter of time before we a cross-platform
>of
>>Logic.
>>
>>Question: James M or Jamie.. The big rumor is that Apple will release a
>vrsion
>>of OS-x for any PC?? Is this true. If it is, wonderful.. Also, that DEll
>>and Hp are signed on to become OEM vendors.Offering a user to either have
>>Windows or OS-x as their prefered OS.???
>>
>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!!
>>>
>>>Oh great, now I'm going to have nightmares! ;^)
>>>
>>>It will be interesting to see what refinements end up in future versions
>>
>>>of Logic. I'm personally glad it's already come so far, and is now not
>
>>>only feature-rich but much more reliable. The hardware and OS it runs
on
>>
>>>is plenty fast and reasonably elegant.
>>>
>>>I'm glad we have choices, too. For anyone who wants Nuendo, Pro Tools
or
>>
>>>is limited to running on MSWindows, clearly you should not buy Logic.
>>>Apple will be OK without your money.
>>>
>>>Of course it _would_ be great if Logic were multi-platform but the
>>>reality is that ain't gonna happen.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>James McCloskey wrote:
>>>> Hey Dedric! I have older versions of Logic, but I'm not running Logic
>>at
>>>> this time. I have kept up with, to some degree, the development of
logic.
>>>> I've been reading the Logic NG for some time, and a lot of the bugs
>have
>>>> been fixed. There was a lot of mad Logic users for a while, especially
>>when
>>>> they started to make changes to the interface. Some people liked it
>the
>>>> way it was, hummmmm!
>>>>
>>>> I've just been reading about Logic and Symphony. It looks like a killer
>>>> combination, but time will tell. From what I gather, the drivers are
>>working
>>>> well. Obviously the latency thing is a plus if it all turns out to
be
>>true.
>>>> I think Logic is still a serious contender for DAW software. Logic
>is
>>still
>>>> a good option for many, with it's PT and new third party hardware options,
>>>> such as DSP cards. It took apple time to get the right people in place
>>for
>>>> the internal Logic team, some people came from Opcode. I think Logic
>>will
>>>> now improve.
>>>>
>>>> My point was it's not fair to pick a part Logic and Macs when your reference
>>>> is a 3 to 4 year old version of Logic and an 8 year old Mac. That's
>ridiculous!
>>>> There has been a lot of improvements to Logic and Macs. I think the
>>current
>>>> state of the art, first hand experience and honesty would reveal a different
>>>> conclusion. Logic and Macs are not dead, they are still prevalent in
>>many
>>>> studios. Logic will improve over time, as all DAWs do. I doubt Logic
>>will
>>>> ever be top dog, but so what. That position will be held by PT, and
>Steinberg
>>>> second for a long time to come. In the end, the best DAW is a vary
subjective
>>>> matter. To each his own.
>>>>
>>>> There is a lot of software out there to choose from, I'm glad we have
>>choices,
>>>> other wise we'd all sound the same.
>>>>
>>>> Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!!
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>> Hey James - are you using Logic with Symphony? How do you like Symphony
>>>> -
>>>>> thoughts? Seems like a great interface and a perfect complement to
>Logic,
>>>>> but I know a few people were skeptical of Apogee's ability to deliver
>>the
>>>>> driver end, if there is such a concern with core audio.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/1/06 5:39 PM, in article 452051c3$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple is a fortune 50 company with billions of dollars behind it.
>I
>>don't
>>>>>> think Apple or Logic are going to fail any time soon. Logic will,
>and
>>>> has
>>>>>> improved over time. Apple could make more money if they had a PC
version
>>>>>> again, but it doesn't much matter to Mac users and their are millions
>>>> of
>>>>>> us. I think the biggest problem with Logic is the $999.00 price,
if
>>it
>>>> were
>>>>>> $499.00, and continued to improve, a lot more people would be using
>>it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no perfect DAW, they all need work. Is Nuendo $1,500.00
better
>>>>>> than Logic? Before you answer that, maybe you should try the latest
>>version
>>>>>> of Logic on a new Mac with Symphony. Then I think you would really
>>know.
>>>>>> Logic 5.5 is a vary old version. It's all subjective, different strokes
>>>>>> for different fokes. Jamie and others here are examples of people
>that
>>>> really
>>>>>> like Logic and are able to do serious work with Logic, so I don't
think
>>>> it's
>>>>>> dyeing. Logic and Apple are only going to get better with time.
By
>>the
>>>>>> way Logic and SoundTrack are supposed to work together, like Vegas
>and
>>>> Acid.
>>>>>> Hey, it's always good to have choices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> James
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hey Dedric,
>>>>>>> I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi
they
>>>>>>> continue
>>>>>>> down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will
die
>>>> off
>>>>>>> if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the
>game
>>>> now.
>>>>>>> Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting
>>>> most
>>>>>>> of their cardsinto IPODS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or
>more
>>>> so
>>>>>>> Sony Vegas Pro.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market
>>>> that
>>>>>>>> will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio.
>They
>>>> have
>>>>>>>> Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio pro
>>as
>>>> soon
>>>>>>>> as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the
>"pro"
>>>>>>>> moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting
>>>> user.
>>>>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>>>>>>>> Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still).
>>
>>>> Even
>>>>>>> PT
>>>>>>>> isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually
>>hate
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry
>as
>>>> a whole.
>>>>>>>> The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology...
>>making
>>>>>>>> what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to
>anyone
>>>>>>> age
>>>>>>>> 5 to 95.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont"
>>>>>>>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level
>of
>>>> audio
>>>>>>>>> editing,
>>>>>>>>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it looks
>>>> like
>>>>>>>>> Apple is heading there without them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading
>>>> the
>>>>>>> Logic
>>>>>>>>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this
>true?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2
>>>>>>>>> _re
>>>>>>>>> storation
>>>>
>>
>"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
>Phil,
>I'm in the same boat as you. I've been looking at the Gigabyte K8NS ultra
>939 which
>has 5 PCI 2.2 slots and which is know to work very well with PARIS,but there
>becoming hard to find. Ideally I'd like a Intel based board with 3 PCI 2.2
>slots
>and PCI-e slots. This will be my first PC so I'm flying blind. I'd like
>to run
>Pro Tools le,Ableton Live and Reasons as well as PARIS. I've been looking
>at
>ASUS P5B Motherboard,don't know if this is a good choice,but I'm going to
>some
>checking around. Let me know what you come up with. Don't like the idea
of
>being
>beta tester but I my have to.
>
>respect
>nappy
>
>
>"Phil Aiken" <paiken@partners.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> My main audio computer needs to be replaced....I am looking to put together
>> a new PC that will be for Paris and also a native platform that I will
>ultimately
>>migrate to - but not right away. (Leaning towards Samplitude) My Paris
system
>>is 2 cards, with 1 UAD card.
>>
>> I have a budget of about $1500.00. What I have come up with myself is
>>an AMD dualcore 2.6 - 3 pci slots and 3 pcie slots - honkin' power supply
>>- 7200 rpm SATA main system drive with a 3 removable SATA drive bay for
>audio.
>>2 Gigs of RAM.
>>
>>I know Paris can't make use of it....but should I be looking at dual processors?
>>Would this send my budget through the roof?
>>
>>Any specific motherboard/processor recommendations?
>>
>>Someone want to point me to the ideal system for my budget and needs?
>>
>>
>>
>I just bought a used Dell Dimension 9100 for this purpose. It is the first
used computer I've ever purchased, but by the time Digi blesses a model it
is discontinued. The one I got on eBay has a dual processor, decent (7200-160GB)
hard drive and 3 PCI and 4 PCIE slots. It cost me $400 plus shipping.
Of course, I'll be adding a 360 GB music drive, 2 GB of RAM, a dual monitor
card, and a Firewire card. Still, the total will be under $1000.........
"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
>Phil,
>I'm in the same boat as you. I've been looking at the Gigabyte K8NS ultra
>939 which
>has 5 PCI 2.2 slots and which is know to work very well with PARIS,but there
>becoming hard to find. Ideally I'd like a Intel based board with 3 PCI 2.2
>slots
>and PCI-e slots. This will be my first PC so I'm flying blind. I'd like
>to run
>Pro Tools le,Ableton Live and Reasons as well as PARIS. I've been looking
>at
>ASUS P5B Motherboard,don't know if this is a good choice,but I'm going to
>some
>checking around. Let me know what you come up with. Don't like the idea
of
>being
>beta tester but I my have to.
>
>respect
>nappy
>
>
>"Phil Aiken" <paiken@partners.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> My main audio computer needs to be replaced....I am looking to put together
>> a new PC that will be for Paris and also a native platform that I will
>ultimately
>>migrate to - but not right away. (Leaning towards Samplitude) My Paris
system
>>is 2 cards, with 1 UAD card.
>>
>> I have a budget of about $1500.00. What I have come up with myself is
>>an AMD dualcore 2.6 - 3 pci slots and 3 pcie slots - honkin' power supply
>>- 7200 rpm SATA main system drive with a 3 removable SATA drive bay for
>audio.
>>2 Gigs of RAM.
>>
>>I know Paris can't make use of it....but should I be looking at dual processors?
>>Would this send my budget through the roof?
>>
>>Any specific motherboard/processor recommendations?
>>
>>Someone want to point me to the ideal system for my budget and needs?
>>
>>
>>
>"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>I sorta liked his idea of having a 10 milliuon dollar kitty that would be
>committed to a Mexican general. Tell the general that at the end of a year,
>he will get the money, but it will be proportionately reduced by $10,000.00
>for each illegal alien that is apprehended in the vicinity of the Mexico/
>Texas during that year.
>
>Problem solved.
>
>;o)
There is a lot that could be said. I'll say that this guy is right on a
lot of issues, but only about half right. His type would, want to use bribery.
With bribery comes corruption, they have been using it for years, and it
has been the down fall of this country. Bribery is not the right solution,
law enforcement is. He is right about fining companies that hire illegals.
Stick it to the people that are benefiting, profiteering and it would stop.
We do need independents, but I don't think this kind of guy is a good idea.
I'd think twice before putting this guy in to power. There are already too
many guys like him already running everything.
James
>
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:452285f2$1@linux...
>>
>> Whatcha gotta do is put a 700 mile fence along a 2000 mile border. Right
>> ? hehe
>
>Anyone who has the chutzpah to sing a song called "They Don't Make Jews Like
Jesus Anymore* in front of a bunch of evangelicals gets my vote any day.
;op)
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4522933c$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
> >I sorta liked his idea of having a 10 milliuon dollar kitty that would be
> >committed to a Mexican general. Tell the general that at the end of a
year,
> >he will get the money, but it will be proportionately reduced by
$10,000.00
> >for each illegal alien that is apprehended in the vicinity of the Mexico/
> >Texas during that year.
> >
> >Problem solved.
> >
> >;o)
>
> There is a lot that could be said. I'll say that this guy is right on a
> lot of issues, but only about half right. His type would, want to use
bribery.
> With bribery comes corruption, they have been using it for years, and it
> has been the down fall of this country. Bribery is not the right
solution,
> law enforcement is. He is right about fining companies that hire
illegals.
> Stick it to the people that are benefiting, profiteering and it would
stop.
>
> We do need independents, but I don't think this kind of guy is a good
idea.
>
> I'd think twice before putting this guy in to power. There are already
too
> many guys like him already running everything.
>
> James
>
>
> >
> >
> >"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:452285f2$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Whatcha gotta do is put a 700 mile fence along a 2000 mile border.
Right
> >> ? hehe
> >
> >
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Thanks James. Good Post... "They took a 90 million dollar charge when Apple
>dropped the cloning thing. For years, Motorola got around to Apples needs
>when Motorola got around to Apples needs."
>WOW!! Amazing..
>
>Question: Before Windows OS got msutherd with viruses (1999-current), what
>was Mac user's excues then for not using Windows?
>Thanks..
>
It sucked! I did use Windoz back then, it was a PITA, and still is. Mac
O/S was a better, easier to use OS! Windows 3.x couldn't stand up to Mac
O/S. Then Windows 95 came out. The press said that it was more Mac like,
which was true. Microsoft continued to copy Mac OS features. MS even stole
the term Plug and Play from Apple. Then they said it was as good as a Mac,
that was the first lie. Then they started to say that Windows 95 was better
than a Mac, that was an even bigger lie. Unfortunately the average guy believed
the lies.
People talked about how Macs would crash and Windows didn't. That was another
lie, Windows 95 did crash. Macs crashed because you need to manually allocate
memory to each program, people would for get to do this and then blame the
Mac. That is like not putting gas in your car, and then say that the car
was defective when it stopped running. That was the draw back of Mac OS
back then, and Win 95 had that one advantage because of the dynamically allocated
memory.
Mac OS was sleeker, more elegant, easier to use back in the 90s and still
is to day. That's why Microsoft keeps trying to copy Apple.
May be it's all just a right brain, left brain thing. Or may be it's that
Microsoft creates software that is inferior, has bugs, has lots of problems,
and it keeps you IT guys working, and that's why you love MS and hate Apple.
James
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>I think it's a rumor. I do think, IF the day comes that Microsoft drops
>MS
>>Office for the Mac it will happen but not right away. My bet is Apple
has
>>a version of OSX and some kind of open Office project that will run on
a
>>PC in their labs that Microsoft is well a where of. It's a cold war approach.
>> It keeps everybody playing nice. (Where is Claris/Apple works?)
>>
>>Apple didn't jump to Intel on a whim, or over night, it was a five year
>process.
>> It was calculated, it was planned. It was a contingency plan, Apple got
>>screwed around by Motorola for years. I sold StarMax systems back in the
>>day, and I spoke to the top brass about OEMing the left over MOBOs. They
>>told me that they were going to get even with Apple, they were mad as hell
>>at Apple. They took a 90 million dollar charge when Apple dropped the
cloning
>>thing. For years, Motorola got around to Apples needs when Motorola got
>>around to Apples needs.
>>
>> IBM started to treat Apple the same way in recent years. I think IBM
found
>>out about Apple's work with Intel. IBM opened their Fishkill Plant with
>>big fanfare. There were a lot of press releases about the IBM/Apple G5,
>>and how IBM built a new state of the art plant for this processor. Steve
>>Jobs announced that with in a year they would be a 3GHZ with the G5, and
>>stated that IBM said so. It never happened. Apple had looked at IBM's
>road
>>map, the G5 spec-ed out good. The problems that were supposed to be fixed
>>in the second generation did not happen. Heat and power consumption were
>>big issues, that's why G5's never made it in to a lap top. IBM could not
>>deliver a faster, cooler, less power hungry processor. Apple had to do
>something,
>>or get left in the dust. I think the relationship also broke down. after
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72591 is a reply to message #72586] |
Mon, 18 September 2006 02:35 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
re-rich but much more reliable. The hardware and OS it runs
>on
>>>
>>>>is plenty fast and reasonably elegant.
>>>>
>>>>I'm glad we have choices, too. For anyone who wants Nuendo, Pro Tools
>or
>>>
>>>>is limited to running on MSWindows, clearly you should not buy Logic.
>
>>>>Apple will be OK without your money.
>>>>
>>>>Of course it _would_ be great if Logic were multi-platform but the
>>>>reality is that ain't gonna happen.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>James McCloskey wrote:
>>>>> Hey Dedric! I have older versions of Logic, but I'm not running Logic
>>>at
>>>>> this time. I have kept up with, to some degree, the development of
>logic.
>>>>> I've been reading the Logic NG for some time, and a lot of the bugs
>>have
>>>>> been fixed. There was a lot of mad Logic users for a while, especially
>>>when
>>>>> they started to make changes to the interface. Some people liked it
>>the
>>>>> way it was, hummmmm!
>>>>>
>>>>> I've just been reading about Logic and Symphony. It looks like a killer
>>>>> combination, but time will tell. From what I gather, the drivers are
>>>working
>>>>> well. Obviously the latency thing is a plus if it all turns out to
>be
>>>true.
>>>>> I think Logic is still a serious contender for DAW software. Logic
>>is
>>>still
>>>>> a good option for many, with it's PT and new third party hardware options,
>>>>> such as DSP cards. It took apple time to get the right people in place
>>>for
>>>>> the internal Logic team, some people came from Opcode. I think Logic
>>>will
>>>>> now improve.
>>>>>
>>>>> My point was it's not fair to pick a part Logic and Macs when your
reference
>>>>> is a 3 to 4 year old version of Logic and an 8 year old Mac. That's
>>ridiculous!
>>>>> There has been a lot of improvements to Logic and Macs. I think the
>>>current
>>>>> state of the art, first hand experience and honesty would reveal a
different
>>>>> conclusion. Logic and Macs are not dead, they are still prevalent
in
>>>many
>>>>> studios. Logic will improve over time, as all DAWs do. I doubt Logic
>>>will
>>>>> ever be top dog, but so what. That position will be held by PT, and
>>Steinberg
>>>>> second for a long time to come. In the end, the best DAW is a vary
>subjective
>>>>> matter. To each his own.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a lot of software out there to choose from, I'm glad we have
>>>choices,
>>>>> other wise we'd all sound the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just be glad Gibson didn't buy Logic!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> James
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Hey James - are you using Logic with Symphony? How do you like Symphony
>>>>> -
>>>>>> thoughts? Seems like a great interface and a perfect complement to
>>Logic,
>>>>>> but I know a few people were skeptical of Apogee's ability to deliver
>>>the
>>>>>> driver end, if there is such a concern with core audio.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/1/06 5:39 PM, in article 452051c3$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>>>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apple is a fortune 50 company with billions of dollars behind it.
>
>>I
>>>don't
>>>>>>> think Apple or Logic are going to fail any time soon. Logic will,
>>and
>>>>> has
>>>>>>> improved over time. Apple could make more money if they had a PC
>version
>>>>>>> again, but it doesn't much matter to Mac users and their are millions
>>>>> of
>>>>>>> us. I think the biggest problem with Logic is the $999.00 price,
>if
>>>it
>>>>> were
>>>>>>> $499.00, and continued to improve, a lot more people would be using
>>>it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no perfect DAW, they all need work. Is Nuendo $1,500.00
>better
>>>>>>> than Logic? Before you answer that, maybe you should try the latest
>>>version
>>>>>>> of Logic on a new Mac with Symphony. Then I think you would really
>>>know.
>>>>>>> Logic 5.5 is a vary old version. It's all subjective, different
strokes
>>>>>>> for different fokes. Jamie and others here are examples of people
>>that
>>>>> really
>>>>>>> like Logic and are able to do serious work with Logic, so I don't
>think
>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> dyeing. Logic and Apple are only going to get better with time.
>By
>>>the
>>>>>>> way Logic and SoundTrack are supposed to work together, like Vegas
>>and
>>>>> Acid.
>>>>>>> Hey, it's always good to have choices.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> James
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hey Dedric,
>>>>>>>> I disagree..I think Apps like DP & Logic Audio should die off fi
>they
>>>>>>>> continue
>>>>>>>> down their Mac centric, mac only, Midi first approach. They will
>die
>>>>> off
>>>>>>>> if they don't adjust their product to the demands of the industry..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now it's a Steinberg, Digidesign, Cakwwalk who are dominating the
>>game
>>>>> now.
>>>>>>>> Apple has dropped the ball with Logic. It seems that Apple is putting
>>>>> most
>>>>>>>> of their cardsinto IPODS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think Final Cut Pro will mature into a Nueundo(ish) type app or
>>more
>>>>> so
>>>>>>>> Sony Vegas Pro.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Imho, Soundtrack Pro seems to be aimed directly at the video market
>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> will spend tens of thousands on video, but not a dime on audio.
>
>>They
>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>> Soundtrack "Pro", which automatically replaces an actual audio
pro
>>>as
>>>>> soon
>>>>>>>>> as it is launched! (Thanks to ProTools, any program carrying the
>>"pro"
>>>>>>>>> moniker automatically imparts professional skills on any unsuspecting
>>>>> user.
>>>>>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Logic is a great program. So are DP, Nuendo, SX, Sonar, and
>>>>>>>>> Samplitude/Sequoia (despite the lack of dual core support, still).
>>>
>>>>> Even
>>>>>>>> PT
>>>>>>>>> isn't bad for a generic or educational DAW. ;-) I would actually
>>>hate
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> see any of them die off - it wouldn't bode well for the industry
>>as
>>>>> a whole.
>>>>>>>>> The biggest threat DAWs face isn't one another, but technology...
>>>making
>>>>>>>>> what we do for a living a simple click of a button accessible to
>>anyone
>>>>>>>> age
>>>>>>>>> 5 to 95.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9/30/06 11:26 PM, in article 451f5170$1@linux, "LaMont"
>>>>>>>>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jamie My Logic Audio Buddy..An even better example of the level
>>of
>>>>> audio
>>>>>>>>>> editing,
>>>>>>>>>> look and feel that Logic shouold be heading towards. Well, it
looks
>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>>> Apple is heading there without them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I heard a rumor that most of the German(emagic)team is not leading
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> Logic
>>>>>>>>>> Audio development team. That it's all Apple developers? Is this
>>true?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/quicktours/?quicktours/a udio/qt_stpro_2
>>>>>>>>>> _re
>>>>>>>>>> storation
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>Anyone who has the chutzpah to sing a song called "They Don't Make Jews
Like
>Jesus Anymore* in front of a bunch of evangelicals gets my vote any day.
>
>;op)
Well you'll get what you pay for!
James
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:4522933c$1@linux...
>>
>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>> >I sorta liked his idea of having a 10 milliuon dollar kitty that would
be
>> >committed to a Mexican general. Tell the general that at the end of a
>year,
>> >he will get the money, but it will be proportionately reduced by
>$10,000.00
>> >for each illegal alien that is apprehended in the vicinity of the Mexico/
>> >Texas during that year.
>> >
>> >Problem solved.
>> >
>> >;o)
>>
>> There is a lot that could be said. I'll say that this guy is right on
a
>> lot of issues, but only about half right. His type would, want to use
>bribery.
>> With bribery comes corruption, they have been using it for years, and
it
>> has been the down fall of this country. Bribery is not the right
>solution,
>> law enforcement is. He is right about fining companies that hire
>illegals.
>> Stick it to the people that are benefiting, profiteering and it would
>stop.
>>
>> We do need independents, but I don't think this kind of guy is a good
>idea.
>>
>> I'd think twice before putting this guy in to power. There are already
>too
>> many guys like him already running everything.
>>
>> James
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:452285f2$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> Whatcha gotta do is put a 700 mile fence along a 2000 mile border.
>Right
>> >> ? hehe
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>Just a followup on this which may not apply to anyone at all, but just in
case:
I had been using a template to do this that was derived from some earlier
experimentations I was doing in an earlier version of Cubase SX. Bad Idea as
I was having some lockups. Creating an new template from scratch to work
with has clearedd up the lockup issues. This is working sooo well. I'm going
to likely mix this way from now on out.
Deej
"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4520b451@linux...
> I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for
the
> UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks
> being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and
yet
> others are being processed with outboard gear.
>
> Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and
everything
> sounds appropriately PHAT!!!
>
> I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying them
into
> Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris. Just a
> matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and there.
> Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is very handy.
>
> I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very well.
>
> On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral.
>
> G'nite all.
>
> ;o)
>
>Hmmm... I wonder if I could insert HD on the Nuendo track that is
inserted on the Paris track... ;-)
David.
DJ wrote:
> Just a followup on this which may not apply to anyone at all, but just in
> case:
>
> I had been using a template to do this that was derived from some earlier
> experimentations I was doing in an earlier version of Cubase SX. Bad Idea as
> I was having some lockups. Creating an new template from scratch to work
> with has clearedd up the lockup issues. This is working sooo well. I'm going
> to likely mix this way from now on out.
>
> Deej
>
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4520b451@linux...
>
>>I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for
>
> the
>
>>UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks
>>being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and
>
> yet
>
>>others are being processed with outboard gear.
>>
>>Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and
>
> everything
>
>>sounds appropriately PHAT!!!
>>
>>I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying them
>
> into
>
>>Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris. Just a
>>matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and there.
>>Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is very handy.
>>
>>I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very well.
>>
>>On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral.
>>
>>G'nite all.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>
>
>Gary,
Are you going to try and get PARIS running on this box?
respect
Nappy
"Gary Flanigan" <gary_flanigan@ce9.uscourts.gov> wrote:
>
>I just bought a used Dell Dimension 9100 for this purpose. It is the first
>used computer I've ever purchased, but by the time Digi blesses a model
it
>is discontinued. The one I got on eBay has a dual processor, decent (7200-160GB)
>hard drive and 3 PCI and 4 PCIE slots. It cost me $400 plus shipping.
>
>Of course, I'll be adding a 360 GB music drive, 2 GB of RAM, a dual monitor
>card, and a Firewire card. Still, the total will be under $1000.........
>
>
>
>
>
>"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>Phil,
>>I'm in the same boat as you. I've been looking at the Gigabyte K8NS ultra
>>939 which
>>has 5 PCI 2.2 slots and which is know to work very well with PARIS,but
there
>>becoming hard to find. Ideally I'd like a Intel based board with 3 PCI
2.2
>>slots
>>and PCI-e slots. This will be my first PC so I'm flying blind. I'd like
>>to run
>>Pro Tools le,Ableton Live and Reasons as well as PARIS. I've been looking
>>at
>>ASUS P5B Motherboard,don't know if this is a good choice,but I'm going
to
>>some
>>checking around. Let me know what you come up with. Don't like the idea
>of
>>being
>>beta tester but I my have to.
>>
>>respect
>>nappy
>>
>>
>>"Phil Aiken" <paiken@partners.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> My main audio computer needs to be replaced....I am looking to put together
>>> a new PC that will be for Paris and also a native platform that I will
>>ultimately
>>>migrate to - but not right away. (Leaning towards Samplitude) My Paris
>system
>>>is 2 cards, with 1 UAD card.
>>>
>>> I have a budget of about $1500.00. What I have come up with myself
is
>>>an AMD dualcore 2.6 - 3 pci slots and 3 pcie slots - honkin' power supply
>>>- 7200 rpm SATA main system drive with a 3 removable SATA drive bay for
>>audio.
>>>2 Gigs of RAM.
>>>
>>>I know Paris can't make use of it....but should I be looking at dual processors?
>>>Would this send my budget through the roof?
>>>
>>>Any specific motherboard/processor recommendations?
>>>
>>>Someone want to point me to the ideal system for my budget and needs?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>I'm sure you could and you need to do this immediately!!! BTW, while you've
been hanging in Banff, I've been taking your Canadian tech support calls,
you slacker!
(which has also actually been rather nice, BTW)
;o)
"EK Sound" <askme@nospam.com> wrote in message news:45229bc7@linux...
> Hmmm... I wonder if I could insert HD on the Nuendo track that is
> inserted on the Paris track... ;-)
>
> David.
>
> DJ wrote:
> > Just a followup on this which may not apply to anyone at all, but just
in
> > case:
> >
> > I had been using a template to do this that was derived from some
earlier
> > experimentations I was doing in an earlier version of Cubase SX. Bad
Idea as
> > I was having some lockups. Creating an new template from scratch to work
> > with has clearedd up the lockup issues. This is working sooo well. I'm
going
> > to likely mix this way from now on out.
> >
> > Deej
> >
> > "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote in message news:4520b451@linux...
> >
> >>I created some sampleslide presets to work with the nudge increments for
> >
> > the
> >
> >>UAD-1 plugins and I've got a sweet mix happening here with Paris tracks
> >>being processed in SX, while others are being processed with EDS FX and
> >
> > yet
> >
> >>others are being processed with outboard gear.
> >>
> >>Cubase SX is humming along just like a big ol' effects rack and
> >
> > everything
> >
> >>sounds appropriately PHAT!!!
> >>
> >>I'm liking this. Much easier than rendering all the tracks, flying them
> >
> > into
> >
> >>Cubase SX and mixing by streaming every track back through Paris. Just a
> >>matter of a few presets in Sampleslide and a small nudge here and there.
> >>Being able to spread those outboard reverbs across submixes is very
handy.
> >>
> >>I'll post up my Sampleslide presets ASAP. Theyre working very well.
> >>
> >>On that note......I'm off to St Mattress cathedral.
> >>
> >>G'nite all.
> >>
> >>;o)
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Cheque's in the mail... ;-) yah, Don's ok... for a drummer...
David.
DJ wrote:
> I'm sure you could and you need to do this immediately!!! BTW, while you've
> been hanging in Banff, I've been taking your Canadian tech support calls,
> you slacker!
>
> (which has also actually been rather nice, BTW)
>
> ;o)
>
>
> "EK Sound" <askme@nospam.com> wrote in message news:45229bc7@linux...
>
>>Hmmm... I wonder if I could insert HD on the Nuendo track that is
>>inserted on the Paris track... ;-)
>>
>>David.
>>No news on Abbey Road's or Chandler's sites yet.
http://www.abbeyroad.co.uk/news.php?id=131
http://www.chandlerlimited.com/products/plugin_tg12413.php
Tony
"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
news:4522703e$1@linux...
>
>
> I just saw on Gearslutz that teh EMI limiter is coming to VST.
> Anyone know anymore?Now now James: )I've been a Mac user since 1988. I had a Mac IIci(Nice duds
in thoses days). While it was nice(expensive) it was problematic.
Then my next mac was the powerfull 9500 in 1995. Nice machine, however, a
friend came over with his Compaq (blah blah)win Win95. I was blown away by
the speed alone. Yes, it would crash if you really pushed hard, but undr
normal conditions, it flew.
It made me take a fresh look at this Apple thing.. Btw, my was with the Compaq,
had a Mac Quadra 8400(pimped out)..
From there, I went to a pimped out G3..Soon after G4..The into Paris, with
BrianT's help, I've been a PC windows user ever since.
Disagree: GM headquarters(where I worked) had the Mac IIci's as their standard
desktop from 1989-till 1995. We are talking North Americans operations. Over
50,000 users..
Well, do I even need to go into the problems we experienced with the Macs??Let's
not even get into apple's customer service or lack there of..
That GM fisaco is what did Apple in as far as Big business standard desktop..
They droppped the ball big time.
Lie after lie afert lie..
At our formal studio, whre we have 4 Mac, (1-G5 Dual 2.7,1-Dual 877, 2 older
G4-500).. They run our various Pro _Tools setups. Do they crash?? Yes.. Even
with Pro Tools.
I'm not overly impressed with Mc Os-x. It's slow, and needed the juice that
Mr Jobs always said was their with the Motorola CPUS.. ANd, people really
believed that hype without even testing simular apps on a PC. That my friend,
is Blind studpidity..Now, you (mac) guys are grasping for your last bit of
Hype with stating that Mac OS-X is superior to Windows OS. That's your torch
song now..
What happend to the old torch song that the G5 was faster than an Opteron
& Xeon ?? I can't hear you........
Save that mac OS-x hype for somebody who has never owed or used a mac.. I
have used them and still use them, and I can tell you un-equivilicaly, that
it's still about hype and illusion with Apple. They have a real opertunity
to to reatore their name with PC user's if , they just come clean once in
awhile. If they keep up the lies, they will continue to be a niche player..
And, once VArs and resellers get the new Dual core Intels, aong with AMD
announcing big price cuts on their Opterons, CHECK MATE... We'll build a
bigger, faster,PC for a lot less..
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Thanks James. Good Post... "They took a 90 million dollar ch
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed May 06 05:31:51 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05125 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
