Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Thank God we will be *Macless* soon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #60929 is a reply to message #60918] |
Sun, 04 December 2005 12:04   |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
> >> >>
> >> >>John,
> >> >>
> >> >>Another option would be to cut the performance into separate chunks,
=
> >> >>spread them over a few tracks, then adjust the volume
> >> >>on the individual tracks so they match.
> >> >>
> >> >>Lance
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote in message =
> >> >>news:43b59383$1@linux...
> >> >> John,
> >> >> Besides automation I like to put two La2as in series. A Waves
ren/C1
> >> > =
> >> >>will
> >> >> also work here. Use the first one to grab the peaks in limit mode
> >> >> and
> >> > =
> >> >>the other to
> >> >> smooth what's left in comp mode. Dial in small amounts so neither
=
> >> >>gets whacked too hard. =20
> >> >> Then apply automation to what's still out of control.
> >> >> Tom
> >> >>
> >> >> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b554dc@linux...
> >> >> DJ is from the future. I was just playing around so I was trying
> >> >> to
> >> > =
> >> >>
> >> >> find a plug to do this but it makes TOTAL sense to ride the
faders
> >> >> =
> >> >>and=20
> >> >> automate. DOH.
> >> >>
> >> >> This girl who sang is an untrained teen and I was just recording
> >> >> her
> >> > =
> >> >>for=20
> >> >> fun. So I was thinking a plug would totally tame it. I was
wrong
> >> >> =
> >> >>;-)
> >> >>
> >> >> cujo wrote:
> >> >> > Almost simultaneous answering here, strange DJ's post says 8:07
=
> >> >>but it wasnt
> >> >> > there when I looked
> >> >> >=20
> >> >> > "cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote:
> >> >> >=20
> >> >> >>I am sure you tried this but, automation?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>John <no@no.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>I have a female vocal that has huge dynamic range. She starts
=
> >> >>out like
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>a ballad and then is belting it out like whitney. I tried a =
> >> >>variety of
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>compressors but none seem able to tame this. Limiters seem
to
> >> >> =
> >> >>work the
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>best so far. I'm going to try a combo of the two but just =
> >> >>wondered what
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>you guys would do for plugins. I tried C1 Comp, RenVox, =
> >> >>Timeworks=20
> >> >> >>>Mastering Compressor, Ultrafunk compressor (worked better), =
> >> >>Bluetubes,
> >> >> >=20
> >> >> >=20
> >> >> >>>Voxengo, but the Bluetubes limiter seemed to do the best job
so
> >> >> =
> >> >>far.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>Where would you be going on this. Is there a stereo NoLimit?
I
> >> > =
> >> >>forget.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> If so, is that a possibility? What plugin can jam this into
> >> >> the
> >> > =
> >> >>pocket.
> >> >> >>&g
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #60935 is a reply to message #60929] |
Sun, 04 December 2005 15:45 |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294
Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
to sync to
AVI's and Mpegs....Paris couldn't do it so I got Nuendo and found it did all
that stuff that I required way better than Paris, although I really liked
the sound of Paris and the fact that it was a CPU independent system.
I'm just starting to venture into Surround...what a minefield, but fun.
-- Happy New Year.
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b6003c@linux...
> Hey Martin, If you have a minute, what setup are you running now instead
> of Paris.
>
> John wrote:
>> i don't get it? seriously
>>
>> Martin Harrington wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Pete.no speedos [;ease!!!!
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 12:19:22 -0500, John <no@no.com> wrote:
>If this ski boat shows up I will slalom ski in 40 degree weather and
>I'll post pictures here. hehe
>
>justcron wrote:
>> They said they were going out on the 3rd, so watch for em around then...
>>
>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b52675$1@linux...
>>
>>>I'm waiting on my tracking numbers for the ski boat, jet ski and motocross
>>>bike. holding my breath. :-) I believe!
>>
>>
>>saw it on the news last night ...talk about dumb luck. ya think pet
rock would fly again???
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 06:45:13 -0500, "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>Ingenious!
>
>Copied from PSW
>
>"While we slave away as audio goobers, this guy makes a million bucks with a
>brilliantly simple idea. Shoot me now, why the hell didn't I think of this?
>
>http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051229/ts_nm/homepage_dc
>
>
>DOn
>only if i get that speedo promise in writing.
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 18:13:08 -0500, John <no@no.com> wrote:
>I'm gonna get a local artist to airbrush the Ski Nautique all in
>HydroRecords logo art and buy rick and you a plane ticket to come down
>and cruise around. hehe
>
>justcron wrote:
>> sure man... now quit asking for stuff. you sound like a girl.
>>
>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b582c0@linux...
>>
>>>well if justcron is listening, throw in a pair of them too please.....oh
>>>and a allen and heath mixwizard 16:2 heheh
>>>
>>>Chris Latham wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?type=33&cat=20& ;id=332
>>>>
>>>>I heard these yesterday at a music store and was blown away, and was
>>>>shocked
>>>>to hear the price! If you're out and about, give 'em a listen.
>>>>
>>>>CL
>>>>
>>
>>it's the speedo he's wearing whilst waiting for his new skiboat...me
thinks it's a bit small...
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 15:20:56 -0500, "justcron"
<pachinko@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>sure man... now quit asking for stuff. you sound like a girl.
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b582c0@linux...
>> well if justcron is listening, throw in a pair of them too please.....oh
>> and a allen and heath mixwizard 16:2 heheh
>>
>> Chris Latham wrote:
>>> http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?type=33&cat=20& ;id=332
>>>
>>> I heard these yesterday at a music store and was blown away, and was
>>> shocked
>>> to hear the price! If you're out and about, give 'em a listen.
>>>
>>> CL
>>>I've got the speedo on now !
rick wrote:
> it's the speedo he's wearing whilst waiting for his new skiboat...me
> thinks it's a bit small...
>
> On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 15:20:56 -0500, "justcron"
> <pachinko@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>
>
>>sure man... now quit asking for stuff. you sound like a girl.
>>
>>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b582c0@linux...
>>
>>>well if justcron is listening, throw in a pair of them too please.....oh
>>>and a allen and heath mixwizard 16:2 heheh
>>>
>>>Chris Latham wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?type=33&cat=20& ;id=332
>>>>
>>>>I heard these yesterday at a music store and was blown away, and was
>>>>shocked
>>>>to hear the price! If you're out and about, give 'em a listen.
>>>>
>>>>CL
>>>>
>
>Sometimes the DVD/CD-drives don't like to be secondary slave, maybe you
should get an firmware-update for your DVD-drive. And remember to tell
windows to use more than 3gigs of ram.
make sure you are using a good ide-cable
hope it helps
Jorsi
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:43b56d2a$1@linux...
> Speak English DJ! Oh, never mind. I forgot I was a Mac guy for second
> there! ;>)
>
> Tony
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:43b4c491@linux...
>> It gets wierder. I just shuffled the drives. I hung the DVDR
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #60936 is a reply to message #60935] |
Sun, 04 December 2005 17:02 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
on IDE 2 as
>> master and the sample drive as IDE2 slave. Now IDE2 master mode is
>> showing
>> up DMA2 and the sample drive is DMA5. I don't know enough about this
>> situation to know if the DMA2 on the IDE2 master will bottleneck the
>> sample
>> drive, or not, but right now, it's streaming samples from BFD without
>> breathing hard at all. Are all computers this bizarre or just *my*
>> computers?
>>
>> ;oP
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>> news:43b4a4f1$1@linux...
>>> I think I may have a defective mobo. I've been chasing too many
>>> gremlins.
>>> I've managed to kill off all but two, as follows-
>>>
>>> 1. Gremlin #1-I have a 400G drive dedicated to samples. It's a 7200RPM
>>> Seagate Barracuda and is IDE2 master. All of my samples for BFD are on
>> this
>>> drive. All will be well for a couple of days and then suddenly, for no
>>> discernable reason, BFD loses the ability to load and stream samples
>>> with
>>> any speed at all. CPU usage goes to around 50% and life just plain
>>> sucks.
>>> Restoring a Ghost of my system drive wherein BFD was working properly
>> prior
>>> to the Ghosting will fix the problem.
>>>
>>> I'm wondering if maybe DMA isn't enabled or there is some bus mastering
>>> wierdness happening. I can't find the DMA or bus mastering options
>> anywhere.
>>> I'm running win XPSP1a with DX9 installed. Where the heck do I check
>>> this?
>>>
>>> 2. Gremlin #2-I've got 4 x matched 1G RAM sticks. This is good CAS2
>> Corsair
>>> XMS stuff. They all are functioning normally in pairs and three at a
>> time.
>>> Any three sticks will show up in any three of my RAM slots......plus I
>> have
>>> tested all of them singly to make sure they show up and are doing the
>> things
>>> that RAM is supposed to do. However, after adding all four RAM sticks to
>> the
>>> 4 x RAM slots on the mobo, only 3 gigs of system memory shows up. I have
>>> tested every RAM slot in the mobo individually in singles, pairs and
>>> configurations of three and all four of the slots work fine, but when a
>>> fourth RAM stick is added, only three G of RAM are available as system
>>> memory. This suck'eth most seriously.
>>>
>>> I'm thinking *big bullseye on DAW* right about now. It's been a while
>> since
>>> I've unlimbered my 12ga.
>>>
>>> Someone please save my computer's life. It's in mortal and immediate
>> danger
>>> right about now.
>>>
>>> TIA,
>>>
>>> Deej
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>my first pair of mon's was the older ver of these. there on the guest tv
now and sound incredible still.
Chris Latham wrote:
> http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?type=33&cat=20& ;id=332
>
>I heard these yesterday at a music store and was blown away, and was shocked
>to hear the price! If you're out and about, give 'em a listen.
>
>CL
>
>
>
>EWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 07:12:04 -0500, John <no@no.com> wrote:
>I've got the speedo on now !
>
>rick wrote:
>> it's the speedo he's wearing whilst waiting for his new skiboat...me
>> thinks it's a bit small...
>>
>> On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 15:20:56 -0500, "justcron"
>> <pachinko@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>sure man... now quit asking for stuff. you sound like a girl.
>>>
>>>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b582c0@linux...
>>>
>>>>well if justcron is listening, throw in a pair of them too please.....oh
>>>>and a allen and heath mixwizard 16:2 heheh
>>>>
>>>>Chris Latham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?type=33&cat=20& ;id=332
>>>>>
>>>>>I heard these yesterday at a music store and was blown away, and was
>>>>>shocked
>>>>>to hear the price! If you're out and about, give 'em a listen.
>>>>>
>>>>>CL
>>>>>
>>
>>And remember to tell
> windows to use more than 3gigs of ram.
What if I tell it and it refuses? Is there some way I can force it to do
this whether it likes it or not? If so, how?
;o)
"Jorsi" <studios@greennet.gl> wrote in message news:43b68078@linux...
> Sometimes the DVD/CD-drives don't like to be secondary slave, maybe you
> should get an firmware-update for your DVD-drive. And remember to tell
> windows to use more than 3gigs of ram.
> make sure you are using a good ide-cable
> hope it helps
> Jorsi
>
> "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:43b56d2a$1@linux...
> > Speak English DJ! Oh, never mind. I forgot I was a Mac guy for second
> > there! ;>)
> >
> > Tony
> >
> >
> > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > news:43b4c491@linux...
> >> It gets wierder. I just shuffled the drives. I hung the DVDR on IDE 2
as
> >> master and the sample drive as IDE2 slave. Now IDE2 master mode is
> >> showing
> >> up DMA2 and the sample drive is DMA5. I don't know enough about this
> >> situation to know if the DMA2 on the IDE2 master will bottleneck the
> >> sample
> >> drive, or not, but right now, it's streaming samples from BFD without
> >> breathing hard at all. Are all computers this bizarre or just *my*
> >> computers?
> >>
> >> ;oP
> >>
> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >> news:43b4a4f1$1@linux...
> >>> I think I may have a defective mobo. I've been chasing too many
> >>> gremlins.
> >>> I've managed to kill off all but two, as follows-
> >>>
> >>> 1. Gremlin #1-I have a 400G drive dedicated to samples. It's a 7200RPM
> >>> Seagate Barracuda and is IDE2 master. All of my samples for BFD are on
> >> this
> >>> drive. All will be well for a couple of days and then suddenly, for no
> >>> discernable reason, BFD loses the ability to load and stream samples
> >>> with
> >>> any speed at all. CPU usage goes to around 50% and life just plain
> >>> sucks.
> >>> Restoring a Ghost of my system drive wherein BFD was working properly
> >> prior
> >>> to the Ghosting will fix the problem.
> >>>
> >>> I'm wondering if maybe DMA isn't enabled or there is some bus
mastering
> >>> wierdness happening. I can't find the DMA or bus mastering options
> >> anywhere.
> >>> I'm running win XPSP1a with DX9 installed. Where the heck do I check
> >>> this?
> >>>
> >>> 2. Gremlin #2-I've got 4 x matched 1G RAM sticks. This is good CAS2
> >> Corsair
> >>> XMS stuff. They all are functioning normally in pairs and three at a
> >> time.
> >>> Any three sticks will show up in any three of my RAM slots......plus I<
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #60937 is a reply to message #60936] |
Sun, 04 December 2005 18:43 |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294
Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
br />
> >> have
> >>> tested all of them singly to make sure they show up and are doing the
> >> things
> >>> that RAM is supposed to do. However, after adding all four RAM sticks
to
> >> the
> >>> 4 x RAM slots on the mobo, only 3 gigs of system memory shows up. I
have
> >>> tested every RAM slot in the mobo individually in singles, pairs and
> >>> configurations of three and all four of the slots work fine, but when
a
> >>> fourth RAM stick is added, only three G of RAM are available as system
> >>> memory. This suck'eth most seriously.
> >>>
> >>> I'm thinking *big bullseye on DAW* right about now. It's been a while
> >> since
> >>> I've unlimbered my 12ga.
> >>>
> >>> Someone please save my computer's life. It's in mortal and immediate
> >> danger
> >>> right about now.
> >>>
> >>> TIA,
> >>>
> >>> Deej
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>Similar to riding faders, I change preamp input gain levels during tracking,
but not in real time.
First, I ask the artist to lay down a dummy vocal so we can see vs./ch. or
whatever.
Then we cut whispery stuff with a high gain and shouting vocals with a lower
gain.
Result - far less need for compression of any kind.
I work with some classically trained vocalists who can sing in any part of
their range without gain problems.
Then there are folks who need some help:the knob, the comp, or alcohol!
Best,
Lance - Budding old fart.
"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:43b5c2b5@linux...
> I know I'm going to sound like an "old fart" as Deej so eloquently put it
a
> few posts back, but I see this a lot with "younger engineers" (sorry),
that
> weren't bought up with analogue.
> They are told that all you need to do is set an optimum level, and then
fix
> it in the mix.....Wrong...........
> You must always try and get the most amount of signal to tape, (disk),
> allowing for dynamics and song type of course.
> Riding record levels was one of the first things we were ever taught, (I
> can't remember being taught it, but I know I was), because if you under
> recorded with tape, all you got was noise when you had to ride the levels
> eventually in the mix, especially vocals.
> That's not to say we didn't limit or compress, but we still rode those
> levels.
> Rant off...thanks for reading.
> Cheers
> Martin Harrington
> www.lendanear-sound.com
>
> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:43b5b29a$1@linux...
> >
> >
> > This is the approach I often take. Or at times, if there's just a couple
> > of noticeable sections, I'll just do a volume change on the track
itself.
> > Simply cut the track boost up the low bit to match better with the rest.
> > Often you'll find the performer only uses a couple of different
> > intensities
> > through the performance, so cutting at the change point(s) and adding or
> > subtracting a few db can do the job.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Kim.
> >
> > "Lance Reichert" <lance.rocks@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>John,
> >>
> >>Another option would be to cut the performance into separate chunks, =
> >>spread them over a few tracks, then adjust the volume
> >>on the individual tracks so they match.
> >>
> >>Lance
> >>
> >>
> >> "Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote in message =
> >>news:43b59383$1@linux...
> >> John,
> >> Besides automation I like to put two La2as in series. A Waves ren/C1
> > =
> >>will
> >> also work here. Use the first one to grab the peaks in limit mode and
> > =
> >>the other to
> >> smooth what's left in comp mode. Dial in small amounts so neither =
> >>gets whacked too hard. =20
> >> Then apply automation to what's still out of control.
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b554dc@linux...
> >> DJ is from the future. I was just playing around so I was trying to
> > =
> >>
> >> find a plug to do this but it makes TOTAL sense to ride the faders =
> >>and=20
> >> automate. DOH.
> >>
> >> This girl who sang is an untrained teen and I was just recording her
> > =
> >>for=20
> >> fun. So I was thinking a plug would totally tame it. I was wrong =
> >>;-)
> >>
> >> cujo wrote:
> >> > Almost simultaneous answering here, strange DJ's post says 8:07 =
> >>but it wasnt
> >> > there when I looked
> >> >=20
> >> > "cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote:
> >> >=20
> >> >>I am sure you tried this but, automation?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>John <no@no.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>I have a female vocal that has huge dynamic range. She starts =
> >>out like
> >> >>
> >> >>>a ballad and then is belting it out like whitney. I tried a =
> >>variety of
> >> >>
> >> >>>compressors but none seem able to tame this. Limiters seem to =
> >>work the
> >> >>
> >> >>>best so far. I'm going to try a combo of the two but just =
> >>wondered what
> >> >>
> >> >>>you guys would do for plugins. I tried C1 Comp, RenVox, =
> >>Timeworks=20
> >> >>>Mastering Compressor, Ultrafunk compressor (worked better), =
> >>Bluetubes,
> >> >=20
> >> >=20
> >> >>>Voxengo, but the Bluetubes limiter seemed to do the best job so =
> >>far.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Where would you be going on this. Is there a stereo NoLimit? I
> > =
> >>forget.
> >> >>
> >> >>> If so, is that a possibility? What plugin can jam this into the
> > =
> >>pocket.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Thanks,
> >> >>>John
> >>
> >><!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 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR>
> >><STYLE></STYLE>
> >></HEAD>
> >><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> >><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>John,</FONT></DIV>
> >><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> >><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Another option would be to cut =
> >> the=20
> >>performance into separate chunks, spread them over a few tracks, then =
> >>adjust the=20
> >>volume</FONT></DIV>
> >><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>on the individual tracks so they=20
> >>match.</FONT></DIV>
> >><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> >><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Lance</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:43b59383$1@linux">news:43b59383$1@linux</A>...</DIV>
> >> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>John,</FONT></DIV>
> >> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Besides automation I like to put two
> > =
> >>La2as in=20
> >> series. A Waves ren/C1 will</FONT></DIV>
> >> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>also work here. Use the =
> >>f</FONT><FONT=20
> >> face=3DArial size=3D2>irst one to grab the peaks in limit mode and the
> > =
> >>other=20
> >> to</FONT></DIV>
> >> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>smooth what's left in comp =
> >>mode. Dial in=20
> >> small amounts so </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>neither gets =
> >>whacked too=20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #60980 is a reply to message #60963] |
Tue, 06 December 2005 00:28 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
g and it's working now so I'm not gonna worry about
>>it. pita though.
>>
>>Deej
>>
>>"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
>>news:43b95eb1@linux...
>>
>>>Our networking guys for the office shudder everytime they hear "ME"...
>>> we actually had to remove ME from all our office machines because
>>>they were so unstable with the new network we installed recently.
>>>
>>>David.
>>>
>>>DJ wrote:
>>>
>>>>What's strange about this is that it was workig perfectly with my
>
> other
>
>>DAW.
>>
>>>>I hven't made any changes at all to any settings on the Paris DAW
>>
>>running
>>
>>>>ME.
>>>>
>>>>"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:43b952b4$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>ME does NOT play nice with NT/2000/XP for networking. You may want to
>>>>>look at going back to 98SE instead as this is way more network
>
> friendly.
>
>>>>>David.
>>>>>
>>>>>DJ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I just set up my network connections between both my DAWs. They are
>>>>
>>>>seeing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>each other's HD's and I have unrestricted sharing set. However, I
>
> can't
>
>>>>>>transfer files from my Paris DAW anymore. For some reason, even
>
> though
>
>>>>the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>folders are set up for sharing, the sub directories and the folders
>>>>
>>>>within
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>these subdirectories have somehow been set to where I have to go into
>>>>
>>>>every
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>subdirectory level and set each folder to share. This machine is
>>
>>running
>>
>>>>>>Windows ME. I have literally hundreds of subdirectories and sub-sub
>>>>>>directories within my main directories. How could this happen? Prior
>
> to
>
>>>>>>hooking up this new DAW, I just set my main directories to share on
>>
>>both
>>
>>>>>>machines and I could shuttle stuff back and forth all day long. The
>>>>
>>>>current
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>situation sucks most seriously..........(sigh)..........what else can
>>>>>>happen????.......wait.........don't answer that!!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>Found the problem. Didn't have the "allow users to change my files" settings
clicked on the SX computer so though I could transfer from the SX DAw to the
Paris DAW (backasswards from what I need to be doing), I couldn't transfer
from the Paris DAw to the Cubase DAW. Pilot error .......as usual.
Seems like I need to build a DAW a week just to keep my syanpses firing
properly. When I go for a couple of years, I forget one of the
327443333333337892 simple little things that are necessary to make this
happen.
I did talk to Chris Ludwig earlier today. It ws gratifying to know that
99.9% of the wierdness I've experienced while building this DAW has also
been encountered by others.
OK.......now where was I????
;o)
"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
news:43b97979$1@linux...
> That was the issue here... sometimes it would work, other times... not
> so much.
>
> David.
>
> DJ wrote:
> > Nope......didn't work after all.........Grrrrrrrr ...........;o(
> >
> > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > news:43b972eb$1@linux...
> >
> >>I fixed this by going into my ME networking and setting up a the drives
to
> >>access using a password. I have no idea why it should need this now, but
> >>it's just a small thing and it's working now so I'm not gonna worry
about
> >>it. pita though.
> >>
> >>Deej
> >>
> >>"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
> >>news:43b95eb1@linux...
> >>
> >>>Our networking guys for the office shudder everytime they hear "ME"...
> >>> we actually had to remove ME from all our office machines because
> >>>they were so unstable with the new network we installed recently.
> >>>
> >>>David.
> >>>
> >>>DJ wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>What's strange about this is that it was workig perfectly with my
> >
> > other
> >
> >>DAW.
> >>
> >>>>I hven't made any changes at all to any settings on the Paris DAW
> >>
> >>running
> >>
> >>>>ME.
> >>>>
> >>>>"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:43b952b4$1@linux...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>ME does NOT play nice with NT/2000/XP for networking. You may want
to
> >>>>>look at going back to 98SE instead as this is way more network
> >
> > friendly.
> >
> >>>>>David.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>DJ wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I just set up my network connections between both my DAWs. They are
> >>>>
> >>>>seeing
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>each other's HD's and I have unrestricted sharing set. However, I
> >
> > can't
> >
> >>>>>>transfer files from my Paris DAW anymore. For some reason, even
> >
> > though
> >
> >>>>the
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #60992 is a reply to message #60980] |
Tue, 06 December 2005 08:27 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ng about when you select
a whole tracks fader automation and want to put it up say .2 db sometimes
it will only go up .5 or so. The shift drag thinkg does not seem to work
for me at least.
EK Sound <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote:
>Hey Cujo
>
>You *can* "shift" to get smaller values when moving the automation
>points. Also, if you click on the track number in the editor, all of
>that tracks auto points turn red allowing you to move them all at
>once. Further, you can "shift select" additional tracks... all 16 of
>them actually, and move the whole shebang up or down.
>
>David.
>
>cujo wrote:
>> The automation editor is pretty cool. I only wish I could type in values.
>> For instance on bringing an entire track with automation up by .5 db.
>> Also, the shift/ fader for .1 db tweaks trick would be nice in the automation
>> editor,
>> Check it out though
>>
>> "Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote:
>>
>>>The automation is a great feature, but I too stay away from it cause everytime
>>>I sit through mixing.. I end up changing things... and I haven't figured
>>>out how to "edit" the automation either. Funny thing.. I been using my
>>
>> Paris
>>
>>>since 2001 and I just use it for basic tracking/mixing. I never got into
>>>all the features... but it's on my list too.. lol. By the time I learn,
>>>Paris will be obsolete. Oh! it IS obsolete... lol. So, what do you use
>>
>> Paris
>>
>>>for? You got a band, or just play with it, like me? I don't go out much
>>>(not too many places to go in southern MD.. lol.) So this is my hobby
and
>>>my little get-away. It's been fun. I started out with a Roland system.
>>>But I knew I had to move to a DAW since it wasn't easy to edit single
files/channels
>>>on the Roland. Ok.. I bored ya enough... Thanks again and I'll try the
>>
>> normalize
>>
>>>funtion... ~ Ed
>>>
>>>
>>>"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You bet! Actually, you don't have to do it that way. You could just
>>>>normalize down/up from the highest fader value in the mix.
>>>>
>>>>I haven't gotten in to the automation or the automation editor yet either,
>>>>except to just make sure the automation worked after my install of Paris.
>>>>But its on my list.
>>>>Edna
>>>>
>>>>"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b9652e$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>>Thanks Edna... I'll try that. I seen the normalize button, but was
unsure
>>>>>how it operated. In fact, I wished I known this option a few days ago...
>>>>>would have saved me lots of time. I was trying to remix/remaster some
>>>>
>>>>older
>>>>
>>>>>projects and songs.. and it was very time consuming to individually
adjust
>>>>>each channel. Thanks again... :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes, you can use the normalize function to do this - bring them up
or
>>>>
>>>>down.
>>>>
>>>>>>For example say you want to lower them all by 3db. On an unused channel
>>>>>>move its fader to 10 and then normalize with highest at 7. This brings
>>>>>>down all faders by 3. (To bring them back up to where they were,
>>>>
>>>>normalize
>>>>
>>>>>>to 10.)
>>>>>>Edna
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b952d0$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi All. Perhaps a quick n' easy question for you Paris power users.
>>>
>>>I
>>>
>>>>>>mainly
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>use the mouse for controlling everything on the mixer(s) and such.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Anyway,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I was working on a few projects and found that I sonically liked the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>levels
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>of one of the projects. It is very frustrating going back through
>>>
>>>all
>>>
>>>>>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>other songs in the other projects to bring down each channel fader
>>>>>>
>>>>>>individually.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My question is... is there a way to control all active (active meaning
>>>>>>
>>>>>>there
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>is something on the channel) channel faders at the same time? Another
>>>>>>
>>>>>>words,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have all the channel faders set properly, but I want to bring them
>>>>
>>>>all
>>>>
>>>>>>>down a few db's. Is there a way to bring them all down at the same
>>>>
>>>>time
>>>>
>>>>>>>without doing them individually?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Lastly, I don't have any automation set, so that won't be effected
>>>
>>>by
>>>
>>>>>>this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In fact, I try to stay away from automation because of this reason.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>may be an easy way to "edit" the automation, but I haven't figured
>>>
>>>it
>>>
>>>>>out.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just try to stay away from it. Some day I may delve into that
>>>>
>>>>learning
>>>>
>>>>>>>process... lol. I am old school. Just use Paris for basic recording,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>mixing....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks in advance... and Happy New Year (2006)!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0136_01C60FF9.E01BCEF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cujo,
Same here. Usually works but not always.
3.1
Tom
"cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message =
news:43b9ffaa$1@linux...
Thanks EK, I know about all of that but I was talking about when you =
select
a whole tracks fader automation and want to put it up say .2 db =
sometimes
it will only go up .5 or so. The shift drag thinkg does not seem to =
work
for me at least.
EK Sound <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote:
>Hey Cujo
>
>You *can* "shift" to get smaller values when moving the automation=20
>points. Also, if you click on the track number in the editor, all of=20
>that tracks auto points turn red allowing you to move them all at=20
>once. Further, you can &quo
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #61012 is a reply to message #60963] |
Tue, 06 December 2005 13:59 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;>>
>>>>>>>>other songs in the other projects to bring down each channel fader
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>individually.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>My question is... is there a way to control all active (active meaning
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>is something on the channel) channel faders at the same time? Another
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>words,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I have all the channel faders set properly, but I want to bring them
>>>>>
>>>>>all
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>down a few db's. Is there a way to bring them all down at the same
>>>>>
>>>>>time
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>without doing them individually?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Lastly, I don't have any automation set, so that won't be effected
>>>>
>>>>by
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>In fact, I try to stay away from automation because of this reason.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>There
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>may be an easy way to "edit" the automation, but I haven't figured
>>>>
>>>>it
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I just try to stay away from it. Some day I may delve into that
>>>>>
>>>>>learning
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>process... lol. I am old school. Just use Paris for basic recording,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>mixing....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>thanks in advance... and Happy New Year (2006)!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ed and Edna,
You're doing this with "Normalize mix"(Ctrl+N). If it's 0, the highest
channel volume will be 0db. If you're setting it to+4, the highest channel
will be +4db. All the other channels will automatically be following with
+4db. If you need 2 more db's up, it's +6. It can be a little tricky if you
have some volumes automated. Sometimes it will not follow the "normalizing"
process, so you have to go into automatin mode(Shft+E), mark the automations
red and normalize it with the same +4db's in "Change volume"(Ctrl+E).
If you're learning the automation tricks, it's like a new world will be
opened up for you. It's a good idea to find out more about it from the
manual.
Erling
"Ed" <askme@email.com> skrev i melding news:43b9a83a$1@linux...
>
> Ummm... I am afraid your advice didn't work Edna. I failed to mention
> that
> I am using Paris 3.0. I only see the "normalize mix" option in the
> Functions
> section on the Mixer. When I select it, it wants me to adjust the total
> mix by maximun Db. I'll have to play with it I suppose. But I could have
> sworn there was a way to control all faders at the same time....
>
> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>Well I just got into Paris a couple months ago. Its my first DAW. I am
>>amazed at what all it can do. I did try out a Roland unit one time but
> was
>>disappointed with the sound - dead, cold, etc. I am using Paris to track
>>vocals and synth mainly for church related things, BG tracks, CDs, etc.
>>Also for writing my own stuff - I play kybds/sing. Used to play in bands.
>>I got Paris for the sound. I prefer analog, and Paris was touted as the
>>nearest to that. It certainly wipes the floor with the Roland, IMHO. And
> I
>>love the editing features. At the moment I am experimenting with
>>mixdowns,
>>trying to get the exported stereo files to sound as good as the original
> mix
>>and as loud as comm cds - when I bring the stereo wav back to the project
>>and a/b with the original, it doesn't sound quite as open and clear.
>>Edna
>> "Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b9713f$1@linux...
>>>
>>> The automation is a great feature, but I too stay away from it cause
>>everytime
>>> I sit through mixing.. I end up changing things... and I haven't figured
>>> out how to "edit" the automation either. Funny thing.. I been using my
>>Paris
>>> since 2001 and I just use it for basic tracking/mixing. I never got
>>> into
>>> all the features... but it's on my list too.. lol. By the time I learn,
>>> Paris will be obsolete. Oh! it IS obsolete... lol. So, what do you use
>>Paris
>>> for? You got a band, or just play with it, like me? I don't go out
>>> much
>>> (not too many places to go in southern MD.. lol.) So this is my hobby
> and
>>> my little get-away. It's been fun. I started out with a Roland system.
>>> But I knew I had to move to a DAW since it wasn't easy to edit single
>>files/channels
>>> on the Roland. Ok.. I bored ya enough... Thanks again and I'll try the
>>normalize
>>> funtion... ~ Ed
>>>
>>>
>>> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>> >You bet! Actually, you don't have to do it that way. You could just
>>> >normalize down/up from the highest fader value in the mix.
>>> >
>>> >I haven't gotten in to the automation or the automation editor yet
>>either,
>>> >except to just make sure the automation worked after my install of
>>> >Paris.
>>> >But its on my list.
>>> >Edna
>>> >
>>> >"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b9652e$1@linux...
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks Edna... I'll try that. I seen the normalize button, but was
>>unsure
>>> >> how it operated. In fact, I wished I known this option a few days
>>ago...
>>> >> would have saved me lots of time. I was trying to remix/remaster
>>> >> some
>>> >older
>>> >> projects and songs.. and it was very time consuming to individually
>>adjust
>>> >> each channel. Thanks again... :)
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>> >> >Yes, you can use the normalize function to do this - bring them up
> or
>>> >down.
>>> >> >For example say you want to lower them all by 3db. On an unused
>>channel
>>> >> >move its fader to 10 and then normalize with highest at 7. This
>>brings
>>> >> >down all faders by 3. (To bring them back up to where they were,
>>> >normalize
>>> >> >to 10.)
>>> >> >Edna
>>> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #61023 is a reply to message #61012] |
Tue, 06 December 2005 19:16 |
A Mac User 2
Messages: 1
Registered: December 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
e automation editor is pretty cool. I only wish I could type in =
values.
>>>For instance on bringing an entire track with automation up by .5 =
db.
>>>Also, the shift/ fader for .1 db tweaks trick would be nice in the =
automation
>>>editor,
>>>Check it out though
>>>
>>>"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>The automation is a great feature, but I too stay away from it =
cause everytime
>>>>I sit through mixing.. I end up changing things... and I haven't =
figured
>>>>out how to "edit" the automation either. Funny thing.. I been =
using my
>>>
>>>Paris
>>>
>>>
>>>>since 2001 and I just use it for basic tracking/mixing. I never =
got into
>>>>all the features... but it's on my list too.. lol. By the time I =
learn,
>>>>Paris will be obsolete. Oh! it IS obsolete... lol. So, what do =
you use
>>>
>>>Paris
>>>
>>>
>>>>for? You got a band, or just play with it, like me? I don't go =
out much
>>>>(not too many places to go in southern MD.. lol.) So this is my =
hobby
>=20
> and
>=20
>>>>my little get-away. It's been fun. I started out with a Roland =
system.
>>>>But I knew I had to move to a DAW since it wasn't easy to edit =
single
>=20
> files/channels
>=20
>>>>on the Roland. Ok.. I bored ya enough... Thanks again and I'll =
try the
>>>
>>>normalize
>>>
>>>
>>>>funtion... ~ Ed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>You bet! Actually, you don't have to do it that way. You could =
just
>>>>>normalize down/up from the highest fader value in the mix.
>>>>>
>>>>>I haven't gotten in to the automation or the automation editor =
yet either,
>>>>>except to just make sure the automation worked after my install =
of Paris.
>>>>>But its on my list.
>>>>>Edna
>>>>>
>>>>>"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b9652e$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks Edna... I'll try that. I seen the normalize button, but =
was
>=20
> unsure
>=20
>>>>>>how it operated. In fact, I wished I known this option a few =
days ago...
>>>>>>would have saved me lots of time. I was trying to =
remix/remaster some
>>>>>
>>>>>older
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>projects and songs.. and it was very time consuming to =
individually
>=20
> adjust
>=20
>>>>>>each channel. Thanks again... :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes, you can use the normalize function to do this - bring them =
up
>=20
> or
>=20
>>>>>down.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>For example say you want to lower them all by 3db. On an =
unused channel
>>>>>>>move its fader to 10 and then normalize with highest at 7. =
This brings
>>>>>>>down all faders by 3. (To bring them back up to where they =
were,
>>>>>
>>>>>normalize
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>to 10.)
>>>>>>>Edna
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message =
news:43b952d0$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hi All. Perhaps a quick n' easy question for you Paris power =
users.
>>>>
>>>>I
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>mainly
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>use the mouse for controlling everything on the mixer(s) and =
such.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Anyway,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I was working on a few projects and found that I sonically =
liked the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>levels
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>of one of the projects. It is very frustrating going back =
through
>>>>
>>>>all
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>other songs in the other projects to bring down each channel =
fader
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>individually.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>My question is... is there a way to control all active (active =
meaning
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>is something on the channel) channel faders at the same time? =
Another
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>words,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I have all the channel faders set properly, but I want to =
bring them
>>>>>
>>>>>all
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>down a few db's. Is there a way to bring them all down at the =
same
>>>>>
>>>>>time
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>without doing them individually?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Lastly, I don't have any automation set, so that won't be =
effected
>>>>
>>>>by
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>In fact, I try to stay away from automation because of this =
reason.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>There
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>may be an easy way to "edit" the automation, but I haven't =
figured
>>>>
>>>>it
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I just try to stay away from it. Some day I may delve into =
that
>>>>>
>>>>>learning
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>process... lol. I am old school. Just use Paris for basic =
recording,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>mixing....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>thanks in advance... and Happy New Year (2006)!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
------=_NextPart_000_015E_01C61019.AB158960
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>Thanks Dave. I'll give it a =
try. I=20
rarely use max zoom but maybe</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>more often now. Features, =
features,=20
features.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Dave(EK Sound)" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:audioguy_editout_@shaw.ca">au
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #61057 is a reply to message #61023] |
Wed, 07 December 2005 10:05 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<BR>>=20
<BR>>>>>this.<BR>>>>> <BR>>>>>> =
In fact,=20
I try to stay away from automation because of this=20
=
reason.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>There <BR>>>>><=
BR>>>>>>may=20
be an easy way to "edit" the automation, but I haven't figured<BR>> =
<BR>> it<BR>>=20
<BR>>>>out.<BR>>>> <BR>>>>>> I just =
try to=20
stay away from it. Some day I may delve into=20
=
that<BR>>><BR>>>learning<BR >>><BR>>>>>>p=
rocess...=20
lol. I am old school. Just use Paris for basic=20
=
recording,<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>mixing.... <BR>>>&=
gt;><BR>>>>>>=20
thanks in advance... and Happy New Year=20
=
(2006)!<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> <BR>>><BR>></BLOC=
KQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_01A9_01C61075.0C8B9490--What is Control-E ?
Tom Bruhl wrote:
> John,
> I've been a Control E user for years.
> Tom
>
>
> "John" <no@no.com <mailto:no@no.com>> wrote in message
> news:43ba69b5@linux...
> Editing automation is easy. It's also in the manual. Basically you
> turn on the display data buttons for either volume, pan or mute and
> then
> turn on the edit data button for the same. Then you pick the tool at
> the top to select, move, draw lines, freeform draw, erase. You can use
> interpolate or simplify to add more values or reduce the number of
> values easily. Reply if this doesn't make sense. 10 minutes in the
> manual and you'll have it. I'll repost my automation notes soon for
> recording automation cuz the ones on my site are wrong at the last step.
>
> John
>
> Ed wrote:
> > The automation is a great feature, but I too stay away from it
> cause everytime
> > I sit through mixing.. I end up changing things... and I haven't
> figured
> > out how to "edit" the automation either. Funny thing.. I been
> using my Paris
> > since 2001 and I just use it for basic tracking/mixing. I never
> got into
> > all the features... but it's on my list too.. lol. By the time I
> learn,
> > Paris will be obsolete. Oh! it IS obsolete... lol. So, what do
> you use Paris
> > for? You got a band, or just play with it, like me? I don't go
> out much
> > (not too many places to go in southern MD.. lol.) So this is my
> hobby and
> > my little get-away. It's been fun. I started out with a Roland
> system.
> > But I knew I had to move to a DAW since it wasn't easy to edit
> single files/channels
> > on the Roland. Ok.. I bored ya enough... Thanks again and I'll
> try the normalize
> > funtion... ~ Ed
> >
> >
> > "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com <mailto:edna@texomaonline.com>> wrote:
> >
> >>You bet! Actually, you don't have to do it that way. You could just
> >>normalize down/up from the highest fader value in the mix.
> >>
> >>I haven't gotten in to the automation or the automation editor
> yet either,
> >>except to just make sure the automation worked after my install
> of Paris.
> >>But its on my list.
> >>Edna
> >>
> >>"Ed" <askme@email.com <mailto:askme@email.com>> wrote in message
> news:43b9652e$1@linux...
> >>
> >>>Thanks Edna... I'll try that. I seen the normalize button, but
> was unsure
> >>>how it operated. In fact, I wished I known this option a few
> days ago...
> >>>would have saved me lots of time. I was trying to
> remix/remaster some
> >>
> >>older
> >>
> >>>projects and songs.. and it was very time consuming to
> individually adjust
> >>>each channel. Thanks again... :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com <mailto:edna@texomaonline.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Yes, you can use the normalize function to do this - bring them
> up or
> >>
> >>down.
> >>
> >>>>For example say you want to lower them all by 3db. On an
> unused channel
> >>>>move its fader to 10 and then normalize with highest at 7.
> This brings
> >>>>down all faders by 3. (To bring them back up to where they were,
> >>
> >>normalize
> >>
> >>>>to 10.)
> >>>>Edna
> >>>>
> >>>>"Ed" <askme@email.com <mailto:askme@email.com>> wrote in
> message news:43b952d0$1@linux...
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hi All. Perhaps a quick n' easy question for you Paris power
> users.
> >
> > I
> >
> >>>>mainly
> >>>>
> >>>>>use the mouse for controlling everything on the mixer(s) and such.
> >>>>
> >>>>Anyway,
> >>>>
> >>>>>I was working on a few projects and found that I sonically
> liked the
> >>>>
> >>>>levels
> >>>>
> >>>>>of one of the projects. It is very frustrating going back through
> >
> > all
> >
> >>>the
> >>>
> >>>>>other songs in the other projects to bring down each channel fader
> >>>>
> >>>>individually.
> >>>>
> >>>>> My question is... is there a way to control all active
> (active meaning
> >>>>
> >>>>there
> >>>>
> >>>>>is something on the channel) channel faders at the same time?
> Another
> >>>>
> >>>>words,
> >>>>
> >>>>>I have all the channel faders set properly, but I want to
> bring them
> >>
> >>all
> >>
> >>>>>down a few db's. Is there a way to bring them all down at the
> same
> >>
> >>time
> >>
> >>>>>without doing them individually?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Lastly, I don't have any automation set, so that won't be effected
> >
> > by
> >
> >>>>this.
> >>>>
> >>>>> In fact, I try to stay away from automation because of this
> reason.
> >>>>
> >>>>There
> >>>>
> >>>>>may be an easy way to "edit" the automation, but I haven't figured
> >
> > it
> >
> >>>out.
> >>>
> >>>>> I just try to stay away from it. Some day I may delve into that
> >>
> >>learning
> >>
> >>>>>process... lol. I am old school. Just use Paris for basic
> recording,
> >>>>
> >>>>mixing....
> >>>>
> >>>>> thanks in advance... and Happy New Year (2006)!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >I just learned Ctrl-R (Set Record Path, cuz it seems to love to have it
set regularly).
Tom Bruhl wrote:
> John,
> I've been a Control E user for years.
> Tom
>
>
> "John" <no@no.com <mailto:no@no.com>> wrote in message
> news:43ba69b5@linux...
> Editing automation is easy. It's also in the manual. Basically you
> turn on the display data buttons for either volume, pan or mute and
> then
> turn on the edit data button for the same. Then you pick the tool at
> the top to select, move, draw lines, freeform draw, erase. You can use
> interpolate or simplify to add more values or reduce the number of
> values easily. Reply if this doesn't make sense. 10 minutes in the
> manual and you'll have it. I'll repost my automation notes soon for
> recording automation cuz the ones on my site are wrong at the last step.
>
> John
>
> Ed wrote:
> > The automation is a great feature, but I too stay away from it
> cause everytime
> > I sit through mixing.. I end up changing things... and I haven't
> figu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #61087 is a reply to message #61081] |
Wed, 07 December 2005 17:03 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
. Pro Tools HD sounds wonderful with low and high track counts and ITB
>>(in the Box) or summed to the SSL,
>>
>>At my home studio, I have PT LE & Nuendo and while I love Nuendo's elequent
>>editing and nice soft sound, it's 32 bit floating mixer in a major pain
>in
>>!@# to mix aggresive Rock, R &B, Hip hop with. Onthe other hand, those
>same
>>mixes done in PT LE, have that sparkle and width. In Nuendo, after 30 tracks,
>>things start's getting "smearded" and tracks levels tends to get lost or
>>they don't sit right.
>>
>>However, in PT Le, (same songs, tracks are not smeared, levels stay intacked,
>>and the overall mix sounds very professional, just like mixes in Paris..
>>
>>Some local Engineer friends in the area( Motown), have been in discussions
>>about the state of current DAWs and what's working and what's not. Opinions
>>varied,but the one constant opinion that was stated was how dificult it
>was
>>to mix in Cubase and Nuendo on mixes over 30 tracks. No matter what i/o
>converters(Apogee,Lucid,Motu,
>>RME) mixing Rock , R&B, Hip-Hop is a dificult chore in SX/Nuendo..Where
>>as mixing in Paris and Pro Tools is not..
>>Hey,Just one Engineer's opinon.
>>
>>P.S
>>Jsut for geekdum sakes, the new Sonar 5 uses a newly coded 64 to 32bit
>floating
>>point mixer..
>>
>>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>Yukkk,
>>>Don't do it..PT I mean.
>>>I've just been playing with PT M-Powered 6.8, using my Delta 1010, and
>I
>>
>>>have to say...I don't like it.
>>>The interface is (IMNSHO), horrible, confusing, and convoluted.
>>>Moves that come easily in Paris, and more easily in Nuendo, are tiresome
>>in
>>>PT, apart from the reagon tool...taht has always been good, right from
>the
>>
>>>Session 8 days, but not much else.
>>>And..it only plays .MOV video files, which in my case is a no-no, (the
>full
>>
>>>TDM version may play the others but I don't think so).
>>>To top it off, playing one of my projects from Nuendo, (reassembled),
it
>>
>>>didn't have the "life" that the original had, by a long shot.
>>>I repeat...don't go there, Jeff......
>>>--
>>>Martin Harrington
>>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>>
>>>"jef knight" <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote in message
>>>news:436fce7a$1@linux...
>>>>I just read the doc, thanks for posting the link. Much of it is quite
>
>>>>interesting and just as much is confusing.
>>>> I didn't know tdm systems sounded gnarly, never having worked with one.
>>At
>>>> what track count would they sonically crap out?
>>>>
>>>> If I can't get some of my tedious little troubles with paris resolved
>>I'm
>>>> considering switching to protools.
>>>>
>>>> jef
>>>>
>>>> DJ wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://akwww.digidesign.com/support/docs/WhitePaper_48BitMix er.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>>Any comments? It appears to me that the signals are recorded at 24
>>>>>bit, then processed at whatever bit rate the plugin on the channel has,
>>>>>including dither, or not, then reprocessed to 24 bit, then these channels
>>>>>are summed. I'm no guru when it comes to this stuff, but I get this
>>>>>feeling
>>>>>that this reprocessing *per channel* is the reason the TDM systems seem
>>to
>>>>>start sounding gnarly as more and more tracks are summed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>Those Cd's from Lynn Fuston.
Since I work on nearly all DAW platforms, I can tell a Sonar mix. because
it has that very nice generic (non coloring) sound.
Logic-can't tell, DP, Can't tell, SX-I can Spot, PT-Yes, Paris (well Of Course)
and so can my producer friends. They can spot the a PAris mix right away.
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I've got that CD too (I bought all of the 3Daudio CD's a while back.). On
>the summing CD I accurately picked the Paris mix, first listen. I was
>surprised by this. Then,while later I got a friend to shuffle them around
>and did another listening and I could discern differences, but couldn't
>really say that one sounded so much better than the others. The AD
>conversion CD that he did is similar. It's surprising for all of the hype
>about this, how little difference there really is. There is more diversity
>in the preamp CD, but not as much as you would suspect. The microphone
>comparison CD is really where the rubber meets the road. This is where the
>majority of the *color* in a recording comes from and this CD really serve
>that up on a sliver platter.
>
>;o)
>
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43baf061$1@linux...
>>
>> I did the DAW summing CD thingy from what's his name in Nashville and
>could
>> find basically zero difference in anything. Maybe I'm deaf, but if you
>were
>> to double blind me I don't think I could pick out individual mixes
>consistently.
>> Since that was (if I recall) a 24 track mix that was big and loud and
>R&B/rock/gospel
>> I would think that would argue against this idea. However, it's a little
>> like the audiophile world sometimes where when the tests seem to disprove
>> personal experience the test is faulted instead of the experience. That's
>> fine, ears are very fine instruments and some are just better than others.
>>
>>
>> That said, I now work a good bit of my time in the finance world where
>fortunes
>> are made and lost according to the certitude of people in their
>experiences
>> or mathmatical models. Over time this has lead me to believe more in
>emperical
>> results than my experience. So if I do my own blind tests with the
>Nashville
>> CD and can't generate statistically significant data that DAWs sound
>different
>> then *I* will believe they sound the same. This could mean a flawed test
>> or flawed ears but that's my belief until someone can present me with
more
>
>> convincing data.
>>
>> But hey, that's just me. I've also done mixes of 30+ tracks in SX and
>think
>> they sound quite nice.
>>
>> TCB
>>
>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hey guys,
>> >
>> >I know that this is an old thread, but I have to disagree with
>assessments
>> >on Pro Tools sound quality.
>> >
>> >First, I mix with Pro Tools HD at our Church's studio for major release
>> Gospel
>> >Cds. Pro Tools HD sounds wonderful with low and high track counts and
ITB
>> >(in the Box) or summed to the SSL,
>> >
>> >At my home studio, I have PT LE & Nuendo and while I love Nuendo's
>elequent
>> >editing and nice soft sound, it's 32 bit floating mixer in a major pain
>> in
>> >!@# to mix aggresive Rock, R &B, Hip hop with. Onthe other hand, those
>> same
>> >mixes done in PT LE, have that sparkle and width. In Nuendo, after 30
>tracks,
>> >things start's getting "smearded" and tracks levels tends to get lost
or
>> >they don't sit right.
>> >
>> >However, in PT Le, (same songs, tracks are not smeared, levels stay
>intacked,
>> >and the overall mix sounds very professional, just like mixes in Paris..
>> >
>> >Some local Engineer friends in the area( Motown), have been in
>discussions
>> >about the state of current DAWs and what's working and what's not.
>Opinions
>> >varied,but the one constant opinion that was stated was how dificult
it
>> was
>> >to mix in Cubase and Nuendo on mixes over 30 tracks. No matter what i/o
>> converters(Apogee,Lucid,Motu,
>> >RME) mixing Rock , R&B, Hip-Hop is a dificult chore in SX/Nuendo..Where
>> >as mixing in Paris and Pro Tools is not..
>> >Hey,Just one Engineer's opinon.
>> >
>> >P.S
>> >Jsut for geekdum sakes, the new Sonar 5 uses a newly coded 64 to 32bit
>> floating
>> >point mixer..
>> >
>> >"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>> >>Yukkk,
>> >>Don't do it..PT I mean.
>> >>I've just been playing with PT M-Powered 6.8, using my Delta 1010, and
>> I
>> >
>> >>have to say...I don't like it.
>> >>The interface is (IMNSHO), horrible, confusing, and convoluted.
>> >>Moves that come easily in Paris, and more easily in Nuendo, are tiresome
>> >in
>> >>PT, apart from the reagon tool...taht has always been good, right from
>> the
>> >
>> >>Session 8 days, but not much else.
>> >>And..it only plays .MOV video files, which in my case is a no-no, (the
>> full
>> >
>> >>TDM version may play the others but I don't think so).
>> >>To top it off, playing one of my projects from Nuendo, (reassembled),
it
>> >
>> >>didn't have the "life" that the original had, by a long shot.
>> >>I repeat...don't go there, Jeff......
>> >>--
>> >>Martin Harrington
>> >>www.lendanear-sound.com
>> >>
>> >>"jef knight" <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:436fce7a$1@linux...
>> >>>I just read the doc, thanks for posting the link. Much of it is quite
>>
>> >>>interesting and just as much is confusing.
>> >>> I didn't know tdm systems sounded gnarly, never having worked with
>one.
>> >At
>> >>> what track count would they sonically crap out?
>> >>>
>> >>> If I can't get some of my tedious little troubles with paris resolved
>> >I'm
>> >>> considering switching to protools.
>> >>>
>> >>> jef
>> >>>
>> >>> DJ wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> http://akwww.digidesign.com/support/docs/WhitePaper_48BitMix er.pdf
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Any comments? It appears to me that the signals are recorded at 24
>> >>>>bit, then processed at whatever bit rate the plugin on the channel
>has,
>> >>>>including dither, or not, then reprocessed to 24 bit, then these
>channels
>> >>>>are summed. I'm no guru when it comes to this stuff, but I get this
>> >>>>feeling
>> >>>>that this reprocessing *per channel* is the reason the TDM systems
>seem
>> >to
>> >>>>start sounding gnarly as more and more tracks are summed.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>FWIW I heard that many sounded the same, but some were noticably different
to me and Paris was one. Wasn't as different as I expected, but I could tell
it was different...
....FWIW.
Cheers,
Kim.
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>I did the DAW summing CD thingy from what's his name in Nashville and could
>find basically zero difference in anything. Maybe I'm deaf, but if you were
>to double blind me I don't think I could pick out individual mixes consistently.
>Since that was (if I recall) a 24 track mix that was big and loud and R&B/rock/gospel
>I would think that would argue against this idea. However, it's a little
>like the audiophile world sometimes where when the tests seem to disprove
>personal experience the test is faulted instead of the experience. That's
>fine, ears are very fine instruments and some are just better than others.
>
>
>That said, I now work a good bit of my time in the finance world where fortunes
>are made and lost according to the certitude of people in their experiences
>or mathmatical models. Over time this has lead me to believe more in emperical
>results than my experience. So if I do my own blind tests with the Nashville
>CD and can't generate statistically significant data that DAWs sound different
>then *I* will believe they sound the same. This could mean a flawed test
>or flawed ears but that's my belief until someone can present me with more
>convincing data.
>
>But hey, that's just me. I've also done mixes of 30+ tracks in SX and think
>they sound quite nice.
>
>TCB
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Hey guys,
>>
>>I know that this is an old thread, but I have to disagree with assessments
>>on Pro Tools sound quality.
>>
>>First, I mix with Pro Tools HD at our Church's studio for major release
>Gospel
>>Cds. Pro Tools HD sounds wonderful with low and high track counts and ITB
>>(in the Box) or summed to the SSL,
>>
>>At my home studio, I have PT LE & Nuendo and while I love Nuendo's elequent
>>editing and nice soft sound, it's 32 bit floating mixer in a major pain
>in
>>!@# to mix aggresive Rock, R &B, Hip hop with. Onthe other hand, those
>same
>>mixes done in PT LE, have that sparkle and width. In Nuendo, after 30 tracks,
>>things start's getting "smearded" and tracks levels tends to get lost or
>>they don't sit right.
>>
>>However, in PT Le, (same songs, tracks are not smeared, levels stay intacked,
>>and the overall mix sounds very professional, just like mixes in Paris..
>>
>>Some local Engineer friends in the area( Motown), have been in discussions
>>about the state of current DAWs and what's working and what's not. Opinions
>>varied,but the one constant opinion that was stated was how dificult it
>was
>>to mix in Cubase and Nuendo on mixes over 30 tracks. No matter what i/o
>converters(Apogee,Lucid,Motu,
>>RME) mixing Rock , R&B, Hip-Hop is a dificult chore in SX/Nuendo..Where
>>as mixing in Paris and Pro Tools is not..
>>Hey,Just one Engineer's opinon.
>>
>>P.S
>>Jsut for geekdum sakes, the new Sonar 5 uses a newly coded 64 to 32bit
>floating
>>point mixer..
>>
>>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>Yukkk,
>>>Don't do it..PT I mean.
>>>I've just been playing with PT M-Powered 6.8, using my Delta 1010, and
>I
>>
>>>have to say...I don't like it.
>>>The interface is (IMNSHO), horrible, confusing, and convoluted.
>>>Moves that come easily in Paris, and more easily in Nuendo, are tiresome
>>in
>>>PT, apart from the reagon tool...taht has always been good, right from
>the
>>
>>>Session 8 days, but not much else.
>>>And..it only plays .MOV video files, which in my case is a no-no, (the
>full
>>
>>>TDM version may play the others but I don't think so).
>>>To top it off, playing one of my projects from Nuendo, (reassembled),
it
>>
>>>didn't have the "life" that the original had, by a long shot.
>>>I repeat...don't go there, Jeff......
>>>--
>>>Martin Harrington
>>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>>
>>>"jef knight" <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote in message
>>>news:436fce7a$1@linux...
>>>>I just read the doc, thanks for posting the link. Much of it is quite
>
>>>>interesting and just as much is confusing.
>>>> I didn't know tdm systems sounded gnarly, never having worked with one.
>>At
>>>> what track count would they sonically crap out?
>>>>
>>>> If I can't get some of my tedious little troubles with paris resolved
>>I'm
>>>> considering switching to protools.
>>>>
>>>> jef
>>>>
>>>> DJ wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://akwww.digidesign.com/support/docs/WhitePaper_48BitMix er.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>>Any comments? It appears to me that the signals are recorded at 24
>>>>>bit, then processed at whatever bit rate the plugin on the channel has,
>>>>>including dither, or not, then reprocessed to 24 bit, then these channels
>>>>>are summed. I'm no guru when it comes to this stuff, but I get this
>>>>>feeling
>>>>>that this reprocessing *per channel* is the reason the TDM systems seem
>>to
>>>>>start sounding gnarly as more and more tracks are summed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>Oh, I like it, I like it a lot! I wish I had this one years ago,
Tanks
"Dale" <dalebradleycello@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Cujo,
>
>Re your original question:
>
>"The automation editor is pretty cool. I only wish I could type in values.
>For instance on bringing an entire track with automation up by .5 db."
>
>You can--first select the automation points you want moved (on a single
track
>or multiple tracks) and under "Functions" menu, it's "Change Value..." (command-E
>shortcut on a Mac)
>
>You can move values up or down (entering negative value lowers volume) by
>as little as .1 db
>
>dale
>
>
>
>
>"cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>Thanks EK, I know about all of that but I was talking about when you select
>>a whole tracks fader automation and want to put it up say .2 db sometimes
>>it will only go up .5 or so. The shift drag thinkg does not seem to work
>>for me at least.
>>
>>
>>EK Sound <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote:
>>>Hey Cujo
>>>
>>>You *can* "shift" to get smaller values when moving the automation
>>>points. Also, if you click on the track number in the editor, all of
>>>that tracks auto points turn red allowing you to move them all at
>>>once. Further, you can "shift select" additional tracks... all 16 of
>>>them actually, and move the whole shebang up or down.
>>>
>>>David.
>>>
>>>cujo wrote:
>>>> The automation editor is pretty cool. I only wish I could type in values.
>>>> For instance on bringing an entire track with automation up by .5 db.
>>>> Also, the shift/ fader for .1 db tweaks trick would be nice in the automation
>>>> editor,
>>>> Check it out though
>>>>
>>>> "Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The automation is a great feature, but I too stay away from it cause
>everytime
>>>>>I sit through mixing.. I end up changing things... and I haven't figured
>>>>>out how to "edit" the automation either. Funny thing.. I been using
>my
>>>>
>>>> Paris
>>>>
>>>>>since 2001 and I just use it for basic tracking/mixing. I never got
>into
>>>>>all the features... but it's on my list too.. lol. By the time I learn,
>>>>>Paris will be obsolete. Oh! it IS obsolete... lol. So, what do you
use
>>>>
>>>> Paris
>>>>
>>>>>for? You got a band, or just play with it, like me? I don't go out
>much
>>>>>(not too many places to go in southern MD.. lol.) So this is my hobby
>>and
>>>>>my little get-away. It's been fun. I started out with a Roland system.
>>>>>But I knew I had to move to a DAW since it wasn't easy to edit single
>>files/channels
>>>>>on the Roland. Ok.. I bored ya enough... Thanks again and I'll try
the
>>>>
>>>> normalize
>>>>
>>>>>funtion... ~ Ed
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>You bet! Actually, you don't have to do it that way. You could just
>>>>>>normalize down/up from the highest fader value in the mix.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I haven't gotten in to the automation or the automation editor yet
either,
>>>>>>except to just make sure the automation worked after my install of
Paris.
>>>>>>But its on my list.
>>>>>>Edna
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b9652e$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks Edna... I'll try that. I seen the normalize button, but was
>>unsure
>>>>>>>how it operated. In fact, I wished I known this option a few days
>ago...
>>>>>>>would have saved me lots of time. I was trying to remix/remaster
some
>>>>>>
>>>>>>older
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>projects and songs.. and it was very time consuming to individually
>>adjust
>>>>>>>each channel. Thanks again... :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes, you can use the normalize function to do this - bring them up
>>or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>down.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>For example say you want to lower them all by 3db. On an unused
channel
>>>>>>>>move its fader to 10 and then normalize with highest at 7. This
>brings
>>>>>>>>down all faders by 3. (To bring them back up to where they were,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>normalize
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>to 10.)
>>>>>>>>Edna
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b952d0$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Hi All. Perhaps a quick n' easy question for you Paris power users.
>>>>>
>>>>>I
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>mainly
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>use the mouse for controlling everything on the mixer(s) and such.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Anyway,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I was working on a few projects and found that I sonically liked
>the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>levels
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>of one of the projects. It is very frustrating going back through
>>>>>
>>>>>all
>>>>>
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>other songs in the other projects to bring down each channel fader
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>individually.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My question is... is there a way to control all active (active
meaning
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>is something on the channel) channel faders at the same time? Another
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>words,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I have all the channel faders set properly, but I want to bring
them
>>>>>>
>>>>>>all
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>down a few db's. Is there a way to bring them all down at the same
>>>>>>
>>>>>>time
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>without doing them individually?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Lastly, I don't have any automation set, so that won't be effected
>>>>>
>>>>>by
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In fact, I try to stay away from automation because of this reason.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>There
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>may be an easy way to "edit" the automation, but I haven't figured
>>>>>
>>>>>it
>>>>>
>>>>>>>out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just try to stay away from it. Some day I may delve into that
>>>>>>
>>>>>>learning
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>process... lol. I am old school. Just use Paris for basic recording,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>mixing....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> thanks in advance... and Happy New Year (2006)!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>Why not group all the faders, make one a master and then move that?
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43baa442$1@linux...
>
> Well, it doesn't work for me. Imagine a song with faders currently all
> over
> the place for adjustment. Most are below the zero. When I select
> "Normalize"
> from the function menu in the Mixer, it asks for the Db level (with a zero
> default). I experimented on one song and I put in a -3.0. Once I hit
> return,
> ALL my faders did move.. but they moved way UP! So that function in Paris
> 3.0 is not what I want. I was wanting a way to physically move one fader
> and the rest of the faders follow suit. I thought there was a feature in
> Paris to do that, but I guess not. Thanks for you help tho.....
>
>
> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>Normalize Mix is the correct function. The Maximum DB level is what you
>>will set to move the faders - this is the value your highest level fader
>>will be increased to, and this amount of increase will be the amount all
>>faders are changed by. As an experiment, set all your faders a 0 db.
>>Now,
>>lets say you would like to raise the entire mix by 5 db. Select
>>Normalize
>>Mix and enter 5db for the maximum db level. Now all your faders will move
>>up to 5db. If this worked for you, then take one of your actual mixes you
>>would like to increase. Lets say you want to move the faders all up by
> 3 db
>>and they are all at different levels. Find the fader with the highest
>>level
>>(make sure your unused faders are below this value). Lets say it is at
> 2db.
>>Now select Normalize Mix and set the maximum db gain at 5db (its 2db level
> +
>>your 3d increase). Now this fader moves up 3db to reach the max 5db value
>>you chose. At the same time the other faders will move up 3db as well.
>>
>>If you wanted to lower the levels, just set the maximum level of the
>>highest
>>fader down by however many db you want. Lets say the 3db above was too
>>much and you would like to reduce it by a db. Same procedure, just set
> the
>>maxumum db level to 4db. This reduces your max level fader from 5db to
>>4db - a one db change for all faders.
>>
>>Hope this helps. I use it a lot and it works for well for me.
>>Edna
>>
>>"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b9a83a$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Ummm... I am afraid your advice didn't work Edna. I failed to mention
>>that
>>> I am using Paris 3.0. I only see the "normalize mix" option in the
>>Functions
>>> section on the Mixer. When I select it, it wants me to adjust the total
>>> mix by maximun Db. I'll have to play with it I suppose. But I could
> have
>>> sworn there was a way to control all faders at the same time....
>>>
>>> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>> >Well I just got into Paris a couple months ago. Its my first DAW. I
> am
>>> >amazed at what all it can do. I did try out a Roland unit one time but
>>> was
>>> >disappointed with the sound - dead, cold, etc. I am using Paris to
>>> >track
>>> >vocals and synth mainly for church related things, BG tracks, CDs, etc.
>>> >Also for writing my own stuff - I play kybds/sing. Used to play in
>>bands.
>>> >I got Paris for the sound. I prefer analog, and Paris was touted as
> the
>>> >nearest to that. It certainly wipes the floor with the Roland, IMHO.
> And
>>> I
>>> >love the editing features. At the moment I am experimenting with
>>mixdowns,
>>> >trying to get the exported stereo files to sound as good as the
>>> >original
>>> mix
>>> >and as loud as comm cds - when I bring the stereo wav back to the
>>> >project
>>> >and a/b with the original, it doesn't sound quite as open and clear.
>>> >Edna
>>> > "Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b9713f$1@linux...
>>> >>
>>> >> The automation is a great feature, but I too stay away from it cause
>>> >everytime
>>> >> I sit through mixing.. I end up changing things... and I haven't
>>figured
>>> >> out how to "edit" the automation either. Funny thing.. I been using
> my
>>> >Paris
>>> >> since 2001 and I just use it for basic tracking/mixing. I never got
>>into
>>> >> all the features... but it's on my list too.. lol. By the time I
>>learn,
>>> >> Paris will be obsolete. Oh! it IS obsolete... lol. So, what do you
> use
>>> >Paris
>>> >> for? You got a band, or just play with it, like me? I don't go out
>>much
>>> >> (not too many places to go in southern MD.. lol.) So this is my
>>> >> hobby
>>> and
>>> >> my little get-away. It's been fun. I started out with a Roland
>>system.
>>> >> But I knew I had to move to a DAW since it wasn't easy to edit
>>> >> single
>>> >files/channels
>>> >> on the Roland. Ok.. I bored ya enough... Thanks again and I'll try
> the
>>> >normalize
>>> >> funtion... ~ Ed
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>> >> >You bet! Actually, you don't have to do it that way. You could
>>> >> >just
>>> >> >normalize down/up from the highest fader value in the mix.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >I haven't gotten in to the automation or the automation editor yet
>>> >either,
>>> >> >except to just make sure the automation worked after my install of
>>Paris.
>>> >> >But its on my list.
>>> >> >Edna
>>> >> >
>>> >> >"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b9652e$1@linux...
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Thanks Edna... I'll try that. I seen the normalize button, but
> was
>>> >unsure
>>> >> >> how it operated. In fact, I wished I known this option a few days
>>> >ago...
>>> >> >> would have saved me lots of time. I was trying to remix/remaster
>>some
>>> >> >older
>>> >> >> projects and songs.. and it was very time consuming to
>>> >> >> individually
>>> >adjust
>>> >> >> each channel. Thanks again... :)
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> >Yes, you can use the normalize function to do this - bring them
> up
>>> or
>>> >> >down.
>>> >> >> >For example say you want to lower them all by 3db. On an unused
>>> >channel
>>> >> >> >move its fader to 10 and then normalize with highest at 7. This
>>> >brings
>>> >> >> >down all faders by 3. (To bring them back up to where they were,
>>> >> >normalize
>>> >> >> >to 10.)
>>> >> >> >Edna
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >"Ed" <askme@email.com> wrote in message news:43b952d0$1@linux...
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> Hi All. Perhaps a quick n' easy question for you Paris power
>>users.
>>> >> I
>>> >> >> >mainly
>>> >> >> >> use the mouse for controlling everything on the mixer(s) and
>>such.
>>> >> >> >Anyway,
>>> >> >> >> I was working on a few projects and found that I sonically
>>> >> >> >> liked
>>> the
>>> >> >> >levels
>>> >> >> >> of one of the projects. It is very frustrating going back
>>through
>>> >> all
>>> >> >> the
>>> >> >> >> other songs in the other projects to bring down each channel
>>fader
>>> >> >> >individually.
>>> >> >> >> My question is... is there a way to control all active (active
>>> >meaning
>>> >> >> >there
>>> >> >> >> is something on the channel) channel faders at the same time?
>>> >Another
>>> >> >> >words,
>>> >> >> >> I have all the channel faders set properly, but I want to bring
>>> them
>>> >> >all
>>> >> >> >> down a few db's. Is there a way to bring them all down at the
>>same
>>> >> >time
>>> >> >> >> without doing them individually?
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> Lastly, I don't have any automation set, so that won't be
>>effected
>>> >> by
>>> >> >> >this.
>>> >> >> >> In fact, I try to stay away from automation because of this
>>reason.
>>> >> >> >There
>>> >> >> >> may be an easy way to "edit" the automation, but I haven't
>>figured
>>> >> it
>>> >> >> out.
>>> >> >> >> I just try to stay away from it. Some day I may delve into
> that
>>> >> >learning
>>> >> >> >> process... lol. I am old school. Just use Paris for basic
>>> >recording,
>>> >> >> >mixing....
>>> >> >> >> thanks in advance... and Happy New Year (2006)!
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>John,Look on the B&H site,
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=search& ;Q=&b=1315&shs=&ci=9576&ac=&Submit.x=17& amp;Submit.y=12
They have all the cards you'll need plus all the software.
Buying any M-Audio product means you can buy PT M-Powered for around $300
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43babdce@linux...
> But how much money is it? And can it use VSTs ?
>
> LaMont wrote:
>> Hey John,
>>
>> I don't really know if LE has PDC, HD does. You can get 16 i/os in LE
>> with
>> the Follwoing Products:
>>
>> -Digi 002(Rack)or not
>> -M-Audio Project Mix I/O
>> -FireWire 1814
>>
>> All of the above units have a additional Adat ports. That way you can add
>> 8 channels of I/O of your choice.
>> LaMont
>>
>> John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Does PT LE have autocompensation for plugs? How much can I get 16 I/Os
>>
>>
>>>for ?
>>>
>>>LaMont wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hey guys,
>>>>
>>>>I know that this is an old thread, but I have to disagree with
>>>>assessments
>>>>on Pro Tools sound quality.
>>>>
>>>>First, I mix with Pro Tools HD at our Church's studio for major release
>>
>> Gospel
>>
>>>>Cds. Pro Tools HD sounds wonderful with low and high track counts and
>>
>> ITB
>>
>>>>(in the Box) or summed to the SSL,
>>>>
>>>>At my home studio, I have PT LE & Nuendo and while I love Nuendo's
>>>>elequent
>>>>editing and nice soft sound, it's 32 bit floating mixer in a major pain
>>
>> in
>>
>>>>!@# to mix aggresive Rock, R &B, Hip hop with. Onthe other hand, those
>>
>> same
>>
>>>>mixes done in PT LE, have that sparkle and width. In Nuendo, after 30
>>
>> tracks,
>>
>>>>things start's getting "smearded" and tracks levels tends to get lost
>>
>> or
>>
>>>>they don't sit right.
>>>>However, in PT Le, (same songs, tracks are not smeared, levels stay
>>>>intacked,
>>>>and the overall mix sounds very professional, just like mixes in Paris..
>>>>
>>>>Some local Engineer friends in the area( Motown), have been in
>>>>discussions
>>>>about the state of current DAWs and what's working and what's not.
>>>>Opinions
>>>>varied,but the one constant opinion that was stated was how dificult it
>>
>> was
>>
>>>>to mix in Cubase and Nuendo on mixes over 30 tracks. No matter what i/o
>>
>> converters(Apogee,Lucid,Motu,
>>
>>>>RME) mixing Rock , R&B, Hip-Hop is a dificult chore in SX/Nuendo..Where
>>>>as mixing in Paris and Pro Tools is not.. Hey,Just one Engineer's
>>>>opinon.
>>>>P.S
>>>>Jsut for geekdum sakes, the new Sonar 5 uses a newly coded 64 to 32bit
>>
>> floating
>>
>>>>point mixer..
>>>>
>>>>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Yukkk,
>>>>>Don't do it..PT I mean.
>>>>>I've just been playing with PT M-Powered 6.8, using my Delta 1010, and
>>
>> I
>>
>>>>
>>>>>have to say...I don't like it.
>>>>>The interface is (IMNSHO), horrible, confusing, and convoluted.
>>>>>Moves that come easily in Paris, and more easily in Nuendo, are
>>>>>tiresome
>>>>
>>>>in
>>>>
>>>>>PT, apart from the reagon tool...taht has always been good, right from
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>
>>>>>Session 8 days, but not much else.
>>>>>And..it only plays .MOV video files, which in my case is a no-no, (the
>>
>> full
>>
>>>>
>>>>>TDM version may play the others but I don't think so).
>>>>>To top it off, playing one of my projects from Nuendo, (reassembled),
>>
>> it
>>
>>>>
>>>>>didn't have the "life" that the original had, by a long shot.
>>>>>I repeat...don't go there, Jeff......
>>>>>--
>>>>>Martin Harrington
>>>>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>>>>
>>>>>"jef knight" <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:436fce7a$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I just read the doc, thanks for posting the link. Much of it is quite
>>
>>
>>>>>>interesting and just as much is confusing.
>>>>>>I didn't know tdm systems sounded gnarly, never having worked with
>>>>>>one.
>>>>
>>>>At
>>>>
>>>>>>what track count would they sonically crap out?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If I can't get some of my tedious little troubles with paris resolved
>>>>
>>>>I'm
>>>>
>>>>>>considering switching to protools.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>jef
>>>>>>
>>>>>>DJ wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://akwww.digidesign.com/support/docs/WhitePaper_48BitMix er.pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Any comments? It appears to me that the signals are recorded at 24
>>>>>>>bit, then processed at whatever bit rate the plugin on the channel
>>>>>>>has,
>>>>>>>including dither, or not, then reprocessed to 24 bit, then these
>>>>>>>channels
>>>>>>>are summed. I'm no guru when it comes to this stuff, but I get this
>>
>>
>>>>>>>feeling
>>>>>>>that this reprocessing *per channel* is the reason the TDM systems
>>>>>>>seem
>>>>
>>>>to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>start sounding gnarly as more and more tracks are summed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>Is the Paris mix the one that requires a challenge response to start
playing the song. hehe
LaMont wrote:
> Those Cd's from Lynn Fuston.
>
> Since I work on nearly all DAW platforms, I can tell a Sonar mix. because
> it has that very nice generic (non coloring) sound.
>
> Logic-can't tell, DP, Can't tell, SX-I can Spot, PT-Yes, Paris (well Of Course)
> and so can my producer friends. They can spot the a PAris mix right away.
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>
>>I've got that CD too (I bought all of the 3Daudio CD's a while back.). On
>>the summing CD I accurately picked the Paris mix, first listen. I was
>>surprised by this. Then,while later I got a friend to shuffle them around
>>and did another listening and I could discern differences, but couldn't
>>really say that one sounded so much better than the others. The AD
>>conversion CD that he did is similar. It's surprising for all of the hype
>>about this, how little difference there really is. There is more diversity
>>in the preamp CD, but not as much as you would suspect. The microphone
>>comparison CD is really where the rubber meets the road. This is where the
>>majority of the *color* in a recording comes from and this CD really serve
>>that up on a sliver platter.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43baf061$1@linux...
>>
>>>I did the DAW summing CD thingy from what's his name in Nashville and
>>
>>could
>>
>>>find basically zero difference in anything. Maybe I'm deaf, but if you
>>
>>were
>>
>>>to double blind me I don't think I could pick out individual mixes
>>
>>consistently.
>>
>>>Since that was (if I recall) a 24 track mix that was big and loud and
>>
>>R&B/rock/gospel
>>
>>>I would think that would argue against this idea. However, it's a little
>>>like the audiophile world sometimes where when the tests seem to disprove
>>>personal experience the test is faulted instead of the experience. That's
>>>fine, ears are very fine instruments and some are just better than others.
>>>
>>>
>>>That said, I now work a good bit of my time in the finance world where
>>
>>fortunes
>>
>>>are made and lost according to the certitude of people in their
>>
>>experiences
>>
>>>or mathmatical models. Over time this has lead me to believe more in
>>
>>emperical
>>
>>>results than my experience. So if I do my own blind tests with the
>>
>>Nashville
>>
>>>CD and can't generate statistically significant data that DAWs sound
>>
>>different
>>
>>>then *I* will believe they sound the same. This could mean a flawed test
>>>or flawed ears but that's my belief until someone can present me with
>
> more
>
>>>convincing data.
>>>
>>>But hey, that's just me. I've also done mixes of 30+ tracks in SX and
>>
>>think
>>
>>>they sound quite nice.
>>>
>>>TCB
>>>
>>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hey guys,
>>>>
>>>>I know that this is an old thread, but I have to disagree with
>>
>>assessments
>>
>>>>on Pro Tools sound quality.
>>>>
>>>>First, I mix with Pro Tools HD at our Church's studio for major release
>>>
>>>Gospel
>>>
>>>>Cds. Pro Tools HD sounds wonderful with low and high track counts and
>
> ITB
>
>>>>(in the Box) or summed to the SSL,
>>>>
>>>>At my home studio, I have PT LE & Nuendo and while I love Nuendo's
>>
>>elequent
>>
>>>>editing and nice soft sound, it's 32 bit floating mixer in a major pain
>>>
>>>in
>>>
>>>>!@# to mix aggresive Rock, R &B, Hip hop with. Onthe other hand, those
>>>
>>>same
>>>
>>>>mixes done in PT LE, have that sparkle and width. In Nuendo, after 30
>>
>>tracks,
>>
>>>>things start's getting "smearded" and tracks levels tends to get lost
>
> or
>
>>>>they don't sit right.
>>>>
>>>>However, in PT Le, (same songs, tracks are not smeared, levels stay
>>
>>intacked,
>>
>>>>and the overall mix sounds very professional, just like mixes in Paris..
>>>>
>>>>Some local Engineer friends in the area( Motown), have been in
>>
>>discussions
>>
>>>>about the state of current DAWs and what's working and what's not.
>>
>>Opinions
>>
>>>>varied,but the one constant opinion that was stated was how dificult
>
> it
>
>>>was
>>>
>>>>to mix in Cubase and Nuendo on mixes over 30 tracks. No matter what i/o
>>>
>>>converters(Apogee,Lucid,Motu,
>>>
>>>>RME) mixing Rock , R&B, Hip-Hop is a dificult chore in SX/Nuendo..Where
>>>>as mixing in Paris and Pro Tools is not..
>>>>Hey,Just one Engineer's opinon.
>>>>
>>>>P.S
>>>>Jsut for geekdum sakes, the new Sonar 5 uses a newly coded 64 to 32bit
>>>
>>>floating
>>>
>>>>point mixer..
>>>>
>>>>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Yukkk,<
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #61089 is a reply to message #61084] |
Wed, 07 December 2005 16:02 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;>>
>>>>>>what track count would they sonically crap out?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If I can't get some of my tedious little troubles with paris resolved
>>>>
>>>>I'm
>>>>
>>>>>>considering switching to protools.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>jef
>>>>>>
>>>>>>DJ wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://akwww.digidesign.com/support/docs/WhitePaper_48BitMix er.pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Any comments? It appears to me that the signals are recorded at 24
>>>>>>>bit, then processed at whatever bit rate the plugin on the channel
>>
>>has,
>>
>>>>>>>including dither, or not, then reprocessed to 24 bit, then these
>>
>>channels
>>
>>>>>>>are summed. I'm no guru when it comes to this stuff, but I get this
>>>>>>>feeling
>>>>>>>that this reprocessing *per channel* is the reason the TDM systems
>>
>>seem
>>
>>>>to
>>>>
>>>>>>>start sounding gnarly as more and more tracks are summed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>very nice, it looks like the 8 control surface is about $1200 also
Martin Harrington wrote:
> John,Look on the B&H site,
>
> Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #61093 is a reply to message #61089] |
Wed, 07 December 2005 20:18 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
mixer..
>>>>>
>>>>>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Yukkk,
>>>>>>Don't do it..PT I mean.
>>>>>>I've just been playing with PT M-Powered 6.8, using my Delta 1010, and
>>>
>>>I
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>have to say...I don't like it.
>>>>>>The interface is (IMNSHO), horrible, confusing, and convoluted.
>>>>>>Moves that come easily in Paris, and more easily in Nuendo, are
>>>>>>tiresome
>>>>>
>>>>>in
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>PT, apart from the reagon tool...taht has always been good, right from
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>Session 8 days, but not much else.
>>>>>>And..it only plays .MOV video files, which in my case is a no-no, (the
>>>
>>>full
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>TDM version may play the others but I don't think so).
>>>>>>To top it off, playing one of my projects from Nuendo, (reassembled),
>>>
>>>it
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>didn't have the "life" that the original had, by a long shot.
>>>>>>I repeat...don't go there, Jeff......
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>Martin Harrington
>>>>>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"jef knight" <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:436fce7a$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I just read the doc, thanks for posting the link. Much of it is quite
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>interesting and just as much is confusing.
>>>>>>>I didn't know tdm systems sounded gnarly, never having worked with
>>>>>&g
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Thank God we will be *Macless* soon [message #61101 is a reply to message #61093] |
Thu, 08 December 2005 01:53 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ilto:lendan@bigpond.net.au" target="_blank">lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yukkk,
>>>>>>> Don't do it..PT I mean.
>>>>>>> I've just been playing with PT M-Powered 6.8, using my Delta
>>>>>>> 1010, and
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> have to say...I don't like it.
>>>>>>> The interface is (IMNSHO), horrible, confusing, and convoluted.
>>>>>>> Moves that come easily in Paris, and more easily in Nuendo, are
>>>>>>> tiresome
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PT, apart from the reagon tool...taht has always been good, right
>>>>>>> from
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Session 8 days, but not much else.
>>>>>>> And..it only plays .MOV video files, which in my case is a no-no,
>>>>>>> (the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> full
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> TDM version may play the others but I don't think so).
>>>>>>> To top it off, playing one of my projects from Nuendo,
>>>>>>> (reassembled),
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> it
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> didn't have the "life" that the original had, by a long shot.
>>>>>>> I repeat...don't go there, Jeff......
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Martin Harrington
>>>>>>> www.lendanear-sound.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "jef knight" <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:436fce7a$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I just read the doc, thanks for posting the link. Much of it is
>>>>>>>> quite
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> interesting and just as much is confusing.
>>>>>>>> I didn't know tdm systems sounded gnarly, never having worked
>>>>>>>> with one.
>>>>>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed May 06 05:51:50 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.22467 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
