Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Wormhole_buying_list_discount_sign-up?
| Re: Wormhole_buying_list_discount_sign-up? [message #59787 is a reply to message #59786] |
Tue, 01 November 2005 13:01   |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
using a couple
> >
> > effects
> >
> >>>in the aux module on one channel, I was surprised to get this error. I
> >>
> >>have
> >>
> >>>a gig of memory and a fast processor as well. I am using XP pro with
SP1
> >>>though.
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>E
> >>>
> >>>"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:4392898b$1@linux...
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Hey E,
> >>>>THis is one of my fave's cause I can actually help.
> >>>>If you see this error, stop what you are doing, do not respond to the
> >>>
> >>>error
> >>>
> >>>>message on the screen, get to the project window and save the project
> >>>
> >>>under
> >>>
> >>>>a new name (songV2 or something) and the let paris crach, your project
> >>>
> >>>will
> >>>
> >>>>be A OK when you get paris back up!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Has anyone been able to interpret just what this message means? And
> >>>>>basically what causes it? I only had 8 tracks recorded and was
> >
> > working
> >
> >>>>on
> >>>>
> >>>>>aux effects on the piano track which I had copied, delaying the
copy,
> >>>>>shifting the pitch, and then panning them L and R. After working
> >
> > most
> >
> >>>>of
> >>>>
> >>>>>the day on the project, this error appeared but I wasnt able to save
> >>
> >>the
> >>
> >>>>>project and since I hadn't remembered to save the project earlier I
> >
> > lost
> >
> >>>>it
> >>>>
> >>>>>all. Think I will call it a day! :-(
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >Hi DJ,
The machine I just built for Nuendo is an A8V Deluxe with an
Athlon 64 X2 4800 and 2 gigs of Kingston RAM. I'm liking it
so far, but I haven't taxed it yet, so I'm not sure where
the break point is. I did a simple test recording 24 tracks
at 44.1/24, played those back and recorded 24 more, played
all that back and punched in and out repeatedly on the last
24. The CPU indicator in Nuendo didn't get past ONE light.
Then I added a bunch of native and UA plus to the tracks
(at least 30 plugs, most of them different). I played back
the 48 tracks and punched in and out of 24 tracks with the
plugs running. The CPU indicator never got past 4 bars.
Oh, and I'm only running XP home (not 64), and standard IDE
drives! :-)
David.
DJ wrote:
> Wife definitely wants to abandon Mac and switch to Windows. I may fix it up,
> hang an MBox or an 001 off of it and advertize that I have Pro Tools here
> ;o}
>
> My current native audio system is running an AMD XP3000 CPU on a 333MHZ
> system bus with 2 x gigs of RAM. Considering the fact that it will be at
> least twice (if not more) s fast as her G4 466 Mac, this will be more than
> enough for her current needs with Photoshop, Illustrator, Pagemaker, etc.
>
> Since I keep my computers set up on open SenFu test benches in a machine
> room, what I'm going to do is buy a good, quiet case, PSU, video card, audio
> card, CD/DVD player/burner, floppy and a big storage drive for her, install
> the current system drive, mobo and aforementioned componentry into that,
> reformat the drive, reload Win XP (so that she's not running the *tweaked to
> hell* system I'm running now) and buy her the Adobe software that she needs
> to be productive.
>
> Next, I'm going to build another native system. I'm going to need a mobo,
> RAM and a dual core AMD CPU. I'll be interfacing my audio hardware/UAD-1
> cards using a Magma 13 slot chassis so I'm not really concerned about the
> number of PCI slots. One thing I do want to be able to do is to use my two
> existing Matrox G450's (AGP and PCI) Due to this, I am leaning toward trying
> the ASUS A8V-Deluxe mobo just because I'm familiar with the quirks of ASUS,
> I know that one of the PCI slots will be hardwired to the AGP and I know
> that since the Matrox cards share the same driver, this *should* work nicely
> with the host card of the Magma using az PCI slot that (hopefully) isn't
> sharing an IRQ with any other device, or at least benignly with something
> friendly. I'm also going to be going with at least 2 gig of DDR in this
> machine.....maybe more. Guess I'll check ASUS' site to see what's
> recommended.
>
> Lastly is the CPU. I want to be able to operate this machine as much as
> possible at low latencies with VSTi's. I've been eyeing the dual core 3800
> CPU's because they are the least expensive right now, but skimping will
> defeat the whole purpose of this upgrade.
>
> Is anyone using an AMD dual core CPU system right now? If so, I'd be mighty
> interested to hear your experiences before I once again descend into
> computer building hell.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Deej
>
>
>That's good news Dave. After checking out the mobo manual, it looks like PCI
#4 isn't shared. I'm also thinking of going with a Matrox P750 since I'm
just using 3 x monitors on my native system. I can use the G450 AGP on my
wife's computer.
Newegg has very good deals on the components right now. I can get an A8V
deluxe with 2G of Corsair RAM and an AMD 64 4400 x 2 for around $800.00.
That oughta get me what I need here and then some.
Thanks,
Deej
"Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_editout_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:43934838@linux...
> Hi DJ,
>
> The machine I just built for Nuendo is an A8V Deluxe with an
> Athlon 64 X2 4800 and 2 gigs of Kingston RAM. I'm liking it
> so far, but I haven't taxed it yet, so I'm not sure where
> the break point is. I did a simple test recording 24 tracks
> at 44.1/24, played those back and recorded 24 more, played
> all that back and punched in and out repeatedly on the last
> 24. The CPU indicator in Nuendo didn't get past ONE light.
> Then I added a bunch of native and UA plus to the tracks
> (at least 30 plugs, most of them different). I played back
> the 48 tracks and punched in and out of 24 tracks with the
> plugs running. The CPU indicator never got past 4 bars.
> Oh, and I'm only running XP home (not 64), and standard IDE
> drives! :-)
>
> David.
>
> DJ wrote:
> > Wife definitely wants to abandon Mac and switch to Windows. I may fix it
up,
> > hang an MBox or an 001 off of it and advertize that I have Pro Tools
here
> > ;o}
> >
> > My current native audio system is running an AMD XP3000 CPU on a 333MHZ
> > system bus with 2 x gigs of RAM. Considering the fact that it will be at
> > least twice (if not more) s fast as her G4 466 Mac, this will be more
than
> > enough for her current needs with Photoshop, Illustrator, Pagemaker,
etc.
> >
> > Since I keep my computers set up on open SenFu test benches in a machine
> > room, what I'm going to do is buy a good, quiet case, PSU, video card,
audio
> > card, CD/DVD player/burner, floppy and a big storage drive for her,
install
> > the current system drive, mobo and aforementioned componentry into that,
> > reformat the drive, reload Win XP (so that she's not running the
*tweaked to
> > hell* system I'm running now) and buy her the Adobe software that she
needs
> > to be productive.
> >
> > Next, I'm going to build another native system. I'm going to need a
mobo,
> > RAM and a dual core AMD CPU. I'll be interfacing my audio hardware/UAD-1
> > cards using a Magma 13 slot chassis so I'm not really concerned about
the
> > number of PCI slots. One thing I do want to be able to do is to use my
two
> > existing Matrox G450's (AGP and PCI) Due to this, I am leaning toward
trying
> > the ASUS A8V-Deluxe mobo just because I'm familiar with the quirks of
ASUS,
> > I know that one of the PCI slots will be hardwired to the AGP and I know
> > that since the Matrox cards share the same driver, this *should* work
nicely
> > with the ho
|
|
|
|
| Re: Wormhole_buying_list_discount_sign-up? [message #59788 is a reply to message #59787] |
Tue, 01 November 2005 15:06 |
Brandon
Messages: 49
Registered: June 2005
|
Member |
|
|
st card of the Magma using az PCI slot that (hopefully) isn't
> > sharing an IRQ with any other device, or at least benignly with
something
> > friendly. I'm also going to be going with at least 2 gig of DDR in this
> > machine.....maybe more. Guess I'll check ASUS' site to see what's
> > recommended.
> >
> > Lastly is the CPU. I want to be able to operate this machine as much as
> > possible at low latencies with VSTi's. I've been eyeing the dual core
3800
> > CPU's because they are the least expensive right now, but skimping will
> > defeat the whole purpose of this upgrade.
> >
> > Is anyone using an AMD dual core CPU system right now? If so, I'd be
mighty
> > interested to hear your experiences before I once again descend into
> > computer building hell.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Deej
> >
> >
> >Sounds like a good plan Steve. I may do just that. Might as well put this
box to work somehow.
;o)
"steve the artguy" <artguy@svnhoohaa.net> wrote in message
news:43933d94$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >Wife definitely wants to abandon Mac and switch to Windows.
>
> hey, DJ- Howdy!!
>
> this has nothing to do with your question (of course!)--
>
> just a thought. I don't know how much I've told you about this - my memory
> is harder to upgrade than these computers' -- but here's my personal plan.
>
>
> Macs for internet = no viruses, no adware, no nuthin' (at least as far as
> I can tell, and compared to the XP machines on the internet that I know
of.)
>
>
> XP machine for heavy duty work stuff -(with considerable overlap - I
transfer
> stuff between machines manually with a traveldrive all the time) but never
> let the XP machine onto the internet. Never. XP machine I put together
last
> year is still running flawlessly.
>
> The iMac I'm using right now came, like most of my computers, used - G3,
> piles of ram, OS9 and OSX, newer versions of most of the programs I use -
> for $220 last January. I think it's crashed twice in 12 months. Does the
> iTunes thing. I spend most of my time on this toy -- plus I can even toss
> it in the car and drag it to places like the world's heaviest laptop.
>
> I tell everyone who's just getting into the internet to grab an old iMac
> and go.
>
> Ok, steve out....!For everyone that doesn't want a Mac, it's great that you don't have to
have one. I wasn't completely sold on Macs in the 80s when the Atari
offered better MIDI features at a lower price and the Amiga offered a
more exciting computing vision, although the Mac of that time still had
some advantages in available software.
Fast forward to the 90s. OS7-8-9 were careening off the tracks - stuck
in decisions and mistakes of the 80's. No preemptive multitasking, no
clean protected memory design, band-aid on top of band-aid to wire
around obsolete legacy code. And after years of unsuccessfully
attempting to rewrite their way out of the bag, scrapping the whole mess
and starting over with OSX was the salvation of the company.
You could argue that the GUI and some operating specs should have
changed less. I would agree in some ways and disagree in others. For
example, requiring a ".xxx" extention in the name for file
identification was a step backwards. But for the most part the changes
were for the better. For example, core audio is great.
The transition wasn't cheap. But it did capitalize on the experience of
NeXT and the engineering talent they acquired with the buyout.
Reportedly it was either that or buy BeOS, the other major option on the
table. Both were good choices with advantages and disadvantages.
At this point the dual G5 boxes out now have plenty of muscle and
available software for audio production, with the ability to do amazing
amounts of real time tracks, virtual instruments and effects.
Speaking of desktop hardware speed, at times Motorola has been faster,
at times, Intel, at times AMD and at times IBM. Motorola's
slower-than-expected rollout of improved G4 chips and then IBM's
slower-than-expected rollout of G5 upgrades the last few years have put
Apple trailing more often than not on the muscle car front, but to say
"extremely slow" is innaccurate. At the moment, the quad G5 has a pretty
good claim for leader of the desktop pack and the duals are no slouches.
Offering Intel chips will put OSX head to head with MSWindows and it
will be interesting to see that comparison.
Price wise, Apple has been a bit more expensive, about the same or a bit
less than comparable offerings from similar turnkey computer companies
depending on the product range or how you compare. The downward trend on
prices overall has not exempted Apple, Mac prices have come down over
the last few years (despite their unfortunate decision to pull the plug
on Mac clone manufacturers).
For those who want to build their own boxes, especially in
configurations Apple has not offered, that can be a money saving option.
I say "can be" and not "will be" money saving because some box builders
I know end up turning over their hardware fairly often. And their old
hardware typically holds a lower resale value than Apple hardware. So
whether building your own boxes is cheaper in the long run is not always
a sure thing.
Factor in the time spend researching, building, testing, replacing
components, fussing with drivers, customizing your MSWindows setup.
Then, depending on what your time is worth, the comparison may come out
differently. But there's no denying that building your own box may give
you a closer approximation of what you want, assuming Apple doesn't
already offer what you want and assuming you don't want OSX and you
really like MSWindows, BSD or Linux.
Speaking of BSD and Linux, if up front cost is the measure, by far the
cheapest-upfront-cost way to go is to build your own box and run an open
source OS and software. For example: ubuntulinux.org/download/ The back
end costs are similar for any box building adventure, time spent getting
it all to work and getting software happening.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
Mike Audet wrote:
> I agree completely. OSX was a big left turn, too. That spinning pizza is
> just completely unacceptable. They crash if they don't have enough ram.
> They're extremely slow compared to a PC (which will change when they use
> PC chips). And, they are very expensive for what the hardware and software
> are really worth.
>
> They had a really nice, simple, clean OS with OS8-9. They saved a lot of
> money not having to develop an OS from the ground up by going with UNIX,
> but they lost most of what made Apple wonderful and unique, too.
>
> Just my 2 cents. :)
>
> Mike
>I have the HDSP9652 and two UAD1 cards in there... seems
happy... I had considered picking up the 750, but we are
going to stay with two monitors for now. Using a GeForce
FX5200 card at the moment (I think), and it seems happy as well.
David.
DJ wrote:
> That's good news Dave. After checking out the mobo manual, it looks like PCI
> #4 isn't shared. I'm also thinking of going with a Matrox P750 since I'm
> just using 3 x monitors on my native system. I can use the G450 AGP on my
> wife's computer.
>
> Newegg has very good deals on the components right now. I can get an A8V
> deluxe with 2G of Corsair RAM and an AMD 64 4400 x 2 for around $800.00.
>
> That oughta get me what I need here and then some.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Deej
> "Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_editout_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:43934838@linux...
>
>>Hi DJ,
>>Deej,
I'm using the ASUS A8V-Deluxe with a 7 % overclocked dual core 3800 CPU(49
degrees Celsius), but not for Paris use. I'm using ATI 3700 graphiccard with
it and E-MU 1820M audiosystem. No problems at all with the little use I have
had with audio works on it.
For the Paris system, I'm now using an Epox 9NDA3+ motherboard with a 3200+
processor. It couldn't use my Matrox G550 card with it, so I buyed a G-Force
FX5200 card, to be sure it would work with the nForce3 Ultra chipset on the
motherboard. I'm using an Artic-Cooling Freezer 64 Pro on the processor and
a North-Q 400w power supply with a 140 mm super silent fan. I must say I
was asstonished when I saw the temperature was stable at about 42 degrees
Celsius on both processor and motherboard when driving the system hard.
Between the two Paris card it showes about 10-12 degrees higher, so the new
system is about 10-15 degrees cooler than my old Asus A/V600-X board with a
3000+ processor. On the old system I had for the most problems wit Paris and
WinXP, but on the new system, I havn't had any problems at all on both WinME
or WinXP after using it a couple of weeks. So I'm crossing my fingers that
WinXP now will work as WinME allways have done for me. So, it seems to be a
wonderful system if you're not using Matrox graphic cards with it, so Doug,
here you're out.
I have tested both boards with recoding videoes with Nero 7 and the dual
core system was unbelievable more speedy.
Erling
> Next, I'm going to build another native system. I'm going to need a mobo,
> RAM and a dual core AMD CPU. I'll be interfacing my audio hardware/UAD-1
> cards using a Magma 13 slot chassis so I'm not really concerned about the
> number of PCI slots. One thing I do want to be able to do is to use my two
> existing Matrox G450's (AGP and PCI) Due to this, I am leaning toward
> trying
> the ASUS A8V-Deluxe mobo just because I'm familiar with the quirks of
> ASUS,
> I know that one of the PCI slots will be hardwired to the AGP and I know
> that since the Matrox cards share the same driver, this *should* work
> nicely
> with the host card of the Magma using az PCI slot that (hopefully) isn't
> sharing an IRQ with any other device, or at least benignly with something
> friendly. I'm also
|
|
|
|
| Re: Wormhole_buying_list_discount_sign-up? [message #59795 is a reply to message #59788] |
Wed, 02 November 2005 02:42 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
a offered a
>>more exciting computing vision, although the Mac of that time still had
>
>
>>some advantages in available software.
>>
>>Fast forward to the 90s. OS7-8-9 were careening off the tracks - stuck
>>in decisions and mistakes of the 80's. No preemptive multitasking, no
>>clean protected memory design, band-aid on top of band-aid to wire
>>around obsolete legacy code. And after years of unsuccessfully
>>attempting to rewrite their way out of the bag, scrapping the whole mess
>
>
>>and starting over with OSX was the salvation of the company.
>>
>>You could argue that the GUI and some operating specs should have
>>changed less. I would agree in some ways and disagree in others. For
>>example, requiring a ".xxx" extention in the name for file
>>identification was a step backwards. But for the most part the changes
>>were for the better. For example, core audio is great.
>>
>>The transition wasn't cheap. But it did capitalize on the experience of
>
>
>>NeXT and the engineering talent they acquired with the buyout.
>>Reportedly it was either that or buy BeOS, the other major option on the
>
>
>>table. Both were good choices with advantages and disadvantages.
>>
>>At this point the dual G5 boxes out now have plenty of muscle and
>>available software for audio production, with the ability to do amazing
>
>
>>amounts of real time tracks, virtual instruments and effects.
>>
>>Speaking of desktop hardware speed, at times Motorola has been faster,
>>at times, Intel, at times AMD and at times IBM. Motorola's
>>slower-than-expected rollout of improved G4 chips and then IBM's
>>slower-than-expected rollout of G5 upgrades the last few years have put
>
>
>>Apple trailing more often than not on the muscle car front, but to say
>>"extremely slow" is innaccurate. At the moment, the quad G5 has a pretty
>
>
>>good claim for leader of the desktop pack and the duals are no slouches.
>>
>>Offering Intel chips will put OSX head to head with MSWindows and it
>>will be interesting to see that comparison.
>>
>>Price wise, Apple has been a bit more expensive, about the same or a bit
>
>
>>less than comparable offerings from similar turnkey computer companies
>>depending on the product range or how you compare. The downward trend on
>
>
>>prices overall has not exempted Apple, Mac prices have come down over
>>the last few years (despite their unfortunate decision to pull the plug
>
>
>>on Mac clone manufacturers).
>>
>>For those who want to build their own boxes, especially in
>>configurations Apple has not offered, that can be a money saving option.
>
>
>>I say "can be" and not "will be" money saving because some box builders
>
>
>>I know end up turning over their hardware fairly often. And their old
>>hardware typically holds a lower resale value than Apple hardware. So
>>whether building your own boxes is cheaper in the long run is not always
>
>
>>a sure thing.
>>
>>Factor in the time spend researching, building, testing, replacing
>>components, fussing with drivers, customizing your MSWindows setup.
>>Then, depending on what your time is worth, the comparison may come out
>
>
>>differently. But there's no denying that building your own box may give
>
>
>>you a closer approximation of what you want, assuming Apple doesn't
>>already offer what you want and assuming you don't want OSX and you
>>really like MSWindows, BSD or Linux.
>>
>>Speaking of BSD and Linux, if up front cost is the measure, by far the
>>cheapest-upfront-cost way to go is to build your own box and run an open
>
>
>>source OS and software. For example: ubuntulinux.org/download/ The back
>
>
>>end costs are similar for any box building adventure, time spent getting
>
>
>>it all to work and getting software happening.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>Mike Audet wrote:
>>
>>>I agree completely. OSX was a big left turn, too. That spinning pizza
>
> is
>
>>>just completely unacceptable. They crash if they don't have enough ram.
>>>They're extremely slow compared to a PC (which will change when they use
>>>PC chips). And, they are very expensive for what the hardware and software
>>>are really worth.
>>>
>>>They had a really nice, simple, clean OS with OS8-9. They saved a lot
>
> of
>
>>>money not having to develop an OS from the ground up by going with UNIX,
>>>but they lost most of what made Apple wonderful and unique, too.
>>>
>>>Just my 2 cents. :)
>>>
>>>Mike
>>>
>
>It sounds like I should read up on core audio. Too bad our beloved PARIS
won't be able to take advantage of it. Windows XP completely sucks for MIDI
timing as soon as a few DX plugins are thrown into the mix. I haven't tested
this since getting a dual Athlon setup, so maybe it will do better with extra
CPUs. Most of my software doesn't, though. Who knows.
I'm using fewer and fewer plugins all the time. I caught myself wishing
I could run PARIS in windows 3.1 earlier. :) Maybe I should try it in an
old mac running os 9.
Take care,
Mike
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Hi Mike,
>
>No offense taken at all. I didn't mean to say OS 7-8-9 was useless,
>either, just that I was never impressed with it on a technical basis,
>whereas OSX does impress me. Glad you got good use out of OS9 despite my
>naysaying. :^)
>
>OSX is not just "old UNIX" - it's been developed for media production
>and offers significant advantages. Before you dismiss Core Audio, or for
>that matter the other core media elements, you might want to look into
>what's there. It took a lot of work for Apple to get to this point. And
>Apple is way ahead of the game on this.
>
>Most of my software that needs it does advantage of dual processors and
>would take advantage of quad processors. It's actually not "just
>marketing." It's faster DVD encoding, more audio plugins (like I need
>any more than my dual 2.5GHZ can do already), faster animation
>rendering, etc. etc.
>
>BTW, when OSX goes Intel it will be able to take good advantage of the
>next round of Intel duallies.
>
>Anyway, enjoy what you have. What matters in the end is the music we make.
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>Mike Audet wrote:
>> Hi Jamie,
>>
>> I appologize if I offended you. I certainly didn't mean to. I used to
love
>> the mac back in th day, and despite the layers of bandaids below the surface,
>> the elegance of having extentions, control pannels, and preference files
>> made for a beautiful system.
>>
>> No, it didn't have pre-emptive multitasking or protected memory, but those
>> things can just get in the way of timing sensitive multimedia processes
anyway.
>> I know that Windows XP sucks compared to Windows 3.1 for midi timing,
and
>> it's because of the "features" that are great for office apps and server
>> processes, but bad for audio.
>>
>> BeOS woul dhave been wondeful. Unix is only good because it is old.
It's
>> not the best design - or even a good design - it's just so old that all
the
>> major bugs have been worked out.
>>
>> I haven't had any expereince with core audio - maybe it smokes Windows
XP
>> for timing. I just don't know. I doubt it, though.
>>
>> The lack of CPU speed is 100% because Apple's partners let them down.
A
>> power PC CPU should be faster than a CISC processor - but when the money
>> doesn't get spent to make it happen, it doesn't happen. As for quad processor
>> systems, how much software can use 4 CPUs? Not very much. It's just
marketing.
>> The fact that all modern CPUs are more than fast enough for most people
>> most of the time means that the gap between a G5 and an Athlon64 may not
>> be all that apparent. But, it's there, and it's big.
>>
>> For me, it all comes down to that damn spinning disk, though. Who at
Apple
>> thought that it is ok to lock up the user interface for minutes at a time
>> while some disk spins? Unbelievable!
>>
>> Be well!
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>>>For everyone that doesn't want a Mac, it's great that you don't have to
>>
>>
>>>have one. I wasn't completely sold on Macs in the 80s when the Atari
>>>offered better MIDI features at a lower price and the Amiga offered a
>>>more exciting computing vision, although the Mac of that time still had
>>
>>
>>>some advantages in available software.
>>>
>>>Fast forward to the 90s. OS7-8-9 were careening off the tracks - stuck
>>>in decisions and mistakes of the 80's. No preemptive multitasking, no
>>>clean protected memory design, band-aid on top of band-aid to wire
>>>around obsolete legacy code. And after years of unsuccessfully
>>>attempting to rewrite their way out of the bag, scrapping the whole mess
>>
>>
>>>and starting over with OSX was the salvation of the company.
>>>
>>>You could argue that the GUI and some operating specs should have
>>>changed less. I would agree in some ways and disagree in others. For
>>>example, requiring a ".xxx" extention in the name for file
>>>identification was a step backwards. But for the most part the changes
>>>were for the better. For example, core audio is great.
>>>
>>>The transition wasn't cheap. But it did capitalize on the experience of
>>
>>
>>>NeXT and the engineering talent they acquired with the buyout.
>>>Reportedly it was either that or buy BeOS, the other major option on the
>>
>>
>>>table. Both were good choices with advantages and disadvantages.
>>>
>>>At this point the dual G5 boxes out now have plenty of muscle and
>>>available software for audio production, with the ability to do amazing
>>
>>
>>>amounts of real time tracks, virtual instruments and effects.
>>>
>>>Speaking of desktop hardware speed, at times Motorola has been faster,
>>>at times, Intel, at
|
|
|
|
| Re: Wormhole_buying_list_discount_sign-up? [message #59807 is a reply to message #59795] |
Wed, 02 November 2005 20:28 |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
; =3D
=
>>>href=3D3D3D'mailto:erlilo@online.no">erlilo@online.no</A'>mailto:erlil=
o@o=3D
>nlin=3D3D
> >>e.no">erlilo@online.no</A</A>>>=3D3D20
> >> wrote in =3D3D3D<BR>>>message <A=3D3D3D20<BR>>> =3D3D20
> >> =3D3D3D<BR>>>href=3D3D3D3D"<A=3D3D20
> >> =3D3D
> =3D
=
>>>href=3D3D3D'news:43900b57$1@linux">news:43900b57$1@linux</A>...<BR'>ne=
ws:=3D
>4390=3D3D
> >>0b57$1@linux">news:43900b57$1@linux</A>...<BR</A>>>=3D3D20
> >> =3D3D3D<BR>>> There=3D3D3D20<BR>>> you have the problem. I =
=3D3D
> >>think=3D3D20
> >> rendering the tracks and look=3D3D20
> >> =3D3D3D<BR>>>=3D3D3D3D<BR>>after=3D3D3D20<BR>>> =3D3D20
> >> that=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> each stereopair is starting and ending at =
=3D3D
> >>the=3D3D20
> >> =3D3D3D<BR>>>same=3D3D3D20<BR>>> places will do=3D3D20
> >> the<BR>=3D3D3D3D<BR>>job=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> when saving=3D3D20
> >> =3D3D3D<BR>>>under a new=3D3D3D20<BR>>> name, just to be =3D3D
> >>sure to go back=3D3D20
> >> if =3D3D
> >>=3D3D3D<BR>>>something<BR>=3D3D3D3D<BR>>are=3D3D3D3D20 <BR>=3D3D
> >>>=3D3D20
> >> =3D3D3D20<BR>>> going wrong again. If the time alignments are =
=3D3D
> >>going=3D3D20
> >> wrong in some of=3D3D3D20<BR>>> =3D3D
> >>=3D3D3D3D<BR>>the=3D3D3D3D20<BR>>=3D3D20
> >> stereofiles, you can rendering the =3D3D3D<BR>>>old, =3D3D
> >>hard=3D3D3D20<BR>>> =3D3D20
> >> way, as in version 2, =3D3D3D3D<BR>>when=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> =3D3D
> >>mixing down=3D3D20
> >> =3D3D3D<BR>>>each=3D3D3D20<BR>>> stereopair with panning =3D3D
> >>hard left and=3D3D20
> >> right and =3D3D3D3D<BR>>muting=3D3D3D20<BR>>> =3D3D
> >>all=3D3D3D3D20<BR>>=3D3D20
> >> other tracks. Then you can import them into the=3D3D20
> >> =3D3D3D<BR>>>project=3D3D3D20<BR>>> again on=3D3D20
------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C5F92E.3954AE70
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></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Dimitrios,</FONT><BR>>I have a =
major problem=20
with this cause some of the tracks of submix 1` cannot<BR>>be =
rendered=20
neither with no native plugins...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Is this because you are flying them =
in from=20
another program? I'd record them in Paris if =
this</FONT></DIV><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>is the case. Then apply stereo plugs =
(native) to=20
tracks. Rendering is not needed.</FONT>
<DIV><BR>>Is there any tip using the digital spdif in out to have =
all in=20
time and alligned?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Just the BT loop technique. You'll need to use sampleslide =
or=20
equivilent to time</DIV>
<DIV>align.<BR>>I have read that spdif out-in is 1 sample =
latent.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yes 1 ms.</FONT></DIV><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2></FONT>
<DIV><BR>The problem is that I have to record via spdif via actual =
levels and=20
then<BR>when I import should leave them at 0 point level, right =
? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As long as levels are right I'd just leave them.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>or do it the other way around ?</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I don't understand exactly what you =
are saying=20
here. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><BR><BR><BR><BR>"Tom Bruhl" =
<<A=20
href=3D"mailto:arpegio@comcast.net">arpegio@comcast.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>><BR>><BR>>Dimitrios,<BR >>Sorry I had a gig last =
night. Do as Erling suggested regarding =
=3D<BR>>rendering<BR>>all=20
tracks and copying to a new folder. Start a new Paris project =
and=20
=3D<BR>>call<BR>>it something different. Go to audio =
window and=20
import all newly =3D<BR>>rendered<BR>>files you need. Set =
a new=20
record path too. Make sure saves work after<BR>=3D<BR>>each =
step.=20
=3D20<BR>>In original project make sure all effects being used have =
been=20
saved =3D<BR>>individually. In old project<BR>>copy all =
mixer=20
settings in Mixer A (You discovered this last week!), =3D<BR>>open =
new=20
project and paste=3D20<BR>>all mixer settings in its Mixer A. =
Try to=20
save right after this and =3D<BR>>every step. Close Mixer A =
in new=20
project<BR>>then reopen it. This should make all the plugins=20
'appear'. Just a =3D<BR>>quirky Paris thing.<BR>>Now get =
those=20
presets working in each plugin. Try a save. If all is=20
=3D<BR>>well do these same steps<BR>>across all Submixes until =
all=20
Mixers/plugins are the same as original =3D<BR>>project. Try =
a=20
save.<BR>>Now might be a good time to try your stereo plugin that =
causes=20
your =3D<BR>>problem in the old<BR>>project. If after it's =
installed=20
in the new one, you can save then =3D<BR>>you're almost out of the=20
woods.<BR>><BR>>If you were using automation you will need to =
copy that=20
too. Go to =3D<BR>>Automation Editor A in old =
project.<BR>>Select=20
Volume, Set Now Line to beginning of project. Use 'Select All'=20
=3D<BR>>command or drag<BR>>across all 16 tracks with mouse to =
highlight=20
everything. Control C =3D<BR>>(copy). Go to new=20
project,<BR>>put Now Line at beginning of project in Automation =
Editor and=20
make sure<BR>=3D<BR>>active track is the first one that was =
active<BR>>on=20
the old project when copying. Otherwise your data may paste a track=20
=3D<BR>>or two off. The effects<BR>>return automation has to be =
done=20
separately from tracks. After this, go<BR>=3D<BR>>to original =
project=20
and select Mute.<BR>>Copy paste etc.. Repeat these steps on =
all auto=20
editors that were being<BR>=3D<BR>>used.<BR>><BR>>It sounds =
harder than=20
it really is. Remember to try saving between =
each<BR>=3D<BR>>step in=20
new project.<BR>>If at any time it doesn't want to save, you have =
found out=20
why there is<BR>=3D<BR>>a problem. Possibly<BR>>an unknown =
bug.=20
=3D20<BR>><BR>>Good luck. You'll be a better man for=20
it!<BR>>Tom<BR>><BR>><BR>> "erlilo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:erlilo@online.no">erlilo@online.no</A>> wrote in =
message <A=20
href=3D"news:43918529@linux">news:43918529@linux</A>...<BR>> =20
Dimitros<BR>><BR>> My way of doing this is:<BR>> =
Have=20
Paris closed,<BR>> make a new folder on the audio harddisk =
with=20
Explorer or something=3D20<BR>> similar(I'm using=20
TotalCommander).<BR>> Copy ONLY waves or/and PAF files from =
the old=20
project into the new =3D<BR>>folder.<BR>> Start a new =
project in=20
Paris.<BR>> Import from the new folder all the Waves and PAF =
files=20
you need into =3D<BR>>the new=3D20<BR>> project and set =
the path to=20
the new project.<BR>> In Ediit menu, set the files into the =
subgroups=20
and channels you wish.<BR>> Now you have a new project =
without any=20
old, saved information at all =3D<BR>>to=3D20<BR>> start =
from=20
scratch.<BR>> It's important that all files are rendered to =
start=20
from zero in the =3D<BR>>old=3D20<BR>> =
project.<BR>><BR>> =20
If this doesn't help and the earlier rendered stereofiles have=20
=3D<BR>>absolutelly=3D20<BR>> correct lenghts, I can't =
think of other=20
things than plugin problems.<BR>><BR>> Hope this can help =
to=20
explain my way of doing something with this=20
kind<BR>=3D<BR>>of=3D20<BR>> =
problems.<BR>><BR>> =20
Erling<BR>><BR>> "Dimitrios" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:musurgio@otenet.gr">musurgio@otenet.gr</A>> skrev i =
melding=20
=3D<BR>>news:43917c01$1@linux...<BR>> ><BR>> =20
><BR>> > Sory if I ask much but the way I do the =
project=20
rebuild does not =3D<BR>>help.<BR>> > How do you do a =
rebuild=20
?<BR>> > I just go to audio folder export audio objects or =
wave=20
files under a<BR>=3D<BR>>new<BR>> > folder then save =
the new song=20
and then reopen from new folder.<BR>> > I guess you might =
refer to=20
something different here right ?<BR>> > Can you explain =
your way=20
?<BR>> > Thanks<BR>> > Regards,<BR>> =
>=20
Dimitrios<BR>> > "Tom Bruhl" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:arpegio@comcast.net">arpegio@comcast.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> =20
>>Dimitrios,<BR>> >>I agree with Erlilo. =
Try=20
different channels or a different<BR>> >>submix if you=20
can. Otherwise rebuilding the mix from<BR>> =
>>scratch in=20
a new project is the next best bet. Copy all<BR>> =
>>mixer=20
settings and presets of effects to make it easier.<BR>> =20
>>Tom<BR>> >><BR>> =
>><BR>> =20
>><BR>> >> "Rod Lincoln" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com">rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com</A>&g=
t;=20
wrote in message =3D3D<BR>> =20
>>news:43908331$1@linux...<BR>> >><BR>> =20
>> Dimitrios, You probably know this, but just to make=20
sure...<BR>> >> If you want to use stereo native =
plugins,=20
you can NOT have any =3D<BR>>mono =3D3D<BR>> =20
>>plugins<BR>> >> on those tracks. That =
goes for=20
native and EDS.<BR>> >> Do you have any mono eds =
or=20
native plugs also on the stereo pair?<BR>> >> =20
Rod<BR>> >> "Dimitrios" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:musurgio@otenet.gr">musurgio@otenet.gr</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> =
>Dear=20
Tom,<BR>> >> >It is not the plugin under other =
song I=20
can open a stereo native<BR>=3D<BR>>=3D3D<BR>> =20
>>effect.<BR>> >> >In my project I =
cannot open=20
ANY stereo effect.<BR>> >> >Even chainer=20
only...<BR>> >> >I can save my project no =
problem if I=20
don't use a stereo native =3D<BR>>=3D3D<BR>> =20
>>effect.<BR>> >> >ALSO on submix 3 I =
managed=20
toopen a stereo native effect but not<BR>=3D<BR>>on =
=3D3D<BR>> =20
>>submix<BR>> >> >1 or 4 , any =
suggestion=20
?<BR>> >> >Regards,<BR>> =
>> =20
>Dimitrios<BR>> >> ><BR>> =
>> =20
>"Tom Bruhl" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:arpegio@comcast.net">arpegio@comcast.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>> >> >><BR>> =
>> =20
>><BR>> >> >>Dimitrios,<BR>> =
>> >>Are you saying you can save before this stereo=20
plugin<BR>> >> >>is inserted? I'd say =
you may=20
have a rouge plugin that<BR>> >> >>your =
wrapper or=20
Paris just doesn't like. Try the same thing<BR>> =
>> =20
>>in a different project. ie: Same stereo plugin=20
inserted<BR>> >> >>on another stereo pair =
of=20
tracks. Now can you save?<BR>> >> =
>>If so it=20
may be your project. If not it's probably your =
plugin.<BR>> =20
>> >><BR>> >> >>Good=20
luck,<BR>> >> >>Tom<BR>> =
>> =20
>> "Dimitrios" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:musurgio@otenet.gr">musurgio@otenet.gr</A>> wrote in =
message=20
=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>news:43906b78$1@linux...<BR>> >> =20
>><BR>> >> >> Thanks for your=20
suggestions.<BR>> >> >> I have =
rendered using=20
the hardware method via adat and =3D<BR>>achieved =
=3D3D<BR>> =20
>>one =3D3D3D<BR>> >> =
>>nice<BR>> =20
>> >> compact stereo track with my acoustic =
guitars, I=20
even saved =3D<BR>>all =3D3D<BR>> =
>>audio<BR>> =20
>> >=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>files<BR>> >> >> on new =
folder and=20
saved under new name I used the clear =3D<BR>>missing =
=3D3D<BR>> =20
>>files<BR>> >> >=3D3D3D<BR>> =20
>> >>just<BR>> >> =
>> before=20
that but again no luck when I put a stereo native =3D<BR>>effect=20
on<BR>> > =3D3D<BR>> =
>>=3D3D3D<BR>> =20
>> >>this stereotrack<BR>> >> =20
>> even without hitting play when I try to save =
assertion=20
fails<BR>=3D<BR>>and<BR>> > =3D3D<BR>> =20
>>=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =
>>doesn't<BR>> =20
>> >> allow of any save !<BR>> =
>> =20
>> Note that assertion failure appears ONLY when I hit =
SAve=20
...<BR>> >> >> rEGARDS,<BR>> =
>> >> dIMITRIOS<BR>> >> =20
>><BR>> >> >> "Tom Bruhl" =
<<A=20
href=3D"mailto:arpegio@comcast.net">arpegio@comcast.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> =20
>> >> ><BR>> >> =
>> =20
>Dimitrios,<BR>> >> >> =
>Rendering is=20
your answer. Don't render tracks with=20
plugins.<BR> =3D<BR>>In<BR>> > =3D3D<BR>> =
>>=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =
>>stereo<BR>> =20
>> >> =3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>> >the right side=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> =
>> =20
>> >won't have any effect. Double check to see =
that their=20
timing<BR>=3D<BR>>is<BR>> > =3D3D<BR>> =20
>>=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =
>>correct<BR>> =20
>> >> =3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>> >too.<BR>> >> >> =
>Some=20
people have problems with that.<BR>> >> =
>> =20
>Tom<BR>> >> >> > =
"erlilo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:erlilo@online.no">erlilo@online.no</A>> wrote in =
message=20
=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>news:43900b57$1@linux...<BR>> >> =
>> =20
> There you have the problem. I think rendering the tracks=20
=3D<BR>>and =3D3D<BR>> >>look<BR>> =
>> =20
=3D3D3D<BR>> >> >>=3D3D3D3D<BR>> =20
>> >> >after that=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> =20
>> >> > each stereopair is starting =
and=20
ending at the same places =3D<BR>>will<BR>> > =
=3D3D<BR>> =20
>>do<BR>> >> =3D3D3D<BR>> =
>> =20
>>the<BR>> >> >> =
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> =20
>> >> >job=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> =
>> =20
>> > when saving under a new name, just to be =
sure to go=20
back if<BR>=3D<BR>>=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>something<BR>> >> >> =20
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =20
>are=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> >> =
> going=20
wrong again. If the time alignments are going wrong =3D<BR>>in=20
=3D3D<BR>> >>some<BR>> >> =20
=3D3D3D<BR>> >> >>of =
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> =20
>> >> >the=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> =
>> =20
>> > stereofiles, you can rendering the old, hard =
way, as=20
in =3D<BR>>version<BR>> > =3D3D<BR>> =20
>>2,<BR>> >> >=3D3D3D<BR>> =
>> =20
>>=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =20
>when=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> >> =
> =20
mixing down each stereopair with panning hard left and =
=3D<BR>>right=20
=3D3D<BR>> >>and =3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =
>muting=20
all=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> >> > =
other=20
tracks. Then you can import them into the project =3D<BR>>again=20
=3D3D<BR>> >>on =3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>their<BR>> >> >> =20
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =20
>old=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> >> =
> places=20
and give them new names.<BR>> >> >> =20
><BR>> >> >> > =20
Erling<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> =20
>> >> ><BR>> >> =
>> =20
> "Dimitrios" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:musurgio@otenet.gr">musurgio@otenet.gr</A>> skrev i =
melding=20
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =20
>news:439000f1$1@linux...<BR>> >> =
>> =20
> ><BR>> >> >> > =
>=20
Hi,<BR>> >> >> > > Thanks =
for=20
your replies.<BR>> >> >> > =
> What=20
I have managed is to have the same start and end=20
for<BR>=3D<BR>>=3D3D<BR>> >>both =
=3D3D3D<BR>> =20
>> >>audio<BR>> >> =
>> =20
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =
>files<BR>> =20
>> >> > > just by cutting at =
cursor pointy=20
on both tracks.<BR>> >> >> > =
>=20
Buit insight the stereo tracks each of themhas=20
different<BR>=3D<BR>>cut<BR>> > =3D3D<BR>> =20
>>=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =
>>points<BR>> =20
>> >> =3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>> >and=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> =
>> =20
> > joint<BR>> >> >> =
> =20
> points , does this matter?<BR>> >> =
>> =20
> > If you ask me why it is because these tracks are not=20
=3D<BR>>actually<BR>> > =3D3D<BR>> =20
>>=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =
>>stereo<BR>> =20
>> >> =3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>> >but<BR>> >> >> =
> =20
> two takes of acoustic guitar playing so I had tomove =
=3D3D<BR>> =20
>>different =3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>parts<BR>> >> >> =20
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =20
>on=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> >> =
> >=20
each<BR>> >> >> > > of =
the=20
"stereo" tracks to make them on time.<BR>> >> =20
>> > > I want a stereo effect because I wanna =
expand=20
the stereo<BR>=3D<BR>>=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>perspective<BR>> >> >> =20
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =20
>of=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> >> =
> >=20
them<BR>> >> >> > > =
pl;aying hard=20
left and hard right.<BR>> >> >> =
> =20
> Have you tried T-racks compressor's stereo widening =
knob<BR>=3D<BR>>??=20
=3D3D<BR>> >>!!<BR>> >> =
>> =20
> > Amazing stereo result with complete mono compatibility =
,<BR>=3D<BR>>not<BR>> > =3D3D<BR>> =20
>>like<BR>> >> >=3D3D3D<BR>> =20
>> >>=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> =
>> =20
>waves=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> >> =
> >=20
imager<BR>> >> >> > > at=20
all...<BR>> >> >> > >=20
Cheers,<BR>> >> >> > >=20
DImitrios<BR>> >> >> > =20
><BR>> >> >> > =
><BR>> =20
>> >> > > "Ennio" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:ennio@galicorp.net">ennio@galicorp.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>> >> >> > =
>>The=20
in-points (and out-points) on both sides of the =3D<BR>>stereo=20
=3D3D<BR>> >>file<BR>> >> =20
=3D3D3D<BR>> >> >>must<BR>> =
>> =20
>> =3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =20
>be<BR>> >> >> > >=20
at<BR>> >> >> > >>the=20
identical spot - down to the sample (the furthest =3D<BR>>down=20
=3D3D<BR>> >>you =3D3D3D<BR>> >> =
>>can=20
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> >go =
on<BR>> =20
>> >> > > the<BR>> =
>> =20
>> > >>zoom tool)<BR>> =
>> =20
>> > >><BR>> >> =
>> =20
> >>"erlilo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:erlilo@online.no">erlilo@online.no</A>> wrote in =
message=20
=3D3D3D<BR>> >> =20
>>news:438f4d36@linux...<BR>> >> =
>> =20
> >>> Is it exactly the same length on each stereo =
files or=20
=3D<BR>>no =3D3D<BR>> >>=3D3D3D<BR>> =
>> =20
>>different<BR>> >> >> =20
=3D3D3D3D<BR>> >> >> =
>holes<BR>> =20
>> >> > >>in<BR>> =20
>> >> > >>> any of the =
stereo=20
objects?<BR>> >> >> > =20
>>><BR>> >> >> > =20
>>> Erling<BR>> >> >> =
> =20
>>><BR>> >> >> > =20
>>> "Dimitrios" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:musurgio@otenet.gr">musurgio@otenet.gr</A>> skrev i=20
=3D<BR>>melding=3D3D3D3D20<BR>> >> =
>> =20
> >>> <A=20
=
href=3D"news:438f3760$1@linux">news:438f3760$1@linux</A>...<BR>> =
=20
>> >> > >>> =
><BR>> =20
>> >>&nbs
|
|
|
|
| Re: Wormhole_buying_list_discount_sign-up? [message #59935 is a reply to message #59657] |
Sun, 06 November 2005 09:48 |
Miguel Vigil [1]
Messages: 258
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
r />
>>>between .paf an.sd2 or does it does .wav also,I couldn't remember.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Pete
>>
>Oh Man, sorry to hear it, Tony. I hate to think of all the suffering
you're about to undergo with that G5 Mac.
Listen, tell ya what. Just leave it in the box and send it to me. I'll
shield you from the pain! ;^)
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
Tony Benson wrote:
> My gift just arrived today! But it's one of those nasty, poopy, evil G5
> Macs. ;>) It's going to be my new DP/UAD-1 Box (No more dual booting! My G4
> is now officially my PARIS only box!). I had to go with a "new old stock" G5
> though as the UAD-1 won't work with the new PCIe slots. Oh well, the price
> was right and I'm sure it will be more than powerful enough for my needs, at
> least until the new Intel Macs have time to mature.
>
> Here's wishing all my PARIS brothers and sisters a glorious and safe holiday
> season, regardless of your computer preference!
>
> Tony
>
>
> "erlilo" <erlilo@online.no> wrote in message news:4395433e$1@linux...
>
>>heyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, I'm not yelling, just saying hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
>>back. Christmas is coming, maybe with new 'puter gifts for many of us,
>>ummmhhh.... ....Have you been a nice enough boy the last couple of months
>>to get some gifts from Santa Claus?;o)....
>>
>>
>>"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.com> skrev i melding
>>news:439483bb@linux...
>>
>>>hey yall
>>>
>>>just sayin hi
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>DJ,
What I would suggest is pick a used Creamware card that uses 32 bit integer
(not floating) bussing has 64 mixing busses as ASIO so you can use your Nuendo
and mix on Pulsar great digital consoles that rely on dsp and not on cpu.
Great clearance.
I bought one for 400$ , now I have three Pulsars.
One of these days I will describe you my system , Paris, three Pulsars and
cubase.
Regards,
Dimitrios
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>One of my colleagues here who has a fairly hefty PTHD system just send me
an
>e-mail with some pretty positive raving about how the D2B opens up the
>soundstage. We will be *doing lunch*later this week and I'll be gioving
this
>a listen.
>
>I've been wondering if this D2B might be the magic bullet for putting a
>native system on the same sonic footing as Paris. I may have just picked
up
>a pretty big client with ongoing work involving composing original music
for
>video. This clients sells *lots* of videos so it's got the makings of being
>one of those situations that I've been hoping for with steady work. I just
>got the call about this last night. I'm glad I haven't yet ordered the parts
>for the new computer. I may be needing to upgrade to Nuendo and to build
>something with a bit more horsepower if this becomes a reality.
>
>
>touche mon ami but fence crashing can be quite invigorating.
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 06:45:57 -0700, DTerry <dterry@no_spamkeyofd.net>
wrote:
>Oh, no, I don't fence. Skiing is more my sport. And yes, I've busted my
>butt a few times. But fortunately I've never crashed into any fences.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------
>Disclaimer: This email was typed on a Mac and edited on a PC, but could very
>easily have been done the other way around in the same amount of time.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------
>
>On 12/6/05 3:15 AM, in article 84pap1dg2s03o0aki2oihrei8fpcmmdcrj@4ax.com,
>"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> man, that fence you're sitting on has got to be killing your butt.
>> ;o)
>>
>> On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 22:31:28 -0700, DTerry <dterry@no_spamkeyofd.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> My wife's Mac crashes or locks up 5 times a day on average, but icy roads
>>> caused way more than 5 crashes here today.
>>>
>>> It's good to know Sweetwater's G5 can run 146 tracks while tracking 100
>>> more. I used to run track. I probably sweated as much as the G5, but I bet I
>>> can still kick it's butt in the 100m high hurdles.
>>>
>>> Macs are can make life easier, but Big Macs can cut it short. I don't
>>> remember the last time I had a Big Mac. I still have a couple of Macs
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Nothing wrong with having a PC, but not being PC is rather unpopular right
>>> now. I have PCs, but try to avoid being one.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/5/05 9:10 PM, in article 43950137$1@linux, "gene lennon"
>>> <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Chris Wargo" <NA@NA.NA> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Yay, Mac vs. PC "debates". Wank wank...
>>>>>
>>>>> "I hate computers" <BO@spamno.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> It does seem a little silly - Hi Chris I know, I owe you a call…
>>>> But…
>>>> Speaking of crappy Macs, Sweetwater tests DP/Mac systems and gets:
>>>> 100 simultaneous inputs at 48kHz/24 bits, recorded to a second internal SATA
>>>> drive, and play back of146 simultaneous tracks from a dual G5.
>>>> (48kHz/24-bit)
>>>> My system running an internal 10K RAID can do a little better.
>>>> Gene
>>>> http://www.sweetwater.com/feature/motu/
>>>>
>>>> And yes I could build a PC with equal power.
>>>>
>>HI,
I wonder if you have a multi recording session that has used all 16 analog
ins on card A and you wanna use another set of 16 channels on second eds
card what is the situation here ?
I mean you hear (not that really matters for musicians) 12-14 samples latent
when real monitoring ? Or you just have 12-14 samples latency only when playing
back ?
Did I make myself clear here ?
I think late
|
|
|
|
| Re: Wormhole_buying_list_discount_sign-up? [message #59936 is a reply to message #59807] |
Sun, 06 November 2005 09:50 |
Miguel Vigil [1]
Messages: 258
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ly I giving some hard time for you guys reading my posts right
?
Regards,
DimitriosThe D2B is a lot of money for a box full of resistors... ;-)
David.
DJ wrote:
> One of my colleagues here who has a fairly hefty PTHD system just send me an
> e-mail with some pretty positive raving about how the D2B opens up the
> soundstage. We will be *doing lunch*later this week and I'll be gioving this
> a listen.
>
> I've been wondering if this D2B might be the magic bullet for putting a
> native system on the same sonic footing as Paris. I may have just picked up
> a pretty big client with ongoing work involving composing original music for
> video. This clients sells *lots* of videos so it's got the makings of being
> one of those situations that I've been hoping for with steady work. I just
> got the call about this last night. I'm glad I haven't yet ordered the parts
> for the new computer. I may be needing to upgrade to Nuendo and to build
> something with a bit more horsepower if this becomes a reality.
>
>
>14 samples is 3 tenths of a millisecond at 44.1KHz. If you can hear
this amount of latency, you have better ears than me! ;-)
David.
Dimitrios wrote:
> HI,
> I wonder if you have a multi recording session that has used all 16 analog
> ins on card A and you wanna use another set of 16 channels on second eds
> card what is the situation here ?
> I mean you hear (not that really matters for musicians) 12-14 samples latent
> when real monitoring ? Or you just have 12-14 samples latency only when playing
> back ?
> Did I make myself clear here ?
> I think lately I giving some hard time for you guys reading my posts right
> ?
> Regards,
> DimitriosHey Deej,
I'm doing a story for EM about 64 bit processors/operating systems. As part
of that I'm upgrading myself (also leaning toward a dual core Athlon because
audio apps are fairly multi-threaded). The one suggestion I might make is
checking out DFI boards. They've really become the benchmark gamer board
while also being rock solid and that's a rare combination. They do stuff
like rev a board to put more layers between memory tracing to decrease crosstalk.
Certainly worth a look.
Also, you might want to check out the Cakewalk forums/news. They're leading
the charge on 64 bit Windows audio computing.
TCB
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Wife definitely wants to abandon Mac and switch to Windows. I may fix it
up,
>hang an MBox or an 001 off of it and advertize that I have Pro Tools here
>;o}
>
>My current native audio system is running an AMD XP3000 CPU on a 333MHZ
>system bus with 2 x gigs of RAM. Considering the fact that it will be at
>least twice (if not more) s fast as her G4 466 Mac, this will be more than
>enough for her current needs with Photoshop, Illustrator, Pagemaker, etc.
>
>Since I keep my computers set up on open SenFu test benches in a machine
>room, what I'm going to do is buy a good, quiet case, PSU, video card, audio
>card, CD/DVD player/burner, floppy and a big storage drive for her, install
>the current system drive, mobo and aforementioned componentry into that,
>reformat the drive, reload Win XP (so that she's not running the *tweaked
to
>hell* system I'm running now) and buy her the Adobe software that she needs
>to be productive.
>
>Next, I'm going to build another native system. I'm going to need a mobo,
>RAM and a dual core AMD CPU. I'll be interfacing my audio hardware/UAD-1
>cards using a Magma 13 slot chassis so I'm not really concerned about the
>number of PCI slots. One thing I do want to be able to do is to use my two
>existing Matrox G450's (AGP and PCI) Due to this, I am leaning toward trying
>the ASUS A8V-Deluxe mobo just because I'm familiar with the quirks of ASUS,
>I know that one of the PCI slots will be hardwired to the AGP and I know
>that since the Matrox cards share the same driver, this *should* work nicely
>with the host card of the Magma using az PCI slot that (hopefully) isn't
>sharing an IRQ with any other device, or at least benignly with something
>friendly. I'm also going to be going with at least 2 gig of DDR in this
>machine.....maybe more. Guess I'll check ASUS' site to see what's
>recommended.
>
>Lastly is the CPU. I want to be able to operate this machine as much as
>possible at low latencies with VSTi's. I've been eyeing the dual core 3800
>CPU's because they are the least expensive right now, but skimping will
>defeat the whole purpose of this upgrade.
>
>Is anyone using an AMD dual core CPU system right now? If so, I'd be mighty
>interested to hear your experiences before I once again descend into
>computer building hell.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Deej
>
>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0077_01C5FA6F.950A20F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
David,
Dimitrios has surprised us before!
Tom
"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message =
news:4395dfa3$1@linux...
14 samples is 3 tenths of a millisecond at 44.1KHz. If you can hear=20
this amount of latency, you have better ears than me! ;-)
David.
Dimitrios wrote:
> HI,
> I wonder if you have a multi recording session that has used all 16 =
analog
> ins on card A and you wanna use another set of 16 channels on second =
eds
> card what is the situation here ?
> I mean you hear (not that really matters for musicians) 12-14 =
samples latent
> when real monitoring ? Or you just have 12-14 samples latency only =
when playing
> back ?
> Did I make myself clear here ?
> I think lately I giving some hard time for you guys reading my posts =
right
> ?
> Regards,
> Dimitrios
------=_NextPart_000_0077_01C5FA6F.950A20F0
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>David,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Dimitrios has surprised us =
before!</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>"EK Sound" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com">spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com</A>=
>=20
wrote in message <A=20
href=3D"news:4395dfa3$1@linux">news:4395dfa3$1@linux</A>...</DIV>14 =
samples is 3=20
tenths of a millisecond at 44.1KHz. If you can hear <BR>this =
amount of=20
latency, you have better ears than me! =
;-)<BR><BR>David.<BR><BR>Dimitrios=20
wrote:<BR>> HI,<BR>> I wonder if you have a multi recording =
session that=20
has used all 16 analog<BR>> ins on card A and you wanna use another =
set of=20
16 channels on second eds<BR>> card what is the situation here =
?<BR>> I=20
mean you hear (not that really matters for musicians) 12-14 samples=20
latent<BR>> when real monitoring ? Or you just have 12-14 samples =
latency=20
only when playing<BR>> back ?<BR>> Did I make myself clear here=20
?<BR>> I think lately I giving some hard time for you guys reading =
my posts=20
right<BR>> ?<BR>> Regards,<BR>> =
Dimitrios</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0077_01C5FA6F.950A20F0--Lt. Cmd. Dimitrios Data??? ;-)
David.
Tom Bruhl wrote:
> David,
> Dimitrios has surprised us before!
> Tom
>
>
> "EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com
> <mailto:spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com>> wrote in message
> news:4395dfa3$1@linux...
> 14 samples is 3 tenths of a millisecond at 44.1KHz. If you can hear
> this amount of latency, you have better ears than me! ;-)
>
> David.
>
> Dimitrios wrote:
> > HI,
> > I wonder if you have a multi recording session that has used all
> 16 analog
> > ins on card A and you wanna use another set of 16 channels on
> second eds
> > card what is the situation here ?
> > I mean you hear (not that really matters for musicians) 12-14
> samples latent
> > when real monitoring ? Or you just have 12-14 samples latency
> only when playing
> > back ?
> > Did I make myself clear here ?
> > I think lately I giving some hard time for you guys reading my
> posts right
> > ?
> > Regards,
> > DimitriosIn all fairness, it's a box of resistors and a lineamp ;-)
But seriously, a fully passive summing box can be DIY'ed for about $20-$150
(depending on the features and # of channels you need), and then you can
use whatever flavor of mic pre for gain makeup. On a scale of 1-10 in difficulty,
this job is a 1.5.
-Chris
EK Sound <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote:
>The D2B is a lot of money for a box full of resistors... ;-)
>
>David.
>
>DJ wrote:
>> One of my colleagues here who has a fairly hefty PTHD system just send
me an
>> e-mail with some pretty positive raving about how the D2B opens up the
>> soundstage. We will be *doing lunch*later this week and I'll be gioving
this
>> a listen.
>>
>> I've been wondering if this D2B might be the magic bullet for putting
a
>> native system on the same sonic footing as Paris. I may have just picked
up
>> a pretty big client with ongoing work involving composing original music
for
>> video. This clients sells *lots* of videos so it's got the makings of
being
>> one of those situations that I've been hoping for with steady work. I
just
>> got the call about this last night. I'm glad I haven't yet ordered the
parts
>> for the new computer. I may be needing to upgrade to Nuendo and to build
>> something with a bit more horsepower if this becomes a reality.
>>
>>
>>Hehe , well...
This is an academic question to stop wonder.
Also it is important if you have phase coherent tracks like more some of
your drumtracks have to be on second eds card while recording.
The real question is this latency beetween eds cards applies only on playback
or also when monitoring...:)
Well in any case I would like to know that.
I have a multi preamp system where some preamps go to analog ADAT in cards
and some digitally either via adat card or spdif or both.
So there are different latencies involved.
My DBX 376 and 386 have a 13 samples latency compared to analog mec card
in.
But I use spdif on 4th eds card.
So when I record the dbx both with Paris analog and Paris spdif I detect
this 13 samples latency for the spdifed track.
I know also that 4th card gives me a 17 samples latency.
So to clear things out I would like to know the following :
If you record same time on both first card and fourth card analog only, will
the tracks playing back with 17 samples latency or this is only when you
move tracks from one card to the other.
Regards,
Dimitrios
EK Sound <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote:
>Lt. Cmd. Dimitrios Data??? ;-)
>
>David.
>
>Tom Bruhl wrote:
>> David,
>> Dimitrios has surprised us before!
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> "EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com
>> <mailto:spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com>> wrote in message
>> news:4395dfa3$1@linux...
>> 14 samples is 3 tenths of a millisecond at 44.1KHz. If you can hear
>> this amount of latency, you have better ears than me! ;-)
>>
>> David.
>>
>> Dimitrios wrote:
>> > HI,
>> > I wonder if you have a multi recording session that has used all
>> 16 analog
>> > ins on card A and you wanna use another set of 16 channels on
>> second eds
>> > card what is the situation here ?
>> > I mean you hear (not that really matters for musicians) 12-14
>> samples latent
>> > when real monitoring ? Or you just have 12-14 samples latency
>> only when playing
>> > back ?
>> > Did I make myself clear here ?
>> > I think lately I giving some hard time for you guys reading my
>> posts right
>> > ?
>> > Regards,
>> > DimitriosFirst things first. Applications are run as one or more threads. An appliction
can be coded to run as one massive thread or as more than one smaller thread.
Some applications lend themselves to running as multiple threads very well
(an audio app, for example, which can quite efficiently have threads for
every plug-in, every EQ, the mix engine, graphics, etc.) and some do not
(an SSH file transfer, for example, or a database query). Each thread has
to be assigned to a processor, and can't run on more than one. So, if you
have a quad processor machine (any platform, any OS) and your machine is
running three threads then one of the processors by definition will not be
used. So it *is* necessary for software to be coded to use multiple processors,
save that maybe the app can swamp one while the rest of OS is multi-threaded.
So we all can learn more and do some more reading when it comes to computers.
As I've said here recently, to me OS X and M$oft OS's are simply two sides
of a nearly identical coin. Neither grants their users the right to change
the platform for the better. Neither allows users to share their modifications
and improvements with others. Neither compels other to offer similar freedoms.
Until one or the other does (ha ha) I'm happy as a clam over here with Debian
and Gnome. Acutally I think Gnome beats the daylights out of both OS X and
XP as a desktop.
Oh, I build a PC that ran a goodsized database and serves out half a terabyte
of data per day. It's never crashed and has had uptimes of over a year running
XP Server. So don't tell me a PC won't run right if it's set up right.
TCB
"A Mac User" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote:
>>
>>I agree completely. OSX was a big left turn, too. That spinning pizza
>is
>>just completely unacceptable. They crash if they don't have enough ram.
>>They're extremely slow compared to a PC (which will change when they use
>>PC chips). And, they are very expensive for what the hardware and software
>>are really worth.
>>
>>They had a really nice, simple, clean OS with OS8-9. They saved a lot
of
>>money not having to develop an OS from the ground up by going with UNIX,
>>but they lost most of what made Apple wonderful and unique, too.
>>
>>Just my 2 cents. :)
>>
>>Mike
>>
>
>Mike, what you should do, is actually us Mac OSX for some time before commenting
>on it. It is obvious to me, that you are repeating the same ignorant stuff
>some other ignorant PC user told you, or you read in a PC biased article.
> What is unbelievable is the ignorance PC users have about the Mac, and
the
>fact that they perpetuate the same ignorant bull shit. A lot of PC users
>talk about the Mac like they know what they're talking about, when in fact,
>they have no idea what they are talking about!
>
>Go use a Mac G5 with OSX everyday for a year, then you'd have the right
and
>knowledge to tell people that the Mac sucks, but, that isn't what you'd
be
>saying. I don't think you would give up your XP box right away because
there
>would be some proprietary software you wouldn't want to give up, although
>you could run XP on your Mac. What would happen is you would end up using
>your Mac for 90% of your computing, and you would start to think that XP
>is more of a PITA to use.
>
>Why would you use a Mac over your PC??? Because it is hassle free computing,
>it's fast and it just works! It is a more pleasurable experience. You
don't
>have to be a security administrator, worms and other viruses are not so
much
>an issue. Pop ups, spy-ware, are not much of an issue either. You don't
>have to tweak and fuss with your computer to get it to work. PC guys are
>constantly trouble shooting and tweaking their computers. It is amazing
>to me that there is supposed to be standardized hardware for a PC, but a
>lot of it doesn't work with out trouble shooting, that is such a hassle.
> The amount of buggy software sold retail for the PC amazes me. All the
>B.S. PC users must put up without much complaint, simply amazes me. A lot
>of time is lost on trying to debug and get PCs to work. For the most part,
>the hassle factor doesn't exist with a Mac.
>
>
> A Mac, works differently than a PC, once you understand how a Mac works,
>then you will understand why Mac users are somewhat fanatical. I'll put
>it this way, Mac users are fanatical about their Macs, because they've used
>PCs, and know a Mac is better. I personally use both platforms and have
>for years. I use XP and 2000 for what I have to, and I use a Mac for the
>other 80% of my computing. The Mac is simply less headaches. It is less
>time consuming, and time is money. PC users always talk about how much
cheaper
>a PC is than a Mac because of the hardware cost. It's not cheaper when
you
>figure in time, the time to build, administrate, trouble shoot, bug fix,
>down load drivers and patches. You guy's talk about band-aids and patches,
>Microsoft software has more holes in it than a sieve.
>
>When PC users start Mac bashing, Mac users just shake their heads, we've
>heard the lies for so long we usually have to just turn and walk away.
The
>guys that are brain washed are zealot PC users that repeat old bull shit
>about how Mac suck, and Macs can't do this and that. Some people have their
>heads so far up Bill Gates ass they can't see strait. Please don't repeat
>the same dumb stuff! Find out for your self, and I'm not talking about
trying
>out a mac at a store or library, either.
>
>Mike you say Mac OSX crashes, that is pure bullshit! You say, Macs are
extremely
>slow compared to a PC, More dumb bullshit! Not even close to the truth!
> Your talking out your back side. Mike, honestly, you wouldn't know what
>the software on a Mac is worth, because you don't use a Mac. You say that
>OSX was a left turn, if Apple ever releases a version of OSX for PC, you
>will see major erosion in the Windoz market share by general computer users,
>because it's better than Windoz!
>
>As for the four processor in the new G5s and software not being able to
utilize
>the four processors, more ignorance. Mac OSX was written so that the processing
>load of a program is distributed across all four processors. It is not
>necessary to run software that is optimized for multi processors to take
>advantage of multi processors on a Mac. Although there are plenty of programs
>on the Mac platform that are optimized for multi processors. You really
>should read up on these things!
>
>As for the Pizza box (Beach Ball) spinning, if you where a Mac user you
would
>under stand what this means and what to do. First, on Windows it is the
>hour glass, same thing on a Mac only it is a spinning beach ball. On a
windows
>machine you would get an error message saying " The program is not responding
>" and you would go through the dialog boxes and quit the program. On a
Mac
>when you get a spinning beach ball you would do a force quit, to quit a
program
>that was not responding. It's the same as on a PC, but you are going to
>say the Mac sucks, when in fact you don't understand how it works. It doesn't
>suck, your just ignorant about it.
>
>The Mac bashing gets old, especially when some one is speaking from a point
>of ignorance, but acts as if they are an expert on the subject. Some here
>have comparing Mac OS9 on an old machine to Windows XP on the latest machine
>is not a fair comparison, either.
>
>If your a PC user, and you don't ever want to know about a Mac fine. You
>can stick your head in the sand or up Bill Gates ass or whatever, stay ignorant
>if you want, but don't bash the Mac until you have honestly used a new Mac
>with OSX for a year or more.
>Hello Everyone,
Just wondering if there was anyone here that would be interested in building
a computer for Paris. I have a 2.8 gig athlon with kt600 chipset Asus board,
don't recall what the # is on the motherboard. I switched to xp about a year
ago and have not really been able to get this computer working as it should.
I am now getting busy in the studio and really need something that is reliable.
Thanks, DavidThanks Jamie for knocking some sense into me and throwing yourself on this
"grenade". I almost made a huge mistake! I'm sending you the G5 now and have
just ordered the parts for my DIY PC. I'm having them shipped to Deej though
so he can assemble, tweak and test for me. I wouldn't know the Bios from the
Biosphere, so. . . ;>)
Seriously, I used to get miffed at Mac bashing, but now the whole PC vs. Mac
thing just seems silly. I'm typing this message on a PC, one of six or so I
try to keep running and playing nice together on the network here at work.
Over the years I've had at least ten different Macs. Right now my home
network has two PC's (one my son and I built) two Mac desktops, and two
laptops (one PC and one Mac). The fact is, all the computers I take care of
are fantastic, and all of them suck. They're fantastic when they're working
right and suck when they don't.
Peace on earth and good will toward men, yada, yada, yada.
Tony
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4395d57f@linux...
>
> Oh Man, sorry to hear it, Tony. I hate to think of all the suffering
> you're about to undergo with that G5 Mac.
>
> Listen, tell ya what. Just leave it in the box and send it to me. I'll
> shield you from the pain! ;^)
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
> Tony Benson wrote:
>> My gift just arrived today! But it's one of those nasty, poopy, evil G5
>> Macs. ;>) It's going to be my new DP/UAD-1 Box (No more dual booting! My
>> G4 is now officially my PARIS only box!). I had to go with a "new old
>> stock" G5 though as the UAD-1 won't work with the new PCIe slots. Oh
>> well, the price was right and I'm sure it will be more than powerful
>> enough for my needs, at least until the new Intel Macs have time to
>> mature.
>>
>> Here's wishing all my PARIS brothers and sisters a glorious and safe
>> holiday season, regardless of your computer preference!
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>
>> "erlilo" <erlilo@online.no> wrote in message news:4395433e$1@linux...
>>
>>>heyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, I'm not yelling, just saying hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
>>>back. Christmas is coming, maybe with new 'puter gifts for many of us,
>>>ummmhhh.... ....Have you been a nice enough boy the last couple of months
>>>to get some gifts from Santa Claus?;o)....
>>>
>>>
>>>"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.com> skrev i melding
>>>news:439483bb@linux...
>>>
>>>>hey yall
>>>>
>>>>just sayin hi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>does anyone have a big ben in use along with paris... or paris and
SX/nuendo?
the apogee site says to terminate with a T and a terminator at the input,
when the device recieving WC has only In and Out.
Does this method work with Paris??
Jeremy"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:43961fa4$1@linux...
> does anyone have a big ben in use along with paris... or paris and
> SX/nuendo?
>
> the apogee site says to terminate with a T and a terminator at the input,
> when the device recieving WC has only In and Out.
>
> Does this method work with Paris??
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>ok so everything LOOKS good... no problems according to big ben... all
lights look good.
Paris LOOKS happy too. Both Mecs set to "Word". Optical lock lights are on
for all adat modules.
everything looks good on 9652 also... green word clock light is on and
everything reads correctly on the settings panel... everything is synced...
clock mode is set to word clock and sync ref says Word.
problem... i don't get any audio from 9652 adat 9-24. 9-24 is connecting to
Mec #2(submix 2) modules. when i put a file in submix 2 i hear it... but in
live mode i hear nothing from nuendo. everything is fine on adat 1-8
connected to Mec 1 (submix 1).
i am at 44.1
any suggestions?
Jeremy
emy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message news:43961ff1@linux...
>
> "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:43961fa4$1@linux...
> > does anyone have a big ben in use along with paris... or paris and
> > SX/nuendo?
> >
> > the apogee site says to terminate with a T and a terminator at the
input,
> > when the device recieving WC has only In and Out.
> >
> > Does this method work with Paris??
> >
> > Jeremy
> >
> >
> >
>
>http://www.kfocus.com/paris/ has my updated notes including my latest
win98 setup info. If anyone needs the actual treepad file just email me
at john@kfocus.com for now.
Thanks,
JohnMec 2 says 48k but everything else is set to 44.1
"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:43961ff1@linux...
>
> "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:43961fa4$1@linux...
> > does anyone have a big ben in use along with paris... or paris and
> > SX/nuendo?
> >
> > the apogee site says to terminate with a T and a terminator at the
input,
> > when the device recieving WC has only In and Out.
> >
> > Does this method work with Paris??
> >
> > Jeremy
> >
> >
> >
>
>That's normal. It's a glitch in the detection on slave MEC units.
AA
"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4396413e@linux...
> Mec 2 says 48k but everything else is set to 44.1
>
>
> "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:43961ff1@linux...
>>
>> "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:43961fa4$1@linux...
>> > does anyone have a big ben in use along with paris... or paris and
>> > SX/nuendo?
>> >
>> > the apogee site says to terminate with a T and a terminator at the
> input,
>> > when the device recieving WC has only In and Out.
>> >
>> > Does this method work with Paris??
>> >
>> > Jeremy
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>Can you deteil your system? How is the word clock routed?
are you jumping between MEC's or feeding direct? What OS?
David.
Jeremy Luzier wrote:
> ok so everything LOOKS good... no problems according to big ben... all
> lights look good.
>
> Paris LOOKS happy too. Both Mecs set to "Word". Optical lock lights are on
> for all adat modules.
>
> everything looks good on 9652 also... green word clock light is on and
> everything reads correctly on the settings panel... everything is synced...
> clock mode is set to word clock and sync ref says Word.
>
> problem... i don't get any audio from 9652 adat 9-24. 9-24 is connecting to
> Mec #2(submix 2) modules. when i put a file in submix 2 i hear it... but in
> live mode i hear nothing from nuendo. everything is fine on adat 1-8
> connected to Mec 1 (submix 1).
>
> i am at 44.1
>
> any suggestions?
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> emy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message news:43961ff1@linux...
>
>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:43961fa4$1@linux...
>>
>>>does anyone have a big ben in use along with paris... or paris and
>>>SX/nuendo?
>>>
>>>the apogee site says to terminate with a T and a terminator at the
>
> input,
>
>>>when the device recieving WC has only In and Out.
>>>
>>>Does this method work with Paris??
>>>
>>>Jeremy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>thanks Aaron!
wasn't there some kinda "procedure" for clocking paris to an external
source.
like....
your default project had to be internal 48k.
and then you switch to word at 48k...
then change the external source to 44k?
i dont remember the procedure but i thought there was one!?
"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4396413e@linux...
> Mec 2 says 48k but everything else is set to 44.1
>
>
> "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:43961ff1@linux...
> >
> > "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:43961fa4$1@linux...
> > > does anyone have a big ben in use along with paris... or paris and
> > > SX/nuendo?
> > >
> > > the apogee site says to terminate with a T and a terminator at the
> input,
> > > when the device recieving WC has only In and Out.
> > >
> > > Does this method work with Paris??
> > >
> > > Jeremy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>Phil Schiller explains in an interview in 2001, near the end of the article.
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-254554.html
Mac OSX uses symmetric multiprocessing. Here is information from 2002.
Look for the line that says, "Mac OS X features symmetric multiprocessing,
enabling the operating system itself, as well as applications, to take full
advantage of dual processors for dramatic performance gains."
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2002/jan/28pmg4.html
Here's an article all the way back in 2000 talking about symmetric multiprocessing
on a Mac.
http://www.macobserver.com/editorial/2000/08/02.1.shtml
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>First things first. Applications are run as one or more threads. An appliction
>can be coded to run as one massive thread or as more than one smaller thread.
>Some applications lend themselves to running as multiple threads very well
>(an audio app, for example, which can quite efficiently have threads for
>every plug-in, every EQ, the mix engine, graphics, etc.) and some do not
>(an SSH file transfer, for example, or a database query). Each thread has
>to be assigned to a processor, and can't run on more than one. So, if you
>have a quad processor machine (any platform, any OS) and your machine is
>running three threads then one of the processors by definition will not
be
>used. So it *is* necessary for software to be coded to use multiple processors,
>save that maybe the app can swamp one while the rest of OS is multi-threaded.
>So we all can learn more and do some more reading when it comes to computers.
>
>
>As I've said here recently, to me OS X and M$oft OS's are simply two sides
>of a nearly identical coin. Neither grants their users the right to change
>the platform for the better. Neither allows users to share their modifications
>and improvements with others. Neither compels other to offer similar freedoms.
>Until one or the other does (ha ha) I'm happy as a clam over here with Debian
>and Gnome. Acutally I think Gnome beats the daylights out of both OS X and
>XP as a desktop.
>
>Oh, I build a PC that ran a goodsized database and serves out half a terabyte
>of data per day. It's never crashed and has had uptimes of over a year running
>XP Server. So don't tell me a PC won't run right if it's set up right.
>
>TCB
>
>"A Mac User" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>I agree completely. OSX was a big left turn, too. That spinning pizza
>>is
>>>just completely unacceptable. They crash if they don't have enough ram.
>>>They're extremely slow compared to a PC (which will change when they use
>>>PC chips). And, they are very expensive for what the hardware and software
>>>are really worth.
>>>
>>>They had a really nice, simple, clean OS with OS8-9. They saved a lot
>of
>>>money not having to develop an OS from the ground up by going with UNIX,
>>>but they lost most of what made Apple wonderful and unique, too.
>>>
>>>Just my 2 cents. :)
>>>
>>>Mike
>>>
>>
>>Mike, what you should do, is actually us Mac OSX for some time before commenting
>>on it. It is obvious to me, that you are repeating the same ignorant stuff
>>some other ignorant PC user told you, or you read in a PC biased article.
>> What is unbelievable is the ignorance PC users have about the Mac, and
>the
>>fact that they perpetuate the same ignorant bull shit. A lot of PC users
>>talk about the Mac like they know what they're talking about, when in fact,
>>they have no idea what they are talking about!
>>
>>Go use a Mac G5 with OSX everyday for a year, then you'd have the right
>and
>>knowledge to tell people that the Mac sucks, but, that isn't what you'd
>be
>>saying. I don't think you would give up your XP box right away because
>there
>>would be some proprietary software you wouldn't want to give up, although
>>you could run XP on your Mac. What would happen is you would end up using
>>your Mac for 90% of your computing, and you would start to think that XP
>>is more of a PITA to use.
>>
>>Why would you use a Mac over your PC??? Because it is hassle free computing,
>>it's fast and it just works! It is a more pleasurable experience. You
>don't
>>have to be a security administrator, worms and other viruses are not so
>much
>>an issue. Pop ups, spy-ware, are not much of an issue either. You don't
>>have to tweak and fuss with your computer to get it to work. PC guys are
>>constantly trouble shooting and tweaking their computers. It is amazing
>>to me that there is supposed to be standardized hardware for a PC, but
a
>>lot of it doesn't work with out trouble shooting, that is such a hassle.
>> The amount of buggy software sold retail for the PC amazes me. All the
>>B.S. PC users must put up without much complaint, simply amazes me. A
lot
>>of time is lost on trying to debug and get PCs to work. For the most part,
>>the hassle factor doesn't exist with a Mac.
>>
>>
>> A Mac, works differently than a PC, once you understand how a Mac works,
>>then you will understand why Mac users are somewhat fanatical. I'll put
>>it this way, Mac users are fanatical about their Macs, because they've
used
>>PCs, and know a Mac is better. I personally use both platforms and have
>>for years. I use XP and 2000 for what I have to, and I use a Mac for the
>>other 80% of my computing. The Mac is simply less headaches. It is less
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed May 06 21:42:38 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03451 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
