Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Drawmer 1969 Mercenary Edition
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drawmer 1969 Mercenary Edition [message #67861 is a reply to message #67858] |
Sun, 07 May 2006 19:54   |
Cujjo
Messages: 325
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
r />
>>>2,4,6 and 8. Pan hard right. Using the Paris VST EQ, split the files =
>>>into different bands. 1/2 will be lo pass, 3/4 will be low mid band, 5/6
>>=
>>>will be hi mid band, 7/8 will be hi pass. Freq will vary depending on
=
>>>taste and what you're going for and program material. Use your ears, =
>>>nobody can hand you that in text and be completely accurate. Start with
>>=
>>>the Sakis Frequencies... Lo 20-90hz. Lo-Mid 90-540 Hi-Mid 540-6Khz
Hi
>>=
>>>6-20Khz. Compress each 'set' of channels (1/2, 3/4, 5/6, 7/8) with =
>>>either the Paris Compressor or with a good sounding native POST Paris
=
>>>VST EQ. The placement is absolutely critical. Tie all faders together
=
>>>using Grouping on the mixer. Do not for ANY reason split these waves =
>>>into another editor unless you're ready to fight phase and time delay
=
>>>demons between submixes. Also, be sure you have everything selected with
>>=
>>>the time lock tool when you do this - same reason about phase/time.=20
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drawmer 1969 Mercenary Edition [message #67872 is a reply to message #67869] |
Mon, 08 May 2006 05:41 |
Rob Arsenault
Messages: 152
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;VST EQ,=20
>>>split the files into different bands. 1/2 will be lo pass, 3/4 will be
>=
>>>low mid=20
>>>band, 5/6 will be hi mid band, 7/8 will be hi pass. Freq will vary =
>>>depending on=20
>>>taste and what you're going for and program material. Use your ears, =
>>>nobody can=20
>>>hand you that in text and be completely accurate. Start with the Sakis=20
>>>Frequencies... Lo 20-90hz. Lo-Mid 90-540 Hi-Mid =
>>>540-6Khz Hi=20
>>>6-20Khz. Compress each 'set' of channels (1/2, 3/4, 5/6, 7/8) with =
>>>either the=20
>>>Paris Compressor or with a good sounding native POST Paris VST EQ. The
>=
>>>placement=20
>>>is absolutely critical. Tie all faders together using Grouping on the
=
>>>mixer. Do=20
>>>not for ANY reason split these waves into another editor unless you're
>=
>>>ready to=20
>>>fight phase and time delay demons between submixes. Also, be sure you
=
>>>have=20
>>>everything selected with the time lock tool when you do this - same =
>>>reason about=20
>>>phase/time. </STRONG></FONT></DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><STRONG></STRONG></FONT> </DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><STRONG>Now, the thing is, you can =
>>>adjust the=20
>>>Gain/EQ mojo separately for each band, you can compress with different
>=
>>>ratios,=20
>>>thresholds.. whatever suits the material, all in Paris. If you use the
>=
>>>Paris=20
>>>compressor, be sure to match each pair of tracks' settings (1=3D2, =
>>>3=3D4, 5=3D6, 7=3D8).=20
>>>Ditto on the eq bands, they must match, period. </STRONG></FONT></DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><STRONG></STRONG></FONT> </DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><STRONG>Now then, for more secret sauce
>>=
>>>beyond the=20
>>>Eq/Gain trick.. put one more compressor on the global but do NOT =
>>>compress with=20
>>>it. Threshold all the way up, ratio all the way down. Instead, use the
>=
>&
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drawmer 1969 Mercenary Edition [message #67999 is a reply to message #67947] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 10:05 |
duncan
Messages: 123
Registered: November 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt; together
> >> > and then run other WC cables of differing lengths to 3 x RME
interfaces
> >> > and
> >> > 3 x MECs while also running ADAT sync cables from 3 x Paris ADAT
modules
> >> > to
> >> > the ADAT sync inputs of the 3 x RME cards while the digital I/O of
the
> >RME
> >> > cards, the Paris modules, all of your external spdif gear and ADAT
gear
> >is
> >> > all patched into three different M-Audio Digipatch units which are
daisy
> >> > chained to each other using spdif cables in an attempt to allow
> >> > simultaneous
> >> > clocking of everythiong from two different sources derived from the
> same
> >> > master clock while cross patching all of the digital I/O between
various
> >> > lightpipe, coax and optical spdif devices through these digital
> >patchbays
> >> > that, BTW, don't reclock the incoming/outgoing signal.
> >> >
> >> > I know a bunch of you guys were getting ready to do this , but just
> say
> >> > no.
> >> >
> >> > (I swear there was a valid reason for trying this.........really
there
> >> > was)
> >> >
> >> > ;oD
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>That technique works perfectly. If you do it like that you will get the best
sweet spot where the stereo imaging is the most 3d.
I have little 2x4 blocks to aim the speakers down when I"m sitting mixing
and straight when I'm standing playing. It keeps the sweet spot ideal.
John
EK Sound <askme@nospam.com> wrote:
>Ideally, the speaker should be as far away from your ears as they are
>apart from each other (equal sided triangle). Also, the cabinets
>should be aiming at you with the center of the cabinet at right angles
>to your head. This means that if you have the cabinets sitting lower
>than your head, you should tilt them up slightly, and tilt down if
>they are over your head.
>
>Just a rule of thumb... YMMV
>
>David.
>
>Brandon wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> According to the manual these were designed to be placed in a vertical
>> position. I have read articles on speaker placement and they say most
speakers
>> are designed to have the listeners ear at a level height with the tweeter
>> OR level with the space between the tweeter and the woofer. I notice that
>> the phantom center shifts up and down in front of me as I change my ear
level
>> in relation to the tweeters. It is written that there is an optimal listening
>> position when considering phase relation between the tweeter and the woofer.
>> I wrote to Mackie and there response was:
>>
>> "As long as you are a descent distance away from the cabinets, a meter
>> or so, I don't think it matters. Put them in a horizontal plane with
>> your head and stay a good bit away from them. You should be fine. msp"
>>
>> This response goes against how the speakers were designed to be mounted
and
>> listened thru.....So........
>> Does anyone know the optimal positioning?and why?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Brandonwell, uh..........no
hehe
John
"Rich Lamanna" <richard.lamanna@verizon.net> wrote:
>Does this mean even I can learn how to sing?
>
>Rich
>
>"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:44811172$1@linux...
>>
>> Here's a way to make money with your studio!
>>
>> http://www.newyorkfirst.com/gifts/2122.html
>
>It's got ADAT and spdif I/O and USB ports but no PCI . Sooooo.............if
you connect it to a computer using it's USB port, can you access UAD cards,
patch the ADAT I/O into the Paris ADAT I/O, set up a Paris PB scenario
wherein the ADAT I/O is routed to different inserts and auxes and then
process Paris tracks using UAD-1 hardware with zero latency?
"Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4ps182lqijgopurtdgibdig363g5ido8j6@4ax.com...
> I have one and simply love it. Morgan gave me a great deal on a base
> model, and I upgraded the RAM and harddrive for pretty cheap.
>
> I mostly use the soft synths, and there are so many nice free ones
> that come with it, that I have yet so shell out money for any
> commercial ones.
>
> It comes with a bunch of nice effects too, and what is really cool is
> that you can plug in a guitar/bass into a DI port and use the effects
> directly with the instrument.
>
> If you are a gigging musician who would like to get some VST(i) into
> your act but have problems lugging a computer around, the Receptor is
> worth consideration. Big name acts are taking racks of these things on
> the road now, and it is really catching on.
>
> - Paul Artola
> Ellicott City, Maryland
>
> On 3 Jun 2006 06:37:43 +1000, "Chris Lang" <yo@yo.yo> wrote:
>
> >
> >www.museresearch.com
> >
> >Looks like the Receptor can do both effects and instruments.
> >
> >It looks really cool, but a good unit with enough memory and
> >RAM is two grand at Musician's Friend.
> >
> >Anyway, FYI.
> >
> >peace,
> >
> >Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote:
> >>No, there was a hardware rack mount box out there that ran VST's, I
remember
> >
> >>seeing it intro'd just before a NAMM I think.. but I cannot for the life
> >of
> >>me remember the name or if it actually made production.
> >>
> >>AA
> >>
> >>
> >>"Gantt Kushner" <ganttmann
|
|
|
|
| Re: Drawmer 1969 Mercenary Edition [message #68004 is a reply to message #67999] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 12:58 |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"_blank">http://saqqararecords.com/images/WhatThisFinalMixMP3.mp3
Guitars were kinda your typical numetal setup - EMG humbuckers
through Mesa triple rectifier heads, one guy had a Mesa cab
with Celestions & the other guys used an older Marshall cab,
also with Celestions, but the Mesa cab sounded as if the
speakers had a bit tighter cones.
*Signal chain for the guy with the Marshall cab (lead parts) was
2x Audix i5's through a Focusrite Red 8; same mics, but each
mic on a different speaker, as the two bottom speakers had
slightly different characteristics from one another.
*Signal Chain for the rhythm guitarist was an Audix i5 and a
BLUE Ball, through Grace101 mic pre's.
Drums were a combination of e-kit & live mics. Kick, snare &
toms were all e-kit. We also recorded the MIDI output so we
could regenerate the sounds on separate tracks for more
flexibility during mixdown. Snare & Tom samples were from the
Roland TD-20 brain, Kick was from my Fantom. The only exception
to this was the "industrial kit" sound at the start & end
of "What This", which was all from the TD-20.
*Three cymbals were live & three were e-kit cymbals. Hi-Hats
were live (we ended up using the hi-hat e-pad, though, anyway...
moved it over on the other side of the kit for an extra tom pad.
*OH mics were TLM-103's and the Hi-Hat mic was an Earthworks
TC-30, all through a Focusrite ISA 428, with impedances on
the "ISA-110" setting.
Bass was direct through a Carvin head which had an XLR line-
level out... you may remember my posts about this issue - the
guys liked the sound at first, but after we'd recorded
everything I was able to point out that it was a bit too
indistinct, and we ended up reamping it through the Mesa
Head/Cab combination on the cleanest possible settings, and
also taking a line out into a Sansamp Bass module & retracking
that signal on a separate track. Re-amping was handled by a
TLM-103 - since I needed a mic that would emphasize the highs
& definition, but still had excellent low-end extension - and
run through a Neve Portico preamp. What you're hearing is a
combination of the re-amp'ed track & the Sans-amped track,
pretty much in equal proportion, with absolutely zero of the
original track involved.
Vocals on the softer sections (like the verses in "What This")
were tracked with the "Claytor-67" through a Chandler TG2
preamp. A TLM-103 through the Neve Portico was used on the
harder sections of that song. The -103 through an ISA 428 was
used on all the parts on "Bitch Liberte".Hey,
Sounds good. The ending of that second one is pretty cool. And you
actually used amplifiers and microphones on the guitars. :)
Sarah
www.sarahtonin.com/wayward.htm
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44826027@linux...
>
> These guys are calling these "final mixes", but I'm going to see
> if I can get the to make a few tweaks. We're leaving 2-bus
> compression off until Mastering, so the levels are prolly a
> little on the low side... gonna send 4 stereo stems to
> Mastering, so they'll most likely compress each stem separately.
> Recording notes are posted below, for those that may be
> interested.
> Anyway, the band said "post 'em freely", so enjoy!
>
> http://saqqararecords.com/images/BitchLiberteFinalMixMP3.mp3
>
> http://saqqararecords.com/images/WhatThisFinalMixMP3.mp3
>
>
> Guitars were kinda your typical numetal setup - EMG humbuckers
> through Mesa triple rectifier heads, one guy had a Mesa cab
> with Celestions & the other guys used an older Marshall cab,
> also with Celestions, but the Mesa cab sounded as if the
> speakers had a bit tighter cones.
> *Signal chain for the guy with the Marshall cab (lead parts) was
> 2x Audix i5's through a Focusrite Red 8; same mics, but each
> mic on a different speaker, as the two bottom speakers had
> slightly different characteristics from one another.
> *Signal Chain for the rhythm guitarist was an Audix i5 and a
> BLUE Ball, through Grace101 mic pre's.
>
> Drums were a combination of e-kit & live mics. Kick, snare &
> toms were all e-kit. We also recorded the MIDI output so we
> could regenerate the sounds on separate tracks for more
> flexibility during mixdown. Snare & Tom samples were from the
> Roland TD-20 brain, Kick was from my Fantom. The only exception
> to this was the "industrial kit" sound at the start & end
> of "What This", which was all from the TD-20.
> *Three cymbals were live & three were e-kit cymbals. Hi-Hats
> were live (we ended up using the hi-hat e-pad, though, anyway...
> moved it over on the other side of the kit for an extra tom pad.
> *OH mics were TLM-103's and the Hi-Hat mic was an Earthworks
> TC-30, all through a Focusrite ISA 428, with impedances on
> the "ISA-110" setting.
>
> Bass was direct through a Carvin head which had an XLR line-
> level out... you may remember my posts about this issue - the
> guys liked the sound at first, but after we'd recorded
> everything I was able to point out that it was a bit too
> indistinct, and we ended up reamping it through the Mesa
> Head/Cab combination on the cleanest possible settings, and
> also taking a line out into a Sansamp Bass module & retracking
> that signal on a separate track. Re-amping was handled by a
> TLM-103 - since I needed a mic that would emphasize the highs
> & definition, but still had excellent low-end extension - and
> run through a Neve Portico preamp. What you're hearing is a
> combination of the re-amp'ed track & the Sans-amped track,
> pretty much in equal proportion, with absolutely zero of the
> original track involved.
>
> Vocals on the softer sections (like the verses in "What This")
> were tracked with the "Claytor-67" through a Chandler TG2
> preamp. A TLM-103 through the Neve Portico was used on the
> harder sections of that song. The -103 through an ISA 428 was
> used on all the parts on "Bitch Liberte".
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Well I'm still working on it, and I seem to be progresing fairly well I think.
I bought this little program for $12:
http://www.brenthugh.com/eartest/
It simply throws notes at you. I've now got it hooked up through my fave
digital piano with MIDI. It plays a note on my piano, and I have to try and
hit that note. It doesn't care if I get the octave right, but I try and do
that anyhow.
You can decide how many/which notes you want it to test you on, and weight
them so that some play more than others according to what you're bad at.
I'm currently using the entire C major scale, and I'm getting about 98% correct
when I'm not hung over. ;o) Earlier today I got over 100 questions correct
in a row. Generally I get about 50 right and get overconfident or lose concentration
and stuff one up, but if I'm concentrating I can get them pretty much all
right.
I've read a few tips about the place net. It seems the skills generally come
first to you on your natural instrument, and then slowly migrate over to
others. Having said that I just had my first experience of what I'd call
"real" perfect pitch earlier today, when, in between tests, while plugging
in some MIDI stuff, my phone beeped an SMS and I went "Hey, that's F!!".
;o) I don't find I recognise the keys and notes in songs on the radio yet
however, but no doubt that will come.
My aim is to get up to 98% averages on the entire chromatic scale at 440Hz
by the end of the month, and then I'll start to worry about translating that
on to tunes on the radio. I figure when you hear someone sing a note, it's
not hard to imagine a piano playing the note, so if that's what I have to
do to start with, so be it.
The good thing is I'm growing increasingly confident that it's working, and
I'm pretty stoked about that. :o)
Cheers,
Kim.this is sooooooooo very disappointing...i thought it was going to be
about a perfect pitcher of beer. but, i'm glad you're still happy
with the product.
On 4 Jun 2006 17:18:00 +1000, "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Well I'm still working on it, and I seem to be progresing fairly well I think.
>
>I bought this little program for $12:
>http://www.brenthugh.com/eartest/
>
>It simply throws notes at you. I've now got it hooked up through my fave
>digital piano with MIDI. It plays a note on my piano, and I have to try and
>hit that note. It doesn't care if I get the octave right, but I try and do
>that anyhow.
>
>You can decide how many/which notes you want it to test you on, and weight
>them so that some play more than others according to what you're bad at.
>I'm currently using the entire C major scale, and I'm getting about 98% correct
>when I'm not hung over. ;o) Earlier today I got over 100 questions correct
>in a row. Generally I get about 50 right and get overconfident or lose concentration
>and stuff one up, but if I'm concentrating I can get them pretty much all
>right.
>
>I've read a few tips about the place net. It seems the skills generally come
>first to you on your natural instrument, and then slowly migrate over to
>others. Having said that I just had my first experience of what I'd call
>"real" perfect pitch earlier today, when, in between tests, while plugging
>in some MIDI stuff, my phone beeped an SMS and I went "Hey, that's F!!".
>;o) I don't find I recognise the keys and notes in songs on the radio yet
>however, but no doubt that will come.
>
>My aim is to get up to 98% averages on the entire chromatic scale at 440Hz
>by the end of the month, and then I'll start to worry about translating that
>on to tunes on the radio. I figure when you hear someone sing a note, it's
>not hard to imagine a piano playing the note, so if that's what I have to
>do to start with, so be it.
>
>The good thing is I'm growing increasingly confident that it's working, and
>I'm pretty stoked about that. :o)
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.do people still wear their collars up like that?
On 4 Jun 2006 02:37:36 +1000, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>well, uh..........no
>hehe
>John
>
>
>"Rich Lamanna" <richard.lamanna@verizon.net> wrote:
>>Does this mean even I can learn how to sing?
>>
>>Rich
>>
>>"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:44811172$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Here's a way to make money with your studio!
>>>
>>> http://www.newyorkfirst.com/gifts/2122.html
>>
>>KB player for the Dead and even better yet, the Tubes, died today. Reports
are it was suiside but nothing confirmed yet. RIP Vince....
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/06/03/MNG4 5J861V4.DTLPerfect pitch is "tossing an accordian in the toilet without hitting the
rim"
> >
> >
> >Well I'm still working on it, and I seem to be progresing fairly well I
think.
> >
> >I bought this little program for $12:
> >http://www.brenthugh.com/eartest/
> >
> >It simply throws notes at you. I've now got it hooked up through my fave
> >digital piano with MIDI. It plays a note on my piano, and I have to try
and
> >hit that note. It doesn't care if I get the octave right, but I try and
do
> >that anyhow.
> >
> >You can decide how many/which notes you want it to test you on, and
weight
> >them so that some play more than others according to what you're bad at.
> >I'm currently using the entire C major scale, and I'm getting about 98%
correct
> >when I'm not hung over. ;o) Earlier today I got over 100 questions
correct
> >in a row. Generally I get about 50 right and get overconfident or lose
concentration
> >and stuff one up, but if I'm concentrating I can get them pretty much all
> >right.
> >
> >I've read a few tips about the place net. It seems the skills generally
come
> >first to you on your natural instrument, and then slowly migrate over to
> >others. Having said that I just had my first experience of what I'd call
> >"real" perfect pitch earlier today, when, in between tests, while
plugging
> >in some MIDI stuff, my phone beeped an SMS and I went "Hey, that's F!!".
> >;o) I don't find I recognise the keys and notes in songs on the radio yet
> >however, but no doubt that will come.
> >
> >My aim is to get up to 98% averages on the entire chromatic scale at
440Hz
> >by the end of the month, and then I'll start to worry about translating
that
> >on to tunes on the radio. I figure when you hear someone sing a note,
it's
> >not hard to imagine a piano playing the note, so if that's what I have to
> >do to start with, so be it.
> >
> >The good thing is I'm growing increasingly confident that it's working,
and
> >I'm pretty stoked about that. :o)
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Kim.
>"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>Hey,
>
>Sounds good. The ending of that second one is pretty cool.
>And you actually used amplifiers and microphones on the
>guitars. :)
LOL! Yeah, but when the drummer says his kit is "crap", and
so are some of his cymbals, plus he'd just broken his
main crash the week before we were supposed to start and the
bass player doesn't even have a cabinet (they go direct through
his head into their PA live), then you kinda wing it & make some
adjustments.
I guess I'm not too concerned about being a "purist" with
regard to impressive micing of live instruments, especially if
the situation doesn't allow for it; I'm more concerned with
getting the artist an end result that they're over-the-top
happy with.
The first certainly gives a great deal of self-satisfaction,
no doubt about it, but the second sure gets you a lot of
referrals.
Next up might be a hip-hop project if scheduling works out,
so chances are there won't be but ONE mic involved in that
one! lol
NeilHey Neil
My only comment is in the first tune the vocal phrasing seems out of time
with the drums (or rhythm tracks) in certain spots which makes the groove
jerky if you know what I mean.
Other than that sounds okay to me although I'm not familiar enough with the
genre to make a comment on the mix
Don
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:4482f8b5$1@linux...
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>Hey,
>>
>>Sounds good. The ending of that second one is pretty cool.
>>And you actually used amplifiers and microphones on the
>>guitars. :)
>
> LOL! Yeah, but when the drummer says his kit is "crap", and
> so are some of his cymbals, plus he'd just broken his
> main crash the week before we were supposed to start and the
> bass player doesn't even have a cabinet (they go direct through
> his head into their PA live), then you kinda wing it & make some
> adjustments.
>
> I guess I'm not too concerned about being a "purist" with
> regard to impressive micing of live instruments, especially if
> the situation doesn't allow for it; I'm more concerned with
> getting the artist an end result that they're over-the-top
> happy with.
> The first certainly gives a great deal of self-satisfaction,
> no doubt about it, but the second sure gets you a lot of
> referrals.
>
> Next up might be a hip-hop project if scheduling works out,
> so chances are there won't be but ONE mic involved in that
> one! lol
>
> NeilAnyone into Spyro Gyra and such would like this one for sure. I'm groovin
big time to it.
http://tinyurl.com/o8gp5
Enjoy,
JohnI checked out the second one, the drummer's right. Seems like he could
have chosen more convincing sounds (you sure that wasn't a TD10?), but
since the MIDI tracks are available drum sample replacement should be no
prob. Or maybe he likes those sounds, who knows. As long as the client
is happy.
Guitars sound good.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
Neil wrote:
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> Sounds good. The ending of that second one is pretty cool.
>> And you actually used amplifiers and microphones on the
>> guitars. :)
>
> LOL! Yeah, but when the drummer says his kit is "crap", and
> so are some of his cymbals, plus he'd just broken his
> main crash the week before we were supposed to start and the
> bass player doesn't even have a cabinet (they go direct through
> his head into their PA live), then you kinda wing it & make some
> adjustments.
>
> I guess I'm not too concerned about being a "purist" with
> regard to impressive micing of live instruments, especially if
> the situation doesn't allow for it; I'm more concerned with
> getting the artist an end result that they're over-the-top
> happy with.
> The first certainly gives a great deal of self-satisfaction,
> no doubt about it, but the second sure gets you a lot of
> referrals.
>
> Next up might be a hip-hop project if scheduling works out,
> so chances are there won't be but ONE mic involved in that
> one! lol
>
> NeilI don't think you can integrate the Receptor and UAD-1, sadly. If
there were a way to combine these hardwares, it would be a match made
in heaven.
The Muse is basically a 2U AMD-cpu'd computer running a tight Linux
distro with a Windows virtual computer inside to run and control the
VST(i). If Muse would partner up with the folks at Magma, I bet they
could work out a way to get expansion cards into the Muse and then the
sky would be the limit.
- Paul Artola
Ellicott City, Maryland
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:34:21 -0600, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>It's got ADAT and spdif I/O and USB ports but no PCI . Sooooo.............if
>you connect it to a computer using it's USB port, can you access UAD cards,
>patch the ADAT I/O into the Paris ADAT I/O, set up a Paris PB scenario
>wherein the ADAT I/O is routed to different inserts and auxes and then
>process Paris tracks using UAD-1 hardware with zero latency?
>
>
>"Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:4ps182lqijgopurtdgibdig363g5ido8j6@4ax.com...
>> I have one and simply love it. Morgan gave me a great deal on a base
>> model, and I upgraded the RAM and harddrive for pretty cheap.
>>
>> I mostly use the soft synths, and there are so many nice free ones
>> that come with it, that I have yet so shell out money for any
>> commercial ones.
>>
>> It comes with a bunch of nice effects too, and what is really cool is
>> that you can plug in a guitar/bass into a DI port and use the effects
>> directly with the instrument.
>>
>> If you are a gigging musician who would like to get some VST(i) into
>> your act but have problems lugging a computer around, the Receptor is
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 07 16:32:16 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.25753 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
