Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Reverse engineering a disaster
| Reverse engineering a disaster [message #74473] |
Thu, 19 October 2006 19:17  |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ration I try, I just simply do not have Analog Out
>>> #4 any more... weird. I don't know when this might have
>>> happened, because I haven't needed to use that before.
>>>=20
>>> If anyone can give me a hint as to what I might try, I'd
>>> appreciate it!
>>>=20
>>> In any event, I'm using 4 sets of stereo analog outs, going
>>> into the Paris 8-in module, and monitoring off the MEC... what
>>> do I think so far? Well, there's definitely a difference vs.
>>> mixing ITB on a 2-buss Native mix, as I suspected there would
>>> be. Does it sound better than a straight 2-buss Native mix?
>>> Yeah, I think so in a way... I'm definitely losing some high
>>> end, but it sounds bigger - won't be able to tell for sure
>>> until I a/b them, but those are my initital impressions. To me
>>> it sounds much like what you'd get if you stemmed out four or
>>> five stereo submixes in SX, then re-imported them into a new
>>> project & summed it to your final 2-track mix from there.
>>> Again, not certain how close the comparison is, but tomorrow
>>> I'm going to run a totally ITB Native 2-buss mix, a stemmed
>>> Native mix, and a "summed in Paris" mix & post some clips so you
>>> guys can compare for yourselves.
>>>=20
>>> Neil
>
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering a disaster [message #74482 is a reply to message #74473] |
Thu, 19 October 2006 22:42  |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Paris compatible motherboards, so I'd
better by getting one while the getting is good...
Cheers,
Kim.Three files total... one's a 'Mixed in SX, Summed in Paris'
mix, another is a straight-ahead SX 2-Buss Mix, and another
is an SX Stems Mix (note: NOT necessarily in the order I
just mentioned):
http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen t%20ClipA.mp3
http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen t%20ClipB.mp3
http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen t%20ClipC.mp3
They're fairly short... 1:14 each, just enough to get a touch of
instrumentation by itself, a portion with lead vox, then
background vox. They're Hi-Rez mp3's.
Any guesses as to which is which? Or better yet, which one do
you like better?
Neil"DC" <dc@spammersindenmark.com> wrote:
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu5sH_jNCBw
>
>yikes!!
That's great! LOLNappy
"Neil" <IOU@OIUOI.com> wrote:
>
>Three files total... one's a 'Mixed in SX, Summed in Paris'
>mix, another is a straight-ahead SX 2-Buss Mix, and another
>is an SX Stems Mix (note: NOT necessarily in the order I
>just mentioned):
>
> http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen t%20ClipA.mp3
>
> http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen t%20ClipB.mp3
>
> http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering a disaster [message #74483 is a reply to message #74482] |
Thu, 19 October 2006 22:43 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t%20ClipC.mp3
>
>
>They're fairly short... 1:14 each, just enough to get a touch of
>instrumentation by itself, a portion with lead vox, then
>background vox. They're Hi-Rez mp3's.
>
>Any guesses as to which is which? Or better yet, which one do
>you like better?
>
>NeilI'm not listening on refs but my laptop speakers tell me A is best, B is
second but slightly scoopy, C is last, narrow and less detailed. Lower mids
in A really treat the guitars nicely without trouncing the keys and seems
just all around more suitable for the piece. B wouldn't be bad if it were
Contemp Jazz or such. C... don't know what's up with that one but it just
don't do it for me. I'll be interested to hear which is PARIS, etc, and
what your routing, hdwr and procedures are/were.
Dubya
"Neil" <IOU@OIUOI.com> wrote in message news:4557bcc2$1@linux...
>
> Three files total... one's a 'Mixed in SX, Summed in Paris'
> mix, another is a straight-ahead SX 2-Buss Mix, and another
> is an SX Stems Mix (note: NOT necessarily in the order I
> just mentioned):
>
> http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen t%20ClipA.mp3
>
> http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen t%20ClipB.mp3
>
> http://www.saqqararecords.com/Music/Neil/Summing%20Experimen t%20ClipC.mp3
>
>
> They're fairly short... 1:14 each, just enough to get a touch of
> instrumentation by itself, a portion with lead vox, then
> background vox. They're Hi-Rez mp3's.
>
> Any guesses as to which is which? Or better yet, which one do
> you like better?
>
> NeilHey Tom! I don't know Jack; ) There is supposed to be a way in XP and OSX
to log on to another system over a network and toggle between them. Supposedly,
there is no need for a KMV switch.
When I get time, I'll look in to this. Right now I'm going out of town
for a week, so if you find out, let me know.
James
"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>James,
>Tell us what you know?!!!
>Tom
>
> "James McCloskey" <
|
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering a disaster [message #74484 is a reply to message #74483] |
Thu, 19 October 2006 23:14 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
>news:45576cdc$1@linux...
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >
> >Hey Jeff...
> >
> >No, I don't have a spare one laying around anymore - the one I
> >did have was cannibalized to build the Paris PC. I don't know
> >if I really want to a third one to the mix - I'm trying to
> >figure out how to configure this additional stuff now
> >(**physically** configure, I mean - not configuring connections,
> >etc.), so I don't know if I'd even have a good place to put
> >another PC; although you're right, that could be an inexpensive
> >way to go about it - I could pick up a cheapie e-machines brand
> >or equivalent for in the slightly over $300 range.
> >
> >That'll definitely be something to consider if I end up going
> >through dual-ASIO-driver hell on the main PC.
>
> There are ways to remotely access the other system through software =
>and
> a network connection, the KMV may not be necessary.
>
> James
>
> >
> >Neil
> >
> >
> >Jeff hoover <jkhoover@excite.com> wrote:
> >>Neil,
> >>
> >>Kind of a neophyte on all this stuff, but what about picking up a =
>low=20
> >>end pc just for multiface control(or you may have one in your back=20
> >>room). Still just starting with the multiface thing myself, but I =
>doubt
> >
> >>it takes any power to run Totalmix, and that would get around the=20
> >>"confguration lost when power's off" if you run the multifaces=20
> >>standlone. The multifaces would be relegated to basically just A/D=20
> >>converters, but it sounds like that's what you want. Just use a KVM
=
>
> >>switch (cheap one) to get to the piece occasionally if there is =
>issues.
> >>
> >>Just a thought
> >>
> >>
> >>Jeff
> >>
> >>Neil wrote:
> >>> "DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
> >>>=20
> >>>>Hey Neil,
> >>>>
> >>>>Feel free to give me a call if you hit any snags with the Pulsar.=20
> >>>=20
> >>>=20
> >>> Thanks for the offer, Deej - I may do that... it's not
> >>> scheduled to get here until late next week, actually, so it
> >>> won't be right away that I need to take you up on it if I have
> >>> problems.
> >>>=20
> >>>=20
> >>>>I've been test driving mine some more today and I'm still
> >>>>liking it a lot.
> >>>=20
> >>>=20
> >>> What? You havent shitcanned it yet? (oh, no wait, that's
> >>> tomorrow - Sunday)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering a disaster [message #74523 is a reply to message #74473] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 13:33 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;B" is the Native Stems version.
>>
>>Mix "C" is the Summed-in-Paris version.
>>
>>
>>Neil
>>
>
>Neil-
>
>Thanks so much for posting this, it's really helpful.
>One of the things I've heard repeated often over the years here is the
>need to mix Paris projects differently (like any piece of gear, play to
its
>strengths). Specifically the highs need more presence.
>
>Naive question but adding a few dbs and a stereo spreader
>in the treble would go a certain way towards granting your wish of
>combiningg the lows of C with the highs of B, wouldn't it?
>Mixing stems in Paris might be a good way to attack this...
Ted, it could be (the way to deal with it), but I wanted to
try & make this comparison as much about summing as possible,
in a fair manner - although Paris did have an advantage in that
I didn't have to dither down to the 44.1/16 2-buss wav file
therein. I did this both for my own curiosity - as I'm looking
for the best solution, too - as well as doing it for you guys
so that I could demonstrate that:
1.) The whole "collapsed soundfield" thing in Native is not
necessarily a given... none of the three clips have a major
difference between them in either the stereo spread or
imaging. There are some slight differences, yes - as one would
expect... I think we'd all we'd all be shocked as hell if
there WEREN'T some differences; and 2.) as I also have
mentioned in past threads, running several stems out, then
reimporting into a new project reinforces the imaging &
soundstage, and also preserves more subtleties.
If had EQ'ed the Paris stuff any differently, it wouldn't have
been as accurate of a comparison for the purposes of this test.
Having said that, maybe that'll be the next step! Like I said,
I'm looking for the "right stuff" for my own benefit as
well... it's not as if I just went out & repurchased some
Paris gear just in order to get you guys to drink my Native
Kool-aid. :)
So maybe the next step should be:
1.) A clip of the Paris-Summing, but with some EQ applied (in
Paris at the time of creating the 2-channel mix itself); trying
to match as closely as possible the upper mids & highs of
clip "B" (the Native Stems mix).
2.) A clip of the Native Stems themselves imported into Paris
(like someone asked about); but since the stems are at 88.1k
I'm not sure if I should samplerate convert them using dither
or do it with no dither.
NeilThat Teleport software looks pretty interesting. Please post how it works
out for you.
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>no, WiFi BAD.
>:)
>
>AA
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:4554a417$1@linux...
>>
>> Are you guys talking about WIRELESS networking of audio from one computer
>> to another? (I'm a complete dunderhead when it comes to
>> networking concepts, so pardon my ignorance.)
>>
>> Can you really do this?
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>> "Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
|
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering a disaster [message #74524 is a reply to message #74523] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 13:44 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>>>
>>>
>>>Aaron,=20
>>>That's the last step I'll be taking. and I was hoping you networkers
=
>>>might help me
>>>with that. I was thinking the onboard LAN in the ASUS A8R-MVPcomp #2
=
>>>would do to a=20
>>>onboard ASUS A7N8X-X LAN in comp #3. I think a crossover cable should
=
>>>do since
>>>I'm not on the internet with any of my music rigs.
>>>
>>>Aaron is there a speed/functionality issue with this? Remember 'simple'
>> =
>>>is good for me
>>>as long as it works.
>>>Tom
>>>
>>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote in message =
>>>news:45549ea7@linux...
>>> What protocol/type of interface are you using for your networking?
>>> AA
>>>
>>> "Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote in message =
>>>news:45542b13$1@linux...
>>> Hey guys,
>>> I am no match for DJ when it comes to this but I am pursuing a =
>>>controllable version of a monster setup.
>>>
>>> I have a master plan that is as simple as I can figure to pump Paris
>> =
>>>full of real-time processing juice. =20
>>> Here it is.
>>>
>>> Comp #1: Paris is running very well on a XP P4 3.0 and all the =
>>>goodies. 2 active
>>> ADAT cards along with 32 A-D, D-As, two SPDIFS and
a
>> =
>>>UAD-1 stocked for good measure.
>>>
>>> Comp #2: Cubase Studio 4 on my new AMD 4800+ Dualcore with =
>>>Creamware
>>> 14 chip Pro card with 20 In/out and Delta 66 w/4 x
=
>>>A-D, D-As and one SPDIF in/out,=20
>>> FX-Teleport Host to comp below linked by 100mbps =
>>>LAN.
>>>
>>> Comp #3: Spare AMD 3000+ waiting for a FX-Teleport Client link to
=
>>>Cubase comp #2
>>> via 100mbps LAN. This guy will take up the slack
=
>>>for the Cubase rig if need be.
>>>
>>> My application is for heavy use of Kontakt, multiple softsynths and
>> =
>>>surely Creamware plugs of all sorts. =20
>>> Music styles ranging from rock, heavy synth, orchestral and =
>>>sometimes in between all of those.
>>>
>>> My goal is to have solid/stable performance by not abusing any one
=
>>>computer in the network.
>>> Also to maintain an almost unlimited amount of close to real-time
=
>>>processing power throughout.
>>>
>>> I am looking into Windows Remote Desktop to help with =
>>>monitor/keyboard assignments.
>>> I expect to have 4 monitors and two keyboard/mice combos with one
=
>>>KVM between comp 1 & 2.
>>> I'm about 2 monitors, a Matrox Triple Head 2 Go and Kontakt away =
>>>before I'm all the way there.
>>>
>>> Anyone see anything blatantly wrong with my design? I'm still =
>>>Scoping it out!
>>> Thanks for your input,
>>> Tom=20
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>>> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>>>
>>><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 07 13:45:05 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.25471 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
