Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » More Pulsar Observations
| More Pulsar Observations [message #77423] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 09:00  |
Nil
Messages: 245
Registered: March 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
OK, after twiddling around with this beast quite a bit more
yesterday, I have a few more observations, FWIW, in case any
others of you were still thinking of going this route:
1.) The overall sound, is, IMO, really good... in the
configuration in which I am able to use it, I can only get a
total of 8 inputs (4 stereo submixes in my case, running
through 2 lightpipe in's), but even with just that (i.e.: not
being able to sum like all 40 channels of a given project or
whatnot) I am definitely hearing a bit more well-defined or
clearer sound.
2.) I'm not all that impressed with the plugins...
the "Optimaster" one is very useful, and the MasterVerbPro &
Vinco are also pretty cool, but since I'm using this as a
summing tool, I'm not about to slap a reverb across the 2-buss
or one of the submixes - same goes for the Vinco (it's a
pretty much dead-on 1176 emulation; sunds great, but there's not
much of a chance I'm going to use that particular comp across
an entire mix or submix). While some of the other plugins
are "cool" in concept (like the PsyQ, which is a spatial
manipulator, of sorts), IME they're not very useful - the
PsyQ, for instance, has about two degrees of manipulation
available before it starts sounding like crap LOL now
that's kind of a waste of code, if you ask me! There are quite
a few plugs like that one in the bunch, trust me, but again,
there are also a few useful ones... I'm just not all that
impressed with a lot of them. Maybe I was expecting more from a
whole crop of DSP-based plugs, I dunno.
3.)The Mixer, is not much of a mixer... if you're expecting
something like you'll find in Paris or Cubase/Nuendo in terms
of versatility, automation, etc, forget it. It sure LOOKS
pretty, though! :) it doesn't have built-in EQ, you have to
select an EQ plugin (of which there are a couple), and there
are only a couple of plugin slots per channel (depending on
which Mixer you select).
4.) The software is not very intuitive, but it's also not
overly cumbersome, either - once you learn how to speak German,
you'll be fine LOL j/k... serisouly, though, once you learn
how "they" do things (certain click/drops & "is it a right or a
left click?" - stuff like that), you'll find that those
patterns pretty much repeat themselves across all the windows &
menus/submenus. It's very much like Paris in the sense that
it's got a routing window (virtual patchbay-style), a main
project window, a separate mixer window, etc. It does NOT have
an editor of any kind (that I have come across, anyway), or a
tracking feature similar in any way shape or form to any DAW
wherein you have a window that shows what audio tracks you
have, where they start & stop, etc, etc. You CAN track a number
of of tracks to disk through this gear alone, but then you'd
have to reimport those into some DAW app to do anything really
useful with them... so in case there was any confusion, the
Creamware stuff in & of itself, is NOT really useable as a
standalone DAW application - you'd have to have some other ASIO-
compliant DAW partnered with it to be able to work in any
manner even remotely close to what you're currently used to.
5.) Finally, DSP: DO NOT be fooled by your brain telling
you: "Wow that card has THREE whole DSP chips! That should be
PLENTY of power for what I want to do, since I have exactly
ZERO DSP chips now!!!" Lemme tellya something... I have the
Project Card - six DSP chips - and if I insert one big plugin
like the Optimaster, I can insert exactly ONE more plugin
before it gives me the white flag of DSP surrender. If I don't
have a "big" plugin like the Optimaster inserted, I can insert,
for example - exactly FIVE Vinco compressors before the DSP
resources are exceeded. There's a thing called SBC (Spectral
Balance Controller), and even if NO OTHER PLUGINS are inserted,
if I insert that at 88.2k, all DSP resources become maxed-out.
Now I can also kinda see why Deej opted for a couple of
the "Home" (3-DSP) cards & one of the Project (6-DSP) cards,
because there's also an i/o & routing issue, and so Deej ended
up with a dozen total DSP chips across the three cards he's
got, plus a bit better i/o flexibility as compared to if he'd
gotten just one of the Pro (14-DSP) Cards. Now also, keep in
mind I'm running at 88.2k, so that indeed is going to take more
DSP horsepower to process in three different Pulsar stages
(Mixer channels/any plugins/and Mixer bus) than those of you
running at 44.1 or 48, but if I can only insert TWO big plugins
or five normal less-DSP-intensive ones on this card, how many
instances could you get at 44.1k? Far from what we're used to
in Paris or Native, methinks.
So if you're looking to get into this stuff, I'd say do your
homework here first, asking the guys who have it already,
and don't trust what tyhe Creamware reps tell you, because in
my own personal experience, they don't know their product very
well, and they certaily they don't stand behind it (I mean, when
a guy whines to me that he's going to lose money if he takes
the product back, even after he told me it WOULD do something
that it DOESN'T, then THAT is a guy that ought not to be running
any kind of business in the first place).
Anyway, the stuff doens't suck, and I'm sure some of you could
find it useful; just pick your cards and i/o options carefully
is what I'm trying to say, because it's very unlikely that if
you need to swap something out, these guys will be willing to
make it happen. Or they'll bitch & whine if they do - who needs
that when you're forking over hundreds or perhaps thousands of
$$$? Not me, baby! lol
Merry Creamwaresmas!
Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77424 is a reply to message #77423] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 08:32  |
AlexPlasko
Messages: 211
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
thanks neil! and merry christmas!
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:458ff58b$1@linux...
>
> OK, after twiddling around with this beast quite a bit more
> yesterday, I have a few more observations, FWIW, in case any
> others of you were still thinking of going this route:
>
> 1.) The overall sound, is, IMO, really good... in the
> configuration in which I am able to use it, I can only get a
> total of 8 inputs (4 stereo submixes in my case, running
> through 2 lightpipe in's), but even with just that (i.e.: not
> being able to sum like all 40 channels of a given project or
> whatnot) I am definitely hearing a bit more well-defined or
> clearer sound.
>
> 2.) I'm not all that impressed with the plugins...
> the "Optimaster" one is very useful, and the MasterVerbPro &
> Vinco are also pretty cool, but since I'm using this as a
> summing tool, I'm not about to slap a reverb across the 2-buss
> or one of the submixes - same goes for the Vinco (it's a
> pretty much dead-on 1176 emulation; sunds great, but there's not
> much of a chance I'm going to use that particular comp across
> an entire mix or submix). While some of the other plugins
> are "cool" in concept (like the PsyQ, which is a spatial
> manipulator, of sorts), IME they're not very useful - the
> PsyQ, for instance, has about two degrees of manipulation
> available before it starts sounding like crap LOL now
> that's kind of a waste of code, if you ask me! There are quite
> a few plugs like that one in the bunch, trust me, but again,
> there are also a few useful ones... I'm just not all that
> impressed with a lot of them. Maybe I was expecting more from a
> whole crop of DSP-based plugs, I dunno.
>
> 3.)The Mixer, is not much of a mixer... if you're expecting
> something like you'll find in Paris or Cubase/Nuendo in terms
> of versatility, automation, etc, forget it. It sure LOOKS
> pretty, though! :) it doesn't have built-in EQ, you have to
> select an EQ plugin (of which there are a couple), and there
> are only a couple of plugin slots per channel (depending on
> which Mixer you select).
>
> 4.) The software is not very intuitive, but it's also not
> overly cumbersome, either - once you learn how to speak German,
> you'll be fine LOL j/k... serisouly, though, once you learn
> how "they" do things (certain click/drops & "is it a right or a
> left click?" - stuff like that), you'll find that those
> patterns pretty much repeat themselves across all the windows &
> menus/submenus. It's very much like Paris in the sense that
> it's got a routing window (virtual patchbay-style), a main
> project window, a separate mixer window, etc. It does NOT have
> an editor of any kind (that I have come across, anyway), or a
> tracking feature similar in any way shape or form to any DAW
> wherein you have a window that shows what audio tracks you
> have, where they start & stop, etc, etc. You CAN track a number
> of of tracks to disk through this gear alone, but then you'd
> have to reimport those into some DAW app to do anything really
> useful with them... so in case there was any confusion, the
> Creamware stuff in & of itself, is NOT really useable as a
> standalone DAW application - you'd have to have some other ASIO-
> compliant DAW partnered with it to be able to work in any
> manner even remotely close to what you're currently used to.
>
> 5.) Finally, DSP: DO NOT be fooled by your brain telling
> you: "Wow that card has THREE whole DSP chips! That should be
> PLENTY of power for what I want to do, since I have exactly
> ZERO DSP chips now!!!" Lemme tellya something... I have the
> Project Card - six DSP chips - and if I insert one big plugin
> like the Optimaster, I can insert exactly ONE more plugin
> before it gives me the white flag of DSP surrender. If I don't
> have a "big" plugin like the Optimaster inserted, I can insert,
> for example - exactly FIVE Vinco compressors before the DSP
> resources are exceeded. There's a thing called SBC (Spectral
> Balance Controller), and even if NO OTHER PLUGINS are inserted,
> if I insert that at 88.2k, all DSP resources become maxed-out.
> Now I can also kinda see why Deej opted for a couple of
> the "Home" (3-DSP) cards & one of the Project (6-DSP) cards,
> because there's also an i/o & routing issue, and so Deej ended
> up with a dozen total DSP chips across the three cards he's
> got, plus a bit better i/o flexibility as compared to if he'd
> gotten just one of the Pro (14-DSP) Cards. Now also, keep in
> mind I'm running at 88.2k, so that indeed is going to take more
> DSP horsepower to process in three different Pulsar stages
> (Mixer channels/any plugins/and Mixer bus) than those of you
> running at 44.1 or 48, but if I can only insert TWO big plugins
> or five normal less-DSP-intensive ones on this card, how many
> instances could you get at 44.1k? Far from what we're used to
> in Paris or Native, methinks.
>
> So if you're looking to get into this stuff, I'd say do your
> homework here first, asking the guys who have it already,
> and don't trust what tyhe Creamware reps tell you, because in
> my own personal experience, they don't know their product very
> well, and they certaily they don't stand behind it (I mean, when
> a guy whines to me that he's going to lose money if he takes
> the product back, even after he told me it WOULD do something
> that it DOESN'T, then THAT is a guy that ought not to be running
> any kind of business in the first place).
>
> Anyway, the stuff doens't suck, and I'm sure some of you could
> find it useful; just pick your cards and i/o options carefully
> is what I'm trying to say, because it's very unlikely that if
> you need to swap something out, these guys will be willing to
> make it happen. Or they'll bitch & whine if they do - who needs
> that when you're forking over hundreds or perhaps thousands of
> $$$? Not me, baby! lol
>
> Merry Creamwaresmas!
>
> Neil
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77425 is a reply to message #77423] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 09:18 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Neil,
Obviously the higher sample rates are hitting the DSP's pretty hard. I've
got a pretty huge mixer matrix set up and still have leftover DSP, but I'm
running 21 DSP's over 3 x cards. I'm pretty much in agreement about the
plugins, but the stock plugins are better than a lot of the native plugins,
I've used....................if you've got the DSP left over to run them.
Keep in mind that I haven't used "native" pluins in a couple of years. I've
been running strictly UAD-1 stuff and a few specialty items like Antares
AVOX and Autotune.
There is an audio recording program for this. I think it's called tripleDAT
and I think there is also an editor. I don't think either of them would hold
a candle to Cubase though.
I'm glad you are getting some joy out of it though and I can continue to
lurch happily through the Transylvanian villages without fearing the angry
mob.
;)
Merry Christmas.
Deej
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:458ff58b$1@linux...
>
> OK, after twiddling around with this beast quite a bit more
> yesterday, I have a few more observations, FWIW, in case any
> others of you were still thinking of going this route:
>
> 1.) The overall sound, is, IMO, really good... in the
> configuration in which I am able to use it, I can only get a
> total of 8 inputs (4 stereo submixes in my case, running
> through 2 lightpipe in's), but even with just that (i.e.: not
> being able to sum like all 40 channels of a given project or
> whatnot) I am definitely hearing a bit more well-defined or
> clearer sound.
>
> 2.) I'm not all that impressed with the plugins...
> the "Optimaster" one is very useful, and the MasterVerbPro &
> Vinco are also pretty cool, but since I'm using this as a
> summing tool, I'm not about to slap a reverb across the 2-buss
> or one of the submixes - same goes for the Vinco (it's a
> pretty much dead-on 1176 emulation; sunds great, but there's not
> much of a chance I'm going to use that particular comp across
> an entire mix or submix). While some of the other plugins
> are "cool" in concept (like the PsyQ, which is a spatial
> manipulator, of sorts), IME they're not very useful - the
> PsyQ, for instance, has about two degrees of manipulation
> available before it starts sounding like crap LOL now
> that's kind of a waste of code, if you ask me! There are quite
> a few plugs like that one in the bunch, trust me, but again,
> there are also a few useful ones... I'm just not all that
> impressed with a lot of them. Maybe I was expecting more from a
> whole crop of DSP-based plugs, I dunno.
>
> 3.)The Mixer, is not much of a mixer... if you're expecting
> something like you'll find in Paris or Cubase/Nuendo in terms
> of versatility, automation, etc, forget it. It sure LOOKS
> pretty, though! :) it doesn't have built-in EQ, you have to
> select an EQ plugin (of which there are a couple), and there
> are only a couple of plugin slots per channel (depending on
> which Mixer you select).
>
> 4.) The software is not very intuitive, but it's also not
> overly cumbersome, either - once you learn how to speak German,
> you'll be fine LOL j/k... serisouly, though, once you learn
> how "they" do things (certain click/drops & "is it a right or a
> left click?" - stuff like that), you'll find that those
> patterns pretty much repeat themselves across all the windows &
> menus/submenus. It's very much like Paris in the sense that
> it's got a routing window (virtual patchbay-style), a main
> project window, a separate mixer window, etc. It does NOT have
> an editor of any kind (that I have come across, anyway), or a
> tracking feature similar in any way shape or form to any DAW
> wherein you have a window that shows what audio tracks you
> have, where they start & stop, etc, etc. You CAN track a number
> of of tracks to disk through this gear alone, but then you'd
> have to reimport those into some DAW app to do anything really
> useful with them... so in case there was any confusion, the
> Creamware stuff in & of itself, is NOT really useable as a
> standalone DAW application - you'd have to have some other ASIO-
> compliant DAW partnered with it to be able to work in any
> manner even remotely close to what you're currently used to.
>
> 5.) Finally, DSP: DO NOT be fooled by your brain telling
> you: "Wow that card has THREE whole DSP chips! That should be
> PLENTY of power for what I want to do, since I have exactly
> ZERO DSP chips now!!!" Lemme tellya something... I have the
> Project Card - six DSP chips - and if I insert one big plugin
> like the Optimaster, I can insert exactly ONE more plugin
> before it gives me the white flag of DSP surrender. If I don't
> have a "big" plugin like the Optimaster inserted, I can insert,
> for example - exactly FIVE Vinco compressors before the DSP
> resources are exceeded. There's a thing called SBC (Spectral
> Balance Controller), and even if NO OTHER PLUGINS are inserted,
> if I insert that at 88.2k, all DSP resources become maxed-out.
> Now I can also kinda see why Deej opted for a couple of
> the "Home" (3-DSP) cards & one of the Project (6-DSP) cards,
> because there's also an i/o & routing issue, and so Deej ended
> up with a dozen total DSP chips across the three cards he's
> got, plus a bit better i/o flexibility as compared to if he'd
> gotten just one of the Pro (14-DSP) Cards. Now also, keep in
> mind I'm running at 88.2k, so that indeed is going to take more
> DSP horsepower to process in three different Pulsar stages
> (Mixer channels/any plugins/and Mixer bus) than those of you
> running at 44.1 or 48, but if I can only insert TWO big plugins
> or five normal less-DSP-intensive ones on this card, how many
> instances could you get at 44.1k? Far from what we're used to
> in Paris or Native, methinks.
>
> So if you're looking to get into this stuff, I'd say do your
> homework here first, asking the guys who have it already,
> and don't trust what tyhe Creamware reps tell you, because in
> my own personal experience, they don't know their product very
> well, and they certaily they don't stand behind it (I mean, when
> a guy whines to me that he's going to lose money if he takes
> the product back, even after he told me it WOULD do something
> that it DOESN'T, then THAT is a guy that ought not to be running
> any kind of business in the first place).
>
> Anyway, the stuff doens't suck, and I'm sure some of you could
> find it useful; just pick your cards and i/o options carefully
> is what I'm trying to say, because it's very unlikely that if
> you need to swap something out, these guys will be willing to
> make it happen. Or they'll bitch & whine if they do - who needs
> that when you're forking over hundreds or perhaps thousands of
> $$$? Not me, baby! lol
>
> Merry Creamwaresmas!
>
> Neil
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77426 is a reply to message #77425] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 10:19 |
neil[1]
Messages: 164
Registered: October 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>Hi Neil,
>
>Obviously the higher sample rates are hitting the DSP's pretty hard. I've
>got a pretty huge mixer matrix set up and still have leftover DSP, but I'm
>running 21 DSP's over 3 x cards.
21 DSP's? I thought you said you had gotten two of the Home
cards & one Project card? That'd be twelve SHARC chips total.
What'd you end up getting?
>I'm pretty much in agreement about the plugins, but the stock
plugins are better than a lot of the native plugins,
>I've used........
Like I said, IMO they're not bad, they're just kinda plain
vanilla, very clean & with no real "attitude", IME, YMMV, etc,
etc.; except for the more "out-there" ones, which I don't find
useful at all - perhaps people doing dance mixes & stuff like
that would find them useful.
Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77429 is a reply to message #77426] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 09:47 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Wait!!!....I'm running 2 x Project cards (a Plus plate on one and an ADAT
Plate on the other) and one Home card so that's how many?........17 DSP's?
I forget.
;o)
"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:4590081d$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>>Hi Neil,
>>
>>Obviously the higher sample rates are hitting the DSP's pretty hard. I've
>
>>got a pretty huge mixer matrix set up and still have leftover DSP, but I'm
>
>>running 21 DSP's over 3 x cards.
>
> 21 DSP's? I thought you said you had gotten two of the Home
> cards & one Project card? That'd be twelve SHARC chips total.
> What'd you end up getting?
>
>
>>I'm pretty much in agreement about the plugins, but the stock
> plugins are better than a lot of the native plugins,
>>I've used........
>
> Like I said, IMO they're not bad, they're just kinda plain
> vanilla, very clean & with no real "attitude", IME, YMMV, etc,
> etc.; except for the more "out-there" ones, which I don't find
> useful at all - perhaps people doing dance mixes & stuff like
> that would find them useful.
>
> Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77430 is a reply to message #77423] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 10:43 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Neil,
As Deej said, I wonder if the sample rate you're using is part of the problem.
88.2 means half the DSP f/x no matter what, but it sounds to me like you're
getting even less than that. Dunno. I have the pro card and I can get a lot
more f/x than you're talking about, not just twice more but even more than
that.
I haven't messed with the f/x that much, but I think in general you're right,
the stock f/x are pretty vanilla. The synths, though, are anything but--they're
chocolate and raspberry and poppyseed flan and tobasco chutney and that's
not even counting the modular synth which I'm starting to learn.
I think it's an incredible system when paired with a UAD card or two. But
I make electronic music so that might have an influence on such things.
TCB
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>OK, after twiddling around with this beast quite a bit more
>yesterday, I have a few more observations, FWIW, in case any
>others of you were still thinking of going this route:
>
>1.) The overall sound, is, IMO, really good... in the
>configuration in which I am able to use it, I can only get a
>total of 8 inputs (4 stereo submixes in my case, running
>through 2 lightpipe in's), but even with just that (i.e.: not
>being able to sum like all 40 channels of a given project or
>whatnot) I am definitely hearing a bit more well-defined or
>clearer sound.
>
>2.) I'm not all that impressed with the plugins...
>the "Optimaster" one is very useful, and the MasterVerbPro &
>Vinco are also pretty cool, but since I'm using this as a
>summing tool, I'm not about to slap a reverb across the 2-buss
>or one of the submixes - same goes for the Vinco (it's a
>pretty much dead-on 1176 emulation; sunds great, but there's not
>much of a chance I'm going to use that particular comp across
>an entire mix or submix). While some of the other plugins
>are "cool" in concept (like the PsyQ, which is a spatial
>manipulator, of sorts), IME they're not very useful - the
>PsyQ, for instance, has about two degrees of manipulation
>available before it starts sounding like crap LOL now
>that's kind of a waste of code, if you ask me! There are quite
>a few plugs like that one in the bunch, trust me, but again,
>there are also a few useful ones... I'm just not all that
>impressed with a lot of them. Maybe I was expecting more from a
>whole crop of DSP-based plugs, I dunno.
>
>3.)The Mixer, is not much of a mixer... if you're expecting
>something like you'll find in Paris or Cubase/Nuendo in terms
>of versatility, automation, etc, forget it. It sure LOOKS
>pretty, though! :) it doesn't have built-in EQ, you have to
>select an EQ plugin (of which there are a couple), and there
>are only a couple of plugin slots per channel (depending on
>which Mixer you select).
>
>4.) The software is not very intuitive, but it's also not
>overly cumbersome, either - once you learn how to speak German,
>you'll be fine LOL j/k... serisouly, though, once you learn
>how "they" do things (certain click/drops & "is it a right or a
>left click?" - stuff like that), you'll find that those
>patterns pretty much repeat themselves across all the windows &
>menus/submenus. It's very much like Paris in the sense that
>it's got a routing window (virtual patchbay-style), a main
>project window, a separate mixer window, etc. It does NOT have
>an editor of any kind (that I have come across, anyway), or a
>tracking feature similar in any way shape or form to any DAW
>wherein you have a window that shows what audio tracks you
>have, where they start & stop, etc, etc. You CAN track a number
>of of tracks to disk through this gear alone, but then you'd
>have to reimport those into some DAW app to do anything really
>useful with them... so in case there was any confusion, the
>Creamware stuff in & of itself, is NOT really useable as a
>standalone DAW application - you'd have to have some other ASIO-
>compliant DAW partnered with it to be able to work in any
>manner even remotely close to what you're currently used to.
>
>5.) Finally, DSP: DO NOT be fooled by your brain telling
>you: "Wow that card has THREE whole DSP chips! That should be
>PLENTY of power for what I want to do, since I have exactly
>ZERO DSP chips now!!!" Lemme tellya something... I have the
>Project Card - six DSP chips - and if I insert one big plugin
>like the Optimaster, I can insert exactly ONE more plugin
>before it gives me the white flag of DSP surrender. If I don't
>have a "big" plugin like the Optimaster inserted, I can insert,
>for example - exactly FIVE Vinco compressors before the DSP
>resources are exceeded. There's a thing called SBC (Spectral
>Balance Controller), and even if NO OTHER PLUGINS are inserted,
>if I insert that at 88.2k, all DSP resources become maxed-out.
>Now I can also kinda see why Deej opted for a couple of
>the "Home" (3-DSP) cards & one of the Project (6-DSP) cards,
>because there's also an i/o & routing issue, and so Deej ended
>up with a dozen total DSP chips across the three cards he's
>got, plus a bit better i/o flexibility as compared to if he'd
>gotten just one of the Pro (14-DSP) Cards. Now also, keep in
>mind I'm running at 88.2k, so that indeed is going to take more
>DSP horsepower to process in three different Pulsar stages
>(Mixer channels/any plugins/and Mixer bus) than those of you
>running at 44.1 or 48, but if I can only insert TWO big plugins
>or five normal less-DSP-intensive ones on this card, how many
>instances could you get at 44.1k? Far from what we're used to
>in Paris or Native, methinks.
>
>So if you're looking to get into this stuff, I'd say do your
>homework here first, asking the guys who have it already,
>and don't trust what tyhe Creamware reps tell you, because in
>my own personal experience, they don't know their product very
>well, and they certaily they don't stand behind it (I mean, when
>a guy whines to me that he's going to lose money if he takes
>the product back, even after he told me it WOULD do something
>that it DOESN'T, then THAT is a guy that ought not to be running
>any kind of business in the first place).
>
>Anyway, the stuff doens't suck, and I'm sure some of you could
>find it useful; just pick your cards and i/o options carefully
>is what I'm trying to say, because it's very unlikely that if
>you need to swap something out, these guys will be willing to
>make it happen. Or they'll bitch & whine if they do - who needs
>that when you're forking over hundreds or perhaps thousands of
>$$$? Not me, baby! lol
>
>Merry Creamwaresmas!
>
>Neil
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77432 is a reply to message #77430] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 10:52 |
Nil
Messages: 245
Registered: March 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>Hey Neil,
>
>As Deej said, I wonder if the sample rate you're using is part of the problem.
>88.2 means half the DSP f/x no matter what, but it sounds to me like you're
>getting even less than that. Dunno. I have the pro card and I can get a
lot
>more f/x than you're talking about, not just twice more but even more than
>that.
>
>I haven't messed with the f/x that much, but I think in general you're right,
>the stock f/x are pretty vanilla. The synths, though, are anything but--they're
>chocolate and raspberry and poppyseed flan and tobasco chutney and that's
>not even counting the modular synth which I'm starting to learn.
>
>I think it's an incredible system when paired with a UAD card or two. But
>I make electronic music so that might have an influence on such things.
You also got the Synth & Sampler pack (I take it), right? Sounds
that way, anyhoo... I got the Mix & Master Pack; so yeah, if
that's what you got, then we've got totally different needs &
approaches there.
Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77434 is a reply to message #77432] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 11:31 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
With the pro card, which I needed 'cause I'm so pro I don't even need to mention
the fessional, one gets both the synth/sampler and mix/master pack. It's
a pretty good argument for the higher end card if one will be using it for
both kinds of sounds.
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>Hey Neil,
>>
>>As Deej said, I wonder if the sample rate you're using is part of the problem.
>>88.2 means half the DSP f/x no matter what, but it sounds to me like you're
>>getting even less than that. Dunno. I have the pro card and I can get a
>lot
>>more f/x than you're talking about, not just twice more but even more than
>>that.
>>
>>I haven't messed with the f/x that much, but I think in general you're
right,
>>the stock f/x are pretty vanilla. The synths, though, are anything but--they're
>>chocolate and raspberry and poppyseed flan and tobasco chutney and that's
>>not even counting the modular synth which I'm starting to learn.
>>
>>I think it's an incredible system when paired with a UAD card or two. But
>>I make electronic music so that might have an influence on such things.
>
>
>You also got the Synth & Sampler pack (I take it), right? Sounds
>that way, anyhoo... I got the Mix & Master Pack; so yeah, if
>that's what you got, then we've got totally different needs &
>approaches there.
>
>Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77439 is a reply to message #77423] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 17:15 |
Bill Lorentzen
Messages: 140
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Neil,
I missed the origination of this thread. What is the purpose of this card
for you? Does it serve as a mixdown processor? What are you running it with?
And Merry XMas to all!
Bill L
"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:458ff58b$1@linux...
>
> OK, after twiddling around with this beast quite a bit more
> yesterday, I have a few more observations, FWIW, in case any
> others of you were still thinking of going this route:
>
> 1.) The overall sound, is, IMO, really good... in the
> configuration in which I am able to use it, I can only get a
> total of 8 inputs (4 stereo submixes in my case, running
> through 2 lightpipe in's), but even with just that (i.e.: not
> being able to sum like all 40 channels of a given project or
> whatnot) I am definitely hearing a bit more well-defined or
> clearer sound.
>
> 2.) I'm not all that impressed with the plugins...
> the "Optimaster" one is very useful, and the MasterVerbPro &
> Vinco are also pretty cool, but since I'm using this as a
> summing tool, I'm not about to slap a reverb across the 2-buss
> or one of the submixes - same goes for the Vinco (it's a
> pretty much dead-on 1176 emulation; sunds great, but there's not
> much of a chance I'm going to use that particular comp across
> an entire mix or submix). While some of the other plugins
> are "cool" in concept (like the PsyQ, which is a spatial
> manipulator, of sorts), IME they're not very useful - the
> PsyQ, for instance, has about two degrees of manipulation
> available before it starts sounding like crap LOL now
> that's kind of a waste of code, if you ask me! There are quite
> a few plugs like that one in the bunch, trust me, but again,
> there are also a few useful ones... I'm just not all that
> impressed with a lot of them. Maybe I was expecting more from a
> whole crop of DSP-based plugs, I dunno.
>
> 3.)The Mixer, is not much of a mixer... if you're expecting
> something like you'll find in Paris or Cubase/Nuendo in terms
> of versatility, automation, etc, forget it. It sure LOOKS
> pretty, though! :) it doesn't have built-in EQ, you have to
> select an EQ plugin (of which there are a couple), and there
> are only a couple of plugin slots per channel (depending on
> which Mixer you select).
>
> 4.) The software is not very intuitive, but it's also not
> overly cumbersome, either - once you learn how to speak German,
> you'll be fine LOL j/k... serisouly, though, once you learn
> how "they" do things (certain click/drops & "is it a right or a
> left click?" - stuff like that), you'll find that those
> patterns pretty much repeat themselves across all the windows &
> menus/submenus. It's very much like Paris in the sense that
> it's got a routing window (virtual patchbay-style), a main
> project window, a separate mixer window, etc. It does NOT have
> an editor of any kind (that I have come across, anyway), or a
> tracking feature similar in any way shape or form to any DAW
> wherein you have a window that shows what audio tracks you
> have, where they start & stop, etc, etc. You CAN track a number
> of of tracks to disk through this gear alone, but then you'd
> have to reimport those into some DAW app to do anything really
> useful with them... so in case there was any confusion, the
> Creamware stuff in & of itself, is NOT really useable as a
> standalone DAW application - you'd have to have some other ASIO-
> compliant DAW partnered with it to be able to work in any
> manner even remotely close to what you're currently used to.
>
> 5.) Finally, DSP: DO NOT be fooled by your brain telling
> you: "Wow that card has THREE whole DSP chips! That should be
> PLENTY of power for what I want to do, since I have exactly
> ZERO DSP chips now!!!" Lemme tellya something... I have the
> Project Card - six DSP chips - and if I insert one big plugin
> like the Optimaster, I can insert exactly ONE more plugin
> before it gives me the white flag of DSP surrender. If I don't
> have a "big" plugin like the Optimaster inserted, I can insert,
> for example - exactly FIVE Vinco compressors before the DSP
> resources are exceeded. There's a thing called SBC (Spectral
> Balance Controller), and even if NO OTHER PLUGINS are inserted,
> if I insert that at 88.2k, all DSP resources become maxed-out.
> Now I can also kinda see why Deej opted for a couple of
> the "Home" (3-DSP) cards & one of the Project (6-DSP) cards,
> because there's also an i/o & routing issue, and so Deej ended
> up with a dozen total DSP chips across the three cards he's
> got, plus a bit better i/o flexibility as compared to if he'd
> gotten just one of the Pro (14-DSP) Cards. Now also, keep in
> mind I'm running at 88.2k, so that indeed is going to take more
> DSP horsepower to process in three different Pulsar stages
> (Mixer channels/any plugins/and Mixer bus) than those of you
> running at 44.1 or 48, but if I can only insert TWO big plugins
> or five normal less-DSP-intensive ones on this card, how many
> instances could you get at 44.1k? Far from what we're used to
> in Paris or Native, methinks.
>
> So if you're looking to get into this stuff, I'd say do your
> homework here first, asking the guys who have it already,
> and don't trust what tyhe Creamware reps tell you, because in
> my own personal experience, they don't know their product very
> well, and they certaily they don't stand behind it (I mean, when
> a guy whines to me that he's going to lose money if he takes
> the product back, even after he told me it WOULD do something
> that it DOESN'T, then THAT is a guy that ought not to be running
> any kind of business in the first place).
>
> Anyway, the stuff doens't suck, and I'm sure some of you could
> find it useful; just pick your cards and i/o options carefully
> is what I'm trying to say, because it's very unlikely that if
> you need to swap something out, these guys will be willing to
> make it happen. Or they'll bitch & whine if they do - who needs
> that when you're forking over hundreds or perhaps thousands of
> $$$? Not me, baby! lol
>
> Merry Creamwaresmas!
>
> Neil
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Pulsar Observations [message #77454 is a reply to message #77444] |
Mon, 25 December 2006 21:26 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Bill, yep, Cubase on both of 'em, same mix, just summed
differently.
....and probably rigged, if you ask Lamont.
:D
Neil
"Bill Lorentzen" <bill@lorentzen.ws> wrote:
>I listened to your samples and yes there is a big diff. Is that Cubase
>you're using?
>
>
>"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:459076c2$1@linux...
>>
>> "Bill Lorentzen" <bill@lorentzen.ws> wrote:
>>>Hey Neil,
>>>
>>>I missed the origination of this thread. What is the purpose of this card
>>
>>>for you? Does it serve as a mixdown processor? What are you running it
>>>with?
>>
>> Hey Bill...
>>
>> I'm using it as a summing device, basically, so I can sum
>> "outside the box", yet still keep everything in the digital
>> domain all the way through as I do this (going out of two
>> lightpipe outs into the Pulsar Cards' 2 lightpipe in's).
>>
>> Neil
>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri May 10 22:30:41 PDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01376 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
