Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » MIDI Keyboards/Giga/FirePod/KRK Etc.
| MIDI Keyboards/Giga/FirePod/KRK Etc. [message #61470] |
Sat, 17 December 2005 08:41  |
chuck duffy
Messages: 453
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ally that
simple.
> > I have found that the performer often "plays" to the compression,
especially
> >during vocals. Think of it in terms of a guitar player playing to the
sound
> >of a sustained amp. You can't really get that after the fact. My
epiphany
> >about this occurred when I put my voice through a Lawson-DW Fearn-Manley
> >ELOP. For the first time in my recording experience, the damned thing
sound
> >right off the bat like a record. Not necessarily a good record, but a
record
> >nonetheless. :)
> >>
> >>
> >
>Funny, we don't track drums with compressors either, so far.
Everything else? Lots of it.
Jimmy
"Gantt Kushner" <gizmo@his.com> wrote in message
news:43A30A8E.F1E7B43@his.com...
> The RNC is a great little box for the bucks. If you're talking about
tracking
>
> thru compressors, I'd say this: I frequently (but not always) track
vocals,
> bass, guitars and horns thru compressors, usually dbx 160X for vocs, UREI
> LA-4's for guitars and bass (although the 160X is nice for them too) and
horns,
>
> then RNC (I have 3 of 'em). I never track drums thru compressors! Nor do
I
> ever gate drums. I would always rather have the un-compressed drum tracks
> first, then compress as needed after. In fact, I frequently don't
compress
> drums, even in the mix...
>
> Just my .02 worth.
>
> Gantt
>
> Sanbar wrote:
>
> > I'm thinking about trying to get rid of as many software effects as
> > possible. Is the idea of buying 4-5 RNC Compressors for drums along with
a
> > couple of good compressors for vocals and bass a crazy idea. The goal is
to
> > get the signal close enough on the way in that any touch up can be done
with
> > Paris software thus eliminating the latency situations.
> >
> > I'm guessing that most would find this ludicrous, but if anyone is
> > succeeding with such an idea I would be curious.
>Life seems to be good without the VIA drivers, t least o
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: MIDI Keyboards/Giga/FirePod/KRK Etc. [message #61529 is a reply to message #61472] |
Sun, 18 December 2005 10:00  |
chuck duffy
Messages: 453
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
realtime CPU's.
AA
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43a565b0@linux...
>I was testing rendering and it was doing the natives effects but not the
>EDS or Paris EQ's. I'm just letting other know who may be wondering.
>
> Also, if you want a cool core dump in XP, start a render and then hit
> CTRL-ALT-DEL and kill Paris. My mistake, I was closing paris and didn't
> realize the render was still going and it stopped responding. Ka blamo!
>
> JohnThe case for the most cost effective system is not as clear as you might
guess at first, and it will depend on your specific needs.
If you price a Mac compared to, for example, a Dell, I don't think the
difference in price comes anywhere near the a down payment on a house.
If you look at the average turnover, I would guess it's less with Macs.
PowerMacs are upgradable with faster display cards, copious amounts of
RAM, i/o cards on a very fast bus, wireless, firewire and USB2 i/o. My
dual 2.5GHZ PowerMac does not need replacement even though it's a few
years old. It already does far more real time plugins and tracks than I
require and it can keep doing what it does for years to come. It may
even get better if that Logic plugin dropout bug gets fixed someday. ;^)
The hardware churn on the MSWindows market has actually been higher over
the last few years if you want to stay current. Meanwhile if you look at
average resale value I'll bet it's been higher with Macs.
If you want to talk about being locked in, that's very much what
MSWindows is all about. You're locked into a proprietary OS and the
chipsets it supports. And you're supporting a company that was convicted
of using its monopoly power to drive other choices out of business.
Which has left us in a limited choice position as consumers.
With the Intel/Athlon boxes you can build your own system from parts, an
advantage: On the plus side you can choose the combination of parts
you want and the cost of parts may be less than, say, a Dell or Mac
system. On the minus side, what is your time worth? Add that in and the
cost of your system could easily come up to that of a Dell or Mac, or
more if you run into configuration and hardware troubles.
Bottom line, there are a limited number of choices available today
because we're down to just a few OS choices and chip manufacturers.
Choose whichever proprietary system best meets your needs. Choice is
good. Narrowing of choices is disturbing.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
PS. If you spec your system for what you actually need and don't settle
for something that falls short _or_ float with the hype of the latest
thing, you can get a very long life out of your equipment investments.
This is true no matter what type of system you choose.
Neil wrote:
> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Anybody have any thoughts?
>
>
> The only thing I have against Macs is that - at least with
> regard to DAW applications - you're really locked into more
> proprietary stuff. Less flexibility... and that's the same thing
> I have against PT, now that sonically (at least IMO) the new HD
> systems are really quite good. If you need to upgrade your Mac
> at some point, you've got buy a whole new one... same thing
> with PT - every few years you're forking over another down
> payment on a house in order to get a new system just to stay
> current.
>
> Neil>My
dual 2.5GHZ PowerMac does not need replacement even though it's a few
years old. It already does far more real time plugins and tracks than I
require and it can keep doing what it does for years to come<
Unless Steveo decides he needs more cash and obsoletes it tomorrow. It
always amazed me that Bill Gates got such a bad rap even when it was Jobs
that created a Mac monopoly by yanking the OS licensing from Power computing
and Umax.
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:43a5b143@linux...
>
> The case for the most cost effective system is not as clear as you might
> guess at first, and it will depend on your specific needs.
>
> If you price a Mac compared to, for example, a Dell, I don't think the
> difference in price comes anywhere near the a down payment on a house.
>
> If you look at the average turnover, I would guess it's less with Macs.
> PowerMacs are upgradable with faster display cards, copious amounts of
> RAM, i/o cards on a very fast bus, wireless, firewire and USB2 i/o. My
> dual 2.5GHZ PowerMac does not need replacement even though it's a few
> years old. It already does far more real time plugins and tracks than I
> require and it can keep doing what it does for years to come. It may
> even get
|
|
|
|
| Re: MIDI Keyboards/Giga/FirePod/KRK Etc. [message #61648 is a reply to message #61529] |
Tue, 20 December 2005 06:42 |
tonehouse
Messages: 184
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
and there were quite a few other problems as well.
>>>
>>> Do you know anyone who services the Houston controller? It might be
>>> having
>>> some problems as well. I've seen similar phenomena when the USB connector
>> on
>>> a device went south.
>>>
>>> ;O)
>>> "Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_editout_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:43a6255d@linux...
>>> > Yah, Rrrrrriiiiiiiiiggggggggghht! ;-)
>>> >
>>> > David.
>>> >
>>> > DJ wrote:
>>> > > This weekend has truly been hellacious. I sort of expected it. I've
>>> pretty
>>> > > much succeeded at most of what I wnted to accomplish, but it was
a
>> bitch
>>> > > getting there.
>>> > >
>>> > > I'm never going to build another computer as long as I live........I
>>> > > promise.
>>> > >
>>> > > ;oP
>>> > >
>>> > > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>>> > > news:43a4dd92@linux...
>>> > >
>>> > >>I forgot how.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>;o}
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>As the Rude Frenchman in Monty Python's Holy Grail one said....
“Oh yes, it's very nice! (aside) I told him he already got one!”
Now go and boil your bottom, son of a silly person!
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>I've been reading this NG on and off again for a few weeks and am wondering
>something. Why do all of you guys use those clunky old Matrox cards? There
>must be some reason or another, but one of the first rules of stable computing
>is never mix hardware and software from vastly different eras. Don't put
>your brand new 8X AGP Super Gamer Qautro nVidia card on a 1999 mobo running
>WinME. Don't run Netscape 4.2 on Server 2003 SP2. Yes, it's a PITA to upgrade,
>but dual DVI nVidia cards to run on nVidia chipsets are no longer horribly
>expensive and it seems people here are giving up a lot of time and effort
>to use a (let's admit pretty crappy) old video card.
>
>Obviously, this same argument could be used to suggest dropping PARIS itself,
>but at least PARIS adds some distinct value with its sonics. I don't think
>Matrox pixels look any better.
>
>Just wondering . . .
>
>TCBFirst thing I think of is that I would have to buy 3 new DVI flat panels to
go with 3 DVI outs... not cheap. PCI-E is going to force this change on ppl
sooner or later anyway, but - In DJ's case at least - the problem comes in
the amount of usable PCI slots and video heads. By sticking to the agp/pci
duo of Matrox 450, he loses no usable PCI slots and gets 4 head outputs
without taking more than one IRQ.
On a single or even dual head video system, I couldn't see keeping those old
units - especially knowing that with the Matrox drivers they are somewhat
evil with resource hogging.
AA
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43a81dae$1@linux...
>
> I've been reading this NG on and off again for a few weeks and am
> wondering
> something. Why do all of you guys use those clunky old Matrox cards? There
> must be some reason or another, but one of the first rules of stable
> computing
> is never mix hardware and software from vastly different eras. Don't put
> your brand new 8X AGP Super Gamer Qautro nVidia card on a 1999 mobo
> running
> WinME. Don't run Netscape 4.2 on Server 2003 SP2. Yes, it's a PITA to
> upgrade,
> but dual DVI nVidia cards to run on nVidia chipsets are no longer horribly
> expensive and it seems people here are giving up a lot of time and effort
> to use a (let's admit pretty crappy) old video card.
>
> Obviously, this same argument could be used to suggest dropping PARIS
> itself,
> but at least PARIS adds some distinct value with its sonics. I don't think
> Matrox pixels look any better.
>
> Just wondering . . .
>
> TCBActually, I think Aaron hit it on the head... the G-450 is already confirmed
by various systems, motherboards, etc. that it works well with these setups,
along with Paris. Since I have built and own quite a few different systems,
I can tell you that some of the newer, NVIDIA-type power video cards LOVE
to screw with IRQs. Or perhaps the other way around... the newer cards are
forced on IRQs that Paris don't like. I am not that technical with all that...
but in layman's terms, that is my understanding. I bought the G-450 back
in 99 or 2000 when everyone on here said it is the easiest to work with...
for compatibility. Stuck with it since and I have had ZERO issues.
I am sure some of the newer ones will work just fine... but that may depend
on your motherboard, what other cards are plugged in and sometimes, which
card is in which slot. If you have the time, patience, money and virtuoso...
good luck in finding compatibility... then again... to elimimate that.. find
a cheap G-450! Lastly, as I said I have multiple computers and I am at work
and can't remember model numbers, but personally, I don't see that much of
a difference in a G-450 -vs- some of the newer ones. I do
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Jun 22 18:59:01 PDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01968 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
