Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............
| Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55235] |
Sun, 03 July 2005 15:14  |
![Deej [3] is currently offline](/theme/PARIS_Forum_Template/images/offline.png "Deej [3] is currently offline")
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
apps. Haven't tried it with Paris though. It is a very stable
board.
>
> Yes, I remember you recommended this board to me a while back. I had it
pegged
> as my new board, but as it turns out that board has PCI 2.3, and I'm 90%
> sure that Paris EDS cards wont run in anything past PCI 2.2. Hence I've
had
> to look elsewhere. PCI 2.2 is the last one to fully support 5V PCI cards,
> and I'm pretty sure that's what the EDS card is.
>
> Until I worked that out, that board had my name on it.
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.
>
> >
> >Chris
> >
> >
> >Kim wrote:
> >> the 250GB NForce3 if it makes any difference, but any experience would
> be
> >> valued.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Kim.
> >>
> >> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Anybody have any experience with the NForce3 chipset with Paris,
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55243 is a reply to message #55235] |
Sun, 03 July 2005 20:23  |
Jeremy Luzier
Messages: 102
Registered: November 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
material and who is twisting the knobs. But NONE have the PARIS
> intangibles.
>
> I have wanted to try this and i am wondering if anyone using another DAW
> with PARIS has compared these 2 scenarios using the same final mix....
>
> Scenario #1.
> Mix in other DAW (lets say Nuendo, DP, whatever)... lightpipe to PARIS
> in live mode where you bounce the final stereo mix.
>
> Scenario #2.
> Mix in other DAW.... lightpipe to PARIS where you record all of the
> seperate busses... say 12 stereo busses or 24 tracks.... which include...
> vocals buss, bass, guitar buss, drums buss, loops buss, keys buss, fx
buss.
> etc. THEN play those files in PARIS and bounce to disk.
>
> A/B to first scenario.
>
> Anyone done that?
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:42c86353@linux...
> > ......just go back to using Paris and ditching the rest of this
> > monstrousity..........well, I doubt I'll really do that, but I'm
wondering
> > more and more if I really need it.
> >
> > It's really cool to be able to run all the UAD-1 plugins and other cool
> toys
> > in SX and then use them wioth Paris, but in all honesty, I've been
> comparing
> > some rough mixes, using SX and all those nice DSP cards to ITB Paris
mixes
> > using the native plugins I've got here whioch are cheap and very good
> > (BlockFish, Spitfish, etc, Dave Brown, Waves NPPII, PowerTechnology
DSP/FX
> > and PSP plugins. These are plugins I used for years before I built my
> SXDAW
> > and started using lots of UAD-1 cards, and though the mixes sound a
little
> > bit different, they both sound *really* good.
> >
> > I think it's one of those things where the SX is turning into more like
> > something I have available if I need it, and I'm just not really going
to
> > need it much.
> >
> > We've already discussed this stuff to death, but we really do have
> something
> > special here guys. Having a really well loaded native DAW to compare to
> > Paris just makes me appreciate Paris all the more.
> >
> > Go figure.
> >
> >
>
>I'm posting this from my toshiba laptop - it's now running SUSE Linux 9.1
and opera.
Man it was really interesting - I downloaded the SUSE ISO image to this formerly
windows XP professional laptop, burned a bootable ISO CD, left the CD in
the dr
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55245 is a reply to message #55243] |
Sun, 03 July 2005 21:53 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
.. and can
>hear the mix with native plugins across the whole mix.
>
>problem is.... the solo buttons don't work.... when i solo something i hear
>nothing. i guess this is because of how everything is looped.
>
>anyways.... Gene... you have mentioned that you do this... so i am curious
>how you set it up.
>
>anybody else can certainly chime in as well.
>
>thanks,
>
>Jeremy
>
>
>My first Linux experience was fairly painless too. I installed Mandrake 9.1
(I think) on a box a while back, which is the same box which now hosts the
newsgroup, and, indeed, the same Linux install. There's a few new things
to get used to of course with the move, like getting around the linux command
prompts, and editing certain text files and the like. Accessing windows shares
wasn't as painless as I'd hoped, but, for example, getting a webserver running
was basically as simple as running the installer, choosing "Yes, I'd like
APACHE installed" and waiting. Basically it just worked.
Who'd a' thought? ;o)
Cheers,
Kim.
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>
>I'm posting this from my toshiba laptop - it's now running SUSE Linux 9.1
>and opera.
>
>Man it was really interesting - I downloaded the SUSE ISO image to this
formerly
>windows XP professional laptop, burned a bootable ISO CD, left the CD in
>the drive and rebooted. About an hour later it had installed, detected
all
>the devices and was up and running on my wireless network.
>
>The install was absolutely painless, the UI is really sweet - They really
>have this stuff down!
>
>ChuckI really think that one of the reasons I'm doing this is the *WOW!* factor.
No one around here does anything like this so the mad scientist thing is a
commercial plus for me.
There are 4 commercial studios here running Pro Tools, one studio with 3 x
ADATs and a D8B, one studio with some kind of Korg box sorta' like a 32
channel Roland.
The guy with the D8B has his own band and his own venue and primarily
records this band and also has a lot of business from churches, plus he has
been voted the national flatpicking champion of the universe a few times and
he's a good engineer so he stays busier than I do and has a nice niche. He's
doing a project with Charlie Daniels right now and has asked me to master
it. He also sends me other mastering work. He also does session work here
and we have collaborated on a few things because I am ADAT compatible.
The studio with the Korg recorder is a small room in a record store and is
pretty limited.
The four studios with Pro Tools are doing a lot of business. They are well
estblished and suck up a lot of the local business.
That leaves me here using a DAW that no one has ever heard of. Once they see
it though, it gets their attention and once they hear it, they want to work
here. One of my clients is a pretty well known producer in this area, well
connected and has clients of his own that he's bringing in here because he
*gets it* sonically having worked mostly in larger facilities with 2" tape.
If it weren't for this guy and the friend who owns the studio with the ADATs
and D8B, I wouldn't have much going on right now. Pro Tools is so prevalent
that people look at you with this blank stare when you tell them you don't
use it.
Having something different here like Cubase SX, that at least they've heard
of, sort of switches on the lights long enough for me to swirl some sonic
smelling salts in the room and snap them out of the *I gotta have crispy
audio* syndrome.
;o)
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:42c8bd58$1@linux...
>
>
> I like you because your posts make me feel good about my DAW. ;o)
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.
>
> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote:
> >......just go back to using Paris and ditching the rest of this
> >monstrousity..........well, I doubt I'll really do that, but I'm
wondering
> >more and more if I really need it.
> >
> >It's really cool to be able to run all the UAD-1 plugins and other cool
> toys
> >in SX and then use them wioth Paris, but in all honesty, I've been
comparing
> >some rough mixes, using SX and all those nice DSP cards to ITB Paris
mixes
> >using the native plugins I've got here whioch are cheap and very good
> >(BlockFish, Spitfish, etc, Dave Brown, Waves NPPII, PowerTechnology
DSP/FX
> >and PSP plugins. These are plugins I used for years before I built my
SXDAW
> >and started using lots of UAD-1 cards, and though the mixes sound a
little
> >bit different, they both sound *really* good.
> >
> >I think it's one of those things where the SX is turning into more like
> >something I have available if I need it, and I'm just not really going to
> >need it much.
> >
> >We've already discussed this stuff to death, but we really do have
something
> >special here guys. Having a really well loaded native DAW to compare to
> >Paris just makes me appreciate Paris all the more.
> >
> >Go figure.
> >
> >
>HI Kim,
EDS cards will work fine with these slots.
Are you maybe confusing them with PCI-xpress slots? They won't work on
those. These are the ones that are on the Mac G5's and on Dual AMD
Opterons. Of Course folks on the PC side were smart enough to design
there hardware so that in the event you plugged in the 5 volt
incompatible older PCI card the machine just won't boot. Apple thought
it would be smarter to make it so that the G5 and the PCI cards goes up
in a puff of smoke if you want to install the wrong card. Go Figure.
Chris
Kim wrote:
> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>
>>HI Kim,
>>Overall I've had the best luck with the Gigabyte K8NS-Ultra 939 for
>>audio apps. Haven't tried it with Paris though. It is a very stable board.
>
>
> Yes, I remember you recommended this board to me a while back. I had it pegged
> as my new board, but as it turns out that board has PCI 2.3, and I'm 90%
> sure that Paris EDS cards wont run in anything past PCI 2.2. Hence I've had
> to look elsewhere. PCI 2.2 is the last one to fully support 5V PCI cards,
> and I'm pretty sure that's what the EDS card is.
>
> Until I worked that out, that board had my name on it.
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.
>
>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>Kim wrote:
>>
>>>the 250GB NForce3 if it makes any difference, but any experience would
>
> be
>
>>>valued.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Kim.
>>>
>>>"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Anybody have any experience with the NForce3 chipset with Paris, or am
>
> I
>
>>>>about to become a guinea pig...? ;o)
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>Kim.
>>>
>>>
>>--
>>Chris Ludwig
>>ADK
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55249 is a reply to message #55244] |
Sun, 03 July 2005 23:02 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
slot.
Gee, much as it would mean I've been on a wild goose chase, I would LOVE
to hear that I can use a PCI 2.3 motherboard. :o)
Cheers,
Kim."Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote:
>I really think that one of the reasons I'm doing this is the *WOW!* factor.
Hehe, was there ever any doubt? ;o)
>No one around here does anything like this so the mad scientist thing is
a
>commercial plus for me.
Well I'm not denying that there's a commercial plus, but I'm not convinced
that you're *doing* it for the commercial plus. Hehe. I'd prefer to think
you just can't help yourself. ;o)
Either that or you do it just for our entertainment, or to make us drool,
or something. ;o)
Cheers,
Kim.http://www.detnews.com/2005/metro/0507/03/D04-235568.htm"this nectar comes in a box my friend....." when only the best will
do...must be nice...sigh
On 4 Jul 2005 00:24:22 +1000, "michael bliss" <mbliss1@austin.rr.com>
wrote:
>
>yep... started my holiday a little too early....
>what do you mean put the cap back on, this nectar comes
>in a box my friend.....
>
>if anyone needs a Drawmer DS 201 dual gate, or a pair of
>Genelecs and a subwoofer, there is a studio here in Austin
>that put these up for sale on craigslist. Mind you i don't work at the studio
>or have
>any affiliation, just thought if anyone wanted a nice 4th of July
>present...... good price on the Drawmer gates.
>http://austin.craigslist.org/msg/82191045.html
>
>genelics-
>http://austin.craigslist.org/msg/82190454.html
>
>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>michael, put the bottle down. okay, now put the cap back on...good
>>job michael. now, put the bottle back in the fridge. gooooood job.
>>oh yeah, give me the keys.
>>
>>On 2 Jul 2005 08:45:40 +1000, "michael bliss" <mbliss1@austin.rr.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>what, too early...... he did say "pre holiday wishes"
>>>
>>>"michael bliss" <mbliss1@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>yha have a good christmas everyone
>>>>
>>>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote:
>>>>>Best wishes for the weekend, Party Hearty and drive safely
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm outta here!
>>>>>
>>>>>Don
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>Deej, I'm with you here when it comes to plugins and Paris. The last
production I had before traveling to Norway, I didn't used the UAD-1 card at
all with Paris. For the most I used Kjaerhus VST plugins. I must say I'm in
love with this all in one plugin: http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/gac-1.php
and used it on most of the tracks. I mean their Gold series is well worth to
try out. http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/gold-series.php . I have most of
these plugins and using them most of the time to &qu
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55256 is a reply to message #55235] |
Mon, 04 July 2005 04:35 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
asing
> aren't aren't quite right, but you'll should a kick out of it,
> nonetheless:
>
> http://www.jgeoff.com/rush/midi/spiradio.mid
>
>
> Just some O.T. rambling on a day off... y'all have a Happy 4th!
>
> NeilDamn the torpedoes.............just do it!!!!!!!
;oD
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:42c94d34$1@linux...
>
> Kim. I'm about to start building a cubase rig for a friend using the K8NS
> Ultra 939. I was thinking about trying to load Paris in it to see if it
would
> work. After reading this thread, it sounds like it will either work, or
not
> even boot, but nothing will be damaged. Does this sound correct? I really
> don't want to do this if there is even a chance of damaging the system.
> Rod
> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
> >>HI Kim,
> >>EDS cards will work fine with these slots.
> >
> >According to this:
> >
> > http://www.lavalink.com/fileadmin/newsletters/link_12_02.pdf
> >
> >"PCI revision 2.3 removes 5-volt-only cards from the specification, but
> retains
> >the 5-volt-only motherboard connector. "
> >
> >What the point is of retaining the 5V connector but removing 5V cards
from
> >the spec, I have no idea, and has been a source of constant confusion.
> >
> >That said, I've just learned that PCI 2.1, released in '95, actually
included
> >the 3.3 volt spec, hence EDS cards COULD be 3.3 volt, but I have this
post
> >by Doug W:
> >
>
> http://news.parisnewsgroup.com/cgi-bin/dnewsweb?cmd=article& amp;group=IDEA.EMUE
nsoniqPARIS&item=164269&utag=
> >
> >...which says "you need the 5v slot". Mind you it also talks of the newer
> >specs which wont work "Neither electrically nor physically..." and I'm
98%
> >sure that an EDS card WILL fit in a PCI 2.3 slot.
> >
> >Gee, much as it would mean I've been on a wild goose chase, I would LOVE
> >to hear that I can use a PCI 2.3 motherboard. :o)
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Kim.
>DJ
Thanks for the post. I really appreciate you being
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55262 is a reply to message #55235] |
Mon, 04 July 2005 13:24 |
emarenot
Messages: 345
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
sounds like it will either work, or
>not
>>even boot, but nothing will be damaged. Does this sound correct? I really
>>don't want to do this if there is even a chance of damaging the system.
>>Rod
>>"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>>>HI Kim,
>>>>EDS cards will work fine with these slots.
>>>
>>>According to this:
>>>
>>> http://www.lavalink.com/fileadmin/newsletters/link_12_02.pdf
>>>
>>>"PCI revision 2.3 removes 5-volt-only cards from the specification, but
>>retains
>>>the 5-volt-only motherboard connector. "
>>>
>>>What the point is of retaining the 5V connector but removing 5V cards
from
>>>the spec, I have no idea, and has been a source of constant confusion.
>>>
>>>That said, I've just learned that PCI 2.1, released in '95, actually included
>>>the 3.3 volt spec, hence EDS cards COULD be 3.3 volt, but I have this
post
>>>by Doug W:
>>>
>>> http://news.parisnewsgroup.com/cgi-bin/dnewsweb?cmd=article& amp;group=IDEA.EMUEnsoniqPARIS&item=164269&utag=
>>>
>>>...which says "you need the 5v slot". Mind you it also talks of the
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55270 is a reply to message #55245] |
Mon, 04 July 2005 17:23 |
Jeremy Luzier
Messages: 102
Registered: November 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t; > using the native plugins I've got here whioch are cheap and very good
> > > (BlockFish, Spitfish, etc, Dave Brown, Waves NPPII, PowerTechnology
> DSP/FX
> > > and PSP plugins. These are plugins I used for years before I built my
> > SXDAW
> > > and started using lots of UAD-1 cards, and though the mixes sound a
> little
> > > bit different, they both sound *really* good.
> > >
> > > I think it's one of those things where the SX is turning into more
like
> > > something I have available if I need it, and I'm just not really going
> to
> > > need it much.
> > >
> > > We've already discussed this stuff to death, but we really do have
> > something
> > > special here guys. Having a really well loaded native DAW to compare
to
> > > Paris just makes me appreciate Paris all the more.
> > >
> > > Go figure.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>ahh yes!
I thought about that right after i posted.... just add the stereo mix
channel to the solo channel. Funny how sometimes writing out your problem
will help you find the answer.
Thanks for quick reply.
Feel free to share any other acronyms you might have come up with regarding
DAW's and general computer rock-n-rollin'!
:-)
Jeremy
"gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:42c8cc30$1@linux...
>
> Solo works fine in my setup. DP has a "Solo Exempt" option on every
channel
> including Aux channels and Master channels. This is a big help for leaving
> reverbs on or auditioning multiple vocals against a piano track. It also
> works to allow the return mix to stay on during solo. Without the Solo
Exempt
> option, you would need to add the stereo mix to the solo selection each
time.
> That would be somewhat of a pain but not the end of the world.
> Gene
>
>
>
>
> "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote:
> >Yo Gene!
> >
> >I remember you saying that you were doing this because you wanted to run
> >some stuff on the master bus... applied to the whole mix.
> >
> >Is it possible to do this and still be able to use your solo buttons in
> the
> >first box?
> >
> >I am set up like this....
> >
> >i have an external insert loop setup on the global master. it is routed
> to
> >channels 1 and 2 of my RME card. the output of channels 1 and 2 (RME) is
> >routed back to the global master insert... and the loop is complete.
> >
> >now when i set up a track in SX... and hit the monitor switch... and can
> >hear the mix with native plugins across the whole mix.
> >
> >problem is.... the solo buttons don't work.... when i solo something i
hear
> >nothing. i guess this is because of how everything is looped.
> >
> >anyways.... Gene... you have mentioned that you do this... so i am
curious
> >how you set it up.
> >
> >anybody else can certainly chime in as well.
> >
> >thanks,
> >
> >Jeremy
> >
> >
> >
>Jeremy,
I think the mojo of this whole thing lies in the tracks being summed in
Paris. I think it would be very easy to set up a number of routing scenarios
in Sxwhich would use the Paris insert and aux FX as inserts in cubase and,
that's something I hadn't really thought about doing. the Paris FX are very
good and this would really add a lot of power to SX. I might try this some
day.
The setup I have is really easy at this point because I've already created
the mix templates. It's just a matter of a rendering of all thee tracks to a
folder, a batch processing from .paf to .wav and then adding the audio files
to the desired tracks in SX. After that, it's just a matter of mixing,
adding insert FX, EQ and send FX in both Paris and SX with lfader evels
being controlled in SX and panning in Paris.
]The thing that is somewhat inconvenient about it is that I often tend to to
start my rough mixes while the tracking and overdubs are still happening.
The method that I'm using now really works best when all tracking has been
finished and the basic editing has been done in Paris. Still, I can see
some projects never leaving Paris at all.
Cool idea about using the Paris channels as inserts in SX though. That's
some original and creative thinking.
;o)
"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:42c9d095@linux...
> Deej,
>
> Why the hell is your setup so damn complicated? :-)
>
> It seems to me you want to get the benefits of the UAD-1 and maybe some
> other VST effects you can't get in PARIS... and you still want to be able
to
> use PARIS effects or external inserts.
>
> In general, here's what i would do if i had all your shit.
>
> Get SX 3. MIX in SX!! If you want to use PARIS plugins or external
> inserts/effects then figure out how to make it work by using the SX
external
> insert function available in 3.00. You certainly have enough frickin'
adat
> channels so that some could be used as submix channels from SX.... and
> others could be used to setup external insert loops... where you loop
> through PARIS to get the plugin or external hardware you want... using the
> SX external insert function. Does this make sense?
>
> So you would have some adat channels that would be used to get your actual
> tracks from SX to PARIS... you would be submixing in SX sending everything
> through 24 channels. The other 24 channels could be used as loops to get
> PARIS effects or external hardware back into SX which would end up going
> through your 24 submix channels to be bounced in PARIS.
>
> its a theory.... i am not sure how you would set up the loop so that you
> are not "hearing" the PARIS loop effects twice... but i think it's
do-able.
> And, TO ME, it seems alot more streamlined and less convoluted.... you
don't
> have to worry about sync.... reverb giddyness... where to pan what where
and
> when and from who.... automation can be done in one DAW instead of 2.
>
> You are like a mad scientist!
>
> :-)
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:42c8c0df@linux...
> > Jeremy,
> >
> > This is how I am working.
> >
> > Cubase SX with 2 x RME HDSP 9652's.
> >
> > The outputs of the 9652 are routed to the inputs of 6 x ADAT modules in
3
> x
> > MECs.
> >
> > The Cubase SX mix template has 46 mono tracks and two stereo pair.
> >
> > Stereo SPDIF of the HDSP 9652's are routed to a Quantec Yardstick and
> > Lexicon PCM 90 as outboard processors.
> >
> > The Cubase SX mix template has 44 mono tracks and two stereo tracks. One
> of
> > the stereo tracks is for bussing a drum submix to tracks 15 & 16 of
Paris
> > submix #1. The other stereo track busses all reverbs, etc (Cubase send
FX)
> > to aux #8 of Paris Submix #3.
> >
> > Each of the outputs in SX has a very flexible and transparent dither
> plugin
> > on the last insert slot of the channel.
> >
> > My Paris DAW and SX DAW are networked. Once I'm finished tracking, I
> render
> > the files across the network to a 250G drive on the SX DAW, open Wavelab
> and
> > batch process the .paf's to .wav files.
> >
> > I open my Cubase mix template and import these files to their respective
> > tracks so that the SX Vocal channel, etc. is being played back through
the
> > respective Paris vocal channel in a Paris mix template which has no
tracks
> > and is set to Live Mix mode.
> >
> > I then duplicate whatever drum tracks I want to squash and set them to
> > output through the stereo drum bus. the rest of the tracks are being
> played
> > back straight across the lightpipe connection to Paris.
> >
> > I have a 9 pin serial cable running from one of my ADAT modules to the
> ADAT
> > sync input of my master HDSP card and have this card set to sync to ADAt
> > timecode.
> >
> > I record enable the Paris tracks and then the Paris transport controls
the
> > start/stop of SX.
> >
> > All panning must be dopne in Paris because mono channels in Sx cannot
pan
> > unless they are bussed to a stereo bus.
> >
> > All fader moves are done in SX because the live reverb scenario between
SX
> > and Paris creates a prefader send scenario if levels are controlled in
> > Paris. Thus, if you lower level of a track that has a reverb processor
in
> SX
> > the track level goes down, but the reverb level doesn't. The only way
> around
> > this if you want to use Paris for fader levels is to apply reverb as a
> > plugin on the SX tracks, so I'm doing my fader automation in SX and
> > plugin/EQ automation as well.
> >
> > Also, when mixing this way, in order to automate pans in Paris, Paris
must
> > be the master and have a moving timeline or there is no way to automate
> pans
> > in Paris so in this scenario, the DAWs must be timeline locked with
Paris
> as
> > the master becaus s I said before, cubase can only pan if the channel is
> > sent to a stereo bus and all tracks are being bussed mono out of Cubase.
> >
> > I can also still use external and EDS inserts and aux FX in in Paris in
> Live
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55272 is a reply to message #55270] |
Mon, 04 July 2005 18:11 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ugins and other VST
> > > effects correct?
> > >
> > > and/or you have the two boxes synced so you can actually play tracks
in
> SX
> > > and PARIS at the same time... while processing SX track with UAD-1 and
> > > stuff?
> > >
> > > There is no question PARIS is unique. Its quite perplexing why NO ONE
> > else
> > > has been able to even come close. Granted, logic, DP and the Nuendo
> > engine
> > > are all very good and are sonically acceptable and CAN sound great
> > depending
> > > on the material and who is twisting the knobs. But NONE have the
PARIS
> > > intangibles.
> > >
> > > I have wanted to try this and i am wondering if anyone using another
DAW
> > > with PARIS has compared these 2 scenarios using the same final mix....
> > >
> > > Scenario #1.
> > > Mix in other DAW (lets say Nuendo, DP, whatever)... lightpipe to
> PARIS
> > > in live mode where you bounce the final stereo mix.
> > >
> > > Scenario #2.
> > > Mix in other DAW.... lightpipe to PARIS where you record all of
the
> > > seperate busses... say 12 stereo busses or 24 tracks.... which
> include...
> > > vocals buss, bass, guitar buss, drums buss, loops buss, keys buss, fx
> > buss.
> > > etc. THEN play those files in PARIS and bounce to disk.
> > >
> > > A/B to first scenario.
> > >
> > > Anyone done that?
> > >
> > > Jeremy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > > news:42c86353@linux...
> > > > ......just go back to using Paris and ditching the rest of this
> > > > monstrousity..........well, I doubt I'll really do that, but I'm
> > wondering
> > > > more and more if I really need it.
> > > >
> > > > It's really cool to be able to run all the UAD-1 plugins and other
> cool
> > > toys
> > > > in SX and then use them wioth Paris, but in all honesty, I've been
> > > comparing
> > > > some rough mixes, using SX and all those nice DSP cards to ITB Paris
> > mixes
> > > > using the native plugins I've got here whioch are cheap and very
good
> > > > (BlockFish, Spitfish, etc, Dave Brown, Waves NPPII, PowerTechnology
> > DSP/FX
> > > > and PSP plugins. These are plugins I used for years before I built
my
> > > SXDAW
> > > > and started using lots of UAD-1 cards, and though the mixes sound a
> > little
> > > > bit different, they both sound *really* good.
> > > >
> > > > I think it's one of those things where the SX is turning into more
> like
> > > > something I have available if I need it, and I'm just not really
going
> > to
> > > > need it much.
> > > >
> > > > We've already discussed this stuff to death, but we really do have
> > > something
> > > > special here guys. Having a really well loaded native DAW to compare
> to
> > > > Paris just makes me appreciate Paris all the more.
> > > >
> > > > Go figure.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>Deej,
Why are you recording in paf if you're going to wav anyway? quality loss?
JH
Mr Simplicity wrote:
> Jeremy,
>
> I think the mojo of this whole thing lies in the tracks being summed in
> Paris. I think it would be very easy to set up a number of routing scenarios
> in Sxwhich would use the Paris insert and aux FX as inserts in cubase and,
> that's something I hadn't really thought about doing. the Paris FX are very
> good and this would really add a lot of power to SX. I might try this some
> day.
>
> The setup I have is really easy at this point because I've already created
> the mix templates. It's just a matter of a rendering of all thee tracks to a
> folder, a batch processing from .paf to .wav and then adding the audio files
> to the desired tracks in SX. After that, it's just a matter of mixing,
> adding insert FX, EQ and send FX in both Paris and SX with lfader evels
> being controlled in SX and panning in Paris.
>
> ]The thing that is somewhat inconvenient about it is that I often tend to to
> start my rough mixes while the tracking and overdubs are still happening.
> The method that I'm using now really works best when all tracking has been
> finished and the basic editing has been done in Paris. Still, I can see
> some projects never leaving Paris at all.
>
> Cool idea about using the Paris channels as inserts in SX though. That's
> some original and creative thinking.
>
> ;o)
>
>
> "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:42c9d095@linux...
>
>>Deej,
>>
>>Why the hell is your setup so damn complicated? :-)
>>
>>It seems to me you want to get the benefits of the UAD-1 and maybe some
>>other VST effects you can't get in PARIS... and you still want to be able
>
> to
>
>>use PARIS effects or external inserts.
>>
>>In general, here's what i would do if i had all your shit.
>>
>>Get SX 3. MIX in SX!! If you want to use PARIS plugins or external
>>inserts/effects then figure out how to make it work by using the SX
>
> external
>
>>insert function available in 3.00. You certainly have enough frickin'
>
> adat
>
>>channels so that some could be used as submix channels from SX.... and
>>others could be used to setup external insert loops... where you loop
>>through PARIS to get the plugin or external hardware you want... using the
>>SX external insert function. Does this make sense?
>>
>>So you would have some adat channels that would be used to get your actual
>>tracks from SX to PARIS... you would be submixing in SX sending everything
>>through 24 channels. The other 24 channels could be used as loops to get
>>PARIS effects or external hardware back into SX which would end up going
>>through your 24 submix channels to be bounced in PARIS.
>>
>>its a theory.... i am not sure how you would set up the loop so that you
>>are not "hearing" the PARIS loop effects twice... but i think it's
>
> do-able.
>
>>And, TO ME, it seems alot more streamlined and less convoluted.... you
>
> don't
>
>>have to worry about sync.... reverb giddyness... where to pan what where
>
> and
>
>>when and from who.... automation can be done in one DAW instead of 2.
>>
>>You are like a mad scientist!
>>
>>:-)
>>
>>Jeremy
>>
>>
>>
>>"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
>>news:42c8c0df@linux...
>>
>>>Jeremy,
>>>
>>>This is how I am working.
>>>
>>>Cubase SX with 2 x RME HDSP 9652's.
>>>
>>>The outputs of the 9652 are routed to the inputs of 6 x ADAT modules in
>
> 3
>
>>x
>>
>>>MECs.
>>>
>>>The Cubase SX mix template has 46 mono tracks and two stereo pair.
>>>
>>>Stereo SPDIF of the HDSP 9652's are routed to a Quantec Yardstick and
>>>Lexicon PCM 90 as outboard processors.
>>>
>>>The Cubase SX mix template has 44 mono tracks and two stereo tracks. One
>>
>>of
>>
>>>the stereo tracks is for bussing a drum submix to tracks 15 & 16 of
>
> Paris
>
>>>submix #1. The other stereo track busses all reverbs, etc (Cubase send
>
> FX)
>
>>>to aux #8 of Paris Submix #3.
>>>
>>>Each of the outputs in SX has a very flexible and transparent dither
>>
>>plugin
>>
>>>on the last insert slot of the channel.
>>>
>>>My Paris DAW and SX DAW are networked. Once I'm finished tracking, I
>>
>>render
>>
>>>the files across the network to a 250G drive on the SX DAW, open Wavelab
>>
>>and
>>
>>>batch process the .paf's to .wav files.
>>>
>>>I open my Cubase mix template and import these files to their respective
>>>tracks so that the SX Vocal channel, etc. is being played back through
>
> the
>
>>>respective Paris vocal channel in a Paris mix template which has no
>
> tracks
>
>>>and is set to Live Mix mode.
>>>
>>>I then duplicate whatever drum tracks I want to squash and set them to
>>>output through the stereo drum bus. the rest of the tracks are being
>>
>>played
>>
>>>back straight across the lightpipe connection to Paris.
>>>
>>>I have a 9 pin serial cable running from one of my ADAT modules to the
>>
>>ADAT
>>
>>>sync input of my master HDSP card and have this card set to sync to ADAt
>>>timecode.
>>>
>>>I record enable the Paris tracks and then the Paris transport controls
>
> the
>
>>>start/stop of SX.
>>>
>>>All panning must be dopne in Paris because mono channels in Sx cannot
>
> pan
>
>>>unless they are bussed to a stereo bus.
>>>
>>>All fader moves are done in SX because the live reverb scenario between
>
> SX
>
>>>and Paris creates a prefader send scenario if levels are controlled in
>>>Paris. Thus, if you lower level of a track that has a reverb processor
>
> in
>
>>SX
>>
>>>the track level goes down, but the reverb level doesn't. The only way
>>
>>around
>>
>>>this if you want to use Paris for fader levels is to apply reverb as a
>>>plugin on the SX tracks, so I'm doing my fader automation in SX and
>>>plugin/EQ automation as well.
>>>
>>>Also, when mixing this way, in order to automate pans in Paris, Paris
>
> must
>
>>>be the master and have a moving timeline or there is no way to automate
>>
>>pans
>>
>>>in Paris so in this scenario, the DAWs must be timeline locked with
>
> Paris
>
>>as
>>
>>>the master becaus s I said before, cubase can only pan if the channel is
>>>sent to a stereo bus and all tracks are being bussed mono out of Cubase.
>>>
>>>I can also still use external and EDS inserts and aux FX in in Paris in
>>
>>Live
>>
>>>Mix mode.
>>>
>>>After my earlier post, I did a little experiment and recorded some
>
> tracks
>
>>>across from Cubase SX to Paris with the dither plugin and then A/B'ed
>
> them
>
>>>with the original .paf that had been batch processed to a .wav and then
>>>recorded across back into Paris. I had my level in Paris set at unity
>>>during the pass so the resulting recorded file was about 2dB lower in
>>>amplitude than the original file which was recorded direct to Paris.
>
> They
>
>>>were also not phase coherent, probably due to the dither algo.
>>>
>>>Once I got the levels matched, I did a very painstaking A/B of these
>
> using
>
>>>my ears. One of my clients was here and I got him involved as the
>>>blindfoldee. Neither one of us could tell any difference between the
>
> files
>
>>>so I'm satisfied that this transferrence between DAWs is not causing a
>>
>>sonic
>>
>>>hit.
>>>
>>>Mixing in Paris is a
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55273 is a reply to message #55272] |
Mon, 04 July 2005 21:20 |
JeffH
Messages: 307
Registered: October 2007
Location: Wamic, OR
|
Senior Member |
|
|
bout as good as I could hope to get. Adding SX to
>
> the
>
>>>equation is a two edged sword. It's expensive and complicated, but you
>>
>>have
>>
>>>a zero latency DAW with pretty monstrous automation capabilities and the
>>>entire Paris gain structure/summing architecture available.
>>>
>>>If you want to achieve the ultimate in gnarly, take a track in SX, open
>
> up
>
>>a
>>
>>>UAD-1 compressor on it and honk on it a bit, then send it over the
>>
>>lightpipe
>>
>>>feed to a Paris channel with the Paris meters set post fader. This
>>
>>controls
>>
>>>the *level of phat* that is being generated by the 32bit mix engine in
>
> SX
>
>>>and sent to Paris and then the Paris gain structure is still available.
>>>It's about as good as it gets for tricking 1's and 0's into thinking
>
> they
>
>>>are magnetic particles on plastic tape being carried through electric
>>>circuits that are behaving in a non-linear way............but no matter
>>
>>how
>>
>>>hard I try, I just can't get this to sound like Pro Tools.
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>
>>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:42c8a93d@linux...
>>>
>>>>Deej,
>>>>
>>>>for clarification...
>>>>
>>>>you are mixing in PARIS while using SX for UAD-1 plugins and other VST
>>>>effects correct?
>>>>
>>>>and/or you have the two boxes synced so you can actually play tracks
>
> in
>
>>SX
>>
>>>>and PARIS at the same time... while processing SX track with UAD-1 and
>>>>stuff?
>>>>
>>>>There is no question PARIS is unique. Its quite perplexing why NO ONE
>>>
>>>else
>>>
>>>>has been able to even come close. Granted, logic, DP and the Nuendo
>>>
>>>engine
>>>
>>>>are all very good and are sonically acceptable and CAN sound great
>>>
>>>depending
>>>
>>>>on the material and who is twisting the knobs. But NONE have the
>
> PARIS
>
>>>>intangibles.
>>>>
>>>>I have wanted to try this and i am wondering if anyone using another
>
> DAW
>
>>>>with PARIS has compared these 2 scenarios using the same final mix....
>>>>
>>>>Scenario #1.
>>>> Mix in other DAW (lets say Nuendo, DP, whatever)... lightpipe to
>>
>>PARIS
>>
>>>>in live mode where you bounce the final stereo mix.
>>>>
>>>>Scenario #2.
>>>> Mix in other DAW.... lightpipe to PARIS where you record all of
>
> the
>
>>>>seperate busses... say 12 stereo busses or 24 tracks.... which
>>
>>include...
>>
>>>>vocals buss, bass, guitar buss, drums buss, loops buss, keys buss, fx
>>>
>>>buss.
>>>
>>>>etc. THEN play those files in PARIS and bounce to disk.
>>>>
>>>>A/B to first scenario.
>>>>
>>>>Anyone done that?
>>>>
>>>>Jeremy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:42c86353@linux...
>>>>
>>>>>......just go back to using Paris and ditching the rest of this
>>>>>monstrousity..........well, I doubt I'll really do that, but I'm
>>>
>>>wondering
>>>
>>>>>more and more if I really need it.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's really cool to be able to run all the UAD-1 plugins and other
>>
>>cool
>>
>>>>toys
>>>>
>>>>>in SX and then use them wioth Paris, but in all honesty, I've been
>>>>
>>>>comparing
>>>>
>>>>>some rough mixes, using SX and all those nice DSP cards to ITB Paris
>>>
>>>mixes
>>>
>>>>>using the native plugins I've got here whioch are cheap and very
>
> good
>
>>>>>(BlockFish, Spitfish, etc, Dave Brown, Waves NPPII, PowerTechnology
>>>
>>>DSP/FX
>>>
>>>>>and PSP plugins. These are plugins I used for years before I built
>
> my
>
>>>>SXDAW
>>>>
>>>>>and started using lots of UAD-1 cards, and though the mixes sound a
>>>
>>>little
>>>
>>>>>bit different, they both sound *really* good.
>>>>>
>>>>>I think it's one of those things where the SX is turning into more
>>
>>like
>>
>>>>>something I have available if I need it, and I'm just not really
>
> going
>
>>>to
>>>
>>>>>need it much.
>>>>>
>>>>>We've already discussed this stuff to death, but we really do have
>>>>
>>>>something
>>>>
>>>>>special here guys. Having a really well loaded native DAW to compare
>>
>>to
>>
>>>>>Paris just makes me appreciate Paris all the more.
>>>>>
>>>>>Go figure.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>Just trying to make a plan here for this new machine. Currently I have a
"Paris Only" boot of XP on my machine which is on a measely 4 Gig partition.
I'm tempted to go 20Gig or so for my Paris only partition, but then, why?
I mean it fits on 4 Gig happily enough, but I'm paradoid that it will somehow
get bigger.
I'm planning to have a whole bunch of seperate boots on this box, so that
I can mess with things without impacting productivity. A Paris only boot.
A "general music" boot where I can load Paris plus other music apps. An office/publishing
boot. A gaming boot. I'm trying to work out how big these boot sizes need
to be to plan for the future. I mean this laptop here only has a 10 gig OS
boot, which seems big enough, but it just seems like that's too small.
Am I having an attack of partition size paranoia here? I guess, in my 20
years of computing, everything has constantly needed more more more, but
I'm seriously wondering if we're reaching a point now where OS and application
sizes might start to relax in growth a little, or am I dreaming...
....or do I just need to relax and get more sleep... ;o)
Cheers,
Kim.....and, as an added bonus, in the post above this one there is actually
some body in the text. :o)I want to record at 24 bit in Paris. I don't think you can record 24 bit
..wav in Paris............can you?
"Jeff hoover" <jkhoover@excite.com> wrote in message news:42ca0a85@linux...
> Deej,
>
> Why are you recording in paf if you're going to wav anyway? quality loss?
>
> JH
>
>
>
> Mr Simplicity wrote:
> > Jeremy,
> >
> > I think the mojo of this whole thing lies in the tracks being summed in
> > Paris. I think it would be very easy to set up a number of routing
scenarios
> > in Sxwhich would use the Paris insert and aux FX as inserts in cubase
and,
> > that's something I hadn't really thought about doing. the Paris FX are
very
> > good and this would really add a lot of power to SX. I might try this
some
> > day.
> >
> > The setup I have is really easy at this point because I've already
created
> > the mix templates. It's just a matter of a rendering of all thee tracks
to a
> > folder, a batch processing from .paf to .wav and then adding the audio
files
> > to the desired tracks in SX. After that, it's just a matter of mixing,
> > adding insert FX, EQ and send FX in both Paris and SX with lfader evels
> > being controlled in SX and panning in Paris.
> >
> > ]The thing that is somewhat inconvenient about it is that I often tend
to to
> > start my rough mixes while the tracking and overdubs are still
happening.
> > The method that I'm using now really works best when all tracking has
been
> > finished and the basic editing has been done in Paris. Still, I can see
> > some projects never leaving Paris at all.
> >
> > Cool idea about using the Paris channels as inserts in SX though. That's
> > some original and creative thinking.
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> >
> > "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:42c9d095@linux...
> >
> >>Deej,
> >>
> >>Why the hell is your setup so damn complicated? :-)
> >>
> >>It seems to me you want to get the benefits of the UAD-1 and maybe some
> >>other VST effects you can't get in PARIS... and you still want to be
able
> >
> > to
> >
> >>use PARIS effects or external inserts.
> >>
> >>In general, here's what i would do if i had all your shit.
> >>
> >>Get SX 3. MIX in SX!! If you want to use PARIS plugins or external
> >>inserts/effects then figure out how to make it work by using the SX
> >
> > external
> >
> >>insert function available in 3.00. You certainly have enough frickin'
> >
> > adat
> >
> >>channels so that some could be used as submix channels from SX.... and
> >>others could be used to setup external insert loops... where you loop
> >>through PARIS to get the plugin or external hardware you want... using
the
> >>SX external insert function. Does this make sense?
> >>
> >>So you would have some adat channels that would be used to get your
actual
> >>tracks from SX to PARIS... you would be submixing in SX sending
everything
> >>through 24 channels. The other 24 channels could be used as loops to
get
> >>PARIS effects or external hardware back into SX which would end up going
> >>through your 24 submix channels to be bounced in PARIS.
> >>
> >>its a theory.... i am not sure how you would set up the loop so that
you
> >>are not "hearing" the PARIS loop effects twice... but i think it's
> >
> > do-able.
> >
> >>And, TO ME, it seems alot more streamlined and less convoluted.... you
> >
> > don't
> >
> >>have to worry about sync.... reverb giddyness... where to pan what where
> >
> > and
> >
> >>when and from who.... automation can be done in one DAW instead of 2.
> >>
> >>You are like a mad scientist!
> >>
> >>:-)
> >>
> >>Jeremy
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >>news:42c8c0df@linux...
> >>
> >>>Jeremy,
> >>>
> >>>This is how I am working.
> >>>
> >>>Cubase SX with 2 x RME HDSP 9652's.
> >>>
> >>>The outputs of the 9652 are routed to the inputs of 6 x ADAT modules in
> >
> > 3
> >
> >>x
> >>
> >>>MECs.
> >>>
> >>>The Cubase SX mix template has 46 mono tracks and two stereo pair.
> >>>
> >>>Stereo SPDIF of the HDSP 9652's are routed to a Quantec Yardstick and
> >>>Lexicon PCM 90 as outboard processors.
> >>>
> >>>The Cubase SX mix template has 44 mono tracks and two stereo tracks.
One
> >>
> >>of
> >>
> >>>the stereo tracks is for bussing a drum submix to tracks 15 & 16 of
> >
> > Paris
> >
> >>>submix #1. The other stereo track busses all reverbs, etc (Cubase send
> >
> > FX)
> >
> >>>to aux #8 of Paris Submix #3.
> >>>
> >>>Each of the outputs in SX has a very flexible and transparent dither
> >>
> >>plugin
> >>
> >>>on the last insert slot of the channel.
> >>>
> >>>My Paris DAW and SX DAW are networked. Once I'm finished tracking, I
> >>
> >>render
> >>
> >>>the files across the network to a 250G drive on the SX DAW, open
Wavelab
> >>
> >>and
> >>
> >>>batch process the .paf's to .wav files.
> >>>
> >>>I open my Cubase mix template and import these files to their
respective
> >>>tracks so that the SX Vocal channel, etc. is being played back through
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>respective Paris vocal channel in a Paris mix template which has no
> >
> > tracks
> >
> >>>and is set to Live Mix mode.
> >>>
> >>>I then duplicate whatever drum tracks I want to squash and set them to
> >>>output through the stereo drum bus. the rest of the tracks are being
> >>
> >>played
> >>
> >>>back straight across the lightpipe connection to Paris.
> >>>
> >>>I have a 9 pin serial cable running from one of my ADAT modules to the
> >>
> >>ADAT
> >>
> >>>sync input of my master HDSP card and have this card set to sync to
ADAt
> >>>timecode.
> >>>
> >>>I record enable the Paris tracks and then the Paris transport controls
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>start/stop of SX.
> >>>
> >>>All panning must be dopne in Paris because mono channels in Sx cannot
> >
> > pan
> >
> >>>unless they are bussed to a stereo bus.
> >>>
> >>>All fader moves are done in SX because the live reverb scenario between
> >
> > SX
> >
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55277 is a reply to message #55273] |
Mon, 04 July 2005 23:00 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
Cubase.
> >>>
> >>>I can also still use external and EDS inserts and aux FX in in Paris in
> >>
> >>Live
> >>
> >>>Mix mode.
> >>>
> >>>After my earlier post, I did a little experiment and recorded some
> >
> > tracks
> >
> >>>across from Cubase SX to Paris with the dither plugin and then A/B'ed
> >
> > them
> >
> >>>with the original .paf that had been batch processed to a .wav and then
> >>>recorded across back into Paris. I had my level in Paris set at unity
> >>>during the pass so the resulting recorded file was about 2dB lower in
> >>>amplitude than the original file which was recorded direct to Paris.
> >
> > They
> >
> >>>were also not phase coherent, probably due to the dither algo.
> >>>
> >>>Once I got the levels matched, I did a very painstaking A/B of these
> >
> > using
> >
> >>>my ears. One of my clients was here and I got him involved as the
> >>>blindfoldee. Neither one of us could tell any difference between the
> >
> > files
> >
> >>>so I'm satisfied that this transferrence between DAWs is not causing a
> >>
> >>sonic
> >>
> >>>hit.
> >>>
> >>>Mixing in Paris is about as good as I could hope to get. Adding SX to
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>equation is a two edged sword. It's expensive and complicated, but you
> >>
> >>have
> >>
> >>>a zero latency DAW with pretty monstrous automation capabilities and
the
> >>>entire Paris gain structure/summing architecture available.
> >>>
> >>>If you want to achieve the ultimate in gnarly, take a track in SX, open
> >
> > up
> >
> >>a
> >>
> >>>UAD-1 compressor on it and honk on it a bit, then send it over the
> >>
> >>lightpipe
> >>
> >>>feed to a Paris channel with the Paris meters set post fader. This
> >>
> >>controls
> >>
> >>>the *level of phat* that is being generated by the 32bit mix engine in
> >
> > SX
> >
> >>>and sent to Paris and then the Paris gain structure is still available.
> >>>It's about as good as it gets for tricking 1's and 0's into thinking
> >
> > they
> >
> >>>are magnetic particles on plastic tape being carried through electric
> >>>circuits that are behaving in a non-linear way............but no matter
> >>
> >>how
> >>
> >>>hard I try, I just can't get this to sound like Pro Tools.
> >>>
> >>>;o)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >>>news:42c8a93d@linux...
> >>>
> >>>>Deej,
> >>>>
> >>>>for clarification...
> >>>>
> >>>>you are mixing in PARIS while using SX for UAD-1 plugins and other VST
> >>>>effects correct?
> >>>>
> >>>>and/or you have the two boxes synced so you can actually play tracks
> >
> > in
> >
> >>SX
> >>
> >>>>and PARIS at the same time... while processing SX track with UAD-1 and
> >>>>stuff?
> >>>>
> >>>>There is no question PARIS is unique. Its quite perplexing why NO ONE
> >>>
> >>>else
> >>>
> >>>>has been able to even come close. Granted, logic, DP and the Nuendo
> >>>
> >>>engine
> >>>
> >>>>are all very good and are sonically acceptable and CAN sound great
> >>>
> >>>depending
> >>>
> >>>>on the material and who is twisting the knobs. But NONE have the
> >
> > PARIS
> >
> >>>>intangibles.
> >>>>
> >>>>I have wanted to try this and i am wondering if anyone using another
> >
> > DAW
> >
> >>>>with PARIS has compared these 2 scenarios using the same final mix....
> >>>>
> >>>>Scenario #1.
> >>>> Mix in other DAW (lets say Nuendo, DP, whatever)... lightpipe to
> >>
> >>PARIS
> >>
> >>>>in live mode where you bounce the final stereo mix.
> >>>>
> >>>>Scenario #2.
> >>>> Mix in other DAW.... lightpipe to PARIS where you record all of
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>>seperate busses... say 12 stereo busses or 24 tracks.... which
> >>
> >>include...
> >>
> >>>>vocals buss, bass, guitar buss, drums buss, loops buss, keys buss, fx
> >>>
> >>>buss.
> >>>
> >>>>etc. THEN play those files in PARIS and bounce to disk.
> >>>>
> >>>>A/B to first scenario.
> >>>>
> >>>>Anyone done that?
> >>>>
> >>>>Jeremy
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >>>>news:42c86353@linux...
> >>>>
> >>>>>......just go back to using Paris and ditching the rest of this
> >>>>>monstrousity..........well, I doubt I'll really do that, but I'm
> >>>
> >>>wondering
> >>>
> >>>>>more and more if I really need it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>It's really cool to be able to run all the UAD-1 plugins and other
> >>
> >>cool
> >>
> >>>>toys
> >>>>
> >>>>>in SX and then use them wioth Paris, but in all honesty, I've been
> >>>>
> >>>>comparing
> >>>>
> >>>>>some rough mixes, using SX and all those nice DSP cards to ITB Paris
> >>>
> >>>mixes
> >>>
> >>>>>using the native plugins I've got here whioch are cheap and very
> >
> > good
> >
> >>>>>(BlockFish, Spitfish, etc, Dave Brown, Waves NPPII, PowerTechnology
> >>>
> >>>DSP/FX
> >>>
> >>>>>and PSP plugins. These are plugins I used for years before I built
> >
> > my
> >
> >>>>SXDAW
> >>>>
> >>>>>and started using lots of UAD-1 cards, and though the mixes sound a
> >>>
> >>>little
> >>>
> >>>>>bit different, they both sound *really* good.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I think it's one of those things where the SX is turning into more
> >>
> >>like
> >>
> >>>>>something I have available if I need it, and I'm just not really
> >
> > going
> >
> >>>to
> >>>
> >>>>>need it much.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>We've already discussed this stuff to death, but we really do have
> >>>>
> >>>>something
> >>>>
> >>>>>special here guys. Having a really well loaded native DAW to compare
> >>
> >>to
> >>
> >>>>>Paris just makes me appreciate Paris all the more.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Go figure.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >Surely they could have done everyone a favour by called the "kickball" the
"football"... I mean come on!! ;o)
"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>
>Everyone knows about the Ball mic, and probably lots of people
>know about the condensor 8-Ball by now, but for anyone who's
>not been keeping up, they now have a "Kickball", specially
>designed for kick drums (and yes, it comes in the familiar
>subdued red color so well-known to us from when we were kids);
>and now they have a new one coming our called the "Snowball" -
>from what I understand, this is a dual-element mic, which has
>switchable settings... one more tailored to vocals, and one
>more tailored to instruments... AND, it comes with a USB
>interface! Based on the switchability & USB deal, it appears to
>be targeted specifically at low-budget home recordists.
>
>Just thought I'd share... I just happen to think these guys are
>pretty innovative. http://www.bluemic.com if you don't have
>the link handy. What's next? The "Baseball", specially-
>designed for Bass guitar (comes in white, with little red
>stiches around it)? Maybe the "Racketball" for REALLY loud
>sounds, or perhaps the "Gag-Ball", for vocalists that you don't
>really want to hear at all?
>
>
>
>Also, look what I came across... it's pretty funny to hear this
>stuff with standard General MIDI sound fonts (unless you've got
>those disabled on your computer, you should be able to just
>click on the link & hear it that way). The notes & phrasing
>aren't aren't quite right, but you'll should a kick out of it,
>nonetheless:
>
>http://www.jgeoff.com/rush/midi/spiradio.mid
>
>
>Just some O.T. rambling on a day off... y'all have a Happy 4th!
>
>NeilPanic,
I got a little confused as to what you want to do by trying to
read the thread,so I'll try to answer the original post.
First,you CAN record midi into PARIS 3.0 but,its not ever
efficient. The best way is to use another sequencer that
handles midi better and sync that app with PARIS either
on the same box as PARIS or another box all together.
You could use a hardware sequencer or a software one.
On the Mac the only sequencers that I'm aware of that
sync with PARIS that run on OS9x are Opcode's Vision
and MOTU Digital Performer.
You must use OMS to sync either one to PARIS. DP uses
their own system which is called Free MIDI. It can also
run under OMS as well. I will not go into this in detail
because you can read about most of this stuff on the sites
that I we list.
If you don't have either one of these apps I would go
here:http://www.fm-music.com/v/ You can download
OMS 2.8.3 and Vision 4.5.1 for FREE. All the manuals
for Vision and OMS are found here as well. You can
record your midi data in Vision and that will drive the synth.
Just patch the output of the Synth to the inputs of your PARIS
interface and record. All the info on how to sync Vision with PARIS on th
Mac can be found in th PARIS manual from
version1.8 to 3.0. OMS will use the IAC bus to send MTC
to PARIS. When PARIS is set-up as the Master all you do
is hit play and record in PARIS and Vision will follow as if they
were one application.
You will need a MIDI interface and a MIDI device for inputing
the data. OMS with identify the interface and device..
hope this helps!
respect
Nappy
"Colonel Panic" <Panic@home.nowhere> wrote:
>
>You all have probably all been through this, so maybe you can help me.
>
>How do you record and playback MIDI info in Paris 3.0?
>
>Say you want to sync a Synth box to paris using MIDI clock.
>
>Can this be done? There doesn't appear to be any way to get MIDI signal
>in and out of PARIS.
>
>TIA
>
>PanicDeej,
I actually meant doing both.... SUMMING in SX and using your second 24
channels of lightpipe for PARIS loop effects back into SX.... and then
eventually back into PARIS for summing.... so some tracks would actually be
sent to PARIS twice.
I absolutely agree that the mojo is to sum everything in PARIS.
Does this make sense now?
Jeremy
"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:42ca2260@linux...
> I want to record at 24 bit in Paris. I don't think you can record 24 bit
> .wav in Paris............can you?
>
> "Jeff hoover" <jkhoover@excite.com> wrote in message
news:42ca0a85@linux...
> > Deej,
> >
> > Why are you recording in paf if you're going to wav anyway? quality
loss?
> >
> > JH
> >
> >
> >
> > Mr Simplicity wrote:
> > > Jeremy,
> > >
> > > I think the mojo of this whole thing lies in the tracks being summed
in
> > > Paris. I think it would be very easy to set up a number of routing
> scenarios
> > > in Sxwhich would use the Paris insert and aux FX as inserts in cubase
> and,
> > > that's something I hadn't really thought about doing. the Paris FX are
> very
> > > good and this would really add a lot of power to SX. I might try this
> some
> > > day.
> > >
> > > The setup I have is really easy at this point because I've already
> created
> > > the mix templates. It's just a matter of a rendering of all thee
tracks
> to a
> > > folder, a batch processing from .paf to .wav and then adding the audio
> files
> > > to the desired tracks in SX. After that, it's just a matter of mixing,
> > > adding insert FX, EQ and send FX in both Paris and SX with lfader
evels
> > > being controlled in SX and panning in Paris.
> > >
> > > ]The thing that is somewhat inconvenient about it is that I often tend
> to to
> > > start my rough mixes while the tracking and overdubs are still
> happening.
> > > The method that I'm using now really works best when all tracking has
> been
> > > finished and the basic editing has been done in Paris. Still, I can
see
> > > some projects never leaving Paris at all.
> > >
> > > Cool idea about using the Paris channels as inserts in SX though.
That's
> > > some original and creative thinking.
> > >
> > > ;o)
> > >
> > >
> > > "Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > news:42c9d095@linux...
> > >
> > >>Deej,
> > >>
> > >>Why the hell is your setup so damn complicated? :-)
> > >>
> > >>It seems to me you want to get the benefits of the UAD-1 and maybe
some
> > >>other VST effects you can't get in PARIS... and you still want to be
> able
> > >
> > > to
> > >
> > >>use PARIS effects or external inserts.
> > >>
> > >>In general, here's what i would do if i had all your shit.
> > >>
> > >>Get SX 3. MIX in SX!! If you want to use PARIS plugins or external
> > >>inserts/effects then figure out how to make it work by using the SX
> > >
> > > external
> > >
> > >>insert function available in 3.00. You certainly have enough frickin'
> > >
> > > adat
> > >
> > >>channels so that some could be used as submix channels from SX.... and
> > >>others could be used to setup external insert loops... where you loop
> > >>through PARIS to get the plugin or external hardware you want... using
> the
> > >>SX external insert function. Does this make sense?
> > >>
> > >>So you would have some adat channels that would be used to get your
> actual
> > >>tracks from SX to PARIS... you would be submixing in SX sending
> everything
> > >>through 24 channels. The other 24 channels could be used as loops to
> get
> > >>PARIS effects or external hardware back into SX which would end up
going
> > >>through your 24 submix channels to be bounced in PARIS.
> > >>
> > >>its a theory.... i am not sure how you would set up the loop so that
> you
> > >>are not "hearing" the PARIS loop effects twice... but i think it's
> > &
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55280 is a reply to message #55277] |
Tue, 05 July 2005 01:36 |
Jeremy Luzier
Messages: 102
Registered: November 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> > >>>
> > >>>All panning must be dopne in Paris because mono channels in Sx cannot
> > >
> > > pan
> > >
> > >>>unless they are bussed to a stereo bus.
> > >>>
> > >>>All fader moves are done in SX because the live reverb scenario
between
> > >
> > > SX
> > >
> > >>>and Paris creates a prefader send scenario if levels are controlled
in
> > >>>Paris. Thus, if you lower level of a track that has a reverb
processor
> > >
> > > in
> > >
> > >>SX
> > >>
> > >>>the track level goes down, but the reverb level doesn't. The only way
> > >>
> > >>around
> > >>
> > >>>this if you want to use Paris for fader levels is to apply reverb as
a
> > >>>plugin on the SX tracks, so I'm doing my fader automation in SX and
> > >>>plugin/EQ automation as well.
> > >>>
> > >>>Also, when mixing this way, in order to automate pans in Paris, Paris
> > >
> > > must
> > >
> > >>>be the master and have a moving timeline or there is no way to
automate
> > >>
> > >>pans
> > >>
> > >>>in Paris so in this scenario, the DAWs must be timeline locked with
> > >
> > > Paris
> > >
> > >>as
> > >>
> > >>>the master becaus s I said before, cubase can only pan if the channel
> is
> > >>>sent to a stereo bus and all tracks are being bussed mono out of
> Cubase.
> > >>>
> > >>>I can also still use external and EDS inserts and aux FX in in Paris
in
> > >>
> > >>Live
> > >>
> > >>>Mix mode.
> > >>>
> > >>>After my earlier post, I did a little experiment and recorded some
> > >
> > > tracks
> > >
> > >>>across from Cubase SX to Paris with the dither plugin and then A/B'ed
> > >
> > > them
> > >
> > >>>with the original .paf that had been batch processed to a .wav and
then
> > >>>recorded across back into Paris. I had my level in Paris set at
unity
> > >>>during the pass so the resulting recorded file was about 2dB lower in
> > >>>amplitude than the original file which was recorded direct to Paris.
> > >
> > > They
> > >
> > >>>were also not phase coherent, probably due to the dither algo.
> > >>>
> > >>>Once I got the levels matched, I did a very painstaking A/B of these
> > >
> > > using
> > >
> > >>>my ears. One of my clients was here and I got him involved as the
> > >>>blindfoldee. Neither one of us could tell any difference between the
> > >
> > > files
> > >
> > >>>so I'm satisfied that this transferrence between DAWs is not causing
a
> > >>
> > >>sonic
> > >>
> > >>>hit.
> > >>>
> > >>>Mixing in Paris is about as good as I could hope to get. Adding SX to
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > >>>equation is a two edged sword. It's expensive and complicated, but
you
> > >>
> > >>have
> > >>
> > >>>a zero latency DAW with pretty monstrous automation capabilities and
> the
> > >>>entire Paris gain structure/summing architecture available.
> > >>>
> > >>>If you want to achieve the ultimate in gnarly, take a track in SX,
open
> > >
> > > up
> > >
> > >>a
> > >>
> > >>>UAD-1 compressor on it and honk on it a bit, then send it over the
> > >>
> > >>lightpipe
> > >>
> > >>>feed to a Paris channel with the Paris meters set post fader. This
> > >>
> > >>controls
> > >>
> > >>>the *level of phat* that is being generated by the 32bit mix engine
in
> > >
> > > SX
> > >
> > >>>and sent to Paris and then the Paris gain structure is still
available.
> > >>>It's about as good as it gets for tricking 1's and 0's into thinking
> > >
> > > they
> > >
> > >>>are magnetic particles on plastic tape being carried through electric
> > >>>circuits that are behaving in a non-linear way............but no
matter
> > >>
> > >>how
> > >>
> > >>>hard I try, I just can't get this to sound like Pro Tools.
> > >>>
> > >>>;o)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > >>>news:42c8a93d@linux...
> > >>>
> > >>>>Deej,
> > >>>>
> > >>>>for clarification...
> > >>>>
> > >>>>you are mixing in PARIS while using SX for UAD-1 plugins and other
VST
> > >>>>effects correct?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>and/or you have the two boxes synced so you can actually play tracks
> > >
> > > in
> > >
> > >>SX
> > >>
> > >>>>and PARIS at the same time... while processing SX track with UAD-1
and
> > >>>>stuff?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>There is no question PARIS is unique. Its quite perplexing why NO
ONE
> > >>>
> > >>>else
> > >>>
> > >>>>has been able to even come close. Granted, logic, DP and the Nuendo
> > >>>
> > >>>engine
> > >>>
> > >>>>are all very good and are sonically acceptable and CAN sound great
> > >>>
> > >>>depending
> > >>>
> > >>>>on the material and who is twisting the knobs. But NONE have the
> > >
> > > PARIS
> > >
> > >>>>intangibles.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I have wanted to try this and i am wondering if anyone using another
> > >
> > > DAW
> > >
> > >>>>with PARIS has compared these 2 scenarios using the same final
mix....
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Scenario #1.
> > >>>> Mix in other DAW (lets say Nuendo, DP, whatever)... lightpipe to
> > >>
> > >>PARIS
> > >>
> > >>>>in live mode where you bounce the final stereo mix.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Scenario #2.
> > >>>> Mix in other DAW.... lightpipe to PARIS where you record all of
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > >>>>seperate busses... say 12 stereo busses or 24 tracks.... which
> > >>
> > >>include...
> > >>
> > >>>>vocals buss, bass, guitar buss, drums buss, loops buss, keys buss,
fx
> > >>>
> > >>>buss.
> > >>>
> > >>>>etc. THEN play those files in PARIS and bounce to disk.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>A/B to first scenario.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Anyone done that?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Jeremy
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > >>>>news:42c86353@linux...
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>......just go back to using Paris and ditching the rest of this
> > >>>>>monstrousity..........well, I doubt I'll really do that, but I'm
> > >>>
> > >>>wondering
> > >>>
> > >>>>>more and more if I really need it.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>It's really cool to be able to run all the UAD-1 plugins and other
> > >>
> > >>cool
> > >>
> > >>>>toys
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>in SX and then use them wioth Paris, but in all honesty, I've been
> > >>>>
> > >>>>comparing
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>some rough mixes, using SX and all those nice DSP cards to ITB
Paris
> > >>>
> > >>>mixes
> > >>>
> > >>>>>using the native plugins I've got here whioch are cheap and very
> > >
> > > good
> > >
> > >>>>>(BlockFish, Spitfish, etc, Dave Brown, Waves NPPII, PowerTechnology
> > >>>
> > >>>DSP/FX
> > >>>
> > >>>>>and PSP plugins. These are plugins I used for years before I built
> > >
> > > my
> > >
> > >>>>SXDAW
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>and started using lots of UAD-1 cards, and though the mixes sound a
> > >>>
> > >>>little
> > >>>
> > >>>>>bit different, they both sound *really* good.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I think it's one of those things where the SX is turning into more
> > >>
> > >>like
> > >>
> > >>>>>something I have available if I need it, and I'm just not really
> > >
> > > going
> > >
> > >>>to
> > >>>
> > >>>>>need it much.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>We've already discussed this stuff to death, but we really do have
> > >>>>
> > >>>>something
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>special here guys. Having a really well loaded native DAW to
compare
> > >>
> > >>to
> > >>
> > >>>>>Paris just makes me appreciate Paris all the more.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Go figure.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
>
>Thanks Chris.
Paris has been running fine on 98SE. I guess I won't mess with a
solid setup. I even continue to beta and run Samplitude on it, though
I test it on XP as well.
For some reason, I find XP really annoying and rarely use it in the
studio. I find 2000 flawless for my admin system and network but have
never used any audio apps on it.
Peace - Don
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 09:31:09 -0400, Chris Ludwig
<chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>yes Windows 2000 sucks balls to put it in technical terms.:)
>
>Sick with 98SE unless you need to use some app that won't work on it.
>Other wise use XP Home.
>
>
>
>Chris
>
>DMorrell wrote:
>
>> I've been running Paris on 98SE with very few problems. I'd like to
>> run a couple of other apps on the same rig - is anyone running Paris
>> on 2000 Pro? If so, any drawbacks?
>>
>> Thanks - DonThat was great, Neil.
I could use a hairball.... for some of the cool cats I get to
record...
... and I'm thinking that perhaps Chris Ludwig might be interested in
some of Blue's offerings.
Peace - Don
On 5 Jul 2005 01:43:46 +1000, "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>
>Everyone knows about the Ball mic, and probably lots of people
>know about the condensor 8-Ball by now, but for anyone who's
>not been keeping up, they now have a "Kickball", specially
>designed for kick drums (and yes, it comes in the familiar
>subdued red color so well-known to us from when we were kids);
>and now they have a new one coming our called the "Snowball" -
>from what I understand, this is a dual-element mic, which has
>switchable settings... one more tailored to vocals, and one
>more tailored to instruments... AND, it comes with a USB
>interface! Based on the switchability & USB deal, it appears to
>be targeted specifically at low-budget home recordists.
>
>Just thought I'd share... I just happen to think these guys are
>pretty innovative. http://www.bluemic.com if you don't have
>the link handy. What's next? The "Baseball", specially-
>designed for Bass guitar (comes in white, with little red
>stiches around it)? Maybe the "Racketball" for REALLY loud
>sounds, or perhaps the "Gag-Ball", for vocalists that you don't
>really want to hear at all?
>
>
>
>Also, look what I came across... it's pretty funny to hear this
>stuff with standard General MIDI sound fonts (unless you've got
>those disabled on your computer, you should be able to just
>click on the link & hear it that way). The notes & phrasing
>aren't aren't quite right, but you'll should a kick out of it,
>nonetheless:
>
>http://www.jgeoff.com/rush/midi/spiradio.mid
>
>
>Just some O.T. rambling on a day off... y'all have a Happy 4th!
>
>Neilfrom all (what) that i've read 20g is the max with 10 - 12 ideal.
On 5 Jul 2005 15:07:43 +1000, "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Just trying to make a plan here for this new machine. Currently I have a
>"Paris Only" boot of XP on my machine which is on a measely 4 Gig partition.
>I'm tempted to go 20Gig or so for my Paris only partition, but then, why?
>I mean it fits on 4 Gig happily enough, but I'm paradoid that it will somehow
>get bigger.
>
>I'm planning to have a whole bunch of seperate boots on this box, so that
>I can mess with things without impacting productivity. A Paris only boot.
>A "general music" boot where I can load Paris plus other music apps. An office/publishing
>boot. A gaming boot. I'm trying to work out how big these boot sizes need
>to be to plan for the future. I mean this laptop here only has a 10 gig OS
>boot, which seems big enough, but it just seems like that's too small.
>
>Am I having an attack of partition size paranoia here? I guess, in my 20
>years of computing, everything has constantly needed more more more, but
>I'm seriously wondering if we're reaching a point now where OS and application
>sizes might start to relax in growth a little, or am I dreaming...
>
>...or do I just need to relax and get more sleep... ;o)
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.Thanks Guys,
this is the first time I've checkerd the NG for a few days, been doing up to
16 hrs a day on a new reality show called "Australian Princess", a copy of
the US version made by Granada TV in the UK....loooong hours, but
fun....this is my first day off in weeks..
Sleep looks good..(so do some of the young girls in the show, I might add).
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tvocc1978c9oegbu96nf0kplh74kmp8csb@4ax.com...
> suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure you do mr. 55. ya know...ya probably got more of
> a variety of things done when you were younger and obsessed with sex
> then gear. oh w3ell...slut on.
>
> ;o)
>
>
> On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 14:05:02 -0600, "Mr Simplicity"
> <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote:
>
>>ARRRGGGGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>;oP
>>
>>OK! OK!.......now I remember!!!!!!!!!!!!.
>>
>>"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:104bc1l96pmpifasr4pee5sagc9rt49ln2@4ax.com...
>>> speaking of memories...mr.slackerheimer...
>>>
>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 10:27:39 -0600, "Mr Simplicity"
>>> <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Ahhhh...........so today's the day? Well, so much for my feeble memory.
>>> >I
>>> >thought Martin's B'day wa on the 29th. Anyway, here's to you Martin.
>>> >
>>> >;o)
>>> >
>>> >"erlilo" <erlilo@online.no> wrote in message news:42c56a66$1@linux...
>>> >> Yeh, now's the day to celebrate you too, Martin. A big congratulation
>>here
>>> >> from Norway! It's 55 years, as far as my old brain are telling
>>> >> me!?!:-)
>>> >>
>>> >> Erling
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>
>Thanks Deej, and all, I'm working....(I did the loos last week)
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:42c2c06a@linux...
> Hope you're having a good one down under. I started the morning by fixing
> the seal on a loo that was constantly running.
>
> Such is life.
>
> Hope you have a great day.
>
> ;o)
>
>What a memory...thatnks Nappy.
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:42c2c13c$1@linux...
>
> Happy 55th Birthday my brother!
> We have been doing this since you were 49,I think?
>
> respect
> Nappy
>
>
> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote:
>>Hope you're having a good one down under. I started the morning by fixing
>>the seal on a loo that was constantly running.
>>
>>Such is life.
>>
>>Hope you have a great day.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>DMorrell <don@toneworks.com> wrote:
>That was great, Neil.
>
>I could use a hairball.... for some of the cool cats I get to
>record...
lol - good one.
>.. and I'm thinking that perhaps Chris Ludwig might be interested in some
of Blue's offerings.
Chris is never gonna live down that one typo, is he? (I didn't
comment on it at the time, but I recall seeing it &
thinking "now THAT's a man who really likes gaming!" lol)
:)"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wr
|
|
|
|
| Re: Man, I'm soooo tempted to ............ [message #55292 is a reply to message #55280] |
Tue, 05 July 2005 08:05 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
files.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>I open my Cubase mix template and import these files to their
> > respective
> > > >>>tracks so that the SX Vocal channel, etc. is being played back
> through
> > > >
> > > > the
> > > >
> > > >>>respective Paris vocal channel in a Paris mix template which has no
> > > >
> > > > tracks
> > > >
> > > >>>and is set to Live Mix mode.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>I then duplicate whatever drum tracks I want to squash and set them
> to
> > > >>>output through the stereo drum bus. the rest of the tracks are
being
> > > >>
> > > >>played
> > > >>
> > > >>>back straight across the lightpipe connection to Paris.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>I have a 9 pin serial cable running from one of my ADAT modules to
> the
> > > >>
> > > >>ADAT
> > > >>
> > > >>>sync input of my master HDSP card and have this card set to sync to
> > ADAt
> > > >>>timecode.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>I record enable the Paris tracks and then the Paris transport
> controls
> > > >
> > > > the
> > > >
> > > >>>start/stop of SX.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>All panning must be dopne in Paris because mono channels in Sx
cannot
> > > >
> > > > pan
> > > >
> > > >>>unless they are bussed to a stereo bus.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>All fader moves are done in SX because the live reverb scenario
> between
> > > >
> > > > SX
> > > >
> > > >>>and Paris creates a prefader send scenario if levels are controlled
> in
> > > >>>Paris. Thus, if you lower level of a track that has a reverb
> processor
> > > >
> > > > in
> > > >
> > > >>SX
> > > >>
> > > >>>the track level goes down, but the reverb level doesn't. The only
way
> > > >>
> > > >>around
> > > >>
> > > >>>this if you want to use Paris for fader levels is to apply reverb
as
> a
> > > >>>plugin on the SX tracks, so I'm doing my fader automation in SX and
> > > >>>plugin/EQ automation as well.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Also, when mixing this way, in order to automate pans in Paris,
Paris
> > > >
> > > > must
> > > >
> > > >>>be the master and have a moving timeline or there is no way to
> automate
> > > >>
> > > >>pans
> > > >>
> > > >>>in Paris so in this scenario, the DAWs must be timeline locked with
> > > >
> > > > Paris
> > > >
> > > >>as
> > > >>
> > > >>>the master becaus s I said before, cubase can only pan if the
channel
> > is
> > > >>>sent to a stereo bus and all tracks are being bussed mono out of
> > Cubase.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>I can also still use external and EDS inserts and aux FX in in
Paris
> in
> > > >>
> > > >>Live
> > > >>
> > > >>>Mix mode.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>After my earlier post, I did a little experiment and recorded some
> > > >
> > > > tracks
> > > >
> > > >>>across from Cubase SX to Paris with the dither plugin and then
A/B'ed
> > > >
> > > > them
> > > >
> > > >>>with the original .paf that had been batch processed to a .wav and
> then
> > > >>>recorded across back into Paris. I had my level in Paris set at
> unity
> > > >>>during the pass so the resulting recorded file was about 2dB lower
in
> > > >>>amplitude than the original file which was recorded direct to
Paris.
> > > >
> > > > They
> > > >
> > > >>>were also not phase coherent, probably due to the dither algo.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Once I got the levels matched, I did a very painstaking A/B of
these
> > > >
> > > > using
> > > >
> > > >>>my ears. One of my clients was here and I got him involved as the
> > > >>>blindfoldee. Neither one of us could tell any difference between
the
> > > >
> > > > files
> > > >
> > > >>>so I'm satisfied that this transferrence between DAWs is not
causing
> a
> > > >>
> > > >>sonic
> > > >>
> > > >>>hit.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Mixing in Paris is about as good as I could hope to get. Adding SX
to
> > > >
> > > > the
> > > >
> > > >>>equation is a two edged sword. It's expensive and complicated, but
> you
> > > >>
> > > >>have
> > > >>
> > > >>>a zero latency DAW with pretty monstrous automation capabilities
and
> > the
> > > >>>entire Paris gain structure/summing architecture available.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>If you want to achieve the ultimate in gnarly, take a track in SX,
> open
> > > >
> > > > up
> > > >
> > > >>a
> > > >>
> > > >>>UAD-1 compressor on it and honk on it a bit, then send it over the
> > > >>
> > > >>lightpipe
> > > >>
> > > >>>feed to a Paris channel with the Paris meters set post fader. This
> > > >>
> > > >>controls
> > > >>
> > > >>>the *level of phat* that is being generated by the 32bit mix engine
> in
> > > >
> > > > SX
> > > >
> > > >>>and sent to Paris and then the Paris gain structure is still
> available.
> > > >>>It's about as good as it gets for tricking 1's and 0's into
thinking
> > > >
> > > > they
> > > >
> > > >>>are magnetic particles on plastic tape being carried through
electric
> > > >>>circuits that are behaving in a non-linear way............but no
> matter
> > > >>
> > > >>how
> > > >>
> > > >>>hard I try, I just can't get this to sound like Pro Tools.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>;o)
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>"Jeremy Luzier" <j.luzier@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > >>>news:42c8a93d@linux...
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>Deej,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>for clarification...
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>you are mixing in PARIS while using SX for UAD-1 plugins and other
> VST
> > > >>>>effects correct?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>and/or you have the two boxes synced so you can actually play
tracks
> > > >
> > > > in
> > > >
> > > >>SX
> > > >>
> > > >>>>and PARIS at the same time... while processing SX track with UAD-1
> and
> > > >>>>stuff?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>There is no question PARIS is unique. Its quite perplexing why NO
> ONE
> > > >>>
> > > >>>else
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>has been able to even come close. Granted, logic, DP and the
Nuendo
> > > >>>
> > > >>>engine
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>are all very good and are sonically acceptable and CAN sound great
> > > >>>
> > > >>>depending
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>on the material and who is twisting the knobs. But NONE have the
> > > >
> > > > PARIS
> > > >
> > > >>>>intangibles.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>I have wanted to try this and i am wondering if anyone using
another
> > > >
> > > > DAW
> > > >
> > > >>>>with PARIS has compared these 2 scenarios using the same final
> mix....
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Scenario #1.
> > > >>>> Mix in other DAW (lets say Nuendo, DP, whatever)... lightpipe
to
> > > >>
> > > >>PARIS
> > > >>
> > > >>>>in live mode where you bounce the final stereo mix.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Scenario #2.
> > > >>>> Mix in other DAW.... lightpipe to PARIS where you record all
of
> > > >
> > > > the
> > > >
> > > >>>>seperate busses... say 12 stereo busses or 24 tracks.... which
> > > >>
> > > >>include...
> > > >>
> > > >>>>vocals buss, bass, guitar buss, drums buss, loops buss, keys buss,
> fx
> > > >>>
> > > >>>buss.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>etc. THEN play those files in PARIS and bounce to disk.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>A/B to first scenario.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Anyone done that?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Jeremy
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > > >>>>news:42c86353@linux...
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>......just go back to using Paris and ditching the rest of this
> > > >>>>>monstrousity..........well, I doubt I'll really do that, but I'm
> > > >>>
> > > >>>wondering
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>>more and more if I really need it.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>It's really cool to be able to run all the UAD-1 plugins and
other
> > > >>
> > > >>cool
> > > >>
> > > >>>>toys
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>in SX and then use them wioth Paris, but in all honesty, I've
been
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>comparing
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>some rough mixes, using SX and all those nice DSP cards to ITB
> Paris
> > > >>>
> > > >>>mixes
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>>using the native plugins I've got here whioch are cheap and very
> > > >
> > > > good
> > > >
> > > >>>>>(BlockFish, Spitfish, etc, Dave Brown, Waves NPPII,
PowerTechnology
> > > >>>
> > > >>>DSP/FX
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>>and PSP plugins. These are plugins I used for years before I
built
> > > >
> > > > my
> > > >
> > > >>>>SXDAW
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>and started using lots of UAD-1 cards, and though the mixes sound
a
> > > >>>
> > > >>>little
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>>bit different, they both sound *really* good.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>I think it's one of those things where the SX is turning into
more
> > > >>
> > > >>like
> > > >>
> > > >>>>>something I have available if I need it, and I'm just not really
> > > >
> > > > going
> > > >
> > > >>>to
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>>need it much.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>We've already discussed this stuff to death, but we really do
have
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>something
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>special here guys. Having a really well loaded native DAW to
> compare
> > > >>
> > > >>to
> > > >>
> > > >>>>>Paris just makes me appreciate Paris all the more.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>Go figure.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
>
>I always remember yours because its right around mine.
After six years its not hard. Funny,now I'm 49,my birthday
was the 4th.
respect
Nappy
"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>What a memory...thatnks Nappy.
>--
>Martin Harrington
>www.lendanear-sound.com
>
>"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:42c2c13c$1@linux...
>>
>> Happy 55th Birthday my brother!
>> We have been doing this since you were 49,I think?
>>
>> respect
>> Nappy
>>
>>
>> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>Hope you're having a good one down under. I started the morning by fixing
>>>the seal on a loo that was constantly running.
>>>
>>>Such is life.
>>>
>>>Hope you have a great day.
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>I know there has been some past discussion of the NHT PVC for passive volume
control, and maybe some here are using it. I've read reports that due to
cheaper pots (compared to Coleman and others), it has stereo balance issues
at lower levels, and to some degree balance problems up to reasonable
listening levels. I am wondering what experience you have. I guess for
$100 you get what you pay for.
Thanks,
DedricI've been using one for 3 years. Never had these issues at all. This sounds
like FUD to me.
Deej
"Dedric Terry" <dedric@keyofd.net> wrote in message
news:BEF00CDF.2B92%dedric@keyofd.net...
> I know there has been some past discussion of the NHT PVC for passive
volume
> control, and maybe some here are using it. I've read reports that due to
> cheaper pots (compared to Coleman and others), it has stereo balance
issues
> at lower levels, and to some degree balance problems up to reasonable
> listening levels. I am wondering what experience you have. I guess for
> $100 you get what you pay for.
>
> Thanks,
> Dedric
>One way to check would be to feed a signal through a "Y" cable to the
input, then invert one of the outputs and sum through another "Y"
cable. This should effectively cancel the signal. Any audio coming
through would indicate a left-right imbalance. It's my guess that the
difference would be less than 1/4 dB. The Central Station that we are
using has some of the same anomalies... but with the dim button, you
can get out of the bottom of the taper where the problems exist.
David.
Mr Simplicity wrote:
> I've been using one for 3 years. Never had these issues at all. This sounds
> like FUD to me.
>
> Deej
>
>
>
> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@keyofd.net> wrote in message
> news:BEF00CDF.2B92%dedric@keyofd.net...
>
>>I know there has been some past discussion of the NHT PVC for passive
>
> volume
>
>>control, and maybe some here are using it. I've read reports that due to
>>cheaper pots (compared to Coleman and others), it has stereo balance
>
> issues
>
>>at lower levels, and to some degree balance problems up to reasonable
>>listening levels. I am wondering what experience you have. I guess for
>>$100 you get what you pay for.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Dedric
>>
>
>
>So now you are trying to induce insecurity into my perfect world?
Hmmmm......now, after I test the PVC, I'm going to have to get an
oscilloscope and go through each piece of gear in the studio and test it and
also I will need to create a grid in my tracking areas based on 6"
increments and test for phase cancellation with every microphone against
every other microphone on every square of the grid at every possible
relative rotational value and also t every elevation in 1" increments from
floor to ceiling, first using two mics, then three, then four, until I've
tried all 30 of my mics at every location on the grid at every vertical 1"
increment.
I'll report my findings when I'm done.
;oP
"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
news:42cab6b3@linux...
> One way to check would be to feed a signal through a "Y" cable to the
> input, then invert one of the outputs and sum through another "Y"
> cable. This should effectively cancel the signal. Any audio coming
> through would indicate a left-right imbalance. It's my guess that the
> difference would be less than 1/4 dB. The Central Station that we are
> using has some of the same anomalies... but with the dim button, you
> can get out of the bottom of the taper where the problems exist.
>
> David.
>
> Mr Simplicity wrote:
> > I've been using one for 3 years. Never had these issues at all. This
sounds
> > like FUD to me.
> >
> > Deej
> >
> >
> >
> > "Dedric Terry" <dedric@keyofd.net> wrote in message
> > news:BEF00CDF.2B92%dedric@keyofd.net...
> >
> >>I know there has been some past discussion of the NHT PVC for passive
> >
> > volume
> >
> >>control, and maybe some here are using it. I've read reports that due
to
> >>cheaper pots (compared to Coleman and others), it has stereo balance
> >
> > issues
> >
> >>at lower levels, and to some degree balance problems up to reasonable
> >>listening levels. I am wondering what experience you have. I guess for
> >>$100 you get what you pay for.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Dedric
> >>
> >
> >
> >Have the report on my desk by 14:00. ;-)
David.
Mr Simplicity wrote:
> So now you are trying to induce insecurity into my perfect world?
>
> Hmmmm......now, after I test the PVC, I'm going to have to get an
> oscilloscope and go through each piece of gear in the studio and test it and
> also I will need to create a grid in my tracking areas based on 6"
> increments and test for phase cancellation with every microphone against
> every other microphone on every square of the grid at every possible
> relative rotational value and also t every elevation in 1" increments from
> floor to ceiling, first using two mics, then three, then four, until I've
> tried all 30 of my mics at every location on the grid at every vertical 1"
> increment.
>
> I'll report my findings when I'm done.
>
> ;oP
> "EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
> news:42cab6b3@linux...
>
>>One way to check would be to feed a signal through a "Y" cable to the
>>input, then invert one of the outputs and sum through another "Y"
>>cable. This should effectively cancel the signal. Any audio coming
>>through would indicate a left-right imbalance. It's my guess that the
>>difference would be less than 1/4 dB. The Central Station that we are
>>using has some of the same anomalies... but with the dim button, you
>>can get out of the bottom of the taper where the problems exist.
>>
>>David.
>>
>>Mr Simplicity wrote:
>>
>>>I've been using one for 3 years. Never had these issues at all. This
>
> sounds
>
>>>like FUD to me.
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Dedric Terry" <dedric@keyofd.net> wrote in message
>>>news:BEF00CDF.2B92%dedric@keyofd.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>I know there has been some past discussion of the NHT PVC for passive
>>>
>>>volume
>>>
>>>
>>>>control, and maybe some here are using it. I've read reports that due
>
> to
>
>>>>cheaper pots (compared to Coleman and others), it has stereo balance
>>>
>>>issues
>>>
>>>
>>>>at lower levels, and to some degree balance problems up to reasonable
>>>>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Dec 26 00:08:49 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01449 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
