Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Something I'm discovering about native
| Something I'm discovering about native [message #95296] |
Thu, 31 January 2008 19:50  |
![Deej [5] is currently offline](/theme/PARIS_Forum_Template/images/offline.png "Deej [5] is currently offline")
Deej [5]
Messages: 373
Registered: March 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
1. The options that it offers are nothing short of amazing
2. The sound quality can be very very good when properly gainstaged.
3. Low latency monitoring is possible, thought the more money you throw at
it, the more "possible" it really is in a practical way.
4. The ability to use higher sample rates is no big deal to me. I did it for
a while. I really don't use them much any more.
5. I'm discovering that Paris was easier to use and sounded better with
fewer options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus compression gets
you in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and if you do
need bus compression in Paris, you can bounce down to a stereo pair and
compress the tracks (a type of parallel compression). No matter how much I
try to like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. Creamware was much
better as far as I/O interface is concerned on a native platform.
6. VSTi drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never in a
million years.
7. The deal killler for me with Paris was lack of delay compensation, but I
have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now that I could probably lose
the UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune in. Analog
hardware, Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float my boat now
that I have had a healthy dose of "the other side". I would keep a 2nd comp
on the side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio and I'd
probably be just as happy....of course, then I lose recall (sigh)
There really is no perfect world these days for what I want to do..........I
guess there really never has been, has there?
;o}
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95297 is a reply to message #95296] |
Thu, 31 January 2008 21:35  |
Cujjo
Messages: 325
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Deej, I'm sending my Paris mixes through my BA 312's via Avedis' line pads
into my Drawmer 1968 and I really dig the depth I am getting.
I would say the 1968 is a tad mushy and warm.. But I think it really is worth
the round trip.
"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>1. The options that it offers are nothing short of amazing
>
>2. The sound quality can be very very good when properly gainstaged.
>
>3. Low latency monitoring is possible, thought the more money you throw
at
>it, the more "possible" it really is in a practical way.
>
>4. The ability to use higher sample rates is no big deal to me. I did it
for
>a while. I really don't use them much any more.
>
>5. I'm discovering that Paris was easier to use and sounded better with
>fewer options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus compression gets
>you in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and if you
do
>need bus compression in Paris, you can bounce down to a stereo pair and
>compress the tracks (a type of parallel compression). No matter how much
I
>try to like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. Creamware was
much
>better as far as I/O interface is concerned on a native platform.
>
>6. VSTi drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never in a
>million years.
>
>7. The deal killler for me with Paris was lack of delay compensation, but
I
>have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now that I could probably lose
>the UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune in. Analog
>hardware, Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float my boat
now
>that I have had a healthy dose of "the other side". I would keep a 2nd comp
>on the side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio and I'd
>probably be just as happy....of course, then I lose recall (sigh)
>
>There really is no perfect world these days for what I want to do..........I
>guess there really never has been, has there?
>
>;o}
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95300 is a reply to message #95297] |
Fri, 01 February 2008 00:25 |
Deej [5]
Messages: 373
Registered: March 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Scott,
I'm just too invested in what I've got going on here to go back to using
Paris. I made a decision to move on and I'm going to stick with it. Part of
that decision was based on the presumption that I would really need the
ability to work at higher sample rates. another assumption was that I would
want to use midi tracks to trigger VSTi's. Neither assumption has really
proven itseld to have been really necessary. I am starting to get a bit of
post work here and Cubase is pretty handy for working with video.
DJ
"Cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message news:47a2a182$1@linux...
>
>
> Deej, I'm sending my Paris mixes through my BA 312's via Avedis' line pads
> into my Drawmer 1968 and I really dig the depth I am getting.
>
> I would say the 1968 is a tad mushy and warm.. But I think it really is
> worth
> the round trip.
>
>
> "Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>1. The options that it offers are nothing short of amazing
>>
>>2. The sound quality can be very very good when properly gainstaged.
>>
>>3. Low latency monitoring is possible, thought the more money you throw
> at
>>it, the more "possible" it really is in a practical way.
>>
>>4. The ability to use higher sample rates is no big deal to me. I did it
> for
>>a while. I really don't use them much any more.
>>
>>5. I'm discovering that Paris was easier to use and sounded better with
>
>>fewer options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus compression
>>gets
>
>>you in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and if you
> do
>>need bus compression in Paris, you can bounce down to a stereo pair and
>
>>compress the tracks (a type of parallel compression). No matter how much
> I
>>try to like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. Creamware was
> much
>>better as far as I/O interface is concerned on a native platform.
>>
>>6. VSTi drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never in a
>>million years.
>>
>>7. The deal killler for me with Paris was lack of delay compensation, but
> I
>>have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now that I could probably
>>lose
>
>>the UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune in.
>>Analog
>
>>hardware, Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float my boat
> now
>>that I have had a healthy dose of "the other side". I would keep a 2nd
>>comp
>
>>on the side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio and I'd
>
>>probably be just as happy....of course, then I lose recall (sigh)
>>
>>There really is no perfect world these days for what I want to
>>do..........I
>
>>guess there really never has been, has there?
>>
>>;o}
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95307 is a reply to message #95300] |
Fri, 01 February 2008 09:44 |
|
|
Yep.. Paris @ 16 bit 44.1/48k sounds just as good as other DAWS @ 88.2 & 96k..
Here'my take: Native soud cool to me when using a Analoge mixer to sum. As
you know, I use a SoundCraft Ghost. Even Paris sounds better summing thru
the Ghost.. More dept..
I keep my 4 card Paris rig armed and ready at all times. it still gives that
"AWE" effect on clients and engineers. When I play it, they all smile. The
interface is still(IMO) the bets looking..
Most projects I work on these days are on Slow-Tools which I find for mixing
really nice. Editing is an entirely diffenent story.
But one thing is for sure: The PAris sound keeps bringing me return business
form my Engineer and Producers who use Pro Tools & Cubase.. They just want
to run their mix thru (Paris) for the sound..
"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>Scott,
>
>I'm just too invested in what I've got going on here to go back to using
>Paris. I made a decision to move on and I'm going to stick with it. Part
of
>that decision was based on the presumption that I would really need the
>ability to work at higher sample rates. another assumption was that I would
>want to use midi tracks to trigger VSTi's. Neither assumption has really
>proven itseld to have been really necessary. I am starting to get a bit
of
>post work here and Cubase is pretty handy for working with video.
>
>DJ
>
>"Cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message news:47a2a182$1@linux...
>>
>>
>> Deej, I'm sending my Paris mixes through my BA 312's via Avedis' line
pads
>> into my Drawmer 1968 and I really dig the depth I am getting.
>>
>> I would say the 1968 is a tad mushy and warm.. But I think it really is
>> worth
>> the round trip.
>>
>>
>> "Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>1. The options that it offers are nothing short of amazing
>>>
>>>2. The sound quality can be very very good when properly gainstaged.
>>>
>>>3. Low latency monitoring is possible, thought the more money you throw
>> at
>>>it, the more "possible" it really is in a practical way.
>>>
>>>4. The ability to use higher sample rates is no big deal to me. I did
it
>> for
>>>a while. I really don't use them much any more.
>>>
>>>5. I'm discovering that Paris was easier to use and sounded better with
>>
>>>fewer options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus compression
>>>gets
>>
>>>you in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and if you
>> do
>>>need bus compression in Paris, you can bounce down to a stereo pair and
>>
>>>compress the tracks (a type of parallel compression). No matter how much
>> I
>>>try to like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. Creamware was
>> much
>>>better as far as I/O interface is concerned on a native platform.
>>>
>>>6. VSTi drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never in a
>>>million years.
>>>
>>>7. The deal killler for me with Paris was lack of delay compensation,
but
>> I
>>>have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now that I could probably
>>>lose
>>
>>>the UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune in.
>>>Analog
>>
>>>hardware, Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float my boat
>> now
>>>that I have had a healthy dose of "the other side". I would keep a 2nd
>>>comp
>>
>>>on the side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio and
I'd
>>
>>>probably be just as happy....of course, then I lose recall (sigh)
>>>
>>>There really is no perfect world these days for what I want to
>>>do..........I
>>
>>>guess there really never has been, has there?
>>>
>>>;o}
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95310 is a reply to message #95307] |
Fri, 01 February 2008 10:07 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I really like the higher samplerates - I can ABSOLUTELY hear a
difference (and so can you, I'm convinced anyone here could).
It's not so much about "how much more high end is there?" it's
about CLARITY up top, and an openness to the sound. And getting
the digital lowpass filters up out of the range of human
hearing.
Anyway, I've thought about trying a console, and was
considering one of those new Toft ATB's (since they're supposed
to sound like Trident 80-series, and I LOVOOOVE that tough,
yet musical Trident sound - but I understand the outputs are
unbalanced, which I'm not too keen on.
BTW, can anyone help me with a quick Paris HW config question?
I'm getting ready to start tracking a new project for a local
band, and I was thinking about doing the basics in Paris, then
porting over to Cubase for overdubs & mixing - if I have a
single EDS card, one MEC, two 8-in's, and an ADAT card, is
there any "best" order to load the cards in the MEC? I just got
the 2nd 8-in card the other day (thanks, John Shapiro), but
I've noticed that with the current setup in the MEC (which is
8-in in the first, slot, ADAT in the 2nd) the patch bay sees
the ADAT card first, then the 8-in. Is that always the case?
IOW, I'd like to have it so that the patch bay/EDS card sees
the two 8-in modules first, THEN the ADAT card.
Neil
"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Yep.. Paris @ 16 bit 44.1/48k sounds just as good as other DAWS @ 88.2 &
96k..
>
>Here'my take: Native soud cool to me when using a Analoge mixer to sum.
As
>you know, I use a SoundCraft Ghost. Even Paris sounds better summing thru
>the Ghost.. More dept..
>
>I keep my 4 card Paris rig armed and ready at all times. it still gives
that
>"AWE" effect on clients and engineers. When I play it, they all smile. The
>interface is still(IMO) the bets looking..
>
>Most projects I work on these days are on Slow-Tools which I find for mixing
>really nice. Editing is an entirely diffenent story.
>But one thing is for sure: The PAris sound keeps bringing me return business
>form my Engineer and Producers who use Pro Tools & Cubase.. They just want
>to run their mix thru (Paris) for the sound..
>
>"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>Scott,
>>
>>I'm just too invested in what I've got going on here to go back to using
>
>>Paris. I made a decision to move on and I'm going to stick with it. Part
>of
>>that decision was based on the presumption that I would really need the
>
>>ability to work at higher sample rates. another assumption was that I would
>
>>want to use midi tracks to trigger VSTi's. Neither assumption has really
>
>>proven itseld to have been really necessary. I am starting to get a bit
>of
>>post work here and Cubase is pretty handy for working with video.
>>
>>DJ
>>
>>"Cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message news:47a2a182$1@linux...
>>>
>>>
>>> Deej, I'm sending my Paris mixes through my BA 312's via Avedis' line
>pads
>>> into my Drawmer 1968 and I really dig the depth I am getting.
>>>
>>> I would say the 1968 is a tad mushy and warm.. But I think it really
is
>
>>> worth
>>> the round trip.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>>1. The options that it offers are nothing short of amazing
>>>>
>>>>2. The sound quality can be very very good when properly gainstaged.
>>>>
>>>>3. Low latency monitoring is possible, thought the more money you throw
>>> at
>>>>it, the more "possible" it really is in a practical way.
>>>>
>>>>4. The ability to use higher sample rates is no big deal to me. I did
>it
>>> for
>>>>a while. I really don't use them much any more.
>>>>
>>>>5. I'm discovering that Paris was easier to use and sounded better with
>>>
>>>>fewer options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus compression
>
>>>>gets
>>>
>>>>you in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and if
you
>>> do
>>>>need bus compression in Paris, you can bounce down to a stereo pair and
>>>
>>>>compress the tracks (a type of parallel compression). No matter how much
>>> I
>>>>try to like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. Creamware was
>>> much
>>>>better as far as I/O interface is concerned on a native platform.
>>>>
>>>>6. VSTi drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never in
a
>>>>million years.
>>>>
>>>>7. The deal killler for me with Paris was lack of delay compensation,
>but
>>> I
>>>>have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now that I could probably
>
>>>>lose
>>>
>>>>the UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune in.
>>>>Analog
>>>
>>>>hardware, Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float my boat
>>> now
>>>>that I have had a healthy dose of "the other side". I would keep a 2nd
>
>>>>comp
>>>
>>>>on the side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio and
>I'd
>>>
>>>>probably be just as happy....of course, then I lose recall (sigh)
>>>>
>>>>There really is no perfect world these days for what I want to
>>>>do..........I
>>>
>>>>guess there really never has been, has there?
>>>>
>>>>;o}
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95311 is a reply to message #95310] |
Fri, 01 February 2008 09:18 |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00E9_01C864CC.8A18B480
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Neil,
You can swap the order of the hardware in the Paris Patchbay.
Just pick the module you want from the list on the upper right and
drag n drop to the location in Mec Modules that you want it to be in.
I do have the 8 ins, 8 outs then ADAT in my Mecs. The show up
in that order in the Patchbay too. I'm not sure why your ADAT
shows up first. Every system is a little different. Wait for the=20
upgrade.
Tom
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:47a351ee$1@linux...
I really like the higher samplerates - I can ABSOLUTELY hear a
difference (and so can you, I'm convinced anyone here could).
It's not so much about "how much more high end is there?" it's
about CLARITY up top, and an openness to the sound. And getting
the digital lowpass filters up out of the range of human
hearing.
Anyway, I've thought about trying a console, and was
considering one of those new Toft ATB's (since they're supposed
to sound like Trident 80-series, and I LOVOOOVE that tough,
yet musical Trident sound - but I understand the outputs are
unbalanced, which I'm not too keen on.
BTW, can anyone help me with a quick Paris HW config question?
I'm getting ready to start tracking a new project for a local
band, and I was thinking about doing the basics in Paris, then
porting over to Cubase for overdubs & mixing - if I have a
single EDS card, one MEC, two 8-in's, and an ADAT card, is=20
there any "best" order to load the cards in the MEC? I just got
the 2nd 8-in card the other day (thanks, John Shapiro), but
I've noticed that with the current setup in the MEC (which is
8-in in the first, slot, ADAT in the 2nd) the patch bay sees
the ADAT card first, then the 8-in. Is that always the case?
IOW, I'd like to have it so that the patch bay/EDS card sees
the two 8-in modules first, THEN the ADAT card.
Neil
"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Yep.. Paris @ 16 bit 44.1/48k sounds just as good as other DAWS @ =
88.2 &
96k..
>
>Here'my take: Native soud cool to me when using a Analoge mixer to =
sum.
As
>you know, I use a SoundCraft Ghost. Even Paris sounds better summing =
thru
>the Ghost.. More dept..
>
>I keep my 4 card Paris rig armed and ready at all times. it still =
gives
that
>"AWE" effect on clients and engineers. When I play it, they all =
smile. The
>interface is still(IMO) the bets looking..
>
>Most projects I work on these days are on Slow-Tools which I find for =
mixing
>really nice. Editing is an entirely diffenent story.=20
>But one thing is for sure: The PAris sound keeps bringing me return =
business
>form my Engineer and Producers who use Pro Tools & Cubase.. They just =
want
>to run their mix thru (Paris) for the sound..
>
>"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>Scott,
>>
>>I'm just too invested in what I've got going on here to go back to =
using
>
>>Paris. I made a decision to move on and I'm going to stick with it. =
Part
>of=20
>>that decision was based on the presumption that I would really need =
the
>
>>ability to work at higher sample rates. another assumption was that =
I would
>
>>want to use midi tracks to trigger VSTi's. Neither assumption has =
really
>
>>proven itseld to have been really necessary. I am starting to get a =
bit
>of=20
>>post work here and Cubase is pretty handy for working with video.
>>
>>DJ
>>
>>"Cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message =
news:47a2a182$1@linux...
>>>
>>>
>>> Deej, I'm sending my Paris mixes through my BA 312's via Avedis' =
line
>pads
>>> into my Drawmer 1968 and I really dig the depth I am getting.
>>>
>>> I would say the 1968 is a tad mushy and warm.. But I think it =
really
is
>
>>> worth
>>> the round trip.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>>1. The options that it offers are nothing short of amazing
>>>>
>>>>2. The sound quality can be very very good when properly =
gainstaged.
>>>>
>>>>3. Low latency monitoring is possible, thought the more money you =
throw
>>> at
>>>>it, the more "possible" it really is in a practical way.
>>>>
>>>>4. The ability to use higher sample rates is no big deal to me. I =
did
>it
>>> for
>>>>a while. I really don't use them much any more.
>>>>
>>>>5. I'm discovering that Paris was easier to use and sounded better =
with
>>>
>>>>fewer options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus =
compression
>
>>>>gets
>>>
>>>>you in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and =
if
you
>>> do
>>>>need bus compression in Paris, you can bounce down to a stereo =
pair and
>>>
>>>>compress the tracks (a type of parallel compression). No matter =
how much
>>> I
>>>>try to like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. =
Creamware was
>>> much
>>>>better as far as I/O interface is concerned on a native platform.
>>>>
>>>>6. VSTi drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never =
in
a
>>>>million years.
>>>>
>>>>7. The deal killler for me with Paris was lack of delay =
compensation,
>but
>>> I
>>>>have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now that I could =
probably
>
>>>>lose
>>>
>>>>the UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune =
in.
>>>>Analog
>>>
>>>>hardware, Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float =
my boat
>>> now
>>>>that I have had a healthy dose of "the other side". I would keep a =
2nd
>
>>>>comp
>>>
>>>>on the side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio =
and
>I'd
>>>
>>>>probably be just as happy....of course, then I lose recall (sigh)
>>>>
>>>>There really is no perfect world these days for what I want to=20
>>>>do..........I
>>>
>>>>guess there really never has been, has there?
>>>>
>>>>;o}
>>>>
>>>>
>>>=20
>>
>>
>
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_00E9_01C864CC.8A18B480
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Neil,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You can swap the order of the hardware =
in the Paris=20
Patchbay.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just pick the module you want from the =
list on the=20
upper right and</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>drag n drop to the location in Mec =
Modules that you=20
want it to be in.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I do have the 8 ins, 8 outs then =
ADAT in my=20
Mecs. The show up</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>in that order in the Patchbay =
too. I'm not=20
sure why your ADAT</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>shows up first. Every system is a =
little=20
different. Wait for the </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>upgrade.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Neil" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:OIUOIU@OIU.com">OIUOIU@OIU.com</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
href=3D"news:47a351ee$1@linux">news:47a351ee$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>I =
really=20
like the higher samplerates - I can ABSOLUTELY hear a<BR>difference =
(and so=20
can you, I'm convinced anyone here could).<BR>It's not so much about =
"how much=20
more high end is there?" it's<BR>about CLARITY up top, and an openness =
to the=20
sound. And getting<BR>the digital lowpass filters up out of the range =
of=20
human<BR>hearing.<BR><BR>Anyway, I've thought about trying a console, =
and=20
was<BR>considering one of those new Toft ATB's (since they're =
supposed<BR>to=20
sound like Trident 80-series, and I LOVOOOVE that tough,<BR>yet =
musical=20
Trident sound - but I understand the outputs are<BR>unbalanced, which =
I'm not=20
too keen on.<BR><BR>BTW, can anyone help me with a quick Paris HW =
config=20
question?<BR>I'm getting ready to start tracking a new project for a=20
local<BR>band, and I was thinking about doing the basics in Paris,=20
then<BR>porting over to Cubase for overdubs & mixing - if I have=20
a<BR>single EDS card, one MEC, two 8-in's, and an ADAT card, is =
<BR>there any=20
"best" order to load the cards in the MEC? I just got<BR>the 2nd 8-in =
card the=20
other day (thanks, John Shapiro), but<BR>I've noticed that with the =
current=20
setup in the MEC (which is<BR>8-in in the first, slot, ADAT in the =
2nd) the=20
patch bay sees<BR>the ADAT card first, then the 8-in. Is that always =
the=20
case?<BR>IOW, I'd like to have it so that the patch bay/EDS card =
sees<BR>the=20
two 8-in modules first, THEN the ADAT=20
card.<BR><BR>Neil<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>"LaMont" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:jjdpro@gmail.com">jjdpro@gmail.com</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>><BR>>Yep.. Paris @ 16 bit 44.1/48k sounds just as =
good as=20
other DAWS @ 88.2 &<BR>96k..<BR>><BR>>Here'my take: Native =
soud cool=20
to me when using a Analoge mixer to sum.<BR>As<BR>>you know, I use =
a=20
SoundCraft Ghost. Even Paris sounds better summing thru<BR>>the =
Ghost..=20
More dept..<BR>><BR>>I keep my 4 card Paris rig armed and ready =
at all=20
times. it still gives<BR>that<BR>>"AWE" effect on clients and =
engineers.=20
When I play it, they all smile. The<BR>>interface is still(IMO) the =
bets=20
looking..<BR>><BR>>Most projects I work on these days are on =
Slow-Tools=20
which I find for mixing<BR>>really nice. Editing is an entirely =
diffenent=20
story. <BR>>But one thing is for sure: The PAris sound keeps =
bringing me=20
return business<BR>>form my Engineer and Producers who use Pro =
Tools &=20
Cubase.. They just want<BR>>to run their mix thru (Paris) for the=20
sound..<BR>><BR>>"Deej" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:noway@jose.net">noway@jose.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>>>Scott,<BR>>><BR >>>I'm just too invested =
in what=20
I've got going on here to go back to using<BR>><BR>>>Paris. I =
made a=20
decision to move on and I'm going to stick with it. Part<BR>>of=20
<BR>>>that decision was based on the presumption that I =
would=20
really need the<BR>><BR>>>ability to work at higher sample =
rates.=20
another assumption was that I would<BR>><BR>>>want to use =
midi tracks=20
to trigger VSTi's. Neither assumption has =
really<BR>><BR>>>proven=20
itseld to have been really necessary. I am starting to get a =
bit<BR>>of=20
<BR>>>post work here and Cubase is pretty handy for working with =
video.<BR>>><BR>>>DJ<BR>>> <BR>>>"Cujo" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:chris@applemanstudio.com">chris@applemanstudio.com</A>>=
wrote=20
in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:47a2a182$1@linux">news:47a2a182$1@linux</A>...<BR>>>&g=
t;<BR>>>><BR>>>>=20
Deej, I'm sending my Paris mixes through my BA 312's via Avedis'=20
line<BR>>pads<BR>>>> into my Drawmer 1968 and I really dig =
the=20
depth I am getting.<BR>>>><BR>>>> I would say the =
1968 is a=20
tad mushy and warm.. But I think it =
really<BR>is<BR>><BR>>>>=20
worth<BR>>>> the round=20
trip.<BR>>>><BR>>>> <BR>>>> "Deej" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:noway@jose.net">noway@jose.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>>>>>1. The options that it offers are nothing =
short of=20
amazing<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>2. The sound quality =
can be=20
very very good when properly=20
gainstaged.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>3. Low latency =
monitoring=20
is possible, thought the more money you throw<BR>>>>=20
at<BR>>>>>it, the more "possible" it really is in a =
practical=20
way.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>4. The ability to use =
higher=20
sample rates is no big deal to me. I did<BR>>it<BR>>>>=20
for<BR>>>>>a while. I really don't use them much any=20
more.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>5. I'm discovering that =
Paris was=20
easier to use and sounded better =
with<BR>>>><BR>>>>>fewer=20
options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus=20
=
compression<BR>><BR>>>>>gets <BR>>>><BR>>>&g=
t;>you=20
in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and=20
if<BR>you<BR>>>> do<BR>>>>>need bus compression =
in Paris,=20
you can bounce down to a stereo pair=20
and<BR>>>><BR>>>>>compress the tracks (a type of =
parallel=20
compression). No matter how much<BR>>>> =
I<BR>>>>>try to=20
like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. Creamware=20
was<BR>>>> much<BR>>>>>better as far as I/O =
interface is=20
concerned on a native =
platform.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>6. VSTi=20
drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never=20
in<BR>a<BR>>>>>million=20
years.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>7. The deal killler for =
me with=20
Paris was lack of delay compensation,<BR>>but<BR>>>>=20
I<BR>>>>>have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now =
that I=20
could=20
=
probably<BR>><BR>>>>>lose <BR>>>><BR>>>>&=
gt;the=20
UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune=20
=
in.<BR><BR>>>>>Analog<BR>>>> <BR>>>>>hard=
ware,=20
Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float my =
boat<BR>>>>=20
now<BR>>>>>that I have had a healthy dose of "the other =
side". I=20
would keep a=20
=
2nd<BR>><BR>>>>>comp<BR >>>><BR>>>>>on=
the=20
side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio=20
and<BR>>I'd<BR>>>><BR>>>>>probably be just as=20
happy....of course, then I lose recall=20
(sigh)<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>There really is no =
perfect world=20
these days for what I want to=20
=
<BR>>>>>do..........I<BR>>>> <BR>>>>>gues=
s=20
there really never has been, has=20
=
there?<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>;o} <BR>>>>><BR>=
>>>><BR>>>>=20
<BR>>><BR>>><BR>><BR ></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_00E9_01C864CC.8A18B480--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95326 is a reply to message #95310] |
Fri, 01 February 2008 13:18 |
|
|
Hey Neil.. Yes, on Pro Tools,recording @ 96k I and others hear more "Thickness"
fuller track. On Nuendo, I hear (@96) more full-reange if you will (Open-ness)
...
The Trident would be a KILLER!! addition to your rig. I hear they will have
a ADATdigital i/o option in the near future.
Lastly, I dicovered the opossite: Track in Nuendo/Cubase/Slow-Tools/Sonar/DP/Logic...
Mix in Paris. Reason:
Even tracks dumped from an Roland VS-880/1680 sound better when imported
into Paris.
Tracks in Paris take on a New Life. Now, When I take tracks recorded in
Paris and mix in Slo-Tools, NUendo etc..The magicis gone. And, thus the
tracks start sounding they were recorded in thosw DAWS..
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>I really like the higher samplerates - I can ABSOLUTELY hear a
>difference (and so can you, I'm convinced anyone here could).
>It's not so much about "how much more high end is there?" it's
>about CLARITY up top, and an openness to the sound. And getting
>the digital lowpass filters up out of the range of human
>hearing.
>
>Anyway, I've thought about trying a console, and was
>considering one of those new Toft ATB's (since they're supposed
>to sound like Trident 80-series, and I LOVOOOVE that tough,
>yet musical Trident sound - but I understand the outputs are
>unbalanced, which I'm not too keen on.
>
>BTW, can anyone help me with a quick Paris HW config question?
>I'm getting ready to start tracking a new project for a local
>band, and I was thinking about doing the basics in Paris, then
>porting over to Cubase for overdubs & mixing - if I have a
>single EDS card, one MEC, two 8-in's, and an ADAT card, is
>there any "best" order to load the cards in the MEC? I just got
>the 2nd 8-in card the other day (thanks, John Shapiro), but
>I've noticed that with the current setup in the MEC (which is
>8-in in the first, slot, ADAT in the 2nd) the patch bay sees
>the ADAT card first, then the 8-in. Is that always the case?
>IOW, I'd like to have it so that the patch bay/EDS card sees
>the two 8-in modules first, THEN the ADAT card.
>
>Neil
>
>
>
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Yep.. Paris @ 16 bit 44.1/48k sounds just as good as other DAWS @ 88.2
&
>96k..
>>
>>Here'my take: Native soud cool to me when using a Analoge mixer to sum.
>As
>>you know, I use a SoundCraft Ghost. Even Paris sounds better summing thru
>>the Ghost.. More dept..
>>
>>I keep my 4 card Paris rig armed and ready at all times. it still gives
>that
>>"AWE" effect on clients and engineers. When I play it, they all smile.
The
>>interface is still(IMO) the bets looking..
>>
>>Most projects I work on these days are on Slow-Tools which I find for mixing
>>really nice. Editing is an entirely diffenent story.
>>But one thing is for sure: The PAris sound keeps bringing me return business
>>form my Engineer and Producers who use Pro Tools & Cubase.. They just want
>>to run their mix thru (Paris) for the sound..
>>
>>"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>Scott,
>>>
>>>I'm just too invested in what I've got going on here to go back to using
>>
>>>Paris. I made a decision to move on and I'm going to stick with it. Part
>>of
>>>that decision was based on the presumption that I would really need the
>>
>>>ability to work at higher sample rates. another assumption was that I
would
>>
>>>want to use midi tracks to trigger VSTi's. Neither assumption has really
>>
>>>proven itseld to have been really necessary. I am starting to get a bit
>>of
>>>post work here and Cubase is pretty handy for working with video.
>>>
>>>DJ
>>>
>>>"Cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message news:47a2a182$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Deej, I'm sending my Paris mixes through my BA 312's via Avedis' line
>>pads
>>>> into my Drawmer 1968 and I really dig the depth I am getting.
>>>>
>>>> I would say the 1968 is a tad mushy and warm.. But I think it really
>is
>>
>>>> worth
>>>> the round trip.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>>>1. The options that it offers are nothing short of amazing
>>>>>
>>>>>2. The sound quality can be very very good when properly gainstaged.
>>>>>
>>>>>3. Low latency monitoring is possible, thought the more money you throw
>>>> at
>>>>>it, the more "possible" it really is in a practical way.
>>>>>
>>>>>4. The ability to use higher sample rates is no big deal to me. I did
>>it
>>>> for
>>>>>a while. I really don't use them much any more.
>>>>>
>>>>>5. I'm discovering that Paris was easier to use and sounded better with
>>>>
>>>>>fewer options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus compression
>>
>>>>>gets
>>>>
>>>>>you in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and if
>you
>>>> do
>>>>>need bus compression in Paris, you can bounce down to a stereo pair
and
>>>>
>>>>>compress the tracks (a type of parallel compression). No matter how
much
>>>> I
>>>>>try to like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. Creamware
was
>>>> much
>>>>>better as far as I/O interface is concerned on a native platform.
>>>>>
>>>>>6. VSTi drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never in
>a
>>>>>million years.
>>>>>
>>>>>7. The deal killler for me with Paris was lack of delay compensation,
>>but
>>>> I
>>>>>have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now that I could probably
>>
>>>>>lose
>>>>
>>>>>the UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune in.
>
>>>>>Analog
>>>>
>>>>>hardware, Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float my
boat
>>>> now
>>>>>that I have had a healthy dose of "the other side". I would keep a 2nd
>>
>>>>>comp
>>>>
>>>>>on the side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio and
>>I'd
>>>>
>>>>>probably be just as happy....of course, then I lose recall (sigh)
>>>>>
>>>>>There really is no perfect world these days for what I want to
>>>>>do..........I
>>>>
>>>>>guess there really never has been, has there?
>>>>>
>>>>>;o}
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95327 is a reply to message #95326] |
Fri, 01 February 2008 13:22 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Lamont - problem in this case, with tracking in SX, mixing in
Paris, is the "type" of mixing I'm going to have to do...
it's going to require lot's of varied types of VST plugin's
plugin parameter automation, etc, etc.
Neil
"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Hey Neil.. Yes, on Pro Tools,recording @ 96k I and others hear more "Thickness"
>fuller track. On Nuendo, I hear (@96) more full-reange if you will (Open-ness)
>..
>
>The Trident would be a KILLER!! addition to your rig. I hear they will have
>a ADATdigital i/o option in the near future.
>
>Lastly, I dicovered the opossite: Track in Nuendo/Cubase/Slow-Tools/Sonar/DP/Logic...
>Mix in Paris. Reason:
>
>Even tracks dumped from an Roland VS-880/1680 sound better when imported
>into Paris.
>Tracks in Paris take on a New Life. Now, When I take tracks recorded in
>Paris and mix in Slo-Tools, NUendo etc..The magicis gone. And, thus the
>tracks start sounding they were recorded in thosw DAWS..
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>I really like the higher samplerates - I can ABSOLUTELY hear a
>>difference (and so can you, I'm convinced anyone here could).
>>It's not so much about "how much more high end is there?" it's
>>about CLARITY up top, and an openness to the sound. And getting
>>the digital lowpass filters up out of the range of human
>>hearing.
>>
>>Anyway, I've thought about trying a console, and was
>>considering one of those new Toft ATB's (since they're supposed
>>to sound like Trident 80-series, and I LOVOOOVE that tough,
>>yet musical Trident sound - but I understand the outputs are
>>unbalanced, which I'm not too keen on.
>>
>>BTW, can anyone help me with a quick Paris HW config question?
>>I'm getting ready to start tracking a new project for a local
>>band, and I was thinking about doing the basics in Paris, then
>>porting over to Cubase for overdubs & mixing - if I have a
>>single EDS card, one MEC, two 8-in's, and an ADAT card, is
>>there any "best" order to load the cards in the MEC? I just got
>>the 2nd 8-in card the other day (thanks, John Shapiro), but
>>I've noticed that with the current setup in the MEC (which is
>>8-in in the first, slot, ADAT in the 2nd) the patch bay sees
>>the ADAT card first, then the 8-in. Is that always the case?
>>IOW, I'd like to have it so that the patch bay/EDS card sees
>>the two 8-in modules first, THEN the ADAT card.
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Yep.. Paris @ 16 bit 44.1/48k sounds just as good as other DAWS @ 88.2
>&
>>96k..
>>>
>>>Here'my take: Native soud cool to me when using a Analoge mixer to sum.
>>As
>>>you know, I use a SoundCraft Ghost. Even Paris sounds better summing thru
>>>the Ghost.. More dept..
>>>
>>>I keep my 4 card Paris rig armed and ready at all times. it still gives
>>that
>>>"AWE" effect on clients and engineers. When I play it, they all smile.
>The
>>>interface is still(IMO) the bets looking..
>>>
>>>Most projects I work on these days are on Slow-Tools which I find for
mixing
>>>really nice. Editing is an entirely diffenent story.
>>>But one thing is for sure: The PAris sound keeps bringing me return business
>>>form my Engineer and Producers who use Pro Tools & Cubase.. They just
want
>>>to run their mix thru (Paris) for the sound..
>>>
>>>"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>>Scott,
>>>>
>>>>I'm just too invested in what I've got going on here to go back to using
>>>
>>>>Paris. I made a decision to move on and I'm going to stick with it. Part
>>>of
>>>>that decision was based on the presumption that I would really need
the
>>>
>>>>ability to work at higher sample rates. another assumption was that I
>would
>>>
>>>>want to use midi tracks to trigger VSTi's. Neither assumption has really
>>>
>>>>proven itseld to have been really necessary. I am starting to get a bit
>>>of
>>>>post work here and Cubase is pretty handy for working with video.
>>>>
>>>>DJ
>>>>
>>>>"Cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message news:47a2a182$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Deej, I'm sending my Paris mixes through my BA 312's via Avedis' line
>>>pads
>>>>> into my Drawmer 1968 and I really dig the depth I am getting.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would say the 1968 is a tad mushy and warm.. But I think it really
>>is
>>>
>>>>> worth
>>>>> the round trip.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>>>>1. The options that it offers are nothing short of amazing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>2. The sound quality can be very very good when properly gainstaged.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>3. Low latency monitoring is possible, thought the more money you throw
>>>>> at
>>>>>>it, the more "possible" it really is in a practical way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>4. The ability to use higher sample rates is no big deal to me. I did
>>>it
>>>>> for
>>>>>>a while. I really don't use them much any more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>5. I'm discovering that Paris was easier to use and sounded better
with
>>>>>
>>>>>>fewer options. Yeah, bus compression is nice, but what bus compression
>>>
>>>>>>gets
>>>>>
>>>>>>you in native, Paris gets you without needing bus compression and if
>>you
>>>>> do
>>>>>>need bus compression in Paris, you can bounce down to a stereo pair
>and
>>>>>
>>>>>>compress the tracks (a type of parallel compression). No matter how
>much
>>>>> I
>>>>>>try to like RME Totalmix, it's just cumbersome and sucks. Creamware
>was
>>>>> much
>>>>>>better as far as I/O interface is concerned on a native platform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>6. VSTi drums will never make me happy....no matter what....never in
>>a
>>>>>>million years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>7. The deal killler for me with Paris was lack of delay compensation,
>>>but
>>>>> I
>>>>>>have added enough outboard crap to my rig by now that I could probably
>>>
>>>>>>lose
>>>>>
>>>>>>the UAD-1 stuff that I like so much and have invested a fortune in.
>>
>>>>>>Analog
>>>>>
>>>>>>hardware, Paris DSP and low latency VST plugs would likely float my
>boat
>>>>> now
>>>>>>that I have had a healthy dose of "the other side". I would keep a
2nd
>>>
>>>>>>comp
>>>>>
>>>>>>on the side to stream VSTi's in real time, recording them as audio
and
>>>I'd
>>>>>
>>>>>>probably be just as happy....of course, then I lose recall (sigh)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There really is no perfect world these days for what I want to
>>>>>>do..........I
>>>>>
>>>>>>guess there really never has been, has there?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>;o}
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95355 is a reply to message #95310] |
Sat, 02 February 2008 04:36 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:47a351ee$1@linux...
>
> BTW, can anyone help me with a quick Paris HW config question?
> I'm getting ready to start tracking a new project for a local
> band, and I was thinking about doing the basics in Paris, then
> porting over to Cubase for overdubs & mixing - if I have a
> single EDS card, one MEC, two 8-in's, and an ADAT card, is
> there any "best" order to load the cards in the MEC? I just got
> the 2nd 8-in card the other day (thanks, John Shapiro), but
> I've noticed that with the current setup in the MEC (which is
> 8-in in the first, slot, ADAT in the 2nd) the patch bay sees
> the ADAT card first, then the 8-in. Is that always the case?
> IOW, I'd like to have it so that the patch bay/EDS card sees
> the two 8-in modules first, THEN the ADAT card.
>
> Neil
Memory serving, that is correct that no matter how you load the cards, it's
going to come up adat first always. Also, memory serving, you can set up the
patch bay anyway you want, including a reordering of the cards and save that
as your template thereby bringing it up the way you want each time you boot
if you save that template as 'default project' and stuff it in the same
folder where you installed Paris.exe
AA
|
|
|
|
| Re: Something I'm discovering about native [message #95360 is a reply to message #95355] |
Sat, 02 February 2008 08:46 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thanks Aaron (& Tom, earlier). Yeah, I do seem to recall the
patchbay saved-settings thing, and using it for something or
other back when Paris was my only DAW. I'll just use that
method - I was just wondering if there was a specific order
in which those cards should be loaded, to get it to default
to seeing the 8-in's first... IME, getting any hardware to
default a certain way is always preferable, since it then
never wants to try & change back to some other configuration if
a glitch occurs.
Neil
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:47a351ee$1@linux...
>>
>> BTW, can anyone help me with a quick Paris HW config question?
>> I'm getting ready to start tracking a new project for a local
>> band, and I was thinking about doing the basics in Paris, then
>> porting over to Cubase for overdubs & mixing - if I have a
>> single EDS card, one MEC, two 8-in's, and an ADAT card, is
>> there any "best" order to load the cards in the MEC? I just got
>> the 2nd 8-in card the other day (thanks, John Shapiro), but
>> I've noticed that with the current setup in the MEC (which is
>> 8-in in the first, slot, ADAT in the 2nd) the patch bay sees
>> the ADAT card first, then the 8-in. Is that always the case?
>> IOW, I'd like to have it so that the patch bay/EDS card sees
>> the two 8-in modules first, THEN the ADAT card.
>>
>> Neil
>
>
>Memory serving, that is correct that no matter how you load the cards, it's
>going to come up adat first always. Also, memory serving, you can set up
the
>patch bay anyway you want, including a reordering of the cards and save
that
>as your template thereby bringing it up the way you want each time you boot
>if you save that template as 'default project' and stuff it in the same
>folder where you installed Paris.exe
>
>AA
>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 30 06:28:56 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.08317 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
