|
|
|
|
|
Re: Firsthand skinny on this sys anyone? [message #57379 is a reply to message #57355] |
Mon, 29 August 2005 11:33 |
rick
Messages: 1976 Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
15b8s5c7ahe7d1u7uaon6vtr9h5cp@4ax.com...
> took the smart money way out...and a steady job.
>
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 13:05:17 -0400, John <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>>A long time ago I heard there were family health issues but have not
>>heard a peep. Anyone know how this fine man and family is doing ?
>>
>>John
>I know you were a bit down on UAD but how did the Senderella work for this?
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>Regarding lookahead.
>How do you compensate ?
>Say you have 7 ms lookahead, you nudge 7 times 1ms to the left or one 5ms
>and two 1ms ?
>Is this the same ?
>I read that 1ms is 80 samples but 5 ms is not 5x80=4000 but instead 240
!!
>What do you do ?
>Dimitrios
>
>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.r.com> wrote in message
>news:43134d1c$1@linux...
>>
>> every eds effect (compressor, gate, etc) has 2 samples of latency, and
the
>> aux's have 2 samples also, so you would be correct with 4 samples,
>assuming
>> no look ahead.
>> Rod
>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>> >One correction, here it goes again...
>> >I was having already btwo instances of compression open with lookahead
so
>> >the 236 was reffering to those two compressors too, sorry...
>> >The actual latency is 4 samples.
>> >Yes only 4 samples when you send via aux to a eds compressor with 0
>> >lookahead.
>> >So to compensate you have to nudge for 1ms (80 samples) , thus voxengo
>> >sample delay should be 76 samples...
>> >I hope now I got this right.
>> >Sorry again for beeing so quick with my posts without double checking
>first.
>> >Dimitrios
>> >"cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message
>news:4313339c$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> May also
|
|
|