|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Question about paf-wav converter [message #59326 is a reply to message #59323] |
Thu, 20 October 2005 10:33   |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net" target="_blank">animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:4357eaf8@linux...
> Ya know........I'm getting fairly busy with mastering projects here. Just
> 'fer grins, I bought the Har Bal program. I don't think it is something
that
> is a magic bullet and will be a substitute for the hard work it takes to
get
> a good mix done. Not by any stretch, but I have been applying it to some
> files that I previously mastered that I was 90% happy with and I have
taken
> these to around the 98% level. Since the last 2% will never be possible
for
> me (because this is the area where I second guess myself and every other
> mastering job I've ever heard), I'm thinking this program can be an
> extremely useful tool. I've only tried it with a couple of songs so far
and
> the results are subtle, but definitely a positive step.
I've got it and I think it does a good job when the mix is close. If the mix
is far off, you can't expect any program to magically fix it. It's nice to
have a visual representation of what is going on.How much does "Wavelab Essential" usually run?
Thanks Dave,
Shawn
EK Sound <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote:
>If you are running on XP, the V3 copy won't run. You would have to
>get Wavelab Essential (which is an updated V3). Essential does have
>batch processing and would be a valuable addition to a Cubase rig. We
>usually stock it, but I'm out right now.
>
>David.
>
>
>Shawn Johnsen wrote:
>
>> Thanks Dave-
>>
>> I don't have Wavelab, but I was thinking of picking up a copy. Do you
know
>> what versions this will work in? I think Steinberg.ca sells a copy for
$99
>> (3.0). Thanks for the help!
>>
>> Shawn
>>
>>
>> EK Sound <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hey Shawn,
>>>
>>>Do you have Wavelab? You c
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Question about paf-wav converter [message #59329 is a reply to message #59328] |
Thu, 20 October 2005 12:38 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;> Ya know........I'm getting fairly busy with mastering projects here. Just
>> 'fer grins, I bought the Har Bal program. I don't think it is something
>that
>> is a magic bullet and will be a substitute for the hard work it takes
to
>get
>> a good mix done. Not by any stretch, but I have been applying it to some
>> files that I previously mastered that I was 90% happy with and I have
>taken
>> these to around the 98% level. Since the last 2% will never be possible
>for
>> me (because this is the area where I second guess myself and every other
>> mastering job I've ever heard), I'm thinking this program can be an
>> extremely useful tool. I've only tried it with a couple of songs so far
>and
>> the results are subtle, but definitely a positive step.
>
>
>I've got it and I think it does a good job when the mix is close. If the
mix
>is far off, you can't expect any program to magically fix it. It's nice
to
>have a visual representation of what is going on.
>
>Most recently used it to eq a snare I was having problems with. Put in
a sample I liked for reference and it helped get me in the ballpark much
faster.
JH
Rod Lincoln wrote:
> I've used Har Bal on a few things, and have the same opinion as you guys.
> Useful tool. Not a magic bullet.
> Rod
> "Sanbar" <sanbar@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>>news:4357eaf8@linux...
>>
>>>Ya know........I'm getting fairly busy with mastering projects here. Just
>>>'fer grins, I bought the Har Bal program. I don't think it is something
>>
>>that
>>
>>>is a magic bullet and will be a substitute for the hard work it takes
>
> to
>
>>get
>>
>>>a good mix done. Not by any stretch, but I have been applying it to some
>>>files that I previously mastered that I was 90% happy with and I have
>>
>>taken
>>
>>>these to around the 98% level. Since the last 2% will never be possible
>>
>>for
>>
>>>me (because this is the area where I second guess myself and every other
>>>mastering job I've ever heard), I'm thinking this program can be an
>>>extremely useful tool. I've only tried it with a couple of songs so far
>>
>>and
>>
>>>the results are subtle, but definitely a positive step.
>>
>>
>>I've got it and I think it does a good job when the mix is close. If the
>
> mix
>
>>is far off, you can't expect any program to magically fix it. It's nice
>
> to
>
>>have a visual representation of what is going on.
>>
>>
>
>http://apnews.excite.com/article/20051020/D8DC1GO82.htmlCan anyone comment on given the choice of 98se or ME which is better for
paris and why?
ThanksJohn, I can only address half of this equation. I have used 98SE since I was
introduced to Paris in 2001. It has been quite stable for me and personally
I see no reason to change.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Question about paf-wav converter [message #59332 is a reply to message #59329] |
Thu, 20 October 2005 14:00 |
Shawn Johnsen
Messages: 11
Registered: June 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
nert fountain. the connection
>>machine was pretty sweet with all those lights.
>>
>>of course, many computing purests still swear by their dec pdp-11's.
>>go figure!
>>
>>- paul artola
>> ellicott city, maryland
>
>Paul,
>You could probably get a Cray for about $60.00 at the Trenton State Computer
>Fair.
>Stuff a Mac inside and you will be about 6+Million ahead. You will still
>have the lights.
>GeneHere's my experiences with both OS's:
I've used both but neither at the moment.. I've gone XP for stability in the
OS and keeping up my other software/network concerns.
98se is more stable on the long term than ME but it has midi timing and IRQ
issues that kept me from wanting to go back. Be aware that I and others have
found that IRQ assignements are sometimes backwards between the two OS's.
ME: improved internal timing with MIDI, system restore added and better
security. It also for whatever reason seems to run better on newer machines
than 98. However, it suffers from the same DLL rot 98se has, only it's worse
and happens faster. Problem being, MS made a frankenstein monster brew of it
and Win2000. The way to deal with this is Ghost an image once your setup is
running the way you want, and refresh the image every few months. ME also
has better hardware support, of particular interest video drivers/handling
and multi monitors.. big for me because I run 3 screens. DirectX also is
better, and that means that you may have more life left in plugs because of
it before you are forced to the next newest OS, which would be XP. ME also
seems to handle RAM usage better, and I felt it was a snappier system with
the exact same hardware.
Help any?
AA
-----------
Can anyone comment on given the choice of 98se or ME which is better for
paris and why?
Thanks
-------------Thinking of picking up a couple of these for overheads, ACC guitars / dobro
/ mandolin...etc
Thanks
Rob_AIs this much different than Steinberg's spectral anylizer that has also has
a learn funtion as well?
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Ya know........I'm getting fairly busy with mastering projects here. Just
>'fer grins, I bought the Har Bal program. I don't think it is something
that
>is a magic bullet and will be a substitute for the hard work it takes to
get
>a good mix done. Not by any stretch, but I have been applying it to some
>files that I previously mastered that I was 90% happy with and I have taken
>these to around the 98% level. Since the last 2% will never be possible
for
>me (because this is the area where I second guess myself and every other
>mastering job I've ever heard), I'm thinking this program can be an
>extremely useful tool. I've only tried it with a couple of songs so far
and
>the results are subtle, but definitely a positive step.
>
>
>I'm looking at the Waves GTR or M-Audio Black box for recording. I was wondering
if anybody has any opinions on either of these Guitar Processors for recording?
I'm also considering Guitar rig and the latest version of Amplitube. I've
been told the POD and Amplitube suck??? Opinions???
I'm looking to get usable guitar productions (good tone). I would like to
have some versatility as opposed to a one trick pony amp, for the same kind
of money. So the question is, is any of this stuff up to the task? I'll
be mainly recording rhythm guitar with occasional noodleing. Mainly doing
Rock, Heavy Rock, a bit of metal, Country and Pop.
I've owned Guitar effect processors ten years ago, none of them sounded vary
good to me. I sold everything off. I have a new Steve Vai model Ibanez
I picked up from a friend. I have a SansAmp GT 2, and old Crate GT 40 C
(Cheap sounding amp), Nigel plugin from UA, and a direct box. That's the
extent of my Guitar gear.
There are so many new guitar processors out there now. Being that I'm a
drummer it's a little tuff to figure out how to get good, usable guitar sound
on a $600.00 budget.
Any advice would be greatly
|
|
|
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
