Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Your biggest reason for leaving Paris?
| Re: Your biggest reason for leaving Paris? [message #88463 is a reply to message #88431] |
Mon, 23 July 2007 18:28   |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I knew you were referring to that story. I don't disagree. My point was
just that whatever was happening in the lower band resulting from upper
frequency data would still be there if the upper data were not recorded.
Just the upper data would not be there. All I meant is that
down-sampling probably would yield a track very similar (though not the
same) to a track recorded at 44.1. So for purposes of experimentation on
a mix it would be acceptable to me.
On the EQ thing, who knows? Have you tried it? Besides, putting matched
mics on the same source is already such a variable the rest of the test
is useless. You knew that, but wondered if I would fall for it. Hah! I
ain't your sucker, bro.
Neil wrote:
> I'll also amplify & riff a bit on something you said:
>
> "OR we can perceive the data in some way without actually
> hearing it."
>
> I've always believed this to be the case... there's a story
> that Rupert Neve tells about how Geoff Emerick found a bad
> channel in a Neve console that was being installed - I believe
> it was at one of the AIR studios - upon testing, it turned out
> that the channel had a bad capacitor that was oscillating at
> slightly over 30k. Now, can we hear 30k? according to lots of
> people, we can't - and maybe neither could Geoff; but have you
> ever noticed how 60hz hits you in the groin, 80hz hits you in
> the solar plexus, and 250hz hits you right in the throat? Crank
> up Billy Joel's "We Didn't Start the Fire" or "Downeaster
> Alexa" sometime - that kick is hitting you right in the
> throat... you can't listen to it too loud for too long! I have
> no idea why TLA hit the frequency so hard, but in those songs
> he sure did.
>
> Maybe 30k hits you right in the 13th chakra or something like
> that.
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> Oh, getting fiesty now, are you? :)
>>
>> OK, try this... track something, anything, into your 44.1k DAW
>> of choice, using a matched pair of mics, and split it equitably
>> into two tracks - one that has a mic pre & an EQ engaged, but
>> no EQ tweaking done - let's call that track "A", and one that
>> has the same kind of mic pre and EQ engaged, but with a lo-pass
>> at 10k - let's call that track "B".
>>
>> Now, play back both tracks, but route track "A" through the
>> same EQ & set your lo-pass at 10k just like you did when
>> tracking "B", and play both back. If you can say there's no
>> difference between the two tracks; IOW, the fact that track
>> "A" had content above the range that track "B" was allowed to
>> have from the get-go, regardless of what kind of content
>> they're allowed to pass on playback, then i'll quit arguing
>> with you about 44.1k vs. 88.2k (i'll still record at 88.2k,
>> i'll just quit arguing with you about it lol).
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>> OK, now I'm pretty sure you have not thought this through. Those
>>> "lower-order harmonics of data....above 22k" would necessarily still be
>>> there whether it was down-sampled or originally converted as 44.1. We
>>> are talking about air pressure waves. The waves are either there or not.
>>> They are not *attached* to the above 22K information, they are the
>>> *result* of the above 22K information, which was there in the room when
>>> the mic was used.
>>>
>>> My guess is the reason that higher frequency content that is inaudible
>
>>> to us makes a difference is because the lower order harmonics sound
>>> wrong or out of place or even distorted in some way without the
>>> continued contribution of the upper end data that originally caused
>>> them. OR we can perceive the data in some way without actually hearing
> it.
>>> Neil wrote:
>>>> Oh, and apart frm the samplerate resolution, another reason
>>>> that it wouldn't be a fair comparison is that the downconverted
>>>> 44.1k files inthis case WOULD have frequency content that
>>>> contained lower-order harmonics of data that was originally
>>>> above 22k in them, since they started out as 88.2k files,
>>>> whereas if you started out tracking at 44.1k, they wouldn't
>>>> have any of this content.
>>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>> Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Well put, Neil. I don't think we are really talking apples and
>>>>> apples,
>>>>>> but I also don't think the difference is even worth arguing about.
>
>>>>>> That's the kind of mood I'm in.
>>>>> You're just in a contrary state of mind - that's fine, let's
>>>>> go... we're not insulting each other over this, so I'm
>>>>> happy to argue semantics & philosophy with regard to samplerate
>>>>> & resolution.
>>>>>
>>>>>> There actually could be a fairily simple way to compare
>>>>>> projects: take one recorded and mixed at 88 or 96 and knock
>>>>>> the tracks down to 44.1 with a good converter and run the mix
>>>>>> again. Not perfectly scientific, but it would satisfy me I
>>>>>> suppose.
>>>>> This wouldn't really be a fair test, IMO, it would be adding
>>>>> another conversion step to the 44.1 files - you'd be rounding
>>>>> off two samples worth of 88.2k to produce each 44.1k event
>>>>> as opposed to grabbing two original/accurate 44.1's of the said
>>>>> event. IOW, I'm an 88.2k proponent and I wouldn't trust this as
>>>>> a fair comparison, or else I would've done so already.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you got a mix you could do that with?
>>>>> Yes, but Lamont would just accuse me of purposely manipulating
>>>>> the 44.1k version to sound worse. :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Neil
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Your biggest reason for leaving Paris? [message #88527 is a reply to message #88428] |
Wed, 25 July 2007 05:20 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I hear that C4's big bug fix is around the corner too. I wonder if they
don't let Cubase users find the bugs and then incorporate the refined
code in Nuendo?
Dedric Terry wrote:
> Now if we could just get the marketing to flip flop so it follows the
> reality of what you and many of us know about Nuendo vs. ProTools.
>
> I completely agree - the workflow with PT always seemed a bit awkward (much
> like Avid vs. Vegas, or even Avid vs. FCP to some degree).
>
> Lamont - Nuendo 4 is just around the corner with some really nice updates -
> new automation system for one.... maybe not a lot for music users, but a
> nice update list for post.
>
> Dedric
>
> On 7/22/07 9:59 AM, in article 46a37ee9$1@linux, "LaMont"
> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>> You like Pro Tools editing over Nuendo's?? And you liek Pro Toosl workflow
>> over Neundo??
>>
>> I've never heard anyone who really used the 2 DAWs state that. Even the most
>> ardent Pro Tools users. They will readily admit, that Neundo/SX workflow
>> and editing is in another league.
>>
>> Just look at each update to Pro Tools now 7.3. Each update icorporates more
>> and more Neundo/SX liek features .. Pro Tools workflow is still not there
>> yet.. Yes, they have added the right-mouse clicks for gettign to menus, but
>> not as deep as Neundo/SX..
>>
>> And , Pro Tools (conforming) mouse still is not as slick or fast as Paris.
>>
>>
>> I have Pro Tools and use HDAcel at the studio in our church, and I'm always
>> amazed at how it reconized as the DAW leader. I'm not that impressed
>>
>> "Brad Lyons" <brad@audioandmidi.com> wrote:
>>> I loved Paris for tracking and mixing, but it started to tick me
>>> off--numerous
>>> bugs, lockups, plugins not working properly, mixes bouncing differently
>> than
>>> how I mixed them on larger projects, etc. I just couldn't deal with it
>> anymore,
>>> fortunately at that time I was taking a break from doing studio work and
>>> left it behind. I then picked up a Nuendo rig for live recording, I liked
>>> it...but wasn't in-love with the workflow. Since then, I've put in a pair
>>> of ProToolsHD3 Accel systems with a Control24 and couldn't be happier.
>>> Brad Lyons
>>> www.audioandmidi.com
>>>
>>> "Mikep" <mikep@hometownrecords.com> wrote:
>>>> I have been looking at the current popular atlternatives to Paris (sans
>>> PT)
>>>> and I'm not impressed. I have no reason to change systems right now, but
>>>> looking forward I know I'll need to update sometime.
>>>> I was just wondering what some of your reasons were to change?
>>>>
>>>> Right now the biggest asset to me would be Nuendo's latency compensation.
>>>>
>>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Your biggest reason for leaving Paris? [message #88539 is a reply to message #88527] |
Wed, 25 July 2007 08:45 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Bill, I did not take the C4 bait.. it's been my experience with Steinberg
to "wait" for a few revisions before updating..
Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>I hear that C4's big bug fix is around the corner too. I wonder if they
>don't let Cubase users find the bugs and then incorporate the refined
>code in Nuendo?
>
>Dedric Terry wrote:
>> Now if we could just get the marketing to flip flop so it follows the
>> reality of what you and many of us know about Nuendo vs. ProTools.
>>
>> I completely agree - the workflow with PT always seemed a bit awkward
(much
>> like Avid vs. Vegas, or even Avid vs. FCP to some degree).
>>
>> Lamont - Nuendo 4 is just around the corner with some really nice updates
-
>> new automation system for one.... maybe not a lot for music users, but
a
>> nice update list for post.
>>
>> Dedric
>>
>> On 7/22/07 9:59 AM, in article 46a37ee9$1@linux, "LaMont"
>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>> You like Pro Tools editing over Nuendo's?? And you liek Pro Toosl workflow
>>> over Neundo??
>>>
>>> I've never heard anyone who really used the 2 DAWs state that. Even the
most
>>> ardent Pro Tools users. They will readily admit, that Neundo/SX workflow
>>> and editing is in another league.
>>>
>>> Just look at each update to Pro Tools now 7.3. Each update icorporates
more
>>> and more Neundo/SX liek features .. Pro Tools workflow is still not there
>>> yet.. Yes, they have added the right-mouse clicks for gettign to menus,
but
>>> not as deep as Neundo/SX..
>>>
>>> And , Pro Tools (conforming) mouse still is not as slick or fast as Paris.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have Pro Tools and use HDAcel at the studio in our church, and I'm
always
>>> amazed at how it reconized as the DAW leader. I'm not that impressed
>>>
>>> "Brad Lyons" <brad@audioandmidi.com> wrote:
>>>> I loved Paris for tracking and mixing, but it started to tick me
>>>> off--numerous
>>>> bugs, lockups, plugins not working properly, mixes bouncing differently
>>> than
>>>> how I mixed them on larger projects, etc. I just couldn't deal with
it
>>> anymore,
>>>> fortunately at that time I was taking a break from doing studio work
and
>>>> left it behind. I then picked up a Nuendo rig for live recording, I
liked
>>>> it...but wasn't in-love with the workflow. Since then, I've put in
a pair
>>>> of ProToolsHD3 Accel systems with a Control24 and couldn't be happier.
>>>> Brad Lyons
>>>> www.audioandmidi.com
>>>>
>>>> "Mikep" <mikep@hometownrecords.com> wrote:
>>>>> I have been looking at the current popular atlternatives to Paris (sans
>>>> PT)
>>>>> and I'm not impressed. I have no reason to change systems right now,
but
>>>>> looking forward I know I'll need to update sometime.
>>>>> I was just wondering what some of your reasons were to change?
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now the biggest asset to me would be Nuendo's latency compensation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Your biggest reason for leaving Paris? [message #88549 is a reply to message #88539] |
Wed, 25 July 2007 21:33 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
It's been my experience never to be a "paying beta-tester" for
anything - I always wait 'til version 1-point-something at the
very least.
Neil
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Hi Bill, I did not take the C4 bait.. it's been my experience with Steinberg
>to "wait" for a few revisions before updating..
>
>Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>I hear that C4's big bug fix is around the corner too. I wonder if they
>
>>don't let Cubase users find the bugs and then incorporate the refined
>>code in Nuendo?
>>
>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> Now if we could just get the marketing to flip flop so it follows the
>>> reality of what you and many of us know about Nuendo vs. ProTools.
>>>
>>> I completely agree - the workflow with PT always seemed a bit awkward
>(much
>>> like Avid vs. Vegas, or even Avid vs. FCP to some degree).
>>>
>>> Lamont - Nuendo 4 is just around the corner with some really nice updates
>-
>>> new automation system for one.... maybe not a lot for music users, but
>a
>>> nice update list for post.
>>>
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> On 7/22/07 9:59 AM, in article 46a37ee9$1@linux, "LaMont"
>>> <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You like Pro Tools editing over Nuendo's?? And you liek Pro Toosl workflow
>>>> over Neundo??
>>>>
>>>> I've never heard anyone who really used the 2 DAWs state that. Even
the
>most
>>>> ardent Pro Tools users. They will readily admit, that Neundo/SX workflow
>>>> and editing is in another league.
>>>>
>>>> Just look at each update to Pro Tools now 7.3. Each update icorporates
>more
>>>> and more Neundo/SX liek features .. Pro Tools workflow is still not
there
>>>> yet.. Yes, they have added the right-mouse clicks for gettign to menus,
>but
>>>> not as deep as Neundo/SX..
>>>>
>>>> And , Pro Tools (conforming) mouse still is not as slick or fast as
Paris.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have Pro Tools and use HDAcel at the studio in our church, and I'm
>always
>>>> amazed at how it reconized as the DAW leader. I'm not that impressed
>>>>
>>>> "Brad Lyons" <brad@audioandmidi.com> wrote:
>>>>> I loved Paris for tracking and mixing, but it started to tick me
>>>>> off--numerous
>>>>> bugs, lockups, plugins not working properly, mixes bouncing differently
>>>> than
>>>>> how I mixed them on larger projects, etc. I just couldn't deal with
>it
>>>> anymore,
>>>>> fortunately at that time I was taking a break from doing studio work
>and
>>>>> left it behind. I then picked up a Nuendo rig for live recording,
I
>liked
>>>>> it...but wasn't in-love with the workflow. Since then, I've put in
>a pair
>>>>> of ProToolsHD3 Accel systems with a Control24 and couldn't be happier.
>>>>> Brad Lyons
>>>>> www.audioandmidi.com
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mikep" <mikep@hometownrecords.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I have been looking at the current popular atlternatives to Paris
(sans
>>>>> PT)
>>>>>> and I'm not impressed. I have no reason to change systems right now,
>but
>>>>>> looking forward I know I'll need to update sometime.
>>>>>> I was just wondering what some of your reasons were to change?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right now the biggest asset to me would be Nuendo's latency compensation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Dec 01 10:34:43 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01231 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
