Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » A Paris reality check
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59727 is a reply to message #59708] |
Sun, 30 October 2005 19:33   |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294
Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
stay in Paris and to process them either
>elsewhere, or in Paris with low enough latency that I can set up a mix
>template with 48 tracks and mix in Paris using the Paris
>automation............wait, didn't I already say that?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Deej
>
Deej,
I have not used Wormhole that way from Paris (I usually use Wormhole to send
to Paris), but I have used it that way from Performer.
I go from Performer on my Mac, to a PC (not Paris) and pick up PC only effects,
and return the effect to Performer. Performer automatically compensates for
the latency using PDC.
Generally I will do this with an ADAT loop, but when I run out of ADAT channels,
I use Wormhole. The ADAT channels are not PDC corrected but the WH plugs
are. I don’t pay any attention to the delay since it is compensated for and
it adds no additional delay to a normal mix.
I also use it to gain access to the VSTI instruments that came with Logic
Pro. I have Logic on a second Mac. I send MIDI using MIDI over LAN CP and
return the VSTI tracks using Wormhole. That way I can use Performer as my
sequencer but use Sculpture and the other nice Logic instruments. In a complex
mix, I may have Wormhole going all over the place. It should appeal to you!!
Fee demos of both the Mac and PC version are on the website, with the normal
periodic interrupts.
GeneJimmy.........you may not have any problems at all. I posted a word.doc of
my routing matrix in another post here earlier. I've got a *very*
complicated system here. There is a certain boot sequence that I use that is
fairly reliable, but not always. Sometimes, if the system won't lock up, I
have to just shut things down and start over. A major factor in this
clocking tr4ain wreck is having over 60 digital I/O's interfacing between
the two DAWs and other digital gear. One wimpy handshake and the whole think
can go south. It's a huge bunch of variables , a pair of Digipatch units and
routing of digital I/O of outboard units using various format converters to
get everything happy and the spdif I/O of Paris and RME HDSP units as
additional patchbays. Endless possibilities for trouble. I must say
though........when it's up and running it's an awesome beast.
"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:43657ac9@linux...
> I put the Digipatch software on the back burner in order to try the rest
of
> your suggestions first.
>
> I'll be damned if it didn't work.
>
> Doug, you're a peach. My feeling of victory was electric. Such an easy
> 15-minute fix.
>
> What sort of dodginess should I expect? You spoke of unreliability...
>
> Jimmy
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:43656037@linux...
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59729 is a reply to message #59727] |
Sun, 30 October 2005 18:57 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
before the talent shows up.
> >
> > If you have done all of the above things and you're still not getting
the
> > other MECs to clok to WC, launch your defaultproject.ppj and then toggle
> the
> > sync source to internal. Let it sit until it quits popping and
> > fussing........then toggle it back to WC and let it pop and fuss until
it
> > settles down. You can usually tell when it's locked up because you will
> hear
> > a loud pop, then it stabilized. this can sometimes take 5-10 seconds to
> > happen.
> >
> > Dontcha' just love Paris?
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> >
> >
> > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:43654494@linux...
> > > Howdy.
> > >
> > > I'm in the process of getting my Paris rig patched digitally to my
> > Kurzweil
> > > FX boxes via an MAudio Digipatch.
> > >
> > > As far as I am able to tell, I have everything physically patched
> > properly.
> > > As a matter of fact, I get word-clock lock on both Kurzweil boxes from
> my
> > > Lucid master clock (via the SPDIF ins and outs on Paris), and the
first
> FX
> > > box sends and receives audio data seamlessly, at least on submix1/MEC1
> via
> > > an aux send set to "external".
> > >
> > > I am not, however, having any luck after that. No other Digipatch
> > "patches"
> > > seem to work, whether it's simultaneously patching the 2nd FX box to
> > > submix2/MEC2, or switching the 1st FX box to another submix/MEC.
> > >
> > > I have a three-card, three-MEC system, and thought I has sussed out
the
> > > layout of my physical cabling pretty well. Is there something I don't
> > > understand about the Paris aux modules? I was under the impression
that
> > each
> > > submix had its own complement of 8 aux modules, independently of the
> other
> > > submixes...I'm probably being stupid somehow...
> > >
> > > Confused,
> > > Jimmy
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>I would sag to my knees and cry like a little bitch just to be asked to
begin to understand a system like that. I'm a life-long bookish
intellectual, but I always shied away from things of a more mathematical or
technical nature. I can get the math stuff if I try, but it takes a mighty
effort to overcome the fear and loathing.
Things are absolutely solid here: so far, so good. It sounds absolutely
fantastic. SOOOOO easy just to push a switch and re-do the whole
configuration between 3 MECs and 2 FX boxes.
You know what this calls for, right?
More FX boxes! Yay!
By the way, who came up with all this methodology? It's mond-boggling. I
would be dead in the water without the help of this NG (a lot of "The Deej"
recently, please don't jump ship, dooood....)
Jimmy
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43658d5e@linux...
> Jimmy.........you may not have any problems at all. I posted a word.doc of
> my routing matrix in another post here earlier. I've got a *very*
> complicated system here. There is a certain boot sequence that I use that
is
> fairly reliable, but not always. Sometimes, if the system won't lock up, I
> have to just shut things down and start over. A major factor in this
> clocking tr4ain wreck is having over 60 digital I/O's interfacing between
> the two DAWs and other digital gear. One wimpy handshake and the whole
think
> can go south. It's a huge bunch of variables , a pair of Digipatch units
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59739 is a reply to message #59735] |
Sun, 30 October 2005 20:47 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
he way, who came up with all this methodology?
>
> Well.........I cobbled mine together with the advice of others, like Gene
> Lennon, John Macy, Brian T, Aaron, Mic Cross, Cory Bonnett and others who
> had built the larger rigs. The clock is the starting point to go beyond 2
x
> MECs. then it's just a matter of what you have and what you want to do
with
> it. It really is simple once you've got your templates set up.
>
> ;o)
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:43658fa7@linux...
> > I would sag to my knees and cry like a little bitch just to be asked to
> > begin to understand a system like that. I'm a life-long bookish
> > intellectual, but I always shied away from things of a more mathematical
> or
> > technical nature. I can get the math stuff if I try, but it takes a
mighty
> > effort to overcome the fear and loathing.
> >
> > Things are absolutely solid here: so far, so good. It sounds absolutely
> > fantastic. SOOOOO easy just to push a switch and re-do the whole
> > configuration between 3 MECs and 2 FX boxes.
> >
> > You know what this calls for, right?
> >
> > More FX boxes! Yay!
> >
> > By the way, who came up with all this methodology? It's mond-boggling. I
> > would be dead in the water without the help of this NG (a lot of "The
> Deej"
> > recently, please don't jump ship, dooood....)
> >
> > Jimmy
> >
> >
> >
> > "DJ" <Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59744 is a reply to message #59739] |
Sun, 30 October 2005 23:43 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>DJ,
What I have tested to be rock solid and working by now is feeding audio from
a second pc using a daw like Cubase or whatever (delay compensation needed
there) use you audio tracks for mixing inside cubase use your plugins there
DX/VST/UAD1/POWERCORE and then send as groups or indivindually to Paris for
submixing.
I achieved rock solid perfectly alligned 24 tracks with 100mb lan and 2600
Intel processor.
You know here due to Paris submix delay bug you just need to compensate inside
Paris using Voxengo sample delay for the 8 tracks used on another submix.
Now using wormhole as insert I have not achieved synced results, maybe I
am doing something wrong, Gene might jump into this, but my few tests could
not achieve synced results.
By the first way of using wormhole you have to note the following.
The tracks inside Paris that are wormholed are around 4000 samples apart
from audio tracks not wormholed, but from within cubase if you want hear
audio tracks along with audio tracks in Paris (not handy at all I guess)
you need to dleay (from inside wormhole host slider) the wormholing tracks
for 32756 samples which is a default anyway inside wormhole for best networking.
So to make things a little bit clearer.
If you have say 48 audio tracks inside Cubase and you are ready to mix ,
you put all your DX/VST etc effects from there and then subgrouping them
down to 24/32 (whatever your system permits as wormhole instances) and then
send them inside Paris to use the Paris mix engine and EDS effects.
In this way you don't care about the latency difference beetween audio tracks
in Paris and wormholed tracks.
First of all Cubase compensates automatically.
Note though that this extra compensation with host slider is ONLY needed
if you wanna hear at the same time tracks from Cubase and tracks from Paris.
BUT in the above scenario you 'should" not need to hear both , that cannot
mix your song right ?
You only need to hear the end wormhole instances inside Paris and from then
use your automation EDS effecting volume slamming, whatever.
If you think well you can only do that with wormhole I would answer this
would be a dream a year ago for Paris right ?
So I am a firmly believer that wormhole even doing only that (that could
change with updates or further tests though) is well worth it the 49 bucks.
If you have cpu's over 3 gb with 1000 lan you could achieve maybe 48 wormhole
instances fully synced...
Regards,
Dimitrios
"DJ" <
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59749 is a reply to message #59744] |
Mon, 31 October 2005 01:06 |
Kim
Messages: 1246
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
d
>something
>> >> new. I'm all down with improvement, but if things are growing 'that'
>> >fast,
>> >> then maybe we should have a look at what are we really using to begin
>> >with.
>> >> Change can't generally happen that quickly and be for the long term
>good.
>> >> Computers are a funny beast man.
>> >> AA
>> >>
>> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:43651390@linux...
>> >> > Ya know............Im sitting here listening to some *roughs* of
a
>> >> > tracking
>> >> > session I did Friday night. No compression, a very tiny bit of
>> >subtractive
>> >> > EQ, a tiny touch of NoLimit on the mix bus. That's it. The rest of
>the
>> >> > story
>> >> > is using the Paris EQ makeup gain and the fader gain stages to get
>the
>> >> > *mixphat thing going*.
>> >> >
>> >> > I swear guys.......this sounds better to my ears than all of the
>> >1,000,000
>> >> > gobazzillion plugin options I have available when using the SX rig
>> >during
>> >> > mixdown.
>> >> >
>> >> > It's pretty minimalist stuff to begin with......acoustic rythym
>guitar,
>> >> > acoustic lead guitar, fiddle, electric bass and acoustic drum
>> >> > kit........but
>> >> > that seems to be all I do these days anyway.
>> >> >
>> >> > Sometimes less is truly more.
>> >> >
>> >> > Deej
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>This is the reason I never bothered to use UA plugs in Paris... too
much hassle.
David.
DJ wrote:
>
> Futzing around with the slip'n slide thing during a mix is what drives me
> nuts.
>
> ;o)
>
>It doesn't.
Paris EQs are usable in a pinch, which means I don't need them anymore.
Cuz I'm the proud owner of a Great River 1073... :)
Jimmy
"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
news:43661314@linux...
>
> Hi Jimmy,
>
> How do you find the paris eq stacks up against the 1073 eq?
>
> All the best,
> Mike
>
>
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> w
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59752 is a reply to message #59729] |
Mon, 31 October 2005 05:50 |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294
Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> >> >> > EQ, a tiny touch of NoLimit on the mix bus. That's it. The rest of
> >the
> >> >> > story
> >> >> > is using the Paris EQ makeup gain and the fader gain stages to get
> >the
> >> >> > *mixphat thing going*.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I swear guys.......this sounds better to my ears than all of the
> >> >1,000,000
> >> >> > gobazzillion plugin options I have available when using the SX rig
> >> >during
> >> >> > mixdown.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It's pretty minimalist stuff to begin with......acoustic rythym
> >guitar,
> >> >> > acoustic lead guitar, fiddle, electric bass and acoustic drum
> >> >> > kit........but
> >> >> > that seems to be all I do these days anyway.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Sometimes less is truly more.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Deej
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>Hey Jimmy,
So do you have the Great River eq or the pre or both?If you
have the eq how do you like it;I'm sure its killer.
Pete
"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>It doesn't.
>
>Paris EQs are usable in a pinch, which means I don't need them anymore.
>
>Cuz I'm the proud owner of a Great River 1073... :)
>
>Jimmy
>
>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
>news:43661314@linux...
>>
>> Hi Jimmy,
>>
>> How do you find the paris eq stacks up against the 1073 eq?
>>
>> All the best,
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >It's weird, how many people are using native plugins.
>> >
>> >I've not used the UAD-1, so I felt the need to pipe up with that caveat.
>> >
>> >But it is astounding how bad plugins sound, and how much time you can
>spend
>> >trying to get them to sound good; but when you plug in an 1176 or a 1073
>> EQ
>> >or a nice FX box (or even an RNC compressor), it takes about 10 seconds
>> >before things just make more sense sonically. Outboard is still
>light-years
>> >ahead of plugins, in my somewhat informed opinion.
>> >
>> >Jimmy
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
>> >news:4365825c$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> I agree with everything you just said about plugins. Exteral harware
>> just
>> >> blows the doors off virtual.
>> >>
>> >> Mike
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >> >I do not use plugins, and haven't for years. They do not sound as
good
>> as
>> >> >high-quality outboard equipment, not on any level, and that's putting
>> it
>> >> >very politely. I am shocked that companies like Waves make any money
>> at
>> >> all
>> >> >selling those kinds of products.
>> >> >
>> >> >Paris is amazing, but I use it's EQ sparingly at most. Ulitmately,
for
>> >me,
>> >> >it's a glorified tape machine with an awesome built-in editing
>> >capability,
>> >> >plus some well-documented gain-staging "tips and tricks" that sound
>> >simply
>> >> >delicious.
>> >> >
>> >> >Jimmy
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>> >> >news:43652386$Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59754 is a reply to message #59752] |
Mon, 31 October 2005 08:42 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
>what
>> >> >> muddied up the mix. I know that we as an industry are in trouble
>when
>> >> >every
>> >> >> year, or less, we have to evaluate our tools and think we need
>> >something
>> >> >> new. I'm all down with improvement, but if things are growing
>'that'
>> >> >fast,
>> >> >> then maybe we should have a look at what are we really using to
>begin
>> >> >with.
>> >> >> Change can't generally happen that quickly and be for the long term
>> >good.
>> >> >> Computers are a funny beast man.
>> >> >> AA
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:43651390@linux...
>> >> >> > Ya know............Im sitting here listening to some *roughs*
of
>> a
>> >> >> > tracking
>> >> >> > session I did Friday night. No compression, a very tiny bit of
>> >> >subtractive
>> >> >> > EQ, a tiny touch of NoLimit on the mix bus. That's it. The rest
of
>> >the
>> >> >> > story
>> >> >> > is using the Paris EQ makeup gain and the fader gain stages to
get
>> >the
>> >> >> > *mixphat thing going*.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I swear guys.......this sounds better to my ears than all of the
>> >> >1,000,000
>> >> >> > gobazzillion plugin options I have available when using the SX
rig
>> >> >during
>> >> >> > mixdown.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > It's pretty minimalist stuff to begin with......acoustic rythym
>> >guitar,
>> >> >> > acoustic lead guitar, fiddle, electric bass and acoustic drum
>> >> >> > kit........but
>> >> >> > that seems to be all I do these days anyway.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Sometimes less is truly more.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Deej
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>Just a thought, maybe using MIDI-LAN to send MTC and have one of the machines
lock to it???
James
"Dimitrio" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>
>DJ,
>What I have tested to be rock solid and working by now is feeding audio
from
>a second pc using a daw like Cubase or whatever (delay compensation needed
>there) use you audio tracks for mixing inside cubase use your plugins there
>DX/VST/UAD1/POWERCORE and then send as groups or indivindually to Paris
for
>submixing.
>I achieved rock solid perfectly alligned 24 tracks with 100mb lan and 2600
>Intel processor.
>You know here due to Paris submix delay bug you just need to compensate
inside
>Paris using Voxengo sample delay for the 8 tracks used on another submix.
>Now using wormhole as insert I have not achieved synced results, maybe I
>am doing something wrong, Gene might jump into this, but my few tests could
>not achieve synced results.
>By the first way of using wormhole you have to note the following.
>The tracks inside Paris that are wormholed are around 4000 samples apart
>from audio tracks not wormholed, but from within cubase if you want hear
>audio tracks along with audio tracks in Paris (not handy at all I guess)
>you need to dleay (from inside wormhole host slider) the wormholing tracks
>for 32756 samples which is a default anyway inside wormhole for best networking.
>So to make things a little bit clearer.
>If you have say 48 audio tracks inside Cubase and you are ready to mix ,
>you put all your DX/VST etc effects from there and then subgrouping them
>down to 24/32 (whatever your system permits as wormhole instances) and then
>send them inside Paris to use the Paris mix engine and EDS effects.
>In this way you don't care about the latency difference beetween audio tracks
>in Paris and wormholed tracks.
>First of all Cubase compensates automatically.
>Note though that this extra compensation with host slider is ONLY needed
>if you wanna hear at the same time tracks from Cubase and tracks from Paris.
>BUT in the above scenario you 'should" not need to hear both , that cannot
>mix your song right ?
>You only need to hear the end wormhole instances inside Paris and from then
>use your automation EDS effecting volume slamming, whatever.
>If you think well you can only do that with wormhole I would answer this
>would be a dream a year ago for Paris right ?
>So I am a firmly believer that wormhole even doing only that (that could
>change with updates or further tests though) is well worth it the 49 bucks.
>If you have cpu's over 3 gb with 1000 lan you could achieve maybe 48 wormhole
>instances fully synced...
>Regards,
>Dimitrios
>
>
>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59755 is a reply to message #59754] |
Mon, 31 October 2005 10:26 |
Pete Ruthenburg
Messages: 127
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>Can I use Wormhole with a standalone VST rack of some sort to route audio
>>from a Paris insert or aux, though the VST rack and then return it to
>>Paris..........with 40ms latency?? I will want to use my 4 x UAD-1 cards
>in
>>the VST Rack and I will need low enough latency in Paris that I can keep
>my
>>tracks in Paris and use the Paris mix automation without problem. I think
>I
>>saw Dimitrios post here that he had achieved somewhere around 40ms latency
>>using the FXPansion VST/DX wrapper? Not sure why he would need this if
the
>>UAD-1 cards are in another machine...........but anyway........can this
>be
>>done somehow? If it involves using Cubase SX.........well, I've already
>got
>>that happening with no latency as long as all tracks are being played back
>>in SX. I need the tracks to stay in Paris and to process them either
>>elsewhere, or in Paris with low enough latency that I can set up a mix
>>template with 48 tracks and mix in Paris using the Paris
>>automation............wait, didn't I already say that?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Deej
>>
>>
>Thanks Gene! I was under the impression it was PC only. Duh!
Tony
"genelennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:4362a477$1@linux...
>
> "Tony Benson" <t o n y@s t a n d i n g h a m p t o n.c o m> wrote:
>>I don't suppose there is any hope of a Mac Wormhole. If I was running a
> PC
>>I'd buy. Sorry.
>>
>>Tony
>>
> You get both a Mac and a PC copy. I use it for both and frequently
> cross-platform.
> gI have both. They call it the MP2EQ, or something like that, a single
channel of each racked side by side. I have them patched seperately in my
patch bay so I can use the EQ as a send from Paris.
Look, I don't want to piss on the parade of anybody who can't afford the
good stuff. I've been there myself, I know how it feels.
But my experience with DAW plugins has been anything but pleasurable. I've
been training my ear since I was four years old, at least as an audiophile,
and my journey as a studio-rat has been slowed and frustrated no end by
years of time wasted trying to get the sounds I know are possible to get,
but without having the gear necessary to make those sounds happen. It took
me years to realize that part of my problem was plugins. I consider them a
scam perpetrated on innocent musicians who don't know better.
High-end outboard gear is expensive for a reason. And, in this case at
least, you get what you pay for. It just sounds so fucking good. There's no
cloudiness, no endless tweaking, no lingering feeling of dissatisfaction, no
weird phasing sounds, no flatness; just sweet, clean, art-inducing
rightness. Well worth the money.
I mean, sure you can get yourself a $200.00 guitar and set about learning to
play it, try to make some art with it. But the moment you pick up a
$1,000.00 guitar, you know the difference. It's infinitely easier to play,
it sounds infinitely better, and it records infinitely better. It's just
that simple.
Jimmy
"Pete Ruthenburg" <ruthenburg@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:436653c1$1@linux...
>
> Hey Jimmy,
> So do you have the Great River eq or the pre or both?If you
> have the eq how do you like it;I'm sure its killer.
>
> Pete
>
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >It doesn't.
> >
> >Paris EQs are usable in a pinch, which means I don't need them anymore.
> >
> >Cuz I'm the proud owner of a Great River 1073... :)
> >
> >Jimmy
> >
> >"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
> >news:43661314@linux...
> >>
> >> Hi Jimmy,
> >>
> >> How do you find the paris eq stacks up against the 1073 eq?
> >>
> >> All the best,
> >> Mike
> >>
> >>
> >> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> >It's weird, how many people are using native plugins.
> >> >
> >> >I've not used the UAD-1, so I felt the need to pipe up with that
caveat.
> >> >
> >> >But it is astounding how bad plugins sound, and how much time you can
> >spend
> >> >trying to get them to sound good; but when you plug in an 1176 or a
1073
> >> EQ
> >> >or a nice FX box (or even an RNC compressor), it takes about 10
seconds
> >> >before things just make more sense sonically. Outboard is still
> >light-years
> >> >ahead of plugins, in my somewhat informed opinion.
> >> >
> >> >Jimmy
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:4365825c$1@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> I agree with everything you just said about plugins. Exteral
harware
> >> just
> >> >> blows the doors off virtual.
> >> >>
> >> >> Mike
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> >> >I do not use plugins, and haven't for years. They do not sound as
> good
> >> as
> >> >> >high-quality outboard equipment, not on any level, and that's
putting
> >> it
> >> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59758 is a reply to message #59755] |
Mon, 31 October 2005 10:10 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
uter in order to stream them back
to Paris with auto delay compensation in SX.
It would be fairly simple to set up a mix template in Paris and just import
rendered .paf's into it. I used to do this, but the cumulative latency (4 x
UAD-1 plugins each needing 16000+ samples) made using Paris automation
unusable. Come to think of it, the Wormhole configuration for this would
have to have 40ms latency for *multiple* Paris plugins or the same situation
would start to happen......adding more than one UAD plugin would increase
the latency by another 40ms so the mix template would have to have a delay
compensator for at least x UAD-1 plugins and then the automation options
are maybe not so good becaus inste4ad of 40ms, every track in the mix
template would have an inherent 160ms latency. That's very close to the
highest buffer settings in the RME control panel (8192) and I have tried
mixing at those settings using a Steinberg Houston controller. The latency
was just too much to use the fader controller with any accuracy at all for
critical mix moves. The automation lags too far behind the audio event.
Now if the Spinaudio or other VST rack thingie could lower the latency of
any number of UAD-1 plugins to 40ms, no matter how many plugins were used, I
might be all over this.
I'm going to buy the Wormhole just because I think that this guy is someone
who should be supported and I hope this helps out my fellow Parisites who
are, quite frankly, going way beyond what I'm doing these days in terrms of
experimentation. Now that I've found a solution to my particular needs, I've
become a bit complacent.
Perhaps I need to step outside the box again.......but my little box here is
working and is fairly comfortable.
Thanks again for all of your efforts.
;O)
Deej
"Dimitrio" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:4365e2e9$1@linux...
>
> DJ,
> What I have tested to be rock solid and working by now is feeding audio
from
> a second pc using a daw like Cubase or whatever (delay compensation needed
> there) use you audio tracks for mixing inside cubase use your plugins
there
> DX/VST/UAD1/POWERCORE and then send as groups or indivindually to Paris
for
> submixing.
> I achieved rock solid perfectly alligned 24 tracks with 100mb lan and 2600
> Intel processor.
> You know here due to Paris submix delay bug you just need to compensate
inside
> Paris using Voxengo sample delay for the 8 tracks used on another submix.
> Now using wormhole as insert I have not achieved synced results, maybe I
> am doing something wrong, Gene might jump into this, but my few tests
could
> not achieve synced results.
> By the first way of using wormhole you have to note the following.
> The tracks inside Paris that are wormholed are around 4000 samples apart
> from audio tracks not wormholed, but from within cubase if you want hear
> audio tracks along with audio tracks in Paris (not handy at all I guess)
> you need to dleay (from inside wormhole host slider) the wormholing tracks
> for 32756 samples which is a default anyway inside wormhole for best
networking.
> So to make things a little bit clearer.
> If you have say 48 audio tracks inside Cubase and you are ready to mix ,
> you put all your DX/VST etc effects from there and then subgrouping them
> down to 24/32 (whatever your system permits as wormhole instances) and
then
> send them inside Paris to use the Paris mix engine and EDS effects.
> In this way you don't care about the latency difference beetween audio
tracks
> in Paris and wormholed tracks.
> First of all Cubase compensates automatically.
> Note though that this extra compensation with host slider is ONLY needed
> if you wanna hear at the same time tracks from Cubase and tracks from
Paris.
> BUT in the above scenario you 'should" not need to hear both , that cannot
> mix your song right ?
> You only need to hear the end wormhole instances inside Paris and from
then
> use your automation EDS effecting volume slamming, whatever.
> If you think well you can only do that with wormhole I would answer this
> would be a dream a year ago for Paris right ?
> So I am a firmly believer that wormhole even doing only that (that could
> change with updates or further tests though) is well worth it the 49
bucks.
> If you have cpu's over 3 gb with 1000 lan you could achieve maybe 48
wormhole
> instances fully synced...
> Regards,
> Dimitrios
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >Can I use Wormhole with a standalone VST rack of some sort to route audio
> >from a Paris insert or aux, though the VST rack and then return it to
> >Paris..........with 40ms latency?? I will want to use my 4 x UAD-1 cards
> in
> >the VST Rack and I will need low enough latency in Paris that I can keep
> my
> >tracks in Paris and use the Paris mix automation without problem. I
think
> I
> >saw Dimitrios post here that he had achieved somewhere around 40ms
latency
> >using the FXPansion VST/DX wrapper? Not sure why he would need this if
the
> >UAD-1 cards are in another machine...........but anyway........can this
> be
> >done somehow? If it involves using Cubase SX.........well, I've already
> got
> >that happening with no latency as long as all tracks are being played
back
> >in SX. I need the tracks to stay in Paris and to process them either
> >elsewhere, or in Paris with low enough latency that I can set up a mix
> >template with 48 tracks and mix in Paris using the Paris
> >automation............wait, didn't I already say that?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >
>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>just sweet, clean, art-inducing rightness.
What a great line! That should be in a song or at least up on the wall...
I used to have a sign on the wall that said:
There are 2 things in audio, cheap talk, and what's on tape...
DCSo are you using any EQ at mixdown?
If so are you goin in to hardware?
"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>I have both. They call it the MP2EQ, or something like that, a single
>channel of each racked side by side. I have them patched seperately in my
>patch bay so I can use the EQ as a send from Paris.
>
>Look, I don't want to piss on the parade of anybody who can't afford the
>good stuff. I've been there myself, I know how it feels.
>
>But my experience with DAW plugins has been anything but pleasurable. I've
>been training my ear since I was four years old, at least as an audiophile,
>and my journey as a studio-rat has been slowed and frustrated no end by
>years of time wasted trying to get the sounds I know are possible to get,
>but without having the gear necessary to make those sounds happen. It took
>me years to realize that part of my problem was plugins. I consider them
a
>scam perpetrated on innocent musicians who don't know better.
>
>High-end outboard gear is expensive for a reason. And, in this case at
>least, you get what you pay for. It just sounds so fucking good. There's
no
>cloudiness, no endless tweaking, no lingering feeling of dissatisfaction,
no
>weird phasing sounds, no flatness; just sweet, clean, art-inducing
>rightness. Well worth the money.
>
>I mean, sure you can get yourself a $200.00 guitar and set about learning
to
>play it, try to make some art with it. But the moment you pick up a
>$1,000.00 guitar, you know the difference. It's infinitely easier to play,
>it sounds infinitely better, and it records infinitely better. It's just
>that simple.
>
>Jimmy
>
>
>"Pete Ruthenburg" <ruthenburg@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>news:436653c1$1@linux...
>>
>> Hey Jimmy,
>> So do you have the Great River eq or the pre or both?If you
>> have the eq how do you like it;I'm sure its killer.
>>
>> Pete
>>
>> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >It doesn't.
>> >
>> >Paris EQs are us
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59761 is a reply to message #59758] |
Mon, 31 October 2005 14:15 |
cujo
Messages: 285
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
; >> > Deej
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>"DC" <dc@spamyomama.com> wrote:
>There are 2 things in audio, cheap talk, and what's on tape...
Hehe. Nice.
Cheers,
Kim.With no other effects being used....I get this error message when trying to
use noLIMIT on the master bus: "An error occurred in creating insert. The
effects resources are now maxed out. The specified effect can not be created".
Is there a configuration setting or change to the stockfx.ini file that would
eliminate this message and allow me to use noLIMIT on the master bus?
Thanks in advance. Mike.Mike,
I'm assuming you have more than one EDS card? Is this right? The master buss
effects use card A's processing power. Make sure the submix assigned to card
A isn't using very many send and /or insert EDS effects. If this doesn't
help, give us some more details on your set-up.
Tony
"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote in message news:43669bd4$1@linux...
>
> With no other effects being used....I get this error message when trying
> to
> use noLIMIT on the master bus: "An error occurred in creating insert. The
> effects resources are now maxed out. The specified effect can not be
> created".
>
> Is there a configuration setting or change to the stockfx.ini file that
> would
> eliminate this message and allow me to use noLIMIT on the master bus?
>
> Thanks in advance. Mike.Tony,
Sorry I wasn't a little more specific in my first post. Here is what I have:
Single EDS card
442
C16
3.0 software on XP Pro
The track has no other effects activated....also no sends (internal or external).
The odd thing is that all the other effects (compressor, delay, chorus, etc.)
can be initiated on the master buss....just not the noLIMIT plug.
Let me know if I can provide any other info that would help. I have no problem
working with computers (I build Video, and some Audio, computers).
Thanks again, Mike.
"Tony Benson" <t o n y@s t a n d i n g h a m p t o n.c o m> wrote:
>Mike,
>
>I'm assuming you have more than one EDS card? Is this right? The master
buss
>effects use card A's processing power. Make sure the submix assigned to
card
>A isn't using very many send and /or insert EDS effects. If this doesn't
>help, give us some more details on your set-up.
>
>Tony
>
>
>"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote in message news:43669bd4$1@linux...
>>
>> With no other effects being used....I get this error message when trying
>> to
>> use noLIMIT on the master bus: "An error occurred in creating insert.
The
>> effects resources are now maxed out. The specified effect can not be
>> created".
>>
>> Is there a configuration setting or change to the stockfx.ini file that
>> would
>> eliminate this message and allow me to use noLIMIT on the master bus?
>>
>> Thanks in advance. Mike.
>
>I think I have it. I'm holding a 4 page document and put it in my
copier and have it email it to me as pdf then I can post it. YEAH IT
DOES THAT ! wow
Then let me know if that is what you want. I bet it is.
John
jon chaikin wrote:
> thanks for the pointer. i've yet to find the one that was on the
> Ensoniq site which gave a step by step for using the aux sends to
> create a headphone mix, but i'll keep looking.
>
> thanks again.
>
> jon
>
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 19:05:02 -0400, John <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>
>>www.kfocus.com/paris
>>
>>Look under Paris, _Setup, Queue Mixes
>>
>>jon chaikin wrote:
>>
>>>i used to have a tutorial that showed how to setup a headphone mix
>>>using the external effects system. does anyone still have a copy?
>>>
>>>thanks
>>>
>>>jon
>
>Do you have any other eds effects on that card..on any channel, or even eds
reverbs? No Limit is a resource hog. if you have some other effects anywhere
in the submix you may be maxed out.
Rod
"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote:
>
>Tony,
>
>Sorry I wasn't a little more specific in my first post. Here is what I
have:
>
>Single EDS card
>442
>C16
>3.0 software on XP Pro
>
>The track has no other effects activated....also no sends (internal or external).
>
>The odd thing is that all the other effects (compressor, delay, chorus,
etc.)
>can be initiated on the master buss....just not the noLIMIT plug.
>
>Let me know if I can provide any other info that would help. I have no
problem
>working with computers (I build Video, and some Audio, computers).
>
>Thanks again, Mike.
>
>
>"Tony Benson" <t o n y@s t a n d i n g h a m p t o n.c o m> wrote:
>>Mike,
>>
>>I'm assuming you have more than one EDS card? Is this right? The master
>buss
>>effects use card A's processing power. Make sure the submix assigned to
>card
>>A isn't using very many send and /or insert EDS effects. If this doesn't
>
>>help, give us some more details on your set-up.
>>
>>Tony
>>
>>
>>"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote in message news:43669bd4$1@linux...
>>>
>>> With no other effects being used....I get this error message when trying
>
>>> to
>>> use noLIMIT on the master bus: "An error occurred in creating insert.
>The
>>> effects resources are now maxed out. The specified effect can not be
>>> created".
>>>
>>> Is there a configuration setting or change to the stockfx.ini file that
>
>>> would
>>> eliminate this message and allow me to use noLIMIT on the master bus?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance. Mike.
>>
>>
>I'm sorta anal-retentive, so I've been polishing my productions bits and
pieces at a time as I track them and edit the parts, while continuing to
learn the engineering and performance chops o' the trade as I go, as it
were. I will probably never have a true "mix session" in the traditional
sense of the term, as I'll have already tweaked the mixes countless times by
the time all the tracking is done.
I'm an artist, not a professional engineer. I think my engineering skills
have gotten pretty good in the last few years, but it's in the service of my
art, not that of a day-to-day business. That's probably a point I should
have made a while ago.
But in the final stages of things (which are coming up soon for this
project), I'll do more of what I've been doing, which is isolate an
instrument or two at a time and get things sounding just right. I can't
afford a shit-load of nice outboard gear, and I play everything myself, so
I've long since fallen into the habit of concentrating on a few instruments
at a time.
My buddy Swen is becoming a greater and greater presence in the studio and
in my creative process, and we have mirrored setups in terms of basic gear,
so we have the sweet stuff racked on 10-space SKB racks so that we can have
2 channels of 1176, 3 of the 1073, etc., all together at the same time, in
the same place, for certain more intensive/collaborative tracking/mixing
days.
My basic philosophy is to get it sounding "right" as I go, with the obvious
cleaning-up stuff right at the end. I don't want to find myself in the
middle of a song production and not feel overwhelmed by its beauty. I refuse
to be involved in anything that isn't just obviously beautiful. Luckily, we
seem to have stumbled recently, at long last, onto just that. We'll see
soon. But it's an old, old way of looking at this "recording" thing: mix it
with the way you play it...make it sound the way you want as you
go...commit, commit, commit...
But really, it's like being a film-maker, in that there's an ever-increasing
amount of stuff you can do in the edit suite to tweak and polish and
rearrange what was filmed. But the great films revolve primarily around the
actions of a relatively few actors and camera/light/direction types in a
series of carefully prepared, highly intense moments. Sure the editing is
crucial, but any attempt at film editing depends entirely upon the raw
materials at hand, ie: the filmed performaces. So, I EQ and compress and
affect going to tape, and then edit the part, and then pass it out to the EQ
or compressor again, if necessary, to make it sit just right in the mix as
it stands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59768 is a reply to message #59761] |
Mon, 31 October 2005 17:55 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s the doors off virtual.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Mike
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> >I do not use plugins, and haven't for years. They do not sound
> as
> >> good
> >> >> as
> >> >> >> >high-quality outboard equipment, not on any level, and that's
> >putting
> >> >> it
> >> >> >> >very politely. I am shocked that companies like Waves make any
> >money
> >> >> at
> >> >> >> all
> >> >> >> >selling those kinds of products.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Paris is amazing, but I use it's EQ sparingly at most.
Ulitmately,
> >> for
> >> >> >me,
> >> >> >> >it's a glorified tape machine with an awesome built-in editing
> >> >> >capability,
> >> >> >> >plus some well-documented gain-staging "tips and tricks" that
sound
> >> >> >simply
> >> >> >> >delicious.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Jimmy
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
> >> >> >> >news:43652386$1@linux...
> >> >> >> >> I've found with software less is almost always more. I went
> >through
> >> >> my
> >> >> >> >plug
> >> >> >> >> in craze phase.. ironically, I suspect phase and calculations
> are
> >> >what
> >> >> >> >> muddied up the mix. I know that we as an industry are in
trouble
> >> >when
> >> >> >> >every
> >> >> >> >> year, or less, we have to evaluate our tools and think we need
> >> >> >something
> >> >> >> >> new. I'm all down with improvement, but if things are growing
> >> >'that'
> >> >> >> >fast,
> >> >> >> >> then maybe we should have a look at what are we really using
> to
> >> >begin
> >> >> >> >with.
> >> >> >> >> Change can't generally happen that quickly and be for the long
> >term
> >> >> >good.
> >> >> >> >> Computers are a funny beast man.
> >> >> >> >> AA
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> news:43651390@linux...
> >> >> >> >> > Ya know............Im sitting here listening to some
*roughs*
> >> of
> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> > tracking
> >> >> >> >> > session I did Friday night. No compression, a very tiny bit
> of
> >> >> >> >subtractive
> >> >> >> >> > EQ, a tiny touch of NoLimit on the mix bus. That's it. The
> rest
> >> of
> >> >> >the
> >> >> >> >> > story
> >> >> >> >> > is using the Paris EQ makeup gain and the fader gain stages
> to
> >> get
> >> >> >the
> >> >> >> >> > *mixphat thing going*.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > I swear guys.......this sounds better to my ears than all of
> >the
> >> >> >> >1,000,000
> >> >> >> >> > gobazzillion plugin options I have available when using the
> SX
> >> rig
> >> >> >> >during
> >> >> >> >> > mixdown.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > It's pretty minimalist stuff to begin with......acoustic
rythym
> >> >> >guitar,
> >> >> >> >> > acoustic lead guitar, fiddle, electric bass and acoustic
drum
> >> >> >> >> > kit........but
> >> >> >> >> > that seems to be all I do these days anyway.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Sometimes less is truly more.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Deej
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >thanks john. that would be great. if you want to email it my email
is: jc@nonstopsound.com otherwise i'll look for it here.
thanks again.
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:18:12 -0500, John <no@no.com> wrote:
>I think I have it. I'm holding a 4 page document and put it in my
>copier and have it email it to me as pdf then I can post it. YEAH IT
>DOES THAT ! wow
>Then let me know if that is what you want. I bet it is.
>John
>
>jon chaikin wrote:
>> thanks for the pointer. i've yet to find the one that was on the
>> Ensoniq site which gave a step by step for using the aux sends to
>> create a headphone mix, but i'll keep looking.
>>
>> thanks again.
>>
>> jon
>>
>> On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 19:05:02 -0400, John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>www.kfocus.com/paris
>>>
>>>Look under Paris, _Setup, Queue Mixes
>>>
>>>jon chaikin wrote:
>>>
>>>>i used to have a tutorial that showed how to setup a headphone mix
>>>>using the external effects system. does anyone still have a copy?
>>>>
>>>>thanks
>>>>
>>>>jon
>>
>>Rod, thanks for the tip.....but no, no other effects on any channel.
Would any irregular "configuration" settings affect this? (overview cache,
etc.)
Puzzling............
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>Do you have any other eds effects on that card..on any channel, or even
eds
>reverbs? No Limit is a resource hog. if you have some other effects anywhere
>in the submix you may be maxed out.
>Rod
>"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>Tony,
>>
>>Sorry I wasn't a little more specific in my first post. Here is what I
>have:
>>
>>Single EDS card
>>442
>>C16
>>3.0 software on XP Pro
>>
>>The track has no other effects activated....also no sends (internal or
external).
>>
>>The odd thing is that all the other effects (compressor, delay, chorus,
>etc.)
>>can be initiated on the master buss....just not the noLIMIT plug.
>>
>>Let me know if I can provide any other info that would help. I have no
>problem
>>working with computers (I build Video, and some Audio, computers).
>>
>>Thanks again, Mike.
>>
>>
>>"Tony Benson" <t o n y@s t a n d i n g h a m p t o n.c o m> wrote:
>>>Mike,
>>>
>>>I'm assuming you have more than one EDS card? Is this right? The master
>>buss
>>>effects use card A's processing power. Make sure the submix assigned to
>>card
>>>A isn't using very many send and /or insert EDS effects. If this doesn't
>>
>>>help, give us some more details on your set-up.
>>>
>>>Tony
>>>
>>>
>>>"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote in message news:43669bd4$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> With no other effects being used....I get this error message when trying
>>
>>>> to
>>>> use noLIMIT on the master bus: "An error occurred in creating insert.
>>The
>>>> effects resources are now maxed out. The specified effect can not be
>
>>>> created".
>>>>
>>>> Is there a configuration setting or change to the stockfx.ini file that
>>
>>>> would
>>>> eliminate this message and allow me to use noLIMIT on the master bus?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance. Mike.
>>>
>>>
>>
>Hey Dimitrios -- count me in. Appreciate your efforts to squeeze more
juice out of this old orphan platform of ours.
Chas.
On 28 Oct 2005 19:08:01 +1000, "Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>
>Hello to everyone.
>After my last conversation with Adrian -wormhole's author- I have concluded
>that wormhole is not selling well ( where are we guys ?) so maybe major updates
>will get longer to support as he has to concentrate his efforts to "selling"
>appz.
>I wonder how we Parisians expect plugin authors like Adrian to support plugins
>like wormhole which are a godsend for Paris with tremendous present and future
>possibilities... (he is thinking of making wormhole lighter so to have even
>more instances).
>I don't see us people here supporting wormhole and that makes me sad and
>maybe all my efforts toward this direction will fail somehow.
>If we don't buy it how can we ask him for this and that ?
>Even two or three buys would not justify major -Paris oriented- updates with
>wormhole...
>Please sign here if you care for using wormhole even as two channel cross
>bridge beetween two computers (NOTE IT CAN BE USED ON SAME COMPUTER WITH
>DIFFERENT APPZ TOO).
>If we sign enouph people here (enouph depends I would say 10 and over I will
>kindly ask for a small discount for mass purchase.
>Please try wormhole and see for yourself how great this plugin is.
>We need Adrian (convince him make appz suited to Paris) and we certainly
>need wormhole.
>It will keep Paris alive for things to come no matter where audio technology
>will go.
>You will always have Paris thus connected with modern pc's doing what it
>is known to do best, sounding good when summing...
>Please forgive me if I am being so pushy with this but noone else except
>for Adrian (till now) has showed so much interest to help us ,Paris users.
>I wanna convince him make an automatic LATENCY compensator for VST plugins
>which I think would be great if succeeded.
>Believe me if only two-three Paris users will sign this I will be having
>no guts to ask him that or anything else.
>This plugin sells for 49 $ only...
>Please respond with signing also.
>With regards,
>DimitriosDear Dj,
Do you have your UAD's on Paris computer or on second pc ?
Secondly if you use inside Paris only 16 bit then the solution is using multifxvst
from inside chainer to have 2048 smaples latency around 40 ms...
And that is on the same computer with Paris.
I only use now (used to use even 32bit integer -not floating-) 16bit as it
sounds best to my ears so I have no probvlem using the above configuration
with UAD card.
As for the separate VST rack thing with or without wormhole I will continue
searching for the best solution for Paris.
Regards and thanks for your kind words.
Dimitrios
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Hi Dimitrio,
>
>Thanks for your answer. The issue for me with this is that I have already
>spent the $$$ to create a situation here that is zero latency while mixing.
>It's very fast and easy for *me* to use because I customized it to work
with
>all of my personal gear. I don't see any up side to my adding Wormhole to
>the mix unless it would allow me to keep my tracks in Paris and run a
>standalone VST rack on a second computer with very low latency (40ms tops).
>If I could do this, I could use Paris fader automation and not have to
>transport my tracks over to a second computer in order to stream them back
>to Paris with auto delay compensation in SX.
>
>It would be fairly simple to set up a mix template in Paris and just import
>rendered .paf's into it. I used to do this, but the cumulative latency (4
x
>UAD-1 plugins each needing 16000+ samples) made using Paris automation
>unusable. Come to think of it, the Wormhole configuration for this would
>have to have 40ms latency for *multiple* Paris plugins or the same situation
>would start to happen......adding more than one UAD plugin would increase
>the latency by another 40ms so the mix template would have to have a delay
>compensator for at least x UAD-1 plugins and then the automation options
>are maybe not so good becaus inste4ad of 40ms, every track in the mix
>template would have an inherent 160ms latency. That's very close to the
>highest buffer settings in the RME control panel (8192) and I have tried
>mixing at those settings using a Steinberg Houston controller. The latency
>was just too much to use the fader controller with any accuracy at all for
>critical mix moves. The automation lags too far behind the audio event.
>
>Now if the Spinaudio or other VST rack thingie could lower the latency of
>any number of UAD-1 plugins to 40ms, no matter how many plugins were used,
I
>might be all over this.
>
>I'm
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59776 is a reply to message #59768] |
Tue, 01 November 2005 05:42 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>>
>>can
>>
>>>>>spend
>>>>>
>>>>>>>trying to get them to sound good; but when you plug in an 1176 or
>>
>>a
>>
>>>1073
>>>
>>>>>>EQ
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>or a nice FX box (or even an RNC compressor), it takes about 10
>>>
>>>seconds
>>>
>>>>>>>before things just make more sense sonically. Outboard is still
>>>>>
>>>>>light-years
>>>>>
>>>>>>>ahead of plugins, in my somewhat informed opinion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jimmy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:4365825c$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I agree with everything you just said about plugins. Exteral
>>>
>>>harware
>>>
>>>>>>just
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>blows the doors off virtual.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I do not use plugins, and haven't for years. They do not sound
>>
>>as
>>
>>>>good
>>>>
>>>>>>as
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>high-quality outboard equipment, not on any level, and that's
>>>
>>>putting
>>>
>>>>>>it
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>very politely. I am shocked that companies like Waves make any
>>>
>>>money
>>>
>>>>>>at
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>all
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>selling those kinds of products.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Paris is amazing, but I use it's EQ sparingly at most.
>
> Ulitmately,
>
>>>>for
>>>>
>>>>>>>me,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>it's a glorified tape machine with an awesome built-in editing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>capability,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>plus some well-documented gain-staging "tips and tricks" that
>
> sound
>
>>>>>>>simply
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>delicious.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Jimmy
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>news:43652386$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I've found with software less is almost always more. I went
>>>
>>>through
>>>
>>>>>>my
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>plug
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>in craze phase.. ironically, I suspect phase and calculations
>>
>>are
>>
>>>>>what
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>muddied up the mix. I know that we as an industry are in
>
> trouble
>
>>>>>when
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>every
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>year, or less, we have to evaluate our tools and think we need
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>something
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>new. I'm all down with improvement, but if things are growing
>>>>>
>>>>>'that'
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>fast,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>then maybe we should have a look at what are we really using
>>
>>to
>>
>>>>>begin
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>with.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Change can't generally happen that quickly and be for the long
>>>
>>>term
>>>
>>>>>>>good.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Computers are a funny beast man.
>>>>>>>>>>AA
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>news:43651390@linux...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Ya know............Im sitting here listening to some
>
> *roughs*
>
>>>>of
>>>>
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>tracking
>>>>>>>>>>>session I did Friday night. No compression, a very tiny bit
>>
>>of
>>
>>>>>>>>>subtractive
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>EQ, a tiny touch of NoLimit on the mix bus. That's it. The
>>
>>rest
>>
>>>>of
>>>>
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>story
>>>>>>>>>>>is using the Paris EQ makeup gain and the fader gain stages
>>
>>to
>>
>>>>get
>>>>
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>*mixphat thing going*.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>I swear guys.......this sounds better to my ears than all of
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>>>>>>>1,000,000
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>gobazzillion plugin options I have available when using the
>>
>>SX
>>
>>>>rig
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>during
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>mixdown.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>It's pretty minimalist stuff to begin with......acoustic
>
> rythym
>
>>>>>>>guitar,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>acoustic lead guitar, fiddle, electric bass and acoustic
>
> drum
>
>>>>>>>>>>>kit........but
>>>>>>>>>>>that seems to be all I do these days anyway.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Sometimes less is truly more.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
>Try this.
starting with no effects at all, (inserts, aux, or master)start putting eds
comps (the standard one) on channel inserts. How many can you get? You should
be able to get 16. One on every channel.
If you can't get that, force Paris to open up a clean project.
If you don't have a Default ppj that Paris opens from (if you didn't save
one, you don't) just hit P (project window) and "ctrl N". If you have a default
project saved you'll have to go into your Paris folder on the C drive and
hide it(create a new folder and name it something else). If your running
Paris 3 this will be in the EMU/Paris Pro folder. If your running Paris 2.x
it will be in the ensoniq/Paris folder.
Once you open from a totally fresh project try opening 16 standard compressors.
Rod
"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote:
>
>Rod, thanks for the tip.....but no, no other effects on any channel.
>
>Would any irregular "configuration" settings affect this? (overview cache,
>etc.)
>
>Puzzling............
>
>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>Do you have any other eds effects on that card..on any channel, or even
>eds
>>reverbs? No Limit is a resource hog. if you have some other effects anywhere
>>in the submix you may be maxed out.
>>Rod
>>"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Tony,
>>>
>>>Sorry I wasn't a little more specific in my first post. Here is what
I
>>have:
>>>
>>>Single EDS card
>>>442
>>>C16
>>>3.0 software on XP Pro
>>>
>>>The track has no other effects activated....also no sends (internal or
>external).
>>>
>>>The odd thing is that all the other effects (compressor, delay, chorus,
>>etc.)
>>>can be initiated on the master buss....just not the noLIMIT plug.
>>>
>>>Let me know if I can provide any other info that would help. I have no
>>problem
>>>working with computers (I build Video, and some Audio, computers).
>>>
>>>Thanks again, Mike.
>>>
>>>
>>>"Tony Benson" <t o n y@s t a n d i n g h a m p t o n.c o m> wrote:
>>>>Mike,
>>>>
>>>>I'm assuming you have more than one EDS card? Is this right? The master
>>>buss
>>>>effects use card A's processing power. Make sure the submix assigned
to
>>>card
>>>>A isn't using very many send and /or insert EDS effects. If this doesn't
>>>
>>>>help, give us some more details on your set-up.
>>>>
>>>>Tony
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Mike Yanoska" <yanoska@cox.net> wrote in message news:43669bd4$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> With no other effects being used....I get this error message when trying
>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>> use noLIMIT on the master bus: "An error occurred in creating insert.
>>>The
>>>>> effects resources are now maxed out. The specified effect can not be
>>
>>>>> created".
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a configuration setting or change to the stockfx.ini file
that
>>>
>>>>> would
>>>>> eliminate this message and allow me to use noLIMIT on the master bus?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance. Mike.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Hello.
Well, there are three cosmeticly different PARIS bundle 3 systems.
Black with imbus screws, than black with cross(phillips) screws and blue.
BUT, how many revisions are under the hood?
Every board inside the MEC, I/O, ADAT, EDS, etc.. has some
PCB (board) revision, year of manufacture and the firmware (ROM chip).
I thought that we could make come research on how many revisions of
paris components and Firmware(ROM) revisions are there and which
ones are the newest.
ROM chips are easy to copy, so we can make some exchange.
That could be an excelent guide to answer "why some Paris configurations
are working for someone and for someone not", and why some configurations
doesn't work at all.
Here are some pictures and revisions of some paris parts....
I hope there will be a huge response for this topic.
Greetings to all!!
Suad Cokljat
Indigo Audio
GLynn does this in the making of WHo's Next DVD
I suspect it is just a mult of remixed drums though and bass. ither that
or they tracked the verb and delay and commited as well.
But I do agree with much of what Jimmy said.
Altough, many valid artforms require working with the tools at hand.
John <no@no.com> wrote:
>So how do you get Fleetwood Macs rhythm section isolated? Also which
>Stevie Wonder song are you talking about? I have the CD Songs in the
>Key of Life. I actually just bought it again after 15 years without the
>album. Nicaguella is my fav. What vocal chops.
>
>John
>
>uptown jimmy wrote:
>> I'm sorta anal-retentive, so I've been polishing my productions bits and
>> pieces at a time as I track them and edit the parts, while continuing
to
>> learn the engineering and performance chops o' the trade as I go, as it
>> were. I will probably never have a true "mix session" in the traditional
>> sense of the term, as I'll have already tweaked the mixes countless times
by
>> the time all the tracking is done.
>>
>> I'm an artist, not a professional engineer. I think my engineering skills
>> have gotten pretty good in the last few years, but it's in the service
of my
>> art, not that of a day-to-day business. That's probably a point I should
>> have made a while ago.
>>
>> But in the final stages of things (which are coming up soon for this
>> project), I'll do more of what I've been doing, which is isolate an
>> instrument or two at a time and get things sounding just right. I can't
>> afford a shit-load of nice outboard gear, and I play everything myself,
so
>> I've long since fallen into the habit of concentrating on a few instruments
>> at a time.
>>
>> My buddy Swen is becoming a greater and greater presence in the studio
and
>> in my creative process, and we have mirrored setups in terms of basic
gear,
>> so we have the sweet stuff racked on 10-space SKB racks so that we can
have
>> 2 channels of 1176, 3 of the 1073, etc., all together at the same time,
in
>> the same place, for certain more intensive/collaborative tracking/mixing
>> days.
>>
>> My basic philosophy is to get it sounding "right" as I go, with the obvious
>> cleaning-up stuff right at the end. I don't want to find myself in the
>> middle of a song production and not feel overwhelmed by its beauty. I
refuse
>> to be involved in anything that isn't just obviously beautiful. Luckily,
we
>> seem to have stumbled recently, at long last, onto just that. We'll see
>> soon. But it's an old, old way of looking at this "recording" thing: mix
it
>> with the way you play it...make it sound the way you want as you
>> go...commit, commit, commit...
>>
>> But really, it's like being a film-maker, in that there's an ever-increasing
>> amount of stuff you can do in the edit suite to tweak and polish and
>> rearrange what was filmed. But the great films revolve primarily around
the
>> actions of a relatively few actors and camera/light/direction types in
a
>> series of carefully prepared, highly intense moments. Sure the editing
is
>> crucial, but any attempt at film editing depends entirely upon the raw
>> materials at hand, ie: the filmed performaces. So, I EQ and compress and
>> affect going to tape, and then edit the part, and then pass it out to
the EQ
>> or compressor again, if necessary, to make it sit just right in the mix
as
>> it stands.
>>
>> As far as I'm concerned, the sound going to tape needs to be really, really
>> inspiring AS IT IS RECORDED. And that requires really good gear, as well
as
>> the really amazing performaces that good gear sometimes inspires...
>>
>> I'll say it again: alot of unwitting, well-intentioned folk have been
>> hoodwinked over that last few years into thinking that they can do it
all
>> "in the box". I have yet to see or hear the evdence that that is true.
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59779 is a reply to message #59776] |
Tue, 01 November 2005 08:22 |
Cujjo
Messages: 325
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Jimmy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:43661314@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi Jimmy,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>How do you find the paris eq stacks up against the 1073 eq?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>All the best,
>>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It's weird, how many people are using native plugins.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I've not used the UAD-1, so I felt the need to pipe up with that
>>>>
>>>>caveat.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>But it is astounding how bad plugins sound, and how much time you
>>>
>>>can
>>>
>>>>>>spend
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>trying to get them to sound good; but when you plug in an 1176 or
>>>
>>>a
>>>
>>>>1073
>>>>
>>>>>>>EQ
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>or a nice FX box (or even an RNC compressor), it takes about 10
>>>>
>>>>seconds
>>>>
>>>>>>>>before things just make more sense sonically. Outboard is still
>>>>>>
>>>>>>light-years
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>ahead of plugins, in my somewhat informed opinion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Jimmy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:4365825c$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I agree with everything you just said about plugins. Exteral
>>>>
>>>>harware
>>>>
>>>>>>>just
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>blows the doors off virtual.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I do not use plugins, and haven't for years. They do not sound
>>>
>>>as
>>>
>>>>>good
>>>>>
>>>>>>>as
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>high-quality outboard equipment, not on any level, and that's
>>>>
>>>>putting
>>>>
>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>very politely. I am shocked that companies like Waves make any
>>>>
>>>>money
>>>>
>>>>>>>at
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>all
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>selling those kinds of products.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Paris is amazing, but I use it's EQ sparingly at most.
>>
>> Ulitmately,
>>
>>>>>for
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>me,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>it's a glorified tape machine with an awesome built-in editing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>capability,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>plus some well-documented gain-staging "tips and tricks" that
>>
>> sound
>>
>>>>>>>>simply
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>delicious.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Jimmy
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>news:43652386$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>I've found with software less is almost always more. I went
>>>>
>>>>through
>>>>
>>>>>>>my
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>plug
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>in craze phase.. ironically, I suspect phase and calculations
>>>
>>>are
>>>
>>>>>>what
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>muddied up the mix. I know that we as an industry are in
>>
>> trouble
>>
>>>>>>when
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>every
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>year, or less, we have to evaluate our tools and think we need
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>something
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>new. I'm all down with improvement, but if things are growing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>'that'
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>fast,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>then maybe we should have a look at what are we really using
>>>
>>>to
>>>
>>>>>>begin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>with.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Change can't generally happen that quickly and be for the long
>>>>
>>>>term
>>>>
>>>>>>>>good.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Computers are a funny beast man.
>>>>>>>>>>>AA
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>news:43651390@linux...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Ya know............Im sitting here listening to some
>>
>> *roughs*
>>
>>>>>of
>>>>>
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>tracking
>>>>>>>>>>>>session I did Friday night. No compression, a very tiny bit
>>>
>>>of
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>subtractive
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>EQ, a tiny touch of NoLimit on the mix bus. That's it. The
>>>
>>>rest
>>>
>>>>>of
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>story
>>>>>>>>>>>>is using the Paris EQ makeup gain and the fader gain stages
>>>
>>>to
>>>
>>>>>get
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>*mixphat thing going*.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I swear guys.......this sounds better to my ears than all of
>>>>
>>>>the
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>1,000,000
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>gobazzillion plugin options I have available when using the
>>>
>>>SX
>>>
>>>>>rig
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>during
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>mixdown.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>It's pretty minimalist stuff to begin with......acoustic
>>
>> rythym
>>
>>>>>>>>guitar,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>acoustic lead guitar, fiddle, electric bass and acoustic
>>
>> drum
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>kit........but
>>>>>>>>>>>>that seems to be all I do these days anyway.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Sometimes less is truly more.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>I was referring to the "Classic Albums" DVDs. Very good buys, though some
are better than others.
Stevie is a personal hero, a majestic god-awful genius.
Jimmy
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43676327@linux...
> So how do you get Fleetwood Macs rhythm section isolated? Also which
> Stevie Wonder song are you talking about? I have the CD Songs in the
> Key of Life. I actually just bought it again after 15 years without the
> album. Nicaguella is my fav. What vocal chops.
>
> John
>
> uptown jimmy wrote:
> > I'm sorta anal-retentive, so I've been polishing my productions bits and
> > pieces at a time as I track them and edit the parts, while continuing to
> > learn the engineering and performance chops o' the trade as I go, as it
> > were. I will probably never have a true "mix session" in the traditional
> > sense of the term, as I'll have already tweaked the mixes countless
times by
> > the time all the tracking is done.
> >
> > I'm an artist, not a professional engineer. I think my engineering
skills
> > have gotten pretty good in the last few years, but it's in the service
of my
> > art, not that of a day-to-day business. That's probably a point I should
> > have made a while ago.
> >
> > But in the final stages of things (which are coming up soon for this
> > project), I'll do more of what I've been doing, which is isolate an
> > instrument or two at a time and get things sounding just right. I can't
> > afford a shit-load of nice outboard gear, and I play everything myself,
so
> > I've long since fallen into the habit of concentrating on a few
instruments
> > at a time.
> >
> > My buddy Swen is becoming a greater and greater presence in the studio
and
> > in my creative process, and we have mirrored setups in terms of basic
gear,
> > so we have the sweet stuff racked on 10-space SKB racks so that we can
have
> > 2 channels of 1176, 3 of the 1073, etc., all together at the same time,
in
> > the same place, for certain more intensive/collaborative tracking/mixing
> > days.
> >
> > My basic philosophy is to get it sounding "right" as I go, with the
obvious
> > cleaning-up stuff right at the end. I don't want to find myself in the
> > middle of a song production and not feel overwhelmed by its beauty. I
refuse
> > to be involved in anything that isn't just obviously beautiful. Luckily,
we
> > seem to have stumbled recently, at long last, onto just that. We'll see
> > soon. But it's an old, old way of looking at this "recording" thing: mix
it
> > with the way you play it...make it sound the way you want as you
> > go...commit, commit, commit...
> >
> > But really, it's like being a film-maker, in that there's an
ever-increasing
> > amount of stuff you can do in the edit suite to tweak and polish and
> > rearrange what was filmed. But the great films revolve primarily around
the
> > actions of a relatively few actors and camera/light/direction types in a
> > series of carefully prepared, highly intense moments. Sure the editing
is
> > crucial, but any attempt at film editing depends entirely upon the raw
> > materials at hand, ie: the filmed performaces. So, I EQ and compress and
> > affect going to tape, and then edit the part, and then pass it out to
the EQ
> > or compressor again, if necessary, to make it sit just right in the mix
as
> > it stands.
> >
> > As far as I'm concerned, the sound going to tape needs to be really,
really
> > inspiring AS IT IS RECORDED. And that requires really good gear, as well
as
> > the really amazing performaces that good gear sometimes inspires...
> >
> > I'll say it again: alot of unwitting, well-intentioned folk have been
> > hoodwinked over that last few years into thinking that they can do it
all
> > "in the box". I have yet to see or hear the evdence that that is true.
> >
> > I am now regularly sending both analog and digital signals to my
outboard
> > gear. I refuse to jump through the Paris/UAD-1 hoops, and none of the
native
> > plugins sound remotely comparable to my outboard gear, so...
> >
> > Man, I'll tell you straight-up: you ain't played till you've played
through
> > really good gear. It makes all the difference. It just makes everything
so
> > much easier, in that "wow I can't believe I ever thought it could work
any
> > other way" kind of way.
> >
> > That was waaay too many words. Thanks to DC for the compliment, btw. It
may
> > end up in a song, but then I've got stacks of lyrical bits and pieces
laying
> > around.
> >
> > BTW, you can study any of those "Classic Albums" DVDs and in each case
the
> > engineer will inevitably just push up the faders on a copy of the
original
> > master tapes and say to the camera: "It just mixes itself, doesn't it?"
It
> > is astounding to hear, say, Fleetwood Mac's rhythm section isolated.
> > Unfuckingbelievable. Or Stevie's drums on a song from "Key of
Life"....good
> > lord...it was played that way, you know?
> >
> > Jimmy
> >
> >
> >
> > "cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
> > news:43668989$1@linux...
> >
> >>
> >>So are you using any EQ at mixdown?
> >>If so are you goin in to hardware?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>I have both. They call it the MP2EQ, or something like that, a single
> >>>channel of each racked side by side. I have them patched seperately in
my
> >>>patch bay so I can use the EQ as a send from Paris.
> >>>
> >>>Look, I don't want to piss on the parade of anybody who can't afford
the
> >>>good stuff. I've been there myself, I know how it feels.
> >>>
> >>>But my experience with DAW plugins has been anything but pleasurable.
> >
> > I've
> >
> >>>been training my ear since I was four years old, at least as an
> >
> > audiophile,
> >
> >>>and my journey as a studio-rat has been slowed and frustrated no end by
> >>>years of time wasted trying to get the sounds I know are possible to
get,
> >>>but without having the gear necessary to make those sounds happen. It
> >
> > took
> >
> >>>me years to realize that part of my problem was plugins. I consider
them
> >>
> >>a
> >>
> >>>scam perpetrated on innocent musicians who don't know better.
> >>>
> >>>High-end outboard gear is expensive for a reason. And, in this case at
> >>>least, you get what you pay for. It just sounds so fucking good.
There's
> >>
> >>no
> >>
> >>>cloudiness, no endless tweaking, no lingering feeling of
dissatisfaction,
> >>
> >>no
> >>
> >>>weird phasing sounds, no flatness; just sweet, clean, art-inducing
> >>>rightness. Well worth the money.
> >>>
> >>>I mean, sure you can get yourself a $200.00 guitar and set about
learning
> >>
> >>to
> >>
> >>>play it, try to make some art with it. But the moment you pick up a
> >>>$1,000.00 guitar, you know the difference. It's infinitely easier to
> >
> > play,
> >
> >>>it sounds infinitely better, and it records infinitely better. It's
just
> >>>that simple.
> >>>
> >>>Jimmy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"Pete Ruthenburg" <ruthenburg@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> >>>news:436653c1$1@linux...
> >>>
> >>>>Hey Jimmy,
> >>>> So do you have the Great River eq or the pre or both?If you
> >>>>have the eq how do you like it;I'm sure its killer.
> >>>>
> >>>>Pete
> >>>>
> >>>>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>It doesn't.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Paris EQs are usable in a pi
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Paris reality check [message #59780 is a reply to message #59776] |
Tue, 01 November 2005 07:42 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
nch, which means I don't need them
> >
> > anymore.
> >
> >>>>>Cuz I'm the proud owner of a Great River 1073... :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Jimmy
> >>>>>
> >>>>>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:43661314@linux...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Hi Jimmy,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>How do you find the paris eq stacks up against the 1073 eq?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>All the best,
> >>>>>>Mike
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>It's weird, how many people are using native plugins.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I've not used the UAD-1, so I felt the need to pipe up with that
> >>>
> >>>caveat.
> >>>
> >>>>>>>But it is astounding how bad plugins sound, and how much time you
> >>
> >>can
> >>
> >>>>>spend
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>trying to get them to sound good; but when you plug in an 1176 or
> >>
> >>a
> >>
> >>>1073
> >>>
> >>>>>>EQ
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>or a nice FX box (or even an RNC compressor), it takes about 10
> >>>
> >>>seconds
> >>>
> >>>>>>>before things just make more sense sonically. Outboard is still
> >>>>>
> >>>>>light-years
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>ahead of plugins, in my somewhat informed opinion.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Jimmy
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>news:4365825c$1@linux...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>I agree with everything you just said about plugins. Exteral
> >>>
> >>>harware
> >>>
> >>>>>>just
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>blows the doors off virtual.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Mike
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>I do not use plugins, and haven't for years. They do not sound
> >>
> >>as
> >>
> >>>>good
> >>>>
> >>>>>>as
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>high-quality outboard equipment, not on any level, and that's
> >>>
> >>>putting
> >>>
> >>>>>>it
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>very politely. I am shocked that companies like Waves make any
> >>>
> >>>money
> >>>
> >>>>>>at
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>all
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>selling those kinds of products.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Paris is amazing, but I use it's EQ sparingly at most.
> >
> > Ulitmately,
> >
> >>>>for
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>me,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>it's a glorified tape machine with an awesome built-in editing
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>capability,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>plus some well-documented gain-staging "tips and tricks" that
> >
> > sound
> >
> >>>>>>>simply
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>delicious.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Jimmy
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>news:43652386$1@linux...
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>I've found with software less is almost always more. I went
> >>>
> >>>through
> >>>
> >>>>>>my
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>plug
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>in craze phase.. ironically, I suspect phase and calculations
> >>
> >>are
> >>
> >>>>>what
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>muddied up the mix. I know that we as an industry are in
> >
> > trouble
> >
> >>>>>when
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>every
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>year, or less, we have to evaluate our tools and think we need
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>something
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>new. I'm all down with improvement, but if things are growing
> >>>>>
> >>>>>'that'
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>fast,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>then maybe we should have a look at what are we really using
> >>
> >>to
> >>
> >>>>>begin
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>with.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>Change can't generally happen that quickly and be for the long
> >>>
> >>>term
> >>>
> >>>>>>>good.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>Computers are a funny beast man.
> >>>>>>>>>>AA
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>news:43651390@linux...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>Ya know............Im sitting here listening to some
> >
> > *roughs*
> >
> >>>>of
> >>>>
> >>>>>>a
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>tracking
> >>>>>>>>>>>session I did Friday night. No compression, a very tiny bit
> >>
> >>of
> >>
> >>>>>>>>>subtractive
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>EQ, a tiny touch of NoLimit on the mix bus. That's it. The
> >>
> >>rest
> >>
> >>>>of
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>the
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>story
> >>>>>>>>>>>is using the Paris EQ makeup gain and the fader gain stages
> >>
> >>to
> >>
> >>>>get
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>the
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>*mixphat thing going*.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>I swear guys.......this sounds better to my ears than all of
> >>>
> >>>the
> >>>
> >>>>>>>>>1,000,000
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>gobazzillion plugin options I have available when using the
> >>
> >>SX
> >>
> >>>>rig
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>during
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>mixdown.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>It's pretty minimalist stuff to begin with......acoustic
> >
> > rythym
> >
> >>>>>>>guitar,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>acoustic lead guitar, fiddle, electric bass and acoustic
> >
> > drum
> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>kit........but
> >>>>>>>>>>>that seems to be all I do these days anyway.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>Sometimes less is truly more.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>Deej
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >
> >Rod,
Tried your suggestion. Opened clean project with no effects whatsoever.
Tried loading compressor on each channel and only could get 6 loaded before
I got the "maxed out" error message.
I'm convinced I have something set wrong. What is your configuration setting?
Thanks again, Mike.Tom,
If you want, you can email them to me and I'll put them on my web site so
anyone can go download them. I've got extra space and bandwidth right now,
so it's no big deal. Let me know.
Email me here: tony@mercysakes.com
Tony
"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote in message news:43672bab@linux...
Okay I did the mic shoot out but the files are way too large to
post here. It's 6 Meg. 16 tracks in all. If you want 'em I can email
them to you unless you have another way. I don't really want to be
printing disks.
Tom
"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote in message news:4365791b@linux...
Cujo,
I know what you're saying about the hi-gain sounds. The
414 is always abrassive here. I have been a 57 lover from
the getgo but am always fighting to reproduce what's coming from
the amp in the control room.
If the 121s can be murky maybe that will be true with the Shiny Box
also. I can say they accept paris high end eq very gracefully. Not
like a 57 or a 414.
The jury is in session as we speak...
Tom
"cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
news:436568a1$1@linux...
Cool, one thing I really harp on wiht bands about guitars is less is
more.
So many great guitar bands (Led Zep, The Who, zz Top, Hendix, and even
more
modern stuff like The Smiths, or the Clash) did not use that JCM800 type
marshall sound but often used cleaner sounds and less wall of guitar
overdubs
for sure than say Foo Fighters or something of that nature. so it seems
that
many of the LDC's or even 57's can sound pretty abrasive with them, but
these
High Gain amos can sound cool for sure, the ribbon may be just the
trick.,I
know the 121s do ok for this, but I do think they sound at tad murky
too.
"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>Dale and Cujo,
>Heres what I can tell you about the 46Ls:
>
>I haven't any ribbons to AB them with. My experience with
>Beyer M-160s was less than stellar so I am certainly biased.
>The information I got from Jon at Shiny Box is that the Lundahls make =
>the
>mics more clear from top to bottom. I know John Macy is preferring the
=
>standard
>46s over his Royer 121s on e. gtrs. I am going to hammer
>them tonight with some crunch guitars for yours and my benefit.
>I'll A-B them with a 57, 421 414 so you have some basis for my
>comments. I'll gain match too using the same pre.
>
>Maybe I'll post a short mp3 too. It's so subjective with all the =
>variables.
>I'll give you my gut feeling though.
>Tom
>
> "cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message =
>news:4365146f$1@linux...
>
>
> I saw a pair of the SE ribbons at a dealer.=20
> They do look really well constructed, and I guess they are supposed
to
=
>be
> a tad more airy than the Royer. They aint super cheap though as are =
>the shiny..
> I really do want to know about the diff in the tranny of the Shiny
box
=
>mics,
> I am thinking a pair of these may fit the bill as room mics. Of
course
=
>you
> afiten get what you pay for
> I also want to know how they sound on a crunchy master gain marshall.
>
> I heard a clip of DJ's gemini in action, how does the 5000 compare?
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >I can't wait to give one of these SE ribbons a try. I'm very =
>impressed with
> >the SE stuff. We just used a matched pair of SE3's on some guitar =
>overdubs.
> >We compared them to a matched pair of Neumann KM 184's and a pair of
=
>AKG
> >C460B's before we committed to them. The SE3's sound great. I think
=
>this
> >company is hitting some home runs with some high quality products at
=
>very
> >good prices.
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >"Dale" <dalebradleycello@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:4364187c$1@linux...
> >>
> >> A buncha questions about these "ShinyBox" mics I hear tell of....
> >>
> >> So how does the ShinyBox sound compared with Beyer M160 & Royer =
>(both
> of
> >> which I have used)? Does a $310 mic (46L) really outperform a =
>Royer?!?
> >>
> >> I just scanned the shinybox.com, but didn't see much description
of
=
>the
> >practical
> >> difference between the 46, 46C, & 46L except about the =
>transformers. How
> >> are the spendier ones better?
> >>
> >> I don't suppose anyone has got one of the new SE Electronics
Ribbon
=
>mics
> >> to report on? I have one of their tube mics (SE 5000) which I like
=
>a lot.
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >> Dale
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Glad you like them, Tom. I think they are
> >> >a fantastic value. I use my 46's over my Royers
> >> >all the time, especially on electric guitars. I
> >> >know Darren Rahn for the group here got a pair
> >> >also and is verry pleased, too. Even the unmatched,
> >> >stock transformer 46's are pretty nice :)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>Had a project that called for tenor sax, vocals
> >> >>and a little egg shakin'.
> >> >>
> >> >>Used 'em on everything through the Precision 8
> >> >>with really great results.
> >> >>
> >> >>The best words to describe them are natural and not hyped.
> >> >>to remove the room coming off the backside of the figure 8.
> >> >>Vocals didn't need compression. I was singing and watching
> >> >>levels so that made this possible. They did seem slightly
> >> >>compressed sounding though. Even when the wave got
> >> >>squared off in Paris it didn't gack or even sound clipped.
> >> >>I rerecorded those spots because they looked bad...
> >> >>Odd but kinda cool. =3D20
> >> >>
> >> >>Vocals in the mix need lots of high end. Not a problem either.
> >> >>It was a disco thing with that sizzly sound that only a
condensor
> >> >>should get. What I found was that these things took Paris' =
>eq=3D20
> >> >>sweetly. The esses didn't go over the edge and tone was smooth
> >> >>as silk. I did use La2a's across them at mixdown though. The =
>eggs
> >> >>recorded nicely and again sounded natural. One on each side of
=
>the
> mic.
> >> >=3D
> >> >>=3D20
> >> >>
> >> >>These are the first ribbons I've used except for some Beyer
M160s
=
>way
> =3D
> >> >>back.
> >> >>These are floating my boat right now. I think they will rock on
=
>brass
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Dec 21 07:27:43 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.08974 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
