Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Final Verdict = Pulsar is going back
|
|
|
|
| Re: Final Verdict = Pulsar is going back [message #76350 is a reply to message #76344] |
Wed, 22 November 2006 22:13   |
|
|
Already!! Wha'ts not working for you.?? The sound, the plugins??
Hey, Neil, you can always get a Paris rig to mix on.. I still do.
My XP /Paris rig is so stable, and with the URS and Waves SSL plugins.. It's
mixing dream for ITBB mixing..
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OU.com> wrote:
>
>Totally useless for what I wanted it to be able to do.
>
>End of story.
>
>Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: Final Verdict = Pulsar is going back [message #76351 is a reply to message #76347] |
Wed, 22 November 2006 22:13 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>Hassle factor, bad sounds, interface issues?
>Where's the beef bro?
Hassle factor had me pissed from the beginning, but ultimaely it comes down
to this:
1.) You can't use the Pulsar plugins in your Native app... this
was one of two big things I wanted to do... take some load off
my CPU resources. You have to route a particular channel
through the Pulsar mixer to insert one of their DSP-powered
plugins.
2.) It won't do 88.2k - at least not of its own volition. It
has 44.1, 48, and 96... now it CAN be slaved, but will the
slaving work at that samplerate? I dunno, because YOU NEED
ANOTHER CARD in order to do this - the guy who sold it to me
didn't tell me that I would need the Pulsar Sync Plate in order
to do what I wanted to accomplish - and I was VERY explicit
with him in terms of samplerates & everything, yet he assured
me this would work. This was really the deal-breaker in my
case... you guys using 44.1 or 48 all the time might be fine
using this (or another Pulsar) card.
3.) Even the Professional card (the one with 14 DSP chips,
which is the one I got) doens't seem to have the DSP power to
really "get there" for what I wanted... I played back an 88.2k
project at the 96k samplerate just to see how the Pulsar EFX
sounded & I set it up for summing through the big Pulsar mixer
(which is, IIRC, 48 channels); after whipping out with one of
the Pulsar Reverbs & a couple of their compressors, I got a
prompt saying that I was out of DSP resources and would I like
to go fuck off? (ok, not really - it asked me something else,
which I don't recall right now, but it's pretty much the same
end result: "Go fuck off, you can't add any more EFX!").
So, if I kept the Pulsar card I would have to either:
1.) Buy this Sync Plate thing... screw it - not interested in
spending any more $$$; especially since the guy told me this
would work as-is.
2.) Downconvert everything to 44.1k... screw it, not even CLOSE
to what I am trying to accomplish, plus if I wanted to do that
I could just sum in Paris via analog & still be able to work
the individual tracks at the higher 88.2k resolution in SX.
3.) Upconvert everything to 96k... virtually impossible at my
track counts; for those of you who haven't messed with these
higher sample rates, you should know that there is indeed a
big difference in the amount of resources consumed by 40
tracks worth of 96k files vs 40 tracks worth of 88.2k - my
computer will run 40+ tracks of 88.2k with a goodly amount of
plugins... that many tracks of 96k & plugins = lockup city.
4.) Live with mixing in the Pulsar environment, since you can't
insert their pluigins in your Native app. Again, not what I
wanted (and either was told it could do, or perhaps
misunderstood - not sure about that particular aspect) in that
regard. Irrespective of that, why do I want to do this? Why
would I want to have to toggle back & forth all the time
between the Pulsar & the SX environment?
So, there you have it in a nutshell.
Neil
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Final Verdict = Pulsar is going back [message #76356 is a reply to message #76351] |
Wed, 22 November 2006 22:47 |
DJ
Messages: 1124
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Neil,
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45652e17$1@linux...
>
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
> >Hassle factor, bad sounds, interface issues?
> >Where's the beef bro?
>
> Hassle factor had me pissed from the beginning, but ultimaely it comes
down
> to this:
>
> 1.) You can't use the Pulsar plugins in your Native app... this
> was one of two big things I wanted to do... take some load off
> my CPU resources. You have to route a particular channel
> through the Pulsar mixer to insert one of their DSP-powered
> plugins.
There is actually a way to do this. It is called XTC mode. I haven't paid
any attention to it really because using Pulsar plugins in cubase wasn't one
of my priorities I don't see much in the way of successes with it on the
Pulsar forum. It seems to be viewed by Pulsar geeks as an anachronistic mode
of working, but every platform's aficianados have their preferences. Since
you brought this up, I decided to have a look around and I have found the
location wherin the "XTC" mode can be launched and saved as the default
project. I'm going to explore this and, FWIW, see if I can get it working.
If you want to hang on to that card until Monday, I should be able to tell
you if it's worth fooling with.
> 2.) It won't do 88.2k - at least not of its own volition. It
> has 44.1, 48, and 96... now it CAN be slaved, but will the
> slaving work at that samplerate? I dunno, because YOU NEED
> ANOTHER CARD in order to do this - the guy who sold it to me
> didn't tell me that I would need the Pulsar Sync Plate in order
> to do what I wanted to accomplish - and I was VERY explicit
> with him in terms of samplerates & everything, yet he assured
> me this would work. This was really the deal-breaker in my
> case... you guys using 44.1 or 48 all the time might be fine
> using this (or another Pulsar) card.
Cant do anything for you there and it will cost additional $$ to achieve
this functionality. No way around it.
>
> 3.) Even the Professional card (the one with 14 DSP chips,
> which is the one I got) doens't seem to have the DSP power to
> really "get there" for what I wanted... I played back an 88.2k
> project at the 96k samplerate just to see how the Pulsar EFX
> sounded & I set it up for summing through the big Pulsar mixer
> (which is, IIRC, 48 channels); after whipping out with one of
> the Pulsar Reverbs & a couple of their compressors, I got a
> prompt saying that I was out of DSP resources and would I like
> to go fuck off? (ok, not really - it asked me something else,
> which I don't recall right now, but it's pretty much the same
> end result: "Go fuck off, you can't add any more EFX!").
Hmmmmm....don't work at these sample rates so this might be the biggest deal
breaker of all. The reverbs are the DSP suckers. No doubt about that. You're
basically halving your resources when you work at 88.2.
>
> So, if I kept the Pulsar card I would have to either:
>
> 1.) Buy this Sync Plate thing... screw it - not interested in
> spending any more $$$; especially since the guy told me this
> would work as-is.
>
> 2.) Downconvert everything to 44.1k... screw it, not even CLOSE
> to what I am trying to accomplish, plus if I wanted to do that
> I could just sum in Paris via analog & still be able to work
> the individual tracks at the higher 88.2k resolution in SX.
>
> 3.) Upconvert everything to 96k... virtually impossible at my
> track counts; for those of you who haven't messed with these
> higher sample rates, you should know that there is indeed a
> big difference in the amount of resources consumed by 40
> tracks worth of 96k files vs 40 tracks worth of 88.2k - my
> computer will run 40+ tracks of 88.2k with a goodly amount of
> plugins... that many tracks of 96k & plugins = lockup city.
>
> 4.) Live with mixing in the Pulsar environment, since you can't
> insert their pluigins in your Native app. Again, not what I
> wanted (and either was told it could do, or perhaps
> misunderstood - not sure about that particular aspect) in that
> regard. Irrespective of that, why do I want to do this? Why
> would I want to have to toggle back & forth all the time
> between the Pulsar & the SX environment?
I think this was a big misunderstanding. Doing the fader moves and panning
in the Pulsar environment seems to be the preferred MO on their forum. I
prefer the summing in the Pulsar environment when I'm not summing in Paris,
even when doing the fader automation and panning in Cubase, but more DSP
based advantages are available when mono tracks are streamed from the native
app and the fader moves and panning are done in the Scope mixer. If you
want automated faders, panning, etc., you will need to do some midi mapping
in the sequencer to automate the mixer moves in Pulsar. It's a deep
application and needs some time to get one's head around in order to access
it's most powerful features. It's not an overnight read, though to get it
working the way I wanted it to work was an absolute breeze and it remains
rock solid. Yesterday, I looped a 40 track project for 12 hours and it
didn't crash once. The way you work and I work are somewhat different
though..........especially the sample rate situation and the DSP limitations
on the card at those sample rates are disappointing, I'm sure.
>
> So, there you have it in a nutshell.
>
> Neil
All three of my cards only total 18 DSP's and lots of that power is occupied
by my huge routing matrix in order to interface with Paris I/O, but I'm
gonna try to get my head around the XTC mode and see if it's viable. Summing
in Pulsar instead of Paris should free up about 60% of the resources I'm
using and allow them to be used for XTC plugins in Cubase SX. Who
knows???.this might be the ****! I'm really curious now. Had I known that
was a priority for you, I would have looked into it sooner.
Cheers,
DJ
|
|
|
|
| Re: Final Verdict = Pulsar is going back [message #76371 is a reply to message #76356] |
Thu, 23 November 2006 08:53 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
>> 1.) You can't use the Pulsar plugins in your Native app... this
>> was one of two big things I wanted to do... take some load off
>> my CPU resources. You have to route a particular channel
>> through the Pulsar mixer to insert one of their DSP-powered
>> plugins.
>
>There is actually a way to do this. It is called XTC mode.
>I haven't paid any attention to it really because using Pulsar
>plugins in cubase wasn't one of my priorities I don't see
>much in the way of successes with it on the
>Pulsar forum.
Egggzactly - sounds like one giant clusterfuck of a workaround
to me.
>It seems to be viewed by Pulsar geeks as an
>anachronistic mode of working,
And if the Pulsar geek power-users think this, then what of us
mere neophytes? Shouldn't this tell you that it could be an ass-
puckering experience? Not interested... looking for something
that's going to increase productivity, not add 10 steps to what
ought to be a simple process, like inserting a plugin, or force
me to do the constant window-toggle between SX & any Pulsar
plugin's I might want to use, but would then have to do so in
the Pulsar matrix (in fact, isn't that why they're called
plugin's? Otherwise, shouldn't they be called plugOUTS? :D )
>I played back an 88.2k project at the 96k samplerate just to
see how the Pulsar EFX
>> sounded & I set it up for summing through the big Pulsar mixer
>> (which is, IIRC, 48 channels); after whipping out with one of
>> the Pulsar Reverbs & a couple of their compressors, I got a
>> prompt saying that I was out of DSP resources and would I like
>> to go fuck off? (ok, not really - it asked me something else,
>> which I don't recall right now, but it's pretty much the same
>> end result: "Go fuck off, you can't add any more EFX!").
>
>Hmmmmm....don't work at these sample rates so this might be the biggest
deal
>breaker of all. The reverbs are the DSP suckers. No doubt about that. You're
>basically halving your resources when you work at 88.2.
I was actually VERY surpised that the 14-chip card didn't have
the horsepower to do this... of course, I was having to use the
big mixer in this instance, because I was trying to see how the
whole plugin insertion thing would go, so I could evaluate
whether I wanted to even consider this as an (unexpected)
option, and as you yourself pointed out, the big mixer consumes
up a whole lot of DSP resources in & of itself. What I had
originally hoped to do - and what I specifically asked Gary if
I would be able to do, and to which he replied affirmatively
that I indeed could do - was to be able to sum using the Pulsar
mixer, insert a few Pulsar plugins on individual Cubase
channels, and maybe replace a couple of 'verbs - all geared
around the key point of "can the DSP handle this at the 88.2k
sample rate?" In fact I had originally ordered the Project
card, and then I e-mailed him back & asked him if I should get
the Professional card just to be safe... he said that I
probably should, that he wasn't sure if the Project card would
be able to handle it (yet he was going to go ahead & sell me
one of those anyway???). So yeah, I was pretty shocked when it
waved the white flag on DSP resources so early in the game.
>> Irrespective of that, why do I want to do this? Why
>> would I want to have to toggle back & forth all the time
>> between the Pulsar & the SX environment?
>
>I think this was a big misunderstanding. Doing the fader moves and panning
>in the Pulsar environment seems to be the preferred MO on their forum.
Still, even if I wanted to do this, it crapped out after a
reverb, the Vinco & one other thing was inserted - again,
considering having to use the big mixer & summing 40+ channels
of 88.2k... at lower samplerates you're probably fine.
>Yesterday, I looped a 40 track project for 12 hours and it
>didn't crash once.
And I'm sure my system will loop a 40+ track project with a
metric buttload of plugins at 88.2k for that long... at least
I have to assume it would loop it, because a much more acidic
of a test is: "Can you WORK on the project for many hours
straight - tracking, punching, rewinding, punching again,
editing, scrolling, inserting & trying out plugins on the fly,
etceteraaah, etceteraaah?", and the answer is
resoundingly: "YEPPERS!", So, I assume it would sit there &
peacefully loop all day if I asked it to.
Now, I understand why you're doing this, because you've had some
stability problems with the RME cards in your setup... I don't
know why, though - I have found them to be rock-solid stable,
and the only time I've had a card-related stability issue with
the Multifaces was when I had that older PCI card (pre v1.7),
that they found would sometimes develop an intermittent power-
up issue... RME upgraded it free of charge, even though the
warranty had expired long, long ago, and when I installed XP
Service Pack 2 I had to reload the RME drivers, as I recall,
because something changed in the registry file & that was
causing an issue of one kind or another; so that was a PITA
until I figured it out, but I dunno if that's RME's fault, or
just Windoze trying to reconfigure everything you've done, as
it seems to enjoy attempting from time to time.
Neil
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Dec 24 16:18:48 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01142 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
