Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface???
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface??? [message #71975 is a reply to message #71969] |
Sat, 02 September 2006 09:15   |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
LaMont, no I'm not having trouble with one, since I don't own
one; but my reason for asking is that I'm considering a
reconfiguration of my setup - one of the options being setting
up a separate PC for Virtual Instruments - and if I do this,
I'm wondering if I should get an 1812M for the audio PC and use
my current interface (which is an RME Multiface) for the VST
machine, or just go with Multifaces for both machines.
The EMU website lists 44.1, 48, 96, and 192k, but it doesn't
say anything about 88.2, so that's why I am wondering
specifically about that samplerate (which is my preferred
samplerate to use).
Neil
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>I have one (1212M & 0404) card(s). They both can record up to 192k. I'll
be
>inthe Studio tommorow and I'll do a test @82.2K and post the the results.
>
>Curious..Are you having trouble with your EMU cad?
>
>
>
>"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>I know at least a couple of you said you had these units...
>>can you do me a favor & check to see if it will record &
>>playback & process @ 88.2k samplerate?
>>
>>Neil
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface??? [message #71976 is a reply to message #71975] |
Sat, 02 September 2006 09:21 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Neil.........I don't have any first hand experience with this and my source
is a post made by Matthias Carstens (IIRC) , so consider the source, but a
couple of years ago I saw a post on the RME forum stating that the ADAT
protocall of the EMU interfaces wasn't *standard* and that there could
possibly be clocking issues when interfacing an EMU card with an RME card.
Whether this would be an issue if both were receioving a thrid party house
clock, I don't know, but my take on what I read was that without this they
might be speaking different dialects of the same language.
;o)
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44f9ae21$1@linux...
>
> LaMont, no I'm not having trouble with one, since I don't own
> one; but my reason for asking is that I'm considering a
> reconfiguration of my setup - one of the options being setting
> up a separate PC for Virtual Instruments - and if I do this,
> I'm wondering if I should get an 1812M for the audio PC and use
> my current interface (which is an RME Multiface) for the VST
> machine, or just go with Multifaces for both machines.
>
> The EMU website lists 44.1, 48, 96, and 192k, but it doesn't
> say anything about 88.2, so that's why I am wondering
> specifically about that samplerate (which is my preferred
> samplerate to use).
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
> >
> >I have one (1212M & 0404) card(s). They both can record up to 192k. I'll
> be
> >inthe Studio tommorow and I'll do a test @82.2K and post the the results.
> >
> >Curious..Are you having trouble with your EMU cad?
> >
> >
> >
> >"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>I know at least a couple of you said you had these units...
> >>can you do me a favor & check to see if it will record &
> >>playback & process @ 88.2k samplerate?
> >>
> >>Neil
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface??? [message #71993 is a reply to message #71976] |
Sun, 03 September 2006 03:27 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
i think neil's going to be putting the emu in another dedicated vsti
machine, much the same way i dual purpose the lynx card.
On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:21:43 -0600, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Neil.........I don't have any first hand experience with this and my source
>is a post made by Matthias Carstens (IIRC) , so consider the source, but a
>couple of years ago I saw a post on the RME forum stating that the ADAT
>protocall of the EMU interfaces wasn't *standard* and that there could
>possibly be clocking issues when interfacing an EMU card with an RME card.
>Whether this would be an issue if both were receioving a thrid party house
>clock, I don't know, but my take on what I read was that without this they
>might be speaking different dialects of the same language.
>
>;o)
>
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44f9ae21$1@linux...
>>
>> LaMont, no I'm not having trouble with one, since I don't own
>> one; but my reason for asking is that I'm considering a
>> reconfiguration of my setup - one of the options being setting
>> up a separate PC for Virtual Instruments - and if I do this,
>> I'm wondering if I should get an 1812M for the audio PC and use
>> my current interface (which is an RME Multiface) for the VST
>> machine, or just go with Multifaces for both machines.
>>
>> The EMU website lists 44.1, 48, 96, and 192k, but it doesn't
>> say anything about 88.2, so that's why I am wondering
>> specifically about that samplerate (which is my preferred
>> samplerate to use).
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >I have one (1212M & 0404) card(s). They both can record up to 192k. I'll
>> be
>> >inthe Studio tommorow and I'll do a test @82.2K and post the the results.
>> >
>> >Curious..Are you having trouble with your EMU cad?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>I know at least a couple of you said you had these units...
>> >>can you do me a favor & check to see if it will record &
>> >>playback & process @ 88.2k samplerate?
>> >>
>> >>Neil
>> >
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface??? [message #72000 is a reply to message #71993] |
Sun, 03 September 2006 09:23 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Not sure at this point... was thinking of trying it in my audio
PC just to see if I like the sound of the EMU convertors better
than the Multiface's convertors. If it turned out I didn't like
them better, then I could always just use the EMU interface for
the VSTi machine... in that case I'd be driving the VSTi rig
with MIDI from the main PC, then coming out of the VSTi rig
with digital audio anyway.
Also thinking about the fact that the EMU card has hardware-
accelerated processing.... gotta find a way to take CPU load
off the audio PC somehow - you get 30-something tracks going at
88.2k, and you can only handle so many inserts & 'verbs before
you have to back off on latency settings or start freezing
tracks in SX, so I'm thinking about that or perhaps a Mucusrite
Liquidmix/SSL Duende, or something along those lines (UAD
doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).
Neil
rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>i think neil's going to be putting the emu in another dedicated vsti
>machine, much the same way i dual purpose the lynx card.
>
>
>
>On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:21:43 -0600, "DJ"
><animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>
>>Neil.........I don't have any first hand experience with this and my source
>>is a post made by Matthias Carstens (IIRC) , so consider the source, but
a
>>couple of years ago I saw a post on the RME forum stating that the ADAT
>>protocall of the EMU interfaces wasn't *standard* and that there could
>>possibly be clocking issues when interfacing an EMU card with an RME card.
>>Whether this would be an issue if both were receioving a thrid party house
>>clock, I don't know, but my take on what I read was that without this they
>>might be speaking different dialects of the same language.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44f9ae21$1@linux...
>>>
>>> LaMont, no I'm not having trouble with one, since I don't own
>>> one; but my reason for asking is that I'm considering a
>>> reconfiguration of my setup - one of the options being setting
>>> up a separate PC for Virtual Instruments - and if I do this,
>>> I'm wondering if I should get an 1812M for the audio PC and use
>>> my current interface (which is an RME Multiface) for the VST
>>> machine, or just go with Multifaces for both machines.
>>>
>>> The EMU website lists 44.1, 48, 96, and 192k, but it doesn't
>>> say anything about 88.2, so that's why I am wondering
>>> specifically about that samplerate (which is my preferred
>>> samplerate to use).
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >I have one (1212M & 0404) card(s). They both can record up to 192k.
I'll
>>> be
>>> >inthe Studio tommorow and I'll do a test @82.2K and post the the results.
>>> >
>>> >Curious..Are you having trouble with your EMU cad?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>I know at least a couple of you said you had these units...
>>> >>can you do me a favor & check to see if it will record &
>>> >>playback & process @ 88.2k samplerate?
>>> >>
>>> >>Neil
>>> >
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface??? [message #72001 is a reply to message #72000] |
Sun, 03 September 2006 09:39 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>or something along those lines (UAD
doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).<
UAD-1 is worth the pain. Looks like Duende is Mac only.
http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/duende_specs.html
but will have PC drivers.................soon........(remember
............soon?)
http://solid-state-logic-en.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/solid_state _logic_en.cfg/ph
p/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=84&p_created=1142337836&am p;p_sid=bMTX7Jgi&p_acces
sibility=0&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX 2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jb
nQ9NzgmcF9wcm9kcz0xJnBfY2F0cz0mcF9wdj0xLjEmcF9jdj0mcF9wYWdlP TE*&p_li=&p_topv
iew=1
I would anticipate a ration of pain with this too.
;o)
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44fb0188$1@linux...
>
> Not sure at this point... was thinking of trying it in my audio
> PC just to see if I like the sound of the EMU convertors better
> than the Multiface's convertors. If it turned out I didn't like
> them better, then I could always just use the EMU interface for
> the VSTi machine... in that case I'd be driving the VSTi rig
> with MIDI from the main PC, then coming out of the VSTi rig
> with digital audio anyway.
>
> Also thinking about the fact that the EMU card has hardware-
> accelerated processing.... gotta find a way to take CPU load
> off the audio PC somehow - you get 30-something tracks going at
> 88.2k, and you can only handle so many inserts & 'verbs before
> you have to back off on latency settings or start freezing
> tracks in SX, so I'm thinking about that or perhaps a Mucusrite
> Liquidmix/SSL Duende, or something along those lines (UAD
> doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
> various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).
>
> Neil
>
>
> rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >i think neil's going to be putting the emu in another dedicated vsti
> >machine, much the same way i dual purpose the lynx card.
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:21:43 -0600, "DJ"
> ><animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Neil.........I don't have any first hand experience with this and my
source
> >>is a post made by Matthias Carstens (IIRC) , so consider the source, but
> a
> >>couple of years ago I saw a post on the RME forum stating that the ADAT
> >>protocall of the EMU interfaces wasn't *standard* and that there could
> >>possibly be clocking issues when interfacing an EMU card with an RME
card.
> >>Whether this would be an issue if both were receioving a thrid party
house
> >>clock, I don't know, but my take on what I read was that without this
they
> >>might be speaking different dialects of the same language.
> >>
> >>;o)
> >>
> >>
> >>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44f9ae21$1@linux...
> >>>
> >>> LaMont, no I'm not having trouble with one, since I don't own
> >>> one; but my reason for asking is that I'm considering a
> >>> reconfiguration of my setup - one of the options being setting
> >>> up a separate PC for Virtual Instruments - and if I do this,
> >>> I'm wondering if I should get an 1812M for the audio PC and use
> >>> my current interface (which is an RME Multiface) for the VST
> >>> machine, or just go with Multifaces for both machines.
> >>>
> >>> The EMU website lists 44.1, 48, 96, and 192k, but it doesn't
> >>> say anything about 88.2, so that's why I am wondering
> >>> specifically about that samplerate (which is my preferred
> >>> samplerate to use).
> >>>
> >>> Neil
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >I have one (1212M & 0404) card(s). They both can record up to 192k.
> I'll
> >>> be
> >>> >inthe Studio tommorow and I'll do a test @82.2K and post the the
results.
> >>> >
> >>> >Curious..Are you having trouble with your EMU cad?
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>I know at least a couple of you said you had these units...
> >>> >>can you do me a favor & check to see if it will record &
> >>> >>playback & process @ 88.2k samplerate?
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Neil
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface??? [message #72002 is a reply to message #72001] |
Sun, 03 September 2006 10:03 |
IOOIU
Messages: 13
Registered: December 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
I'm leaning towards Liquidmix, rather than Duende, partially
because I'll betcha that the Liquidmix has emulations of some
SSL comps & EQ's (plus a lot more) whereas the SSL has - well,
only SSL ones.
With the EMU card, I'd get some hardware-accelerated plugins,
plus it's a known quantity in terms of the convertors (since
it's supposed to have the same ones as in the Digi HD192
interface - and I've used those & know that they sound good).
Problem is with EMU's track record of support - or lack
thereof - if at some point I need to migrate to something more
up-to-date than WinXP, will EMU have new drivers for it? Doubt
it. They'll just discontinue that card, wait a couple years &
build a "new" one that you'll have to buy from scratch.
Neil
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>or something along those lines (UAD
>doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
>various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).<
>
>UAD-1 is worth the pain. Looks like Duende is Mac only.
>http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/duende_specs.html
>
>but will have PC drivers.................soon........(remember
>...........soon?)
> http://solid-state-logic-en.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/solid_state _logic_en.cfg/ph
> p/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=84&p_created=1142337836&am p;p_sid=bMTX7Jgi&p_acces
> sibility=0&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX 2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jb
> nQ9NzgmcF9wcm9kcz0xJnBfY2F0cz0mcF9wdj0xLjEmcF9jdj0mcF9wYWdlP TE*&p_li=&p_topv
>iew=1
>
>I would anticipate a ration of pain with this too.
>
>;o)
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44fb0188$1@linux...
>>
>> Not sure at this point... was thinking of trying it in my audio
>> PC just to see if I like the sound of the EMU convertors better
>> than the Multiface's convertors. If it turned out I didn't like
>> them better, then I could always just use the EMU interface for
>> the VSTi machine... in that case I'd be driving the VSTi rig
>> with MIDI from the main PC, then coming out of the VSTi rig
>> with digital audio anyway.
>>
>> Also thinking about the fact that the EMU card has hardware-
>> accelerated processing.... gotta find a way to take CPU load
>> off the audio PC somehow - you get 30-something tracks going at
>> 88.2k, and you can only handle so many inserts & 'verbs before
>> you have to back off on latency settings or start freezing
>> tracks in SX, so I'm thinking about that or perhaps a Mucusrite
>> Liquidmix/SSL Duende, or something along those lines (UAD
>> doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
>> various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >i think neil's going to be putting the emu in another dedicated vsti
>> >machine, much the same way i dual purpose the lynx card.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:21:43 -0600, "DJ"
>> ><animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Neil.........I don't have any first hand experience with this and my
>source
>> >>is a post made by Matthias Carstens (IIRC) , so consider the source,
but
>> a
>> >>couple of years ago I saw a post on the RME forum stating that the ADAT
>> >>protocall of the EMU interfaces wasn't *standard* and that there could
>> >>possibly be clocking issues when interfacing an EMU card with an RME
>card.
>> >>Whether this would be an issue if both were receioving a thrid party
>house
>> >>clock, I don't know, but my take on what I read was that without this
>they
>> >>might be speaking different dialects of the same language.
>> >>
>> >>;o)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44f9ae21$1@linux...
>> >>>
>> >>> LaMont, no I'm not having trouble with one, since I don't own
>> >>> one; but my reason for asking is that I'm considering a
>> >>> reconfiguration of my setup - one of the options being setting
>> >>> up a separate PC for Virtual Instruments - and if I do this,
>> >>> I'm wondering if I should get an 1812M for the audio PC and use
>> >>> my current interface (which is an RME Multiface) for the VST
>> >>> machine, or just go with Multifaces for both machines.
>> >>>
>> >>> The EMU website lists 44.1, 48, 96, and 192k, but it doesn't
>> >>> say anything about 88.2, so that's why I am wondering
>> >>> specifically about that samplerate (which is my preferred
>> >>> samplerate to use).
>> >>>
>> >>> Neil
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >I have one (1212M & 0404) card(s). They both can record up to 192k.
>> I'll
>> >>> be
>> >>> >inthe Studio tommorow and I'll do a test @82.2K and post the the
>results.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >Curious..Are you having trouble with your EMU cad?
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>I know at least a couple of you said you had these units...
>> >>> >>can you do me a favor & check to see if it will record &
>> >>> >>playback & process @ 88.2k samplerate?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>Neil
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface??? [message #72003 is a reply to message #72002] |
Sun, 03 September 2006 10:20 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> Problem is with EMU's track record of support - or lack
> thereof - if at some point I need to migrate to something more
> up-to-date than WinXP, will EMU have new drivers for it? Doubt
> it. They'll just discontinue that card, wait a couple years &
> build a "new" one that you'll have to buy from scratch.
>
As cheap as these cards are, I would say that that's a good possibility.
They are already being sold at *blowout* prices. They will liley discontinue
them rather than write a 64 bit driver.
From what I'm hearing about Vista, I'm thinking that it won't matter. There
seem to be some incredibly stupid and, CPU intensive stuff going on under
the hood at this point. Apparently MS has decided to have the little musical
intro hardwired so that it can't be disabled in the control panel, etc. That
in itself, though obnoxious, isn't a deal breaker. Totally idiotic, to be
sure, but . one reason I stick with windows is because I can *undo* the crap
that they think is important and that I don't. If they start fucking around
with this I might have to jump to the dark side after all.
Deej
"Neil" <IOOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44fb0af5$1@linux...
>
> I'm leaning towards Liquidmix, rather than Duende, partially
> because I'll betcha that the Liquidmix has emulations of some
> SSL comps & EQ's (plus a lot more) whereas the SSL has - well,
> only SSL ones.
>
> With the EMU card, I'd get some hardware-accelerated plugins,
> plus it's a known quantity in terms of the convertors (since
> it's supposed to have the same ones as in the Digi HD192
> interface - and I've used those & know that they sound good).
> Problem is with EMU's track record of support - or lack
> thereof - if at some point I need to migrate to something more
> up-to-date than WinXP, will EMU have new drivers for it? Doubt
> it. They'll just discontinue that card, wait a couple years &
> build a "new" one that you'll have to buy from scratch.
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >>or something along those lines (UAD
> >doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
> >various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).<
> >
> >UAD-1 is worth the pain. Looks like Duende is Mac only.
> >http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/duende_specs.html
> >
> >but will have PC drivers.................soon........(remember
> >...........soon?)
>
> http://solid-state-logic-en.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/solid_state _logic_en.cfg/p
h
>
> p/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=84&p_created=1142337836&am p;p_sid=bMTX7Jgi&p_acce
s
>
> sibility=0&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX 2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19j
b
>
> nQ9NzgmcF9wcm9kcz0xJnBfY2F0cz0mcF9wdj0xLjEmcF9jdj0mcF9wYWdlP TE*&p_li=&p_top
v
> >iew=1
> >
> >I would anticipate a ration of pain with this too.
> >
> >;o)
> >"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44fb0188$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Not sure at this point... was thinking of trying it in my audio
> >> PC just to see if I like the sound of the EMU convertors better
> >> than the Multiface's convertors. If it turned out I didn't like
> >> them better, then I could always just use the EMU interface for
> >> the VSTi machine... in that case I'd be driving the VSTi rig
> >> with MIDI from the main PC, then coming out of the VSTi rig
> >> with digital audio anyway.
> >>
> >> Also thinking about the fact that the EMU card has hardware-
> >> accelerated processing.... gotta find a way to take CPU load
> >> off the audio PC somehow - you get 30-something tracks going at
> >> 88.2k, and you can only handle so many inserts & 'verbs before
> >> you have to back off on latency settings or start freezing
> >> tracks in SX, so I'm thinking about that or perhaps a Mucusrite
> >> Liquidmix/SSL Duende, or something along those lines (UAD
> >> doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
> >> various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).
> >>
> >> Neil
> >>
> >>
> >> rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >i think neil's going to be putting the emu in another dedicated vsti
> >> >machine, much the same way i dual purpose the lynx card.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:21:43 -0600, "DJ"
> >> ><animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Neil.........I don't have any first hand experience with this and my
> >source
> >> >>is a post made by Matthias Carstens (IIRC) , so consider the source,
> but
> >> a
> >> >>couple of years ago I saw a post on the RME forum stating that the
ADAT
> >> >>protocall of the EMU interfaces wasn't *standard* and that there
could
> >> >>possibly be clocking issues when interfacing an EMU card with an RME
> >card.
> >> >>Whether this would be an issue if both were receioving a thrid party
> >house
> >> >>clock, I don't know, but my take on what I read was that without this
> >they
> >> >>might be speaking different dialects of the same language.
> >> >>
> >> >>;o)
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44f9ae21$1@linux...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> LaMont, no I'm not having trouble with one, since I don't own
> >> >>> one; but my reason for asking is that I'm considering a
> >> >>> reconfiguration of my setup - one of the options being setting
> >> >>> up a separate PC for Virtual Instruments - and if I do this,
> >> >>> I'm wondering if I should get an 1812M for the audio PC and use
> >> >>> my current interface (which is an RME Multiface) for the VST
> >> >>> machine, or just go with Multifaces for both machines.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The EMU website lists 44.1, 48, 96, and 192k, but it doesn't
> >> >>> say anything about 88.2, so that's why I am wondering
> >> >>> specifically about that samplerate (which is my preferred
> >> >>> samplerate to use).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Neil
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >I have one (1212M & 0404) card(s). They both can record up to
192k.
> >> I'll
> >> >>> be
> >> >>> >inthe Studio tommorow and I'll do a test @82.2K and post the the
> >results.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >Curious..Are you having trouble with your EMU cad?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>I know at least a couple of you said you had these units...
> >> >>> >>can you do me a favor & check to see if it will record &
> >> >>> >>playback & process @ 88.2k samplerate?
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>Neil
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Who has the EMU 1212 or 1812 series interface??? [message #72013 is a reply to message #72003] |
Sun, 03 September 2006 12:50 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Being a dealer I'm starting to get the discontinued vibe also.
EMU does have beta 64bit drivers for Windows XP Pro 64 but who know s if
they have even started on Vista drivers. Not sure why anybody would
waste development time on Windows XP 64. It would be like writing only
for Windows ME.
Vista will be just fine for audio/video and is more tweak able than XP
even.
Your still talking about a year from now before all the small 3rd party
companies get their software and hardware fully optimized for Vista.
Chris
DJ wrote:
>>Problem is with EMU's track record of support - or lack
>>thereof - if at some point I need to migrate to something more
>>up-to-date than WinXP, will EMU have new drivers for it? Doubt
>>it. They'll just discontinue that card, wait a couple years &
>>build a "new" one that you'll have to buy from scratch.
>>
>
> As cheap as these cards are, I would say that that's a good possibility.
> They are already being sold at *blowout* prices. They will liley discontinue
> them rather than write a 64 bit driver.
> From what I'm hearing about Vista, I'm thinking that it won't matter. There
> seem to be some incredibly stupid and, CPU intensive stuff going on under
> the hood at this point. Apparently MS has decided to have the little musical
> intro hardwired so that it can't be disabled in the control panel, etc. That
> in itself, though obnoxious, isn't a deal breaker. Totally idiotic, to be
> sure, but . one reason I stick with windows is because I can *undo* the crap
> that they think is important and that I don't. If they start fucking around
> with this I might have to jump to the dark side after all.
>
> Deej
> "Neil" <IOOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44fb0af5$1@linux...
>
>>I'm leaning towards Liquidmix, rather than Duende, partially
>>because I'll betcha that the Liquidmix has emulations of some
>>SSL comps & EQ's (plus a lot more) whereas the SSL has - well,
>>only SSL ones.
>>
>>With the EMU card, I'd get some hardware-accelerated plugins,
>>plus it's a known quantity in terms of the convertors (since
>>it's supposed to have the same ones as in the Digi HD192
>>interface - and I've used those & know that they sound good).
>>Problem is with EMU's track record of support - or lack
>>thereof - if at some point I need to migrate to something more
>>up-to-date than WinXP, will EMU have new drivers for it? Doubt
>>it. They'll just discontinue that card, wait a couple years &
>>build a "new" one that you'll have to buy from scratch.
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>or something along those lines (UAD
>>>
>>>doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
>>>various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).<
>>>
>>>UAD-1 is worth the pain. Looks like Duende is Mac only.
>>>http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/duende_specs.html
>>>
>>>but will have PC drivers.................soon........(remember
>>>...........soon?)
>>
>> http://solid-state-logic-en.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/solid_state _logic_en.cfg/p
>
> h
>
>> p/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=84&p_created=1142337836&am p;p_sid=bMTX7Jgi&p_acce
>
> s
>
>> sibility=0&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX 2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19j
>
> b
>
>> nQ9NzgmcF9wcm9kcz0xJnBfY2F0cz0mcF9wdj0xLjEmcF9jdj0mcF9wYWdlP TE*&p_li=&p_top
>
> v
>
>>>iew=1
>>>
>>>I would anticipate a ration of pain with this too.
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44fb0188$1@linux...
>>>
>>>>Not sure at this point... was thinking of trying it in my audio
>>>>PC just to see if I like the sound of the EMU convertors better
>>>>than the Multiface's convertors. If it turned out I didn't like
>>>>them better, then I could always just use the EMU interface for
>>>>the VSTi machine... in that case I'd be driving the VSTi rig
>>>>with MIDI from the main PC, then coming out of the VSTi rig
>>>>with digital audio anyway.
>>>>
>>>>Also thinking about the fact that the EMU card has hardware-
>>>>accelerated processing.... gotta find a way to take CPU load
>>>>off the audio PC somehow - you get 30-something tracks going at
>>>>88.2k, and you can only handle so many inserts & 'verbs before
>>>>you have to back off on latency settings or start freezing
>>>>tracks in SX, so I'm thinking about that or perhaps a Mucusrite
>>>>Liquidmix/SSL Duende, or something along those lines (UAD
>>>>doesn't seem to be an option, too many of you guys have had
>>>>various & sundry issues with that card for my taste).
>>>>
>>>>Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>i think neil's going to be putting the emu in another dedicated vsti
>>>>>machine, much the same way i dual purpose the lynx card.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:21:43 -0600, "DJ"
>>>>><animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Neil.........I don't have any first hand experience with this and my
>>>
>>>source
>>>
>>>>>>is a post made by Matthias Carstens (IIRC) , so consider the source,
>>
>>but
>>
>>>>a
>>>>
>>>>>>couple of years ago I saw a post on the RME forum stating that the
>
> ADAT
>
>>>>>>protocall of the EMU interfaces wasn't *standard* and that there
>
> could
>
>>>>>>possibly be clocking issues when interfacing an EMU card with an RME
>>>
>>>card.
>>>
>>>>>>Whether this would be an issue if both were receioving a thrid party
>>>
>>>house
>>>
>>>>>>clock, I don't know, but my take on what I read was that without this
>>>
>>>they
>>>
>>>>>>might be speaking different dialects of the same language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>;o)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44f9ae21$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>LaMont, no I'm not having trouble with one, since I don't own
>>>>>>>one; but my reason for asking is that I'm considering a
>>>>>>>reconfiguration of my setup - one of the options being setting
>>>>>>>up a separate PC for Virtual Instruments - and if I do this,
>>>>>>>I'm wondering if I should get an 1812M for the audio PC and use
>>>>>>>my current interface (which is an RME Multiface) for the VST
>>>>>>>machine, or just go with Multifaces for both machines.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The EMU website lists 44.1, 48, 96, and 192k, but it doesn't
>>>>>>>say anything about 88.2, so that's why I am wondering
>>>>>>>specifically about that samplerate (which is my preferred
>>>>>>>samplerate to use).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Neil
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I have one (1212M & 0404) card(s). They both can record up to
>
> 192k.
>
>>>>I'll
>>>>
>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>inthe Studio tommorow and I'll do a test @82.2K and post the the
>>>
>>>results.
>>>
>>>>>>>>Curious..Are you having trouble with your EMU cad?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Neil" <IUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I know at least a couple of you said you had these units...
>>>>>>>>>can you do me a favor & check to see if it will record &
>>>>>>>>>playback & process @ 88.2k samplerate?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Neil
>>>>>>>>
>>>
>
>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Dec 14 20:51:38 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01221 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
