The PARIS Forums: PARIS: Main » Rendered files in Paris

Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Rendered files in Paris

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Rendered files in Paris [message #98864]

Wed, 21 May 2008 11:40

Tyrone Corbett

Messages: 253
Registered: August 2006

Senior Member

Hey guys, typically I print stems the old fashioned way (manual bouncing 2
tracks at a time). For the first time I experimented with rendering the tracks
via Paris's "Render Track to Disk". It certainly saved me lots of time and
the tracks "0" out which does not happen to that exactness when manually
bouncing tracks.

I am now using all the "rendered tracks" and my project is giving me occasional
playback error messages such as "adjust playback settings". I never had this
happen before. Any thoughts?

Thanks, Tyrone

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #98867 is a reply to message #98864]

Wed, 21 May 2008 13:52

Tyrone Corbett

Messages: 253
Registered: August 2006

Senior Member

Resolved. Thanks!

"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Hey guys, typically I print stems the old fashioned way (manual bouncing
2
>tracks at a time). For the first time I experimented with rendering the
tracks
>via Paris's "Render Track to Disk". It certainly saved me lots of time and
>the tracks "0" out which does not happen to that exactness when manually
>bouncing tracks.
>
>I am now using all the "rendered tracks" and my project is giving me occasional
>playback error messages such as "adjust playback settings". I never had
this
>happen before. Any thoughts?
>
>Thanks, Tyrone

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #98869 is a reply to message #98867]

Wed, 21 May 2008 14:50

Ted Gerber

Messages: 705
Registered: January 2009

Senior Member

What was the cause/solution?

(just wondering)

Ted

"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Resolved. Thanks!
>
>"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>Hey guys, typically I print stems the old fashioned way (manual bouncing
>2
>>tracks at a time). For the first time I experimented with rendering the
>tracks
>>via Paris's "Render Track to Disk". It certainly saved me lots of time
and
>>the tracks "0" out which does not happen to that exactness when manually
>>bouncing tracks.
>>
>>I am now using all the "rendered tracks" and my project is giving me occasional
>>playback error messages such as "adjust playback settings". I never had
>this
>>happen before. Any thoughts?
>>
>>Thanks, Tyrone
>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #98870 is a reply to message #98869]

Wed, 21 May 2008 15:59

Tyrone Corbett

Messages: 253
Registered: August 2006

Senior Member

Hey Ted, it seemd that some of the files I rendered were duplicated in the
project (not sure how that happened). Once I removed the additional load
from the system (the project was pretty massive in size to begin with), all
was well and back to normal.

Tyrone

"Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>What was the cause/solution?
>
>(just wondering)
>
>Ted
>
>"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>Resolved. Thanks!
>>
>>"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Hey guys, typically I print stems the old fashioned way (manual bouncing
>>2
>>>tracks at a time). For the first time I experimented with rendering the
>>tracks
>>>via Paris's "Render Track to Disk". It certainly saved me lots of time
>and
>>>the tracks "0" out which does not happen to that exactness when manually
>>>bouncing tracks.
>>>
>>>I am now using all the "rendered tracks" and my project is giving me occasional
>>>playback error messages such as "adjust playback settings". I never had
>>this
>>>happen before. Any thoughts?
>>>
>>>Thanks, Tyrone
>>
>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #98871 is a reply to message #98870]

Wed, 21 May 2008 20:28

Ted Gerber

Messages: 705
Registered: January 2009

Senior Member

Thanks Tyrone

I just recently started rendering files with native plugins
after testing the rendered against the edited original and
flipping the phase (copy channel settings to the new track
with the rendered file etc etc) I've been happy with the
result. Any prior nudging for latency (with UAD for
instance) is accounted for in the newly rendered file and it
saves time and horsepower. I hadn't used PARIS for a few years
until last summer, and remembered the debate between Sakis and
others over whether rendered files - with or without plugins -
were as accurate as bounced files. So far so good.

Ted

"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Hey Ted, it seemd that some of the files I rendered were duplicated in the
>project (not sure how that happened). Once I removed the additional load
>from the system (the project was pretty massive in size to begin with),
all
>was well and back to normal.
>
>Tyrone
>
>"Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote:
>>
>>What was the cause/solution?
>>
>>(just wondering)
>>
>>Ted
>>
>>"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Resolved. Thanks!
>>>
>>>"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Hey guys, typically I print stems the old fashioned way (manual bouncing
>>>2
>>>>tracks at a time). For the first time I experimented with rendering the
>>>tracks
>>>>via Paris's "Render Track to Disk". It certainly saved me lots of time
>>and
>>>>the tracks "0" out which does not happen to that exactness when manually
>>>>bouncing tracks.
>>>>
>>>>I am now using all the "rendered tracks" and my project is giving me
occasional
>>>>playback error messages such as "adjust playback settings". I never had
>>>this
>>>>happen before. Any thoughts?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks, Tyrone
>>>
>>
>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #98889 is a reply to message #98871]

Thu, 22 May 2008 19:08

Rod Lincoln
Messages: 883
Registered: September 2005

Senior Member

Ted, If I remember right, rendered files were never in dispute, as Brian T
did a 10th generation render and it still canceled out. What was in dispute
was disk bounce in 3.0 versues spdif bounce in 3.0. Sakis held the position
that disk bounce in 3.0 was not as accurate as spdif bounce.
Rod
"Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>I just recently started rendering files with native plugins
>after testing the rendered against the edited original and
>flipping the phase (copy channel settings to the new track
>with the rendered file etc etc) I've been happy with the
>result. Any prior nudging for latency (with UAD for
>instance) is accounted for in the newly rendered file and it
>saves time and horsepower. I hadn't used PARIS for a few years
>until last summer, and remembered the debate between Sakis and
>others over whether rendered files - with or without plugins -
>were as accurate as bounced files. So far so good.
>
>Ted
>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #98893 is a reply to message #98889]

Fri, 23 May 2008 06:22

Cujjo

Messages: 325
Registered: June 2007

Senior Member

Hmm, now I am curious, does anyone else hear a diff?
Is the SPDIF file more open and clear?

"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>Ted, If I remember right, rendered files were never in dispute, as Brian
T
>did a 10th generation render and it still canceled out. What was in dispute
>was disk bounce in 3.0 versues spdif bounce in 3.0. Sakis held the position
>that disk bounce in 3.0 was not as accurate as spdif bounce.
>Rod
>"Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote:
>>
>>I just recently started rendering files with native plugins
>>after testing the rendered against the edited original and
>>flipping the phase (copy channel settings to the new track
>>with the rendered file etc etc) I've been happy with the
>>result. Any prior nudging for latency (with UAD for
>>instance) is accounted for in the newly rendered file and it
>>saves time and horsepower. I hadn't used PARIS for a few years
>>until last summer, and remembered the debate between Sakis and
>>others over whether rendered files - with or without plugins -
>>were as accurate as bounced files. So far so good.
>>
>>Ted
>>
>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #98895 is a reply to message #98893]

Fri, 23 May 2008 06:44

Rod Lincoln
Messages: 883
Registered: September 2005

Senior Member

I don't know, I just remember a dispute between Brian T and Sakis over spdif
verses Disk bounce. Also (and I can't remember for sure) Sakis held the position
that either disk bounce or spdif got screwed up in version 3.x I've done
some unsientific listen tests between the two, and I can't tell the difference.

Rod
"Cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote:
>
>
>Hmm, now I am curious, does anyone else hear a diff?
>Is the SPDIF file more open and clear?
>
>
>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>Ted, If I remember right, rendered files were never in dispute, as Brian
>T
>>did a 10th generation render and it still canceled out. What was in dispute
>>was disk bounce in 3.0 versues spdif bounce in 3.0. Sakis held the position
>>that disk bounce in 3.0 was not as accurate as spdif bounce.
>>Rod
>>"Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>I just recently started rendering files with native plugins
>>>after testing the rendered against the edited original and
>>>flipping the phase (copy channel settings to the new track
>>>with the rendered file etc etc) I've been happy with the
>>>result. Any prior nudging for latency (with UAD for
>>>instance) is accounted for in the newly rendered file and it
>>>saves time and horsepower. I hadn't used PARIS for a few years
>>>until last summer, and remembered the debate between Sakis and
>>>others over whether rendered files - with or without plugins -
>>>were as accurate as bounced files. So far so good.
>>>
>>>Ted
>>>
>>
>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #98899 is a reply to message #98893]

Fri, 23 May 2008 09:38

EK Sound

Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005

Senior Member

A SPDIF bounce would put Word Clock into the fray... A disc bounce would
use the Paris internal clock and not make use of any external clock. If
you had a really high quality clock source, it may make a noticeable
difference with a SPDIF bounce.

David.

Cujo wrote:
> Hmm, now I am curious, does anyone else hear a diff?
> Is the SPDIF file more open and clear?
>
>
> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>> Ted, If I remember right, rendered files were never in dispute, as Brian
> T
>> did a 10th generation render and it still canceled out. What was in dispute
>> was disk bounce in 3.0 versues spdif bounce in 3.0. Sakis held the position
>> that disk bounce in 3.0 was not as accurate as spdif bounce.
>> Rod
>> "Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote:
>>> I just recently started rendering files with native plugins
>>> after testing the rendered against the edited original and
>>> flipping the phase (copy channel settings to the new track
>>> with the rendered file etc etc) I've been happy with the
>>> result. Any prior nudging for latency (with UAD for
>>> instance) is accounted for in the newly rendered file and it
>>> saves time and horsepower. I hadn't used PARIS for a few years
>>> until last summer, and remembered the debate between Sakis and
>>> others over whether rendered files - with or without plugins -
>>> were as accurate as bounced files. So far so good.
>>>
>>> Ted
>>>
>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #99004 is a reply to message #98899]

Thu, 29 May 2008 17:32

Tyrone Corbett

Messages: 253
Registered: August 2006

Senior Member

EK Sound <ask_me@nospam.net> wrote:
>A SPDIF bounce would put Word Clock into the fray... A disc bounce would

>use the Paris internal clock and not make use of any external clock. If

>you had a really high quality clock source, it may make a noticeable
>difference with a SPDIF bounce.
>
>David.
>
>Cujo wrote:
>> Hmm, now I am curious, does anyone else hear a diff?
>> Is the SPDIF file more open and clear?
>>
>>
>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>> Ted, If I remember right, rendered files were never in dispute, as Brian
>> T
>>> did a 10th generation render and it still canceled out. What was in dispute
>>> was disk bounce in 3.0 versues spdif bounce in 3.0. Sakis held the position
>>> that disk bounce in 3.0 was not as accurate as spdif bounce.
>>> Rod
>>> "Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote:
>>>> I just recently started rendering files with native plugins
>>>> after testing the rendered against the edited original and
>>>> flipping the phase (copy channel settings to the new track
>>>> with the rendered file etc etc) I've been happy with the
>>>> result. Any prior nudging for latency (with UAD for
>>>> instance) is accounted for in the newly rendered file and it
>>>> saves time and horsepower. I hadn't used PARIS for a few years
>>>> until last summer, and remembered the debate between Sakis and
>>>> others over whether rendered files - with or without plugins -
>>>> were as accurate as bounced files. So far so good.
>>>>
>>>> Ted
>>>>
>>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #99005 is a reply to message #98899]

Thu, 29 May 2008 17:39

Tyrone Corbett

Messages: 253
Registered: August 2006

Senior Member

As I have listened (not with any great detail mind you) I have not noticed
a difference from the rendered files. I was a bit apprehensive as I have
always taked the "real time" approach to printing stems. Obviously, from
a time consumption stand point it can't be beat.

Tyrone

EK Sound <ask_me@nospam.net> wrote:
>A SPDIF bounce would put Word Clock into the fray... A disc bounce would

>use the Paris internal clock and not make use of any external clock. If

>you had a really high quality clock source, it may make a noticeable
>difference with a SPDIF bounce.
>
>David.
>
>Cujo wrote:
>> Hmm, now I am curious, does anyone else hear a diff?
>> Is the SPDIF file more open and clear?
>>
>>
>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>> Ted, If I remember right, rendered files were never in dispute, as Brian
>> T
>>> did a 10th generation render and it still canceled out. What was in dispute
>>> was disk bounce in 3.0 versues spdif bounce in 3.0. Sakis held the position
>>> that disk bounce in 3.0 was not as accurate as spdif bounce.
>>> Rod
>>> "Ted Gerber" <tedgerber@rogers.com> wrote:
>>>> I just recently started rendering files with native plugins
>>>> after testing the rendered against the edited original and
>>>> flipping the phase (copy channel settings to the new track
>>>> with the rendered file etc etc) I've been happy with the
>>>> result. Any prior nudging for latency (with UAD for
>>>> instance) is accounted for in the newly rendered file and it
>>>> saves time and horsepower. I hadn't used PARIS for a few years
>>>> until last summer, and remembered the debate between Sakis and
>>>> others over whether rendered files - with or without plugins -
>>>> were as accurate as bounced files. So far so good.
>>>>
>>>> Ted
>>>>
>>

Report message to a moderator

Re: Rendered files in Paris [message #99006 is a reply to message #98899]

Thu, 29 May 2008 17:42

Tyrone Corbett

Messages: 253
Registered: August 2006

Senior Member

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	FOR GUITARISTS ONLY (bassists too, I guess)
Next Topic:	Got two ADATs in mec A working under XP

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat May 17 13:33:31 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01391 seconds