Just scored a 60, was this a good price?

skalawa wrote:

as for the drums, my xl could never make my drms sound like when they come off the 950, i think there is some vodoo doll in tht thing.

Record your xl drums into PT through a Great River or API pre with a Distressor, then tweak them with URS eq's and a little DUY or McDSP and you'll probably never worry about that again.

ntalec wrote:

skalawa wrote:

as for the drums, my xl could never make my drms sound like when they come off the 950, i think there is some vodoo doll in tht thing.

Record your xl drums into PT through a Great River or API pre with a Distressor, then tweak them with URS eq's and a little DUY or McDSP and you'll probably never worry about that again.

i aint gonna lie, but, what you said there a while a go, i think i ll stick with tht vodoo doll in my 950, sounds a whole lot simpler

skalawa wrote:

ntalec wrote:

skalawa wrote:

as for the drums, my xl could never make my drms sound like when they come off the 950, i think there is some vodoo doll in tht thing.

Record your xl drums into PT through a Great River or API pre with a Distressor, then tweak them with URS eq's and a little DUY or McDSP and you'll probably never worry about that again.

i aint gonna lie, but, what you said there a while a go, i think i ll stick with tht vodoo doll in my 950, sounds a whole lot simpler

I guess it depends on how you work.
Everything ends up in PT so that's where the mix and balance of the drums happens for me.
Doesn't matter if it the SP, MPC, EMAX, ASR, 950 or whatever, the mixing in PT is where the drums start to sound like drums.

ntalec wrote:

skalawa wrote:

ntalec wrote:

skalawa wrote:

as for the drums, my xl could never make my drms sound like when they come off the 950, i think there is some vodoo doll in tht thing.

Record your xl drums into PT through a Great River or API pre with a Distressor, then tweak them with URS eq's and a little DUY or McDSP and you'll probably never worry about that again.

i aint gonna lie, but, what you said there a while a go, i think i ll stick with tht vodoo doll in my 950, sounds a whole lot simpler

I guess it depends on how you work.
Everything ends up in PT so that's where the mix and balance of the drums happens for me.
Doesn't matter if it the SP, MPC, EMAX, ASR, 950 or whatever, the mixing in PT is where the drums start to sound like drums.

so you record clean then crunch your drums in pro tools,? what pro tools you running. we have ripped pro tool gus apart in the past, like those chipmunks on elmac... cousin hector. bout my belly is full now, and it will be for some time, what are your views on pro tools, we came to a firm decision that LMAO thast a maxwell casette sounds far better than it. care to share your views

skalawa,
I don't record clean to PT.
Record the sound and then make the mix happen.
You can tweak your samples and synths all you want but it still won't make a mix happen.
My viewson PT;not directed at anyone
well PT is like every other tool, it's only as good as the user.
You have to know the program and hardware to make things happen.
Listen to all the people who say they have PT, if you give them enough time to talk they will let you know how little they know about how to make things happen.
I can't see how someone can go buy a $500 mBox, $1k 002r and think PT is going to work some magic.
Even if you went out and got a HD2 system it still won't work magic.
Recording is about recording whether you use DA88's, Scully decks and DAW or Roland VS.
You gotta have a functional path, proper gain staging and calibration, front to back.
People get some incredible results with their setups but that doesn't mean they are good results.
When you are shopping beats know one wants to hear you explain why we can't get this track to work in a mix.
Regardless of whether you are just doing the tracks for someone or going to their session with your harddrive, they don't want to have to fix your mix or have to deal with trying to get the drums up to a point that they can use them in a seesion.
I use the 002r with PT6.7 (been using PT since the days of v5.0). Track through the U5's, ME-1nv, 737 or 512's into the Apogee or Cransong then PT.
Mixdown is generally Apogee + 002r outs to a Folcrom and whatever pre sounds good to the recorder or BTD.
We dumped the analog tape aspect back in May, just extra steps for something that's easy to achieve other ways.
Sometimes people track their vocals here sometimes they don't works either way.
All I ever take with me to bigger studios is a harddrive and my iLok, mount it up and we can keep rolling on the HD system.

hey lec, thanks for the info, well put man.

Man, running from an apogee into a pre then recording, at that point doesn't it kinda lose the PT sound? I've noticed that a lot of pros run everything PT through a big board or some expensive equipment like above, few seem to just use the PT converters. Having done sound tests with different sequencers numerous times, I find the P converters have this kind of sheen, like there is some sort of slight boost and cut combo in the high mids. I have found other audio sequencers have better sound overall than PT, even radar systems, but I think running anything through a big board or using high end converters will take any computer audio sequencer to task. But if you are stuck with just the computer and say an RME, the improvement in sound of other sequencers gets you further without having to use such high end processing, although that would be most welcome.

Just curious on your take.

My take is kinda different.
Nuendo and SX sound good, but when I start doing a lot of processing and mixing it just seems that the plug-in start to break the sound down.
I'm talking about running the Native Tools setup (Nuendo, Apogee AD16/DA16).
The real problem with PT is to make use of it can be costly so most setups will be a little shy on that.
With PT as with any DAW your goal is to get the best signal in, you just can't really fix bad recordings. You can make them better but not right.
The newer HD Accel setups sound really good and can be used that way.
In the past the world got into using Apogee's and such because it was a cost effective way to get a better sound.
You don't really lose the PT sound you allow PT to sound good.
Example look how many people hook their MPC's and synths to their MOTU, RME etc instead of using a DI???
Pretty much means you are already starting with a substandard aspect.
Then you go into those graining sounding converters that are on most multifunctional interfaces.
You only choice then becomes to process the sh*t out of it with plug-ins just to get a sound you can try to mix.
By using better pres/DI's into better converters you pretty much start with a good sound and then just make the mix come together.
You then can mix in the box with quality plug-ins or use external summing and get an excellent result with either.

EL,
if you are at least using the RME converters you are helping the sound of SX in a big way.
I think that's what you use right?
On a SX system your best bet is probably a RNP, Lucid converters (or the RME) some of the plugs from PSP and the original UAD-1 card.
That's not a lot of paper but really capable of a nice sound.


I still remember when we use to use DA88's and had to fight with every mix because we were feeding through a MOTU 2408mkII
No matter what we improved on the front in didn't help since it still went through the MOTU.
It just became simpler to use the analog outputs and feed them into a mixer than way, because it did give it that brittle MOTU sound.
In the last 18 months I have seen more facilities stop using tape and their analog boards.
If the Quantegy thing doesn't get straightened out we will probably see even more people stop using tape.

Oh yeah people should never overlook the benefit of taking classes and reading books.
It's said to think we now have the best tools ever and the worst recordings are being done, because the fundamental background was never developed.

man, you guys (ntalec & elmac, generally) seem to be some heavy hitters in the production world. do you have any links to some of your works?

how long have you guys been producing? what kinds of work have you done? albums? commercials/jingles? video games? other media?

it's good to know there are some vets i can come to for advice here. thanks for dropping proper knowledge on us newbs.

peace!

Not a heavy hitter, sorry.

Thanks for the breakdown Ntalec.

I rock Nuendo and RME most of the time. It works for me, I really couldn't stand the sound of PT, Maybe it's the internal 24 bit processing, but I just think it as a startingpoint takes me further away from where I want to go. I tend not to use crazy amounts of plug ins, and I got the UAD a bit back, and it is top notch. I think I will end up with 4 eventually.

Everything goes through my mixer, so impedence problems are no big issue. plugging direct can be a problem, but if you are doing that you probably have little choice. I only use a DI with electromechanicals when they are around.

But yeah, I find excesive computer processing can make stuff sound pretty bad, unless you are going for crazy digital stuff, not really good for an accoustic guitar tho... I do really like the Nuendo EQ, and the effects are useable to some degree. I tend to get my sounds good going in, and there is little need for that serious kind of processing unless it's just for the hell of it and to see what happens. Above all practice seems to be one of the best teachers, but I do read quite a bit.

On the Tape Front, I don't use tape either, but a few companies smaller than Quantagy have gotten some of their equipment and employees and announced that they will have the EMTEC standard tape available soon, in pancakes. no price increase from what I can tell, they are just smaller operations with lower overheads. That's what sunk Quantegy IMO, the market shrunk underneath them. I can get you more info if you like.

Availability was quoted as May 2005. A lot of people are happy about that, I am too, just cuz I like variety. Now someone needs to make tape machines that don't need so much attention to work right!!

EL,
that's what I was getting at.
People are so caught up in the original purpose of DI's that the don't pay attention to the real advantages of DI's.
Impedance was the why, but what they really do is allow you to capture drum machines and synths in a whole different way.
If you use something like the U5, the DITTO (Brick doesn't sound the same), TD-100, Manley, or the DI on a Neve or API you will hear why drums and such in sound the way they do in certain songs.
They add character and depth to the sound that you just can't get with just a EQ or compressor.
They have crazy headroom.

Oh yeah Frankenstein survived the operation. I just pulled the HD out and secured the floppy drive in the area where the HD use to be and used an internal ZIP.
I like to refer to my EMAX as Frankenstein since unlike most mine is the Keyboard version.

on the tape front, it is going to become like still film cameras vs, the likes of say the canon slr digital using memory cards. it wont die, but you would find more the larger company based studios using them. as for tape maintaince, that is where they mamke thier money, head aliginment, replacement, belts, coks, and the likes, if we had sevice free multitrack machines, then those companies would runbust. i like tape, and ventually i would invest in a reel to reel, only if the damn seller could tell me how many hours on the head!!!!.

i still didnt see the qustion being answered,

with sx 32 bit float point, and vst plug ins having 32 bit float point as well, running through the likes of the RME, would this set up rival the sound of PT set up running through you r apogees, or better yet, both applications running through the same pres?.

motus hd, system has the same indetical converters as PT hd systems, and cost like 8000 less.

as for mixing in the box on pt, i dont know, because of tht fixed point basis, moving the fader only so much in the box, actually dffects the quality, an engineer put it as massive fader movement results in like 18bit quality?

my take on the whole scene is that you just have to spend sh1t loads to achieve what sx or sonar can do. but they just dont have that pro tools badge, that every one buys into, including me.
the object of a DAW is to record as transparent a signal onto a chosen format, ready for editing, duplicating or mixing. if i have to spend 10,000 to do that, its either they dont know what thier doing, b) taking us for damn idiots c) steinberg, and cake walk, or just cheap imitations, or d) pt is not that transparent, and they need the stupid price to mend for thier justiifications.


can any one hear the differece between
24 bit 48khz
24 bit 96khz
24 bit 192khz.

i cant
and if some one is going to mention headroom between them, what do i need it for, if i have already established the sound i am after from source, and do not have to smear it with plug ins, ?
its a tape machine, where i do not have to use sticky tape, splicing block and a razor!

Wow, DI as an effect?! That's wild. I'll have to pick up a nice one soon and try that. Man would I love a neve!!

Skala, Apogee will pretty much take anything out of competition. any software through those will have great improvement, especially if paired with external summing. we're talking dedicated converters, worth thousands for just two channels. whole different ballgame.

The thing is, most pros using PT tend to have this kind of setup, so the home studio mixing and summing right in PT is at a severe disadvantage.

I can tell you, I can hear a difference between 48 and 96, but it isn't really hearing, it is when mixing, things just blend much better, perhaps it is the summing algorhythm works better with more resolution.

skala,
I don't care how well you make something sound at the source when you start stacking tracks to build your mix you will hear things you don't want to hear.
If you like the sound Sonar, DP, SX etc that's cool, but I have used them all and I know what I heard.
I can remember using some Soundscape Mixtreme converters (the ones made prior to Mackie purchasing them) with Vegas and believe me it sounded better than DP, SX or Sonar.
keep in mind there are a lot of internet myths about converters, bits and resolution etc.
It's like using a different reference for the same measurement, it looks different but it not comparing the same factors.
Similar to the belief that a tube pre-amp sounds better that a solid state pre-amp.
A properly designed amp is a properly designed amp, a will deliver a big full sound.
The problem with the whole floating vs fixed point comparison comes down to how well it's implemented and how much control they retain on what is designed to work with it.
The math is not that simple.

Don't get caught up in that.

What makes a converter is the circuit design not the converter used.

-To get a pro level sound from Nuendo is not cheap you will still need to buy quality converters and shop for better plug ins.

Again I will say the majority of people I come across using PT or who have used PT don't understand how it works.
You can pretty much just take a look at their mix window and tell without even asking them any questions how well they do or don't know PT.

Well I guess we'll go back to talking about MPC's and the people who love them
Or better still I should stop playing around on this computer and get some work done.