When is it going to happen Digi

Recording Techniques, People Skills, Gear, Recording Spaces, Computers, and DIY

Moderators: drumsound, tomb

Professor
ghost haunting audio students
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 2:11 pm
Location: I have arrived... but where the hell am I?

Post by Professor » Sun Apr 06, 2008 1:18 pm

thecheat wrote:i NOW currently run a 40 i/o MOTU system at 44.1k, that is also routinely maxed out to 50 tracks or so. The whole system also runs Nuendo 3 (gotta get Cubase 4 or Nuendo 4 oh BABY those look nice) ANd all this is done natively on an AMD Athlon 3000 (!!!!)
See, that's great to know.
If Digi doesn't have what you want then buy something else that does. The only place you'll hit a snag is when you have to be compatible with someone else. (Or maybe anyone else, depending on how esoteric you get.)

-J

John Jeffers
buyin' a studio
Posts: 928
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Contact:

Post by John Jeffers » Sun Apr 06, 2008 7:56 pm

The only place you'll hit a snag is when you have to be compatible with someone else.
Yeah, but that's a big one if you're running a commercial studio, isn't it?

In the time I've been doing this, only one person has asked me to record in Cubase specifically (to be compatible with tracks he recorded elsewhere). People ask for Pro Tools all the time. Pro Tools might not be the "best", you might not like it at all, but it's the reality of the situation. It's just plain easier to use PT if you want to be compatible with the majority of studios out there.

User avatar
Jay Reynolds
carpal tunnel
Posts: 1607
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:48 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact:

Post by Jay Reynolds » Sun Apr 06, 2008 8:38 pm

Professor wrote:
superaction80 wrote:But, considering that M-Audio's full line of interfaces runs with M-Powered, I'm not sure you can really say that the exclusivity of LE interfaces is somehow making Digi's job easier. Its not like Avid bought M-Audio and then dropped some of their products. After all, that hybrid keyboard-controller/interface/mic-pre they make will run M-Powered.
True enough.
But then, when they bought M-Audio they also acquired their entire development team. I'm not sure if they hired/fired/consolidated/etc. but that at least means they can have a separate team solely focused on making sure the M-Audio products work with M-Powered.
And that's still a considerably narrower target than making sure it is compatible with every Presonus, Focusrite, RME, Echo, Behringer, Apogee, MOTU, Tascam, Mackie, Lexicon, Edirol, or countless other interfaces out there on the market. (Musician's Friend lists 49 manufacturers under "audio interface".)
If putting a limit on compatibility means that the products that are compatible are better supported and perform as intended, then that's fine. Sometimes the restaurant with 20 menu items does a better job at those 20 than the place with 500 items. Why the hell should a sushi bar have eggs benedict on the menu, or should the local slurp-n-burp bar be serving fois gras and caviar?

-Jeremy
Of course, your points all make perfect sense. But I wonder if we're both putting too much of the onus on the software manufacturer. Its not like Apple or Steinberg is in charge of writing the drivers for the legion of interfaces that are compatible with Logic and Cubase. For instance, if an interface isn't talking to Core Audio properly, game over, no matter what you try. If a device has crappy internal clocking, its not going to work with anything.
Also, its my understanding that ASIO is a standardized protocol. If the software is able to accept/send audio streams, what other hardware-specific tasks need to be handled?
Prog out with your cog out.

User avatar
fossiltooth
carpal tunnel
Posts: 1734
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Post by fossiltooth » Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:53 pm

toaster3000 wrote:well... we still don't use PT... i have an mbox mini at home now just for prepping files that come in for mixing or overdubs... but there hasn't been a single session when i wished we owned PT. between 2", radar, and logic, there is ABSOLUTELY no need for PTHD, for real. I can export from radar to the computer via FTP faster than PT can consolidate and save.
I can't blame ya!

I use ProTools for one reason, and one reason only:

I've used it so F*ing much, that I don't even see the screen anymore!

I don't think about what I'm doing for a second. I can see every menu with my eyes closed, and I can go for hours without touching the mouse, other than to jump around on the timeline or change I/O. When I'm working completely in a DAW instead of on a console, that really frees me up to listen instead of look , think, or worry.

For me, it's worth it to keep on using the system I'm so familiar with. 90% of studios that welcome freelancers have PT, so I never have to worry about it. I know it inside and out. They got me! They really friggin got me, and now there's nothing I can do about it now.

SO here I am. I use ProTools for all digital sessions.

There's going back now!

Professor
ghost haunting audio students
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 2:11 pm
Location: I have arrived... but where the hell am I?

Post by Professor » Mon Apr 07, 2008 1:34 am

John Jeffers wrote:
The only place you'll hit a snag is when you have to be compatible with someone else.
Yeah, but that's a big one if you're running a commercial studio, isn't it?
In the time I've been doing this, only one person has asked me to record in Cubase specifically (to be compatible with tracks he recorded elsewhere). People ask for Pro Tools all the time. Pro Tools might not be the "best", you might not like it at all, but it's the reality of the situation. It's just plain easier to use PT if you want to be compatible with the majority of studios out there.
That's why I phrased that so bluntly.
If you want to be compatible with someone else, then you need ProTools. If you never work outside of your own place, then you can choose whatever cracks your peanut. But in the world of compatible studios there is ProTools, and then there is every other piece of software on the market. And we can't even blame Digi. They didn't choose to be the de facto standard for our industry, they were chosen. They were chosen by smarter guys than me long before I was in the game, and I'm like Justin there, perpetuating their dominance. I know the software so ridiculously well now, why would I ever want to use something else. I could certainly use anything else out there because my knowledge of how to record, edit, and mix resides in my head. But I would need to relearn how to setup tracks, assign inputs & outputs, and find all the other goodies I might need in some new piece of software. I could do it, but it would slow me down, and I'd probably be cranky about it.

Back when I built the school studio about 6 years ago I had the option to go any direction I wanted. And at the time, Nuendo was just the talk of the AES floor. Lots of big name guys were whining about how terrible Digi & PT were, and how they were going to swear them off forever. And I was open to their opinions so I seriously considered other options. In the end, Digi won because they wrote great software, built great hardware, and I knew that software would always talk to the PCI cards which would always talk to the hardware I/O boxes, and it was built & tested to run on any Mac Apple was selling. The only thing that would have made me happier would have been to see Digi put out their own computer with a Digi-OS. But reducing my compatibility to only two companies (who are also geographical neighbors) got me close enough to feel secure about the system.
Been hooked ever since.

-Jeremy

User avatar
trodden
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5651
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 8:21 am
Location: C-attle
Contact:

Post by trodden » Mon Apr 07, 2008 8:52 am

fossiltooth wrote: I've used it so F*ing much, that I don't even see the screen anymore!

I don't think about what I'm doing for a second. I can see every menu with my eyes closed, and I can go for hours without touching the mouse, other than to jump around on the timeline or change I/O. When I'm working completely in a DAW instead of on a console, that really frees me up to listen instead of look , think, or worry.
thats rad. I hope to be able to move like that someday.

thecheat
pushin' record
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:28 am
Location: Central, FL
Contact:

Post by thecheat » Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:05 am

John Jeffers wrote:
The only place you'll hit a snag is when you have to be compatible with someone else.
Yeah, but that's a big one if you're running a commercial studio, isn't it?

In the time I've been doing this, only one person has asked me to record in Cubase specifically (to be compatible with tracks he recorded elsewhere). People ask for Pro Tools all the time. Pro Tools might not be the "best", you might not like it at all, but it's the reality of the situation. It's just plain easier to use PT if you want to be compatible with the majority of studios out there.
Well in my experience, Yes and no.

i have never had a single client ask for Pro Tools. Now, i dont pretend to live off of my studio work but in all the years ive been doing this i haven't had so many requests that i felt like i needed a system. i HAD an mbox that never got used except once right before i sold it.

In fact, the more i talk to people i work with, mostly rock guys, or indie guys the more im starting to feel a Pro Tools backlash amongst them. (I dont do much hip hop) They've started to realize some of the negative effects of what has been known to be called "Pro Tooling" stuff to death. Im not trying to start a big old war about the proper uses or editing of blah blah blah. But, im just making the point that i dont get enough requests for it to make a difference, and if i do, ill go get the mBox, do the bounces, and call it a day.

Mabye if i was in a commercial facility i would have a different view but im fortunate enough to not have to whore myself out to every idiot with an MPC who thinks hes the next Bubba Sparxx (yes, i am trying to be funny) i went to school with enough of those dudes.

i like to think that my clients just trust me to use whatever i use for the same reason i wouldn't tell my plumber what Pipe Wrench to use while hes fixing my toilet. then again, they could have been totally drinking at the time.

*Gets down off soapbox*

Chris
"It's like Tom Jones Gargling a Hammer."
http://www.alpacaranchrecording.com

Professor
ghost haunting audio students
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 2:11 pm
Location: I have arrived... but where the hell am I?

Post by Professor » Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:39 am

thecheat wrote:They've started to realize some of the negative effects of what has been known to be called "Pro Tooling" stuff to death.
Yup, I've heard this one floating around for a short while now, along with "dude I don't want auto-tuned vocals on my album". But so many of them don't know what it means that they just associate it with the program title and not any particular function. Tell them they're not recording on PT but on Cubase instead, and they'll still want to edit out all the mistakes, line up all the rhythms, etc. "I don't want to be 'auto-tuned' ecause there's too much of that crap out there, but one of those notes I sang is really off, is there something we can do to fix it?" Sure I can, I'll just make sure to not call it "Auto-Tune (tm)".

It reminds me of when I first started working at the university and had do deal with a bunch of classical musicians who heard and knew full well that music was "way too overcompressed these days". If I mentioned the word "compressor" aloud or they read it on a piece of gear, I'd never hear the end of it. But every time I patched one in where needed and dialed it up, they liked the sonic improvement and wondered how I did it. I had to start explaining that there's this tool that can take the dynamic range of a performance, find the softest and loudest parts, and simply pull that dynamic range in a little closer, making the soft stuff a little louder without pushing the loudest stuff into the red. Oh, they loved the sound of that, it was like magic - the quiet stuff wouldn't be so quiet that they would be turning up the volume on the stereo just to be blown out of their seats by the loud stuff. They loved the definition and effect of a compressor, but I dare not use the word for about the first 2-3 years I was here.

-Jeremy

dsw
tinnitus
Posts: 1247
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 10:23 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Post by dsw » Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:20 pm

1) Kik
2) Snare top
3) Snare bottom
4) OH Left
4) OH Right
5) Bass DI
6) Bass Cab
7) Acoustic Gtr Left
8) Acoustic Gtr Right
9) Elec Gtr close
10) Elec Gtr room
12) Nord Electro L
13) Nord Electro R
14) Sax mic
15) Scratch vocal
16) Harmony vocal

Here's an input list for an 8 person live at once session that you could easily accomplish with PT at home. That friends is a big session by anyone's standards and for a modest system intended for 'home' recording, its pretty amazing that it can be done at all.
PT LE was intended for home recording. If you need more than the above, maybe you're a pro that needs pro gear, and no matter what platform you pick, it's going to cost more than what you pay for a 003R and an ADAT out 8 ch pre.

jc_terrones
gettin' sounds
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 9:15 am

Post by jc_terrones » Mon Apr 07, 2008 1:25 pm

Do people still want to record folks who come in and demand ProTools when they don't know why they want ProTools? The few people I have come across who demanded such have been people I wouldn't let in my place in the first place.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 45 guests