SYNTH ZONE
Visit The Bar For Casual Discussion
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3
Topic Options
#2773 - 02/19/05 06:42 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
3351 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/17/03
Posts: 1194
Loc: Toronto, Canada.
As I thought. It's funny how delemas always create new delemas?
Kind of a delema within another delema paradoxe?
But before I get carried away..

See, it's like with my DX7 and TX816 modules. I love that stuff. It is no match for FM7 or any other advanced FM synth (like FS1R or DX200). But there are some tone qualities and little things like the way the envelopes respond that can't be simulated with the software (or new hardware for that matter.

To think of it FM itself isn't exactly top of the line nowadays. Yet I'm still hooked on it.

And hey, speaking of synths (Like that's unusual around here) an AN1X plug-in board for my Motif ES8 is a very cool little synth. It doesn't really have any of the tone qualities of the classic analog instruments but it does sound analog. Lack of knobs and a bit of limitations in ranges is about it. THe rest is just awsome.

My Novation nova is standing right next to me and yet I haven't touched it in weeks....

-ED-
_________________________
A gentleman is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally.
- - - Oscar Wilde

Top
#2774 - 02/20/05 01:53 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
freddynl Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/17/99
Posts: 1150
Loc: netherlands
Quote:
Originally posted by 3351:
QUick question to all PC users here.
JUst how much latency do you guys experience while trying to run software synths?
How many of them can you run at the same time? (Needless to mention Arturia in this case, since that stuff is really power hungry(
-ED-
[This message has been edited by 3351 (edited 02-18-2005).]


Hello Ed,

I don't use softsynth's but I do record in realtime sometimes 32 tracks at the same time
(16 tracks stereo)
Sonar and Cooledit running at the same time.
No measurable/audible latency

This is on my old PC Pentium III 500!

But I have to admit that:
1. I built this PC myselve
2. It's dedicated for audio/graphics only
3. I use two delta 1010 19" rack units.
(so the A/D converters are in the 19"rack and don't use processor time)

The O/S is win 2000 professional
ram 512mb

The only hardware I upgraded was the video card., (Hercules 8500 as I use two monitors)

Never had to re-install the O/S
Still working without a problem.
_________________________
Keyboards/Sound Units: Kurzweil 2600S, Roland VR-760, Acces Virus C, Roland G-800, Akai AX60, Minimoog, Machine Drum, Roland R8-M, mediastation x-76

Top
#2775 - 02/21/05 08:37 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Sheriff Offline
Member

Registered: 02/18/05
Posts: 965
Loc: Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany
Quote:
Originally posted by 3351:
But there are some tone qualities and little things like the way the envelopes respond that can't be simulated with the software (or new hardware for that matter.


That's what I meant as I've written: "Virtual synthesises are not really equal to real sysnthesises with analogic oscillators." ;-)
The fact is that all oscillators built in the past had their own characteristics. The same fact is true for the LFOs, AMPs, FXs, etc.
V.S.T. tries to emulate all those hardware in all characteristics. Unfortunality there are really some physical barriers to do so. The result is an engine which sounds 'not really equal', 'nearly the origin', 'pretty good' or something like that. Otherwise you'll get new 'colours' so why not? ;-)

Quote:
Originally posted by 3351:
And hey, speaking of synths (Like that's unusual around here) an AN1X plug-in board for my Motif ES8 is a very cool little synth. It doesn't really have any of the tone qualities of the classic analog instruments but it does sound analog. Lack of knobs and a bit of limitations in ranges is about it. THe rest is just awsome.

It's a shame but I don't know the most synths you're enumerating (except DX7). But I've readed between your lines that you're using a lot of soft synths. I guess that soft synths are less expensive than hard synths? ;-)

Oh...by the way...the Atari Falcon 030 doesn't really make me feeling limited because of its MFP. This little chip gave the Atari a special interupt for the midi controller on board. This gave many professional studios in Germany the reason to keep on 'tracking' with their Falcons. Furthermore there are newer TOS systems with higher efficient CPUs (but that's another story). ;-)
Other (modern) systems have no special midi interupt. So they need a software driver to translate the PCI (or any other) interupt into a midi interupt. The latency for example in PC systems is created by the very high bus traffic developed by win32. This problem had exist for a long time until some manufacturers created a new standard in cooperation with MS - ASIOdirect! Authoritatively participated in creating the new standard was the Cubase's developer Steinberg. An assistant of Steinberg personally told me that ASIOdirect domineers the most backing functions of win32 systems. This means that you'll need an audio card which supports ASIOdirect and any software (for example Cubase) which also supports ASIOdirect. That's imho the only way to use an external keyboard without latency under win32. By the way, this standard isn't used under Mac OS.
Unfortunality another problem appeared - the mainboard's chip set. The most PC mainboards today use the VIA chip set. It emerged that this chip set doesn't fully support the PCI bridge. So the ASIOdirect doesn't work correctly.
Win32, the never ending story... ;-)

How many soft synths could be used at the same time? Every soft synth program has its own source code size which is using RAM. Every sound texture created or used by those programs also uses RAM. So it isn't easy to say how many synths.
A music dealer told me that 512 MB were enough for parallel running of 3 soft synths. (which not automatically means that 1 GB affords capacity for only 6 synths). But what would you do with so many synths? You're not making live music, are you? ;-)


------------------
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)
_________________________
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

Top
#2776 - 02/21/05 09:07 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Pennywizz6 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/10/04
Posts: 434
Loc: Shakopee, MN, USA
Freddy,

How does the two monitors work? Ive always concidered that, but didnt know how it would work.

Phil

Top
#2777 - 02/21/05 12:43 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
freddynl Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/17/99
Posts: 1150
Loc: netherlands
Hello Phil,

That works great.
Specially if you run more as one software program.
you basicly make one large screen en place the software windows where ever you like.
F.i. I have usually Sonar running on one screen, Cooledit and the delta mixpannel on another screen.
Due to this setup I can use larger fonts as well.

The Hercules card works great as you can use analogue en digital monitors at the same time.
(I use a 21"dell trinitron + a 19"dell flatscreen at the same time)

Ofcourse you can also set up the monitors for having them on different places just to monitor the other monitor. etc...

If you have more as one system and use a switch between two systems you have again other handy setup possibilities etc...

Fred
_________________________
Keyboards/Sound Units: Kurzweil 2600S, Roland VR-760, Acces Virus C, Roland G-800, Akai AX60, Minimoog, Machine Drum, Roland R8-M, mediastation x-76

Top
#2778 - 02/22/05 12:11 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
3351 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/17/03
Posts: 1194
Loc: Toronto, Canada.
Hey I know what you meant Sheriff. It is just that your original comment almost implied that it is better to use real analog synths as in oppose to software instruments. I have simply expanded that idea by pointing out that there is more to the sound of today’s electronic music (as well as all the music made with electronic equipment) than analog sounds and analog emulations. Not that you disagreed with that.

How many soft synths do I need to run at the same time? Well, I usually run about twenty of them when I get really creative. On top of it I run tons of plug-ins and FX. I only bounce to disc once the piece is complete. Why do I do that?
Because I can you PC crippled people!!! LOL

My G4 Mac handles it all quite nicely (considering it is only a 933Mhz machine with the bus speed of a 133Mhz).

Half the stuff I write relies on huge sample libraries (spectrasonics stuff) and running multiple software samplers (Like my Emagic EXS24) is a lot more convinnient than running tons of hardware and having to wait for it all to load (provided there is an autoload function that even AKAI samplers do not handle that well). Another reason for me being such a control freak is the fact that I really like being able to go back and change any parameter on any synth without having to re-record it. Just open Logic file, change what I want, bounce to disc and bingo – I am done!!!
Time in the studio is precious, so waiting around for stuff to be re-recorded and having to scroll through tons of files is out of the question. That bullshit annoyed me in the 90s. No more of that. My patience has a limit. LOL

Of coarse, for all the fans of pain and suffering of having to do all that I strongly recommend an Atari or a PC. Or both, to make the pain worse. I actually own a custom built PC just for that. Just to remind myself how miserable it can be. Well, no I am just joking. PCs can do nicely with audio wave editing. And many other things. I am actually writing all this using a PC.
But not for much longer... Damn WIN XP is about to die from another virus. Way to go Norton!!! ALthough it could be that SP2 bugger that I tried to install last night. I had problems with that stupid update before, but I guess some people just don't learn!!! Try and fail, try again.
Regards,
-ED-
_________________________
A gentleman is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally.
- - - Oscar Wilde

Top
#2779 - 02/22/05 01:20 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
freddynl Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/17/99
Posts: 1150
Loc: netherlands
Quote:
Originally posted by 3351:

Way to go Norton!!! ALthough it could be that SP2 bugger that I tried to install last night. I had problems with that stupid update before, but I guess some people just don't learn!!! Try and fail, try again.
Regards,
-ED-



Ed,
The first thing I allways do with PC's from friends and clients, IF I see Norton IS; REMOVE Norton immediately.
Norton is causing 50% of the problems of slow PC's.
You don't need Norton unless you are a real digibeet (sorry don't know the english word)
You should look at your PC and say to yourselve what do I need.
Everything else can go!
In other words strip your PC virtually and stop installing crap.
If you only could install all these crap on a MAC, you would have the same problems most
PC users have.

A PC is like playing in a band!
You can recognise a good musician in what he is not playing!
_________________________
Keyboards/Sound Units: Kurzweil 2600S, Roland VR-760, Acces Virus C, Roland G-800, Akai AX60, Minimoog, Machine Drum, Roland R8-M, mediastation x-76

Top
#2780 - 02/23/05 02:59 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Sheriff Offline
Member

Registered: 02/18/05
Posts: 965
Loc: Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany
Quote:
Originally posted by freddynl:
...Norton is causing 50% of the problems of slow PC's...


And the other 50% comes from windows itself...*lol* ;-)

That's another reason why I'm using Atari-TOS because of its transparence for the user. No file will be copied in any folder without the control of the user (ok, I'm an old software engineer for TOS applications so I really know what TOS really does). :-)
I thought that working with Mac OS seemed to be the same because both systems were based on the 68k CPU. Unfortunality I have no experience with this OS. :-(


------------------
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)
_________________________
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

Top
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3

Moderator:  Admin 



Help keep Synth Zone Online