[redirected from LUG to Logic-OT:] From: "technodork_2000" <technodork_2000@...> Date: Sat Mar 23, 2002 4:33pm Subject: Re: [OT] Monitors what are using to mix? The real deal is, you don't necessarily need the best sounding monitors, because if the monitors are all around flattering to all material such as say Genelecs, you are likely to not work as hard on the mix, and potentially have the mix not sound as good on many different mediums(TV, Film, Radio, CD). I know that many people have their ears tuned in and do amazing mixes with these monitors, I have found that for me, testing mixes on a well rounded number of various systems is the best protocol, and working on NS-10's makes me work harder to make my mix sound better, and then reference on say a pair of Mackie HR824's and Dynaudio M1's(which in my opinion tend to be very revealing, one of my favorites), then test it in a jambox, and in your car system. Make a well rounded decision with various systems, that seems to work best for me, don't necessarily go for the best sounding monitors. The all around choice of many pro's always seems at some point to revolve around the much loved and hated Yamaha NS-10M's, they seem to give the most well rounded mixes as far as how the mix will sound across many monitors and mediums. My 2 cents........or maybe 4 cents......

[redirected from LUG to Logic-OT:] [PS: the original post wan't really meant to be passed onto the LUG...definitely not without OT header... our apologies] From: "doctorbudz" <doctorbudz@...> Date: Sun Mar 24, 2002 6:08pm Subject: Re: GEN: PACE Copy Protection One of the funniest things about PACE is that not only is it one of the most widely used protection systems, it is also one of the most frequently cracked. In fact, there exists a universal PACE deprotection software which allows any PACE-protected application to be deprotected extremely easily. It is a FACT that if you buy several pieces of PACE-protected software, it will refuse to work together : quite a staggering flaw in a protection system that prides itself on being 'the most widely- used'. I know several people who have been hit by the pain of buying multiple PACE protected programs. I think this article on ProRec is superb, and hopefully will discourage any software company from using this terrible system. I for one would never buy anything which uses this system, and the more people who adopt this stance, the sooner this pathetic company will stop afflicting the world of audio software. peace --- In logic-users@y..., "f-erenc szabo" <zerobeat@g...> wrote: > There's a great article showing how detestable PACE copy > protection is. I hope Alan Cronce (Pace president) reads it > and weeps. Emagic's copy protection (old and new) is a > zillion orders of magnitude better than this. I've had many > dozens of problems with PACE crap over the years. > > > Here's one paragraph amongst many: > > Rip Rowan writes: > "I implore PACE to provide responsible copy protection software, > or get out of the business. The Interlok product is the worst piece > of software I have ever stumbled across in over twenty years of > working with computers. It is more virus than application. Hopefully, > any new products that PACE produces will adhere to the guidelines > outlined above for unintrusiveness, interoperability, stability, > availability, > cost-effectiveness, and copy protection effectiveness." > > > For the entire thing, check out: > <www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/articles/4F0B51C39C17DA6386256B7F0 077FBA6> > > > > f-erenc szabo, smarty pants > Z+E+R+O+B+E+A+T > "NOW POWERED BY THE MIRACLE OF THE TRANSISTOR!"

--- In logic-ot@y..., Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@k...> wrote: > > I don't know if this is of any help -- you probably know them all and > have tried them all already -- but there are quite a few free > samplesites out there. I have a rather big listing of them on my > website (see signature) in the Link section (Music sub-section). > No, I guess I've been lazy and too willing to spend money for something that might or might not serve the purpose as well as the free sites. Assuming that if it costs money it will be quality. But obviously from looking at the list on your site I'm starting to see that there are probably enough free resources on this. Now to deal with downloads on my 56k modem... Thanks, sprawling

It's also partly a 'Europe versus USA' thing! The VU 'standard' was cobbled together by Bell Labs, CBS and NBC back in the late 30's or early 40's. They optimized it for radio broadcasting primarily, but for all sound recording in general. I don't think those Bell labs scientists would have liked the way you describe their pioneering efforts, by the way those labs were an international bunch of scientists cobbling stuff together as the first in the world at that time. PPM just like PAL came later and was in part build on the lessons learned from Bell..

[admin-forwarded from LUG for being way to OT] Subject:[OT] The future of studio hardware Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 18:16:40 +0100 From: "Diego Valladolid Torres" <valladoliddiego@...> Hi! Ever heard of this? http://messe.harmony-central.com/Musikmesse02/Content/SoundArt/PR/Chameleon- Shipping.html And it's from Spain, dudes! ;) By the way, the interface and logo was designed by the people who designed Reason -and a very good designers they are. Hope you like it...

Kool Musick wrote: >It's also partly a 'Europe versus USA' thing! The VU 'standard' was cobbled >together by Bell Labs, CBS and NBC back in the late 30's or early 40's. >They optimized it for radio broadcasting primarily, but for all sound > recording in general. To which res0934j <res0934j@...> responded: >I don't think those Bell labs scientists would have liked the way >you describe their pioneering efforts, Hmmmm .... maybe ... then again maybe not. >by the way those labs were >an international bunch of scientists cobbling stuff together as >the first in the world at that time. PPM just like PAL came later >and was in part build on the lessons learned from Bell.. To be honest, I was going for the (typically British) humorous and ironic approach. I was simply trying to make what I was writing a tad more interesting seeing as how what I mostly write is so very dull and tedious. I have EVERY respect for those guys because, as you said, they were doing things that we now take totally for granted as obvious when when they were doing it it was not at all obvious. I never in the world meant to imply the slightest bit of disrespect to the Bell engineers, who also gave us the beginning of information theory, and apologise to them if that's how it came off. To be honest, it never once occurred to me that what I had said could have been interpreted in the way you have suggested. Kool Musick Keep Musick Kool _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Sorry if I overreacted.. "cobbled together" might not be as I thought you meant it. Peace From: Kool Musick <koolmusick@...> Reply-To: logic-ot@yahoogroups.com Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 15:49:56 -0800 To: logic-ot@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [L-OT] Lovely Rita Meter Maid..... Kool Musick wrote: >It's also partly a 'Europe versus USA' thing! The VU 'standard' was cobbled >together by Bell Labs, CBS and NBC back in the late 30's or early 40's. >They optimized it for radio broadcasting primarily, but for all sound > recording in general. To which res0934j <res0934j@...> responded: >I don't think those Bell labs scientists would have liked the way >you describe their pioneering efforts, Hmmmm .... maybe ... then again maybe not. >by the way those labs were >an international bunch of scientists cobbling stuff together as >the first in the world at that time. PPM just like PAL came later >and was in part build on the lessons learned from Bell.. To be honest, I was going for the (typically British) humorous and ironic approach. I was simply trying to make what I was writing a tad more interesting seeing as how what I mostly write is so very dull and tedious. I have EVERY respect for those guys because, as you said, they were doing things that we now take totally for granted as obvious when when they were doing it it was not at all obvious. I never in the world meant to imply the slightest bit of disrespect to the Bell engineers, who also gave us the beginning of information theory, and apologise to them if that's how it came off. To be honest, it never once occurred to me that what I had said could have been interpreted in the way you have suggested. Kool Musick Keep Musick Kool _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>; .

[Redirected from Logic-users to Logic-OT] From: Dave Howard <david@...> Date: Mon Mar 25, 2002 1:41pm Subject: Re: [LUG] [GEN] CRT Versus LCD Noise! (please continue thread in Logic-OT) on 22/3/02 3:11 PM, David Tobin at wowandflutter@t... wrote: > This would mean that you could face the monitor instead of Cupertino Der......the home of Apple Computers!!!

[redirected from LUG to Logic-OT:] From: affe@... Date: Tue Mar 26, 2002 10:11am Subject: Re: [LUG] GEN: PACE Copy Protection On Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:48:11 -0500, "f-erenc szabo" <zerobeat@g...> wrote: >There's a great article showing how detestable PACE copy >protection is. Great? The article is full of FUD. There are updated (XP compatible) Interlok drivers available for downlad at Waves www-site.

[redirected from LUG to Logic-OT:] From: mars@... Date: Tue Mar 26, 2002 2:07pm Subject: re: [OT] 1176N v's UAD-1's 1176N > ** Original Message follows... > From: "Qwli" <stevenLogic@e...> > Subject: [OT] 1176N v's UAD-1's 1176N > I was just wondering if anybody had had a chance to compare the UAD-1's > 1176N to the original 1176N. Is it as close as they say. I'm trying to > give digital DSP one last chance. > [Note from Admin - since this is technically Off Topic (yet very interesting) please send all replies to Logic-OT@Y..., or privately to Qwli if you must... but not back to the LUG. Thanks!] While I appreciate that Admin is trying to reduce the amount of OT on this list, this is a topic of direct interest to many Logic users. It would be good if persons could respond on the list. I unsubscribed from the Logic-OT list when it recently descended into a series of political diatribes. Thanks Mars

> > > > I was just wondering if anybody had had a chance to compare the UAD-1's > > 1176N to the original 1176N. Is it as close as they say. I'm trying to > > give digital DSP one last chance. > > > [Note from Admin - since this is technically Off Topic (yet very >interesting) please send all replies to Logic-OT@Y..., or privately to >Qwli if you must... but not back to the LUG. Thanks!] > >While I appreciate that Admin is trying to reduce the amount of OT on >this list, this is a topic of direct interest to many Logic users. It >would be good if persons could respond on the list. I unsubscribed from >the Logic-OT list when it recently descended into a series of political >diatribes. > Sorry Mars, but I agree with the other admin who suggested to redirect the thread. The OT list has become more useful than some weeks ago. We didn't have any "political" threads anymore. Hopefully we can welcome you back. Cheers, Joeri -- Joeri Vankeirsbilck joeri@... Belway Productions - http://www.belway.com List-admin Logic-users/SoundD*ver-users/Logic-TDM

Hi Group! Is there any advantages using multi-channel sound card in Logic (or in any other current seq)? I don't need multiple inputs or outputs - 2in 2out is fine. By multi-channel I mean internal "busses" like in Yamaha SW1000XG which I already have. It has only stereo out, but 6 internal stereo channels that can have onboard effects on them etc. So, I'm planning to get a dedicated audio card (no synths or midi) and the question is: can I get better performance (more tracks, less cpu load etc.) with a multi-channel card? I don't have Logic yet and I'm not familiar with ASIO things... Thanks, Jere

> Jere > I also have the sw1k, how many tracks do you get?? Cheers John Groovey Band website mail to : chickenjohn@... http://www.grooveyband.co.uk/ East Kent Morris Minor Club web site or ; john@... http://www.ekmm.co.uk Shake The Snake web site (other band) or ; john@... http://www.shakethesnake.co.uk ----- Original Message ----- From: "asdfdsfi" <asdfdsfi@...> To: <logic-ot@yahoogroups.com> Sent: 26 March 2002 22:01 Subject: [L-OT] Multi-channel sound card? > By multi-channel I mean internal "busses" like in Yamaha SW1000XG ) > and the question is: can I get better performance (more tracks, less > cpu load etc.) with a multi-channel card? > I don't have Logic yet and I'm not familiar with ASIO things... > > Thanks, > > Jere > >

Sorry, I don't have Logic yet and actually haven't been using lots of audio tracks with my current setup. Yamaha's XGWorks is not very good for audio ;) Jere --- In logic-ot@y..., "John Matthews" <Groovey@b...> wrote: > > Jere > > > I also have the sw1k, how many tracks do you get?? > Cheers > > John >

Jere, I quickly gave up on XGworks, Logic Gold is much better for midi and audio. You need gold rather than silver for the sw1k because Logic Gold has 8 stereo busses, the card has 6 stereo busses, its like having two mixers!! each able to apply effects to the audio tracks. To do this you need XG edit (probably on the CD that came with the card). I didnt bother with the logic environments as i couldnt find one that works for the SW1K, however, XG edit can be run at the same time as logic, and can select whatever sound you want for each midi channel or apply whatever effects to the sw1k busses, or to midi sounds. As for track count- I think you can go up to the limit for Gold with the SW1k, which is 32 tracks of audio (you can only get 12 audio tracks with XGworks). I've got up to 16 tracks of audio, but not needed to use more yet! good luck John From: "asdfdsfi" <asdfdsfi@...> > Sorry, I don't have Logic yet and actually haven't been using lots of > audio tracks with my current setup. Yamaha's XGWorks is not very good > for audio ;) > > Jere > > --- In logic-ot@y..., "John Matthews" <Groovey@b...> wrote: > > > Jere > > > > > I also have the sw1k, how many tracks do you get?? > > Cheers > > > > John > > >

--- In logic-ot@y..., "asdfdsfi" <asdfdsfi@y...> wrote: > Is there any advantages using multi-channel sound card in Logic (or > in any other current seq)? I don't need multiple inputs or outputs - > 2in 2out is fine. > By multi-channel I mean internal "busses" like in Yamaha SW1000XG > which I already have. It has only stereo out, but 6 internal stereo > channels that can have onboard effects on them etc. Thats one advantage. > So, I'm planning to get a dedicated audio card (no synths or midi) > and the question is: can I get better performance (more tracks, less > cpu load etc.) with a multi-channel card? You say, by multicha card you mean SW. And as SW has onboard fx it dont use cpu power when using them. Performancewise IMO it´s more about what drivers. The SW drivers are OK IMO. Supports all platforms. With LAWG4.8 and SW "asio" my biggest project had 28 st/mono cha with lots of plugs and VSTi. This is on a PIII800. 384mbram, CUSL2, 10Gb seagate barracuda, matrox g450, sw1000xg, win98se The latency issue. SW has 28ms latency and thats not up to date at all compared to other newer cards. IMO it´s OK enough. Why not first update your sequencer. Dont think you will gain anything if using XGWorks with a "better" audiocard. Get Logic. Save some more money. Buy a newer card ;-) Best, Mikael Adle http://www.mp3.com/MikaelAdle

Thanks guys for the info! Yes, I'll get Logic first and use SW1000XG with it. I'm sure it plays well enough for me (being a guitarist...). For soft synths the 28ms latency may be a bit too high though. Thanks, Jere

[Redirected from the LUG to L-OT] From: "splugapass" <bobandmaria@...> Date: Wed Mar 27, 2002 10:09am Subject: Re: [OT] Yellow keys --- In logic-users@y..., "rhodes1972" <rhodes1972@y...> wrote: > [Note from Admin - please send all replies to Logic-OT@y... or privately to rhodes1972@y..., **not** to the LUG, thanks!] > > > Hi evrybody, i'm wondering it there is an easy way to whiten yellow > keys, is there a particuliar stuff i should use? > > Thanks for any help! > > Regards, > > Phil Paint? Bob

Hello all, Every time -and way- I try to switch to True Color 24 bit mode, the DualHead is disabled and when I enable the 2nd monitor it automatically goes back to High Color 16 bit mode. Is there any way run DualHead in 24 bit mode?? Wavelab 4.0 is yelling at me that I need this. Also a couple more GEN Matrox questions... What are the ideal settings for high quality fast pc's that are DAWS? I hear to turn off the 32 Bit Zbuffering or was it the Bus Mastering? As well as turn the hardware acceleration down 1 notch. There are so many other options that are still esoteric to me. (I also can't ever seem to get my ViewSonic crt monitors perfectly square. The edges always curve somewhat no matter what the setting, but that's another subject!) Thanks for any help!

> > >What are the ideal settings for high quality fast pc's that are DAWS? > I'm setting it to 16bit mostly. Enough colors for me and uses less bandwidth. >I hear to turn off the 32 Bit Zbuffering or was it the Bus >Mastering? > Dunno. >As well as turn the hardware acceleration down 1 notch. > Not a good idea imo. -- Joeri Vankeirsbilck joeri@... Belway Productions - http://www.belway.com List-admin Logic-users/SoundD*ver-users/Logic-TDM

Hi There, I need to buy a good stereo microphone. I'm recording some live jazz quartets and trios. I currently have a cheap audio technica which actually does a good job but is battery powered and has bad noise floor etc... I need a mic that can be phantom powered preferably and which can pick up everything from double bass to sizzle cymbals. Anybody have any good suggestions? I was also considering going with an M-S matrix, but I am recording straight to MD (I know, but its far from a paying job..) and one of the Spirit potable mixers (ie. only four input channels and two stereos with phono inputs...) . If I do decide to go with the M-S what would be a good figure eight microphone? I already have a RODE NT1 which works great for a 'center' microphone. ANybody have any experience recording live with a minimal mic setup (I should add its a small room and mic placement cannot be in the audience, they get rowdy... :) ) cheers -- Mark Lennox Technical Consultant ENDUSER Suite 40 Guinness Enterprise Centre Taylors Lane Dublin 8 Ireland Tel: +353 1 4100 665 Fax: +353 1 4100 985 web: http://www.enduser.com --

Hello, I always record live drums and I never seem to get that clean sound that I hear on so many recordings. Clean meaning how the hell do they get the snare drum so loud without the hi-hat bleeding through? Is it e.q.? Compression? Limiting? Miking the top and bottom of the snare? I have a SM57 on the top of the snare aimed at where the stick hits. Whenever I crank up the snare I get tons of hi-hat:-( The 57 is also aimed away from the hat. In a lot of recordings they get the hi-hat nice and quiet. How? Right now I'm cutting drums with the following: AKG C3000B overhead (soon to be two Audio Technica 4041's), an AKG D112 on bass drum and 57's on toms and snare. This is driving me nuts. The drums I'm recording are very open not muted or dead sounding and gates aren't working for me. What's the trick? I've tried different miking placement and still not it:-( Thanks!! --Roger

Kool Musick wrote an entertaining and informative post: >Peaks and VU's are both useful which is why they are both there, >although >with digital recordings peaks have really become pretty close to >essential >in a way that they weren't before. >Hope that makes sense. Thanks Kool!! That helped put it into perspective very well!! Sorry it took so long for me to respond. Been tracking around the clock here. --Roger

[Redirected from the LUG to L-OT] From: Vincent Kenis <vincent.k@...> Date: Wed Mar 27, 2002 6:34pm Subject: [OT] TiBook 500 vs 667 Hi Any news about the Ti500 vs Ti667 contest ? Thanks

AKG has a great MS mic.. From: "Mark Lennox" <mark@...> Reply-To: logic-ot@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 14:18:40 -0000 To: "Logic OT" <logic-ot@yahoogroups.com> Subject: [L-OT] OT: Stereo microphone Hi There, I need to buy a good stereo microphone. I'm recording some live jazz quartets and trios. I currently have a cheap audio technica which actually does a good job but is battery powered and has bad noise floor etc... I need a mic that can be phantom powered preferably and which can pick up everything from double bass to sizzle cymbals. Anybody have any good suggestions? I was also considering going with an M-S matrix, but I am recording straight to MD (I know, but its far from a paying job..) and one of the Spirit potable mixers (ie. only four input channels and two stereos with phono inputs...) . If I do decide to go with the M-S what would be a good figure eight microphone? I already have a RODE NT1 which works great for a 'center' microphone. ANybody have any experience recording live with a minimal mic setup (I should add its a small room and mic placement cannot be in the audience, they get rowdy... :) ) cheers -- Mark Lennox Technical Consultant ENDUSER Suite 40 Guinness Enterprise Centre Taylors Lane Dublin 8 Ireland Tel: +353 1 4100 665 Fax: +353 1 4100 985 web: http://www.enduser.com -- Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>; .