Hi. I use many different softsynths, all of which have different CCs for different parameters on the softsynths. I'd love to set up "maps" for each softsynth so that I can instantly recall the setup for each softsynth. Is there a way to do this with the MC225? i.e. Synth one uses #75-82 for the parameters I want; Synth 2 uses #85-92 for the parameters I want. Is there a way I can instantly recall Settings for Synth 1, then for synth 2, so that I don't have to remap the CC #s each time I switch synths? Thanks much, Robert

> Hi. I use many different softsynths, all of which have different CCs for > different parameters on the softsynths. I'd love to set up "maps" for each > softsynth so that I can instantly recall the setup for each softsynth. Is there > a way to do this with the MC225? > > i.e. Synth one uses #75-82 for the parameters I want; Synth 2 uses #85-92 for > the parameters I want. Is there a way I can instantly recall Settings for Synth > 1, then for synth 2, so that I don't have to remap the CC #s each time I switch > synths? Thanks much, Robert It depends on if the Evolution has the presets for controler routings.. Or you could do it via Environment Transformers and cable the block of them... if you need to control another synth cable another block of transformers... (the trasnformers which route control 75 to 85, 76 to 86... etc). Ray. Digital Illusions.

On a fine day, 23-01-2003, ROBERT GALLIGAN, BLOOMBERG/ 499 PARK wrote: >Hi. I use many different softsynths, all of which have different CCs for >different parameters on the softsynths. I'd love to set up "maps" for each >softsynth so that I can instantly recall the setup for each >softsynth. Is there >a way to do this with the MC225? > >i.e. Synth one uses #75-82 for the parameters I want; Synth 2 uses #85-92 for >the parameters I want. Is there a way I can instantly recall >Settings for Synth >1, then for synth 2, so that I don't have to remap the CC #s each >time I switch >synths? Thanks much, Robert If your synth doesn't have presets in which you can store mappings, you can do it in Logic's environment. Just one transformer for every "preset" is needed. Set a transformer's "Operations" -1- parameter to "Use Map" and draw the appropriate Map. E.g. if your synth sends out CC1-CC8 and you want them to map to CC85-92, set the map up such that 1 maps to 85, 2 maps to 86, etc. Make one transformer map for each setting you need. Then create a Cable Switcher, and cable it into the various maps. If you set the switch's 'style' to Text, you can type in sensible names for the various presets. Cable the maps to whichever object you want to control. Assign an Arrange track to the switch, and off you go. You could have a small floating environment window open next to your arrange, displaying the switch, so you can easily switch settings. Why did you sends this to L-OT btw? Seems perfectly on-topic to me. -- Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@...> Omega Art: http://www.omega-art.com

Does anybody know this device? I'm going to buy an audio interface, i love logic, so i think it could be a nice idea to buy EMI 6I2 m, but... I don't know anything about this one. Does it sound good? Are it's connectors balanced? What's it's dynamic range? Isn't it too cheap to be good ;-) ? Thanks a lot. Bye. phunkee poosheck --------------r-e-k-l-a-m-a----------------- OnetPoczta: du¿a, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/

On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 04:47 PM, kondi wrote: > Does anybody know this device? I'm going to buy an audio interface, i > love logic, so i think it could be a nice idea to buy EMI 6I2 m, > but... I don't know anything about this one. Does it sound good? Are > it's connectors balanced? What's it's dynamic range? Isn't it too > cheap to be good ;-) ? > Thanks a lot. Bye. > fwiw I am using one for my live rig with an iBook - I like it Not using it to record just yet - but playback is fine from Logic and iTunes (for rehearsal mp3) - in fact both apps play simultaneously under OSX using the same device/ports without any problems - this is a real bonus. I imagine it would do just fine for spot recording or overdubs etc. I am getting plenty of signal for my stage amps - no problem. Nice to know that if I want to do some location recording I can match the sample rate etc of my studio rig. That said - it is not going to replace the multiface in my studio - but I think it looks like a good solution for small setups, portables or low budgets.

I am running Logic 5.5 on a PowerMac 8500 with a G4 upgrade card. My system needs a boost, and I need some advice on how to spend my limited budget. Of course, I will be upgrading to Logic 6 as soon as it is available. Should I get a new Mac? If so, which one? Or, should I get a UAD-1 and/or PowerCore and get a new mac later? The addon cards will give me a nice boost in audio quality, but what about processing power? Will the card(s) feel as much of a boost as the new mac? I never want to see that message about running out of power again... Of course, there is the freeze feature coming up... Computers get outdated pretty quickly. How about these DSP cards? Will they be outmoded in a year or so? Any opinions or advice appreciated... Thanks a lot, smeet

Xbitlabs report that Western Digital is about to announce 10k RPM serial ATA drives. http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id44471776

I'm trying to use a Multiface with my TiBook 800 Although I can get the sound in, I'm not getting any output. In fact it usually crashes the machine. I have tried it with SPARKle, but the same - in only, no out. I have checked "Alt ASIO" It works fine through the Mac AV outs. Any enlightenment gratefully received! :-( RJ

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, "Sascha Franck" <S.Franck@g...> wrote: > To me it looks like there's not much public demand for a > new standard. VST plugins (of course assuming they're > running well) seem to fit most needs pretty well allready. Yep, VST's seem to work pretty well. And if Steinberg leapfrog AU by rushing out an improved "VST version 3" in a few months time, and they make it nominally a superset of the published AU format, but with the added advantage of being cross--platform ... and include a simple shell that allows VST3s to effectively run stand-alone with rewire support, under all the platforms ... Emagic could look very silly. It would look like they'd put people through all this grief for months, and caused delays in innumerable third-party softsynth development programs, for something that would look like it would have happened anyway. [Erk] (message rejected from "logic-users")

>And if Steinberg leapfrog AU by rushing out an improved >"VST version 3" in a few months time, and they make it >nominally a superset of the published AU format, but with >the added advantage of being cross--platform ... and >include a simple shell that allows VST3s to effectively >run stand-alone with rewire support, under all the >platforms ... And if they hurry up and put those wings on pigs.....

On a fine day, 19-02-2003, Dennis Gunn wrote: > >And if Steinberg leapfrog AU by rushing out an improved >>"VST version 3" in a few months time, and they make it >>nominally a superset of the published AU format, but with >>the added advantage of being cross--platform ... and >>include a simple shell that allows VST3s to effectively >>run stand-alone with rewire support, under all the >>platforms ... > >And if they hurry up and put those wings on pigs..... You obviously saw too many old Pink Floyd videos lately... :-) -- Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@...> Omega Art: http://www.omega-art.com

Could You recommend me not expensive, good workin' PCI Card to connect Lucid AD/DA9624 converters to my PC? I work with Logic Audio 5.5 and Win XP. I think i need AES or TOSlink connectors in this PCI Card, because I'd like to record with 96kHz (S/PDIF can work only with 48 kHZ, doesn't it?). MIDI is not nescessary, because I can buy a MT4. Thanks. Cheers. phunkee pooh --------------r-e-k-l-a-m-a----------------- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Gunn <dennisg@a...> wrote: > >And if Steinberg leapfrog AU by rushing out an improved > >"VST version 3" in a few months time, and they make it > >nominally a superset of the published AU format, but with > >the added advantage of being cross--platform ... and > >include a simple shell that allows VST3s to effectively > >run stand-alone with rewire support, under all the > >platforms ... > > And if they hurry up and put those wings on pigs..... Well, the "stand-alone shell" part should be easy, and wouldn't need a new VST format -- all they'd have to do is take the VSTACK code and strip out the effects and multi-instrument stuff, so that it's just left as a minimal shell that holds one VST. And if they ported that empty shell to AU, they'd be able to say, "See, now we don't have to bother porting any of our instruments across to AU, because the shell can run an OSX VST inside an AU slot." Perhaps not quite as conveniently as having the host app running the OSX VST directly, but maybe Steinberg wouldn't lose too much sleep over that ... Snag is, it might slightly undermine VSTACK sales on the other platforms. So .. perhaps another possible alternative might be for them to produce an OSX version of VSTACK that can run as an AU? That way they'd have an "AU" option for all their OSX VSTs, and they'd get to make a few extra sales at the same time (and get SystemLink-capable software installed onto more machines)

>--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Gunn <dennisg@a...> wrote: >> >And if Steinberg leapfrog AU by rushing out an improved >> >"VST version 3" in a few months time, and they make it >> >nominally a superset of the published AU format, but with >> >the added advantage of being cross--platform ... and >> >include a simple shell that allows VST3s to effectively >> >run stand-alone with rewire support, under all the >> >platforms ... >> >> And if they hurry up and put those wings on pigs..... > >Well, the "stand-alone shell" part should be easy, and wouldn't need >a new VST format -- all they'd have to do is take the VSTACK code and >strip out the effects and multi-instrument stuff, so that it's just >left as a minimal shell that holds one VST. Some day someone may make an AU Wrapper for VSTs. The question is "why should we consumer want that?". What is the point of all this Rube Goldberg wrapper crap that will just at a layer of instability, complication, and CPU overheard? It would be about a million times better for all of us consumers if the developers would simply make the OSX plugins in the AU format like they should be doing. *That* is what you should be lobbying for. There is some thing that really bugs me in the way that people keep ignoring the fact that there is no such thing as a cross platform format now. As we all know, just because the label says VST does not mean that you can use a Mac one on a PC or vice versa. Same with TDMs and RTAS and every other plugin format out there. Plugins on the various platforms all need some rewriting before they can work on other platforms. So what if a PC VST ends up getting called an AU when it is in OSX? The code that makes the sound will be the same.

Dennis Gunn wrote: > As we all know, just because the label says VST does not > mean that you can use a Mac one on a PC or vice versa. Same with > TDMs and RTAS and every other plugin format out there. Plugins on > the various platforms all need some rewriting before they can work on > other platforms. So what if a PC VST ends up getting called an AU > when it is in OSX? The code that makes the sound will be the same. You defenitely have a point here, Dennis - but as usual that's not all there is about it. So far quite a lot of developers seem to go the "VST/Win/MacOS9 > VST/OSX > perhaps AU" route. That doesn't make the AU format look like a very prominent thing, regarding public perception. In the end, no matter how you put it, the programmers have to a) accept AU as being the best "standard" to develop for on OSX (no matter whether they'll be doing OSX/OS9/Win -VST versions at the same time) and b) convince people those new AUs are a good thing to have/buy - instead of still buying VST versions. And then, Erik has a point as well, what if VST3 simply superceeds the specs of AU? I don't know whether that'd be possible at all, but hey, in the end all these discussions are rather speculative anyways. The only point IMO is: It's just silly to force someone into a new "standard", no matter if it'd be WAY better than anything that was existing before. Thing is, LA6 IS VST compatible (as the OS9 version will prove) and VST-support for OSX is possible as well. To me it just looks stupid making a program LESS compatible just to force people to believe in (or develop for) a new standard. If AU is so much better, people will just buy AU versions and developers will just do AU versions instead of VST/OSX versions. As said before, EASI was said to be a WAY better protocol than ASIO too. It's almost unknown these days though because ASIO allready was good enough. Whether that is a good thing or not I'm not able to decide, but it clearly shows that once you established something for a wide amount of people it's hard to make the folks believe there's something better - no matter if it is or not. Sascha

Hi gang, I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and await v6 with baited breath. Does anyone have links to access settings files for Logic's internal effects and processors? As a fairly new user I've relied upon Logic's available presets as a starting point before additional tweaking. Quite a few of the native effects or processors do not come with any settings files and I'm sure many people have come up with interesting/useful settings. Any help would be welcome. Regards, Darren Earp ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, "Sascha Franck" <S.Franck@g...> wrote: > As said before, EASI was said to be a WAY better protocol > than ASIO too. > It's almost unknown these days though because ASIO allready > was good enough. > Whether that is a good thing or not I'm not able to decide, > but it clearly shows that once you established something > for a wide amount of people it's hard to make the folks > believe there's something better - no matter if it is > or not. Hi Sascha! Yep, I think the "good enough" point is relevant ... if people already have something that works, any replacement has to seem to offer /significant/ advantages to make the switch worthwhile, otherwise the inconvenience of switching (and worrying about whether to switch or not, and compatibility, and migration) can be the overriding factor. Apart from some of the more "techhie" people, I think people just want stuff that works, that they can do music on, without thinking too much about what's going on under the hood. In a similar vein, the .DLS ("DownLoadable Sounds") format was allegedly a superset of the SoundFont2 standard, got adopted by the MMA as the "official" sampled instrument standard ... but nobody much seems to use it apart from Apple, because the switch to yet another format and another set of tools just wasn't worth it for most people. Creative's "Vienna" SF2 authoring tool really isn't that great, and I'm prepared to believe that DLS authoring tools might well be better, but most of the people who use these formats are end-users rather than authors (most of us don't write softsynth code or publish sample sets). So even if DLS /was/ technically better, it wasn't better /enough/ to give people a compelling enough reason to withdraw their .SF2 libraries and replace them with .DLS versions. AFAIK, there wasn't the unique DLS-based content that would make people want to go specifically looking for DLS software or hardware Erk

While we joyously continue making music the world is in turmoil. I think we can find time to pause a few moments: this speech by an influential American makes worthwhile reading. If you feel the same maybe you want to consider forwarding it to friends. Cheers, Bob. ---------------------------------------------------------- >Senate Floor Speech by US Senator Robert Byrd: > >We Stand Passively Mute > >Wednesday 12 February 2003 > >"To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human >experiences. On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of >battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of >war. > >Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully >silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the >nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing. > >We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own >uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only on the >editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of >the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war. > >And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple attempt >to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents >a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the >recent history of the world. > >This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary >doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The >doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other >nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening >but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the >traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of >international law and the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time of >world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they >will soon be on our -- or some other nation's -- hit list. High level >Administration figures recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the >table when discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be more >destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty, particularly in a >world where globalism has tied the vital economic and security interests of >many nations so closely together? There are huge cracks emerging in our >time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging >worldwide speculation. Anti-Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation, >suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the once >solid alliance against global terrorism which existed after September 11. > >Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little >guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members are >being called to active military duty, with no idea of the duration of their >stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with less >than adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also >short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. >Fuel prices are rising and may soon spike higher. > >This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be >judged on its record. I believe that that record is dismal. > >In that scant two years, this Administration has squandered a large >projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken us to >projected deficits as far as the eye can see. This Administration's domestic >policy has put many of our states in dire financial condition, under funding >scores of essential programs for our people. This Administration has >fostered policies which have slowed economic growth. This Administration has >ignored urgent matters such as the crisis in health care for our elderly. >This Administration has been slow to provide adequate funding for homeland >security. This Administration has been reluctant to better protect our long >and porous borders. > >In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden. >In fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces and >urging them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances, >possibly crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities like >the United Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question >the traditional worldwide perception of the United States as >well-intentioned, peacekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient >art of diplomacy into threats, labeling, and name calling of the sort that >reflects quite poorly on the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, >and which will have consequences for years to come. > >Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, >denigrating powerful European allies as irrelevant -- these types of crude >insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have massive >military might, but we cannot fight a global war on terrorism alone. We need >the cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies as well as the >newer found friends whom we can attract with our wealth. Our awesome >military machine will do us little good if we suffer another devastating >attack on our homeland which severely damages our economy. Our military >manpower is already stretched thin and we will need the augmenting support >of those nations who can supply troop strength, not just sign letters >cheering us on. > >The war in Afghanistan has cost us $37 billion so far, yet there is evidence >that terrorism may already be starting to regain its hold in that region. We >have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace in Afghanistan, the >dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in that remote and devastated >land. > >Pakistan as well is at risk of destabilizing forces. This Administration has >not finished the first war against terrorism and yet it is eager to embark >on another conflict with perils much greater than those in Afghanistan. Is >our attention span that short? Have we not learned that after winning the >war one must always secure the peace? > >And yet we hear little about the aftermath of war in Iraq. In the absence of >plans, speculation abroad is rife. Will we seize Iraq's oil fields, becoming >an occupying power which controls the price and supply of that nation's oil >for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose to hand the reigns of >power after Saddam Hussein? > >Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks on >Israel? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the >Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, bolstered by >Iran which has much closer ties to terrorism than Iraq? > >Could a disruption of the world's oil supply lead to a world-wide recession? >Has our senselessly bellicose language and our callous disregard of the >interests and opinions of other nations increased the global race to join >the nuclear club and made proliferation an even more lucrative practice for >nations which need the income? > >In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant >Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences >for years. > >One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage >attacks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having only a >shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is nearly >impossible to exact retribution. > >But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely >destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is >currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with the >awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest >superpower on the planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements made by this >Administration are outrageous. There is no other word. > >Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. On what is possibly the eve of >horrific infliction of death and destruction on the population of the nation >of Iraq -- a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under age 15 -- >this chamber is silent. On what is possibly only days before we send >thousands of our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of chemical and >biological warfare -- this chamber is silent. On the eve of what could >possibly be a vicious terrorist attack in retaliation for our attack on >Iraq, it is business as usual in the United States Senate. > >We are truly "sleepwalking through history." In my heart of hearts I pray >that this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not in for a >rudest of awakenings. > >To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a >last resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of any >President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a nation >which is over 50% children is "in the highest moral traditions of our >country". This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears to be >having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in a corner >so quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our >own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time. > >**************** > -- Bob Lowen Antwerp, Belgium Email: rlow@...

Hi guys, What are your favorite tip on making the bass sound good in mixes? I do a lot of different music styles from, plain rock, to RnB to house/transe... but I always seem to screw up in the mix, especially the bass. I find it extremely difficult make the bass sound, warm, with the right attack, and not "smearing" out the mix so to speak... Strangely enough I've gained best results when using an empty EXS24 sine... Anyone? Regards, Obi

lose the tops .... leave them for the wankers , :-) Paul

If you want to see the future, check it out .... www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml

Well similar to the VST situation, I have more than $1000 worth of Photoshop plugins that won't work in OS X. Apple is not very good at this kind of thing.

TazmnianDv@... wrote: > Well similar to the VST situation, I have more than $1000 worth of > Photoshop > plugins that won't work in OS X. Apple is not very good at this kind > of thing. I hate to say this, but I strongly disagree with this. I found my self owning really only two Plugin manufacturers since they came out. Kai's PowerTools [since 1.0] and AlienSkins Black Box [since 1.0] other than that, Gallery effects was bought by Adobe, then later integrated into Photoshop. Most are just icing or cherries and some though productive, show through on Print...badly. Most of the third Plugins that were made for Photoshop, have been replaced by features in PS since version 5.0 up to now in version 7.0. The only Plugin I WANT is KPT Procreate. Other than that, I NO longer need most of the plugins I used to buy. I barely need ProCreate. Yet, with the feature sets in PS7.0, damn, I would rather use PS7.0. But yet, I would like to state, that Adobe has released API's for carbonizing plugins for OSX/Photoshop. But to me, the reality is, it is just really hard to make an interesting, yet viable selling Plugin, when really PS 7.0 can do most of it on its own. Yet, the only Plugin I miss is KPT VectorEffects for Illustrator, but I barely need that anymore either, since I can reproduce most of those just using Illustrator 10. But on this point, this has nothing to do with Apple. It has to do with developers TRYING to create interesting plugins for PS7, but can't because Photoshop does a lot on its own. They pump out stuff, do market research, then artist's come back with, "I can do that already, so I don't need it...I will save the money for something else". Peace, Alexis Yet once again, coming soon to browser near you... http://home.attbi.com/~aiosa9/

bass as in bass gtr or some other thing? when I eq a bass gtr the first thing I do is boost a little (1 or 2 db) at 1-3k and a little at 80-100 hz. very subtle. other than that, a little compression with a medium release to knock the spazzy bits down to human volume and I'm done. If the bass player played well, the track will be good without much work. If you are working it for more than an hour or 2 there's something wrong with the part/playing IMHO. sometimes people forget that in the old days, when you're in a real studio recording with real musicians, the engineers job is to make the shit sound right as it goes down to tape. That is the single most overlooked skill in home studios in my experience. People think you really can fix it in the mix. I don't know who originally made that statement, but it certainly messed up a lot of people's music over the years. I hardly ever use sampled or synth bass, that's a whole other issue. teddybut > What are your favorite tip on making the bass sound good in mixes? I do a > lot of different music styles from, plain rock, to RnB to house/transe... > but I always seem to screw up in the mix, especially the bass. > > I find it extremely difficult make the bass sound, warm, with the right > attack, and not "smearing" out the mix so to speak... Strangely enough I've > gained best results when using an empty EXS24 sine... > > Anyone? > > Regards, > > Obi

> lose the tops .... leave them for the wankers , :-) > > Paul what's a wanker in your world Paul? someone who doesn't cut off all the highs out of their bass sound? weird... teddybut