The a little bit non conventional way : Applescript The computer geek, non user oriented but totally free and fast method in Terminal ls -1 *.aiff | awk '{print "mv "$1" "$1}' | sed s/.aiff//2 | sh To rename all .aiff to .aif ls -1 *.aiff | awk '{print "mv "$1" "$1}' | sed s/.aiff/.aif/2 | sh etc...

This is getting very OT so I haved it there. J.I wrote: For the Rhodes, it was the weight. And the tuning along with all the other little mechanical quirks, I was there I remember it very well. Anyway you are right that by the time the programable keyboards came out, Juno 60, Polysix and the DX7 a little later, the reason to carry those monsters around got less neccesary. It's funny that the DX7 Rhodes was such a big deal back then, it doesn't sound much like a Rhodes at all. It's much more airy and completely without any body. Another sound from the DX that went on everybodys records at the time was the harmonica ie What's Love Got To Do With It. Much like the Rhodes (and the Cher effect) it got out of hand and suddenly disappeared. To this day I hate those sounds but then again, I never liked the 80s much, 3-4 chords broken into 16th arpeggios and a whole lot of make up (and now they're back). PS I know that the Jupiter 4 and 8 was before the above mentioned but they were very expensive and never got very common (which is why they are quite rare and even more expensive today).

Hi all, I'm in Toronto and am looking to find someone in St. John's NFLD to posssibly track a quick lead vocal in the next few weeks sometime. The project is an Afican A Cappella Gospel album that is being produced to help fund raise for an orphanage. There wouldn't be a lot of money invloved, and the session would probably only take 1-2 hours. Anyone interested, please e-mail me at riverwalkaudio@sympatico.ca Thanks, ~Art

Henry Bourne <henry.bourne@gmail.com> wrote: > So to those of you who own, or work in profssional studios, what are your > thoughts on this? Are you still very busy? Have you seen a reduction in the > number of clients? I live and work in NY. Last year the Hit Factory closed; this year Quad. Neither had a shortage of skills in staff or engineers. For a studio to survive, it has to have low overhead, extremely skilled staff, and things that home/project studios don't; namely, quiet space, multiple recording rooms, a well-tuned control room, and a wide mic and preamp selection. I rarely work outside of my own space, and if I do it's for one or more of these things.

--- Jamshied Sharifi <forums@logic-users.org> wrote: For a studio to > survive, it has to have low overhead, extremely > skilled staff, and things that home/project studios > don't; namely, quiet space, multiple recording > rooms, a well-tuned control room, and a wide mic and > preamp selection. I might add to this list: grand painos and B3s. Things that are very rare in home studios. JP

"tomdcarden" <tomdcarden@yahoo.com> wrote: > Was wondering > if Logic would suffice for this or if there > was another app. more suitable. I find Pro Tools better suited for this kind of thing, but Logic will do just fine. Pull the video into your session, make sure the frame rate is correct, import your audio, and chop away.

This is a copy of a post on the LUG list. Trying to move the discussion to OT. Dave Shirk On Sep 8, 2006, at 6:44 PM, Dave Katz wrote: > >> >> I realize this is OT ... but .... In 1976 I was buying (in bulk) >> 1024X1 >> memory chips. The price was right around $6 each. So One K Byte >> of Ram was $48.00. Rounding, 1GB would back then have cost >> $48 Milliion! So much fun. So a little less than in 74! > > Sounds like Moore's Law was right on schedule; less than half of what > I paid. The Don Lancaster "TV Typewriter" used six bits (and had no > lower case!) because memory was too expensive (and the character > generator chip probably only did upper case anyhow.) Kind of way before Logic's time! I knew Don Lancaster, and was great friends with Dan Meyer of SWTPC. Great times. OK - I guess we should now move this to the OT list. (But I did mention Logic - twice!) Dave Shirk

(Mods, I hope this is OK.) Intro to Logic Pro (Apple Certified) taught by Jay Asher, Logic Certified Trainer, [url]www.jayasher.com[/url] Monday, 7-10pm, September 25-December 4 (Equivalent to Apple course Logic 101: An Introduction to Logic Express and Logic Pro.) Logic Pro is a professional music production program that combines composition, notation, and audio production facilities. It offers a comprehensive set of music creation tools featuring extensive software instruments, mixing, automation with total recall, and non-destructive real-time editing of both audio and MIDI. Of interest to songwriters, composers, and audio producers, this course walks participants through the process of creating an actual song, from simple editing and arranging of MIDI sequences to digital effects processing and mixing in 5.1 surround sound. Topics include creating a customized Logic Pro environment that integrates with your personal production studio, the ins and outs of MIDI and audio recording, editing and arrangement techniques to help expedite sound design, and using and automating Logic Pro's comprehensive array of DSP effects and software instruments. Enrollment Fee: $999 – Reg. # S3671 To enroll online, visit our website at [url]www.uclaextension.edu/entertainmentstudies[/url] and click on HOW TO ENROLL at the top of the page. To enroll by phone, please call (310) 825-9971 and reference Reg # S3671. Advanced Techniques in Logic Pro (Apple Certified) taught by Jay Asher, Logic Certified Trainer, [url]www.jayasher.com[/url] Thursdays, 7-10pm, September 28 – December 7 (Equivalent to Apple course Logic 301: Advanced Techniques in Logic Pro.) For composers, producers, songwriters, engineers, and studio programmers who want to create and produce quality music in their Logic-based home studio; this course provides an in-depth look at the powerful features of Logic Pro, covering all areas from production, editing, and mixing to notation and scoring to picture. Instruction uses a step-by-step project-based method that explains how to streamline production workflow, accelerate editing tasks, effectively manage takes, and construct a mix that meets exacting standards. Participants learn advanced techniques for multitrack recording and explore the broad potential of audio instruments, including Ultrabeat, the EX24 sampler, and the revolutionary Sculpture, the newest addition to Logic's software instruments. Students discover invaluable methods for manipulating tempo and pitch, editing audio and MIDI tracks, and creating high-quality mixes. Enrollment Fee: $999 – Reg. # S3672 To enroll online, visit our website at [url]www.uclaextension.edu/entertainmentstudies[/url] and click on HOW TO ENROLL at the top of the page. To enroll by phone, please call (310) 825-9971 and reference Reg # S3672.

I would really appreciate some step by step instructions for setting up the environment to recognize my Roland D-70 keyboard and synth. I come from a Digital Performer background, which I have have left because of Motu's terrible support (ie you cant get through to get any help from them). I have created a multi instrument in the environment and enabled Channels 1-5 and 10 for drums. I dont know what I am supposed to cable it to in the environment and how to input all the patch names. Can anyone out there walk me through this? I went to two Apple stores for training and the trainers know less than I do which is scary.... thanks in advance.

At 1:24 Uhr -0500 17.09.2006, ScottLance wrote: >I have created a multi instrument in the environment and enabled Channels 1-5 and 10 for drums. I dont know what I am supposed to cable it to in the environment and how to input all the patch names. Can anyone out there walk me through this? I went to two Apple stores for training and the trainers know less than I do which is scary.... thanks in advance. You shouldn't cable it to anything but instead set the correct port in the parameter section of the multi instrument. This is the actual MIDI port that your instrument is plugged into. Once you have done that all you need to do is create a track in the arrange with any of the channels of your multi instrument and play your keyboard. The notes should now be sent to your instrument. Cheers Hans

I have a G5 dual 2.0ghz 4 GBram and currently two hds 1 250Gb maxtor that everything is on and another that all my loops ands anyhting that has to do with audio except the application itself mainly libraries . I saw a product that lets you mount up to three more hd in your mac and it was talking about setting up as a raid conf. My question is would a raid set up help perfromance and what raid conf is best. I saw something about raid 1 being pretty useful. I would like to have one hard drive mirror my system hd, then the other two set up to work together. I dont know much about it as you can gather so any help is appreciated

On Sep 17, 2006, at 9:21 AM, garygenn wrote: > I have a G5 dual 2.0ghz 4 GBram and currently two hds 1 250Gb > maxtor that everything is on and another that all my loops > ands anyhting that has to do with audio except the application > itself mainly libraries . I saw a product that lets you mount up > to three more hd in your mac and it was talking about setting up > as a raid conf. My question is would a raid set up help > perfromance and what raid conf is best. I saw something about > raid 1 being pretty useful. I would like to have one hard drive > mirror my system hd, then the other two set up to work together. I > dont know much about it as you can gather so any help is > appreciated Check this url: http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/single.html it covers RAID in great detail. For you need, RAID 0 will give you the performance with no fault tolerance. RAID 1 will give you the mirroring that you're looking for, with lower performance. RAID 7 seems to provide the best 'read/write' performance with fault tolerance but it's not an open standard, which means that you'd have to buy a proprietary controller. Go down the list of RAID 'levels' and search for the one that gives you the best performance in sequential read/writes, since that's the operation you'll do the most in recording. -otto ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------- Otto Gygax - Audio, Computer, Networking Engineering / Percussion otto@GxM.COM / Philomath, Oregon

On 17.09.2006, at 18:21, garygenn wrote: > I saw a product that lets you mount up > to three more hd in your mac and it was talking about setting up > as a raid conf. My question is would a raid set up help > perfromance and what raid conf is best. I saw something about > raid 1 being pretty useful. I would like to have one hard drive > mirror my system hd, then the other two set up to work together. I > dont know much about it Crash course: No RAID One or more drives, all of them independent. That is what you have now. Easy to manage, fast, no security. If one single drive gets involved for several operations like supporting the operating system and recording audio it becomes slower. If the drive fails the data might be lost. RAID 0 Data gets written to and read from all drives simultaneously. It is the fastest type of RAID and has no redundancy which means no security. If one drive fails all data of the whole RAID is lost. Good for streaming data like video but in my opinion not necessary for recording or playing back audio. RAID 1 That is mirroring. Two drives are involved which bear almost the same data. Data gets written to and read from both drives but not necessarily simultaneously. Reading can be faster than with one drive if the system is clever enough to use the data from that disk which can deliver them faster. Writing might be slower than with one single disk. You get a lot of security because if one drive fails you should be able to work with the other one alone until you replaced the broken drive. I think the reduced writing speed does not really affect recording capability. Mirroring is certainly an option for people who do not always have a solid backup system or want a short interruption time in case of a hardware failure. RAID 3 It stripes the data in the same way that RAID 0 does but additionally writes parity data to a dedicated parity drive. In case one disk failes the controller can restore the data based on the parity information to a replacement drive. RAID 3 is designed to employ every disk on every input/output operation. Unlike RAID 0, RAID 3 is a redundant system which can withstand the failure of one drive and has little diminution in performance if one disk fails. RAID 5 That one takes a different approach towards striping and parity storage to better handle applications that barrage the system with many, small input/output operations. Unless RAID 0 and 3 it is designed o engage all drives in the array at the same time on different reads and writes. In/Out per second is higher than I/O of RAID 0 and 3. Performance is remarkable slower if one disk fails. Now, what does all that mean to you? Relax and see it practical ... No RAID at all but a good backup system is good. You can have one system disk which bears also your applications, One disk for sample libraries and ond disk for audio (and recording of course). Flexible and cheap and a modern computer can handle that. If you want more security, the question is - what for? For the system or for your audio data? They should never be on the same disk so you have to mirror one or both of them. If you want speed, speed, speed, you might go for RAID 0. But I don't see an advantage for audio. Although the description of RAID 3 sounds promising I have never seen a RAID 3 outperforming a RAID 0. That might have been been the kind of data but however, RAID 3 is rarely used and people who depend on data aren't that stupid. If you want a fast and reliable redundant system for your audio data and if mirroring is not enough for you you should go for RAID 5 which is a widely used standard. You need at least three disks for that. And because of the parity you lose 25% of the capacity or one drive, whichever occures first. In other words: with a minimal 3-disk system you get only the capacity of 2 disks. The relation becomes better with each drive you add. Important: There are software RAID's and hardware controllers. If you want to be really secure do not rely on a software RAID although some of them are quite good (the SUN solution for example). I do not know Apples built-in software RAID. However, a software RAID draws some performance from your computer because it cannot work independently. But it is cheap. I do not know much about RAID 7 which Otto mentioned in his mail but be aware that most "RAID people", in this case the people who want to sell you a system, speak about SCSI. Our Macs don't have that built since a while. SCSI drives are fast, small and expensive. There are other RAID levels for bigger systems (mirrored RAID 0 for example) but I think they are not in out focus here. Hope that helps, Peter Ostry

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, Otto Gygax <otto@...> wrote: > > > Check this url: > http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/single.html > it covers RAID in great detail. For you need, RAID 0 will give you > the performance with no fault tolerance. > RAID 1 will give you the mirroring that you're looking for, with > lower performance. RAID 7 seems to provide the best 'read/write' > performance with fault tolerance but it's not an open standard, which > means that you'd have to buy a proprietary controller. > > Go down the list of RAID 'levels' and search for the one that gives > you the best performance in sequential read/writes, since that's the > operation you'll do the most in recording. > > -otto > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------- > Otto Gygax - Audio, Computer, Networking Engineering / Percussion > otto@... / Philomath, Oregon > Yeah thanks otto I wil check out the link and I appreciate your response

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, Peter Ostry <po@...> wrote: > > Crash course: > > No RAID > One or more drives, all of them independent. That is what you have > now. Easy to manage, fast, no security. If one single drive gets > involved for several operations like supporting the operating system > and recording audio it becomes slower. If the drive fails the data > might be lost. > > RAID 0 > Data gets written to and read from all drives simultaneously. It is > the fastest type of RAID and has no redundancy which means no > security. If one drive fails all data of the whole RAID is lost. Good > for streaming data like video but in my opinion not necessary for > recording or playing back audio. > > RAID 1 > That is mirroring. Two drives are involved which bear almost the same > data. Data gets written to and read from both drives but not > necessarily simultaneously. Reading can be faster than with one drive > if the system is clever enough to use the data from that disk which > can deliver them faster. Writing might be slower than with one single > disk. You get a lot of security because if one drive fails you should > be able to work with the other one alone until you replaced the > broken drive. I think the reduced writing speed does not really > affect recording capability. Mirroring is certainly an option for > people who do not always have a solid backup system or want a short > interruption time in case of a hardware failure. > > RAID 3 > It stripes the data in the same way that RAID 0 does but additionally > writes parity data to a dedicated parity drive. In case one disk > failes the controller can restore the data based on the parity > information to a replacement drive. RAID 3 is designed to employ > every disk on every input/output operation. Unlike RAID 0, RAID 3 is > a redundant system which can withstand the failure of one drive and > has little diminution in performance if one disk fails. > > RAID 5 > That one takes a different approach towards striping and parity > storage to better handle applications that barrage the system with > many, small input/output operations. Unless RAID 0 and 3 it is > designed o engage all drives in the array at the same time on > different reads and writes. In/Out per second is higher than I/O of > RAID 0 and 3. Performance is remarkable slower if one disk fails. > > Now, what does all that mean to you? Relax and see it practical ... > > No RAID at all but a good backup system is good. You can have one > system disk which bears also your applications, One disk for sample > libraries and ond disk for audio (and recording of course). Flexible > and cheap and a modern computer can handle that. > > If you want more security, the question is - what for? For the system > or for your audio data? They should never be on the same disk so you > have to mirror one or both of them. > > If you want speed, speed, speed, you might go for RAID 0. But I don't > see an advantage for audio. Although the description of RAID 3 sounds > promising I have never seen a RAID 3 outperforming a RAID 0. That > might have been been the kind of data but however, RAID 3 is rarely > used and people who depend on data aren't that stupid. > > If you want a fast and reliable redundant system for your audio data > and if mirroring is not enough for you you should go for RAID 5 which > is a widely used standard. You need at least three disks for that. > And because of the parity you lose 25% of the capacity or one drive, > whichever occures first. In other words: with a minimal 3-disk system > you get only the capacity of 2 disks. The relation becomes better > with each drive you add. > > Important: > There are software RAID's and hardware controllers. If you want to be > really secure do not rely on a software RAID although some of them > are quite good (the SUN solution for example). I do not know Apples > built-in software RAID. However, a software RAID draws some > performance from your computer because it cannot work independently. > But it is cheap. > > I do not know much about RAID 7 which Otto mentioned in his mail but > be aware that most "RAID people", in this case the people who want to > sell you a system, speak about SCSI. Our Macs don't have that built > since a while. SCSI drives are fast, small and expensive. > > There are other RAID levels for bigger systems (mirrored RAID 0 for > example) but I think they are not in out focus here. > > > Hope that helps, > Peter Ostry Peter, thanks for all that information it defintitely gives me some ideas. The main reason I started thinking about this is right now I have 2 MAxtor 250 Gb HD's one cam with the computer , the other I installed, the one I installed has my iTunes Lib, My 70+ Gbs Of loops , and scratch disksa for Bias Pro Xt, and I usually record to it in live and Logic pro. Even though I have evberything Backed up on a crap load of DVDs I dont really have a solid Back up system. A couple weeks ago I started getting A message in disk utility program ,"Volume Header Needs minor reapir", Well easy enough to fix with reapiar disk but it made me start wondering ,Is my disk going bad ? So I started think it would be nice all the way around to have a set up that mirrored the system disk then have a raid set up fpr my music. One thing that is streange is I changed the nam e of my hd I kept all my audio stuff on and the problem stopped . the name before was , Audio_HD , Now it is Audio HD I took out that underscore thinking my be the disk doesnt like have that in it. Seems silly but that was the only thing i did different after installing the HD. ANyWay.... Maybe I should use the maxtor in it now to do mirroring for a regular back up , then set up a raid conf with that Jive 5 and a pci controller that has at least three connections. that way I could have to seperate raid configurations as far as the one for the two hds for the system and the other three for recording and library storage.

On 18.09.2006, at 18:02, garygenn wrote: > Peter, thanks for all that information it defintitely gives me some > ideas. You're welcome. > ...A couple weeks ago I started getting A message in disk utility > program ,"Volume Header Needs minor reapir", Well easy enough to > fix with reapiar disk > but it made me start wondering ,Is my disk going bad ? So I started > think it would be nice > all the way around to have a set up that mirrored the system disk > then have a raid set up > fpr my music. One thing that is streange is I changed the nam e of > my hd I kept all my > audio stuff on and the problem stopped . the name before was , > Audio_HD , Now it is > Audio HD I took out that underscore thinking my be the disk doesnt > like have that in it. > Seems silly but that was the only thing i did different after > installing the HD. ANyWay.... The underscore was certainly a good idea. It is a usual sign and many people who work in the terminal (shell) prefer names with underscores. Spaces are generally not beloved by those people because spacces separate file names and commands. I rather think that the renaming changed the header information and the error was simply overwritten. Looks like you found a nice way to repair such a minor problem ;-) > Maybe I should use the maxtor in it now to do mirroring for a > regular back up , then set > up a raid conf with that Jive 5 and a pci controller that has at > least three connections. that > way I could have to seperate raid configurations as far as the one > for the two hds for the > system and the other three for recording and library storage. That PCI controller supports two different RAIDs simultaneously? Amazing. Anyway, to keep you from getting bored :-) here are some thoughts about that setup: Three drives are the minimum for a RAID 5. You cannot have a "hot spare" in such a set, which would automatically jump in if one drive fails. You could set it up with 4 or five disks and one or two hot spares. BUT - the RAID might get remarkable slower if one drive fails. I do not know if one can record in such a situation. Furthermore, if you are really forced to recover the data (and you are in my opinion) you are most likely unable to record on that RAID for an hour or more while it rebuilds the set. And these controllers have no mercy and are definitely unpatient: one wrong answer from a drive and the switch it off immidiately. That just as explanation that you are still not on the safe side for an outdoor job. Please be aware that we don't talk about a setup for everyone but about as much security as possible for a (I think) given budget. Therefore we have to apply a higher level of criticism and to be more scared than necessary. It depends how you use that setup. If time is critical, outdoors or inhouse, it could be better to setup two mirrors because they don't lose speed after a drive failure (just my 2 cents). If you do many location recordings without delivering the playback a RAID 5 could still be perfect if you keep enough space free on the system mirror or carry a spare drive with you. On a bad day that can save your ass because although you have no security you CAN record that way. And no security at one occasion is not as bad as it sounds. Thousands of people are used to record that way :-) ___ Peter Ostry

On Sep 18, 2006, at 9:02 AM, garygenn wrote: > Peter, thanks for all that information it defintitely gives me some > ideas. The main reason I > started thinking about this is right now I have 2 MAxtor 250 Gb > HD's one cam with the > computer , the other I installed, the one I installed has my iTunes > Lib, My 70+ Gbs Of > loops , and scratch disksa for Bias Pro Xt, and I usually record > to it in live and Logic pro. > Even though I have evberything Backed up on a crap load of DVDs I > dont really have a solid > Back up system. A couple weeks ago I started getting A message in > disk utility > program ,"Volume Header Needs minor reapir", Well easy enough to > fix with reapiar disk > but it made me start wondering ,Is my disk going bad ? So I started > think it would be nice > all the way around to have a set up that mirrored the system disk > then have a raid set up > fpr my music. One thing that is streange is I changed the nam e of > my hd I kept all my > audio stuff on and the problem stopped . the name before was , > Audio_HD , Now it is > Audio HD I took out that underscore thinking my be the disk doesnt > like have that in it. > Seems silly but that was the only thing i did different after > installing the HD. ANyWay.... > Maybe I should use the maxtor in it now to do mirroring for a > regular back up , then set > up a raid conf with that Jive 5 and a pci controller that has at > least three connections. that > way I could have to seperate raid configurations as far as the one > for the two hds for the > system and the other three for recording and library storage. Why not just use a backup program like Retrospect and duplicate your disk to a second drive every day when you're done working? Also, incremental backups can be useful to keep older versions of your disk in case you erase a file by mistake and then duplicate the disk with the erased file. For those, it's easiest to use a large external drive - you can do it with DVDs but that's slow. - Dave

> The underscore was certainly a good idea. It is a usual sign and many > people who work in the terminal (shell) prefer names with > underscores. Spaces are generally not beloved by those people because > spacces separate file names and commands. > > I rather think that the renaming changed the header information and > the error was simply overwritten. Looks like you found a nice way to > repair such a minor problem ;-) > > > > Maybe I should use the maxtor in it now to do mirroring for a > > regular back up , then set > > up a raid conf with that Jive 5 and a pci controller that has at > > least three connections. that > > way I could have to seperate raid configurations as far as the one > > for the two hds for the > > system and the other three for recording and library storage. > > That PCI controller supports two different RAIDs simultaneously? > Amazing. > I am sorry Peter, That what I said abou tthe two raid configurations is an assumption on my part I h=guess due to lack of knowledge. I assumed that the two Hds in my comuter and the three I would have hooked up to the Jive 5 with a pci controller woukld in fact be two sepertae .........I dont know how to say ummmm two seperate entites in it self Like the two in the computer already are being controlled by its own (their own) controller and the pci slot would be another one. Thanks for bringing that to my attention though. as far as in field or in house.. I just bought a MacBookPro 2.16 Laptop which I am thinking abou tpairing it up to the new apogee ensamble or getting the Mini adc twp channel pre amp convertor and getting Oh I dont know a small analog mixer with at least 4 bus with at least 12 channels so I could have 8 dedicated for a drum then at least one gtr bass vox and Gtr 2 we could do more tracks in house if needed or use the (a) mixer as a stereo 2 channel out to the apogee convertor and get a full live mix. I am digging the ensamble cause it has all the features of the big boys but alot cheaper and that would be a perfect compannion in house or in feild whether or not I had a mixer. So with that said my main computer is the one we are talking about and that will alway sbe in house I have it hooked up to a tascam 1884 fw fro my DAW/audio interface. SO i guess I would have to get some sort of ext Hd drive or raid system the ext raid are pretty pricey I think . I thought I saw on maxtors site a big desktop raid setup from either a fw800/400. Sorry I dont mean to jump around But I am glad to have you answering and well just giving me your 2 cents because I always see you give good info and you know your Sh*t as an engineer and as aLogic user. So with that said I am going to check into the two raid configuration thing and if I have to go with one ,look over your notes again on the raids.. Oh BTW I do have at my disposal a Glyph GT050 Professional 150 GB fw hd that I emptied a while ago and it is just sitting there off right now. I was using it for a de ja vu back up for a while then I put video on it and I cleared it out so I could use it with my MBP on the raod whether on stage or recording. But since I guess it isnt good to use it for both I havent decided what to do with it. !50 GBs these days doesnt seem big enough to partiton. if you have anymore opinions or info I would love to hear them . thanks again for your responses

>> Peter Ostry: >> That PCI controller supports two different RAIDs simultaneously? >> Amazing. > > On 19.09.2006, at 20:13, garygenn wrote: > I am sorry Peter, That what I said abou tthe two raid > configurations is an assumption on > my part I h=guess due to lack of knowledge. No need to be sorry ;-) because that is possible. There are hardware controllers which support several array sets simultaneously and more than one host machine. I just don't know which kind of controllers exist as PCI cards. It could have two plugs and be configured for two arrays for example. > ... > So with that said I am going to check into the two raid > configuration thing and if I have to > go with one ,look over your notes again on the raids.. Oh BTW I do > have at my disposal a > Glyph GT050 Professional 150 GB fw hd that I emptied a while ago > and it is just sitting > there off right now. One external drive for field recordings and one array for the studio is a good solution. There are just two "security leaks" for the portable drive: it can fail and it can get damaged during the transport. I would simply get two of that cheap external Firewire drives with their own housing and power supply. Both formatted. If one fails you just take the other one as it is, that will steal you just a couple of minutes. And if you have the space on your internal drive you may want to backup the recorded files to your laptop. ___ Peter Ostry

--- ScottLance <forums@logic-users.org> wrote: I come from a > Digital Performer background, which I have have left > because of Motu's > terrible support (ie you cant get through to get any > help from them). Glad to have you with us Scott but even Motu's "terrible" support is a step up from Apple's non-existent support for Logic. Well, in fairness, there appears to be some support but the cost is prohibitive. JP

Does anyone of you use the Focusrie Liquidmix? I spent about $1.500 during the last months for several compressor and EQ plugins. Now I found out that the Liquidmix is way cheaper. Does that device really deliver different sounds or can it be seen as one plugin suite with a Liquidmix sound? ___ Peter Ostry

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, Peter Ostry <po@...> wrote: > > One external drive for field recordings and one array for the studio > is a good solution. There are just two "security leaks" for the > portable drive: it can fail and it can get damaged during the > transport. I would simply get two of that cheap external Firewire > drives with their own housing and power supply. Both formatted. If > one fails you just take the other one as it is, that will steal you > just a couple of minutes. And if you have the space on your internal > drive you may want to backup the recorded files to your laptop. Good Idea about the two drives for the feild. they are cheap enough to get two and I really just need to get it from "out there " to "in here"

i saw screenshots and a review in Computer Music, it looks ecxellent! its mainly for EQ and compressors, though. it has heaps of analog-modelled compressors and some of their own too. id say its worth investigating....

On Sep 20, 2006, at 8:56 PM, fuzoid wrote: > Message posted by fuzoid <fuzoid@hotmail.com>: > > i saw screenshots and a review in Computer Music, it looks > ecxellent! its mainly for EQ and compressors, though. it has heaps > of analog-modelled compressors and some of their own too. id say > its worth investigating.... > > I have one - it isn't as wonderful as my Liquid channel preamps and I can convince myself that the models there sound a tiny bit better but it is a good product and they do a great job supporting users. Keep in mind that at 88.1khz, you are limited to 8 channels of liqud mix and that the expansion cards won't be out until late this year. Brian

On 21.09.2006, at 13:23, Brian Mikiten wrote: > I have one - it isn't as wonderful as my Liquid channel preamps and I > can convince myself that the models there sound a tiny bit better but > it is a good product and they do a great job supporting users. Keep > in mind that at 88.1khz, you are limited to 8 channels of liqud mix > and that the expansion cards won't be out until late this year. Thanks, Brian, out of curiousity: Did Focusrite emulate the devices and adapt the parameters for each model or did they emulate the sound and made it compatible to their parameter concept? In other words, can you setup one compressor or EQ and switch to other models to look what sounds best or do you have to concentrate on favorite models which you know and handle them as if they where individual boxes? ____ Peter Ostry