On 1/4/05 8:00 am, "Paul Najar" <paulnajar@...> wrote: > Recently I had a whole bunch of tracks all going to Logic's outs 1 & 2 > and where those outputs come up in Totalmix I was occasionally peaking > in the red. When I split those tracks in Logic across 4 or 5 stereo > pairs there was no more peaks on any of the logic outs in Totalmix any > more. That shows a potential benefit of summing in TM right there. I > also agree with John that the difference between Logic and TM summing > is not huge but it is clearly improved to my ears. surely this is just the difference in where you pull the volume back down - master fader or in TM.

Hi there, since a couple of days Logic just starts playing a song when I open it. This isn't like a breakneck thing, but it is rather inconvenient. Is there a preference I can set? I've looked at pretty much every setting, but couldn't find anything. Cheers Hans Sytem: Logic 7.0.1 Logic 6.4.3 17" PB 1Ghz / 1 GB RAM OS X 10.3.7) MetricHalo MobileIO 2882 Unitor8

Hi ! I tryied to search some documentation about Logic 5.5 with no success.. really sorry but I need this information as quickly as possible. I have 2 Aardvark Q10 audio cards, a PC and Logic 5.5 The question is simple: is possible to record using 2 cards? Or, better, does Logic 5.5 supports 2 recording cards ? Thank you really for an answer..... Erik Lockwar

On 01/04/2005, at 8:10 PM, steve parker wrote: > > > On 1/4/05 8:00 am, "Paul Najar" <paulnajar@...> wrote: > >> Recently I had a whole bunch of tracks all going to Logic's outs 1 & 2 >> and where those outputs come up in Totalmix I was occasionally peaking >> in the red. When I split those tracks in Logic across 4 or 5 stereo >> pairs there was no more peaks on any of the logic outs in Totalmix any >> more. That shows a potential benefit of summing in TM right there. I >> also agree with John that the difference between Logic and TM summing >> is not huge but it is clearly improved to my ears. > > surely this is just the difference in where you pull the volume back > down - > master fader or in TM. Not entirely sure but I think unity gain (no change) is the optimum setting for any digital output because it does not ask the host program (Logic or Totalmix) to do the dither to make the gain change and thus a less affected (cleaner?) bit stream is achieved. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Paul Najar Jaminajar Music Production www.jaminajar.com

Didn't think of that. I'm using a G5 powerbook with a RME FireFace. Is Scrubbing done with the hardware or is it done in the software? I thought it was software! Naim

> --- upandemagic <upandemagic@h...> wrote: > > Please help. I recently purchased a Korg Triton Le > > keyboard and I have no idea how to get > > this board to work with Logic 7. I know what to do > > inside of Logic 7 but I have no clue > > what to do inside the Triton Le to get the two to > > communicate. I will use SoundDiver to > > get all the names, patches, etc. I just need > > someone to please tell me what settings I need > > to change in the Triton LE to get it to communicate > > with Logic as I have no idea and I don't > > want to spend a week reading all the Triton's > > manuals to figure it out. Assume I am in 1st > > grade and provide me with as many details as > > possible. Thank You. Are you wanting to use it as a slave for midi parts and how is it connected? gary

On 1/4/05 12:21 pm, "Paul Najar" <paulnajar@...> wrote: > Not entirely sure but I think unity gain (no change) is the optimum > setting for any digital output because it does not ask the host program > (Logic or Totalmix) to do the dither to make the gain change and thus a > less affected (cleaner?) bit stream is achieved. hi! logic's mix bus has loads of headroom - you can mix with all faders clipping and then pull down the master and the output will not clip. this should sound the same as pulling each individual fader down. (note that I don't at all recommend this a good practise!). gain change doesn't require dither *within* logic's mixer. (for simplicities sake I won't qualify that....) I'm not sure that I haven't misunderstood what you're doing... ..if I have, just ignore me.. steve.

It's worth checking out the Hammerfall AEB-8 I/O cards as well. They're cheap and they sound good. Not sure if you can have both an input and an output card connected to the 9652's internal ADAT connection. I just got this setup with the AEB-8 I only though, and it works great. As a long time Digi 888/24 user, I'm really impressed with Hammerfall. Jack

> > Op Thursday 31 March 2005 20:07, schreef paul kavicky: >> and i don't think that it's all >> some psychological hoo haa. > > As long as you close yourself off to parts of the scope like this, > don't > expect a sensible discussion or a usable result. > > Now anyone who searches for mysteries in the first domain, and > discards any > psychological influence as "hoo haa" has absolutely no clue what he's > talking > about. well, at least your responses are predictably pedantic. my point was that it might not be ALL about the psychology. and the meat of my post was that i suspect that there are things tin digital audio hat would eventually be able to be tested for which would demonstrate additional reasons why people are consistently hearing differences in said digital audio. a few posts later we found out one empirical and mathematical reason why summing might sound different, so that leads to my point. too many good engineers have the same reaction to audio for me to say it's all simply hoo haa. and i think that anyone who says that they are all imagining it has no clue what they are talking about. you didn't give a nod to the portion of my post that delved into the fact that your arguments that the math can't be wrong were the ones that were used when digital first came out. and people who heard differences in the audio were called fools then as well. later those fools were proved right. while i do want further information about digital audio to come to us in provable, empirical, and perhaps even mathematical form to rule out all things subjective, i assert that our current tests like phase inversion simply don't reveal all of the facts. i think to assume that we have all of the facts right now is arrogant and incorrect. especially as that assumption means that so many respected engineers, quoted here and otherwise, are assumed to be wrong for hearing differences. digiital audio is still a relatively young technology and i expect it to become better, and our understanding of it to grow, as time goes on. it's improved a lot in the last few years. and our understanding of it has grown. i am simply stating that the advancements in digital audio will likely reveal why we've been hearing differences now. and i bet there will be an actual provable technical reason that we can discover. and we might know more about this fairly soon given the rate of advancement in digital audio. so i do want the evidence to come in provable objective form. and i think it will. that will make us all happy. for now, though, i'll trust my ears more than my slide rule. that's what this job is about. cheers, paul pounce international http://marsh.prosoundweb.com/ - keyboard forum moderator

On 01/04/2005, at 4:11 PM, Lou Gimenez wrote: > If you like the speed of a mac IIVX go for it. That's what you > computer will feel like I might sound stupid here, but whats a mac IIVX? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------- Andrew Harrison Phantom Dog Music ABN 89 306 085 735 PO Box 663 Moonee Ponds Victoria Australia 3039 ph/fax: 613-93757605 email: andrew_harrison@... web: www.phantomdogmusic.com

I just began recieving this error as well. I have been mixing upwards of 40 audio tracks (24bit 44.1k) with success for the last six months. Within the last week I have have been getting the disk too slow error. George, should I reinstall 10.3.8 via the combo??? Remco, did this fix your proble? Here are my system specs... G5 dual 2g 2.5 gig RAM 160 gig SATA system drive 80gig SATA audio Drive 500gig firewire 800 "sample" drive MIO 2882 firewire i/o 10.3.8 LP 7.0.1 Any additional help would be great. Curtis

> I would suspect that this is more of a ram issue, meaning > loading all the song data from one song to the other, would > require a huge virtual ram disc... This issue of "ram to VR" > I could easily see causing crashes. Although I agree that this could be part of why Logic is crashing, it is still a bug. If there isn't enough RAM, the song should stop loading and a message stating that there is insufficient RAM or something to that effect should be displayed. When a program tries to allocate RAM, the OS will give the application status that the RAM can't be allocated if it isn't available and so this is still probably a Logic bug. Might be a bug with a plug-in or other related app though. Kamm

Keith Hess wrote: > > > Is there a way to keep Logic 6.4.2 running on a OS 9 partition from > searching my OS X partition when it tries to match samples to EXS > instruments? > > I'm considering reinstalling the OS X partition using the UFS > filesystem since I know OS 9 can't read that, but am hoping for an > easier, more elegant solution. Why not just have one set of samples on one of the partitions,e.g. the OS 9 partition? -- Pete Thomas www.petethomas.co.uk - Free Logic Icons, Environments and EXS Instruments

> well, at least your responses are predictably pedantic. I'm just being consistent. :o) Not that speaking of psychological issues as "hoo haa" isn't pedantic.. > my point was that it might not be ALL about the psychology. and the > meat of my post was that i suspect that there are things tin digital > audio hat would eventually be able to be tested for which would > demonstrate additional reasons why people are consistently hearing > differences in said digital audio. Not inside the digital domain. And what I replied to in the first place was the idea that lightpipe and adat as interfaces gave different results. > a few posts later we found out one empirical and mathematical reason > why summing might sound different, so that leads to my point. Of course, different reolutions lead to different results. I never disputed that. But weird stories about magical properties of numbers will perpetuate as long as the point of the discussion keeps changing to fit the argument, especially since the conclusion is always "they said it couldn't make a difference, and be hold it does, so who knows what else is possible". (Since this discussion was about said monitoring systems, the whole Lightpipe/Adat comparison I guess shouldn't have come up in the first place). My point was, is and will be: The same information passed to the same DA-converter will lead to the same sound,regardless of themedium used to deliver the information as long as it appears correctly and in time. > too many > good engineers have the same reaction to audio for me to say it's all > simply hoo haa. and i think that anyone who says that they are all > imagining it has no clue what they are talking about. You're throwing all cases on a pile, and then I'd be the last to say they're "all imagining it". But psychological aspects are an essential part of hearing, you still seem to think that it's "imagination" or "not real". It is real. It's just not a physical aspect of the sound itself. > you didn't give a > nod to the portion of my post that delved into the fact that your > arguments that the math can't be wrong were the ones that were used > when digital first came out. Yes I did actually. Math was used to claim everything up to the DA-conversion was perfect. Which of course was nonsence. But no reason to suspect mystical things happening INSIDE the digital domain (and ignoring things happening in the brain, where we actualy KNOW that we don't know anything). > and people who heard differences in the > audio were called fools then as well. later those fools were proved > right. Exactly. This changes nothing about anything I said though. > while i do want further information about digital audio to come to us > in provable, empirical, and perhaps even mathematical form You don't really want that, because you've been ignoring most of the mathematical proof I gave you. > to rule out > all things subjective, i assert that our current tests like phase > inversion simply don't reveal all of the facts. No, but they reveal all the facts you can hear, except psychological aspects since they aren't relative to volume, meaning that contrary to physical aspects, they don't become clearer when the rest of the sound becomes lower in volume. > i think to assume that > we have all of the facts right now is arrogant and incorrect. Youjust have to know which facts to assume right and which ones to doubt. If you just doubt any mathematical fact, you'll never get anywhere. > especially as that assumption means that so many respected engineers, > quoted here and otherwise, are assumed to be wrong for hearing > differences. There you go again. Psychological aspects are not wrong, imagined or lied, they're real. Just the cause is somewhere else than people might think. And in the case of your examples, mathematical rules were applied in the wrong place (to claim there is no such thing as a bad DA-converter). That doesn't mean all mathematical rules are wrong or unproven. > will make us all happy. for now, though, i'll trust my ears more than > my slide rule. that's what this job is about. That's no problem as long as you don't discard psychology, because that IS in your ears and not in your slide rule. :o) Because if you assume EVERY difference will be explained SOME time, you can never be proven wrong (and you will be wrong at some point). Maurits.

Hi all, well, after one of those fun internal hard drive crashes :-) I'm rebuilding my system. Too bad I didn't have a carbon copy clone lying around.... I'm having to do it all from scratch. I was previously running OS X 10.3.7 with Logic 6.3.1 installed - all working fine. When rebuilding the system, I did an install of OS X 10.3 from CD, and then updated to 10.3.8 using the Combo installer. Now I find after re-installing Logic from installation disks, Logic will crash if I try to select a Core Audio driver during the Setup Assistant phase. If I defer setting a driver during Setup Assistant, it will save my preferences OK. I can then launch Logic, with no audio driver selected, but as soon as I try to set the audio driver to either of my Core Audio interfaces (Built-in, or Novation XStation-Audio), and re-launch, Logic will crash. It doesn't matter whether I use the 6.01 version installed off the CD or whether I apply the 6.3.1 update (as far as Logic Audio goes....) both crash with the same behaviour. I just went back and reinstalled on another partion that only has OS X 10.3 installed and everything seems to work fine, at least with the Built-in Core Audio. Has anyone else had problems with Logic 6.3.1 under OS X 10.3.8 ? Is it a problem with the combo update rather than incremental? Any suggestions of how to go *back* to 10.3.7 without having to do the whole reinstall again?!! I'm planning to upgrade to Logic Express fairly soon, but have concerns about AU validation issues (the trial version won't run Reaktor 4.1.3 for instance....) so I'd like to have 6.3.1 around even when I do upgrade.... Hope this doesn't mean I'm stuck at OS X 10.3.7 forever :-) thanks in advance... Mark

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:09:02 -0500, Jesse Buehler <pulsewidth2@...> wrote: > I recently had to replace my hard drive and reload all of my > software. After loading logic back on (Logic Adio 6.3.1), it > will not start. After clicking the icon, all I can get is > Initializing Core Audio, however, nothing ever happens. Any > suggestions? I'm dying here! Hi Jesse, I'm in the same boat - in fact my 6.3.1 crashes during initialization of Core Audio. See my other post about this for details. Are you using OS X 10.3.8 by any chance? I was previously on 10.3.7 before my hard drive crashed - I did a combo update to 10.3.8 and now it seems I'm regretting it :-) cheers, Mark

> jake holmes wrote: >> It even works in DTDM but since I'm not using Core Audio that makes >> it pretty much useless. > Can you explain what you mean here? > If you´re using DTDM you SHOULD NOT use Core Audio at the same time. > DTDM is a "native" mixer abstractum that feeds into TDM via ESB. > Peter I was just saying that since I am using TDM I can't input audio in DTDM. If I was using Core audio I could.and GR would work for me.Sorry to be so obscure.

A pre PPC Mac... 68030 if I remember right. George On Apr 1, 2005, at 6:07 AM, Andrew Harrison wrote: > I might sound stupid here, but whats a mac IIVX? ________________________________________________________ www.utopiaparkwaymusic.com Mac AND PC: The only way to fly 8-}

Does Logic pro 7 have an RTA for input monitoring? I did find an RTA for tracks that were already recorded, but it didnt work when I was monitoring the inputs (in other words, a pre tape mixer RTA) thanks Jonathan

On 4/1/05 7:14 AM, "logic-users@yahoogroups.com" <logic-users@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > Message: 8 > Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:54:52 -0000 > From: "Bishop Salamat Khokhar" <gbcpk@...> > Subject: (Repost) Any Tascam US-122 users ? I don't have the US-122, but was just working with a friend on his new US-428, so I hope what we did there will help you. > > I have purchased Logic Pro 7 and using it with Tascam US-122. > Every time I try to play a song in Logic I get this error. > "Error while trying to synchronize audio and midi." Usually this error message then includes: "Sample rate xxxx recognized" Does your computer give you this message? You might try checking to see if the sample rate set in CoreAudio is the same as the song's sample rate. You can check your CoreAudio settings in AudioMIDI Setup, under Utilities menu. (See below) > I have PowerMac G4 with processor 1.25 GHz OS 10.3.8 > 768 MB DDR SDRAM. > Also I do not get any output (sound) from my audio interface. Once again, check settings in AudioMIDI setup. If you have installed all the correct drivers (you get these from Tascam.com or on disc with your interface) you should be able to able to select your interface in this menu. You then need to tell Logic that you want to use this interface, by going to the Audio Hardware and Drivers menu. I am doing this from memory, and have just started using Logic 7, so I hope this procedure is still correct. This should help - however, the "Error while trying...." message is one that sometimes seems to make no sense to me - it sometimes names a seemingly random sample rate, (i.e. not 44100 or 48000 but something like 43936) and I confess I don't understand where that comes from. I've asked the list on occasion but have not gotten any further myself on this one.... HTH Blair > > Salamat Khokhar -- blairfisher@...

Hi, I run Logic 5.5 on a 1.6 gig pc w/ Windows 98 and 512 ram. I'm thinking of upgraing to a faster processor and Windows XP. I have two questions. 1. Should I stick with service pack 1 for XP (my music computer is not my online computer). 2. Will there be a problem with Logic if I get a processor with hyperthreading (this computer is used only for music). Thanks for any help, -- Buddy Nuanez 40:31 Music

I am currently getting Logic 7 setup for use on some audio work. L7 is installed on a used (new to me) Mac MDD DP 867MHz G4. I noticed last night that as I load plug-ins on an instrument track that they are being loaded on to the second CPU only(as per Audio Performance meter). I have some questions in regad to this. - How does L7 juggle plug-ins between CPUs? (Audio on one CPU and Audio Instr on the other?) - Does L7 handle this differently than L6? - Do I need set anything in the program to utilize two CPUs? - If so, what is the setting? I only added a few plug-ins on an Audio Instrument track and it railed the plug-in. The largest culprit is NI Guitar Rig with 35% CPU usage, and I was not even playing any sound through it. I thought I would see better performance out of this setup. Also, one additional question. I am trying to set the record length of an audio track. It seems to stop after a 7-8 minutes. How do I increase this number? I remember in Logic v5.5.1 I could set the maximum record length. Mac G4 Specs ------------ Apple Mac G4 - Mirrored Door Dual G4 867MHz (4 sticks) Kingston 512GB PC-2700 RAM Total 2.0GB RAM Western Digital 120GB PATA - OS Drive Western Digital 250GB PATA - Sample Drive Western Digital 250GB SATA - Work Drive Nvidia GeForce Titanium USB 7 Port Powered Hub RME-Audio HDSP PCI and Multiface Audio Interface (3) UAD-1 Audio Cards (1) Powercore PCI Element (1) Powercore FireWire Compact Emagic XSKey Dongle Steinberg CubaseSX Dongle iLok Dongle OSX 10.3.8 with latest patches Thanks in advance, :: chuck hasek :: dj saint :: boulder / denver co :: www.mercury26.com

On 1.4.2005, at 12:58, Hans Hafner wrote: > > > Hi there, > > since a couple of days Logic just starts playing a song when I open > it. This isn't like a breakneck thing, but it is rather inconvenient. > > Is there a preference I can set? I've looked at pretty much every > setting, but couldn't find anything. > > Cheers > Hans Not sure if this helps but how about stopping it and then saving again ? Cheers Check out the web page for my band updated 12.12.2004 . New home address : http://jormapen.fidisk.fi

On Apr 1, 2005, at 7:19 AM, Mark Pedersen wrote: > > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:09:02 -0500, Jesse Buehler > <pulsewidth2@...> wrote: >> I recently had to replace my hard drive and reload all of my >> software. After loading logic back on (Logic Adio 6.3.1), it >> will not start. After clicking the icon, all I can get is >> Initializing Core Audio, however, nothing ever happens. Any >> suggestions? I'm dying here! > > Hi Jesse, > > I'm in the same boat - in fact my 6.3.1 crashes during initialization > of Core Audio. See my other post about this for details. Are you using > OS X 10.3.8 by any chance? I was previously on 10.3.7 before my hard > drive crashed - I did a combo update to 10.3.8 and now it seems I'm > regretting it :-) > > cheers, > > Mark > Have you guys just let Logic boot for a long time, like 5 or more minutes? I know that when you upgrade to LP7 from 6, and leave 6 on your drive, that it WILL take a long time to boot up the first time you try 6 again. Try this one out... George ________________________________________________________ www.utopiaparkwaymusic.com Mac AND PC: The only way to fly 8-}

> From: Hans Hafner <hanshafner@...> > since a couple of days Logic just starts playing a song when I open > it. This isn't like a breakneck thing, but it is rather inconvenient. > Is there a preference I can set? I've looked at pretty much every > setting, but couldn't find anything. Hey hans, just resave the song while it's not playing. If you save during playback logic automatically starts playback upon opening the saved version..... hth, Sam Zeines Composer/Producer www.clockwirk.com