I think that Emagic has established a quite interesting native processing model in its Logic/AW2 package. Combined with a new computer, individual artists or songwriters (bands have different requirements) are now able to make very good recordings and mix them entirely in Logic. It's a simple, clean system that is not for everyone (i.e. bands), but could be ideal for many of us. Now that 24-bit, 96kHz converters are becoming available, why doesn't Emagic make the next logical move, and produce an AW2 "24/96"? By sticking with only a stereo in and out, the cost of the card could be kept down - some of us might be able to afford one by merely selling off our external effects boxes. Then we could forget having to buy external effects boxes and that new digital mixer (with inferior converters). We could leave the "hybrid" studio (half computer based, half centered around the old mixer) behind. I'm a songwriter who sometimes makes artist demos. My studio is not in my bedroom, but it is very small. For my purposes, the ideal setup would be: -Logic -AW2 (24/96) -Great mics and preamps -new G4 (or whatever the best Wintel machine is) -NO external effects units or big mixing board What this is NOT, is a setup for a band. But for people who work on non-band projects (most of us?), and with a taste for very high sonic quality, this would provide a system that is ahead of ProTools at only a fraction of the price. And Emagic already has all of it, except for the new converters. What say ye, friends? Emagic? Tony Maxwell

interesting concepts.... but its funny how one would be particularly keenly interested in a G4 .. which has merely hit the market.. instead of thinking about getting more important studio equipment.. such as :-) a lexicon ob fx. mpc category dmseq.sampler. etc. (these will last for yearsssss) :-) I would not worry too much about getting the latest mac... since i am positive that before year 2000 hit we will be seeing a G5... (or whatever the name will be). lol Actually the next mac to hit the block might be rightfully named 'GJobs' Willlydon (the original spengargon). -----Original Message----- From: Tony Maxwell <tony@i...> To: logic-users@onelist.com <logic-users@onelist.com> Date: Saturday, September 11, 1999 11:54 PM Subject: [LUG] Emagic's next move >From: "Tony Maxwell" <tony@i...> > >I think that Emagic has established a quite interesting native processing >model in its Logic/AW2 package. Combined with a new computer, individual >artists or songwriters (bands have different requirements) are now able to >make very good recordings and mix them entirely in Logic. It's a simple, >clean system that is not for everyone (i.e. bands), but could be ideal for >many of us. > >Now that 24-bit, 96kHz converters are becoming available, why doesn't Emagic >make the next logical move, and produce an AW2 "24/96"? By sticking with >only a stereo in and out, the cost of the card could be kept down - some of >us might be able to afford one by merely selling off our external effects >boxes. Then we could forget having to buy external effects boxes and that >new digital mixer (with inferior converters). We could leave the "hybrid" >studio (half computer based, half centered around the old mixer) behind. > >I'm a songwriter who sometimes makes artist demos. My studio is not in my >bedroom, but it is very small. For my purposes, the ideal setup would be: >-Logic >-AW2 (24/96) >-Great mics and preamps >-new G4 (or whatever the best Wintel machine is) >-NO external effects units or big mixing board > >What this is NOT, is a setup for a band. But for people who work on non-band >projects (most of us?), and with a taste for very high sonic quality, this >would provide a system that is ahead of ProTools at only a fraction of the >price. And Emagic already has all of it, except for the new converters. > >What say ye, friends? Emagic? > >Tony Maxwell > >--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- > >ONElist now has T-SHIRTS! >For details and to order, go to: ><a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/tshirt1 ">Click Here</a> > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >

I for one would love a simple stereo analog 24/96 card (some midi i/o would be good too). I would venture to say that a lot of us are lone rangers, producing music for ourselves, by ourselves, that don't need 24 channels of i/o, etc. etc. How bout a stereo card who's main selling point was the *sound quality*? It's just crazy enough to work. Mike > > Now that 24-bit, 96kHz converters are becoming available, why doesn't Emagic > make the next logical move, and produce an AW2 "24/96"? By sticking with > only a stereo in and out, the cost of the card could be kept down - some of

> I for one would love a simple stereo analog 24/96 card (some midi i/o would > be good too). I would venture to say that a lot of us are lone rangers, > producing music for ourselves, by ourselves, that don't need 24 channels of > i/o, etc. etc. How bout a stereo card who's main selling point was the > *sound quality*? It's just crazy enough to work. I might also add that this kind of card would not only suit us lone rangers or "TBB" (=the bedroom brigade), but also for people who need to convert all kinds of audio to digital form, where the best possible sonic quality is required. Don't know about the midi i/o, but a digital i/o like in the existing AW cards would probably be necessary. Tony Maxwell

check out LynxOne. It's definitely working well for some. I'd be interested to hear from others about this one. www.lynxstudio.com Jim > Message: 15 > Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 03:36:45 -0400 > From: "Michael Package" <mpackage@e...> > Subject: Re: Emagic's next move > > I for one would love a simple stereo analog 24/96 card (some midi i/o would > be good too). I would venture to say that a lot of us are lone rangers, > producing music for ourselves, by ourselves, that don't need 24 channels of > i/o, etc. etc. How bout a stereo card who's main selling point was the > *sound quality*? It's just crazy enough to work. > > Mike > > > > Now that 24-bit, 96kHz converters are becoming available, why doesn't Emagic > > make the next logical move, and produce an AW2 "24/96"? By sticking with > > only a stereo in and out, the cost of the card could be kept down - some of

willydon@q... writes: >I would not worry too much about getting the latest mac... >since i am positive that before year 2000 hit we will be >seeing a G5... (or whatever the name will be). Well, unless you're privy to some earth-shattering secret in the computer business, this is one of the silliest predictions I've ever heard (not as silly as the Y2K bullsh*t, but still wrong... oops, it's not 2000 yet so I can't technically call it "wrong"). You do realize that 2000 is less than 4 months away, and that the G4 hasn't even arrived at most of the planet, right? I know what I'll be saying shortly after midnight December 31/1999: "Where the hell are all the flying cars??" f-erenc

> I know what I'll be saying shortly after midnight December > 31/1999: "Where the hell are all the flying cars??" > This one has to be memorized, great !!!! regards, Hans

Hi people, >I for one would love a simple stereo analog 24/96 card (some midi >i/o would be good too). High-quality stereo I/O cards exist on the market already. Emagic should specialize in what they're best at; software development. The AW8 proved to be problematic hardware, had poor driver support until very recently, distracted Emagic from the numerous deficiencies of the audio engine, and discouraged them from publishing objective system recommendations which would show up the AW8. These were & are still very serious negative effects, for the entire community of Logic users. If Emagic wish to deliver any audio card to their customers in future, it must be OEM'd from someone else; possibly with (EASI) driver assistance from Emagic. Cheers, Thomas

>From: zerobeat@g... (f-erenc szabo) > >willydon@q... writes: >>I would not worry too much about getting the latest mac... >>since i am positive that before year 2000 hit we will be >>seeing a G5... (or whatever the name will be). > >Well, unless you're privy to some earth-shattering secret >in the computer business, this is one of the silliest >predictions I've ever heard (not as silly as the Y2K >bullsh*t, but still wrong... oops, it's not 2000 yet so I >can't technically call it "wrong"). > >You do realize that 2000 is less than 4 months away, >and that the G4 hasn't even arrived at most of the planet, >right? > >I know what I'll be saying shortly after midnight December >31/1999: "Where the hell are all the flying cars??" > >f-erenc Now I guess this is a prime example of the things to be discussed on the new logic-ot list on the onelist. Or not? >:-), Yoonchi. @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ¥ð ;ðnÂÂÂ&c opy;hí "Change has always come from small minorities." Robert Fripp, 1980 http://victorian.fortunecity.com/pinter/438/ http://noten.nl.fortunecity.com/jazz/8/ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

From: "Thomas Whitmore" <thomasw@t... > The AW8 proved to be problematic hardware, had poor driver support until > very recently. Still has. The mme driver is embarrasing. Native EASI driver for LAWP is embarrasingly slow at automation.

> I know what I'll be saying shortly after midnight December > 31/1999: "Where the hell are all the flying cars??" ... and what about the rocket packs??? Regards, Matt -- Matt Kain matt@m... ----------