On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 16:39 +0100, Harry van Haaren wrote:
I'll add a note that if looping the playback
output, using the 1st
option the FX must constantly processes. Option 2 has the FX "recorded
in", which means the FX chain doesn't use CPU.
Unfortunately this is a very important advice!
Assumed the digital effects are part of the studio in the box, the
computer's horsepower seems to be much too important.
Currently I make a song using a digital LFO controlled bandpass from 19"
gear, Qtractor insert out -> sound card ADAT to analog -> analog in
digital effect analog out -> analog to ADAT sound card -> Qtractor
insert in. Assumed I could use all ADAT channels, I would use more
external digital effects. JFTR, for me the computer's horsepower isn't
an issue, but external digital effects often are much better than the
available Linux plugins. YMMV!
On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 13:36 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
I had the pleasure of mixing for KISS back in the
I remember 15 years ago there were a few fashions, it was chic to e.g.
use "The Boiler" ( http://www.ridgefarmindustries.com/bprod.htm
suspect that at the same time the visual vintage design was used for
computer plugins too. It's strange that they until today tend to use
faked old gear, make vintage looking GUIs and often they use real old
gear. No successful Rockband comes without Orange amps, Vox AC30 etc.,
unfortunately they produce their Rock music, often recorded in old
analog studios, using real Mellotrons etc., in the same way all the
mainstream pop music is produced.
Using less compressors, or at least carefully using the compressors
would be welcome. When I was young I had not the money to buy or build
compressors myself, later compressors were available and nowadays I try
to work without compressors again, that's the luxury we have, if we
don't make a living from music and audio engineering. When I learned
audio engineering one of the most important rules was: If people are
able to hear the compressor, you didn't use it correctly.