19 Oct
2016
19 Oct
'16
10:48 p.m.
I think that may or may not be useful, depending on how well it works.
Declaring such a thing 'THE FUTURE OF AUDIO PLUGINS' and worrying about a
standardized protocol is goofy as hell.
The OP seems very resistant to the idea of actually doing something, but
insists that this is THE WAY FORWARD.
That's why people are not taking the discussion seriously.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:25:26PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
The audio engineer with the promotionally
effective name demands
another audio engineer for this kind of assistance. IOW a human does
the mix and another human does the fine tuning. This is quasi the
counterpart of what Fons already mentioned. Let iZotope's Track
Assitant/Neutron do the mix, then use iZotope's Track Assitant/Neutron
to do the fine tuning of the mix it produced before.
I spent most the evening with a group a sound engineers, discussing
things ranging from mixing desk ergonomics to how to approach a
particular mix that our host presented as an example of his work.
Inspired by this thread, I dared to coin the question 'how would
you feel about an EQ plugin that analyses the track it's in, gets
information from its peers in other tracks, and then adjusts itself ?'
Result: general hilarity. Consensus was that this the most stupid
thing ever suggested. Had to take some action to avoid damage to
my own reputation.
Ciao,
--
FA
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user