19 Oct
2011
19 Oct
'11
2:44 p.m.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Arnold Krille <arnold(a)arnoldarts.de> wrote:
On Wednesday 19 October 2011 11:23:09 Jeremy Jongepier
wrote:
I haven't had issues per se with CPU resources (whern I am using Jamin, I am
not doing anything else except recording the output), but what are the
alleged flaws in Jamin?
--
Brett W. McCoy -- http://www.electricminstrel.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the rhythm of music a secret is hidden; If I were to divulge it, it
would overturn the world."
-- Jelaleddin Rumi
On 10/19/2011 10:52 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Completely rebuilding Jamin with single plugins will consume even more cpu
than jamin itself. The reason is that jamin is actually built from plugins
(the look-ahead and the compressors are plugins) but also merges plugins
internally to optimize for speed...
+1, regarding to Jamin is good and it does work
without pumping.
I'm not so fond of JAMin. It has flaws and consumes way too much CPU.
About a year ago Patrick Shirkey mentioned that there was no other JACK
application that attempts to provide a complete mastering chain. But
that was about a year ago, at the moment it is perfectly possible to
create a similar tool chain with the help of plug-ins. I prefer plug-ins
then, more flexible.