Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jdg]

i only use a handfull of pluggins, and no really problems with them yet.. the sonnox oxford limiter does do some weird things... it crashed only once with it, but most of the time when removing the pluggin, the GUI just slows down for a few moments, then its back to normal.

[Stephen Marsh]

I've had 1.1 on an intel desktop since March with a few issues (of course) but workable - safe to move to 1.2?  Any consensus yet?--Steph

[bigaudioblowhard]

I quickly tried the DEMO mode of 1.2 on my Intel MacBook. Seems okay, if this helps.

bab

[Stephen Marsh]

No love - 1.2 wouldn't work on an intel desktop MacPro with a 302 interface for anything, don't waste your time.  I went back to 1.1 with the patch DIO driver from the Metric Halo site - that's buggy as a southern summer night but it runs.

I wonder when Sonic is going to put out some software that's made to, and will, run properly on a computer you can actually go buy

--Steph

[tom eaton]

Now that's a litte harsh.

I have a number of Quadra 950s and even a Nubus PowerMac 8100 (40mHz!) in my basement I'd be happy to sell you.  Sonic works real good on those.

My Quadra 950 here at work boots up fine every day in OS 7.6.1.  Very reliable.  It's a blazing 25mHz machine.  

I can't bring myself to put them out to pasture.

I'm waiting on a Sonic product that will be as stable as my "Classic" 5.4b10 ... sad, really.  I WANT to buy new mastering software... and I actually want to buy from Sonic, but I just don't trust it yet.

t

[Jerry Tubb]

OK, for pure curiosity, I've been considering doing this shoot-out between Pro Tools HD 7.x and SoundBlade 1.2 -

(to keep the test simple, no plug-ins)

1. import a 24-bit unmastered mix into PT HD.

2. master the song through the analog EQ loop, back into PT.

3. without changing any settings, immediately switch to SoundBlade, repeat the same procedure. All i/o, processing, & hardware should be exactly the same, only the DAW software changes, and any necessary routing for Core Audio.

4. use your preferred method to compare the two mastered songs for any sonic differences.

Also do the same shoot-out using analog tape as the source instead of a digital file.

Anyone tried this, or something similar?

Any predictions or issues?

I'm not doubting the integrity of PT HD, just curious about SoundBlade.

JT

[Matt_G]

jfrigo wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 01:56

PMCD is the alternative to waveburner, while sB is the complete DAW. As for having muliple sample rates in the same project, I don't know of any DAW that does that. You'd need multiple clocks and multiple DACs, or everything would have to be SRCd in real-time, which is not something that sounds good to me.

Well add this one to your list... WaveEditor, it can playback multiple sample rates in the same session without converting the files on input using one sound card. How does it do it? Using iZoope's 64bit SRC in real time on playback & it sounds fantastic. Just set up the Core Audio driver in "Audio Midi Set Up" to the destination sample rate of your choice e.g. 44.1kHz & if you load or work on any 48, 88.2 or 96kHz files it SRC's them in realtime to 44.1kHz on output & sounds very transparent. Alternatively if you wanted to work & capture at 96kHz you could  set the Audio Midi Setup I/O to 96Khz so you can playback 44.1 or 48k files & record back in at 96k all in realtime for example.

Matt

[Andy Krehm]

Jerry Tubb wrote on Mon, 18 June 2007 03:38

OK, for pure curiosity, I've been considering doing this shoot-out between Pro Tools HD 7.x and SoundBlade 1.2 - (to keep the test simple, no plug-ins) 1. import a 24-bit unmastered mix into PT HD. 2. master the song through the analog EQ loop, back into PT. 3. without changing any settings, immediately switch to SoundBlade, repeat the same procedure. All i/o, processing, & hardware should be exactly the same, only the DAW software changes, and any necessary routing for Core Audio. 4. use your preferred method to compare the two mastered songs for any sonic differences. Also do the same shoot-out using analog tape as the source instead of a digital file. Anyone tried this, or something similar? Any predictions or issues? I'm not doubting the integrity of PT HD, just curious about SoundBlade. JT

If one is using the same hardware, i.e., a PT's 192, how could the results be any different?

I've done the same tests with WaveBurner and Pro Tools and the results null every time. Of course my tests were in regards to testing, burning and reloading but I don't see how adding the analog loop to the equation can make any difference.

[Roland Storch]

Stephen Marsh wrote on Fri, 15 June 2007 04:42

No love - 1.2 wouldn't work on an intel desktop MacPro with a 302 interface for anything, don't waste your time.  I went back to 1.1 with the patch DIO driver from the Metric Halo site - that's buggy as a southern summer night but it runs. --Steph

Which OSX to you use?
I will try the Version 1.2 with the MacBook Pro tonight.

[jfrigo]

Roland Storch wrote on Mon, 18 June 2007 10:02

Which OSX to you use?

You definitely want to be on the latest version of system software for Sonic stability. With versions of 10.3.X it's got some holes.

[jfrigo]

Matt_G wrote on Mon, 18 June 2007 09:01

jfrigo wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 01:56  or everything would have to be SRCd in real-time, which is not something that sounds good to me. Well add this one to your list... WaveEditor, it can playback multiple sample rates in the same session without converting the files on input using one sound card. How does it do it? Using iZoope's 64bit SRC in real time on playback & it sounds fantastic.

Exactly - everything SRC'd in real-time. This is absolutely great for sound designers and such, but in mastering I want to decide what gets SRC'd, when, and how. That's one of the worst things about Pro Tools - that it SRC's (and not well) on import without even telling you. The WaveEditor way is great for convenience to be sure, and valuable in some workflows, but too "automatic" for my tastes in mastering.

[Jerry Tubb]

Andy Krehm wrote on Mon, 18 June 2007 08:26

If one is using the same hardware, i.e., a PT's 192, how could the results be any different?

That's the point. The only difference would be the two playback and record software engines.

Curious to hear if the two ~software~ DAWs sound any different.

Or would Apple & Digi's "Core Audio" negate any possible differences?

Logic would dictate that the two results would be no different, but being stubborn, I prefer to prove it, at least to my own satisfaction.

Quote:

I don't see how adding the analog loop to the equation can make any difference.

Well since the analog loop is my normal MO, that's when I'm most likely to be "in the zone" and notice any subtle differences.


Thanks for the reply Andy, maybe I'll run the test this week and report in.

JT

[Andy Krehm]

Matt_G wrote on Mon, 18 June 2007 09:01

jfrigo wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 01:56 PMCD is the alternative to waveburner, while sB is the complete DAW. As for having muliple sample rates in the same project, I don't know of any DAW that does that. You'd need multiple clocks and multiple DACs, or everything would have to be SRCd in real-time, which is not something that sounds good to me. Well add this one to your list... WaveEditor, it can playback multiple sample rates in the same session without converting the files on input using one sound card. How does it do it? Using iZoope's 64bit SRC in real time on playback & it sounds fantastic. Just set up the Core Audio driver in "Audio Midi Set Up" to the destination sample rate of your choice e.g. 44.1kHz & if you load or work on any 48, 88.2 or 96kHz files it SRC's them in realtime to 44.1kHz on output & sounds very transparent. Alternatively if you wanted to work & capture at 96kHz you could  set the Audio Midi Setup I/O to 96Khz so you can playback 44.1 or 48k files & record back in at 96k all in realtime for example. Matt

Unfortunately, the current rev. of WE will not load split files without errors and so I'm forced to add a step of exporting the split files at same bit/sample rate as stereo files before I can successfully load it up in WE.

The company has offered me a beta version that supposedly fixes the problems but it comes with a severe warning to back up files, etc, etc,  and therefore I will not use it until they deem it ready for prime time.

I am also tired of beta testing having "helped" two companies recently sort out their issues.

I just want to buy something that works properly which is certainly not a given these days!

One of the reasons I bought Wave Editor rather than Sample Manager was that the upcoming features looked interesting but if one is using Pro Tools to create the original files, one needs to load up split files!

[Matt_G]

jfrigo wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 01:53

Exactly - everything SRC'd in real-time. This is absolutely great for sound designers and such, but in mastering I want to decide what gets SRC'd, when, and how. That's one of the worst things about Pro Tools - that it SRC's (and not well) on import without even telling you. The WaveEditor way is great for convenience to be sure, and valuable in some workflows, but too "automatic" for my tastes in mastering.

True, however the SRC in WE is non destructive (unlike Pro Tools) it SRC's the monitor output only (in realtime), so it doesn't process the file itself. If you don't want it to do this then you just change the SR in the 'Audio Midi Setup' to whatever SR you are wanting to work with.

I've just given my G5 a new task by using the built in optical S/PDIF I/O, I can now monitor WaveEditor, iTunes, Waveburner etc @ 24bit 44.1 or 48kHz & flick between it & Pro Tools on my DAC-1 input. This will be great for compiling masters during a session in WaveEditor or WaveBurner so I can listen to them at 44.1kHz while using Pro Tools at 96khz. If I had a realtime hardware SRC I could go straight out of Pro Tools at 96kHz through the SRC to 44.1kHz & capture straight into WaveEditor at 24-44.1kHz for CD assembly using the built in optical in on the G5.

Could be a very efficient way to work...

Matt

[Matt_G]

Andy Krehm wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 07:03

One of the reasons I bought Wave Editor rather than Sample Manager was that the upcoming features looked interesting but if one is using Pro Tools to create the original files, one needs to load up split files!

That's right Andy, actually I've been using WE 1.3b21 & it does load split L/R files very easily now. You just go to the file menu choose 'open', select just the .L file & it automatically pulls the .R one in & makes it a stereo document. They still need to fix this in SampleManager though.

I've been using WE1.3b21 for sometime now & it's very stable, not a single crash or bug to report yet. I think they are very close to releasing the official 1.3 release, so it's looking very promising.

Matt