| Re: Summing [message #198993 is a reply to message #197848 ] |
Wed, 15 November 2006 20:15  |
 |
 Ronny
Messages: 2739
Registered: April 2004
Location: Brunswick, Georgia |
Platinum Member |
|
|
| danlavry wrote on Thu, 09 November 2006 18:56 |
| Ronny wrote on Thu, 09 November 2006 21:18 |
| danlavry wrote on Fri, 27 October 2006 13:05 |
I suppose my interest in intermediate dithering is born out of the way I tend to work plus the fact that I have done a lot of bouncing in 40 years of recording. I don't use a PC, I use a stand alone DAW, an AKAI DPS24. For various reasons I tend to bounce and print several submixes. These, along with the remaining tracks are mixed to the final stereo mix. Clearly it is important to the quality of my final mix that the printed bounced sub mixes are dithered, and not truncated, before they are printed.
Ian
|
| Quote: |
I have not examined in detail the internal working of a DAW, but at first glance, I would think that more bits calls for much more then then just more storage and a wider buss. It may call for a more powerful compute engine.
Regards
Dan Lavry
http://www.lavryengineering.com
|
The beauty of printing the process rather than running it in real time, is that the power of the computer engine need not be extravagant. The less power and processing speed, the longer it typically takes to print, but that's about it from my experience of printing processes, rather than trying to run a bunch in real time. The benefit is that the computer can take the time it needs to process the signal effectively. For real time processing, yes, the more process' that you run, the more power that you'll need, for printing processes not so important as the computer doesn't have to keep up with the power needed for real time processing. You have less chance of errors to occur and you completely eliminate the latency that you get from processing in real time chaining through various processors.
|
I agree, but many of my customers want to hear what they are doing as they are doing it (real time).
Say you are a mastering engineer and you have to do a sample rate conversion from 96KHz to 44.1KHz. Say you have 2 options:
1. Use a real time SRC, a bit costly to buy, and may yield good results.
2. Use an much less expansive software SRC that will take an hour or a few hours but yield very good results.
What would you do?
There are many people in the music production business that need to monitor every step they do by ear. In many cases, they like to do multiple tasks simultaneously and listen to what they are doing. That way, if something is "off", you can "fix it" immediately, instead of waiting for a long time.
I am not advocating one way or the other. It depends on needs, style, experience...
Regards
Dan Lavry
http://www.lavryengineering.com
|
If you would have asked me that 10 years ago, I would have said real time, every time, but now a days processors are so fast that printing a SRC takes little time on 2 track mixes. Printing dynamic processes or eq tweaks, just a matter of seconds, but you have to know what you want, there isn't the experimentation that real time processing allows, so it's not for every application. Typically when I run real time I'm incorporating analog processing, but if it's all digital, printing provides stability without latency issues and has benefits regarding less CPU taxation on large multi-track projects.
------Ronny Morris - Digitak Mastering------
---------http://digitakmastering.com---------
----------Powered By Experience-------------
-------------Driven To Perfection---------------
|
|
|
Recording Engineering & Production: The nuts and bolts of making records better, not just louder and cheaper. Some of the brightest minds from the creative and scientific world of audio discuss the elements of audio production that interest you most.
Members
Search
FAQ
Register
Login
Home
