EXS 24 Logic Sampler Users Group

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kaveh Cohen" <kavehc@...>
To: <exs-users@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 3:35 AM
Subject: [exs] NATIVE MYTHS


> Technodork, I'm afraid to inform you that you will NOT be seeing native
systems running at the efficiency of dedicated DSP hardware
> systems like Pro Tools.  I own a G4 running Logic Platinum with lots of
RAM, big drives etc. etc. and I work with Pro Tools on a regular
> basis.

>  There are several key elements you left out of your discussion.  First of
all, the type of plug-in determines how many you can
> open.

This is true for PT too, and for any computational system in the (known)
universe. Each system has only a limited amount of processing resources.

> Logic's own plug-ins run native 32bit under Logic's audio engine which is
G4 native.  As a result you have a high plug-in count.
> The minute you start using CPU intensive plug-ins that are non native such
as the Waves plug-ins, that plug-in count drops hugely.

This is normal..... the more DSP a plug uses, the less you can use. Also in
PT.

> As far as the track count is concerned, you may be seeing 80 tracks of
audio, but as soon as you start making edits and cuts in those tracks, the
> strain on the hard drive will increase dramatically and your track count
will decrease.

Who told you this? Have you actually tried it? It's interesting that here
this doesn't happen (PC Logic).

> Sure if you have 80 linear tracks of audio with
> no edits or cuts or crossfades or any other edit of any sort, they'll play
back.  Start cutting and your track count will drop.
 > The comparison between Pro Tools and native systems is beginning to get
ridiculous.  Pro Tools allows 64 tracks of audio playing back with
> hundreds of edits and cuts and fades without so much as a hiccup.  This is
not the case of native systems.

Sorry to tell you, but this is simply not true. Actually track data is read
precached, and not on the fly, so the more you cut,
the less the HD is "strained", as the total amount of readen data is less,
and seek time is the same. Btw, have you any idea of the absurd amount of
performance you can squeeze out of modern HDs? Get a $100 raid card with 2
IBM DTLAs and you're done.

>  Also, most importantly, the
> TDM plug-ins are way better.  Way better. For that very same reason,
companies like Bomb Factory, Serrato, Focusrite, Lexicon and a
> shopping list of others will NOT support VST.

Bomb, Serato, Lexicon don';t offer VST stuff for economic/piracy reasons.
There is no reason why a TDM plugin would sound better than a VST plugin
using the same algorithm. Fact is that  TDM market is more lucrative than
VST's. Do you think lexi could sell a $1000 VST plugin where people spends
$400 for the whole cubase/logic? They correctly chose to sell it only as a
$1000 TDM plug, to people that just spent $10000 for the system.

> In the professional arena, you cannot compare say Roomulator with the
Lexiverb.

Well, not even in the "beginner's arena" you can do that. They are different
products.

> Now I'm gonna get a hundred replies saying that they do professional work
and who am I to say you're not a
> professional if you don't own Pro Tools, so let me qualify by saying that
Pro Tools has merely set the professional standard.

This is a very good point and i agree. But PTools is a standard because it
was the first available good audio solution, not really on year 2001
technical merits.

> standard is first and foremost, compatibility.  Almost all pros working in
film and tv for example own a Pro Tools rig simply so they can
> be one hundred percent compatible with one another.  This saves time since
time costs money.

Agree 100%/. You basically said that you as a pro are *forced* to use PT for
other reasons than quality/performance. True, and Digi would like this
happening forever.

> A Cubase user on his multiprocessor G4 with a gazillion megs of RAM and
fourteen
> 500 gig firewire drives cannot simply get up and go to another studio with
a different G4 or G3 setup running Logic or Digital Performer
> and be up and running in a minute, or at all.

Well, not even a ProTools user can simply get up and go to another studio
with a different G4 or G3 setup running Logic or Digital Performer and be up
and running in a minute, or at all. Maybe going to a studio that uses your
same program helps :))))

> So to answer your remarks Technodork, this system may work well when you
work alone or if you have non-stop linear audio, but the moment
> things get a hair more complicated than that, native is not the answer.

This is simply not true.... why are you saying this? Why PT should have an
inherent advantage in reading stuff from disk?

> Oh, and one more thing.  Before you get too excited about the new quad
processor machines, remember dedicated DSP hardware systems like
> Pro Tools are not standing still in time.  Digidesign WILL continue to
push their DSP farm cards to newer levels effectively placing them
> several levels above native, just as they are now.  Native has made
progress, but their is still no comparison.

Permit me to comment:
The kind of  improvements seen in the CPU field are magnitudes superior to
the DSP area. The best motorola DSP chips
available today (the ones that digi uses) work at a top speed of 150mhz.
This is hugely less than what you can get for todays CPUs.

> I, like you work with
> native, and I am a working professional making my entire living with these
goodies, and although happy with native's capability, can in
> reality see why people pay large sums for their Pro Tools rigs.

I see the reasons me too, but i native has *not* an inherent diadvantage, On
the contrary, native has an inherent ADVANTAGE in advancing
performances at a much lower cost, in an open environment where you choose
stuff based on quality and not on monopoly.

Andrea