TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- What kind of performance boost can I expect with this upgrade?
Pages (9): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 »

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Its not about the people here. Most people didn't buy their software either. Point is the quality of production advice and information here, compared to a myriad of other places is very low. Most of the information here is based on what people heard on another forum. As mentioned before, there isn't even a music theory section.

what do people's buying habits have to do with the fact you think people here are full of shit. So if it is so bad? why even come ? I think you tend to really polarize things instead of actually stepping back and really judging objectively.

I personally see production as a seperate topic from theory so i don't really see the point of a theory forum.

How would you rate yourself as a producer in relation to most here ?

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut The operative word is "if". Assuming said problem to be true when you have no evidence of it, or even any rational reason to assume it, is an insult - and a very juvenile one. Incorrect. What I've called you out on is overrating your own "skills" - such as claiming to be able to duplicate any sound from z3ta+ on 3xOsc, or claiming that you did an orchestral piece without any large samples. You don't even possess the requisite knowledge to realize that other people are talking about beasts that are very different from your piddly-ass patches and projects. To you, there is only your world, and anything that anyone else can do, you can do better. Read my earlier post again. I said you were boasting about nonsense - things that you couldn't possibly back up and/or things that nobody cares about. That's a far cry from being impressed or envious. I was using 3xOsc and 2048-sample latency 4 years ago. I've moved on.

Moved on to what? Those "beasts" you mention were a requirement for good sound 20 years ago. Not today. Just like hardware was a requirement for good sound 20 years ago, not today. That you use so called"beasts" is unimpressive to me. Esp when the tier of production coming from the use of such "beasts" is barely a notch above what can be done with "piddly-ass" software.

Talk all you want about your carburetor, I live in a world where its obsolete.

Also, production isn't something you learn on a forum either. If the sum of your knowledge is what you have learned from the itnernetz, then I feel sorry for you.

How Do I rate myself? As a hobbyist musician Id say pretty average. Maby a little above average because I am able to write a melody and use more than 4 bars of chords. Though all of this is no relevance to you. As I consider many of the "top tier" guys to be absolute shit. So according to your system I may rate myself below average.

Though, Why am I arguing with people about how music sounds? You guys probably enjoy that shitty jazz garbage.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir How Do I rate myself? As a hobbyist musician Id say pretty average. Maby a little above average because I am able to write a melody and use more than 4 bars of chords. Though all of this is no relevance to you. As I consider many of the "top tier" guys to be absolute shit. So according to your system I may rate myself below average.

What do you think seperates you from beinga hobbyist ? I'm really not being patronizing here. I'm really trying to understand you. I'm curious as to wether you enjoy being a hobbyist or would you really like to do music as a living.

quote:

Also, production isn't something you learn on a forum either. If the sum of your knowledge is what you have learned from the itnernetz, then I feel sorry for you.

you won't "learn" anything on a message board. You do get some insight that is helpfull. I've learned things on here. Now if someone that does music as a profession can learn , there must be something you can learn on here.

quote:

Though, Why am I arguing with people about how music sounds? You guys probably enjoy that shitty jazz garbage

what music do you enjoy ?

quote:

Originally posted by RichieV What do you think seperates you from beinga hobbyist ? I'm really not being patronizing here. I'm really trying to understand you. I'm curious as to wether you enjoy being a hobbyist or would you really like to do music as a living.

Doing music as a living is unrealistic today I think. And I can't play an instrument so live play is out of the question. Ontop of that I don't feel like getting involved with the politics of the record world. So I decided long ago the most I would become is a hobbyist. Also I make Niche music. I'm about to release an album, its a compilation of some of my best songs. Which is only about 9-10 songs from recent years. Not a single song is consistent with the nest, the styles, sound, and feeling is all different with each song. Even further more I typically choose sounds that aren't very popular, and I use scales and chords many probably don't feel. So what is the point of going beyond?

I enjoy alot of music, and yeah I am aware of the jazz influence, I just don't like jazz music itself. I'll listen to anything from Bjork to Black Sun Empire, From King Tubby and Jacob Miller to to Dark Lunacy. Dub DnB Jungle Chillout Trance Goa and Techno, Some metal and Hip Hop, plenty of folk and traditional stuff also. Even orchestrated stuff. Though alot of Mozart Bach and all that I don't find too interesting, alot of it changes mood too often. And ive yet to find a chiptune I didn't enjoy.

so it is fair to say you don't make the typical trance people on here make? And if that is the case, wouldn't you find alot of things on here , in regards to production, different from what you do and as such maybe learn something ?

Perhaps, if it weren't for the fact that every time I mention how I myself do things, and how they work and Ive been doing them for years, I get a boot in the face.

Like how Ive used 2048 samples for many years and Its never had a downside, but I am apparently doing something wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Like how Ive used 2048 samples for many years and Its never had a downside, but I am apparently doing something wrong.

That`s like riding a bicycle your whole life, not willing to realize the benefits of a car.

No, its like riding a buss all the time and not realizing the benefits of a bike. If anything 2048 samples is overkill. WIth 1024 samples, for instance. What I am able to do is less. Less VSTi's less polyphony. Less everything. So based on experience, the lower the sample rate the less you can do.

Though no one has explained why its bad when your not using hardware, so who knows.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Perhaps, if it weren't for the fact that every time I mention how I myself do things, and how they work and Ive been doing them for years, I get a boot in the face. Like how Ive used 2048 samples for many years and Its never had a downside, but I am apparently doing something wrong.

you weren't addressing the problem stated by the first poster. The problem is lack of CPU for vsts. Latency , except for extremely low ones ie 128, don't really touch CPU. A higher latency will reduce clicks and pops but that wasn't the problem. You were wrong, not because how what you use, but rather because it was irrelevant to the issue.

You also don't mention your specs, which from an another thread is onboard audio, which is not the norm for most producers on here.

A CPU is slow, so you give the CPU more time to process, How does that NOT help?

Yeah I use onboard sound, as a music producer in 2009, an actual sound card won't benefit me any. My DAW won't even use it for anything other than routing. I don't need any of the input the card comes wither either. And the extra processing power will not be used [or needed]

according to your logic doubling your latency would double your CPU power. Latency is set at your soundcard. It has no control on CPU processing. Higher latency allows your soundcard to digest the information from your CPU which is then converted to audio to your spealers. In theory ( in a perfect world) , they have absolutely no relation.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Yeah I use onboard sound, as a music producer in 2009, an actual sound card won't benefit me any. My DAW won't even use it for anything other than routing. I don't need any of the input the card comes wither either. And the extra processing power will not be used [or needed]

onboard sound suffers from videocard interference. They also have very poor converters so mixing will always be less accurate. This might be perfect for your situation because you don't really need accurate monitoring. But others do and herein lies the problem. You assume people have the exact same needs as you.

Well, over time it would double. Lol.

Measure how much a CPU can process in 1 minute, then give the CPU two minutes, I bet is processes double. But I get what your saying.

Assume people have the exact same needs as me because of the quality of music I hear. It would be crazy to go to an art site full of images that look like they were done in photoshop, and not assume that everyone there uses photoshop.

Everyone reading this, come to http://www.stickam.com/fattybeats Mystical Ninja is doing a live show

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Well, over time it would double. Lol. Measure how much a CPU can process in 1 minute, then give the CPU two minutes, I bet is processes double. But I get what your saying.

no you still don't get it.

Think of the CPU as a faucet and the vsts used as a system that creates the pressure of the faucet. The communication is oonly going one direction. Now think of the soundcard as a buck under the faucet. Now think of latency as holes in the bucket. Latency allows the soundcard enough time to convert the digital data into audio. If the latency is no enough, the bucket might overfill( pops drop outs and clicks, but it will never have any impact on the actual faucet.

quote:

Assume people have the exact same needs as me because of the quality of music I hear. It would be crazy to go to an art site full of images that look like they were done in photoshop, and not assume that everyone there uses photoshop.

you assumed i had the same needs as you concerning ram concerning classical music production without knowing what I do.

Yes I know. And Higher latency makes the bucket fill slower.

But the thing I was joking about was that the CPU will process double the amount of data if given twice the amount of time to do it again.[asuming the cpu speed doesn't change and all that] Nevermind. Lol. My statement is me stating the obvious.

so then you understand then why latency won't affect cpu. Sorry i didn't catch the joking part.

Yes, I was of the understanding the CPU processes everything and the soundcard is just the guy in the middle of the assembly line passing things on.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Though no one has explained why its bad when your not using hardware, so who knows.

You are a complete idiot if you don`t understand the advantages of faster play/stop response and more accurate recording of MIDI and automation in the sequencer.

And i`ve already said it many times.

You can go on with your "i just do this and that so its no problem" bullshit, but for fuck sake, wake up and step outside that fucking bubble of yours, there is not a single person in the whole damn world that agrees with you on anything here, you simply make no sense, and all you want is attention so you can go on further with your sense-less shit talk.

And the shit you said "I would have used 2048 samples latency anyways, even if i had 5 times more CPU power" makes absolutely NO FUCKING SENSE at all.

Using a latency of 512 or 1024 on a decent CPU does not affect performance at ALL. It has ONLY benefits, so there is not a single reason not to use it, how hard is that to understand ?

I know you have a shit CPU, so i CAN understand why you would use such a high latency.

But can you honestly say, that you still dont see why people would use low latencies if they can ?

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Yes, I was of the understanding the CPU processes everything and the soundcard is just the guy in the middle of the assembly line passing things on.

well there you go , you learned something from a place you considered devoid of knowledge. Anyways i'm out for the night. Take care.

jeez subtle - i spent way too much effort to calm things down.

I don't see why people use low latencies if they don't have to.

Using low latency is like saying [I'll only get 256MB of ram because that is all I need.]

The "benefits" of low latency are insignificant at most. Just like the "benefits" of bouncing audio instead of using freeze mode. They are too insignificant to even be a factor in the choice. They have utterly no effect on the work flow. Untill this forum Ive never met anyone who preferred high latency when they didn't use hardware. The whole issue of latency or delay is not even relevant to my world. I jack it up to 2048 simply because I know I won't get stuttering, who cares if the stuttering stops at 512 or 1024? I can go to 2048 and be extra sure it doesn't happen. And no loss to me. Even if I record with a midi keyboard, I can do that regardless of the latency, because midi information doesn't lag.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir I don't see why people use low latencies if they don't have to. Using low latency is like saying [I'll only get 256MB of ram because that is all I need.] The "benefits" of low latency are insignificant at most. Just like the "benefits" of bouncing audio instead of using freeze mode. They are too insignificant to even be a factor in the choice. They have utterly no effect on the work flow.

your ram analogy makes little sense. People use more ram because they require things to go faster ( low latency) yet you equate high latency ( slow ) with more ram.


anyways, one benifit , which is really important for alot of people is the ability to record midi information from a keyboard. That might not be for you but to assume it isn't for anyone is silly.

I can record midi information from a keyboard with 0ms latency or 47ms latency, makes no difference what so ever. I can demonstrate that too.

Mute the synthesizer your recording midi information for, and use the inbuilt sounds of the keyboard. Latency issues resolved. If your midi controller doesn't produce sound, well you bought something that limits you. Or rather, it would severely limit me.

most midi controllers don't have inbuilt sounds. Limited functionality ? not if you have a decent card that makes low latency not an issue. In that case you can hear the sound you actually want to trigger. And people won't have to adjust all their midi information to correspond to the actual intended trigger.

Your logic is really hard to folllow. You critize people for their crappy keyboards for not doing what yours can do which is something i'm assuming you have to do as a result of your crappy soundcard not being able to handle low latency.

you have to understand that for most soundcards made in the last 8 years

512 latency is really nothing.

most modern cards can handle 256 quite comfortably.

quote:

Originally posted by RichieV most midi controllers don't have inbuilt sounds. Limited functionality ? not if you have a decent card that makes low latency not an issue. Your logic is really hard to folllow. You critize people for their crappy keyboards for not doing what your can do as a result of your crappy soundcard.

What does the sound card have to do with it? Wether the sound card is crappy or not, there is still more benefit doing things this way.

Higher latency will have a better audio quality no matter what the setup. And the ceiling to what you can do is a lot higher.

To be honest I'm surprised sound cards are not obsolete these days.

Again, Who cares if they can handle 256? The object, the point, of latency is to set it as high as you can for maximal sound quality. Your saying it can handle 256 as if that is somehow a good thing. Latency isn't even an issue for many people anymore. So wether a card can handle lower latency...who cares??? To be honest, higher latency setting would be nice.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir I don't see why people use low latencies if they don't have to. Using low latency is like saying [I'll only get 256MB of ram because that is all I need.] The "benefits" of low latency are insignificant at most. Just like the "benefits" of bouncing audio instead of using freeze mode. They are too insignificant to even be a factor in the choice. They have utterly no effect on the work flow. Untill this forum Ive never met anyone who preferred high latency when they didn't use hardware. The whole issue of latency or delay is not even relevant to my world. I jack it up to 2048 simply because I know I won't get stuttering, who cares if the stuttering stops at 512 or 1024? I can go to 2048 and be extra sure it doesn't happen. And no loss to me. Even if I record with a midi keyboard, I can do that regardless of the latency, because midi information doesn't lag.

i KNOW the benefits of all this, latency, working with audio instead of freeze etc etc as a fact of life, because i have tested and experienced it myself.

Or do you think i am imagining things ?

Maybe we all are imagining things and you are the only one who really knows the real truth ?

You are an ignorant moron, who sees himself and nothing else in this world, if things do not apply to you (because you are clueless and clearly does not know any better) its wrong, right ?

quote:

Originally posted by Subtle i KNOW the benefits of all this, latency, working with audio instead of freeze etc etc as a fact of life, because i have tested and experienced it myself. Or do you think i am imagining things ? Maybe we all are imagining things and you are the only one who really knows the real truth ? You are an ignorant moron, who sees himself and nothing else in this world, if things do not apply to you (because you are clueless and clearly does not know any better) its wrong, right ?

The simple fact is your supporting methods that are demonstratively inferior. What your saying, is the exact opposite to what happens. That is why I disagree.

You are saying the sun rises in the west and sets in the east, when it clearly rises in the east and sets in the west. Maby My world is different than yours, who knows, but a lot of what people say about how things work, I find them to be the exact opposite.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.