|
producers who use dual screens (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| CReddick |
It's all about desktop real estate man.
I've been running dually screens for about 10 years now... I could never dream of going back. I'd even entertain a 3rd screen.
The more information you have in front of you at once, the better. I typically run Sequence in window 1. Mixer in window 2, shared with master freq analyzer and master meter. Ideally, I'd love to move all sorts of master output info to a 3rd screen and stick a piano roll on the 2nd one with the mixer... whatever. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| 2x 22" widescreen here. Love it. Very functional for me as well. More would be crazy for now, I don't have the room for it and 2x22" is almost 1 meter wide already. :) |
|
|
| Eric J |
I had a Samsung 226BW 22" monitor for a little while before I switched to a Mac. I actually used it with the Mac for a few weeks before I bought the 23" Cinema display. At the time I thought the Samsung was pretty good and fairly big, so when I decided to purchase the Cinema display, I figured that I'd only be able to run the same max resolution since the Apple monitor was only 1 inch bigger.
I was pleasantly surprised when I brought home the Apple monitor and realized that the max resolution was a full order of magnitude bigger than the Samsung even though the Apple monitor was only one inch bigger. The Samsung max resolution was 1680x1050, where as the Apple monitor had a max resolution of 1900x1200.
Of course, the Apple Cinema display costs about twice as much as the Samsung, but it has been really worth it for me. The marriage of the Mac Pro with the Cinema Display provides a beautiful, vibrant color image and sharp, clean lines, perfect for producing when you have lots of small icons and a busy application screen. I would highly recommend that you check the specs and reviews before deciding to make a new purchase. I've always experienced that if something is too cheap, then there is probably a reason. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| i used to use 2x22", but it became more of an annoyance than anything. i hated having to look left or right all the time. now my second 22" is sitting on the floor, not even connected to my pc hah. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
I used to only be able to work on dual screens as I like to have the mixer page open (with vsts etc over it) on one and the arrange page on the other.
However since I got my new imac, and don't have the second screen anymore I haven't yet felt the need for another. |
|
|
| davidbuhau |
i had 4 screens once... got confusing... but i couldn't work very well without dual screens. it's nice not having to move out of the way to do other .
david |
|
|
| Ray_Chappell |
| I use Reason rewired to Ableton quite a bit and having Reason and VSTs on one and Ableton full screen on the other is really helpful for me. |
|
|
| daeus |
Like Bill Gates, the chairman and chief software architect of Microsoft said in Fortune Magazine on April 4, 2006, "On my desk I have three screens, synchronized to form a single desktop. I can drag items from one screen to the next. Once you have that large display area, you'll never go back, because it has a direct impact on productivity."
I think having a Mixer readout as you see/hear the track play is essential so seeing a full mixer on a second screen really helps and being able to tweak VST's during the live mix is tops. |
|
|
| Theran |
I have 2x 17" TFT's, and I think there to small already. I'd like to go for 2x 22" TFT's but my budget won't let me yet.
Since I've been working with dualscreens, my productivity really increased. I was able to do more things at the time. I would never go back to 1 screen, I would prefere 3x 22" TFT's, but not only the budget won't let me, I don't have space for them to.
Go with dualscreen!!! |
|
|
| echosystm |
i honestly think if you are going to get dual screens, don't get widescreens... your display area ends up being like 1m long and is a total pain in the ass. i ended up stacking my 22" monitors ontop of each other because its annoying to look side to side.
having two widescreen monitors like this also makes it basically impossible to position your speakers well... but everyone seems to forget about that, then spend $1k plus on monitors anyway. :stongue: |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
i honestly think if you are going to get dual screens, don't get widescreens... your display area ends up being like 1m long and is a total pain in the ass. i ended up stacking my 22" monitors ontop of each other because its annoying to look side to side. |
Depens on the distance of everything else now doesnt it ?
I have 2x22" and it works perfectly fine for me, i have my right screen as my main screen and the left as secondary, works perfectly fine.
If i had used my left screen as primary that would be a different story. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
Depens on the distance of everything else now doesnt it ?
|
Exactly.
My speakers are about 1.50m apart, I'm only 1m away from the speakers. I don't mind, having the speakers a bit further apart accentuates the stereo image.
That's a good and simple help to ensure the pan settings will stay in a proper range. I prefer it that way honestly.
A lot of professional (stereo sound) studios have the speakers wider apart than the distance from the listener's point as well. Mostly somewhere in between 65 to 75 degrees calculated from listener's point. That's about as far as you can get without causing phase problems. |
|
|
|
|
