Jump to content

Sebastian.Gabler

Advanced User
  • Content Count

    13,987
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sebastian.Gabler

  1. I don't see that any carrier format will ever change the paradigm of refreshing media every couple of years or so. Carrier disintegration is not the only factor in obsolescence. There are other critical issues such as carrier retrieval (players, software), information formats (file systems, file formats), and cost. M-DISC is rather costly per GB, and market penetration is rather low. I am sure that I would not consider it for those reasons.
  2. Digital Long-Term preservation is not really a matter of choosing storage media. It's a matter of having a repository that can do migrations transparently and automatically. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Archival_Information_System#/media/File:OAIS-.gif
  3. My concern with obsolete drives like the Plextor CD writers is that they won't have profiles for current media. This is quite relevant for quality of the results. Moreover, the second generation of the Plextor Premium drives is a completely different beast than the first breed.
  4. Ich habe verstanden dass es dann einfriert. Ok, ich merk's mir mal, und wenn es mir auch passiert melde ich es. Grüße, Sebastian
  5. Samples auf Null setzen habe ich gerade vor ein paar Tagen probiert. Tut einwandfrei. Mir ist nicht klar ob Dein Problem dabei auftritt oder beim Loop Playback. Das nämlich habe ich nicht probiert.
  6. What Whitealbum writes is meaningless unless he posts his project. It's well possible that a certain project needs more CPU with more threads. 16 cores means that only projects that can divide their workload by 16 will fully profit, i.e. 16/32/48 tracks with all the same plugins at the same time, and no buses, to give a simple example.
  7. See http://www.storagenewsletter.com/lt.php?id=fhoMCABTB0oKAQYCS1JVWFlR
  8. Is the service running? (check services.msc) Is the port open? (check your firewall) -S
  9. One question: do they have a license agreement for the spectral editor with CEDAR? See, i.e. http://www.cedaraudio.de/news/dcp19may14.html
  10. Well, I am getting the impression that "envy" and "hate" exist as words on the screen. Else, your utterance reminds me of a Vicar I met when I was young. A most laughable encounter, entertaining, but spooky, and presumably uncertain about the whereabouts of some of his marbles.
  11. If you would read it would have been helpful. I stated explicitly that "recording" and "making music" is not the same for me. I understand they are for you. Could it be that you recombine my thoughts with yours a little too much? I.e. the music/product issue: by no means I have stated that musicians in general couldn't make people happy. I made a statement about a specific product that is highly processed, beautified, styled, and much money is spent on marketing, for nothing but to sell quickly. It's you who turns it upsidedown, suggesting that I had some nonsense problem. For the last time: Stop it, please. There is not the least contradiction between a song being a hit and being a short-lived product. These often go well together. However, there are quite a number of quality records that sell well over decades. Those are the real gems in the catalogue. Guess why Michael Jackson bought rights from Lennon/McCartney songs in the 80's?
  12. Irvin, there is indeed a lot wrong with these statements above. First and foremost, because they are yours. Just a few examples: 1. I don't think and I didn't say that making music autonomously is "bad". What I have said is that making music is great, and nobody needs the any industry for that. 2. I don't think that record labels are "doing what they have done forever: promote their artists and make a profit from it.". 3. I am not pissed at anyone who likes "Happy". (did I mention Gangnam Style at all??) What I stated is about an issue with abundant, exchangeable products with only some weeks of shelf life, or one-hit wonders that come and go. The music industry cannot create sustainable income that way. 4. I am not pissed at someone who doesn't see a problem where I see one. But I am pissed at you now as your only sports seems to be using unfair means, such as excessive rephrasing, arbitrary re-contexting, and made-up quotations. This is not ok.
  13. It's the language. My bad, sorry. I try again: "Business is not the scope of the majority of home recording studios, as well. So, home recording is yet another story, apart from Music and Music Business, as home recorders typically are not doing any business, and recording is not the same as making music (as in performance)."
  14. Who's being naive? And about what? Your post makes no sense. Sascha in this case.
  15. Irvin, the way you are using "lie", "truth", "honesty", "wrong", "right", "good"... doesn't compute for me at all. It's complete "meta". What you say about record labels "filtering" is obsolete. It was true for the "old" business model they had. Nowadays, they are at best gatekeepers of their back catalogue, at worst they are meaningless. Most of them are about ruining their back catalogue by not adding new things to it of the same quality, which is the small 1o1 of license business. It's true that there are capable people out there. The issue for them is to be heard of, which is more difficult than ever. Scrape the rest: Making music is not a question of recording in a cheap home studio. Making music is playing or singing, performing. Making "good" music is as well not a question of playing in front of thousands of people, or selling 100.000 copies. It's as Sascha said: The biggest reward is making people happy. Sold copies and tickets are a matter of music business, which is something completely different, just borrowing the word "music". Luckily, it doesn't depend on your verdict, or mine. Business is neither the scope of the majority of home recording studios. So, yet another kettle of fish. IMO, home recording and music industry have nothing but an opportunistic dependency: A bunch of people who what to utilize cheap commodity equipment. It could be different, and it will be different as soon as the business changes to more profitable perspectives.
  16. Irvin, I am doing pretty fine. Accept it. ("lol.." as you seem to erratically spice up your thoughts) I wonder a little what me (or you) being a no/anybody changes for the situation of artists. If the record finally goes to a crackling Vinyl or a shabby MP3 doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if the recording was done on DAT or on 48 tracks 96/24. In the end, getting more gigs, getting more awareness is what counts. But there will be no or minimal direct returns, i.e. net earnings from selling records. The profits of the MI industry are a separate question.
  17. Irvin, I have no problem with my business, and specifically none I intend to share with you. You must have misunderstood something. It's neither about liking certain music or not. I don't even care you playing the jerk on this forum again and again. Just go ahead. lol: About making money from music: There is an awful lot of people making money from music. There is fantastic music, specifically here in Vienna, every day in our concert halls. There is just close to nobody (artists) making any money from recording and selling those. "Democratic" production means haven't helped artists in that respect.
  18. Don't be naive. It's not about making people happy. This is about a product that sells: Toilet paper, beer, cars, pop songs. Only that the exploitation rights for a mediocre song end 70 years after the author's death. In practise, mediocre music has a market life of less than 2 years, and margins are small. That's why it has to be produced cheap and fast.
  19. I have spent most of my time in rehearsal studios we got from the municipality, recording on rented homerecording grade equipment that was rented between the age of 15 and 21. (Portastudios, Shure dynamic mics, the one and other AKG cheapo). Just that you know where my "arrogance" is from. Unless you are a pure hobbyist, the money for your equipment is an investment. We spent the money they paid us for small gigs, and pocket money on that. Results depended mostly on the acoustics of the rehearsal room and our playing. We got new gigs from the demos we made. That was, in a way, business. On the side, we learned a lot from that. Now, I have some decent professional equipment myself, and I see a lot of other recording engineers invest money in equipment of all grades. It's just not worth it if you look at the ROI. And that is why? IMO, publishers nowadays can get away with low or no investment into production services. The money either goes into marketing, or to other places. The offerings to the consumers are rather worse. I agree that Pharell's "Happy" (mentioned above) is not extraordinary in any way. That's why I don't buy it. I am not alone with that. Producing the extraordinary should again become the scope. Publishers still make money on the old glorious heros: Michael Jackson, Led Zeppelin, Herbert von Karajan are still selling. That's not exactly making it easier for new artists. -S
  20. The fact that everybody is recording from bedroom upwards is good for MI manufacturers, and for no one else. The downsides prevail. The lack of a working music industry (publishers) makes it hard to reach out for everybody, unless he is already established. For consumers it equally hard to find good music among the piles of cheap garbage.
  21. This office will not tolerate redundancy in this office.
  22. Samplitude takes into consideration what it sees. It actually leaves out of the equation what could be there, but is not usable, i.e. n cpu treads that cannot be spawned by Samplitue because there is only one signal to process. What it does is a time measurement. For 48 smpl the maximum allowed processing time @ 48 kHz is 1 ms. Say, the buffer comes back in 0,5 ms, you have 50% DSP load. For CPU%, you ask the system how much stressed the CPU is, and it will tell you that the CPU has lots of resources free. "System capacity" is not very obvious, as I have tried to make clear. You can't use more than one CPU thread with a single audio track. The user could not change that. Just for the sake of completeness: Recording doesn't cost any CPU on modern platforms. It's a chain of buffer copies that end up on disk at some point. -S Stupid! LOL:
  23. That can happen on a multi-threaded system. However, DSP% takes into account which resources it will currently see, and give the specific numbers.
×
×
  • Create New...