Jump to content

Mixing features - does it have...


Vickel
 Share

Recommended Posts

In the Samp mixer, can multiple channels be ganged together so the faders move in unison?

Does Samp have a "channel inspector" like Cubase, Sonar, and SAW? I like the inspector feature because it not only makes all the selected channel's controls easily available, but it also is a good reminder of what the currently selected channel is. I like SAW'a the best followed by Sonar then Cubase- but can Samp do this?

Can anyone offer specific links to analytical evaluations of Samps. audio engine quality versus the competition?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest_Stephen
In the Samp mixer, can multiple channels be ganged together so the faders move in unison?

Yes, just build a group. Works with all controls.

Does Samp have a "channel inspector" like Cubase, Sonar, and SAW?

There comes a single mixer track skin, wich works like an inspector and can be placed all over the screen.

/Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Samp mixer, can multiple channels be ganged together so the faders move in unison?

Yes, just build a group. Works with all controls.

Does Samp have a "channel inspector" like Cubase, Sonar, and SAW?

There comes a single mixer track skin, wich works like an inspector and can be placed all over the screen.

/Stephen

Thanks for the info.

Which skin has the inspector feature ?|

How do you think Samp compares to Paris sonically? I've heard Paris is a very clean system.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Which skin has the inspector feature ?|

Single track mixer skin.

How do you think Samp compares to Paris sonically? I've heard Paris is a very clean system.

As an old Paris user myself, I like Samps more. The sound is perfect clean, no colorations, high-class internal effects, latency delay compensation, POW-R dither ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
As an old Paris user myself, I like Samps more. The sound is perfect clean, no colorations, high-class internal effects, latency delay compensation, POW-R dither ....

Just to give a balanced view –

I love the sound of Samplitude. I think it represents the best of what the current clean, transparent DAWs can sound like.

Paris is a different story. It sounds more like the traditional analog studios I worked in for years. For most projects I prefer the warm, punchy sound of Paris to the pristine sound of Samplitude.

But these days recording systems are a fraction of the cost of traditional studio gear. No reason not to have both and use the most appropriate one for the music.

This is equivalent to choosing a Neve for a mix over a SSL or 9098i Amek, having multiple options at your disposal is a blessing.

You can do professional sounding recordings in almost all the currently available systems.

Gene Lennon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
It sounds more like the traditional analog studios I worked in for years. For most projects I prefer the warm, punchy sound of Paris to the pristine sound of Samplitude.

Warm and punchy means, there is something, wich wasn´t in the audio before. There must be some kind of distortion, producing the "warm" overtones from bass frequencies. In the digital domain this means, the software changes and possible degrades the sound. Not useful in all cases. I think, the host application should be absolutely neutral. Analog sound only with plugins, like Fishphones or UAD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Warm and punchy means, there is something, wich wasn´t in the audio before. There must be some kind of distortion, producing the "warm" overtones from bass frequencies. In the digital domain this means, the software changes and possible degrades the sound. Not useful in all cases. I think, the host application should be absolutely neutral. Analog sound only with plugins, like Fishphones or UAD.

I would never try to change your mind. But while some engineers / producers only want to document a recorded sound, most want to shape it. I know I do. I also know what I like in a final sound. And I know what tools help me get it.

Please leave all the Neve consoles, classic tube mics, Distressors, Pultecs, Paris rigs etc. to fools and degraders like me.

Gene

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Please leave all the Neve consoles, classic tube mics, Distressors, Pultecs, Paris rigs etc. to fools and degraders like me.

He means DIGITAL. Wasn´t aware, that those tools working in the digital domain.

If the audio engine changes - "shapes" - the sound by default, it´s very difficult, to influence the result. That a good job for special "analog" plugins, but there are a lot tools on market, advertising "warm", "punchy" and "analog" sound and producing just a bad copy, not more, than a snapshot of the behaviour of an original analog device. The sound of analog devices is very complex and not easy to reproduce with algorithms. Look at this awful Magneto plugin - this is in fact a simple and bad compressor, with a fixed envelope. No tape frequency curve or something, like that. But we also see a lot of very good digital plugins in the last time.

Regarding Paris: Just play and sum some sinus waves through the engine and compare the result with the original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...