[ardour-dev] Mono switch

[Mark Knecht]

On Apr 8, 2005 12:23 PM, R Parker <rtp405 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> --- Mark Knecht <markknecht at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 8, 2005 11:16 AM, David Gatwood
> > <dgatwood at mac.com> wrote:
> > > On Apr 8, 2005, at 8:56 AM, Mark Knecht wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >    Well, I've got the 002 Rack up for sale.
> > We'll see how soon it's
> > > > gone.
> 
> > Whatever I end up with has to be pretty simple as I
> > have 50-100
> > sessions done in PTLE. If I'm going to make any use
> > of them whatever I
> > do needs to be pretty straight forward.
> 
> We've gone through this with four digital studio
> solutions beginning with a BRC and black face ADAT
> machines then a pair Yamaha AW4416 HDRs, a Mac OS 9
> with the Motu 2408 and Digital Performer, and finally
> an RME9652 with Ardour.
> 
> My solution has been to keep everything.

I think a lot of studios do that. I've been in a lot that have a few
generations of equipment. Almost cheaper to build a second room and
stick the older stuff in it for mixing, video, etc.

> 
> My situation is different than what you have because
> we've probably done a 100 distinct clients since
> buying the AW4416s. For me, the time it would take to
> transfer is more costly than the return on a sale for
> any of this junk.

For sure in your case. In my case these are just my own compositions.
I don't want to waste time but figured I'd better get busy with some
sort of plan before someone shows up with cash and wants to drag the
unit away.

> 
> An 002 would have to get a damned fine resale before
> I'd dump 50 sessions.
> 
> Then again you don't need the hardware to run PTLE and
> you can dump to disk multitrack sessions as you need
> them. What the heck, sell it.

Unfortunately I do need Digi hardware to run Pro Tools, so if I sell
this then at first blush the sessions are stranded. One possibility
that comes to mind would be to borrow or rent an Mbox unit for short
periods of time and do the work that way, should the need ever arise.

I'm probably placing way more importance on this stuff than it
deserves. I'm thinking I should trash it and just move forward.
> 
> > I was thinking I could do a bunch of track by track
> > bounces so that at
> > least I could get song structure back later, but
> > even that would take
> > a week or two to really get done.
> 
> They don't need to be done all-at-once.

Certainly true.

Thanks,
Mark