[ardour-users] some questions
markknecht at gmail.com
Thu Nov 11 08:47:27 PST 2004
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:46:17 -0500, Dave Phillips <dlphilp at bright.net> wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
> > I would not call my use of Ardour today very sophisticated so take
> >this for what it's worth. (Possibly very little...)
> Mark, I'll read anything with your name on it. ;)
you're so flattering! ;-)
> >No, I'm fine running as a normal user using QJC and Ardour. My kernel
> >is 2.6.9-rc2-mm4-VP-S7-UMP-noAPCI. I have the newer Linux Security
> >Module stuff installed and have created a reatime group which is
> >granted privileges. My user account is part of that group. I have 1394
> >enabled for using external audio drives.
> Cool. I'm still running a 2.4 LL kernel on Planet C RH 9, works well but
> I know my system is underpowered.
I first started with Pro Tools on a 500MHz Athlon system. It worked
fine. I could record and mix 16 tracks as long as I didn't use any
plugins. This is where I personally think people make many mistakes.
Plugins use CPU power. The GUI isn't a huge sink for CPU cycles. Good
disk drives and good system optimization goes a long way to making
even low powered systems do a lot.
Of course, in those days there were many fewer VST's & VSTi's so there
wasn't quite the temptation. That said I'm still a firm believer in
only a single stereo reverb and a single compressor in my sessions. If
I can't get the basic sound I'm looking for that way I usally find I'm
doing something wrong.
> >> When I start writing an automated fade the fader always resets to
> >>unity before writing. Is there a way to force it to start from the
> >>fader's current position ?
> >OK, please take this next part with a grain of salt. I'm approaching
> >Ardour like it was Pro Tools and just trying to do the same things.
> >Some things work. Some things don't. That may be by design. I don't
> >know... [snip]
> See my response to Josh's message...
> >Personally I'd feel more at home with an edit process that looked like this:
> >1) Open automation and see an existing line.
> >2) Double click that line and get a new automation edit point existing
> >on that line.
> >3) Single click to grab and move that existing edit point.
> That's how I would expect it to work, it's similar in the old SGI Mix
> program. *Much* clearer than the present implementation.
> >I like Ardour's ability to grab an automation segment and drag it up
> >and down. That's handy.
> >I am completely missing mute automation. Often I record multiple takes
> >and then alternately mute and unmute different portions of different
> >tracks. Ardour doesn't support mute automation (in my beta19 version
> >anyway) so to do something similar I have to mess with volume
> Good point. Have you played around with edit and mix groups yet ? You
> might find a workaround there...
No, but I don't use it on Pro Tools either. Somehow the technique has
never quite stuck with me...
> >Oh - BTW - I have two tracks, both have automation. Both say play. One
> >moves the fader. The other does not. why?
> Probably for the same reason that I can normalize one region but not
> another, i.e., for no apparent reason at all... :(
In my case there is some intereaction between leaving buttons pushed
from recording the automation. I'm not sure what I turned off or on
but it started working slightly after I wrote this note yesterday.
> >> Do you have any favorite LADSPA or VST effects you use frequently ?
> >No VSTs within Ardour since it doesn't support the newest versions of
> >wine. I'm running Ardour with the --novst option and using a few VST
> >instruments outside (Battery, Crystal) along with Zyn as a stand alone
> >synth. I don't tend to use effects much. Reverb and compessors tend to
> >be the limit for me.
> Same here, though I'll hold off the compression 'til the end. Also, I'll
> probably start using JAMin for post-production dynamics processing.
Yes, generally I place a compressor with very light settings on my
Master Fader. In the last year I've taken to recording in sort of a
different way. (No credit to me. All credit to Bob Katz's book.) I'm
now recording at least 10-15dB cooler than I used to and just turning
up the volume on my speakers. IJSB(tm) "It just sounds better..."
Anyway, it also requires less compression. The idea that every track
needs to be mazimized for signal to noise seems less important to me
than the problems associated with summing 32 tracks of audio.
> Just adding a couple different reverbs sends my CPU usage 'way high... I
> need a new machine...
Again, my input would be to just use one reverb, but that's based on
doing primarily music that is supposed to sound 'real'. When a band
plays live they are all in the same room. they all have the same
reverb. I never use more than one, but that's just me. I can certainly
understand that there could be other forms of art that benefit from
multiple reverbs, but I have no experience there.
> Muchas gracias !
More information about the Ardour-Users