[quote=Convectuoso;18176303]Lol full drum kit Beat Detective at 96khz with plug ins on everything, man I need to try that.[/quote]


Wait a second, I think I see my problem. The RAM pages will have the entire data files available because there's no smart way to arbitrarily select which samples stay on the disk and aren't copied. The CPU will know which of the samples to grab out of RAM because the DAW controls that, so the driver buffers get filled (by the results of an ADD operation). But the RAM itself will likely have immediate access to all points in the larger data files.

If that's the case though, then it should suggest multiple edits (and thus, lots of small files) would be less of a problem, which I know isn't the case in practice. Unless there's a fragmentation issue? Or maybe it's just done with pointers, rather than creating a new "base" track of the smaller file. I guess that will be something to look into.

[quote=viciouscycle;18176307]Convection [B]h[/B]eats[/quote]
See what I did there?


@Moseph:


In Pro Tools it never makes new files when you make edits, it just makes regions, which are just snap shots of the waveform. I think they're saved within the Pro Tools session file.

Dunno if that helps in anyway or if I'm just stating the obvious.

Reaper is none destructive and I'm assuming also doesn't create anything new

[quote=Convectuoso;18176482]See what I did there?


@Moseph:


In Pro Tools it never makes new files when you make edits, it just makes regions, which are just snap shots of the waveform. I think they're saved within the Pro Tools session file.

Dunno if that helps in anyway or if I'm just stating the obvious.[/quote]


No, wasn't certain of the particulars for Pro Tools (though I probably knew that at some point). Sonar does something similar unless you bounce the file or set it up to save as it's own file. I guess that does raise up the question about the beat detective/editing then: do the edits actually use up any more RAM?

Once it does the edits and cross fades everything (which apparently on an old G3 can take 2 hours lol) I see no change in performance.

Modern computers throw most preconceptions of DAWs out the windows I tell you.

Hi gice.
Im still unsure about whether to buy DFH or SD2.0.

My laptop specs are Dual Core AMD 2.5ghz, 4 GB RAM. Will either of these run ok with my system, bearing in mind that ill be using Pod Farm, ReCabinet(KeFir) and some other plug ins?

Im also pretty unsure about how these programs work. If i map out the midi using Cubase and then send it to an instrument track do i use DFH as a Vst to track the sound into the instrument track, or does it work the same as Pod Farm - as soon as you remove the Vst it leaves a dry signal?

Could do with someones expert knowledge!

Cheers then.

[quote=benfan;18178864]Hi gice.
Im still unsure about whether to buy DFH or SD2.0.

My laptop specs are Dual Core AMD 2.5ghz, 4 GB RAM. Will either of these run ok with my system, bearing in mind that ill be using Pod Farm, ReCabinet(KeFir) and some other plug ins?

Im also pretty unsure about how these programs work. If i map out the midi using Cubase and then send it to an instrument track do i use DFH as a Vst to track the sound into the instrument track, or does it work the same as Pod Farm - as soon as you remove the Vst it leaves a dry signal?

Could do with someones expert knowledge!

Cheers then.[/quote]

I'll let somebody who uses DFH confirm, but I know you're on the right track for at least SD 2.0. I'm pretty sure they operate the same way though.

The key difference between what I think you're saying and what actually happens is that MIDI, by itself, won't generate audio. It's instruction data: you need some kind of synthesizer to respond to it. So you're "dry signal" is actually inaudible digital instructions. You'll see MIDI meters moving/peaking around but conceptually it's like plugging a cable into a guitar and then not plugging the other end into an amp. The signal is being generated, it's just not being delivered anywhere.

Otherwise, if you're saying what I think you're saying, you've got the right idea.

SD2.0. More options. DFH only sounds good for a few genres and isn't as customizable.

Addictive drums is really snazzy too.

Also. You can just make an instrument track in Cubase. No need to make a MIDI track and route it to an instrument track.

Get Metal Foundry if you want metal drums

[QUOTE=Convectuoso;18179373]Also. You can just make an instrument track in Cubase. No need to make a MIDI track and route it to an instrument track.[/QUOTE]

So i take it that i can map out the MIDI using SD2 and not the MIDI tracks in Cubase?

Do you guys think my laptop will run it ok, given the specs i posted? I use a UX2 and Pod Farm, i get something near zero latency as long as i disable my wireless card. Iv got my buffer size set to medium/high atm though.
I downloaded a latency checker and found the wireless adapter was the source of my latency woes, so i havnt tried messing with buffer since then.

Anyone got an answer for me cause im itching to get some software to do the job?

I think it'll have some sort of sequencer or loop player in it. But essentially you map it out in Cubase. It's how these things work.

SD2 interprets MIDI data and plays back audio associated with such MIDI data. It's very simple and programming beats has become a second nature.

I use Pro Tools. So I load up SD2 as a plug-in on a stereo instrument track first and then open my Pro Tools MIDI window. Then I start programming stuff using Pro Tools midi tools. Hit play and it'll play back.

I always create the same amount of audio tracks as there are drum mics in SD2, because you can root them all out to individual audio files rather than the whole kit just coming out the instrument track output. That way you can track your drums and tweak them in the mix later.

I've got SD2, EZ Drummer and 7 EZXs. I love Toontrack's stuff lol. Will probably get Metal Foundry once I've got some moneh.

[QUOTE=EmbraceRandom;18186220]
I always create the same amount of audio tracks as there are drum mics in SD2, because you can root them all out to individual audio files rather than the whole kit just coming out the instrument track output. That way you can track your drums and tweak them in the mix later.

[/QUOTE]

This.

Also, assuming SD2 works roughly the same is EZD, you'll want to turn off the room mic indie the program and bus all the other mics to a reverb of your own choosing, thereby customising the sound of a standard library.

I love the room mics function on Addictive Drums. It's awesome being able to send the kick and snare to get but none of the cymbals, if only I could do that in real life without sample replacement :(

[QUOTE=spirit;18186397]This.

Also, assuming SD2 works roughly the same is EZD, you'll want to turn off the room mic indie the program and bus all the other mics to a reverb of your own choosing, thereby customising the sound of a standard library.[/QUOTE]

I do both, the room mic with most of the kits I've used has been really effective for making the kit sound fatter. But having the choice is always a good thing, especially using Convolution reverbs.

Thanks for the info guys, the main thing now is figuring out how well my laptop will run it given the other plug ins i already use for guitars.

Do one at once, track is so it's not draining yo CPU.

I.e. sort your drums out first, once you're happy with them, track them to separate tracks. Then do it with guitars. This is like a quasi-recording stage, ultimately you just want raw audio when you begin mixing (no plugs!)

When i track guitars, i record a dry signal into cubase and then add the vsts after so i can change things around as i go. Are you saying i should do it the other way round and record the altered sound into cubase so i dont have to use any plug ins (except for ReCabinet)

Track the DI signal first, with no plug-ins enabled as this will cause lag; as Zomblies explained to me, if you have enough processing going on, you'll find yourself actually playing to a different beat.

So yeah, track DI first. Then upload your guitar amp simulator VSTs, work with it until you've found a sound you are happy with and then use a bus to track that to a new audio track. Then make the VST inactive (not sure how you do it in Cubase, just make sure you're not just bypassing it because it'll still be active, i.e. processing to a degree, just without audible results) and mute the DI signal.

If you change your mind about the guitar sound later, or even during the mix, then make the VST active again, unmute the DI signal, find your new sound and track that out again. But when doing this, I would make all other plugs inactive (that I could have been using in the mix)

I suppose i could record the wet signal as a rough audio track just to help with the drums, and then remove it after the drums are done. Then record the guitars as i have been?
Im not using cubase to monitor the guitars, i send it back through pod farm cause iv read this will help reduce latency.

[quote=EmbraceRandom;18190582]Track the DI signal first, with no plug-ins enabled as this will cause lag; as Zomblies explained to me, if you have enough processing going on, you'll find yourself actually playing to a different beat.

So yeah, track DI first. Then upload your guitar amp simulator VSTs, work with it until you've found a sound you are happy with and then use a bus to track that to a new audio track. Then make the VST inactive (not sure how you do it in Cubase, just make sure you're not just bypassing it because it'll still be active, i.e. processing to a degree, just without audible results) and mute the DI signal.[/quote]

If you're playing a lot of hi-gain stuff or wanting to use delay effects, it will likely be super-helpful to have some other reference than the dry DI signal to help you play the take well. Most DI boxes have an extra "amp" output, so you could do something as simple as use that to feed an actual amplifier in the room. That way, you'll be playing all the nuances based on hearing distortion/effects, but you'll still be capturing the dry signal to tweak with simulators later.

Granted, one of the big reasons for using sims over amps in the first place is the inability to make loud sounds. One of the things I've found useful was recording the dry DI sound while also monitoring using an external effects processor, or other amp. You could set it up in the fashion of a reamp situation, using the outputs of the computer to feed your source of distortion/effects.


[quote=benfan;18190626]I suppose i could record the wet signal as a rough audio track just to help with the drums, and then remove it after the drums are done. Then record the guitars as i have been?
Im not using cubase to monitor the guitars, i send it back through pod farm cause iv read this will help reduce latency.[/quote]

What's the rationale on that? Cubase and Pod Farm are both processing software, so unless you've got individual latency settings for each program, I don't see the distinction there.

Yeah I thought that was a given :) tracking a DI signal by itself is a bit pony.

solution without adding plugins:

the livewire Di box is 40 bucks, it's got two 1/4 inch jacks and one male xlr, the xlr goes to your interface, the 1/4 jacks are in/out so you plug your guitar into one and the other one goes to a pod (or something like it) and run that into your interface as well. group the tracks together so you have an audio reference to the DI while you're editing. When you're done reamp that shit like a man

Iv already got a UX2 interface so im not really looking for another one. Thanks for the input though.

Heres the way i will probaby do it -

Record rough guitar track into cubase,
Set up the Audio track and map out the midi - send to SD2
Delete the rough track when the drums are all sorted,
Record as i have been, Dry signal into cubase using Pod Farm as the monitor, input pod farm as a vst and load up the preset and then upload Kefir and Recabinet.

I cant see any problem with doing it that way, iv not had any latency at all on this computer as long as i disable my wireless card.

Hey guys need a little help.

Im creating preset sounds in pod farm to use as inserts in cubase. When i make, say, a really nice smooth clean sound in Pod Farn (stand alone) and save it in the presets, then record a dry signal into cubase and use the preset as a vst, it sounds really gainy and thin. Not at all like the preset i saved. Is there something im doing wrong? Iv set the outputs in pod farm to send the dry signal. And im using it as an insert on the recorded track.

i'm not to familiar with pod farm, are you using hardware ouputs into an other input/ interface? or sends from audio tracks to a plugin?

It basically goes:

Guitar -> Line 6 UX2(Pad input, dry signal) -> Cubase -> Pod Farm VST

I dial up a good setting then save it in the pod farm directory, and then open it up as a vst in cubase.

it sounds like something's sending the dry signal to the vst a little too hot, is there a way to attenuate the output of the send?

[quote=benfan;18197505]Iv set the outputs in pod farm to send the dry signal. And im using it as an insert on the recorded track.[/quote]

I just wanna make sure this is a typo, or I'm reading it wrong. Because if I'm understanding this correctly, it seems like that would be the immediate cause of the problem.

Do you want to make use of the dry signal as part of the overall sound in PodFarm? My intuition says I would only want the wet/affected signal (i.e., the simulated amp sounds).

The other thing I'd double check is that you don't have any rogue aux sends (or whatever Cubase calls them) or doubled DI tracks working against you.

Lastly, and this one is probably reaching, if you're using stereo effects you might have some issues if the Cubase track is either a mono track or you've got a stereo track with no channel-separation (aka, "big mono"; although I'm pretty sure Cubase doesn't do discrete track control in stereo tracks).

Yeah that is a typo, what i meant to say is im sending the dry signal, and using pod farm as a vst to alter the sound.

Im recording to a stereo audion track in cubase.

I just turned the DI meter to full in the vst and its started to get rid of the problem but its still there. Im just gonna go back and check it isnt a nooby error and that im not sending a mono signal to a stereo track.

[quote=benfan;18198698]Im just gonna go back and check it isnt a nooby error and that im not sending a mono signal to a stereo track.[/quote]


It's more an issue if you're sending a stereo signal to a mono track (i.e., you're squashing two channels into one). A lot of stuff can happen when you move from one to the other, but generally if you're using a mono signal (you should be: a guitar is mono) to feed a stereo track, 1 of the following will happen:

(01) You'll run the mono signal through a stereo effect, thus resulting in the track ultimately having a stereo signal.

(02) The mono signal will be received by stereo track as if it were a stereo input and thus it will only feed one channel of the track.

(03) The mono signal will be received by the stereo track as if the stereo track were a bus, and it will treat the mono signal as a panning mono send to a stereo bus (this isn't likely if you're going straight off the hardware into the track in real-time).


There might be other alternatives, but these are the three implementations of the software I'm familiar with.

Thanks for the help. Im gonna go back and re-check everything, i think iv pretty much got it sorted now. Ill double check the send from Pod Farm is definately set as mono.

[QUOTE=Moseph;18198692]I just wanna make sure this is a typo, or I'm reading it wrong. Because if I'm understanding this correctly, it seems like that would be the immediate cause of the problem.

Do you want to make use of the dry signal as part of the overall sound in PodFarm? My intuition says I would only want the wet/affected signal (i.e., the simulated amp sounds).

The other thing I'd double check is that you don't have any rogue aux sends (or whatever Cubase calls them) or doubled DI tracks working against you.

Lastly, and this one is probably reaching, if you're using stereo effects you might have some issues if the Cubase track is either a mono track or you've got a stereo track with no channel-separation (aka, "big mono"; although I'm pretty sure Cubase doesn't do discrete track control in stereo tracks).[/QUOTE]

i read that like 20 times before i just assumed it was a type lol

[quote=Xomblies;18198781]i read that like 20 times before i just assumed it was a [B]type[/B] lol[/quote]


The humor here is tangible.

i shold have added a hyphen

type-lol

it wasn't that funny though

if you want a nice simple drum recording set up try this:

http://homerecording.about.com/od/recordingtutorials/a/glyn_johns.htm

i've got addictive drums and it's fantastic but you just can't beat a live drummer, warts 'n' all. only got recent experience using cubase (studio 4) and you can tweak out any duff timing if you're mega fussy. the above method has been working a treat in the home studio.

mics - soundtracs topaz project 8 - motu 828 - mac - cubase

Surely this thread should be stickied

I'm trying to use Addictive Drums but it doesn't seem as solid as superior. One big thing I noticed is older samples being replaced by a different sort of hit (Like snare middle, then snare off), the older sample keeps running, so you have samples overlapping each other and it sounds bad