Видео

You need your compressor to detect the transients occurring at < 30 microseconds?

@@brenthauer8365 Brick walling is useful for percussion from time to time live. It's done in recording studios regularly.

brickwall usually refers to ratio of a compressor being 10:1 or higher. @@slofty

I'm curious what 0ms on the Yamaha compressor actually means. They don't display attack times in microseconds like the A&H compressor does. When you turn the knob from 1 ms to 0 ms what is the actual realworld attack time? @@slofty

@@brenthauer8365 "...usually refers to..." By whose (plural) definition? The objective is squashing dynamics, which can take place immediately enough upon crossing threshold. Sure, it's not _actually_ zero, but it's pointless from a notation standpoint to display a fraction of a millisecond. An engineer doesn't need to have a semantic argument with himself whilst mixing 30+ channels and so on.

Thanks! Can't promise anything since I'm extremely busy but who knows... I might make a few more at some point. If you subscribe you might see them if I do.

I don't think there's necessarily 'a way to go' because there's the technical/theoretical side and then there's taste. By all means, toy around with peak compression on vocals to see f it does what you're looking to do! I personally pretty much never use peak compression, to the point where I almost forgot it was even a thing. That doesn't mean peak compression could never help me, but it means I get by fine with RMS compression alone. I do use peak limiters when mastering, but not typically in a live environment, unless it's for a stream or a recording, perhaps. I find that on vocals RMS compression usually gives a result that does what I want to do without artefacts that annoy me, that's a big plus. :) Hope this helps!

You're very welcome! Glad you liked it.

Well on Windows it works out of the box indeed, since windows supports touch screens natively. MacOS sadly still does not (AFAIK) so you'll need some sort of driver to get it to work on a Mac. Not a huge deal, but still a bit of a bummer. I hope you're liking using a touch screen with your DAW!

Yup, I'm happy with the machine. I don't get enough time to enjoy it but that's another matter. ;)

Certainly precise enough for normal DAW work. Then there's ways to fine tune. You can put the faders on extra sensitive mode (larger movement for the same level change. You can use modifiers (CMD/CTRL) on PT if I recall correctly, to do the same with plugin parameters. I must say, that with or without touch screen, for extra fine repeatable adjustments to plugin parameters, I usually enter the value in via the keypad. I find that easier than doing it with the mouse, trackball, trackpad or touch screen. But all of them work fine. Regarding touch screens... if you're working on a small touch laptop or an iPad, I can understand that it could be difficult to make sensitive moves or adjustments, but if you use a larger touch screen say 27" like mine, I don't find any issues with being precise. If you do, you can buy a 32", 49" 55" or whatever size you want ;) I think 27" is the bang for buck sweet spot.

Yes I am. I still think it's the best bang for your buck. I find it incredibly useful and a good investment. I personally don't miss physical faders, but you could add them if you wanted to. I personally prefer having the touch screen, computer keyboard and mouse/trackpad close to me. I don't want to put faders in between that. I also like that it's easy to but a touch screen on a ergonomic arm (I use ergotron). That way, if you play an instrument, you can pull the 'console' (touchscreen) closer to you, so you avoid leaning over etc. I'm using the touch screen in my recording studio and in my home (bedroom) setup. It's the most ergonomic choice for both situations.

Never tried a Cintiq...

Would like to know too as I'm also thinking about doing this with logic on 2019 or 2020 Mac book pro

@@michaelrobson1627 www.touch-base.com/

That's awesome! I'm sorry my build is taking so ridiculously long. Actually, the fact that I decided to turn it into a youtube series has considerably slowed it down too. Took quite a bit of time to edit those first ones. The next ones should be easier. No regrets though, I've been super busy too, so I've had little time to make music. So no losses there. I will have some time in the fall and winter, so I am looking to get this build done ASAP. Currently, however, I'm three weeks into a rather farcical email exchange with AMD support who want proof of purchase and installation before they send me an older processor that I need to update the BIOS on the motherboard.... That on its own is cumbersome and annoying enough, but it does appear that my contact at AMD is unable to open my JPG/PDF attachments, whether I attach them, zip them or wetranser them. Aren't those people in computers??? It's a good thing I'm not religious otherwise I'd be hella paranoid about God testing me right about now. It's a farce of a situation. Welcome to my life :D

@@studio1on151 Once you get this, you will have figured it out for all the people that want to go the AMD route but are afraid (like me) until someone else has figured out how to get through the problems. Hang in there, your contribution will be greatly appreciated!

@@musicjimbutler I'm hanging in there, I'm not in that much of a rush. I'm just kinda bumbed that everything is taking so long for people who are interested. I hope you guys hang on. Of course, this build is mainly going so slowly because I decided to do it while we had our first baby, and just moved house, during COVID, and decided to turn my first ever computer build into a youtube series! So, I hope people don't think that their build would take this excruciatingly long. That said, I'm a bad luck magnet too because I've been trying to get this upgrade kit from AMD now for just two days shy of a month! I've just complained to ASRock about AMD's appalling tech support. Hope that helps expedite things. Hang in there everyone :D We're in this together now...

@@musicjimbutler By all accounts I seem to be having extremely bad luck. It looks like my Motherboard is dead. ASRock suggested one last thing I could try (which involves disconnecting the CMOS battery and running the machine without RAM for a while). I'm going to take the board out of the case and try that. If that won't work, I'll be sending the board in to ASRock and they'll repair or replace it. When that happens, I'll have to pretty much start the build process over again. Yikes. So if you're planning to do this build or another build, make sure you test the mobo, ram, CPU and GPU if necessary outside of the case first, before you start building your system. Don't make this rookie mistake.

@@studio1on151 Woah! That's not good news! Hopefully you can get a replacement, if not, I'd go with Asus (they have support for Ryzen from what I've seen). I took the plunge a few weeks ago and threw in a spare HDD into my Win7 custom build and installed Win10 dual boot to test with all the current DAWS. So far Studio One 5 and FL studio 20 are the only stable DAWS on this clean install. Protools is giving me errors (not that I'd ever consider going the PT way, but I was curious) I'm currently downloading Cubase Elements 30 day trial to see how it competes with Studio One. So far I can record at 44.1 with a buffer of 16 (the lowest) with a Focusrite scarlett 3rd gen testing interface, dropout protection at minimum. 128 seems to be more stable. I am getting pops and cracks however with a browser open at the same time (youtube) even at 1048. Don't have this problem with Logic Pro. Had a drop out tracking guitar once so far in Studio One, very strange. Ran a LatencyMon on my system which was inconclusive. Sometimes it says no issues and other times it displays issues, eventhough there was no drop outs. Next up - Cubase to see how well it performs. Tracking intermittent problems is a pain in the ass sometimes. Hopefully you get your system up and running soon! Can't wait to see how it performs for you. For now I'm going to do more tests.

Thanks! I can understand how it's overwhelming. In all fairness, if it's really overwhelming and you've never built an audio PC before, I'd sugggest paying someone experienced 500 bucks to build it for you. Then again, if my build ends up performing well. You will have the advantage of learning from my many, many newby mistakes. I'll probably be uploading the build footage almost unedited. For several reasons really. But honestly, edited tutorials always leave out something I need. It takes a lot of time to edit, and viewers and skip around and fast forward in youtube anyway. The first build video should be up within a week or so. Cheers and wish me luck! Currently waiting for a bios update kit from AMD to be shipped to me. :D

@@studio1on151 Hopefully the build is going ok! Looking forward to the new episode to see how things worked out. Also, quick question: What DAW are you going to install on this Windows based machine? As for the editing, I agree with you! I'd just post it in parts if its too long and unedited.

@@orpheusthedrummer Hit a little bump (apart from being crazy busy). I'm currently waiting for AMD to send me a processor so I can update the BIOS on the mobo. Apparently you can only update the BIOS if you have a processor installed that the current BIOS supports. Major bummer when you buy a mobo for processor that's been out for six months. But to answer you question: I'll be installing at least Pro Tools Ultimate and Studio One Professional. I might instal Reaper too and give Bitwig another demo. PT and S1 are my main DAWs though, the former more than the latter, but the balance is shifting a bit. Thanks for the interest, I hope to release the next one within a week!

Honestly, I don't know. I spend most of my time in Pro Tools, but I'm starting to work a little more in Studio One, especially for composing. I've been busy and a little ill the last few weeks, so I haven't even fired up the computer yet. I hope to get to that next week. So I can't tell you how well this is all going to run. It will all depend on your application, though. Here's my gut feeling: For the way I work, my 2010 6-core Mac Pro is usually sufficient. It can just get away with recording at 96k 64 buffer, sometimes need to go to 128 buffer. The 3950X has double the single core performance of that chip and 4x the multi core performance. I'm pretty confident that will give me the desired headroom to be able to record in 96k / 64 buffer comfortably. Mind you, I typically don't use a lot of plugins when I record. If you need the very best single core performance (which is apparently beneficial for low buffer performance), then i7/i9(X) can still be king, with potentially a ~20% gain in CPU performance. Whether that results in a similar real world gain, I cannot tell you. I'm betting on it not being that significant to me, and a 100% increase over my old machine will be ample for me. Here's my hunch from the information I've found: low buffer recording situations with or without VIs generally benefit from higher clocks and single core performance. Higher buffer, more paralel tasks like mixing, can lean more and more into the many cores. But I don't think you should read that as 'so ONLY single core matters for recording'. It's a combination. I think it's safe to say that, if you're talking about processors with the same single core performance, a ten core one is going to give better performance and low latency than a 4 core one. The balancing begins when you notice that the more cores you get, the more the clockspeed seems to taper off and with it the single core performance. There might be a point where the penalty in single core speed involved with higher core count of the processor, starts to hinder you in some parts of your workflow, while it helps you in others. It's not my field though, so in the end I'll just have to wait and see too. From what I've seen, these 3900X and 3950X processors seem to perform really well. I took the 3950X because I have a pretty exceptionally power hungry mix process because of the many paralel processes involved. Imagine your mix bus and mastering chain x 20. So I decided to go 16 core. At some point, the less I have to keep (re)freezing, the faster I can work. It's worth it for me. I think that for most people, however, the 3900X is more than enough. Hope this helps a little. In the end I can't really advise you, I can just sort of show you my notes. With a big disclaimer of 'this is what I THINK is about right'. :D

I've read some things that the AMD TB3 implementation doesn't always work well for audio interfaces. But I've also read somethings where it does work fine. I decided to take the risk, but it is a risk. If you want to be safe, go Intel. We'll see if I fire mine up, if it will work well with my Quantum 2. So we're kind of in the same boat. You could hold out your order a little until I get the chance to fire mine up, but I cannot guarantee I will be able to do it within a fortnight. I sure intend to, but things are a little crazy right now. It's at your discretion. If I were you I'd do some heavy googling on quantum and 570 TB3 and see if you see any succes stories.

@@studio1on151 thanks, you brought up a lot of good food for thought. I have searched a lot and have not found anything about the X570 W/TB3 being used with the Quantum 2626. I am reaching out to Brian at pcaudiolabs. They build Presonus approved pcs and appear to be very willing to give advice without my being a customer. I look forward to learning from your results.

@@musicjimbutler That one is rather new, but I do remember finding some people using older gen Quantums like I am. There were mixed results, but apparently, as long as you use specific (startech) TB-TB3 convertor and cables, it seems to work okay. So that's what I bought and we'll see. The upside to the 2626 is that it's TB3 out out the box, so you don't need any conversion step, potentially causing problems. Doesn't guarantee it will work, but still. If Quantum and Quantum 2 work, the 2626 is likely to work too. As always, zero guarantees in audio though.

Hi Jim! Thanks for your reply! I'm in a similar situation. I NEED thunderbolt since I run a HD Native system at my studio and a PreSonus Quantum at home. I'd been on the fence about Intel vs AMD for a long time too. For the longest time I though I'd pay a little more for the 'peace of mind' of Intel, but AMD's processors started to really draw my attention away from Intel. When I saw I could have native TB3 support on AMD now too, I began to seriously consider taking a chance on AMD. You can buy a 16 core AMD for the same kind of money you can only buy a 12 core for at Intel. Granted, if you buy a 2.5k Mac Mini or iMac, you pretty much KNOW that it will work. But with 2.5k you can build a PC that will be MUCH more powerful than a 5-6k iMac. I decided to take that chance. If you're not in a rush, perhaps you can wait for me to get to the point of actually having my system running. I'll certainly test whether it will work well with my Quantum 2 and my HD Native via a Sonnet Thunderbolt chassis. Both will go through a TB3 to TB2 conversion stage too. Fingers crossed!

@@studio1on151 I will anxiously anticipate your results. I understand one problem with Windows 10 is with the updates. Things can go wrong when Auto updates happen and the best thing is to revert to your previous version if you catch it on time. (Within 10 days.) This might be easier to control on the pro version compared to the home version.

@@musicjimbutler I'm not sure about the pro version as opposed to the home version. As I understand it they really differ only in ways not pertinent to the vast majority of audio people.

In the end I got a new MoBo from ASRock as mine was just toast. Yesterday I finally found some time to test it and it went great. Installed everything back into the case, installed windows and tonight I tried connecting my Thunderbolt Quantum2 interface and a preliminary stress test using the Diva soft synth. The results without any performance tweaks are impressive. So far, I'm a happy camper. Stay tuned.

@@studio1on151 Hey, congratulations so far!

Thanks for your reply! What are the latency and thunderbolt issues you are referring to?

AMD has known issues with regards to thunderbolt audio interfaces. Also if you are going AMD you have to be very picky about memory which also have an impact on low buffer size regarding click and pops.The memory should be specially optimized for AMD and at the same time be supported by your motherboard. I saw in your comment below that you have decided on AMD. There are known issues with Presonus Quantum on thunderbolt AMD. Here is just one thread about it: www.gearslutz.com/board/ableton-live/1307769-cpu-spike-when-moving-mouse-ableton.html By the way I have a Quantum working on Intel right know and I gonna upgrade my system to this: Intel Core i9-10900K Noctua NH-D15S Gigabyte Z490 Vision D (native thunderbolt)

@@allkindsofthings673 Thanks! I'm aware of the memory thing and think I've been really careful with my choice of RAM. I've seen things about thunderbolt issues, but I've also seen enough succes stories to dare take the risk. But I'm well aware that I am indeed taking a risk. Only time will tell, let's hope for the best!

A ryzen 3950x with 3600mhz optimised corsair lpx ram ram will outperform a 10900k by a lot at 256 buffer size which is fine. You can also drop to lower buffer sizes. Intel performs a bit better at 64 buffer, but at 256 or more the 3950x will be almost 30 to 40 percent better than the i9 10900k. Just make sure to het the optimised ram pack. Also the x570 taichi montherboard has a thunderbolt 3 header to add asroccks thunderbolt 3 card. And it works with thunderbolt 3 interfaces well. Check out scan 3XS pro audio. Amd has improved a lot, trust me. Especially the 3950x. Edit: and when the new gen amd series cpus come out, the latency performance will be even better. You can just upgrade the cpu with the taichi motherboard.

You are just guessing. Thunderbolt does not work well with all interfaces on AMD. Also 3950x does not perform 40% better on 256 buffer size than i9 10900k. Only thing you are right about is that i9 10900k performs better on 64 buffer size

Thanks for your feedback. I can understand it can be difficult to focus on a video like this, which is train of thought and unscripted. Of course, I make them after thinking about a subject or a long time, so it's not that I don't know that I want to say. It's just not my forte. This is why I generally like to script my videos, but quite often that's not possible because scripting a video costs me WAAAAAAY more time to do. I do these videos as a hobby because I believe they might help some people. Often I just don't have the time to invest into making scripted videos with voice overs. It is free content, that I make without earning a thing from it, if it helps you, great, if it annoys you... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think there was a lot of good content in this video

Hi and thanks for your reply! I have tried Bitwig and it's got some great things going on with multitouch, especially in the note/audio editing and creation department. Where I feel it's lacking is in the mixer department. I keep waiting for them to bring out an updated, mature mixer, but I haven't seen one yet. That said, there's not one DAW in existence that does all parts of my workflow best, it's always a compromise. It's a matter of picking the one that does most crucial things best for you, or using different DAWs for different parts of your production workflow. So far, nothing beats Pro Tools for me, although there have been times that I desperately wished for an alternative. Even though PT has many flaws, I didn't find an alternative that checked all of the necessary boxes for me. But that pertains only to me and my highly specific workflow, needs and wishes. I do however own a Studio One Pro license and I will be toying around with doing the songwriting/production part in Studio One and the mix in Pro Tools. Bitwig is also definitely a candidate to compose/produce in. Its multitouch implementation is definitely miles ahead of Studio One's, which is lacklustre at best.

Thanks! In this video you see me opening multiple plugins at once by way of recalling a memory location. This memory location automatically launches a window config which is the bit that remembers the plugins that were open last time I used that memory location. You also see me opening additional plugins to the one on screen by shift clicking on the 'slot' of an active plugin in the PT mixer. That is, I think it's shift click. It's muscle memory by now. ;) Try it and see if it works. Cheers!

@@studio1on151 I am on Cubase and am about to order a touchscreen and DTouch, I would love to do whether you still using the touch approach or whether you have maybe switched to HW controllers? I am skiing that because two guys who have been posting on RUclips DTouch videos a few years back, have both told me that meanwhile they went back to using Cubase with CC121, shortcuts keys and the mouse because they are much faster this way. So therefore I would love to hear your current opinion.

Sure. A touch screen just requires a normal connections plus a USB connection for the touch part. Bear in mind that MacOS doesn't natively support touch so you need a driver. the DTouch software I use, comes with a driver. Raven comes with a driver. Another option is a driver called Touch Base (which has gesture support you could setup to match Mac's touch pad gestures). Also, it looks like some touch sceens are starting to ship with MacOS drivers. Haven't tried that myself. If you're on any modern windows version, it will just work on its own.