réactions à la news Commentaires sur le test : Software 1 - Hardware 0
- 250 réponses
- 60 participants
- 42 202 vues
- 57 followers
Afficher le sujet de la discussion
je remets mon lien vers le thread dans lequel lexicon donne directement les réponses à nos questions.
Et comme le thread et long et que personne ne va le lire jusqu'au bout, pour vous être aimable
, je remet ici les réponses que donne l'ingénieur créateur de la 480L, 960L, 96 et le plug PCM. C'est très instructif, je pense même que ça clôt le débat.
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/new-product-alert/429867-lexicon-pcm-native-reverb-plugin-bundle.html
-We may indeed be mad, but these are the PCM96 reverbs (which are a bit better than the 960L reverbs.
I wrote the code for both , so I don't need to interpret anything.
-The computer is more than capable of running that code without compromise. Found a few minor bugs in the PCM96 code which I've fixed here. But I intend to take those fixes back to the 96 when I can. I left the input panners out of these algs because it's easier to do it in the DAW. That's the only difference.But I fully expect non-double-blind tests to 'prove' the 96 is better because it's hardware
-This has more modern versions of some of the 480 algs. I haven't bothered to go back and duplicate the 480 exactly, but the 96 and these plugs have many similar characteristics. If you think the 480 is smooth, just pop in some very low frequencies, turn up spin and listen to it grind. I'm not dissing the 480, but it does have some shortcomings.
-You can say that again! But on top of all that, you have extra-algorithmic considerations with chips like the SHARC family or the 56K family. They have to do with memory layout, DMA setup and necessary stuff like that. It's awfully nice to have that rendered irrelevant by a nicely-designed general processor in a well-thought-out system architecture. There's absolutely nothing to be gained by fussing around with a TDM port of these algorithms. I'd have to make too many sacrifices to squeeze them in.
I'm not about to say that I'm done working on DSP chips. There are places where they're helpful, especially when price is a strong consideration. But within the DAW world, the processors in your modern 4/8-core system are literally two orders of magnitude more capable than anything out there in a standalone DSP. That gap will only grow when Intel goes to 32 nm and beyond.
-Algs are all PCM96 (with a few minor bug fixes) except for Vintage Plate, which isn't on the 96. Vintage Plate is an amalgam of several other boxes.
-This Harman death-spiral thing sure is taking a long time. We were a Harman company when we were making the 480L. Plugins are simply a matter of going where the market will inevitably go.
I've been a musician for my whole life, but I worked for other technology companies before I came to Lex. I worked on medical imaging systems, raster processors for publication, speech-recognition systems and systems for seismography. Every one of those markets once used standalone hardware. Every one now lives in your computer. I've been hearing the "hardware is better" thing for a long time. It's generally the last gasp before the hardware goes away. Music technology changes more slowly than others, but it's really about the workflow. Personally I like the fact that I don't need a standalone word processor. I like the fact that my doctor has an ultrasound and EKG system on a computer right in the office. I like the fact that what was once my huge hot rack of audio equipment is down to a half-empty half-rack.
If you're more comfortable turning knobs, then turn knobs. We make stuff with knobs, too. But the nature of the business is changing in many ways. We're just trying to stay part of it.
Si après ça, certains pensent encore qu'une 480L sonne mieux que ce plug, je les invite à prendre des cours d'anglais, ils entendront mieux après
.
Anonyme
39
sonic_the_hotdog
361
Posteur·euse AFfamé·e
Membre depuis 14 ans
SampleHunter
1303
AFicionado·a
Membre depuis 21 ans
je remets mon lien vers le thread dans lequel lexicon donne directement les réponses à nos questions.Et comme le thread et long et que personne ne va le lire jusqu'au bout, pour vous être aimable
, je remet ici les réponses que donne l'ingénieur créateur de la 480L, 960L, 96 et le plug PCM. C'est très instructif, je pense même que ça clôt le débat.https://www.gearslutz.com/board/new-product-alert/429867-lexicon-pcm-native-reverb-plugin-bundle.html
-We may indeed be mad, but these are the PCM96 reverbs (which are a bit better than the 960L reverbs.
I wrote the code for both , so I don't need to interpret anything.
-The computer is more than capable of running that code without compromise. Found a few minor bugs in the PCM96 code which I've fixed here. But I intend to take those fixes back to the 96 when I can. I left the input panners out of these algs because it's easier to do it in the DAW. That's the only difference.But I fully expect non-double-blind tests to 'prove' the 96 is better because it's hardware
-This has more modern versions of some of the 480 algs. I haven't bothered to go back and duplicate the 480 exactly, but the 96 and these plugs have many similar characteristics. If you think the 480 is smooth, just pop in some very low frequencies, turn up spin and listen to it grind. I'm not dissing the 480, but it does have some shortcomings.
-You can say that again! But on top of all that, you have extra-algorithmic considerations with chips like the SHARC family or the 56K family. They have to do with memory layout, DMA setup and necessary stuff like that. It's awfully nice to have that rendered irrelevant by a nicely-designed general processor in a well-thought-out system architecture. There's absolutely nothing to be gained by fussing around with a TDM port of these algorithms. I'd have to make too many sacrifices to squeeze them in.
I'm not about to say that I'm done working on DSP chips. There are places where they're helpful, especially when price is a strong consideration. But within the DAW world, the processors in your modern 4/8-core system are literally two orders of magnitude more capable than anything out there in a standalone DSP. That gap will only grow when Intel goes to 32 nm and beyond.
-Algs are all PCM96 (with a few minor bug fixes) except for Vintage Plate, which isn't on the 96. Vintage Plate is an amalgam of several other boxes.
-This Harman death-spiral thing sure is taking a long time. We were a Harman company when we were making the 480L. Plugins are simply a matter of going where the market will inevitably go.
I've been a musician for my whole life, but I worked for other technology companies before I came to Lex. I worked on medical imaging systems, raster processors for publication, speech-recognition systems and systems for seismography. Every one of those markets once used standalone hardware. Every one now lives in your computer. I've been hearing the "hardware is better" thing for a long time. It's generally the last gasp before the hardware goes away. Music technology changes more slowly than others, but it's really about the workflow. Personally I like the fact that I don't need a standalone word processor. I like the fact that my doctor has an ultrasound and EKG system on a computer right in the office. I like the fact that what was once my huge hot rack of audio equipment is down to a half-empty half-rack.
If you're more comfortable turning knobs, then turn knobs. We make stuff with knobs, too. But the nature of the business is changing in many ways. We're just trying to stay part of it.
Si après ça, certains pensent encore qu'une 480L sonne mieux que ce plug, je les invite à prendre des cours d'anglais, ils entendront mieux après
.Trop de morceaux de musique finissent trop longtemps après la fin. [Igor Stravinsky]
POIVRON CONCOMBRE
157
Posteur·euse AFfiné·e
Membre depuis 17 ans
Freshouse
107
Posteur·euse AFfiné·e
Membre depuis 21 ans
WESTFINGA
120
Posteur·euse AFfiné·e
Membre depuis 18 ans
Bonsoir à tous !
Je viens de me lire tous ces sujets et j'avoue avoir bien rigoler depuis 10 min
! Tous le monde se prend encore la tête au sujets de l'analo/numérique.
Moi je pense que le numérique a arrangé beaucoup les pros qui travaillent en analogique...le coté ludique pratique des plugins en a séduit plus d'un , le top étant de profiter du meilleurs des 2 mondes !
Il faut savoir aussi que le principal étant de savoir utiliser son matos...je connais un mec qui bosse avec une pauvre carte son m-audio et un ptit sequenceur et qui sort des mixs terribles...on aurait dit qu il passait dans une mpc 3000 avec un gros prophet pour la bass et une lexicon 200 pour la reverb...mais non juste des plugs bien utilisé...
Je crois qu en fait il ne faut pas dire avec quoi on bosse. Je suis sur que si on fait ecouter un mix en disant qu il passe dans des tranches Neve on va dire" Whouah le mix de ouf" , alors quand vérité on utilise une émulation.
Seul les "vrais" pro verront une différence.
En plus la majorité des mixs finissent dans un lecteur mp3 donc tout le travail de conversion en amont , les miettes de bande passante gagnées gacher par la conversion en mp3...Alors arretons le débat ana/num et faisons de la bonne Zik en 2010...c'est tout!
Bye
Je viens de me lire tous ces sujets et j'avoue avoir bien rigoler depuis 10 min
! Tous le monde se prend encore la tête au sujets de l'analo/numérique.Moi je pense que le numérique a arrangé beaucoup les pros qui travaillent en analogique...le coté ludique pratique des plugins en a séduit plus d'un , le top étant de profiter du meilleurs des 2 mondes !
Il faut savoir aussi que le principal étant de savoir utiliser son matos...je connais un mec qui bosse avec une pauvre carte son m-audio et un ptit sequenceur et qui sort des mixs terribles...on aurait dit qu il passait dans une mpc 3000 avec un gros prophet pour la bass et une lexicon 200 pour la reverb...mais non juste des plugs bien utilisé...
Je crois qu en fait il ne faut pas dire avec quoi on bosse. Je suis sur que si on fait ecouter un mix en disant qu il passe dans des tranches Neve on va dire" Whouah le mix de ouf" , alors quand vérité on utilise une émulation.
Seul les "vrais" pro verront une différence.
En plus la majorité des mixs finissent dans un lecteur mp3 donc tout le travail de conversion en amont , les miettes de bande passante gagnées gacher par la conversion en mp3...Alors arretons le débat ana/num et faisons de la bonne Zik en 2010...c'est tout!
Bye
karlos73
4269
Squatteur·euse d’AF
Membre depuis 20 ans
Cedar
195
Posteur·euse AFfiné·e
Membre depuis 21 ans
bidulien
194
Posteur·euse AFfiné·e
Membre depuis 18 ans
Cedar
195
Posteur·euse AFfiné·e
Membre depuis 21 ans
Hardware ou software, si tu as vraiment les oreilles pourries... tes mixes seront toujours pourris.
Matez svp, c'est + qu'important et c'est énorme:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQoNW7lOnT4
Ce docu sort le 2 juin en France, en théorie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQoNW7lOnT4
Ce docu sort le 2 juin en France, en théorie.
- < Liste des sujets
- Charte