Soundblade vs Peak vs Wave Editor ??? Master recorder.

[pw8888]

Hi Everybody,
I am looking for the BEST software you can buy to print my mixes.
I don't feel good going back to PT HD.I did it for too long.I used to have a sequoia with a PC and I found it MUCH better in term of fidelidy.(want osx here)
I won't use ANY processing inside de software.Just straight 2 track recording .The setup is going to be :

Pacific Microsonics to Weiss AIF-1 to computer.

I was thinking of soundblade,peak or ??????
Anyone would help on this?. OSX please
Which one seems to sound better for you ? A lot of people talk about the old sonic but too much problem regarding os 9 .... etc.....

thanks

Phil

[finetuner]

For your purpose, SB might be a bit overkill. I'd take a look at PMCD.
Falls neatly between all mentioned options imho.

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by finetuner

For your purpose, SB might be a bit overkill. I'd take a look at PMCD.
Falls neatly between all mentioned options imho.

PMCD is an editor, DDP and CD delivery DAW, not a recording DAW.

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by pw8888

Hi Everybody,
I am looking for the BEST software you can buy to print my mixes.
I don't feel good going back to PT HD.I did it for too long.I used to have a sequoia with a PC and I found it MUCH better in term of fidelidy.(want osx here)
I won't use ANY processing inside de software.Just straight 2 track recording .The setup is going to be :

Pacific Microsonics to Weiss AIF-1 to computer.

I was thinking of soundblade,peak or ??????
Anyone would help on this?. OSX please
Which one seems to sound better for you ? A lot of people talk about the old sonic but too much problem regarding os 9 .... etc.....

thanks

Phil

soundBlade will have the best recording fidelity out of the DAW's that you have mentioned.
People may tell you otherwise but I have them all and sB sounds the best to my ears!
None of the OSX mastering DAW's are completely bug free though!

[finetuner]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

PMCD is an editor, DDP and CD delivery DAW, not a recording DAW.

Oops, you're right.
Failed to realize that that happens to be one of the differences between SB and PMCD

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by karyoky****

hi,

you literally just want to record a mix?

just use logic. it'll do that much, and its cheap.

If Protools HD running 48 bit internally, is not good enough for this guy, Logic definitely won't be!

sB has the edge because of the sonic studio engine.

[dave-G]

Originally Posted by pw8888

Hi Everybody,
I am looking for the BEST software you can buy to print my mixes.
I don't feel good going back to PT HD.I did it for too long.I used to have a sequoia with a PC and I found it MUCH better in term of fidelidy.(want osx here)
I won't use ANY processing inside de software.Just straight 2 track recording

Am I understanding correctly that you're working within PT already but don't want to print back to it? I'm interested to hear how you determined that simply recording to PT, assuming the same ADC/interface, is of any detriment to fidelity. I could see wanting to print to a second DAW for ergonomic reasons, but PTHD as a recorder is not even an area where the obtuse debates about DSP and wordlength through the mix engine could rightly be of concern.

Common, common-sense tests could even prove this one way or the other ... hence my curiosity as to your rationale.

-dave

[dave-G]

Originally Posted by karyoky****

i don't know if this is what the original poster was on about, but i will print back to a different daw so that i can save copies at a variety different of bit depths and sample rates for future use.

when you mix back into the pro tools session you have to stick with whatever the session's sample rate and bit depth are.

Hence my saying "I could see wanting to print to a second DAW for ergonomic reasons".

However, that doesn't seem to be what his post is implying.

-dave

[Table Of Tone]

Of course I actually think that PTHD is fine but whatever DAW he's recording back into, he should be using a serious ADC.
Definitely NOT just a Digi 96 or 192!

Maybe a Lavry AD122 or Prism AD2.

That will make a noticable difference!

[WBM]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

Of course I actually think that PTHD is fine but whatever DAW he's recording back into, he should be using a serious ADC.
Definitely NOT just a Digi 96 or 192!

Maybe a Lavry AD122 or Prism AD2.

That will make a noticable difference!

I used Lavry Gold A/D into MH 2882(transparent) and edit with Wave editor, super steady, in the same computer a Lynx AES 16E (more Air) different capture, good for different kind of music.
PC with Marc 2pro( warm) and wavelab,Lynx AES 16 (more Air).
Digi 002 with Heed 192 ( commercial sound)

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by karyoky****

hi,

yeah, probably the only real difference. but i though he had a pacific microsonics. those are pretty good, huh?

well, maybe space2019 will recommend some cables for the glorious occasion.

Oops!
I forgot about the pacific microsonics!
Doh!

[pw8888]

Printing my mixes(out of a Neve-analog-) trough protools and hearing the result in DIGITAL trough my Avocet ....shows me a difference in sound when PTHD is used (playing about 48 to 80 tracks and recording 2---maybe something going on when you do both I same time) that if I go to a PC (sequoia) using a Lynx studio2 (aes in) (PT playing and Sequoia recording 2 tracks) and then back to the avocet as well.
Using pacific microsonics in both cases.i am looking for an osx solution.I am talking printing my mixes here.maybe a bit of editing but no "processing" (compression ,eq etc...).Software DO sound different.even simply as reading a file.that's for sure.
thanks for all your info !!

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by pw8888

Printing my mixes(out of a Neve-analog-) trough protools and hearing the result in DIGITAL trough my Avocet ....shows me a difference in sound when PTHD is used (playing about 48 to 80 tracks and recording 2---maybe something going on when you do both I same time) that if I go to a PC (sequoia) using a Lynx studio2 (aes in) (PT playing and Sequoia recording 2 tracks) and then back to the avocet as well.
Using pacific microsonics in both cases.i am looking for an osx solution.I am talking printing my mixes here.maybe a bit of editing but no "processing" (compression ,eq etc...).Software DO sound different.even simply as reading a file.that's for sure.
thanks for all your info !!

If you are hearing a difference, there is obviously something going on!

Maybe a sample rate issue that's been overlooked?

When you use sequoia, are you capturing at the same sample rate as the PTHD playback or is Sequoia running at 44.1?

Maybe get a demo of soundBlade and give it a try?

[pw8888]

I usually use PT at 44.1k (most of the time I receive 44.1k sessions)....and sequoia was running at 44.1k as well....

[pw8888]

Anyone else on this ?

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by pw8888

Anyone else on this ?

Well, I'm currently a soundBlade user but I also love sequoia and I'd say that the two are sonically on a par with each other, although sequoia is way more advanced and flexible.

I'll probably start using it again once I finish the bespoke puter and windows 7 is fully up N' running!

Hope this helps

[pw8888]

thanks !

[pw8888]

I tried today for the first time in a "real" situation soundblade.one word AMAZING !!

out SSL9K to Pacific Model One to Weiss AIF 1 to Soundlabade....back to the avocet digital input

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by pw8888

I tried today for the first time in a "real" situation soundblade.one word AMAZING !!

out SSL9K to Pacific Model One to Weiss AIF 1 to Soundlabade....back to the avocet digital input

Glad you're happy!

That one sounds the best to me!

[Jerry Tubb]

Been running a dual DAW setup lately here (two G5's)
Pro Tools 8 HD as the Playback DAW.
SoundBlade 1.3.4 as the Capture DAW.
Managing two workstaions is a bit more effort,
but certainly worth it to avoid unnecessary SRC.
Easy pre/post EQ monitor switching as well.

soundBlade 1.3.4 is running very well on the Leopard G5 (10.5.6)

I may try the 10.5.8 combo update later today.

Man, this java tastes goood - JT

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

Been running a dual DAW setup lately here (two G5's)
Pro Tools 8 HD as the Playback DAW.
SoundBlade 1.3.4 as the Capture DAW.
Managing two workstaions is a bit more effort,
but certainly worth it to avoid unnecessary SRC.
Easy pre/post EQ monitor switching as well.

soundBlade 1.3.4 is running very well on the Leopard G5 (10.5.6)

I may try the 10.5.8 combo update later today.

Man, this java tastes goood - JT

Me too!
Things are just way quicker and way better running two systems and no plugins!
soundBlade 1.3.4 is also running really well for me on G5 (10.5.8)

[miro]

what do you guys think about dsp quattro actually?
i'm thinking of purchasing one of the apps later this year
and that one seems quiet nice and has a nice price. seems that most here prefer SB or WE. i tried wave editor but couldn't become friends somehow.
looking at dsp's gui seemed more friendly to me personally.
and seems the 3.XX version is improved in many ways.

any thoughts/critics/reviews?

[skuttbergsveen]

Originally Posted by miro

what do you guys think about dsp quattro actually?
i'm thinking of purchasing one of the apps later this year
and that one seems quiet nice and has a nice price. seems that most here prefer SB or WE. i tried wave editor but couldn't become friends somehow.
looking at dsp's gui seemed more friendly to me personally.
and seems the 3.XX version is improved in many ways.

any thoughts/critics/reviews?

Here is the latest update-info:

13.08.2009 DSP-Quattro 3.1 is now available
This is a very important major release, coming with long-waited new features: new VST 2.4 Instruments and Effect plug-ins native support on both PowerPC and Intel based macs, now the PlayList offers full CD-Text support for Audio CD-ROM mastering and CD burning, and the Project has been totally revisited and extended. Moreover, there are several other important improvements and some bug fixes. All DSP-Quattro 3 users are highly recommended to update their version 3 to the 3.1, it is a free upgrade!

When Waveburner 1.5 suffered from the bit-bug I bought DSP-Quattro. They released it April 1.st 2009 and have had 5 updates since then. It still has a way to go (i.e. the cue-sheet has errors with time/lenght I think) but it has gotten a lot better in short time. Now it finally writes cd-text and then there is mostly DDP and a few bugs left they must deal with.
Still, when Apple released Logic Studio 2 which includes Waveburner 1.6 with fixed bugs (and a few new added) and DDP support, I´m back where I started. It does what I need.

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

Me too!
Things are just way quicker and way better running two systems and no plugins!
soundBlade 1.3.4 is also running really well for me on G5 (10.5.8)

"Apple today announced that Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard will go on sale Friday, August 28"

Gee Whiz, I'm still getting used to Leopard 10.5.8 on our DAWs.

Talk about a moving target...

Cheers - JT

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

"Apple today announced that Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard will go on sale Friday, August 28"

Gee Whiz, I'm still getting used to Leopard 10.5.8 on our DAWs.

Talk about a moving target...

Cheers - JT

I heard that Snow Leopard is Intel only?

My Dual core G5 runs really well on 10.5.8 but the older, Dual processor G5 is in some ways, better on Tiger.

I guess Tiger is by now, a pretty much solid OS?
(I still kept my Tiger system on another drive for that G5, just in case)

soundBlade 1.3.4 seems to run equally as well on both OSX systems but I had to remove Wave Editor from the Dual processor G5 as it had a tendency to crash the entire puter on quitting that app!
This was with 10.5.8 running on it.

WE runs fine on the Dual Core G5.

I'm probably gonna stick with the standard Leopard, even on my intel mac!
Snow Leopard?
Sonic must be running around like headless chickens!

[pw8888]

Do you know if it will run with it ? (soundblade-snow leopard )

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by pw8888

Do you know if it will run with it ? (soundblade-snow leopard )

Ask Sonic!
Send em an email.

The standard Leopard is only just starting to rock at 10.5.8 and things like "spotlight" still don't work as well as Tiger!

Why would you wanna move on up to the next OSX so soon after its release?

Especially on a music production puter!

[pw8888]

no I won't !
I never do that....that was just a question....

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by pw8888

Do you know if it will run with it ? (soundblade-snow leopard )

I would wait on sB 2.0... due anytime now, Fall AES perhaps : - )

(I know Jon is busy working on it everyday.)

But it's worth a try, esp with the ease of swapping OS Hard Drives on a Mac Pro tower.

But I think running a Mac Pro on Snow Leo will be less of a leap than Tiger > Leopard.

JT