Will Pyramix be the end of my DAW Holy Grail Quest ?

[drBill]

Pascal - HD was the answer to my question. (Similar to yours) If you're not running a lot of 3rd party or MOTU soft synths, DP seems to be fairly stable on PTHD hardware right now, although the tiny crowded nature of the GUI bugs me. Who knows when 6 comes out though. Logic is not even an option for me. Pyramix - ??? Not for me.

[noize_organizer]

Thanx for your input.

I actually do use a lot of Native Instruments for production, a few of them only for recording and mixing (a couple of Reaktor patches here and there, sometimes a Guitar Rig to complement studio guitars).

The PT HD way is tempting but I still have to compare its audio performances with Pyramix. And go the Digi way ... not that cool.
Glad to hear that DP+DAE is quite stable, though.

Do you know how many tracks you can run with DP/DAE with just 1 Core Card ?
The idea would be to buy the most minimal Digi gear to access DAE + use (i.e.) Lynx Aurora with PT cards.

Thanx again,

Pascal

[drBill]

Originally Posted by noize_organizer

Thanx for your input.

I actually do use a lot of Native Instruments for production, a few of them only for recording and mixing (a couple of Reaktor patches here and there, sometimes a Guitar Rig to complement studio guitars).

The PT HD way is tempting but I still have to compare its audio performances with Pyramix. And go the Digi way ... not that cool.
Glad to hear that DP+DAE is quite stable, though.

Do you know how many tracks you can run with DP/DAE with just 1 Core Card ?
The idea would be to buy the most minimal Digi gear to access DAE + use (i.e.) Lynx Aurora with PT cards.

Thanx again,

Pascal

Native Instruments/Digi and MOTU do NOT get along well. I'll drop it at that. I'm no longer a NI fan. for me there is nothing that can compare to a PTHD system out there right now. I'm not sure. Track count is dependant on so many different things. Like how complex your mixer is, how many plug-ins your'e using, # of i/o interfaces, etc. Track count uses up mixer chips so......I guess that's a long way of saying I don't know. I'm running an HD3. Good luck.

bp

[noize_organizer]

OK

Well, a possible solution would be to run DP under MAS to compose/produce/VIs and switch to DAE mode for mixing.
But then, I'll have to deal with the interfaces issues (native vs PT standard) ...

Thus the idea to split platforms instead of trying to find a all-in-one.

So you are doing all your midi etc. in PT HD as well ?

Pascal

[noize_organizer]

Originally Posted by drBill

Who knows when 6 comes out though.

That's another point.
I wish they could fix the audio engine and summing for real in DP6 but it looks like they are more into adding bells and whistles.

It's a bummer because I think they could get all the non-PT HD users looking for a killer sounding platform on their side...

Let's give DP6 a chance and investigate more into Pyramix.

Pascal

[JimmySX]

I did try the Pyramix once and found it not intuitive too use at all!
PT HD I only use for audiopost production. The only thing it's good for in my opnion
And for musicproduction midi+audio, for me there is only 1 answer: Nuendo! But then again, starting from atari with cubase, for me it was the logical step. No learning curve for me there

[soundseeker]

hey jim

hw is cuebase / nuendo on a mac at 96k. i heard nuendo isnt really optimized for mac.

and what is the benefit of nuendo over cubase?

[noize_organizer]

I used to work on Cubase SX and found it OK but not top-level for audio.
As Nuendo has the same audio engine, I think I could get good results but not top.
+ it would mean going back to PC, which I am not that found of.
It would also be the case for Pyramix ...

True, Pyramix does not look that intuitive and the learning curve is supposedly quite steep. Now, I am not afraid of a thick manual and if it is to really go up there with my audio defintion (coupled with good converters/clock), I am ready to give it a try.

A friend of mine will let me tweak it for a while, I'll let you know my impressions soon.

pask

[Zuewi]

I'd suggest trying samplitude or sequoia

[noize_organizer]

OK _ I'll have a look at Samplitude and Sequoia.
PC again, here.

Is Reaper a serious option to your opinion ?

pask

[mOjO FET]

If you have the option try Samplitude. Very good sounding engine IMO.

It works quite nice in all aspects from composing, recording, mixing and mastering.

Michael

[noize_organizer]

Originally Posted by drBill

Native Instruments/Digi and MOTU do NOT get along well. I'll drop it at that. I'm no longer a NI fan.

bp

This VIs issue is a key element for me.
Do you mean that Native Instruments won't work that well on a PT HD system ?
Or is it the DP/DAE + Native Instruments combination that is not stable ?

NI + DP/MAS works for me.

The advantage I see in using DP/DAE is I won't have to get into a new app + I still have the option to use PT (clients ...).
The idea would be to switch from MAS (pitch correction i.e.) to DAE (rec, mix) and back when needed, but some slutz say it is pretty crashy ... so, again, it sounds like a compromise.

pask

[inthere]

If things get crowded after 10-12 tracks that is most definitely your sound card. Logic, Nuendo, PT, Sonar, and most DAW's are very close in sound quality, it's not them. I've done 40+tracks on Logic and the separation was awesome and the only limiting factor was sound card quality.

If you're looking to increase your sond quality I'd suggest upgrading converters or interfaces, the DAW won't make that much of a difference. Top of the line interface would be the Prism Orpheus, and there are loads of great converters out there, just do a search and you'll soon know what to get.

Top of the line converters would be Lavry, Weiss, DAD, and Prism, with Crane Song, Lynx, Burl, and Apogee a notch below.

[siriusbliss]

Originally Posted by mOjO FET

If you have the option try Samplitude. Very good sounding engine IMO.

It works quite nice in all aspects from composing, recording, mixing and mastering.

Michael

+1 for Samplitude!

Greg

[noize_organizer]

Originally Posted by inthere

If things get crowded after 10-12 tracks that is most definitely your sound card. Logic, Nuendo, PT, Sonar, and most DAW's are very close in sound quality, it's not them. I've done 40+tracks on Logic and the separation was awesome and the only limiting factor was sound card quality.

If you're looking to increase your sond quality I'd suggest upgrading converters or interfaces, the DAW won't make that much of a difference. Top of the line interface would be the Prism Orpheus, and there are loads of great converters out there, just do a search and you'll soon know what to get.

Top of the line converters would be Lavry, Weiss, DAD, and Prism, with Crane Song, Lynx, Burl, and Apogee a notch below.

Yes, I know the interfaces play a very important role in the global process (and so does the clock as well) but I talked to a couple of guys who experimented the same as me, even with good interfaces.
I think each DAW has some sort of sound and a way to handle audio that makes it "feel" a bit different from the others.

So, I thought of starting with new converters (Lynx probably) but then I have to choose the cards and I am back to the Digi VS Native war ... as Digi have their own type of connectors/protocol.

Thanx for your inputs, it helps a lot !

pask

[JimmySX]

Originally Posted by soundseeker

hey jim

hw is cuebase / nuendo on a mac at 96k. i heard nuendo isnt really optimized for mac.

and what is the benefit of nuendo over cubase?

I wouldn't know, I'm running it on a PC! HAve a look at the Nuendo forum for your answer.
And as for quality of the soundenige, I can only say from what my personal experiences are. To me either Nuendo and PT sound the same. I love both audio-enigines. But hey that's just me!

[zakco]

Originally Posted by JimmySX

I can only say from what my personal experiences are. To me either Nuendo and PT sound the same. I love both audio-enigines. But hey that's just me!

Nope, that's not just you.

I've got PTHD on a mac and Cubase on a PC. Most of us have much bigger challenges audio wise than the difference between these two apps sonically. I'd say use whatever platform suits your workflow the best. That's a bigger deal IMO.

-Z-

[rasmus]

cubase 4 is working fine on macs...
pt does not sound better, it´s the converters and plugs that do make a difference.
choosing a daw should be more about workflow than sound.

[JimmySX]

Originally Posted by zakco

Nope, that's not just you.

I've got PTHD on a mac and Cubase on a PC. Most of us have much bigger challenges audio wise than the difference between these two apps sonically. I'd say use whatever platform suits your workflow the best. That's a bigger deal IMO.

-Z-

[noize_organizer]

Originally Posted by burt3k

cubase 4 is working fine on macs...
pt does not sound better, it´s the converters and plugs that do make a difference.
choosing a daw should be more about workflow than sound.

I know a lot of people think this way and I can understand how minor this aspect may sound to some.

Nevertheless, at the end of the day, you end up with a mixed track that does sound substantially different.
Probably nearly all the DAWs will sound similar with a couple of tracks being played/summed. Now, when you mix 80-tracks rock 'n roll with tons of guitars piled up on each other, the sound differences start to be more perceptible and even bring out the weakness of an audio engine.

Otherwise, you would find mastering engineers using whatever DAW and it is definitely not the case.

As I said, these are differencies that I can feel and describe, not just theories.

Workflow is one thing, and it is really important, sound definition is another one and my goal was to point that out in this thread.

pask

[henryrobinett]

For me the solution is easily a 2882+dsp and or ULN-2, both with 2d card. I sum with the Metric Halo, use a lot of their plugins plus the NI and anything else, along with DP/Logic, whatever.

DP is a perfect fit for Metric Halo boxes summing with 2d/v.5 Mixer. It sounds way better than the DP engine. Many folks I've talked to who have PT HD also love and think it sounds better or as good.

Introducing 2d

I'm not selling anything.

[MarkRB]

I use Pyramix, PT, Cubase and (when I absolutely have to) Logic.

Pyramix is very good at what it does and the VS3 plug-ins are among the best sounding software plugs I've ever heard, even the free ones that come with it.

I use it for mastering so have never tried to use it in a multitrack recording setting but the idea fills me with terror! I could probably mix inside pyramix and I think the learning curve might be worth it but when I have ProTools and a deadline it has to be PT all the way for now.

I think it was designed with mastering and broadcast in mind and it's general unfriendliness/unintuitiveness belies that. That said I think if you invest some time in setting it up how you like it (it is very customizable) it could serve you very well.

[noize_organizer]

Originally Posted by MarkRB

... the idea fills me with terror! I could probably mix inside pyramix and I think the learning curve might be worth it but when I have ProTools and a deadline it has to be PT all the way for now.

Thanx for your input !

How would you describe the differencies between PT HD and Pyramix, stricly audio-wise (not talking features here) ?

pask

[James Meeker]

Originally Posted by noize_organizer

Nevertheless, at the end of the day, you end up with a mixed track that does sound substantially different.
Probably nearly all the DAWs will sound similar with a couple of tracks being played/summed. Now, when you mix 80-tracks rock 'n roll with tons of guitars piled up on each other, the sound differences start to be more perceptible and even bring out the weakness of an audio engine.

Honestly this seems like splitting hairs to the n-th degree for the major DAWS, which all sound good. In the grand scheme of things it's not really going to matter *IF* someone is skilled.

[unclejoe]

I use pyramix on a regular basis (live recording mainly), with very high track counts and actually really like editing on it. I do admit it took a while to get used to, but any new platform does. never used it to mix ITB though. Only downside is the cost.

[MarkRB]

Originally Posted by noize_organizer

Thanx for your input !

How would you describe the differencies between PT HD and Pyramix, stricly audio-wise (not talking features here) ?

pask

Audio wise I can't really comment as I don't have the systems side by side and use different converters for both. The only thing I can say on that side is the VS3 plugins are far superior to TDM to my ears. I hear different things on both rigs but I'm sure the rooms/converters play a large part in that. Bottom line: both are great!
I'd go with the one you are most comfortable with.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by noize_organizer

This VIs issue is a key element for me.
Do you mean that Native Instruments won't work that well on a PT HD system ?
Or is it the DP/DAE + Native Instruments combination that is not stable ?

NI + DP/MAS works for me.

The advantage I see in using DP/DAE is I won't have to get into a new app + I still have the option to use PT (clients ...).
The idea would be to switch from MAS (pitch correction i.e.) to DAE (rec, mix) and back when needed, but some slutz say it is pretty crashy ... so, again, it sounds like a compromise.

pask

DP + DAE + NI = tuttdfegad

[drBill]

Originally Posted by inthere

If things get crowded after 10-12 tracks that is most definitely your sound card.

Not with DP. It's something in the mix bus. I've used DP with Apogee's and Digi 192's - both of which sound great with PT and sucky with the DP mix buss.

[noize_organizer]

Originally Posted by drBill

Not with DP. It's something in the mix bus. I've used DP with Apogee's and Digi 192's - both of which sound great with PT and sucky with the DP mix buss.

Great point, thanx !

So - again - it seems that DP is lacking in the summing department (a fact that quite a few engineers I talked to agreed on).

Is there a workaround for that ?
I am using a small 16 channels mixer (Neumann type) for summing and it helps but it is still not 100%.

When does the summing process occur ?
- at master fader (obvious)
- at group busses (via aux) ?
- when sending several tracks to the same hardware output ? (some sort of internal pre-out summing) ?

I am considering working at low levels (that is another story) and avoiding (when possible) using groups and master fader + sending my tracks directly out to the converters -> mixer.

I'll re-work one of my last mixes using this technique and post my impressions.
The easiest scenario is if only the master fader does the crowdy thing.

Thanx for sharing your experience on that.

BTW, if DP+DAE+NI is NOT a good combination, the all-in-one advantage is lost if going the DP/DAE way ...
Is PTHD + NI a 100% working solution for you ?

pask






rhaaaa ...