The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Universal Audio Announces All-New LUNA Recording System
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3001
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Through effects that get recorded to tape? I would have thought most interfaces with internal effects would provide that functionality. Antelope certainly does, but you can also do it entirely natively with DAWs like Reaper, Cubase and Nuendo. They all have input effects.
i know you can do effects like verbs and delays and such...but, can you track a mic input from say...a snare drum...through a plugin in compressor and eq and still monitor with low enough latency for it to not effect the player ?

it seems to me that this is what the apollo system offers that others do not.

again, i've been out of it awhile with health issues so maybe i missed some major developments in the last few years.

i'm hoping to be able to track 12-18 inputs from a live band into a daw...and ideally, which is what it seems luna will offer, through plugins like compressors, eqs, saturation, etc. in addition to mic preamp models like the unison stuff.

i also need to be able to send out maybe 4 stereo cues or 8 mono cues i can send to my headphone rig to feed the musicians. i need this to be with low enough latency that it does not affect the playing.

ideally i'd like to be able to punch in a full band, all inputs, to a recorded track and not have to do weird switching and routing of the cue sends.

again, this is what it appears luna is offering.

maybe i'm missing something here...but i know other people earlier in this thread were expressing the same issues with most native daws...that i have been.

i thought the whole tracking live inputs through plugins was something UA had in their apollo and console setup using the apollo on board dsp....that no one else had.

again...maybe i'm totally wrong and misunderstanding all of this.
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3002
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by andersmv View Post
Thanks to everyone that's taken time out of their days to ruin this tread. I'm going to go back to recording music and making a living I guess? I'll be messing with Luna when it comes out, I'm sure it will be a very miserable experience seeing as I still have my iLok plugged in as well.

yeah, it's been pretty ridiculous...even for gearslutz.

i think i'm going to try the facebook groups that drew comments in to get more information.

this thread just keeps getting bogged down with nonsense.
3
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3003
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1zerozerozero1 View Post
I used the term "cult" because all I'm trying to say is something I'd like to think think most people would agree with: marketing should tell the truth. Whereas you've all basically come back to me with "it's ok..." so effectively "the truth doesn't matter". That certainly seems pretty cult-like to me. Shrug.
But they are telling the truth, every UA product I own has been exactly what I expected it to be and operated as I expected it to. So how exactly does that mean I'm, or others, are ok with the truth not being told exactly?

You're othering UA users and stereotyping, that's closer to cult-like behaviour.

But that's not the purpose of marketing, its there to sell products, plus this is a propriety system and who the hell buys into such a system without knowledge of what it is? Do I need to be told each plugin is an emulation every single time or its not actual tape I'm recording to? Or that the guitar amp emulation I'm using isn't powered by actual valves?

Plus I feel UA's use of "analog sound" is more accurate than you might think, as its about the artefacts rather than the medium(s) itself, which people are trying to recreate in a DAW, if people were after an analogue medium they wouldn't be using a DAW to start with. Their tagline that you quoted is actually a kind of empty statement in that regard rather than an outright false one.

But all language is context dependent & requires understanding on both sides and that is what the vast majority of all your communication is actually like, otherwise everything said & done would be more like a legal contract.
2
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3004
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnscalia View Post
Well,
I meant what many of you are also wondering.
How much of “Luna” needs my Mac’s precious dsp?
I have a iMac Pro , and it’s a beast , but even I have to suffer the latency when my track count gets high. And I currently use Apollo Twin with an OCTO sat.
Logic just sort of says F.U when I wanna add an instrument. The way I cure it , is I hit the “low latency” button in logic. It will disable some of my native plugs , but it gets me from A to B.
Based on what I’m hearing , that will no longer be a thing in the Lunaverse
what i understand is that the host computer will always process any 3rd party AU plugins so those will always be disabled on any "live tracks" in other words...inputs that are actively recording and thus sent thru a low latency path using the apollo dsp.

i'm fine with this. as i understand it, the live inputs will be able to go thru UAD plugins just as they do in console...but the input switching and cue switching will happen in the background in luna. that is cool.

especially when you are punching in a part on something that has already been recorded...you don't have to do any rerouting or redundant plugin chains to keep the cue monitors the same.

it's also cool that luna will do all the adjusting when you do track an overdub on a huge mix to not have to adjust buffer size or again...do any weird routing or mess up your existing mix.

hoping drew can chime in later and clear some of this up.

or...i'll just wait till the damn thing is released and figure this all out for myself.

either way...what i saw so far looks promising.
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3005
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1zerozerozero1 View Post
No you couldn't. But you could if they claimed a cheeseburger was in fact French fries. You seem to have a difficulty differentiating between using hyperbolic adjectives in marketing - which is normal and fine - and using factually incorrect nouns, ie saying a product is X when in fact it's Y. By disputing my flagging up of their marketing, you're saying the latter is ok and acceptable.
No I'm not, I've repeatedly pointed out that you took that one sentence out of context and disregarded the rest of the page which describes what the product actually is & does. Which requires going through the product category to get to that page anyway!

UA clearly doesn't claim its something else, contrary to all your poorly fabricated claims with flimsy cherrypicked evidence for them.

I don't have a problem differentiating anything, I've just had to explain to you what the difference between a headline & a strap/tagline. You are in no position to tell people what they are struggling with!
3
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3006
Gear Addict
as to the cult of UA nonsense...i just don't get it.

i just use tools that work.

i have a UA apollo and twin. they work great. i've been using the UAD platform for plugins for about 15 years now.

if i'm in any cult its for RADAR and daking and chandler and trident A ranges.

those are the things i have used and loved for over 20 years now.

i've used protools since it was sound tools. i started with a soundtools rig, then a nubus protools rig, then tdm, then hd and all the le versions.

protools has been my main daw for 25 years. i also like and use logic, reaper, samplitude and others. they are all tools.

i like the apollo system. it sounds great and is user friendly and lets me focus more on the music and production which is all i really want. i'm a producer and musician first. i learned to engineer to facilitate production.

i don't like avid's new model. i have always used protools...but i'm fine moving to something else if it helps my work flow and mostly...gets out of the way of me helping bands and artists to make music. that is what is paramount to me.

i'm not a guy that is going to do null tests and compare mics for days at a time. i don't care.

i just like stuff that sounds good, is easy to use and operate, and facilitates music getting recorded more conveniently and easily.

so far...UA seems to have a pretty good grasp of what folks like me want and need...and LUNA just seems to be the next step in their whole ethos.

i dig that.

in a perfect world, i'd continue to just work on radar with my mic preamps and console and outboard gear. it works for me and i like how it sounds.

this new music business world is a different place than even 10 years ago. i need to change with the times and LUNA may offer me a way to keep my workflow and methodology...but move it into a laptop and interface setup.

if i can do that...LUNA will be where i move toward in the coming years.
6
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3007
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by haze015 View Post
Plus I feel UA's use of "analog sound" is more accurate than you might think, as its about the artefacts rather than the medium(s) itself, which people are trying to recreate in a DAW, if people were after an analogue medium they wouldn't be using a DAW to start with. Their tagline that you quoted is actually a kind of empty statement in that regard rather than an outright false one.
exactly the point i was trying to make earlier.

this is just such a pedantic argument and just static.

if you think luna is going to suck...don't buy it.

for free.
2
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3008
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crestifer View Post
i know you can do effects like verbs and delays and such...but, can you track a mic input from say...a snare drum...through a plugin in compressor and eq and still monitor with low enough latency for it to not effect the player ?

it seems to me that this is what the apollo system offers that others do not.

again, i've been out of it awhile with health issues so maybe i missed some major developments in the last few years.

i'm hoping to be able to track 12-18 inputs from a live band into a daw...and ideally, which is what it seems luna will offer, through plugins like compressors, eqs, saturation, etc. in addition to mic preamp models like the unison stuff.

i also need to be able to send out maybe 4 stereo cues or 8 mono cues i can send to my headphone rig to feed the musicians. i need this to be with low enough latency that it does not affect the playing.

ideally i'd like to be able to punch in a full band, all inputs, to a recorded track and not have to do weird switching and routing of the cue sends.

again, this is what it appears luna is offering.

maybe i'm missing something here...but i know other people earlier in this thread were expressing the same issues with most native daws...that i have been.

i thought the whole tracking live inputs through plugins was something UA had in their apollo and console setup using the apollo on board dsp....that no one else had.

again...maybe i'm totally wrong and misunderstanding all of this.
First, there are 2 kinds of UAD plugins: zero-latency plugins (most of the time, legacy one) and latency plugins (most of the time, unison plugins, MkII versions of "legacy" plugins).

So when you add a plugin, even with an Apollo, if this plugin has latency, it will add latency and the latency adds up (plugin latency 1 2ms + plugin latency 2 2ms = 4ms latency). It will, I think use the largest latency chain as the base in order to compensate the latency in your DAW.

If you use only 0 latency plugins, all is good. you'll have a very small latency under ~3ms in 44khz.
if you use plugins that are not latency free then that can add up quickly.
let's say you put the fender tweed plugin has a plugin, this will add 119 samples of latency (119/44 =~2.7ms) that will add up to the base latency of 2.2ms so 5ms.

if you add a 1176 MkII, la2a MkII, each with 55 samples of latency you should get an other 2.5ms which will bring the overall latency to approximately 7.5ms.
(if you use a DSP pairing this will add up an other 70 sample of latency...)

this is at 44khz so at 96khz, 7.5ms becomes 3.75ms.

if you use for example not the fender but a Friedman it will be 0 latency.
if you use not the MkII versions but the "legacy" version, it will also be 0 latency.
so you'll stay at 2.2ms at 44khz or 1.1ms at 96khz.

Well, this is the same story in native world.
You have many plugins that are latency free. Waves has many plugins that are latency free, as Fabfilter, etc.

so then the latency will be the one from the combinaison between your computer power and your audio interface.
1
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3009
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by scatter_brain View Post

Well, this is the same story in native world.
You have many plugins that latency free. Waves has many plugins that are latency free, as Fabfilter, etc.
ok, thank you. i do understand all of that.

the thing i'm still not understanding is...how do you track through plugins on other native systems and interfaces like you can with console on the apollo system ?

i guess i'm just not aware of the other rigs that will do this.

short of setting up aux tracks and bussing input tracks through them.

again, i'm coming from radar and protools hd here. this apollo system is the first native rig i've tried to use to record more than just one input at a time.

thanks for taking the time to respond.
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3010
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crestifer View Post
ok, thank you. i do understand all of that.

the thing i'm still not understanding is...how do you track through plugins on other native systems and interfaces like you can with console on the apollo system ?
my bad haha.

In native, you just directly use the DAW and monitor directly from it, you do not need a console software on top of it.

Quantum has a 2ms of latency at buffer 32/44khz so better than the Apollo Twin X.
1
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3011
Quote:
Originally Posted by crestifer View Post
i know you can do effects like verbs and delays and such...but, can you track a mic input from say...a snare drum...through a plugin in compressor and eq and still monitor with low enough latency for it to not effect the player ?

it seems to me that this is what the apollo system offers that others do not.

again, i've been out of it awhile with health issues so maybe i missed some major developments in the last few years.

i'm hoping to be able to track 12-18 inputs from a live band into a daw...and ideally, which is what it seems luna will offer, through plugins like compressors, eqs, saturation, etc. in addition to mic preamp models like the unison stuff.

i also need to be able to send out maybe 4 stereo cues or 8 mono cues i can send to my headphone rig to feed the musicians. i need this to be with low enough latency that it does not affect the playing.

ideally i'd like to be able to punch in a full band, all inputs, to a recorded track and not have to do weird switching and routing of the cue sends.

again, this is what it appears luna is offering.

maybe i'm missing something here...but i know other people earlier in this thread were expressing the same issues with most native daws...that i have been.

i thought the whole tracking live inputs through plugins was something UA had in their apollo and console setup using the apollo on board dsp....that no one else had.

again...maybe i'm totally wrong and misunderstanding all of this.

It is totally possible. Native plugins and bussing have 0 samples of latency - but even when they don't, it gets rolled into the native sample buffer (ie. a plugin with 33 samples of delay will only increase the latency by 1 sample when running a 32 sample buffer).

Here are some screenshots of an old native session. Pro Tools, 2010 Mac Pro 12-core, Antelope Zen Studios - 10 channels being tracked with 6 stereo headphone mixes, plus a plugin on each channel... then another couple of dozen playback channels. From memory the session was running at a 64 sample buffer. The system is a long way from ideal though - The Zen Studio is USB, and it chewed a heap of native CPU power just to run. Using one of the decent TB or PCIe interfaces listed in that database will yield much better results. So would choosing a brand new iMac Pro or Mac Pro. The computer running this session is almost a decade old!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2i6ranj6v2...622_o.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txi4iv5ihb...991_o.jpg?dl=0


As mentioned, Reaper, Cubase, Nuendo, etc offer the ability to place plugins in two different places. In the monitor path, like in the above Pro Tools session, and also in the input path so that you compress and EQ the audio before it gets recorded by the DAW.
2
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3012
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crestifer View Post
ok, thank you. i do understand all of that.

the thing i'm still not understanding is...how do you track through plugins on other native systems and interfaces like you can with console on the apollo system ?

i guess i'm just not aware of the other rigs that will do this.

short of setting up aux tracks and bussing input tracks through them.

again, i'm coming from radar and protools hd here. this apollo system is the first native rig i've tried to use to record more than just one input at a time.

thanks for taking the time to respond.
As far as I'm aware, you don't/can't track through them, the DAW will host them (Can usually feed channels into eachother & therefore plugin chains to be recorded quite easily in a lot of DAWs). But this adds a bit of latency because of the buffer size. Which I think is where the confusion comes in, what happens in Console is before the DAW's buffer (Much like Luna it has no buffer of its own), which will always add some latency and its possible to monitor from both Console & your DAW at the same time, instant comb filter effect!
Basically some are finding with their combination of computer & interface they are less reliant on monitoring without bypassing the DAW's buffer as their latency is low enough anyway to not be an issue. Which, with everything YMMV.
2
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3013
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1zerozerozero1 View Post
To repeat, the headline, I repeat headline, says: "Stunning analog sound for your PC or Mac."
Anyone who sees that headline - and that headline ONLY - and then decides to go buy a UAD-2 after which they plop it into an available PCIe slot and is subsequently surprised that it's a software emulation plugin(s) rather than analog processing is a damn idiot.

If you're not an idiot it is clear what it is and what it isn't.

But yeah, I suppose I should assume that in today's society anything that's longer than a tweet won't be understood by the masses...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1zerozerozero1 View Post
This is a lie in big bold text at the top of the page.
Here's a simple yes or no question for you:

Is "sound" "analog"?

Yes,
or,
no...

?
5
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3014
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1zerozerozero1 View Post
Headline: "Stunning analog sound for your PC or Mac."
Come on man, be reasonable.

People don't use UAD, Slate, Waves, Kush or whatever plugins because they are literally analog. They use them because they deliver that much sought after 'classic analog sound' within the digital domain.

Context is everything.
5
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3015
Gear Addict
 
JTC111's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by crestifer View Post
as to the cult of UA nonsense...i just don't get it.

i just use tools that work.

i have a UA apollo and twin. they work great. i've been using the UAD platform for plugins for about 15 years now.
The hyperbole that some engage in can make it feel that way. I'm a longtime UAD user from way back when UAD-1 first came out. I owned a silverplate Apollo and now I own an X8p. I love the products. I didn't read through this entire thread but I did get involved in some conversations in UAD groups on Facebook where some were claiming that Luna is now the "industry standard."

There are several reasons why this is hyperbole:
1. Luna does not allow hardware inserts.
2. Luna does not offer control surface support.
3. Luna is not even available to UA customers at the present.

People who are making the argument that Luna is now the end-all-be-all, in light of those facts, do make it sound a bit cultish. I get the whole "I'm excited that a new UAD product is on the way" thing, but some folks are handling this like 11 year old girls when a new boy band comes on the scene.
3
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3016
Gear Nut
 

Dang checking back in on the thread a week later and people are still arguing the same dumb points over and over. Some of you are just straight up losers and I'm surprised mods don't just shut down threads like this.
2
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3017
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by JTC111 View Post
some were claiming that Luna is now the "industry standard."
that's pretty hilarious considering it's not even released yet. haha.

i don't care about industry standard.

i'm just hoping it will be a solution for me and how i work.

if not, i'll probably try to find a hdx rig.

the idea of just being able to haul around my apollo twin and a laptop to do overdubs using unison mic preamps and other plugins on the way in...is appealing to me.

i like to track with the sounds i want in the mix....to tape (disc)

that's just how i've always worked. i like to commit to things while the tracks are being laid down.

with my health issues it's just not feasible to haul around the 2 24 space racks i used to carry with my radar and preamps and outboard...and a small console.

those days are over.

i'm hoping luna with apollo can give me close to my old workflow...with a laptop and an interface.

i love the uad plugins. i can see tracking through an la2 or 1176 or the unison neve/api/uad mic preamp models. i've got good mics and i know how to get good sounds. i'll probably still hang on to my old daking modules as i know them so well, but i'm fine moving into a digital world totally.

the stuff sounds good.

i don't know if luna will be the answer...but it looks promising, and based on ua's track record...i have faith it will be cool for me.

i'm already using apollo and console at home on my own stuff and it's been great. i just don't like the flipping back and forth to protools or logic, and the whole virtual channel thing to monitor my daw when overdubbing is kinda weird. it's a weird workflow for me.

from the namm demo, i can see luna doing what i hope it will do.

we shall see.
4
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3018
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by crestifer View Post
ok, thank you. i do understand all of that.

the thing i'm still not understanding is...how do you track through plugins on other native systems and interfaces like you can with console on the apollo system ?
Because other manufacturers have better drivers (RME). With an RME Interface I can get a lower Latency routing through the daw than with an Apollo using the console. Simply as that.
1
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3019
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by folkfreak View Post
Because other manufacturers have better drivers (RME). With an RME Interface I can get a lower Latency routing through the daw than with an Apollo using the console. Simply as that.
ok i get that. i've had rme stuff in the past and it was great.

what i mean is...how do you track inputs through plugins and record that to the daw?

i know i can setup an aux buss and send an input channel through it with a plugin on it, but how do you do this with other daws ? with the apollo system, the plugins are instantiated on the console channel where your input shows up...and can either just be monitored or recorded to disc.

i was just not aware you could do this same thing with other interfaces and daws.

i'm only familiar with pt and logic.
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3020
Gear Addict
now i remember why i liked RADAR so much in the first place.

it just replaced my studer...and everything else stayed the same. haha.

all this latency stuff and buffers and input monitoring and etc etc etc.

it's just stuff i'd rather not care about.

i just want to focus on the mic placement, the sounds, and the playing.

this is what i'm hoping luna can help streamline for me.

i realize this is probably not what most people are wanting.

i'm a musician and producer first. engineer only by necessity.

i just want something that keeps things simple and allows me to focus on the music rather than buffer size and routing and other technical stuff.
2
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3021
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by crestifer View Post
thanks for all of this. i used to have a lynx setup using an aes card. it was great.

what i don't understand still is...how are people tracking THRU plugins on the way into the recorder?

in other words, i put some mics on my drumkit...i send the mics into mic preamps and then into the line inputs of the interface. if i want to use compression and eq....in plugin form...on the way in...while recording...how are people doing this ?
In PT:
Just slap the plugins on the tracks if you want to monitor through them while recording.
If you want to record through the plugins, printing the effects into te audio:
Use aux tracks as your inputs, put your plugs on them, route those to tracks, record arm those tracks and hit record.
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3022
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
In PT:
Just slap the plugins on the tracks if you want to monitor through them while recording.
If you want to record through the plugins, printing the effects into te audio:
Use aux tracks as your inputs, put your plugs on them, route those to tracks, record arm those tracks and hit record.

Or just hit commit or freeze after you hit stop.
3
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3023
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
In PT:
Just slap the plugins on the tracks if you want to monitor through them while recording.
If you want to record through the plugins, printing the effects into te audio:
Use aux tracks as your inputs, put your plugs on them, route those to tracks, record arm those tracks and hit record.
right. i know i can do this...but again, it's extra steps and more routing and more processing.

i thought folks were saying there was something akin to what ua had done with console in the apollo system.

this is what is appealing to me about this whole luna thing. the fact that the routing and switching and buffer adjusting, etc etc...is done behind the scenes.

it appears you can just route an input to a track, then decide if you want to just monitor with a plugin or print those sounds to the track...and you just slap the plugin on there and go.

it also seems that all the latency is calculated when you are overdubbing to an existing mix with lots of plugins that likely will be delaying the tracks they are on...so that the newly recorded tracks will all sync up.

i like that, at least from the demos i've seen, they have made it pretty streamlined. it looks like console is just part of the luna recorder mixer.

i like that integrated approach. i see why they are insisting on calling it a recording system rather than saying it's another daw.
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3024
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
In PT:
Just slap the plugins on the tracks if you want to monitor through them while recording.
If you want to record through the plugins, printing the effects into te audio:
Use aux tracks as your inputs, put your plugs on them, route those to tracks, record arm those tracks and hit record.
same in logic.
You do need to assign the input from the interface to the logic track.
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3025
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crestifer View Post
right. i know i can do this...but again, it's extra steps and more routing and more processing.

i thought folks were saying there was something akin to what ua had done with console in the apollo system.

this is what is appealing to me about this whole luna thing. the fact that the routing and switching and buffer adjusting, etc etc...is done behind the scenes.

it appears you can just route an input to a track, then decide if you want to just monitor with a plugin or print those sounds to the track...and you just slap the plugin on there and go.

it also seems that all the latency is calculated when you are overdubbing to an existing mix with lots of plugins that likely will be delaying the tracks they are on...so that the newly recorded tracks will all sync up.

i like that, at least from the demos i've seen, they have made it pretty streamlined. it looks like console is just part of the luna recorder mixer.

i like that integrated approach. i see why they are insisting on calling it a recording system rather than saying it's another daw.
oh, you're talking about recording the result from the plugin directly("destructive" recording)?

It's not possible like Console in Logic at least but a few DAWs allow this.
1
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3026
News Desk Editor
 
The Press Desk's Avatar
 

3
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3027
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Yes it seems to be quite elegantly integrated in Luna indeed.
But not without its drawbacks, it seems.

It’ll work great if you want to use UAD plugs on the way in, but from Drew’s comments I gather it’s just plain impossible to monitor through native plugs AT ALL on recording tracks.
Not even if you decide 96k low buffer on your Apollo is low latency enough for you.
Hope I’m wrong about this.
Luckily other DAWs will still allow it if Luna doesn’t.
2
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3028
Lives for gear
 

A lot of words were written, but very little was said.
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3029
Lives for gear
 
andersmv's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TNM View Post
Once again I am out, but if personal attacks continue, I’ll be back and this will never end.
You are ridiculous.
5
Share
Old 22nd January 2020
  #3030
Talking

This thread is hilarious....reminds me of the old days of gearslutz. One thing is for sure, people never see something revolutionary until after the fact....go look at discussions when Apple first released the iPod....or the iPhone. I’m not saying Luna is necessarily revolutionary, but if it is, so many of these comments won’t age well!

Personally, I have no use for low latency processing, because zero latency (analog) is the the only thing that’s acceptable for me when I’m tracking....that’s what my analog gear is for. I take human performance and rhythm very seriously, and do not feel ok allowing a few milliseconds, even if it’s imperceptible. Im either cutting to tape monitoring the input, or cutting to DAW and sending to headphones from console before the converters to an analog headphone system. I only need to think about buffer when I use virtual instruments.
2
Share
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump