• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Topic: Shooting ourselves in the foot?

  1. #1

    Shooting ourselves in the foot?

    Howdy all!

    For awhile now it seems that audio technology hasn\'t really lived up to the hype. I know that when I bought Cubase 24 I expected it and Wavelab to be all I\'d need to make music...pretty dumb in hindsight.

    Now there is a new delimma: As technology advances and computers are starting to offer us the ability to make the quality of music we\'ve been waiting for, software keeps bumping into the technological limits. What I mean is that now that we have computers that can run orchestral projects at 16 bits, software and manufacturers are looking to move to 24 and/or 32 bits, which for a large project will overtax the computer. It would be great to think that you could get a good 16 bit library and stick to it, but many manufacturers don\'t support their \"legacy\" products, so if I\'m happy running Gigastudio 2.5 and EWQL Gold, what happens when Tascam no longer supports GS 2.5? Note: I\'m using GS as an example here...I realize GS3 will run 16 bit samples.

    It seems like we\'re in a vicious cycle...I wonder if we\'ll ever get to a point where we\'ll have a completely stable sample/sequencer/etc system with high quality audio that will last for more than a couple of years.


  2. #2

    Re: Shooting ourselves in the foot?

    You can freeze any system and continue to use equipment indefinitely (I still have a couple of instruments from the early \'80s, for example), but music technology is as much of an ongoing pursuit as anything else. It\'s never \"finished,\" any more than any other science or art is.

    But I disagree that it hasn\'t lived up to the hype. It\'s all pretty amazing to me.

  3. #3

    Re: Shooting ourselves in the foot?


    I guess I should have said that it used to not live up to the hype. What I mean is that now the hype is reality and I\'m wondering if the continual pursuit of better technology will end up hurting us. Even if we get a system that works well for a few years, once you do decide to upgrade everything it\'s an expensive proposition.

    Then again, it\'s always been this way....studios are always turning over gear trying to get the best audio equipment they can find. By comparison, we don\'t have it so bad.

    I\'m just hoping that once I get my system put together that I\'ll have a stable, functional system that I can learn and not spend the majoprity of my time troubleshooting or trying to get one piece of equipment to play well with the others.


  4. #4

    Re: Shooting ourselves in the foot?

    Wes. I have been invloved with some aspect of the music/audio business for the last 25 years. In that time, technology has never stopped changing, evolving and moving. (there is debate on whether it is always for the good....but I digress).

    I suspect the industry will never stop evolving. Remember, that just because something is new, it doesn\'t mean you have to jump on board. There are still people making and recording music today with 20 year old technology....and happily.

  5. #5

    Re: Shooting ourselves in the foot?


    Good point. The one difference now is that we\'re getting to a point where a small project studio can enable a single person to do things that were impossible a few years back.


  6. #6

    Re: Shooting ourselves in the foot?

    Don\'t worry about it...

    Example - I\'m running a Mackie d8b console, which I bought to replace a Spirit 328 Digital, which I bought to replace a Soundcraft 200B, which I...

    I bought the d8b because I had more synths than would fit in the line ins of the Spirit, and because the Spirit required too much bank switching to tweak mixes.

    The rest of the world is moving toward tracking at 24/96, but I have no plan to replace the board, even though it will never do 96K. Why? I don\'t have deliverables that require it, and if I ever do, I will simply add the outboard gear (CD burner, DVD burner, whatever) needed, and mix to it in analog. The one in a thousand that can hear that difference on their home system will still not notice, as it\'s the music that they\'re listening to, not the sample rate or bit depth-the slight loss of transparency will not be audible to the iPod, mp3, boom box, car stereo, average home system, etc. listener...

    Now if I were recording for HDTV, or actual major film tracks, it would be a needed product, But if I upgrade everything to 96K, in five years the industry will be adopting 192, and the cycle of GAS begins again. Stay one or two generations behind and reap the rewards of the technology without the extreme expense of staying on the cutting edge. As Adam Osborne was so fond of pointing out, \"Those who live on the cutting edge of technology shall bleed upon it.\"


  7. #7

    Re: Shooting ourselves in the foot?

    [ QUOTE ]
    As Adam Osborne was so fond of pointing out, \"Those who live on the cutting edge of technology shall bleed upon it.\"

    [/ QUOTE ]


  8. #8

    Re: Shooting ourselves in the foot?

    I just looked up the Mackie d8b console....is drool bad for one\'s keyboard?

Go Back to forum


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts