Forums | Search | Archives

All Forums  Cool Edit  Cool Edit for the Mac ?

Author	Topic
alphacrust Posts: 1	Posted - Sat May 03, 2003 1:39 pm  Hi Guys, We sucessfully use Cool Edit Pro 2 on the PC as part of our radio training / pre-production radio editing software. What we really need now is something that is pretty much exactly the same on the Mac. Full editing and multitrack features etc. Anybody got any ideas ? Cheers, Paul.
jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901	Posted - Sat May 03, 2003 2:23 pm  I think it's safe to say that there's nothing quite like CE for Macs, and certainly not in the "bang-for-the-buck" category. If money isn't a problem, then there are quite a few programs out there for Macs, but they will also include sequencing functions (lots of MIDI implementation), and they will cost somewhat more than US$249... in many cases, quite a bit more - certainly you can find editor/multitrack functions in a lot of these. Are you relegated to using Macs for a particular purpose, or are you just trying to cover some bases? Best... -Jon _________________
wink Posts: 7	Posted - Sat May 03, 2003 4:39 pm  Hi Paul, I would love to see CEP for OSX. Talk about the ideal setup! However I don't see Synt ever doing it. There's really only two programs I've found in the running, though neither is in CEP's league. SparkXL and Peak. I liked Spark better of what's currently shipping, but the new Peak 4.0 looks pretty slick. I'll be looking at it when it starts shipping. I've actually been running CEP 1.2a for some time via Virtual PC on my Mac. Sadly 2.0 is too much of a hog and tends to crash. I've been able to play around 10 tracks without skips and too many crashes, but I mostly do 2 mix work and that works much better. Due to VPC's emulation, things run much slower (transforms, saving, etc.), but they do work. Even the Spin Audio VST-DX wrapper works allowing me to use certain plug-ins. I've only run it on my one Mac, a dual 800 w/1.5 gig ram, so I don't know if older slower machines would work or not. I'd think the newer machines would work even better. I'll find out for sure when the 970 based machines are released. I'm running the latest version of VPC as well, unfortunately now a Microsoft product. I really wouldn't recommend this setup in a production environment, but it may be an interim solution till something better comes to OSX, and something definitely will... Good luck! wink
monopoli Location: Netherlands Posts: 33	Posted - Sun May 04, 2003 12:57 am  There's an open source audio editor that may be interesting and works on Windows, Mac OS and Linux. I haven't tried it myself though. You can find it here : http://audacity.sourceforge.net/index.php?lang=en
Mark T Location: Norway Posts: 890	Posted - Mon May 05, 2003 12:47 am  Quote: I would love to see CEP for OSX. Talk about the ideal setup! I'm sorry - I can't imagine what you mean:D _________________ Mark nil desperandum - nunc est bibendum
wink Posts: 7	Posted - Mon May 05, 2003 11:30 am  Hi monopoli, I looked at Audacity a while back, but you jogged my memory to check the latest. Still a long long way to go IMO. CEP it'll likely never be, but I'd love to be proved wrong. I'll have to keep looking, but I'd still love to see iCEP. :) Hey Mark, I sure don't want to re-kindle that fire... ;) wink
nhaukap Location: USA Posts: 130	Posted - Mon May 05, 2003 4:07 pm  wink wrote: I'll have to keep looking, but I'd still love to see iCEP. You wouldn't know it from the views people around the forum generally have towards Macs , but you're definitely not the only one. And since Apple acquired Emagic/Logic last year, there have been off and on rumors about just that - an audio editing component to the iLife suite isn't totally beyond the realm of possiblity. But with the "full-featured" Logic already in the stable (albeit presently with lackluster editing functions compared to CEP), what's might be more likely (or less unlikely) could be a high-end consumer app, along the lines of iMovie but for audio. Anyway, I'm waiting along with you...nice to know there's at least one other Mac user among the hoardes of nonbelievers here...
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Mon May 05, 2003 4:25 pm  Quote: You wouldn't know it from the views people around the forum generally have towards Macs , but you're definitely not the only one. I only got put off MACs because of the cost of ownership, the OS (I don't like it), the lack of hardware choice, the rather dated architecture that's not really keeping up to date, the rather 'elitist' views of some of their owners, the Company's rather agressive attitude towards fair competition (AKA Logic takeover), and probably half a dozen other reasons I can't remember. And let's face it, MACs do not exactly have a growing userbase... I wonder why? I'm not a big fan of MS either, but as far as I'm aware, Bill Gates at least pays for his kids' upbringing... But since Syntrillium do software development for MS, I think that there's probably a better chance of Hell freezing over than a MAC version of CEP! _________________
nhaukap Location: USA Posts: 130	Posted - Mon May 05, 2003 6:16 pm  And speaking of the anti-Mac hoardes...hi Steve!;) I don't know why I do it, but again I'll succumb to your needling and counterpoint a couple points. (And apologies to everyone else for going so far off topic here, but it is somewhat germane give the nature of the discussion.) On price: If you really do mean the ongoing "cost of ownership" (and not just the purchase price of the hardware), all I can say is I've owned 4 Mac models since 1984, and in that time my cost of ownership beyond the purchase price has amounted to replacing one power supply; less than a hundred bucks over nearly 20 years. Not exactly what I would call excessive. As for the initial cost of the hardware, yes, Macs tend to cost a little more - although, the difference is far less today than in the past, and even then, there is rarely a direct feature to feature comparison to be made between a PC's feature set and a Macs. There are a lot of similarities, but also some important differences. For example, a PC equipped with the same feature set, component quality, design integrity, and overall level of hardware/software integration as the current iMac does not exist. At any price. And the iMac is comparably priced to the brand-name PCs that it competes against - machines that fall short on all the points I just mentioned. For me, the extra cost of owning and using a Mac has always been more than worth whatever the small price difference has been. On OS X: No real way for me to dispute this, as an OS choice is very much a matter of personal preference. You prefer Windows, I prefer a Mac. Even after working for Microsoft, having access to all of their software for nearly free, and being privy to no shortage of "inside" information on future products, I have never and will never own a Windows PC. I would venture to say that I've seen much, much more of the Windows "world" than you have seen of the Mac world, and that I might possibly have a better perspective when it comes to comparing the two...but in the end, it comes down to what you like, and you happend to like Windows more than Macintosh. To each his own. On a "dated architecture": Ummm...huh? Apple has almost singlehandedly out-innovated every other PC manufacturer (and Microsoft) in the past fifteen years, and in the last couple of years, the difference is so great it's nearly comical. To name some of the biggies...WYSIWYG page design...the elimination of the floppy drive...USB...FireWire...wi-fi networking...digital LCD displays...not to mention ancillary but still exceedingly brilliant things like the iPod and the new online music store...all critically (and user) acclaimed Apple-pioneered advancements. If it was the architecture of the OS you're referring to, my point remains. Windows XP is so bloated and intrusive compared to OS X it's silly. Just my personal preference now? Sure...but unlike you, I actually do use both platforms on a daily basis, and my Windows observations aren't based purely on subjective points. On elitist owners: Oh yeah, they're definitely out there. We'd prefer to be called "passionate", but I do take your point. I mean, along that line of logic, we'd all be "elitist" CEP users, then, wouldn't we?;) On fair competition: You have got to be kidding. If we compared a list of the industry competitors Apple as acquired/hindered/squashed in the past 20 years to the same list for MS in the past five years, it'd be as lopsided as a Harlem Globetrotters game. [Perhaps too US-centric a reference...do you get the Globetrotters' antics in the UK?]. This argument, objection, beef, whatever you want to call it, is beyond baseless. There simply is no company on the planet that has bought/assimilated/killed more of it's competitors than Microsoft, and to use that against Apple is extremely misguided and unfair. I understand that the Apple/Logic thing hits much closer to home, being in the audio software arena, but please, don't ignore the facts. On stalled userbase growth: A bit of a mystery, that one. Build a computer that's better designed, better equipped, easier to use, and comparably priced compared to the competition...and somehow still end up in the vast minority. Must be how BMW feels when they compare the spectacular sales success of the Toyota Camry to the relative apparrent failure of the 3 series. But darned if they're not somehow still hangin' in there. And pity the poor BWM owners...just think of the money they could have saved if they'd only bought a car like everyone else owns. (Yes, I know, this analogy is flawed...the price relative price difference is nowhere near the same, and the quality level of a PC is nowhere near that of the Camry.) In the end, yeah - I'm a bit of a Mac zealot, I'll admit. I see and use both sides every day, a PC at work because I have to, and a Mac at home because it's my money, I have a choice, and I get to. End of sermon!
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Mon May 05, 2003 6:58 pm  Hey nhaukap, don't forget some of the other "strong" selling points! Like...... They make dandy door stops. Or, if you tie a rope to one, it'll make a really good boat anchor. _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
nhaukap Location: USA Posts: 130	Posted - Tue May 06, 2003 5:53 am  Ah, but but a stylish boat anchor!
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Tue May 06, 2003 12:24 pm  nhaukap wrote: And speaking of the anti-Mac hoardes...hi Steve!;) I don't know why I do it, but again I'll succumb to your needling and counterpoint a couple points. (And apologies to everyone else for going so far off topic here, but it is somewhat germane give the nature of the discussion.) On price: If you really do mean the ongoing "cost of ownership" (and not just the purchase price of the hardware), all I can say is I've owned 4 Mac models since 1984, and in that time my cost of ownership beyond the purchase price has amounted to replacing one power supply; less than a hundred bucks over nearly 20 years. Not exactly what I would call excessive. As for the initial cost of the hardware, yes, Macs tend to cost a little more - although, the difference is far less today than in the past, and even then, there is rarely a direct feature to feature comparison to be made between a PC's feature set and a Macs. There are a lot of similarities, but also some important differences. For example, a PC equipped with the same feature set, component quality, design integrity, and overall level of hardware/software integration as the current iMac does not exist. At any price. And the iMac is comparably priced to the brand-name PCs that it competes against - machines that fall short on all the points I just mentioned. For me, the extra cost of owning and using a Mac has always been more than worth whatever the small price difference has been. On OS X: No real way for me to dispute this, as an OS choice is very much a matter of personal preference. You prefer Windows, I prefer a Mac. Even after working for Microsoft, having access to all of their software for nearly free, and being privy to no shortage of "inside" information on future products, I have never and will never own a Windows PC. I would venture to say that I've seen much, much more of the Windows "world" than you have seen of the Mac world, and that I might possibly have a better perspective when it comes to comparing the two...but in the end, it comes down to what you like, and you happend to like Windows more than Macintosh. To each his own. On a "dated architecture": Ummm...huh? Apple has almost singlehandedly out-innovated every other PC manufacturer (and Microsoft) in the past fifteen years, and in the last couple of years, the difference is so great it's nearly comical. To name some of the biggies...WYSIWYG page design...the elimination of the floppy drive...USB...FireWire...wi-fi networking...digital LCD displays...not to mention ancillary but still exceedingly brilliant things like the iPod and the new online music store...all critically (and user) acclaimed Apple-pioneered advancements. If it was the architecture of the OS you're referring to, my point remains. Windows XP is so bloated and intrusive compared to OS X it's silly. Just my personal preference now? Sure...but unlike you, I actually do use both platforms on a daily basis, and my Windows observations aren't based purely on subjective points. On elitist owners: Oh yeah, they're definitely out there. We'd prefer to be called "passionate", but I do take your point. I mean, along that line of logic, we'd all be "elitist" CEP users, then, wouldn't we?;) On fair competition: You have got to be kidding. If we compared a list of the industry competitors Apple as acquired/hindered/squashed in the past 20 years to the same list for MS in the past five years, it'd be as lopsided as a Harlem Globetrotters game. [Perhaps too US-centric a reference...do you get the Globetrotters' antics in the UK?]. This argument, objection, beef, whatever you want to call it, is beyond baseless. There simply is no company on the planet that has bought/assimilated/killed more of it's competitors than Microsoft, and to use that against Apple is extremely misguided and unfair. I understand that the Apple/Logic thing hits much closer to home, being in the audio software arena, but please, don't ignore the facts. On stalled userbase growth: A bit of a mystery, that one. Build a computer that's better designed, better equipped, easier to use, and comparably priced compared to the competition...and somehow still end up in the vast minority. Must be how BMW feels when they compare the spectacular sales success of the Toyota Camry to the relative apparrent failure of the 3 series. But darned if they're not somehow still hangin' in there. And pity the poor BWM owners...just think of the money they could have saved if they'd only bought a car like everyone else owns. (Yes, I know, this analogy is flawed...the price relative price difference is nowhere near the same, and the quality level of a PC is nowhere near that of the Camry.) In the end, yeah - I'm a bit of a Mac zealot, I'll admit. I see and use both sides every day, a PC at work because I have to, and a Mac at home because it's my money, I have a choice, and I get to. End of sermon! The stalled userbase shouldn't be such a mystery - the vast majority of potential buyers don't look at MACs through your rose-coloured spectacles. I don't like MS much either - all these OS's try to be all things to all people, and this is a significant failing. And I don't rent a copy of XP, for the reasons you alluded to... Processing power - I measure it in value for money terms, and MACs don't stack up - once again, as perceived (correctly) by most other people. The architecture is dated - it's inevitable, because there is no competition on the platform - the ultimate example of unfair competition, and it does Apple no credit, or any good. Yes, we are probably elitist CEP users - and you have to ask yourself why we have this sort of software available whilst it isn't on the MAC. It's because enough of it can be sold to enable it to be priced affordably. And with Apple's restrictive practices, it will be ever thus. All Apple software is inevitably going to be over-priced on this basis. If Syntrillium developed a MAC product, it would have to cost a fortune to cover its costs, or we'd all have to share in the cost of it through a price increase. And most of us would resent that! But hey, you can go on wishing... _________________
natone Posts: 70	Posted - Tue May 06, 2003 12:49 pm  It's only recently that I have been exposed to Apple computers. Say what you want, they're built better and designed better, software and hardware. 'Nuff said!
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Tue May 06, 2003 5:07 pm  I bet Celine Dion's got an Apple... _________________
post78 Location: USA Posts: 2887	Posted - Tue May 06, 2003 5:24 pm  Quote: I bet Celine Dion's got an Apple... Oh my! Stick 'em both in a piņata and we've got a great BD present for Steve. _________________ Answer = 1. Probably.
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Tue May 06, 2003 9:13 pm  Only cause he gets to "whack" them with stick!! _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
Mark T Location: Norway Posts: 890	Posted - Wed May 07, 2003 12:43 am  Goody, goody a pointless argument! I love e'em:D It is very simple really, Macs are innovative & easy to use and come up with lots of clever ideas. BUT PC's can today consistently support a hugely greater diversity of products than the Mac 'cos manufacturers makes stuff for PC's and not for Macs. Statistically everyone runs a PC with Windows - how are you going to argue with that? Tests also show that anything you can do with a Mac can today be done at least as well, and usually better on a PC INCLUDING graphics (that was a test by in a compuer graphics magazine BTW)! Face it guys any basically proprietary architecture is going to have trouble competing with an open architecture even though the Mac is in principle a superior architecture:D. _________________ Mark nil desperandum - nunc est bibendum
groucho Posts: 334	Posted - Wed May 07, 2003 1:13 am  Having recently moved in with a woman who owns a Mac, I've been getting to know the machine a little bit lately. After a few months of playing with the Imac, my conclusions are as follows: 1) It's cute. 2) It's small (the coolest feature IMO) 3) It's slow. 4) The OS is obviously designed for small children. In short, a nifty little computer for waaaay too much money. But my baby digs it so it's alright by me...:) Chris
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Wed May 07, 2003 6:19 am  groucho wrote: 4) The OS is obviously designed for small children. The original OS was deliberately designed on Piagetian principles - it was supposed to be 'intuitive'. Personally, I find it extremely frustrating. And lest anybody think that my MACophobia is just blind prejudice on my part, it's not. It's based on having done a book on one, and trying to troubleshoot some rather bizarre networking problems on several more. And they have consistently been more trouble to fix than PCs over a number of years. I do like the way that the hardware is laid out in them - it is a better system than the one most PCs use, but IMHO it's a good job - because I've had to delve into the innards at least as much as with PCs. I have a friend who has a recent MAC example that he uses for music and video editing, and he confesses that using a MAC has for him been anything but a smooth ride, especially with this latest OS. Exactly what is there on a MAC that is so much better, in performance and value for money terms? I haven't seen it - I remain profoundly sceptical! _________________
texas terry Location: USA Posts: 31	Posted - Fri May 09, 2003 3:31 pm  Geeeeesssssssshhhhhh.... Talk about stone throwing. I have a Mac AND a PC side by side in my studio here at the station. Granted "Radio" Production is FAR different from music. We need More FX more little files (beeps and such) and less tracks (I usualy hover around 12 tracks for a big production, and as little as 1 mono and 1 stereo for some commercials) So before I begin don't attack with that... Sorry Mac owners, my Mac is turned off , or unsued. My entire airstaff refuses to use it, and finds it MORE complicated than PC (I even admit that one is weird, but that is what they tell me). NO I WASN'T BORN A PC GUY... My first computer was a Apple ][... I used my dad's Lisa... Mac's and PC's in College... and even something called Amiga... But here is the Rub... Say what you will about MS... But the PC platform is the only open computer platform of the two. That's good and bad. The hardware, depending on what you buy can be way worse... or way better than an Apple. This one fact is what Apple people use to say they are "cutting edge" on hardware. Mac people... Your computer uses a PCI Bus... designed by PC companys... it uses USB... designed by PC... the Graphic cards... are PC cards with drivers for Mac (and old ones at that, try to find even a ATI 9800 pro or GeForce FX 5800 Ultra on a Mac... for cards that are 2 years old you have to pay double)... Oh and that card is in an AGP bus... designed by PC... other things from the PC world... Ethernet, 802.11 (calling it airport doesn't make it a new invention), EIDE Hard drives (something Mac people would tease PC people about in the past), and your using ATA100 on your top systems, PCs are at ATA133... your using PCs OLD memory, systems under 1,800 use SDRAM!.. only the most expensive Macs have DDR333, expensive PCs are using DDR400 and DDR2... or even RamBus, way faster... but not used as much... and I could go on all day. PS Apple had no part in designing Digital LCD Screens (they do PAY another company to make purty ones for them to put their name on) And as far as Wi-Fi, SCSI, and even FireWire... all of these were groups of companys sharing resources to make a "standard" Apple was one, on board with these tons of other hardware companys, all which make PC hardware... sorry guy, check your facts. And lets see Serial ATA on a Mac... Already have it on my home system... or how about Bluetooth? WYSIWYG... Apple settled that in cort... they didn't design that. Gotta give credit to Stanford PHD in th 60s (before Apple existed)... and was first on the "Alto" computer by Xerox... NOT APPLE, YEARS BEFORE LISA and MAC. They didn't even make up the term. (FYI the Lisa came out in 1983 and was the "pre" Mac) The whole Apple interface was a copy of the Xerox Star, which came out in 1981... The first WYSIWYG application for the Mac was the Aldus Pagemaker which came out in 1985... the same year as (very primitive) Windows 1. elmination of the floppy.... Pa-Lease... Apple users were very upset at that, and Apple them selves said it was a cost cutting measure... somthing that all computers have, or will do... Other than the OS... and a handful of chips on the motherboard, your running a PC guys, a "purty" one... but a PC none the less. About MS Squashing more people in 5 years than Apple has in it's entire history... Well I guess that's true. If you never open the doors to let people make hardware and OS... and some software... There is no one to squash... You got me there. Lastly, I loved the Mac... I only used Apple's and made fun of PCs... until 1984 when the Amiga came out... the CEO of Apple at the time bashed it becuase who would need a seperate processor for graphics... and bashed the "Fancy color graphics that have no use in the real world"... That's real vision Mr Jobs. If Apple is your love, that's wonderful... If you edit on Apple, Luv ya babe... It does do a great job with Pro Tools. Yes it's easy to use... yes it's attractive... Yes the IPod is cool. BUT: CEP is a PC product. We own PC's Putting your $1,300+ dollar IMac against a $600 PC to prove to yourself that your bad... is real sad guys... Dollar for Dollar PCs are Faster, and have more hardware advancements, look it up... If only Microsoft could make a OS as purty... and the cheap PCs went away... you would have no arguement. NuBus died because Apple could not afford to be a hardware developer, addopeted PC standards and focused on what they are real good at... OS... and purty case deisgn. And don't even try to tell me that a 1.42ghz (their fastest processer) is faster than a 3.06... cause it's not true, all benchmarks prove it. Please spread your propaganda elsewhere. _________________ "Texas" Terry Phillips Creative Services/Production Director Infinity Broadcasting's 99.5 WYCD Detroit's Best Country www.wycd.com www.texasterry.com
ozpeter Location: Australia Posts: 3200	Posted - Fri May 09, 2003 5:49 pm  We had the Pro-Tools/Mac-using technical director of the classical music station that I regularly record for over to dinner last night, and after an hour of playing with my PC and CEP2.1, he went home to find his chequebook for a similar system, which would cost peanut as far as the station's budget is concerned. He couldn't believe the speed advantage. I guess the answer to the original question here is, there is no equivalent on the Mac in affordable terms to CEP. But I still can't bring myself to disconnect my Mac, even though I never actually switch it on.... - Ozpeter
jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901	Posted - Fri May 09, 2003 9:24 pm  Don't laugh, but there's an "olde" Quadra 610 sitting over in the corner of the studio - and its sole purpose in life is to run Performer v.4.2 and Galaxy Editors..... .....but that's all it does. _________________
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Fri May 09, 2003 10:16 pm  I trashed several MACs into a skip a few months back, and that was too good for them. They were inconveniently large to use as doorstops, and I couldn't see the point of trying to run anything on their rather fossilised architecture. Unfortunately, just about every printer going around here loves MACs, even though Quark, etc can be got to run much better on a fast PC than it ever will on a MAC. And yes, we've had all the file transfer problems... (Bloody stupid 'resource fork' system... its only saving grace is that it recognises proper file extensions to a degree...) I understand that people can be reluctant to throw away MACs that they mistakenly spent good money on - it can be a hard thing to do, as it is an admission to yourself that you cannot see into the future (even though all the signs were there ), which is never easy. There is a solution - and that is to get somebody else to sling them for you. I am prepared to offer a very reasonably-priced service for anybody who can't bring themselves to do the neccessary... What do you get for the money? I have to pay the waste disposal station a small fee, although I can get away with calling a small quantity of MACs 'domestic waste'. You also get a framed picture of your MAC going in the crusher (if I talk nicely to the right guy), which you can hang by the door and use as an icon - you touch it every time you pass it, to remind yourself that technology is fickle, and that hindsight is the ultimate precise science of hard knocks. _________________
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Sat May 10, 2003 5:33 am  Quote: I understand that people can be reluctant to throw away MACs that they mistakenly spent good money on - it can be a hard thing to do, as it is an admission to yourself that you cannot see into the future (even though all the signs were there ) Which is the same "principle" behind the Pro Tools folks still claiming their product to be superior. It Ain't!!! Wake up! It might have been 6/8 years ago, but there's a "new Sheriff in town"... his name is COOL EDIT PRO!! I am truly sorry that the "profools" folks didn't have the insight before paying, (what amounts to) too much $$$ for a product that has now, not only been matched, but surpassed. I also understand that they don't know where to begin explaining their investment blunder. Now, they're stuck between a rock and a hard spot, because they've got their $$$ tied up in "yesterdays news". _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
Havoc Posts: 735	Posted - Sat May 10, 2003 9:45 am  Lovely such trivial discussions! My only experience with mac was doing some CAD work. Made even seem autocad great. What I fail to get is why mac is so hyped in education. Education is to prepare youth far later on (or am I to reactionary here?). Why do that on a platform that has only 4% market? Admit it, even Pixar runs on Intel hardware.
ozpeter Location: Australia Posts: 3200	Posted - Sat May 10, 2003 6:03 pm  I hate to think of what it has cost me to get to where I am now, namely using the cheapest system that I've ever bought, and by far the most powerful. I started on those huge Sony betamax systems which you rented for 60 pounds sterling per hour, back in 1984, then decided to save a lot of money and bought a Digidesign system running on an Atari - I think the 400Mb drive alone cost more than 1000 pounds - the AD converter came from Raf Rafferty the sax player - of course that became obsolete within minutes. Then came a PowerMac6100 with more hugely expensive and now tiny SCSI drives, and that's the one silent beneath my desk now. I can plug the drives into the PC but as the largest is 6Gb, there's not a lot of point when I have 60Gb of IDE drive already humming. It's actually the thought that there might just be some sentimental item of data lurking in there, with the program to access it, which stops me from paying SteveG to come over to Australia to sort the matter out. Sorry, SG. - Ozpeter BTW, I'd say there is still a place for ProTools if you need (or think you need....) huge amounts of DSP to do the equivalent of 20 tracks of immediate realtime full reverb or similar - much as I love CE, I doubt whether anyone's system would do that, simply because CE relies entirely on the host CPU, whereas my understanding is that PT uses additional hardware to offload the DSP.
AMSG Location: Sweden Posts: 594	Posted - Sun May 11, 2003 3:40 am  Grrr, don't get me started on mac, hehe;) The thing I hate is that if you take a look at courses in sound engineering at schools (university etc.), that they always have some lessons about working with protools. ALWAYS protools. I think that's weird. I have a friend who has protools and I can tell you. The first time I saw it, I was like ...is THIS protools???!! It didn't seem special or so superior to me. And I did watch him work a few hours with it. The same with mac, everyone who has to do with audio (or graphics for that matter) has to have a mac. Just because it is the thing to do seems it. It's standard. well, I don't give a sh*t about that, hehe:D I look at the most cost-effective solution. And if you need DSP power, hey, just get some more for your PC. Whether it's just some more RAM, faster CPU, new harddrive,... Or maybe DSP cards like mackie's UAD1 for example? You saved some money by not getting a mac so you have some room for extra expenses:D By the way, NO cool edit for the mac!!! That's my opinion, they have their own programs and I think it's better that syntrillium sticks to windows. Look at protools (again), good on the mac, sucks on windows. So I believe it's better that syntrillium focuses on windows. Amen, hehe:clown:
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Sun May 11, 2003 4:22 am  ozpeter wrote: BTW, I'd say there is still a place for ProTools if you need (or think you need....) huge amounts of DSP to do the equivalent of 20 tracks of immediate realtime full reverb or similar - much as I love CE, I doubt whether anyone's system would do that, simply because CE relies entirely on the host CPU, whereas my understanding is that PT uses additional hardware to offload the DSP. I'm sure that's true - there is no way ProTools can run on the pitiful resources present in a MAC. The MAC is merely a shell for the excruciatingly expensive DSP system, and that's what costs the money... But Peter, if I'm in Australia anytime, I'll come and trash your MAC for free... you got a sledgehammer? _________________
ozpeter Location: Australia Posts: 3200	Posted - Sun May 11, 2003 4:48 am  I'd certainly offer you a beer - not so sure about the sledgehammer. C'mon, you are talking to one who has previously confessed to shedding a tear when saying goodbye to a Unix minicomputer after a change of job! I have relationships with these things! (Pathetic, huh?) - Ozpeter
Mark T Location: Norway Posts: 890	Posted - Sun May 11, 2003 6:12 am  ozpeter wrote: I'd certainly offer you a beer - not so sure about the sledgehammer. C'mon, you are talking to one who has previously confessed to shedding a tear when saying goodbye to a Unix minicomputer after a change of job! I have relationships with these things! (Pathetic, huh?) - Ozpeter Well, Oz having just got up to page 200 of the Unix Haters Handbook - and having laughed myself silly on the way (Sendmail? - what a hoot!) I can only assume your tears were of happiness or relief;) _________________ Mark nil desperandum - nunc est bibendum
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Sun May 11, 2003 6:14 am  ozpeter wrote: I'd certainly offer you a beer - not so sure about the sledgehammer. C'mon, you are talking to one who has previously confessed to shedding a tear when saying goodbye to a Unix minicomputer after a change of job! I have relationships with these things! (Pathetic, huh?) - Ozpeter A grenade launcher will do fine instead of a sledgehammer. Is the beer to drink, or pour ceremoniously into the MAC? I think that drinking it is probably preferrable - I can think of some more suitable liquids for the MAC. Hydrochloric acid springs to mind... _________________
ozpeter Location: Australia Posts: 3200	Posted - Sun May 11, 2003 6:03 pm  Quote: having just got up to page 200 of the Unix Haters Handbook.... I used to love unix (this being in the days of 'real' unix on big minicomputers running loads of character-based terminals, when Windows was a new fangled thing for wimps) - when our first system was delivered, the office automation software was delayed for a couple of weeks, so we amused ourselves while we waited by writing a comparable system just using unix shell scripts. There wasn't much you couldn't do just using the os. Ok, I didn't try writing a multitrack audio editing system..... - Ozpeter
jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901	Posted - Sun May 11, 2003 7:42 pm  SteveG wrote: I have to pay the waste disposal station a small fee, although I can get away with calling a small quantity of MACs 'domestic waste'. Well, I've just got to say it. It's a damned shame you don't have a recycling program over there. That crap is definitely a toxic stew, which, of anyone here, I'm sure you're most aware. And for anyone who doesn't know, here's just one example - a CRT (that's a cathode ray tube, or picture tube, which obviously includes television sets) has anywhere from three to eight pound of lead in it, which is used as x-ray shielding. Not to mention all the cadmium, and..... well, anyway, all the rest of the toxic stuff you find in electronic gear - I won't go into it. I sure don't want that crap seeping into my groundwater, do you? X( Well, okay. Nevermind.......... :blackeye: _________________
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Mon May 12, 2003 1:32 am  jonrose wrote: SteveG wrote: I have to pay the waste disposal station a small fee, although I can get away with calling a small quantity of MACs 'domestic waste'. Well, I've just got to say it. It's a damned shame you don't have a recycling program over there. That crap is definitely a toxic stew, which, of anyone here, I'm sure you're most aware. And for anyone who doesn't know, here's just one example - a CRT (that's a cathode ray tube, or picture tube, which obviously includes television sets) has anywhere from three to eight pound of lead in it, which is used as x-ray shielding. Not to mention all the cadmium, and..... well, anyway, all the rest of the toxic stuff you find in electronic gear - I won't go into it. I sure don't want that crap seeping into my groundwater, do you? Well, okay. Nevermind.......... :blackeye: Waste Disposal Station = place you take stuff you don't want any more. It handles everything - and they do a lot of recycling. Okay, not enough, but the situation is improving. Land-fill sites are carefully monitored, and seepage into watercourses basically doesn't happen much, because the sites are carefully chosen. I'm not saying that this is perfect, or foolproof, but that's what we've got. Recently we had a fridge mountain, because European legislation required us to recycle fridges completely, rather than just de-gas them, and the facilities just weren't there. So we are having to get used to building recycling plants in a hurry at the moment! Most 'domestic' waste (and I include TVs and conputer monitors in that now!) is expensive to recycle, so cash-strapped local authorities charge you for anything out of the ordinary - I have a tonnage limit that I can take in, and yes, it's weighed. (Land Rover and trailer plus waste, minus Land Rover and trailer.) I'm a big fan of recycling if it's done properly. And so I should be - we used to recycle the gold out of contacts in mainframe computer backplanes at a time when nobody else was doing it, and got it sold as bullion every time the gold market peaked. And made a lot of money out of it. We had to pre-process this pretty carefully - and this appears to be the key to effective recycling - it's only cost-effective if it's relatively easy to sort and refine, and if it's not cost-effective, then nobody's going to bother unless there is some other sort of incentive... But this is a small island, and places for dumping stuff are getting very limited, so I think that since we live in a blatently consumerist society, we are going to have to address the recycling business rather more comprehensively in the future. We don't have any deserts for dumping old aircraft in, (or anything else, for that matter) and there is a huge fuss made about what goes into the sea now, so in many ways, improvements are becoming inevitable. And I find the idea that a MAC is really an assemblage of toxic waste rather comforting in a way! But unlike PCs (which, to be fair, are made of similar raw materials), there's rather less that you can recycle. You can only buy a pre-assembled working MAC, which means that you end up with rather more whole computers to trash. So as well as everything else wrong with them, MACs are not as environmentally friendly as PCs. Another nail in their coffin... _________________
	Topic

Page: