Re: [Traverso-devel] Some remarks / missing features

[Nicola Döbelin]

Hi Jonatan,

> I have a hardware studio here which I work a lot in (yes, you know, real
> devices instead of a computer! ;) and I often do exactly as above, I
> have some signal on a channel which I send to some effects, then I want
> to record it but I want to hear the effects while recording, so either I
> send only the dry channel input to the tape recorder but still listen to
> the effects, or I send the monitoring channel from the tape recorder to
> the effects and listen there.

I do the same (using my 56+56 channel inline mixing desk and 2 Alesis HD24 
recorders, plenty of real buttons and faders around here ;-). I usually split 
the signal at the direct-out connectors and record the dry signal. Then I use 
the mixing desk to set up a monitor mix with external effect units. For mixing 
I transfer the tracks from the HD recorder to the PC. That's why I have no clue 
how to do the monitoring stuff in software only. Would you really use a reverb 
plugin for monitoring? What about latency? Wouldn't a high-quality software 
reverb (e.g. convolution) introduce quite a bit of delay between the incoming 
and processed signal? Smaller buffer sizes, on the other hand, would increase 
the risk of dropouts during recording.

AFAIK high-quality sound cards provide hardware monitoring, which yields the 
lowest possible latency, but does not allow to process the monitor signal at 
all. This may be different for DSP hardware, though. What hard-/software are 
you using in your studio?

Cheers
Nic

-- 


"Feel free" – 10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat ...
Jetzt GMX TopMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/topmail