Brand New Software Mixer

A place to discuss AMP - Audio Mixing Platform (http://www.ampmix.net)

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby RBIngraham » Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:00 pm

BrentEvans wrote:After reading through Frank's post, it seems that the current state can be summed up as this:

It has nearly everything that SAC needs but doesn't have, but lacks a few things that SAC has which would make it a truly usable product (plugin support being the main thing I can see).

Any chance of a downloadable demo (same type of thing Bob offers, with a working but crippled engine)?


I guess I don't see plug in support as all that important for most users. Yeah it lets people do crazy things like put all their amp sims right in the mixing software (SAC), but if this thing had a modest compliment of reverbs and delays built in, most users would be fine sans plug-ins. The only real reason you need plugs so badly in SAC is to make up for the things that are missing, like Output EQ, Delay for input and output, etc.... If you want a fancy reverb, just buy a rack mount unit and plug it in. Or just use another computer as a plug in host and hook it up via a couple of ADAT I/O.
Richard B. Ingraham
RBI Computers and Audio
http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/
SAC details and goodies at: http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/SAC.html
RBIngraham
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:05 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH USA

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby RBIngraham » Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:07 pm

randyhyde wrote:They had me right up to this point:

"The Host program requires a USB key for authorization. We provide you with TWO USB keys, so you always have a backup in case of a hardware failure. (Yes, you could also run the two simultaneously.)"

I don't do USB dongles. After some terrible experiences with DigiDesign, swore I'd never go down that route again.
I'd gladly pay more money, but I won't allow the requirement of a dongle in a system that my business depends on.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde


I also respectfully disagree with this whole thing of never using a dongle. Not guts, no glory is my moto. :D

Yeah, they suck, I would prefer an online authorization method as well. But frankly the Bob method is foolish. I simply don't believe that he is not being at least somewhat ripped off by his lack of copy protection. Sure, that takes time and uses up human resources... but I know for a fact from working for software companies.... copy protection is not for protecting you from the hackers. It is to keep honest users honest.

If the USB dongle scares you, put it inside the computer case. That is what many SFX users used to do until Stage Research went with the online registration. It worked just fine for most people and like I said... kept the honest users honest.

Anyway, sorry but to me the "I'll never use a dongle" thing is as shortsighted as those that keep trying to put SAC on their Macs. :roll: If you like the product... you just deal with it. Problem solved.
Richard B. Ingraham
RBI Computers and Audio
http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/
SAC details and goodies at: http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/SAC.html
RBIngraham
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:05 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH USA

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby BrentEvans » Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:40 pm

RBIngraham wrote:I guess I don't see plug in support as all that important for most users. Yeah it lets people do crazy things like put all their amp sims right in the mixing software (SAC), but if this thing had a modest compliment of reverbs and delays built in, most users would be fine sans plug-ins. The only real reason you need plugs so badly in SAC is to make up for the things that are missing, like Output EQ, Delay for input and output, etc.... If you want a fancy reverb, just buy a rack mount unit and plug it in. Or just use another computer as a plug in host and hook it up via a couple of ADAT I/O.


Using hardware for FX means more IO, plus more gear to carry plus more gain stages. Doing it all in the box is inherently better from a quality, cost, and size perspective. While it is true that "most users" would be OK with a good reverb and tap delay built in, it's certainly a feature worth having in a Windows based system.

On another topic... how does this product handle latency on different signal paths? Is everything synchronized, or is latency cumulative if you feed one bus into another, for instance? Does adding processing affect latency?
User avatar
BrentEvans
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:05 pm

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby soundguy » Fri Jan 03, 2014 7:51 pm

The conversation about the evils of dongles and/or iLoks has once again risen in the SAW/SAC world. Get over it folks. The industry has chosen the dongle as their standard, like it or not. If you are not using a dongle, then you are missing out on some very cool audio applications that could likely take your business or career or compatibility quotient to another level. And guess what, any software developer or hardware manufacturer could go either way with the dongle at any minute, and they have.

If you choose not to use an app that you would otherwise embrace simply because they use a dongle for protection, then you are taking another step backwards. If you are a "one gig" guy that does not need to ever change or upgrade, then this does not apply to you.

Soundguy
soundguy
 
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:21 pm

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby Craig » Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:09 pm

I'm not that worried about the dongle. Sure, I'd rather it didn't have one, but no big deal. But no plugin support is a deal breaker for me. I do too much with plugs now to not have it. I'll keep my eyes on this as it does look interesting.
-Craig
SAC/SAWStudio User
Core 2 Duo running XP with RME Digiface and ADA8000's
TCU
User avatar
Craig
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:34 pm
Location: Greensboro NC

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby RBIngraham » Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:53 pm

Don't get me wrong. I like having plug ins as well. But you have to admit that if any one thing can bring software to it's knees.... that would be plug-ins. Qlab is a great example, very stable software. Until... Chris added plug in support. Then people ran into all sorts of issues. Figure 53 has great support (better than Bob in my no so humble opinion) so they fixed them or are working on them. All I'm saying is if there is one thing you're going to hold off on... plug ins would be a good one to hold off on. No one complains that they can not host their favorite plug on a Yamaha M7. Or at least no one that has a brain anyway. The Yamaha desks have resonable amounts of multi-effects as do most hardware consoles. The only hardware desks I know of that host plug-ins are the Digidesign units, for the obvous resaons. Yeah it's a selling point, but I just disagree that it "the" selling point for those desks.

I guess I must be the only one that doesn't worry to the Nth degree about how many rack spaces of gear I have to lug. :-)

All I'm saying is that if plug-ins are the only thing I have to give up and dealing with a dongle.... well Fuck It! Count me in. As long at it's as stable as or more stable than SAC and I can have a decent amount of DCA support.... CYA SAC!
Richard B. Ingraham
RBI Computers and Audio
http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/
SAC details and goodies at: http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/SAC.html
RBIngraham
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:05 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH USA

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby Jeremyjo » Sat Jan 04, 2014 5:00 pm

Hi Frank,

Any word on CPU efficiency? Multi-core optimized? Latency? Could it be used with the ASIO host as a "headless", minimal GUI brain and multiple remotes for personal monitor mixing and a FOH remote that has faders? Does it need Windows XP, 7, 8, 8.1, or something specific?

Maybe you're just starting to poke at it. I'm just curious having used SAC for almost three years and getting a little tired of some limitations I see.

I haven't had the technical troubles some other users have had, and I've learned to deal with the virtual mixing concept, but I'd like to have some of the capabilities AMP seems to offer over SAC.

I tend to agree, that a reverb or plug in support is very important though.

Thanks

Jeremy
Jeremyjo
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby Frank DeWitt » Sat Jan 04, 2014 7:23 pm

Lets see. A little more CPU useage then SAC with just a few channels. Load it down with 32 ch and lots of eq and it uses less. Runs on anything from XP on. It does need a dedicated computer so you can limit the interrupts it can be used headless, in fact you can run it without the GUI! You get a simple black and white row of faders and that's all. The creator of the software ran it at his church for a few months with a bunch of BCR 2000s for personal mixers. Then he added FOH

FOH. And or any remote can run real faders, up to 8 sets of 8 I think. I like the fact that motor mixes and similar are not chained together. Each one is separate so they are still fast as you get 3 or more of them.

Frank DeWitt
Lbpinc.com
Frank DeWitt
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:08 pm

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby mycorn » Sun Jan 05, 2014 5:48 am

the must have gottem plenty of beta test offers...

i didn even get a 'thanks for your interest' response

fwiw
mycorn
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: Brand New Software Mixer

Postby mycorn » Sun Jan 05, 2014 5:20 pm

they were swamped

and i did get a note today

they are down to wanting weird combinations of stuff to test on

my stuff is probably a little too "normal"
mycorn
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:15 pm

PreviousNext

Return to AMP Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron