[Dream] DSP vs CPU (Was Timestretch)

[Doofus McFluoro]

Do you guys need to borrow my tape measure?

On 2/21/07, UnderTow <undertow at trance.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Mark wrote:
>
> > Admittedly, the subject of the thread has changed.  However,
> > considering good netiquette in that the listowner is one of its
> > participants, I left changing the subject field to his discretion.
> > I'm old school like that :)
>
> I'm getting very lax on my netiquette. :)
>
> > Not that dedicated hardware doesn't use general purpose
> > microprocessors as well, but yes, the CPU's in Macs and PC are much
> > more powerful.  They also have much more to do.  They have to run OS
> > X or Windows and whatever else is installed.  Running DSP on
> > dedicated hardware avoids all sorts of problems that can occur due to
> > software and hardware conflicts.
>
> I still don't agree. The new Intel chips (and even the Opteron chips) pack
> alot more punch than an Accel card.
>
> The main reason I wrote "(most)" in my previous posts was because of the
> Fairlight CC-1 card. Then again, the CC-1 card is based on FPGA technology
> which is general purpouse by nature. It doesn't use a DSP chip.
>
> > Well, it certainly appears to be.  For example, TC Electronics, a
> > company famous for its DSP hardware, released Spark XL -- a DSP and
> > editing application that ran native. It was an awesome program, imho,
> > way better than Peak or using the editor in Pro Tools.  According to
> > them, they discontinued development and stopped selling it because of
> > piracy.   Yet, they continue to sell Powercore, which requires
> > dedicated hardware.  Eventide and Lexicon have followed similar
> > paths.  Even companies traditionally known for top-shelf analogue,
> > such as Focusrite, Universal Audio, and SSL, have introduced DSP
> > products that work with DAW's but still require dedicated hardware.
>
> Fair point. On the other hand, CakeWalk have more than a million paying
> Sonar users so it seems it is possible to successfully develope and sell
> native based programs despite the piracy.
>
> > Stand-alone DSP is so much more stable it's not even funny.  Even
> > with systems that use both PC's and dedicated hardware, the problem
> > is almost always with the software functions that run on the PC's
> > hardware.
>
> The ProTools hardware often causes problems. Not just the stuff running on
> the PC! Maybe Digidesign isn't the best example of flawless DSP based
> processing. ;)
>
> >> Mark, you seem out of touch with the current market. I earn my living
> >> being paid by the hour to work on ProTool rigs running inside general
> >> purpouse computers!
> >
> > No, you don't.
>
> Yes I do. The edit suites (as opposed to the mixing suites) tend to run PT
> LE. Admitedly I am rarely in the edit suites these days.
>
> > Well, it runs *inside* a computer.  It doesn't run on
> > it.  ProTools runs on bespoke, dedicated, specifically designed
> > hardware that you can only get from them.  We are talking about DSP,
> > not the GUI or file management.  All the DSP runs on their hardware.
> > Which has all three advantages I've been writing about:
> >
> > 1.  The software is optimized for the hardware.
> > 2.  While cracking the ProTools software might evade an update fee,
> > it cannot be run without the hardware.
> > 3.  The hardware is optimized for specific tasks.
>
> Agreed with all that but I was refering to LE as much as HD. And even in
> HD, I'll use RTAS plugins when the HD cards max out.
>
> >> Many many professionals are using general purpouse computers as the
> core
> >> of their studios. I would say for every pro running dedicated hardware
> >> there are 10 pros running on PCs.
> >
> > And I would say that 9 out of those 10 are running ProTools using
> > dedicated hardware installed in a Mac.
>
> These days, in the Netherlands at least, most studios, especially in post
> production, have moved to Windows based PCs. (Btw, when I write PC, unless
> otherwise specified I mean Personal Computers. That includes Macs).
>
> Anyway, on a side note, Nuendo is making ground in the Post world. Not in
> the studios I work at as they tend to be heavily integrated with Avid
> systems. My main clients were the first in the world to implement the Avid
> Interplay system. We are guinea pigs. :) But quite a few studios I know
> have switched to Nuendo for cost reasons.
>
> > Yes, but if I had to pick a number, I'd say psy-trance is around
> > .001% of the DSP market :)
>
> Oh absolutely. That was a bit of a tongue in cheek remark. :)
>
> UnderTow
> _______________________________________________
> DreamWeavers mailing list
> DreamWeavers at enabled.com
> http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/dreamweavers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.enabled.com/pipermail/dreamweavers/attachments/20070221/672cb0a9/attachment-0001.htm