Optimability chugging at $25 for studio processing


F

Flasherly

That's the aim. Everybody, virtually, can now be an "home" recording
artiste, if not podcaster. Since the last couple years, anyway, in
case you've been sleeping.

Interesting modules, nonetheless: Exciters for narrowing into freq. Qs
and messing with harmonics, so-styled retro/vintage, tape, tube, and
what all;- all kinds of (usually) parametric EQs, some with and
variously combined to compression/limitation override controls;- all
being software, of course, where would we be without including
bit-level "dithering," which I won't even pretend to psycho
acoustically bond with.

Combinations thereof for further splitting distinctions between cross
hairs, I should suspect would enhance a total gestalt especially when
printing out pretty boxes for bundling up a CD inside;- if not for
reverse-engineering standalone modules, among VST inclusions to be had
for "chaining" into a better front end sound-processing program with
DSP options (even with some video players being up to par in that
regard).

So, it's now to a point of sophistication: German psycho acoustics,
the invention of MP3, has been officially augmented for studio-grade
"tools," (approximations thereof), both readily accessible and within
such means that simply anyone can't afford not to notice;- Given
they're free for a modicum of aural appreciation.

Up to a point and for some of the plug-ins. Others, however,
dedicated packages containing interlinked processing modules exact
some overhead notably on CPU-usage when generously overextended.

Probably due specious bloat code for my relatively new dual-core 3Ghz
Intel I managed to squeeze off Ebay for $15. Therefore, I really
should further indulge and purchase a quad core, already, albeit four
2.33Ghz cores. It's my best course of rationalization for tearing
down two computers, to their bare cases, and rebuilding them for all
components diametrically opposite, to include OS migrations and one
very careful installation of W7, so to natively utilize the quad core
at its best vantage as a multimedia platform centre.

That's a lot for another Ebay $25 processor, the quad core now en
route and shipped. If I were a technician, I'd be charging over $500
for the labor involved, alone. But I'm not and, try as I might, it'll
be likely another insatiably deferred project (I have only pop that
quad into this computer initially - the multimedia "target," btw, is a
2.2Ghz dual Athlon). All on a hunch some software will perform with
all its oars in the waters;- I presently can only eke out two modules
of processing, from a studio suite-oriented platform, that is not
without overloading the processor, e.g., inducing artifacts.

Then, again, I'm running two pairs of studio-grade monitors in a
wet/dry looped arrangement through a mixer for a two-amp feed with one
pre amp providing the DSP-processed wet/dry reference signals. Sucks,
I know, but at that level do I have any choice? It's not like,
really, you can tell me I'll derive benefit or how many modules will
take on a $25 2.33Ghz platform dispersed four-ways by Win7 (and,
whether by advantage from 32- or 64-bit code). Not offhand, I think.
Best just to "do it" -;) eh.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top