duende uses 333mhz sharc chips

[Wired]

this is interesting, also very good sounding, going to trade my korg radius in for it, pretty sure, must be those sharc chips?

[darkrezin]

Duende is a good box, if you can deal with latency-infested plugin paradigm.

A good DSP is nothing without a good algorithm to run on it.

[Wired]

i don't thinki've had a prob with latency, i know people with protools le have no latency comp, but steinberg should have no problem, ...do you mean vs. external hardware?...i did want to get the neve portico tape sim, but this looks like better bang with the circuitry not being an emulation , but the actual c series chips (sharc at that!), if this thing sounds exactly like my cw plat, it'll hurt

[darkrezin]

Yes I mean latenncy relative to external hardware/Scope.

Also unless you're happy avoiding Duende use until the final mix, say goodbye to using low buffer sizes while writing your projects. This kind of VST-based DSP box doesn't play nice at low latencies - click and pop central.

The Portico tape processor is a totally different thing to the SSL box. The SSL stuff won't add 'warmth' to your signals at all, it's designed to be as transparent as possible, with clean and precise EQs for mixing. The Bus compressor of course can make things sound 'big'. But it's not going to add analog-style harmonics to the signal.

If you want cheap and dirty tape processing, use a tape deck in record mode with a minijack->tape adapter (the kind that you use to connect a CD/mp3 walkman to your car stereo).

[Wired]

i read that 1 fw buss on d is needed, . My set up right now is a16 ultra, api atod, and two scope cards, ..my issue, does duende sound any diff than our sharc based plat, ?, i hate latency issues, right now i have none

[Wired]

really, duende is an awesom addition to scope, i strapped a bus comp over an input to record a whole song into nuendo, and wow, there is magic in that plug, i'm sure they are compicated algos, ...but useing sharc's , you can't go wrong here, ....

[astroman]

well, this seems a common misunderstanding - it's often just reverse because...
a very powerfull processor allows for a very 'stupid' programming...

not that I suspect SSL specifically suffers from this, but it simplyfies (and speeds up) things enormously, if you don't need to care about performance optimizations.
first impression may be misleading occasionally - I've fooled myself a couple of times - but I'd also expect a great performance (from what's technically known about the thing)

cheers, Tom

[Wired]

it seems high end audio, (sony oxford, ..ssl boards, consoles) use sharc, and i heard they were harder to program, ...when i bought duende i was afraid it would be a lateral move instead of moving up, but like tech support said from there, 'there is nothing in scope or uad that sounds like duende", ...its in the algo's they said,...anyway us cw users can take comfort that our boards are hi end, ....and have great potential with the right programmers

[valis]

I tend to agree with darkrezin, if I were to use a VST based dsp platform I'd probably be more inclined to use it during mixing than recording. Glad you're happy with your purchase, SSL does have the moxie to pay for decent algorithms & their creators that's for sure.

[digitalaudiosoft]

(forget das on this post)

how many of you have work on a true ssl or sony oxford ?

jeff...can you tell us if you find lots of big differences about a c200 emulation by ssl and a serie e4000 v1 or v2 emulation on creamware ? of course ,i don't want you to say creamware is better or duende is the top of the top ...i would like to hear if an emulation of a digital eq is sounding better,for you and your own experience,as an emulation of an analogique eq...
i'm sure duende is a very good hardware because i know those 2 ssl console and i love ssl very much,but,as i know and work on the true sony oxford,and their plugins on protools,i don't qualify plugins as an exact emulation of the true console,even if they use same algo...
it's easy for ssl and sony to use same algo they use in c200 or oxford,because they are numerical console.
but,how can you emulate analog c200 preamp on a numerical hardware like duende ?
my own experience,not a das developper,but as sound engineer,show me that there are lots of difference btw ssl4000e vs ssl9000 preamps,so ,i would like to know how duende emulate the stage of the c200 analog preamp to a/d and after digital eq ?
i know you can't answer this question,but one day,i'm sure i will test this duende too...
what i like with creamware sfp,is the way to emulate a true console.
i use a plus version ,and analog preamps are not very good,but it's a very good way to understand and hear the diference,btw, a full numerical traitement vs analo convert and after a plugin traitement....

eric

[dawman]

Brotha' Man Eric,

Your experience and knowledge on these consoles is appreciated and respected. Your talents, and explanations could help so many of us here @ the Z. I invite you to engage in conversations like these, so we may pick your brain a little.

Thank You,

[Wired]

of course eric, ...just like a uad emulation of a neve doesn't have preamp or voltage circuitry, what i think the ssl claim is , is that , they say..its not an emulation, its 'closer' because of the same chips and code off the console, ...i 'm not saying its for everybody, its expensive, and some people say waves is very close, ...apparently most of the dsp resources have gone to the compressor section, ...obviously , someone with your ears would have to test it oneday for the device it is, ......peter gabriel in a forum suggested it for med end users. Is the c series nice to work on?, ...i know the threshold on duende has auto makeup gain, but does the eq on c series?, ...

[digitalaudiosoft]

Brotha' Man Eric,

Your experience and knowledge on these consoles is appreciated and respected. Your talents, and explanations could help so many of us here @ the Z. I invite you to engage in conversations like these, so we may pick your brain a little.

Thank You,

but ,i don't see any big knowledge in my post...

everybody can have ,like me,more that 27 years of experience and knowledge in sound and music...you have just to be born in an artist family.when i was 14,i went with my father ( he was bass player ) to recording sessions on the biggest studio in paris,and i have decided to be musician (bass) and sound engineer...when i have recorded the singer of eagles ( hotel california) it was exactly 23 years ago... i was the youngest sound engineer in france ...my mother was singer and has recorded numbers of vinyls,and now,my brother is one the 10 best drummer in france...

nice story isn't it ?

bye,

eric

[dawman]

Yes,
But some people here are interested in positive aspects of DAS / and you. We are well aware of your lesser traits, may they rest in peace.
I know that you and Ollie have tons of ideas and experience, that's what this forum is for. Learning. I signed in here almost 2 years ago and didn't know shit about shine-ola. But because od Astro, GaryB, at0m, alfonso, etc. I am starting to teach others. It's just a good thing.
So any of your expertise in these matters is deeply appreciated. That you do have, as your quality products have demonstrated.
You must have noticed that Glen Frey smells like Eucalyptus!!

Jump In For The Big Win,

[Wired]

the ssl 'sound' is awesome, clean accurate, no aliasing, ... on pc, its firewire i/o had a lotta problems, namely devices muting tracks, (basically crash) and having to restart the project every edit or so. , the fw thing isn't working for ssl too well with pc. If ssl can make things work on pc flawlessly, i may invest in it again someday, but 2000.00 canadian is alot of money. But the sound was an upgrade from scope,..... but again, that experience will only let me eq and compress more tentatively with scope stuff (and uad), ...duende introduced workflow latency, where i don't have that in scope

[darkrezin]

The firewire issue is most likely because of the controller chip on the motherboard. Even on Mac most people really have to buy a dedicated firewire card (ideally on a PCI-X slot so that it uses a different bus to the regular PCI bus that is also used by the on-board Firewire). Most intel/AMD motherboards don't have more than 1 PCI bus so it will always fight with other hardware for PCI resources. However IMHO a greater threat is the quality of the Firewire controller chipset, and you can probably get better results with a good controller card. If you want killer performance for this kind of hardware, it's worth looking into workstation boards with multiple PCI buses. (I know you took it back but maybe this will be useful to other ppl)

But it's still got latency (ugh)

[Wired]

you understand the dilemma, the tech support for ssl suggested i buy an 80 dollar pci firewire card 'and it would work flawlessly', but it didn't work at all because of the conditions you said in your post (the chipsets change too often, even on the pci fw card), i also noticed many slowdowns while navigating in xp and when i edited anything in cubase 4 it popped the device in duende (making me reset project), ...I can't duplicate an ssl drumstrip in strip in scope, the das mastercomp gets to the lows well, ....I noticed duende did lows really well (50hz on kick, great!), no popping, just smooth and clean., i hate latency, we with scope never get it, ...i'm just learning to use my scope to get the same sounds as the ssl, but its not happening,