Johan Althoff wrote:
>>If Victor was with us, he would say it's because Sonic Foundry
wants
>>you to suffer. Now that I beat him to it, I can explain some stuff
>>instead:
>>


hehe

This is not sonic foundry's fault, it is a problem with the WHOLE way
we look at audio on the PC

A REAL tape recorder style Auto-Input feature is needed, and as far
as I know CANNOT happen with the direct-x MME system

Here's what they expect you to do, and it may just work in your case:

monitor the signal you are recording at the card's INPUT as in y-
cable the signal going to your darla to another monitoring
source...so while youre recording, great, you can hear yourself...its
when it comes time to punch in that youre pretty much screwed

Just as I wrote, I was assuming Cliff did in fact mean monitoring in
a virtual zero-latency domain. This is, afaik, not possible in any
software to this day's date. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The Coroner wrote:
>>Aaron:
>>
>>All you say in your post (hardware monitoring) and what Johan said
in
>>his post is true, but it can give the wrong impression to
a "newbie"
>>like Cliff. (For some reason, the name Cliff Hodges made me think
of
>>Bruce, but that's a different story...)
>>
>>The short answer: it is not possible with Vegas. But it is possible
>>with different software and THE SYSTEM YOU ALREADY HAVE.
>>
>>
>>Now: Why should my answer be perceived as "BAD"? Did I lie? Is this
>>against SonicFoundry?
>>It is not against anyone for this simple reason: Cliff has to
decide
>>what he can get out of Vegas as opposed to what he can get out of
>>other software. What Vegas has to ofeer that the other software
lacks,
>>and viceversa.
>>His decision.
>>
>>But I bet any amount of money, SonicFoundry will not like
information
>>to be disseminated like this. Too dangerous for business. An
informed
>>customer is not the easiest pray....
>>
>>
>>Victor.
>>
>>Aaron Carey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Johan Althoff wrote:
>>>>>>If Victor was with us, he would say it's because Sonic Foundry
>>>>wants
>>>>>>you to suffer. Now that I beat him to it, I can explain some
stuff
>>>>>>instead:
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>hehe
>>>>
>>>>This is not sonic foundry's fault, it is a problem with the WHOLE
>>way
>>>>we look at audio on the PC
>>>>
>>>>A REAL tape recorder style Auto-Input feature is needed, and as
far
>>>>as I know CANNOT happen with the direct-x MME system
>>>>
>>>>Here's what they expect you to do, and it may just work in your
>>case:
>>>>
>>>>monitor the signal you are recording at the card's INPUT as in y-
>>>>cable the signal going to your darla to another monitoring
>>>>source...so while youre recording, great, you can hear
>>yourself...its
>>>>when it comes time to punch in that youre pretty much screwed
>>>>

Johan Althoff wrote:
>>Just as I wrote, I was assuming Cliff did in fact mean monitoring
in
>>a virtual zero-latency domain. This is, afaik, not possible in any
>>software to this day's date. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>>


The whole thing is a silly workaround

Just plain not acceptable, but as I dont do or plan to do any
recording in vegas, its not so much an issue with me, yet

I keep hearing about ASIO direct monitoring...is that a zero latency
system? I would like more info on ASIO

heres what needs to happen:


(A)
Audio Source(guitar mic whatever)
------------------------------------->| software | output
| controlled |---------> to
------------------------------------->| switch | monitor
(B)
tape(or computer software track)
RETURN


Pardon my AssKey art, I wont quit my day job


During recording, the software switches signal A to the outputs for
monitoring

During playback, the software switches signal B to the outputs for
monitoring

Now here is the interesting part:
During a punch in signal A is routed to the output UNTIL at the point
of the punch in, where signal B is routed to the outputs, after the
puch out, signal A is routed to the outputs

No new concept, every tape recorder and dedicated hard disk recorder
has this function

Can this be done with the current direct x MME system?
If not lets CHUCK it!!!

Just thought I'd mention WHY I thought the feature wasn't there.
Digital audio is rather complicated, and I simply sought to share
what I know on the subject with the rest of the guys in the forum. I
did also reply to his question in the same way you just did.

Furthermore, I asked people to correct me whether there was any
software available that would provide the feature Cliff requested, as
I couldn't think of any at the moment.

Side-note: A virtual zero-latency domain would be a system where
there is virtually no latency, like hardware digital effect boxes and
stuff like that. There is always a theoretical latency (yes, we've
discussed that before) but it's often neglible or not detectable
during the normal course of operation.

A recording monitoring latency of 2ms, for example, would IMHO be a
virtual zero-latency monitoring latency, as it would not provide any
grave drawbacks to the purpose of simply hearing what your recorded
sound would be like. 550ms, on the other hand, would.

That's what I meant by a virtual zero-latency domain. Sorry for being
fuzzy, I suppose I should have called it rather-low-latency.

Johan Althoff

The Coroner wrote:
>>Johan:
>>
>>Did you read his post? The guy is just asking this: How come I
can't
>>hear what I record WHILE it record it?
>>Answer: Because Vegas doesn't have that feature.
>>Nobody has mentioned latency or zero-latency or anything
complicated.
>>
>>So, I guess, yes, you are wrong.
>>
>>I don't understand what you mean "virtual zero-latency monitoring",
>>because when it comes to latency, you can't use the
world "virtual".
>>Latency is VERY REAL, and we had this discussion before.
>>
>>Victor.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Johan Althoff wrote:
>>>>Just as I wrote, I was assuming Cliff did in fact mean monitoring
in
>>>>a virtual zero-latency domain. This is, afaik, not possible in
any
>>>>software to this day's date. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>>>>
>>>>The Coroner wrote:
>>>>>>Aaron:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>All you say in your post (hardware monitoring) and what Johan
said
>>>>in
>>>>>>his post is true, but it can give the wrong impression to
>>>>a "newbie"
>>>>>>like Cliff. (For some reason, the name Cliff Hodges made me
think
>>>>of
>>>>>>Bruce, but that's a different story...)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The short answer: it is not possible with Vegas. But it is
>>possible
>>>>>>with different software and THE SYSTEM YOU ALREADY HAVE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now: Why should my answer be perceived as "BAD"? Did I lie? Is
>>this
>>>>>>against SonicFoundry?
>>>>>>It is not against anyone for this simple reason: Cliff has to
>>>>decide
>>>>>>what he can get out of Vegas as opposed to what he can get out
of
>>>>>>other software. What Vegas has to ofeer that the other software
>>>>lacks,
>>>>>>and viceversa.
>>>>>>His decision.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>But I bet any amount of money, SonicFoundry will not like
>>>>information
>>>>>>to be disseminated like this. Too dangerous for business. An
>>>>informed
>>>>>>customer is not the easiest pray....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Victor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Aaron Carey wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Johan Althoff wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>If Victor was with us, he would say it's because Sonic
Foundry
>>>>>>>>wants
>>>>>>>>>>you to suffer. Now that I beat him to it, I can explain
some
>>>>stuff
>>>>>>>>>>instead:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>hehe
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>This is not sonic foundry's fault, it is a problem with the
>>WHOLE
>>>>>>way
>>>>>>>>we look at audio on the PC
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>A REAL tape recorder style Auto-Input feature is needed, and
as
>>>>far
>>>>>>>>as I know CANNOT happen with the direct-x MME system
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Here's what they expect you to do, and it may just work in
your
>>>>>>case:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>monitor the signal you are recording at the card's INPUT as
in
>>y-
>>>>>>>>cable the signal going to your darla to another monitoring
>>>>>>>>source...so while youre recording, great, you can hear
>>>>>>yourself...its
>>>>>>>>when it comes time to punch in that youre pretty much screwed
>>>>>>>>

If I understand this correctly, this is nothing but an automated
version of my quick-quick variant of monitoring: It simply use the
hardware's analogue signal paths. This is not, I think, what we
should refer to as monitoring, as you won't hear what actually gets
recorded. In order to do that, you need to hear what the DSP hears,
not just send the input back out without even touching the digital
domain.

It will, admitted, solve what Cliff asked for, but I think the really
neat days will be when you simply arm a track for record, strap up
your SM57, punch up your favourite mic preamp-and-compressor plug,
add some Vegas EQ, a little tape compression and start tweaking the
parameters in real-time, with the rest of the tracks running on
playback. That is what I call monitoring =)))

The Coroner wrote:
>>More info on subject:
>>
>>Zero Latency Monitoring (ZLM®)
>>
>>ZLM brings real tape machine feeling to the PC. Each cassette
recorder
>>and tape machine passes the input signal of the track in record to
the
>>output when record starts. On the PC such a kind of track dependent
>>pass through wasn't available. Often all channels are put in
>>monitoring or pass through mode all together. Or the monitoring is
>>handled by the software, resulting in a big delay (latency) between
>>the signal at the input and the output. After all the pass through
>>mode is activated at record, not at Punch-in. ZLM now solves all
these
>>problems with a simple technique. At Punch-in the corresponding
track
>>is switched into bypass directly
>>in the hardware, at Punch-out it switches back to playback. Thus
the
>>PC behaves exactly like a 'normal' tape machine. ZLM is already
>>available with SEK'D's Samplitude Studio and 2496, and is included
as
>>ASIO Direct Monitoring in ASIO 2.0.
>>
>>
>>This text is copied from the RME website:
>>
>>http://www.rme-audio.com/english/index.htm
>>
>>I know it WORKS, because I own a Digi9652 sound card. (but no
>>Samplitude for me, thanx!!!!)
>>
>>Victor
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Johan Althoff wrote:
>>>>Just thought I'd mention WHY I thought the feature wasn't there.
>>>>Digital audio is rather complicated, and I simply sought to share
>>>>what I know on the subject with the rest of the guys in the
forum. I
>>>>did also reply to his question in the same way you just did.
>>>>
>>>>Furthermore, I asked people to correct me whether there was any
>>>>software available that would provide the feature Cliff
requested,
>>as
>>>>I couldn't think of any at the moment.
>>>>
>>>>Side-note: A virtual zero-latency domain would be a system where
>>>>there is virtually no latency, like hardware digital effect boxes
>>and
>>>>stuff like that. There is always a theoretical latency (yes,
we've
>>>>discussed that before) but it's often neglible or not detectable
>>>>during the normal course of operation.
>>>>
>>>>A recording monitoring latency of 2ms, for example, would IMHO be
a
>>>>virtual zero-latency monitoring latency, as it would not provide
any
>>>>grave drawbacks to the purpose of simply hearing what your
recorded
>>>>sound would be like. 550ms, on the other hand, would.
>>>>
>>>>That's what I meant by a virtual zero-latency domain. Sorry for
>>being
>>>>fuzzy, I suppose I should have called it rather-low-latency.
>>>>
>>>>Johan Althoff
>>>>
>>>>The Coroner wrote:
>>>>>>Johan:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Did you read his post? The guy is just asking this: How come I
>>>>can't
>>>>>>hear what I record WHILE it record it?
>>>>>>Answer: Because Vegas doesn't have that feature.
>>>>>>Nobody has mentioned latency or zero-latency or anything
>>>>complicated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So, I guess, yes, you are wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't understand what you mean "virtual zero-latency
>>monitoring",
>>>>>>because when it comes to latency, you can't use the
>>>>world "virtual".
>>>>>>Latency is VERY REAL, and we had this discussion before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Victor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Johan Althoff wrote:
>>>>>>>>Just as I wrote, I was assuming Cliff did in fact mean
>>monitoring
>>>>in
>>>>>>>>a virtual zero-latency domain. This is, afaik, not possible
in
>>>>any
>>>>>>>>software to this day's date. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The Coroner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>Aaron:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>All you say in your post (hardware monitoring) and what
Johan
>>>>said
>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>his post is true, but it can give the wrong impression to
>>>>>>>>a "newbie"
>>>>>>>>>>like Cliff. (For some reason, the name Cliff Hodges made me
>>>>think
>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>Bruce, but that's a different story...)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>The short answer: it is not possible with Vegas. But it is
>>>>>>possible
>>>>>>>>>>with different software and THE SYSTEM YOU ALREADY HAVE.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Now: Why should my answer be perceived as "BAD"? Did I lie?
Is
>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>>>against SonicFoundry?
>>>>>>>>>>It is not against anyone for this simple reason: Cliff has
to
>>>>>>>>decide
>>>>>>>>>>what he can get out of Vegas as opposed to what he can get
out
>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>other software. What Vegas has to ofeer that the other
>>software
>>>>>>>>lacks,
>>>>>>>>>>and viceversa.
>>>>>>>>>>His decision.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>But I bet any amount of money, SonicFoundry will not like
>>>>>>>>information
>>>>>>>>>>to be disseminated like this. Too dangerous for business.
An
>>>>>>>>informed
>>>>>>>>>>customer is not the easiest pray....
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Victor.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Aaron Carey wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Johan Althoff wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If Victor was with us, he would say it's because Sonic
>>>>Foundry
>>>>>>>>>>>>wants
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>you to suffer. Now that I beat him to it, I can explain
>>>>some
>>>>>>>>stuff
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>instead:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>hehe
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>This is not sonic foundry's fault, it is a problem with
the
>>>>>>WHOLE
>>>>>>>>>>way
>>>>>>>>>>>>we look at audio on the PC
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>A REAL tape recorder style Auto-Input feature is needed,
and
>>>>as
>>>>>>>>far
>>>>>>>>>>>>as I know CANNOT happen with the direct-x MME system
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Here's what they expect you to do, and it may just work
in
>>>>your
>>>>>>>>>>case:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>monitor the signal you are recording at the card's INPUT
as
>>>>in
>>>>>>y-
>>>>>>>>>>>>cable the signal going to your darla to another
monitoring
>>>>>>>>>>>>source...so while youre recording, great, you can hear
>>>>>>>>>>yourself...its
>>>>>>>>>>>>when it comes time to punch in that youre pretty much
>>screwed
>>>>>>>>>>>>

The Coroner wrote:
>>Aaron:
>>
>>In practical terms, with ASIO 2 you this is what you can expect:
>>6ms latency with a sound card and software that support ASIO (more
>>than 50 sound cards as of now.). With a so-so system, you can have
>>12ms latency. Excellent for monitoring your signal without
problems.
>>For info on ASIO and some of the best sound cards in the market,
check
>>the RME website: http://www.rme-audio.com/english/index.htm
>>
>>

thanks for ASIO link, Ill check it out, dont tell my partner that Im
looking at RME stuff though, cuz his wallet feels lighter every time

6-12 ms latency is good, probably fine for most applications, but to
me NO latency is acceptable, system dependant performance is a good
insdicator that it is still the wrong solution...
in a correct system, assuming input was selected at the time, the
computer could crash, or be turned off and you'd still be hearing
what you were playing

The Coroner wrote:
>>More info on subject:
>>
>>Zero Latency Monitoring (ZLM®)
>>
>>ZLM brings real tape machine feeling to the PC. Each cassette
recorder
>>and tape machine passes the input signal of the track in record to
the
>>output when record starts. On the PC such a kind of track dependent
>>pass through wasn't available. Often all channels are put in
>>monitoring or pass through mode all together. Or the monitoring is
>>handled by the software, resulting in a big delay (latency) between
>>the signal at the input and the output. After all the pass through
>>mode is activated at record, not at Punch-in. ZLM now solves all
these
>>problems with a simple technique. At Punch-in the corresponding
track
>>is switched into bypass directly
>>in the hardware, at Punch-out it switches back to playback. Thus
the
>>PC behaves exactly like a 'normal' tape machine. ZLM is already
>>available with SEK'D's Samplitude Studio and 2496, and is included
as
>>ASIO Direct Monitoring in ASIO 2.0.
>>
>>
>>This text is copied from the RME website:
>>
>>http://www.rme-audio.com/english/index.htm
>>
>>I know it WORKS, because I own a Digi9652 sound card. (but no
>>Samplitude for me, thanx!!!!)
>>
>>Victor



AHA! now we are getting somewhere....but still, why the reluctance
from manufacturers to call it auto-input?

Johan Althoff wrote:
>>If I understand this correctly, this is nothing but an automated
>>version of my quick-quick variant of monitoring: It simply use the
>>hardware's analogue signal paths. This is not, I think, what we
>>should refer to as monitoring, as you won't hear what actually gets
>>recorded.

If I understand thois correctly, this is EXACTLY what is needed. Have
you ever used a professional multitrack recorder? even the ADAT will
do this...while recording you DO NOT hear the signal on tape for the
particular track you are recording on...Unless: see below

>>In order to do that, you need to hear what the DSP hears,
>>not just send the input back out without even touching the digital
>>domain.
>>

what you are talking about here is called Confidence Monitoring,
available only on a very few digital multitrack recorders such as the
TASCAM DA-98...there you will get a latency of two samples or
1/24,000 of a second at 48kHz still well below anything I see on a PC
today

or if you wanted to be silly, you could be talking about putting the
machine in "repro mode" on an analog tape recorder....THEN you will
get PC style latency, as the distance between the repro, and record
head are quite far...this is how tape delay works

>>card and use it with Vegas. It won't work.That's why ASIO support
is
>>so necessary for Vegas. 90% of the limitations would go away...
>>
>>I know SonicFoundry's policy of no ASIO support. But in all
fairness,
>>Don't you think that ASIO support is better than NOTHING?
>>Explain to me why SonicFoundry would do this, when there's EVIDENCE
>>that ASIO works to professional standards?
>>
>>
>>Victor.


This is one of your knocks against sonic foundry that I do agree
with...
If sonic foundry will have no ASIO support, how about if SF comes up
with something else???
the status quo is NOT acceptable

and to really kick ass, how about a TDM/ RTAS emulator....NOW were
talking!

The Coroner wrote:
>>As always, Aaron, I can't but agree with you.
>>Now, I would like to hear a VALID argument from SF....
>>
>>Victor.
>>


Me too
here is a good chance to prove that they are responsive to their
customers' needs, not a giant corporate behometh
How about it guys? any good ideas?
how about:
SFIO
sounds good to me

I vaguely remember Peter mentioning something along these lines a few
weeks ago. I don't have the patience to go back and find the post for
you (one forum page takes approx. 5-15 secs to load over here, and
I'm on a 2 MBIT
He also answered why SF won't implement ASIO in their products: ASIO
is a Steinberg invention, and Sonic Foundry don't wanna rely on one
of their competitors. Besides, I think Sonic Foundry is a better
company than Steinberg any day of the month. Since I have no need for
them so-called "pro" features in Vegas yet, I'll gladly wait.

Side track: Exactly what is the definition of the word "pro" anyway?
I've been a working sound designer, audio engineer and Full-Motion
Video editor for the last three years, I'm getting paid for it. Am I
pro? Or am I pro just if other people think I am pro? Or, do I have
to apply for pro-ness at my local pro-office? And have Steinberg
applied for a "pro"-tag on Nuendo, or don't germans have to do that?
Are all germans pro? I'm really confused...

Aaron Carey wrote:
>>
>>
>>The Coroner wrote:
>>>>As always, Aaron, I can't but agree with you.
>>>>Now, I would like to hear a VALID argument from SF....
>>>>
>>>>Victor.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>Me too
>>here is a good chance to prove that they are responsive to their
>>customers' needs, not a giant corporate behometh
>>How about it guys? any good ideas?
>>how about:
>>SFIO
>>sounds good to me
>>

Johan Althoff wrote:
>>He also answered why SF won't implement ASIO in their products:
ASIO
>>is a Steinberg invention, and Sonic Foundry don't wanna rely on one
>>of their competitors. Besides, I think Sonic Foundry is a better
>>company than Steinberg any day of the month.

No problem, dont implement ASIO, give us something better
Because I, too think that sonic foundry is a better company than
steinberg, in customer service, ease of use, and forward thinking, I
feel sonic foundry should have no problem CREATING a much better
system.

This is a legitamate concern...right now, as far as I can tell, PC
I/O functionality is a JOKE
ASIO seems to be a good idea, but still, if the word latency is even
MENTIONED, I think it is the wrong solution, just a temporary
workaround


>>Side track: Exactly what is the definition of the word "pro"
anyway?

Who knows???
Guitar center has a "pro" audio section
ADAT says "professional multitrack recorder" on it
Some people call EQ magazine pro
an even bigger insult is a bought and paid for magazine called "Pro
Audio Review"
In a sense, if you get paid, you are a pro
But if you are talking about a piece of gear, whether hardware or
software, then, YES, there is definitely a set of parameters that
make it pro or not, a bought and paid for Roger Nichols endorsement
or not.

>>I've been a working sound designer, audio engineer and Full-Motion
>>Video editor for the last three years, I'm getting paid for it. Am

I need some help with my video, I need to convert .avi to .asf
any suggestions?
Maybe vegas can do this?


>>to apply for pro-ness at my local pro-office? And have Steinberg
>>applied for a "pro"-tag on Nuendo, or don't germans have to do
that?
>>Are all germans pro? I'm really confused...
>>


Actually the German Pro Audio industry as a whole has VERY strict
guidelines on the distinction between pro and consumer, and have not
yet even adopted the semi-pro moniker at all

who knows what the Nuendo stuff says...

>>
>>It is ok for SF to not implement ASIO. What is NOT ok is to
implement
>>NOTHING, and leave their users in the air. Now, Johan, answer this
in
>>a logical manner: How has ASIO support NEGATIVELY affected other
>>products like Samplitude and Logic Audio, just to name a few? They
>>support the ASIO protocol and Steinberg is their COMPETITOR.
>>


This brings up the point of VST
Isnt VST also used by emagic's il-Logic Audio?



>>A pro is not a guy who doesn't understand the BASIC needs of his
>>chosen occupation.
>>


There you go!
Better than I could put it

Yeah, I remember that one, and actually I thought it quite innovative
=) One thing, though: "Prolix" in my dictionary reads: PROLIX(tm),
asian brand of percussion instruments for junior musicians, made
famous mostly for their fine cymbals". Is this some kind of
conspiracy?

The Coroner wrote:
>>Dear Pros:
>>
>>I have no choice, but to borrow this post from Vic...I mean, "Irvin
>>Gomez".
>>
>>Dear Offended Pro:
>>
>>My most heartfelt apologies if my use of the word "pro" has
offended
>>you. It was never intended as an insult.My desire to not
discriminate
>>against anyone regardless of race, religion, working experience,
>>marital status or gastro-intestinal attitude, led me to choose a
word
>>that would cover everyone.
>>That word is, as you know, the by-now infamous word "PRO".
>>It was meant to include
>> the pro...miscuous
>> the pro...crastinator
>> the pro...blematic
>> the pro...fligate (pro..ceed to get the dictionary!)
>> the pro...fane, etc.
>>Not being a pro...fessed pro...ponent of pro...longed discussion, I
>>pro...pose to all pro...minent pro...fessionals in this forum to
>>pro..mptly accept my pro...posal for a pro...ductive, mutually
>>pro...fitable friendship and a more pro...ficient use of the space
in
>>this pro...digious forum.
>>Pro...bably I won't get any pro...clamations of friendship, but I
>>pro...gnosticate that a more pro...mising future lies ahead of us
when
>>our pro...bative personalities abandon the not-so-pro...mising road
of
>>hatred and embrace the pro...motion of musical brotherhood,
>>pro...pelling us into a world of intellectual pro...gress.
>>Not wanting to pro...duce a pro...lix (Jennifer, get me the damn
>>dictionary again!!!) document, I pro...d you, fellow "pros" not to
>>waste what looks to be a pro...pitious time to forgive and forget.
>>
>> Sincerely
>>
>> irvin...err, Victor
>>
>>
>>PS: Collector's item, along with "My Cosin Billy and Vegas" and the
>>"Chinese Boy". More to come....
>>
>>
>>
>>

Thanks =)

The Coroner wrote:
>>Good one, Johan. lol.
>>
>>
>>Victor.
>>
>>Johan Althoff wrote:
>>>>Yeah, I remember that one, and actually I thought it quite
>>innovative
>>>>=) One thing, though: "Prolix" in my dictionary reads: PROLIX
(tm),
>>>>asian brand of percussion instruments for junior musicians, made
>>>>famous mostly for their fine cymbals". Is this some kind of
>>>>conspiracy?
>>

>> I need some help with my video, I need to convert .avi to .asf
>> any suggestions? Maybe vegas can do this?

Yup, no big deal. It has an integrated ASF renderer with a lot of
settings for either single-rate or multi-rate video / audio.

Wow!! Thanks for the detailed info, I just learned a lot. Victor, why
not Samp2496?
George

Johan Althoff wrote:
>>>> I need some help with my video, I need to convert .avi to .asf
>>>> any suggestions? Maybe vegas can do this?
>>
>>Yup, no big deal. It has an integrated ASF renderer with a lot of
>>settings for either single-rate or multi-rate video / audio.
>>


COOL!!!
now I finally get to post my video promo!

Cliff,

Although I haven't used Echo products, I'm about 100% sure that they
provide an input monitoring feature so that you can hear your inputs
from your outputs while recording. Lots of pro cards do this, and
it's usually either a hardware 'echo' function or an act of the DSP
in the case of your Gina. Contact the guys at Echo to find out more.
As far as ASIO goes, there is no real reason why Vegas needs it. It's
nice for mixing (due to the low latency), but I wouldn't call it
necessary by any means.

-Dylan

Cliff Hodges wrote:
>>Hello-
>> This is a fairly novice question, but what the heck,
>>I'm a novice. I'm using Vegas Pro with the Echo Darla24.
>>My question is, why can I not here an incoming track until
>>it is recorded? Is there some kind of moniter function so
>>that I can here the sound levels before and during
>>recording? I'd like to be able to have the sound coming in
>>from the echo routed to microsoft sound mapper or something
>>like that so I can here something as I play it live instead
>>of after it is recorded. Thanks,
>>
>>Cliff