damon

I agree with the decision. I would only add that, like swear words (which, for the record, I never used in the thread), I think allowing a member (shivermetimbers) to routinely make a sport out of mocking newbies who come here with perfectly reasonable questions, which have perfectly reasonable starting point answers is, too, a bad reflection on the forum and off topic. I don't find it humorous. I find it more akin to bullying. I've heard it said, and agree, that "silence is complicity." In that sense, I remain uninterested in participating in a forum which allows a bully like shivermetimbers to routinely abuse the new kids on the play ground.

@ Eric: Exactly. The Apollo system is limited to, I think, four plugins per a limited number of channels to achieve its definition of "real time." For me, most of these would be taken up with what I consider input plugins. From there, one is tied to a proprietary system with expensive add on plugins which will require updating, may or may not be compatible with OS updates, etc. All reasons why I left Protools for Logic. And, then opted for hardware to cover my basic input needs… which is, apparently, a big no-no according to the louder voices of the forum.

@ Eric: Thanks for the clarification. However, UA is claiming "Realtime" (sub-2ms latency) on input. In that sense, many are using the term "revolutionary." @ Rev: I know. And, for what it's worth, any former student of Rooksby is ok in my book:) That book of his has helped me so much! And you know I like your music. @ David: Exactly. Thanks.

For the record, Rev, we went on to discuss that Logic's compressor adds no latency beyond that of the process buffer. Which, if I understand it correctly is engaged when you use software monitoring... which you would have to do to use the compressor, thus introducing latency. A stock computer just isn't fast enough to deal with plugins on input, which was the essence of the discussion - or my part of it anyway. As I said, if it was, then a product like UA's Apollo wouldn't be considered revolutionary.

Seriously? I mean what does this prove? Les didn't use an actual Fairchild (because it wasn't built yet), big deal. But the guy who built the Fairchild built his console... hmmm. Wonder what's under the hood of that baby! Besides, Les layered so many guitars, to actual tape, that the compression effect would have been supplied by the tape itself. Not to mention the tubes his whole system was probably based on. Plug your guitar or vocal mic directly into your typical A/D converter and see where it gets you. Still, since you have yet to answer the question: Do you really think the Chic guitars were the result of a technician riding the faders? The artist himself states otherwise. How about Gilmore's work? Prince? Andy Summers? Mark Knopfler? There's no compression on Bowie's vocal? Beyonce? Adrian Belew? This doesn't even take into consideration the country genre with its clean Tele's and, what not. Compression is both a performance tool and an effect. Whether you like it or not. To point to a tape and tube based past really only proves the point further as both offer a natural compression unavailable to any A/D converter.

Understood, Rev. But, I think people, (at least I do) come here for information on modern practice. If information is all Shiv wants to convey, surely a Wikipedia link would suffice? Again, why the hate? As far as the Chic guitar, it goes to the point that compression is not rendered obsolete by digital headroom. It is used (in modern practice) as a performance tool and effect. Check it out from the artist himself. Guitar Player interview (It's the second to the last question): "How did you record your guitar on the classic Chic records? It was mostly my guitar on the neck pickup, direct into a Neve console with some compression..." Source: http://www.guitarplayer.com/article/nile-rodgers/8940 If you wanna get that sound today, the direct in on your DAW ain't gonna do it. You'll need compression plugins, which introduce latency. For the performer, this needs to happen in real time. UA's Apollo is the only device I'm aware of that is even suggesting it can track plugins at input with zero latency. Crunching the numbers to go that route just gets so close to buying the real thing that it just doesn't make sense, to me. Especially on a first generation product. Anyway, steering newbies away from compression w/ mockery and outdated information is incomplete, misleading and wrong. It's akin to telling a vocalist that the latency of your system is a form of reverb. No good, experienced vocalist will buy it for a millisecond and I suspect that many inexperienced vocalists are needlessly being discouraged by the experience. God only knows what it is doing to new guitarists.

Quit. I do it often. I mean psychologically, not as in sell all your gear. Live as a "mortal." I suspect you won't like it. Facing life without the possibility of music as an outlet for creation tends to re-inspire me when, after a week or two I find that I'm really not interested in life on this planet, in this time/space "reality" without the option to at least attempt creating music. I know this sounds flippant, but it's genuinely not intended to be. Seriously: embrace a reality w/o music as an outlet for creation for a week or two. Give up. Imagine yourself unworthy or cursed. Whatever it takes to internalize it. While you're doing that, listen to music that inspires you... I mean the early stuff, from child/teenhood. It probably won't work the first time you try it, at least it didn't for me. You may have to do it a few times, you may need to listen to things you never thought you even liked, you may find it part of a new, ongoing process. I also find it useful to review "theory" during these periods. The "Songwriting Sourcebook" (Rikky Rooksby) has helped, a lot. Keep your studio clean and operational despite your lack of use. Keep things "ready." Vacuum, dust. This may sound like a bunch of crap, and maybe it is - as I'm still trying to find my way, but this I do believe: The Muse is always there. It's a question of whether or not we are prepared to listen.

For some general starting points, check this out: http://recordinginstitute.com/R2KREQ/basiccomp.htm All the digital headroom in the world doesn't change the fact that compression is not and never was used exclusively due to the limitations of tape, vinyl, technicians or radio transmission levels. Compression shapes the dynamic range of the voice or instrument. It becomes a performance issue. And, when used properly, most consider it a pleasing, liberating, if not flat out necessary part of getting a good performance. It's also used as an effect. Do you really think that famous Chic rhythm guitar on "Good Times" was the result of a technician riding the faders?

Strange. I haven't had any problems with mine. You should contact Apogee, they have online chat support: http://www.apogeedigital.com/company/support.php

Yeah, the Mackie 1640i would do it: 16 in, 16 out. If you're doing lot's of live drums, I think that would be a great solution. I never had any problems with my 1220, loved it. Seems like I've seen David post about some of his clients having problems, but I'm not sure which model it was/if it has all been worked or not. Maybe he'll chime in on this thread with some other ideas for you...

No problem Also, not sure if you knew this or not but Apogee is recommending OS 10.7.4 along with their own May 2012 update for Duet 2 users: http://www.apogeedigital.com/knowledgebase/duet-2-usb/duet-2-usb-software-installer-may-2012/ And, when you get a chance, fill in your system specs here, too. It helps everybody to help you more. See #5: rules.php

I ran into the same problem when I recently got an API Lunchbox. Thought I'd be able to limp along with my old Mackie Onyx 1220 for a while, then realized there's really no way to patch the API in and out as the Mackie only has the 2 out via firewire. So, I got a Duet 2. Others will recommend an RME Babyface and MOTU has a new unit out, too... Track16, I think is what it's called. Any of those should work, just depends on your i/o needs.

Weird. No, haven't had that problem. Are you using the Maestro software? Open Maestro and see if you've got the Duet 2 configured correctly for that mic. If not, change it via Maestro and see if that takes care of it. Other than that, I'd recommend heading over to the Apogee support section and see what you can learn. If there's nothing there, maybe post the same question there and see if they can help you out: http://www.apogeedigital.com/knowledgebase/category/duet-2-usb/

Hi Martin. What happens if you unplug the mic? Is the noise still there?

No argument from me there, triplets. I should probably mention that I'm on a 2 core MBP, though. So, who knows? I've got no allegiance to Apogee. I bought it as an interim solution until Thunderbolt stuff starts hitting the market. But, even when that happens, all I really want from a converter is conversion. I like the idea of a hybrid analog/digital set up. In fact, I don't know why analog manufacturers don't just stick Thunderbolt i/o on their products and be done with it. Apple should just get its stock converters up to studio quality too, as far as I'm concerned. It's 2012 for crying out loud! I'm sick of all the voodoo and slow walking in the name of commerce. But, I digress...