Modular Mixing

[tjsound]

I seem to understand how to optimize use XITE for ASIO mixing.

I use modular mixer from SpaceF, Scope 5.1 RC2.
1 load Asio in outs, wave source, and other dest, set 64 channels.
2 load 4 SpaseF modmixer modules -8SL, 2 R167v modules, 16x16 merger, dynamicMixer for masterbus, Optimaster.
3 assign DSP like on picture, save and reopen project.
4 load plugins into inserts.
I got load:
x32 8BandParamEQ S
x32 HP\LP\BP (built-in ModMix Channels)
x32 KomPressor (wolf)
x12 Vinco S
x12 Limiter S
SC Ambience
SC RMX 160
MasterVerb Pro
Optimaster
Hell, I do not know what else to cram in there.

[dawman]

There Ya' Go...

[siriusbliss]

very cool.

Greg

[t_tangent]

Thanks for the info. And the pic makes it nice and easy to understand.

Just reinstalled Scope XITE-1 on Win7 32bit at the moment and it is working flawlessly on that, but for some reason on my Win7 64bit partition I am getting some serious ASIO dropouts, so still trying to sort that out.

Anyway, cheers again and have fun.

[w_ellis]

I'd be interested to know how this relates to Eric's post here: http://xited.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=601

[maky325]

Huh..Slightly offtopic but that oliverandic person seems very hostile Anyone with grain of braincell can see it bellow his lines. I am not questioning his product they seems to be very nice but his communication is really bad. I am reading his history. It seems whenever someone ask him some technical question or whenever other developer say something in thread where he is posting - he get very very upset and hostile talking really weird nonsense (look at that xite reverb optimization thread). Whenever even out of pure curiosity someone ask him something he think that "guys affirmating things that they don't understand".

Weird for mature person. I guess we are all different in really "different" way...

But he for sure understand everything about xite. I would like to know is it possible for SC to develop some kind of automatic intelligent and transparent optimization for Xite? That way user would not worry about it, it could get perfect optimization and avoid problems oliverandinc speak about. And yes oliverandic has a point there. I am surprised that people does not realize why is outofphase problem bad. Try to do your NY compression when your signal is out of phase and you'll see why he thinks that this is important.

Btw why Xite does not have something like that already? One would expect that from 3000EUR device? Is it up to device/plugin or is it up to the platform itself? What do you think is it possible?

[Janni]

Those phase-issues are one of several reasons why I stick to protools...
I always wondered why u can't squeeze as much plugs out of protools compared to scope.
I think that's one of those reasons. Protools seems limited in that point but everything is in phase...
If someone has the skills and time to check the phase where it's needed, XITE is a killer.
You have the whole power at your fingertips but you have to know how to use it
Protools is more for fast-fiddling-idiots like me... and I mostly mix for TV (news, shows, ads, docu, fictional, etc... no music)

[tjsound]

I am surprised that people does not realize why is outofphase problem bad.

If this is about me, it is not true, because I know that this phase distortion and how it is bad for coherent stereo pairs or groups of well-phased signals from several microphones.
I tested the mixer, as suggested Mr. Oliveanderic on other forum, and really - 2448, 4896 mixers very poorly phased, for example, 1channel not coherent with 10 channel etc. That is very bad.
Modular mixer was not have this problem (inside any, but one module) Phase mismatch may be in other places, when connecting to various modules and a different number of plug-ins. But I repeat myself - Nowhere in the real mix, I do not intend to break the stereo pair or group of microphones for different modules, and nowhere can be phase distortion between the coherent signals.

[maky325]

I am surprised that people does not realize why is outofphase problem bad.

If this is about me, it is not true, because I know that this phase distortion and how it is bad for coherent stereo pairs or groups of well-phased signals from several microphones.
I tested the mixer, as suggested Mr. Oliveanderic on other forum, and really - 2448, 4896 mixers very poorly phased, for example, 1channel not coherent with 10 channel etc. That is very bad.
Modular mixer was not have this problem (inside any, but one module) Phase mismatch may be in other places, when connecting to various modules and a different number of plug-ins. But I repeat myself - Nowhere in the real mix, I do not intend to break the stereo pair or group of microphones for different modules, and nowhere can be phase distortion between the coherent signals.

It's not about you, i was talking in general. I've seen a lot of people which produce music but does not even know there is a phase in sound. Sorry for misunderstood me.

[tjsound]

okay, I understand.
I did some experiments with phase correlation, and found better dsp assignment:

[tgstgs]

sorry but there are definitive no phase issues as long as you do not build one in;
you will have this everywhere even in analog wolrd when you record with the best mics ever
on an analog desk on a analog tape;
in xite people from sc gives you access to control all of this effects -> if you take care;
if not do not manually assing plugs to dsps_
this effect is the base of a lot of effects (plugs) btw im sure evryone of you have at least one of those plusg in your setup;
so i would say if you call it issues you had to blame the creator of the univers and you had to thank SC for ultimative controll over it;

@tjsound
do you realy need such a setup?
take check to check the delay of NON EFFECTED LINES to see if you have a difference in delays;

good vibes from vienna

[tjsound]

Thanx, tgstgs.
"check" does not work on my x64 system (scope 5.1 RC2)- "dsp ...not loaded, plz check install."

[tgstgs]

yes SORRY 32bit only __

64 bit next year_

good vibes

[tjsound]

If someone is helpful, I tried to calculate the latency in samples for XITEs dsp
Please comment on .. where did I go wrong?

[Warp69]

I would appreciate if you could explain your picture - it's a bit unclear what the different numbers represents.

As stated earlier :

* Some processing methods introduce latency.
* When you include external hardware in your Scope projects - you will introduce latency because of the AD/DA stage (happens on all systems) - also if you connect digital units via AES/EBU
* Latency introduced by intercommunication
etc.

Here's a list of latencies regarding Waves TDM plugins : http://www.wavesupport.net/content.aspx?id=2213

[tjsound]

I checked here, what will be a delay if I manually assign the DSP on modules.
For example, if you assign a module to 7 dsp (or any in red area) will be delayed seven samples.
sequential assignment adds latency. if "horizontal" 4 dsp - 22 smpl, if "verical 3 dsp - 11 samples
green area dsps - less then other dsp.
I'm not saying anything, just interested to find this out for yourself.

ps sorry for bad english

is there a latency in the XITE? - yes
Is that bad? No, because I know how to compensate for it.

[dawman]

I love Phase Fix.
Here's one just in case you missed it for making an external Analog synth real beefy.

http://forums.planetz.com/download/file.php?id=3103
http://forums.planetz.com/download/file.php?id=3202

I am fascinated by the calculations and science of digital audio.
Sometimes it's imperfections are what I like.
I never liked perfectly tuned Pianos, so I guess that's why imperfections are OK by me..
I especially enjoy using digital DAW effects on external Analog hardware.

Thanks Thomas for the neat little Checker.
You always have such cool stuff.

[w_ellis]

tjsound: One question relating to a point you made above. Did you use the phase compensation feature in 2448/4896 when doing your test (see page 18 of the manual)? As I understood it, that should fix the issue you identified.

[spacef]

if I understand well, the latency of dsp communication in Xite is likely to cause latency, not phase - at least not in the modular mixer if you connect things well together you don't necessarily get micro delays on different channels. at least that's what i see in the picture (the one above is 8 channels on another dsp than the latency checker... as there is no latency inside the mixer's channels(at least not to my scope-pci knowledge..)... if you are concerned about phase, you are concerned in latencies induced in parallel processes, not cascaded modules that act as latency nullifiers (if latency of all parallel processes is equal, all channels are aligned (variation of parallel latencies = 0). For phase, you can compensate automatically if you force devices to load on certain dsp in a certain way, but for a cost in dsp ressources. You cannot compensate automatically for user-induced-latencies (some effects on various channels). There are also tons of tools and methods for this for scope and sequencers (cut/add samples, track delays etc).... ps, if you want to compare, 22 samples is just a bit more than what it takes to trigger an envelope (15/20 samples, depends on the trigger).

[tjsound]

2 w_ellis : this test is only for XITE - on STM 2448-X (xite version) do not even have buttons "phase fix", and I have not tested the latency value between the two channels (1-10 for example) a single device, I was surprised that this is possible..
This is impossible in Modular mixer from SpaseF, so I'm going to use it. And for many other reasons.