Subject:other programs like Acid????

Posted by: longb

Date:5/10/2002 9:21:34 AM

Hey everybody....I would like to be able to make loops AND add unlimited tracks with FX and EQ AND burn redbook CDs - Are there any programs that can do this, or am I just fantasizing???

Subject:RE: other programs like Acid????

Reply by: Spirit

Date:5/10/2002 10:01:43 AM

Try Sonar 2.0

Subject:RE: other programs like Acid????

Reply by: Chienworks

Date:5/10/2002 4:53:44 PM

What about ACID Pro? What do you need that it doesn't do?

Subject:RE: other programs like Acid????

Reply by: longb

Date:5/10/2002 5:29:32 PM

I want to record several vocal and guitar parts along with the loops(without problems)....Acid Pro cannot do this

Subject:RE: other programs like Acid????

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:5/10/2002 8:31:21 PM

Yes and no depending on your hardware and config. If you make sure you keep all recorded audio tracks as "One Shots" and set for max length one-shots to be played out of RAM, and have at least 512Megs, you might get by with it. Just keep the audio tracks to a minimum, under 10. And no MP3's for rhythm tracks, too hard on the CPU to decode.

Subject:RE: other programs like Acid????

Reply by: Erik_Nygaard

Date:5/11/2002 6:56:12 AM

If you only need to record one track at a time, Acid Pro can do this.
I normally render all my backing loops/tracks to a stereo track before I record to lessen the strain on the system. Then just mute the originals and have the new backing track play while you record. I do all my midi work in Sonar, but Acid is so much easier when arranging both loops and normal audio tracks.

Subject:RE: other programs like Acid????

Reply by: groovewerx

Date:5/11/2002 10:50:36 AM

its strange to keep seeing you guys talk about limiting tracks in acid to 10 or less whe i routinely run 40+ one-shot & beat mapped song-length tracks before i add 10-20 loops to a project. the most i've run at once was 79 of all types. the only reason i didn't use more is because 79 finished the song...

as for a program like acid...i think each program has its own specialties the others don't. it would probably take a combination of software to match acid...

Subject:RE: other programs like Acid????

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:5/11/2002 12:29:29 PM

groove--somehow I don't think your rig is in Kansas anymore. I get nasty playback artifacts after just a few tracks with a tweaked Athlon T-bird 1G. SF has come on here and stated it "does not support Acid as a multitrack audio app" and "you might get by with a few full-length audio tracks". Seems like you can do a lot better with just the right combo of OS and hardware and tweaks, but few have that combo. Acid is so right-to-the-bone performance-wise SF shound install an auto-defragger that sweeps up after every data frag from recording. I've heard Acid is one of the fraggiest programs going--you're disc looks like the floor of the Stock Exchange on triple witching day after a half hour of laying tracks.

Subject:RE: kansas

Reply by: groovewerx

Date:5/11/2002 7:33:03 PM

i get those artifacts as well but probably much later than most do. acid is the fraggiest software i've ever used. that auto defrag idea is a must after each session or during offline instances.

my sytem specs:

4U Rack Case (Air Cooled)
Enermax 500W PS
Abit VP6
Dual P3-1G/133
1GB Crucial (2x512/PC133/L2)
ATI Radeon VE AGP
EgoSys WamiRack24 Audio
Sony 24x CDRW & 52x CDROM
IBM 20GB 7200 (System)
IBM 40GB 7200 (Work)
Windows 2000 sp2
Dual IBM 21" LCDs

Subject:RE: kansas

Reply by: Spirit

Date:5/11/2002 10:10:12 PM

I routinely have five or six 3-minute one shots, plus sometimes four or five really looong tracks which I've then chopped like crazy into maybe 5 - 10 little snippets on each track, and maybe 10 or 20 loops or short one-shots. I've never had any problems except *always* crackling when I adjust volume and EQ in real time when playing. I'm ready to switch into VV3 when the system chokes, but so far that hasn't happened :)

Asus P4B266
P4 1.8 512K L2 cache
BarracudaIV 40 + 80
512Mb RAM
XP

Subject:RE: kansas

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:5/12/2002 1:06:48 PM

Okay, well that explains why you guys are doing so well in the performance sweepstakes! Us Unfrozen Cave Loopers from the Jurassic 1G CPU/ME world are frightened and confused by your modern technology!

Bottom line: if you want to handle any kind of multitrack audio in Acid, the recommended starting point should really be a 1.6P4 or one of the new Athlon 1800+ with 256G min. Keep your system on a separate drive (7200's) and defrag like mad all the time. Guys like me trying to fake it on one-year-old technology are doomed to some pops and crackles during multitrack playback--but for me since they go away in the render, it's not quite a dealbreaker.

Subject:RE: kansas

Reply by: Chienworks

Date:5/12/2002 7:53:46 PM

I dunno. 40 tracks (admittedly very few effects though) runs slick as anything on my 866MHz P3 Win98SE 256MB.

Subject:RE: kansas

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:5/12/2002 8:54:21 PM

You mean 40 3 min+ continuous AUDIO tracks/One Shots? To paraphrase Meg Ryan's lunch neighbor, "I'll have whatever he's having!"

Subject:RE: kansas

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:5/12/2002 9:14:52 PM

"Guys like me trying to fake it on one-year-old technology are doomed to some pops and crackles during multitrack playback..."

I wouldn't really consider my 1GHz Athlon (192 MB of RAM) a dinosaur... That's more a classification for the K6-3 450 I used to run Acid 3 on. =) But just so I've got this strait, you guys are using the term "multitrack" as in using Acid like Vegas, correct? Not using an even mix of one-shots, loops, and beatmaps, right? I ask this because I typically have projects with upwards of 40 tracks, 90 events (variety of loops, one-shots, and beatmaps, including 3 vocal tracks), 3 FX busses, and iZotope Ozone running with all modules active in the master buss. This puts me right up at about 98% CPU utilization (in Win2K) and no crackles. Naturally, Ozone isn't enabled when recording the vocals, but it still works flawlessly. Now if I were running those all as long beatmapped tracks, yeah, I'll bet there'd be some crackle, since this version of Acid wasn't designed to be used like that (perhaps the future will be different). But using just typically sized loops? Shouldn't be crackle.

If I were any one of you, I'd first use the "msconfig" command to find any unnecessary processes and nuke them. If you've got a machine that you access the web with, download Ad-Aware and nix any spyware that might be installed. Then I'd raid through the registry and get rid of all errors and double-references (there are tools for this). Then I'd get rid of all stray DLL's (there are tools for this, too). Or you could simplify the process and reformat and start from scratch. Bottom line is that a modest set of hardware can run pretty beefy projects so long as the software is clean. The more stuff you install, the worse it will potentially run.

Hope this helps,
Nick LaMartina

Subject:RE: kansas

Reply by: nlamartina

Date:5/13/2002 1:17:18 AM

Kelly and I must be smoking the same thing, Maruuk. I got curious and did a test of my own. Here are the stats:

- 41 total tracks (yes tracks, not events)
- Times ranging between 1 and 5 minutes in duration
- Even mix of one-shots and beatmapped tracks
- Half of the tracks were MP3's, the other half WAV's
- All files are stored on/streamed off a 5400 RPM Maxtor hard disk that's never been defragged (although it's never had to be... different story)
- 1 GHz Athlon processor
- 192 MB of SDRAM (the slow kind, not DDR)
- Win2K OS
- SBlive! with kX WDM driver

Here are the results:
- No crackle. Not a single time.
- CPU utilization didn't go above 70%.

Now, I wan't using FX, but even then, I still had headroom to do so. Sooooo.... Take this as you will. I really think you've got a hardware/software environment problem if you're having the kind of difficulty you're describing. From what both Kelly and I can see, Acid's not the problem. Get back to me and we'll see if we can't get that system of yours up to snuff.

Regards,
Nick LaMartina