Emagic aquisition = improved sound hardware?

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 62
    tabootaboo Posts: 128member
    If apple has a new hardware video solution (we have to assume this is the case, with the recent purchases), is it possible that they simply wanted a hardware audio solution to market as a total package? ie a video in/out and audio in/out (with integration) sold as a single editing package.

    I run exactly this type of setup at home with an old videovision/digidesign combo on a 9150, and it still performs quite admirably - with a g3 upgrade. They even sync very well.

    The statement I noticed was that EMagic would operate as a "wholly owned subsidiary(?) of Apple". That would presumably mean that they would be free to market their own solutions (hardware and/or software) as well.
  • Reply 42 of 62
    xaqtlyxaqtly Posts: 450member
    This is an interesting issue for me, because right now I have a beige G3, a MOTU PocketExpress midi box and no audio hardware (aside from the built in audio port). I can't move this setup to a new G4 right now because it's entirely serial-based (the old DIN-8 serial, not USB).



    So I've accepted I'll have to get new hardware eventually when I get a new Mac, but Apple's purchase of Emagic made the prospect look a whole lot more inviting. I can only hope that this purchase will force the hardware issue, and soon we'll have at least a couple good midi and audio solutions in hardware. I mean Apple would have to be crazy not to push for it after buying Emagic... so I'm going to assume they are in fact doing something about it. Whether it's putting pressure on MOTU, or having Emagic do it or whatever, I'm hoping to see some good hardware over the next 6 months to a year.
  • Reply 43 of 62
    jindrichjindrich Posts: 120member
    i cant believe it, a crowed audio topic in AI!



    To those who bought the soundblaster for mac: I SERIOUSLY WARNED YOU (when it was first announced), So dont complain now about that piece of crap.



    Regarding the improvements in Mac audio hardware after the acqusition:



    well, besides soft, emagic builds some hardware too. They have the best and fastest USB midi interfaces out there (which avoid OMS) But as they previously hired the OMS designers to integrate midi into OS X that means we could have some serious MIDI interface built-in in future hardware as they now have both OMS and Active Midi Transmission (AMT) engineers in house.



    Emagic also builds the best USB audio interface, the emi 2|6, that not only plays 8 simultaneous channels with the lowest ever latency (2+6 thru the 'limited' USB bandwidth) but also can do 24/96. Moreover, the quality of its converters are comparable -or better- to up to $1000 audio interfaces. Emagic thought the 2|6 could be used not only under pro audio environments but for home/surround apps too (has 6 outs). It never took off as a surround home device so now they're also making the 6|2 (6 inputs 2 outputs) and the spdif I/O can be metamorphosed into midi I/O



    So from the Mac user perspective this acquisition is extremely good news.

    (just the opposite for PC logic users, they're feeling like been 'Microsofted' by APPLE)





    Very likely: the merger may get us too some kind of a free 'iLogic' audio app a la iMovie.



    BTW The emagic brand will always be there IMHO. Apple cant get in the audio business because of an old lawsuit with Apple Records (Beatles label).



    [ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: jindrich ]</p>
  • Reply 44 of 62
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,425member
    [quote] BTW The emagic brand will always be there IMHO. Apple cant get in the audio business because of an old lawsuit with Apple Records (Beatles label). <hr></blockquote>



    Good point. I forgot about that.



    Here's what I'm hoping for.



    The Box Set to beat all.



    Final Cut Pro 4.0

    DVD SP 2.0

    Shake 1.0

    Logic Audio/India Titler/EM 2/6



    All in one box for 2995.95



    Your one stop shop for Audio/Video and multichannel.
  • Reply 45 of 62
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by jindrich:

    <strong>Emagic also builds the best USB audio interface, the emi 2|6, that not only plays 8 simultaneous channels with the lowest ever latency (2+6 thru the 'limited' USB bandwidth) but also can do 24/96. Moreover, the quality of its converters are comparable -or better- to up to $1000 audio interfaces.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    While the EMI 2|6 is very good, there are many reports of popping sounds while recording. I would not recommend it for recording so long as owners continue to report this problem. Hopefully Apple will take the time to fix this since it is such a cool interface otherwise.
  • Reply 46 of 62
    jindrichjindrich Posts: 120member
    yes it is such a cool interface. the size of a VHS tape, USB powered and with surprisingly good converters (for the price). I own one and never experienced those hiccpus. i think that that has more to do on a proper 9.2.2 configuration.



    anyway, hopefully apple will fix any problems may them exist, along with a os X version of logic.
  • Reply 47 of 62
    overtoastyovertoasty Posts: 439member
    [quote]Originally posted by giant:

    <strong>

    But only recently have producers been switching in record numbers from Pro-Tools to Logic. </strong><hr></blockquote>



    ... hmmmmm, and only recently has native DSP been able to seriously rival that of proprietary hardware.



    The trend is clear, the only question with Apple's Emagic "Aqua-sition" is: will they surf the wave, or sink beneath it?
  • Reply 48 of 62
    whoamiwhoami Posts: 301member
    _____&gt;giant!

    it's good to see another chicago house head on the boards who knows what's up! i've been using logic since version 2.6 on my 7100/80! heh. it's come a long way since then. lately i've been using cubase though, the integration via rewire with reason is much more stable than with logic. they better fix this, or i'll be using cubase sx when logic 5 is around for osx! that's my only beef with logic. logic is a very good piece of software, i just hope apple pushes the engineers to continue innovating! i'm sure they will!
  • Reply 49 of 62
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by whoami:

    <strong>_____&gt;giant!

    it's good to see another chicago house head on the boards who knows what's up! i've been using logic since version 2.6 on my 7100/80! heh. it's come a long way since then. lately i've been using cubase though, the integration via rewire with reason is much more stable than with logic. they better fix this, or i'll be using cubase sx when logic 5 is around for osx! that's my only beef with logic. logic is a very good piece of software, i just hope apple pushes the engineers to continue innovating! i'm sure they will! </strong><hr></blockquote>





    fill-ins on the red line?
  • Reply 50 of 62
    whoamiwhoami Posts: 301member
    no, i'm not into graf., but i know what you're talking about. haven't seen that name around since the "sivel" days! heh!
  • Reply 51 of 62
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    PTools is good for Spot-synching sound to video... and really excels at that when you have the hardware SMPTE device . . . .



    apple needs to think along those lines..... as far as I can tell, Logic isn't really for the same things as PTools for video: cleaning up audio, sound design for video, synching etc.



    as far as I could tell, (with very little experience in Logic so take it easy on me) Logic is more about composing music than working with audio for sound design?

    is this true?



    [ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: pfflam ]</p>
  • Reply 52 of 62
    sizzle chestsizzle chest Posts: 1,133member
    Pro Tools is more like a multi-track audio recorder & editor. It's good for laying down tracks, editing & splicing and moving stuff around. The midi capabilities are really poor, and that's why people who work with midi, yet need the Pro Tools TDM hardware for DSP on their audio work, use Logic as a front-end for Pro Tools.



    Logic Audio is an audio multi-tracker, and also a midi sequencer, with some advanced compositional tools (loop design, drum machine-style programming, wave editing, notation display, etc.) and ways of interacting with your material. It also has VST compatibility, opening up a much wider range of VST plugins and VSTi instruments. That's not to say it's better -- it's just not exactly the same thing.



    Another factor is that many "high end" engineering talents (producers, engineers, mixers) are very comfortable with the Pro Tools interface and prefer it, and it's ubiquitous in pro studios. Even if it's not their preferred tool, they need to have Pro Tools available. Many people have been choosing Logic Audio, or the new version of Digital Performer, based on certain interoperabilities with Pro Tools hardware or software.



    On the other side, many people dislike the fact that entry into the Pro Tools club is pretty expensive -- you have to use their hardware unless you want to use the free version of Pro Tools, which is stripped-down. If you want to use the interface of your choice, and there are several good ones to choose from, you're probably going to investigate Logic Audio, Cubase, or Digital Performer.



    Also Emagic has some really cool auxiliary products -- virtual samplers and synthesizers, effects plugins, and the like. Not that they are the only ones with these on offer, but they're of high quality (people really like their EXS 24, I think it is, sampling module) and work well within Logic.
  • Reply 53 of 62
    overtoastyovertoasty Posts: 439member
    [quote]Originally posted by pfflam:

    <strong>PTools is good for Spot-synching sound to video... and really excels at that when you have the hardware SMPTE device . . . .



    apple needs to think along those lines..... as far as I can tell, Logic isn't really for the same things as PTools for video: cleaning up audio, sound design for video, synching etc.



    as far as I could tell, (with very little experience in Logic so take it easy on me) Logic is more about composing music than working with audio for sound design?

    is this true?



    [ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: pfflam ]</strong><hr></blockquote>





    It's becoming less true, but the essence of your post is quite correct ... Pro-Tools was never originally intended to be a composer's tool to the same degree as a proper MIDI sequencer; it first made it's money in the Post Market (which was a bit of surprise in the degree to which this became the case), and then slowly branched out into the Multi-track market (helping to make bands like Metalica sound like they can actually play to a click track).



    Pro Tools had the advantage in that it was always MUCH easier to learn than Logic,and the interface was much simpler and directed at Audio almost exclusively (yeah they had MIDI support, kinda ...) but best of all, it's way of working was designed from the ground up to be fairly close to the way audio Multi-track guys worked anyway, so to them, a few hours of instruction at the interface, a manual, a fine mug of Java, and the rest was pretty much gravy.



    Not So Logic:



    Logic has always been an extremely sophisto 3-D MIDI sequencer, and you just don't learn something like that in a couple of hours ... but more to your point, it was never intended to take over PT's position in the post market ... part of that had to do with file compatibility (all the post heads used PT's, so if you did something in Logic, you couldn't just open the file in your local mixing house's PT system and have the engineer know what to do with it)- part of that had to do with designing an interface for MIDI which PT basically completely avoided(oddly enough, I'm sure you could make some screen sets in LA that could probably mimic PT quite nicely, not to mention customize your key commands to match almost perfectly) ...



    ... and part of the problem had to do with inherint Digi protectionism ... PT, since it depended on some pretty hi end DSP chips which cost a fair chunk of dough to R&D, always had a bit of an advantage ... if you wanted to compete with them, not only did you have to fight against a market which they already owned, but you also had to design hardware that was far better just to get people to take a chance on your product - which wouldn't be file compatible with Digi. And Digi always always always played the game where, it was cheaper to just buy their upgrades, than it was to switch to the competitors new system.



    But now, that game is slowly getting blown away.



    The horsepower in a Mac very soon, is going to make all but very heaviest DSP needs of most proprietary third party DSP systems a total non-issue. So Digi won't be able to hide behind it's hardware, not that it's bad hardware mind you, geez ... 192kHz, 24bit? bloody marvy ... but for the money?



    I think Apple's actually going to be setting some new standards here ... I don't know exactly how they're going to attack the post thing ... but they've already got FCP doing some pretty cool basic stuff ... I'm sure they could come up with a totally interchangeable file format so that things could be swapped around from FCP, to Logic to whatever else they've got up their sleeve (Shake etc), but I also wonder if they could have CORE audio handling things while FCP and Logic provide a pretty face to the same set of data?



    Imagine that? You're in FCP, and you want to edit your audio? hit a button, FCP still runs in the background, but now, logic's up ... move and play with the audio to your hearts content, and when you're done, switch back to FCP.



    The integration possibilities?!?!



    Frankly, I'm scared.
  • Reply 54 of 62
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by sizzle chest:

    <strong>



    Another factor is that many "high end" engineering talents (producers, engineers, mixers) are very comfortable with the Pro Tools interface and prefer it, and it's ubiquitous in pro studios. Even if it's not their preferred tool, they need to have Pro Tools available. Many people have been choosing Logic Audio, or the new version of Digital Performer, based on certain interoperabilities with Pro Tools hardware or software.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    The vast majority of the biggest selling producers right now are using logic on digi hardware. Hell, I only know two other logic users w/out digihardware (Since I've gotten my tibook, I don't have to go into a studio until the later phases). There seems to be less and less people composing w/ the software, but it's not budging in most other markets at all. Apple likes to be the platform for media creation, and Logic is the best choice, much better than pro-tools, for that. That's why they bought Emagic.
  • Reply 55 of 62
    woosterwooster Posts: 27member
    I use both Logic and ProTools (both Digi001 and the real stuff Mix/HD) and I always prefer to edit and create MIDI in Logic. I have used Logic´s audiopart and it is OK (much better than Cubase 4.x and 5.x) but it has a long way to go before it´s on par with Protools. ProTools is simply the most brilliant, quickly learnt and used interface for audioediting. ProTools even beats all the two-track programs out there in terms of simplicity. But sorry to say the MIDI part leaves much to ask for. I know people that use it in studio-enviroments but they are in minority.



    Simply put (my opinion):



    Logic for MIDI

    ProTools for Audio (the software and hardware)
  • Reply 56 of 62
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    [quote] from Overtaosty:

    imagine that? You're in FCP, and you want to edit your audio? hit a button, FCP still runs in the background, but now, logic's up ... move and play with the audio to your hearts content, and when you're done, switch back to FCP.<hr></blockquote>

    Yes... but can I spot synch with Logic like I can with ProTools?????
  • Reply 57 of 62
    [quote] ... lately i've been using cubase though, the integration via rewire with reason is much more stable than with logic... <hr></blockquote>

    Me too, I was initially disapointed at Apple's purchase, partly cos of this, but Rebirth has been out for a while and with the mods I never use the old Roland sounds. Isn't it time for a new app. to surpass Rebirth?



    Logic is very detail oriented, but has a steep learning curve I was never to get into it as much as Cubase. The interface is far less Mac like than most sequencers. But it's reputation is one of being a powerfull audio tool, and with the hardware it's a good move for Apple .



    I would upgrade to Logic if they had a better interface and maybe that's the strength Apple will bring to the marriage. I don't think they intend to compete directly with ProTools, but if ProTools stopped suporting Mac hardware(I don't even want to think about this), Apple would be able step in with damage control quite easily and give Digidesign a strong competitor.



    Make the interface Mac elegant (not necessarily aqua color) but ergonomically easy, retain the depth, power and detail of Logic and I would just about have to use it.
  • Reply 58 of 62
    overtoastyovertoasty Posts: 439member
    [quote]Originally posted by pfflam:

    <strong>

    Yes... but can I spot synch with Logic like I can with ProTools?????</strong><hr></blockquote>



    All key commands are editable, as are the screens, as for locking to Black and SMPTE ... that depends on what hardware you're on.



    The answer - depending on how you work today - is probably yes.
  • Reply 59 of 62
    jbytesjbytes Posts: 33member
    [quote]Originally posted by giant:

    <strong>



    While the EMI 2|6 is very good, there are many reports of popping sounds while recording. I would not recommend it for recording so long as owners continue to report this problem. Hopefully Apple will take the time to fix this since it is such a cool interface otherwise.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Actually, I'd like to see Apple slap a FireWire port on that baby. Also, I'm wondering if they'll try to convert all Emagic hardware into mLan devices.



    --JBytes
  • Reply 60 of 62
    lemon bon bonlemon bon bon Posts: 2,383member
    I think Apple's buying spree is canny.



    They are a software company in disguise. Trouble was...their software closet was bare.



    That is changing now.



    If they added Maya to the list...then their workstation masterplan looks game on...



    Lemon Bon Bon
Sign In or Register to comment.