Tracking with UA plugs??Question for Corndanb or anyone.....

gregwhartley · Post by **gregwhartley** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:00 am

grimepoch,
In the new issue of Tape Op George Massenburg knocks 7506's in favor of Grado RS-1's ( http://www.gradolabs.com/product_pages/rs1.htm ). These things are about $700, and from all the reviews (and GM endorsement) I'm sure they work "at least a little okay." But sorry George, I'd still prefer to spend that $$$ on a new pre and stick with my lowly 7506's

.

Greg

grimepoch · Post by **grimepoch** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:20 am

I tried a pair of Grado's about a year ago. While I liked the sound, I felt that the headphone was INCREDIBLY uncomfortable for me. Did anyone else feel that way when using them?

I may try out the 7506's and compare them to the Sennheiser's I am using now (HD280PRO).

(And yeah, I agree with the price tag issue)

porieux · Post by **porieux** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 2:05 pm

I've been using the Sony 7506 for years...they are not accurate at all.

The Sennhieser HD-280 is a HUGE step up from the Sonys.
Why aren't you happy with them? Perhaps they are damaged.

grimepoch · Post by **grimepoch** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:11 pm

I think I just want another compare point while I am mixing. Is there any other companies that make good open ear phones? Maybe that's what I need for a good balance between the two.

porieux · Post by **porieux** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:35 pm

Sennheiser make open ear phones as well. I think it's the 580?

grimepoch · Post by **grimepoch** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:47 pm

I'll have to see if the local shops have them and try them out. It's good to have at least 2390489023 sets of speakers to listen to your mix in, right?

(I do use two stereos, two sets of headphones, a set of computer speakers, a local club that let's me check certain things, and my Tannoy's. The more I do it, the less I need to check the stuff so thoroughly, but I always check anyways to make sure)

KWEBB · Post by **KWEBB** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:57 pm

I also track with uad. Buffer at 128 with a dry track also to line up with after the fact.

giles117 · Post by **giles117** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 5:33 am

I have done the track through a UAD plugin thing. Under PT TDM/HD it was marvelous....14 samples of latency MAX...

Under DP. Guys with perfect timing noticed 128 samples (which is more like 256) and complained. so I wound up adjusting tracks by sample after recording.. Which is a time waster.

How no one notices it baffles me. Even I had to admit the "feel" of the tracks done that way were slightly off. With musicians with darn near perfect timing, that small amount is very noticable. Especially when you are playing up against a sequenced track.

grimepoch · Post by **grimepoch** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:57 pm

Here is where I used to get into trouble:

1 VI Track
1 Synth Track from external.

If your buffer latency is too high, the external synth is going to be 1 full buffer out from the VI. The reason, I am coming in A->D which has one buffer latency, then getting the D->A just like the VI Track.

When you record though, DP aligns it correctly. So imagine me thinking something was in time then recording it and finding out it was off by 1024 samples.

So now, what I do is put an instance of 'buffy' inline with my soft synths. I set it to 1 to add an extra set of buffer latency. HOWEVER, I have to remember to disable it when I freeze the VI tracks, or then they will be delayed a buffer set.

I try to do all my tracking and writing now at 128 setting so this really isn't a problem. And as I have mentioned I think earlier, I monitor vocals real time for zero latency which is the only way to go for me.