"Paul Stamler" wrote:

Probably not an issue, since a 20 bit signal is actually a 24 bit
signal with the last four bits set to 0.

No, in this case it would be a 20 bit signal created by hacking off the
last four bits by truncation.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

"Mike Schmidt" wrote in message
...
"Sue Morton" wrote in message
. ..
If device manager is working fine, it should be compatible with your
mobo. Open system management and look at IRQ conflicts, see if the Gina
is
sharing an IRQ with anything. That's usually what is solved by moving it
to a different slot. But if you have ACPI turned on in the bios, moving
it to a different slot won't matter.
--
Sue Morton

I went in the Bios despite not really knowing my way around there (I
usually
leave default values).

I looked for ACPI references, and found that I have ACPI options of S1,
S3,
or S1&S3. Right now, it's set to S1&S3.

I also have ACPI APIC, which is enabled. No idea what that is.

Additionally, it seems the "boot" graphic device was set to PCI. The only
other option was PCIe. Since my video card is PCIe, I switched it to PCIe.

I then went to PCI management, which was set at Auto. I switched it to
manual to see what it would let me do... it opens a door to all the IRQs
available. By default in manual mode, they all seem to be going to "PCI".
The whole lot of them (at least a dozen). I didn't change anything.

I tried rebooting with the PCIe boot, no change. I tried just switching
the
automatic resource config to manual without actually changing what the
IRQ's
are assigned to (all PCI)... no change.

Again, the Device Manager reports the Gina3G as fully functional. Even
going
in-depth into its properties reveals fully functional MIDI drivers and
everything else. But Windows still can't see it anywhere but in the device
manager. Even the Echo Console doesn't see it, and reports an error when I
try loading it.

So that's it? No one has anything else to suggest? The Gina3G and the Asus
A8N-SLI Deluxe just won't play together?

"Jon J. Yeager" wrote:

So that's it? No one has anything else to suggest? The Gina3G and the Asus
A8N-SLI Deluxe just won't play together?

It's not that simple. I'll bet dollars to donuts that if I could get into his
configuration I could get it working in no time. On the surface there are not
any issues with either device. But Mike does have something going on, I just
can't tell from way over here.

PapaNate

I don't recall for sure - I think you said OS is WinXP? If so:

To see IRQ's and other resources in use (and possible conflicts and sharing)
go he

Control Panel - Administrative Tools - Computer Management - Device
Manager

Then menu choice View - Resources by Type, expand the IRQ section. Scan
the list and see if anything is sharing an IRQ with the Gina (it must be
installed to see this).

Switch the view back to Devices by Type. Under Sound, Video and Game
Controllers, do you have ATI WDM Rage Theatre Video listed? If so try
disabling that and see if the Gina can be reinstalled. (After disabling
you'll need to pull the Gina, boot the system, shut it down, and reseat the
Gina).

While you're here in Computer Management, check the Event Viewer logs and
see what kinds of errors are being recorded on your machine. During Gina
install there may be something recorded that you didn't see on screen.
--
Sue Morton

"Mike Schmidt" wrote in message
...

Not a big expert in IRQ matters, but ok.. where do I find "System
Management"?

Bob Cain wrote:
Pat Farrell wrote:
Bob Cain wrote:

Forget how many bits it says it converts. Instead find the
dynamic
range specification in dB and divide by six. That will tell you
about how many of those bits are meaningful. The rest might as
well
not be there at all.


And while we're talking about bringing a little sanity into it....

There is next to zero chance that more than 18 bits of signal
exist anywhere that it makes any difference.

Quiet studios are about 35 dB.
Normal living rooms are about 50 or 60dB.

But there is a real audible difference between the
correlated noise of rooms and studios and the uncorrelated
hiss of converters.

Agreed.

We seem much more tolerant of the
correlated noise.

I wouldn't say that. If the spectral content is similar, the
uncorrelated noise is more likely to be heard less.

Thing is, convertor noise is likely to be white or pink, while the
room noise is more likely to be red or brown. Red or brown noise has
more attenuation of the range where the ear is most sensitive.

Dunno how that translates into dB
figures, if it does at all, but I think that you need more
bits than the studio ambient noise would indicate you do.

Agreed that its not an apples-to-apples comparison. However with
modern relatively inexpensive equipment pulling 100 dB dynamic range
figures, and studios and performance spaces stuck below 80 dB dynamic
range, its still not an apples to apples comparison.

BTW 80 db is generous. Most live recordings have 65 dB dynamic range
or worse while the quieter studio recordings top out in the mid-70s.
One problem with multi-mic recordings is that every mic picks up
another copy of the ambient noise, which gets added up in the console.
Low frequency noise tends to predominate, so much of the summed noise
is correlated. That means that it adds up as scalars instead of random
vectors.

"Sue Morton" wrote in message
. ..
I don't recall for sure - I think you said OS is WinXP? If so:

To see IRQ's and other resources in use (and possible conflicts and
sharing) go he

Control Panel - Administrative Tools - Computer Management - Device
Manager

Then menu choice View - Resources by Type, expand the IRQ section. Scan
the list and see if anything is sharing an IRQ with the Gina (it must be
installed to see this).

Yes. Gina3G and 6600GT video card are on IRQ 18.

Other shared IRQ are nVidia CK804 ADMA Controller (v2.7) and nVidia Network
Bus Enumerator (both on IRQ 20).

Everything else has its own IRQ. If there was a way to output this list to
TXT for you, I would paste it here.

Switch the view back to Devices by Type. Under Sound, Video and Game
Controllers, do you have ATI WDM Rage Theatre Video listed?

No.

If so try disabling that and see if the Gina can be reinstalled. (After
disabling you'll need to pull the Gina, boot the system, shut it down, and
reseat the Gina).

While you're here in Computer Management, check the Event Viewer logs and
see what kinds of errors are being recorded on your machine. During Gina
install there may be something recorded that you didn't see on screen.

There are a few errors listed here and there but I wouldn't be able to tell
if it's specifically during Gina installation. In fact, I'm pretty sure it
wasn't. The ones listed here don't seem to correspond to the dates and times
I tried installing it.

Mike Schmidt wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Norbert Hahn wrote:
"Mike Schmidt" wrote:

I'm buying an Echo Gina3G later today to replace my Gina20.

Question.. would I be wasting my time trying to sell the Gina20?
I
mean.. for all the praise it keeps getting on r.a.p. and other
such
groups, it remains a 20 bit card when most of them are 24 bit
now.

Hm, I looked at the specs of the Gina3G. Signal to noise ration is
114 dB, so you may expect 19 bits. The old Gina20 most likely has
18 valid bits. Both numbers are for output.

No way was the Gina20 even close to 19 bits.

http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/gina/index.htm suggests that on
a
good day it was 16 bits in or out.

Wait.. what about the 3G? Is it not a true 24bit card?

Read my lips - there never have been any true 24 bit audio interfaces
or converters. At least none that weren't swimming in liquid nitrogen
or helium or some such. Probably out of your price range, mine too!
;-)

See the other post about dividing the unweighted dynamic range by 6 to
get the actual real world bit depth of an audio interface.

Here's some practical examples:

An audio interface with 100 dB unweighted dynamic range has just under
17 bits of resolution.

An audio interface with 110 dB unweighted dynamic range has just over
18 bits of resolution.

An audio interface with 120 dB unweighted dynamic range has 20 bits
of resolution.

There ain't a whole lot much past 120 dB.

"Sue Morton" wrote in message
news
Try this. Disable the Gina drivers in Device Manager (be sure you get
them
all, if there is more than one entry, my Lynx has two), shut down and pull
the card, move to a different slot, then bring up the box and check the
IRQs. Is it still sharing with the Video card?

Also, can your video card be installed as AGP instead of PCI-Express (AGP
slot on your mobo?)? If so, try moving it to AGP and then in your BIOS
change the setting to NOT allocate an IRQ to the video card. Don't do
this
unless you know your card is compatible with AGP (look at specs).

These are some of the things I would try, but I am not at your machine and
cannot see what is going on, to know if there are other clues we should be
taking into account.

I recommend you investigate a local "PC Club" to help you with this,
someone
working directly at your machine is worth gold. It is often the part
you're
NOT telling us that will solve the problem, but we don't know what to ask
and you don't know what to mention.

Oh well, thanks anyways, guys. Sounds like you're all about as tired of this
subject as I am.

I did move it back to slot 1, and now it's sharing IRQ 16 with the TI OHCI
1394 Host Controller, whatever that is.

For the record, I've tried all 3 PCI slots,
installing/uninstalling/enabling/disabling both AC97 and the Gina in various
combinations... The behavior doesn't change by one iota. Installation of the
drivers is fine, the device shows up and working fine in Device Manager, but
Windows won't let me use the device.

I'm going to return the card, unless there are any last-minute suggestions
that haven't yet been tried.

PS: I also tried turning Plug n Play off in the bios. No change.

PPS: You never did tell me what to do about ACPI when I described what
options were presented to me in the BIOS. Why did you give up on that route
before it was explored?

Bob Cain wrote:
Pat Farrell wrote:
Bob Cain wrote:
And while we're talking about bringing a little sanity into it....

There is next to zero chance that more than 18 bits of signal
exist anywhere that it makes any difference.

Quiet studios are about 35 dB.
Normal living rooms are about 50 or 60dB.


But there is a real audible difference between the correlated noise of
rooms and studios and the uncorrelated hiss of converters. We seem much
more tolerant of the correlated noise. Dunno how that translates into
dB figures, if it does at all, but I think that you need more bits than
the studio ambient noise would indicate you do.

The value of the higher number of bits is, as has been stated here
often, only in recording where you want a lot of room above the noise
floor for headroom and in processing to help ameliorate the
computational accumulation of noise.


I am not arguing that there is zero value in more bits.
I am saying that there is no practical reason to think that
you have 96 dB of music in your signal. As others have posted,
you are lucky to get 80dB.

The point of all this is to make music. Great music
on quality 16 bit convertors is way better than mediocre
music on 24 bits.

It is too easy to lose sight of the goal.



--
Pat Farrell in
PRC Recording http://www.pfarrell.com/prc/

"Glennbo" wrote in message
. 30.44...
The entity known as Mike Schmidt, posted:

I did move it back to slot 1, and now it's sharing IRQ 16 with the TI
OHCI 1394 Host Controller, whatever that is.

If nobody has yet suggested it, I would suggest that you *disable* in the
BIOS all onboard peripherials that you aren't using. IOW, if you aren't
using any serial port devices, then disable both serail ports in the
BIOS. If you aren't using the parallel port for a printer, then disable
it. You can usually free up a ton of resources by turning off the built
in stuff on your motherboard that isn't being used. Plug-n-play will see
all the resources and re-assign everything differently, and will
frequently, un-cork a problem.

Yeah, I do that with every new computer. For instance, RAID is disabled. And
until I got an IDE burner, IDE was disabled (only SATA was on). I also have
our company's network admin look over my bios to turn off everything that's
unnecessary (he even turned off Plug n Play).

Not that turning it on helped when I tried it.

"Pat Farrell" wrote in message
news:1113321411.7a4e949688ce641de85e2f2d12d7f993@t eranews...
Bob Cain wrote:
But there is a real audible difference between the correlated noise of
rooms and studios and the uncorrelated hiss of converters. We seem much
more tolerant of the correlated noise. Dunno how that translates into dB
figures, if it does at all, but I think that you need more bits than the
studio ambient noise would indicate you do.

The value of the higher number of bits is, as has been stated here often,
only in recording where you want a lot of room above the noise floor for
headroom and in processing to help ameliorate the computational
accumulation of noise.

I am not arguing that there is zero value in more bits.
I am saying that there is no practical reason to think that
you have 96 dB of music in your signal. As others have posted,
you are lucky to get 80dB.

The point of all this is to make music. Great music
on quality 16 bit convertors is way better than mediocre
music on 24 bits.

It is too easy to lose sight of the goal.

True, but you're kind of changing the subject here to avoid the main issue.


Your analogy is like saying you're better off doing 90 mph in a Ford Escort
than 20 mph in a Jaguar because you don't know how to use a stick.

While true, it doesn't change the fact that the Jaguar is better built, and
can optimally go much faster than the Escort when used the way it's supposed
to.

So if someone is asking if there's more value in more bits, they're not
necessarily adding "if the person using them is a fool" to the question.
They're just asking if there's more value to more bits, and if the answer is
yes, then it's simply yes.

I'm not familiar with your mobo, so what you wrote means nothing to me.

You'd best have someone hands-on, to fool with ACPI. Not something to mess
with from remote, or your machine might end up not booting.
--
Sue Morton

"Mike Schmidt" wrote in message
...

PPS: You never did tell me what to do about ACPI when I described what
options were presented to me in the BIOS. Why did you give up on that
route
before it was explored?

"Glennbo" wrote in message
. 30.48...

Well, if you have sharing going on with the "TI OHCI 1394 Host Controller,
whatever that is", then you either have some actual firewire gear
connected
and really need this enabled, or you don't and should disable it, because
the TI 1394 is a firewire interface most likely on the mobo.

I just asked the network admin where I work if he disabled Firewire like he
did everything else I wasn't using, and he says he didn't. Because he
figured I'd be using FW sooner or later.

And you know, he kinda has a point Do I really want this soundcard if
it'll mean losing my Firewire capabilities permanently? Is there no other
way to get this card on another IRQ?

I'll try it just so I can say I tried it... but I'd hate to lose Firewire
for good. I'll be back with the results in a few mins.

"Glennbo" wrote in message
. 30.48...

Well, if you have sharing going on with the "TI OHCI 1394 Host Controller,
whatever that is", then you either have some actual firewire gear
connected
and really need this enabled, or you don't and should disable it, because
the TI 1394 is a firewire interface most likely on the mobo.

Okay, I just tried it. Disabled the PCI IEEE 1394 in the Bios, and booted.

Same result. A quick check at the IRQ list reveals the Echo3G is now alone
at IRQ 16. But still won't show up in the playable devices list.

The IRQs are distributed as follows :

(ISA) 0 System timer
(ISA) 1 Standard Keyboard
(ISA) 8 System CMOS/real time clock
(ISA) 9 Microsoft ACPI-compliant system
(ISA) 10 MPU-401Compatible MIDI Device
(ISA) 12 PS/2 Compatible Mouse
(ISA) 13 Numeric Data processor
(PCI) 5 NVIDIA nForce PCI System Management
(PCI) 14 NVIDIA CK804 Parallel ATA Controller (v2.7)
(PCI) 16 Gina3G
(PCI) 18 NVIDIA GeForce 6600GT
(PCI) 20 Standard OpenHCD USB Host Controller
(PCI) 21 Standard Enhanced PCI to USB Host Controller
(PCI) 22 NVIDIA CK804 ADMA Controller (v2.7)
(PCI) 23 NVIDIA CK804 ADMA Controller (v2.7)
(PCI) 24 NVIDIA Network Bus Enumerator

When Firewire was turned on, it was above the Gina3G, also at PCI 16.

Mike Schmidt wrote:
"Pat Farrell" wrote in message
I am not arguing that there is zero value in more bits.
I am saying that there is no practical reason to think that
you have 96 dB of music in your signal. As others have posted,
you are lucky to get 80dB.

The point of all this is to make music. Great music
on quality 16 bit convertors is way better than mediocre
music on 24 bits.


Your analogy is like saying you're better off doing 90 mph in a Ford Escort
than 20 mph in a Jaguar because you don't know how to use a stick.
So if someone is asking if there's more value in more bits, they're not
necessarily adding "if the person using them is a fool" to the question.
They're just asking if there's more value to more bits, and if the answer is
yes, then it's simply yes.

I do not believe it is either simple or just yes.

There is value to more bits of signal.
There is zero value to more random bits unless
you are explicitly using dither.

In marketing, "mine is bigger" sells. It does not
mean that it actually makes a difference.

I'm stepping out, this is becoming theological



--
Pat Farrell in
PRC Recording http://www.pfarrell.com/prc/

"Mike Schmidt" wrote:

Same result. A quick check at the IRQ list reveals the Echo3G is now alone
at IRQ 16. But still won't show up in the playable devices list.

Hm, not all drivers are happy with an IRQ above 12.

OTOH, some weeks ago I had a similar problem with a soundcard from a
different vendor. The card was correctly listed in the inventory of
the BIOS, the device manager showed the card correctly and drivers
loaded. But neither sound nor accessible from any Windows program.
After a long search I found that I installed the wrong driver, same
vendor but a different model.

Mike, have you checked with Echo Audio that you have got the right
driver for the combination of card and operating system?
Are all patches for the motherboard installed?
Does the Gina driver support Athlon 64?

Norbert

Mike Schmidt wrote:

Your analogy is like saying you're better off doing 90 mph in a Ford Escort
than 20 mph in a Jaguar because you don't know how to use a stick.
So if someone is asking if there's more value in more bits, they're not
necessarily adding "if the person using them is a fool" to the question.
They're just asking if there's more value to more bits, and if the answer is
yes, then it's simply yes.

If you're limited to driving in 20 mph zones, though, there may not be
a substantial performance difference between an Escort and a Jaguar,
which is the real point.

And a 16-bit converter that sounds good will beat a 24-bit converter that
sounds bad. Dynamic range is not everything. These days it's not even
a very important thing.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

So I'm back on the phone with Echo. And the guy tells me they haven't tested
on my MoBo yet, so I'm probably stuck returning the soundcard. He does,
however, recommend I go to nvidia.com and update the chipset drivers before
I give up completely. Just in case.

I'm thinking yeah right, you just wanted to feel like you actually
contributed something. I just bought the MB, and its rev.2, what are the
odds that updating the chipset drivers will change anything. It's not like
those on the CD were from 2001.

Well, believe it or not, before the drivers were even done installing... in
MID-INSTALLATION PROCESS... the Gina3G's lights go on. I spit out my coffee.

I let it finish the installation, which actually DOES produce an error with
the TV Tuner... but I don't care. I see lights on my Gina3G.

I run to Sounds and Audio Devices... it's there!

I reboot. I turn the onboard audio and firewire ports back on in the BIOS
when I do so. Am I pushing my luck? We'll see.

It's still there! And so is the onboard audio!

I load Sonar and try to play a project file I'd migrated... it plays!

I can't hear it cuz I'm at work and I don't have 1/4" cables here... but by
all accounts, everything works!

The big test is tonight when I find out if there's mass clipping everywhere
or any other artifacts in the sound... but so far, it really looks like all
it took was updating the chipset driver. I'd updated everything else on the
computer except that.

(!)

Also, are you uninstalling the drivers each time you move the Gina, or just
moving it to different slots? Sometimes drivers won't re-initialize unless
they're uninstalled, reinstalled.
--
Sue Morton

"Norbert Hahn" wrote in message
...
"Mike Schmidt" wrote:

Same result. A quick check at the IRQ list reveals the Echo3G is now alone
at IRQ 16. But still won't show up in the playable devices list.

Hm, not all drivers are happy with an IRQ above 12.

OTOH, some weeks ago I had a similar problem with a soundcard from a
different vendor. The card was correctly listed in the inventory of
the BIOS, the device manager showed the card correctly and drivers
loaded. But neither sound nor accessible from any Windows program.
After a long search I found that I installed the wrong driver, same
vendor but a different model.

Mike, have you checked with Echo Audio that you have got the right
driver for the combination of card and operating system?
Are all patches for the motherboard installed?
Does the Gina driver support Athlon 64?

Norbert

RE your posting:
Same result. A quick check at the IRQ list reveals the Echo3G is now alone
at IRQ 16. But still won't show up in the playable devices list.
The IRQs are distributed as follows :
(I snipped this, to include it would have been overkill)
When Firewire was turned on, it was above the Gina3G, also at PCI 16.

I don't want to come across as a smart alec, but seriously - have you ever
given some consideration to trying a Macintosh?

- John

......... it doesn't change the fact that the Jaguar is better built, and
can optimally go much faster than the Escort
Faster yes,
Better built??? You may have never actually owned a Jaguar, or had to deal
with the electronics in said car.
Max Arwood


"Mike Schmidt" wrote in message
...
"Pat Farrell" wrote in message
news:1113321411.7a4e949688ce641de85e2f2d12d7f993@t eranews...
Bob Cain wrote:
But there is a real audible difference between the correlated noise of
rooms and studios and the uncorrelated hiss of converters. We seem
much
more tolerant of the correlated noise. Dunno how that translates into
dB
figures, if it does at all, but I think that you need more bits than
the
studio ambient noise would indicate you do.

The value of the higher number of bits is, as has been stated here
often,
only in recording where you want a lot of room above the noise floor
for
headroom and in processing to help ameliorate the computational
accumulation of noise.

I am not arguing that there is zero value in more bits.
I am saying that there is no practical reason to think that
you have 96 dB of music in your signal. As others have posted,
you are lucky to get 80dB.

The point of all this is to make music. Great music
on quality 16 bit convertors is way better than mediocre
music on 24 bits.

It is too easy to lose sight of the goal.

True, but you're kind of changing the subject here to avoid the main
issue.


Your analogy is like saying you're better off doing 90 mph in a Ford
Escort
than 20 mph in a Jaguar because you don't know how to use a stick.

While true, it doesn't change the fact that the Jaguar is better built,
and
can optimally go much faster than the Escort when used the way it's
supposed
to.

So if someone is asking if there's more value in more bits, they're not
necessarily adding "if the person using them is a fool" to the question.
They're just asking if there's more value to more bits, and if the answer
is
yes, then it's simply yes.

"John Albert" wrote:

I don't want to come across as a smart alec, but seriously - have you
ever given some consideration to trying a Macintosh?


Excellent suggestion. Then you won't have to update chipset drivers,
you'll just have to make sure you have EXACTLY the right combination of
software version and operating system version, because version 6.1.2 of
the software will work with version 10.2.3 of the operating system, but
a later version of the software won't work with that version of the
operating system, and a later version of the operating system won't work
on a two-year-old G4, forcing you to go out and buy a new computer to
support your software upgrade. WAY better than updating drivers! g

Oh yeah, you will also be assured that all your software is completely
up to date, because you'll have to replace everything you already own
with Mac versions.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

Max Arwood wrote:
........ it doesn't change the fact that the Jaguar is better built, and
can optimally go much faster than the Escort
Faster yes,
Better built??? You may have never actually owned a Jaguar, or had to deal
with the electronics in said car.
Max Arwood


Didn't people use to drop Chevy 350s in those Jags?

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 00:34:52 GMT, John Albert
wrote:


I don't want to come across as a smart alec, but seriously - have you ever
given some consideration to trying a Macintosh?

You might have had a point a few years back, before the Mac world
entered os-version hell. Now, Mac users fervently wish that
something as simple (and free) as a chipset driver upgrade would fix
their compatibility problems. How are the mighty fallen :-)

Lorin wrote:
Excellent suggestion. Then you won't have to update chipset drivers,
you'll just have to make sure you have EXACTLY the right combination of
software version and operating system version, because version 6.1.2 of the
software will work with version 10.2.3 of the operating system, but a later
version of the software won't work with that version of the operating system,
and a later version of the operating system won't work on a two-year-old G4,
forcing you to go out and buy a new computer to support your software
upgrade. WAY better than updating drivers! g
Oh yeah, you will also be assured that all your software is completely up
to date, because you'll have to replace everything you already own with Mac
versions.

And Laurence added:
You might have had a point a few years back, before the Mac world entered
os-version hell. Now, Mac users fervently wish that something as simple (and
free) as a chipset driver upgrade would fix their compatibility problems. How
are the mighty fallen :-)

Yes, things are more complicated now than when I bought my first Mac back in
87. Those days, you could fit both the System and your application on a single floppy!

But here's an interesting data point to consider:

Got home from work a few hours ago and found a box from UPS sitting on my back
porch. In it was a Presonus Firebox (along with an Audio-Technica AT2020).

I brought the box inside and unpacked things. Took a firewire cable, plugged
it into the Firebox, and plugged that into my g4/1.25 dual-processor, then
turned it on.

Got to the Finder, opened up the Sound preference pane, and there's the
Firebox. I didn't install a driver. Actually, there isn't any driver needed on
the Mac (OS X apparently has some type of built-in drivers [CORE?] with 10.3.7
and later). The Firebox was just "there", waiting to be selected and used.

I _did_ install the "Firebox mixer" application (not a driver), which allows
you to blend inputs and outputs for zero-latency overdubs.

I opened up Garageband 2, and selected the Firebox from the GB preferences
(again, it was just "there", no drivers needed).

Once I tinkered with the mixer, and plugged in a mic, everything worked.
Fifteen to thirty minutes out of the box, never having used an audio interface
before, I was recording.

Granted, I still have very much to learn. But going from scratch to
entry-level multitrack recording was one of the easier things I've done with
the Mac. Perhaps if I'd realized it was _that_ easy, I would have tried it a
lot sooner!

Again, just a data point.

- John
Unrelated question: The AT-2020 came with a mount that has a considerably
smaller [inside diameter] thread than on my mike boom. Do they have
"down-size" converters for such things?

"John Albert" wrote in message
...
Lorin wrote:
Excellent suggestion. Then you won't have to update chipset drivers,
you'll just have to make sure you have EXACTLY the right combination of
software version and operating system version, because version 6.1.2 of
the
software will work with version 10.2.3 of the operating system, but a
later
version of the software won't work with that version of the operating
system,
and a later version of the operating system won't work on a two-year-old
G4,
forcing you to go out and buy a new computer to support your software
upgrade. WAY better than updating drivers! g
Oh yeah, you will also be assured that all your software is completely
up
to date, because you'll have to replace everything you already own with
Mac
versions.

And Laurence added:
You might have had a point a few years back, before the Mac world
entered
os-version hell. Now, Mac users fervently wish that something as simple
(and
free) as a chipset driver upgrade would fix their compatibility problems.
How
are the mighty fallen :-)

Yes, things are more complicated now than when I bought my first Mac back
in
87. Those days, you could fit both the System and your application on a
single floppy!

But here's an interesting data point to consider:

Got home from work a few hours ago and found a box from UPS sitting on my
back
porch. In it was a Presonus Firebox (along with an Audio-Technica AT2020).

I brought the box inside and unpacked things. Took a firewire cable,
plugged
it into the Firebox, and plugged that into my g4/1.25 dual-processor, then
turned it on.

Got to the Finder, opened up the Sound preference pane, and there's the
Firebox. I didn't install a driver. Actually, there isn't any driver
needed on
the Mac (OS X apparently has some type of built-in drivers [CORE?] with
10.3.7
and later). The Firebox was just "there", waiting to be selected and used.

I _did_ install the "Firebox mixer" application (not a driver), which
allows
you to blend inputs and outputs for zero-latency overdubs.

I opened up Garageband 2, and selected the Firebox from the GB preferences
(again, it was just "there", no drivers needed).

Once I tinkered with the mixer, and plugged in a mic, everything worked.
Fifteen to thirty minutes out of the box, never having used an audio
interface
before, I was recording.

Granted, I still have very much to learn. But going from scratch to
entry-level multitrack recording was one of the easier things I've done
with
the Mac. Perhaps if I'd realized it was _that_ easy, I would have tried it
a
lot sooner!

Again, just a data point.

- John
Unrelated question: The AT-2020 came with a mount that has a considerably
smaller [inside diameter] thread than on my mike boom. Do they have
"down-size" converters for such things?

Thaat's probably an adapter that will screw out leaving a 5/8ths x 28 female
that you are more familiar with.

Steve King

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 05:02:44 GMT, John Albert
wrote:

Got to the Finder, opened up the Sound preference pane, and there's the
Firebox. I didn't install a driver. Actually, there isn't any driver needed on
the Mac (OS X apparently has some type of built-in drivers [CORE?] with 10.3.7
and later). The Firebox was just "there", waiting to be selected and used.


Probably would have been exactly the same on a Windows XP system :-)

Pat Farrell wrote:
There is value to more bits of signal.
There is zero value to more random bits unless
you are explicitly using dither.

Depends on where you use the bits. If they're used as additional
headroom, so you don't risk going into digital clipping on a
louder-than-expected passage, then you've won even if you haven't gained
more accuracy during normal recording.