![]() Or should I send the mulitclock clock wherever it needs to go knowing that everything is receiving the same clock and therefore there won’t be any clock doubling? Or would I be better to distribute the multiclock clock direct to the machines via the MIO and tell Pyramid not to send clocking? (And ignoring the Super Bass Station for the moment) Should I just send the multiclock clock to the Pyramid and slave my machines sequenced by the Pyramid to that? So assuming that I am happy with the Pyramid clocking my machines. The old Super Bass Station can be a bit sloppy with its timing, as it goes. So using the separate clock offsets on the mulitclock to account for that hadn’t occurred to me. Other than the usual DAW/MIDI latency/jitter woes (hence the acquisition of the multiclock) I’ve not had any latency issues with machines that are sequenced or clocked (synched) by the Pyramid. Especially while the sequence chaining functionality is still broken and I have lost patience waiting for the fix in OS 3. I find the Pyramid is incredible for jamming and generating ideas but I’m struggling to write detailed, finished work on it. I can route this MIDI out via the MIO to the other gear and completely bypass the Pyramid. Thereafter I can finalise/ fine edit my arrangement in the DAW without needing Pyramid to drive my hardware. Once I’ve got it all going I want to jam with my tracks and sequences and send a duplicate of the Pyramid’s MIDI outs out to my DAW MIDI ins to track my arrangement in MIDI as a left to right timeline. Although this might not be at all noticeable in the real world. ![]() I’m guessing the timing may be fractionally tighter if the MIO distributes the clock rather than it passing through the Pyramid and the Pyramid resending it along with all the other MIDI info it has to crunch and distribute. Or will it not make any material difference however I do it so long as everything gets the same clock from the same source? Or should the clock go everywhere it needs to go with Pyramid sending clock/sync too? Would this result in clock doubling? Or should I turn the sync send off on the Pyramid and just split the clock from the multiclock out direct to all my devices that need it? Effectively slaving everything to the ERM rather than Pyramid. Do I want to send that clock just to the Pyramid and then slave all my devices to Pyramid? The clock will then come into the MIO for routing. My DAW is going to send the audio pulse to the ERM to generate the clock in the ERM. What’s the best way to distribute the clock from the multiclock to my hardware that is connected to and sequenced by Pyramid? I’ve got the MIO and the Pyramid hooked up already. Can I get some advice from other Pyramid users on integrating iconnectivity MIO, my DAW and ERM multiclock?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |