Purchase decision assistance - Pyramix or Sequoia

Welcome to the Pyramix MassCore discussion forum.
Forum rules
The Merging Technologies team cannot be held responsible for support queries logged on the public forums. If a support query is logged here and only here, it may not be found and dealt with by the appropriate team.
To ensure that your support issue or bug report is dealt with properly and in good time, please use the link to the tech support request form page on the Merging website.
Make sure to let us know what version you are using when you send your mail. THANKS!
alexaudio
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 17:54
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Contact:

Purchase decision assistance - Pyramix or Sequoia

Postby alexaudio » Mon Oct 28, 2002 18:11

Hello all,

Over the years, I have been a proud user of the Sonic Solutions workstations, then a SADiE 2496 user & Samplitude 2496 user. Currently, I own a Samplitude 2496 editing system. Now taking over the priveledges, responsibiltieis, etc. of the Corbett Studio in Cincinnati, I am faces with the purchase of yet another editing system. I am not too inclined to spend thousands of dollars again on a SADiE system or a Sonic System (for other reasons as well there), as Samplitude has been a very useful tool. However, I do greatly miss the 4 point cut option, as well as a few other Sonic/SADiE like features. So, I have looked at MANY DAWs out there and have it narrowed down to two: Pyamix and Sequoia.

Besides the obvious benefits/drawbacks of these systems, such as one using dedicated hardware & processing board to operate vs. the CPU; I am more interested in comments from you, the users far as mixing and editing functionality. Though 80% of the work that I do is in the classical relm, I do need to use DAW for digital mixing of various music forms with a hardware controller. We record multitrack projects to the Tascam MX2424. So - getting those files into the DAW apprpriately is imperative. Anyone else using the MX2424 and Pyramix? If so - any comments on getting the MX2424 files into Pyamix.

After getting these types of multitrack recorded files into the DAW, I am looking to use the DAW as a digital mixing console. Generally speaking - could you give me your point of view on Pyramix as a mixing engine in comparison to say a Ramsa DA7 or a Tascam DM-24. How about the abilities of this DAW if I am going to be mulit-channel effects sends and returns to say, a TC Electronic System 6000 while mixing?

Also, how is the use and implimentation of VST and/or DX plugins. Obviously, using native plugins is better, but I am interested in VST abilities. I haven't gotten a clear answer yet that VST is supported. If VST is supported, is anyone using the TC Powercore with Pyramix (and if so, what problems have you had, if any).

Last but not least, though a very generalized question - has anyone else compared Pyramix to Sequoia (or Samplitude 2496 for that matter) - and could you give me your point of view.

Last but not least, have any of you ran into any problems running Pyamix on Win XP Pro?

Thanks much
Alex Kosiorek
Audio Recording & Mastering Engineer
Corbett Studio - www.corbettstudio.com
Located at the studios of WGUC www.wguc.org

Bernhard Guettler
Posts: 885
Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 13:35
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Purchase decision assistance - Pyramix or Sequoia

Postby Bernhard Guettler » Mon Oct 28, 2002 20:20

alexaudio wrote:...I do greatly miss the 4 point cut option, as well as a few other Sonic/SADiE like features. So, I have looked at MANY DAWs out there and have it narrowed down to two: Pyamix and Sequoia.

...any comments on getting the MX2424 files into Pyamix.

...Last but not least, though a very generalized question - has anyone else compared Pyramix to Sequoia (or Samplitude 2496 for that matter) - and could you give me your point of view.

...Last but not least, have any of you ran into any problems running Pyamix on Win XP Pro?

Thanks much


Hi Alexander,

Trying to answer some of your questions:

Regarding Editing Features the upcoming new 4.1 Version of Pyramix (currently in beta) will give you Source-Dest-Editing and 2/3/4 Point Edit within a full multitrack environment. Sequoia is a good editor, but has problems with editing multitrack projects within the source-destination modus.

MX2424 files should easily import into Pyramix. PMX reads many file formats and even can import OpenTL (and other) projects (optional). I once had a SCSI disc connected to my Pyramix-DAW that was recorded on a MX2424 in BWF format, and it just played directly from that disc nicely, audio and TC all there.

Comparing Sequoia and Pyramix is difficult because both are very complex and powerful programs and it all depends what you want them to do. A few differences stick out though IMO.
Pyramix syncs to almost anything beautifully (all kind of TC, Video, Clock). Sequoia is quite limited in that department.
Pyramix got the much better mixer IMO, in both functionality and ergonomics (dedicated monitor and solo buses, surround mixing, multiple mixing stems, great native Plug-Ins, PPM's etc.)
-SACD option
-Variety of prof. I/O solutions
...

some of Sequoia's advantages:
-Clip based effects and automation(even though Pyramix 4.1 will give you some great - optional - rendering plug-ins)
-Comparisonics
-a good marker management (naming takes in Source-Dest-Editing etc.)
-runs on Notebooks without external hardware
...

WinXP: Pyramix 4.1 runs (and is developed) on WinXP.

Regards

Bernhard
5.0.2 B
WinXP SP2

Pyromanic
Posts: 478
Joined: Wed May 22, 2002 18:31
Location: Germany, Lindlar
Contact:

HI

Postby Pyromanic » Mon Oct 28, 2002 21:42

Hi,
when you do mostly classical stuff, you should contact Polyhymnia, they do DSD recording with pyramix and are very competent!
http://www.polyhymnia.nl
best regards

Pyromanic

Silas
Posts: 759
Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 15:36
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Contact:

Postby Silas » Mon Oct 28, 2002 21:46

Hi Alex,

One year ago we were in a similar position. Two points to add to Bernhard's comments - I have not used the mx-2424 with Pyramix but have needed to edit a few projects recorded on Mac based ProTools systems and I am impressed with how Pyramix seamlessly read the file formats and worked off of the mac formatted drive. I am confident that as long as the scsi systems are compatible Pyramix will not get in the way. For our classical work we are recording directly to Pyramix on a laptop. Perhaps this option is worth a look for you. When we were decided which DAW to buy one of the stand-out points for Pyramix was that it has BOTH tremendous DSP with the Mykerinos but also can simultaneously tap into the CPU at the user's discretion. We use direct-x plugins all the time as well as the native ones to great satisfaction. You can also cleanly mix down / export faster than realtime (A LOT faster...) if you choose. I understand that v. 4.1 offers complete project interchange with ProTools and Sonic which will greatly increase the flexibility. We also work mostly with classical projects and the pmx editing features are among the most flexible in v. 4.0 (x-fade editor) and 4.1 seems to expand the features again exponentially. I believe that VST implementation is in v4.1 as well.

Good Luck,

Silas

nam0617
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2002 05:45
Location: Seoul, Korea
Contact:

Sequoia VS Pyramix

Postby nam0617 » Tue Oct 29, 2002 04:50

Dear Alex,

I'd like to add my opinion on seq vs pmx in terms of the cost effectiveness.
Now I have both DAWs, and use them on a daily basis.

First, if your need exists on good mastering DAW, the better answer would be Sequoia. You can open two or three projects which has different sample rate simultaneoulsy using sequoia. This will enable you to upsample the 44.1 or 48 data to enhance the digital outboard such as weiss eq or HEDD to calculate the data more precisely. And the Seq will have the POW-R dither at next version which is supposed to be released in DEC.
And the best thing is if you construct the DAW which has 2 or 4 I/O, it is little more cheaper than PMX.

However, if your need exists on 4-point editing and multitrack mixing, the better answer would be PMX. Compared to the ability of comparisonics, PMX has the dynamic view of wave data. As for me the latter helps me to set the in and out points much more easily. And the X-fade editor seems to be better for "the editing machine" like us.
And the cost is cheaper if you construct the DAW which has more than 24 I/O.

I hope this can help...

regards,
Wook

JVergence
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 19:03

Postby JVergence » Sun Nov 03, 2002 20:59

Alex, we are very close to going "on-line" with Pyramix - email or call me for further discussion.

Jack Vad
San Francisco Symphony