And, that's why I don't do it, frankly.
Thank you kindly,
Christopher-Mark Gilland.
Founder of CLG Productions
Blog:
http://www.clgproductions.org
Podcast:
http://clgproductions.podhoster.com
E-mail:
[email protected]
IMessage/Facetime:
[email protected]
Windows Live Messenger:
[email protected]
Twitter:
@gilland_chris
Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland
Skype:
twinklesfriend2007
Send me a fax from any standard fax machine:
704-697-2069
Google Voice: (Please use sparingly):
980-272-8570
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Reeves" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: Question about monitoring vocals
I never use direct monitoring because I like having the PT effects running
during my recording sessions. The latency isn't really that bad, it's just
part of the process. Plus, if I were to use direct monitoring, I lose out on
any panning I've done in PT to see how other tracks I'm recording are
sitting with everything else. You also miss out on the ability to tell if a
track is record enabled. I actually think that direct monitoring is a
hindrance. I hired an engineer 3 years ago who used direct monitoring and
because of this, wasn't able to pick out some major problems with what was
going into pro tools until it was too late. Let's just say it was a $4000
lesson learned.
Kevin=
