It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 6:39 am


Upgrading to better technology

A discussion forum for anything even marginally Hauptwerk-related.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

engrssc

Member

  • Posts: 7283
  • Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:12 pm
  • Location: Roscoe, IL, USA

Re: Protecting Hauptwerk Version IV

PostFri Sep 10, 2021 9:18 am

Antoni Scott wrote:If I were to dedicate the newer 12 core MacPro to Verion VI as I would like to do, is there any way of obtaining the required ILok dongle without rendering the original dongle unworkable even if it meant purchasing an entire new license ? The ILok dongle could be used for the 12 core and the original dongle for my eight core ?


Unfortunately you can't have both dongle and the iLok licenses active at the same time. In order to get the licenses migrated (transferred) to the iLok system, you need to give up the use of the dongle. It's either not both.

The only other option is to buy new licenses for all your sample sets as well, as a new Hauptwerk license, which no doubt is not what you would want to do.

Rgds,
Ed
Offline
User avatar

mdyde

Moderator

  • Posts: 15446
  • Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 1:19 pm
  • Location: UK

Re: Protecting Hauptwerk Version IV

PostFri Sep 10, 2021 9:44 am

Hello Antoni,

(I see that we both replied at the same time previously.)

Thanks for the continued interest in upgrading.

To confirm and add to Ed's reply (thanks, Ed):

If you bought (or have already bought) an upgrade to v6, you would then be able to install and use v6 on your 2011 (12-core) Mac Pro with St. Anne's and with any other non-dongle-licensed sample sets for which you have existing licences, whilst still being able to use v4 with all of your licensed 2008 Mac Pro for a reasonable period of time.

Once you had v6 installed and working properly, you could then migrate the sample set licences from your v4 dongle to the iLok system (Hauptwerk v5+). After you had done that you would then also be able to install and use the v5+ versions of those sample sets within v6, but you would then no longer be able to use v4 at all (and so you would no longer be able to use your 2008 Mac Pro with Hauptwerk, since your 2008 Mac Pro isn't compatible with Hauptwerk v5+).
Best regards, Martin.
Hauptwerk software designer/developer, Milan Digital Audio.
Offline

Antoni Scott

Member

  • Posts: 982
  • Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:18 pm

Re: Protecting Hauptwerk Version IV

PostFri Sep 10, 2021 2:25 pm

Hello Martin:
I've decided to purchase a new license for Version VI with the appropriate dongle necessary to install on my newer 2011 MacPro, after I upgrade it to the latest OSX system which will be necessary to accommodate the newer version of Hauptwerk, . There was no other way to get around it. That way I can retain the old dongle on my earlier 2007 MacPro which operates all of my sample sets. I think I was made aware that this is the final OSX upgrade that my 2011 MacPro will accommodate before going to an entirely new computer system ( which I want to avoid).
All of my sample sets, with the exception of Milan's Metz, the Organ Art Media Bosch-Schnitger and the Inspired Acoustics Esztergom , are mostly by Sonus Paradisi and are not encrypted. I have the discs for all these sample sets.
That way I can continue to play my Hauptwerk while I figure out how to get help to do the upgrade. I wish it were simpler but it is what it is. Thank you for all your help.
Antoni
Offline
User avatar

mdyde

Moderator

  • Posts: 15446
  • Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 1:19 pm
  • Location: UK

Re: Protecting Hauptwerk Version IV

PostFri Sep 10, 2021 2:35 pm

Thanks, Antoni.

Hope you enjoy v6 once you have it up and running.
Best regards, Martin.
Hauptwerk software designer/developer, Milan Digital Audio.
Offline

mnailor

Member

  • Posts: 1602
  • Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 5:57 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Protecting Hauptwerk Version IV

PostFri Sep 10, 2021 3:10 pm

Doesn't Francois (micdev here) still offer remote consulting?
Offline
User avatar

micdev

Site Admin

  • Posts: 2099
  • Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 9:24 am
  • Location: Canada, Quebec

Re: Protecting Hauptwerk Version IV

PostFri Sep 10, 2021 9:01 pm

Hello MNailor,

Yes I do :) ... PM me if need or contact me thru my website
Best regards
François

Virtually sharing my enthusiasm and experience with you
Worldwide technical assistance, consultation and ready to play system.

http://www.HauptwerkConsultant.com

AND Hauptwerk Support Manager
Offline

Antoni Scott

Member

  • Posts: 982
  • Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:18 pm

Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostMon Nov 08, 2021 7:01 pm

Has anyone done an A-B comparison of the audio improvements of Version V or VI over Version IV ?
Antoni
Offline

mnailor

Member

  • Posts: 1602
  • Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 5:57 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostMon Nov 08, 2021 7:35 pm

Unfortunately, since the license conversion is strictly one way (can't go back), only someone who owns two identical computers and two full licenses could even do such testing. It's too bad. I can report that I hear an audible difference, but I can't prove it to anyone.

However, if you're on HW 6, you can quickly switch an organ between higher definition pitch shifting and standard pitch shifting without a restart to see if you can hear the difference that one feature makes on your favorite organs.
Offline

seh52

Member

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 10:16 am
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA 90019

Re: Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostTue Nov 09, 2021 11:16 am

Hearing is related to so many variables.

I use HW 4.2.1 and am surprised by how much better each of my organs sounds each time I play them! :wink:
Last edited by seh52 on Tue Nov 09, 2021 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

jkinkennon

Member

  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 9:43 am
  • Location: Vancouver, WA

Re: Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostTue Nov 09, 2021 3:08 pm

seh52 wrote:I use HW 4.2.1 and am surprised by how much better each of my organs sounds than it did the last time I played it! :wink:


This is so true. I don't think anyone is going to try to make a recording to demonstrate the superiority of HW VI. Reducing the sound to two channels at 48k for a recording is going to lose a lot of the potential audio benefits that are best heard with multiple speakers at a 96k sample rate.

HW VI sounds better to me, but as mentioned, Hauptwerk just sounds better and better so buy for the features you need or consider a short subscription and listen for yourself. The convenience of no longer needing Reaper or expensive reverb solutions is worth the upgrade in my case.
Offline
User avatar

mdyde

Moderator

  • Posts: 15446
  • Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 1:19 pm
  • Location: UK

Re: Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostTue Nov 09, 2021 3:43 pm

To add to others' replies, if you wanted to make Hauptwerk v6 sound as close as possible to v4-quality for comparison purposes, then in v6 you would need to select all three of the following:

1. 48 kHz for 'General settings | Audio device ... | Sample rate (for audio engine and audio output)'.

2. 'Standard' for 'Organ settings | Organ preferences | Audio engine | Real-time audio pitch-shifting quality'.

3. Tick 'Organ settings | Organ preferences | Audio engine | Reduce relay/MIDI/tremulant/model response/accuracy/quality for max polyphony'.

(The result would still be slightly higher audio quality than v4, but it would be close to v4-quality.)

To hear v6 sounding its best you would set those three to '96 kHz', 'Higher definition', and un-ticked, respectively.
Best regards, Martin.
Hauptwerk software designer/developer, Milan Digital Audio.
Offline

Antoni Scott

Member

  • Posts: 982
  • Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:18 pm

Re: Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostSat Nov 13, 2021 9:42 am

I haven't personally heard any audio improvements with each upgrade. The only real benefit I noticed with my latest upgrade to Version 4.2 was better untilization of RAM and the "auto-detect" feature which simplified things immensly but no perceptible improvement in audio quality.
The audio differences seems to be more with the sample set rather than the Hauptwerk software. Microphone placement during sampling seems to offer the perception of better audio. In the beginning when sample sets were recorded with one micophone, the choice of the best position was always a compromise as to where to place the microphone. Close up microphone placement gave a more realistic pipe sound at the expense of the impression of being in a large acoustic space, which is so desirable. Now we have Front /Rear, Front, Middle, Rear, Front Left, Front Right, Rear left, Rear Right, Direct, Diffuse, etc. plus many more. It seems that each sample set has something unique to offer based on how the sample set producer created their sample.

My all time favorite "big organ" sound is the Inspired Acoustics Esztergom. Magnificent sound when played slowly with its huge acustics but the up front and close sound is not there. There is no Front/Rear mixing.

I'm probably going down the wrong rabbit hole. Since I use headphones ( left and right channels) and a subwoofer, perhaps all the myriad of options and channel choices is not taking advantage of what new upgrades can offer.

When I asked for an A-B comparison of Version IV to V or VI, I didn't realize that wasn't possible with Hauptwerk since upgrading to V or VI destroys Version IV ( i'e once you go forward you can't go back).

Antoni
Offline

mnailor

Member

  • Posts: 1602
  • Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 5:57 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostSat Nov 13, 2021 9:51 am

You could actually try out HW 6 on a separate computer using a new one month subscription license without surrendering your HW 4 license.

Since the major audio engine improvements were done *after* HW 4.2, you shouldn't expect to have heard big audio improvements -- I think the 4.x versions were mostly user convenience upgrades. The audible difference going to HW 6 was very noticeable to me, especially on large organs in a reverberent space.
Offline

Antoni Scott

Member

  • Posts: 982
  • Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:18 pm

Re: Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostSat Nov 13, 2021 10:46 am

Mnailor said: The audible difference going to HW 6 was very noticeable to me, especially on large organs in a reverberent space.

Thank you Mnailor. This is a very constructive response.
Antoni
Offline

mnailor

Member

  • Posts: 1602
  • Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 5:57 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Audio comparison between Version IV and V/VI

PostSat Nov 13, 2021 11:02 am

I should add, even though it's not strictly about playback quality on HW 6, I've found that the built-in convolution reverb and rank perspective routing improved my experience a lot for organs that, to me, were recorded too close, are in too-dry rooms, or only have stereo samples when my audio system is laid out for surround.

I use HW 6 to truncate inadequate reverb tails and add reverb -- I especially like the Caen IR samples from SP -- and also to add a surround perspective to wet organs like Salisbury and Metz by duplicating the front channels, truncating releases, and routing to rear speakers with some of the Caen rear-facing mic IR samples.**

That last experiment on Salisbury and Metz didn't work well because the reverbs conflict unless I truncate the original all the way. The other experiments did work.
PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests