westhemann

Totally agree with you... But if the latency is so small you can't tell the diffrence than who cares? ← obviously you are right...but technically it is still there.

welcome rob.

I disagree wes. I have like the best sound card you can buy And I downloaded the trial version of guitar rig and I diddnt get any latency. Now I diddnt like the sounds of guitar rig but thats another story ← no you have latency....it is just small enough you can't hear it.but that is a technicality...tecnically amps have it as well...hell,even your hearing has latency in it feel free to disagree though if you wish ...waste of time though,i am always right but yeah...extra ram helps.if you don't have enough ram and you set your latency too low(or however you would say it),you can get clicks and pops in your recordings. i don't mind the latency...there are so many ways around it built right into the recording software yes and no...really the sound quality of the final product depends more on how good you are with the software rather than how badass your rig is.the badass rig just makes it easier to iron out the little kinks(like latency) the computer just records what you put in it.i am getting pretty nice results with mine...but the only reason they are not completely proffessional results is that i don't yet know the ins and outs of the software i do need more ram though....mine is upgradeable to a gig

do you guys realize that there is already a showcase on the main site?it is called the gallery all you have to do is send brian the pics of your guitar http://www.projectguitar.com/menu/gallery.htm

Correct... if the processor in your pc is not up to speed (especially as Guitar rig is Processor intensive) you will lag behind and get annoyig echo... Go and throw a LOT of ram into your pc.. that ** Should ** Help a little... Alternativly get a new pc and make sure it has LOTS of ram and procesisng power... expensive but if your going to do recording via your pc... its needed really... Also a nice soundcard will help... the more frequenceies it supports the better Hope it all helps Slain Angel ← I've got 512 MB Ram and 1.7 Ghz processor, more than needed to run the program according to the website, i'll try tweaking it though thanks. ← you will always have latency...my computer has 512m ram and a 2.4 gig processor,and no matter how i set it,it still has latency.(even if it is only a hundredth of a second or so) but i use mine for recording,and there are ways around it. i record all my tracks to the click track and mute the ones previously recorded.this automatically lines them up for playback...but if it is a solo or something like that which i need to hear the other tracks for,i record it with the click track off and the rythm tracks unmuted(the track i am recording is always muted...i monitor it through headphones running directly from the music source)... then after they are recorded i go through and manually line them all up with my mouse. for just simply playback i don't know.i think using a computer as an amp may be problematic in nature

hmmm...i have a vacation coming up

matt....that guitar of yours is gorgeous

yeah...if i remember right i think it was that way before the tutorials section.

everyone hosts there pictures externally so that wouldn't affect PG bandwidth. ← how many times does it have to be written in plain english before the wannabee intellectuals get it? load times for threads get slower when more images are posted...end of story...capishe?i don't care if another site IS hosting the pic...pg thread load times are still affected. anyway...have all the fun you want looking silly...we have been over this same thing enough that if you don't get it,you never will. as always...if you don't like the rules,go play on stereokiller.com or something and by the way...it is "their" ← i would love for you to talk to me like that to my face. ← i have to delete your hissy fit.it looks like you broke some rules after all,now didn't you? but don't worry.i copied it in all it's glory for leisurely perusal in the mod section.i assure you we will all get a big laugh about it ***YAWN***

i think it is a good idea...whether it is implementable at all i don't know.

No I didn't. I didn't said that Lee broke any rule, I was just pointing out the fact that why bitch about a rule that we already said that wasn't debatable!!! Lee if you re-read my post, in any place I pointed that you "BROKE" any rule. I was just pointing the fact, that, eveif they are not to your liking, there are rules, and the mod work was to point it out to noobies before it becomes a problem. (I haven't gone past this post by AlGee, so if somebody already pointed this out, I will edit as soon as I get done) ← Yeah you did. Aw shucks, i was only kiddin' around ← you don't REALLY want a reminder of what a "burn" really is,do you?

sorry...tutorials section

You sure about the In Progress pics? I've seen a few warnings over there about pictures... ← sure they weren't warnings about pic size?

oh...by the way...tutorials and in progress are still unlimited pics,as far as i know,and always have been. and brian(the guy who runs this place for you) is on dial up..

everyone hosts there pictures externally so that wouldn't affect PG bandwidth. ← how many times does it have to be written in plain english before the wannabee intellectuals get it? load times for threads get slower when more images are posted...end of story...capishe?i don't care if another site IS hosting the pic...pg thread load times are still affected. anyway...have all the fun you want looking silly...we have been over this same thing enough that if you don't get it,you never will. as always...if you don't like the rules,go play on stereokiller.com or something and by the way...it is "their"

i 100% agree. ← tough. what you guys are forgetting about are the load times for dial up AFTER the initial opening. guy opens up topic to keep up with the new replies and every stinking time he opens the page he has to wait for all those high res pics to load...and then all he sees most times is one new post that says "lol" or "bump" or "nice" would you not agree with that logic ,greg?as far as lee is concerned,i am afraid his next post will be "well those people on dial up should bow down to those of us on cable,for we are the MASTERS!!!!! you may think that sounds silly,but that is an actual paraphrasing of an answer to this subject previously

http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.ph...366entry11366 hmm..well my search yeilded this...the original relic thread...plus a few more unfortunately all the pics are gone...but you can learn alot from reading it

yeah jonathon's guitar is also what got me into trying to build my own. that seven string of his just kicks ass

marshall dsl

i scrapped a neck on a neck through...because i felt the mahogany i used was not dense enough to be stable. icould have easily just ripped it along the glue lines with a bandsaw...but instead i used a neck i already had built and turned the guitar into a set neck. in my mind it was alot better than living with a neck i was unsure of

entries only please.any questions or comments you can start another thread for if you wish

well that is how you see it.i can understand self absorption,we are all guilty of it ,i just thought we were having a great conversation and then you had to end it with your "snobbish" jab

yes i am.but that is NOT what i was doing with you until you tried to use me as your tool.you claim you were not but it is clear you were. i was TRYING to have an enjoyable conversation with a guy who i thought had some valid points,but then you turned it around. and don't pretend i don'tt like a fair debate.you know i love them and like reading them as well as joining them. but one thing i don't like is an attempt to lead me into contradicting another.it is insulting and you did not even succeed before you tried to throw in your little "i win" but move on.i have

good idea.save your money and use a speedloader instead of a transtrem.it's what i would do. and then you do not need a zero fret...the speedloader nut installs just like a regular locking nut as a matter of fact you cannot use a zero fret with a speedloader nut ← Actually, though I offhandedly mentioned the zero fret, in actual fact if you dig out the threads in which I've discussed it, Speedloader is at the top of my list. I wouldn't use a zero fret with it, but I bet you COULD, even though it's not designed to. ← no you could not.the whole way the system works is through preset string lengths..moving the nut back farther to make room for it would kind of ruin that..though you COULD buy 25.5 strings and use a 24.75 scale..that way you would place the zero fret at the 24.75 spot and be allright...but that would be silly,since you would still need to place the nut at the 25.5 length. don't play dumb.you accused someone of snobbery in the last few pages(maybe perry rather than lovekraft)but your other post was just a simple jab.my pointing it out was not a jab,and now you are again being antagonistic at yet another person only trying to have a polite discussion of the fine points of this topic. you turned it around with this which is undeniably an attack yet again at somebody in this thread.you are not talking to a moron.YOU made the mistake of trying to gain a personal upper hand against people i respect and agree with on the majority of this topic through my conversation,trying to use me as a tool and a pawn.and what i said in no way even goes against what they told you before.a zero fret in a steinberger is a cheaper way of solving the problem of proper nut placement in that particular case. jab at you?no sir.get over yourself and try to join the world of the polite ,no motive,conversation please,now you are just making things up.in no way did i say or even imply this.as a matter of fact i myself consider the two as being a tradeoff...but your "luthier friend" is wrong.a zero fret is not a replacement for a COMPENSATED nut.see..you said here which totally contradicts you earlier assertion that you were NOT claiming a zero fret did the same thing as a compensated nut i am done with you and this conversation.you dissapoint me as i thought you were better than this

not really...it's just that i think he was having design problems with his nut system,and that is the solution he chose,rather than making a REALLY complex nut that would have to slip over the end of the headless neck,hold the double ball end strings, and end up at the exact right spot. think about it a little. you will just jump at the chance to try and make a useless jab at lovekraft,who only means to help you anyway,won't you? for shame