|
I phrased it wrong, I should have said "you can't get full use of 4GB without a 64-bit OS". A 32-bit OS can address exactly 4*1024^3 bytes of RAM--but that includes the video RAM and other hardware address spaces. If you have 4GB and a 512MB graphics card, at least 512MB of your physical RAM will never be used (not sure what you mean by "hardware interrupts/overhead", that is "regular use"). In reality you'll have access to between 2.5GB and 3.5GB. SH/SC can probably explain it better than me 
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2009 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 06:50 |
|
|
struan87 posted:A 32-bit OS can address exactly 4*1024^3 bytes of RAM--but that includes the video RAM and other hardware address spaces. If you have 4GB and a 512MB graphics card, at least 512MB of your physical RAM will never be used (not sure what you mean by "hardware interrupts/overhead", that is "regular use"). In reality you'll have access to between 2.5GB and 3.5GB. Address space is needed for a lot more than RAM, as mentioned a certain amount is absorbed for interrupts, for PCI bus addressing, for video RAM, for various things including system RAM which is usually the biggest drain by far. If you have a 32-bit OS, the amount of RAM which will be addressable depends on how much address space is left over after some is eaten up for other stuff depending on your hardware configuration. Rivensbitch is losing roughly .5GB of address space to this "other stuff" and so he can "see" about 3.5GB of RAM and utilize it effectively. Typical system configurations have in fact been known to eat up from 500-1500MB for this other stuff so the left over figure for RAM of 2.5-3.5GB is in fact typical. One way to maximize this is to avoid video cards with lots of video RAM as they really chew through your available address space. Bottom line if you think you're gonna do some hairy poo poo and you might want more than 2 or 3 GB of RAM on a regular basis, use a 64-bit OS and just make sure you get interface hardware which has appropriate drivers. Personally I don't reccomend investing in hardware from a company too sluggish to have 64-bit drivers yet in this day and age because their software dev is obviously poorly managed and they will probably fall way behind on other future PC hardware trends as well. Col.Kiwi fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Feb 18, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2009 23:48
|
|
|
The real issue with 32-bit OS (e.g. XP) is the per-process memory limit of ~1.7gb which these days is quite easy to exceed if you're using large sample libraries. Even using LAA (large address aware) apps and the /3gb swtich (which ups the per process limit to ~2.5gb) is not a solution as apparently some 32-bit plug-ins or host software will still crap out once you cross the 1.7gb limit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2009 02:24
|
|
|
Chipyy posted:Should be inserts? correct, I think I passed out right as I typed that and landed on the submit button
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2009 03:57
|
|
|
never mind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2009 20:02
|
|
|
Col.Kiwi posted:Bottom line if you think you're gonna do some hairy poo poo and you might want more than 2 or 3 GB of RAM on a regular basis, use a 64-bit OS and just make sure you get interface hardware which has appropriate drivers. So sadly even in this day and age, distributing your samplers across multiple PCs is still the best solution: VST system link, fx teleport, or plain old MIDI.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2009 21:36
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the increase in per-process virtual address space you get in Win64 applies to 32-bit processes as well. But I've been wrong before. Do you have more info on that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2009 00:31
|
|
|
You're right, I think. But until someone tests it (and I haven't found verification anywhere) I think at some point we're still application-bound for 32-bit apps e.g. they'll still start crashing at the 1.7gb limit. I do not have confirmation on this, though, just extensive googling last week when I was researching whether it would be worth it for me to move to Vista64. edit: Here's a forum post I found about it: http://www.fx-max.com/bb/viewtopic.php?p=6485 So, it seems whether or not you will get the benefits from 64-bit are a bit of a crapshoot but perhaps better than I initially stated. e.g the LAA stuff on Vista64 is better than I thought even though perhaps imperfect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2009 00:54
|
|
|
I've seen way to many threads on manufacturers forums lamenting the lack of 64 bit support to really jump on the bandwagon. I'm sure that the new OS X snow leopard will make a big dent in manufacturer support for 64bit, it's coming in 8-10 months I think so I'd say in 2 years you'll probably have super awesome 64bit platforms that work amazing all around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2009 01:09
|
|
|
I'm pretty set on a vista 32bit OS because of pro-tools. That is what our recording engineer uses and I'd like the compatibility. My main concern is the AMD Turion X2 Ultra Dual-Core Mobile ZM-86 2.4GHz Processor. It's the only option from the company that I would like to give my business to. I'd prefer to find out if this processor works with pro-tools LE before I but the laptop, but I guess I can always switch it out for an intel later if need be...
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2009 21:42
|
|
|
JayBeeTee posted:but I guess I can always switch it out for an intel later if need be... Why would Pro Tools work with Intel but not AMD? Applications don't typically care which proc you use unless the depend on some specific feature. I doubt Pro Tools does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2009 22:01
|
|
|
mr_package posted:You're right, I think. But until someone tests it (and I haven't found verification anywhere) I think at some point we're still application-bound for 32-bit apps e.g. they'll still start crashing at the 1.7gb limit.  . I've ranted on this before here so I won't go on and on but I'll just say this: if it takes more than a very minimal amount of effort to make your software which runs on 32-bit systems portable to 64-bit systems, you have failed catastrophically in the design or implementation of your software.FWIW I did test today by loading up lots of bullshit and Ableton Live 7.0.3 can handle allocating >2GB of memory in Win64. Specifically I tested in Windows 7 b6801 (yeah I know I'm behind) but I'm sure this would hold true for Win64 in general. RivensBitch is probably right, the slower/stupider audio companies are slowly starting to clean up their mess and snow leopard should encourage them further so it probably won't be that long. Windows 7 RTM is also expected around August or September, at which point development on the successor to Windows 7 is likely to move immediately into full swing - putting more pressure on vendors. The successor to Windows 7 is unlikely to even be available in a retail 32-bit version. To the other guy, no you cannot switch out the CPU in a notebook later (not usually.) No, ProTools is not aware of or interested in what kind of CPU you have. Col.Kiwi fucked around with this message at 00:41 on Feb 21, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2009 00:39
|
|
|
struan87 posted:Why would Pro Tools work with Intel but not AMD? Applications don't typically care which proc you use unless the depend on some specific feature. I doubt Pro Tools does. If you peruse the DUC you might find a thread discussing alternative processors, who knows.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2009 04:21
|
|
|
I would like to know how I could improve or at very least get the best out of my "set-up" that I currently use. My microphone is a Sennhieser e609 with an XLR mic cable hooked up into a mic cable to USB converter. My amp that is being mic'd is a Line 6 Spider II. I use Adobe Audition 3.0 to record. I know that isn't an incredible amount of information but I'd like to see if there are any suggestions as to how I can mic up my amp for the best sound. When i record I normally get kind of a distance effect as if the mic was recording from a distance. I also don't seem to be able to get a full range of tones so bass and treble come through very strong but some of the mids don't come through as well. I'm not looking for studio quality sound here, just some suggestions as to how I could get the most out of my set-up or maybe some slight improvements I could use. I don't have a bottomless wallet so hopefully any improvements will be cheap.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2009 12:40
|
|
|
Col.Kiwi posted:Audio companies are getting away with releasing some exceptionally lovely software because a lot of music people aren't computer-inclined and don't realize how badly they're getting hosed For the record, when troubleshooting my problems with an mx002r and my toshiba AMD laptop, flock-o-werewolves mentioned that protools does have known compatability issues with SOME AMD processors/chipsets As for the software development issues, unfortunately it seems like a LOT of companies developing these products have very small software teams. I spoke with someone who works at a popular synthesizer company, and he hinted at but didn't outright say that there was only ONE guy who knew how a particular plugin of theirs had been coded, and that they wouldn't be able to fix the plugin's knows issues until he came back from a sabbatical. It seemed that there were only a handful of other people even coding for the company. I also know for a fact that many of these companies outsource their drivers and sometimes entire pieces of a product, such as firewire or USB audio communication with drivers. There's a lot of corner cutting because it's a small industry and price is often the most important feature to the end user.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2009 20:37
|
|
|
RivensBitch posted:There's a lot of corner cutting because it's a small industry and price is often the most important feature to the end user. I hadn't heard that about protools, I was just speaking generally that software rarely requires certain kinds of processors for any "legit" reason (like needing a certain feature etc.) If there have been issues with certain processors that suggests there's probably a bug in protools which crops up only with a certain generation of a certain CPU architecture or something along those lines. This falls right into place with the discussed precedent for poor/sloppy development in this industry - the standard response in software dev to a bug which breaks things only in specific hardware configurations would be to write a patch fixing the bug. Sounds like the response from the protools team was to shrug and take the hardware affected by their bug off of the compatibility list. Ever wonder why we all scramble to specifically get TI-chipset firewire cards to make audio devices work correctly, yet people are using different firewire cards in high-performance and high-throughput situations for non-audio equipment and having no problems? Allow me to hint that it's not because there's something magical about TI chipsets that makes them "better."
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2009 21:27
|
|
|
Is sidechaining a compressor when mixing useful for anything specifically? I know about the house music WHOOMPH WOOMPH WHOOMPH thing but I'm thinking more practical than that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2009 04:18
|
|
|
Hey guys, I'm a total rook when it comes to these kinds of things and I'm trying to set up a Roland V-Drums TD-6V electronic drum kit in Logic. I have the set plugged into an M-Box Fast Track Pro (plugged into the MIDI in) and I created a midi track in Logic. I can play on the set and notes will start popping up in the Piano Roll but I can't get any playback. It's like it's recording notes but without the sound. Anybody got any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2009 05:40
|
|
|
Druck posted:It's like it's recording notes but without the sound. Anybody got any ideas? That's exactly what MIDI is and is supposed to do - MIDI is not audio. Perhaps you need to connect another MIDI cable from the interface's MIDI out to the TD MIDI in; or connect the TD's audio output to your interface's audio inputs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2009 13:32
|
|
|
I'm trying to do some drum n bass since it's pretty popular here and i know a few of the local DJs who'd probably play it if i could make something that would fit in with their sets i've been able to get a good sound out of the drums (using reason 4, handling the drumming in redrum) but I'm not having much luck getting a good bass sound. does anyone have any tips? I was trying to use a couple analog oscillators in thor for an eigthies bass synth sound but even running it through scream it's just not sounding right, would it be better if i actually played it on a bass and then ran that through some filters or are there some synth settings I could try?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2009 15:33
|
|
|
infiniteseal posted:I'm trying to do some drum n bass since it's pretty popular here and i know a few of the local DJs who'd probably play it if i could make something that would fit in with their sets I've never used thor before but with bass you gotta love the square wave. For dnb i guess using a filter envelope on a low pass filter to set the attack so that you can get the roundish WOOOM sound might be helpful. Compression and a tad of extra gain can help a bass a lot in terms of giving it a good dominant sound. I like to plug my Roland SH-201 into my presonus tubepre to get a nice fat bass.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2009 17:21
|
|
|
infiniteseal posted:I'm trying to do some drum n bass Throw this through Google translator or something. "Beispiel" means example and has an mp3. In short, you start out with regular waveforms, add 3 Scream distortions, sample the result and then use NN-XT's own filter to make things wobble.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2009 21:08
|
|
|
Col.Kiwi posted:Ever wonder why we all scramble to specifically get TI-chipset firewire cards to make audio devices work correctly, yet people are using different firewire cards in high-performance and high-throughput situations for non-audio equipment and having no problems? Allow me to hint that it's not because there's something magical about TI chipsets that makes them "better."  v It's not that TI chipsets are always better, it's that so far they're the ones who haven't cut that particular corner yet (assuming myself and the article weren't full of poo poo).One of the big problems though, is support. When you sell someone a $20,000+ hardware and software DAW solution, like Pro Tools does, you have an obligation to make sure that product is bullet-proof and your users will be calling you if it's not. Therefore, Digidesign chooses to limit the hardware they will support so that they can support it better, the same way Apple does by manufacturing all of their own products. I personally don't have a problem with this, and prefer they do this and test it very well on that hardware rather than release patches every week. If they released bug-ridden software and patches the way the gaming industry or the OS industry does, no one who relied on their DAW for their living would ever update their software unless absolutely necessary (and many don't as it is now anyway). This doesn't absolve slow development of stable drivers for platforms that came out years ago or anything. Speaking specifically to the idea that DAWs and audio hardware manufacturers should be able to support all 3rd party hardware configurations, I think that's really unrealistic. You may be right that LE development suffers because Digidesign can basically say "well, we still have one of the most stable platforms in the budget market." But can you come up with an application as specialized as audio, where any unexpected latency can be catastrophic, and where there are lots of software solutions that people have no driver problems with, running on the same rigs they use for gaming/web browsing/email? We're not just talking about running a webserver or maintaining a database stably. There is no open-source program that is anywhere near competitive with how powerful the most popular DAWs are. That's not to say everyone needs all that power, just pointing out how I see it differing from most other software applications.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2009 22:27
|
|
|
Yoozer posted:http://producer-network.de/wissen/tutorials-und-howtos/optical-noisia-calyx-baesse-so-gehts holy poo poo this is intense so putting together what you & ben and stew said, if i want to use thor, i put together an analog osc w/ square soundwave w/ an envelope filter to get the roundish sound then run it through add 3 scream distortions? i was using thor 2/ w analog osc both on sawtooth waves and 1 scream so no woner it was so off. can i get an example of some kind of envelope filter settings to use? those ones i don't understand so much... i take it i want a slow rate w/ a moderate envelope?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 00:34
|
|
|
Three Red Lights posted:Is sidechaining a compressor when mixing useful for anything specifically? I know about the house music WHOOMPH WOOMPH WHOOMPH thing but I'm thinking more practical than that. It's very good for many things. The simplest application is giving a certain instrument priority over others. Let's say for instance you have a heavy distorted guitar that is sitting in the same space as the lead vocal. You could try to EQ it, but another trick would be to put a compressor on the guitar, and sidechain the vocal to the compressor's trigger input. Set a quick release and a medium/fast attack, and set the threshold and ratio so that you get about 2-3db of reduction, and now your vocal will pop out. It can be subtle or extreme, but sometimes using an EQ on the guitar in that situation is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You're sacrificing what could be a good tonal area throughout the track, when it's only those sections that really need tweaking. There's a plugin from TC electronic called dynamic EQ, which allows you to do the exact same thing, but it applies EQ instead of compression.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 04:21
|
|
|
infiniteseal posted:holy poo poo this is intense quote:so putting together what you & ben and stew said, if i want to use thor, i put together an analog osc w/ square soundwave w/ an envelope filter to get the roundish sound then run it through add 3 scream distortions? Then you just hold the middle C for a while, sample that to .wav, cut off the start and end, and load that up. I'll make you an example with screenshots when I get home again; I only have the trial version of Reason since I only use it to explain concepts to people .
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 07:37
|
|
|
Thanks, I really appreciate it. I taught myself ProTools last year and I've been slowly stumbling through Reason, mostly using samples and presets, but now thanks to your other thread and Reason's "Thor De-mystified" series I'm trying to figure out how to create patches from scratch but I'm having such a time trying to get my head around this
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 10:27
|
|
|
I saw a couple other questions about MIDI and drum sounds, so now it's my turn! I'm pretty far on this:struan87 posted:I have a crazy idea in my head of writing a driver that will capture the USB output of my ion rock band drum kit and use it to trigger drum samples. It's a longshot, but it's a lot cheaper than a DM5. I took Yoozer's suggestion and made it write MIDI instead of being a VST, but I don't really know enough about MIDI to make it work the way I want. Right now I have it writing simple data packets to the default MIDI device (the standard "Microsoft GS Wavetable Device" that comes with Windows) whenever a drum is hit. This works okay, except the samples play about 100-250 ms after I send the packet. I suspect this is due to latency in that emulated device, and I should probably switch to another device anyway because that one sounds terrible. So that's where I need help--I don't know how to make it show up as a proper device. When you record MIDI in a DAW, where does it come from? Obviously I can't plug this device into a MIDI port, so how do I fake that? There's no "write to the armed track in your DAW" device in MIDI mapper. Once I have the notes in the track, how do I make them play? Is the MIDI track to wave audio conversion done by a VST or some other sort of plugin? This is similar to Druck's question, except I don't have an external sound module. You'll have to forgive me if these are stupid questions, the last time I dealt with MIDI was in the days of the AWE32.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 17:06
|
|
|
RivensBitch posted:It's very good for many things. The simplest application is giving a certain instrument priority over others. Let's say for instance you have a heavy distorted guitar that is sitting in the same space as the lead vocal. You could try to EQ it, but another trick would be to put a compressor on the guitar, and sidechain the vocal to the compressor's trigger input. Set a quick release and a medium/fast attack, and set the threshold and ratio so that you get about 2-3db of reduction, and now your vocal will pop out. It can be subtle or extreme, but sometimes using an EQ on the guitar in that situation is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You're sacrificing what could be a good tonal area throughout the track, when it's only those sections that really need tweaking. There's a plugin from TC electronic called dynamic EQ, which allows you to do the exact same thing, but it applies EQ instead of compression. Yeah I was thinking that would be obvious but everytime I try to sidechain or automate something when making guitar based music it always sounds awful and fake. Guess I need to work on it some more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 18:06
|
|
|
Try this: It skips the sampling portion but should still sound good enough for most purposes. infiniteseal posted:but I'm having such a time trying to get my head around this The original drum and bass bass was the TR-808 kickdrum, modified in such a way that it'd sound for a full 10 seconds or so, and then sampled. There was also the Aphrodite bassline - the original 'wobble' of which lots of bass sounds came, which was itself a variation on the "Reese" bass, which was made by turning up the chorus rate of a Roland Alpha Juno 2 and turning down the cutoff. Samples and the Alpha Juno were the poor man's synths - after all, sampling only required a single big purchase (that of a sampler) and the Alpha Juno is cheap because there's no sliders on it. Its quirks (PWM on multiple waveforms and chorus rate adjustment) allow it to sound like it's in unison - even with a single oscillator, because of the warbling effect PWM + chorus have. The logical progression would be to add distortion and to make the bass sounds rougher, more industrial and atonal; and eventually the original ordeal of using the above sources was dropped for the just as effective technique of stacking a bunch of oscillators using unison and throwing the result of that through the filter. Since the German on the page I linked you to is casual, the translator may have trouble with some parts, so here goes: 1) Okay, we'll start with the V-station. I load it up on a track and set Oscillator 1 to saw with a low pitch (ed.: probably -12 or -24 semitones, it's all relative. Also, the demo sounds like a square wave, so that may be an error). 2) I'll add a second oscillator and pitch it down just a bit. (ed. this is actually a saw and if the first is set to -12 this one's -2) 3) And a third oscillator (ed. probably set to +4 semitones, and this is again, a saw wave). 4) In the channel view I load up a distortion plugin. Basically, you can pick anything you want; I use Logic's own distortion plugin and I play a little bit. 5) On top of that I put Antares Tube to give it a little more power. You shouldn't actually do this but I don't give a rat's rear end about it. 6) Maybe add a little phaser (ed. this is to add more motion to the sound) 7) And perhaps again another Tube plugin because I like it. 8) Since the sound is a bit grating this way I use the EQ to apply a little notch. 9) I add a reverb with a short decay time so it doesn't sound so dry. (ed. this basically muddies up the sound again; 10) I render this poo poo to wave and load it up in a sampler. I personally like Kontakt, it's the best! (ed. ShortCircuit does the job just as well and has a lot more interesting filter models, but that's pretty much what he's saying at the bottom) 11) I play a melody so I can get a good idea of how the sound works on several pitches - to get a bit of the feeling. 12) In Kontakt, I add a lowpass filter and put modulation on the cutoff frequency. Keep in mind that the LFO should be synchronized so it follows the beat properly. (ed. any filter will do - 12 db will sound leaner, 24 db will sound more muffled). 13) I throw a chorus plugin on Kontakt. Our Reece bass enjoys this. 14) I load up the sample again and detune it from the other one. 15) Again, on this second sample there's going to be an LFO, too, so there's a bit more motion in the ocean. 16) I put an EQ on the track and cut off everything below 30 Hz to avoid rumbling. 17) I use the EQ to cut away a notch around 500 Hz. It makes it sound articial, which is what we want. 18) I add an Antares Tube plugin, and I still like the result. 19) A reverb to wet your panties 20) This is too stereo so I route it to mono (ed. stereo would make the bass lose focus and power which is not what you want) 21) I put a compressor on the channel. 22) OK! I render this to a wave file again and save it. 23) A new round, a new sampler. I load up the wavefile in another instance of Kontakt and modulate the volume to add a little groove. 24) Again, I add a lowpass filter that gets modulated. 25) I load up this sample again (ed. so now he's got 3 oscillators, bounced to wave, times two is 6 oscillators, bounced to wave, times two again is 12 oscillators). 26) To this sample, I add a bandpass filter. 27) The channel EQ gets a cut around 30 Hz again. 28) And another compressor. 29) And another EQ on top of that. 30) I add a second EQ to lift up the highs a bit so it gets more presence. 31) OK I don't like what the second saw in the sampler's doing so I am going to adjust its modulation. 32) I play another bassline 33) OK, good! Let's add a little delay for width. 34) And a drum sample from jux.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 21:05
|
|
|
Thanks a lot! I think it definitely sounds far better than what I was messing aroud with. I just wish I understood this better, I've read your post a dozen times and every time my brain just starts falling apart. Changing Thor gave me this 40 second snippet: http://www.jasonboyce.com/music/DrumNBass.mp3 would you say that I'd need an envelope filter to get a bit more of that wobble going or is it because the notes I'm using are too short? On second thought maybe this was the point of sampling it, I could sample the sounds and then throw them in their own track in protools as an audio file where eI could run more particular EQs on them since I can't too specific on my frequencies in thor/scream alone with Reason's MClass equalizer. wish i was still smoking, then i'd probably have more patience for this bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Feb 23, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 22:30
|
|
|
Part of what's in the 40-steps tutorial is that the sound is treated with several LFOs at the same time. In the case of the V-station you can see here that it really doesn't have much in the way of LFOs for the filter. http://messe.harmony-central.com/Musikmesse04/Content/Novation/PR/V-Station-PowerCore-lg.jpg Thor is in a better position with 2 LFOs and a loopable envelope, but the waveforms have to be combined to be complex. I think that part of the sampling/resampling is to make up for the lack of complexity; if you chop the sample at a point that the LFO's not neatly finished and back to zero, you get a more complex LFO waveform, so to say. To show the benefit of this:  which sounds like this: http://www.theheartcore.com/megathread/subfocus.mp3 In this case, the stuttering, chopped-up LFO waveform you see there adds groove and drive to the bass sound. In this case it's perhaps a little overdone. Your bass sound might benefit from a little more top end, though; and it's perfectly viable to put the sample into a sampler instead of letting it reside in Reason. Not only can you then double the bass sound again if you want to, it might even cost less power to process; sample playback is not as processor-intensive as calculating the waveform.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 23:42
|
|
|
OK I think I see what you're saying - getting the bass notes bounced and then sampling them would allow the sampler to chop up where the sound waves are opening and the wobble sound comes from maybe starting the sound somewhere in the middle of its wave instead of from 0? normally chopping up a soundwave and then starting it somewhere else in its cycle would just wind up giving me a click sound but I think I can visualise that sampling it that way and forcing the wave to open up much more quickly than it would when it's being processed in Thor would hit a little bit harder Am I missing too much top end or is it just a bit? Your sample has a lot more top end and a bit less bass, though I guess I just tend to push the low end too hard in general. It's a habit I've slowly been trying to break myself of, as it'll free up a lot more room in the mids and highs in general but I just keep thinking bass first.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2009 23:51
|
|
|
Yes. The clicks are removed by the distortion and the filtering afterwards, which is why the process is repeated.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2009 07:34
|
|
|
OK so I think I'm starting to get the gist of it. So I made a C1 w/ the Thor settings, then loaded it up into NNXT and mucked around with it. This was my first time messing with sampling, too, so I really have very little idea of what I'm doing. I managed to get it to replay it, then ran it through some EQs and compression and reverb, though I think I've sucked a lot of the life out of it. This is the same 40 seconds as a sample through NNXT with an EQ, compression, another EQ and Reverb. I've been messing around with the amp and velocity envelopes to try to get more wobble but I'm not sure if I'm doing it right. http://www.jasonboyce.com/music/DrumNBass_2.mp3 I'm gessing I set the LPF too low so I'm not getting any mids or highs though the low end seems to be alright. Maybe I can gently caress around with some more in Thor for more mids and then re-sample that. Edit: I went ahead and doubled the MIDI track and routed the second one back to the original Thor and started working on that, so I guess doubling the number of oscillators and adding a lot more midrange and presence to it. If that's sounding better, then I could sample the new Thor mix and run that sidebyside with the current NNXT. bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Feb 24, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2009 14:22
|
|
|
Hm, this still sounds a bit muffled. What are you using as monitor speakers?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2009 19:34
|
|
|
All I've got is a cheap pair of speakers and a pair of Sennheiser HD202 headphones. Honestly I think it's just me being poo poo at producing, when I'm listening to the same beat over and over it sounds alright but when I A/B it against some good music I can start to hear where it's deficient, I just have no idea how to fix it. ok so this one is your settings with a couple of tweaks: http://www.jasonboyce.com/music/DrumNBass_3.mp3 and this one is pretty much exactly what you put up http://www.jasonboyce.com/music/DrumNBass_4.mp3 Overall I think I just don't "get" it. It seems like all the oscillators I set up in Thor either give me a lot of mids with no bass or muffled bass with no mids or highs. bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Feb 24, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2009 20:30
|
|
|
I have an L-shaped closet that I am planning on using for a recording booth (small guitar amp, 8 - 10"). What materials/techniques (for reasonably cheap, maybe $100 or less) can I use to quiet it down and/or enhance acoustics? Also, where in an L-shaped closet would be generally good places for amp and microphone placement?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2009 02:33
|
|
|
SnackinStarfish posted:I have an L-shaped closet that I am planning on using for a recording booth (small guitar amp, 8 - 10"). What materials/techniques (for reasonably cheap, maybe $100 or less) can I use to quiet it down and/or enhance acoustics?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2009 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 06:50 |
|
|
At last, 3 forums later, I have arrived! qball was nice enough to direct me here rather than flaming me to a crisp over in the A/V Arena, and having read through pages upon pages of these threads, I am officially way out of my depth. I am finally building a new computer, which is familiar territory... I built mine 5 years ago and it's starting to show it's age. I have mixed music and recorded vocals on my computer casually for years, and have recently started learning guitar. I am wanting to improve my recording hardware (I use an 8 year old Hercules Gametheater xp7.1, which I love), but I do not know anything about what I SHOULD or COULD be using to record better quality through my (soon to be constructed) PC. I have learned alot lurking through the stickied threads in here and in the A/V arena, but I'm actually even more aware of my ignorance now than I was when I started. I use fruityloops, nTrack studio, goldwave, and recently have started trying to get amplitube running w/out horrendous static issues, but my gametheater xp is no longer maintained with new drivers, and is quirky at best with XP, and I think it is time to upgrade! I use Logitech z680 5.1 speakers (old but absolutely awesome speakers, never had a complaint!), and plan on building my new PC with an intel core 2 quad, if it makes much difference. (Like rivensbitch, I have 4gigs of RAM that I've been looking to pair w/a 64bit OS for a while now) I'm not trying to build an HTPC or a professional recording studio; in fact, I do a little bit of everything, from programming to photo editing to gaming to work; I just also want to record and mix, and I simply am not knowledgable enough about good PC (windows, intel) sound hardware these days. I would say that I would prefer a pci or pci express card w/a breakout box, over USB or Firewire unless this is not the optimal solution for the cost. I haven't purchased a MoBo yet, so I can tailor firewire ports etc to my needs. I would like to keep my sound card under $250, and would hopefully be playing electric guitar directly into something like amplitube in addition to mixing in FL and singing. What would you recording/studio experts suggest as a good sound card or audio interface or recording set up (additional hardware or whatever) for vocals/guitar(accoustic and electric)/mixing through my PC? I am not too worried about price, though of course it is a consideration. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2009 02:12
|
|