|
Recorded some guitar and vocals for shits and giggles. Anybody care to critique mix/levels/how I can improve it? (Aside from the takes. These are the best I got before the woman had to go to bed  ) Used an MXL v67g for vocals and sennheiser MK4 for guitar, about 8 inches from the fretboard pointed toward ~15 fret from a bit above, pointing downward (if that makes any sense.) I added a bit of reverb to both with epicverb. I completely overdid it, relistened, and turned that way the gently caress down. I think it's a more reasonable reverb now. Just wanna know if there's anything glaringly wrong with it (I mean, it doesn't SOUND wrong to me, but I could be dumb in the head. Who knows.) Anyway, it's a simple song. Just guitar and vocals. But I figure I should tackle something simple as this before trying to record something maybe a bit more complicated? Anyway, input is appreciated! Thanks. E: Listening again and again (again.) the guitar sounds dull, muffled, flat. Grah. I mean, the guitar has some fairly old strings and the girl wasn't using a pick, but still, it didn't sound this dead live. Rotten Cookies fucked around with this message at 04:51 on Jun 11, 2012 |
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 04:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 03:47 |
|
|
My bandmembers moved into their new loft. It's big. Not like massive but have currently a 20'x20'x20' room that is going to be soundproofed with GreenGlue, but I'm worried about treating the inside of the room. Three of the walls are drywall, one is brick and mortar, and the ceiling is wood. Just whistling in the room right now (not quite finished) is extremely resonant. In the mean time my band has been practicing at the end of the big hall this room is partitioned from. My rough estimates is that the hall is 40x80x20 feet, with that 20' partition. It sounds fuckin' awesome when we play and it's amazing to listen to it. I really love the idea of tracking the record at the space, either in the band room or in the big hall and then sending the tracks to be mixed professionally. The biggest thing I'd worry about is that the tracks sound completely different than it did in the loft while tracking, or that there would be a SNAFU with the session when it comes time to mix. I realized when searching for answers to this problem, this is quite a nice problem to have from my perspective.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 07:35
|
|
|
Rotten Cookies posted:Recorded some guitar and vocals for shits and giggles. Anybody care to critique mix/levels/how I can improve it? (Aside from the takes. These are the best I got before the woman had to go to bed I think all in all it sounds pretty good at a basic level, the tracks are clear sounding to me. I don't think the guitar sounds bad at all, I think it's a little quiet relative to the vocals, but the real issue is that I think the vocals have this lower frequency boom that takes up a lot of space, making the whole thing sound a little claustrophobic. I'd either high-pass the vocals to give the guitar some room to breathe or find that frequency and notch it out and the guitar problem might solve itself. himajinga fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Jun 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 19:57
|
|
|
Rotten Cookies posted:Recorded some guitar and vocals for shits and giggles. Anybody care to critique mix/levels/how I can improve it? (Aside from the takes. These are the best I got before the woman had to go to bed I'm sure there are people here who can give better and more in depth advice than me, but to my ears/taste, the vocals are a little too loud. Bringing the vocals down a little will bring the guitar forward a little. I always put vocals a little on the low side, so take that with a grain of salt, but I really think it would make a big difference. As for the guitar, you could probably bring up the brightness a little (cutting some of the low-mids/lows just a little), but part of it seems to be the performance (it's not bad, but she strums a little harder on the lower strings). I think if you cleaned up the lows on the guitar and evened out the levels a little it would help a lot, but it sounds good to me in general, and I like where the reverb is at.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 20:02
|
|
|
Thank you both. I'll give what y'all said a try and report back E:  Here is a retry. Improvement? e2: To elaborate, I tried lowering the vox a bit, taking out a lil bit of the vox mid-low, but couldn't quiet get it without sounding like I was hollowing it out, so I didn't take too much out of there. Instead, I brought a low-pass up to where it started to sound poo poo, then backed off a bit. I boosted the mid-high/high of the guitar just an eensy bit and rolled off a lil bit of low end. To me it sounds a bit brighter now and less jarbled together. If this vox+geet is passable, I'll try to mic up the next jam/loving around that me and my friends have and see if I can make it sound okay. Rotten Cookies fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Jun 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 20:26
|
|
|
Noise Machine posted:room that is going to be soundproofed with GreenGlue It claims to dissipate acoustic energy back into the room in the form of heat. This is the same thing that any mechanical damper does, such as the wall you already have before you use the Green Glue. A concrete wall converts sound energy to heat energy technically speaking, but it sure as hell doesn't do it efficiently enough to soundproof something. It goes to great lengths to tell you that no other soundproofing agent works below 100Hz but I can't find anything on their site telling you exactly how effective Green Glue is from 30 to 100Hz, where the wavelengths are so long they practically don't even see a wall or floor existing (you know, the waves that travel a mile and a half away from a Jay-Z show or night club). I fail to see how a polymer is going to turn a 90dB, 22ft 50Hz waveform into heat before it makes it to the other side, and I can tell you if it does you are going to need some pretty serious AC in that room. YMMV but I would be pretty wary of buying the 19 cases they recommend for your size room at $150 a piece and expecting a soundproofed band rehearsal/recording spot. edit: OK, I see their data stuff now, so lets think about it.  In this graph the green is attenuation by frequency of Green Glue treated walls, the blue is just plain dry wall. They circle the bottom because lol look how much more attenuation GreenGlue has down here, but look how much more attenuation just a piece of dry wall has at 1KHz compared to Green Glue at 100Hz. You can hear someone talking on the phone on the other side of dry wall, and that's how much low end attenuation Green Glue gives you. OK, that's significantly more low end attenuation than drywall... it is not "isolating 2 movie theaters from each other" levels of attenuation. ChristsDickWorship fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Jun 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 20:56
|
|
|
wixard posted:What is your intended purpose with this product? I've never used it, but I've also never seen anything other than several tons of sand soundproof a room. There is no material you can coat a wall with to stop it from passing sub frequencies through it. You can maybe stop resonances in the material of the wall from adding to noise, but you aren't going to stop them from transmitting through it. Our intended purpose was to give the girlfriend's of the band members living in the loft space a little give so they can possibly get some sleep. We're aware that such a thing as "perfect" soundproofing doesn't exist, so this is just something that can allow us to practice later than 9-10 PM without people seeing it as a nuisance. We're not expecting miracles but from what I know we'll still have to treat the inside of the room.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 22:05
|
|
|
Rotten Cookies posted:Thank you both. I'll give what y'all said a try and report back Definite improvement, totally passable. The EQ on the vocals makes the two parts much more differentiated, though I might move the EQ just slightly back in the other direction. I'd say that the vox can come up just a hair since it's not tonally trampling the guitar anymore. himajinga fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jun 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 22:40
|
|
|
Noise Machine posted:Our intended purpose was to give the girlfriend's of the band members living in the loft space a little give so they can possibly get some sleep. We're aware that such a thing as "perfect" soundproofing doesn't exist, so this is just something that can allow us to practice later than 9-10 PM without people seeing it as a nuisance. We're not expecting miracles but from what I know we'll still have to treat the inside of the room. If it's already OK, you don't have any serious problems and any noticeable improvement makes everyone happy, it seems promising. If you're expecting it to keep bitchy neighbors off your rear end, I'm not confident it will make it less obvious that a band is playing right above their ceiling.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 23:19
|
|
|
himajinga posted:Definite improvement, totally passable. The EQ on the vocals makes the two parts much more differentiated, though I might move the EQ just slightly back in the other direction. I'd say that the vox can come up just a hair since it's not tonally trampling the guitar anymore. Agreed, definitely better, and I'd give the same advice. In fact, I think you could probably bring a little more of the lows back to the guitar (just the teeniest bit).
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
wixard posted:I'm just afraid that in practice you're going to be muffling the sound of a band playing, but that a C-weighted dB meter on the other side of the wall might not change all that much because of the low-end. It will sound like you rolled the window up more on a thumping car stereo. I'm sure it will be noticeable, I just question whether it's worth the money for your purposes. If you said you were trying to keep the girlfriends' chatter and neighbor's sprinkler out of your recording takes, I would be more confident in its results. I'm not sure if we're RIGHT under someone, but I know that someone does live underneath the actual living space of the loft, which has hardwood floors instead of stone slab. The landlord came by the other day and walked in on us practicing and said it was an acceptable level. It's a little too late as the stuff is already bought, but I will report back with findings once we've installed it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 06:01
|
|
|
What wixard is getting at is the only thing that can stop bass frequencies is physics. The denser the material the better it will be at converting those low frequencies to heat and there's absolutely no way in hell that this polymer has that kind of density even if you laid it on 2" thick. You know... unless they've stumbled onto some crazy space glue or something. In a pinch bookshelves full of books/records seem to work out okay plus they work to diffuse higher frequencies as well because of their irregular shape. If anything bursts out of your chest please advise. Hogscraper fucked around with this message at 17:46 on Jun 12, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 17:44
|
|
|
Uh Noise Machine, you are hanging an additional layer of drywall using the green glue right? Not just slathering it on some drywall that's already there? The stuff is just an elastic adhesive that lets you bind two layers of drywall together, making them nice limp masses that can resonate at low frequencies. The glue itself stops a negligible amount of transmission, but a 3/4" sheet of drywall that's attached via it can absorb more. Still not sure about their numbers though, I don't know if the "conventional assembly" they refer to is resilient channel drywall mounting or just screwed-to-the-studs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 18:00
|
|
|
Mradyfist posted:Uh Noise Machine, you are hanging an additional layer of drywall using the green glue right? Not just slathering it on some drywall that's already there? Yes we're hanging an additional layer of drywall using the green glue. I myself am not doing anything, I don't even live in the space currently.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 18:28
|
|
|
I don't know if these guys work for sound isolation as well as they work at taming bass resonance, but I made six bass traps and they've done wonders for my home studio. I made them using the instructions from this video for ~$150 total using 6pcf Knauf Ecose board from a local supplier (shipping is killer on Corning 703).
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 18:52
|
|
|
The Mystery Date posted:I don't know if these guys work for sound isolation as well as they work at taming bass resonance, but I made six bass traps and they've done wonders for my home studio. I made them using the instructions from this video for ~$150 total using 6pcf Knauf Ecose board from a local supplier (shipping is killer on Corning 703). Thanks! This is what I was looking for.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 19:03
|
|
|
Bass trapping doesn't really stop bass either. At least it won't keep it from traveling through a wall. It works by diffusing the low frequency waves a bit and eliminating comb filtering that would cause bass nulls in your room which ultimately gives you a more even response. Say you walk into an extremely live room and you snap your fingers and hear a very loud echo. Bass frequencies are doing the exact same thing in that room. When the same frequencies bounce off of the wall and meet at the same time with a direct wave of the same frequency those frequencies cancel each other out causing a null in the room. When you put up foam diffusers you no longer hear that echo from the snap of your fingers because it disperses those high frequencies in a random way rather than directly back at the source (fingers/speakers). Foam diffusers don;t work at all on low frequencies so you have to use a denser material to diffuse it; hence, OC703/705. Again, it doesn't get rid of the sound whatsoever; It just disperses it in a random fashion so it doesn't collide with the source.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 20:24
|
|
|
Has anyone here had experience using the Tascam 1800? I'm looking for the best interface I Can get under 300 dollars, and the number of connectors it features makes it very attractive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 01:51
|
|
|
Hogscraper posted:Bass trapping doesn't really stop bass either. At least it won't keep it from traveling through a wall. It works by diffusing the low frequency waves a bit and eliminating comb filtering that would cause bass nulls in your room which ultimately gives you a more even response. You're right about bass traps not being appropriate for isolation, but comb filtering isn't really a problem with low frequencies. Comb filtering is when an acoustic signal is mixed with a copy of itself, either from two separate loudspeakers or the mix of a direct signal and a reflected signal from a nearby surface, and forms an interference pattern that changes the effective frequency response. Generally it only applies to frequencies above a few hundred Hertz, where audio acts as a directional wave and slight differences in the distance a wave travels can easily add up to a quarter-wavelength or more. Bass frequencies aren't directional, which is why we can usually use a single subwoofer in a stereo system and not lose any positioning, and they tend to transmit through solid surfaces rather than be reflected by them - things like comb filtering don't apply, because you're not dealing with multiple reflected waves from the same source with that meet up with significant amount of phase change between them. Instead, you're worried about standing waves, which are frequencies that are reinforced by parallel surfaces in the room that are as long as a single wavelength or more. If you picture a frequency response chart of the two phenomena, it's easy to see how they're very different beasts when it comes to treatment; a comb-filtering situation looks, well, like a comb - regularly spaced drastic spikes in frequency response. Standing waves would look like single bumps at particular room modes, and you can have anything from a number of oddly spaced bumps and nulls to one single bump, to no bumps in the range you're looking at because the room is too small to reinforce those frequencies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 05:33
|
|
|
You may be correct that Hogscraper used the term comb filtering incorrectly, but trying to separate comb filtering and room modes by what frequency they occur in isn't practically meaningful and I often hear people use it referring to subs. When you walk around a room you will usually find spots where the bass is hyped and spots where it disappears. The room doesn't become an omnidirectional resonator everywhere when you hit the wrong note. If you put your home theater sub in the corner, you're placing it so the most significant reflections reinforce the direct sound because the time between them is so short, that's why placing your subs in a corner or your monitors near a wall creates a bass boost. The same idea is why bass will usually seem emphasized when you are near a wall in the room. In terms of the way your brain localizes low end content, it doesn't matter where you put your sub so it doesn't matter if you have discrete left and right subs, but in terms of frequency response at any given point in the room it does. Actually the frequency response overall in your room will almost certainly become less consistent if you set up left and right subs receiving the same signal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 07:52
|
|
|
Yeah, I mistyped and combined and original sentence with a new one and forgot to take out part of it. That's supposed to read "eliminating comb filtering and bass nulls that would cause an uneven frequency response in your room". It's simplifying language and all of these things are interconnected. The point is that acoustic treatment isn't to keep sound from escaping it's for slowing or stopping reflections from going right back toward the source or sweet spot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 15:57
|
|
|
wixard posted:You may be correct that Hogscraper used the term comb filtering incorrectly, but trying to separate comb filtering and room modes by what frequency they occur in isn't practically meaningful and I often hear people use it referring to subs. When you walk around a room you will usually find spots where the bass is hyped and spots where it disappears. The room doesn't become an omnidirectional resonator everywhere when you hit the wrong note. Oh definitely, room modes will produce different effective frequency responses at different spots in the room, and you'll have nulls or bumps at different locations depending on the frequency you're reproducing and the room modes. But unlike comb filtering, which is going to end up with drastically different effects based on minor changes like how you toe-in your speakers and what's on the wall surfaces that provide a single reflected signal, the nulls and bumps from a room mode are going to end up in the same places and at the same frequencies. The position of your sub isn't going to change the frequencies that room modes affect, it will just change the amplitude of their effects. Now, if you're reproducing low end from two sources, like stereo full-range speakers, it complicates matters more because the amplitude of the gain provided by room modes will be dependent on each speaker's distance from walls and corners, but that just makes it harder to calculate because room modes can be axial, tangential, or oblique, and the distance from different walls determines how prevalent each class of mode is. I think these three classes should be affected evenly (although not necessarily resulting in an even response) if your monitors/subs are either in the corners or in the center of the room (assuming a rectangular room) with the corners boosting room modes the greatest and the center the least, but I can't remember exactly. Of course, assuming a symmetrical room and two speakers placed symmetrically, you avoid any variation between which classes of room modes are excited and you can just calculate for a single source. Contrast that with comb filtering, where position and direction of your monitors will drastically change the frequencies which experience nulls. You can take your sub and rotate it 90 degrees, and your pattern of nulls will still be essentially the same throughout the room and at the same frequencies; do the same with a tweeter, and the interference patterns would be completely different. Likewise, you can add some diffusion or absorption to target areas, like behind the mix point or on the walls at a calculated reflection point from the mix point to the monitors and resolve a lot of high-frequency comb-filtering issues, but if you want to treat low-end you put absorption in the corners of the room (assuming it's rectangular) and call it a day.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 20:38
|
|
|
Mradyfist posted:I think these three classes should be affected evenly (although not necessarily resulting in an even response) if your monitors/subs are either in the corners or in the center of the room (assuming a rectangular room) with the corners boosting room modes the greatest and the center the least, but I can't remember exactly. Of course, assuming a symmetrical room and two speakers placed symmetrically, you avoid any variation between which classes of room modes are excited and you can just calculate for a single source. quote:Contrast that with comb filtering, where position and direction of your monitors will drastically change the frequencies which experience nulls. You can take your sub and rotate it 90 degrees, and your pattern of nulls will still be essentially the same throughout the room and at the same frequencies; do the same with a tweeter, and the interference patterns would be completely different. Likewise, you can add some diffusion or absorption to target areas, like behind the mix point or on the walls at a calculated reflection point from the mix point to the monitors and resolve a lot of high-frequency comb-filtering issues, but if you want to treat low-end you put absorption in the corners of the room (assuming it's rectangular) and call it a day. Moving a sub closer and farther from a wall will effect the nulls and peaks wherever you are standing as the phase relationship (timing) between the direct and reflected sound change. The same way the comb filter of a monitor will change when you re-angle it to be more or less coincident with a wall, and the same way my cardioid stacks of subs would if you angled them toward or away from a wall (right now mine are both toed in about 30-40deg toward the center of the venue to avoid that).
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 01:54
|
|
|
Jesus christ, I agreed to record my band in my basement a while ago and we're starting tomorrow. Normally we record with my guitarist who works at a studio, but he's gotten a 7-day/week job to supplement his income for the summer. (Because not many people record at a studio when they can just use a friend's basement ) So he won't always be there to help me. Nobody's expecting a great recording, and everybody understands that, hey, it's my basement. I'm just a bit overwhelmed and possibly nervous. I know it'll be fine. They're friends. Just... gah. Sorry for this vent. But it is home recording.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
wixard posted:As you move subs close to a corner they get louder across their entire bandwidth, not just at room modes, because the first reflection from the walls are now in time(/phase) with the direct sound at all frequencies it is reproducing. When you stand next to a wall, the reflections from that wall are now in time with the direct sound from the sub (because the reflection arrives only instantaneously later) and you hear exaggerated low end across the whole spectrum, not just at room modes. I'm not positive but I think you have it backwards: placing subs in the corner gives you the least measured effect from room modes (because the first reflection will cause no nulls at all and even summing across the sub's whole bandwidth), while placing a sub in the center of the room will make as many modes as possible obvious. I'm pretty sure that subs or full range speakers will excite room modes more strongly in the corner, which is why half-space and quarter-space switches roll off low end on studio monitors. If you put it in a quarter-space situation like a corner, you want to cut low-end response to keep the average closer to unity. And you're right that technically bass frequencies are directional, but only in environments where the dimensions of the room are all at least a wavelength (maybe half a wavelength? It's been a while). So yes, directional subs are cool in a big auditorium, but if you take that sub and move it into your average control room it will act omnidirectional. That's why they're only used in big PA situations, I'm sure studio engineers would pay buckets of money to have sweet line-array monitors that eliminate the need for wall treatment, and they do in a sense - MTM configurations and ribbon tweeters act almost like line arrays. But only for about 150hz on up, below that they radiate omni. Compare that to your giant auditorium, where the room modes are probably in the infrasonic range; yes, you can definitely treat low-end as directional, but that's just because your room doesn't produce standing waves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 00:02
|
|
|
Rotten Cookies posted:Jesus christ, I agreed to record my band in my basement a while ago and we're starting tomorrow. Normally we record with my guitarist who works at a studio, but he's gotten a 7-day/week job to supplement his income for the summer. (Because not many people record at a studio when they can just use a friend's basement It'll be fine! You can get great results at home with a minimal-ish setup, I recorded and minimally mixed the tracks below with 3 SM57s, a pair of cheap overheads, a PG58, and a DI box live in my living room (the vocals are the scratch take recorded live during the tracking).   Just take your time setting up the mics and getting good performances. I used an ORTF configuration for the overheads and I really like the way it turned out. If you can bribe a friend with a case of beer to be "tape op" for the session so you're not constantly putting your guitar down and running over to the computer to hit record/stop that's helpful to keep your head in the game too. himajinga fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Jun 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 18:04
|
|
|
himajinga posted:It'll be fine! You can get great results at home with a minimal-ish setup, I recorded and minimally mixed the tracks below with 3 SM57s, a pair of cheap overheads, a PG58, and a DI box live in my living room (the vocals are the scratch take recorded live during the tracking). Thanks for the encouragement. This definitely gives me some confidence. Nice tracks. I hope I can do that. I also realized I don't have as many mic stands as I'd like... or a stereo mic stand..... So I made one with lexan, a heat gun, and a drill.  I'm ready to roll.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 19:30
|
|
|
Mradyfist posted:I'm pretty sure that subs or full range speakers will excite room modes more strongly in the corner, which is why half-space and quarter-space switches roll off low end on studio monitors. If you put it in a quarter-space situation like a corner, you want to cut low-end response to keep the average closer to unity. If you move that sub to the center of the same wall, now fewer of its faces are creating reflections completely in phase with the direct sound for your location. Worse, now the 2 walls adjacent to the wall the sub is on are causing first reflections that reach you a little more than 6ms later than the direct sound. This is causing 80Hz to either sum or cancel more or less than the rest of the frequencies in the sub's range. If you move closer to the sub, the difference in time increases and the frequency effected moves lower. You would probably have to stand near the back wall to hear as even a response as you did when you had the sub in the corner, and that discrepancy in frequency response is in addition to any room mode issues. If you place the sub in the center of the room, you've created a situation where you can't stand anywhere without getting lots of destructive reflections, there will be no reinforcement of the subs's "correct" frequency response at all, thus the modes will measure as more pronounced. I'm positive about the first part of that statement, not the second, but that's my logic for saying placing the sub in the center of the room makes the room's modes most noticeable. If monitor switches were made to combat room modes, they would be sweepable notch filters, because the mode would depend on the room right? But shelf switches work because they attenuate the entire range of frequencies that act omnidirectionally. Bass is the only thing that has to worry about the wall reflections because it's the only bandwidth that is omnidirectional enough to cause it when the speaker is aimed away from the wall. quote:And you're right that technically bass frequencies are directional, but only in environments where the dimensions of the room are all at least a wavelength (maybe half a wavelength? It's been a while). A line array is basically a terrible idea indoors btw. It's all the rage (because it's pretty easy and requires way less processing) but because of the fact that line arrays tend to have really wide dispersion and their physics makes them throw twice as far as conventional speakers, they are a huge pain in the rear end in most venues in terms of reflections. Soundchecking in an empty venue with a line array can be a nightmare for musicians trying to dial in monitors because of the bounce with no people there. If something actually approached the physics of a line array it would suck as a replacement for nearfields (I've never seen any consumer products or monitors with enough drivers to develop a line source pattern).
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 01:58
|
|
|
http://soundcloud.com/wernotron/deathnote So here's one of the songs we recorded today. No mix, no eq on anything. Didn't get to recording vocals or the second guitar. SO..... pretty rough (Guitar solo in the bridge hits some bad notes :/ ). But overall, I'm thrilled with how it turned out. Used 2 Samson C02s on the overheads, and 2 57s for kick and snare. 57 on an Vox valvetronix 80 or whatever. Bass direct in. I'm thinking I really want to trigger that snare. But yeah. This actually exceeds my expectations, even this early. Pretty sure it was the overall mood and good juju from the beginning of the day that did it. And we have 2 tracks that are in a state of less finished.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 03:32
|
|
|
Rotten Cookies posted:Thanks for the encouragement. This definitely gives me some confidence. Nice tracks. I hope I can do that. I want to say that I can tell you'll be fine. I'm just starting to really get my feet wet with sessions and engineering, but I can say the actual work with this stuff seems to be actual engineering, as in finding or improvising fixes or solutions for problems that become apparent as time goes on, a lot of which you will never see coming no matter how much anal planning you do (see all my posts in this thread) So update on my situation... Yes, the GreenGlue is going to be used with two separate pieces of drywall, and the floor is concrete that is a foot thick before you reach the ceiling of the room below it. With regard to the loving can o worms I opened up with the acoustics question...  Knowing that there are no quick fixes, is this something that's going to rely on trapping bass frequencies than anything else? Should I just start a 101 course on acoustics or should I pay a professional in the field to come look at the space and run some tests?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 06:53
|
|
|
I'm looking for a drum pad MIDI controller that has pads designed for being hit with sticks rather than fingers. I'm not particularly good at or fond of finger banging. All I could really find that fits the bill is the Alesis ControlPad, but it seems to be out of stock at all the major retailers at the moment which has me thinking it is discontinued. Everything similar seems to be much more expensive because they can be used standalone as samplers rather than only providing MIDI control. Any ideas? fake edit: some sites confirm that more ControlPads will be shipping, so I guess its not discontinued, however, I'd still love to hear if anyone has any experience with it or knows of some similar products to checkout.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2012 00:14
|
|
|
Splinter posted:I'm looking for a drum pad MIDI controller that has pads designed for being hit with sticks rather than fingers. I'm not particularly good at or fond of finger banging. All I could really find that fits the bill is the Alesis ControlPad, but it seems to be out of stock at all the major retailers at the moment which has me thinking it is discontinued. Everything similar seems to be much more expensive because they can be used standalone as samplers rather than only providing MIDI control. Any ideas? This is pretty much the "industry standard" http://www.musiciansfriend.com/drums-percussion/roland-spd-30-octapad We use this live and haven't had any trouble with it: http://www.simmonsdrums.net/sdmp1/
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2012 08:37
|
|
|
The Octapad looks nice and I've also seen people using the DTX-Multi 12, but that's what I'm talking about with the units that are also drum machines costing much more. I really only need this for MIDI so I'm not looking to spend too much more than the finger pad units cost. Under $300 for sure. That SDMP1 does look nice, but I can't seem to find anywhere selling it currently.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2012 23:21
|
|
|
Is there a way to select specific inputs in Audacity? I have a MOTU Ultralite which has like 8 inputs, and the inputs I want to use are the stereo pair of inputs 3 and 4. I can't tell if there's a way within Audacity to only record those inputs, the best I can do is record the first four inputs from the interface at the same time which is dumb and takes 2x the disk space. I can't use the first two inputs 'cause they're instrument level and I'm recording the out of a DJ mixer. Alternatively is there another good, free recording software I can get for Mac? e: nevermind, it's not possible to select inputs... as far as all the info I've found if you're using audacity and want to record channels 5+6 you have to record 1-4 as well. Muck and Mire fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Jun 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
Muck and Mire posted:Is there a way to select specific inputs in Audacity? I don't have a MOTU Ultralite so I'm not sure if that particular audio interface allows you to select seperate inputs, but for my Fast Track Pro in the Audacity preferences section (and in the Windows Auio input panel, and every other audio program for that matter,) it lets me select which inputs I want to use and seperates 1/2 from 3/4. I'm guessing if you're not seeing any kind of option like that, then it's a restriction of your hardware, not Audacity. Edit Menu > Preferences > Audio I/O > Recording
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2012 23:23
|
|
|
Muck and Mire posted:Is there a way to select specific inputs in Audacity? I know this isn't what you're looking for, but if you're trying to use Audacity to record music, or really anything, go grab Reaper (because it's free) or spend the money and get PT or something. Audacity is "okay" if you're just trying to get sound in to a computer, but if you want to do anything else with it, it kind of blows as a DAW.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2012 00:09
|
|
|
Yeah, Audacity is pretty lame, I agree. I use Ableton normally but I'm just trying to record a DJ set and didn't want to put Ableton onto this computer just for that. I thought Audacity would be the easiest way to do it but I seriously can't believe that they don't let you select individual inputs... it works out 'cause I only need five hours to record and I have ~8 hours available (recording TWO simultaneous stereo channels, one of which is completely silent) but seriously, Audacity. Why. I feel really bad for anyone who tries to get into audio production with Audacity, I'm sure it does some things well but I've never really encountered those things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
Muck and Mire posted:Yeah, Audacity is pretty lame, I agree. I use Ableton normally but I'm just trying to record a DJ set and didn't want to put Ableton onto this computer just for that. I thought Audacity would be the easiest way to do it but I seriously can't believe that they don't let you select individual inputs... it works out 'cause I only need five hours to record and I have ~8 hours available (recording TWO simultaneous stereo channels, one of which is completely silent) but seriously, Audacity. Why. I spent like 2 years recording with audacity because I was too lazy to think about learning how to use a real DAW they all seemed so complicated and difficult. I've started using Mixcraft now and it's definitely the easiest and most intuitive software I've tried imo, which is very useful for a babby like me
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2012 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 03:47 |
|
|
I'm looking for some advice on mixers. My current setup is: M-Audio Firewire Audiophile interface (only one pair of stereo inputs) Computer running Ableton Live Some hardware synths (Blofeld, Microkorg, Shurthi-1) and an electric guitar Essentially, I've amassed enough gear that I've grown tired of having to keep switching cables around when I want to play a different instrument. I guess a mixer is what I need, but I know next to nothing about them. What should I be looking for that will allow me to have all my gear wired up and still be reasonably cheap? I'd prefer to have the synths in stereo. A mixer+interface combo would be nice (operating under the assumption the inputs would all be available as separate audio sources in my DAW). Are there any mixers that double as MIDI interfaces, or would I have to hold on to the M-Audio box? The absolute max I'm willing to spend is $300.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 17:19
|
|