|
I can't figure out how to phrase this for Google since everything I think of gets me answers about exporting stems, so I'll ask here. I've got a Logic project that I want to split into 14 individual files for distribution. In Audition, it had a thing where you could set CD track cues and it would let you do a batch export from those markers. Is there a way to do this in Logic Pro 9, or will it be easier to bounce the whole thing as a single .wav and split/export that into individual songs in Audition? I'd prefer not to have to transcode it more than I have to, but I also don't want to fight with exporting every section in Logic by hand and possibly having to redo some so they match perfectly when played back-to-back.
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
CaptainViolence posted:I'd prefer not to have to transcode it more than I have to I'd say even if there's some convoluted way for doing this in Logic, go with Audition, it's made for that poo poo and will allow you to do sample accurate snipping with ease.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Flipperwaldt posted:There's no transcoding in the process you describe using Audition as long as you go from wav to wav with the same samplingrate/bitrate. It's a lossless fileformat. You won't lose quality like when opening and re-saving an MP3. Thanks. I didn't think there would be any actual transcoding going on since the formats are lossless, but I get paranoid about stuff like that. Sounds like I have my solution!
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
RandomCheese posted:Set your metronome click to double your intended tempo and then play to it in halftime, the extra tics should help you follow the slower pace and after a while it will feel natural. Excellent, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
I've been thinking of making a thread where I'd put... basically all the songs I know, but mostly arrangements I've done, to get people's feedback. I'm struggling with at what point I should do it. I've recorded about half of the grand total of a dozen there hopefully will be. I'm not sure at what rate it will continue because I've left hardest for the last. I'm concerned whether I'm going to get any responses at all depending on my timing, that is, I could dump all of my recordings at once when I'm done, I could put up half now and then continue updating along with my progress, or I also could start with one or two songs and update at regular intervals, having a buffer to rely on. The last option seems like it would be more fitting for a professional musician with professional quality recordings. Any thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 11:58
|
|
|
Trying to predict people's reactions to a thread is always hit-or-miss, but in my experience, it's always better to do a thing than to not do a thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
It hasn't been my experience... I've just half-remembered and half-realized another reason for delaying: it's so that I'd be able to focus on implementing people's feedback, instead of delaying it to record the rest of the songs. And I don't want to mix these together, because I feel like I'm on a path to an important milestone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
supermikhail posted:Any thoughts? Relax a bit and
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
I'd just like to say that I'm not simply ignoring your advice, people, but suddenly I've been lacking the time, and the circumstances have been crappy on occasion... and I've also simply forgotten to think about the thread I want to make. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 05:44
|
|
|
Does anyone have the chords to Whorehouse Blues by Motörhead? I'm trying to make a Mandolin version and can only find guitar tabs, not the chords.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Gear question This may be better suited here than the audio questions megathread. I got a Tascam DR-07MkII field recorder for screwing around with nature sounds (birds, frogs, ambient nature noise), general field recording, and amateur nature videography. I'd like to start looking into microphones after I get used to the recorder. I'm doing my research about mics through various field recording blogs, forums, websites, etc, but there's a massive volume of stuff to wade through, and not a whole lot of information about matching a mic to a recorder at the low budget level. So I'm looking for advice on babby's first microphone on a small budget (<$150). Stereo, hypercardioid, supercardioid? Good models, bad models? Is there a decent mic that can handle both ambient sounds in stereo and be used for focused sounds, like an individual bird? I've seen the Audio-Technica ATR55 recommended as the most decent of the cheap stuff. Also, is there a nature/field recording thread that I'm missing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
I've posted the thread - http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3709476 But I didn't sleep too well last night, so I can't vouch for the coherency of the OP. (And I forgot the thread tag.) But I didn't want to postpone it further.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:Gear question Well, first, don't underestimate the on-board mics. You're probably going to use those more than anything, especially if you want stereo recordings. The other thing to think about right away is that if I'm reading the specs right, the DR-07 doesn't have an onboard preamp for an external mic. If you were to plug a standard mic into the 1/8" on the recorder, you would never get the mic signal loud enough to record it effectively. This is pretty standard for smaller recorders, and is part of what makes them more affordable. That being said, if you have some other means of recording using a traditional mic (like an audio interface + a laptop or whatever), for that low of a budget I'd say your first mic should be something like an SM-57. It's durable, sounds decent on just about anything, and will be a mic you'd use even with a pretty robust collection of them. Depending on what you're trying to record, there may be other options, but the 57 is a pretty standard first choice. Regarding recording an individual bird, you pretty much need a shotgun mic for that kind of recording, and even then it can be tough to isolate distant sounds. The only "cheap" shotgun that I know of would be a used Rode NTG-1. I grabbed one off eBay a few years ago for $125. Even then, it might not do what you're looking for. A lot of field recordists sink serious money into parabolic reflectors and the like to record individual bird calls. But like I said, all this talk of external mics is sort of immaterial with your recorder, if I'm reading the spec sheet correctly. MockingQuantum fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Mar 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:Well, first, don't underestimate the on-board mics. You're probably going to use those more than anything, especially if you want stereo recordings. The other thing to think about right away is that if I'm reading the specs right, the DR-07 doesn't have an onboard preamp for an external mic. If you were to plug a standard mic into the 1/8" on the recorder, you would never get the mic signal loud enough to record it effectively. This is pretty standard for smaller recorders, and is part of what makes them more affordable. Right on, that helps me a lot, thanks. I'm very new to this kind of gear and still learning how to read spec sheets. Now I see why the lowest level field recorders that are recommended are the DR-100 and Zoom H4. I'll spend my time learning how to more effectively use this thing rather than going after more gadgets. So my original thought was that by getting a nicer mic, I could quiet the floor down a bit. Is there a simple way of doing this on the machine? I can record in WAV or MP3 at various bitrates; does file type carry a specific floor volume characteristic with it? After recording, I'm amplifying the files in Audacity. Are there things I can do in post to cut the floor out? As I said, I'm very new to this level of recording, so I appreciate any input on it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
HenryJLittlefinger posted:Right on, that helps me a lot, thanks. I'm very new to this kind of gear and still learning how to read spec sheets. Now I see why the lowest level field recorders that are recommended are the DR-100 and Zoom H4. I'll spend my time learning how to more effectively use this thing rather than going after more gadgets. Congratulations, you've arrived very quickly at an extremely important lesson that took me years to learn. You will get much more mileage out of gear, and be a better recordist, by finding out how to get excellent recordings out of cheap or less full-featured gear. HenryJLittlefinger posted:So my original thought was that by getting a nicer mic, I could quiet the floor down a bit. Is there a simple way of doing this on the machine? I can record in WAV or MP3 at various bitrates; does file type carry a specific floor volume characteristic with it? After recording, I'm amplifying the files in Audacity. Are there things I can do in post to cut the floor out? Well I'm not totally clear on what you mean by "floor" in this case. But generally speaking, you're either dealing with A) the noise floor, or self-noise of the recorder (the hiss you get when raising the gain on the recorder), or B) the loudness ratio between what you're trying to record, and the ambient noise around it. For noise floor/self-noise, you'll need to overcome the noise that the recorder imparts on whatever it's recording. This basically means trying to capture the source material as loudly as possible, without turning up the gain on your recorder more than you have to. This usually involves getting closer to your source. I'd normally assume that this isn't the problem you're talking about, but having dealt with a lot of the Tascam recorders, I know that they actually do get kind of noisy if you have to use too much of their internal gain. For the latter, mic position is more important than anything else. Always experiment with different positions, different angles, different distances. This can be tough if you're recording ambiences, but even then there's going to be some variances depending on where the recorder is. If you're doing nature ambiences around a hill, for example, try the mic facing towards the hill vs. away from it. You may find that certain positions in relation to hard or reflective surfaces will give you better results. So basically, in either case, try to get closer to your sound source, and try different positions. Recording at a higher sampling rate probably won't make a difference for background or gain noise. You could experiment with different bit depths (i.e. 16 bit vs 24 bit). I don't know that you'd get that significant of an improvement, but it's possible. Since you're using Audacity, you could try the Noise Reduction tool that's included with it. I don't remember the exact process, but I think it amounts to highlighting a section of the audio file that is just noise, then using it. Doing this can sometimes net you pretty good results, but you may have to play around with settings to make sure the end result doesn't sound unnatural or overly processed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 08:16
|
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:Well I'm not totally clear on what you mean by "floor" in this case. But generally speaking, you're either dealing with A) the noise floor, or self-noise of the recorder (the hiss you get when raising the gain on the recorder), or B) the loudness ratio between what you're trying to record, and the ambient noise around it. quote:For noise floor/self-noise, you'll need to overcome the noise that the recorder imparts on whatever it's recording. This basically means trying to capture the source material as loudly as possible, without turning up the gain on your recorder more than you have to. This usually involves getting closer to your source. I'd normally assume that this isn't the problem you're talking about, but having dealt with a lot of the Tascam recorders, I know that they actually do get kind of noisy if you have to use too much of their internal gain. quote:For the latter, mic position is more important than anything else. Always experiment with different positions, different angles, different distances. This can be tough if you're recording ambiences, but even then there's going to be some variances depending on where the recorder is. If you're doing nature ambiences around a hill, for example, try the mic facing towards the hill vs. away from it. You may find that certain positions in relation to hard or reflective surfaces will give you better results. quote:Since you're using Audacity, you could try the Noise Reduction tool that's included with it. I don't remember the exact process, but I think it amounts to highlighting a section of the audio file that is just noise, then using it. Doing this can sometimes net you pretty good results, but you may have to play around with settings to make sure the end result doesn't sound unnatural or overly processed. Thanks for the help. Hopefully I'll get something onto my Soundcloud this weekend. I'd appreciate more critique if anyone is interested.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
I started out playing classical guitar and learned to play with my fingers and nails. It's been more than 10 years since I switched to electric and I've been using picks for another 5 or 6. However, I very much prefer the 'size' and shape of my own index fingernail as a pick (even when it's just slightly grown out) over any pick I've tried so far (I tend to switch between jazz IIIs, various sizes tortex picks and DAVA picks). Not least due to chronic arm inflammations, I enjoy playing with my hands only and it comes to me more easily and fluidly than a pick. Does anyone know of any nail-like picks? I don't mean fake nails or whatever, I mean picks that simulate the feeling? Or of any useful technique? For reference, the pick I used to enjoy playing with most was a 0.60mm orange tortex.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 13:27
|
|
|
SSJ2 Goku Wilders posted:Does anyone know of any nail-like picks? I don't mean fake nails or whatever, I mean picks that simulate the feeling? You can also use an emery board to shape the ends too if you want to adjust it a bit (or if you're an idiot who insists on doing gratuitous pick slides with expensive picks).
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
SSJ2 Goku Wilders posted:Does anyone know of any nail-like picks? These are comfortable (they don't rely on pinching the blood out of your fingers to lock) and record well: http://www.alaskapik.com/ They may look fragile, but I haven't managed to break my 20+ year old transparent plastic set yet - only use them for recording now and then, though. e: After trying them on again just now I remembered that the way their thumbpick is cut makes string dampening a little awkward. The ones for the other fingers are fine. Underflow fucked around with this message at 12:02 on Apr 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
If I have mechanical rights to two songs, do I have the rights to do a mashup or otherwise alter them if its all my own instruments/vocals/etc?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
Weird Al says you don't need a permission, but it's nice to ask (if I remember right)... Or maybe that applies only in his particular case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remix#Copyright_implications (drat, I'm not a lawyer, what am I even doing here?  )
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
supermikhail posted:Weird Al says you don't need a permission, but it's nice to ask (if I remember right)... Or maybe that applies only in his particular case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remix#Copyright_implications (drat, I'm not a lawyer, what am I even doing here? Fair use definitely applies to parody, but it gets way murkier with mashups since they're frequently not interpretable as commentary. My guess is that you're okay if you do have the mechanical rights to both songs, but I'm not a lawyer or anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
Wouldn't it largely depend on what you intended to do with the final product?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:Wouldn't it largely depend on what you intended to do with the final product? Well my understanding is mechanical rights let you sell and perform your cover, but its the alteration part that I'm confused about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
A quick question for those of you that play strings: I've been playing cello for a bit more than half a year now but I still can't play for longer than around 5 minutes at once without my right hand starting to hurt. My instructor said there's nothing wrong with my bow grip, is there anything else I might be doing wrong? Or does it just take a bit longer to get used to it? I remember getting hand cramps when I started playing guitar but those went away fairly soon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Superimposition posted:A quick question for those of you that play strings: Aside from the obvious "loosen your grip", there are a bunch of muscles in your hand that aren't normally used in day to day activities that are activated when you hold a bow. Have you checked out the "Windsheild Wiper" exercise? Its designed for people to get use to their bow grip.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
I want to play Runaway by Bon Jovi, but we don't have a key player. Can I find a backing track in Eb somewhere or do I have to make my own? And how should I make my own, if I've never used backing tracks before?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Boz0r posted:I want to play Runaway by Bon Jovi, but we don't have a key player. Can I find a backing track in Eb somewhere or do I have to make my own? And how should I make my own, if I've never used backing tracks before? It's pretty easy to make your own really, especially that song, is there any reason you can't just run the keyboard intro on the guitar?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
iostream.h posted:is there any reason you can't just run the keyboard intro on the guitar? Not really, but the keyboard thing runs through the entire song, I don't know if it would sound right, but it's worth a try.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
If you do end up making your own backing track, I'm going to make the thousandth recommendation for Audacity. I made an instrumental recording once just to play around with it, it's very simple. You can record practically anything even on the most basic of skill levels as long as you're willing to do it measure by measure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Boz0r posted:Not really, but the keyboard thing runs through the entire song, I don't know if it would sound right, but it's worth a try.  The hardest thing for you will be transitioning (I'll assume that you're on guitar) from keyboard to guitar, but it sounds easily doable for that one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
What are the best <$200 mixers out there for playing live? Can be 4 or 8 channels, must have decent reverb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
In protools-- how do i change the automation of inserts (such as d verb) throughout the track (besides turning knobs while originally recording the track)? i am obviously able to do this with things like volume and panning from the drop down menu but can't figure out how to do so with the insert effect levels. thanks!
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
Am I violating the "if you're not getting a little practice amp, go straight to the bigger performance rigs" rule by getting a BG250 12 inch? I need an amp and this thing seems to review pretty good. Maybe not powerful enough?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
PadreScout posted:Am I violating the "if you're not getting a little practice amp, go straight to the bigger performance rigs" rule by getting a BG250 12 inch? I need an amp and this thing seems to review pretty good. Not really, no. It'll be fine at first, but it is not going to cut it in a live setting, even if you don't play loud music. Bad acoustics and the audience itself will deaden your sound and mess with its definition, so you'll be turning up the volume to near-distortion and eventually you'll have amp trouble. Most players would recommend you get a powerful head, a cab that'll suit your needs for now, and stomp boxes to taste. Will save money and tears.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2015 11:22
|
|
|
Underflow posted:Not really, no. It'll be fine at first, but it is not going to cut it in a live setting, even if you don't play loud music. Bad acoustics and the audience itself will deaden your sound and mess with its definition, so you'll be turning up the volume to near-distortion and eventually you'll have amp trouble. Most players would recommend you get a powerful head, a cab that'll suit your needs for now, and stomp boxes to taste. Will save money and tears. Copy that, I saw where the fender Rumble 410 is supposed to be a solid cabinet, I'll research a head to go with it and do that. A bit more money, but screw it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
I'm a newbie in this department and am in the market for a retro looking vinyl record player. I suppose $200 is my limit, and so far after some shopping this Electrohome is the lead runner... http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B004F1NDP4/ref=mp_s_a_1_6?qid=1430142348&sr=1-6&pi=AC_SX110_SY165_QL70 Suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
This is probably a dumb idea, so I'm asking here. I'm interested in wiring some guitar effects together in parallel so that I can have the dry signal and multiple effect signals blended together. My idea is to use a combination of something like this and this to split the signal into 4, put it through whatever effects I want, and mix them back into a single signal for my amp. This would be going through the effects send / return for my amp. Will this work, or is it going to sound horrible? I tried to find any posts about someone else trying something like this but I couldn't find anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
ignore this
PadreScout fucked around with this message at 00:16 on May 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
DeathBySpoon posted:This is probably a dumb idea, so I'm asking here. I'm interested in wiring some guitar effects together in parallel so that I can have the dry signal and multiple effect signals blended together. My idea is to use a combination of something like this and this to split the signal into 4, put it through whatever effects I want, and mix them back into a single signal for my amp. This would be going through the effects send / return for my amp. Will this work, or is it going to sound horrible? I tried to find any posts about someone else trying something like this but I couldn't find anything. You might consider something like the saturnworks parallel loopers, which seem made to do exactly that (+ footswitches). I haven't used them myself yet, but I've been considering doing the same thing and they looked like a good option.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 20:25
|
|
