AUdIoCoUrSeS
Joined: 31 Oct 2002
Posts: 2014
|
| Live Workshop - 091005 |
 |
|
jaminuk has joined the conference.
thx1138-Alex has joined the conference.
Kristian Eliasson has joined the conference.
Andrew Barber has joined the conference.
rbro100 has joined the conference.
rbro100: HI
Me: evening
thx1138-Alex: hello!
Kristian Eliasson: Hi everybody!
Andrew Barber: hello
jaminuk: hhi all
thx1138-Alex: how is everyone?
Andrew Barber: not bad
rbro100: okay
Kristian Eliasson: pretty good
Andrew Barber: sampling questions were good
Andrew Barber: difficult without course book?
Me: There are suggestions for course books in the reception area.
Andrew Barber: yep ive got one on order, comin 2moro
Me: nice... there is a good one i just got through the post which contains a CD of examples.
Stephen Rodriguez has joined the conference.
Kristian Eliasson: Whats the title of it?
Me: just finding it for you
Kristian Eliasson: ok
Me: http://www.audiocourses.com/amazon-buy-0240514971.html
Stephen Rodriguez: what's this for?
Kristian Eliasson: looks good!!
Andrew Barber: does CD correspond to tutorials?
Andrew Barber: or just funky samlpes
Me: I think it's more of an exploratory nature.. like most audio needs to be..
Andrew Barber: samples
Me: well it has explanations of what you hear.
thx1138-Alex: looks interesting
Me: Something to think about.. how were the questions then?
rbro100: Haven't got mine uploaded yet, will do it first thing tomorrow!
thx1138-Alex: looked scary at first but managed to muddle through
Stephen Rodriguez: i'm with acoustical on thatone
Kristian Eliasson: I agree...but in some way is always possible to get through....
Stephen Rodriguez: still muddling though
Andrew Barber: took a while to get my head round all the mutlitrackers out there
Me: It did?
Andrew Barber: there so many out there
Me: yeah, and there are still a considerable number of dedicated digital tape recording formats in existence, although they are slowly being superseded by computer-basad workstations using removable disks or other mass storage media.
Me: guess you would have seen that on studio gear lists?
Me: or not?
Andrew Barber: yep, its made me appreciate my PC DAW much more
Kristian Eliasson: I found mostly computer based gear though G5 Protools
Me: you found mostly G5 listed as in use in studios?
Kristian Eliasson: well i havent counted but quite often I see that...
Me: They did seem to have the market cornered until more recent times, we have seen the dominance decrease since the mid 90s
Me: anyone know why, mainly?
jaminuk: I think Apple are more concerned about iPod sales these days!
Me: lol ouch...
Kristian Eliasson: you mean Mac computers?
Me: Ben is a big apple fan..
Me: not as in New York..
jaminuk:
Andrew Barber: o
jaminuk: no they're alright, i don't mind them really - i just think they are very overpriced
jaminuk: Apples design dept have saved them from going bankrupt a couple of times!
rbro100: I heard they're movong to pentium next year
rbro100: *moving
Me: sure have, in conjunction with their marketing dept.
jaminuk: absolutely - marketing, marketing, marketing - digidesign also are very hot on the marketing front
Me: yeah ProTools is a good example too.. of that
Kristian Eliasson: "Its not a hobby" campaign...
Andrew Barber has joined the conference.
Stephen Rodriguez: why is pro tools the "industry standard?
jaminuk: even the naming of 'pro tools' was a masterstroke
thx1138-Alex: almost bought one of those mini macs yesterday
jaminuk: they got in there early and have used marketing aggresively to reinforce their position
jaminuk: the software is good though
Me: Well in my opinion there are a few reasons..
Me: yeah they did, very early...
Me: and had excellent support in the early days...
Me: Soundscape was actually a far better product in the early years...
Stephen Rodriguez: and now they've watered everything down?
Me: but ProTools had better support and far better marketing
Me: ProTools is sold as "the only way to make music is"
Me: ProTools is "without this you can't make good music" (which is of course ridiculous)
Me: It's a bit like Levis jeans...
Stephen Rodriguez: is it true that most studios won't hire if you're not pro tools certified?
jaminuk: iheart... depends on what they run
Stephen Rodriguez: I see
Me: If i didnt have ProTools in my studio I'd hire you based on what I need.
jaminuk: to be honest pro tools is possibly the easiest package to get up and running on (at least initially)
Stephen Rodriguez: oh
jaminuk: if you watch a 'master' pro tools operator
jaminuk: the thing you will notice the most is how little they rely on the mouse - they keyboard plays a massive part - the PT key commands are very good and allow you to work very very quickly
jaminuk: many people find the workflow much quicker
Stephen Rodriguez: oh okay
Stephen Rodriguez: so is that as a result of years of refinement?
jaminuk: pro tools also operates on a 2 window basis - there are only 2 windows in the whole app
Stephen Rodriguez: that's it?
jaminuk: the mix window and project window
Stephen Rodriguez: wow
jaminuk: no audio editors, midi editors, part editors
jaminuk: absolutely - everything is done in those 2 windows
Stephen Rodriguez: so ifyou do need to edit then what?
jaminuk: you zoom in on the project window and do it there
jaminuk: which i've got to say isn't my favourite way of doing it
jaminuk: however, people who use pro tools often use it as more of a multitrack recorder replacement
jaminuk: in fact, an awful lot of studios actually run logic as the software front end of the pro tools hardware - which says something!
Stephen Rodriguez: so they're running an ICON mixer with logic as the software?
jaminuk: as far as i know all pro tools hardware (not including the digi 00x series) can be used, on a mac at least, with logic as the front end
jaminuk: you may want to check that though as i've never personally ran logic with PT hardware
Stephen Rodriguez: alrighty
jaminuk: but a lot of people do it - the MIDI in logic is miles ahead of PT
jaminuk: MIDI arrived late to the Pro Tools party!
Me: indeed.. logic was also the first app to have the "built-in" ability to create a MIDI part from an audio part...
Me: which has massive creative potential...
Andrew Barber: didnt know that was possible
Andrew Barber: sounds ace
Me: anyone know why this might be a useful thing?
Kristian Eliasson: well to build up harmonies from your guitar solo!
Me: yeah I guess so...
Kristian Eliasson: you can get all audio written out easily
thx1138-Alex: be good for replacing sounds
Me: yeah good replacing sounds is a good one.
thx1138-Alex: how well does logic do this?
Me: they did it first, it's pretty good, lots of ways of doing it now of course..
thx1138-Alex: i found a few things online that convert mono audio to midi but i've not found a good one
Me: but if you can take an audio file, say rhythm parts for example
Me: you can then have the "hits" mapped out in a file... which can play any sound you wish it to...
Me: you can duplicate it many times, move it around a few fractions of a sec here and there...
Me: it opens up a BIG world...
Me: for "focussed" production.
thx1138-Alex: in the mixing practical i tried to use an audio to midi program to replace the drums
thx1138-Alex: didnt work well at all though
Me: ohhhhh a confession!
Kristian Eliasson: are there any good vst converters out there?
jaminuk: i used a reasonable one recently - i'll try to dig out the link
Me: Recycle developed this idea as one of its main features
Kristian Eliasson: great!
Rachelh-Rachel has joined the conference.
Rachelh-Rachel: hi all sorry for being late
thx1138-Alex: yeah you can do it quite well with recycle
Me: there are otherways of replacing sounds, Drumagog for drums obviously...
thx1138-Alex: find all the regions, load the rex file into reason and then export as a midi file
Me: but having a performance in a MIDI format (as well as) does open some good areas for creative possibilities
thx1138-Alex: good for 'stealing' drum grooves from real drummers too
Me: indeed
Me: hi rach..
Rachelh-Rachel: hi
Me: However, no substitutue for performance..
Me: but.. in terms of programming, it's something you should look at.
Me: OK moving on, did you have a practical this week?
Kristian Eliasson: yeah...mastering
Me: and how did this go for everyone?
thx1138-Alex: argh i knew there was something i forgot
Andrew Barber: only did it quickly, but had a go
Kristian Eliasson: well tried different things...
Me: Kris like to share what you did?
Kristian Eliasson: well I was checking different ways to master...
Kristian Eliasson: I checked the forum here on audiocourses...
Kristian Eliasson: I read the documents that Ben gave us...
Kristian Eliasson: I built different chains with waves...found in the forum
Kristian Eliasson: I uploaded a couple of results...
jaminuk: grabbing them now
Kristian Eliasson: I tried to listen to some CD with the same kind of music...I have big respect for mastering engineers...now...hehe
jaminuk: absolutely
Me: good point
Kristian Eliasson: I think the mastering chain 2 mix sounds better but the waves is really square...hehe. I tried to reach the sam level as on the CD
Me: you are saying you created a square wave?
Me:
Kristian Eliasson: well I think I limited to much to reach the same level...pushed it to far...so oI must have done something wrong eralier in the chain
Kristian Eliasson: hehe dont be angry I have other versions not so square...hehe
Me: One thing you might want to start to do is to create a "save as" each time you perform a process
Kristian Eliasson: you mean on the effect or processor
jaminuk: version 2 is certainly well compressed during the middle sections!
Me: so by the end of it you have multiple versions, each with one more process..
Me: naturally with some software you simply master with effects in a rack, and can bypass differing combinations..
Me: but if you actually create saved versions.. it can be a very enlightening activity to listen to and compare.
Kristian Eliasson: Yes that was what I was thinking....
Me: it is a good way of working..
Me: you can also burn differint versions to CD and toggle between them in different environments..
Me: to learn what YOUR studio is doing to the sound.
Me: no point in having a great sounding track in our own studio if it sounds "lame" in another or on the radio.
Kristian Eliasson: yes...I also understood the importence of having the right listening environment...
Me: good..
Me: mastering is a real anorak job..
Me: as you all probably realise now.
Kristian Eliasson: yeah!
jaminuk:
Andrew Barber: lol
Me: youd probably go to work with a packed lunch, all neat and tidy for you, same thing on mondays each week..
Me: lol just realised some people might actually do that..
jaminuk: brb
rbro100: thanks chris!
Me: lol
Me: you see, you;d be a good mastering engineer
rbro100: Then so'd my dad and he's deaf
thx1138-Alex: aha so its all in the lunchbox
Me: lol
Andrew Barber: lol
Me: yeah something like that... lol
jaminuk: back
Me: joking aside I think that kind of attention to detial is part and parcel of most of the recording arts.
rbro100: I find I know what to listen for but find it hard hearing it. Is it just practice?
jaminuk: definitely
Me: Basically yes... ..
Me: It's about training your ears to recognise sounds, or hear problems in a mix.. It's very different to merely listening to music.
rbro100: Is there any websites that give you examples of the same song?
jaminuk: i used to work with a (live) engineer who could identify the frequencies of feedback by ear alone!
Me: oh that's easy!
Me: lol
Me: We have a feedback trainer you could all use.
Me: http://www.audiocourses.com/download-file-41.html
Me: It's like a quiz.. it plays frequencies and you are to guess them.
Me: This would be a good thing to incorporate into your practise regime.
Me: Everyone grabbing that? It's neat thing
Kristian Eliasson: hehe cool
rbro100: Not working on my mac
jaminuk: grrrrrr
rbro100: There's a change
Andrew Barber: need the practise
rbro100: need a new computer
Me: rbro, maybe you could make your own?
rbro100: what does the trainer do?
Me: the trainer plays random frequencies and asks you to tick a box of possible solutions.
rbro100: like, kick it?
rbro100: how would I make my own?
rbro100: using a wav editor?
Me: well you could create some sinne wave tones
Me: say 20 or 30
Me: of equal lenght
Me: and equal amplitude
Me: and save them with filenames equal to the frequency
Me: 440.wav
Me: 1000.wav
Me: etc..
Me: stick them in your winamp player on random playback
rbro100: trying now.... Get the idea, good!
Me: and just listen when you have chosen, open your eyes and see if the filename corresponds to what you have guessed.
Me: that's a working-class self-build options
rbro100: tried 1000 is that what they use at the end of tele broadcast?
Me: been a while since i heard it.. but you are not far off. ... TV don't end anymore does it?
Me: 1K is a common line-up tone though
Me: as is 10K
rbro100: I know, miss that little girl drawing on blackboard!
Me: those two tones are almost exclusive for lining up.
Me: Youd hera them at the start of old skool analogue tape masters
Me: and on mixing desks you'll find them.
jaminuk: lot of analogue desks will have built in oscillators
jaminuk: doh - beat me to it!
rbro100: So how does it work, with using a tone I mean? What do they do?
Me: This topic is now moving into what is known as a reference levels.
Me: All studios, music and TV.... broadcast etc...
Me: must have what is known as an "Operating Level"
Me: This is a level which means when the meters throughout that studio are on 0, there is a particular known quantity of voltage operating.
Me: that is also tranferred to magnetic flux quantities on tape also.
Me: There are numerous reference levels in circulation with the most typical being 0dbu
Me: that is Zero Decibels at a reference of 0.775volts.
Me: the decibel itself has no meaning, it is not a unit, it is a measure of a ratio...
Me: it is a way of saying that the current level is so many times bigger than a referenced level.
Me: with me so far?
rbro100: yeah
thx1138-Alex: just about
Andrew Barber: yes
Kristian Eliasson: yes
Rachelh-Rachel: yep
Me: 0db means nothing..
Me: does not exist...
Me: 0dbu does however mean something
Me: it means when the fader is on 0 (in a odbu references environment) there would be 0.775volts at the fader.
Me: if we then set the fader to +1.5db the amplitude is now 1.5db above 0.775volts
Me: right?
rbro100: ok
Kristian Eliasson: yes
thx1138-Alex: right
Andrew Barber: ok
Me: if we set the fader to -1.5 the voltage is now -1.5db below 0.775volts
Me: decibels are fantastic as it means we don't have to get worried about large numbers with decimal places...
Me: or small ones..
Me: we can operate in a range of about +/-24 and accomodate most mixing solutions.
Me: instead of worrying about ridiculous quantities containing decimal places etc...
Me: ok?
rbro100: yes
Andrew Barber: yes
Rachelh-Rachel: yep
Kristian Eliasson: yes
Me: good..
Me: now
Me: we can find decibels used to describe sound levels also...
Me: rather than voltages
Me: so we can find 0dbSPL
Me: anyone know what that might be?
thx1138-Alex: sound pressure level?
Me: Sound Pressure Levels. GOOD
Kristian Eliasson: round a specific frequency?
Me: so in this case it has nothing to do with voltage yet using the SPL after the db we know it means sound pressure levels..
Me: so 0dbu and 0dbSPL are two completely different things..
Me: for example...
Me: 0dbSPL = 20 micro pascals...
Me: the pascal being a unit for the measurement of pressure
Me: As sound is disturbances of air, changes in pressure, we use a pressure unit for loudness.
Me: the more pressure (or intensity) the louder...
Me: the more pascals, the greater the amplitude (loudness)
Me: following?
Kristian Eliasson: yes
Rachelh-Rachel: yep
Andrew Barber: yep
thx1138-Alex: aye
Me: great..
Me: So back to our operating levels in the studio...
Me: in the good old days of analogue....
Me: we had tape machines...
Me: so we had to ensure that when the meters on the tape machine read 0, that that actually had scientific meaning.
Me: we had to ensure that when our desk was on zero at a reference level, so too was out tape on zero...
Me: and we also then had to ensure that a certain level of magentic flux was recorded on the tape itself.
Me: SO we had to "calibrate" the machines... to an operating level..
Me: This mean if we sent out tape off for mastering or further production etc, the tape would play back identically on other machines.
Me: imagine the problems if that were not the case.
Me: Now what happened is that two standards came into play...
Me: Pro and semi-pro ----- -10 and +4
Me: oops that's back to front.
Me: pro being +4 (above 0dbu) and semi-pro being -10dbu
Me: right?
Me: you could draw parellels here with digital and 16bit or 24bit (kinda)
Me: -10 being so much cheaper to manufacture also meant a lower signal level and therefore increased noise....
Me: +4 being so much more costly also meant a far greater SNR and magetism on tape.
Me: Still with me?
Rachelh-Rachel: yep
rbro100: think so
Kristian Eliasson: yes I have seen that they sometimes write -10 dBV insted of dbu....
Andrew Barber: yes
Me: We still need to calibrate our gear and ensure we have this operating level sorted, and often inputs need "trimming" or zeroing.
rbro100: why's -10 cheaper?
Me: electronic components are like mini heaters
Me: they convert energy into heat
Me: to make component that can operate at higher temp ranges costs more...
rbro100: gotcha
Me: I forgot the original question now..
Me: doh!
Me: Oh yeah line up tones...
Me: 1k and 10k
Me: that should about do it for now.. any questions?
Me: lol
Kristian Eliasson: does the SPL changes over the frequency span?
jaminuk: i think you finsihed them off!
Me: Yes it does...
Me: well...
Me: not technically....
Me: but our ears, or our ability to percieve sound does!
Me: in fact this is a good topic for mentioning during mastering...
jaminuk: definitely
Me: Becuase our ears respond in a non linear way...
Kristian Eliasson: I was thinking of the curve there...
jaminuk: the fletcher-munson curve!
Me: that is to say, our ears do not operate in a flat response...
Me: if we plot a graph of our ears respone
Me: with freqeuncy on the horiztonal axix
Me: and SPL on the vertical..
Me: we'd have a very interesting moment of enlighteenment,,
Me: ben can ya grab a flethcer image?
Me: so we can disccus it..
Me: what happens is that at low listening levels our ear do not have the ability to detect low frequencies very well...
jaminuk: http://www.silcom.com/~aludwig/images/Fletcher-Munson.jpg
Me: as the SPL increases the ear response becomes flatter and has a better ability to hear low frequencies
Me: you can note on that graph exactly how thaqt works
Me: notice at 20dbSPL we can't hear 50Hz at all..
Me: yes for the same sound at 60SPL we can..
Me: however at 20SPL we can hear frequencies in the mid-range (the most sensitive area of hearing)
Me: (which is different for girls and boys)
Me: girls have a higher sensitive spot lol
rbro100: lol
Me: lol cheap gag (sorry)
Me: so....
Me: this has implications for MONITORING LEVELS for when you mix.
Kristian Eliasson: does the curve mean that the lowest level we should mix on is 80 dB?
Me: if you mix you music loud like around 120db , apart from killing you, you'd set your bass so you are hapy with the level.... yet when the music is played at low volumes the bass would simply dissapear.
Me: In reality, the way you'd work it to mix at very low levels...
Me: and set your bass, mid, top ration accordingly, so it sounds as you want..
Me: then as the SPL increases in some environments, the bass eneger will increase...
Me: rather than the inverse.
Me: bass energy..
Me: does that make sense?
Kristian Eliasson: yes
Me: also kris in relality you'd never get as low as 20 anyway dure to background noise etc...
Me: around 32 is considerd about the lowest a pro studio could be..
Me: bear in mind that +6 represents a doubling of amplitude
Me: So the key point is low mixing levels are far better...
Me: means your music will sound best at more volume ranges
Me: Is that clear for all?
thx1138-Alex: just about
Rachelh-Rachel: yep
Andrew Barber: clear
Kristian Eliasson: yes
Me: cool.. well the short hand is pointing at 11 and the long hand is pointing at :03
Me: lol
Me: so I guess it's goodnight from him..
rbro100: oh thats not nice
Me: ?
rbro100: the poor mans just in his grave
Me: Oh no, it was a tribute..
Me: I love his work.
rbro100: ah, sorry
Me:
rbro100: was the best!!!
Andrew Barber: and its good night from me
Me: lol
Andrew Barber:
Me: have a great week all.
rbro100: is there a practical this week?
Me: ummm...
Me: yeah a replacement practical..
Me: liek we discussed earlier
Kristian Eliasson: didnt anybody else try to master...I want to continue that discussion....
Kristian Eliasson: if not here but in the forum
rbro100: I tried, but didn't have a clue
Andrew Barber: ill try again and post a reply
jaminuk: yes i still think that everyone should try to master that track - it is a very worthwile exercise
jaminuk: rbro - did you read the resources on the ftp?
Kristian Eliasson: ben was it all terrible or is there some hope?
rbro100: will do, sorry didn't see them
jaminuk: they're pretty good starting points
Kristian Eliasson: hehe diplomatic...
thx1138-Alex: got to go
thx1138-Alex: bye all
rbro100: bye
jaminuk: kris - tis good. the 2nd one had a much more commercial feel in terms of dynamics and also 'brightness'
jaminuk: bye awd
thx1138-Alex has left the conference.
Andrew Barber: bye all
Kristian Eliasson: ok lets try to master another time then...
Andrew Barber has left the conference.
jaminuk: the 1st was a bit more 'old school' in terms of dynamics
rbro100: Chris, remember I'm away next week and might not get to a computer
Kristian Eliasson: yeah I agree...but the bass is not clear maybe it shouldnt be
Me: ok
rbro100: next sunday I mean
Me: k
Kristian Eliasson: bye andy! try to maswter so we can discuss!
jaminuk: the bassists tone isn't particularly defined on the recording mind
Kristian Eliasson: no it isnt...
jaminuk: you could try to coax out some clarity with MB comp and/or some surgical eq
Kristian Eliasson: ok
Kristian Eliasson: I will try I will upload it...
jaminuk: by the way - MIDI -> Audio VST plug-ins
Kristian Eliasson: yes!
jaminuk: http://www.widisoft.com/
jaminuk: this plug-in can run polyphonically
jaminuk: although obviously its not perfect
Kristian Eliasson: really...
Kristian Eliasson: must check it out!
jaminuk: also for monophonic sources;
jaminuk: http://www.kvraudio.com/get.php?mode=show&id=827
jaminuk: http://www.kvraudio.com/get.php?mode=show&id=1342
jaminuk: http://www.kvraudio.com/get.php?mode=show&id=738
rbro100: right everyone, I'm off (need a bath hehe). have a good week!
jaminuk: cheers rbro
Kristian Eliasson: bye bye!
rbro100 has left the conference.
Kristian Eliasson: Thanks I will try the demo
Rachelh-Rachel: bye all see u next week
jaminuk: cheers rach
Me: bye bye
Rachelh-Rachel: bye
Rachelh-Rachel has left the conference.
Kristian Eliasson: byebye
jaminuk: i tried the vst-plug on a boogie woogie piano part with some fast playing and lots of notes and it coped ok - not 100% but a lot better than the technology has been
Kristian Eliasson: looks great and its actually in real time
jaminuk: yeah! they do an offline one too but i haven't tried this out
Kristian Eliasson: hehe...ok nightshift again...hehe
Kristian Eliasson: Ok then I better go then...I will try to find the bass in "aint got you"...
jaminuk: ok kris - good work so far with the mastering - good luck!
Kristian Eliasson: thanks see you next week!
jaminuk: cheers
_________________
It's all in the ears. - Learn the concepts not the software.
Audio Courses is a way into the music business for you
|
Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:42 am |
|
|
 
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Fri May 16, 2008 1:16 pm
|
|
|
|
| |
