Jump to content

Harmony

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,081

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Harmony

    So my Firebox died

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    the knobs are endless rotary, which I do not prefer
    Yeah, that's a big turn-off. I've also had bad experiences with Alesis. At one point I had two MutliMix 8 USB's and I couldn't get either to work without significant pops/crackles on two different setups. Meh, but that's what return policies are for :)

    Thanks for the suggestions Jimmy. You've given me a few things to think about.

    So my Firebox died

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    I haven't had any real problems with my usb interfaces, but I have gotten surprised a couple of times. (Surprise #1: USB 1.0 limits recording/monitoring options. Surprise #2: Alesis MultiMix 8 USB != Alesis MultiMix 8 USB 2.0)

    I was just trying to avoid anymore surprises by going firewire. However, since $700 seems to be the sweet spot for firewire with 8 preamps (too rich for my blood right now), I may have to bow out and go with a nice usb 2.0 interface. My options do open up a little more then. So I'm going to have to look into the U82S. I don't know how it sounds, but it looks sexy.

    So my Firebox died

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    Ugh, way to ruin my dreams Jimmy (a.k.a. thanks for the heads up!). Well, I guess the next best thing for me, besides possibly the MOTU 8Pre, which I know nothing about, would be the M-Audio Profire 2626 which is $200 more and has a bunch of digital I/O that I don't need. Wish M-Audio made a "Project" version of the 2626 :(

    So my Firebox died

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    I think it was a faulty unit anyways.
    That's pretty lame. Well, my next interface will most likely be the Firestudio Project which would be an upgrade for you, but if you've got the money, I think the music gods were telling you something. Of course, if the "Firebox" overheats and destroys components, what should I expect from the "Firestudio"!? 8O:tomatoface:

    Kore Player problem T-T

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    I swear it took me an hour to realize that you have to double click on the sounds in the right panel in order to load them up. Otherwise, nothing.

    If you're brighter than me and have already done that, let's keep this little embarrassing story between us, mkay?

    EDIT: ...and I see that Mike has already said that. Well then, nevermind :oops:

    Aural or Visual mixing?

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    I couldn't ever imagine doing everything by ear with the tools that we have today. It's possible, and in some cases useful, but in general I'd call it counterproductive. If you have a ring in a snare that you want to enhance, you can immediately look at a spectrum analyzer, find the primary tone then push the EQ up a few dB on that AND the other harmonics. Sure you could sweep an EQ peak to find the prime tone then do some quick math to figure out where the harmonics are, but why when there is a tool that specifically shows you this in precise detail?

    How do you know it you have excess energy in the sub-40Hz range if the monitors you have don't respond in that range? Either buy better monitors or just look at your freq spectrum and see.

    Why isn't your track as phat as zircon's? Look at the waveform and you can see that his track is more compressed than yours. Looking at waveforms is especially useful for beginners who don't know what compression really is. It's hard to hear the effects of compression attack, release and threshold. It's extremely easy to see them.

    Why does my master of the same mix sound more mid-heavy than someone else's? Look at a freq spectrum and see that you have a hump at 2k that could be scaled back. Going further, Why doesn't my pop track sound as EQ-balanced as Rhianna's newest song? Well, since the majority of pop music follows the 3dB falloff per octave rule, visually check your freq spectrum and see where you're not in line with that. Bet your mix will sound "better" after you've EQ'd to that falloff rate. I doubt anyone without lots of training could do that by ear.

    There are plenty of times when the ear, and the ear alone, is your best tool, but I hope more applications continue to emphasize both visual and aural feedback. A great example is something like Logic's linear phase EQ where you can overlay the freq spectrum to hear AND see what you're doing. It's a win-win!

    Setting up SONAR to take both MIDI and audio into the same plugin

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    by default sonar will bring gsnap in as a VST plug-in (effect), meaning that it can only operate on audio. To change this you need to configure it as both a plug-in (takes in audio) and a synth (takes in midi). I'm in sonar 6 so it might be different for your version, but to do this, go into the plugin manager, click on the "VST Audio Effects" category, then find gsnap in the "Registered Plug-ins" panel. Highlight it then click on the "Plug-in Properties" button. Set gsnap to be configured as both a plug-in and a synth by checking the appropriate boxes. After doing that, gsnap should no longer appear under the "VST Audio Effects" category. It should now be a synth found under the "VSTi Instruments" category. Now you can add it to your list of synths and start using it.

    In order to get midi mode to work, you can't (to my knowledge) use the simple Insert>synth method that automatically routes the midi channel to the audio track and turns the audio track into a special synth track. No, you have to go old school and route it yourself. Insert>Audio Track. In the audio track's FX bin, add gsnap as a SYNTH. Now Insert>MIDI Track. Set the input of your midi track to your keyboard and set the output to gsnap.

    That should do it. You might also want to check and make sure that gsnap is indeed both synth and a plug-in. Bring up the gsnap interface from the audio track fx bin, then check the vst properties from the drop-down menu in gsnap.

    Recording Good Guitar Sounds

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    I think the point here is that there is nothing preventing you from producing exactly the same sounds in the box as you'd get with amps+mics.That's the beauty of the digital age in which we live and operate. "Openness", "air", "distance" and "presence" are all qualities that can be adjusted realistically within any decent amp sim, and even without a good amp sim, these characteristics can be approximated with EQ and simple fx chains.

    So, while there is nothing physical preventing the exact reproduction of amp+mic sounds, there will obviously be differences when practically attempting to match any two tones (even between similar amp+mic setups). The question is, can you or anyone else actually perceive these minor differences if, as Nekofrog says, the person running the production knows what they're doing. I tend to agree that the answer is, by and large, no.

    Recording Good Guitar Sounds

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    I've never heard a single remix from this site that had good guitar tones.
    If you've listened to most of the remixes on this site and that's your opinion, that's cool. But I know many people, many experienced people, would disagree with that.
    The only way you're going to get them is with money.
    That's just not true, my friend. Recording guitar is a very subjective artform, and it may take money to get a specific sound, but it does not take money to get a good sound.
    Recording acoustic guitar isn't so complicated.
    It can be just as complicated as recording a distorted guitar. :?
    and if all else fails, use a gate. EQ doesn't get rid of noise,
    A gate doesn't get rid of noise, it just makes the entire signal equally quieter when the volume dips below a certain level. EQ, on the other hand, can reduce the specific frequencies that contain noise. Have a high freq hiss? Try reducing the higher freqs and you will reduce the noise. Of course, you will also affect any of the desirable guitar sound that lives in those freqs too. Have a 60Hz ground-loop buzz? Proper EQ will knock that out in no time. EQ won't do it all, but it is another useful tool in the noise reduction arsenal.

    Recording Good Guitar Sounds

    in Music Composition & Production

    Posted

    It would definitely help to know what equipment you have.

    For my electric/acoustic, if I'm doing a solo piece or one featuring the guitar I record both from the line in (plug the guitar directly into the soundcard) and from a mic...doesn't really matter how good your mic is. Usually the line in gives a clean bright signal, but it lacks warmth and tone. The mic usually can pick up good meaty low sounds, as well as ambient sounds like pick/fret noise. If your mic isn't that great, you can use EQ to take out parts of the signal that sound bad (like use a low pass filter to get rid of the harsh/noisy high frequencies). Pan one signal hard left and the other hard right, adjust the volume to your liking, and you've got sweet acoustic magic.

    To eliminate as much noise as possible, make sure your mic is as close to the guitar as possible, as far from the computer as possible, and that the room is as quiet as possible (turn off the a/c, the fridge, the fan, the tv, lights, etc). You also might try some noise reduction software. Audacity (free) has a plug-in that can get rid of some of the background noise with a minimal loss in quality.

×
×
  • Create New...