Nabeel Ansari

When individual sections are put together in a mix, it sounds even less organic. It's the sound of flutes playing alone, plus oboes playing alone, plus clarinets playing alone, etc. Ensemble playing isn't additive. It's not a bunch of vacuums with walls removed and everyone does their own thing. There's no synergy. There's no intrinsic balance between the musicians. Of course, ensemble patches also have flaws, like you said, different sections having the x-fades at exactly the same time has a not great effect. I'm not glorifying ensembles over individuals, I'm just stating facts here. Yes, you can't get individual sections with ensembles; but orchestrating for individual sections is very time-consuming and a lot of meticulous effort. Professional composers know this and compromise to what gets the job done in a timely manner with the best sound unless they're doing their magnum opus soundtracks where they have time to get all of that proper writing together. I used to think proper sectional arranging was the only way to go when I was younger; now I pretty much exclusively mix Metropolis Ark, Albion ONE, and CS2 (as well as some Embertone solos). I work pretty fast now. My music isn't super well "performed", but it sounds dazzling enough to a layperson for marketing purposes. On an actual gig, I'll spend the time expanding the orchestration and doing everything manual. Angel is of course welcome to dive into a FULL set of orchestral samples with breadth and depth, and that's why I also gave recommendations for those. @AngelCityOutlaw Your CineBrass + CS2 combo is great. If you have money, like Neifion said, Mural is much better strings (big orchestra strings) and Sable (small chamber, intimate strings). CineWinds being improved recently, I think it'll also be a good part of that lineup, though if you have the budget, Berlin Woodwinds is probably a better investment.

Yes.

Actually, as far as audio interfaces, not really, but field recorders do it. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1116977-REG/zoom_zh4nsp_h4nsp_handy_recorder.html This takes XLR, though (mic cables), so you might need a converter as well.

gol doesn't like other DAW's because it makes him feel insecure. If FL becomes usable and more user-friendly it's likely because it's becoming like other DAW's and we can't have that, can we?

Basically this. You can't orchestrate without articulations. That's a basic cornerstone of arranging for instruments; knowing their ranges and playing techniques. Practicing on garbage sounds ingrains into you habits, habits that say "oh, when I write music like this, it sounds bad" when sometimes it wouldn't sound bad with a good performance or good samples. Even a simple chord can sound bad on a piano but sound wonderful on brass. Sound matters. Composing is as much about sound as it is the notes on the paper. A bad performance can kill a composition.

I have CineSamples. It's okay. Some patches are amazing, like Horns legatos in CineBrass. The Winds are okay, they used to have bad noise issues and it got mostly fixed recently, but still nothing really inspiring. I have no comment on their strings, but I have a different recommendation for strings nonetheless. I think CineBrass is the strongest of the three, I would JUST get that one if you wanted CineSamples. For full orchestra, I recommend Albion ONE. Fantastic sound, mixability, and good legato patches. It's not split into each instrument section like most libraries but... it really doesn't matter if you're not doing meticulous orchestration. You have Highs, Lows, and Mids, and that's really all you need to paint really pretty pictures. Plus, the fact that it's pre-recorded as sections voiced together only makes it sound more organic when you have legato lines. For individual sections, as I said before CineBrass is good brass. For winds, CineWinds is okay and you get the main solos (clarinet, flute, piccolo, bassoon, oboe) which is good for a standard selection. Around VI-Control though, you'll see people talk very highly of Berlin Woodwinds, and their articulation switching system is out of this world. For strings, I have to recommend Cinematic Strings 2. CS2 is one of those libraries that everyone loves. It's simply designed and you just pop it into your project and it works. Has a great, full-bodied sound too, and with some good reverb it's honestly pretty convincing. I understand bundle pricing and all that is a big factor in a decision; if that's the case and it's important to you, then do get the CineSamples bundle. It's like the difference between a good chicken sandwich and a good cheeseburger; you're gonna have a good time either way.

Welcome to Shreddage 2 SRP, the newest KONTAKT PLAYER-powered virtual guitar from Impact Soundworks! Building on our legacy of rock & metal focused 7-string guitars, we've sampled a new American guitar performed by rising star Jules Conroy - better known as FamilyJules7x on YouTube. Together, we collaborated to create an incredibly versatile sample library that excels for hi-gain styles, but is just as well suited for a wide range of genres. Using the same great engine as our other Shreddage guitars, SRP offers total control over mapping, performance, and engine settings, allowing you to customize the instrument to your liking - OR just load and play, using any of the built-in FX presets! AUDIO DEMOS LIBRARY WALKTHROUGH (intro song is me!) SHREDDAGE 2 vs. IBZ vs. SRP COMPARISON KEY FEATURES * Over 15,000 new 24-bit samples * 7 strings with a low note of drop G * Clean (DI) recordings for custom tone crafting * Classic American sound: well-rounded and versatile * Ultra-realistic performance engine * Customizable articulation mapping & engine settings * Easy compatibility with Shreddage 2 & IBZ * Built-in FX rack with amp/cab presets * Compatible with KONTAKT PLAYER ARTICULATIONS * Single note & powerchord sustains * Single note & powerchord palm mutes UP TO 11 LAYERS * Single note & powerchord staccatos * Tremolo picking * Pinch squeal & regular harmonics * Portamento slides * Hammer-on and pull-off legato * Unpitched & pitched release noises * Over 100 FX sounds AVAILABILITY * Available NOW for Kontakt Player 5.3.1 * Intro price: $119 for new customers, $99 for Shreddage 2 license owners, $79 for Shreddage 2 IBZ owners Click for more information and to purchase!

So I did understand you right, and so my answer to: " Do I only hear the left or right panning? " Is the same; you will hear just one of the channels. Suppose you lose the right channel, all you will hear is just a mono signal of what's in the left channel. When the sound from the Canvas is hard panned to the right, there will be no sound at all. When it's panned to the left, it's the loudest. You need to wrap your head around the fact that there really isn't such a thing as left or right in signals. Stereo RCA out is two cables carrying separate mono signals. One is the "left", one is the "right". Panning the Canvas sound is just changing the volume balance between the two mono signals. You're shoving 2 mono signals via one connector into 1 mono input on the Behringer, and so one of them gets cut out. Let me say that again. You're shoving 2 mono signals via one connector (the 1/8" jack) into 1 mono input on the Behringer, and so one of them gets cut out. TO CONTRAST, the line-in on your computer knows how to process both of those channels. It is different from the Behringer. I'm not sure how to make this clearer at this point. There's only so much an explanation will do for you, you have to actually play with the technology to see it working. Would you like me to make a diagram for you? Would that help?' P.S. Don't tell me how to use the forums. I don't post here just for you, I post for everyone. Also, WHY are you using an audio interface and then just putting it into your computer's line-in anyway? That doesn't make any sense. That just brings the noise back. There's a USB cable on the back of the Behringer. You hook it up to your computer via USB and have FL Studio read the audio directly from the Behringer box. I think the reason for the confusion is that you're trying to record into this box and then direct monitor the Canvas sound straight towards the Behringer's outputs and then fire that out of the box into another cable into your computer's line in. It's unnecessary. Eliminate the computer line-in entirely, that's what you need to do.

This is a very confusing description... you need to be specific and be careful where you're using the words "in" and "out". Where is the sound coming from? Where is it going? "to the line-in jack out of my computer" for example contradicts itself. Is it a line in or is it going out? I can help you understand, but you need to help me understand as well. If I understand you right, you recorded this using a stereo cable (like a standard headphone jack). If you take this signal and put it into the Behringer input, it's only going to get one of the two channels (either the left or right one, I forget which. I think it's the left). Assuming the left is what's captured, the right channel will disappear because nothing is connecting it. So you'll just hear silence when the sound is only at the right. You can liken this to playing stereo music but turning off one of your speakers and placing the remaining one in front of you. If you want to get both the left and right channels, you need to have each part of the stereo RCA go to a separate input. http://www.crutchfield.com/p_979CPR203/Hosa-Stereo-1-4-to-RCA-Adapter-Cable-3-meter.html?tp=63670&awkw=122700762985&awat=pla&awnw=g&awcr=64103486185&awdv=c In other words, stereo RCA out from the keyboard, two 1/4 go into separate channels on the interface. When the signal gets into the DAW, hard pan each one.

It won't be narrow-sounding; if you pan left and right the signals as they come into the DAW, you've 100% re-established the stereo space. Like I said... stereo tracks are nothing more than two mono tracks panned left and right. This is a universal truth in all of audio technology. It's not difficult to get them to balance. You question the design, but I assure you, this is how it's worked for many decades. There's no reason to label an input as stereo left or right; none of the electronics would change, at all. Unless maybe they automatically panned it for you, but then that would be gimping two perfectly good normal inputs and killing the versatility. Here's a more concrete explanation: if you take the stereo output of the Sound Canvas thing and run it into the two separate inputs on an interface, and then pan them hard left and right (100% either side) as they enter the DAW, it will sound 100% identical to the Sound Canvas. I understand coming at it from an angle of experience only with newer more sensible technology, it's confusing. However, I assure you, this is how it's done, this is how people do it, and it's not as difficult (nor does it compromise quality) to do as you may think. Give it a shot.

In audio recording since the industry became a thing at all, stereo has always been simply the combination of two mono sources panned left and right. When you record in stereo, for example, you're actually using two mics on either side of the instrument/performance, and they're both running mono as separate inputs (which, yes, have separate mixer tracks, separate EQ's, compressors, gain control, etc.) into the studio set-up and are panned left and right on the mixer itself to appropriately space out the signal and the properly placed speakers recreates the stereo effect. The concept of a "stereo track" was actually pretty much exclusive to the digital era of software DAW's and beyond; they didn't exist in hardware, really. There have been some other micing techniques invented such as "Mid-Side" which aim to better capture stereo image and width through use of clever principles of wave math and geometry. One in particular uses two mics, a bi-directional (which actually creates two outputs because it picks up on both sides) facing left and right and a uni-direction facing forward. But even then, it's mixed down to a left and right channel in the end (ultimately are two mono signals that get sent separately to your left speaker and right speaker). Typical non-recording audio cables like in your headphones carry both signals at once; if you look at the tip of your headphone jack you'll notice it has 2 rings on it. Each of those is transmitting or receiving a separate signal (the single left channel signal and the single right channel signal). In recording however, separate cables are used for each and every input to ensure proper shielding, minimal interference, etc. You'll notice standard 1/4" have one ring on them, that's how you know it's mono and only going to grab one of them. You can also find cables that are two single-ring connectors on one end and one double-ring connector on the other; this demonstrates the principle more literally to show you that each ring on the double side corresponds to one of the other single ring connectors. To more practically answer your question, what you have to do is get the two channels as separate inputs (at the same gain, use your fingers, it's not that scary ) and then in your DAW or wherever you're recording to you need to have it set so the tracks are panned left and right so you hear it properly. Otherwise, like you mentioned, it's unnaturally narrow and doesn't sound good. Also, each cable needs to be the exact same length, or you'll get phase cancellation issues where one signal has some frequencies slightly delayed from the ones in the other signal and it cancels out creating a comb filter-like effect (because waves).

Yes, those inputs are designed to handle both line in (using regular 1/4 jacks) and mic in (using XLR). There's usually a method to tell the interface which one it is, like a button or something, because the electrical treatment is different for each one.

I don't agree with removing Vega's previous command-style but I understand why they did it; normalizing the characters makes the game a little more accessible. In a game with as much depth as Street Fighter V, accessibility is valuable. Though of course, they completely messed accessibility up by not offering challenge mode to teach basic combos on launch.

That catacomb boss is gonna give me nightmares

The game is pretty awful outside of the actual fighting, I think mostly everyone agrees.

I don't know dude, maybe adjust your playstyle? Try different things, if you're going for a first playthrough as a parry-maniac you're not going to have a good time. This isn't Bloodborne, it's Dark Souls. Pulling an incredibly risky maneuver like a parry isn't supposed to be easy or fluid. I don't think I've even attempted to parry once in this game. I haven't found a 100% physical shield yet, so it's not even practical to do a standard patience-and-hold-shield defensive strategy that's needed to learn the timing of the attacks to parry them. Going for backstabs and poise-breaking instead, having way more luck.

I find the game panders to me a little too much. I go "I really wish there was a bonfire coming up..." and then look at that, there it *actually* is in the next 30 seconds. I didn't *mean it*, you twats. I played DS1 and DS2, I can handle it; don't treat me like a child. The risk and reward build-up isn't hitting me as hard as I want it to. Anyways, really pleased with the game. New combat feels butter, the punishes are brutal as enemies have more difficult and faster attack patterns. I like we've returned to singular contiguous level design instead of branching paths from Majula. Really interested in the narrative here, too. Spoilers: I saw a Giant Tree near the beginning of the game, I wonder what's going on there.

Uhm... no. iLok is a technology that existed independent of EastWest and Soundsonline. Many, many music software companies still use it. iLok 2 has not been cracked yet, so it's still functionally perfect piracy prevention. I hate iLok too, but let's try to be accurate and factual here. There's nothing "acid trip" about wanting to protect your business.

Well... I guess I lied; V-Reversals help you here. A V-Reversal is a command reversal that uses V-meter and functions like a red parry: once you block something, you can perform the reversal and it's an instant, unyielding reversal. Try it in training mode with a CPU opponent; it's really not hard to pull off, the input window for it is gigantic and I'm pretty sure you're invincible while it's happening so they can't just poke you out of it. Basically it just lets you stop a rushdown and get back to neutral, or rush them down.

Wow! Sounds nice, the one during the World of Warcraft footage was great. Spot on for that kind of area, I say as a former WoW player

Some plug-ins don't work properly in offline bouncing in some DAW's. Kontakt has stability issues with changing tempos, and Omnisphere will actually omit the first note if it's right at the start. It's not really much of an opinion; it's just knowing the tech. Pretty objective.

Definitely share the opinion that selling a 50GB pack of good wav files doesn't really cut it anymore in this industry.

V-Reversals are probably the most useless mechanic in the game

You know you're agreeing with me, and not him, right? You're plainly stating that there's a degree of nuance here that isn't afforded by calling something simply a "good" or "bad" game. That's what I'm saying. I'm not saying games that get better over time are good games (please re-read " The point is not that MMO's become good games in endgame when they start off as bad games. "). In fact you essentially parroted what I said and expanded on it.

Calling something a good game or bad game as some kind of singular encompassing verdict when games have many, many aspects and parts to them is a useless evaluation. The point is not that MMO's become good games in endgame when they start off as bad games. The point is that when someone says it gets better in the endgame, it is more fun to play in the endgame. So yeah, it might still be a "bad game" but no one really gives a fuck; if later on it's possible to derive enjoyment from it, and that enjoyment is of a quality the person likes, then that by contrast is a pretty useful evaluation of the game. If you're the kind of person who wants their games to always have that level of quality and enjoyment from start to finish, that's fine too, and there are plenty of games for you. I played WoW and had some pretty insane experiences with playing with OCR friends and pursuing tasks that had aesthetic and social rewards that I enjoyed. That was mostly at the endgame content, in the expansions. Would I say it was worth playing through the beginning parts to get to that point? Considering it was a mere fraction of the total time I spent on the game, absolutely. Was it objectively a bad game because it started off bad? I don't... really care? What's the point of making that verdict? I'd prefer to tell it like it is; I had a potently good experience in several parts of the game and a boring one in a few others. That's far more useful in recommending a game to someone than saying "yeah the endgame is more fun but it's a bad game".