Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc.
| Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56919] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 18:54  |
![Deej [1] is currently offline](/theme/PARIS_Forum_Template/images/offline.png "Deej [1] is currently offline")
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to critique
it.
>
> TIA for the enlightenment.
>
> ;o)
>
> Deej
>
> Deej
>
>OK, a few thoughts... below.
DJ wrote:
<snip>
First, the ONLY time I would ever bother with detailed sound
stage is if I were doing a live concert locked to video
(which I do), and even then I would only bother with making
sure that the sound source is panned to the picture
location. The big problem with that is when you get a
close-up shot the instrument should, in theory, become
center panned and louder than the rest... it's closer...
right? Too much work.
>
> I figure that if I've got a group of musicians on a stage 50' wide, then
> each panning increment in the 100-100 L/R spread equals 0.25' so for every
> 4 increments, I'm moving the performer to the left or right by 1'. For
> example, if I wanted to position the band members within a space 30' across,
> then from the center, to place the guitarist 15' to stage left, I would pan
> him left to 60.
That would depend on the viewing angle... are you in the
front row, or center of the hall?
>
> This would theoretically put him 10' from the closest wall and 35' from the
> farthest wall.
>
> Now a few questions about early reflections and predelay and soundstaging in
> general, as follows:
>
> 1. If I'm using a stereo reverb, since the performer is stage left at pan
> position 60, I would pan the reverb return to stage right 60 and set the
> ER's for the right side to around 35ms and the ER's to the left to around
> 10ms with the levels about 2/3 to 3/4 (or less) of the strength of the
> original signal. This woulld theoretically give me a basic two dimensional
> (L/R) location of the musician in an ambient space, right?
The delay would not be necessary and would actually
"clutter" the mix. Longer reverb pre-delays will simulate a
larger overall "space". You would be better off "thinning
out" the sound slightly to make it seem to come from a
distance. You would have to combine this with reduced
bandwidth on the reverb return to simulate greater distance
as highs and are acoustically rolled off naturally over
distance.
>
> Also, do you pan the reverb send to mirror the return? I'm just not getting
> this for some reason. Seems that panning the send does nothing. Maybe I'm
> just too overwhelmed at the moment to notice.
Panning the return and reducing the reverb width would be a
better way to accomplish this as most reverbs are not
"discrete" stereo.
>
> 2. In order to get the front/back positioning of the musician relative to
> the other band members and the front/back of the room, using predealy would
> provide some dimensional space........right? what I'm not clear about is
> whether the predelay should be set for positioning the performers relative
> to the fall of the space that is farthest from them or from the wall that is
> behind them. I know that since they are broadcasting into the room, that the
> front makes sense, but music travels all directions and it seems it would
> make smoe sense to at least take the back wall into consideration.
>
> Also, I'm thinking that using actual short (2-3 ms delays) between the
> instruments/performers themselves would help to create some sense of
> relative front-to-back relational spatiality.
Too much trouble for not enough benefit... try thinning for
distance instead. Leave the arrival time intact, it will
help to maintain the "impact" of the piece..
>
> I'm working mostly with acoustic musicians, some drums, but very little in
> the way of special FX like phaser/chorus/synth stuff,..........just trying
> to create a realistic optimal and dimensionally realistic space for the
> performance.
>
> How big a soundstage is generally used for commercial studio projects? I
> know it's all relative, but if there is some sxort of *go-by* here that is
> an accepted standard, I'd like to know.
I think only classical people would ge
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56920 is a reply to message #56919] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 19:17  |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t really fussy about
this stuff... Don??? I think for your type of projects, you
won't have to get too crazy with sound stage. The two
things you have going for you in a stereo mix are position
and timbre. Make sonic "holes" for different instruments to
sit in. What sounds killer in a mix will often sound weak
or stale soloed. Don't make your EQ decisions in solo
mode... always tweak it with other instruments going. Make
it louder than it's surroundings to make EQ judgments, then
pull it way down in the mix and bring up slowly to taste.
You should find that the instrument is more audible at a
lower volume or fader level. If you are struggling to hear
it and the meters are pegged, your tone is off.
>
> Thanks for indulging my ignorance and enlightening me..Also, I've got an MP3
> of a mix that I did last night that I'd like to get some of your opinions
> on. It's a very talented bluegrass band-5 pieces. It's about 2.5 MB and
> the soundstage I created for it is small.......around 30' wide. I was trying
> to get an intimate, realistic feeling to this as it was tracked live in my
> studio with 10 open mics.
Keep in mind, intimate means CLOSE... this means full sounds
and WIDE panning as they would be literally right in front
of you. I really think you are overANALizing things too
far... Can you hear all the instruments clearly? Do they
sound pleasing in the mix? Is there some "space or air"
around the instruments (not piled on top of each other
acoustically). Is there some "ear-candy" present (subtle,
but not instantly audible).
I may be way off base to what others do, so take this with a
truck-load of salt! ;-)
My $.02
David.
>
> I'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to critique it.
>
> TIA for the enlightenment.
>
> ;o)
>
> DeejI hear ya'. I live on the northern edge of the second largest natural gas
basin in North America. I heat this house with natural gas and since were at
high altitude, it gets pretty cold here in the winter. My gas bills are
enormous in the winter (but non-existent from late April through
September/early October so that's something at least)
;oP
"Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_nospam_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:43014575@linux...
> Well... between the tar sands project and the millions of
> holes in the ground around this province, Alberta is in that
> boat. Record profits here for the oil patch. Our regular
> gas here in Calgary is at $0.99 Can/Litre which equals
> $3.11951 US/US Gallon.
>
> We also produce WAY more Natural Gas than our Country can
> use so we sell at *least* half to the US. My
> "locked-in-as-of-two-years-ago" gas rate is $6.85 Can/GJ.
> The funny part about that is that my gas "cost" for last
> month (middle of summer) was $6.64, but they charged me
> $15.98 in assorted fees (Fixed charge, Variable charge,
> Production Rider, Storage Rider and Franchise fee). These
> fees go up with the gas bill, so they aren't fixed.
>
> The oil companies have us by the "short and curlies"... and
> they know it. :-\
>
> David.
>
>
>
> DJ wrote:
> > There are lots of *possible* explanations.............such as the fact
that
> > Nigeria is an oil *exporting* country. It may
> > have an actual surplus of oil, per capita and it's also possible that
there
> > are subsidized or artificial price controls on domestic production due
to
> > the royalty structuring of the operating agreements with the
corporations
> > who are producing the oil, in other words, Nigeria's royalties may be
taken
> > *in kind* rather than *in cash* or a combination of both, which could,
given
> > very productive wells, create an actual oil surplus within it's borders.
I
> > have4n't studied this so it's pure speculation on my part and may be
woron,
> > but the above scenarios are definitely possible. If we were producing
more
> > oil than we could use here, it would be cheap too.
> >
> > Deej
> >
> > "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> > news:43013501@linux...
> >
> >>Amigo, but how does that actually explain the low price of gas there?
> >>
> >>"TC" <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote in message
> >>news:43012e4a@linux...
> >>
> >>>Sure, but can the average Nigerian pay that? Or even afford a car?
> >
> > That's
> >
> >>>probably a
> >>>pretty small token gesture for what the oil companies get in return for
> >>>the exploitation
> >>>of Nigeria.. although I am sure the government officials do well..
> >>>
> >&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56921 is a reply to message #56919] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 19:23 |
audioguy_nospam_
Messages: 60
Registered: June 2005
|
Member |
|
|
gt;>Cheers,
> >>>
> >>>TC
> >>>
> >>>justcron wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Nigeria can get gas for 38 cents a gallon, but we gotta pay 10 times
> >>>>that??? BULLSHIT
> >>>>http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/
> >>>>
> >>>>"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:dot1g1l42vkrb7l298ddn399lpbl55gro3@4ax.com...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>the only thing that comforts me is that all our refineries are having
> >>>>>problems at the same time and are getting a huge tax break to help
> >>>>>them out during these record profit times...thank god...our
government
> >>>>>is there to help.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>On 15 Aug 2005 22:23:42 +1000, "mike claytor" <claytor@nospam.com>
> >>>>>wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >
> >Thanks Dave,
I do have 3 x discrete stereo reverbs, plus, I thought the Paris reverbs
were *true* stereo. So your thinking is more along the lines of the not
screwing around with the L/R early reflections? (your reply referred to
predealys but i think you may have meant ER's)
Rolling off the HF of the return makes sense to me. I get your drift on this
one........and also carving out the space with EQ, of course.
I appreciate your feedback on this. The devil's always in the details, but
Mr. Simplicity can *always* make things harder and more complicated than
they need to be.
;o)
"Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_nospam_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:43014e3c$1@linux...
> OK, a few thoughts... below.
>
> DJ wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> First, the ONLY time I would ever bother with detailed sound
> stage is if I were doing a live concert locked to video
> (which I do), and even then I would only bother with making
> sure that the sound source is panned to the picture
> location. The big problem with that is when you get a
> close-up shot the instrument should, in theory, become
> center panned and louder than the rest... it's closer...
> right? Too much work.
>
> >
> > I figure that if I've got a group of musicians on a stage 50' wide, then
> > each panning increment in the 100-100 L/R spread equals 0.25' so for
every
> > 4 increments, I'm moving the performer to the left or right by 1'. For
> > example, if I wanted to position the band members within a space 30'
across,
> > then from the center, to place the guitarist 15' to stage left, I would
pan
> > him left to 60.
>
> That would depend on the viewing angle... are you in the
> front row, or center of the hall?
>
> >
> > This would theoretically put him 10' from the closest wall and 35' from
the
> > farthest wall.
> >
> > Now a few questions about early reflections and predelay and
soundstaging in
> > general, as follows:
> >
> > 1. If I'm using a stereo reverb, since the performer is stage left at
pan
> > position 60, I would pan the reverb return to stage right 60 and set the
> > ER's for the right side to around 35ms and the ER's to the left to
around
> > 10ms with the levels about 2/3 to 3/4 (or less) of the strength of the
> > original signal. This woulld theoretically give me a basic two
dimensional
> > (L/R) location of the musician in an ambient space, right?
>
> The delay would not be necessary and would actually
> "clutter" the mix. Longer reverb pre-delays will simulate a
> larger overall "space". You would be better off "thinning
> out" the sound slightly to make it seem to come from a
> distance. You would have to combine this with reduced
> bandwidth on the reverb return to simulate greater distance
> as highs and are acoustically rolled off naturally over
> distance.
>
> >
> > Also, do you pan the reverb send to mirror the return? I'm just not
getting
> > this for some reason. Seems that panning the send does nothing. Maybe
I'm
> > just too overwhelmed at the moment to notice.
>
> Panning the return and reducing the reverb width would be a
> better way to accomplish this as most reverbs are not
> "discrete" stereo.
>
> >
> > 2. In order to get the front/back positioning of the musician relative
to
> > the other band members and the front/back of the room, using predealy
would
> > provide some dimensional space........right? what I'm not clear about is
> > whether the predelay should be set for positioning the performers
relative
> > to the fall of the space that is farthest from them or from the wall
that is
> > behind them. I know that since they are broadcasting into the room, that
the
> > front makes sense, but music travels all directions and it seems it
would
> > make smoe sense to at least take the back wall into consideration.
> >
> > Also, I'm thinking that using actual short (2-3 ms delays) between the
> > instruments/performers themselves would help to create some sense of
> > relative front-to-back relational spatiality.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56923 is a reply to message #56921] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 20:07 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> >
> > First, the ONLY time I would ever bother with detailed sound
> > stage is if I were doing a live concert locked to video
> > (which I do), and even then I would only bother with making
> > sure that the sound source is panned to the picture
> > location. The big problem with that is when you get a
> > close-up shot the instrument should, in theory, become
> > center panned and louder than the rest... it's closer...
> > right? Too much work.
> >
> > >
> > > I figure that if I've got a group of musicians on a stage 50' wide,
then
> > > each panning increment in the 100-100 L/R spread equals 0.25' so for
> every
> > > 4 increments, I'm moving the performer to the left or right by 1'. For
> > > example, if I wanted to position the band members within a space 30'
> across,
> > > then from the center, to place the guitarist 15' to stage left, I
would
> pan
> > > him left to 60.
> >
> > That would depend on the viewing angle... are you in the
> > front row, or center of the hall?
> >
> > >
> > > This would theoretically put him 10' from the closest wall and 35'
from
> the
> > > farthest wall.
> > >
> > > Now a few questions about early reflections and predelay and
> soundstaging in
> > > general, as follows:
> > >
> > > 1. If I'm using a stereo reverb, since the performer is stage left at
> pan
> > > position 60, I would pan the reverb return to stage right 60 and set
the
> > > ER's for the right side to around 35ms and the ER's to the left to
> around
> > > 10ms with the levels about 2/3 to 3/4 (or less) of the strength of the
> > > original signal. This woulld theoretically give me a basic two
> dimensional
> > > (L/R) location of the musician in an ambient space, right?
> >
> > The delay would not be necessary and would actually
> > "clutter" the mix. Longer reverb pre-delays will simulate a
> > larger overall "space". You would be better off "thinning
> > out" the sound slightly to make it seem to come from a
> > distance. You would have to combine this with reduced
> > bandwidth on the reverb return to simulate greater distance
> > as highs and are acoustically rolled off naturally over
> > distance.
> >
> > >
> > > Also, do you pan the reverb send to mirror the return? I'm just not
> getting
> > > this for some reason. Seems that panning the send does nothing. Maybe
> I'm
> > > just too overwhelmed at the moment to notice.
> >
> > Panning the return and reducing the reverb width would be a
> > better way to accomplish this as most reverbs are not
> > "discrete" stereo.
> >
> > >
> > > 2. In order to get the front/back positioning of the musician relative
> to
> > > the other band members and the front/back of the room, using predealy
> would
> > > provide some dimensional space........right? what I'm not clear about
is
> > > whether the predelay should be set for positioning the performers
> relative
> > > to the fall of the space that is farthest from them or from the wall
> that is
> > > behind them. I know that since they are broadcasting into the room,
that
> the
> > > front makes sense, but music travels all directions and it seems it
> would
> > > make smoe sense to at least take the back wall into consideration.
> > >
> > > Also, I'm thinking that using actual short (2-3 ms delays) between the
> > > instruments/performers themselves would help to create some sense of
> > > relative front-to-back relational spatiality.
> >
> > Too much trouble for not enough benefit... try thinning for
> > distance instead. Leave the arrival time intact, it will
> > help to maintain the "impact" of the piece..
> >
> > >
> > > I'm working mostly with acoustic musicians, some drums, but very
little
> in
> > > the way of special FX like phaser/chorus/synth stuff,..........just
> trying
> > > to create a realistic optimal and dimensionally realistic space for
the
> > > performance.
> > >
> > > How big a soundstage is generally used for commercial studio projects?
I
> > > know it's all relative, but if there is some sxort of *go-by* here
that
> is
> > > an accepted standard, I'd like to know.
> >
> > I think only classical people would get really fussy about
> > this stuff... Don??? I think for your type of projects, you
> > won't have to get too crazy with sound stage. The two
> > things you have going for you in a stereo mix are position
> > and timbre. Make sonic "holes" for different instruments to
> > sit in. What sounds killer in a mix will often sound weak
> > or stale soloed. Don't make your EQ decisions in solo
> > mode... always tweak it with other instruments going. Make
> > it louder than it's surroundings to make EQ judgments, then
> > pull it way down in the mix and bring up slowly to taste.
> > You should find that the instrument is more audible at a
> > lower volume or fader level. If you are struggling to hear
> > it and the meters are pegged, your tone is off.
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks for indulging my ignorance and enlightening me..Also, I've got
an
> MP3
> > > of a mix that I did last night that I'd like to get some of your
> opinions
> > > on. It's a very talented bluegrass band-5 pieces. It's about 2.5 MB
and
> > > the soundstage I created for it is small.......around 30' wide. I was
> trying
> > > to get an intimate, realistic feeling to this as it was tracked live
in
> my
> > > studio with 10 open mics.
> >
> > Keep in mind, intimate means CLOSE... this means full sounds
> > and WIDE panning as they would be literally right in front
> > of you. I really think you are overANALizing things too
> > far... Can you hear all the instruments clearly? Do they
> > sound pleasing in the mix? Is there some "space or air"
> > around the instruments (not piled on top of each other
> > acoustically). Is there some "ear-candy" present (subtle,
> > but not instantly audible).
> >
> > I may be way off base to what others do, so take this with a
> > truck-load of salt! ;-)
> >
> > My $.02
> >
> > David.
> >
> > >
> > > I'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to
critique
> it.
> > >
> > > TIA for the enlightenment.
> > >
> > > ;o)
> > >
> > > Deej
>
>I don't believe that getting this analytical about something
will necessarly make it sound better. Why do you feel you have
to create a specific space (unless you're
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56924 is a reply to message #56923] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 20:40 |
uptown jimmy
Messages: 441
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
trying to match it to
an existing specific space like in Foley work, ADR, replacment
tracks for a live multitrack performance, etc).
How about this... Imagine what kind of space you'd like to hear
that particular song in, pick one that's close to that in one of
your verb units, then tweak as necessary to your heart's
content - and that's the key, use your heart (emotional
response), not your brain.
Neil
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I'm needing to get pretty anal retentive with this stuff these days. I'm
in
>a very small market and I am starting to carve out a niche for myself. The
>engineers in the other studios around here have many more years behind the
>board than I do (average of around 30 years of full-time *earning a living
>at it* kind of experience so I'm a comparative newbie)
>
>I've learned a few things over the years of turd polishing and doing small
>demo projects and I'm starting to actually get some small labels sniffing
>around my door so I must be doing something right in spite of myself and
the
>rather limited and haphazard education and experience I've managed to
>accumulate.
>
>I'm really feelin' the need to get my head around the finer points of this
>craft if I'm going to make a go of this. A huge part of this is soundstaging
>and needing to spend the time to do much more than just pan a reverb send
>here and there to create a semblance of realism. To that end I've been doing
>a bit of research and I'm beginning some more in depth experimentation with
>this. I just want to make sure that my methodology is somewhat sound and
>that I'm not tilting at windmills here. I've got a full plate so though
I'd
>like to be able to spend the next 6 months floundering around learning by
>making mistakes (my normal MO), but I don't seem to have that luxury right
>now.
>
>I figure that if I've got a group of musicians on a stage 50' wide, then
>each panning increment in the 100-100 L/R spread equals 0.25' so for every
>4 increments, I'm moving the performer to the left or right by 1'. For
>example, if I wanted to position the band members within a space 30' across,
>then from the center, to place the guitarist 15' to stage left, I would
pan
>him left to 60.
>
>This would theoretically put him 10' from the closest wall and 35' from
the
>farthest wall.
>
>Now a few questions about early reflections and predelay and soundstaging
in
>general, as follows:
>
>1. If I'm using a stereo reverb, since the performer is stage left at pan
>position 60, I would pan the reverb return to stage right 60 and set the
>ER's for the right side to around 35ms and the ER's to the left to around
>10ms with the levels about 2/3 to 3/4 (or less) of the strength of the
>original signal. This woulld theoretically give me a basic two dimensional
>(L/R) location of the musician in an ambient space, right?
>
>Also, do you pan the reverb send to mirror the return? I'm just not getting
>this for some reason. Seems that panning the send does nothing. Maybe I'm
>just too overwhelmed at the moment to notice.
>
>2. In order to get the front/back positioning of the musician relative to
>the other band members and the front/back of the room, using predealy would
>provide some dimensional space........right? what I'm not clear about is
>whether the predelay should be set for positioning the performers relative
>to the fall of the space that is farthest from them or from the wall that
is
>behind them. I know that since they are broadcasting into the room, that
the
>front makes sense, but music travels all directions and it seems it would
>make smoe sense to at least take the back wall into consideration.
>
>Also, I'm thinking that using actual short (2-3 ms delays) between the
>instruments/performers themselves would help to create some sense of
>relative front-to-back relational spatiality.
>
>I'm working mostly with acoustic musicians, some drums, but very little
in
>the way of special FX like phaser/chorus/synth stuff,..........just trying
>to create a realistic optimal and dimensionally realistic space for the
>performance.
>
>How big a soundstage is generally used for commercial studio projects? I
>know it's all relative, but if there is some sxort of *go-by* here that
is
>an accepted standard, I'd like to know.
>
>Thanks for indulging my ignorance and enlightening me..Also, I've got an
MP3
>of a mix that I did last night that I'd like to get some of your opinions
>on. It's a very talented bluegrass band-5 pieces. It's about 2.5 MB and
>the soundstage I created for it is small.......around 30' wide. I was trying
>to get an intimate, realistic feeling to this as it was tracked live in
my
>studio with 10 open mics.
>
>I'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to critique
it.
>
>TIA for the enlightenment.
>
>;o)
>
>Deej
>
>Deej
>
>Increasing ER levels simulates proximity to surfaces,
whereas adjusting predelay gives a sense as to the size of
space, or distance to source... but not in the way you would
think it would. Longer predelay times (time to first
reflection) will actually make it seem like you are closer
to the sound source in a larger room, and no predelay makes
it seem like you are farther away from the source. This
would of course have to be combined with appropriate level
and EQ of the source signal and verb return to complete the
illusion. Loud bright early reflections give the impression
of being close to a hard surface. By altering the L/R
balance of the ER's, you will make it sound like you are
standing next to a surface on one side. As for the arrival
time delay, there would actually be more delay between
sources (proportionally) if you were close up rather than if
you were farther away. The farther away from the stage you
get, the arrival time curve flattens out making the time
differences less noticeable. Your sound stage also narrows
with distance.
If you mixed dialog and FX for feature films, this stuff
would become second nature, but it is not necessary for
music IMHO. Sorry to make your life "simpler" ;-)
David.
DJ wrote:
> Thanks Dave,
>
> I do have 3 x discrete stereo reverbs, plus, I thought the Paris reverbs
> were *true* stereo. So your thinking is more along the lines of the not
> screwing around with the L/R early reflections? (your reply referred to
> predealys but i think you may have meant ER's)
>
> Rolling off the HF of the return makes sense to me. I get your drift on this
> one........and also carving out the space with EQ, of course.
>
> I appreciate your feedback on this. The devil's always in the details, but
> Mr. Simplicity can *always* make things harder and more complicated than
> they need to be.
>
> ;o)
>
> "Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_nospam_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:43014e3c$1@linux...
>
>>OK, a few thoughts... below.
>>
>>DJ wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>First, the ONLY time I would ever bother with detailed sound
>>stage is if I were doing a live concert locked to video
>>(which I do), and even then I would only bother with making
>>sure that the sound source is panned to the picture
>>location. The big problem with that is when you get a
>>close-up shot the instrument should, in theory, become
>>center panned and louder than the rest... it's closer...
>>right? Too much work.
>>
>>
>>>I figure that if I've got a group of musicians on a stage 50' wide, then
>>>each panning increment in the 100-100 L/R spread equals 0.25' so for
>
> every
>
>>>4 increments, I'm moving the performer to the left or right by 1'. For
>>>example, if I wanted to position the band members within a space 30'
>
> across,
>
>>>then from the center, to place the guitarist 15' to stage left, I would
>
> pan
>
>>>him left to 60.
>>
>>That would depend on the viewing angle... are you in the
>>front row, or center of the hall?
>>
>>
>>>This would theoretically put him 10' from the closest wall and 35' from
>
> the
>
>>>farthest wall.
>>>
>>>Now a few questions about early reflections and predelay and
>
> soundstaging in
>
>>>general, as follows:
>>>
>>>1. If I'm using a stereo reverb, since the performer is stage left at
>
> pan
>
>>>position 60, I would pan the reverb return to stage right 60 and set the
>>>ER's for the ri
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56925 is a reply to message #56919] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 20:51 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ght side to around 35ms and the ER's to the left to
>
> around
>
>>>10ms with the levels about 2/3 to 3/4 (or less) of the strength of the
>>>original signal. This woulld theoretically give me a basic two
>
> dimensional
>
>>>(L/R) location of the musician in an ambient space, right?
>>
>>The delay would not be necessary and would actually
>>"clutter" the mix. Longer reverb pre-delays will simulate a
>>larger overall "space". You would be better off "thinning
>>out" the sound slightly to make it seem to come from a
>>distance. You would have to combine this with reduced
>>bandwidth on the reverb return to simulate greater distance
>>as highs and are acoustically rolled off naturally over
>>distance.
>>
>>
>>>Also, do you pan the reverb send to mirror the return? I'm just not
>
> getting
>
>>>this for some reason. Seems that panning the send does nothing. Maybe
>
> I'm
>
>>>just too overwhelmed at the moment to notice.
>>
>>Panning the return and reducing the reverb width would be a
>>better way to accomplish this as most reverbs are not
>>"discrete" stereo.
>>
>>
>>>2. In order to get the front/back positioning of the musician relative
>
> to
>
>>>the other band members and the front/back of the room, using predealy
>
> would
>
>>>provide some dimensional space........right? what I'm not clear about is
>>>whether the predelay should be set for positioning the performers
>
> relative
>
>>>to the fall of the space that is farthest from them or from the wall
>
> that is
>
>>>behind them. I know that since they are broadcasting into the room, that
>
> the
>
>>>front makes sense, but music travels all directions and it seems it
>
> would
>
>>>make smoe sense to at least take the back wall into consideration.
>>>
>>>Also, I'm thinking that using actual short (2-3 ms delays) between the
>>>instruments/performers themselves would help to create some sense of
>>>relative front-to-back relational spatiality.
>>
>>Too much trouble for not enough benefit... try thinning for
>>distance instead. Leave the arrival time intact, it will
>>help to maintain the "impact" of the piece..
>>
>>
>>>I'm working mostly with acoustic musicians, some drums, but very little
>
> in
>
>>>the way of special FX like phaser/chorus/synth stuff,..........just
>
> trying
>
>>>to create a realistic optimal and dimensionally realistic space for the
>>>performance.
>>>
>>>How big a soundstage is generally used for commercial studio projects? I
>>>know it's all relative, but if there is some sxort of *go-by* here that
>
> is
>
>>>an accepted standard, I'd like to know.
>>
>>I think only classical people would get really fussy about
>>this stuff... Don??? I think for your type of projects, you
>>won't have to get too crazy with sound stage. The two
>>things you have going for you in a stereo mix are position
>>and timbre. Make sonic "holes" for different instruments to
>>sit in. What sounds killer in a mix will often sound weak
>>or stale soloed. Don't make your EQ decisions in solo
>>mode... always tweak it with other instruments going. Make
>>it louder than it's surroundings to make EQ judgments, then
>>pull it way down in the mix and bring up slowly to taste.
>>You should find that the instrument is more audible at a
>>lower volume or fader level. If you are struggling to hear
>>it and the meters are pegged, your tone is off.
>>
>>
>>>Thanks for indulging my ignorance and enlightening me..Also, I've got an
>
> MP3
>
>>>of a mix that I did last night that I'd like to get some of your
>
> opinions
>
>>>on. It's a very talented bluegrass band-5 pieces. It's about 2.5 MB and
>>>the soundstage I created for it is small.......around 30' wide. I was
>
> trying
>
>>>to get an intimate, realistic feeling to this as it was tracked live in
>
> my
>
>>>studio with 10 open mics.
>>
>>Keep in mind, intimate means CLOSE... this means full sounds
>>and WIDE panning as they would be literally right in front
>>of you. I really think you are overANALizing things too
>>far... Can you hear all the instruments clearly? Do they
>>sound pleasing in the mix? Is there some "space or air"
>>around the instruments (not piled on top of each other
>>acoustically). Is there some "ear-candy" present (subtle,
>>but not instantly audible).
>>
>>I may be way off base to what others do, so take this with a
>>truck-load of salt! ;-)
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56926 is a reply to message #56923] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 21:04 |
audioguy_nospam_
Messages: 60
Registered: June 2005
|
Member |
|
|
t;>
>>My $.02
>>
>>David.
>>
>>
>>>I'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to critique
>
> it.
>
>>>TIA for the enlightenment.
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>Deej
>
>
>To start with, panpots are nearly useless in precisely placing things.
They have three positions that actually do anything.
Hard left, hard right, and center. And *maybe* in between center
and hard pan on each side of center.
Everything else is useless.
Human beings determine positioning by a combination of volume
(which speaker is louder) and delay. Delay is more important.
Sort this out before you use any reverb at all.
Try this: Copy a track in Paris in the editor window. (use the time-locked
tool) Pan them hard left and right.
Now, slide one of the tracks backward in time, use small
increments, and listen to how precisely you can place things.
(just listen to the two tracks at first, and mute everything else)
Sound staging can be done much more precisely this way than
with pan pots alone. It can, of course, also be done in the mixer
with aux sends and FX returns, but it is easier to see in the editor
window.
When you use delay and panning creatively to setup a soundstage,
you then use reverb to complement it, not create it, and you will
probably need less reverb than otherwise. a good thing IMO
Oh, and always work on the soundstage of the drums and bass
first. If they aren't happy, ain't nobody happy.
Leave space, leave space, leave space....
DC
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I'm needing to get pretty anal retentive with this stuff these days. I'm
in
>a very small market and I am starting to carve out a niche for myself. The
>engineers in the other studios around here have many more years behind the
>board than I do (average of around 30 years of full-time *earning a living
>at it* kind of experience so I'm a comparative newbie)
>
>I've learned a few things over the years of turd polishing and doing small
>demo projects and I'm starting to actually get some small labels sniffing
>around my door so I must be doing something right in spite of myself and
the
>rather limited and haphazard education and experience I've managed to
>accumulate.
>
>I'm really feelin' the need to get my head around the finer points of this
>craft if I'm going to make a go of this. A huge part of this is soundstaging
>and needing to spend the time to do much more than just pan a reverb send
>here and there to create a semblance of realism. To that end I've been doing
>a bit of research and I'm beginning some more in depth experimentation with
>this. I just want to make sure that my methodology is somewhat sound and
>that I'm not tilting at windmills here. I've got a full plate so though
I'd
>like to be able to spend the next 6 months floundering around learning by
>making mistakes (my normal MO), but I don't seem to have that luxury right
>now.
>
>I figure that if I've got a group of musicians on a stage 50' wide, then
>each panning increment in the 100-100 L/R spread equals 0.25' so for every
>4 increments, I'm moving the performer to the left or right by 1'. For
>example, if I wanted to position the band members within a space 30' across,
>then from the center, to place the guitarist 15' to stage left, I would
pan
>him left to 60.
>
>This would theoretically put him 10' from the closest wall and 35' from
the
>farthest wall.
>
>Now a few questions about early reflections and predelay and soundstaging
in
>general, as follows:
>
>1. If I'm using a stereo reverb, since the performer is stage left at pan
>position 60, I would pan the reverb return to stage right 60 and set the
>ER's for the right side to around 35ms and the ER's to the left to around
>10ms with the levels about 2/3 to 3/4 (or less) of the strength of the
>original signal. This woulld theoretically give me a basic two dimensional
>(L/R) location of the musician in an ambient space, right?
>
>Also, do you pan the reverb send to mirror the return? I'm just not getting
>this for some reason. Seems that panning the send does nothing. Maybe I'm
>just too overwhelmed at the moment to notice.
>
>2. In order to get the front/back positioning of the musician relative to
>the other band members and the front/back of the room, using predealy would
>provide some dimensional space........right? what I'm not clear about is
>whether the predelay should be set for positioning the performers relative
>to the fall of the space that is farthest from them or from the wall that
is
>behind them. I know that since they are broadcasting into the room, that
the
>front makes sense, but music travels all directions and it seems it would
>make smoe sense to at least take the back wall into consideration.
>
>Also, I'm thinking that using actual short (2-3 ms delays) between the
>instruments/performers themselves would help to create some sense of
>relative front-to-back relational spatiality.
>
>I'm working mostly with acoustic musicians, some drums, but very little
in
>the way of special FX like phaser/chorus/synth stuff,..........just trying
>to create a realistic optimal and dimensionally realistic space for the
>performance.
>
>How big a soundstage is generally used for commercial studio projects? I
>know it's all relative, but if there is some sxort of *go-by* here that
is
>an accepted standard, I'd like to know.
>
>Thanks for indulging my ignorance and enlightening me..Also, I've got an
MP3
>of a mix that I did last night that I'd like to get some of your opinions
>on. It's a very talented bluegrass band-5 pieces. It's about 2.5 MB and
>the soundstage I created for it is small.......around 30' wide. I was trying
>to get an intimate, realistic feeling to this as it was tracked live in
my
>studio with 10 open mics.
>
>I'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to critique
it.
>
>TIA for the enlightenment.
>
>;o)
>
>Deej
>
>Deej
>
>Anyone see anything here that would be a problem for Paris 3.0?
Either:
Athlon 64 3500+ 2.2 GHz 512KB cache
or
Athlon 64 4000+ 2.4 GHz 1MB cache
Asus A8N-SLI mobo w/ 800+ MHz FSB
1 GB RAM 400 MHz
GeForce 256MB dual head vid card
(2) 200 GB Maxtor 7200 RPM ATA-133 hd
Plextor SATA DVD-RW
MS Win XP Pro
450watt power supply
dual 17" Flat panels
Spappy"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I'm needing to get pretty anal retentive with this stuff these days...
>Deej
>
Well…
I have worked with many producers and mix engineers over the years that do
sweat the details, including sound stage.
M/S.
Binaural.
X/Y.
These exist because people consider the stereo imaging and sound stage important.
Obviously this is not the most critical issue in typical, modern, radio driven
productions, but that does not equate to being meaningless.
I love recording in true stereo (primarily M/S) whenever it seems appropriate.
Trying to control the sound stage “after the fact” is a completely different
animal but again, the details do add up.
I have been playing around a little with GigaPulse, the convolution reverb
that comes with Giga3, and now available separately. With multiple instances,
you can create a very controlled and convincing 3D soundstages that you actually
can adjust during mixdown. This reminds me a little of using the Calrec Soundfield
(the ultimate mic for post recording control of sound stage.)
The new generation of hardware and software phase correction systems also
opens up new possibilities. As an example: If you record a small acoustic
ensemble with M/S, you should be able to add spot mics and “correct” the
phase relationship after the fact. I have not had a chance to try this yet,
but I hope to soon.
(PhaseTone from Tritone is out now and free.)
http://www.tritonedigital.com/products.htm
GeneOK..........makes perfect sense to me. Thanks for the explanation. I'm doing
pretty well r4ight now with minimal tweaking. Lots of space between the
instruments carved out with mostly subtractive EQ, then blended nicely with
appropriately panned subtle reverbs is creating a very nice ambient space on
this particular project. I may get a bit more tweaky on it just for fun and
see if I can get an even better result but I can see how getting too far
outside the box could create some imbalances that might make the mix fall
apart. there are only 5 instrumednts in this mix so there's plenty of space
to play with without having to put on my muckers and shovel mud at 200Hz +-.
;o)
"Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_nospam_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:430165f4@linux...
> Increasing ER levels simulates proximity to surfaces,
> whereas adjusting predelay gives a sense as to the size of
> space, or distance to source... but not in the way you would
> think it would. Longer predelay times (time to first
> reflection) will actually make it seem like you are closer
> to the sound source in a larger room, and no predelay make
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56927 is a reply to message #56919] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 21:32 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s
> it seem like you are farther away from the source. This
> would of course have to be combined with appropriate level
> and EQ of the source signal and verb return to complete the
> illusion. Loud bright early reflections give the impression
> of being close to a hard surface. By altering the L/R
> balance of the ER's, you will make it sound like you are
> standing next to a surface on one side. As for the arrival
> time delay, there would actually be more delay between
> sources (proportionally) if you were close up rather than if
> you were farther away. The farther away from the stage you
> get, the arrival time curve flattens out making the time
> differences less noticeable. Your sound stage also narrows
> with distance.
>
> If you mixed dialog and FX for feature films, this stuff
> would become second nature, but it is not necessary for
> music IMHO. Sorry to make your life "simpler" ;-)
>
> David.
>
> DJ wrote:
>
> > Thanks Dave,
> >
> > I do have 3 x discrete stereo reverbs, plus, I thought the Paris reverbs
> > were *true* stereo. So your thinking is more along the lines of the not
> > screwing around with the L/R early reflections? (your reply referred to
> > predealys but i think you may have meant ER's)
> >
> > Rolling off the HF of the return makes sense to me. I get your drift on
this
> > one........and also carving out the space with EQ, of course.
> >
> > I appreciate your feedback on this. The devil's always in the details,
but
> > Mr. Simplicity can *always* make things harder and more complicated
than
> > they need to be.
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> > "Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_nospam_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> > news:43014e3c$1@linux...
> >
> >>OK, a few thoughts... below.
> >>
> >>DJ wrote:
> >>
> >><snip>
> >>
> >>First, the ONLY time I would ever bother with detailed sound
> >>stage is if I were doing a live concert locked to video
> >>(which I do), and even then I would only bother with making
> >>sure that the sound source is panned to the picture
> >>location. The big problem with that is when you get a
> >>close-up shot the instrument should, in theory, become
> >>center panned and louder than the rest... it's closer...
> >>right? Too much work.
> >>
> >>
> >>>I figure that if I've got a group of musicians on a stage 50' wide,
then
> >>>each panning increment in the 100-100 L/R spread equals 0.25' so for
> >
> > every
> >
> >>>4 increments, I'm moving the performer to the left or right by 1'. For
> >>>example, if I wanted to position the band members within a space 30'
> >
> > across,
> >
> >>>then from the center, to place the guitarist 15' to stage left, I would
> >
> > pan
> >
> >>>him left to 60.
> >>
> >>That would depend on the viewing angle... are you in the
> >>front row, or center of the hall?
> >>
> >>
> >>>This would theoretically put him 10' from the closest wall and 35' from
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>farthest wall.
> >>>
> >>>Now a few questions about early reflections and predelay and
> >
> > soundstaging in
> >
> >>>general, as follows:
> >>>
> >>>1. If I'm using a stereo reverb, since the performer is stage left at
> >
> > pan
> >
> >>>position 60, I would pan the reverb return to stage right 60 and set
the
> >>>ER's for the right side to around 35ms and the ER's to the left to
> >
> > around
> >
> >>>10ms with the levels about 2/3 to 3/4 (or less) of the strength of the
> >>>original signal. This woulld theoretically give me a basic two
> >
> > dimensional
> >
> >>>(L/R) location of the musician in an ambient space, right?
> >>
> >>The delay would not be necessary and would actually
> >>"clutter" the mix. Longer reverb pre-delays will simulate a
> >>larger overall "space". You would be better off "thinning
> >>out" the sound slightly to make it seem to come from a
> >>distance. You would have to combine this with reduced
> >>bandwidth on the reverb return to simulate greater distance
> >>as highs and are acoustically rolled off naturally over
> >>distance.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Also, do you pan the reverb send to mirror the return? I'm just not
> >
> > getting
> >
> >>>this for some reason. Seems that panning the send does nothing. Maybe
> >
> > I'm
> >
> >>>just too overwhelmed at the moment to notice.
> >>
> >>Panning the return and reducing the reverb width would be a
> >>better way to accomplish this as most reverbs are not
> >>"discrete" stereo.
> >>
> >>
> >>>2. In order to get the front/back positioning of the musician relative
> >
> > to
> >
> >>>the other band members and the front/back of the room, using predealy
> >
> > would
> >
> >>>provide some dimensional space........right? what I'm not clear about
is
> >>>whether the predelay should be set for positioning the performers
> >
> > relative
> >
> &g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56929 is a reply to message #56919] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 22:45 |
gene lennon
Messages: 565
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;make smoe sense to at least take the back wall into consideration.
> >>>
> >>>Also, I'm thinking that using actual short (2-3 ms delays) between the
> >>>instruments/performers themselves would help to create some sense of
> >>>relative front-to-back relational spatiality.
> >>
> >>Too much trouble for not enough benefit... try thinning for
> >>distance instead. Leave the arrival time intact, it will
> >>help to maintain the "impact" of the piece..
> >>
> >>
> >>>I'm working mostly with acoustic musicians, some drums, but very little
> >
> > in
> >
> >>>the way of special FX like phaser/chorus/synth stuff,..........just
> >
> > trying
> >
> >>>to create a realistic optimal and dimensionally realistic space for the
> >>>performance.
> >>>
> >>>How big a soundstage is generally used for commercial studio projects?
I
> >>>know it's all relative, but if there is some sxort of *go-by* here that
> >
> > is
> >
> >>>an accepted standard, I'd like to know.
> >>
> >>I think only classical people would get really fussy about
> >>this stuff... Don??? I think for your type of projects, you
> >>won't have to get too crazy with sound stage. The two
> >>things you have going for you in a stereo mix are position
> >>and timbre. Make sonic "holes" for different instruments to
> >>sit in.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56930 is a reply to message #56926] |
Mon, 15 August 2005 22:59 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
What sounds killer in a mix will often sound weak
> >>or stale soloed. Don't make your EQ decisions in solo
> >>mode... always tweak it with other instruments going. Make
> >>it louder than it's surroundings to make EQ judgments, then
> >>pull it way down in the mix and bring up slowly to taste.
> >>You should find that the instrument is more audible at a
> >>lower volume or fader level. If you are struggling to hear
> >>it and the meters are pegged, your tone is off.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Thanks for indulging my ignorance and enlightening me..Also, I've got
an
> >
> > MP3
> >
> >>>of a mix that I did last night that I'd like to get some of your
> >
> > opinions
> >
> >>>on. It's a very talented bluegrass band-5 pieces. It's about 2.5 MB and
> >>>the soundstage I created for it is small.......around 30' wide. I was
> >
> > trying
> >
> >>>to get an intimate, realistic feeling to this as it was tracked live in
> >
> > my
> >
> >>>studio with 10 open mics.
> >>
> >>Keep in mind, intimate means CLOSE... this means full sounds
> >>and WIDE panning as they would be literally right in front
> >>of you. I really think you are overANALizing things too
> >>far... Can you hear all the instruments clearly? Do they
> >>sound pleasing in the mix? Is there some "space or air"
> >>around the instruments (not piled on top of each other
> >>acoustically). Is there some "ear-candy" present (subtle,
> >>but not instantly audible).
> >>
> >>I may be way off base to what others do, so take this with a
> >>truck-load of salt! ;-)
> >>
> >>My $.02
> >>
> >>David.
> >>
> >>
> >>>I'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to critique
> >
> > it.
> >
> >>>TIA for the enlightenment.
> >>>
> >>>;o)
> >>>
> >>>Deej
> >
> >
> >I've been playing around with a couple of these songs I'm mixing. 10 tracks
on one submix. I'm applying compression in SX, then lightpiping to Paris,
ap[plying reverb and panning and bouncing to disk. I'm mixing hot, the
faders are often kissing the 0dBfs limit on the individual Paris channels
and the submix fader is redlined almost constantly. The Global fader is at
0dBfs and I've got NoLimit set with a threshold of -2 , limiting at -0.9.
This mix sounds very big and I hear no distortion at all. It's really
reminiscent of analog tape, no harshness/brittle sound. It may be a bit much
for a Bluegrass mix but it held together well and there is plenty of
separation.
When I open it in Wavelab, it's obvious where the NoLimit was doing it's
thing. Certain peaks were squared off a bit.........nothing resembling a
square wave situation, just a number of spots where it is visually apparent.
When I run an analysis of the mix file in Wavelab, I'm getting huge amounts
of errors, like 1000 errors in the first 6 seconds.
I wonder what's up. If NoLimit is doing something to this file which would
preclude it being dupliccated in reproduction plant, then I'm going to have
to be much more careful. I'm also wondeering if lightpiping this many tracks
from SX to Paris with a dither lgo applied to each track to avoid
quantization errors is perhaps causing errors somehow. I have listened very
closely and I hear absolutely no audible problems, other than the sort of
smooth glue that is the *secret sauce* that mixing hot on this system can
impart to the tracks.wanting to buy another c16 can anyone help ?
Pretty Please!!I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT! YOU'VE GOT A COACHING
STAFF...BASTARDO
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:30:59 -0600, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>huh?????
>
>"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:iut1g15mjl6tq0j32fur8r5havd4kb72v9@4ax.com...
>> "I do know a little about Lava Lamps though"
>>
>> but isn't that an inhale deeply and forget thing???
>>
>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:13:53 -0600, "DJ"
>> <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>
>> >This Wormhole stuff is a question for Gene Lennon and/or Dimitrios. I've
>> >never tried it. I do know a little about Lava Lamps though.
>> >
>> >;o)
>> >
>> >"W. Mark Wilson" <wmarkwilson@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> >news:43004a41$1@linux...
>> >> Ask Deej; he'll know for sure. Hey, and while your at it, I think you
>> >> should find some place in your loops to insert a nice warm sounding
>70's
>> >> lavalamp.... reddish orange would probably sound good.
>> >>
>> >> Global Master Out,
>> >> Dubya
>> >>
>> >> (all written "tongue-in-cheek" I assure you).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Brandon" <brandon_goodwin@REMOVETHISsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:42ff5fda@linux...
>> >> > Global Master Outs to the ADAT lightpipe outs
>> >> > Hard Loop from ADAT lightpipe Out to ADAT lightpipe In
>> >> > ADAT lightpipe In to Tacks 15 & 16 (L&R respectively)
>> >> > Mute Tracks 15 &16 and Insert instance of Wormhole on each track
>> >> > Open WaveLab and Or CoolEdit Pro and Insert Wormhole on two new
>tracks
>> >> > (L&R)
>> >> > Use VST/DX plugs from within and bounce inside the second app. Should
>> >not
>> >> > loose any PARIS sound since Digital transfer correct?
>> >> > Then go SPDIF out to converter to XLR for my monitors
>> >> >
>> >> > This is all on one machine.
>> >> >
>> >> > Possible?????
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't know if wormhole works like this or if I can hard loop on
>ADAT
>> >> > like that without clocking.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>i'd use either click detection 1 or 2 only on the obviously hot
passages. like i said to you on the phone, you can run the digi
detection on any production cd and it will pull up the same thing @ 20
threshold. if you want to stick with the digi format then try
starting the threshold setting @ 100 and work your way down then
listen to it after every 5 clicks down.
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 01:36:54 -0600, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I've been playing around with a couple of these songs I'm mixing. 10 tracks
>on one submix. I'm applying compression in SX, then lightpiping to Paris,
>ap[plying reverb and panning and bouncing to disk. I'm mixing hot, the
>faders are often kissing the 0dBfs limit on the individual Paris channels
>and the submix fader is redlined almost constantly. The Global fader is at
>0dBfs and I've got NoLimit set with a threshold of -2 , limiting at -0.9.
>
>This mix sounds very big and I hear no distortion at all. It's really
>reminiscent of analog tape, no harshness/brittle sound. It may be a bit much
>for a Bluegrass mix but it held together well and there is plenty of
>separation.
>
>When I open it in Wavelab, it's obvious where the NoLimit was doing it's
>thing. Certain peaks were squared off a bit.........nothing resembling a
>square wave situation, just a number of spots where it is visually apparent.
>
>When I run an analysis of the mix file in Wavelab, I'm getting huge amounts
>of errors, like 1000 errors in the first 6 seconds.
>
>I wonder what's up. If NoLimit is doing something to this file which would
>preclude it being dupliccated in reproduction plant, then I'm going to have
>to be much more careful. I'm also wondeering if lightpiping this many tracks
>from SX to Paris with a dither lgo applied to each track to avoid
>quantization errors is perhaps causing errors somehow. I have listened very
>closely and I hear absolutely no audible problems, other than the sort of
>smooth glue that is the *secret sauce* that mixing hot on this system can
>impart to the tracks.
>"Dominic" <BERTSTUDIO@aol.com> wrote:
>I have been using my 2 inch MCI with Paris ever since Paris came out.
I produce country records and I trck drums bass and acoucoustic guitars on
the tape.
I then dump it all in Paris and and do my overdubs and mix.
I used to slave my 2 inch with Paris and run both using my origanal tape
tracks.
I dont anymore as Paris sounds great with the stuff that has been dumped.
cheers
Hank
>Hello fellow Parisites.........
>I just completed restoring an Ampex MM1200, now what to do?
>Iam running PARIS with two EDS cards Iam going to sync them
>has anyone had any experience with this type of set up and what
>are you doing? Rerecording your anolog tracks in Paris? or
>syncing them and playing back all together. By the way Ive been
>recording on PARIS for over 5yrs with good results but hearing
>wide band analog tracks reminds me of what music was when I was
>growing up. It's a shame whats happened to our industry... oh
>well thats another story.
>Thanx again
>Dominic
>Sanctuary StudiosFor those who were listening, I've had the new machine running for a few
days now with every driver and windows update under the sun loaded, and it
seems to now be fairly stable.
I haven't tested much Paris-wise as of yet, but the machine iteself has stopped
BSODing and is behaving and performing beautifully.
I'll give another update in a week or so. Over the weekend I should get to
do some more experimenting, as I plan to buy some new HDD's and start loading
a few different boots on to the machine. We'll see how it goes...
Cheers,
Kim.DJ, I was having this problem, have you tried pulling down the global submix
faders, say start with -2 or something....It seems to work. If you pull down
just the master fader, you get big time flat files. Leave that all the way
up.
rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>i'd use either click detection 1 or 2 only on the obviously hot
>passages. like i said to you on the phone, you can run the digi
>detection on any production cd and it will pull up the same thing @ 20
>threshold. if you want to stick with the digi format then try
>starting the threshold setting @ 100 and work your way down then
>listen to it after every 5 clicks down.
>
>On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 01:36:54 -0600, "DJ"
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56943 is a reply to message #56925] |
Tue, 16 August 2005 06:54 |
cujo
Messages: 285
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;>an existing specific space like in Foley work, ADR, replacment
>>tracks for a live multitrack performance, etc).
>>
>>How about this... Imagine what kind of space you'd like to hear
>>that particular song in, pick one that's close to that in one of
>>your verb units, then tweak as necessary to your heart's
>>content - and that's the key, use your heart (emotional
>>response), not your brain.
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>
>>>I'm needing to get pretty anal retentive with this stuff these days. I'm
>>
>>in
>>
>>>a very small market and I am starting to carve out a niche for myself.
>
> The
>
>>>engineers in the other studios around here have many more years behind
>
> the
>
>>>board than I do (average of around 30 years of full-time *earning a living
>>>at it* kind of experience so I'm a comparative newbie)
>>>
>>>I've learned a few things over the years of turd polishing and doing small
>>>demo projects and I'm starting to actually get some small labels sniffing
>>>around my door so I must be doing something right in spite of myself and
>>
>>the
>>
>>>rather limited and haphazard education and experience I've managed to
>>>accumulate.
>>>
>>>I'm really feelin' the need to get my head around the finer points of this
>>>craft if I'm going to make a go of this. A huge part of this is soundstaging
>>>and needing to spend the time to do much more than just pan a reverb send
>>>here and there to create a semblance of realism. To that end I've been
>
> doing
>
>>>a bit of research and I'm beginning some more in depth experimentation
>
> with
>
>>>this. I just want to make sure that my methodology is somewhat sound and
>>>that I'm not tilting at windmills here. I've got a full plate so though
>>
>>I'd
>>
>>>like to be able to spend the next 6 months floundering around learning
>
> by
>
>>>making mistakes (my normal MO), but I don't seem to have that luxury right
>>>now.
>>>
>>>I figure that if I've got a group of musicians on a stage 50' wide, then
>>>each panning increment in the 100-100 L/R spread equals 0.25' so for every
>>>4 increments, I'm moving the performer to the left or right by 1'. For
>>>example, if I wanted to position the band members within a space 30' across,
>>>then from the center, to place the guitarist 15' to stage left, I would
>>
>>pan
>>
>>>him left to 60.
>>>
>>>This would theoretically put him 10' from the closest wall and 35' from
>>
>>the
>>
>>>farthest wall.
>>>
>>>Now a few questions about early reflections and predelay and soundstaging
>>
>>in
>>
>>>general, as follows:
>>>
>>>1. If I'm using a stereo reverb, since the performer is stage left at
>
> pan
>
>>>position 60, I would pan the reverb return to stage right 60 and set the
>>>ER's for the right side to around 35ms and the ER's to the left to around
>>>10ms with the levels about 2/3 to 3/4 (or less) of the strength of the
>>>original signal. This woulld theoretically give me a basic two dimensional
>>>(L/R) location of the musician in an ambient space, right?
>>>
>>>Also, do you pan the reverb send to mirror the return? I'm just not getting
>>>this for some reason. Seems that panning the send does nothing. Maybe I'm
>>>just too overwhelmed at the moment to notice.
>>>
>>>2. In order to get the front/back positioning of the musician relative
>
> to
>
>>>the other band members and the front/back of the room, using predealy would
>>>provide some dimensional space........right? what I'm not clear about is
>>>whether the predelay should be set for positioning the performers relative
>>>to the fall of the space that is farthest from them or from the wall that
>>
>>is
>>
>>>behind them. I know that since they are broadcasting into the room, that
>>
>>the
>>
>>>front makes sense, but music travels all directions and it seems it would
>>>make smoe sense to at least take the back wall into consideration.
>>>
>>>Also, I'm thinking that using actual short (2-3 ms delays) between the
>>>instruments/performers themselves would help to create some sense of
>>>relative front-to-back relational spatiality.
>>>
>>>I'm working mostly with acoustic musicians, some drums, but very little
>>
>>in
>>
>>>the way of special FX like phaser/chorus/synth stuff,..........just trying
>>>to create a realistic optimal and dimensionally realistic space for the
>>>performance.
>>>
>>>How big a soundstage is generally used for commercial studio projects?
>
> I
>
>>>know it's all relative, but if there is some sxort of *go-by* here that
>>
>>is
>>
>>>an accepted standard, I'd like to know.
>>>
>>>Thanks for indulging my ignorance and enlightening me..Also, I've got an
>>
>>MP3
>>
>>>of a mix that I did last night that I'd like to get some of your opinions
>>>on. It's a very talented bluegrass band-5 pieces. It's about 2.5 MB and
>>>the soundstage I created for it is small.......around 30' wide. I was trying
>>>to get an intimate, realistic feeling to this as it was tracked live in
>>
>>my
>>
>>>studio with 10 open mics.
>>>
>>>I'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to critique
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56945 is a reply to message #56943] |
Tue, 16 August 2005 07:46 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
risl@adkproaudio.com>
> www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
> (859) 635-5762The hipass has a slope so unless you set it with the bottom of the slope
around 90Hz, you are going to have some residual audible LF. What you will
hear will depend on how good your LF hearing is, but teeney computer
speakers might start fartin' at you if inaudible LF energy within their
frequency range capabilities is too high. Sounds like what you need is a
graphic EQ. If you're trying to mix to suit the masses of teeny speaker
users, the Waves MaXXBass is a cool tool to get this stuff under control
(though personally, I think it's cooler to watch tiny bits of smoking
speaker cone go flying out of the grilles of laptops. ;o)
"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
news:4301eec7$1@linux...
>
>
>
> Anone else notice that the graphical interface if the EQ is somewhat
misleading.
>
> For instance the highpass seems to leave a bunch of low stuff int
here..but
> the graphic looks like it is cutting everything.
>
> Are there any more "accurate" eq's out there..Say I want to cut evrything
> under 90hz..it it could make a hard cut there with out a slope?
>
>Speaking of which, have you seen this yet?
http://www.waves.com/content.asp?id=1600
You must have one or..... ;-)
David.
DJ wrote:
> The hipass has a slope so unless you set it with the bottom of the slope
> around 90Hz, you are going to have some residual audible LF. What you will
> hear will depend on how good your LF hearing is, but teeney computer
> speakers might start fartin' at you if inaudible LF energy within their
> frequency range capabilities is too high. Sounds like what you need is a
> graphic EQ. If you're trying to mix to suit the masses of teeny speaker
> users, the Waves MaXXBass is a cool tool to get this stuff under control
> (though personally, I think it's cooler to watch tiny bits of smoking
> speaker cone go flying out of the grilles of laptops. ;o)
>
> "Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
> news:4301eec7$1@linux...
>
>>
>>
>>Anone else notice that the graphical interface if the EQ is somewhat
>
> misleading.
>
>>For instance the highpass seems to leave a bunch of low stuff int
>
> here..but
>
>>the graphic looks like it is cutting everything.
>>
>>Are there any more "accurate" eq's out there..Say I want to cut evrything
>>under 90hz..it it could make a hard cut there with out a slope?
>>
>>
>
>
>Couldn't he run Paris on Win 95 and then dither to Win 3.0 ?
;op
"Chris Ludwig" <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote in message
news:4301ed42@linux...
> HI Spappy,
>
> Paris is 32 bit. It will not work with a 64 bit OS because the hardware
> driver will not be compatible with 64bit. Paris will work fine with a
> 64bit processor and a 32bit OS. Example of this would be a AMD 939 based
> motherboard which is 64 bit compatible but works perfect with 32 bit OS
> such as Windows xp home or Pro.
>
>
> Chris
>
>
> Spappy wrote:
>
> > Does *anything* in the Paris system operate in a 16 bit environment?
> > (Primarily in the software.) If it does, can I use the 64 bit
processor?
> >
> > Spappy
> >
> >
>
> --
> Chris Ludwig
> ADK
> chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
> www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
> (859) 635-5762Saki's was demonstrating one of those at a recent expo in Downunderland. I
do need one really bad, but that's because I think it's cool because it's
black with chrome handles. Big awesome looking rack gear that is black with
lots of blinky little leds complements a Paris system very well and you can
show it to clients and they are so impressed that they give you all of their
money and you don't even have to do anything else.
;o)
"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
news:43020d34$1@linux...
> Speaking of which, have you seen this yet?
>
> http://www.waves.com/content.asp?id=1600
>
> You must have one or..... ;-)
>
> David.
>
> DJ wrote:
> > The hipass has a slope so unless you set it with the bottom of the slope
> > around 90Hz, you are going to have some residual audible LF. What you
will
> > hear will depend on how good your LF hearing is, but teeney computer
> > speakers might start fartin' at you if inaudible LF energy within their
> > frequency range capabilities is too high. Sounds like what you need is
a
> > graphic EQ. If you're trying to mix to suit the masses of teeny speaker
> > users, the Waves MaXXBass is a cool tool to get this stuff under control
> > (though personally, I think it's cooler to watch tiny bits of smoking
> > speaker cone go flying out of the grilles of laptops. ;o)
> >
> > "Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
> > news:4301eec7$1@linux...
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>Anone else notice that the graphical interface if the EQ is somewhat
> >
> > misleading.
> >
> >>For instance the highpass seems to leave a bunch of low stuff int
> >
> > here..but
> >
> >>the graphic looks like it is cutting everything.
> >>
> >>Are there any more "accurate" eq's out there..Say I want to cut
evrything
> >>under 90hz..it it could make a hard cut there with out a slope?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >OK,
It's been a long time since I've used Paris on win ME, but my thoughts are
that if it was unstable with one card that issue needs to be resolved first
off so losing the Korg Oaysis card (at least for now) is the first step.
When I was running Paris on Win XP I was using a pre-SP1 OS that was very
stable. Maybe the SP1 or SP2 is glitching things so if you've got an older
XP system disk, don't load the SP's. Paris doesn't need them and you don't
want to use this computer for anything other than audio
anyway.........right?
Assuming that there is a stable Win XP insta
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56967 is a reply to message #56945] |
Tue, 16 August 2005 16:52 |
Mike ClMike Claytor
Messages: 52
Registered: July 2005
|
Member |
|
|
nd the flyer.
> Let meknow what you find out too.
>
>
> "Brandon" <brandon_goodwin@REMOVETHISsbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>I am having a hard time with my Insurance Agent getting insurance to cover
>
>>my studio
>>equipment. I am not actually running it as a business right now so I
>>wasn't
>
>>going to
>>insure it as such...problem is they don't have a policy that will cover
> over
>>$1000 on
>>electronics. I know it sounds outrageous to me too....
>>There is also no way to upgrade that policy to cover the dollar value
>>...$50,000..it's more like
>>$40,000 but I didn't think it would hurt to have over coverage for growth.
>>Of course that is when everything was brand new...nowadays it is probably
>
>>worth $15,000.
>>
>>Anyway...who are you guys using for this?
>>
>>I wonder if ASCAP has something available????
>>
>>Should I go ahead and insure it as a
>>business...benefits???non-benefits????
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>"cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote:
>
>What I am looking for is to tame the low end on both guitar and bass.
>Compared to my fave ref CD's the nass and kick have way way too much low
>end on my BM-15s. (this is fast, 70's influence punk not big rich FLoyd
>or whatever)
>THis is stuff I am remixing for someone, If I had produced it, choice would
>have been made earlier that would not require this. That said, it does seem
>that straight digital recirding (no tape) seems to leave unwanted lows sometimes.
Why don't you just use a sharp Q curve at 20HZ on the Bass?
Drop it down like -18 db, then widen it out a little bit until
it starts to sound "not quite full enough", then back off a
hair; then bring it up from -18 to let's say -12 or so... see
if that gives you some of the subharmonics without bringing in
more murk. Try that approach & you'll likely find something that
works. As for guitar, you can drop everything below 40hz
without any problem, even if it's numetal tuned down a step -
for the stuff you described, you could probably even go to 60
or 80hz & be fine.
NeilDon't really know, except to say that most of my mates that use Paris, )or
other audio programs), had stability problems when setting the system up.
I, and other P4 users had zero setup problems, and still dont.
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"TC" <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote in message
news:430274ea$1@linux...
> Really? I thought the opposite was true by what most people use here?
> Or am I thinking of more like 3 years ago?
>
> Cheers,
>
> TC
>
>
> Martin Harrington wrote:
>> Pentium processors, probably give more hassal free service than the
>> equivalent AMD version with Paris.
>> AMD work but there seems to be more tweeking involved to get a stable
>> system.thats great, but your system clock is still a day ahead
"Brandon" <brandon_goodwin@REMOVETHISsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:430271bf@linux...
> prepal.com
>
>
>
> "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> news:43026eb7@linux...
>> homie can you fix your clock pleeeeze :)
>>
>> "Brandon" <brandon_goodwin@REMOVETHISsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:43026d39$1@linux...
>>> There used to be a website that had "current" resale value for just
>>> about any pro audio gear...
>>> Anyone know it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>yep ebay is IT.
its cool as heck that prepal.com is an analogx project tho
"mike claytor" <claytor@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:43027ae8$1@linux...
>
> I've never found prepal to be very current. eBay has sorta become the
> defacto
> price guide these days. Some pawnshops are even using average eBay sales
> prices instead of the old "bluebook" system.
>
> MC
>
>
>
> "Brandon" <brandon_goodwin@REMOVETHISsbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>prepal.com
>>
>>
>>
>>"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
>>news:43026eb7@linux...
>>> homie can you fix your clock pleeeeze :)
>>>
>>> "Brandon" <brandon_goodwin@REMOVETHISsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>> news:43026d39$1@linux...
>>>>
>
> There used to be a website that had "current" resale value for just about
>
>>>> any pro audio gear...
>>>> Anyone know it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>Maybe he just wants to find out what his gear will be worth tomorrow...!!!
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
news:430291fe@linux...
> thats great, but your system clock is still a day ahead
>
> "Brandon" <brandon_goodwin@REMOVETHISsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:430271bf@linux...
> > prepal.com
> >
> >
> >
> > "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> > news:43026eb7@linux...
> >> homie can you fix your clock pleeeeze :)
> >>
> >> "Brandon" <brandon_goodwin@REMOVETHISsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> >> news:43026d39$1@linux...
> >>> There used to be a website that had "current" resale value for just
> >>> about any pro audio gear...
> >>> Anyone know it?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>Hmm, yes I'll giv it a try on the bass, but I musty admit, it seems like the
guitars I often hear havenotheing below say even 200, Leads for instance.
Seems liek the more lows I cut the closer I get to some classic sounds. Lows
seem to make things sound more "demoish" think about say the guiitar at the
begining of "baby you can drive my car" now take a song like "bang an gon"
and I hear alittle more lowsbut more in the Bass than guitar, I thought I
read visconti say there is nothing good below 100 for bass guitar.
"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>&quo
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56978 is a reply to message #56929] |
Tue, 16 August 2005 22:55 |
RZ
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2005
|
Member |
|
|
a dark room and some nice headphones and sit back and listen to
the Woman In Me or Come on Over and you will be amazed at the space,
imaging and sheer number of instruments you can hear clearly (typically
6 to 8) all at once, most with their own stereo images and unique
contrasting textures. Get some smoke from justcron and the cd will come
alive. hehe
John
mike claytor wrote:
> That's a disturbing image!
>
> Damn that Mutt Lange! Damn him to hell!
>
>
> John <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>>While Zep 1 has great depth, it does not have any of the imaging found
>>on The Woman In Me.
>>
>>Cujo wrote:
>>
>>>I may sound like a luddite(iI am occused of this often by friends) here,
>>>but old Glynn Johns for instance had a left right and center pan control,
>>>sounds like Ememrick did too. annd some tape delays, springs and plates.
>>>Ok, they probably had some real chambers. I still think Zep 1 and Who's
>
> Next
>
>>>sound amazing. and have "depth"
>>>Of course the general public probably thinks they sound old..so what the
>>>hell do I know?
>>>
>>>
>>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I don't believe that getting this analytical about something
>>>>will necessarly make it sound better. Why do you feel you have
>>>>to create a specific space (unless you're trying to match it to
>>>>an existing specific space like in Foley work, ADR, replacment
>>>>tracks for a live multitrack performance, etc).
>>>>
>>>>How about this... Imagine what kind of space you'd like to hear
>>>>that particular song in, pick one that's close to that in one of
>>>>your verb units, then tweak as necessary to your heart's
>>>>content - and that's the key, use your heart (emotional
>>>>response), not your brain.
>>>>
>>>>Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I'm needing to get pretty anal retentive with this stuff these days.
>
> I'm
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56988 is a reply to message #56967] |
Wed, 17 August 2005 06:10 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;>>>>on. It's a very talented bluegrass band-5 pieces. It's about 2.5 MB and
>>>>>the soundstage I created for it is small.......around 30' wide. I was
>
> trying
>
>>>>>to get an intimate, realistic feeling to this as it was tracked live
>
> in
>
>>>>my
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>studio with 10 open mics.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'd be glad to e-mail it to those here who would be willing to critique
>>>>
>>>>it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>TIA for the enlightenment.
>>>>>
>>>>>;o)
>>>>>
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>it's mid 90's every day here and i'm jealous of you ! I'll be back in
Oregon one day :-)
DJ wrote:
> Summer is over here. It's been raining every day for about 10 days and fall
> is in the air big time. It was actually a bit nippy today until late
> afternoon and right now it's probably close to 40 degrees F.
>
> I'm getting ready to turn on the friggin heater.......in August. Seems like
> a strange thing to do but if I don't Crashbasket and Juliet will jump up on
> the bed and lay down on top of me while I'm asleep so they can get warm
> while I die of suffocation.
>
> ;oP
>
>It's been pretty much 90's and high humidity here in NC. Send some of that
cold thisaway would ya? About 20 degrees worth would be just about right.
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Summer is over here. It's been raining every day for about 10 days and fall
>is in the air big time. It was actually a bit nippy today until late
>afternoon and right now it's probably close to 40 degrees F.
>
>I'm getting ready to turn on the friggin heater.......in August. Seems like
>a strange thing to do but if I don't Crashbasket and Juliet will jump up
on
>the bed and lay down on top of me while I'm asleep so they can get warm
>while I die of suffocation.
>
>;oP
>
>HI,
The single processor Nforce 4 chipset will not work well at all with
audio. It has major PCI/PCI-E conflicts. The SLI option will be a waste
of money also. Go for a Nforce3 based motherboard.
Chris
Spappy wrote:
> Anyone see anything here that would be a problem for Paris 3.0?
>
> Either:
> Athlon 64 3500+ 2.2 GHz 512KB cache
> or
> Athlon 64 4000+ 2.4 GHz 1MB cache
>
> Asus A8N-SLI mobo w/ 800+ MHz FSB
> 1 GB RAM 400 MHz
> GeForce 256MB dual head vid card
> (2) 200 GB Maxtor 7200 RPM ATA-133 hd
> Plextor SATA DVD-RW
> MS Win XP Pro
> 450watt power supply
> dual 17" Flat panels
>
> Spappy
>
>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762What a screwed up summer this year... here we have had record rainfall
and widespread flooding. On the plus side, the crops are good for the
farmers, but the surplus will bring the price down and they will start
grumbling again... ;-)
David.
DJ wrote:
> Summer is over here. It's been raining every day for about 10 days and fall
> is in the air big time. It was actually a bit nippy today until late
> afternoon and right now it's probably close to 40 degrees F.
>
> I'm getting ready to turn on the friggin heater.......in August. Seems like
> a strange thing to do but if I don't Crashbasket and Juliet will jump up on
> the bed and lay down on top of me while I'm asleep so they can get warm
> while I die of suffocation.
>
> ;oP
>
>http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MaxxBCL/
David.
Tyrone Corbett wrote:
> David, any idea of the cost on this unit. I went to the website, but unless
> I overlooked it, there was no reference to cost.
>
> Thanks, TyroneThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0053_01C5A31E.7D5FBDA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If you haven't seen it, it is very cool now.
Finally got Drumagog 4.02 cooking and it is as good as it ever was.
Better graphics although settings are a little too small for=20
my taste. Cool new features like a graphic of a stick
hitting a drum in time with the trigger instead of a meter.
Rim says it is low on the CPU priority chain so not to worry.
I'm still figuring out a few things but it looks much better than
2.0 which I was using. Seems to trigger more easily and allows for
less latency-greater CPU load settings.
Great plugin in general.
Tom
------=_NextPart_000_0053_01C5A31E.7D5FBDA0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If you haven't seen it, it is very cool =
now.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Finally got Drumagog =
4.02 cooking and it=20
is as good as it ever was.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Better graphics although settings are a =
little too=20
small for </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>my taste. Cool new features =
like a=20
graphic of a stick</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>hitting a drum in time with the trigger =
instead of=20
a meter.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rim says it is low on the CPU priority =
chain so not=20
to worry.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm still figuring out a few =
things but it=20
looks much better than</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>2.0 which I was using. Seems to =
trigger more=20
easily and allows for</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>less latency-greater CPU load=20
settings.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Great plugin in general.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0053_01C5A31E.7D5FBDA0--Hi TC,
The Pentium version of the Shuttle box work great you should only use a
865 chip set. If you are using Paris it will give you the most
compatibility. Here is the model I'd suggest.
http://global.shuttle.com/Product/Barebone/SB61G2%20V4.asp
Chris
TC wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Thanks for the link. So I assume that I should stay away from
> Pentium processors with Paris then? The reason I was looking
> at that asus one was that my dealer down the street carries it,
> and gave me a good price on a customized system. I'm not going
> to be able to fit that many EDS cards in my tower so I thought I
> may as well go smaller and use the magma.
>
> Cheers,
>
> TC
>
> Chris Ludwig wrote:
>
>> Hi TC,
>> Not sure what your planning for this but if you having some strange
>> urge to use a small form factor PC with Paris then I would say the
>> Shuttle boxes are a far better option. They actually make a great AMD
>> Nforce 3 chipset 939 based system.
>> http://global.shuttle.com/Product/Barebone/SN95G5%20V3.asp
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> TC wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I am thinking of putting together a new system with a magma chassis
>>> for Paris, and am looking at the following:
>>>
>>> http://usa.asus.com/prog/spec.asp?m=S-presso&langs=09
>>>
>>> Does anyone know if this board would work with Paris?
>>>
>>> All my experience has been with AMD processors and Paris, so this is
>>> new territory.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts are appreciated.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> TC
>>
>>
>>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK Pro Audio
(859) 635-5762
www.adkproaudio.com
chrisl@adkproaudio.comHi Martin,
Intel and AMD both perform perfect. It is the motherboard and chip set
makers who tend to screw things up. Currently Intel and AMD are both
having growing pains with the new dual-core technology. It is mostly the
motherboard manufacturers doing stupid stuff to cut costs on the boards.
Martin Harrington wrote:
> Pentium processors, probably give more hassal free service than the
> equivalent AMD version with Paris.
> AMD work but there seems to be more tweeking involved to get a stable
> system.
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK Pro Audio
(
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #56998 is a reply to message #56929] |
Wed, 17 August 2005 09:18 |
Tony Benson
Messages: 453
Registered: June 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/a>> wrote in message news:430363ea$1@linux...
Gary,
I'm on XP Pro, only a couple of samples come with it
but the upgrade allows access to purchasing more
samples from Wavemachines (Drumagog) website.
I have my own sample library derived from many sources
and converted to .wavs.
Drumagog allows multi samples for triggering which adds
realism to the sounds. In other words you can use any
and all of 20 samples as one snare sound and Drumagog
will use velocity or even random to choose them for individual
strikes. I need to get some multi samples for that too.
http://www.drumagog.com/info.htm
Check it out if you haven't already.
Tom
"Gary Flanigan" <gary_flanigan@ce9.uscourts.gov> wrote in message
news:43035e1f$1@linux...
"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
If you haven't seen it, it is very cool now.
Finally got Drumagog 4.02 cooking and it is as good as it ever was.
Does this come with its own set of replacement drum sounds, or do you use
it with sample libraries? Also, what is your Paris setup? Win98, XP?
Mac?
ThanksThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0097_01C5A328.3607FE40
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tony,
You got sounds? Mine had two snares and two kicks I think.
I'll look again.
Tom
"Tony Benson" <t o n y@s t a n d i n g h a m p t o n.c o m> wrote in =
message news:43036520@linux...
Yes, it does come with it's own sounds and they're pretty good. It's =
also=20
pretty easy to import your own sounds. I've imported several of my dfh =
Superior sounds. I've been running the AU version of 4.02 on my Mac =
with DP=20
4.52 for several weeks and it works well. I haven't tried it with =
PARIS yet.
Tony
"Gary Flanigan" <
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #57018 is a reply to message #56929] |
Wed, 17 August 2005 21:30 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
br />
>
> NeilSave As:
Project_a.ppj. wait 5 minutes
Project_b.ppj wait 5 minutes
Project_c.ppj wait 5 minutes
..........
I'd be amazed if there wasn't either an autosave or someone hasn't written
and app to do it for ya for Cubase. If not, get yourself a hot/macro set up.
AA
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43040e9f@linux...
> Looks like I've got one of those *sweatin the details* producers on my
> hands. I'm going to have to get my head around a lot more stuff than I
> thought. He's bringing three more projects over here PDQ and we've been
> sitting around talking about all sorts of extremely anal ear candy kinda
> stuff that he expects to be able to do. It's do'able, it's just a lot to
> learn. He's worked a lot in Nashville with some major heavy hitters so
> I'll
> get an education. Glad he's a nice guy. I'll probably be learning a lot
> from
> him.
>
> Working on two DAWs simultaneously is getting faster every day. There's a
> lot to learn, but the available options for doing different things is mind
> boggling. I've given myself a pretty major crash course in Cubase SX, at
> least in regard to the things I need to do with it for mixing.
>
> I also found out a few quirks of the Houston control
> surface...........like
> when you hit the write automation button, *everything* gets automated if
> you're not careful, including the mutes and EQ, so if you're writing
> automation and doing some EQ'ing on the fly and muting/unmuting tracks as
> you go, you're writing all of this to the project and it will be read
> during
> playback along with the4 fader moves. I just had to fix three songs
> (basically a remix) because all this squirrelly **** crap was going on and
> I
> couldn't figure it out until I opened up all of the automation windows and
> saw this major mess happening.
>
> Lots ot learn.
>
> ;o)
>
>
> "gene lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
> news:43017d6c$1@linux...
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >I'm needing to get pretty anal retentive with this stuff these days...
>> >Deej
>> >
>>
>> Well.
>> I have worked with many producers and mix engineers over the years that
>> do
>> sweat the details, including sound stage.
>> M/S.
>> Binaural.
>> X/Y.
>> These exist because people consider the stereo imaging and sound stage
> important.
>> Obviously this is not the most critical issue in typical, modern, radio
> driven
>> productions, but that does not equate to being meaningless.
>> I love recording in true stereo (primarily M/S) whenever it seems
> appropriate.
>>
>> Trying to control the sound stage "after the fact" is a completely
> different
>> animal but again, the details do add up.
>> I have been playing around a little with GigaPulse, the convolution
>> reverb
>&
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Soundstaging, predelay, e4arly reflections, etc. [message #57022 is a reply to message #57018] |
Thu, 18 August 2005 00:14 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
it's time to shop for a new board. This machine won't see Paris,
> but it may see Adobe Premiere and the odd Windows editing app.
>
> Any suggestions? Looking for good balance between killer performance
> and damn cheap.
>
> pab
>
> "Enjoy every sandwich." -- Warren Zevon
>
> "Here at Microsoft, Quality is job, oh, I dunno, maybe 7 or 8?"http://www.whirlwindusa.com/split.html
PaulN wrote:
> If you have a pretty decent FOH console you should be able to take the
> channel direct outs (already preamped) straight into Paris or recorder. I
> use Paris to record at our church occasionally and I set it up next to the
> mixer and take the direct outs off the mixer.
> Works great.
>
> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4303ceeb$1@linux...
>
>>
>>What's the best way to split audio so I can run it to some kind of
>>recording
>>device and to a PA at the same time?
>>
>>I guess potentially I could just use DI boxes with an in and an out, and
>>feed balanced signals to the recorder...?
>>
>>What's the best way to look at doing this? Feeding the channels from a
>>desk
>>insert isn't likely to be an option as most of these channels will be
>>mixed
>>prior to getting to the main desk.
>>
>>And what's an excellent, top quality, 16 track portable digital recorder
>>for under $100? ;oP
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Kim.
>
>
>http://www.line6.com/toneport/ ???
Kim wrote:
> I'm thinking of picking up a Roland VS-880EX or something.
>
> Surely by now though somebody has a simpler box. I mean lets face it, all
> the average user needs is a little box with a HDD and some A/D convertors...
> and something that allows to two to talk. Those roland boxes with built
> in mixers and the like, while they're great if you want all that, are really
> overkill for many, who like me, probably just want to turn audio in to wav
> files and worry about effects and mixing later on a computer DAW.
>
> I figure I need a minimum of 8 tracks, probably preferably more like 16,
> but cost is a factor...
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.I wonder how much latency he is working with?? Talented sod....
"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4nk8g11pgmtho8irhrptr72cceqvue4ack@4ax.com...
> thanks aaron for putting my balls into a lesser place: pride has
> replaced with disappointment.
>
> ;o(
>
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 03:13:12 -0500, "Aaron Allen"
> <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>
>>..... so I threw it out on one of my servers for everyone to dig.
>>
>>http://smirk.bjenterprise.com/PianoBalls.wmv
>>
>>Enjoy,
>>AA
>>
>>
>>
> Kim wrote:
> > I'm thinking of picking up a Roland VS-880EX or something.
> > I need a minimum of 8 tracks, probably preferably more like 16,
> > but cost is a factor...
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Kim.
Kim, there's a little guy my friend has been using that he's very happy with; this is the FirePod
from PreSonus.
http://www.presonus.com/firepod.html
Kinda neat, and I can vouch for the fact that it sounds pretty nice. Not spectacular, but very nice.
It has built-in pre's and converters, and apparently they're working on a way to daisy chain them to
get 16 or more tracks at a time.
bcJohn <no@no.com> wrote:
>have you tried new ram ?
>
>
No. It's possible, I guess. This ram is only 2 years old and was minty-fresh
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Dec 29 21:34:41 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01567 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
