Members Ernest Buckley Posted August 29, 2006 Members Share Posted August 29, 2006 Craig, I`m always yelling and screaming about EQ and my gripes with it so I`d like to publicly acknowledge the good work that is going back into the magazine. Of course there was always a good column or review but the overall content in the last 4 years was subpar for EQ. I`m relieved you are at the helm and I am grateful that the magazine is getting back to the human element that made EQ a true standout when I started reading it in the `90s. Follow your gut.EB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BLAblablah Posted August 29, 2006 Members Share Posted August 29, 2006 +1! My August issue came just in time for a long flight...it was great to actually enjoy reading the opening letter from the editor (I had stopped even bothering some time back). And the new columns from those vaguely familiar names ( )...very cool. I'm now looking forward to future issues and can't wait to see how it evolves. Bear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members love_hate23 Posted August 29, 2006 Members Share Posted August 29, 2006 A big improvement, I convinced a friend to subscribe even, due to the noticeable shift in focus (to me at least, it seems less like a book of reviews, you know?) Joseph K Murphy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators MrKnobs Posted August 29, 2006 Moderators Share Posted August 29, 2006 And to my surprise, I actually found myself in agreement with Lee Flier about something! Terry D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted August 29, 2006 Members Share Posted August 29, 2006 Originally posted by MrKnobs And to my surprise, I actually found myself in agreement with Lee Flier about something! Really?????? :eek: What? Glad you guys are digging the new direction; I am too. Unless it's something I'm really excited about (which doesn't happen all that often), I really don't enjoy doing gear reviews much. I vastly prefer writing about techniques and applications and people, and that's what I'd rather read about too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted August 29, 2006 Author Members Share Posted August 29, 2006 Glad you guys are digging the new direction; I am too. Unless it's something I'm really excited about (which doesn't happen all that often), I really don't enjoy doing gear reviews much. I vastly prefer writing about techniques and applications and people, and that's what I'd rather read about too. Can I get an Amen!? The focus of people and their techniques turned me onto EQ and the trend towards technology turned me off and the reviewing of it so I`m glad the emphasis has changed a bit and I look forward to whatever else Craig and mates have in store! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TBush Posted August 29, 2006 Members Share Posted August 29, 2006 Amen- I really like the mag now and I always look forward to reading it when it comes. Also, a 'yay' to Lee Flier's latest- recording a great band without the click can be sooo cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 > That means more to me than you could possibly realize, and it will also mean a lot to Associate Editor Matt Harper, who is a very important part of this equation. He has a lot to do with the "human element" aspect. > You'll be happy to hear that I've been given the support and leeway to do that. There have been a lot of changes at the parent company, and one is much greater trust of the staff to do what they think is right. And frankly, if it wasn't for the staff we have and the help from people like Ernie Rideout (Keyboard) and Mike Molenda (Guitar Player), I would not even be able to do EQ, given my parallel commitment to HC. We're not out of the woods yet, but support is picking up from readers and advertisers, and that's a very good sign given that only two issues have come out with the new approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 > Thank you! Subscriptions really help the cause. One thing we are really trying to do with reviews is make them more applications-oriented, so that even if you don't like reviews per se, you can learn something about typical applications, and what gear does. You'll be seeing more and more of this in the months ahead, and fewer and fewer specs -- we can just send people to the web for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 > Lee is a wonderful addition to the mag. I don't always agree with her subjective tastes, but who cares, taste is personal. She's fantastic on the "emperor's new clothes" aspect of technology, and I appreciate her emphasis on not throwing away valuable techniques just because there are newer, alternate ways to do something. She "gets" a lot of the techniques that I grew up with, well before her time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators MrKnobs Posted August 30, 2006 Moderators Share Posted August 30, 2006 Originally posted by Lee Flier Really?????? :eek: What? The click track thing. I HATE click tracks, but I work with so many bands that insist on using them, even live. To me, a tempo should breathe a little. Vibe over perfection, every time - in my opinion. Usually I don't have a choice. The band wants to record to a click, the horn and string folks I use (over the internet) want a click so they can just play each section once and cut 'n paste the rest in ProTools. But last month, on one of OUR tunes, the drummer wanted a click. I was the boss, but I humored him and cut it both ways. I let him listen to both tracks, and he was stunned at how much better the track without click was. Thanks for tellng it like it is, ma'am! And Craig - congrats on the new job. But damn, I left my business card for you with the guys at the EQ booth when I couldn't find you at NAMM. Didn't they give that to you? I'm beginning to think you don't like me. Terry D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 Glad someone started this thread. I just got home from my summer travels to Ecuador and then later, West Virginia, and have a big pile of magazines, so it's gonna take me a while to get through them. And you beat me to this thread, but I am also in agreement that the new EQ looks better! And I'll chime in and also say that I rarely record rock and pop bands with a click. Occasionally, just to set a specific tempo, I'll start 'em out with a click and then duck the click down after a few measures, which the bands appreciate. But most of the time, there's no reason to use a click for rock and pop bands, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 Originally posted by MrKnobs I HATE click tracks, but I work with so many bands that insist on using them, even live. Ugggghhh. I'm sorry. Usually I don't have a choice. The band wants to record to a click, the horn and string folks I use (over the internet) want a click so they can just play each section once and cut 'n paste the rest in ProTools. GAAHHHH. And that's another thing! Why do bands cut with a click? So they can make editing easier. Why do they want to do so much editing anyway? Cuz they're too lazy to play a part 3 times in a 3 minute song. Why do listeners turn off a song after 30 seconds? Cuz they know the last chorus is going to sound exactly the same as the first one did. Pushing the dynamics or the tempo a little and varying the part just a little as the song goes on, to make the song build - not something that seems to occur to anyone. Fercryinoutloud it's a 3 minute song, play it all the way through. But last month, on one of OUR tunes, the drummer wanted a click. I was the boss, but I humored him and cut it both ways. I let him listen to both tracks, and he was stunned at how much better the track without click was. Good, hopefully he'll never make that mistake again! I also know way too many drummers who've now grown up with the notion that metronomic tempo is required by everyone so they always use a click - when they practice, in the studio, often on stage. They get so they can't play very well without them and feel uncomfortable if it isn't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 There's some drummers that play really well to a click and can push and pull it even with a click. I think it was Omar Hakim who said that a click are merely suggestions for landing points. They can make it sound really natural and have a great feel. That said, MOST drummers that I've seen can't do that. And I would still say that most rock and pop music doesn't need a click. ~~~~~~~~~~~ Anyway, to steer this back on topic, one of the things that I sometimes found a little grating about the EQ of yore was this seemingly (to me, anyway) forced irreverent, "hipper-than-thou" thing that seemed to peak around the "Fashion Issue". I like the present tone far better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members eightyeightkeys Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 Originally posted by UstadKhanAli And I would still say that most rock and pop music doesn't need a click. There is a way around the click issue in Cubase SX. It's called Time Warp. The band plays live without a click in free time. You then create a Tempo Map of the drummers meter using the Time Warp feature. You can create a grid with markers once per bar, once per beat, whatever is required. The Cubase Click then follows the drummer rather than the other way 'round. Time consuming ? Yes. But, worth it. I've done it many times and it works perfectly preserving the original feel of the rhythm section. I've received sessions from other studios in other cities, using other applications on other OS's and been able to lay in huge orchestras to a flexible click. Technology ! I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 Yes I believe I mentioned this in the article. Not Time Warp specifically but you can do the same thing in Pro Tools with Beat Detective. It is indeed a great way to get around the problem of not having a tempo map if you need one. Yes, a wonderful use of technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 Sounds like an excellent solution to me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 Originally posted by eightyeightkeys Time consuming ? Yes. But, worth it. As I also mentioned in the article , it's a lot less time consuming if you have the drummer overdub a track of quarter or eighth notes on a cowbell or something equally sharp, and use that to generate the tempo map (obviously you mute it in the mix). This was a commonly used trick to trigger MIDI devices from analog recordings. It also makes it easier to find edit points even if you don't have a Beat Detective/Time Warp kind of solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 And also note it's entirely possible to create clicks that breathe and change tempo as needed. Most sequencers let you change the master tempo to pull back and push as much as you like, but a lot of people simply don't take the time and have a "flat line" tempo. Even the dance stuff I do sounds much better with tempo variations. I also agree totally that you don't have to play TO a click, you can play WITH a click -- let it provide the beat that you play around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members the stranger Posted August 30, 2006 Members Share Posted August 30, 2006 Originally posted by Lee Flier Fercryinoutloud it's a 3 minute song, play it all the way through. ADD. I will add that being a compulsive/obsessive perfectionist, I could play a guitar track through 400 times and still not be happy with it. So, this might be part of the allure of the cut and paste approach. It helps you zero in and focus on every little detail (to the detriment of the song, imo). Usually I'm tracking a guitar part before I even really know it. Once I write a bit and get a structure going, I lay down the basics. What happens is in the process of adding more guitar tracks, I am also writing as I go. The old "bust a lead three times and just pick the best one" or "bust three tracks and composite the best of the three into one (in your head and hands-NOT the DAW!). If you do comp a track in the computer, do us a favor and learn the comp and then play it. I would say that most guitar stuff I have laid down and kept was the first or second time I actually made it through the 3 minutes. Anything after that just doesn't have that certain sense of chaos. Once you can play a song through, hit record and do 3 passes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted August 31, 2006 Author Members Share Posted August 31, 2006 My rule of thumb is to create 5 tracks per part. Record 4 takes and comp on the fifth. If you can`t get what you want after 4 tries, you need to re-write the song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted August 31, 2006 Members Share Posted August 31, 2006 > Funny, I have the same rule of thumb. If I can't get what I want from four tracks (the first track that might be the best, the second one after I figured out what I wanted to do, the third one for luck, and the fourth "just in case"), it ain't gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 31, 2006 Members Share Posted August 31, 2006 4-5 takes is mine as well. Anything more than that becomes really difficult to keep track of mentally, at least for me, even with careful notetaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.