Cheesy Backing Tracks and PA System Dynamic Range

[dboomer]

I think we were stealing the other thread ... so I'd like to start a new discussion here ...

 

I have no idea what you are implying there.

 

Yeah ... that's the problem.

 

First, I was by no means making any negative comment wrt MIDI. I use it for most of my performances. The point that I am trying to make is that most users are completely unaware of the dynamic issues through the entire system a and that choosing to compress a lot, some or none the material that you present to the sound system to reproduce is ultimately gonna be decided by the capabilities (and the sonic quality) of the sound system.

 

So all of this goes back to the comments (not pointing anyone out here) about not compressing their tracks. The point I am trying to make is that even though you are not consciously making the decision to compress and the backing track level, your action (or lack thereof) is causing the system to do the compression/limiting on it's own.

 

The point I was trying to make about MIDI sequences is that you basically (not 100%, but generally) have a known quantity (of max output voltage). So it is in this respect that it behaves (and you can treat it) as a compressed/limited signal. Now if you don't know, you should take the time to discover it ... unless your system is literally 10's of times more powerful than you need for your average listening level. I was trying to contrast this to "traditional" instruments (could be acoustic, could be electric). Yes there are hard limits (air compresses and has an SPL limit ... I think about 194 dB SPL) ... but in the real world. Back to my example above, If you hit a rim shot on a snare you could easily generate a 20 dB peak over the average level or if a bass player snaps a string ... same thing.

 

A 20 dB peak would require 100x more power from your system than whatever you were running at for your average level and almost no one (including the biggest pros) have 20 dB of headroom in their systems.

 

I would also like to add that some of these "poor dynamic range" issues contribute to the perception of "cheesy backing tracks". You just can't even come close to running backing tracks through a Fishman Solo or Bose PA, let alone a Fender Passport (as examples) and have them sound real. And if they don't sound real then maybe they sound cheesy. I have played electronic drums since the 80's and if you don't have at least a few thousand Watts of power and a couple of 15 or 18" drivers you are not even gonna get close to reproducing what an acoustic drum set can do. I think this is one of the major factors in the lack of acceptance of drummers to adopt electronic kits

[Notes_Norton]

MIDI sequences do not have any output voltage at all. MIDI is just data - bits and no-bits - zeros and ones. There is absolutely no direct correlation between MIDI and output voltage. If you believe this, you need to learn more about MIDI. MIDI is merely a computer control language that "plays" a synthesizer.

 

MIDI Sequences play synthesizers as if they were invisible hands playing the keys. In fact, that is all the sequencer does, it faithfully records what your hands do on the MIDI controller (and/or add breath, foot, and other controllers).

 

MIDI has no dynamic range. MIDI has data. Synthesizers have dynamic range. Some synthesizers have poor dynamic range, others have much more than you need. Most synths designed for the pro market have enough dynamic range for anyone. If they didn't Stevie Wonder, Keith Emerson and the others I listed in the post that inspired this one wouldn't play them.

 

Are you really telling me that all synthesizers have poor dynamic range? Less than an electric guitar? Less than a sax? Less than any other instrument going through the same PA set?

 

On the other hand, cheesy backing tracks will always sound cheesy, and good backing tracks will always sound good. Cheesy guitarists sound cheesy, good guitarists sound good. Cheesy vocalists sound cheesy, good vocalists sound good. Cheesy sax players sound cheesy, good sax players sound good.

 

Making backing tracks, like playing any other instrument requires talent, skill, practice and a huge learning curve. If it was instant gratification, anyone could do it, and people wouldn't pay me to have so much fun!

[tlbonehead]

I think the main point Don was making is that you need some "peak horsepower" in order to have backing tracks sound convincing, mainly because of the dynamics needed for drum tones. Same with electronic drums or a drum machine.

[dboomer]

I don't mean this to sound confrontational, but rather to help people understand one of the elements that goes into the perception of the quality of backing tracks.

 

 

MIDI sequences do not have any output voltage

 

 

Correct ... I was referring to the output from MIDI sound modules and not MIDI data

 

 

 

Are you really telling me that all synthesizers have poor dynamic range? Less than an electric guitar? Less than a sax? Less than any other instrument going through the same PA set?

 

 

I'm not so much saying "poor" dynamic range as I am "limited" dynamic range. They all have some fixed max voltage output level. You cannot exceed this level no matter what you do (except re-designing the electronics). But you can still blow into a sax with more strength and continue to increase the output level of the sax itself until you reach the theoretical limit of sound in air (your audience would all be bleeding far before you get anywhere near this point)

 

 

On the other hand, cheesy backing tracks will always sound cheesy, and good backing tracks will always sound good.

 

 

I agree that cheesy will always be cheesy. But great quality tracks can become lesser quality if the system playing them doesn't have enough dynamic range to do them justice. I would submit that if you took your tracks and instead of playing them through the system you currently play them through you suddenly ran them into a system with 1/10th the available power while they still could have the same perceived loudness but the quality would move towards the cheesy side because of lack of dynamics.

[daddymack]

and it may not even be about the power alone; the quality of the speakers, the inherent EQ limitations of the system, etc. could all make even the best tracks sound weaker.

[Bob Dey]

OK the snare drum example makes sense, but if I intentionally add dynamics to my backing tracks there will be dynamics. There will be points of the music getting softer, and points where it gets louder. But if I intentionally compress either the midi data or audio file, there will be hardly any volume changes.

 

As a solo (one-man-band) there are basically two types of gigs. One is playing very quiet for dinner type engagements. The other is playing a bar where they usually have a band. Even in the second case, it's still not expected that a solo will have the same volume as a band, because the rooms are still relatively small.

 

If a system of several thousand watts were used in a small bar you would be told to turn it down right away don't ya think? I find I can get enough dynamics so people can hear it and feel it. That's all that's needed. And if tracks were intentionally compressed there would be a big difference (hardly any dynamics).

[Notes_Norton]

 

I agree that cheesy will always be cheesy. But great quality tracks can become lesser quality if the system playing them doesn't have enough dynamic range to do them justice. I would submit that if you took your tracks and instead of playing them through the system you currently play them through you suddenly ran them into a system with 1/10th the available power while they still could have the same perceived loudness but the quality would move towards the cheesy side because of lack of dynamics.

 

 

Same for electric guitars and electronic keyboards. So what's different about that?

 

I have a decent PA and can play dinner gigs at 65db or less or dance gigs at well over 120db (although we tend to keep it down so as not to hurt our audience members ears).

 

There is nothing inherent about MIDI that makes it less dynamic than an electric guitar. It's all in the amplification. What makes a guitar loud will make a synth loud.

[dboomer]

 

If a system of several thousand watts were used in a small bar you would be told to turn it down right away don't ya think? I find I can get enough dynamics so people can hear it and feel it.

 

 

I think the problem here is a bit of confusion between terms.

 

Being asked to turn down the PA would be a question of average level (for which there are empirical measurements) and/or loudness (for which there are not empirical measurements possible).

 

Loudness has subjective elements, which is why it cannot be measured ... so two systems could be exactly the same (sound pressure) level but have two different "loudness" levels. It would depend on how you use the system. A 2000W PA simply has 10 dB more dynamic range than a 200W system. So it is quite possible that you would actually be asked to turn down the smaller system first as it would have become harsh and distorted first. It certainly is possible to turn the larger system up even further but that comes at the expense of sonic quality ... which has been the point I have been trying to make all along.

[dboomer]

 

Un-amplified sax tops out at about 100db give or take depending on mouthpiece and reed. You cannot exceed that.

 

 

So I have a couple of questions about this (not necessarily even disagreeing with you)

 

Is that 100 dB level "max instantaneous peak" or "average"? What is the limiting factor to exceeding this level?

 

Actually is really doesn't matter. What does matter is the typical dynamic range of the instrument as played (and I realize it is different from player to player and from instrument to instrument)

 

So back to MIDI (instruments ... not data). My contention is that most times the range will be smaller in a MIDI instrument than with a lot of acoustic (or even electric guitars). It is certainly possible to construct a patch with very wide dynamic range, but again my opinion, this would hold true for the typical preset patches widely available in common MIDI instruments.

[Notes_Norton]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

 

My MIDI sequences have as much dynamic range as I need and definitely more dynamic range than my acoustic sax. I mic my sax and play my guitar directly through the PA set (RP355 fx/ amp simulator/direct box) and they blend fine with my MIDI sequences. I use a half dozen pro quality synth modules and 2 hardware samplers in my MIDI sequences, record them to WAV file, turn them into a high quality MP3 and bring them to the gig.

 

The sequences are not lacking in dynamic range by any stretch of the imagination.

 

If you do it right, with the right gear, there is no dynamic problem.

[tlbonehead]

Same for a guitar, saxophone, flute, bassoon, or double-belled euphonium. Un-amplified sax tops out at about 100db give or take depending on mouthpiece and reed. You cannot exceed that. Un-amplified electric guitar much less than that. The synth, like the guitar, depends on the amp to make it louder than that. Low powr amp means low volume potential, higher powers mean more volume potential. Same for electric guitars and electronic keyboards. So what's different about that? I have a decent PA and can play dinner gigs at 65db or less or dance gigs at well over 120db (although we tend to keep it down so as not to hurt our audience members ears). There is nothing inherent about MIDI that makes it less dynamic than an electric guitar. It's all in the amplification. What makes a guitar loud will make a synth loud.

But the attack of a kick and snare requires higher "peak-ability".

[tlbonehead]

? I find I can get enough dynamics so people can hear it and feel it. That's all that's needed. And if tracks were intentionally compressed there would be a big difference (hardly any dynamics).

not if it wasn't too loud.

[dboomer]

 

If you do it right, with the right gear, there is no dynamic problem.

 

 

That IS my point. It's just easier to do with MIDI because MIDI instrument are much more predictable and therefore less of a problem to deal with.

[SusieP]

So can we clarify what is a 'cheesy' backing track and what isn't?

 

Is it the actual song itself? Like a 'novelty' kind of song?

Is it the keyboard that sounds like a child's plastic toy piano and a saxophone that sounds like a kazoo?

I'd say all the above create cheese.

Am I right???

[EightString]

I recently saw a guy performing with backing tracks in a crowded outdoor area. The tracks were pretty good, but IMHO, the guy's performance was so... generic that he didn't bring much to the proceedings.

 

The entire time that I was watching, not a single person (other than me) even glanced at the guy.

 

It wasn't the backing tracks' fault. They sounded professionally produced, with no "cheese".

 

I think the problem was the lackluster "phoning it in" performance of the live musician.

 

He was certainly a competent enough singer and guitar player, but why perform like that with backing tracks at all if you aren't going to try to stand out as the focal point of the thing, and work to get an audience going?

[Notes_Norton]

 

So can we clarify what is a 'cheesy' backing track and what isn't? Is it the actual song itself? Like a 'novelty' kind of song? Is it the keyboard that sounds like a child's plastic toy piano and a saxophone that sounds like a kazoo? I'd say all the above create cheese. Am I right???

 

 

To my ears, Cheesy equals:

 

 

But it is absolutely subjective. You can make a great sequence with inauthentic MIDI sounds. If you ever get a chance to hear "Wacky Dust" by Manhattan Transfer from their "Extensions" album, the backing track is done entirely with analog synths - the kind with oscillators, patch cords, and twirly knobs. Not one sound is authentic, but the monsters who played them coaxed so many nuances out of them that you hear trumpets, clarinets, saxophones and trombones.

 

Also, what one person considers cheesy might not be to another.

 

To me how it is done/performed contributes more to the essence of cheesy than the actual sounds used.

 

If I hear a step-entered MIDI sequence with great Kurzweil sounds it will ring cheesy to my ears. If I hear a well played MIDI sequence on a laptop sound card it will sound OK to me. Like most people, when I'm listening I care more about expression than tone.

 

The Urban Dictionary considers Celine Dion cheesy because her arrangements are over-produced and her singing is not up to the arrangements - therefore inauthentic. But she makes millions of dollars doing it, so obviously a large number of listeners disagree. So who am I to say?

 

So what defines cheesy to you?

[pogo97]

 

I recently saw a guy performing with backing tracks in a crowded outdoor area. The tracks were pretty good, but IMHO, the guy's performance was so... generic that he didn't bring much to the proceedings.

 

 

Sucks when you're upstaged by your backing tracks.

[JimboKeys]

I think we all have our own definitions of what constitutes cheesy in a backing track. The list of offenders that comes to my mind includes:

 

1. Unedited MIDI files grabbed off the net, complete with melody line played on a harmonica patch.

2. Overly-instrumented tracks with strings, full horn section, backing vocals, etc. The result is that the performer sounds like they're playing along with a CD. I don't care if someone did record all the tracks themselves, tracks should accompanying the performer, not vice-versa.

3. Inappropriate use of pitch bend. Actually it's very seldom that pitch bend in a backing track doesn't sound cheesy.

4. Guitar solos on backing tracks while the performer strums chords.

5. Drum parts that would be impossible for a drummer with only 2 hands and 2 feet to play, or where every hit has the same velocity value.

6. I generally don't have a problem with step-entered/quantized parts as long as it's just drums and bass. Quantized piano chords, though, just sound wrong.

7. Generic beats that run through the entire song. Just my opinion, but i think a track needs to at least hit the important accents, etc.

 

- Jimbo

[pogo97]

 

... 7. Generic beats that run through the entire song. Just my opinion, but i think a track needs to at least hit the important accents, etc. - Jimbo

 

 

The hardest thing for guitar/piano/whatever players to grasp is that the drums do more than go thump thump. A good drummer contributes massively to the overall flow of the music. Not a trivial task at all.

[Mike McLaughlin]

OK, so I'm guilty of using cheesy backing tracks, have scrolling lyrics and chords, and a lame Bose L1 compact. To heighten the cheese factor, I play naked, and have naked girls dancing to my music all night every week! But hell, I have a lot of fun, get paid, sell CDs, and get tips. What's not to like? Below is a sample of clips of about 25 songs if you can bare to watch, LOL! The sound quality isn't too bad for just the Flip Video built in mic.

 

I taped my show last weekend, and what it taught me is I look at the lyrics more often than I thought (it's not that I don't know 'em, but more of a crutch), and I make funny faces while playing guitar! But I ain't ashamed to put it out there!

 

[video=youtube;wUl9-ANoWhk]

[SusieP]

Hopefully having the guitar in front of you prevents 'it' from being out there quite so much.

Unless you hold your guitar really high.

 

You do?

In that case, all I can say is.....you certainly have some balls.

 

 

:lol:

 

 

And if you play cheese, that makes 'em cheese balls. :lol:

[Mike McLaughlin]

HaHa smooth Susie, bringing it back to the genital level, LOL!

[daddymack]

Mike, thank you for keeping the camera at that level...

[richardmac]

My oh my. I did a gig at a nudist place not long ago. I did not strip all the way down, though, because my wife informed me that I'd better not even consider it. I respected her wishes. It went OK. People danced, I got paid. It was a little weird, though. It was like the Clint Eastwood movie - The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Let's leave it at that.

 

Regarding the thread... I think that performers ought to do everything they can to make a great show. If you HAVE to use backing tracks, then they ought to sound as good as possible. I've said this a kabillion times, but it's all in the low end. If you can make your kick drum sound great, you've got something. If not, then it sounds like you're playing along with a CD player. The low end is the energy. You either need 15's sitting on the floor, or you need a sub. IMHO.

[SusieP]

 

HaHa smooth Susie, bringing it back to the genital level, LOL!

 

 

 

hee hee sorry.