Jump to content

SteinbergerHack

Members
  • Posts

    32,416
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    138

Posts posted by SteinbergerHack

  1. Maybe it's a difference in the area, but:

    I have played 8 paying shows over the last three weekends, one of which was virtual.  Audiences were smaller (covid-limited), but present for the other 7.  I have another 6 nights booked in early May, and I was offered a 6-night show in April that I had to turn down due to conflict with my daughter's wedding.  I also have a few nights booked in June and October.

    Even better, I am scheduled to get the vaccine 1st dose tomorrow afternoon.

    It's not back to what it used to be, but it's coming back .......  slowly.......

  2. Over the holiday break, I decided to start playing around with some recording.  I ended up getting roped into doing some large group mixes for a virtual benefit concert....and figured out that I'm in a bit over my head. 

    I know the basics of how things function, but knowing what to do with them to make a recording sound good is where I am a stone-cold beginner.   Below is a link to a really rough song that I've put together to us as a learning tool.  What I'm looking for is an idea of what's wrong with this mix, and what I should be listening for to make it better.  Nay and all input is welcomed, and feel free to be brutally honest.  That said the playing/singing isn't the point - I'm specifically using this to work on my recording/mixing skills.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/1zsjvpyh2gtgyyv/Amie - Rough Mix 1.wav?dl=0

  3. 19 minutes ago, The Other Paul said:

    Marshall JCM900 100w (set to 50), 2x12. Not really a pickup connoisseur. Plus the pre-amp gives plenty of guts, and tone options. I'm thinking maybe an EMG just for looks.

    With that amp, you can make almost anything sound good.  The EMGs have a very characteristic sound, very good for high-gain metal tones (IMO).  I would never mix an EMG with something else, as they don't mix well with anything else in my experience.  Put in a complete set or stick with something more basic like a PAF-style passive.

  4. On 11/3/2020 at 2:17 PM, The Other Paul said:

    I have a SH-1000 that I bought in Vancouver in 1981. Sadly the rear pickup is kacked and I don't have the guitar-fu to know what to replace it with. Any suggestions?

    Pickup selection has more to do with what sound you want from it than what was there before.  What amp do you.use with it?

  5. On 8/19/2020 at 6:08 AM, annie.px said:

    Opera singing is by far the hardest out of all types of singing, not even arguably. It takes DECADES to successfully master your voice and it requires so much skill, talent and so many years of training. Very few can be good opera singers while most people can become pop singers with very little talent. Even Mariah Carey, who has an amazing voice and vocal range, admitted that she will never be able to sing opera, due to it’s high level of difficulty and intense training. In my opinion opera is very much under-appreciated given it’s the hardest form of singing.

    Absolutely true.

    My daughter is studying opera at the Jacobs School, and has probably another 5 years or so of training before she could be considered a viable candidate for a lead role in a major opera company (though she has the lead role in their fall opera this year, ahead of a number of grad students).

    Meanwhile, she can walk into just about any other type of vocal audition and score straight 10/10s.  I music direct with a couple of community theater groups, and I can guarantee you that any trained opera singer will blow away any other sort of vocal setting in technique, diction, presentation, power, and sight reading.

    4 hours ago, kickingtone said:

    It's not all about the genre, but also the piece of music. You could probably write something too challenging for the human voice in any genre. But most genres don't go looking for technical difficulty, as such. That may happen more in opera, as there seems to be a "showing off" element of the singer, as well as a "badge of sophistication" for the composer.

    The original demand of being able to be heard at the back row of a huge venue did set classical singing necessarily apart, but now, with mics...?

    There's a lot more to it than that.  "Classical" performers are selected by highly trained, skilled professionals on the basis of their technical skill and ability BEFORE they are allowed to perform or record; opera is the highest level of vocal performance within the classical spaces, so it is reserved for the absolutely highest-skill performers.  Other genres focus on other aspects, like songwriting, look, and sometimes just acceptance by a lowest-common-denominator audience.  Sure, there are operatic pieces that can be sung by lesser-trained vocalists, but they will never pass the audition to get themselves on an opera stage.

    Put another way, CC Deville and Ace Frehley sold a lot of records playing simple guitar parts, but there's no way either would ever take a gig from Chris Parkening, no matter how well they might be able to play a specific piece; they simply aren't qualified for the gig.

    Oh, and BTW, most operatic performers still work without mics.  Broadway performers use headsets, but not opera. 

  6. 16 minutes ago, Phil O'Keefe said:

    The biggest issue IMHO is latency. It's been the major hindrance for real-time music interaction online. The more distant the collaborator, the worse it tends to be. 

     

    Acceptable latency for video conferencing
    Target values for acceptable video conference performance are 150 ms latency, 40 ms jitter and 1% or less packet loss. Latency includes a fixed component related to the network transmission path length, so physical distance makes this parameter somewhat difficult to control.

    https://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/tip/Video-conferencing-bandwidth-requirements-for-the-WAN

     

    Some people get annoyed when their DAW has ~20 ms or more of latency, and most find 150 ms to be too annoying to deal with. 

    I'd love to have something that would allow two people, or even better, groups of people to interact and jam together in real time, and I'd definitely be an advocate for adding that functionality to HC, but AFAIK, the technology just doesn't exist that allows that in a seamless, non-buggy, latency-free way. 

    Please feel free to correct me if you know of a system that actually does work.

    I'm the last person to ask about this - I'm afraid I'm a bit of a luddite in this area.  I've never even recorded over a digital backing track at home. 

    My studio experience has been either working as a player/composer in a full-on pro studio, or recording a few guitar and/or vocal tracks at home with a very simplistic setup, always one-shot, no overdubs, no punch-ins (until last weekend, when I finally overdubbed parts on a couple of songs for hire).  Back in the mid-80s I engineered some reasonably good (for the time) demo recordings with the old Fostex Model 80, but those techniques don't translate very well to modern technology.

    I would seem that the latency would be highly variable due to the way 'net traffic is routed.  There are ways within a given subnet to prioritize traffic, but I doubt that the average home subscription service will allow those flags to be passed through so that we can hog the neighbors' bandwidth.

  7. 4 hours ago, Phil O'Keefe said:

    The same thing is typically true for things like inventions and patents that a person develops as part of their normal work. For example, if you work for a company that does research into new forms of energy and in the course of your research work you make a discovery that results in a breakthrough in fusion, the patent for that may include your name on it, but the company that was paying you for your research work is probably going to reap the greatest financial rewards from your breakthrough, not you. 

    100% true.  I am a named inventor on a number of patents, yet they are owned by the companies I was working for at the time they were filed.  I got a nice bonus for each of them, but the company that owned the lab space owns the work product that comes from it.

    • Thanks 1
  8. 15 hours ago, Logan Vanek said:

    The wavelengths sent out by the guitar are far longer than what is meant for a PA system. you could blow out the speakers, same reason why you don't use a guitar on a bass amp

    Sorry, but this has no relationship to the way audio systems work.

    A guitar cabinet has a very non-flat response, and this response is part of the overall sound of the amp.

    In contrast, PA cabinets are designed to get as close to a perfectly flat response as possible.  A regular old tube amp connected to a good PA cabinet is going to sound very gritty and harsh - nobody is going to like the sound very much.  It won't damage the speaker, though, unless you exceed it's power rating (or if you connect the speaker output of the amp into the line input of a powered cabinet, which will rapidly let the magic smoke out of the electronics).

    That said, a modeler or profiler will have a cabinet emulator section that will get very close to the sound of that amp played through a cabinet and mic'd - and that signal will sound very good through a PA cabinet (and won't sound very good through a regular old guitar amp cabinet).

    In the end, various kinds of cabinets are designed for specific purposes, and will function best when used as intended.  [Note that the supposed "FRFR" modeler cabinets are really just plain old PA cabinets with a different logo and a higher price tag.  Caveat emptor.]

    [FWIW, the "wavelength" of a kick drum or bass guitar signal coming from a PA is far longer than anything a guitar will ever produce.  Wavelength is inversely proportional to frequency.]

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...