Jump to content

Majoria

Members
  • Posts

    2,071
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Majoria

  1. I upgraded in the spring to A7's after comparing to some Focal's and love the improvement. Still need to have good treatment in order to hear all the improvements. I've made several panels from OC 703 and none are permanently mounted, thus I can move them as necessary for tracking and for mixing.
  2. Another vote for 44.1 kHz/24 bit.
  3. I'm disappointed to hear about your neighbors. I am what society would call a very conservative Christian and am offended when someone uses the term to describe behavior that is anit-Chiristian. Hypocrisy at it's worst. While I agree that high end studios likely aren't using a Roland unit, I have used my VS880EX to get great results. I have since moved to Pro Tools as it works better for me but as I mentioned on another thread, I still have the Roland. Put it this way: Take a cheap hi-hat on it's stand and put it in hands of a high end jazz drummer. Then take a high end 7 piece kit and give it to a rookie. Who would give a more impressive solo? Easily a hi-hat solo by a highly skilled drummer will be way more impressive than anything a rookie will do, even with cheap hats.
  4. My brother-in-law just showed me his Mac, a dual quad core (8 cores theoretically) 3.2GHz with way too much RAM for a normal person. For his works (digital photo editing, some video editing) it's justifiable, has both OS 10.5 and XP on it. Not that I'm going to get that carried away, but would all of that really be able to be used by Pro Tools 7.3 LE or 8? I like the desktop concept with the more power but the Macbook Pro may be the most efficient.
  5. I posted this in the recording forum but received no responses, so I'm trying here. I've been contemplating updating my computer for my Pro Tools LE 7.3 rig, currently I use a Dell Dimension that I bought new 3 years ago, single 2.53 GHz processor and 2 GB of RAM, XP home. My use is just as a hobbyist, I use my rig for recording my own projects, my two bands, and also for song writing. I use a lot of plugins, some of which are very tasking on the system. I was looking at the various new PC options but came across some comments about Macs that peaked my curiosity. Can someone clarity if a PC and a Mac each have 8 GB of RAM, does each have the ability to allocate all available and not needed RAM by the OS to use for Pro Tools or are do they cap Pro Tools at a fixed amount, like 2GB or something regardless of the amount of RAM? My DAW doesn't see the internet. What other advantages/disadvantages are there to consider for Macs? I know about the stability issues of Macs and that PC's only come with Vista now (which I'm not really interested in), what other factors are there? I'm curious if I really can justify the price of a Mac as they appear to be much higher than a PC. I'm really just looking at desktop computers, not laptops. I'm not planning on making a purchase in 2008, not really sure when, just looking at options at this point. My brother-in-law is very familiar with Macs but not from the DAW perspective.
  6. 44.1 kHz and 24 bit. The bits make a bigger difference than the frequency so I keep the frequency down and save file size so I can have more plugins. Besides, CD's are at 44.1 and so it will end up there anyway.
  7. That's incorrect actually. But you're on to something. In the case of a 10:1 ratio, 1/10th is not how much it will be compressed, but how much you will be left with (9/10 will be compressed). Hence a 10:1 ratio compresses more than a 4:1 ratio. Well, actually that is not quite right (but I think you may have meant right). Everything above the threshold is compressed, not just 9/10 of the sound at a 10:1 ratio, it's just that the post compression sound is 1/10th of the db over the threshold as compared to the raw signal. Also remember that the signal is distorted in order to be compressed. 80's hair metal drums were a good example of compression creating an unnatural yet big sound. If you are looking to tame the wide range of sound dynamics without much change in the tone, you'll have to experiment a bit. I use several compressors one after another with a low (2:1) ratio. This is sort of how the Super Nice feature on the RNC works.
  8. In short, the formula is: Final sound level = threshold + (amount over threshold divided by the ratio) -9.75 = -12 + (9/4) 0.25 = 0 + (2/8) Attack of course plays a factor in terms of peak volume and release also factors in.
  9. Ok I know if you use 4:1 ratio and threshold is set at -12dB then that means if signal comes in at say -3dB it will be compressed down to -7dB is that right? If the threshold is set at -12 and the incoming audio is -3 and the ratio is 4:1, then there is 9db of sound to compress at the 4:1 ratio. 9 divided by 4 is 2.25, so add the 2.25 to the original -12 and the final outcome is a sound at -9.75db with a compression amount of 6.75. if threshold is at 0db and ratio is 8:1. If something goes over the threshold by 2dB is it pushed down to -6dB You don't push the source to below the threshold, you only affect what goes over the threshold. In this example, only the last 2 db is compressed and at an 8:1 ratio, the amount left over is 0.25 (2db affected divided by 8 ratio) so add the 0.25 to the threshold of 0 and the final outcome is at 0.25db.
  10. The problem may be the fact that you're not using MP3's. My iPod will play my studio recorded MP3's that are encoded at 44.1/24 with no trouble but it won't play any WAV, AIFF, WMA, etc file so I have to go to high end MP3's for it.
  11. Most of my studio material on my iPod is 24 bit and plays just fine.
  12. I've made a variety of panels including a vocal booth out of Owens Corning 703 rigid fiberglass, last purchase was $53 for 6 sheets of 2'x4'x2". Home improvement stores don't carry it, you have to go to a vendor which you can find here. The vocal booth made a HUGE improvement to vocal tracks just in my home hobby studio, think of what a room treated by a pro can sound like.
  13. AT4041. But now that you found one you like, you have a mission.
  14. For starters, low bass frequencies waves can be as long as 3 feet thus a headphone less than an inch from the ear cannot physically replicate this accurately. While you can hear the low end through standard headphones, that will not possibly translate into other scenarios such as phase inversion. Also, a headphone speaker is too small to replicate the low end accurately for studio quality work. Think about it, do you really want a 1" subwoofer?
  15. I'm just a hobbyist at audio recording but I record in mono. I look at a stereo incoming track as nothing more than two mono tracks anyway and the final mix as the only thing really stereo. I recorded a keyboard yesterday and used two mono tracks instead of a single stereo track. That way I can use different eq, effects, etc on each track.
  16. The singer in my band has perfect pitch and he learned it by just spending hours with a perfectly tuned piano, memorizing the exact proper note and then anything else wasn't right. Kind of like how counterfitters are trained, they don't study counterfeit money, they just hyperanalyze the real money so any deviation from it means it's a counterfeit. So far no luck with me that way but it's a possibility for someone who's not as tone deaf as I am.
  17. I also would love to train my ears to identify frequencies. Right now, I'd love to have a spectrum analyzer since I know at times there are frequency issues in my mixes but trial and error doesn't seem to be helping much. Timing and rhythm are easier for me as I've been a drummer for about 15 years. For pitch itself I just get my band's singer to take a listen as he can detect the slightest off key notes. When our band does recordings I have him present during tracking so that we don't have another session of getting what I thought was a great take only to find out it's a little out of tune.
  18. If it's making a good sound but you just can't capture a good sound then I'd look outside the guitar & amp box. How big is the room? Is the room accoustically treated? Have you tried other mics? Have you followed the suggestion of trying different spots and distances (lots of trial and error here, not just a few spots)?
  19. Still not enough information. It's best to match the singer, mic, and preamp together. I agree with most here that there is no one mic that is best for all, just like there's no one voice that best for all. A male rock voice may like a SM7b which is even below your price range. If $600-800 is your available range, don't ignore the mics less than that in price if they are best for the singer.
  20. My biggest area to improve would be anything that involves using my ears. I'm not an audio engineer by career, just by hobby. Also, I'm complete tone deaf. Luckily, the singer in my band has perfect pitch so he helps out there. What I really need are more devices that visually display audio, such as a spectrum analyzer, so that I can correlate what I'm hearing to something to which I can relate. This hopefully will assist in training my ears. Many times trial and error only result in errors and no fix for a certain issue. And more money for better equipment wouldn't hurt.
×
×
  • Create New...