Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
geoff wrote:
On 7/07/2014 5:37 a.m., Mike Rivers wrote: On 7/6/2014 9:11 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: That makes the noise issues even worse! Now instead of something spewing 60 Hz magnetic fields into your quiet electronics you have something spewing high frequency magnetic fields AND electrical fields all over. As I say too often, improved technology doesn't always make things better, but it always changes how we make things (including making things with things that employ the new technology). Music isn't any better if it's recorded with a DAW than with a mixer and tape deck. Current state-of-the-folklore seems to be that music must be better if it's recorded on tape. And played on vinyl .... geoff I think tape is actually a reaction to Melodyne and a statement about workflow. They never went through some of the multitracks that were available from the Olde Dayes. You'd have need a map to navigate the raw tracks to "Bohemian Rhapsody" so that's not much an example for workflow purity. The vinyl thing? Who knows? -- Les Cargill |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
On 7/9/2014 7:03 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
I think tape is actually a reaction to Melodyne and a statement about workflow. What does Melodyne have to do with tape (or not tape)? It's just another tool. They never went through some of the multitracks that were available from the Olde Dayes. You'd have need a map to navigate the raw tracks to "Bohemian Rhapsody" so that's not much an example for workflow purity. Exactly - they made a map, or more like a matrix, as a guide when mixing. You might have a tambourine on the trombone track when the brass section isn't playing. Usually the way that was handled was to split the track to two mixer channels (there were always more mixer channels than there were tracks - otherwise how else would you track an orchestra?), set up level, panning, EQ, and effects for the trombone, the other for the tambourine, and un-mute the right one at the right place (or else do the mix over again). The vinyl thing? Who knows? The people who love vinyl the most have all partially lost their hearing and eyesight. -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
Mike Rivers wrote:
On 7/9/2014 7:03 PM, Les Cargill wrote: I think tape is actually a reaction to Melodyne and a statement about workflow. What does Melodyne have to do with tape (or not tape)? It's just another tool. Melodyne is mentioned in every interview I have read where people say why they want to use tape. They never went through some of the multitracks that were available from the Olde Dayes. You'd have need a map to navigate the raw tracks to "Bohemian Rhapsody" so that's not much an example for workflow purity. Exactly - they made a map, or more like a matrix, as a guide when mixing. You might have a tambourine on the trombone track when the brass section isn't playing. Usually the way that was handled was to split the track to two mixer channels (there were always more mixer channels than there were tracks - otherwise how else would you track an orchestra?), set up level, panning, EQ, and effects for the trombone, the other for the tambourine, and un-mute the right one at the right place (or else do the mix over again). The vinyl thing? Who knows? The people who love vinyl the most have all partially lost their hearing and eyesight. -- Les Cargill |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
On 7/10/2014 8:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
Melodyne is mentioned in every interview I have read where people say why they want to use tape. Every interview? Really? How strange. Melodyne makes a program called Capstan (quite expensive) that, in some cases, can reduce flutter. Maybe nutty tape people are buying it and using it when they digitize their tapes. When I think of Melodyne (as a product) I think of their musical pitch correction and "Audio DNA" polyphonic editor. The Plangent process really works and removes both frequency modulation and amplitude modulation ("scrape flutter"), but it's for people with a budget for commercial reissues, not for home enjoyment, except for wealthy audiophiles. -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#45
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
On 7/10/2014 8:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote: Melodyne is mentioned in every interview I have read where people say why they want to use tape. Every interview? Really? How strange. Melodyne makes a program called Capstan (quite expensive) that, in some cases, can reduce flutter. Maybe nutty tape people are buying it and using it when they digitize their tapes. When I think of Melodyne (as a product) I think of their musical pitch correction and "Audio DNA" polyphonic editor. The Plangent process really works and removes both frequency modulation and amplitude modulation ("scrape flutter"), but it's for people with a budget for commercial reissues, not for home enjoyment, except for wealthy audiophiles. The last I heard, the Plangent system didn't work in realtime and was still based on some heavy Matlab code for the demodulation. It's amazing, though, the change in sound is considerable. Then again, the blending and blur that it removes is part of the reason why people still use tape today. I have never even heard of Melodyne before... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#46
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
On 7/11/2014 9:08 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
The last I heard, the Plangent system didn't work in realtime and was still based on some heavy Matlab code for the demodulation. It's amazing, though, the change in sound is considerable. Then again, the blending and blur that it removes is part of the reason why people still use tape today. Obviously it's not a simple task. Celemony's (the company that makes Melodyne) Capstan program also crunches numbers in its own good time. It's $4,458 to buy and a 5-day rental for all the flutter you can remove is $199. I have never even heard of Melodyne before... That's what you use when you don't want to use Auto-Tune. It has some neat tricks when it's smart enough, and the audio is clean enough. You can run it against a chord, it'll show you all of the notes in the chord, and you can change the pitch of an individual note, like change a chord from major to minor. I think PreSonus is bundling a light version of it with their mixers and audio interfaces now, maybe as part of their Studio One DAW program. -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
Mike Rivers wrote:
On 7/10/2014 8:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote: Melodyne is mentioned in every interview I have read where people say why they want to use tape. Every interview? Really? How strange. No, small sample size plus somebody I know. Melodyne makes a program called Capstan (quite expensive) that, in some cases, can reduce flutter. Maybe nutty tape people are buying it and using it when they digitize their tapes. When I think of Melodyne (as a product) I think of their musical pitch correction and "Audio DNA" polyphonic editor. So that enables you to "autotune" rhythm, phrasing and duration as well as pitch. It is to recorded sound what MIDI editing is to just the notes. There's a backlash. The Plangent process really works and removes both frequency modulation and amplitude modulation ("scrape flutter"), but it's for people with a budget for commercial reissues, not for home enjoyment, except for wealthy audiophiles. For sure. -- Les Cargill |
#48
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Mike Rivers wrote: On 7/10/2014 8:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote: Melodyne is mentioned in every interview I have read where people say why they want to use tape. Every interview? Really? How strange. Melodyne makes a program called Capstan (quite expensive) that, in some cases, can reduce flutter. Maybe nutty tape people are buying it and using it when they digitize their tapes. When I think of Melodyne (as a product) I think of their musical pitch correction and "Audio DNA" polyphonic editor. The Plangent process really works and removes both frequency modulation and amplitude modulation ("scrape flutter"), but it's for people with a budget for commercial reissues, not for home enjoyment, except for wealthy audiophiles. The last I heard, the Plangent system didn't work in realtime and was still based on some heavy Matlab code for the demodulation. It's amazing, though, the change in sound is considerable. Then again, the blending and blur that it removes is part of the reason why people still use tape today. I have never even heard of Melodyne before... --scott http://www.celemony.com/en/melodyne/what-is-melodyne -- Les Cargill |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
"Les Cargill" wrote in message ...
I have never even heard of Melodyne before... http://www.celemony.com/en/melodyne/what-is-melodyne Fascinating. I can't help but think "a German Harry Partch". One of his points is that everything already exists /as an idea/, even if it hasn't been physically expressed. (I'd go further and say everything exists /only/ as an idea, but that's another issue.) When I'm trying to solve a problem, I keep in mind that, if there's an answer, it already exists. I cannot actually create anything; I can only discover (dis-cover) it. When he's asked how it was that he came up with his approach to analysis, he says he doesn't know. In fact, his work and experiences up to that point had prepared him to recognize something that (probably) no one else had noticed before. |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
... On 7/11/2014 9:08 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: The last I heard, the Plangent system didn't work in realtime and was still based on some heavy Matlab code for the demodulation. It's amazing, though, the change in sound is considerable. Then again, the blending and blur that it removes is part of the reason why people still use tape today. Obviously it's not a simple task. Celemony's (the company that makes Melodyne) Capstan program also crunches numbers in its own good time. It's $4,458 to buy and a 5-day rental for all the flutter you can remove is $199. I have never even heard of Melodyne before... That's what you use when you don't want to use Auto-Tune. It has some neat tricks when it's smart enough, and the audio is clean enough. You can run it against a chord, it'll show you all of the notes in the chord, and you can change the pitch of an individual note, like change a chord from major to minor. I think PreSonus is bundling a light version of it with their mixers and audio interfaces now, maybe as part of their Studio One DAW program. I can see how Melodyne would be very attractive for a project studio doing demos for people who really need it. I know a young lady who got her parents to pay for a lot of studio time and ended up with a really nice sounding demo. But having heard her in person I would have advised that they save their money - she's a terrible singer and the studio probably used Melodyne and a lot of time to fix it all up. Sean |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Les Cargill" wrote in message ... I have never even heard of Melodyne before... http://www.celemony.com/en/melodyne/what-is-melodyne Fascinating. I can't help but think "a German Harry Partch". Exactly. Musique concrete. IMO, it's only German because the plugin business found more of a home there. Bomb Factory, all that started in the US but did not remain. One of his points is that everything already exists /as an idea/, even if it hasn't been physically expressed. (I'd go further and say everything exists /only/ as an idea, but that's another issue.) Gets kinda bootstrappey. Skyhook-ey. When I'm trying to solve a problem, I keep in mind that, if there's an answer, it already exists. I cannot actually create anything; I can only discover (dis-cover) it. You could possibly build it from scratch but I doubt you have the budget for it... When he's asked how it was that he came up with his approach to analysis, he says he doesn't know. In fact, his work and experiences up to that point had prepared him to recognize something that (probably) no one else had noticed before. It's a phenomenal piece of work but it's caused as much despair as anything else but that's possibly observer bias on my part. -- Les Cargill |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
Nate Najar wrote:
lets say under $1000 give or take for 4-8 mic channels. I don't need built in effects or multiple foldback sends. compact, good sound and a built in power supply are the name of the game. Have you seen Bob O's comments at PRW regarding him being suprised to find a well known and well respected classical recordist in Nashville tracking a large ensemble using a Mackie Onyx? The man said he was surprised how very good it all sounded. I'd look at these, personally, if I'm needing to hang with that budget. Maybe carry an RNP where I needed more preamps. http://mackie.com/products/onyx1220i/ -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
Mike Rivers wrote:
I agree with you about the external power supply, but I don't understand why you're having the headroom problem. I understand that. I meet it often, and sometimes it's more than operator ignorance. Some of this kit comes with fanciful specs that don't hold up well under fire. ****ty preamps abound and dialing back the input sensitivity only goes so far. Wish it were otherwise. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message ... On 7/9/2014 2:57 AM, Trevor wrote: The music going in may not be better, but the audio quality coming out can be! So who cares? Probably the people who don't actually listen to the music. And those of us that do. Trevor. |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
"Les Cargill" wrote in message ... Mike Rivers wrote: What does Melodyne have to do with tape (or not tape)? It's just another tool. Melodyne is mentioned in every interview I have read where people say why they want to use tape. Just more proof they don't have a clue then. Trevor. |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
geoff wrote: "Current state-of-the-folklore seems to be that music must be better if
it's recorded on tape. And played on vinyl .... " That's because the format intended to supercede those is being used in totally the wrong way. Plus this: http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/thread...oo-hot.350381/ The title should be amended to include DVD players and cable/sat boxes. |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 06:00:28 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote: "Les Cargill" wrote in message ... I have never even heard of Melodyne before... http://www.celemony.com/en/melodyne/what-is-melodyne Fascinating. I can't help but think "a German Harry Partch". One of his points is that everything already exists /as an idea/, even if it hasn't been physically expressed. (I'd go further and say everything exists /only/ as an idea, but that's another issue.) When I'm trying to solve a problem, I keep in mind that, if there's an answer, it already exists. I cannot actually create anything; I can only discover (dis-cover) it. When he's asked how it was that he came up with his approach to analysis, he says he doesn't know. In fact, his work and experiences up to that point had prepared him to recognize something that (probably) no one else had noticed before. Does anyone have an idea how he sorts this stuff out? I have a feeling basic FFT won't do it. |
#58
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
Well ****. That was easy. H pad was just the ticket. Cheap too.
|
#59
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
Nate Najar wrote:
Well ****. That was easy. H pad was just the ticket. Cheap too. See? -- Les Cargill |
#60
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
compact mixer of decent quality
Nate Najar wrote:
Well ****. That was easy. H pad was just the ticket. Cheap too. Now get a dozen more, because someday you will need them all. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Nakamichi RCA plugs...decent quality? | High End Audio | |||
Nakamichi RCA plugs...decent quality? | Marketplace | |||
A&H compact mixer series - who uses/has used them? | Pro Audio | |||
compact mixer - which one ? | Audio Opinions | |||
best quality compact mp3 player/recorder? | Pro Audio |