51m0n

If there are two frequencies that cause another 'beating' freuquency lower down, that lower frequency is really there, the air is actually moving at that frequency, our ears aren't making it up, so it isnt only there because you hear the two original frequencies and imagine the third, it is caused by the two original frequencies, and therefore will be recorded by any digital system, whereby the beating frequency is below the Nyquist frequency. So it isnt magically 'lost'. That is a part of why the sampling theory holds true. And why any such audible result of higher harmonics that we cant actually hear is nevertheless reproduced accurately. A young chap out in the countryside may [i]just[/i] be able to discern the presesnce of 20000Hz (although its unlikely if he's older than about 7 or 8 years), but certainly wont be able to hear it [i]easily[/i]. No one can, and no one has ever been found who can hear above 20KHz and can actually get more than a 50/50 guess rate of success at telling if such frequencies are being played. And people have been trying to find someone who could for about 100 years now. Bats hear up to 150KHz, humans hear at best up to 20KHz and this fades from about the age of 8 onwards. The bit depth part is also not really accurate. It is suggesting that there is no discernable noise from vinyl. Which is rubbish, there is mechanical noise, rumble, yada yada yada, on top of thermal noise in vinyl too. Quantisation 'noise' is typically only heard on material with truncated bit depth that is undithered and had no noise-shaping applied. Only on very very quiet parts of the source even then, you are talking about the last bit in the range, which is 6dB, at the bottom of a 96dB scale. With dithering at the time of mastering ad noise-shaping which moves any noise to outside the areas humans hear best anyway its not going to be discernable by anyone on a normal hifi in a normal room. Dithering is equivalent to anti-aliasing in video if you like. It effectively smooths the edges that we might have been able to discern. It is done when converting from 24bit final mix to 16bit CD quality master. Where you might just notice something different between the 24bit and 16 after mastering is the very end of a reverb trail that completely fades out. It may be ever so slightly shorter on a dithered 16 bit representation. Anyone here have a room that is quieter than -90dB when everything is switched on and nothing playing back? I though the general opinion was specialised rooms for listening weren't practical? In which case the quantisation noise from 16bit isnt practically noticeable. Anyone here care to show us a recording with a dynamic range wider than 90dB??? If your CD has a dynamic range of 20dB you arent going to be able to notice any dithering in reality. The noise floor of great vinyl is only about 70dB anyway. So it cant reproduce that recording either...

Heavy handed drummers are as much to blame as overly zealous guitarists with 4x12s or even 2x12s cranked. Best guitar sound in a band mixing itself for a 300 seater venue the guitarist had a tiny littel Fender 6watt tube amp and he was smoking hot, brilliant tone and completely under control....

Best sound I've heard in a large(ish) venue ever was Travis at Brighton Center. I'd just about given up hope for live sound but they had it exactly nailed, exceptional sound all night, brilliant guy on FOH mixing throughout, fair sounded like the album. Next best was probably Dr John at The Dome (usually only average due to it being a rather difficult room). Every time I go to London to see a gig in a larger venue it sounds rubbish, most small club venues have a soundguy bereft of a clue as to what to do with a live band, and most bands in pubs are just waaaaayyyy too loud...

I prefer DRs to d'Addarios too. Hi-Beams for me, but they feel far nicer to player than the d'Addarios that were on my Roscoe when I first got it.

Yeah, definitely, I dont need to be getting het up about this, stop it at once And dont knock midi goldfish - its the future...

Oh well done Bilbo!

[quote name='Phil Starr' timestamp='1355918759' post='1904391'] Those other kits would cost a lot more and you'd get better quality and if you spend enough you eventually might get top quality a bit cheaper than buying ready made, depending upon how much you've learned in the mean time. Sadly the days when DIY was a cheaper option are just about gone. [/quote] I know this is getting off topic here, but the seventh circle kits are considered about as good as it gets by very very very many people in the studio world, and better than the vast majority of mic pres available at any price. They are expensive, especuially by bassist terms, but very significantly cheaper than the original items they are based upon (about half price).

Errr, no you can definintely DIY mic pres that far outsrips the quality and reliability iof anything with a Behringer sticker on it. It just wont be cheaper I'm afraid:- http://www.seventhcircleaudio.com http://www.soundskulptor.com/ http://www.fivefishstudios.com http://www.hamptone.com/index_old.html All of which will completely blow away said behringer unit. And hurt your wallet a lot more I'm afraid

Excellent [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable-gain_amplifier"]desciption of VCA here [/url]in the In Sound Mixing Consoles section. Cant be bothered to paraphrase it here - bit busy right now.... Dayummmm you guys are quick!

Doh, I meant slap all three strings with the right hand What a wally !

You missed out tapping, which is definitely another way to play. Not done well by many IMO, but you can certainly get sequencer like arpeggios out with it, and done right it can even be rather funky too... Plus there is Bootsy's octave slapping, whereby you hold octaves with the left hand (muting the middle string) and slap all three strings with the curved fingers of the left hand (slapping as in like you might slap a pert bottom, i.e not with a thumb ). That can sound immense if you do it right, which is to say far gentler than you may think you need to.

Are you turing the interior of that room into a faithful mockup of the bridge of the Millenium Falcon?

You're not hanging a cloud off it are you??

Tasty bit of compression with a slow attack time will increase the transient spike, giving you more attack - you will need more headroom to generate the extra spike though...

You defintely definitely need to stay balanced here. live is a world of hurt regarding noise, especially considering the long cable runs with dollops of all sorts of unknown leaky wiring and crud flying around. A studio is a hugely cleaner environment to work in as often as not IME...

Awesome line - used to play it years ago - everytime it gets to the pops I shudder though, I hate the timbre of them, he needed new strings or a less twangly sound IMHO

I use an H4n and se the levels manually, 24bit 48KHz wav files allowing a good 12dB of level above the peaks. That way I never, ever get any unwanted overs. 24bits means massive dynamic range, so make use of it! I then use Reaper after the fact to bring the level up to something more sensible for general playback, and render down to 320kbps mp3 for ease of transfer to other band members via the web (wetransfer.com is brilliant). Reaper lets you set up sections and then render them, automatically naming them as it goes, it is super easy to pull out the good bits from the entire rehearsal, takes me about 15 minutes to do a 2 hour rehearsal, and I record in 4 track off it now as a rule as well..

A Zoom H4n on its own, just stuck up near the wall in a reaheasal room souinds like this when recording a 3 piece enjoying a bit of impromptu jammage:- https://soundcloud.com/51m0n-1/track-7/s-T7TIC So far pretty much everything I've heard from the likes of an iPhone or other smart phone hasnt come close, even with a mic attachment thingy.

DV247 completely ballsed up their 'next day delivery' and although they knew it was going wrong they didnt get around to letting me know So on the phone they promised £50 back aby way of apology (on an already great proce). Then they didnt actually do the refund (it didnt turn up on my credit card at all after a week). So I'm spitting feathers at this point, when I phone up again though, they firstly didnt suggest I was talking nonsense or trying it on (a lot of theses places will suggest that you aren't being entirely honest with them or whatever), they had accurate notes that anyone on the team could read about my first call, so it was easy to chas eup the guy who was dealign with it in the first place. They managed to phone me and leave a comprensive answer phone message apologising for the issue again, and ensuring that they had sorted it now, from the original chap who was trying to sort it all out. And sorted it was. Double trouble balls up, but they stil lmanaged to turn that around, and I would shop with them again, amazingly they actually made me feel that it was just 'one of those things', of course if it happened again I wont go near them afterwards - they've had their 'opportunity' now. By contrast dont buy anything from alpha-batteries.co.uk their service after sales is rubbish, their communication is apalling they routinely dont do what they say they will and they are a complete bunch of useless idiots IMO. Had a very very trying time with them over a car battery that failed in warranty, and they just were so unhelpful over the course of several weeks that I wouldnt ever ever buy anything from them again, or let anyone I know take that risk - you have been warned - other than that though they are shiny (not).

This isnt a bad mix is it.Some pretty good all round tones IMO. Nice one! If I had to be critical I'd say there is some conjestion in the track, its all on top of each other a tad and theres some build up in low mids as a result maybe (disclaimer I'm listening on cans that were once good but are now very old, and are a little the worse for wear I think - they certainly dont reach as high as they once did!). Not sure I'd have put that much grind on the bass either, or I'd try and get it to sound less like a seperate instrument alongside the bass and more like a part of the actual bass timbre... I'd look to get the guitars panned wider, the bvs/harmonies out to the sides more as well, give that lead vocal a bigger space to work in. The arrangement could lead you along more too, but thats maybe beyond the mix. On the other hand that is rather the nature of the genre. Like the track though, reminds me of the likes of the Cardigans... I'm being very very critical of what I would consider a pretty good mix all round really of a good song.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1355392564' post='1897643'] Yeah, but ............................................... it would have sounded better on vinyl, hence this thread! [/quote] Coffee -> keyboard....

Cheers! It was a lovely bass tone to begin with - I just fit it in the mix right. Look anyone unsure of how digital works vs analogue - in fact if you even think you know all about it, this video is still worth watching... http://www.xiph.org/video/vid1.shtml

Damned good question Stu! Apologies all the for the War and Peace scale post.... How about I mix by ice cold intuition? In order to be able to use all the tools at my disposal to create a mix that is emotive and compelling I have to know how all those tools work, and what they can do, what they are good at, when its appropriate to use them. I know why I use every single tool that I do use. I have learnt through watching others, listening constantly, reading the theory (obsessively), discussing with real masters of the art on forums and in person, trying and failing and succeeding, and going back to what happened when and trying to understand exactly what I did, and did not achieve and how I could make it better. Like anyone who is desperately fascinated with an art/science its taken a very long time to get to the poitn where I dont have to refer to a text book or website to achieve any of what I do, its just 'in my hands, or under my skin'. I've been fascinated for more than 20 years with the subject of recording. I have learnt some, I know people who have forgotten more than I'll ever know. Its like jazz, you have to learn all that theory so well that you don't think about it at all when playing it if you are going to be any good at it at all (disclaimer, I cant play jazz for love nor money!). But here's the real thing, I cant remember who said it but its gospel, "The best piece of gear in a great mix is the song". A mix is a production of the song, and an arrangement of that song's performance. It is all about the music. I can enjoy terrible reproduction of a great song, I enjoy great reproduction of the same song so much more that it is palpable. I can't stand the best reproduction of a rubbish song because, the all important thing is, does the song move me? I can't do a great job mixing a song that I can't stand, I can do an ok job on a song I think is OK. A great song will get the very best out of me. When I get to actually mix something though I'm not in that theoretical headspace. I am analysing and choosing routes to go intuitively at all times. I react to how the track makes me feel at an emotional level, and try and bring the core of that out of the song each time. I never ever think in terms of the audio theory really now in the act of mixing, so if I want a guitar to pop more, but I don't want to change its tone, I would intuitively reach for a compressor to enhance the transient a bit to give it the impression of being more in your face, yet at the same time remaining the same sound. I wouldn't think about the settings in any theoretical way, I just set them where they do the thing that sounds right, which is where the settings need to be to get the result I need to make the guitar more immediate and to convey the impression that I feel the instrument in that track needs to convey. It just so happens I also can relate what those setting would be in terms of the controls of the device and why, because I really have studied compressors. To do this mixing thing as intuitively as possible I personally have to rigorously (as rigorously as I can) separate the session into several sections, initial listen (throw those faders up and see what hits me, listen to whats there as rough as you like a few times - get a 'hit', a feel for the piece), organisation and tidying up (getting all the groups and channels organised, sorting out gain staging everywhere, last thing I want to think about is making sure the level isn't too hot later on, making some rough guesses on the effects I'll need, cleaning up any obvious unwanted noise), blocking in the mix (getting some proper levels carving out the gash from tracks with eq, trying to get the sounds basically right with whatever tools I need to use), then I usually take a break. That's all the housekeeping uncreative boring crap done (thank goodness), I need to come back at it fresh for the good stuff.... Now all of that may take anywhere between 1 and 8 hours work (depends on the tracking, the number of tracks, the complexity of the textures). And I'm left in a place where I could run off a mix and usually it will be a pretty vanilla mix, it will sound clean and tidy, but the levels wont be right everywhere, there will be a lack of 'mojo' quite often, the band would hear it and in most cases quite like it but be looking for more. Its sort of a demo of the mix to be, not yet fully formed. This is where the creative bit comes in, I like to have found an 'in' by now a thing I can use to pull a listener along, to tie everything together, I don't know, some spark of a cool idea I can use to make the song somehow 'more'. On Little Toy Soldiers it was the dotted note delay on the drums, and then the reverse snares IIRC. It just pops into my head as something to take the mix beyond just a simple reproduction all cleaned up sorted and into the realm of a bit of a production, something a bit more fab than you would normally get live. It can be something very subtle or really in your face, and I hate 'inventing' something out of thin air, it has to be entirely driven by the song and the performance, I don't add new parts, although I do take parts out if they aren't serving the song. This is all intuition. Building these parts of a mix vary but could easily take more than another 4 or 5 hours. This is the key bit this is what makes a mix sound special - and its sometimes (more often than not) sooooo subtle, that people wouldn't know it were there unless it was taken away. There is absolute level refinement all the time, and balance and panning is finalised throughout. Sometimes I'll just find I've gone down a dead end and back waaaay up and go down a different route (happened a lot with Kit, especially with the drums on Little Toy Soldiers, that was truly epic!) Eventually its just all done, I cant polish it any more, I cant take anything out or add anything in without disturbing the way the song flows through its sections and makes me feel. If the musicians hate it now, I'm doomed Its all intuition. Every bit if it. Driven by the emotional response I feel with every single instrument together and alone. But its only possible because I have studied what the tools do, and how they work. And I'm still learning, daily, new ideas, new tricks to get more out of a song to present to a listener. The bigger the arsenal, the easier it is to riff with the material and just create something. The hope is that the result is at least good every time, and occasionally I can pull off something that's really great, a mix that you don't hear at all, but that enhances the pleasure of anyone who hears the song, every time they hear it.... Sorry again for the probably excruciating level of pretentious sounding twaddle in that post....

Fascinating article on flaws in thinking around sample rates and use of ultra high sample rates for playback and how this realtes to amps, ears and stuff - and pono... http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1355328161' post='1897002'] [/quote] I've missed something else here haven't I