BigRedX
-
Posts
20,982 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
12
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Shop
Articles
Everything posted by BigRedX
-
Actually it does. The ear/brain connection is a very clever thing and takes the distance of the sound source into consideration, using the minuscule delay and phase differences between each ear receiving the sound to work it out. So 5.8ms = 1.7M distance. Unless you play big stages most of us stand less than 1M away from our cabs or monitor speakers. So the latency of the wireless system is 3 times what it would be with a cable, but our ear/brain system still works out where the sound source actually is but with a delay on it. That's why IEMs are a bigger problem because it puts the sound source as close to the ear drum as possible and there is no perceivable delay or phase change between the left and right to give any sense of distance. Without that sense of distance to the sound source, the actual disconnect between what you are playing and what you are being hearing becomes a lot more pronounced, and all those slight delays become a lot more important.
-
Ant? Isn't that animal cruelty? Shame on you!
-
What's only got 1.7M(?) of latency. All the figures quoted in this thread and in the the link in the OP state 5.8ms
-
Quite high latency at 5.8ms. Not a problem on it's own, but will be noticeable if combined with additional Analogue to Digital conversions in your signal chain.
-
I've never heard any advantage to the buffer. If I really needed it I'd use the wireless system all the time.
-
I find it simpler to stick with passive basses. Unless you have something like a Wal or ACG filter pre-amp they don't add anything that you should be able to do already elsewhere in your signal chain.
-
From what I've seen and read most musicians who get replaced in the studio tend to be those who don't have the ability to play the parts accurately enough in the time allotted. If you've got a weird bass that produces unconventional sounds at the source then perhaps this is fair enough. However shouldn't the people booking him for the session have checked this out first?
-
Maybe before the advent of 24 track recording in the 70s, but since then any engineer worth their salt would have stuck a safety DI on the bass before the amp. IME unless there were some weird electronics in the bass itself it should be perfectly possible to get a bass sound to allow the producer to salvage the take.
-
With my producer's hat on, it seems very strange to hire someone well known and then not use them on the actual finished version. IME (unless it is something very extreme and completely different from what I was expecting) tone is nearly always fixable when it come to mixing the track. I'd be more likely to reject the part if the musician had been asked to come up with their own baseline and it wasn't what I was hoping for rather than their sound wasn't right.
-
The problem with Eastwood IMO is not the build quality but the fact that much of what they make is put together with standard parts and in doing so the instruments lose much of what made them an interesting and different alternative to buying a Fender P in the first place. I have their Hooky Bass which is a copy of the Shergold Marathon 6-string bass and I can't fault it, but then it was made as an exact copy of Peter Hook's Shergold and all the important hardware has been custom made specifically for this bass. Unfortunately at the other end of the scale are their copies of the Ovation Magnum and the Ampeg Scroll basses, both of which appear to have been "produced" by someone who once saw a blurry photograph of the basses in question and produced the Eastwood copies from their memory of that. These have little in common with the basses they are supposed to be copying other than the fact that the body shape is similar.
-
That's great. The point I was trying to make was much of what makes John Deacon's bass sound good is the way it interacts with the other instruments, in particular the guitar sounds, and in Queen you have a guitarist with a very unique sound. For further illumination: I did the bulk of my musical development between 1978 and 1986 when I was mostly playing synthesiser rather than bass. Often I'd hear a great synthesiser sound on a record, and think that I would want to use that in a song for my band. Like any part of a musical arrangement, what makes that particular sound great is it's place in the overall composition, and much of the time the great synth sound that I had spent ages duplicating needed a lot of tweaking to make it work in the context of the song I'd written as opposed to song I'd borrowed it from, and invariably by the time my song was complete the synth sound bore only a passing resemblance to the one I'd been inspired by.
-
Surely that only really works if your guitarist is Brian May? And again more seriously: what makes a great bass tone is not the bass tone itself but how it works in relation to the other instruments. Just listen to the isolated bass tracks in the Geddy Lee thread. On their own, they are a selection of nasty (not in a good way) farty sounds. However when combined with the rest of the instruments in the mix they are perfect, and that nasty fartiness is a lot less pronounced when it's binding the mix together rather than being standing out on its own. For a great bass tone listen to what the other musicians in your band are doing and find something to works in harmony (pun intended) with them. The sound of each individual instrument and how they all work together is as important as the notes that each instrument is playing and how they all work together.
-
On a more serious note, I don't really have a bass tone. It very much depends on the instrumentation of the band, what the other musicians are playing both in terms of sound and note choices. I have a Line6 Helix, so I can get almost any bass guitar sound imaginable. Also a bass guitar sound isn't always appropriate so I might use a keyboard synth instead.
-
My bass guitar tone sounds like a bass guitar.
-
My experience was exactly the opposite. As a fifteen year old, I was intrigued by the gear porn cover of "All the World's a Stage", especially the Rickenbacker bass, having come across it in the new releases section during my Saturday record shop browsing session. Back at school on Monday I asked around my friends if anyone had any Rush albums and someone promised to lend me "2112" the next day. I eagerly put on the album when I got home on the Tuesday and only played one side (and maybe not even all of that). I just couldn't get past the weird singing voice.
-
I like the idea of the "7th" string as a thumb rest...
-
And there are masters and there are masters. Back in the days when vinyl was the only serious delivery medium, a master was little more than a stereo 1/4" tape with the tracks in the correct order and at roughly the correct relative levels. All those processes that we now think of as "mastering" were actually done when the the record was cut. Sometimes at the time of cutting a "mastered" tape would be made so that when the discs were being cut for a different territory they would sound the same as the next cutting engineer could cut directly from the tape without having to apply any processing. Unfortunately this would mean that these "master" tapes already had the RIAA equalisation curve required for vinyl applied to them. When CDs started to go mainstream and record companies realised that they could make more money by selling the same albums all over again but on CD, they rushed to get CD versions made. Unfortunately sometimes these would be made from the wrong "master". Even it was spotted that a vinyl production master was being used and the CD mastering engineer EQ'd the tracks to reverse the effects of the RIAA EQ curve it was never as good as it would have been if the original stereo mix master had been use as a starting point. I would be very vary about any CD produced before the mid 90s with regards to this.
-
Finished Pics! Single Cut 5-string Short Scale
BigRedX replied to Andyjr1515's topic in Build Diaries
I'm sure that Hipshot bridge is a great piece of engineering, but that arrangement of string retaining slots and intonation screws sends my OCD into overdrive! 🙂 -
A good graphic designer will be able to produce something creative using Microsoft Paint. However that doesn't mean that the professional tools aren't easier to use and ultimately help you get the job done quicker and better. That's certainly the case when you need to produce work to exact technical standards. As I keep saying an OS is only as good as the applications that can run under it. So for all the Linux "bluster" I have yet see evidence of professional quality, native (IMO running under WINE completely defeats the point of using an alternative OS), applications for graphic design for print.
-
As I said mechanical recording and playback systems are full of compromises. Improve one thing and something else suffers.
-
Did you need to update your OS? I never update my OS unless an application I absolutely require demands that I do. I've only updated and got stuck in Logic limbo because I had to update the OS to be able to use the latest versions of Adobe Creative Cloud which I require for my job. These days using my computer for recording/composing music is very much a secondary function to using it to make a living, so work requirements have to come first. Also if you are begrudging spending £199 on Logic Pro, you obviously didn't run Logic in the early days when the new price was IIRC £399 for just the MIDI sequencing application and an additional £300 for the "Audio" extension to allow you to record and manipulate audio; and upgrades were £150-£200 a go (plus an additional £150-£200 to upgrade the Audio component). And if you wanted plug-in instruments they were £50 to £200 each depending on what you bought. A "back of an envelope" calculation on what I spent from buying Logic 1.x to upgrading each version to Logic Audio 4 plus the various plugins is somewhere around £2k (that's just for software - I hate to think how much I spent on MIDI and Audio interfaces over the same period). On top of that some of the upgrades required you to exchange your copy protection dongle for a newer version leaving you without any functioning music software for about a week. In those terms the current pricing of Logic X at £199 is a complete bargain.
-
OK. Point me at Linux native professional standard alternatives to InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop and Acrobat Professional. And Logic is £199.00 To bridge the gap between what comes bundled with Logic and what you get with Reaper is going to cost you a lot more, even if you just pared it down to plugins that you need, rather than the full set that come with Logic.
-
DIY cassette supremos The Instant Automatons released a 19 track "compilation" album that was just them under 19 different names.
-
Is this base on a source you know - i.e. one of your own recordings - or on recordings that you happen to own on both vinyl and CD? In the later case unfortunately there is no real way of telling whether the various formats have actually been produced from the correct master version. Also IME "heft" is generally caused by distortion. Vinyl is very good at adding extra distortion to the signal, but it's not what the makers of the record intended you to hear.
-
IME Linux is fine if you have a strong technical computing background, are happy with command line interface for getting some of the more tricky things done, and your computing interests are either simple web browsing/email/office functions or server administration. For creative users, especially those of us with professional needs for graphics/audio/video the applications simply are not there.
