From MAILER-DAEMON Thu Jun 13 11:28:45 1996 Received: from atlanta.american.edu (atlanta.american.edu [147.9.1.6]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id LAA27081 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 11:28:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from atlanta (atlanta.american.edu [147.9.1.6]) by atlanta.american.edu (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA04182 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 11:03:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199606131503.LAA04182@atlanta.american.edu> Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 11:03:19 -0400 From: "L-Soft list server at AMERICAN.EDU (1.8b)" Subject: File: "EMUSIC-L LOG9604B" To: Joe McMahon X-Status: Status: O ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 04:30:38 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Reisa L. Hannig" Subject: unsubscribe DISCONNECT from EMusic-L Discussion list ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 04:41:40 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "M. Devan" Subject: Re: unsubscribe In a message dated 96-04-07 04:39:08 EDT, you write: >DISCONNECT from EMusic-L Discussion list DISCONNECT from EMusic-L Discussion list ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 05:01:59 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: George Sawyer Subject: Re: Mastertracks Pro Sorry Timothy, I forgot to mention that the original disk is copy-protected and is needed as a key disk. I tried using Copy II Plus by Central Point Software to no avail. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 18:55:25 CST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: harry haecker Subject: The work of Karoly Cserepes Hi friends-- Ever since I bought _Apocrypha_ (Hannibal records, HNCD 1368) by Marta Sebestyen three years ago, I've been in love with her work. For those who are not familiar with her, she sings traditional Hungarian folk songs. On _Apocrypha_, Cserepes uses Duduk, Tilinka (?), Long Flute, and synthesizers to create a perfect intertwining with Sebestyen's modalities. I'm interested in knowing more about this person and hearing more of his music. Harry Haecker (haeckerh@nwrc.gov) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 01:49:04 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Kevin Cooke Subject: Re: Midi Go to WWW and look up MIDISOFT. They are in Issaquah Washington and have a line of products that are all MIDI from Pro Software to Kids interactive stuff. Good luck! ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 02:12:11 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Gordon K. Johnson" Subject: Re: K2000 I envy anyone with a K2000.......I'm thru!! ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 16:39:09 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: The work of Karoly Cserepes Hi Harry, thanks for your message... > Ever since I bought _Apocrypha_ (Hannibal records, HNCD 1368) by Marta > Sebestyen three years ago, I've been in love with her work. For those who > are not familiar with her, she sings traditional Hungarian folk songs. Yes, I bought this album too and I was severely disappointed. What I had previously heard was her work with a band called Muszikas, particularly on a record called The Prisoner's Song (also on Hannibal if you want to look for it). The 'updated' synth arrangements on Apocrypha just didn't do it for me. ( =:-o I think that was the ObEmCon!) But then she does have a very sweet voice. (Ahhh!) Anyway, maybe Cseperes had something to do with Muszikas. Their records are defintiely worth checking out, so even if he wasn't on them, you won't be wasting your time or me (whoops) money. Regards, DAvid msudr@lure.latrobe.edu.au (whoops again) musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au P.S. I still have to track down a copy of that Adzohu tape, Harry, but I haven;tforgotten. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 09:27:14 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Mastertracks Pro >> Outside the US, Amiga leads the music making pack, followed by PC, Atari, >> and Mac. > >This would appear to be mis-informed. Last time I looked, the Atari was the >leader (in the professional world, anyways), followed by Mac. But then, you're in the UK, and I suspect this is rather an out-of-date data point anyway. >Amigas have no timing, and PCs aren't much better. I wouldn't trust either of >them if you want to make any music with soul. I have no idea what the first statement means, nor do I see any correlation to the second. >> Your musical imagination is more important than what kind of computer you >> have. >Agreed, but only to a point. If the track is destined to be played to people, >you *need* correct equipment. The wildest imagination will not produce good >results on inadeqate equipment. Actually, the really wildest imaginations *will*. All the computer platforms are adequate if you can make them do what you want. This is why I use a couple of old Macintosh PowerBooks, and also why the newer flashier PowerMacs don't excite me in the slightest. Some of the best albums of the past ten years - or for that matter, fifty years - were done on equipment which would look laughably antiquated to anyone here. A lot of it is down to skill, not necessarily musical content, but ability to best utilise the tools available. Now, I wouldn't swap my synth rig for one that's less powerful; nor would I swap it for one that's more powerful or expensive. I've built it to work how I want and to match the way my head works. Spec sheets are irrelevant. Now, why don't we all go away and read the Anderton article in KEYBOARD. >Attachment converted: INTERNET:Re- Mastertracks Pro (????/----) (00001826) How exciting. Another attachment to track down and throw away. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL http://www.cassiel.com years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 10:45:36 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: K2000 >I envy anyone with a K2000....... Why? I sporadically envy people who are better composers/arrangers than I am, and I have a tendency to envy people who are more successful than me in the areas I'm (net)working in, but it soon passes. You can't be creative if you're busy being envious. Nor can you be creative if you're worrying about not having a K2000. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL http://www.cassiel.com years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 17:56:23 +0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Andre Fischmann Organization: Lycee Polytechnique - Mauritius Subject: Please some EMail of Roland I have a SD35 ROland. It's the only one of my expanders which is GM/GS. It's failing since yesterday, and I can't repair it myself easely (I change the battery without result). When I start it, all the led's light a short time, and the 3 7segments leds mark : - (first one) - (second one) - (third one) and it stops on the 3 one , nothing more later. I don't see nothing apparently bad, and then I can't diagnostic the failure easely. I use it every day, to work my Midi Files, and to play saxo with it. Could somebody give me please : 1. The EMail of Roland, of some workshop which could be able to repair it 2. If I can get the drawings of the electronic board, where (I think it's difficult) 3. If somebody want's to sell a second hand one, may be I'm interested. -- Andre Fischmann & Diana Silva Santisteban - Fischmann fischman@netbox.com or fischman@bow.intnet.mu French man & peruvian girl living in Mauritius Island (tel. & fax 230-6963393) Interests : Music (sax, flute, keyboard, MIDI...), latin civilisation, Children, Atari - PC... ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 09:22:15 CST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: harry haecker Subject: The work of Karoly Cserepes David writes: >Yes, I bought this album too and I was severely disappointed.[...] The >'updated' synth arrangements on Apocrypha just didn't do it for me. Hmmm. Sorry you were disappointed, man. I don't know how much CD's are in Australia, but it's always a bummer to fork over $$ and get s*** in return (unless you're in the market for manure!). I guess I was blown away by the exotic scales-- lots of major/minor within the same phrase (or in alternating phrases) and quarter tone (?) accidentals, and the beautiful Hungarian language. The rhythms are just complex enough for my semi-solid brain to break out into a wide smile. I'd have to hear Karoly's solo work, if there is any) to pick out just how much was Sebestyn's influence. I have another one of her albums, called _Musikas_, where she sings a lot more traditionally. Since you mention that that is the name of her old band, I assume that this is her first album. I'll look for _The Prisoner's Song_ the next time I'm in New Orleans. With the synth work, I'm under no delusions that it is technically complex-- compared with the 64+ ADAT tracks filled to the brim that some people (over)use, it's pretty straightforward, really-- but I liked the semi-disjointed feel and the use of acoustic instruments. I have found, however, that if you're used to an artist performing in one manner, they always sound strange if they switch styles. It would be like Boris Karlof acting in a slapstick role. >you won't be wasting your time or me (whoops) money. nyeh, nyeh-nyeh n y e h nyeh... Freudian slip, Freudian slip, Freudian slip!!! >P.S. I still have to track down a copy of that Adzohu tape, Harry, but I >haven't forgotten. No prob, David-- I recorded your copy of "Edge Effect!" and "The Feminine Cycle", but haven't filled it out with some of the newer stuff yet. Things are finally settling down a bit now with the new home and infant, but not much!!! I literally have experienced *weeks* w/o time for music :-( later, Harry Haecker (haeckerh@nwrc.gov) http://www.ucs.usl.edu/~cep6494 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 15:41:28 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: NEC_CEELY@FLO.ORG Subject: Re: K2000 Actually, it is not correct...should be "I have a tendency to envy people who are more successful than IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ROPC ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 19:29:12 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Reuben J. Ghose" Subject: Professional Quality Sound I write midi songs and record them on to cassete but they don't sound anywhere near the quality of sound of professional recording. I don't want to spend to much money but can someone tell me how I can improve my sound. Reuben J. Ghose Reuben J. Ghose ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 10:02:33 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "william.b.fox" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Comments: To: recordin@HAVEN.IOS.COM Reuben J. Ghose laments: > I write midi songs and record them on to cassete but they don't sound > anywhere near the quality of sound of professional recording. I don't want > to spend to much money but can someone tell me how I can improve my sound. I'm not sure if this is EMUSIC-L or SYNTH-L territory, but I'll respond here anyway. (Joe or Mike, please let me know if this needs to be moved to SYNTH-L.) Reuben, from your description, it is difficult to say exactly what steps to take to improve your production values. So I'd like to ask, at what point in the process does this perceived lack of quality become apparent? If you play your MIDI sequences through speakers instead of into a tape recorder, do they sound professional to you? In other words, is it the source material or recording process where things go wrong? The recording process can spoil a perfectly good MIDI sequence but cannot improve a bad sequence. (Generally speaking.) There are things that you can do to improve both how your sequences sound and how to record them. Let me recommend that you listen to CDs of the same genre of music you're producing and decide which ones succeed and why. Then see if you can't emulate those production values with the gear you have at hand. If you can describe to the list where and how your recordings fall short of your expectations, then I'm sure that some members will gladly offer tips on how to improve specific problems. BTW, do you read "RECORDING" magazine? A lot of help can be found there. Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com Copy to: Nick Batzdorf, Recording Magazine ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 17:50:13 +0200 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: nicola zonca Subject: Infos on Julliard school Hi, is there somebody that knows if Julliard school has got an e-mail? I'm particullary looking for a teacher, Rita Aiello. Thank you very much!!!! NICOLA ZONCA cel1053@iperbole.bologna.it ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 14:49:46 -0700 Reply-To: Mario Milat Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mario Milat Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound > >I write midi songs and record them on to cassete but they don't sound >anywhere near the quality of sound of professional recording. I don't want >to spend to much money but can someone tell me how I can improve my sound. > Reuben, I assume you are recording directly from a MIDI source to a cassete. You'll never get even close to 'the sound of professional recording' that way, not because cassete isn't considered a professional format but because you're missing a $100K of processing equipment. Cassete recorders nowadays are superior to mastering reel-to-reel the Beatles used to record on so it is possible to achieve a quality sound. Also, the difference between a $200 and a $2K CD player is hardly noticeable, but talking about cassete recorders - it makes a biiig difference. I tend to record a lot of GM to cassete because there is no real advantage of mastering it to DAT unless you use a _really_ good sampler - the GIGO rule (garbage in - garbage out). If you record only a static GM mix, L+R from MIDI to cassete in, try following: -Get a true stereo multieffects processor (you can find a good one in a $300-500 range). Try ART, great sounding and cheap, has an exciter to compensate for the 12K or above where cassettes tend to loose it. -Use compressor (2:1) to tame the peaks. Record at a OdB level to avoid hiss, _occasional_ peaks up to +6dB are OK. -Add appropriate reverb to simulate space but cut off everything below 300-500Hz to avoid 'muddiness'. Cut off some highs too, reflections at 16 KHz hardly exist in nature and sound artificial. -If you're mixing on a home stereo, don't forget to turn 'loudness' off. Check it on your car stereo. If it sounds OK in a car, it will sound acceptable everywhere else. -A $89.95 PC card _won't do it_, sorry. Throw it away, the sooner the better! -Before mixing/mastering, listen to some good CD for an hour or so. -If you have a multiple outputs MIDI source feed MIDI track to a separate mixing channel. This will give you max control, besides, knobs on a board have greater resolution than controls on a GM/XM modules. -A classic advice: keep the heads clean, don't keep/store cassettes near TV, don't use C90/120 cassettes... Hope this helps. Regards. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 19:06:24 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Tom Jordan Subject: Re: Infos on Julliard school Adjunct Professors and other Instructors Experimental Program Mailboxes located in the 8th floor mailroom. Telephone: 998-7847. Rita Aiello psychnet@nyu.edu / Psychology Department / NYU -- last modified 4 August 1995 And she was listed as a grad student at this site, but I was denied access>>> ttp://www.engr.sc.edu/~faculty/staff/campbelh/chemwww/grad.h tm I found this info at: http://altavista.digital.com/ Good Luck on your quest!! nicola zonca wrote: > > Hi, > is there somebody that knows if Julliard school has got an e-mail? > I'm particullary looking for a teacher, Rita Aiello. > Thank you very much!!!! > > NICOLA ZONCA > cel1053@iperbole.bologna.it -- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tom Jordan Composer/Performer / Electronic Music Resource > Wired for Sound! - computer music for kids and > The Virtual Game Room - Uncommon Technological Events tjordan@iac.net ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 10:02:15 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "william.b.fox" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Comments: To: recordin@HAVEN.IOS.COM Reuben replied via private email. Since there may be others who would benefit from these discussions, I'm responding publicly: > Thank you very much for responding. My mix usually goes bad during the > recoding. I record at my schools midi lab so I only have a regular tape > deck with Dolby. Is this the problem? Would it be better to record to a > VHS cassete? Should I use external effects(reverb etc.) instead of the > effects built into the JV-30? A video cassette (Beta or VHS) is probably the best analog recorder available at consumer prices. But even these can color your sequences. Whenever recording, one must consider what the process will do to the sound. I try to compensate the signal going to a recorder to offset ill effects. Or try mixing while listening to the tape monitor if you're using a three head tape recorder. (Just remember the time lag between record and playback heads if there are any time critical fader moves required.) Q: How directly do your sound source outputs go to the recorders inputs? Through any electronics or long cable runs? Cymbals, if recorded too hot, can wreck havoc with some Dolby circuits. I record a rather hot signal to cassette compared to most other people to maximize S/N. But too hot yields distortion. Can you borrow a DAT machine for a few mixes to see if your results improve? It is well known that onboard effects are many times more of a convenience and bullet item on a features list. High quality effects are more common as separate units. That being said, if you like how the effects sound on your keyboard or sound module, why buy an external unit until you need effects that are VASTLY superior to what your unit provides? Try Mario Milat's suggestions. Try out gear in your studio before committing to buy whenever you can. That's the only way to really evaluate its usefulness in your studio. Can you A/B compare your sequence to its cassette recording? Remember to play your cassettes on as many systems as you can to see how well it translates to different playback equipment. (Car, home, studio, boombox, local college am or FM station.) > I live in Canada and the only magazine I have found that has anything on > recording is "Keyboard" and "Electronic Musician". I buy Keyboard regularly. Those are good rags. I subscribe to Keyboard and Recording. Recording ought to be available in Canada. (A separate price is listed on the cover for Canada!) I'll try to remember to bring in the subscription info from home. Don't write Nick B. about it. His email address is for editorial correspondence, not subscription info. > What is the E-mail of SYNTH-L? SYNTH-L's address is synth-l@american.edu but remember to join by sending "sub emusic-l yourname" to listserv@american.edu. Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com Copy to: Nick Batzdorf ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 13:37:57 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Alan M. Bookmiller" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Ok I can't stand it any longer without adding my opinions - yea, yea...I know they are like @#!$#@ 's, and everyone has one (in some cases two or more!). The original thread stated that the listee's recordings don't sound like a "professional" recording, and so far everyone has addressed the equipment, and settings, equipment, and the placement of the stars at certain hours of the month, year, equipment and whatever - but no one has suggested that a "professional" recording is superior because of the expertise, knowledge, background, training, and/or downright experience of a "professional" recordist! Hey, these people have a hell-of-alot to do with the reasons that "professional" recordings sound like, well, "professional" recordings! Too many emusic folks (including myself at one time) think, "Wow I've got a digital system that makes sounds that I can sequence, and since I don't have to use a mic, well I ought to be able to make a "professional sounding recording!" What a let down when the old cassette winds out a dupe of your favorite burst of pride production sounding (like two skeletons forni...I won't do this to you again) only remotely similar to the output of your favorite electronic musical unit, or at least no better. I'm not suggesting that expanders, compressors, aural maximizers and the like aren't used to create a professional sounding recording, but in untrained hands they can become lethal weapons, destroying instead of enhancing a reproduction. A professional recordist is both technologist and artist. Some are better than others. Anyone can tweak, twist, fudge, fake, screw around with, patch, demodulate, encrypt and God only knows what else to come up with an OK recording, but a professional recording will only come from the ears, hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. Sorry. Alan Bookmiller tabbooks@pa.net (Alan M. Bookmiller) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:36:44 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter K Schoenhoff Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound In-Reply-To: ; from "Alan M. Bookmiller" at Apr 10, 96 1:37 pm These are the graceful words of Alan M. Bookmiller: ->...(lotsa stuff)... ->...but a professional recording will only come from the ears, ->hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. Sorry. I could not have said it better! Thank you for laying it on the line. Well spoken! -- -Pete Schoenhoff _\|/_ pschoenh@pen.k12.va.us ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:02:27 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Reuben J. Ghose" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound >Reuben replied via private email. Since there may be others who would >benefit from these discussions, I'm responding publicly: > >> Thank you very much for responding. My mix usually goes bad during the >> recoding. I record at my schools midi lab so I only have a regular tape >> deck with Dolby. Is this the problem? Would it be better to record to a >> VHS cassete? Should I use external effects(reverb etc.) instead of the >> effects built into the JV-30? > >A video cassette (Beta or VHS) is probably the best analog recorder >available at consumer prices. But even these can color your sequences. >Whenever recording, one must consider what the process will do to the >sound. I try to compensate the signal going to a recorder to offset ill >effects. Or try mixing while listening to the tape monitor if you're >using a three head tape recorder. (Just remember the time lag between >record and playback heads if there are any time critical fader moves >required.) Q: How directly do your sound source outputs go to the >recorders inputs? Through any electronics or long cable runs? Cymbals, >if recorded too hot, can wreck havoc with some Dolby circuits. I record >a rather hot signal to cassette compared to most other people to >maximize S/N. But too hot yields distortion. Can you borrow a DAT >machine for a few mixes to see if your results improve? It is well >known that onboard effects are many times more of a convenience and >bullet item on a features list. High quality effects are more common as >separate units. That being said, if you like how the effects sound on >your keyboard or sound module, why buy an external unit until you need >effects that are VASTLY superior to what your unit provides? Try Mario >Milat's suggestions. Try out gear in your studio before committing to >buy whenever you can. That's the only way to really evaluate its >usefulness in your studio. Can you A/B compare your sequence to its >cassette recording? Remember to play your cassettes on as many systems >as you can to see how well it translates to different playback >equipment. (Car, home, studio, boombox, local college am or FM station.) > >> I live in Canada and the only magazine I have found that has anything on >> recording is "Keyboard" and "Electronic Musician". I buy Keyboard regularly. > >Those are good rags. I subscribe to Keyboard and Recording. Recording >ought to be available in Canada. (A separate price is listed on the >cover for Canada!) I'll try to remember to bring in the subscription >info from home. Don't write Nick B. about it. His email address is for >editorial correspondence, not subscription info. > >> What is the E-mail of SYNTH-L? > >SYNTH-L's address is synth-l@american.edu but remember to join by >sending "sub emusic-l yourname" to listserv@american.edu. > >Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com > >Copy to: Nick Batzdorf > > Bill, Thank you once again for responding. In response to your question my sequence goes to mixer then to an amp then to the tape deck. I'm not sure if I can borrow a dat machine because I don't know of anyone who owns one (I'm 15 and this is my first year with midi. I'm taking a class at school). I can ask my teacher if he has one. Recording magazine is probally available in music stores but I can only find keyboard in any regular stores. The music stores are too far just for a magazine. Subscription info would be appreciated. Thank you once again. Reuben J. Ghose ghose@interlog.com Reuben J. Ghose ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:02:55 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Reuben J. Ghose" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound >Ok I can't stand it any longer without adding my opinions - yea, yea...I >know they are like @#!$#@ 's, and everyone has one (in some cases two or >more!). > >The original thread stated that the listee's recordings don't sound like a >"professional" recording, and so far everyone has addressed the equipment, >and settings, equipment, and the placement of the stars at certain hours of >the month, year, equipment and whatever - but no one has suggested that a >"professional" recording is superior because of the expertise, knowledge, >background, training, and/or downright experience of a "professional" >recordist! Hey, these people have a hell-of-alot to do with the reasons >that "professional" recordings sound like, well, "professional" recordings! >Too many emusic folks (including myself at one time) think, "Wow I've got a >digital system that makes sounds that I can sequence, and since I don't >have to use a mic, well I ought to be able to make a "professional sounding >recording!" What a let down when the old cassette winds out a dupe of your >favorite burst of pride production sounding (like two skeletons forni...I >won't do this to you again) only remotely similar to the output of your >favorite electronic musical unit, or at least no better. I'm not suggesting >that expanders, compressors, aural maximizers and the like aren't used to >create a professional sounding recording, but in untrained hands they can >become lethal weapons, destroying instead of enhancing a reproduction. A >professional recordist is both technologist and artist. Some are better >than others. Anyone can tweak, twist, fudge, fake, screw around with, >patch, demodulate, encrypt and God only knows what else to come up with an >OK recording, but a professional recording will only come from the ears, >hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. Sorry. > >Alan Bookmiller > >tabbooks@pa.net (Alan M. Bookmiller) > > Alan, I sort of knew that I couldn't produce a proffesional product but all I wanted to know was how I could make it better. I also know that proffesionals are the only ones that can make "professional" recordings that is why I asked the question. I was hoping that someone would respond and someone did. I feel that the only way someone can get better is knoledge and experience. I wanted extra knoledge here and I would use it to get experience when I work on my own work. Thank you anyways for responding. Reuben J. Ghose ghose@interlog.com Reuben J. Ghose ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 02:29:43 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Eric Sammer Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound try picking up an affordable D.A.T. deck. Something along the lines of a Sony TCD-D7 (I think the "D8" took it's place) it's a portable walkman style D.A.T... but then again, i don't know what kind of budget you're working with... if you can afford a full size D.A.T., buy it!!!!!!! regards, eric sammer ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 17:17:33 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Hi Alan... Calm down! > no one has suggested that a > "professional" recording is superior because of the expertise, knowledge, > background, training, and/or downright experience of a "professional" > recordist! Hey, these people have a hell-of-alot to do with the reasons > that "professional" recordings sound like, well, "professional" recordings! Very true. But few of us are in a position to recruit a professional recordist. As many of the messages on this list have shown, we emusicians _of_necessity_ have to learn some engineering chops. A few of us might have had some training. Many of us started this because of music and have to adapt. Anyway, professionals cost and we emusicians spend every bit of dosh on gear! ;-) Bill's and others' responses to Reuben's original question merely suggested that some part of the audio chain might be having an effect. Bill's last reply suggested _experimenting_ to see what works. Since Reuben is probably not in a position to employ Bob Clearmontain, this is one way he might be able to improve his recordings. Note that he never asked, "Where can I get some engineering skills?" Note, too, that what I have just said does not invalidate your remarks. Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 07:43:54 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Alan M. Bookmiller" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound >Hello David... > >Calm down! If I got any calmer, I'd cease to exist! David, this is a twist, if I remember you get rather excitable yourself! ;-) >> no one has suggested that a >> "professional" recording is superior because of the expertise, knowledge, >> background, training, and/or downright experience of a "professional" >> recordist! Hey, these people have a hell-of-alot to do with the reasons >> that "professional" recordings sound like, well, "professional" recordings! >Very true. But few of us are in a position to recruit a professional >recordist. As many of the messages on this list have shown, we emusicians >_of_necessity_ have to learn some engineering chops. A few of us might have >had some training. Many of us started this because of music and have to >adapt. Anyway, professionals cost and we emusicians spend every bit of dosh >on gear! ;-) This is true David, and I know that you (of all people on the list) are very knowledgeable regarding recording techniques and equipment applications. I have spent the majority of my "dosh" on gear as well - until recently, whereupon most of my "dosh" has been "dashed" by my fourteen year old son! There is this point that all good electromusic-persons arrive at, when sitting in their room, they lean back, and take in all that gear and admit to themselves, "hell, I only use a third of this junk, think I'll jettison some these modules, keyboards, mixing boards and this box that I can't remember how to program anymore... and that damn Stratocaster that hasn't seen the light of day since the White album - it's outta here! IMPORTANT: I think that the advise Reuben has received from the listees has been relatively good and my response may have come from my own frustration in trying to come up with that "professional" reproduction, but, I waited, and waited, and waited for someone to mention that one recording element that you can't jam into a rack - your friendly neighborhood recording engineer! So, I really wasn't going off on Reuben, but more at the failure of the listees to mention this all important factor in the loop of "quality." This goes beyond this thread. There has been alot of talk about recording on this list of late, and I never see any mention of the professional sound recordist. And, I do think that the idea of a closed patched digital system, whereby mics are not necessary, has bred the belief that a professional sound recording is possible from a bedroom studio or inexpensive studio. This has been perpetrated by the manufacturer's as well. We know this isn't true, or at least I have no knowledge of it. I also thought, wow, here is a golden opportunity to get the ol'boys stirred up so that I would get some mail from the emusic list, which I think lately has been sort of dragging. I'm missing the good old days when the postings were zinging, and pinging, and scathing and good and bad and all - you know what I'm talking about! ;-) We know when we lay our butts on the line, shine it on just to get it flamed, just do it. But, I have to admit that what is by far worse than being flamed is best put into words by my good friend Stephen (who chooses to email to my address rather that the list - too bad because he is quite a wit and has alot of good thoughts), but I'll share it with everyone since he won't. On my message regarding the sound engineer Stephen wrote: Betcha get flamed... ;-) Followed up by: Even worse. You got whimpered. You prick, you... :-) Of course he was refering to Reuben's reply to my diatribe - it follows: >I sort of knew that I couldn't produce a proffesional product but all I >wanted to know was how I could make it better. I also know that >proffesionals are the only ones that can make "professional" recordings >that is why I asked the question. I was hoping that someone would >respond and someone did. I feel that the only way someone can get >better is knoledge and experience. I wanted extra knoledge here and I >would use it to get experience when I work on my own work. Thank you >anyways for responding. Christ, I was almost in tears for what I had done! Reuben, you say,"I sort of knew that I couldn't produce a professional product...," well now you know for sure. ->My turn to whimper now. I just didn't want the good people of the list to mess with you Reuben and lead you to believe that you were gonna be able to churn out a professional recording from your bedroom studio. Been there; done that - and without enough money and help from the Pro's it just ain't going to happen for ya guy. If I misunderstood your message, well, my deepest and most profound apologies. >Bill's and others' responses to Reuben's original question merely suggested >that some part of the audio chain might be having an effect. Bill's last >reply suggested _experimenting_ to see what works. Since Reuben is probably >not in a position to employ Bob Clearmontain, this is one way he might be >able to improve his recordings. OK. >Note that he never asked, "Where can I get some engineering skills?" Maybe he should have? > >Note, too, that what I have just said does not invalidate your remarks. Noted! > >Regards, David >musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au Regards back - and good to hear from you. Alan tabbooks@pa.net (Alan M. Bookmiller) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 11:04:36 +0000 Reply-To: cdurnal@staff.lib.ukans.edu Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Chet Durnal Organization: University of Kansas Libraries Subject: Square Dance Comments: To: macappli@dartcms1.EDU, mac-l%yalevm.bitnet@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU, synth-l@american.edu I've heard of a macintosh program called "square dance" to be used with midi files and synthesizers. Does anyone know where I can get this? Thanks Chet Durnal University of Kansas Libraries CDurnal@staff.lib.cc.ukans.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 12:14:43 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "william.b.fox" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Reuben's original post was: > I write midi songs and record them on to cassete but they don't sound > anywhere near the quality of sound of professional recording. I don't want > to spend to much money but can someone tell me how I can improve my sound. ^^^^^^^^^^*******^^^^^^^^^ Alan said: > The original thread stated that the listee's recordings don't sound like a > "professional" recording, and so far everyone has addressed the equipment, > and settings, equipment, and the placement of the stars at certain hours of > the month, year, equipment and whatever - but no one has suggested that a > "professional" recording is superior because of the expertise, knowledge, > background, training, and/or downright experience of a "professional" > recordist! Hey, these people have a hell-of-alot to do with the reasons > that "professional" recordings sound like, well, "professional" recordings! Alan is, of course, right. But how did the professionals learn their chops except by addressing equipment and settings? Of course, pros do it on a daily basis. I guess some or possibly even most emusic-l members don't. So how do we, the non-pros, improve our production values and help our colleagues improve their production values? > Anyone can tweak, twist, fudge, fake, screw around with, > patch, demodulate, encrypt and God only knows what else to come up with an > OK recording, but a professional recording will only come from the ears, > hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. Sorry. True, but please help us do-it-yourselfers improve. Who knows? Reuben, at the tender age of 15, could very well be a proto-pro, the pro of the next millenium! So cut the kid a break and give him your best production tips. In private email, Nick Batzdorf said: > > BTW, do you read "RECORDING" magazine? A lot of help can be > >found there. > > Thanks very much, Bill. You gave him a good answer. We get questions like > that in quite regularly, and they're very difficult to handle. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It made my day to learn that the editor of Recording thinks that I gave a good answer to a difficult question. Subscription info, as promised: Call (619) 738-5571 in the USA. Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 17:37:51 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound >Anyone can tweak, twist, fudge, fake, screw around with, >patch, demodulate, encrypt and God only knows what else to come up with an >OK recording, but a professional recording will only come from the ears, >hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. This is one of the reasons why I'm aiming for sparseness and minimalism in my music at present. The less material that's there, the less that I can fuck up during mixdown. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL http://www.cassiel.com years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 15:15:39 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Art T. User" Subject: Re: ROLAND D-5 - HELP NEEDED - PLS READ THIS MESSAGE To: Distribution Fm: Soundwrite Subject: D-5 Presets and Midi Test While running the D-5 thru its diagnostic mode I came across a error message while testing the MIDI which read "in/out = NG" as oppsosed to OK. Can anyone asist with correcting this situation? Also, I would like to reset the factory presets and need some help ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 14:46:21 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Timothy Kelly Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound >->...but a professional recording will only come from the ears, >->hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. Sorry. Hi All, No way, this is a myth kept going mainly by recording engineers and others who believe laws should be passed for making it illegal for musicans to even have home studios. Go into any cd chain, Blockbuster , Tower, etc. At least 20% of there stock is coming out of self produced and engineered home studios. One learns how to get the best sound out of whatever gear one has simply by using it and getting recording experience. One may not have the desire to learn recording, thats fine, a great engineer is worth it if you can afford one. And find one you like. But one can learn to do ones own recording. And one can get expert help from books, audio courses, video tapes, college courses, making friends with engineers, and putting in the time with your gear and your ears. Its a personal choice. Happy Emusic Timothy Kelly MidiVox -- MidiVox-Worlds 1st Voice to Midi Converter. Real Time. No Delays. Hum a Bass, Croon a Sax, Scat a Horn, Scream a Guitar, Rap some Drums, Sing a Cello. Become a Human Sequencer, Human Vocoder, Human Breath Controller. AES "Best in Show." EM "Editors Choice." " MidiVox Roars." Keyboard. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 17:38:24 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "" Subject: Re: ROLAND D-5 - HELP NEEDED - PLS READ THIS MESSAGE Comments: To: Soundwrite@AOL.COM In-Reply-To: <960411151538_511300048@emout10.mail.aol.com> Hey, I have an idea! Why don't you read the manual, or just turn the thing off! hahahahahaha! Actually, sorry, I do not own a D-5. It is a pretty cool machine, though. Sorry that I cannot help you. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 02:01:57 -0700 Reply-To: Mario Milat Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mario Milat Subject: Re: ROLAND D-5 - HELP NEEDED - PLS READ THIS MESSAGE In-Reply-To: <199604120500.BAA70680@atlanta.american.edu> Art, In a diagnostic mode D-5 generates MIDI test code and sends it to itself, therefore, you have to connect MIDI out to MIDI in. (IN to OUT, directly). To reset presets you have to press certain buttons during the power-up, usually a combination of two or three. Check the User manual, if it's not mentioned it there you'll certainly find it in the Service manual. (You _don't_ want to do this if you have any presets in the user's bank that you want to keep!) Regards. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:16:11 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Alan M. Bookmiller" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound $$$$$$$$$ >In private email, Nick Batzdorf said: >> > BTW, do you read "RECORDING" magazine? A lot of help can be >> >found there. >> >> Thanks very much, Bill. You gave him a good answer. We get questions like >> that in quite regularly, and they're very difficult to handle. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >It made my day to learn that the editor of Recording thinks that I gave >a good answer to a difficult question. Subscription info, as promised: >Call (619) 738-5571 in the USA. > >Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com Anyone else want to $BUY$ a magazine subscription? I'd commend you on a good answer too if I was selling something that you recommended. I've responded to David Rogers, and in my email reply I explained that I was merely adding my opinion on an element of sound quality that in the postings that I've read time and again on this list regarding sound recording has never been given much mention. I hope Reuben aspires to greatness in whatever field he chooses, and was not demeaning him for his question or curiosity. My main gig is producing books, and I believe that any reading, training and/or experience where one can learn is worthy of the endeavor. I think your answer was good also ( although I don't believe that that will "make your day."). One of my main pet peeves is this belief, which is rampant in the industry, that all things digital will sound professional - this just isn't true and everyone should be aware of it. Reuben obviously believes this manufacturer's BS. Lots of folks are spending their "dosh" (thanks David) for stuff that isn't going to get them where they want to go. So let's be honest, lets tell Reuben that in the vast experience of the listees, he might be able to get a better sounding recording, but professional - not. And he did say "Professional." PS: We $SELL$ several books on setting up sound studios, both professional and home based, and many books on recording - email me if you want to know how to order ; ) Alan Bookmiller tabbooks@pa.net (Alan M. Bookmiller) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:25:31 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Alan M. Bookmiller" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound >>Anyone can tweak, twist, fudge, fake, screw around with, >>patch, demodulate, encrypt and God only knows what else to come up with an >>OK recording, but a professional recording will only come from the ears, >>hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. > >This is one of the reasons why I'm aiming for sparseness and minimalism in >my music at present. The less material that's there, the less that I can >fuck up during mixdown. > > Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL > http://www.cassiel.com > > years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again Nick, When I first took the plunge into emusic, I used every bit of data memory availabe - to the point of judging whether I could live with drop-outs. It hit me like "Power Sequencing", or somthing like that. Have you been there? Soon, I realized that the more simplistic, minimalistic (?) and sparse the actual composition, the better the sound. In other words - use only what is needed to get the music across, then shave it a little. Your are absolutely correct. This doesn't mean the elimination of complexity if necessary, but rather a finer definition all around. Alan tabbooks@pa.net (Alan M. Bookmiller) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 09:00:00 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Alan M. Bookmiller" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound >>->...but a professional recording will only come from the ears, >>->hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. Sorry > No way, this is a myth kept going mainly by recording engineers and >others who believe laws should be passed for making it illegal for >musicans to even have home studios. Ah, another who refuses to believe that some people just have a better knack at producing better sounding recordings; gifted so to speak. Tim, I've got to say that your statement is pretty much off the wall! This is no myth. Sound recording is both a science and an art. If you've ever worked with a sound engineer who really knows his stool you wouldn't make statements like this. There is alot more to recording than just plugging in some wires, boxes and pushing the start button. Good recording involves design in many aspects, and a good sound recordist studies and works with more than that which is percieved by the ears - although that is also a main element and no less important. Come back to reality soon. > Go into any cd chain, Blockbuster , Tower, etc. At least 20% of >there stock is coming out of self produced and engineered home studios. Now if you want to talk myths - this is a good one. Do you really think that just because a CD sits on a shelf in a CD chain that it is a grand recording? There are numerous "bad" recordings being sold out there, I've unfortunately been victimized by my unexpected surprise at the sour quality of what I thought should have been a much better recording on a "professional" label. Hey, there are good sound engineers and bad sound engineers. Self-produced doesn't mean squat - bad is bad. Many of these home produced recordings could have been much better had the artists allowed a good sound engineer to do their recording. > One learns how to get the best sound out of whatever gear one has >simply by using it and getting recording experience. > One may not have the desire to learn recording, thats fine, a great >engineer is worth it if you can afford one. And find one you like. > But one can learn to do ones own recording. And one can get expert >help from books, audio courses, video tapes, college courses, making >friends with engineers, and putting in the time with your gear and your >ears. Agreed. Like I've said over and over again, any knowledge is worth the time it takes to acquire it. The best recording you do as perceived by your own ears may be good enough for you - fine; but, if you want "Professional" sound, then you've got to have a professional touch your stuff. End-of-story. Alan Bookmiller tabbooks@pa.net (Alan M. Bookmiller) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 09:05:13 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Alan M. Bookmiller" Subject: Spatializer Howdy all struggling musicians and novice recordists... I've received some info on a piece of equipment called the "Spatializer." Anyone experience this mystical box? Alan Bookmiller tabbooks@pa.net tabbooks@pa.net (Alan M. Bookmiller) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:31:02 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: ROLAND D-5 - HELP NEEDED - PLS READ THIS MESSAGE In-Reply-To: from "" at Apr 11, 96 05:38:24 pm > > Hey, I have an idea! Why don't you read the manual, or just turn > the thing off! hahahahahaha! Actually, sorry, I do not own a > D-5. It is a pretty cool machine, though. Sorry that I cannot > help you. > Non-useful reply, Spencer. Refrain. --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 12:15:47 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Comments: To: midivox@IX.NETCOM.COM In-Reply-To: <199604112146.OAA09992@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> First of all I would like to say that I don't think yo have to be a proffesional sound engineer and have Thousands of dollars worth of equipment to make a great recording. Back when I was 14 I used my father's dubbing deck to make a somewhat decent recording. I understand that it was not as good as paying $25/hr. to go down to the studio, and that I was getting into 3rd and 4th generation (A Big NO-No!) but I knew what I was doing and cleaned it up the best I could with a 1/3rd octave eq. and impressed the hell out of some of my older friends that owned 4-tracks. I can honestly say it has nothing to do with the equipment you own...yes it helps, but it all has to do with knowledge. Now I am 18 and I own my own equipment now, and I'll take the Pepsi challenge with most of the studios down here! I guess all I am saying is that anybody, if they have the proper knowledge can make a great recording--even if there equipment isn't the best. And the best way that I have found to get the knowledge is to sit down and play with it all. Run different setups...Try new technics...push your equipment as far as it will go! Basically learn the things that the manuals don't tell you. Either way it's all about fun, and playing music so keep doing both. Spencer Teran P.S. could you send me some more info. on the MidiVox? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 12:24:39 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "" Subject: Refrain? Comments: To: mcmahon@CLARK.NET In-Reply-To: <199604121431.KAA13086@clark.net> to Mr. Listowner: Hi...listen...useful or not, I had fun writing it, and the gentleman who read it didn't mind reading it. Relax. I am not harming anyone. Spencer Teran ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 12:40:44 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "" Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Comments: To: tabbooks@PA.NET In-Reply-To: <"v01520d02ad916298debf(a)(091)206.228.69.119(093)*"@MHS> Alan: In the same regards, even if you have perfect pitch and a great ear for recording if you don't know what to do to fix a problem on a recording then what good does it do? I honestly think it is a combination of both. Never let your recordings "turn out by themselves". Use your ears to know how you want it to sound, and then use the skills in your brain to help you fix it. Spencer Teran ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:58:07 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe Miklojcik Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound I must agree that the philosophy "good recordings can only come from professional engineers," if interpreted in a very absolute way, is incorrect. If you mean "you can't hope to produce something that sounds first class without a pro in a booth with a big console and mic locker", you're just wrong. If you mean, "pro-engineered recordings tend to sound better than else", then there are few who could argue with you. One of the reasons why I and many musicians I know use electronic and digital means to create music is that it moves certain issues away from the engineer and into the hands of the musician. Often, it's easier to fix problems at the musician's end. Also, we feel more satisfied with the results from the control. As my friend would explain, "I don't go into the studio and bitch about the way my drums were mic'ed, I just dial up a new drum for the next take." There's also the issue of division between "music" and "sound". If the music can't stand up to mediocre recording, it deserves investigation. Obviously, both are important in the final analysis, but if a painting isn't presented intelligently in the gallery, is it less of a painting? Again, modern music technology gives the musician greater control here. jfm@powerpage.com My current IdiotFilter(R) settings are: I read no messages containing the regular expression "suck[s]+!!!*". I read no messages lacking lower case letters. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 15:10:01 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Gus Alden Subject: Re: Refrain? Spencer wrote: >to Mr. Listowner: >Hi...listen...useful or not, I had fun writing it, and the gentleman who >read it didn't mind reading it. Relax. I am not harming anyone. No harm done. True. The problem, however, with posts of such nature, is that they too often lead to other unneeded postings that would never have been posted had the original posting not been posted in the first place, such as the moderators commentary (one worthy of consideration), Spencer's response to it (of little or no value), and now mine (of even lesser value). I realize that I've risked contributing to a downward spiral by posting this, and would have refrained from doing so, but that this whole issue, for whatever reason, has touched a chord deep inside of me, one needing of expression. Thankyou for allowing me the indulgence, and my apologies to Spencer, to Mr. McMahon, and to all. And now... onward with the unfolding of Spring! Gus aldenoob@biddeford.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 11:30:36 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Hi Nick and Alan... > I'm aiming for sparseness and minimalism in my music at present. The less > material that's there, the less that I can fuck up during mixdown. Yes. And the music itself is probably better, too! > Soon, I realized that the more simplistic, minimalistic (?) and sparse the > actual composition, the better the sound. In other words - use only what is > needed to get the music across, then shave it a little. Wasn't it Miles Davis who spoke of space in music. He certianly allowed plenty of it in his later work and I don't think the music suffered at all (hard-care bebop heads may disagree). Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:24:56 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Gerry Pawluk Subject: Compressors/Exciters/Maximizers I have recently purchased a compressor with a "high frequency enhancer" and was wondering if other related products such as "aural exciters" or "sonic maximizers" amount to the same result or are they completely different. Anyone care to comment? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 02:52:27 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Kent Margraves Subject: Re: EMUSIC-L Digest - 12 Apr 1996 to 13 Apr 1996 46 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 03:45:49 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Kent Margraves Subject: Re: EMUSIC-L Digest - 12 Apr 1996 to 13 Apr 1996 In a message dated 96-04-13 01:03:37 EDT, you write: > Compressors/Exciters/Maximizers I'm not sure which unit you are referring to ( compressor w/ HF enhancer) , but I can tell you as a full-time ProAudio engineer the BBE Sonic Maximizer and the Aphex Aural Exciter are in a class by themselves -- they are very effective when used correctly and, unfortunately, very effective when used incorrectly!! Anyway, they are designed to be tools for improving coherency, intelligibility, presence, punch, etc...... They are not dynamics processors, as in a compressor, limiter, or expander, etc., but I'm curious what unit you are referring to and what it does. Be careful that you are not looking at a compressor that has a high-frequency circuit for frequency-weighted compression ( like de-essing vocals) and confusing that process with "enhancing:., Have a model ## ??? , I'm curious. As for all the back-and-forth emails about "Pro" recording and engineers - remember that those are very loose terms. I work on studio sessions regularly and run into musicians who have absolutely no clue about the technology of recording and then there have been some (usually the EMusic types) that have picked up more recording "tricks" than some pro engineers. Anyway, remember to not get lost in the science end of things - it sounds like there are some experienced MIDI guys subscribed here and hopefully all will keep their EARS on and focus on your end products. Let me suggest a great recording techniques book that is excellent and written in practical "down to earth" terms that can be a huge help in translating your art to tape. It's been out a few years and does not reference any recent gear, but most of the principles and techniques are still valid and very well -stated. You don't have to be an engineer to grasp the mixing and processing concepts in it, and I've seen several musicians really benefit from referring to it. I used to teach sound recording and it was my favorite source for preparation then and still is now. Here it is - The RecordingStudio Handbook ( John M. Woram - editor, db magazine) ELAR Publishing Company, N.Y. Also, keyboarding and sequencing is my "second life" . I'm an audio engineer first, but I love to compose and have gotten the basics of MIDI and synths down over the last few years. However, I am now spending more and more time composing/ sequencing and am interested in a good PCbased sequencer. I already own an XP50 and love everything except the internal sequencer. Anyone have any ideas what software I might look at???? Is C-Lab Notator on an Atari still good stuff??? I have the chance to get this system used from a friend real cheap. Wondering if it would be better to stay with the PC stuff ??? Help!?!?!?!?!?!?! Thanks ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 01:15:24 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mario Milat Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound In-Reply-To: <199604130500.BAA57935@atlanta.american.edu> >>Anyone can tweak, twist, fudge, fake, screw around with, >>patch, demodulate, encrypt and God only knows what else to come up with an >>OK recording, but a professional recording will only come from the ears, >>hands and brain of a professional recording engineer. > Every time I see this quote I'm thinking about what do RAVE/AMBIENT/TECHNO freaks have to say?! (Yuk...shame on them! :) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 11:09:35 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound >When I first took the plunge into emusic, I used every bit of data memory >availabe - to the point of judging whether I could live with drop-outs. It >hit me like "Power Sequencing", or somthing like that. Have you been there? Got the T-shirt. A lot of my earlier pieces start with a simple idea, then do it again with something added, then add something else and ... towards the end, all the sounds are fighting each other to be heard. It's taken me a while to learn that musical power and sonic mass aren't the same thing. (The piece for Ronin's EML tape still has a bit of the wedge approach to development, alas, but I've thinned it down as much as possible, and it only has half the elements it might have had two or three years ago.) >Soon, I realized that the more simplistic, minimalistic (?) and sparse the >actual composition, the better the sound. Partly this is obvious, due to what I said: the less that's there, the less that can be screwed up. In addition, if the material's sparse you can focus and concentrate on polishing the components more easily. And their interactions are simpler. Hell, you can just see what you're doing. I sure as hell can't do a professional-sounding mix of a complete, orchestrated piece, but hopefully I'm not far off being able to be proud of a simple, sparse piece of music. As I learn, I'll be able to add more to the stage. Then again, I might decide not to. (Rothwell's Law number 417 in a continuing series of broad generalisations: the most important tool in a studio is the mixer's mute buttons.) (And with a deft retargetting to deliver a broadside in a different direction, I find myself bemused by this great resurgence in analogue synthesiser technology due to the sound being "fat." (Or even "phat.") That only makes the job harder. I think analogue works because it's warm and malleable.) >In other words - use only what is >needed to get the music across, then shave it a little. Quite. What's that quote: A work of art is finished, not when nothing more can be added, but when nothing more can be taken away. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL http://www.cassiel.com years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 12:35:45 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Katz Subject: Re: Spatializer Hello, I've used the spatializer before. If you really want to discuss it, E-mail me. M. Katz ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 14:46:38 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: NEC_CEELY@FLO.ORG Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound What or who is a "HARD CARE BEBOP HEAD"? RPC ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 16:03:18 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Dilip Ghose Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Everyone, I would like to thank everyone who has responded to my questions. I would respond individualy but there are so many responses that I don't have the time for that. All the information you guys have given me will most definitly help me and has also given me a lot to think about. Hopefully after years of practice I will become a pro and will be able to produce a "professional recording". Thank you very much. Reuben J. Ghose ghose@interlog.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 16:52:14 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Reuben J. Ghose" Subject: Berklee's Music Production Workshop I was considering attending the Music Production Workshop at Berklee College of Music from July 19-21. I was wondering if anyone knows if this workshop is worth the money ($350)? Reuben J. Ghose ghose@interlog.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 17:02:23 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Benjamin Leon Subject: E-Mail address for Unisyn?? Greetings! I am wondering if MOTU has an Email address for its Unisyn division? Anyone have any info? Thanks in advance. BLeon@omnifest.uwm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 09:01:57 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: Professional Quality Sound Hi folks, in response to RPC's question... >What or who is a "HARD CARE BEBOP HEAD"? Did I really say hard _care_? Whoops. That should read hard core. Bebop is often characterised by lots of notes. Miles Davis started this way and really pared it down later. Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 18:58:33 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Timothy Kelly Subject: Re: Berklee's Music Production Workshop Hi, $350 is real cheap as far as professional workshops go, so if they are covering stuff you want to learn more about, you may want to go for it. Berklee's staff is the best in the country. Ask if they have a money back guarantee. Happy Emusic Timothy Kelly MidiVox -- MidiVox-Worlds 1st Voice to Midi Converter. Real Time. No Delays. Hum a Bass, Croon a Sax, Scat a Horn, Scream a Guitar, Rap some Drums, Sing a Cello. Become a Human Sequencer, Human Vocoder, Human Breath Controller. AES "Best in Show." EM "Editors Choice." " MidiVox Roars." Keyboard. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 19:54:29 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Vinny Fiorenza Subject: Yamaha TX816 Factory Patches Dear people of E-musicL mailing list: i realize this is quite the longshot but here goes: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- hi. ...Does anybody on here have a copy of the TX816 Factory Preset patches {or the 5-1/4 diskette that came with it} laying around a drawer somewhere that they could ever-so-kindly e-mail me - in sysex format? I shall be ever-grateful for such a gesture. I can also reward you with many patches of your liking for your efforts if you desire. Tried calling Yamaha direct, -they don't have anything at all for the TX816 including factory disk & stuff, so i am out of luck there.. : - ( Perhaps your friend has a copy of them. Maybe a distant cousin on your mother's side can get a copy. You might even know of a place to get them. If any of the above are indeed true in any way/shape/form, please tell me! That would be pretty col.. Any assistance with this quest will be greatly appreciated Thanks for your time Vincent Scott Fiorenza@ccnet.com