RE: Mini / Multi - Home Recording (FX)?

[DonutDude]

Using quotes goes like this: the word quote (alone) in between brackets at the beginning, and the word quote (with a backslash in front of it) in between brackets at the end.
So, simply edit your message and remove the backslashes in front of the word quote at the beginning of each quote...

Thanks Alain, next time you're in Tucson I'll buy you a dozen donuts... doughnuts?

Mark

[thealien666]

You're welcome, Mark.
Mmmh, donuts, is there anything they can't do ? (Homer J. Simpson said that )



Alain.

[monsterjazzlicks]

Hello there Mr Herrick,

Exactly, I sit down and start playing or turning dials until something inspires me. I rarely wake up in the middle of the night with an idea in my head, and those times when I do I just go back to sleep. Inspiration has to hit me when I'm darn well rested and willing to listen to it!

Oh, ok. I kind of know what you mean here in that when I have programmed a (half decent!) new patch on my DX21 or DX7, sometimes ideas come to me very quickly (either in the form of a melody line, chord sequence or bass line). So I always try and record a quick snippet and upload it to the usual cloud spaces. In doing this, it provides me with a documentation/library of my work to date and so, if something sounds as having particular potential, I can then listen back at a later date and turn it into a fully blown arrangement. The FM PROGRAMMING studies are going well (despite it being a tricky topic) but as I say, I feel I am now ready (or rather should have done much earlier!) to add a new ingredient to my self-creations and that's when I started thinking about (finally) using the MOOG(s) alongside CUBASE and/or hardware FX.

I can definitely relate to that. I'm trying to finish another album in the next few months but can't seem to even get started on it. A couple years ago I came up with an idea to help me "get back in the game". You can read about it at my bandcamp page if you're interested (link below). "Vacation Tracks" was the result of that project.

Gee, I totally forgot about the existence of BAND CAMP! lol I just checked my account and it's still active, though I have not even logged in for possible close to two years! Seems it is SYNCED to all of the tracks I have uploaded on either my You Tube or SoundCloud accounts?

Anyway, your music (compositions) sound quite across the board (to me). You are much more of a POP muso than I am although I have done ton's of cover/commercial bands stuff over the years. I like the FLANGER BASS on GIGO and the RHODES of course. This tracks reminds me a little of Paul Simon (in you singing/phrasing). FLY AWAY sounds a bit like it could be influenced (instruments/chords) by Donald Fagen NIGHTFLY. And a nice CLAV on OUT OF SYNC! Do you have the NATIVE library (ie SCARBEE keyboards and bass)?

The whole aux thing took me awhile to figure out so don't worry if what I said above makes no sense. Download some .pdf manuals of mixers. They ususally have diagrams that explain things much better than I can in a few short sentences.

Cheers, that's a good idea. I have a small (8 x channel) Yamaha Mixer (MG something or other [it is dark blue]). Again, I used it with my ex-cheesy duo on the cruise ships! lol

Muchas gracias . . .

Paul

[DonutDude]

Thanks for listening Paul,

I didn't use any software synths on the stuff you listened to. The only software synths I have are Reason 2.5 and GForce Oddity. They are running on my old Win XP computer and connected via an old Emu soundcard to my Korg D1600, but I don't use them much... yet (I keep hoping to include them in future projects).

If you get a chance check out my Moog Rogue solo on "Back Home". It's on the Northridge Sessions album - I'm really proud of that solo.

If you can figure out FM Programming you should have no problems at all with any of this recording stuff. Your Yamaha probably has at least one aux input you can mess around with to see if you like hooking things up that way. After that you can move on to insert effects.

Later dude,
Mark

[monsterjazzlicks]

Ta Mark,

Your Yamaha probably has at least one aux input you can mess around with to see if you like hooking things up that way. After that you can move on to insert effects.

Well I am wondering if I would be better using the LEXICON MX200 via the YAMAHA MG MIXER instead of (or maybe as well as) the FX in CUBASE (ROOMWORKS or whatever they are called)? I mean, would you say the HARDWARE FX will be superior to the VST ones please?

Best,

Paul

[DonutDude]

Well I am wondering if I would be better using the LEXICON MX200 via the YAMAHA MG MIXER instead of (or maybe as well as) the FX in CUBASE (ROOMWORKS or whatever they are called)? I mean, would you say the HARDWARE FX will be superior to the VST ones please?

I don't know the answer to that one. Try them both out and decide which one sounds better to you. Results may vary based on the synth sound you are using. The Lexicon may sound better in some situations and your VST effect may sound better at other times. Have fun experimenting!

Mark

[monsterjazzlicks]

Hi Mark,

Well I am wondering if I would be better using the LEXICON MX200 via the YAMAHA MG MIXER instead of (or maybe as well as) the FX in CUBASE (ROOMWORKS or whatever they are called)? I mean, would you say the HARDWARE FX will be superior to the VST ones please?

I don't know the answer to that one. Try them both out and decide which one sounds better to you. Results may vary based on the synth sound you are using. The Lexicon may sound better in some situations and your VST effect may sound better at other times. Have fun experimenting!

Ok, I had not looked it at that way. I was thinking (hoping!) there was a hard and set answer here, but obviously not.

I guess the only difference (from a slightly disruptive point of view) is that if you close down a project for a few months, and then reopen it again at a later date, you will (obviously) have to reconnect the LEXICON (if you do not keep it permanently wired up) in order to be able to re-access all aspects of the project. Or else substitute the hardware with VST.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlicks]

Hi again,

I think the one thing (question) which continues to re-emerge quite often is that of: whether or not the performer would prefer to RETAIN the exact true character of the PRESET or INSTRUMENT?! Though I think the ANSWER to this dilemma lies in the reason(s) behind the sole purpose (objective) of creating the musical recording(s) in the first place.

For example, if you were going to RECORD a SONG or ALBUM (such as the material which fellow member 'DonutDude' outputs), then it is extremely likely that one is going to go the the full extent of Mixing/EQ-ing/Mastering etc in order to deliver as polished a final product as possible (for the simple reason that if it sounds CRAP, then nobody is going to listen or buy it!).

Whereas, if you wanted to created a DEMONSTRATION of the FACTORY PRESETS on the (say) YAMAHA DX7 (for the purposes of uploading it to You-Tube [as many people do of course]), then arguably the listener is going to prefer to hear the PRESETS sounding as close to how they would if that person were listening/playing the DX7 themselves (ie DRY and with no EQ etc).

Thanks a lot,

Paul

[DonutDude]

When I watch or listen to a demo for instance on YouTube, it is nice to know exactly what I am hearing. Is the synth recorded dry? Is there reverb added, or delay, or some other effect? Is the effect within the patch or is external hardware used? If an onboard preset is used it is nice to know that as well. I appreciate when all that is explained in the video or in the text below it.

There is another thread somewhere in this Forum talking about the best methods for creating demo videos. That thread went into depth regarding what people felt made for a good synth demo, and what elements should be left out. Maybe someone can add a link to that thread here.

One important reason for retaining the "exact true character of the PRESET or INSTRUMENT" is if you think you might want to add some effect to it later, after you have recorded it, but you aren't sure what effect you want to add. If you record both the synth and the reverb together (that's what I do) and later on you don't like the sound of the reverb when it is in the mix with other instruments, you will have to re-record the synth part all over again with a different reverb that fits in the mix better. The reason I don't do that, other than what I've said in the previous post, is I don't have unlimited tracks on my digital recorder. I have 16 tracks available at 16-bit and only 8 tracks if I record in 24-bit. If I had a computer DAW I'm guessing I would adjust my methods to recording more tracks dry and spending time messing around with effects after the synth was recorded, rather than choosing the effect before I record. It's just the way I do it - there is no right or wrong way - just what works in your particular situation.

[monsterjazzlicks]

Thanks DonutDude,

Once again, your working method defines the ultimate outcome.

I would be quite interested to read about the YOU TUBE method making video at some point as this is something I would like to learn more about if possible.

Best,

Paul

[DonutDude]

http://forum.moogmusic.com/viewtopic.ph ... os#p133258

[monsterjazzlicks]

DD,

Thank you very much indeed.

So the thread was not so old (Aug '14).

I ask, because all people can tell me is that my videos are boring and unintuitive. How can I do better?

Gee, now that's being a little too harsh and critical of oneself! lol

Ta,

Paul

[monsterjazzlicks]

Hi,

I just made a couple of excerpt recording of my MULTI (DRY) and so I will LINK them up on PICOSONG in the morning . . .

Paul

[atomicsynth]

So I skimmed though all this and I'm putting how I do it in a nutshell, take it or leave it....

1. Forget about this whole character of the patch thing. It's totally irrelevant as soon as you are practicing the art or craft of squeezing multiple sounds in a mix out of little boxes (speakers). Recording is nothing like natural sound in air. Processes must happen, be they through analog hardware or mixing in the box (the DAW) using plugins).

Try freeware VST's or not. I don't care. I use the ones, and others I cited. They work fine and sound musical.

2. Record every track at 96K or higher, dry without any effects other than internal synth effects that define the program often more than the program itself. This is particularly true when working with a Kurzweil, for example. And ask yourself what happens, speaking in this example, Kurzweil, when KDFX is turned off for that particular program.

3. The reason this whole keep the integrity of the patch is flat out wrong thinking is that in the mixing environment everything changes.

In the mixing environment, every track is going to get EQ and more often than not, compression. You will often find that the synth patch you thought was perfect does not work in the mix at all, so you'll then modify the patch or change it into something new, the latter more than the former. Using EQ properly to place a track into it's own region usually changed what that raw patch sounded like. So much for "integrity". Worry about your reverbs then. I use a hardware Lexicon and record separate effect tracks 100% wet, keeping the dry track dry. I then control the balance in mixing .

4. The goal with EQ is to place everything in it's own space. Reduce your mix to mono. If it sounds worse than the stereo, fix your EQ's because they were just proven wrong if the mono test fails.

5. Avoid loudness maximizers, during mixing, ie brick wall compression. Apply a smooth bus compressor that peaks absolutely no higher than 0 DB and don't use a ratio that wipes your dynamics out.

If you master at home, this generally means entering the "loudness war" with brick wall plugs or hardware and almost always means applying an EQ tone curve to the mix to add air and bass ( that is, if you want it to sound like a record). That being said, if the mids are wrong, it won't sound right, so pay attention to what your mids are doing. Go back and fix your track EQ's if you have to and re-render again, as above.

Will your master sound like what Ted Jensen does at Sterling Sound? No, but you can make it listenable, especially given that we now live in an ear bud, MP3 and Bluetooth speaker world.

6. Convert the sample rate of the high resolution mix. Use a good dither one time only to truncate the digital word length. You can often render a CDR to 24 bits, 44.1K and it will play in a CD player. If it doesn't work than go back and do the one and one only dither to 44.1 16 bit Redbook standard.

I'm adding in postscript, listen to commercial CD's as reference. Compare your result and figure out what you did wrong if it isn't in the ballpark, so to speak. Get very familiar with and then learn to trust your monitors. Mix at a soft volume level because if it sounds good soft it then sounds even better louder. Take your finished mixes out to the car and compare against commercial. That's the final test of if it's right or not.

[thealien666]

I agree with most of what you said atomicsynth. Except maybe the last part about comparing to a commercial CD as reference. There are certainly mountains of differences between them. And some of them are certainly not worth comparing to, production wise, because they sound frankly crappy (not the music, but the sound). Most of the recent "remastering" of classic albums also suffer from "sound demolition" with complete disappearance of nuances. It's the compressor/limiter brick wall, that loudness war that keeps making victims.

Paul, learn to trust your own ears. That's what atomicsynth is suggesting, and that's what I do too. And I use the theory of KIS (Keep It Simple). Don't get too involved with EQ, Effects, Compressors, Limiters, Enhancers, etc...

And as atomicsynth also suggests, record everything dry, then, and only if you feel it could improve things, try some post recording effects, lightly, one at a time, until it sounds good to you, in high fidelity headphones first and then good quality speakers. that's the best thing to do.
Or you can record with effects live, like I do, to get a better feel when playing a solo for example, but then you're stuck with that effect on the final product, so adjust carefully until it sounds good enough but not overshadowing.

Keep in mind that effects can muddy things very quickly, that's why they should only be used when absolutely necessary and only sparingly. Unless you want to create some artificial "space" effect with lots of reverb, but that's the exception that confirms the rule.

If you've listened to some of my recordings on my SoundCloud account, you'll have noticed that it usually sounds good, in most parts (except when very old tapes were used as backdrop). There's no "magic ingredient", no "secret recipe", to my method. It's very straightforward and very little post-processing is done. Mostly playback tracks audio levels adjustments, panning, and fading in or out.

Most synthesizers sound quite good recorded directly (unlike an electric guitar), so the need for added effects on them is less critical. TIFWIW.