sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 8, 2008 17:24:41 GMT
This a simple Celtic song that I recorded over the weekend. I added a bass line to fill out the bottom a little. David Hamby (And I Love Her- from the Phoenix project) just got a new Digitech vocal processor so we were experimenting around. Unfortuately it only outputs vocals into 1 channel so harmony cannot be seperated and panned out. www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=871663&songID=6872497
|
|
|
Post by chrisr on Sept 8, 2008 21:15:39 GMT
It may just be an experiment, but I like this very much (I live in Brittany, which is the Celtic part of France, so...).
David has a very nice voice for this kind of song.
Some Celtic flute, a violin, and some bagpipes would make this tops.
Could you not have patched the input to two tracks, Stan ? And then, with another take on the two next tracks, you would have created a very full vocal part.
Chris
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 8, 2008 22:12:27 GMT
Thanks Chris,
His vocal processor has a seperate guitar out, and 1 vocal out, so the harmonies & main vocal go out from the same channel. I recommended using an extra mic for straight vocals but his Martin acoustic would have bled into it (still might sound good anyway).
The biggest problem was it was in a small area with 3 dogs and lots of cables... maybe your idea of some type of backing track containing added MIDI instruments and drums.
We'll try again, but both of us are usually pretty stressed for time.
|
|
|
Post by mcarp555 on Sept 8, 2008 22:23:12 GMT
I could listen to this stuff all day...
Hey, why not send a mono mix (.wav) to GF for some harmony? She can experiment with importing wav files (he said, volunteering her).
I agree that fiddle & flute would be sweet, but would probably take some doing to get.
|
|
|
Post by chrisr on Sept 8, 2008 23:17:15 GMT
Thanks Chris, His vocal processor has a seperate guitar out, and 1 vocal out, so the harmonies & main vocal go out from the same channel. I recommended using an extra mic for straight vocals but his Martin acoustic would have bled into it (still might sound good anyway). The biggest problem was it was in a small area with 3 dogs and lots of cables... maybe your idea of some type of backing track containing added MIDI instruments and drums. We'll try again, but both of us are usually pretty stressed for time. With the patching thing, I meant sending the one vocals input (coming from the vocal out of the Digitech) to two channels (and thus two separate tracks) at the same time. And having done that, do a second take of the vocals on other tracks (same method), and blend the result (the four vocal tracks) in stereo. Of course, this takes some doing, and I understand that both of you may usually be stressed for time. By the way, Stan, couldn't you chain David to your 2488 or something for the rest of the year ? With his voice and vocal talents, he would really be useful to us for any collab we might have in mind. Chris
|
|
|
Post by mcarp555 on Sept 9, 2008 9:08:22 GMT
With the patching thing, I meant sending the one vocals input (coming from the vocal out of the Digitech) to two channels (and thus two separate tracks) at the same time. And having done that, do a second take of the vocals on other tracks (same method), and blend the result (the four vocal tracks) in stereo. This would actually not sound very good, since the first two tracks of vocals (and the second set on their own) would be identical, thus creating phase cancellations. You would need to move one a few milliseconds out of phase with the other one to make them sound good together. If you're going to do that, then why bother splitting the signal at all? You could just copy the vocal to another track, then move it out of phase.
|
|
|
Post by chrisr on Sept 9, 2008 9:58:15 GMT
With the patching thing, I meant sending the one vocals input (coming from the vocal out of the Digitech) to two channels (and thus two separate tracks) at the same time. And having done that, do a second take of the vocals on other tracks (same method), and blend the result (the four vocal tracks) in stereo. This would actually not sound very good, since the first two tracks of vocals (and the second set on their own) would be identical, thus creating phase cancellations. You would need to move one a few milliseconds out of phase with the other one to make them sound good together. If you're going to do that, then why bother splitting the signal at all? You could just copy the vocal to another track, then move it out of phase. Yes indeed, Mike, why patch the input to two channels ; I forgot that copying would work just as well (and move it out of phase, of course). In my view, the second set (second take, which would naturally not be identical to the first) would make the vocal "ensemble" sound more natural than if it all were just copied.
|
|
|
Post by mcarp555 on Sept 9, 2008 10:43:11 GMT
Yes, it may not have been clear from my note, but the second set would indeed not be identical to the first set. But you would still have to move one of the second set vocals to keep it from being in phase with its twin. Then you would have four "different" vocal tracks.
And if you pan them so the "delayed" tracks are opposite each other and make sure take 1 and take 2 are not the same "width" apart, it would be nice and thick. For example:
Track 1 - L50 Track 2 (delayed) - R50 Track 3 - R30 Track 4 (delayed) - L30
Or something along those lines.
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 9, 2008 14:29:23 GMT
Hey, I love that idea! We could all align to a MIDI backing file for starters & exchange WAV tracks. If this evolved into something then maybe get a flute or harp player to add on a track. David also plays Alto Uke and mandilin; not to mention indian flute.
|
|
|
Post by mcarp555 on Sept 9, 2008 15:21:21 GMT
See Stan, the beauty of this is, that everyone who is involved can get a mono mix from you so they can play along, then just send you the track(s) they record, and you can import them into your master. They should sync right up and you can create a final mix.
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 9, 2008 16:43:56 GMT
I like the MIDI idea for a couple of reasons: 1) the ability to autosnap to the MIDI measures later which is easier than WAV alignment 2) it automatically sets a correct tempo for EZDrummer clips to match the song while setting up a drum track.
I'm relying more on MIDI since I have several synth racks that I can pick and choose from for various sounds.
|
|
|
Post by mcarp555 on Sept 9, 2008 17:15:58 GMT
Doesn't matter, because if you set up a backing track, mix it down to mono and send it out to people, whatever they record will automatically sync up. When you get their tracks back, they would have to start at the same time as your mix, MIDI or not.
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 9, 2008 18:03:26 GMT
You are right Mike. In fact, the 2488 MKII doesn't have MIDI import for the TG anyway so it would need to be a wav backing that was sent out. I'd start with a MIDI backing for mixing purposes to be able and pull out & put in tracks easier; such as drum styles.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Sept 9, 2008 21:33:16 GMT
You are right Mike. In fact, the 2488 MKII doesn't have MIDI import for the TG anyway so it would need to be a wav backing that was sent out. I'd start with a MIDI backing for mixing purposes to be able and pull out & put in tracks easier; such as drum styles. Stan, According to page 90 of the MkII manual PDF I have, you can copy a SMF to the MkII and then load it into the "MIDI player". It is unclear whether you can do any more than just play the MIDI. One would think that the presence of a TG, a bars and beats mode option, and synchronization master/slave options would indicate more capability, but one never knows. Using WAVs in a collaboration would ensure synchronization as Mike pointed out, but it sure would be nice to have the ability to cut, copy, paste, punch in with bars and beats as reference, without having to lay in the reference track playing to the metronome. I am sure you guys have noticed my cutting and pasting on rhythm guitar tracks on the PS5. Tom
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 10, 2008 14:36:17 GMT
Several owners of the MKII thought that you could directly playback SMF files w/o external help but this seems not the case. Since there is no TG on the MKII I've read lots of posts but I've seen nowhere that someone has actually imported an SMF and get it to sound through the mixer. Whether this is true or not I'm sure that there's some indirect way since the feature is there but I prefer the physical TG fader so I can control volume on the MKI and I don't need to go through any extra steps to figure it out. Since I don't own a MKII it's not a problem.
WAV exchanges, once a tempo has been established, is always the way to go since any mixing software and most recorders come with this feature. I alway export my WAVs to the computer just in case I ever want to remix or add to a song project. I like starting with MIDI because things are much easier aligned (the autosnap feature) and drums can be pulled out and changed out much easier.
|
|