4,807 Forum Posts by "Khuskan"
Does your TV not have an audio out?
Logic is great, if you can afford the investment for a Mac, but I'm tending more towards protools myself... which is even more of an investment.
Mac laptops are pretty good for any sort of audio-video work due to how shit microsofts audio processing systems are - It's impossible to get a good input latency on windows without ASIO hardware, whereas on mac, any audio hardware will do, even built in sound cards, and the fact that OSX is a 32bit/64bit hybrid gives huge advantages as far as memory is involved.
You would be surprised how much a heavy curtain can help reduce outside noise and aid sound diffusion, but making a bedroom studio-quality soundproof is pretty much impossible without serious investment and a loss of quite a bit of usable space.
At 1/17/10 03:48 PM, brokendeck wrote: When using USB or Firewire instead of a PCI or PCI-E interface, you will have a significant amount of additional lag time
You've obviously had -very- bad experience with cheap USB/Firewire soundcards.
On my laptop running windows, ASIO can bring my latency down to 1ms via my USB card. The studio I use also has a 64 channel rack-mount firewire audio system that has <1ms latency.
USB 2.0 hardware latency is measurable only in microseconds, which are a magnitude smaller than milliseconds, which is what audio latency tends to be measured in. If you're getting high latency, either you're not using ASIO hardware acceleration, or your computer is really, really slow.
Yeah, looks like you were banned for questionable sample usage.
Next time you submit, list all the samples you used to create the song and under what license they are being used - they must be compatible with the Creative Commons attribution license outlined on the submit page in order to be accepted onto the website.
Also I'm worried about:
3. Producer employs Composer to write, compose, orchestrate, perform, record and submit to Producer
That really sounds like that, even though they only really want one song, if they ask you to do another and you refuse, you will be breaching the contract.
My choice of external soundcard is the M-Audio Audiophile USB. It includes 2 inputs and 2 outputs (both phonos), 2 mono jack inputs and SPDIF in/out, as well as a very good quality built in headphone amp with stereo jack output and midi in/out.
It also has hardware ASIO, which is pretty much essential if you're producing on a windows-based platform, and drivers are available for pretty much all operating systems, OSX, linux and windows, including win7.
Pretty cheap, for what it is. Only real downside is that it requires its own power supply, which means you have to be tethered to a power point to use it, but the benifits of that result in a very good signal-to-noise ratio on input and output.
As for reasonably priced monitors, have a look at m-audio and mackies collections. Don't just buy based on internet reviews, get into a music shop where you can actually see and test them first hand.
If you remix a copyrighted song using actual audio from the song without explicit permission, you are potentially breaking copyright law, should the copyright owner take offence to your work. If you provide ample credit to the origional artist, however, it could be considered fair use, and the copyright holder is more likely to leave you alone as you are essentially advertising in their favour.
Regardless, Newgrounds policy is not to allow any track with any copyrighted material included. If you really want to remix something and post it on Newgrounds, then the only real way of doing it is to remix a track that is already on the portal, citing the origional artist's audio page.
Seems like a cut-n-paste to me. It seems like he's chosen the wrong form for what he wants, that is quite clearly a commisioned composition contract as opposed to a copyright license for the use of an individual track. I wouldn't say it was suspicious, more like he's making the film for a college project or something, and that's the form they told him to use for audio work.
Email him back and ask him exactly what he wants, as the agreement he has sent you makes no reference of what track he wishes to license, under what license he wants to use it, and so on. If he is licensing one of your tracks, it is you who should be writing the contract, not the studio.
It would actually genuinely be cheaper to hire an orchestera and recording audiotorium than to buy that, let alone the cost of an 8gb ram 64 bit computer to use it.
At 1/12/10 12:05 AM, Back-From-Purgatory wrote:At 1/11/10 11:54 PM, Mans0n wrote: Or just release it, and give credit to the original artist. Becuse Eric Prydz isn't going to care as long as you didnt claim the song to be yours.Don't take this guys advice. Great way to get sued.
Not really. If a copyright holder has a problem with a remix, they will demand a takedown before moving to other legal practices - it's pointless and difficulty suing somebody over a not-for-profit work.
At 1/7/10 03:14 AM, loansindi wrote:At 1/7/10 03:01 AM, InvisibleObserver wrote: Theres your problem as loansindi stated. .Wav is generally considered uncompressed,Wav is not 'generally considered uncompressed', it is uncompressed.
There are various propitiatory lossless compression formats that maintain the .wav extension.
Convert the file to a .wav or .aif or some other lossless/uncompressed format, or you will add compression artifacts.
If submitted to NG, it would (probably) be approved under the terms of fair use, as long as provide ample credit to the remix subject. However, the original publisher could turn around and call copyright on it, but this is unlikely as NG work is strictly non-profit.
At 1/5/10 06:39 PM, lantaren wrote: you could easily put infront of A song, copyright to "in my case" lantaren all rights reserved. duplication of this copyrighted file without written permission will obtain you punishible by law. enjoy, lantaren." while music was playing, but not the kind where its going into youre song.just some backround music, then quite it for a second and play the music. easy as that.
Nope, not on the Audio Portal at least. When you upload, you agree to the terms to use the NG copyright, regardless of what you say in the track title or comments.
Yes, that would be a breach of intellectual copyright.
Lemons contain a chemical compound called Lemonine, which effectively numbs the vocal chords allowing them to be pushed. However, it has also been tied to testicular cancer.
You have been warned.
Major scales don't exist either, by his logic. Major and Minor are terms used to differentiate between two similar-keyed but different sounding chords. Without one, there is not the other.
Every creative work is automatically covered under a copyright, regardless of if you apply for one or not - the only advantage of applying for a copyright from a copyright office is that they keep paper records for you.
It's true mailing to yourself is one way to prove that you own a work, however simply having the source files and materials of a rendered song is more than enough.
When you upload tracks to the Audio Portal, you agree to upload them under a specific Creative Commons license that specifically allows people to use your work however they please, as long as they credit you and aren't making money off it.
At 1/5/10 02:24 PM, InGenius wrote: Remember, the AP is merely a tool for Flash artists to use to keep from breaking copyright law for copywritten music...but the powers-that-be have never cracked down hard on flash artists who continue to use copywritten music so most flash artists see absolutely no reason to come down to our end of the Portal
Thanks in part to the wonderful DMCA, which practically makes copyright breach impossible unless the copyright holder cries.
No, OP is correct. 99% of what gets through sucks so hard that it makes me cry when I have to click the 'approve' button.
Also, the ratio between people uploading songs and people listening/voting/reviewing is terribly skewed that most tracks get completely buried after they're off the 'new uploads' list.
At 1/3/10 03:10 PM, krssvr wrote: if your song was using samples (like Dj's Usually do) you probably have been banned use of copyrighted material is not allowed here at NG
Nah, he's not listed on the system as banned, or having any submissions.
Use a different audio converter.
Logic or Cubase are pretty much the only other things on the same sort of production level as protools, both of which have an advantage that no specialist hardware is required (except a computer running OSX for Logic, obviously)
At 12/26/09 07:15 PM, loansindi wrote: Invest in equipment with ground lift switches, or '3 to 2' adapters (which are effectively an extension cord with the ground prong cut off [though generally they're just big enough for the plug.])
And then cry when you accidentally short your motherboard one day and you brick your whole system.
Safest bet is to get an external with its own power supply. Desktop computers should always be grounded.
Sounds like you're using a laptop internal soundcard or motherboard integraded soundcard. If the former, try recording with the laptop unplugged from the mains. If the latter, buy a quality external soundcard.
Weebl uses Reason 4 as far as I can tell, and melodyne to tune vocals.
Didn't have time to 'shop it up properly, but you get the idea.
