Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

If you like your microphones with that extra hint of 'being recorded through a pair of old socks', go right ahead and buy a Sennheiser.

You have inadvertently created the greatest oxymoronic title to ever grace the NG forums.

Congratulations.

'solo collab'

Depends how crap your song is.

I am SO in.

also for some reason this text is illegal. lol wut?

What has this got to do with Cubase?

If you're under the impression Cubase is some sort of PA system, then uh, I've got some bad news.

Can we plz go back to the good old days when people wouldn't start random arguments about why they hated certain genres of music/how their own genre is underrated and and instead just concentrated on making their own music as good as possible?

At 12/23/07 01:14 AM, InsaneSmilie wrote: even though Pro-Tools is the industry standard,

Logic is the industry standard, good sir. Protools is still very much a minority due to it's much greater capital cost and relience on specific hardware.

At 12/24/07 10:32 PM, HookerRoad wrote: Another poster made the point that Reason is not a stand-alone piece of software. It makes more sense to look at it like that, then it doesn't have to live up to as high a standard.

Reasons sequencer isn't perfect, yes, but if a 'proffesional' isn't happy to work arround issues using a more intelligent technique anyway (external sequencer) then they probably arn't a proffesional. Reason is stand-alone in the same way that Garritan Orchestra is stand alone. You can run it on it's own. Sure, you can record it, but it's just another plugin at the end of it.

As a tool for generating some really cool sounds it's quite impressive. Because of the sequencer I can see some uses in a production oriented environment.

Actually quite the contrary, as I've been pressing for ages, no proffesional would ever use reasons sequencer. Punch me propellerheads, but it just sucks.

That dosn't mean I don't use it, but propellerheads decided, very cleverly, to make Reason extremely compatable with every piece of software out there, so you don't need to worry about it. Removing the built in sequencer would simply add to it's learning curve and devalue the product as a stand-alone device.

I think it's biggest problem being considered a professional piece of software is it's learning curve. People making music want to make music. They don't want to spend a bunch of time learning another crappy piece of software. So if it isn't intuitive and easy to use without always refering to a manual, don't expect a pro to use it.

I hate to say it, but that's the biggest piece of arse-talk I've ever heard in my life. Have you ever -used- pro-tools? Have you tried using maxMSP without some sort of mathematical programming degree? Music software is basically a musical instrument, and if you play any sort of instrument you'll realise that the learning curve is steep but the goal is worth it.

Profesionals are more than happy to learn how to use a new piece of software. This is mostly because they're paid to do it, and they've got the training - and expensive and timely that is - to do so.

1. End product (Quality)
2. User friendly (Easy to use)
3. System integration (Can it be used alongside and in conjunction with existing software)

These three things are the major determining factors any pro will go by to decide whether or not to use a piece of equipment or software.

The only factors that decide whether a proffesional will use something in a track are:

1. Will it produce the required sound or effect?
--Getting a piece of software 'for the hell of it' with no idea of it's capabilities.
2. Is it compatable with my sequencer?
--Every track has a master sequencer, and nearly everything is compatable with the three major sequencers - Logic, ProTools and Cubase. Most hardwar equipment can be DI'd and microphones can be used.
3. Can I afford it.
--Real producers can't just use anything that falls off the back of a bit-torrent website, and after working with a few studios, budget can have a huge effect on what is used. It can decide between hiring a session musician to play that piano riff or recording it using a sequencer.

Because the majority of people on NG don't [i]like[/i] hip-hop, and since most of them arn't musicaly skilled enought to be able to seporate personal opinion on a track from the musical ability demonstrated in it, they can't appreciate it for what it is either.

Never touched logic in my life, but based on what I know about other programs (don't laugh, once you've used a few, you'll get the idea), you probably need to tell logic that you want changes of pitch on they keyboard to apply to your samples as well. As logic is VST based, I'd assume you're using some sort of VST to map your drum samples to your keyboard, so the pitch functionality would be there somewhere. Look for a button that says 'kbd pitch trk' or something of the sort. It will probably have cut letters like that.

Then again, if you're using a cheap drum sampler VST, then it might not be able to do that. You would be best getting a custom mappable VST for sampled INSTRUMENTS, it would allow more control over the samples.

I feel overlooked.

At 12/23/07 06:37 PM, machacker2000 wrote: Lol. Have you ever noticed that some "songs" accepted today as music don't have any theory in them? I mean, no harmonic progression, no melodic progression, no change in rhythm, and they use the 7/11 rule: The same 7 words, sung 11 times.

You don't need to have all the elements of music for something to be music. That's sort of like saying something can't be considered a painting unless paint, oil pastels, chalk, pencils, human blood were included in it's creation.

Yes, some music is... rather simple, but that dosn't make it crap. The fact that hundreds of thousands of people love such music can't really be ignored. Simple people need (and make) music too.

Vocals are hard to do right, 90% of the people on the AP can't sing for shit, and 100% of the people on the AP who think they can sing can't sing for shit.

Then you get the tracks which have vocals and 90% of those are stock downloads/remixes and 10% are actually worth listening to.

At 8/19/07 12:30 PM, DaGrahamCraka wrote: i think solus made a vst. or maybe not.

Someone made one properly through coding (god I hate to say it like that, no offense to rigs awesome vst skills) but I shamefully forgot who it was.

At 12/22/07 06:41 AM, TheNossinator wrote:

At 12/22/07 06:02 AM, Khuskan wrote: If you want a final recording of your track though, I suggest you export midi, and load the midi into VST capable software such as cubase, FL or logic, then apply the GPO sounds that way.

Which one would you recommend?

They're all pretty expensive, but realitively speaking, FL is the cheapest.

Experience wise though, i.e. it would be better to pitch in for something like Cubase SE3 - It's basically the budget version of Cubase SX, but it isn't really 'cut down', it's more a re-release of cubase SX1/2. Although Logic is the industry standard, you do need a mac for it, and it is extremely expensive anyway, and functionally, it isn't much different from Cubase. Learn one, learn them all.

Evolution MK-461C.

9 Faders, 12 control knobs, 12 assignable buttons, 2 assignable wheels, at a reasonable price. Google it.

/r/ rule 34 on rule 10

At 12/22/07 05:50 AM, TheNossinator wrote: Is there any way for Garritan to 'auto-load' the correct sounds, or is it all down to me?

Sadly not, it's the most annoying as fuck thing to do with sibelius and GPO.

If you want a final recording of your track though, I suggest you export midi, and load the midi into VST capable software such as cubase, FL or logic, then apply the GPO sounds that way. They have more control over various variables of the GPO sound, as well as allowing you to use effects like reverb, delay and EQing.

Also,

At 12/22/07 03:26 AM, HookerRoad wrote: The word 'loop' about 8 times when refering to Reason

Reason is definatly not loop based. Yes, it has a .rx2 loop machine, but it's difficult to find a sequencer that [b]dosn't[/b] these days.

The only instances I find myself using the rx2 in reason is if I need to cut down my processor usage, for example making a loop of drum sounds I created in the first place using recycle.

Reason is a bit weird.

As a stand alone program, it isn't really proffesional level at all. There are so many critical things it simply cannot do such as handle audio or vsts.

However, proffesionals that use it don't see reason as a stand-alone studio It is, infact, the biggest, most extensive and powerful VST on the market that can plug into any VST sequencer. I dare you to find any complete VST that has two built in synths, a plethora of effects, built in EQ, step sequencers, drum machines and samplers. Plug it into cubase, protools or logic and you've got a very, very nifty little system on the go.

It does also have benifits for live performance (lots of fun), but my experience with that is pretty limited so there's probably someone else who can blag it better.

At 12/21/07 09:17 AM, Draqo wrote: What be going on this fine day?

Newfags getting confused about PX9s sexuality again.

At 12/16/07 07:32 AM, HookerRoad wrote: So what? If your stuff sounds too good it might get mistaken for non-original material and you'll get banned??? I hope these guys don't take themselves quite that seriously.

It pains me to think that NG audio mods might assume that audio that is 'too good' is unorigional.

None of the midi controllers I have ever used have required drivers to work on windows XP, all knobs and faders should work by default.

The only part that would require drivers are visual displays, motorised faders or built in sound modules.

HOLD ON A SECOND.

Weren't you the guy who made that thread about people using garageband having no creativity and all that jazz?

You filthy, filthy hypocrite.

At 12/4/07 09:55 PM, FatKidWitAJetPak wrote: There is a program... a 400$ program... but it makes music the MOST FREAKING BEST THING EVER.. This program is epic AND I MEAN IT!!! It is called

Logic Studio

Wow, I'd never heard of this 'lodgic studio' or whatever other industry standard recording software that over 60% of all commercial tracks are produced with! Thanks for the heads up! I'll get a copy for my macbook pro.

At 12/9/07 11:06 AM, CHOWN wrote: Does anyone else hate it when you just put TONS of work into a song, using REAL instruments, then put it on the audio portal, then the next day someone will put up a song with fake instruments programmed to play on garageband? I just dont think its fair. What talent does it take to make a song with fake instruments?

Just because the methods are different doesn't mean that there is no talent. Writing music is a skill in itself, regardless of how it is presented. Heck, I know thousands of .mid files infinitely better than most self-recorded bands.

Also, to be honest, it doesn't matter how much effort you put into a track - if somebody else makes something better in 2 days on inferior software, you're trumped.

Learn your own techniques and learn them well before you start criticizing others. You won't earn any respect from any sort of music community, armature or professional for holding impersonal grudges over anyone who produces in a different way to you.

At 12/4/07 04:03 AM, 0con wrote: I like the winter theme =)

Winter theme? seriously.

Has NG gone politically correct on our asses?

It's fucking Christmas, fucks sake.

At 11/27/07 10:57 PM, Adam-Beilgard wrote: So here's where I stand:

Trying to capture an acoustic instrument live either produces too much hum or a distant sound (like I'm in a large room, and I'm not). I can't seem to get a clean sound no matter what I do, pre or post-production.

I use Behringer B-2 Pro condenser mics on the cardiod setting hooked up to a Behringer Eurorack MX802A soundboard running directly to my soundcard (via mic jack). Cakewalk is my multi-track.

You didn't say what kind of instrument you're recording, so I'm assuming that you're using a crossed pair or spaced stereo pair and ambient recording a room.

One of the big problems about ambient recording is background noise. Condenser mics are actually more sensitive than the human ears when it comes to decibel levels, partly due to the way they're made, and also due to the fact that our heads have their own built in compressor meaning we ignore quiet noises and amplify the ones we expect to hear.

Higher frequencies travel further than lower frequencies. Basically this means that once you start moving your mic away from the sound source, you're going to start loosing frequencies from the bottom end first. In situations where there is a lot of bassyness at high amplitude (i.e. electronic guitar bands with amplified bass guitars) this isn't normally that much of a problem, but bass rolloff causes big issues with acoustic instruments.

You could try increasing the gain - this would effect the sensitivity of the mic so the lower ferquencies stand out more, but that also amplifies the higher once. A compressor might do the trick if you run it through the EQ first, but my personal motto is 'If you can't get a good sound without post production, you need to rethink your recording method'.

For example, if you were recording piano, have a crossed pair right in the centre of the piano, facing outwards with a 90 degree angle between them (that's 45 off vertical normal). Open up the lid and drop them right in there so that they're about 15cm above the hammers. Keep the gain low on the desk, then give it a whil, and you should get some lovely, crisp piano sounds with a defined bass.

For acoustic guitar, you'll want a single close mic. There are several positions you can put it, though generally the mic has to be within 5-10cm off the strings. Point it directly at the fretboard for a more fretty sound, or point it at the fingers to get a more strummed sound.

If you're restricted to ambient micing, you might want to consider buying a low-frequency mic like the
d112, and place it closest to the bass output of the instrument (left side of a upright piano, directly under a grand piano, top left side of a guitar pointing at the hole). This will give your recordings a bass boost which you can control using your desk.

Good luck!

I fail to see the part where you're breaking any sort of laws here and would need to bow to legal pressure from him.

You're not pretending to be him, nor are you making any money out of it. 'Dj' and 'Pope' are not original terms, and even when combined threes no way anyone could express any sort of intellectual copyright over them.

Just ignor it or give him a hearty 'fuck you'. Both would work. If he tries to sue you, he'll fail because you haven't stolen anything.

It's impossible to not get reason 4, even if you buy reason 3 - You instantly get a free upgrade if you purchase after january 2007.

I know what you mean. I can't seem to turn the radio on any more without black people talking at me over drum beats.