Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[cerberus]

Tom C wrote on Wed, 13 September 2006 05:04

cerberus wrote on Wed, 13 September 2006 04:54 is it possible to have the source files at the original bit depth?     imo, we should be given a fair chance to do our best mixing...so it makes sense to not compromise the source files. We're already at 1 GB worth of files (300,something MB compressed). With this size I would already have problems with my web-space provider (traffic wise) if more than 100 people would download it. Each IMP seems to attract more people. Imagine 300 people (50 Mixermans [TM] and 250 lurkers) downloading a > 500 MB file.

i see what you mean... didn't consider the server perspective!  perhaps in the future, psw could help us out with hosting?

perhaps the file size could have been much smaller if the silence were stripped off and regions were marked "starts at sample number XXX"?

maybe there is lossless compression format we have not tried? (however, i don't know of any that work with high sample rates/bit depths)

---

ok, enough on that from me.  this song reminds me of the wallflowers, and a bit of dave matthews...  it's going to be a pleasure to mix.  

so this is the second imp mix in a row with tom mics, but the drummer doesn't play much toms (any?!) ...  are toms falling out of fashion?

jeff dinces

[scottoliphant]

you didn't get all the 8 sec roto tom fills in your zip file?

[NelsonL]

cerberus wrote on Wed, 13 September 2006 11:32

Tom C wrote on Wed, 13 September 2006 05:04 cerberus wrote on Wed, 13 September 2006 04:54 is it possible to have the source files at the original bit depth?     imo, we should be given a fair chance to do our best mixing...so it makes sense to not compromise the source files. We're already at 1 GB worth of files (300,something MB compressed). With this size I would already have problems with my web-space provider (traffic wise) if more than 100 people would download it. Each IMP seems to attract more people. Imagine 300 people (50 Mixermans [TM] and 250 lurkers) downloading a > 500 MB file. ...  are toms falling out of fashion? jeff dinces

Tom C, are you going to take that?

Just kidding.

Jeff, no offense-- but I think your strip silence idea would make my brain explode. Personally, I'd rather stick with 16/48--since it's just an audio potluck after all. We can always pick on the mp3 guys for kicks.

What's the track count up to anyway, 48 or something?

Yowza.

[garret]

Just a quick comment re: file size and 24bit versus 16bit...

RAR compression takes care of stripping silence rather well, and it's one of the best lossless audio codecs around. Monkey's audio, FLAC, Shorten, and RAR are all good, but RAR is better because the software is easier to find/install.  To get any smaller, you have to reduce sampling rate, bit depth, or go lossy.

I downloaded the tracks, but I'm not sure i'm going to take part this time around, given the new arrival.

-G

[ShakesTheClown]

Toms are overrated....Just play the groove and get on with your life.

This is way fun, probably one of the best excercises I've been a part of, and this song is pretty challenging for me.

I can get with that. I can't wait to hear all of these.

[Tom C]

cerberus wrote on Wed, 13 September 2006 20:32

perhaps the file size could have been much smaller if the silence were stripped off and regions were marked "starts at sample number XXX"?

IIRC the RAR format already takes care of this (that's why it's
better than zip for media formats).

[Tom C]

ShakesTheClown wrote on Wed, 13 September 2006 22:58

Toms are overrated....

That's completely utterly wrong.

[Podgorny]

Anybody else have difficulty opening the rar file on a Mac?  I'm getting a corrupted file error.

[dconstruction]

Huh.  Haven't heard anything like that.  The file was created on a PC, but I'm sure some of the Mixerpeople use Mac and would have noticed.

Bad download transfer?  How many bytes is your file?  It should be:
350,038,596 bytes.

[NelsonL]

Podgorny wrote on Thu, 14 September 2006 13:23

Anybody else have difficulty opening the rar file on a Mac?  I'm getting a corrupted file error.

Worked here on a mac-- I had it DL on another workstation and wasn't present when it was un-rared though.

[chrisj]

ShakesTheClown wrote on Wed, 13 September 2006 16:58

This is way fun, probably one of the best excercises I've been a part of, and this song is pretty challenging for me. I can get with that. I can't wait to hear all of these.

Oh same here. I love how quick IMP is compared to anything else other than the first WUMPs.

I'm having loads of fun too, which is interesting considering how alarmed I was at first. Not only is it more tracks than I've ever encountered before, but I just got Logic Express (sorry Jeff- as I suspected it turned out natural for me) so I'm doing it while learning a new program

I have at least one thing going on which is _weird_ I'm making a slapback out of a mutated reverb on the snare bottom I also revisited last IMP while I was at it, to good effect.

Good thing the deadline is Tuesday 'cos I am probably going to have to keep thinning stuff out...

[maxim]

definitely, a wall of tracks

[dconstruction]

More tracks = better, right?

That's why I initially made all the tracks stereo - twice as good!

[j.hall]

dconstruction wrote on Fri, 15 September 2006 09:37

More tracks = better, right? That's why I initially made all the tracks stereo - twice as good!

HAHAHAHAHAHA

nicely done!

honestly guys, i think the dealine for the IMP will be musch shorter.

one week seems long to me.

then again, i'm in pre-production on two records and waiting for another band to get back from tour to recall their mixes, so i'm not nearly as busy as i was with the last IMP.

[rankus]

j.hall wrote on Fri, 15 September 2006 09:08

one week seems long to me. then again, i'm in pre-production on two records and waiting for another band to get back from tour to recall their mixes, so i'm not nearly as busy as i was with the last IMP.

Noooo, please don't make it shorter.... Us guys with commercial studios need to squeeze in a few hours here and there, as bookings allow.  For instance I had some time on Tues night, and now Friday I hope to get on it for another hour and finish up on Sunday afternoon....  A week is comfortable in my case.