Post by: hargerst on April 16, 2004, 05:30:21 PM
(Sorry I missed you in Nashville.)
Post by: George Massenburg on April 17, 2004, 12:37:03 AM
George
Post by: hargerst on April 17, 2004, 01:35:09 AM
Don't hold back on talking about your stuff. I mean all those damn nice GML toys you make. You should be proud of them and if someone asks you about them, there's no reason on earth why we shouldn't get the right info "straight from the horse's mouth", so to speak.
It's some of the finest gear on earth, so why not be proud of it and explain why it's so great? That ain't pimpin'; that's just stating facts.
As far as the other ideas, I'm starting to feel that a big part of the recording equation has always been left out of these forums; the human interaction between the people at the session. Dealing with the different types of artists, from the "it's not very good, is it?" artist, to the "I only do one take" artist.
I know I'll think of other stuff, now that you're in the neighborhood.
This is gonna be SO COOL !!!
Post by: Bob Olhsson on April 17, 2004, 02:00:39 PM
Also both of you, don't be a stranger from the Industry forum. We've got a lot of people to educate!
Post by: hargerst on April 17, 2004, 03:00:33 PM
Post by: Former Oceanway drone on April 21, 2004, 01:29:28 PM
In the last few months I have found myself scanning through your former forum looking for signal in amongst the noise. I hope that you and the structure here can help raise the s/n ratio a bit. I would also second the comment about client interaction while I must say that a great deal of that information is useful both within and without the recording industry (i.e. the knowledge is valuable in a variety of situations).
Incidentally, if you're coming to Berlin and you have some ideas about what kind of food you'd like to eat and where you're staying (it's not a small town, more like a collection of them) and would like any assistance that I might be able to provide, please let me know as it would be a genuine pleasure to attempt to assist you and your entourage here in Berlin.
Cheers,
Alan Tomlinson
Post by: digiengineer on April 21, 2004, 01:47:09 PM
It's an honor to have you here, I can't wait to tap into your knowledge again!
Post by: Cram on April 21, 2004, 04:47:02 PM
Post by: Tim Gilles on April 21, 2004, 05:49:54 PM
Good to see the mob assemble.
Tim.
Post by: magicchord on April 21, 2004, 05:53:35 PM
May you stay long and prosper.
Post by: Lee Flier on April 21, 2004, 06:13:36 PM
Post by: Geoff Grace on April 21, 2004, 09:56:29 PM
Best,
Geoff
Post by: Aardvark on April 21, 2004, 10:03:49 PM
Kidding of course. It is a pleasure and an honour for all of us to have you here.
Now about the vocal chain for Linda R....
Best wishes,
Aardvark
Post by: mcsnare on April 21, 2004, 10:07:49 PM
Great to see you here. All the best moderating what will hopefully become a highpoint in web recording forums.
I'd like to ask you if you ever miss the resolution and musicality that the very best of analog can provide. I know that what's available in the digital realm these days is very, very good, not to mention the obvious advantages. However I remember reading a talk you gave at an AES? convention where you sang the praises of good analog. Care to comment?
Dave McNair
Post by: mark fassett on April 21, 2004, 11:40:09 PM
Cheers y'all!
Post by: Zoesch on April 22, 2004, 12:32:43 AM
Enjoy yourself, or as they say in another forum EnGioia yourself
(Sorry, little MARSH joke)I hope this forum will be a conduit to discuss some of the most interesting issues regarding, well, pretty much everything recording related.
Post by: Trazan on April 22, 2004, 02:05:33 AM
Welcome George!
Post by: KevinC2 on April 22, 2004, 04:06:28 AM
Post by: natpub on April 22, 2004, 05:01:09 AM
Kurt Thompson,
Natalia Publishing, Inc (BMI)
Post by: jfrigo on April 22, 2004, 06:16:27 AM
Post by: George Massenburg on April 22, 2004, 07:05:20 AM
The whole damn business reminds one of Vegas. Is it any mistake that radio broadcasters gather in Vegas every year to discuss creative strategies? I think not.
George
Post by: Cram on April 22, 2004, 10:13:35 AM
Never gamble the money you were going to use for food.
Post by: lucey on April 22, 2004, 10:55:39 AM
in our one phone conversation you were great, and i'm sure you'll be so here
Post by: Fredo on April 22, 2004, 12:57:51 PM
Have fun at your new playground !
Glad to see so many familiar faces.
Post by: Geoff Grace on April 22, 2004, 01:51:41 PM
In my opinion, you deserved a much better send-off.
Best,
Geoff
Post by: miroslav on April 22, 2004, 02:06:31 PM
| Geoff Grace wrote on Thu, 22 April 2004 13:51 |
In my opinion, you deserved a much better send-off. |
DITTO
Post by: Phil O'Keefe on April 22, 2004, 04:10:46 PM
Again, all the best to you.
Post by: zakco on April 22, 2004, 05:50:18 PM
-Z-
Post by: jackpine on April 22, 2004, 08:30:29 PM
Post by: ted nightshade on April 22, 2004, 09:14:52 PM
I realize I am one of the less-than-professional chronic users, so do let me know if I do a faux pas of some kind, such as showing up...
anyhow your presence is much appreciated, and here's hoping for a static-free time for all.
Post by: mantovibe on April 23, 2004, 02:34:54 AM
Post by: Peter Simonsen on April 23, 2004, 03:33:57 AM
First off let me say congrats with your "new home". I hope for as many enjoyable moments here as in the past at MP.
Which you all the very best to come
Kind regards
Peter
Post by: George Massenburg on April 23, 2004, 06:07:57 AM
Nice to see you here. Hope this one works as well, if not better, than the MP site. Are you coming to Berlin in May? Will I see you there? There will be a Studio Practices and Production Technical Committee meeting on...uh is it Sunday? We'll undoubtedly be doing Deliveries & Archiving, and I'll send out an agenda ahead of time.
George
George
Post by: Peter Simonsen on April 23, 2004, 06:34:33 AM
Thanks !! Yes I hope to be in Berlin in may. Schedule is a little tight, but I plan on spending 2 days in Berlin, soo if nothing changes I´ll see you there for sure.
Kind regards
Peter
Post by: stone on April 23, 2004, 10:18:30 AM
It took me a while to get properly set up.
It is wonderful to see you here.
I look forward to the continuing dialogue.
Peace.
Post by: Eddie Matthews on April 23, 2004, 10:49:12 AM
| zakco wrote on Thu, 22 April 2004 16:50 |
George, it's great to see you hear. -Z- |
Pun intended? Heh.
Post by: Keyplayer on April 23, 2004, 12:02:14 PM
Post by: Nika Aldrich on April 23, 2004, 12:48:18 PM
Nika.
Post by: Loco on April 23, 2004, 01:20:37 PM
The topic generation seems to be runnning slower than at MP, tough. Not enough users yet?
Post by: stone on April 23, 2004, 01:30:26 PM
| Nika Aldrich wrote on Fri, 23 April 2004 12:48 |
...Whew! OK, I made it in. Anyone else still stuck out there? Anyone seen NYC Drew or Alphajerk or Curve yet? Nika. |
What, now all of a sudden you're a comedian?
Post by: MusicMedicine on April 23, 2004, 04:18:43 PM
I learned tons from your MP forum over the last couple of years. I may not have much to contribute - there are so many people more knowledgeable than me - but I'm looking forward to picking up a few more nuggets from you and everyone else around here.
Jeff
Post by: Stephen Fortner on April 23, 2004, 05:00:08 PM
Post by: Nika Aldrich on April 23, 2004, 05:33:49 PM
| Stephen Fortner wrote on Fri, 23 April 2004 22:00 |
Any opinions expressed here are entirely my own. They are not intended to reflect the opinions, editorial policy, or official position of any publication, media entity, manufacturer, or other organization with which I may be associated. |
Such as?
Post by: Dot on April 23, 2004, 09:29:05 PM
Post by: Geoff Grace on April 23, 2004, 09:36:23 PM
| Nika Aldrich wrote on Fri, 23 April 2004 14:33 | ||
Such as? |
http://www.keyboardmag.com/archive/1203/1203_r1.htm
Best,
Geoff
Post by: WFTurner on April 23, 2004, 10:00:01 PM
Thanks for everything. Glad you're continuing you're good work.
Post by: Lee Tyler on April 25, 2004, 01:03:31 AM
Post by: chrisj on April 25, 2004, 02:42:54 AM
Maybe this will be a better way. Power of the internet and all. I'm keeping busy in the same way that attracted your attention, as always- for today, it was rehacking a slew clipping routine so it became a soft clip- if threshold is X and going beyond the threshold is X+Y, it became X + sqrt(Y). Yesterday it was setting that threshold to within X of the previous sample. Formerly (embarrassingly, on CAPE and the last WOMP) it was having the threshold clipped to zero instead of to the previous sample- ouch, crunchy...
Got a hell of an improvement off even the hard clipping version, surprisingly one of the primary things it does is define bass better. The soft clip version REALLY defines bass better. And the effect in the highs is as intended very much like acoustic distance being present. I wish I'd had this debugged even a month ago... wonder if I should be coming up with a test file, seeing as the forum appears to be allowing the uploading of a file?
Anyway, working- and more than happy to belatedly chat, better late than never.
Post by: punkest on April 25, 2004, 01:06:29 PM
Good luck
Hans
Post by: Imagine on April 27, 2004, 02:49:36 AM
Cheers,
Dean
Post by: George Massenburg on April 27, 2004, 06:29:43 PM
| chrisj wrote on Sun, 25 April 2004 01:42 |
Pleased to meet you- I never got around to spending much time in the EQ forums, and when you suggested I call you and chat, I talked myself out of it Maybe this will be a better way. Power of the internet and all. I'm keeping busy in the same way that attracted your attention, as always- for today, it was rehacking a slew clipping routine so it became a soft clip- if threshold is X and going beyond the threshold is X+Y, it became X + sqrt(Y). Yesterday it was setting that threshold to within X of the previous sample. Formerly (embarrassingly, on CAPE and the last WOMP) it was having the threshold clipped to zero instead of to the previous sample- ouch, crunchy... Got a hell of an improvement off even the hard clipping version, surprisingly one of the primary things it does is define bass better. The soft clip version REALLY defines bass better. And the effect in the highs is as intended very much like acoustic distance being present. I wish I'd had this debugged even a month ago... wonder if I should be coming up with a test file, seeing as the forum appears to be allowing the uploading of a file? Anyway, working- and more than happy to belatedly chat, better late than never. |
Well, the SQRT function is the right way to go, but I wonder if it should be more continuous - there's clearly a more-or-less sharp break even for nominal values of Y. I'd suggest a continuous function - perhaps cobble one together from a Taylor series expression.
You didn't mention how you were fabricating this? Is it in data domain? Or analog?
Thanks for the stimulating thought,
George
Post by: chrisj on April 28, 2004, 01:22:06 AM
| George Massenburg wrote on Tue, 27 April 2004 18:29 |
Well, the SQRT function is the right way to go, but I wonder if it should be more continuous - there's clearly a more-or-less sharp break even for nominal values of Y. I'd suggest a continuous function - perhaps cobble one together from a Taylor series expression. You didn't mention how you were fabricating this? Is it in data domain? Or analog? Thanks for the stimulating thought, George |
All in the box, it is. Data domain. Actually if I was going for a continuous function (and maybe that would be a Good Thing for the next iteration) I might want to go with a sine-based function. I did a 'drive' control once that essentially mapped values to other values with some variation of a sine/cosine thing- values close to 0 got greatly amplified, values out by 32767 were hardly touched, and the break was literally as soft as you could get. I could see that being useful for the slew clipper, actually- softest break possible, since even the sqrt() was a nice improvement over a totally sharp clipping threshold.
Thanks- I bet you anything that would be another quality jump. Must implement. Maybe make some test files depicting each algorithm's effect...
It's surprising how musical things sound even if you refuse to let anything slew more than a bit (increment of 1 out of 65536 output 16-bit sample values) per sample! It does strange things to the sound, not like simply EQing, because it's sensitive to the amplitude of the frequency, not just the frequency itself. You could do a mock-up by simply tracking the waveform with a value that only adds or subtracts one if the source audio is greater or less than the value (rather like SACD only at 44.1K). Or, you can allow it to add or subtract more up to a point- which would duplicate the functionality of the crudest form of slew limiter, and illustrate the effect. I found this interesting stuff because I'm allergic to glarey digital- and it neatly de-glares even the glariest digital, when that glarey digital is happening through really hot high frequency transients stressing the converters. You can do a real case of converter valium
Chris Johnson