How do you record & mix ?

[kara]

that's true, there's a new one every day...

True, but don't you have the impression that developers are doing the same thing over & over again ?
I really didn't see anything really mindblowing revolutionary in the last years...

[Laguna Rising]

that's true, there's a new one every day...

True, but don't you have the impression that developers are doing the same thing over & over again ?
I really didn't see anything really mindblowing revolutionary in the last years...

Yeah, I agree, there are no more new-ideas and the developers are recycling the old ones. If you look at it under technical side, they always use the same sound-synthesis and the difference is in the architecture or how they chain effects, eq, etc.
Sometimes I try new VSTi which have a different GUI or slightly different presets but the sound is the same as other classical ones. I think there's something new in EFFECTS, but same old jam into INSTRUMENTS.
We'll see if something fresh and new will come out of the Developer Contest at KVR this next summer

Cheers

[kara]

I actually wonder if there could be such a thing as new sound synthesis.
If we see what we have at the moment, between :
- The classical VA
- FM
- Substractif
- Wavetable
- combination

synths, i wonder what a 'new way' of producing sounds could be ? But then again i'm not a synth builder
And yes, in the FX categorie there are still some new interesting ones.

[Moon]

For that I have found a solution, I've quit I stick to my hardware synths 
I realy don't have the time to learn all those Vsti's

But, there is a simple way to aviod this problem! Just treat your PC as a hardware synth: you configure it and make it work flawsely like any other hardware. Once it's up, you only have to make sure you're not seduced by a new VSTi. Just stick with what you have and don't use your DAW for anything else than a DAW. Treat your DAW as a hardware synth and you shouldn't be worrying it is a PC.
P.S.: My new DAW is almost complete so I let you know how good it is holding up ! 

[kara]

Yes you have a point there Moon.
But....
1. you must have the time to build a DAW like this
2. you must have the time to select the Vsti's you want and test them to be sure that they are stable.
A setup like this is propably the reason of success of the Receptor from Muse. To be honnest, I would buy a receptor if
1. it wasn't a Linux machine, i don't have anything against Linux, but the choice of vsti's is limited and depends on the good will of developers to port them for the receptor
2. if there was good support for it in France. Which there isn't, if there is a problem with a machine it is send back to Muse.

But it is a good concept. Best thing is propably the different scenes setup and the possibility to use it without screen,mouse and keyboard in a live situation. I'm pretty sure that I would buy it if there was a windows version of it with good support here.

For that I have found a solution, I've quit I stick to my hardware synths 
I really don't have the time to learn all those Vsti's

But, there is a simple way to avoid this problem! Just treat your PC as a hardware synth: you configure it and make it work flawlessly like any other hardware. Once it's up, you only have to make sure you're not seduced by a new VSTi. Just stick with what you have and don't use your DAW for anything else than a DAW. Treat your DAW as a hardware synth and you shouldn't be worrying it is a PC.
P.S.: My new DAW is almost complete so I let you know how good it is holding up ! 

[NeoN]

The mix, I mean the Volume of each instrument, is fine to me.
I would only lower that hi hat a little, and add a little reverb to all the song

[Marc JX8P]

I tend to overlay several tracks. I will mostly optimise each track after recording it (effects, compressor and equalizer as needed - though mostly only percussive stuff gets the compressor). When I'm happy with this then I'll mix it in that I adjust the volume levels and pan position or mute segments to create variety. I try to mix in a way that instead of pushing one channel to the top I try to lower the other channels. Also, I like to use pan to seperate tracks that are similar in frequency use. I use reverb mostly as a send and I try to hold back on it for percussive stuff in order to avoid cluttering the track. I love to use delays, especially on drums and arpeggios and for this I'll generally use a stereo delay where I seperate the times on both channels. In the final mix, I nearly never use compression to up the master channel.

[ziyben]

I prefer to record each analog track separately in my sequencer (Sonar).This allows me to apply pitch correction and effects to each track as required/desired. I use compression on voice recordings and on the finished mix. When all tracks are satisfactory I position them with Sonar's mixer and I go. The one area this does not work as well as I would like it is voice over-dubs/harmony. For that, I find Adobe-Audition to be an excellent producer. I know there are much better systems out there but this is all my day job will support. By the way Kara, Edirol's sampled muted-trumpet sound is one of the best I have heard next to the actual muted trumpet. Your excellent Blue Moon still comes as a sax--which is quite fine too.

[kara]

... By the way Kara, Edirol's sampled muted-trumpet sound is one of the best I have heard next to the actual muted trumpet. Your excellent Blue Moon still comes as a sax--which is quite fine too.

Interesting to know, have to check that out !
Thanks for the information

k

[folderol]

I'm a keyboard man and have always relied on touch sensitivity to give the expression I want both from a timing and volume viewpoint. However since I got MIDIfied (my earliest attempts were on a 4 track taperecorder) I now use several different ways to build a piece.

Sometimes, just mooching around on the keyboard with result in an interesting chord pattern, interesting enough for me to get the sequencer going. I'll then develop this and add a melody, harmonies etc.

Other timers a tune or musical phrase will pop into my head and I'll work exactly the opposite way to the above!

Very occasionally I will lay down a bass line step-wise on the sequencer and build up from that. This gives me the most accurate timing overall, but the least expresiveness.

I almost never use compression - most electronic instruments really don't need it - but I do use reverb and echo effects quite a bit.

I end up with a single file on the sequencer that I just set to play the entire work, so only one mixed wav file is produced - hardware synths coming in on the sound card - Being completely repeatable (although some of the effects come out slightly different each time) means I feel more confident about making changes and trying new ideas.

[Wyatt]

My setup is fairly simple:

Fender Custom Shop Stratocaster ..into a Fender Cyber Deluxe amp ..into a EuroRack 802A mixer..into an EMU-1212m soundcard.My computer has an AMD X2 4200 chip which is good, but runs XP Media Center Edition which is not so good.

 I mostly use Adobe Audition, which I already had for restoration work. I am too familiar with it, even with it's weaknesses, to want to change yet.

I record acoustic guitar sometimes..using a  Shure PG-58 vocal mike..I am surprised at some of the interesting things this versatile little mike can do. I use a Shaker mike for Harmonica.

I also have a Yamaha keyboard, which I use sparingly for a little atmosphere, and have been using HammerHead along with COngas for percussion tracks. I usually record the Strat directly to the mixer and into the soundcard. Occasionally, I will mike the amp on one channel and use the amp signal on the other channel.
'
Except for a couple of special FX, (for an example, see, "Spring"... 'in the shadows' section)..
I have never used EQ until just recently. No compressor for me either, but I do occasionally use a limiter for a quiet mix..try to leave at least 1db of headroom.


Wyatt

[elwoodblues1969]

Like Folderol,I am a keyboard guy as well.Primarily because with all of the technolgy,advances & features that are available-there is no reason for me to look beyond keyboard workstations.
The biggest reason why I will not venture into pc recording,is due to the fact that there is far too much trouble-shooting involved,when a problem arises on a computer.Also there is far too many compatibility issues as well & I don't want to complicate my creativity.
I do realize that there are advantages to utilizing a pc for recording that can't be found elsewhere,but it seems to me that computer based recording is more for
commercial use-such as movie productions and I am not that serious about recording.
I do however care a great deal about the quality of my recording & mixes,but not to that level.

Currently I am recording,arranging,implementing effects & mixing/mastering all on my Korg Triton Extreme,as bascially-aside from also utiliziing my built in sampler,I am not recording vocals or any external instruments at this time.

Should I decide to venture into singing & collaborating with other musicians to record with me,I will be able to accomplish that,once I get my Alesis Fusion.

For my studio to be complete for what I want to achieve,I am also going to add a professional grade cd burner & analogue mixer-& then that will be it for me,as I will have covered all the bases & I will then be able to put my gear quest to rest.

Once all that is out of the way,I will need to set aside all the money I can get my hands on,as I need to invest in sound isolation materials for my studio,as I live in an apartment & once I apply these materials to the walls,ceiling & floor,I will be able to go completely crazy any time of the day or night and no one will hear a peep from me.
I discovered these fantastic materials on Auralex.com,as they have the most amazingly effective materials I've ever come across and thier audio demos on the effects of there sound isolation materials are utterly fascinating!!

[elwoodblues1969]

One thing I forgot to mention with regard to studio gear; I may add an external midi sequencer to my Fusion once I get it,as I suspect I'll need one.

I have no experience with external midi recording,but I'll have no choice but to learn once I get the Fusion,most likely.

[kara]

I tought the fusion had midi-sequencer ?
Anyway if your not satisfied with the sequencer of the fushion you could have a look at e-bay for the yamaha qy700. One of the best hardware midi sequencer ever build.

k

One thing I forgot to mention with regard to studio gear; I may add an external midi sequencer to my Fusion once I get it,as I suspect I'll need one.

I have no experience with external midi recording,but I'll have no choice but to learn once I get the Fusion,most likely.

[elwoodblues1969]

Kara,

Yes,the Fusion has a midi sequencer,but it does not have pattern recording.
Thanks for the tip on the Yamaha,but I don't buy used & I especially don't do Ebay either.
I was thinking about the Korg EMX-1,as I thought it might be easier for me to operate-since I am most familiar with Korg products.

As far has new,entry level external midi sequencers go,they are all priced the same,so I figure on going with the Korg.

Elwood