Speaks to the mastering dynamics of a retail release. It's not a simple RMS, but think of it that way---it's a kind of algorithmically averaged peak to valley range. DR6 is a normal modern master. DR11-14 were 98% of masters from 1973-1995. The 50/s60s recordings (meaning of pop/rock) lacked....they were more like DR9-11 due to the lack of fidelity of the old tape machines....and lack of VCA compression to make transients punch harder....and various stylistic balance preferences. In the early/mid 90s, lookahead limiters changed that now that there was no need to master for vinyl, where DR14 was actually "louder" and less noisy on playback than DR8....on CD, lower range=louder. So, the irony was that the shift to a format that could represent MORE dynamic range.....manifested into less and less.
Hasn't there been a retail solution for this? I know the guy who sold me mine years ago lent me his little adapter--said he needed it back for another mic....but, it didn't make any difference (then) in my studio. I've since run into some issues-once out of no where Garth Brooks was singing in my ear as I started to do a vocal take. Few minutes later.....gone. Silent again. Nothing moved....nothing changed in the gear....
So did you buy it from someone? You weren't clear....or did you buy some female to female adapter and rewire it inside for the one pin? I'd like to do that now....not that I don't like Garth as much as the next guy, um, but....
Guitarists will buy point to point wired tube amps, hand wound pickups with a special CABLE, or Luther built acoustics that ring true as a piano....and then they go to record a bass track and they buy some Squire or MexiP and wonder why there are issues.
I am equally shitty on any bass. I promise you that the hotspots are the fault of the wood/construction/electronics/strings. Which part of that? No idea--don't care, because it's an easy fix. Buy a good bass. Put good (style&axe appropriate) strings on it. What problem?
Now....if you're recording an amp, you can band aid the problem of the shitty bass....but, now you CAN introduce issues because of the room nodes making certain notes "bigger" at the microphone....but, if you DI--you want a good axe... no matter how good or shitty the player.
Last Edit: Jun 22, 2017 11:12:30 GMT -6 by popmann
A NEW anything Fender will beat a 90s anything (save custom shop) Fender. They've made huge improvements post 2008 across all their lines. FWIW. In some cases HUGE. I had a little trouble selling my 90s JazzV in fact because the 2008s had just come out and they were SO much nicer....a year earlier, it would've moved WAY quicker.
But, you know--a Jazz does have that ONE unique trick. Both pickups on, tone open--nothing sounds like a Jazz, so if that's the sound you want....anything else is a poor substitute.
It seems fine. I actually pulled up activity monitor to compare the stand alone CPU performance.....and it's actually BETTER with 2.5 than the 2.x I was using. The AU inside Logic looked (by Logic's meter) to be using more than I remember seeing before.....but, I didn't actually play around and watch specifically for that for a before/after. 2012 MBAir, 4gb, LPX.3, OSX.12.
The new shimmer control is interesting....sounds really good playing long slow sustainy bits because it's a kind of a high frequency harmonic overtone thing--but, at extreme settings it's weird on a staccato stuff. So, I'm under their min spec now (wasn't for 2.0).....but, it runs fine, knock on wood.
Just wanted to actually add potentially useful information to RGO's database for anyone searching.
I abandoned Ivory several years ago. Always sounded kind've "plainly to me. Gonna go take a look though.
American D changed that for me. Never cared much for any of the stock 3 pianos. They were "fine enough" but not tangibly better than anything else I've had for 20 years (how long I've been playing disk streaming piano samples). FWIW. They also did the U5 wonderfully, but I don't own it--because I'd have to buy the whole upright collection and well--there's a u3 in the studio....
Well, I'll back up the AU and app files and upgrade to 2.5....see how it goes. When I get time to play. Right now, I've got to get some new production el34s to work in one of my amps....fucking Russians...
I notice they made the required specs a lot higher and did release new 2.1.3 update for those running newer OSX versions but not wanting the 2.5--which tells me (the combo of the two) that it must take a lot more machine. But, it seems to only have two advertised "new" features: Shimmer....and some half pedal configuration/calibration. Maybe they upped the CPU of the engine's sympathetic modeling?
Just wondering if any users have updated to 2.5....sound/feel different? Use noticeably more resources?
I did some searching around the web looking for discussion....none to be had yet....I've not had any issues with OSX.12 other than it not working at ALL in Garageband--which I think I posted about...they said they'd have to update the engine because Apple changed the AU authorization APIs again. I would assume this "fixes that glitch"....at least the 2.1.3 would....
I downloaded, but I'm wondering if they can coexist. Or how nasty it might be to upgrade to try it and put 2.1.3 (or whatever version of 2 I have) back on if it's too heavy CPU.
Sounds lovely clean. That's key for me. It's a crowded market. The funny thing is--with the Tele, still sounds like a Z. Which isn't bad...I'm just saying, with the Jackson Ampworks Britain and El Guapo....the Metropoulis stuff....Suhr....more authentic. This sounds like a Z like all Freidman's boxes have a signature sound. Neither are a bad thing....but, they seem one step removed from traditional brit tone....
I listened to the samples the other day. Sounded pretty cool....can you move the drawbars while you play on this? Meaning, you hold a chord and move the drawbars....sound changes as you move the drawbars? NI's sample based engine didn't....and their demo seemed REALLY careful to NOT move them while sustaining sound....so, I just kinda assumed they haven't dealt with that limitation of using samples.
I sent them an email about demoing the Wurli....got back "we don't offer demos of any kind"....Instruments without playing them is a hard sell for me. But, if they run some deep coupon...it's on my radar.
No-they all cause heat. Magnetics via the motor spinning all the time....SSDs CAN run cooler, but like all chip technology, if you get cutting edge chips, they run hot to the touch. I know Samsung has had some issues with the new NMVE PCIe "chips" overheating and people were installing/rigging RAM style heatsinks on them to prevent the speed from kicking itself down due to the overheating...
But, less than a full size 7200rpm magnetic, sure--yes, less heat. Not heat free.
Yeah, I find it hilarious that I can mix full 88.2 sessions on the little Air while it sits in complete silence, and I mean silence....take a break to watch some guitar amp demo on YouTube, and the fans whir up like its about to take off. For its first few years, it sat in the studio only hooked up to the Kronos...I didn't even think it had a fan! I thought they'd built in completely passively cooled since it simply never kicked on. I remember the first time....looking around the room "where is THAT coming from?"
White's a snake oil salesman. And a good one from his followers. No--that's not an example.
Vanessa Fernandez....you need to look to "audiophile label" recording to find uncompressed vocals. But, largely, you know--it's still bullshit to some degree on a functional level--she's working the mic, someone's riding a fader, likely on the way TO tape (read limiter), and at mix time....Sklar played on the record of hers I have--and chose some thumbpy humbucker loaded Gibson bass for what were R&B standards BECAUSE they knew there would be no compressors. He usually plays Jazz basses. I'm sure he also has the stylistically appropriate Precisions....but, those need a compressor which by "audiophile" accounts it's always a negative. If air quotes weren't enough implication, I disagree. I think that both audiophiles AND modern engineers are wrong. Don't electrically alter the electrical dynamics....clip the shit out of everything....two sides to the same "bad sound" coin. IMO.
Anyway--Vanessa did one a few years ago of old R&B tunes....then one of maybe all Zeplin? All recorded sans dynamics processing.....you know-other than the analog tape.
I've had a U99. Umm....no, it's fucking not. It was a nice enough mic....mine was prior to the name change....so, honestly--if that looks like a Slate product, that's more because a Slate mic looks like a SoundDesign mic from 2003.
You have to use a phono preamp. Always. it's not a level thing (alone)---you need an RIAA EQ. That's what a phono preamp IS....an EQ and gain stage. Capture it at 24/96 and you're almost there. I mean, yes....you will ALSO normalize it....but, that's because no analog signal will record at full scale (and shouldn't).....record it at your ADC's nominal level. Whether you normalize by the side or song depends on your intention. The easiest is to manually declick the side and normalize the whole side--that will give you the best Digital representation of the vinyl playing back. If you actually want the best master, you will likely normalize each song indepedently since the level will drop as the side progresses. Just a attribute of the format.
Always wanted to try that, given that I own an old UM70s and Stayne makes the amp for my fave personal vocal mic--a specific Innertube modded 87i at Blackbird.
I prefer to pair the Um70 with the LA610 preamp, as it does the tube softened air thing good tune mics do. When I have it at the mic head amp, I prefer using my Millenia where you hear all that nuance...thats ideal.
That's a great price, as I think the mods are usually nearly the same as the 87 mod--so, $1500'ish when I was shopping. I'm super tempted at 666!! Ha.
I made the comment--it was because it was too limited. The lookahead removes the peak which is what pushes the woofer in a decided manner. Leaving just the low frequency "woof"....so you consciously can "hear" there is a kick hit, put it does actually hit you in the chest--no matter how loud you crank it.
I'm not sure why you would be going for that. If the problem is that you don't have any sub oomph....that's in a way the opposite problem. But, I get from "dancing about architecture" how you would get that. I'll tell you that I just mixed a record where what was delivered was a thin heavily EQ'd kick--it sounded (by guess) like a real kick's bleed with a horrible over snappy sample mixed in 75/25....otherwise--it was all beater and bleed! Ha. So,particularly on the slower tunes where that's completely unacceptable, I added an "out font" kick mic sample from BFD2 along with it's room (but separate channels)....it then allowed me to treat it like the two kick mic recordings I prefer---which is to get the beater mic gated pretty tightly and consistent dynamically--allowing the out of kick mic to provide the "bloom"--subbed to a mono channel that got labeled "G-Kick" and the other two hidden ASAP.
Yes, the sine wave thing can work. Key being if you can hear it, it's too loud. You should only hear it's absence when you mute it. But, that's one of those things that was a band aid back in the day (IMO/E) that isn't as relevant when every DAW can add a sample kick out mic in a matter of what 30 sec? Takes longer to sort of choose the sample really....because it's an out sample, like room samples, it literally shouldn't be phase aligned....you don't need the mostest accurratest (sic) analyzer like you might to replace drum hits.
Some of the kicks for BFD2 even have a Yamaha SubKick as a third mic....I mean if you REALLY want to make woofers shake....