|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 27, 2014 21:29:18 GMT -6
Immediate feature request...they need to figure an offline way to do this. I've got my machine chugging at 50% with like a reverb, MPX instance on the snare, and like 15 of these...it's not like I ever want to change them. Align--do I like? Yes/no.
Unlike something like VTM--that is simply enough to print offline in Cubase...this guy has their whole internal bussing...maybe I should try it...but, usually the offline "version" of the plugs don't talk to the real time buffered ones...
It's a great find for this drummer...who isn't really an engineer--he can do this stuff--export all the WAVs for his clients.
Also--is it me, of does it seem like this guy is DYNAMICALLY changing the timing? It definately is doing something VERY different than my manual offsets and 360 phase sweeps. I only tried on bass+DI...but, man--completely different. it looks like it's detecting transients and aligning for best fundamental of every note maybe?
Anyone else playing with this?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 1, 2014 6:55:57 GMT -6
Tried it on Acoustics...and I'm not sure I didn't prefer the "without"...It was only a difference of around 4-6 samples. So, there wasn't really much difference...but you could hear it. I'd like to hear it on overheads - lining it up with the snare track...need to just open something up and try it. On bass and DI too...
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 1, 2014 12:39:30 GMT -6
Yes....that was the first shot...I find the snare is the hardest to get right if you're fighting dynamic cancellation.
I need to understand these "noise floor" sliders. They say "just put it about the noise floor" in their instrumctions, but it's got have an effect on what it's time aligning--ie transient or sustain.
Bass DI and amp....it's was not poaitive on the track I've got here...I suppose that's subjective..,but as a bass player...I don't like--it seems to have emphasized the fundamental...to the detriment of the amp'd overtones...I don't know.
I will say, man is it nice to have a 30day demo window. Let's you actually get to know the tool...where its useful and not...as things naturally come up.
Has anyone tried the Pi Mixer yet? I've yet to...but, man what an intriguing idea....no?
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 1, 2014 12:44:29 GMT -6
Also, I've yet to split the overheads and try to along them to each other. That's, I assume the lack of width thing mentioned earlier? that the two mic acoustic thing. I would almost always prefer without, unless someone did an incompetent job of dual placement. The phase cancellation is the reason you LIKE stereo mic'ing acoustic, IMO...
My issues with tracks I get are the amount of editing I have to do to the TOMS...to get the snare sounding good...so, yes--I've aligned everything to the snare top (except the kick...which is just in and out to itself) it cause some oddity in the Tom attacks...so...
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 1, 2014 13:07:42 GMT -6
I've been using it the last year or so. I don't always love it, but I consistently use it on bass/DI and multi mic'd electric guitar. I often find on acoustic guitar that it's a "lateral" move...sounds different but not necessarily better. But I always prefer it on bass and often on electric guitar. I haven't loved it on drums.
|
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Mar 1, 2014 22:03:58 GMT -6
I think it depends a lot on your recording rooms as to how well this plug works. The smaller the rooms, the more issues and the more open and well treated rooms probably don't need this plug as much.
R
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 5, 2014 17:54:30 GMT -6
Well, I might've just sold myself on it...acoustic piano--ALWAYS a phase nightmare. In fact, the very best recordings have a good amount of phase incoherency to them, IME--so, it's not 100% a bad thing, though it does factor in when it's a piano based song--and collapses to mono--thus changing the balance.
I've long said that the biggest difference in samples pianos is that they edit, note by note to eliminate any issues--and since there's technically never more than one note playing at a time (5 samples notes don't interact--they're just 5 single notes playing at the same time)--that's why digital pianos "work better" in some parts/arrangements.
...that said...this guy...can take a real piano and give it the phase cohesiveness a sample whie retaining the sound of a real one. Somehow. It really doesn't seem like it's sliding things in time (alone)...
I've also begun playing with their "Pi Mixer"....now, that...thus far, I've found truly weird. But, there are a lot of user settings...so, at this point, I'm going to assume I can temper it's phase flipping to some degree--it's default settings flip polarity at different frequencies dynamically and in a really offputting digitally way. I'm more apt to think it would be useful on things like a guitar sub buss....or MAYBE....connecting up the bass buss with the kick maybe?
But, I would like to get geeky with them at some point to see what it's doing. AutoAlign, that is....I really don't think it's a static slide in time. Maybe it combines the static slide with some analysis and 360deg phase sweep. It really doesn't seem to use any CPU after detection, so it's got to be static, right? But, it doesn't display what it's doing to the phase. I know sliding in time the amount they specify they're doing alone does NOT equal what the plug does.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 5, 2014 22:44:33 GMT -6
Ok...I'm done with Pi....my machine isn't powerful enough to run full mixes with it...but, even running a few tracks, it leave all kinds of odd artifacts--I get what it's doing. It just isn't good. It's leaving little squirrelly digitally artifacts all over--you don't hear them clearly in the context of the whole mix....but, solo them, and it's seriously weird. Maybe if a machine is fast enough to run the whole mix, it will do it's think without artifacts...but, I'm out for that one. More time to focus on AutoAlign's uses....
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Mar 6, 2014 7:40:34 GMT -6
I think it depends a lot on your recording rooms as to how well this plug works. The smaller the rooms, the more issues and the more open and well treated rooms probably don't need this plug as much. R I agree. Small tracking room here (pretty much dead) but I find myself using these phase plugins more and more lately. They can really help clean up a mix. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 6, 2014 9:02:33 GMT -6
I thought I heard artifacts being added even to the two acoustic tracks I was running in Auto-align. It isn't a power thing for my computer, so...I just kind of lost interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 6, 2014 9:45:35 GMT -6
Yeah AA doesn't take any (significant) CPU except during its analysis.
It's static, so any artifacts would've just been from phase interplay. You certainly can choose to align based on some odd sounding points.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 15, 2014 18:41:16 GMT -6
Found a(nother) selling point...see, I'm having a hard time justifying it--since I can manually do this...it's just a time saver...BUT...here's where it's a huge time saver--ignore their instruction (or technically misuse BASED on instructions) and EQ each mic as needed first THEN run it after wards in the chain. That way it's accounting for the phase shift inherent in the EQ process.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 15, 2014 19:01:37 GMT -6
That's cool...Have you noticed that it can sometimes get different results depending on where you are in the song.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 15, 2014 21:00:45 GMT -6
Yes...you can also scroll the "match points" to find the one you think works best--which is ultimately what I've had to do on pitched stuff. Also, it takes WAY longer on a piano--it will literally "detect" for like 2min of the song before deciding...drums, it does a few seconds of hits and set it. Because a piano is inheirently phase confused...you can put on a Sara Bareilles record and watch the phase meters go whacko...it's not a right/wrong thing...it's simply a tool that allows you to scroll through the match points to find the best compromise between stereo and mono collapse. That's usually a frustrating thing, since it's less cut and dried as the drums.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 15, 2014 22:52:17 GMT -6
Well, THIS is a neat note...so, what I do when I know I'm going to need EQ on the way in...is I do a take flat...then use digital EQ to find what needs to be done....dial it into the analog EQ and take 2 can be a keeper, tonally. Right? Otherwise, I'm trusting headphones...yikes...I'm not EQ'ing THAT much...
So, I posted the above...and it "detected" like 7ms difference with the digital EQ before it...then I bypass the digital and dial in the analog...record the takes...and when I have it analyze those tracks? 4 SAMPLES...
Man, side note--sampled pianos rule. This winter has been f'n ROUGH in the studio--I had to completely rehydrate and reset up all my basses...and this piano got tuned up like last week, and it's already noticeably out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 16, 2014 10:39:21 GMT -6
Yeah - I have a piano by a window downstairs...hopeless.
|
|
|
|
Post by warrenfirehouse on Jul 10, 2015 12:09:40 GMT -6
Anyone use the melda version of this? I bought it on sale dirt cheap, and also dowloaded the sound radix demo. I think i may have jumped the gun. They work a little differently, but a similar idea. What I am noticing is everytime you analyze tracks with the melda you get a different outcome (delay times). The sound radix gives you very close to the same reading every time. Plus the sound radix analyzes each track seperatly, while the melda does all in one shot.
Anyone having success with melda mautoalgn on drums? If so, how are you using it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 10, 2015 20:18:19 GMT -6
I've had different outcomes with re-analyzing on OH's and Rooms with the Sound Radix too. There is a tutorial somewhere that suggested sending out with the OH's and receiving everywhere else...I think Randge starts with top snare and aligns from there, right Randy? Of course, this thing is fantastic with Acoustic instruments. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107 
|
Post by ericn on Jul 10, 2015 21:31:18 GMT -6
I was taught many moons ago to align to kick and remember to always align before you start using EQ and filters !
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jul 10, 2015 23:49:10 GMT -6
I don't know how i missed this, but I NEVER align a snare to an overhead, phase is a function of distance, overheads are farther away than a close mic snare, if you line them up you screw the image you should have worked hard to get while tracking. With careful close mic placement to overhead distance, the close mic should line up in constructive cycle AHEAD of the overheads simply because the overheads are farther away from the snare, if done properly, you will maintain ALL possible power while maintaining a great depth of image. Aligning them removes the depth of image and the realism.
|
|
|
|
Post by jazznoise on Jul 11, 2015 0:06:27 GMT -6
The problem with time aligning the drums to my ears is pulling the kick in time with the overheads pulls the bleed from that mic even further out. Tom mics are particularly bad for this. If you're gating everything within an inch of its life, maybe it's fine. IPB and other things will fix single anomalies caused by time based cancellation - but since it's a mix of phase shift + delay based error that causes the comb filtering, it's not a magic wand.
So delay from a snare mic to the overheads is 99% linear delay and about 1% phase shift introduced by air. It's not a simple mechanic of either, but when people refer to "Phasing" they usually mean "comb filtering".
Basically I don't think post recording trickery will fix what 10 minutes with a movable mic stand and a good pair of ears will ever do without rendering a result nothing like the original intended recording. Steve Albini's trick of delaying room and/or OH mics till the time delay pushes the comb filtering outside the audible range can help, but usually if someone hasn't checked the basics like phase there's numerous other issues that means the kit mics or their placement don't complement very well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Jul 11, 2015 1:36:50 GMT -6
I've had different outcomes with re-analyzing on OH's and Rooms with the Sound Radix too. There is a tutorial somewhere that suggested sending out with the OH's and receiving everywhere else...I think Randge starts with top snare and aligns from there, right Randy? Of course, this thing is fantastic with Acoustic instruments. Yes, it creates a tight sound that I usually look for. Makes my whole kit super punchy and clear. AutoAlign also has adjustments, so you can separate the drums through use of phase. |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jul 11, 2015 3:56:21 GMT -6
I've had different outcomes with re-analyzing on OH's and Rooms with the Sound Radix too. There is a tutorial somewhere that suggested sending out with the OH's and receiving everywhere else...I think Randge starts with top snare and aligns from there, right Randy? Of course, this thing is fantastic with Acoustic instruments. Yes, it creates a tight sound that I usually look for. Makes my whole kit super punchy and clear. AutoAlign also has adjustments, so you can separate the drums through use of phase. It works on anything that is multi-mic'd.... and man does it make things sound great. Randy turned me onto this one and I love it. For the price it's well worth it, well worth it. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 11, 2015 14:17:35 GMT -6
I agree Tony - with OHs and Room, the timing gives the dimension...I do like this for kick and snare though. And all other acoustic instruments.
Anyone use PI?
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107
|
Post by ericn on Jul 11, 2015 15:17:30 GMT -6
If you align the close mics the overheads and room mics add much more dimension, if you align OH and room mics, you can then control the dimension and space, give it a whirl you will find it to be a tool that you can use either way!
|
|
