| Software Music Machine Archive |
|
June 2003 Archive of Music Software Discussion & Help Page
Submitted by hq_admin_smm on Sun, 06/01/2003 - 04:00.
Music Software Discussion and Help
Archive: June 2003
Check out this site...
Popular Comments:
- rfl.exe HELP (1)
- Where can I download free cdg music? (13)
- Midi/Games port (1)
- Akai MPC 2000 operating system software (16)
- Akai MPC 2000 operating system software (16)
- looking for a way to isolate drum tracks (1)
- whats this song? (7)
- Mac OS X - Midi Panic Button (3)
- indie music hosting sites-best ones? (3)
Advertisement
CD surface question please
have a new CD with looks like maybe ten to fifteen small bubbles on
the label side of the CD, but the CD seems to play just fine
what am i looking at?...something from the cd creation phase?
the underside (non-label) is the side read by the laser, correct?
what causes these bubbles?
and this has no adverse affect on the actual playing of the cd, right?
Re: CD surface question please
The manufacture errors (bubbles) are inconsequential in this case. The
laser reads the unlabled side. This is the side that must be smooth and
shiny.
: have a new CD with looks like maybe ten to fifteen small bubbles on
: the label side of the CD, but the CD seems to play just fine
: what am i looking at?...something from the cd creation phase?
: the underside (non-label) is the side read by the laser, correct?
: what causes these bubbles?
: and this has no adverse affect on the actual playing of the cd, right?
Looking for TASCAM 234
Hello,
If someone on this board wants to sell a "in good condition" TASCAM 234, for
a reasonable price, please email me. Can't hurt to ask ;-) (I know they're
on eBay but it's too much stress to try to outbid others ;-) ).
Thanks,
Daniel
Re: Looking for TASCAM 234
: Hello,
: If someone on this board wants to sell a "in good condition" TASCAM 234, for
: a reasonable price, please email me. Can't hurt to ask ;-) (I know they're
: on eBay but it's too much stress to try to outbid others ;-) ).
: Thanks,
: Daniel
Daniel,
I have one that I haven't used in several years. I found your message as I was doing a search to try to determine it's value. I have all the origianl documentation, schematics, etc.
Craig
jcroberson@comcast.net
Re: Looking for TASCAM 234
Are you still looking for a Tascam 234?
Fairless Masterman
: Hello,
: If someone on this board wants to sell a "in good condition" TASCAM 234, for
: a reasonable price, please email me. Can't hurt to ask ;-) (I know they're
: on eBay but it's too much stress to try to outbid others ;-) ).
: Thanks,
: Daniel
Re: Looking for TASCAM 234
: Are you still looking for a Tascam 234?
i have one 300.00 firm!
email me !
Re: Looking for TASCAM 234
Daniel,
I have one if you're still looking. It's in excellent condition, was only used a few times back in the late 1980s during my brief delusion of being a songwriter/musician. It's been boxed-up in my cupboard ever since. If you are interested I'll power it up and check everything still works OK.
Alan
: Hello,
: If someone on this board wants to sell a "in good condition" TASCAM 234, for
: a reasonable price, please email me. Can't hurt to ask ;-) (I know they're
: on eBay but it's too much stress to try to outbid others ;-) ).
: Thanks,
: Daniel
Transparency ?
Hello All,
In a couple of readings, writers refer to when signals above the audio
range make it into the mix, there's a desired effect of
"transparency"....
I can accept that my equipment may not be able to capture or reproduce
"transparency" but what does "transparency" sound like? Aside from
dogs barking, will peoples spines start to tingling?
Simply curious, just in case I happen upon it...
TIA,
Andy
Re: Transparency ?
: Hello All,
: In a couple of readings, writers refer to when signals above the audio
: range make it into the mix, there's a desired effect of
: "transparency"....
: I can accept that my equipment may not be able to capture or reproduce
: "transparency" but what does "transparency" sound like? Aside from
: dogs barking, will peoples spines start to tingling?
Something is sonically transparent if its input sounds like its output.
Extrapolated to a mix, hmm, what does that mean?
I guess it means that the mix is very faithful to the sound of the
individual tracks.
Re: Transparency ?
: Hello All,
: In a couple of readings, writers refer to when signals above the audio
: range make it into the mix, there's a desired effect of
: "transparency"....
Transparent means that the signal perceived is not affected. The opposite
of it is "colored". If you record a guitar, and the recorded sound sounds
just like that guitar, the record chain was transparent. If the recorded
sound sounds more bassy, then one of the recording devices (the mic, the
pre, the ADC) added a bassy "color" to the sound.
Transparent is also used in the meaning of "not dull", something like
"crisp sounding, but not harsh". I've seen somebody on RAP write something
like on the difference of an Oktava mic ($300) and a Schoeps mic ($2000)
that with the Schoeps "the veil was removed, the sound was much more
transparent"
When you compress a signal with a compressor, and the result is not
colored, and there are no obvious compression artefacts (meaning the sound
still sounds quite natural, the smoothing out of volume is achieved but
not really noticed when listening), the the compressor is a transparent
compressor.
Erwin Timmerman
Re: Transparency ?
: : In a couple of readings, writers refer to when signals above the audio
: : range make it into the mix, there's a desired effect of
: : "transparency"....
: Transparent means that the signal perceived is not affected. The opposite
: of it is "colored". If you record a guitar, and the recorded sound sounds
: just like that guitar, the record chain was transparent. If the recorded
: sound sounds more bassy, then one of the recording devices (the mic, the
: pre, the ADC) added a bassy "color" to the sound.
: Transparent is also used in the meaning of "not dull", something like
: "crisp sounding, but not harsh". I've seen somebody on RAP write something
: like on the difference of an Oktava mic ($300) and a Schoeps mic ($2000)
: that with the Schoeps "the veil was removed, the sound was much more
: transparent"
: When you compress a signal with a compressor, and the result is not
: colored, and there are no obvious compression artefacts (meaning the sound
: still sounds quite natural, the smoothing out of volume is achieved but
: not really noticed when listening), the the compressor is a transparent
: compressor.
That would be my definition too. That what you're hearing is like what is
being recorded.
What's transparent is the recording process - the mic / mic pre / A/D
converter / etc. and are like clean windows onto the musical performance.
You could also color it, and that isn't necessarily bad either. Sometimes
you want a Red recording, or at least a Red bass recording to compliment
the Blue vocal recording.
Regards,
Mark
--
http://www.marktaw.com/
http://www.prosoundreview.com/
User reviews of pro audio gear
Re: Transparency ?
: : : In a couple of readings, writers refer to when signals above the audio
: : : range make it into the mix, there's a desired effect of
: : : "transparency"....
: : Transparent means that the signal perceived is not affected. The opposite
: : of it is "colored". If you record a guitar, and the recorded sound sounds
: : just like that guitar, the record chain was transparent. If the recorded
: : sound sounds more bassy, then one of the recording devices (the mic, the
: : pre, the ADC) added a bassy "color" to the sound.
: : Transparent is also used in the meaning of "not dull", something like
: : "crisp sounding, but not harsh". I've seen somebody on RAP write something
: : like on the difference of an Oktava mic ($300) and a Schoeps mic ($2000)
: : that with the Schoeps "the veil was removed, the sound was much more
: : transparent"
: : When you compress a signal with a compressor, and the result is not
: : colored, and there are no obvious compression artefacts (meaning the sound
: : still sounds quite natural, the smoothing out of volume is achieved but
: : not really noticed when listening), the the compressor is a transparent
: : compressor.
: That would be my definition too. That what you're hearing is like what is
: being recorded.
: What's transparent is the recording process - the mic / mic pre / A/D
: converter / etc. and are like clean windows onto the musical performance.
Thanks for the comments folks...
From earlier understandings, I would've picked the term
"high-fidelity" but it seems like I don't see that term as much these
days... :-)
: You could also color it, and that isn't necessarily bad either. Sometimes
: you want a Red recording, or at least a Red bass recording to compliment
: the Blue vocal recording.
Hah!
The lead vocalists of a group I've been recording grew up in Europe
and sang in those huge cathedrals... She's always wanting as much
reverb as the equipment can muster cleanly and more.
I think I'll name all of her presets "stone"... :-)
Andy
: Regards,
: Mark
Re: Transparency ?
: Hello All,
: In a couple of readings, writers refer to when signals above the audio
: range make it into the mix, there's a desired effect of
: "transparency"....
: I can accept that my equipment may not be able to capture or reproduce
: "transparency" but what does "transparency" sound like? Aside from
: dogs barking, will peoples spines start to tingling?
: Simply curious, just in case I happen upon it...
: TIA,
: Andy
My reading of "transparency" is when everything in the mix can be heard
properly and occupy their own space i.e don't clash with other instruments
frequency wise etc. I suppose it's like a piece of glass. Can you see
evrything clearly ?
--
Big Craigie
Remove yourclothes to e-mail me
Re: Transparency ?
: : Hello All,
: : In a couple of readings, writers refer to when signals above the audio
: : range make it into the mix, there's a desired effect of
: : "transparency"....
: : I can accept that my equipment may not be able to capture or reproduce
: : "transparency" but what does "transparency" sound like? Aside from
: : dogs barking, will peoples spines start to tingling?
: : Simply curious, just in case I happen upon it...
: : TIA,
: : Andy
: My reading of "transparency" is when everything in the mix can be heard
: properly and occupy their own space i.e don't clash with other instruments
: frequency wise etc. I suppose it's like a piece of glass. Can you see
: evrything clearly ?
: --
: Big Craigie
Makes sense...
Until now, I've had transparency mixed up with fidelity -- Been
primarily recording live sessions, everybody in one room, lots of
commotion and collisions. My ears are shot...
A large dose of transparency would be very nice... <vbg>
Andy
Re: Transparency ?
: : : Hello All,
: : : In a couple of readings, writers refer to when signals above the audio
: : : range make it into the mix, there's a desired effect of
: : : "transparency"....
: : : I can accept that my equipment may not be able to capture or reproduce
: : : "transparency" but what does "transparency" sound like? Aside from
: : : dogs barking, will peoples spines start to tingling?
: : : Simply curious, just in case I happen upon it...
: : : TIA,
: : : Andy
: : My reading of "transparency" is when everything in the mix can be heard
: : properly and occupy their own space i.e don't clash with other instruments
: : frequency wise etc. I suppose it's like a piece of glass. Can you see
: : evrything clearly ?
: : --
: : Big Craigie
:
: Makes sense...
: Until now, I've had transparency mixed up with fidelity -- Been
: primarily recording live sessions, everybody in one room, lots of
: commotion and collisions. My ears are shot...
: A large dose of transparency would be very nice... <vbg>
: Andy
Andy
It's only my impression of transparency...my impressions are shocking full
stop, you want to see my John Wayne impression.
I've worked with live bands before as well and the word transparent is never
in the vocabulary to them. If they could get every instrument up to "11"
they would. Saying that, my very early 4 track work wasn't that good
either. I don't mean the music but the mixing. I was a reverb novice and as
a result everything had loads of thick reverb. However as I learned, things
got better. Now that I work almost exclusively on computer the digital
clarity as well as better access to quality reverb, compressors etc allows
me to get better and hopefully transparent mixes. I've also learned to rest
my ears and nor rush things.
Others no doubt will have their own idea about transparency.
Best wishes
--
Big Craigie
Remove yourclothes to e-mail me
Low-budget amp/cabinet simulation?
So I had to add some guitar tracks at home to an old mix - that had been
been recorded mainly with a cassette four-track (in a basement) and then
transferred to computer. I did not want to diststurb the neighbours by
using an amp and mic. So here is how I did it:
Guitar -> BOSS OD stomb box -> compressor/limiter -> mixer -> computer
during the mixing I added the FX inserts:
MDA combo -> Wunderverb room reverb (trying to simulate close-miking) ->EQ
I sent some of this signal to the main reverb, too.
The results where not too bad, especially when compairing it to the audio
quality of the rest of the material. And it was fun setting up the thing.
But that MDA amp/speaker simulator plugin is rather old and I was able to
dial in only a few usable sounds. Keeping things in the low or zero budget
range, are there any other freeware or shareware plugins that get
the job done?
Thanx, M.J.
Re: Low-budget amp/cabinet simulation?
Hi
:are there any other freeware or shareware plugins that get
:the job done?
Its not freeware but sure has great features IMO.
http://www.amplitube.com/
HTH
Count
Re: Low-budget amp/cabinet simulation?
If you can use VST some people think this is one of best regardless of the
fact that's it's free: http://www.simulanalog.org/guitarsuite.htm
If you have the ability to do convolution (as with Cool Edit, Sonic
Foundry's Acoustic Mirror or the freeware VST SIR
http://home.t-online.de/home/520073787260-0001/index_plug.html) here's some
great impulses:
http://www.geocities.com/beamsonic/welcome.htm
: So I had to add some guitar tracks at home to an old mix - that had been
: been recorded mainly with a cassette four-track (in a basement) and then
: transferred to computer. I did not want to diststurb the neighbours by
: using an amp and mic. So here is how I did it:
: Guitar -> BOSS OD stomb box -> compressor/limiter -> mixer -> computer
: during the mixing I added the FX inserts:
: MDA combo -> Wunderverb room reverb (trying to simulate close-miking) ->EQ
: I sent some of this signal to the main reverb, too.
: The results where not too bad, especially when compairing it to the audio
: quality of the rest of the material. And it was fun setting up the thing.
: But that MDA amp/speaker simulator plugin is rather old and I was able to
: dial in only a few usable sounds. Keeping things in the low or zero budget
: range, are there any other freeware or shareware plugins that get
: the job done?
: Thanx, M.J.
Re: Low-budget amp/cabinet simulation?
Thanx. I have downloaded the guitarsuite. A fast trial revealed
some sounds that were usable and som that in my opinion were less so.
But I only tested it on an an already slightly distorted signal... It
seems promising enough, I'll be using it in the future, when I'm making
some new recordings.
I've only stumbled upon convolution.I't never dawned to me that it could
be used to something like speaker simulation, but why not.
M.J.
: If you can use VST some people think this is one of best regardless of the
: fact that's it's free: http://www.simulanalog.org/guitarsuite.htm
: If you have the ability to do convolution (as with Cool Edit, Sonic
: Foundry's Acoustic Mirror or the freeware VST SIR
: http://home.t-online.de/home/520073787260-0001/index_plug.html) here's some
: great impulses:
: http://www.geocities.com/beamsonic/welcome.htm
: : So I had to add some guitar tracks at home to an old mix - that had been
: : been recorded mainly with a cassette four-track (in a basement) and then
: : transferred to computer. I did not want to diststurb the neighbours by
: : using an amp and mic. So here is how I did it:
: : Guitar -> BOSS OD stomb box -> compressor/limiter -> mixer -> computer
: : during the mixing I added the FX inserts:
: : MDA combo -> Wunderverb room reverb (trying to simulate close-miking) ->EQ
: : I sent some of this signal to the main reverb, too.
: : The results where not too bad, especially when compairing it to the audio
: : quality of the rest of the material. And it was fun setting up the thing.
: : But that MDA amp/speaker simulator plugin is rather old and I was able to
: : dial in only a few usable sounds. Keeping things in the low or zero budget
: : range, are there any other freeware or shareware plugins that get
: : the job done?
: : Thanx, M.J.
Cubasis v n-Tracks
Hi,
Which of these two PC Recording applications is considered to be the best
please, in terms of ease of use and available features?
Thanks, Lee.
Re: Cubasis v n-Tracks
: Hi,
: Which of these two PC Recording applications is considered to be the best
: please, in terms of ease of use and available features?
: Thanks, Lee.
I think that depends on which features you need.
--
Les Cargill
Re: Cubasis v n-Tracks
: : Hi,
: : Which of these two PC Recording applications is considered to be the best
: : please, in terms of ease of use and available features?
: : Thanks, Lee.
:
: I think that depends on which features you need.
... maybe you could briefly tell us what the main differences are? Not
only the obvious features, but also some 'subtle' differences which
you only find when you use them.
I was thinking about this question too: CUBASIS (the small Cubase) vs.
N-Track.
I am using Cubasis3.72 and it's quite o.k. for me. However, there are
some limitations which are quite heavy: Only one insert effect per
channel.
I often use a compressor - so if I want to apply second insert effect,
I run into trouble.
That's why I was thinking of changing to N-Track which is a FULL
version without any restrictions - however the overall 'quality' may
not be as good as the 'small' Steinberg product.
For example the audio engine. Is this as good as Steinberg's?
Somewhere it was mentioned that N-Track is not stable - is this true?
(I have never had problems with Cubasis).
Thanks in advance for any help!
Markus
Re: Cubasis v n-Tracks
"Stilgar, do we have wormsign?"
"Usul, we have wormsign the likes of which even octopus has never seen!"
: For example the audio engine. Is this as good as Steinberg's?
: Somewhere it was mentioned that N-Track is not stable - is this true?
: (I have never had problems with Cubasis).
I've never used Cubase, but I used n-Track Studio for three years until
I got Cool Edit Pro, and the problems with n-Track I've noticed are as
follows:
1) Not the most intuitive of interfaces [I mean, it's easy enough, but
it could be better].
2) n-Track Studio had a tendency to crash quite a bit [this was version
2.something by the time I gave up on it last year].
3) Latency. Make that Latency Latency LATENCY. With n-Track, recording
would start to skip if I had more than about five wave files in the
song. I figured this was due to my aging PC not being able to handle the
jandal [P3 500MHz, 128MB RAM, pretty-much full 20GB HD], but when I
installed Cool Edit Pro, I could have double that and not have to worry
about latency issues arising during recording.
Those things in mind, otherwise n-Track Studio is a very solid piece of
software. If you can get a stable set-up [my PC wasn't exactly in
brilliant shape], it should be fine. Having become used to Cool Edit
Pro's wave editing functions, however, I think I'd have a hard time
going back.
--
Jonathan McArthur
Songs: http://www.mp3.com/jonathanmcarthur/
"Wow Jonathan McArthur doesn't like something, there's a fucking shock.
It's people like this that ruin the community kids." - Greg Kavchak
Re: Cubasis v n-Tracks
: "Stilgar, do we have wormsign?"
: "Usul, we have wormsign the likes of which even octopus has never seen!"
: : For example the audio engine. Is this as good as Steinberg's?
: : Somewhere it was mentioned that N-Track is not stable - is this true?
: : (I have never had problems with Cubasis).
: I've never used Cubase, but I used n-Track Studio for three years until
: I got Cool Edit Pro, and the problems with n-Track I've noticed are as
: follows:
: 1) Not the most intuitive of interfaces [I mean, it's easy enough, but
: it could be better].
I suppose that's gonna vary from person to person, but I find all
other DAW user interfaces extremely obtuse. YMMV. Some are downright
goofy. Any DAW with a "create object" button is broken.
: 2) n-Track Studio had a tendency to crash quite a bit [this was version
: 2.something by the time I gave up on it last year].
Maybe it's N-track, maybe it's not. Wish them guys would
start selling qualified, stripped-down PCs with known good
drivers, or at least write a diagnostic to report what
driver levels, that sort of thing.
Once I got all the system intergation issues out of the way, it's
quite stable. It's hard for me to blame the software when changing
a driver clears things up.
In all seriousness, I'm considering writinhg a "what's wrong
with my DAW" diagnostics package. Any interest out there?
People willing to contribute data?
: 3) Latency. Make that Latency Latency LATENCY. With n-Track, recording
: would start to skip if I had more than about five wave files in the
: song. I figured this was due to my aging PC not being able to handle the
: jandal [P3 500MHz, 128MB RAM, pretty-much full 20GB HD], but when I
: installed Cool Edit Pro, I could have double that and not have to worry
: about latency issues arising during recording.
<nods> It's a bit of a pig. I do get umpety ( 20? ) tracks outta an
AMD 600 w/512MB, on multiple 80 GB harddrives.
And I'm sorry, but latency is a non-starter issue. Run the DAW output
back thru a monitor mixer, the one yer tracking with. If you
want F/X in realtime whilst tracking, buy a Nanoverb.
: Those things in mind, otherwise n-Track Studio is a very solid piece of
: software. If you can get a stable set-up [my PC wasn't exactly in
: brilliant shape], it should be fine. Having become used to Cool Edit
: Pro's wave editing functions, however, I think I'd have a hard time
: going back.
Hey, I've heard reports of CoolEdit Pro being crashey, and CEP doesn't
do MIDI. Corrections to any lies most gratefully accepted.
In all seriousness, there's no reason somebody can't use either to
get going.
: --
: Jonathan McArthur
: Songs: http://www.mp3.com/jonathanmcarthur/
: "Wow Jonathan McArthur doesn't like something, there's a fucking shock.
: It's people like this that ruin the community kids." - Greg Kavchak
--
Les Cargill
Re: Cubasis v n-Tracks
I have been running ntrack for about 3 years now (every since v2.3) and I
have had no problems what so ever.
I would highly recommend it.
-gp
: : : Hi,
: : : Which of these two PC Recording applications is considered to be the best
: : : please, in terms of ease of use and available features?
: : : Thanks, Lee.
: :
: : I think that depends on which features you need.
: ... maybe you could briefly tell us what the main differences are? Not
: only the obvious features, but also some 'subtle' differences which
: you only find when you use them.
: I was thinking about this question too: CUBASIS (the small Cubase) vs.
: N-Track.
: I am using Cubasis3.72 and it's quite o.k. for me. However, there are
: some limitations which are quite heavy: Only one insert effect per
: channel.
: I often use a compressor - so if I want to apply second insert effect,
: I run into trouble.
: That's why I was thinking of changing to N-Track which is a FULL
: version without any restrictions - however the overall 'quality' may
: not be as good as the 'small' Steinberg product.
: For example the audio engine. Is this as good as Steinberg's?
: Somewhere it was mentioned that N-Track is not stable - is this true?
: (I have never had problems with Cubasis).
: Thanks in advance for any help!
: Markus
Re: Cubasis v n-Tracks
I'll add in that there's no other software out there where if you discover a
bug, the developer will put up a fix often as early as the same day. Go to
the discussion forum on their web page and see how happy everyone is.
Funk
"Shut up you monkey. Curse be upon your mustache, you traitor"
: I have been running ntrack for about 3 years now (every since v2.3) and I
: have had no problems what so ever.
: I would highly recommend it.
: -gp
: : : : Hi,
: : : : Which of these two PC Recording applications is considered to be the best
: : : : please, in terms of ease of use and available features?
: : : : Thanks, Lee.
: : :
: : : I think that depends on which features you need.
: : ... maybe you could briefly tell us what the main differences are? Not
: : only the obvious features, but also some 'subtle' differences which
: : you only find when you use them.
: : I was thinking about this question too: CUBASIS (the small Cubase) vs.
: : N-Track.
: : I am using Cubasis3.72 and it's quite o.k. for me. However, there are
: : some limitations which are quite heavy: Only one insert effect per
: : channel.
: : I often use a compressor - so if I want to apply second insert effect,
: : I run into trouble.
: : That's why I was thinking of changing to N-Track which is a FULL
: : version without any restrictions - however the overall 'quality' may
: : not be as good as the 'small' Steinberg product.
: : For example the audio engine. Is this as good as Steinberg's?
: : Somewhere it was mentioned that N-Track is not stable - is this true?
: : (I have never had problems with Cubasis).
: : Thanks in advance for any help!
: : Markus
Re: Cubasis v n-Tracks
: : : Hi,
: : : Which of these two PC Recording applications is considered to be the best
: : : please, in terms of ease of use and available features?
: : : Thanks, Lee.
: :
: : I think that depends on which features you need.
: ... maybe you could briefly tell us what the main differences are? Not
: only the obvious features, but also some 'subtle' differences which
: you only find when you use them.
: I was thinking about this question too: CUBASIS (the small Cubase) vs.
: N-Track.
: I am using Cubasis3.72 and it's quite o.k. for me. However, there are
: some limitations which are quite heavy: Only one insert effect per
: channel.
: I often use a compressor - so if I want to apply second insert effect,
: I run into trouble.
: That's why I was thinking of changing to N-Track which is a FULL
: version without any restrictions - however the overall 'quality' may
: not be as good as the 'small' Steinberg product.
Quality with N-track is somewhat sketchy - but it is hard to say
exactly where defects lie, since there is no real instrumentation
in Windows.
I have a set of drivers, a soundcard, an N-track version and
a machine all lined up to where it's pretty stable. Knud once
pointed out that a
plugin I was using was crashy. Stopped using that and it
got better.
The real problem is that Windows does not have a clear mechanism for
identifying which software component fails ( unices have log
files ) so the whole process is hard.
: For example the audio engine. Is this as good as Steinberg's?
Seems to work pretty well. It's 32 bit, offers dither. I've never
bought that any dig. audio system should "sound" different unless
the math in it is very badly done.
: Somewhere it was mentioned that N-Track is not stable - is this true?
Again, it is hard to say. When I've used N-track with the soundblaster
card, I never had any problems. There is a forum @ fasoft.com, but it's
not very high in signal.
I use it to:
- Up/download data to/from a Fostex VF-16 in sync.
- As a VST/ActiveX plugin platform.
- As a MIDI sequencer/recorder.
so the features all seem to work pretty well.
: (I have never had problems with Cubasis).
: Thanks in advance for any help!
: Markus
--
Les Cargill
Re: Cubasis v n-Tracks
I think Cool Edit Pro is better than both of them. I have used n-track, and
thought it was easy to use - that is, I didn't have to go to the help file
all the time. I tried Cubase many versions ago and it gave me headaches.
Jon
: Hi,
: Which of these two PC Recording applications is considered to be the best
: please, in terms of ease of use and available features?
: Thanks, Lee.
Tom
Hi
I am trying to repair my mp3, Fishin Blues, on my website(the voice is
left and guitar right, so I am changing it by normalizing the voice and
making it mono to correct the problem!)
http://www.members.shaw.ca/el_slide_kabong/
When I recorded it a year ago, it was .aif and I changed it to .mp3. I
seem to have lost the freeware program I had to do the conversion and I
forgot how to do it!!!
What program do you use on a Macintosh to convert from .aif to .mp3??
Hopefully Freeware!
Is there any tricks I should know about in doing this conversion?
TIA
Tom
Re: Tom
: Hi
: What program do you use on a Macintosh to convert from .aif to .mp3??
: Hopefully Freeware!
iTunes
: Is there any tricks I should know about in doing this conversion?
Er. Set the compression parameters? :-D
--
||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch>
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | *An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
/_/ /_/ | way of your success. (Todd H.)
Re: Mac users-what pgm to convert aif to mp3?
Biggo
what version are you using?
I am running os 9.2.2 so anything past itunes 2.2.2 is no good for me!
and it dosn't appear to be able to do it in 2.2.2
Thanks though!
Tom
--------------------
: : Hi
: : What program do you use on a Macintosh to convert from .aif to .mp3??
: : Hopefully Freeware!
:
: iTunes
:
: : Is there any tricks I should know about in doing this conversion?
:
: Er. Set the compression parameters? :-D
:
: --
: ||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch>
: |'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
: |._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | *An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
: /_/ /_/ | way of your success. (Todd H.)
Mac users-what pgm to convert aif to mp3?
I am trying to figure out how to convert and aif file extracted from Roxio into an MP3 to be uploaded for a website? Any suggestion on cheap/free software to do this?
Re: Mac users-what pgm to convert aif to mp3?
Ok this is getting silly!
I have Itunes. I selected "convert to mp3" in the preferences. The song
I'm trying to fix was an mp3(it's on my site) I opened and tweeked it in
Peak and saved as an aiff(there seems to be no option for mp3 in peak).
When I open it in itunes it plays fine. when I try to save it (convert to
mp3)it says "none of the files selected could be converted". I don't get
it! Is peak doing something to the file? Do I need to reload itunes?
I also tried saving as a quicktime movie and convert and get the same
results!
Anybody got any Ideas
Thanks
Tom
http://www.members.shaw.ca/el_slide_kabong/
-----------------------------------------
: Biggo
: what version are you using?
: I am running os 9.2.2 so anything past itunes 2.2.2 is no good for me!
: and it dosn't appear to be able to do it in 2.2.2
: Thanks though!
: Tom
: --------------------
: : : Hi
: : : What program do you use on a Macintosh to convert from .aif to .mp3??
: : : Hopefully Freeware!
: :
: : iTunes
: :
: : : Is there any tricks I should know about in doing this conversion?
: :
: : Er. Set the compression parameters? :-D
: :
: : --
: : ||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch>
: : |'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
: : |._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | *An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
: : /_/ /_/ | way of your success. (Todd H.)
Re: Mac users-what pgm to convert aif to mp3?
:: iTunes
:
: what version are you using?
2.0.4 on MacOS 9.2.1
Menu "Advanced" -> "Convert to mp3"
The compression params are under Edit -> Preferences -> Importing.
--
||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch>
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | *An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
/_/ /_/ | way of your success. (Todd H.)
Re: ip shareing
Share With The School 1
What software to convert scanned sheetmusic into MIDI?
Hello,
What software can I use to convert scanned sheetmusic to MIDI? I have a
couple of scores that I would like to print out transposed, and the best
thing to do seems to be to scan them in (entering it all manually takes
too long time), transpose them and print it. I know Sibelius' PhotoCopy
can do this, but what other softwares can I use?
Thanks in advance.
Re: What software to convert scanned sheetmusic into MIDI?
: Hello,
: What software can I use to convert scanned sheetmusic to MIDI?
SharpEye 2 (http://www.visiv.co.uk) does a reasonable job of converting
scanned scores. I just used it to convert 15 six-part scores from Noteworthy
Composer to Finale. Sharpeye can export to MusicXML which Finale can import.
The error rate is reasonable and the kinds of errors are consistent. You do
need to do a visual audit of the converted scores, but unlike the
experiences others have reported, I found this exercise to have saved a
substantial amount of time over manually reentering the notation. I think I
would have made more errors than SharpEye did. SharpEye also exports to NIFF
and MIDI and has a built-in notation editor.
Re: What software to convert scanned sheetmusic into MIDI?
: Hello,
: What software can I use to convert scanned sheetmusic to MIDI? I have a
: couple of scores that I would like to print out transposed, and the best
: thing to do seems to be to scan them in (entering it all manually takes
: too long time), transpose them and print it. I know Sibelius' PhotoCopy
: can do this, but what other softwares can I use?
I think you'll find re-entering is quicker than scanning plus the
correcting you'll need to do afterwards.
OCR for text has matured. OCR for music hasn't yet.
CubaseFAQ page www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
Re: What software to convert scanned sheetmusic into MIDI?
I use Smartscore available here.
http://www.computersandmusic.com/
Re: What software to convert scanned sheetmusic into MIDI?
: Hello,
: What software can I use to convert scanned sheetmusic to MIDI? I have a
: couple of scores that I would like to print out transposed, and the best
: thing to do seems to be to scan them in (entering it all manually takes
: too long time), transpose them and print it. I know Sibelius' PhotoCopy
: can do this, but what other softwares can I use?
In fact, most engravers consider it to be exactly the other way round.
Scanning takes more time than entering manually. This is due to error
correction: scanning will produce many small-but-evil errors which to
discover and to correct takes _more_ time than entering the piece
from scratch.
You might have a look at http://www.music-of-note.ch/, click "Publikationen"
and "Warum ich keine Noten scanne...." by Leonard Cecil.
Quote: "It’s not really the scanning that takes time, it's the checking and
editing of computer generated mistakes that takes the time. People who buy
these programs because they believe the promises made by the software
companies will be generally disappointed."
Harald
Calling All Geniuses! Calling All Geniuses! Man having midi pr
Hello everybody,
I am a newbie to all this, and just built a system for
recording/mixing music. Knowing it was going to be quite a learning
experience, I accepted the challenge of setting up and getting
everything working properly. Unfortunately, I've come to a "dead
end". I cannot hear any midi sounds --no playback of any music or
through the use of a controller keyboard.
Believe me, I think I have tried almost everything in my power to fix
it, from updating drivers (OS and music software),checking IRQ sharing
issues,cable hookups, reinstalling programs/drivers, changing audio
drivers, volume, etc. Of course, there are probably other steps I can
take, just not sure which ones.
Through Magix Studio 7, I get audio playback just fine, but no midi.
In addition, since installing everything, Windows Media Player and
WinAmp frequently playback wavs and video at high speed, like a
Chipmunks song. That may or may not be related to the midi issue.
What I am working with:
1. ABIT SA7 Mobo
2. Piv 1.7 Celeron
3. Win2k service pack 3
4. Terratec DMX 6fire 24/96 soundcard
5. 512 megs DDR ram
6. Magix Studio 7 and Emagic Logic Audio Platinum
I keep feeling that this problem is easier to fix than I think, but I
can't seem to find the solution, even if it is right under my nose.
I would be extremely grateful if anybody could point my nose in the
right direction:)
Michael
Softsynth for Windows XP?
I've got a laptop that I'm trying to move my MIDI composing software over
to, but alas it has no synth! I've found plenty of MIDI rendering engines
out there, but what I'd really like is a MIDI output that does a software
synth and sends the resulting sound out the wave output port.
I seem to have the "Microsoft GS Wavetable SW Synth" available, but my
sequencer doesn't list it as an option. Are there any alternatives out
there?
Re: Softsynth for Windows XP?
D'oh! Two seconds after posting this, I figured out how to get it to show
up. The sequencer supported both the MME and WDM APIS and apparently I had
to force it to use MME to get the MS synth to show up.
: I've got a laptop that I'm trying to move my MIDI composing software over
: to, but alas it has no synth! I've found plenty of MIDI rendering engines
: out there, but what I'd really like is a MIDI output that does a software
: synth and sends the resulting sound out the wave output port.
: I seem to have the "Microsoft GS Wavetable SW Synth" available, but my
: sequencer doesn't list it as an option. Are there any alternatives out
: there?
Re: Softsynth for Windows XP?
But the synth is no good for recording, it has a delay that is unacceptable.
To get no audible recording delay you need a laptop running Windows XP. a
DXi softsynth like the Roland VSC-MP1 and heavy CPU power, DDR memory and a
7200rpm hard drive.
JB
: D'oh! Two seconds after posting this, I figured out how to get it to show
: up. The sequencer supported both the MME and WDM APIS and apparently I had
: to force it to use MME to get the MS synth to show up.
: : I've got a laptop that I'm trying to move my MIDI composing software over
: : to, but alas it has no synth! I've found plenty of MIDI rendering engines
: : out there, but what I'd really like is a MIDI output that does a software
: : synth and sends the resulting sound out the wave output port.
: : I seem to have the "Microsoft GS Wavetable SW Synth" available, but my
: : sequencer doesn't list it as an option. Are there any alternatives out
: : there?
MIDI keyboard on Linux
Hello,
I am using a Mandrake Linux 9.1 system. My computer doesn't have a
MIDI-capable sound card, but I have been able to set up Muse (a midi
sequencer) and NoteEdit (composing software) to successfully use a
softsynth (Timidity) to play MIDI over the ALSA sound system. I was
wondering whether there are MIDI keyboards out there that can be used
to record MIDI on Linux without the need for a MIDI input port on the
sound card (for instance, via USB). I would really appreciate any
help. Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Darien Treize
Re: MIDI keyboard on Linux
: I was wondering whether there are MIDI keyboards out there that can be
: used to record MIDI on Linux without the need for a MIDI input port on
: the sound card (for instance, via USB).
All USB MIDI keyboards from Roland/Edirol http://www.edirol.com/,
Evolution http://www.evolution.co.uk/, M-Audio/Midiman, and Yamaha are
supported by ALSA.
Edirol/Evolution/Yamaha devices work directly with ALSA;
for Midiman devices, you'll need a separate firmware loader from
http://www.informatik.uni-halle.de/~ladischc/midisport_linux_firmware.html.
HTH
Clemens
Re: MIDI keyboard on Linux
: : I was wondering whether there are MIDI keyboards out there that can be
: : used to record MIDI on Linux without the need for a MIDI input port on
: : the sound card (for instance, via USB).
: All USB MIDI keyboards from Roland/Edirol http://www.edirol.com/,
: Evolution http://www.evolution.co.uk/, M-Audio/Midiman, and Yamaha are
: supported by ALSA.
: Edirol/Evolution/Yamaha devices work directly with ALSA;
: for Midiman devices, you'll need a separate firmware loader from
: http://www.informatik.uni-halle.de/~ladischc/midisport_linux_firmware.html.
:
: HTH
: Clemens
Thank you very much. I'll check them out.
Darien
Re: MIDI keyboard on Linux
: Hello,
: I am using a Mandrake Linux 9.1 system. My computer doesn't have a
: MIDI-capable sound card, but I have been able to set up Muse (a midi
: sequencer) and NoteEdit (composing software) to successfully use a
: softsynth (Timidity) to play MIDI over the ALSA sound system. I was
: wondering whether there are MIDI keyboards out there that can be used
: to record MIDI on Linux without the need for a MIDI input port on the
: sound card (for instance, via USB). I would really appreciate any
: help. Thank you very much.
: Sincerely,
: Darien Treize
Here are two from Midiman:
A 49 key version;
http://www.midiman.com/products/m-audio/radium49.php
and a 61 key version;
http://www.midiman.com/products/m-audio/radium.php
Both will connect via USB.
Re: MIDI keyboard on Linux
Roland
--
M.O.T.E. - Music On The Edge
Good MIDI-Sequencer for Atari ST ?
Hi all ,
I bought 2 weeks ago a Atari 1040ST with a Unitor.
Now, i'm looking a good music program to make work this little thing.
I tried Cubase lite but too light. Not enough editing menu.
I also tried Notator but too complexe when you don't be the Conceptor
of Notator.
Does any know a easy to use and advanced stuff for creating Music?
Any proposition welcome:)
Thanks for your answers.
PS: I'm ready to invest.