Jump to content

Recommended Posts

you sure the mics were set up totally right? the sound even before much mixing of a properly tracked, properly mic'd session can be pretty fucking good (if a little quiet).

 

Well, i'm talking about when I was 15 and we saved up to go to the best studio in stoke. he does a lot of work, has a great reputation, has done big bands etc (I don't like the way he mixes, but hey) and it sounded great in the control room on the day, but obviously 5 songs in one day always comes away sounding like a demo.

 

I'm not sure if you get what I mean by "shitty demo sound". It's hard to describe. It's just that feeling you get when you're listening to something, and (just from the sound of it) you know it's a demo, rather than a mix that's been laboured over.

 

To be fair I think some NIN has the shitty demo sound so maybe I should STFU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

shitty demo sound to me implies something sounding dull, muffled or boxy, erratic volume levels, overall poor volume level and poor edits... oh and too much REVERB LOL. all things which could very feasibly happen if you try and do 5 songs in one day i guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shitty demo sound to me implies something sounding dull, muffled or boxy, erratic volume levels, overall poor volume level and poor edits... oh and too much REVERB LOL. all things which could very feasibly happen if you try and do 5 songs in one day i guess.

 

When you're 15, you aren't necessarily great musicians, which is what makes the difference.

 

I'm not explaining this very well. Have you never heard an unsigned band demo on the radio that sounds good but still sounds like a demo? Like my band's demos (the no logo stuff) we put so much effort into getting them right, and I absolutely love the sounds, and I think the mix is great, but if you put one on after a "proper" album, they sound like demos. So not really to do with a "bad" mix or a bad performance, but I don't know what it is to do with. Is it just some sort of feeling I personally have?

 

The creep joint album, i've worked on to the point where to me it sounds like a real album as opposed to a demo, and that feels like a massive achievement. How did I do it? Was it just the sheer amount of time put in to the mix and master? Spooky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you mean. But it is hard to really pin point anything specific about what causes it. I guess it's little details right through the whole process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fuuuuuuuuuu

 

I went to Bucks New Uni on wednesday for my interview for audio and music production.

 

oh my fucking life their studio is amazing! Its one of the best equipped in the UK if not Europe :eek: Part of their newly opened £60 million facility!

 

6 different control rooms with a variety of equipment, and another 6 or so live rooms which have all been engineered by some of the best in the world at designing recording studios, and in the main mixing room, they have a fucking £55,000 control interface :stunned:

 

Then 100+ iMacs all dedicated to the A&M tech students, all running Protools LE/HD and all the main studio Macs running Pro tools 8 HD.

 

They had shit loads of outboard hardware too, Loads of focusrite and sennhiser gear. Its insane!

 

Really can't wait to go there now, I got in, so now I just need to sit through another few weeks of shit education and the summer :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fuuuuuuuuuu

 

I went to Bucks New Uni on wednesday for my interview for audio and music production.

 

oh my fucking life their studio is amazing! Its one of the best equipped in the UK if not Europe :eek: Part of their newly opened £60 million facility!

 

6 different control rooms with a variety of equipment, and another 6 or so live rooms which have all been engineered by some of the best in the world at designing recording studios, and in the main mixing room, they have a fucking £55,000 control interface :stunned:

 

Then 100+ iMacs all dedicated to the A&M tech students, all running Protools LE/HD and all the main studio Macs running Pro tools 8 HD.

 

They had shit loads of outboard hardware too, Loads of focusrite and sennhiser gear. Its insane!

 

Really can't wait to go there now, I got in, so now I just need to sit through another few weeks of shit education and the summer :p

 

oohhh congratulations! it sounds amazing! you must post pictures!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me 6 months or so and I will :p

 

Im really interested in the actual course too, there are optional modules in the second and third year, one of which is lighting for live events and stuff :awesome:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oohhh congratulations! it sounds amazing! you must post pictures!

 

What type of outboard?

 

UA/Teletronix?

 

Neve/API pres?

 

YUMYUM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely you should have quoted me? :LOL:

 

I didn't get a decent look at any of the gear because it was through the viewing windows and from a distance, I just so shit loads of blinking lights in racks and VU metres :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not explaining this very well. Have you never heard an unsigned band demo on the radio that sounds good but still sounds like a demo? Like my band's demos (the no logo stuff) we put so much effort into getting them right, and I absolutely love the sounds, and I think the mix is great, but if you put one on after a "proper" album, they sound like demos. So not really to do with a "bad" mix or a bad performance, but I don't know what it is to do with. Is it just some sort of feeling I personally have?

 

The creep joint album, i've worked on to the point where to me it sounds like a real album as opposed to a demo, and that feels like a massive achievement. How did I do it? Was it just the sheer amount of time put in to the mix and master? Spooky.

 

ah, mixing for radio ready play is quite a different game, harder to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just got my hands on a nice PC. It's of considerably better specification than my current recording rig. I have XP on it at the moment, but as it has a 64bit CPU i'm considering installing XP64 or Win7 (I have both).

 

Will I see any improvement in Cubase SX3? Or is there a new 64bit version of Cubase which I need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've just got my hands on a nice PC. It's of considerably better specification than my current recording rig. I have XP on it at the moment, but as it has a 64bit CPU i'm considering installing XP64 or Win7 (I have both).

 

Will I see any improvement in Cubase SX3? Or is there a new 64bit version of Cubase which I need?

 

You need a new version of Cubase for 64 bit, but there are lots of issues with 64 bit, need to check your plugins and things all work for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing is I have 4Gb of RAM in this and 32bit OSs only see 3Gb. Would SX3 benefit from seeing 4Gb?

 

I can run SX3 on XP64 though surely? You're just saying there'll be no advantage over XP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The other thing is I have 4Gb of RAM in this and 32bit OSs only see 3Gb. Would SX3 benefit from seeing 4Gb?

 

I can run SX3 on XP64 though surely? You're just saying there'll be no advantage over XP?

 

I would run 64bit 7. You will get the processor/ram advantage and you can run programs in 32bit compatibility mode.

In fact whilst you're at it, why not just get Cubase 5?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all my plug ins are 32 bit and I guess wouldn't fit into C5. Also, i'm not sure if my "distributor" has C5 in stock.

 

Another thing - why would I go with Win7 over XP64? This PC is purely for recording.

Edited by cheddatom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
all my plug ins are 32 bit and I guess wouldn't fit into C5. Also, i'm not sure if my "distributor" has C5 in stock.

 

Another thing - why would I go with Win7 over XP64? This PC is purely for recording.

 

I don't think you'd have a problem to be honest - one of my friends is running C5 on a 64bit OS and has no issues...

 

I may be wrong but I don't think XP64 ever got much further than beta and definitely isn't supported any more (along with normal XP) - point being Win7 is very stable, small on resources and things tend to work immediately without any messing about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently lots of VSTs won't transfer to 64 bit Cubase.

 

I run XP64 here at work, and it's really good. Just XP really. I do like Win 7, i'm just wondering what's going to be better for running Cubase. I literally run nothing else on this machine.

 

I'll check with my distributor to see if they have C5 in stock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just moved from a 32bit system to a 64bit and Reaper x64 didn't like a lot of my plugins, worked fine once I used the 32 bit Reaper though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...