First. Recording. Ever. Check it out!

  • Thread starter Thread starter maestoso43
  • Start date Start date
M

maestoso43

New member
Hi Friends,

Attached is a short (~10 seconds) MP3. It is just a little blurb. I will be doing some serious recording though.

I'm using a Yamaha P-85 Digital Piano, a Yamaha Audiogram 3 interface, and Cubase AI 5.

I would appreciate any criticism and any pointers you might have. I figure it would be great to know if I'm doing anything stoopid before I spend hours recording all my stuff.

THANKS!!!

View attachment Sample1 Track 2 (MP3).mp3
 
Twelve posts and you're wondering if the exquisite stuff you posted is okay? Yeah, right...

It's okay. Keep going. Post a whole piece when you get one done. It sounds really nice.
 
dobro said:
Twelve posts and you're wondering if the exquisite stuff you posted is okay? Yeah, right...

It's okay. Keep going. Post a whole piece when you get one done. It sounds really nice.
Click to expand...

Garsh, thanks. I will definitely record a whole piece today and post that for your review. (I just didn't want post a full piece without knowing that my recording quality was at least decent, you know.)

You like Chopin?

The first 7 or so seconds is from his "Minute Waltz." The last few seconds consists of some random chords just to test the sound levels.

Thanks, I'll get back to you.
 
Nice playing - musicianship is good (all 7 seconds of it) :) . Levels on the chords were good - moderate jumps in volume. Could be controlled with a compressor if desired later. Piano sounds OK. Not as nice to my ear as a "real" one would. But decent nevertheless.
 
TripleM said:
Nice playing - musicianship is good (all 7 seconds of it) :) . Levels on the chords were good - moderate jumps in volume. Could be controlled with a compressor if desired later. Piano sounds OK. Not as nice to my ear as a "real" one would. But decent nevertheless.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback! Yes, it is just a digital after all.

As far as the chords--I was intentionally trying to display different volume levels. Did it seem like they were meant to be consistent, but were not recorded consistently?

Forgive my newbie-ness: what is a compressor? Do you have one that you'd recommend?
 
I was just trying to say that the dynamic range was good. Enough to be noticable but not too drastic.

As for an explanation of a compressor, Googling it will get you a better explanation than me. It has to do with narrowing the dynamic range of a track.
 
TripleM said:
I was just trying to say that the dynamic range was good. Enough to be noticable but not too drastic.

As for an explanation of a compressor, Googling it will get you a better explanation than me. It has to do with narrowing the dynamic range of a track.
Click to expand...

Thanks so much for your feedback.

As I said, I'll be posting a longer clip soon! I appreciate your help.
 
TripleM said:
Piano sounds OK. Not as nice to my ear as a "real" one would. But decent nevertheless.
Click to expand...

That was my impression. I'm all about 'if it sounds good, it's good', and that's why I liked the clip he posted. My guess though would be that at the point where he was asking himself 'how can I improve the sound I'm getting' the thought would drift in: get a real piano in a real room with real mics, Frederick.
 
dobro said:
That was my impression. I'm all about 'if it sounds good, it's good', and that's why I liked the clip he posted. My guess though would be that at the point where he was asking himself 'how can I improve the sound I'm getting' the thought would drift in: get a real piano in a real room with real mics, Frederick.
Click to expand...

Cool. This is great feedback. Yep--that's my goal one day.

I want to make sure I'm optimizing my digital recordings for now, though.

Thanks to you guys, it sounds like I'm on the right track.
 
If you can't afford a real piano -- which are real PITAs to record live because mic set up, acoustics, etc. -- get a convolution reverb plugin to add some ambiance to make a "fake room". Set it for a concert hall of your choice if you want. Or grab a VI like Ivory II, one of the East West piano VIs (needs 250 GB), or even NI's Alicia's Keys is very good and not that expensive. Then you need to determine "artist" or "audience" perspective. I prefer audience when listening, but I'm not young anymore, and I remember the days when piano was recorded mono. I have a copy of Gould's Goldberg Variations in mono.
 
The Bosendorfer open lid sound from Steinbergs (Grand 3) collection is a very nice classical sound. The program includes reverb(s)

What you recorded sounded fine to me.
 
Update . . .

Hi Friends,

Thanks again for all your help.

Here is a an update of the complete "Minute" Waltz.

I followed recommendations I have found on the forum.

1. I set the piano's volume to 70%

2. I then set the in channel's volume such that when I played my loudest, it never exceeded -12dB.

Some notes:

The loudest this particular piece ever got was -16.5dB.

I converted it into a WAV at 16bits and 44.1 . . . hz. I then converted it into an MP3 at 192 kbps.

I would appreciate your feedback very much!

What should I adjust? How could I improve it?

Thanks!

View attachment Sample2 (MP3).mp3
 
If that's you playing you have 90% of what it takes to make a good recording - okay maybe I'm exagerating... In other words amazing playing! Touch sensitive keys? Lot of up and down in volume so I would try to compress or volume automate (google) to even it out a bit. Classic Yamaha sound which I have but cannot recreate ha! Overall you're way ahead of where I was when I started on cassette....
 
ido1957 said:
If that's you playing you have 90% of what it takes to make a good recording - okay maybe I'm exagerating... In other words amazing playing! Touch sensitive keys? Lot of up and down in volume so I would try to compress or volume automate (google) to even it out a bit. Classic Yamaha sound which I have but cannot recreate ha! Overall you're way ahead of where I was when I started on cassette....
Click to expand...

Hahaha! Well, garsh. Yes, that is me. Thanks.

Now, as far as compression or volume automation is concerned, wouldn't doing so negatively impact the dynamic range of the music? I mean, isn't it a good thing that the volume is dynamic? Or, would compression/automation maintain the dynamics, while also making it more consistent (so, like, the listener doesn't have to adjust his own volume at every dynamic shift?)

Thanks again.
 
maestoso43 said:
Hahaha! Well, garsh. Yes, that is me. Thanks.

Now, as far as compression or volume automation is concerned, wouldn't doing so negatively impact the dynamic range of the music? I mean, isn't it a good thing that the volume is dynamic? Or, would compression/automation maintain the dynamics, while also making it more consistent (so, like, the listener doesn't have to adjust his own volume at every dynamic shift?)

Thanks again.
Click to expand...

Yes it will impact the dynamics. Nothing is free. IMO though, all this needs is ambiance. It sounds too dry. I'd add a convolution reverb like Waves IR1 (now available for $99 and you can get it from Sweetwater.com so you get tech support). Then I'd raise the overall volume level for the final product, so long as you don't get any clipping. If you get clipping, leave it alone -- people can adjust the volume. I didn't have to play with the volume at all. I know this piece very well. You played it very well.
 
Julia_B said:
Yes it will impact the dynamics. Nothing is free. IMO though, all this needs is ambiance. It sounds too dry. I'd add a convolution reverb like Waves IR1 (now available for $99 and you can get it from Sweetwater.com so you get tech support). Then I'd raise the overall volume level for the final product, so long as you don't get any clipping. If you get clipping, leave it alone -- people can adjust the volume. I didn't have to play with the volume at all. I know this piece very well. You played it very well.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Julia. Yes, it is a fun piece. Thank you for your suggestions.

A follow-up question:

1. You mentioned raising the overall volume level for the final product. Do i just go into the WAV file or Cubase file and adjust the fader? My newbieness (mistakenly) leads me to believe that I'm more or less stuck at the original recording volume. Are you explaining that I can actually manipulate the volume of the already recorded product?
 
I'm gathering this is just a direct recorded instrument, so I'm going to guess you only have one stereo track? Am I right? If so this will be easy.

After you get done with everything you want to do with it (ambiance, maybe a touch of EQ for some "air" for example), I'd do a mixdown to a stereo track with the levels low like they are. Then load that mixdown into Cubase again -- this is the one where you do your volume adjustment. I'm not familiar with Cubase, but I do use Studio One Pro which was written by a bunch of guys who used to work for Steinberg. You might have a mastering limiter with the program. I'd look for that.

I use Sony Soundforge 10 Pro at this stage though -- it has the iZotope Mastering Bundle (very very similar to Ozone). Here's where I do the final polish on it, like any multi-band compression (not for newbs), harmonic exciter (just to add some "tape sheen"), and use the mastering limiter. You might be able to get away with simply boosting the overall volume so that the highest peak is at -0.3 dB. That sometimes does the trick on a simple track, but if you get clipping trying to do that, you need to use the limiter to get more volume. This will squash the mix depending upon how heavy handed you are. I can get a loud track with just limiting the peaks to -0.3 dB and then setting the threshold to -3 or -4. This is very mild and the track will retain a wide dynamic range. I call this my "craptastic" mastering job.

I wouldn't mess with the level on the Master fader or Main, or whatever it's called in Cubase. Leave that set at 0 on your original track. Never work with the original when you boost volume. Always get the mix set proper, then do a mixdown, and you can work with overall level by loading the mixdown back into your DAW or another mastering program. You want the original available in case you need to revert or change something. Also Ctrl-Z is your friend.

And remember "SAVE AS" <filename_#>. NOT "SAVE". Better to have 30 stages of mixing to go to than one that you want to revert to something that isn't there anymore. Do "SAVE AS" after you've made any major change that you're happy with, because you might not be happy with that change the next day.

Large HDs are your friend. :)
 
Julia_B said:
I'm gathering this is just a direct recorded instrument, so I'm going to guess you only have one stereo track? Am I right? If so this will be easy.

After you get done with everything you want to do with it (ambiance, maybe a touch of EQ for some "air" for example), I'd do a mixdown to a stereo track with the levels low like they are. Then load that mixdown into Cubase again -- this is the one where you do your volume adjustment. I'm not familiar with Cubase, but I do use Studio One Pro which was written by a bunch of guys who used to work for Steinberg. You might have a mastering limiter with the program. I'd look for that.

I use Sony Soundforge 10 Pro at this stage though -- it has the iZotope Mastering Bundle (very very similar to Ozone). Here's where I do the final polish on it, like any multi-band compression (not for newbs), harmonic exciter (just to add some "tape sheen"), and use the mastering limiter. You might be able to get away with simply boosting the overall volume so that the highest peak is at -0.3 dB. That sometimes does the trick on a simple track, but if you get clipping trying to do that, you need to use the limiter to get more volume. This will squash the mix depending upon how heavy handed you are. I can get a loud track with just limiting the peaks to -0.3 dB and then setting the threshold to -3 or -4. This is very mild and the track will retain a wide dynamic range. I call this my "craptastic" mastering job.

I wouldn't mess with the level on the Master fader or Main, or whatever it's called in Cubase. Leave that set at 0 on your original track. Never work with the original when you boost volume. Always get the mix set proper, then do a mixdown, and you can work with overall level by loading the mixdown back into your DAW or another mastering program. You want the original available in case you need to revert or change something. Also Ctrl-Z is your friend.

And remember "SAVE AS" <filename_#>. NOT "SAVE". Better to have 30 stages of mixing to go to than one that you want to revert to something that isn't there anymore. Do "SAVE AS" after you've made any major change that you're happy with, because you might not be happy with that change the next day.

Large HDs are your friend. :)
Click to expand...

Julia, you rock. This is soooo helpful! Yes, it is just a stereo track in Cubase. Cubase has a "limiter" option, so I'll look for that.

Your explanation has succinctly answered what I have spent hours trying to figure out. Thank you sooooooo much for helping out a newbie like me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top