Search results

Ahh...you rarely get that info from measuring. People have stuffed their rooms with panels...and the measurements still show some of the same issues with few or many panels, especially in the low end. Which kinda underscores the point that you can only do so much with smaller rooms...there is no...

Exactly.

Yes....that's kinda my point. I wouldn't go so far as to say take 1 is always sloppy...but it's about the energy and feeling that you get from those first few takes. Doing 100 takes so you could finally get a take without any "mistakes", may get you to some kind of perfection, but the energy and...

Up to a point...yes, no matter what you do, it won't change the size of the room, which is not favorable for the low end. That said, my feeling has always been that with small rooms, go for dead...it gives the illusion of a large room, meaning, it takes the room out of the equation and allows...

What goal is that...dead but not boomy...? Add more low end traps. Your room is too small for LF to be easily controlled. If you're just trying to control your vocal boom....step back from the mic and/or try a different mic.

AFAIK...the term came from the computing world long before it became an audio DAW/FX term...it was used to describe a component that you added to a program application in order to expand its functionality and/or features and/or that you "plugged in" additional code...and from there, when DAWs...

I wasn't trying to say that everyone back in the day came in with finished songs,...it was more about comparing the amount of "record ready" songs done in the past...VS...today when DAW's allow endless options, and songs are assembled piecemeal more times than not. When you have a record-ready...

Right...and that has more to do with NOT knowing your song... and needing to beat on it until you do....and then you finally get past that "not knowing" to get back to where you should have been in the first place. If you know your song, your parts...the first few takes have all the magic. I...

So you were there for all 100 takes and know how they all sounded...??? It's got nothing to do with you not being able to tell...it's about what the performer feels...and let me tell you, when you get to about take 10...it's already feeling pretty tiresome. You may still get it "perfect" AFA the...

I'm sure there are many things that you let pass when playing live, that you call mistakes when recording. Playing live you know there is no option to stop and start over...so you push through...but with tracking, you want absolute perfection, so you stop. I quit on that stop/start approach...

:thumbs up: This is not the first thread.

I'll try one more time to help...if you're really looking to learn... You keep repeating that you're going to "double up" your tracks, and I think you mean to take the balanced lines, and split their +/- signals, so you can then use 8 channels to fill up 16 tracks...basically doubles of 8...

Try the Analog forum here...Sweetbeats pops in mainly there. There are other tape deck users there that use 388 decks, and may be helpful.

I don't deny that the earlier wave of Fostex tape decks was playing catch up, and if I'm not mistaken, Fostex was founded by some ex-Tascam folks...but my point was that with the G series, Fostex had outclassed the same format Tascam deck, the MSR16, on many levels. Many G series users who also...

Yes...that's true, why leave the bar if you block it...but even without the bar, that wire approach still doesn't make the tail piece solid/immobile like a block does. I just figure that if you want to make it hardtail...then you can't beat the block approach for solid. Meh...it's a minor...

With all due respect...I wouldn't call the Fostex G series a compromised machine compared to the Tascam MSR 16...both sound about the same, with just the difference in NR...but AFA functionality, the Fostex w/8330 sync card onboard, was much more robust...and it had pro-level options, in a...

Mmm...the way you have that wire if you pressed the bar, you would still stretch the spring where it's hooked...and the tailpiece can still move...with the wood block, it's immovable. It would also need to be a pretty stiff wire so as not to stretch itself. Plus...that wire is way more ghetto! :D

Right...the block pushes the mechanism forward and releases the spring tension. Oh...that's not a picture of my guitar, just something I pulled off the net...but no, the middle spring just happens to not be there on that guitar...it's got nothing to do with the blocking. You could get rid of...

OK Ryan...I'll leave you with your misconceptions, because attempting to have a conversation with you becomes a circular, go-nowhere thing since you first say something that makes no sense, and then I think you realize it at some point, and then you attempt to turn it around and say you never...

Ahh...I'm talking about the things you are misunderstanding here...about balanced lines, about summing two identical tracks, about running parallel channels and thinking it's the same as balanced lines...etc....etc. AFA the digital stuff, you ignored what everyone else in the industry has to...