Search results

ahh thats right, thank you for correcting me on that :D

I think the link you where given was completely inaccurate. If 96k was a recording gimmick, then no one would go through the trouble of manufacturing units that can achieve 96k and beyond. The simple fact is, although you may not hear the frequency, it becomes a resolution issue. Simply put...

To elaborate on your point, I think the future of music will always depend on the most important factor of all: human interpretation. As the tools we engineers use to "enhance" a performance become more sophisticated, the desicions on what to use and what not to use become a bit more complex...

i know that a mixing aim is to try and get your fader levels (the actual signal, and not the knob) as close to 0 db as possible. of course, considering that a high hat usually should be at a lower volume level than a vox track, for example. but when i record a guitar track for example... i try...

yeah dont get me wrong. I was making a comparison. Neve's are the like ferrari's of the pre amp world :cool:

If you mean daisy chaining them, then it's probably not a good idea. I can't usually think of having two preamps in the same signal flow chain other than for one reason: You've recorded a track on a "neutral" or "flat" preamp and you'd like to pass it through a better one just to get it's...

well it's like when you buy a ferrari. You buy it more for the luxury of having one. A nice toy to attract people. Except in this case, Neve has the braging rights. If someone really knew the sound you get get out of one, the 8 grand is well worth it. A dual Neve 1073 DPD goes for around 3...

Well it's not an uncommon approach to hard limit the living fuck out mixes lately, but I've always looked at it like this big "logical mistake". The "limiter Era". :eek: By that I mean, it seems logical to just set a good boundry that you can push at the end of your mix....and that's alright...

I think there was a few posts that lead me to beleive that some people are a little confused on what actually goes on during the mastering stage of an album. Here is some suggested reading by a very skilled ME here in florida known as Bob Katz. I always recommend this to people that are...

I can't beleive people just keep falling for this. :D Looks like Bob Ludwig, Bob Katz, Joe Gastwirt and the hard working ME's in this forum have serious competition!

bythe way...that was ment as a joke. Apparently someone took my roll eyes the wrong way. No hard feelings

yeah...seriously. Use the 15$ wisely and have the guy master one of your songs. :D I think I just made a funny.

jesus christ glen...The CIA needs people like you! :D

if you saved the session, exited and opened it again....then you might have some problems. If not, try a simple ctrl-z. indentify the track you are working with first. It should say something like "name-rvrb" or something like. Look up that track version that dosnt have the rvrb extension on...

well I was saying, it's easier to hear it.

well the more important case seems to be just that: being used to the speakers youre mixing with. I'll say just stay with the ones you're mixing with until you get the monitors.

Alot of funny replies on this one: You know what I've learned in this industry when it comes to credibility? That if you're GOOD at being a con man, then you can actually get very far. Personality and ability to convince people that you know what you're doing. Like this "multi-grammy"...

yeah, probably better to show the clip.

well this is the current state of EQ...and I know this cause Ive seen the scientific results of what occurs to an electric impluse. In the electronic engineering world, they have what they call an oscilloscope. It's VERY good that you know and understand why to use one. Whenever you have...

trust me on that one :)