Making "Learning Tapes"

[moustache]

I tried to post this the other day...don't think it made it...not sure if technical difficulties or it was bounced...i think i was having password troubles, though.

I belong to a barbershop singing organization. A common tool to barbershoppers is the learning tape - which is usually purchased with sheet music. They are part-specific - with (for instance) the right channel set up to be the tenor part, while the left channel has bass, bari, and lead. This allows the singer to learn by turning up the right channel so his part is strong and singing along with it, then once comfortable, change the balance from right to left and sing along with the other three parts on the tape. There are even tapes where the part-specific stuff is on side A, but the other voices on side B set up so that you can learn your part singing with the tape in one direction, then flip it over and sing with the other voices.

I want to be able to produce these sorts of tapes myself - preferably on my computer. My thought is that I could start with one part - say, the lead. Then I could play that part, and record a harmony part with it, and continue to do so with each of the four parts. Then when I need to cut a specific tape for a specific song, I could do my own mix of the four independent tracks, and burn a CD with that mix on it. I could even have a dozen or more songs on a CD done in this manner.

I hope I'm using the right terms.

The question I have is, what software/hardware do I need in my computer to accomplish this? I have been considering this as something that I do entirely on my own. I know how to burn the CD, but the recording and synchronization of the tracks is what I'm wondering about.

Thanks in advance.

 

[skippy]

Damn. Had a reply all done, and the machine ate it. Have to start over.

Learning tapes are the lifeblood of most barbershop organizations- there are far more auditory learners than there are sightreaders out there. I've done a number of these, and they are interesting projects. My wife's a barbershopper, and through her I've learned a lot about this art over the past few years...

What they seem to like is to have 4 mixes of each tune in a row on the tape. The first is all 4 parts in a good balance. The second is all 4 parts, with the part in question popped up about 6-8dB and panned pretty hard left (more on why in a minute). The third is the other 3 parts in good balance, but the part in question dropped out completely. And the 4th is identical to the first, with all 4 parts in good balance.

They like to have the second take's featured part panned left so that when the tape is listened to in the car while driving to rehearsal, it's right on top of the driver... (;-) 90% of barbershop music is learned while driving to rehearsal, it seems! 4 takes in a row means you get 4 passes at it without having to take your hands off the wheel to rewind. Seriously.

Any multitrack software package will do for this work- you just need 4 tracks, so even the crippleware demos that some manufacturers have will do fine. I use Cubase, but N-track or any number of others will do: 4 simple tracks with no effects will not strain the resources of even the most basic package. They will all handle the synchronization for you, allowing you to overdub successive parts in good alignment.

Don't scrimp on the soundcard: qualitywise, even a soundblaster will do fine, but if you get _good_ at this you'll be participating in a surprisingly active cottage industry. Buy the best soundcard you can reasonably afford! Once your group finds out that you can do this, they won't let you go (trust me on this). You won't get rich, but you certainly can make money at it if you have the chops. There are very few folks out there with both the vocal skills and the technical wherewithal to do this work. Most of them (even the ones who charge a lot of money for this service!) just struggle along with an old 4-track cassette Portastudio, and the quality of the result is only just barely adequate. If you do this digitally, you'll blow away most barbershoppers who are used to hissy cassettes!

Tracking is easy- lead first, overdub the bass, and then do the tuning parts with baritone last. You mix each tune 12 times to make a full set of tapes, and it gets to be very straightforward after the first time.

Best of luck! I'd recommend going to a music store and looking at demos of some of the multitrack packages, just to see which ones make the most sense to you. Each works just a little different, and has a different user interface philosophy, so it is important to find one that is intuitive to you to minimize the learning curve...

Hope that helps- and good luck!

 

[dachay2tnr]

Assuming this is all acappella, it should be fairly easy. A lot of what you need will depend on the quality you want for the final product. However, essentially all you would need would be a mic, and preamp, a sound card, and a multitracking software program.

Generally for vocals, you would want a condensor mic. However, if you happen to already own a mic, I would start with that.

As for pre-amp, if you have a mixer you can use that for it's pre-amps. If not, there is a relatively inexpensive one available from Studio Projects (VTB-1 I think).

Since you will only be recording one part at a time, you can probably use the sound card that is already in your computer. Connect the output from the pre-amp into the Line In connection on the sound card.

Last is the multitracking software. Cakewalk puts out a product called Home Studio 2002. The program is somewhat limited, but I don't think any of its limits would effect what you are trying to do. For ex., it onlys allows you to input from two sound sources simultaneously - but you only need a single source anyway, since you plan to overdub each part. Another choice for software is a product called N-Tracks. It is also relatively inexpensive.

All of the above items can be "upgraded" for better quality. However, I think you can get started with this list and get reasonable quality from it for not a lot of $$$. Assuming you have a computer and sound card, I'd say under $500 for a mic, preamp, and software.

 

[moustache]

Skippy,
My experience with getting software, etc, at a music store has not been positive. Usually they seem to want to sell you the store when all you need is a G string (so to speak). For your guitar?

Well...does software usually allow you to play what is already recorded and sing along to it? I would expect so, but not familiar enough to know.

Best of luck! I'd recommend going to a music store and looking at demos of some of the multitrack packages, just to see which ones make the most sense to you. Each works just a little different, and has a different user interface philosophy, so it is important to find one that is intuitive to you to minimize the learning curve...

Hope that helps- and good luck!

 

[dachay2tnr]

Well...does software usually allow you to play what is already recorded and sing along to it? I would expect so, but not familiar enough to know.

That's exactly what is meant by multitracking software - i.e., multiple tracks. The tracks can either be recorded all at one time (subject to the number of inputs on your sound card), or one at a time. Some offer a limit on track counts, while others have (essentially) unlimited track counts. As I suggested earlier, you probably want to look into HS2002 or N-Tracks. Your demands are not very great, and these programs are pretty cheap.

Also, your sound card needs to be full duplex to allow both playback and recording at the same time. However, most recent vintage sound cards are full duplex. If your computer was purchased in the last two years or so, you should be OK.

 

[moustache]

Skippy,
My experience with getting software, etc, at a music store has not been positive. Usually they seem to want to sell you the store when all you need is a G string (so to speak). For your guitar?

Well...does software usually allow you to play what is already recorded and sing along to it? I would expect so, but not familiar enough to know.

Best of luck! I'd recommend going to a music store and looking at demos of some of the multitrack packages, just to see which ones make the most sense to you. Each works just a little different, and has a different user interface philosophy, so it is important to find one that is intuitive to you to minimize the learning curve...

Hope that helps- and good luck!

 

[skippy]

Yes, it does. You use the software package to play back already-recorded material, and record new material, in perfect sync. They all have internal record/playback functions, and internal mixer software to allow you to mix your live signal with the playback from already recorded tracks, so that you can monitor (via headphones) what is going on in real time. The software will take care of the synchronization of new material to old for you.

There *are* minor issues that you'll need to deal with, such as latency. What that means is that the stuff you are recording wil be in perfect sync with what you have already recorded inside the computer, but if you *monitor* your live mic through the software, the version of your live material will *sound* as if it is delayed by a fraction. Latency is the time it takes for the a/d converters to digitize the signal, the software to mix that in with your playback, and the d/a converters to convert it out, and it is an unavoidable fact of computer recording. Don't let this scare you: some packages have much worse latency than others, and some have so little that it is really a nonissue. The faster your computer, the less of an issue it is as well, since the raw speed of the machine controls how long the bits float around in there after they go in the gozintas and before they come out the comesoutas.

Many people aren't bothered by this at all, somehow (I certainly am, being primarily a drummer). Many people who _are_ bothered by this deal with by using a small external mixer to allow them to monitor their mic signal directly without going through the machine, mixed with the playback of the existing tracks out of the computer: thus, with no latency. There are many, many ways to skin that cat.

Realistically, you can do more than you can imagine with a mic, a small, cheap mixer (to use for its mic preamps, and to allow you to monitor with no latency), a pair of good closed-back headphones, a simple soundcard, and *any* of the software packages already mentioned. I think that it is pretty critical for you to lay hands on, though, and _try_ some of these packages at least for a few minutes.

I'm primarily an old analog guy, so I find computer recording to be pretty foreign: I have a working style agonizingly developed over lots of hours of pulling magnetic tape, back in my misspent youth. One thing I know is that some of the packages out there I find to be completely unusable, and some quite straightforward. If you can arrange it, get a chance to look at several- even if the local music store goons try to interfere. You're the customer, after all. Keep trying until you find a helpful computer geek in the store, and don't take no for an answer- it's your money...

 

[skippy]

One (somewhat off-topic) footnote: my wife's chorus (Skyline Chorus out of Denver/Littleton, CO) *just* made it to the 2003 Sweet Adelines International chorus finals, as of about an hour ago. They are now officially in the Top 10 choruses internationally, and we'll just see where they end up in due course. And as of December 8th, you'll be able to buy a 13-tune CD of theirs- recorded, produced, and mastered by me- if you know where to look, anyway. And Lunatic, of course. He assisted in a lot of the tracking. There's nothing like tracking a 150-voice women's barbershop chorus to keep you on your freakin' toes, no?

If they don't win, the CD will be titled "Red Hot Mama". If they *do* win, it'll probably be entitled "Best Kept Secret", if I have anything to do with it. And I blushingly admit that I do...

Yes, I'm proud. DAMNED proud! These ladies have worked *hard* in a very demanding and competitive environment to make this happen- doing the live sound and recording work for them for the last many years has been an honor. I've personally been playing every instrument in sight, and recording it, for over 30 years- and the *worst* of them is better than the best of me. Amazing. Magnificent.

For those that want to listen in , the live webcast of their competition set in the finals can be heard at www.sweetadelinesintl.org under the "Convention Webcast" button: check there for their performance time, they're on 4th out of 10.The sound quality will suck, but you'll be able to tell who brings it and who doesn't. Wait and see...

For those of you that aren't barbershoppers, and feel compelled to do the usual gratuitous BBS slagging-off of somebody else's art: stow it. You don't have to agree with this musical form, you don't have to like it- but ultimately you have to admit that they *have* worked ungodly hard, and I'm glad to see them get some recognition...

Carry on. It's time to celebrate with a Damaging Beverage, and I mean to do that right now.

Go Skyline!

 

[lunatic]

I would just like to second Skippy's enthusiasm. The first time I heard these girls was during the tracking and man... they do sound AWESOME! They have a very tight, very controlled and very big sound.

Skippy, please tell your wife hello for me and I'm hoping for the best for her and Skyline!

We should get together sometime. I think I hear Rio calling our names for more margaritas


Peace,
Lunatic