The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
programming dance beats that push?
Old 15th March 2010
  #151
Lives for gear
 
Simonator's Avatar
 

This

Quote:
Originally Posted by Methlab View Post
Simply moving hihats around doesn't doo too much.
and this

Quote:
Originally Posted by Methlab View Post
What you want to do is look at beats that have been played by drummers in the past. I look at disco beats because this is house music. You will see early kicks sometimes and all kinds of nice feel that is not on the grid. I do not lock my kicks to the grid. I use groove settings on Idrum to make the drums come alive and move you.
.
= same thing, only done manually.

Yes... we all know what groove templates are, and yes we use them too

... but if you are programming a beat from scratch, sometimes you can manually shift stuff a little to impart you own groove onto it in the same way a drummer would do live.

... and yes we understand about the natural flow a drummer might have that would not necessarily be found from manually painting midi blocks... but to counter that there is the advantage of being able to finely tune midi blocks and get it exactly as YOU want it.

No one is saying 'on every track you must must move a hi-hat 5 ms late'... just sometimes it works better if you nudge stuff a little.
Old 15th March 2010
  #152
Lives for gear
It is the same thing, but most people can not do it right. If you can, more power to you, but in my experience a lot of people do not understand how to make it feel as best as possible by sliding MIDI.

That is why I suggested studying the playing of real disco drummers. It is the only way to learn how to program drums that have feel.

You can manually shift stuff, but that doesn't really scream "groove" to me. Of course I am a bass player who has played with a ton of great drummers and may be more OCD about this then others.
Old 16th March 2010
  #153
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Methlab View Post
It is the same thing, but most people can not do it right. If you can, more power to you, but in my experience a lot of people do not understand how to make it feel as best as possible by sliding MIDI.

That is why I suggested studying the playing of real disco drummers. It is the only way to learn how to program drums that have feel.

You can manually shift stuff, but that doesn't really scream "groove" to me. Of course I am a bass player who has played with a ton of great drummers and may be more OCD about this then others.
I'll make you right, which is why only a few house tracks have a really nice sat groove, and most have the raw quant feel of being done by someone who couldn't tell the difference. Always bugged me that, especially if it feels the track deserved to be pocketed properly and ended up sort of travelling in a 'stuck' way, but you won't find anyone more ocd about groove than yours truly.

But that doesn't equate to "the only way to....dot dot" at all. If you have a SPECIFIC feel in your head and you KNOW the hat needs to push a bit less or the kick, or whatever, to 'land' the groove corners in the way you'd like I don't need to hear a disco drummer to know what to do about it. He won't be playing MY groove, will he?!
Old 16th March 2010
  #154
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
and most have the raw quant feel of being done by someone who couldn't tell the difference.
And for that exact reason house music emptied dancefloors in discos around the world.

...oh wait...



And i am curious if you would try a blind test with the three files supplied by simonator - same procedure.

Have a mate play them to you in random order several times over and see if you can tell the three clips apart from each other.
That's all, just to see if you can hear differences at the 5 ms level consistently.

The problem for me is that i can't do the test, because i simply can't hear a 5 ms difference - but since you can, it should be easy for you to get at least 9 out of ten right.
Old 16th March 2010
  #155
Lives for gear
 
aof21's Avatar
 

This argument is insane.

It's easy to tell the difference between 5ms.

I just did the blind test, got it right every time.

Why would you not think you can hear 5ms. Golden Ears ear training program has you trying to distinguish predelay times on reverbs in the milliseconds. You think hearing Hihats off a few milliseconds is hard? Try identifying predelay times on reverbs in the milliseconds. Now that is hard. But it can be done (not by me, but I'm getting there!).

Copy your kick track, delay it by 5 milliseconds and play it over the original track, both together. It makes an audible difference in how it sounds, does it not?

Lining up all my transients on my different elements so they hit at the exact same time (i'm not talking milliseconds, i'm talking down to the sample level, less than a tick!) was a big revelation for me in how to make stuff sound clean and tight.

Learning the value of shifting things forward and backward by milliseconds was the 2nd big revelation for me in making beats.

If you can't hear it, start learning to. It ABSOLUTLEY, POSITIVELY does make a difference. Just because you can't hear it, doesn't mean that it's not relevant, it just means that you need to start getting more into the micro timing of your grooves. Your productions will greatly benefit!
Old 16th March 2010
  #156
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by aof21 View Post
This argument is insane.

It's easy to tell the difference between 5ms.

I just did the blind test, got it right every time.

Why would you not think you can hear 5ms. Golden Ears ear training program has you trying to distinguish predelay times on reverbs in the milliseconds. You think hearing Hihats off a few milliseconds is hard? Try identifying predelay times on reverbs in the milliseconds. Now that is hard. But it can be done (not by me, but I'm getting there!).

Copy your kick track, delay it by 5 milliseconds and play it over the original track, both together. It makes an audible difference in how it sounds, does it not?

Lining up all my transients on my different elements so they hit at the exact same time (i'm not talking milliseconds, i'm talking down to the sample level, less than a tick!) was a big revelation for me in how to make stuff sound clean and tight.

Learning the value of shifting things forward and backward by milliseconds was the 2nd big revelation for me in making beats.

If you can't hear it, start learning to. It ABSOLUTLEY, POSITIVELY does make a difference. Just because you can't hear it, doesn't mean that it's not relevant, it just means that you need to start getting more into the micro timing of your grooves. Your productions will greatly benefit!
Audiophile claims.
I would so much love to see a test like this done irl - under controlled conditions and with unbiased testers.

Regarding determining predelays in milliseconds - i want some of the stuff you are smoking. Must be potent indeed.

As for lining up everything on the same sample level - well, that would make a difference if you had copied samples in the track to prevent phase problems.

In simonators sound examples where the conga was moved there was no audible difference (obviously apart from volume) when playing back two examples simultaneously (in cubase) - which actually surprised me, because i had expected to hear at least hear a little "smear" or "blur" on the conga with the difference being as high as 10 ms when playing the + 10 tick and - 10 tick examples together.

Of course there is a threshold where you can actually hear your track getting untight - but i doubt that it is in the under 5 ms range.


.......


Do some of you people realize that sound travels with a speed of appr. 1 foot per ms?
(For europeans 1 meter = 3 ms)

For all of you that are this sensitive to timing as you claim, moving around in a normal sized room with two stereo speakers would present you with the most hideous rythmic variations as you move just a few meters to either side of the exact center of the stereo field.

Poor you people heh
Old 16th March 2010
  #157
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by aof21 View Post
This argument is insane.

It's easy to tell the difference between 5ms.

I just did the blind test, got it right every time.

Why would you not think you can hear 5ms. Golden Ears ear training program has you trying to distinguish predelay times on reverbs in the milliseconds. You think hearing Hihats off a few milliseconds is hard? Try identifying predelay times on reverbs in the milliseconds. Now that is hard. But it can be done (not by me, but I'm getting there!).

Copy your kick track, delay it by 5 milliseconds and play it over the original track, both together. It makes an audible difference in how it sounds, does it not?

Lining up all my transients on my different elements so they hit at the exact same time (i'm not talking milliseconds, i'm talking down to the sample level, less than a tick!) was a big revelation for me in how to make stuff sound clean and tight.

Learning the value of shifting things forward and backward by milliseconds was the 2nd big revelation for me in making beats.

If you can't hear it, start learning to. It ABSOLUTLEY, POSITIVELY does make a difference. Just because you can't hear it, doesn't mean that it's not relevant, it just means that you need to start getting more into the micro timing of your grooves. Your productions will greatly benefit!
Thank you. Sanity is back in the room.
Old 16th March 2010
  #158
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Audiophile claims.
I would so much love to see a test like this done irl - under controlled conditions and with unbiased testers.

Regarding determining predelays in milliseconds - i want some of the stuff you are smoking. Must be potent indeed.

As for lining up everything on the same sample level - well, that would make a difference if you had copied samples in the track to prevent phase problems.

In simonators sound examples where the conga was moved there was no audible difference (obviously apart from volume) when playing back two examples simultaneously (in cubase) - which actually surprised me, because i had expected to hear at least hear a little "smear" or "blur" on the conga with the difference being as high as 10 ms when playing the + 10 tick and - 10 tick examples together.

Of course there is a threshold where you can actually hear your track getting untight - but i doubt that it is in the under 5 ms range.


.......


Do some of you people realize that sound travels with a speed of appr. 1 foot per ms?
(For europeans 1 meter = 3 ms)

For all of you that are this sensitive to timing as you claim, moving around in a normal sized room with two stereo speakers would present you with the most hideous rythmic variations as you move just a few meters to either side of the exact center of the stereo field.

Poor you people heh
It's just pathetic how this forum is going to shit at the moment! All there is everywhere is people arguing with bullshit theory and clearly without the relevant PRACTICAL experience to realise what they're saying is just rubbish. And all that with a condescending attitude, usually. Poor US people??? Oh dear.....

Have you ever worked in a professional control room? Because you do not sound like you have, and would most likely be surprised at all the wonderous detail you suddenly hear in a proper room. Timing being less dependent on this, but most certainly sounds more wrong in a good room when you don't fix the microtimings/transient interaction up good and tight, and like aof21 said it absolutely positively makes a difference.

And no, I'm not going to bother a friend with any testing, I'm done with this thread.
Old 16th March 2010
  #159
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
It's just pathetic how this forum is going to shit at the moment! All there is everywhere is people arguing with bullshit theory and clearly without the relevant PRACTICAL experience to realise what they're saying is just rubbish. And all that with a condescending attitude, usually. Poor US people??? Oh dear.....

Have you ever worked in a professional control room? Because you do not sound like you have, and would most likely be surprised at all the wonderous detail you suddenly hear in a proper room. Timing being less dependent on this, but most certainly sounds more wrong in a good room when you don't fix the microtimings/transient interaction up good and tight, and like aof21 said it absolutely positively makes a difference.

And no, I'm not going to bother a friend with any testing, I'm done with this thread.
I wonder how they ever made music before the advent of sample accurate editors

Oh, right, it just didn't groove - you said that already. Stupid me
Old 16th March 2010
  #160
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Stupid me
Surprisingly I won't argue with you there. And goodbye.
Old 16th March 2010
  #161
Lives for gear
 
Simonator's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Audiophile claims.

In simonators sound examples where the conga was moved there was no audible difference (obviously apart from volume) when playing back two examples simultaneously (in cubase) - which actually surprised me, because i had expected to hear at least hear a little "smear" or "blur" on the conga with the difference being as high as 10 ms when playing the + 10 tick and - 10 tick examples together.

Of course there is a threshold where you can actually hear your track getting untight - but i doubt that it is in the under 5 ms range.
... I could have the math totally wrapped around my head here... but I think the variation in my examples was around FIFTY FIVE milliseconds rather than 10 ms...

In Logic, 1 tick = 43/3840 of a note. 43/3840 decimalised = 0.011197917

1 note at 123 bpm = 60 (secs) /123 = 0.48780488 seconds

0.48780488 x 0.011197917 = 0.0054623903 = 5.5 ms per tick

10 ticks x 5.5 ms = 55 ms


... errr.... long time since I did any proper maths... is this correct??
Old 16th March 2010
  #162
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by simonator View Post
... I could have the math totally wrapped around my head here... but I think the variation in my examples was around FIFTY FIVE milliseconds rather than 10 ms...

In Logic, 1 tick = 43/3840 of a note. 43/3840 decimalised = 0.011197917

1 note at 123 bpm = 60 (secs) /123 = 0.48780488 seconds

0.48780488 x 0.011197917 = 0.0054623903 = 5.5 ms per tick

10 ticks x 5.5 ms = 55 ms


... errr.... long time since I did any proper maths... is this correct??
I cant follow your math - but looking at the waveforms in cubase i found a timing difference of about 5 ms.

55 ms ( over a 20th of a second) is a lot and certainly an absolutely audible difference - in fact you are getting into 32nd note territory here (obviously depending on the speed of your song...)
Old 16th March 2010
  #163
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
I cant follow your math - but looking at the waveforms in cubase i found a timing difference of about 5 ms.

55 ms ( over a 20th of a second) is a lot and certainly an absolutely audible difference - in fact you are getting into 32nd note territory here (obviously depending on the speed of your song...)
Just one more question my friend: If you run a 3/16 delay and alter the setting by a millisecond, can't you hear/feel that either?
Old 16th March 2010
  #164
Lives for gear
 
Simonator's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
I cant follow your math - but looking at the waveforms in cubase i found a timing difference of about 5 ms.

55 ms ( over a 20th of a second) is a lot and certainly an absolutely audible difference - in fact you are getting into 32nd note territory here (obviously depending on the speed of your song...)
hmmm... I must have misplaced a decimal somewhere down the line.
Old 16th March 2010
  #165
Lives for gear
 
Simonator's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Just one more question my friend: If you run a 3/16 delay and alter the setting by a millisecond, can't you hear/feel that either?
... Unless I'm misunderstanding this question, i don't think it's necessarily fair; with each sounding of the delay feedback the 'millisecond' delay will be magnified.

;it would only be 1 ms different on the first repetition, then an ever increasing amount different with every additional echo.
Old 16th March 2010
  #166
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by simonator View Post
... Unless I'm misunderstanding this question, i don't think it's necessarily fair; with each sounding of the delay feedback the 'millisecond' delay will be magnified.

;it would only be 1 ms different on the first repetition, then an ever increasing amount different with every additional echo.
....still a magnitude from 55ms.......and easily audible. You'll hear the 'wrongness' in the bounce primarily in the first one or two repeats anyway, as they're the ones that either sit or don't, and are still loud enough to be actual parts of the instrumentation before it becomes background slush. I remember never wanting to use spare quadraverbs for delay, as their internal clock seemed to be out with the Atari clock at the time, meaning e.g. an SDE3000 would keep the bounce nicely, whereas the quadraverb always jarred at the same setting. Bel delays were even worse. But hey, I'm only tripping on audiophile foolery, so who gives a feck.
Old 16th March 2010
  #167
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post

But that doesn't equate to "the only way to....dot dot" at all. If you have a SPECIFIC feel in your head and you KNOW the hat needs to push a bit less or the kick, or whatever, to 'land' the groove corners in the way you'd like I don't need to hear a disco drummer to know what to do about it. He won't be playing MY groove, will he?!
Well yeah, agreed. My point was that it helps to know how real human drummers groove before someone just starts just sliding notes. Since you seem to know that already, that probably does not apply in your case. But a lot of people simplify it down to just sliding notes and I think it is important to know the relationship between the kick and snare and hats with a real drummer and how they push and pull the beat. It takes a while to really learn how to get this right.

I remember watching my buddy program drums with incredible feel. He is also a touring drummer and has produced some beats for huge R&B singers, and I would learn from him while I recorded basslines on his beats. His sense of timing was perfect and his pocket was huge. It just took a regular guy's stale drum MIDI and smashed them. It was cool to see how he could make MIDI groove that hard.
Old 16th March 2010
  #168
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Just one more question my friend: If you run a 3/16 delay and alter the setting by a millisecond, can't you hear/feel that either?
Nope - not at the ms level (with the exception of phase problems that might occur), but simonator is right that if regen. is set high enough eventually the delay will "smear out" as each successive pass adds more time discrepancy.
Old 16th March 2010
  #169
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Nope - not at the ms level (with the exception of phase problems that might occur), but simonator is right that if regen. is set high enough eventually the delay will "smear out" as each successive pass adds more time discrepancy.
If you can't hear a ms difference and what it does to the groove on a 3/16 delay it definitely is case closed and I'd worry about more important things than trying to pseudo-scientifically explain things.
Old 16th March 2010
  #170
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
If you can't hear a ms difference and what it does to the groove on a 3/16 delay it definitely is case closed and I'd worry about more important things than trying to pseudo-scientifically explain things.
How do you feel when you are standing just one foot away from the center line between two stereo speakers?

I mean, it must be horrible to have that constant 2 ms time difference between the channels ringing in your ears?

And of course it gets just worse the further away from the centre line you get... You poor tormented soul...

heh

Fact, not pseudo science.

...

You are the guy throwing out outrageous audiophile-like claims yet not willing to submit to a simple blind test to find out wether your ears really are that golden as to be able to distinguish between 3 clips where the timing difference is as high as 5 ms...
Old 16th March 2010
  #171
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

You think in all seriousness that hearing the difference to a groove of a ms in a 3/16 delay is 'audiophile'? See how many pro engineers and/or producers you can find who can NOT hear this and get back to me. This forum is really going to a weird weird place lately.....
Old 16th March 2010
  #172
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
You think in all seriousness that hearing the difference to a groove of a ms in a 3/16 delay is 'audiophile'? See how many pro engineers and/or producers you can find who can NOT hear this and get back to me. This forum is really going to a weird weird place lately.....
Oh, i am sure i can find as many who claim that as i can find audiophiles who claim they can hear differences in sound when they change the knobs on their amps for exotic wooden ones...


But finding producers who could actually hear the differences in a blind test?
Old 16th March 2010
  #173
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Oh, i am sure i can find as many who claim that as i can find audiophiles who claim they can hear differences in sound when they change the knobs on their amps for exotic wooden ones...


But finding producers who could actually hear the differences in a blind test?
Ok, it does feel like you're just taking the mickey now but I'll bite one more time......are you saying that if you run a house track at 125bpm and have a 3/16 delay hanging off say a riff at 360ms, you wouldn't feel any difference if the delay was set at 359, 360 or 361??? That's a feckin John McEnroe, mate! You cannot be serious!
Old 16th March 2010
  #174
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Ok, it does feel like you're just taking the mickey now but I'll bite one more time......are you saying that if you run a house track at 125bpm and have a 3/16 delay hanging off say a riff at 360ms, you wouldn't feel any difference if the delay was set at 359, 360 or 361??? That's a feckin John McEnroe, mate! You cannot be serious!
Well, yes, a slight pisstake was in there somewhere... heh

...

I am quite sure that i wouldn't feel the difference.

Remember a thread i made about differences in BPM between different manufacturers equipment?

It showed that most of them due to internal design do not display the accurate bpm. (I.e. it may say 120, where the real tempo as measured with a clock would be 119,8)

So unless you can be absolutely sure that your hardware manufacturer of choice has the bpm right the milliseconds won't matter.

And it also means that i have to live with the fact that my rs7k may actually not give me a correct readout of the bpm, so that any speculations about the correct number of ms on the wedge are meaningless anyway.

But i don't care, cause i can't hear it at that level of detail anyway ;-)

(Itb may be more accurate, but that is not what i use, so...)
Old 16th March 2010
  #175
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Well, yes, a slight pisstake was in there somewhere... heh

...

I am quite sure that i wouldn't feel the difference.

Remember a thread i made about differences in BPM between different manufacturers equipment?

It showed that most of them due to internal design do not display the accurate bpm. (I.e. it may say 120, where the real tempo as measured with a clock would be 119,8)

So unless you can be absolutely sure that your hardware manufacturer of choice has the bpm right the milliseconds won't matter.

And it also means that i have to live with the fact that my rs7k may actually not give me a correct readout of the bpm, so that any speculations about the correct number of ms on the wedge are meaningless anyway.

But i don't care, cause i can't hear it at that level of detail anyway ;-)

(Itb may be more accurate, but that is not what i use, so...)
Well this is what I was talking about earlier. No piece of gear has an identical clock. Which is why the quadraverb (with Atari kicking out the sequencing) back in memory just didn't groove as a delay for me, whereas an SDE3000 would. Set at the same millisecond! So the difference between them should likely have been LESS than a millisecond. One grooved, one did nothing but obstruct the flow. Couldn't use the Quadraverb for delay. Even on software the bpm isn't the same, if you transfer audio between them. I seem to remember Logic and Cubase were 0.2bpm off, can't remember which way, but that's a while back.

And of course they still bloody matter. Just because you don't "know what actual ms setting" it is in absolute reality...which is irrelevant to the max....your reality to worry about is your groove, and whether it rocks or not. And if you really can not hear the 359/360/361 difference I am shocked. You saying 'I'm quite sure' reads 'I don't know' from here, and since you don't know it makes me wonder how come you don't know?? Have you only ever used a plugin delay set to sync with pretty pictures of notes on it or what? Try it. You might surprise yourself.
Old 16th March 2010
  #176
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post

And of course they still bloody matter. Just because you don't "know what actual ms setting" it is in absolute reality...which is irrelevant to the max....your reality to worry about is your groove, and whether it rocks or not. And if you really can not hear the 359/360/361 difference I am shocked. You saying 'I'm quite sure' reads 'I don't know' from here, and since you don't know it makes me wonder how come you don't know?? Have you only ever used a plugin delay set to sync with pretty pictures of notes on it or what? Try it. You might surprise yourself.
No, it doesn't matter, the groove is not in the milliseconds.
Drum grooves are basically length of samples and playing with velocity - but wether a hit falls a few ms to either side of the grid is not important. Imo.

However - how the other instruments fall around the grid/drums is quite important, because that determines the groove of the entire song, but that isn't measured in under 10 ms increments either. (This is for "handplayed" music, as opposed to programmed, of course.)
Old 16th March 2010
  #177
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
No, it doesn't matter, the groove is not in the milliseconds.
Drum grooves are basically length of samples and playing with velocity - but wether a hit falls a few ms to either side of the grid is not important. Imo.

However - how the other instruments fall around the grid/drums is quite important, because that determines the groove of the entire song, but that isn't measured in under 10 ms increments either. (This is for "handplayed" music, as opposed to programmed, of course.)
lol. Does sound like you're contradicting yourself now, as surely the drums are part of that important entire song.

And then you drop the bomb: FOR HAND PLAYED MUSIC.........lol

Check what the thread is called. I am all the time talking about quantised dance music by the way.......
Old 17th March 2010
  #178
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
lol. Does sound like you're contradicting yourself now, as surely the drums are part of that important entire song.

And then you drop the bomb: FOR HAND PLAYED MUSIC.........lol

Check what the thread is called. I am all the time talking about quantised dance music by the way.......
You are right, this discussion isn't about live/played music. My bad.

So, no samples of live players/instruments with groove?

In that case - did music in the 80's, before in depth editing of timing became available, not groove?
Or music in the 90's that was created with archaic equipment?
Old 17th March 2010
  #179
Lives for gear
 
aof21's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Audiophile claims.
I would so much love to see a test like this done irl - under controlled conditions and with unbiased testers.
Sure, see if you can find an ear training program somewhere in your area. I've attended classes with Dave Moulton where you do this.

Quote:
Regarding determining predelays in milliseconds - i want some of the stuff you are smoking. Must be potent indeed.
Oh yeah, it's a real bunch of stoners, those people with well-trained ears and ability to hear sonic detail.


Here, check the link. Last time I checked Dave Moulton is a fairly well respected audio expert, teacher, published author. Endorsements for his program from two of the biggest audio engineering programs in the US.
Moulton Laboratories :: Golden Ears

Oh, and sorry, I was wrong. His program has you listening for pre-delay times in the TENTHS OF MILLISECONDS.

But I'm sure they are just all high, right?

Quote:
As for lining up everything on the same sample level - well, that would make a difference if you had copied samples in the track to prevent phase problems.
Yes, so once sounds are off by even a few samples you can start to here phase problems between your drum sounds..... follow that train of logic.....


Quote:
In simonators sound examples where the conga was moved there was no audible difference (obviously apart from volume) when playing back two examples simultaneously (in cubase) - which actually surprised me, because i had expected to hear at least hear a little "smear" or "blur" on the conga with the difference being as high as 10 ms when playing the + 10 tick and - 10 tick examples together.
yes, you cannot hear it. That fact has been well established. Some of us can.


Quote:
Of course there is a threshold where you can actually hear your track getting untight - but i doubt that it is in the under 5 ms range.
of course. It's all relative. 5 ms is not going to make a world of difference. It makes a micro difference.

In the same way, people can sing out of tune, notes can be played entire 32nd notes early or late, velocities can be all over the map, we can clip tracks, have noise in our recordings, etc. I've worked with plenty of musicians, mixers etc, who have difficulty hearing all kinds of things.

I think you're right, maybe we shouldn't worry too much about 5ms. At the end of the day, no 5ms is not going to make or break a track. the hook, the lyrics (if applicable), the bassline, the groove, etc is what is going to make people like a song, not whether the hi hat is early or late by a few milliseconds.

But whether or not we can genuinely hear that and whether or not WE feel it is part of a larger picture that affects the final sound of a track is a completely different story. Part of what some of us on Gearslutz are doing is not songwriting, but engineering. People bring me to tracks to make their stuff sound as tight as possible and based on my personal experience, one thing I do is often move stuff around within the + / - 1-10ms range to help tighten it up. I can hear the difference, even if they can't, they like the final product. Certain MODERN drum sounds require this type of precision.


.......

Quote:
Do some of you people realize that sound travels with a speed of appr. 1 foot per ms?
(For europeans 1 meter = 3 ms)

For all of you that are this sensitive to timing as you claim, moving around in a normal sized room with two stereo speakers would present you with the most hideous rythmic variations as you move just a few meters to either side of the exact center of the stereo field.
Of course. That's why I work in an extremely well treated room (or on headphones) and I know where the sweet spot is. I would never dream of doing precision mixing work if I was located even 20-30 cm to either side.

And as is the philosophy with most precision mixing and mastering work, THIS IS EXACTLY WHY THIS STUFF MATTERS. So if you're trying to make extremely clean, tight, precise music and you accidentally have one of your percussion elements hitting a touch late. You then send your track off to mastering, or compress / limit it yourself and all of a sudden one of your biggest drops sounds weird because you had an element that was late by 5 ms and when your compressor / limiter slams down it doesn't come through the window for the attack time and instead comes after it....

I could go on and on.

Go in the mastering forum and ask them if they can hear 5ms and if it makes a difference.
Old 17th March 2010
  #180
Lives for gear
 
aof21's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
You are right, this discussion isn't about live/played music. My bad.
nope it's not. it's the electronic music forum. most of what we are talking about does not apply to live played music. Some of what we are talking about are specific aspects of making extremely precise, tightly quantized modern dance music. if you're playing live music 5ms is probably not going to matter and not going to be heard.

Quote:
So, no samples of live players/instruments with groove?
And you're still misunderstanding the argument. I think someone might have made the mistake of saying that if it's off by 5ms "it CANT groove". That's not true. Of course it can groove if it's off by even 50-60 ms. There's all kinds of loose things that groove. In fact sometimes being loose all over the place is great!

But you started to argue that people CANT HEAR 5ms. And that's where you started to go out of our element.

Quote:
In that case - did music in the 80's, before in depth editing of timing became available, not groove?
Or music in the 90's that was created with archaic equipment?
sure it grooved, it sounded great! again, I don't think anyone is making the claim that 5 ms is going to RUIN a groove and if they are, they are just as wrong as you. But if you have followed the progression of music production techniques since the 80s and 90s you will notice that most relatively popular commercial music electronic and otherwise has gotten more precise. Vocal tuning being another great example. Did music in the 80s and 90s sound bad because it wasn't tuned as tightly as modern vocals? No of course not. But can you hear that it is more off than modern music that has been tuned very precisely? Of course.

Whether or not you agree or like the aesthetic or can hear the difference is a completely different argument.

And please keep that seperate. But please, don't come into a thread where people are discussing legitimate aspects of music production and try to discredit us by saying we are liars and don't know what we're talking about and we are "poor people" who don't understand and we must be "smoking something."
πŸ“ Reply
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
πŸ–¨οΈ Show Printable Version
βœ‰οΈ Email this Page
πŸ” Search thread
♾️ Similar Threads
πŸŽ™οΈ View mentioned gear