The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
A thread for asking the things you should know by now but don't
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6121
Gear Head
 
IGotWorms's Avatar
 

I was referencing the red3(vst) not marking gain reduction levels until -5. I hadn't fully thought about how different songs make the compressor react differently. Thanks guys!
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6122
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by IGotWorms View Post
I hadn't fully thought about how different songs make the compressor react differently. Thanks guys!
Well, if you think about it:

If different songs didn't make the compressor react differently, then there would really be no need for any controls (or metering), now would there?
.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6123
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Changing speed

Is there an easy way to change the speed of a track without artifacts? A client has a song that we wants to 3:30 instead of the 3:40. I'm in Protools and have Melodyne. Is it possible to bounce it down at 44.1k sampling and then somehow play it back at 48k?
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6124
Lives for gear
 
Richard Crowley's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
Is there an easy way to change the speed of a track without artifacts?
Try this:
http://onlinetonegenerator.com/time-stretcher.html
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6125
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
I tried the Time Compression Expansion plugin included with Protools but it compromised the sound too much to be useable. If I could play an 88.2k file at 96k, that could do the trick. I don't mind the pitch shift.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6126
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Well, I'll be damned! I just imported an 88.2k file into a 96k session without converting the sampling rate and it worked. Unfortunately, I think it sounds a bit too fast and changed the quality of the vocal a bit too much for my taste, but it definitely worked! Didn't realize you could do that!
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6127
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
Well, I'll be damned! I just imported an 88.2k file into a 96k session without converting the sampling rate and it worked. Unfortunately, I think it sounds a bit too fast and changed the quality of the vocal a bit too much for my taste, but it definitely worked! Didn't realize you could do that!
Van Halen learned about this "feature" the hard way!

Back in the day, when they did "Jump" they had the keyboard track (and the click for the drummer) played from a DAT tape (recorded at 44.1kHz), and everybody followed it.

One night, the DAT somehow accidentally got played back at 48kHz.

This was the result:
.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6128
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
oops...
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6129
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
Is there an easy way to change the speed of a track without artifacts? A client has a song that we wants to 3:30 instead of the 3:40. I'm in Protools and have Melodyne. Is it possible to bounce it down at 44.1k sampling and then somehow play it back at 48k?
I've had to do this before and through a little trial and error what I found was first rendering the stems and then individually time stretching those gave a much better result. And by better, I mean I really couldn't hear anything but the speed change, whereas I definitely could hear subtle issues with warping the whole track.

My info is dated though. I did this 8 years ago or so, so I don't know if algorithms are better.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6130
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Thanks! Thought o that but didn't try it yet. There's a lot o tracks involved in this piece.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6131
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
oops...
Oh yeah!

...STILL, ya really DO have to admire their determination to "soldier on" through that trainwreck (knowing full well that the audience already loved them when they walked in the door, and was at least as high as they were)!
.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6132
Lives for gear
 
Quetz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
Thanks! Thought o that but didn't try it yet. There's a lot o tracks involved in this piece.
By stems he means submixed groups of tracks e.g. Drums, guitars, not all the individual tracks so should be easier than you think.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6133
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quetz View Post
By stems he means submixed groups of tracks e.g. Drums, guitars, not all the individual tracks so should be easier than you think.
right. missed that word somehow. Reading too quickly. Still, wasn't encouraged enough by doing it wholesale to have confidence in it being good enough. And frankly, I don't think it matters enough to mess with it. Client needs to maybe just bite the bullet and not fuss over an extra 10 seconds.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6134
Gear Head
 

Something I should know by now: Why, oh why are there monitor controllers that cost thousands of dollars?

I understand "because there are people who will pay it"...

But what I don't understand is what monitor controllers are doing that justify the cost. I mean, the signals coming from the DAW are already line level. Powered speakers and power amplifiers are expecting a line level signal. So, I don't suppose any type of amplification, transformer, tube, or processing is used. Do they even change the impedance?

Other than a fancy A/B/C switch with a talkback mic thrown in, are these high end controllers really improving the signal? Or is it just snake oil?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6135
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by camacozie View Post
Something I should know by now: Why, oh why are there monitor controllers that cost thousands of dollars?

I understand "because there are people who will pay it"...

But what I don't understand is what monitor controllers are doing that justify the cost. I mean, the signals coming from the DAW are already line level. Powered speakers and power amplifiers are expecting a line level signal. So, I don't suppose any type of amplification, transformer, tube, or processing is used. Do they even change the impedance?

Other than a fancy A/B/C switch with a talkback mic thrown in, are these high end controllers really improving the signal? Or is it just snake oil?
It would seem that there would be very little in these things, but even driving the impedance of a volume pot is not nothing, so often they include active preamp circuits, even though you could certainly get by just going passive. Problem is, if you have say three sets of speakers to toggle between, as is often the case in the average studio, you will need three different volume pots, and associated buffered preamp circuits for each, so you're really looking essentially at three separate preamps. Considering that people pay quite a lot to do even a single stereo preamp really well, it is not surprising or exorbitant for such a controller to be a few grand. That would pay for a nice but relatively modest high end stereo preamp.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6136
Lives for gear
 
thismercifulfate's Avatar
When you put a cheap monitor controller between your interface/DA convertor and your monitors, it degrades the sound quality and the stereo imaging. A quality one doesn’t mess with the sound at all, which as previously noted is not an easy feat considering all the functions that the device has to do. Fancier units have extra features like talkback systems, built in convertors, SPL metering and more. If you’re running Rokits out of a Scarlett, you may not see the value in a nice monitor controller, but when you have nice gear and a discerning ear, then you know.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6137
Here for the gear
 

Going from a JBL passive switcher to the Dangerous Monitor ST was a massive. Components fail in cheaper passive controllers, speakers sound different at different volumes, differences in L/R.

The workflow functionality of being able to mute speakers, change speakers, and have different mixes routed to the analog inputs and barely have to think about it is worth at least have the price of admission, sonics are worth the other half.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6138
Lives for gear
 

If you connect a set of speakers via AES/EBU to two different audio interfaces (no conversion), what is the technical reason that the two interfaces could sound different ?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6139
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
Is there an easy way to change the speed of a track without artifacts? A client has a song that we wants to 3:30 instead of the 3:40. I'm in Protools and have Melodyne. Is it possible to bounce it down at 44.1k sampling and then somehow play it back at 48k?
Tell him:

A. Fine. What sections do you want me to clip?

B. F%$K Off
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6140
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by planck View Post
If you connect a set of speakers via AES/EBU to two different audio interfaces (no conversion), what is the technical reason that the two interfaces could sound different ?


I don't understand how you can say "no conversion'. You can't send AES directly to a speaker. It has to be converted to analog first. The interfaces are what does that conversion.

If you are using two different audio interfaces, you may be feeding these interfaces identical information via AES - but each interface is doing its own individual conversion to analog, right?

So the possibility that they might sound different is hardly a riddle.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6141
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post


I don't understand how you can say "no conversion'. You can't send AES directly to a speaker. It has to be converted to analog first. The interfaces are what does that conversion.

If you are using two different audio interfaces, you may be feeding these interfaces identical information via AES - but each interface is doing its own individual conversion to analog, right?

So the possibility that they might sound different is hardly a riddle.
And the converters are also feeding analogue out put sections which obviously vary, and the power supplies that feed both the digital and analogue sections are different.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6142
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post


I don't understand how you can say "no conversion'. You can't send AES directly to a speaker. It has to be converted to analog first. The interfaces are what does that conversion.

If you are using two different audio interfaces, you may be feeding these interfaces identical information via AES - but each interface is doing its own individual conversion to analog, right?

So the possibility that they might sound different is hardly a riddle.
Difficult with sketchy info, but I would presume the speakers have AES/EBU and the D/A?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6143
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne View Post
Difficult with sketchy info, but I would presume the speakers have AES/EBU and the D/A?
Ah, so then he is saying he has 2 interfaces, they both output AES and the digital signal from one interface sounds different from the digital signal from another interface when it hits the digital speaker?

That's so out there, I guess I had a hard time conceptualizing the premise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by planck
what is the technical reason that the two interfaces could sound different ?
I suppose there could be 'technical' reasons, jitter or something, but if I had to bet my own money on it, I would go All In on "placebo"
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6144
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post


I don't understand how you can say "no conversion'. You can't send AES directly to a speaker. It has to be converted to analog first. The interfaces are what does that conversion.
No. The interfaces are not doing any conversion. Interfaces are connected via aes only. Digital data is fed to the speakers directly.

The only conversion is the d/a in the speaker.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6145
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by planck View Post
No. The interfaces are not doing any conversion. Interfaces are connected via aes only. Digital data is fed to the speakers directly.

The only conversion is the d/a in the speaker.
then I am at a loss for a technical explanation.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6146
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by planck View Post
If you connect a set of speakers via AES/EBU to two different audio interfaces (no conversion), what is the technical reason that the two interfaces could sound different ?
Quote:
No. The interfaces are not doing any conversion. Interfaces are connected via aes only. Digital data is fed to the speakers directly.

The only conversion is the d/a in the speaker.
Good. Now that that part of the rig is sorted out.. I'd guess the next might be who's doing the clock master?
This is getting above my pay grade. At one point it was said the master is best being internal via the final D/A point. But now even RME seems to say they're to the point the dif is trivial. Here that point is the speakers, and I'll step aside.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6147
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by planck View Post
If you connect a set of speakers via AES/EBU to two different audio interfaces (no conversion), what is the technical reason that the two interfaces could sound different ?
Standard diagnostics, eliminate the obvious, moving backwards from end point to source. Assuming using the exact same cabling, power supply, the next point to check would be the input of the interface(s). The input circuits/software may differ greatly.

Next source output. Are the interfaces using the same driver software, etc.
Old 1 week ago
  #6148
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by IGotWorms View Post
How am I picking up a louder clipping signal on the left channel If there is no left and right being recorded?
I only see one channel in that image.
.
Old 1 week ago
  #6149
Gear Head
 
IGotWorms's Avatar
 

Nevermind I think I figured it out. Im just special.
Old 1 week ago
  #6150
Lives for gear
 
StoneyBCN's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by IGotWorms View Post
The top of half the waveform is larger than the bottom half(does that indicate left and right?). During playback of that part the left channel was clipping. I may be looking at this wrong
It's a mono signal. The waveform is asymmetrical. It's no need to worry. In some cases it's desired. Just make sure you use a hpf at some point...
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…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump