bitflipper

WOW. You even nailed the vocal EQ to capture that 60's U47 tone with just a touch of tube grit. Please consider tackling some of the lesser-covered tracks from that album, such as You Won't See Me or Wait.

You have to reassign those 4 tracks to 4 of the new tracks. Check out the Cakewalk Reference Guide, page 1225. If you don't have a copy, download it here.

Yes. Yes indeed! That's really what a stereo panner is doing, since a stereo track is just two mono streams interleaved together. You can avoid the whole problem by recording your stereo guitars into two mono tracks rather than a single stereo track. The downside to that method is it makes automation, compression and EQ more complicated because everything's duplicated.

This fellow made a choir library with his wife and kids while stuck at home during the pandemic. The result is pretty novel, most likely unlike any other choir library you already have. And it sounds surprisingly good. It's free (requires full Kontakt) for getting on his mailing list. It would appear that his ambition is to start a commercial Kontakt library business. The Meyer Choir

Imagine a true stereo source on stage, such as a drum kit. I call it true stereo because sound emanates from more than one place. Now imagine scooting the whole kit over to one side of the stage. You still want it to be stereo, just moved over. The floor tom that had been panned 10% right might now be in the center, and the kick that had been centered is now 10% left. That's true stereo panning.

I spend a lot of time with my head cocked like a curious German Shepherd, visualizing the notes as if I was looking at a keyboard. Still, the standard orientation is much less confusing to users. Think of it this way: the vast majority of graphs show time in the x-axis and amplitude in the y-axis. Imagine how confusing it would be the other way around, e.g. looking at interest rates plotted over time, but with time as the vertical axis.

Yes. The standard balance control on a hi-fi consists of two ganged volume potentiometers wired in reverse of one another. When you spin the knob, it turns one side up and the other side down. Its purpose is to compensate for asymmetrical speaker placement. Cakewalk's pan slider works the same way on stereo tracks. That has limitations, because if there are significant differences between the content of the left and right channels, you could lose important information. For example, a Leslie speaker in stereo would lose some of its effect with a balance control. "True" stereo panning means you treat each side as a mono signal and pan them in a complementary fashion. Pan to the left, and the right channel moves to the left but does not reduce in volume. The result is still stereophonic in nature but now shifted toward one side. In the Leslie example, it's as if the speaker is situated to one side of the stage but still broadcasting in 360 degrees as expected.

My favorite for bass is Meldaproductions' MDynamicEQ. It's a great static EQ, but being dynamic as well, it's useful for dealing with bass resonances. The dynamic action also lets you add some high-frequency boosts only on the notes that need it. These qualities also make it well-suited for vocals.

Grab the Pan Knob from Boz Digital Labs. It has two modes, balance and pan, with the latter being a true stereo pan function. There are other stereo panners out there, but this is the best one I've found. It keeps low frequencies centered (you can set the crossover frequency) and lets you specify the pan law. It's an essential plugin for me and goes on every stereo track. If the $49 price tag puts you off, just be patient; Boz has frequent sales.

Chrome has more extensions available than any other browser. But there are some that are specific to Firefox. I used to use a video capture plugin with Firefox that was better than anything on Chrome. It could download YouTube videos. Chrome was never going to allow that, since they and YT have the same parent company. Eventually, YT flexed its muscles and got every video downloader to exempt YouTube, including FF.

These are some pretty obscure bugs, none of which I was aware of. Typical for FF updates. Goes to show just how stable their initial releases are, when you have to reach to find any problems.

Brave, I think, is not open-source. It is built on the Chrome API, which is not open-source like Firefox. That allows it to run all the Chrome extensions, but because it lacks a mechanism for vetting them, any time you install one it shows a scary warning about how they can't verify it's legit.

Good idea, thanks. However, I think I'll uninstall Chrome and leave it gone. Brave looks and works like Chrome, even supports Chrome extensions, blocks tracking cookies, and preserves anonymity by using DuckDuckGo as its search engine. It even seems to perform a little snappier. If you actually like ads, you can enable them and get paid for watching them. As for what's wrong with Firefox...it used to be my go-to browser until they went through a rough period of nasty bugs and daily fix releases. That's when I switched to Chrome, which had the advantage of running a little faster. I just wanted reliable software, and wasn't thinking back then about Google tracking my every move. I do, however, still use Thunderbird as my email client.

I've done that, too. Embarrassing. When I joined my current band 5 years ago, I brought the VoiceLive along to the first rehearsal. The singer reacted with horror, demanding I never bring that "thing" back again. All our vocals will be live, she said. Fast forward to four years later, and two of the four singers in the band have gone, leaving only her and myself as vocalists. One day at rehearsal, I quietly set up the VoiceLive and started using it without her knowledge. That went on for several months. She never noticed, other than to comment on how great our harmonies were sounding. The trick was keeping the fake harmonies -12 dB below the dry signal and turning off effects and auto-tuning. You couldn't actually hear the generated harmonies, just a general fattening of the real ones. I came clean after about 4-5 months, after which she became considerably more amenable to the idea of electronic reinforcement. I also had to break it to her that my synth doesn't have any violins inside, either.

No. I generally avoid free utilities, especially file-conversion apps, because they are so often laden with hidden payloads. I have a virus that's been on my computer for two years that I'm pretty sure hitched a ride on a video conversion utility. It's a really sneaky one that no anti-virus, anti-spyware or rootkit identifier tool has been able to identify. The symptom is a page popping up in Chrome advertising online gambling, porn or Indian support scams. I switched to Brave as my default browser to get rid of it. Between Foobar2000 and Adobe Audition I have all the CD-ripper and file conversion capabilities I need.

That's actually how I initially learned them circa 1973. In a classroom, from my ultra-conservative instructor.

I, too, had the Rev 1 version. One of the things that got stolen in my burglary. Insurance bought me a new one, but it's not as good as the old one. Before that, I had an even more primitive version that predated the VoiceLive. Plus I've had a Boss VE-20, more affordable than any of the others but just as fake-sounding. BTW, you can adjust the "perfection" variable.

Man takes his dog to the vet, says the dog has been acting listless. Vet prescribes vitamins. Vitamins? the man said, that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I want a second opinion! So the vet brings in a cat, who walks around the dog and then looks up at the vet and nods. Yep, says the vet. Vitamins. WTF? I want a third opinion! So the vet brings in a Labrador retriever, who sniffs the patient and nods to the doc. Yep, says the vet. That clinches it, and hands the man a bill for $300. 300?!? why so high? Says the vet: don't blame me. You're the one who demanded the cat scan and the lab test.

^^^ That observation is true for every drum sampler I've ever used. Or, for that matter, every virtual instrument that strives to emulate real-life instruments. Getting a credible performance is almost always going to involve some CC automation, whether it's drums or violins. And yes, it can get messy. But don't let that put you off - the rewards are worth the effort.

^^^Well, that's rather cynical...even if mostly true. There are, however, many products that do a decent enough job. Unfortunately, they also cost a fair bit of money, starting at around $150. TH3 is a pretty good mid-priced example. Of course, there are freebies. Lots of them. They don't cost anything, so poke around the internet and give 'em a try. Here are a few lists to get you started. Granted, each is just one person's opinions, but it's a jumping-off point to your adventure. https://www.gearnews.com/top-7-free-amp-sims-the-best-freeware-virtual-guitar-amp-plug-ins/ https://bedroomproducersblog.com/2012/02/21/bpb-freeware-studio-best-free-guitar-amp-simulator-vstau-plugins/ https://www.musicianonamission.com/guitar-amp-simulators-vs-real/

^^^ Was just about to make this point before Craig beat me to it. An alternative to clip gain is to use a gain plugin such as the (free!) ones from Blue Cat. I do this on every vocal track because instead of pulling an entire clip up or down, I can precisely automate gain for both large and small sections regardless of clip membership. Often, I can avoid using a de-esser this way. Putting it in front of the compressor means I'm not constantly re-adjusting compressor threshold as I tweak the track. Plus I don't have to rely entirely on the compressor for leveling, allowing for less-brutal compression ratios. The Blue Cat gain controls are more useful than a plain old volume knob, as they can be scaled (set min/max levels) and ganged (multiple tracks from one knob). When controlling more than one track, one can be opposite the other, i.e as one goes up, the other goes down.

They are. Maybe even a little better. However, I have to add an important caveat: artificial harmonies are a tricky business if you don't want them to sound fake. While harmony-on-the-fly is OK for live performance when used judiciously, they sound pretty bad in a recording. Except, of course, when you're specifically reaching for an artificial-sounding effect such as what's demonstrated so beautifully in the video at the top of this thread. I have only managed to fake acceptable vocal harmonies one way - using Melodyne. Even then, you have to fiddle with formants to make them sound natural, and probably don't want to feature them too prominently in the mix. Whenever I've done that, it's been to create a single high part, higher than I could ever sing myself, sitting atop three naturally-sung parts.

I've never noticed them, either. That's probably down to my poor eyesight - even after having them pointed out, I couldn't see them right away.

There is a simple native solution: look at enough of them long enough and you reach a point where you can recognize them right away. Kind of like how electronics techs can read resistor values at a glance without actually decoding the colored stripes. Also consider downloading a copy of foobar2000. Has a lot of handy features.

Get MediaInfo here. When installed, it becomes a right-click menu option, very convenient. Tells you pretty much everything that can be determined by the file contents alone, including metadata for mp3/flac and bit depth, sample rate and channel count for wav files.