Actually, the recording might turn out fine, even if not as good as FOH.
I mean, you're probably right... but you don't necessarily know for sure how they have their monitors mixed. Sure, vocals only is more common, but plenty of folks want some of the instruments in there too.
It also might have been a sidefill monitor... I've seen plenty of places send the same mix to sidefills as they send to FOH. It's easy to do, doesn't need a separate mix, and is especially nice to have on bigger stages. I've used a minidisc w/a decent mic to record a show off a sidefill before, and it sounded fine.
That would be a cool choice. The last time this came up on Slashdot someone made a pretty good case for Bruce Campbell... and had me convinced it was a good idea.:)
>All right cell networks won't cover 100% of areas. But close !
Uh... not really. In particular the types of places (where people get lost) that require a search & rescue team. They aren't the types of places with a lot of people, which means there probably isn't any cell coverage. And there isn't much incentive to provide it. I imagine cell coverage will increase a lot in 10 years, but don't see it going into remote or wilderness areas.
Example: Around here, I get coverage everywhere I go on the average day. But if I head up into the mountains to play (which I do often... and I'm not talking about skiing areas or resorts) I lose signal within a few miles past the last populated areas.
I could sit here and circle huge areas of my state without coverage, and I'm sure others can for theirs.
Not to get on your case, but I'm starting to get a little tired of this myth.
There are no such strings attached to the Gates Foundation computers. The only requirement is that you provide internet access with them.
We even got an optional "internet server". I told them straight up I would wipe it clean & make it a Debian/Apache/PHP/Squid box to replace the current one. That was cool with them... they just wouldn't support that software. They didn't even blink. Didn't care. As long as it was put to good use, that's what they wanted. Hardware support wouldn't be withheld, either.
I was a little suprised myself, and thought it was pretty cool of them.
There, I said it. The one good thing I have to say about Gates.:) Believe it or not, the Foundation machines really are a gift. Not just a "here's your free Crack sample" thing.
Libraries generally accept most donations, including books of course. But part of the libraries job is to maintain a good collection... often within limited space. They can't put every donated book on the shelf, and one shouldn't assume that they will. Remember, the reason these book sales exist is to weed the collection. A sometimes difficult task (most librarians would love to keep most everything if they could) that needs to be done.
If possible, donated books will be looked over, the same way. But sometimes they might not be. There might be so many that they don't have time to go over them and they need the space back. (We've had enormous amounts of techserv space taken up by donation that we really needed to move, and book sales can do that.) If they can go through them, they'll pick out what they think they really need. They might find some books they don't have already that they wish to add, some they'd like additional copies of (usually due to high demand and long hold queues), or maybe replace an existing item if there is a donated copy is in better condition.
Now, if you are specifically donating books because you feel they should be added to the collection, you need to talk to the librarian in charge of that part of the collection first. (In your example, the "Children's Librarian" or "Children's Collection Developer" is who you need.) Tell them that you have some books to donate because you think it will be a valuable addition to their collection, and it is something you feel is missing.
If they agree with you (or they change their mind after talking with you) they'll happily accept the donation, send them to get cataloged/prepped, and put them out. (You might have saved them the trouble of sorting through piles of other junk to find them.)
If not, then you know if you donate it it will probably be sold. So you can choose to keep it if you prefer.
Hope that helps, and sorry to hear about your books taking a route you might not have expected. I'm sure it happens a lot.
If you talk to the librarians, you stand a much better chance at getting them in the collection. You might even get a little "donated by so & so" plaque in the front cover as a thank you if it really is good stuff.:)
Tolkien himself nixed the Eru/Iluvatar theory. I do like the ones claiming him to represent either the reader, or the creator. (Not Eru... Tolkien himself.)
But I think my favorite (and the one that makes the most sense to me) is the one that claims he is Aule. There's an excellent writeup on that, but don't know where it is at the moment. I think the link someone else gives below probably will have it, though.
But I vote for The Sorcerer's Apprentice... the more SCO tries to take him (and us) down, the more trouble they'll get.
I'm having visions of McBride in a robe & funny hat, frantically trying (and failing) to stop the army of busily working brooms. They simply ignore his wild efforts, and he shouts spell after useless spell to no avail.
"His point was that the existance of background noise and limitations in audio bandwidth were the primary causes for a song to be unpopular."
Err... no. That's not how I read it. Here it is:
"The biggest hurdle to getting your music listened to by the general public was that HISSSSSSS"
Getting your music listened to isn't quite the same as it ending up being popular.
I absolutely agree that the song itself is the most important thing. If it sucks, it sucks whether the sound quality is good or not.
I think the point was that even if the music itself was good, the old-style do-it-yourself equipment has nowhere near the sound quality of current stuff, and people just didn't like to listen to it AT ALL.
The sound quality was a major turn-off... one might not even get as far as actually listening to and paying attention to the music. Your brain would go "this sounds pretty crappy" and tune it out. Maybe even make your hand reach over and just shut it off.
You don't have that problem nowadays. You can make a recording and have it sound quite good... perhaps not what you'd get in a full blown studio, but that doesn't mean it doesn't sound good enough to listen to. At the very least demos are much better than they used to be. That means people are much more likely to actually listen to it. Maybe more than once, if they like it. (A crappy sounding demo won't get much playtime even if the song is good.)
You've got to get people to actually listen to something before they can decide whether they like it or not. One of the worst obstacles to that is now gone.
Now it can be truely judged on its merits as a song... because the evil hiss demon has been destroyed.
Yeah, I remember VINES. And I was in Albany Ga when they first started moving things over to NT. I was stuck in a programming shop at the time, but had done network/banyan stuff previously.
I wasn't impressed.
Dang I'm having some memories flooding back. About that same time the happy little unit I was in was swallowed up by ATLASS, which was major suckage. Great people, stuck with a lousy, ever-changing job. The requirements and tools kept changing over and over. "We're going to use X for this now, so we're going to rewrite everything". Let's throw more people at it, and see what happens!
-- Not cool in my case, because I was really a network guy that got screwed by some stupid requirements when they reorganized MOS's the year before. Non NCO's had a small time window to apply for transfer to the "new" 4066 MOS. I spent that entire (tiny) window in the field in Korea. MSgt back in Oki told us about it when we came back, but it was too late for the couple of peons that had gone. Everyone else in the platoon switched! At least that's what I think happened. Mainly I remember cursing for about a month straight, wondering why we hadn't been told. Duh, because the MSgt was a comm guy, and probably didn't even realize there was much difference.
I got sent to Albany as a programmer, but hadn't touched a lick of code in years. And it was ADA, not C++. Grr.) Talk about wasting resources. I was really good at what I did, but then they went and stuck me in something where I didn't have much of a clue. And no training so that I could become a little more useful. Frustrating.
Heh, heh. Those were the days. I wonder what ever became of ATLASS...
Hey, there. I went in in 93 also, and was a 4067. (That was a programmer... ADA to be more specific. I think it replaced 4063, which was COBOL. Not sure though.)
I went from Quantico to Okinawa and worked mostly in networks, but missed the window for converting to "small systems" or whatever it was. So I ended up in Albany Georgia, too. (Summer of 96 till I got out in Jul 97.) Shoot, I might have even known you.:)
I'm curious, now. And I just noticed something... if your nick is based on your name, I think I did.:)
Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. I think audiophiles that go for that kind of crap are total nutjobs, but some of those lines aren't bunk.
There were a few somewhat valid critiques of music passages (like the different ranges of bass frequencies being there or not). But I think the point here was that the nutjob was atrributing the fact to having a $1000 cable or not.
Different tubes do sound different, though. Talk to any musician that uses amplifiers... stick different tubes in and it will sound like a different amp. It should be less of an issue w/ stereo equipment (since instrument amp tubes are PURPOSELY colored) but I'm sure it still holds true. (That doesn't mean it is enough to really care about.)
Same goes for pre-amps. Push them hard, and they will sound different. Certain freqeuncies the pre is more efficient with MAY become slightly more pronounced than others. (The better the pre, the less this should be true.) They will also distort. Some times clearly distorting, sometimes just sounding like a really hot signal. But more to the point... you shouldn't be pushing a preamp hard to begin with, unless you actually want distortion. (Not uncommon with instruments. Dumb with a stereo. If you need more volume, you turn up the power amp, not blast the pre.)
Lastly, if these looneys truly want their "perfect listening experience" and "totally faithful reproduction" the last thing they need to do is blow $20,000 on a fancy stereo. They need to call up the studio that mastered the recording and find out what the mastering engineer used for monitoring while he worked. (Probably more than one system, but they'll have a primary reference.) That is what they need to buy.
Good powered reference monitors aren't cheap, but they aren't insanely gratuitously expensive either. If accuracy was what these people really wanted, that's what they need to get.
And if they think they'll do better with equipment that is "better" than the monitoring equipment the engineers at the studio used to create it... just walk away. They are so full of shit and so far gone you'll never get any logic through their head.
*Having just finished pimping Spinal Tap in another post*
I gotta concur on Citizen Kane, too. Great extras there. The one I got also includes an entire documentary on the real-life feud between Wells and Hearst that resulted from the film. (Hearst's efforts to stop the film from being finished, and later to keep it out of theaters, etc.) Wonderful stuff.
I'll mention another Tap extra... there's gotta be almost an hour of scenes they got cut. Many of which might have been good enough to not be cut... if they didn't mind making it a 3 hour movie.:)
Because if it is done well (admittedly it often isn't) it can add a lot to the experience.
I would throw away all of the extras & commentaries in most of my DVD's without a second thought... but a couple of them are pure gold. My favorite? The best commentary track ever done... "This is Spinal Tap".
For the 2 or 3 people around that might not know, it's a classic mock documentary of an aging british rock band. One of the funniest movies ever.
Get this: The commentary is provided by the 3 main characters... and performed IN CHARACTER as if it is still a real documentary, and they've been asked to comment on it. They proceed to rag on the "director", reminisce events, tell you bizzare "behind the scenes" goodies, and so on.
In summary... it's an entire brand new Spinal Tap movie, just as hilarious as the first. I'll give that one up as soon as someone talks them into playing Stonehenge again. (NEVER)
>but IIRC most studio masters these days are ADAT (I could be wrong, it's been a few years since ive been in a studio), which at the best offers 20-bit/48kHz, 20-20,000Hz response.
ADAT is still very common and popular. But it has been passed up in that respect. (20/48, etc)
>Are there any multitrack professional-level 24/96 recorders
Heck, yeah. Tons of them. You can even get decent ones for home/small studio usage. (Look at Midiman (M-Audio), ST Audio, MOTU, Terratec, etc.) Not to mention Pro-Tools stuff. Good example: Midiman Delta 1010 (8-in, 8-out 24/96 recording interface for your computer) can be had for under $400 on Ebay. Not much more than that new.
There are also many stand-alone hard disk units (Tascam, Fostex, Mackie, and so on) that operate much like ADAT machines but with higher resolution and removable drives instead of tapes.
Go to any online music store and look in their recording section.
"Jesus is coming. Look busy." You wouldn't believe the amount of grief I get for that.
You're right... it is unbelievable that people would get uptight over that. (I've seen people like that, though. Sad.)
Speaking as a Christian myself, I am constantly amazed at how dull-headed, humorless, uptight, nosy, and pain-in-the asses many so-called Christians can be. (Not to mention "right wing" so-called "conservatives" that seem to be more worried about how other people live their lives than how they live their own. If they actually read that Bible they keep preaching about, they might notice that Jesus guy ranting over and over again about stupid behaviour like that.) Sorry you have to put up with that crap... we're not all like that.:)
Anyway, I think that sticker is funny as hell too. Heck, the priest at my church (Episcopalian) has that same sticker on the door of his office. He even mentioned that fact in his Easter sermon. He's always cracking jokes. Sometimes they're even funny.:P
(FWIW I'm not a big Sunday church go-er either, but if my wife's bell choir is playing I usually can't get out of it.:)
No kidding. There were a bunch of them here... after almost exactly a year they tanked. The paper separator dies. HP knows they sucked, and offers a free "repair kit" that will give you about another year.
They even had to settle a class-action lawsuit for that particular model of printer, because of that very problem.
Yeah, I got a letter to claim my piece of that pie. Boiled down to maybe a $20 coupon, and wasn't worth the trouble to file.:)
>I read the ad in the link you posted. If you >think that 16-track recording and 16-channel >mixing is going to give you results like Sony or >WB puts out, you are deluded.
Bullshit. Most of the best albums of the past were produced with that many (or fewer) tracks and channels. Not to mention that this 16-tracks/16-channel limitation you are seeing is only on simultaneous usage. (You typically get hundreds if not unlimited virtual tracks and channels to work with. I've heard incredible sounding recordings out of a tascam machine w/only 8 channels.)
No it's not what you get in a full-blown studio, but most don't need what a full-blown studio has to get their job done. I'd spend a little more money on different equipment, but not really that much.
>24-track digital multi-track recorder($3,500) Holy hell. If you already have a computer there's no point to that. Maybe $1000 for a good digital interface and plenty trimmings to go with it.
>40-channel mixer/sound board($6,000) Dude, whatcha smokin'? Are you individually mike-ing a full gospel choir and horn section? Get an Allen-Heath or Soundcraft 16 channel mixer with built-in effects. Better, get a used one on ebay. Less than a grand, and it WILL do the job. Save the money... spend another grand on killer mikes and pres if you really need to.
>studio musicians ($???/hour) Why? If you have a band, you have your musicians already. If you don't, what the hell are you recording? If you are a solo act... either learn to play the other things good enough for what you want, or quit being a solo act and get a band.
>booth construction (ca. $10,000) No way. Don't know where you got that. Get some tools, buy the materials, and get to work. It won't be a $10,000 booth, but it will work fine.
>sundries such as cables, media, beer, etc. >($1,000) Again, not that expensive. And I don't drink THAT much.
Just for comparison, here's what many musicians already have just for playing live themselves.
Instruments Instrument Amps/Cabinets Microphones 16-24 channel mixer Effects proceccing gear Power amps PA Speakers Monitor Speakers Usually: Computer
What else is neccessary?
- Some better mics for recording, maybe pre's - Digital interface for computer (I'd go with RME Hammerfall stuff. Probably Multiface. Add A/D converters if more channels neccesary. The Hammerfall will handle almost 200, so I don't think you'll see any limitations there.) - Software. Also not that expensive. You don't really HAVE to use ProTools. - Good accoustic space/isolation booths. This is the toughest part, actually. But not as expensive as you made it out. - Know that you won't be able to do everything, so plan out what HAS to be done in a studio. If you are organized and ready, you won't fart around in there for a month and waste thousands of dollars. More like a few hundred for a few hours. - Some knowledge on how to use your gear. Sound and recording engineering aren't so difficult that you can't learn it unless you work for a big studio. And when you're not sure what to do... you hire one to come in and look at your shit/what you are doing. Yes they will do that... especially if they're the same studio you used to record the stuff you couldn't do yourself.
> The simple fact that you suggested a machine can >do your remastering indicates you don't >understand the steps in recording professional >quality music. Remastering is an art. When Led >Zeppelin - Remastered was released, do you think >they just hooked up the reel to reel tape and fed >the output into a "remastering machine"? It takes >a skilled ear to be able to produce quality >sound, and no machine can duplicate that.
I agree 100% here. That's why you hire that part out. It's not as expensive as you might think. For the studio work I mentioned earlier, make sure to pick one that does mastering. So if they work well with you, they get the extra promise of getting the mastering job.
>Then they have to shop around for a place to >stamp CDs for them. These places are a dime a dozen.
>These artists now have over $30,000 wrapped up in >their album, which they have to recoup from >concerts,
Nope. You collect the equipment as you play shows, before you record the album. Profit goes back into gear and stuff till you have what you need. Then additional profits go into the "studio/mastering/duplicating" fund. You won't need anywhere near $30,000 if you're smart.
>because everyone knows you don't make squat for >profit on CD sales.
You make enough. Remember the cost of the typical CD is paying all the middlemen. There are no middlemen here. Even selling at $10 bucks gives a considerable profit.
> So you book a music hall, hire ticket printers, >take out an insurance policy, and suddenly add >another $50,000 to your bill.
No, you book places that handle the insurance/tickets/etc by taking a percentage of all ticket sales.
Anyway, enough for now. You get the idea. The way you describe doing it is the really dumb way, for lazy/dumb people that want everyone else to do stuff for them, or can't figure out the knobs on a mixer do.
You're a little off, but not too far. Actually a lot closer than the previous poster. (Who is obviously confusing the silmarils with the palantir.)
A couple notes:
- Gil-galad comes along way later than the time frame in question. (The Silmarils came before the first age of middle earth, and were a major focus point of the first age. Gil-galad is late in the second-age. I'm weak on my second-age lore though, so I forget the circumstances.)
- Thingol never came across the sea. Simple summary: He never went to Valinor... he was the king of the Sindarin (grey) elves, who remained while other elves went to Valinor.
The silmarils were 3 jewels created by Feanor, using the light of the two trees of Valinor. Once the trees were destroyed by Ungoliant and Melkor, they were the only remants of their light. (With the sun and moon being close... they were the last fruits of the dying trees, but their light was more harsh and not quite the same.)
Anyway, on his way out of Valinor Melkor killed Feanor's father and stole them. He set them in HIS crown. Feanor and his sons (and the Noldor elves) left Valinor was partly out of rebellion, partly in pursuit of Melkor to try to recover them.
One of the great stories of the first age is how Beren stole one of them from him. It eventually was given to the Valar by Earendil as a gift when he went begging to them for help and they put it up in the sky as a star.
Melkor managed to keep the other two till he was overthrown by the Valar in the War of Wrath, and were eventually stolen by two of Feonor's sons. They couldn't handle them though (they tended to burn those who weren't very nice) and got rid of them. One in a volcano, the other in the sea.
So one ended up in the sky, one in the earth, and one in the sea. Cute, huh?:)
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the recording might turn out fine, even if not as good as FOH.
I mean, you're probably right... but you don't necessarily know for sure how they have their monitors mixed. Sure, vocals only is more common, but plenty of folks want some of the instruments in there too.
It also might have been a sidefill monitor... I've seen plenty of places send the same mix to sidefills as they send to FOH. It's easy to do, doesn't need a separate mix, and is especially nice to have on bigger stages. I've used a minidisc w/a decent mic to record a show off a sidefill before, and it sounded fine.
That would be a cool choice. The last time this came up on Slashdot someone made a pretty good case for Bruce Campbell... and had me convinced it was a good idea. :)
Heh, heh, heh. I remember him too. I was there (for school) from about Oct/Nov 93 till April 94. Small world, huh? :)
I could mention that the Marines were using helocopters long before any of the others.
:)
Or I could just laugh... it was pretty damned funny.
"Gulp"
Very nice... I think you're on to a good solution there. :)
>All right cell networks won't cover 100% of areas. But close !
Uh... not really. In particular the types of places (where people get lost) that require a search & rescue team. They aren't the types of places with a lot of people, which means there probably isn't any cell coverage. And there isn't much incentive to provide it. I imagine cell coverage will increase a lot in 10 years, but don't see it going into remote or wilderness areas.
Example: Around here, I get coverage everywhere I go on the average day. But if I head up into the mountains to play (which I do often... and I'm not talking about skiing areas or resorts) I lose signal within a few miles past the last populated areas.
I could sit here and circle huge areas of my state without coverage, and I'm sure others can for theirs.
Not to get on your case, but I'm starting to get a little tired of this myth.
:) Believe it or not, the Foundation machines really are a gift. Not just a "here's your free Crack sample" thing.
There are no such strings attached to the Gates Foundation computers. The only requirement is that you provide internet access with them.
We even got an optional "internet server". I told them straight up I would wipe it clean & make it a Debian/Apache/PHP/Squid box to replace the current one. That was cool with them... they just wouldn't support that software. They didn't even blink. Didn't care. As long as it was put to good use, that's what they wanted. Hardware support wouldn't be withheld, either.
I was a little suprised myself, and thought it was pretty cool of them.
There, I said it. The one good thing I have to say about Gates.
Libraries generally accept most donations, including books of course. But part of the libraries job is to maintain a good collection... often within limited space. They can't put every donated book on the shelf, and one shouldn't assume that they will. Remember, the reason these book sales exist is to weed the collection. A sometimes difficult task (most librarians would love to keep most everything if they could) that needs to be done.
:)
If possible, donated books will be looked over, the same way. But sometimes they might not be. There might be so many that they don't have time to go over them and they need the space back. (We've had enormous amounts of techserv space taken up by donation that we really needed to move, and book sales can do that.) If they can go through them, they'll pick out what they think they really need. They might find some books they don't have already that they wish to add, some they'd like additional copies of (usually due to high demand and long hold queues), or maybe replace an existing item if there is a donated copy is in better condition.
Now, if you are specifically donating books because you feel they should be added to the collection, you need to talk to the librarian in charge of that part of the collection first. (In your example, the "Children's Librarian" or "Children's Collection Developer" is who you need.) Tell them that you have some books to donate because you think it will be a valuable addition to their collection, and it is something you feel is missing.
If they agree with you (or they change their mind after talking with you) they'll happily accept the donation, send them to get cataloged/prepped, and put them out. (You might have saved them the trouble of sorting through piles of other junk to find them.)
If not, then you know if you donate it it will probably be sold. So you can choose to keep it if you prefer.
Hope that helps, and sorry to hear about your books taking a route you might not have expected. I'm sure it happens a lot.
If you talk to the librarians, you stand a much better chance at getting them in the collection. You might even get a little "donated by so & so" plaque in the front cover as a thank you if it really is good stuff.
Tolkien himself nixed the Eru/Iluvatar theory. I do like the ones claiming him to represent either the reader, or the creator. (Not Eru... Tolkien himself.)
But I think my favorite (and the one that makes the most sense to me) is the one that claims he is Aule. There's an excellent writeup on that, but don't know where it is at the moment. I think the link someone else gives below probably will have it, though.
OK, sounds good.
But I vote for The Sorcerer's Apprentice... the more SCO tries to take him (and us) down, the more trouble they'll get.
I'm having visions of McBride in a robe & funny hat, frantically trying (and failing) to stop the army of busily working brooms. They simply ignore his wild efforts, and he shouts spell after useless spell to no avail.
"His point was that the existance of background noise and limitations in audio bandwidth were the primary causes for a song to be unpopular."
Err... no. That's not how I read it. Here it is:
"The biggest hurdle to getting your music listened to by the general public was that HISSSSSSS"
Getting your music listened to isn't quite the same as it ending up being popular.
I absolutely agree that the song itself is the most important thing. If it sucks, it sucks whether the sound quality is good or not.
I think the point was that even if the music itself was good, the old-style do-it-yourself equipment has nowhere near the sound quality of current stuff, and people just didn't like to listen to it AT ALL.
The sound quality was a major turn-off... one might not even get as far as actually listening to and paying attention to the music. Your brain would go "this sounds pretty crappy" and tune it out. Maybe even make your hand reach over and just shut it off.
You don't have that problem nowadays. You can make a recording and have it sound quite good... perhaps not what you'd get in a full blown studio, but that doesn't mean it doesn't sound good enough to listen to. At the very least demos are much better than they used to be. That means people are much more likely to actually listen to it. Maybe more than once, if they like it. (A crappy sounding demo won't get much playtime even if the song is good.)
You've got to get people to actually listen to something before they can decide whether they like it or not. One of the worst obstacles to that is now gone.
Now it can be truely judged on its merits as a song... because the evil hiss demon has been destroyed.
Yeah, I remember VINES. And I was in Albany Ga when they first started moving things over to NT. I was stuck in a programming shop at the time, but had done network/banyan stuff previously.
I wasn't impressed.
Dang I'm having some memories flooding back. About that same time the happy little unit I was in was swallowed up by ATLASS, which was major suckage. Great people, stuck with a lousy, ever-changing job. The requirements and tools kept changing over and over. "We're going to use X for this now, so we're going to rewrite everything". Let's throw more people at it, and see what happens!
-- Not cool in my case, because I was really a network guy that got screwed by some stupid requirements when they reorganized MOS's the year before. Non NCO's had a small time window to apply for transfer to the "new" 4066 MOS. I spent that entire (tiny) window in the field in Korea. MSgt back in Oki told us about it when we came back, but it was too late for the couple of peons that had gone. Everyone else in the platoon switched! At least that's what I think happened. Mainly I remember cursing for about a month straight, wondering why we hadn't been told. Duh, because the MSgt was a comm guy, and probably didn't even realize there was much difference.
I got sent to Albany as a programmer, but hadn't touched a lick of code in years. And it was ADA, not C++. Grr.) Talk about wasting resources. I was really good at what I did, but then they went and stuck me in something where I didn't have much of a clue. And no training so that I could become a little more useful. Frustrating.
Heh, heh. Those were the days. I wonder what ever became of ATLASS...
Hey, there. I went in in 93 also, and was a 4067. (That was a programmer... ADA to be more specific. I think it replaced 4063, which was COBOL. Not sure though.)
:)
:)
I went from Quantico to Okinawa and worked mostly in networks, but missed the window for converting to "small systems" or whatever it was. So I ended up in Albany Georgia, too. (Summer of 96 till I got out in Jul 97.) Shoot, I might have even known you.
I'm curious, now. And I just noticed something... if your nick is based on your name, I think I did.
Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. I think audiophiles that go for that kind of crap are total nutjobs, but some of those lines aren't bunk.
There were a few somewhat valid critiques of music passages (like the different ranges of bass frequencies being there or not). But I think the point here was that the nutjob was atrributing the fact to having a $1000 cable or not.
Different tubes do sound different, though. Talk to any musician that uses amplifiers... stick different tubes in and it will sound like a different amp. It should be less of an issue w/ stereo equipment (since instrument amp tubes are PURPOSELY colored) but I'm sure it still holds true. (That doesn't mean it is enough to really care about.)
Same goes for pre-amps. Push them hard, and they will sound different. Certain freqeuncies the pre is more efficient with MAY become slightly more pronounced than others. (The better the pre, the less this should be true.) They will also distort. Some times clearly distorting, sometimes just sounding like a really hot signal. But more to the point... you shouldn't be pushing a preamp hard to begin with, unless you actually want distortion. (Not uncommon with instruments. Dumb with a stereo. If you need more volume, you turn up the power amp, not blast the pre.)
Lastly, if these looneys truly want their "perfect listening experience" and "totally faithful reproduction" the last thing they need to do is blow $20,000 on a fancy stereo. They need to call up the studio that mastered the recording and find out what the mastering engineer used for monitoring while he worked. (Probably more than one system, but they'll have a primary reference.) That is what they need to buy.
Good powered reference monitors aren't cheap, but they aren't insanely gratuitously expensive either. If accuracy was what these people really wanted, that's what they need to get.
And if they think they'll do better with equipment that is "better" than the monitoring equipment the engineers at the studio used to create it... just walk away. They are so full of shit and so far gone you'll never get any logic through their head.
*Having just finished pimping Spinal Tap in another post*
:)
I gotta concur on Citizen Kane, too. Great extras there. The one I got also includes an entire documentary on the real-life feud between Wells and Hearst that resulted from the film. (Hearst's efforts to stop the film from being finished, and later to keep it out of theaters, etc.) Wonderful stuff.
I'll mention another Tap extra... there's gotta be almost an hour of scenes they got cut. Many of which might have been good enough to not be cut... if they didn't mind making it a 3 hour movie.
Because if it is done well (admittedly it often isn't) it can add a lot to the experience.
I would throw away all of the extras & commentaries in most of my DVD's without a second thought... but a couple of them are pure gold. My favorite? The best commentary track ever done... "This is Spinal Tap".
For the 2 or 3 people around that might not know, it's a classic mock documentary of an aging british rock band. One of the funniest movies ever.
Get this: The commentary is provided by the 3 main characters... and performed IN CHARACTER as if it is still a real documentary, and they've been asked to comment on it. They proceed to rag on the "director", reminisce events, tell you bizzare "behind the scenes" goodies, and so on.
In summary... it's an entire brand new Spinal Tap movie, just as hilarious as the first. I'll give that one up as soon as someone talks them into playing Stonehenge again. (NEVER)
>but IIRC most studio masters these days are ADAT (I could be wrong, it's been a few years since ive been in a studio), which at the best offers 20-bit/48kHz, 20-20,000Hz response.
ADAT is still very common and popular. But it has been passed up in that respect. (20/48, etc)
>Are there any multitrack professional-level 24/96 recorders
Heck, yeah. Tons of them. You can even get decent ones for home/small studio usage. (Look at Midiman (M-Audio), ST Audio, MOTU, Terratec, etc.) Not to mention Pro-Tools stuff. Good example: Midiman Delta 1010 (8-in, 8-out 24/96 recording interface for your computer) can be had for under $400 on Ebay. Not much more than that new.
There are also many stand-alone hard disk units (Tascam, Fostex, Mackie, and so on) that operate much like ADAT machines but with higher resolution and removable drives instead of tapes.
Go to any online music store and look in their recording section.
"Jesus is coming. Look busy." You wouldn't believe the amount of grief I get for that.
:)
:P
:)
You're right... it is unbelievable that people would get uptight over that. (I've seen people like that, though. Sad.)
Speaking as a Christian myself, I am constantly amazed at how dull-headed, humorless, uptight, nosy, and pain-in-the asses many so-called Christians can be. (Not to mention "right wing" so-called "conservatives" that seem to be more worried about how other people live their lives than how they live their own. If they actually read that Bible they keep preaching about, they might notice that Jesus guy ranting over and over again about stupid behaviour like that.) Sorry you have to put up with that crap... we're not all like that.
Anyway, I think that sticker is funny as hell too. Heck, the priest at my church (Episcopalian) has that same sticker on the door of his office. He even mentioned that fact in his Easter sermon. He's always cracking jokes. Sometimes they're even funny.
(FWIW I'm not a big Sunday church go-er either, but if my wife's bell choir is playing I usually can't get out of it.
No kidding. There were a bunch of them here... after almost exactly a year they tanked. The paper separator dies. HP knows they sucked, and offers a free "repair kit" that will give you about another year.
:)
They even had to settle a class-action lawsuit for that particular model of printer, because of that very problem.
Yeah, I got a letter to claim my piece of that pie. Boiled down to maybe a $20 coupon, and wasn't worth the trouble to file.
>I read the ad in the link you posted. If you >think that 16-track recording and 16-channel >mixing is going to give you results like Sony or >WB puts out, you are deluded.
Bullshit. Most of the best albums of the past were produced with that many (or fewer) tracks and channels. Not to mention that this 16-tracks/16-channel limitation you are seeing is only on simultaneous usage. (You typically get hundreds if not unlimited virtual tracks and channels to work with. I've heard incredible sounding recordings out of a tascam machine w/only 8 channels.)
No it's not what you get in a full-blown studio, but most don't need what a full-blown studio has to get their job done. I'd spend a little more money on different equipment, but not really that much.
>24-track digital multi-track recorder($3,500)
Holy hell. If you already have a computer there's no point to that. Maybe $1000 for a good digital interface and plenty trimmings to go with it.
>40-channel mixer/sound board($6,000)
Dude, whatcha smokin'? Are you individually mike-ing a full gospel choir and horn section? Get an Allen-Heath or Soundcraft 16 channel mixer with built-in effects. Better, get a used one on ebay. Less than a grand, and it WILL do the job. Save the money... spend another grand on killer mikes and pres if you really need to.
>studio musicians ($???/hour)
Why? If you have a band, you have your musicians already. If you don't, what the hell are you recording? If you are a solo act... either learn to play the other things good enough for what you want, or quit being a solo act and get a band.
>booth construction (ca. $10,000)
No way. Don't know where you got that. Get some tools, buy the materials, and get to work. It won't be a $10,000 booth, but it will work fine.
>sundries such as cables, media, beer, etc. >($1,000)
Again, not that expensive. And I don't drink THAT much.
Just for comparison, here's what many musicians already have just for playing live themselves.
Instruments
Instrument Amps/Cabinets
Microphones
16-24 channel mixer
Effects proceccing gear
Power amps
PA Speakers
Monitor Speakers
Usually: Computer
What else is neccessary?
- Some better mics for recording, maybe pre's
- Digital interface for computer (I'd go with RME Hammerfall stuff. Probably Multiface. Add A/D converters if more channels neccesary. The Hammerfall will handle almost 200, so I don't think you'll see any limitations there.)
- Software. Also not that expensive. You don't really HAVE to use ProTools.
- Good accoustic space/isolation booths. This is the toughest part, actually. But not as expensive as you made it out.
- Know that you won't be able to do everything, so plan out what HAS to be done in a studio. If you are organized and ready, you won't fart around in there for a month and waste thousands of dollars. More like a few hundred for a few hours.
- Some knowledge on how to use your gear. Sound and recording engineering aren't so difficult that you can't learn it unless you work for a big studio. And when you're not sure what to do... you hire one to come in and look at your shit/what you are doing. Yes they will do that... especially if they're the same studio you used to record the stuff you couldn't do yourself.
> The simple fact that you suggested a machine can >do your remastering indicates you don't >understand the steps in recording professional >quality music. Remastering is an art. When Led >Zeppelin - Remastered was released, do you think >they just hooked up the reel to reel tape and fed >the output into a "remastering machine"? It takes >a skilled ear to be able to produce quality >sound, and no machine can duplicate that.
I agree 100% here. That's why you hire that part out. It's not as expensive as you might think. For the studio work I mentioned earlier, make sure to pick one that does mastering. So if they work well with you, they get the extra promise of getting the mastering job.
>Then they have to shop around for a place to >stamp CDs for them.
These places are a dime a dozen.
>These artists now have over $30,000 wrapped up in >their album, which they have to recoup from >concerts,
Nope. You collect the equipment as you play shows, before you record the album. Profit goes back into gear and stuff till you have what you need. Then additional profits go into the "studio/mastering/duplicating" fund. You won't need anywhere near $30,000 if you're smart.
>because everyone knows you don't make squat for >profit on CD sales.
You make enough. Remember the cost of the typical CD is paying all the middlemen. There are no middlemen here. Even selling at $10 bucks gives a considerable profit.
> So you book a music hall, hire ticket printers, >take out an insurance policy, and suddenly add >another $50,000 to your bill.
No, you book places that handle the insurance/tickets/etc by taking a percentage of all ticket sales.
Anyway, enough for now. You get the idea. The way you describe doing it is the really dumb way, for lazy/dumb people that want everyone else to do stuff for them, or can't figure out the knobs on a mixer do.
>True, but Luthien was not any orinary Sinarin >Elf. She was half Maia through her mother Melian.
Well, yeah. That gives her an edge over any other Sindarin elf (or Noldo or any other elf for that matter). But Sauron is 100% ALL Maia.
>Also Huan was no ordinary hound. He was also >known as the Hound of Valinor.
Yep... he was Orome's doggie.
>Sauron didn't stand much of a chance against >these two.
Oh, I think he stood a chance... just not a very good one. He got his butt kicked, either way.
(Actually, Huan was the deciding factor. In fact, some say he was actually a Maia himself. Much in the same way Thorondor was.)
You're a little off, but not too far. Actually a lot closer than the previous poster. (Who is obviously confusing the silmarils with the palantir.)
:)
A couple notes:
- Gil-galad comes along way later than the time frame in question. (The Silmarils came before the first age of middle earth, and were a major focus point of the first age. Gil-galad is late in the second-age. I'm weak on my second-age lore though, so I forget the circumstances.)
- Thingol never came across the sea. Simple summary: He never went to Valinor... he was the king of the Sindarin (grey) elves, who remained while other elves went to Valinor.
The silmarils were 3 jewels created by Feanor, using the light of the two trees of Valinor. Once the trees were destroyed by Ungoliant and Melkor, they were the only remants of their light. (With the sun and moon being close... they were the last fruits of the dying trees, but their light was more harsh and not quite the same.)
Anyway, on his way out of Valinor Melkor killed Feanor's father and stole them. He set them in HIS crown. Feanor and his sons (and the Noldor elves) left Valinor was partly out of rebellion, partly in pursuit of Melkor to try to recover them.
One of the great stories of the first age is how Beren stole one of them from him. It eventually was given to the Valar by Earendil as a gift when he went begging to them for help and they put it up in the sky as a star.
Melkor managed to keep the other two till he was overthrown by the Valar in the War of Wrath, and were eventually stolen by two of Feonor's sons. They couldn't handle them though (they tended to burn those who weren't very nice) and got rid of them. One in a volcano, the other in the sea.
So one ended up in the sky, one in the earth, and one in the sea. Cute, huh?
Angband, that is. (Just looked at the post in context, and didn't want anyone thinkin' I meant Utumno. :)
And if you're REALLY a Tolkien geek, he'd know that Luthien (and Huan) kicked Sauron's ass (!) at Tol-in-Gaurhoth to pick up Beren on the way there. :)