For Vocals, the reverb is distracting and stops me from concentrating on
micromanaging my voice (which is not great to start with and could use
all the help it can get).
It probably also thickens the timbre of your voice as an appropiate room
acoustics would do, wouldn't it?
For
On 22/08/14 23:57, t...@trellis.ch wrote:
On Fri, August 22, 2014 17:39, Harry van Haaren wrote:
If the bass player recording with comp eq also *hears* that, as
opposed to hearing it without compression... then perhaps they'll play
better and it'll be easier to mix.
this is an interesting
Hi,
is it correct that the following two scenarios give the exact same result?
(digital audio signal) - (record) - (playback) - (apply fx) - (result)
(digital audio signal) - (apply fx) - (record) - (playback) - (result)
regards
Tom
___
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 04:12:12PM +0200, t...@trellis.ch wrote:
Hi,
is it correct that the following two scenarios give the exact same result?
(digital audio signal) - (record) - (playback) - (apply fx) - (result)
(digital audio signal) - (apply fx) - (record) - (playback) - (result)
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 04:12:12PM +0200, t...@trellis.ch wrote:
is it correct that the following two scenarios give the exact same result?
(digital audio signal) - (record) - (playback) - (apply fx) - (result)
(digital audio signal) - (apply fx) - (record) - (playback) - (result)
In both
On Fri, August 22, 2014 16:35, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 04:12:12PM +0200, t...@trellis.ch wrote:
is it correct that the following two scenarios give the exact same
result?
(digital audio signal) - (record) - (playback) - (apply fx) -
(result)
(digital audio signal)
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:12 PM, t...@trellis.ch wrote:
is it correct that the following two scenarios give the exact same result?
(digital audio signal) - (record) - (playback) - (apply fx) - (result)
(digital audio signal) - (apply fx) - (record) - (playback) - (result)
I'll add a note that
On Fri, August 22, 2014 17:39, Harry van Haaren wrote:
If the bass player recording with comp eq also *hears* that, as
opposed to hearing it without compression... then perhaps they'll play
better and it'll be easier to mix.
this is an interesting side-aspect indeed that goes beyond the
On Friday 22 August 2014 11:35:34 t...@trellis.ch did opine
And Gene did reply:
On Fri, August 22, 2014 16:35, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 04:12:12PM +0200, t...@trellis.ch wrote:
is it correct that the following two scenarios give the exact same
result?
(digital
:)
/me likes anecdotes
On Fri, August 22, 2014 19:36, Gene Heskett wrote:
And there is nothing that assaults ones ears more than someone who thinks
he has to have a room thumping bass line, sets it so the axe and drums
are about +20 db, then runs it all thru a fast compressor, ducking the
On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 16:39 +0100, Harry van Haaren wrote:
I'll add a note that if looping the playback output, using the 1st
option the FX must constantly processes. Option 2 has the FX recorded
in, which means the FX chain doesn't use CPU.
Unfortunately this is a very important advice!
11 matches
Mail list logo
