I knew it had gone full circle when I started seeing "record scratch" and "amp hum" plug-ins to add to fake loops.
You just spent 20 grand to get rid off all that, now you're spending (stealing) 300 bucks to put it back in! :-)
BTW, if you haven't seen "Standing in the Shadows of Motown," yet, go get it, today. To see and hear what those guys did, in a two car garage in Detroit is utterly amazing.
A friend of mine sings BGV's for those guys (Funk Brothers).
Gotcha.
Saw ... ditto sentiments. James Jamerson is one of my heros!
Now, if we just figure out a way to outlaw AutoTune! Both live and in the studio. :)
You don't understand the word "average"?
"Swingman" wrote
I remember a well known recording studio in Seattle that was located right next to a turn around of an old eletcric trolley system. It was a huge mechanical device that rotated the big bus around and pointed in in the opposite direction. It induced shock waves (and lots of low frequency noise) for a 2 or 3 block radius.
I was there during a recording session one day. Everything was scheduled around that bus run. There was big posters on the wall with the bus schedule. And the whole studio shook when it turned around. It was nerve wracking. I thought it was a lousy location, but they did well.
Yes ... historically these are the studios the _memorable_ hits were cut in. As Mike mentioned Motown, so high tech it had a dirt floor! :)
The mega-buck studios are historically out of business in less time than it took to build them.
It makes no difference, the state of the art of the technology, "The Song"(or "The Tune"), is the coin of the realm, and may it ever be.
On Oct 3, 1:20=A0pm, Swingman wrote: [ snipped a bunch of cool stuff for brevity]
Or Erroll Garner grunting while he played...
One of the niftiest recording I have listened to was a choir of monks recorded in the courtyard of a monastery in Spain. A simple pair of Bruel & Kjaer 4133 microphones straight into a Nagra (analogue) then tape straight to cutter. As the B&K's were measuring mics, the noise floor was a bit of an issue, but flat as flat can be. Anyway, the publishing house that issued the record (France) printed an apology on the LP's jacket about the rustling of the trees, and the birds chirping away with the choir. It was delightful.... IOW real life can be a bit noisy.
LOL...don't get me started...
(analogue) then tape straight to cutter.
A name from my distant past.
Back in the early days of the space program, vibration testing was an integral part of the process of proving parts were capable of space flight.
A "Shaker" was a standard piece of test equipment to run these tests.
The "Shaker" was essentially a speaker capable of delivering thousands of pounds of force, driven by an amplifier and controlled by a variable frequency oscillator which delivered either a constant displacement and/or a constant acceleration signal to the amplifier.
B&K was the industry standard, in fact the only supplier, for the oscillator.
Back in those days I was up to my eyeballs in vibration research as it applied to the automotive, not the space industry, but the principles were the same.
BTW, B&K could supply a lot of neat toys if you needed to build an anechoic chamber which had a base price of about $250K for a 10x10x10 room in 1963-1965 time frame.
Lew
I used a 4133 in their handheld meter. The unit had a pre-amp out for their chart recorder which in turn, via a mechanical (speedometer- style drive), would turn a giant knob on a signal generator. Crude but deadly accurate. That kit was hooked up to a B&K style anechoic chamber that The National Research Council in Ottawa where I did my research under Dr, Floyd Toole. His name makes for some interesting Googling. He recently retired out of Harman Int'l.
Geez, how lazy can you get?
So you're saying that a Firewire iBook can't record 24 tracks?
Gee, quite accomodating of you to go out and get experience with devices of which at 9 PM last night you were completely unaware.
You're the one who turned it into a pissing contest by going into denial when someone suggested that you might be mistaken, and then going off on a tangent about "Nashville producers" as if some guy who can't afford a store bought cabinet is going to be equipping a commercial production studio.
What "semantic" is this? You asserted that there were no USB multitrack audio devices on the market. That didn't fit in with my recollection so I checked and found that there were indeed many such devices.
I assumed since you are topping it the expert that giving you the keywords I used would be enough for you with your greater expertise to check into this for yourself rather than having to be spoon fed links, but since you seem to be unable to research such matters for yourself, try
If you could read "Ed", you see that his name is given at the bottom of every post he makes.
It's sort of difficult taking anonymous posters (yeah, like you too) seriously.
Ed (Yes, that's my real name. I have a hard time believing yours is upscale)
Nope, didn't say that. No one would... or would for very long. They would get sick, very quickly, of squinting at the little 13" screen, then go to an external monitor, which shares the ram for video, and the latency or inability to use a big enough screen would drive them nuts.
I didn't assert that there were none. I believe I wrote, "But I may be wrong. The most I've seen is 8 channels, but I wouldn't trust it for anything I care about."
That doesn't strike me as, "going into denial."
You wrote, "Googling "USB multitrack audio reveals a number of products. Do they not work well?"
I tried to tell you they didn't work well and gave an example that the real experts weren't using them.
Hmm, that's all you had to do. :-)
You're the one making this a pissing contest. Asking me if I'm saying they are lying? I answered to my knowledge at the time. I said everything I said in a tone of discussion, you're the one being condescending about it.
The technology has advanced and I am behind in my knowledge of of stuff apparently on the cutting edge.
What I *do know* is what I very often see in studios and hear from the guys using the stuff for a living. All I hear about is problems with USB because of it sharing everything else connected to it and latency and dropouts and sync problems and on and on.
So maybe if I had said, "For all intents and purposes, USB has not been able to handle multi track audio, in the real world, professional setting, and the pros prefer Firewire because of its tested speed and reliability," all this could've been avoided.
My guess is that the MOTU would be the only one trustworthy right now, because they have such a good track record, but their involvement will help the others by lending credence to the technology, simply because "if MOTU is doing it, it must be alright."
"-MIKE-" wrote
Tell me about it. I was once involved in a vocational music program at a local college. I designed and taught course that were cutting edge in terms of technology, equipment knowldge, recording theory etc. Then I moved onto other things.
I went back ten years later and I was an idiot. I didn't know half the stuff there. Although I still retain the basics, I have NO experience with digital recording, etc.
But I still have a small voice only studio and can do good work. But even my little studio has a mixer in it that is much smalle, much cheaper and WAY quieter than I used to use.
However your response demonstrated a lack of familiarity the the products in question, leaving one to wonder on what basis you made your assertion.
And why were you unable to find those products? Are you lazy, or just not the expert you pretend to be?
Yes, you answered from your knowledge rather than taking 30 seconds to actually enter the keywords you were given into Google and looking at the first page of resulting hits.
Finally you get to something other than denial. One of the manufacturers states that their USB device should be attached to a dedicated port rather than hub for the reasons you mention.
Roland has a poor track record?
More condescension. More things I didn't say.
I never claimed to be an expert. I spoke to the experience of the experts I know and work with regularly.
They didn't use hubs.
More words in my mouth, huh?
Complimenting one manufacturer isn't an implicit insult on another. Can you grasp that concept, Skippy? (a little condescension for you, since you seem to be unable to communicate without it.)
MOTU was and is pretty much the standard/benchmark for multi-track i/o's.
Roland does some wonderful things, but they certainly have not been the go-to name and essentially synonymous with digital audio interface for the professional, like MOTU.
You examined the wiring on their motherboards? Or are you simply not aware that many systems have internal hubs that are not necessarily marked as such?
"MOTU would be the only one trustworthy" does not appear to be in any way ambiguous. .
Either MOTU is or is not "the only one trustworthy".
I see. I would have expected professional equipment to be more expensive. Oh, well, live and learn.
I still keep a finger (little)in it(still partners in a working studio, but no longer have anything to do with the day-to-day operation for the past six or seven years).
I am occasionally enticed/arm twisted back to do engineering/producing on a small project by project basis, but even turn most of that down these days. The biggest reason given for even being approached is that it seems there is a dearth of experience in actually getting a world class project out the door these days.
Other than admittedly old ears at this point, my problem with the newbies is that I simply can NOT abide ProTools in any way, shape, or form, and that is ALL most places use these days.
IME, ProTools has done to music what McDonald's did to hamburgers.
Most are, to the best of my knowledge.
Again, one reason why professionals use Firewire. You plug it in and it works.
According to you, with all these wonderful USB multitrack interfaces, one has to open up their computer to examine the motherboard to determine if it'll work properly.
Wow, that sounds sounds trustworthy.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.