iZotope Nectar, mixing vocals

[garyb]

for the last time....
no software can compete head to head with the top hardware. it just can't and probably never will. there are a number of very good reasons for this. actually, there are SOME applications where software has an advantge other than price, but it's a very few applications that this applies to. does that mean that software shouldn't be used or that it's not "good enough"? perish the thought! there is a reason why everyone continues to try to simulate 1176 compressors and vintage analog synths and tape. it's not just because those things are known quantities, but it's also because they sound good to human beings. as a person who has ample experience with the originals and the models, i can tell you that i LOVE many of the models, but they are not 100% of the originals. this is nothing to be ashamed of.

is software putting real studios out of business? of course!
software is cheap and sounds great! plus, no humans are more idiotic or lazy than the average "musician". this is a guy who will build a studio and then say, "why is this so complicated? i'm a musician not an engineer!" and other dumb things. the truth is, almost nobody who has audio software should. most of them should be perfecting thier artform and then when they want to make product, they should be looking to guys who have spent their time perfecting their audio systems to help them, but....

i laugh at folks who use a preset for a compressor but have no idea how the compressor really works. but then i have my own problems...

you don't think musicians are idiotic and lazy? why can't they make a living when every other professional in society is sitting on a gold mine? why can't the average musician be counted on the learn the material that his perspective employer wants to pay him for? why are there jokes like "what do you call a drummer who breaks up with his girlfreind? homeless!" or "how do you make a guitar player shut up? put sheet music in front of him!"... yes, they're lazy, stupid and arrogant and they act like they know about things that they have no actual knowledge of...all that said, i'm just a stupid musician. of course everything i say is nonsense, just like all the rest of them.

[garyb]

My sound is quite "expensive".

my stuff sounds good too. i have fooled many people who think i used tape and hardware, but i know the difference...

i'm more than happy with my computer. i get way more work done than i ever did with 2" tape and the sound is more than acceptable. it's not like i am arguing against computers. i'm not trying to lie either...

[hubird]

the idea of making multiple mixes was one of my first thoughts when I started to record on disk, in 1992
Freed of having to buy new tape every month...
a lot of acts used multi mixing already by the way, I remember a 'single' CD with ten mixes of the main track which got to get a club hit - forgot the specific name.
Handy for DJs in giving the hit a personalized twist on the floor.

In the digital world, there ought to be more than one mix available. An earbud mix, a car mix, etc. This is totally possible. Give the buyer more choices.

Well, this is a good idea... why to restrict ourselves to do just one mix when most music is presented through the web? Even if it sounds weird, I did not think about this obvious option before today… Now, before getting into something like this, I would need to think about it carefully and study what would cause to the people to have several versions of the same song, and what could cause to me if they mistake and start saying: “this song sounds really bad”, because they have messed them up.

Now, when the music is packed in a CD or similar media, you have to get to the old "one mix method".

Anyway, thank you for the idea, it is pretty cool.

[braincell]

Those are usually a different arrangement. I was thinking the exact same music but with EQ, reverb and mastering different.

[hubird]

yes, also those, like a radio mix with hard compression or a club mix with extra sub.
Nothing new.

[braincell]

That's when they take out certain words for radio because one or two conservative assholes are easily offended.

[hubird]

In the States that is.
Here you can easily use words like fuck, screw, cunt or worse in a (national) tv show, life or not.

There's a sex & drugs tv program to teach youngsters a policy of sex without any discernment.
Like 'life' testing all usual drugs by the program presentators, but also showing what a female sex organ looks like and vaginal and even anal penetration shown as close as possible...
(Plus the usual warnings and teachings of course).

Actually already when DAT cassette got popular making multiple mixes got normal.
Often we (3 man electro band) made personal mixes of a collectively made setup, and chose the one with the best sound afterwards.

[braincell]

I belong in Europe.

[garyb]

well.....

[hubird]

come over here, Braincell, it's warm here
Actually the earliest day ever to have 20º C

actually I find the program partly tasteless.
And what about the old way to discover these things on your own...
But the program gives good information, isn't morally intended, and is not hypocrit.
Especially more vulnerable girls would benefit from it.

Most important thing is: this program is possible, just because the broadcasting association is independant and wants to.
View ratings play a role tho, regarding the attemps to cross borders.

Lately the show presented a setup of a small marihuana plantation in a typical grow tent for one tube.
Weekly you could see it growing, on tv
But that was one bridge too far, the responsable minister made it stop at flowering week 5.
Some states in the US seem to overhoal Holland in this dossier, that's the funny thing.

[Nestor]

I remember somebody in the “Announcements” or the “General Scope Discussion” forum that entered once a topic about mastering and the like, and he was from a big studio, it was somebody that came here just a few times only. He was such an idiot, he would refer to himself as a high level professional that knew exactly how to do everything and that understood like nobody else the market, and he would call the rest of us as little boys trying to get into the market, etc., things of the like. He was awfully derogatory. Well, this is the kind of people I am referring to when I say: “Well big boys, sorry but you have to get ready, the market is shifting everything upside down… the music market is changing and changing dreadfully fast… we will soon be able to emulate everything else that is not yet correctly emulated, only with software, the only frontier would be knowledge, talent and experience”.

I believe that we will actually achieve, through software, almost the same quality achieved by hardware in a few years, you may disagree, that’s fine, but I truly believe it, the day, I think, will come.

Anyway, I think that if I give to Bob Clearmoutain my little studio and ask him to master an album, we would all be amazed at what he can do with what I have, which is not that much, because of his knowledge, talent and experience will make the most out of my setup. In the other hand, I could be in his studio with all the tools and all, and I will probably achieve a mediocre result compared to his work.

All these guys in the Hip Hop arena believing to be the best mixing and mastering genius will disappear, because small studios will do wonders in just a few years.

When Steve Jobs came with the idea of a “one in all device”, nobody believed his idea was a good one, today, even those of us not willing to have a Smartphone, are forced to have one to carry on, so what.

I don’t deny that digital will eventually sound different than hardware, but will it mean worse? I don’t think so. I think digital is going to take the market entirely, and that we will end up liking it sound better than hardware, not yet…, but the day will come, it is a logical conclusion, not a wish.

[hubird]

I think digital is going to take the market entirely, and that we will end up liking it sound better than hardware, not yet…, but the day will come, it is a logical conclusion, not a wish.

what's the logic then?

[braincell]

That day is not going to be very soon and meanwhile, hardware will be getting better also. I'm so looking forward to mixing my album down on an SSL Duality in September. I have the Waves SSL emulator and it is *not* the same sound, not even close Nestor.

[garyb]

reality is always richer and more special than virtual. it will always be so. the real world is too intricate to model perfectly.

digital stuff is wonderful. pcs can already do what is needed, but let's not fool ourselves. reality is still king.

[Nestor]

reality is always richer and more special than virtual. it will always be so. the real world is too intricate to model perfectly.

digital stuff is wonderful. pcs can already do what is needed, but let's not fool ourselves. reality is still king.

How could I disagree with that... impossible! But in a different way, digital will reach its own high ground....

But, as I said before…, as long as mankind does not destroy itself first…, which seems is something that is coming to be, as I suggested in my long thread about war.

[hubird]

(...) But, as I said before…, as long as mankind does not destroy itself first…, which seems is something that is coming to be, as I suggested in my long thread about war.

'suggested' is quite some understatement
Be happy, the world is much safer than it ever was

[garyb]

life is not safe now, nor has it ever been.
on the other hand, it's not unsafe either. it depends on your point of veiw and whether it's your flesh that is damaged or not.

as i said, digital is wonderful, but no matter what humans do, reality will always be more infinite, varied, rich and real(!) than digital. a model will always be inferior to the original. anyway, digital is certainly more than sufficient right now.

[jksuperstar]

The way I see it: "Analog Computers" and "Digital Computers" both exist. Each have strengths, and each are constantly being improved. I've never seen anything capable of replacing the other, in the end. As an engineer, we like to say things like "Good enough for government work"...which means you can never be perfect, there is always room for improvement, but at some point, you have to make the deadline, and say things are "done"....or done enough.

(By "Analog computer" I mean the usual analog stuff we call analog. like synths, and filters, and mixing boards. Yes, these really are analog computers, very often calculating math based designs, or like the original synths...trying to model a wooden or brass instrument And those were shunned at the time because they weren't real enough!)

[braincell]

Well one problem with modeling acoustic instruments is the controller. You can make so many sounds and play in so many ways with a bow, bridge, neck etc. that you can never get playing a violin on a keyboard. Physical modeling would have to use a real instrument to do that. Not impossible but highly unlikely any time soon plus you would have to learn to play it like a real instrument. There is no point in that. You might as well buy a real violin.

But back to virtual mixing and effects, I think within 100 years it will be just as good as analog but perhaps the price for the very best stuff always will be prohibitively expensive for the average consumer.

[Bud Weiser]

as i said, digital is wonderful, but no matter what humans do, reality will always be more infinite, varied, rich and real(!) than digital. a model will always be inferior to the original. anyway, digital is certainly more than sufficient right now.

I can only confirm !

The advantage of digital is editing possibilities and total recall.
Soundwise it´s questionable at least because it´s binary and there are the conversions.

But since "music" is also a matter of taste, digital fanboys and VST/AU warriors (latest digital hardware tonegenerator lovers included),- also accept aliasing as a welcome sound source now,- go figure ...

That said,- an analog signal keeps an analog signal/wave w/ minimal degradation when a professional quality signal chain is in use.
Convert it into a digital signal, there´s some degradation always and additional filters are essential smoothing the resulting wave when convert back to analog.
The term "sample rate " alone describes what it is,- a stepped series of samples of a waveform, not the recorded waveform as it is.
Interpolation and oversampling,- all tools or better, crutches, trying to get the original signal back, but never will.

But for the human ear, sooner or later, it´s all about listening habit.

Bud