A Moonies Band ?

[Yesspaz]

Vocals huh? Well, that's gonna depend on a lot of things. #1, they key. #2, the lyrics.

I say we shoot at making an instrumental first, just to get the procudure down.

[fremder99]

I also toot on the didjeridu, and have a couple of really nice ones to provide drones... of course that depends on if the project goes in an ethno-world-space-neo-cultural-dreamtime direction!

I even have the circular breathing thing down.... my friends have seen me go through a meal and claim I'm capable of "circular eating" too!

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by roger
I sing a bit.

I don't. My singing voice has been banned in 17 states plus the District of Columbia and 5 Canadian Provinces as either a torture device or a weapon of mass destruction.

Funny enough, I could sing in California legally.

Once.

Roger -Dot- Lee, Yodel-ay-dee-h0000000

[roger]

Originally posted by Roger Lee Funny enough, I could sing in California legally.

Once.

been on the run ever since?

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by roger
been on the run ever since?

I always say I moved here because of the insane cost of living in California.

That much is true.

That's all I'm gonna say on THAT subject.

[kirk]

i can't believe i overlooked this thread 'til now..(!)

ok...recording bass is a bit more complicated than
just plugging into the soundcard.

the input has to be compressed to max the notes,
(in layman's terms) reduce the distortion.

monitoring is a challenge, almost impossible on pc speakers.
even if you think it sounds good, it's going to sound like
ummm... mud on monitors.
-----------------------------------------------------
we record the same way, in our case on very diverse equipment
from sequencing (me, sonar 4 producer) to a korg hard disk
(steve). von's bass was recorded at steffen pressley's
song-haven studios in LA.
it's really not much different than the way DSOTM
or abbey road was recorded. i'm sure you've all seen the
scenes on the .."pompeii" film, gilmore on a stool w/ headphones.
there was very little live interaction on these 2 greats.
------------------------------------------------------
my advice would be to start w/a small piece, possibly an intro,
become familiar w/ the process before diving in.
get the sound down before going at an arrangement.
-------------------------------------------------------
dot~ you've dl'd tunes from my rifftrader account.
do you think it's user friendly enough for this?

also, most dsl/broadband allows for up to 5 mg.
direct transfer to IE. while working out parts, it saves
beau coup time to send 128k files rather than the full .wav,
especially for dialup users.


fire the questions, i'm at the computer all day.

k

[Elric68]

Hello Moonies, I'm back from vacation and ready to work on the project. It's probably time to begin it.

Well, as a teenager, I sometimes have problems with taking decisions so I'm asking you: "where should we begin ?"
Does someone know ?

[kirk]

hi elric-
while the logical answer would usually be "at the beginning",
that's not really true w/digital recording.
this doesn't have to be linear in any way, parts can be
added at any time, into any place in the song.

i tell most beginners (and longtime musicians) to
think of it like legos that each have a musical phrase attached.

personally, i'd say dot should give us a few bars in an
agreed on key (A is always good), add some efx...think the intro to "end of the day" to the cym hit.

k

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by kirk
i can't believe i overlooked this thread 'til now..(!)

S'OK, Sir. I'd have eventually come to you once we started making noises.

I'm not kidding in the least when I say that my knowledge of such things is on par with my knowledge of brain surgery (I'm aware that they both exist, and that's about it).

dot~ you've dl'd tunes from my rifftrader account.
do you think it's user friendly enough for this?

I'd have to register an emphatic 'YES' on this. However, I've seen the downloads, not the uploads. Is it much different? If not, it should be a walk in the park.

also, most dsl/broadband allows for up to 5 mg.
direct transfer to IE. while working out parts, it saves
beau coup time to send 128k files rather than the full .wav,
especially for dialup users.

For the initial work, perhaps. But we have to remember that we're going to be working with the lowest common denominator here. If we can do my gig, and, say, Spaz and Moses at 192k, but Elric (or Roger or Sharc or ...) can only come in at 128k, will we not all be forced down? What kind of hit are we going to have to take? Will it matter and will we be able to work with/around it?

See? My knowledge of such things is, shall we say, rather limited.

fire the questions, i'm at the computer all day.

Heh. You DID ask. See? He asked for it!

Roger -Dot- Lee

[kirk]

well...if you listen to MP3's on your computer,
everything *should* be good to go.

you'll need to locate the "MIC in" on your soundcard.
this will be a 1/8, so you'll need a radio shack adapter
to 1/4 in.(like a guitar cord) for the next item, a microphone.

one of those cheap goosenecks that "comes with" vid cams,
ect. will do for starters. that won't need an adapter.
we're after routing at this point, making the VU's jump,
not pristine sound.

next, you'll need a sequencer to "capture" the audio,
present .wavs as a graphic. vax mentioned garageband
that's included w/ the latest servicepack.
getting this as an add on is amazing.

moses' "audacity"suggestion looks good for a beginner.
nice simple interface, small cpu requirements.

depending on your computing power, there's also options
like the FREE protools LE available at
http://www.hitsquad.com/smm/mac/
pc users- there's a pc version also. 8 tracks of audio...
128 midi tracks plus effects...you can't beat the price.
-------------------------------------------

as far as kbs goes, size doesn't matter on the collaboration end.
truncation occurs when compressing files to mp3, zip ect.
fr'instance- the files on my computer are .wavs to be made
into a cd file. i encode as needed, in the moon's case, @192kbs.
all audio files in the sequencer are originally recorded as 1114k
.wav files.

it's a question of how long an up/download takes, a patience/convenience issue.
a dialup may take hours to upload a 192k file, where dsl takes a couple of minutes.
from experience, that beats the crap out of creativity when things are rolling,
so dialup users can send smaller files, replace them say, before going to bed w/ .wavs.

quality's worth sacrificing for speed at this stage.
all files are "traded out" to full .wavs in the final product.
on a pc, it's simply "save as..."choose "windows wav" from
the list. the file has to be converted by the original person,
an mp3 can't be reconverted to a full .wav.
clear as mud?

[Wojtek]

If you launch your project guys it won't be the first Moonies band.
And be aware distance recording is EXTREMELY difficult and time-consuming. In normal situation you want to hear new version of song with one parameter changed so you push the button and you got it. In case of virtual band you have to write info, then info must be received, parameter changed, song exported to mp3, put on a server, downloaded from a server, listened, comment written. That lasts.

I mentioned Elric possibility of recording song for fun. But in case of album and a band... that's a long way. To be precise - 16 months seems like the beginning of the road.

But anyway, TRY!

[moses]

In regards to kirk's concern for recording bass... I have a bass and am mildly proficient at playing it. It's not my primary instrument by any stretch of the imagination. That said, if I'm to be the bassist (I don't recall seeing anyone else say they could do it) I can do the compression thing necessary to make it full and plump like a bass should sound.

Maybe in the initial stages the effects like that should be minimal (just enough to get things going) and then the mixer/producer can add more for the final mixdown if necessary, since it's awfully hard to remove such things if you decide it's too much. Certain songs could require a different bass sound and if you hardcode certain effects and EQ settings into it, you're stuck with it.

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by moses
In regards to kirk's concern for recording bass... I have a bass and am mildly proficient at playing it. It's not my primary instrument by any stretch of the imagination. That said, if I'm to be the bassist (I don't recall seeing anyone else say they could do it) I can do the compression thing necessary to make it full and plump like a bass should sound.

Maybe in the initial stages the effects like that should be minimal (just enough to get things going) and then the mixer/producer can add more for the final mixdown if necessary, since it's awfully hard to remove such things if you decide it's too much. Certain songs could require a different bass sound and if you hardcode certain effects and EQ settings into it, you're stuck with it.

Hrm.

Now I may have misread what Moses was saying, or I may have the concept completely backwards, but wouldn't it be better to have the additional wing-dings and goo-gaws in the original recording, removing them later if necessary? Or would it be better off starting with the spartan sound and adding the effects later as desired? I always thought that more would be better since it's easier to remove after the fact than to add.

Is this a mistaken impression?

Roger -Dot- Lee, showing his appauling lack of knowledge of such things.

[kirk]

dot~ no, the producer/mixer wants a clean sound minus
reverbs, ect. there's no taking it out , "fixing it in the mix"
once it's in the original recording.

at mastering, judicious amounts of 'verb is applied
to the complete mix. if a track has efx applied prior,
then it's efx over efx, usually muddying the sound.

moses~ cool! i was referring to elric's suggestion to spaz
re: plugging a bass directly into a soundcard.
(highly not recommended!) LOL

what make/model bass do you have?

i'm in studio hell today, trying to sort why my mackie mixer
has developed an annoying hum in the non-balanced 1-6 channels.

i'll keep an eye on my mailbox.

k

[Elric68]

Speaking of effects, I have a nice sound when recording my guitar with a clean sound on the computer, but the overdriven sound is awful ... That's the same for all my effects pedals. Do you how could I do if I want reverb, overdrive, wah-wah or any other effect ?

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Kirk: I was hoping you'd chime in on this.

Originally posted by kirk
dot~ no, the producer/mixer wants a clean sound minus
reverbs, ect. there's no taking it out , "fixing it in the mix"
once it's in the original recording.

OK, I'll go with that. I was under the understanding that it would be much like removing layers of stuff in case it wasn't needed. I didn't realize it was so dependent.

With that in mind, then yeah, Moses' idea hits the mark in a big way.

And here I thought I was gonna make it through today without learning something.

at mastering, judicious amounts of 'verb is applied
to the complete mix. if a track has efx applied prior,
then it's efx over efx, usually muddying the sound.

OK, so the more pristine the sound (especially for the bass) the easier it is for whomever's taking things and mashing them together into a coherent unit. I geddit now.

moses~ cool! i was referring to elric's suggestion to spaz
re: plugging a bass directly into a soundcard.
(highly not recommended!) LOL

Heh. Even with my extremely limited knowledge of the business (and the technical end of things), even *I* know that this isn't a Good Idea(TM).

OK. So now we've got the lineup. We've got our mixer in place, and the technical aspect of things are starting to line up.

Now who's going to write the tunes for this endeavor? I might be able to help, but I'd probably be better off helping those that can't read music get over that disadvantage.

Roger -Dot- Lee, learnin' things in spite of himself.

[kirk]

... it would be much like removing layers of stuff in case it wasn't needed.

that's true as to track count. sometimes "less is more",
so, good to cut the extraneous.

you can eliminate tracks, but efx are permanent.

elric~ guitars aren't quite as problematic as bass.
the guitar takes up space in the mid-upper bandwidth
generally, w/o much competition, so it takes more abuse.
my buddy steve loves the doubler (oy!)..but it sounds so
good it's worth the effort to tame it. easy on the reverb.

re- pedals- remember you're going from analog to digital.
pedals that do extreme changes like overdrive are primarily made for
live application. most o' my guitarist friends have switched to
DI boxes like the line 6 pod, amp simulators for digital recording.
pedals, and the more items you have in the chain add to the noise floor.
at mastering, that rises along w/ the music.

again, monitoring is a problem. pc speakers, ect.
don't have the sonic range.

[Elric68]

Well I have to admit I don't understand half what you said ...
In English, that's a lot more difficult for me of course.

Is there a way of using guitar FX without buying expensive materials ? For an example, is there a software that can overdrive our reverb my clean sound ?

[moses]

I was gonna say something like what kirk said... if you plug in direct with overdrive effects, you get a nasty sound. Your guitar amp is made to make those things sound good. Actually, the other way around - they're made to sound good through guitar amps. (oddball technical info omitted)

Yes, there are studio effects that can make a clean guitar sound like its overdriven through an amp. I personally don't have anything I really like in that department, but when I record my guitar, I use the amp simulator on my effects unit (Boss GT-6) because it sounds better than my real amp and I don't have to mess with microphones and getting the right sound... it's already set up in the amp simulator.

Probably what would be best for you would be to use a real amp and a microphone - a Shure SM-57 or 58 would work great. If you can't do that and nobody else has a software effect that sounds good, I can run your guitar part through my amp simulator and back into the computer. Sounds like the long way around, but it just might work!

[moses]

First off, I didn't mean to kick Spaz off bass. I somehow remembered that he offered to add vocals but forgot about bass. My bass is a rather cheap Squier MB-5 (because an odd number of strings is an absolute necessity for me.) It's blue.

I need a scorecard here. Anyone else?

Elric - guitar
Yesspaz - bass, vocals
Roger.Lee - euphonium
roger - keys, vocals, bass, drums, vocals, some horns
tobyGnome - cello
moses - guitar, bass (trumpet if necessary, given the other horns available)
VAX - keys, 12 string guitar, trombone
sharcnorris - keys
fremder99 - drums (electronic kit)
progdirjim - drums

If we're starting with an instrumental then vocals are not necessary (unless we want backing "ahhhs" or something) so if Spaz wants to play the bass that's fine with me.

Elric - if you came up with an idea we can start with - even if it's just one 30-second section of the song - we could start there, even if it's not the beginning. Like kirk said, we can (digitally) splice away if we need to. The initial tracks should probably be played to a metronome (let us know the tempo!) or else the drummer could have a really rough time following the rest of us.

Drummers aren't meant to follow.