Thanks for the help. Im having a play around now.

Basically what your saying is that the output of my amp sim into my DAW should be the same as my DI going in?

If im wanting to group all my Drums/Cymbals, Room Mics/OH or Rhythm or Melody guitars together for compressing them or adding reverb and stuff. Do i have to create an FX Channel and send them to that?

Im using Cubase 5.

why are you using cubase in stead of reaper

reaper is for broke ass niggas trying to play me too



























[IMG]http://static.tumblr.com/jdoh5hu/OS2ldtvnc/trollface_small.jpg[/IMG]

Haven't used Cubase in a long time so I'm not sure.

If you are able to make an aux track (i'm assuming cubase's equivilant would be an FX track) Then you just assign the output of each channel so that it buses to the Aux/FX track.

Then whatever plugs you put on the aux/fx track will effect anything being bused to the track.

[quote=JoshIsNumber3;18462127]reaper is for broke ass niggas trying to play me too



























[IMG]http://static.tumblr.com/jdoh5hu/OS2ldtvnc/trollface_small.jpg[/IMG][/quote]
lol josh where you been son

What you want is a Group Channel track. Once you create the track, name it something like "Drums". Then change the output on the desired drum tracks to Drums instead of Stereo 1.

Anyone adept at Side chaining drum tracks. I want to mix a little into my drum group (kick, snare, cymbals). Do i have to set up a seperate send from my group track for the compression, or just use it as an insert on the group channel?

No idea how to do it in Cubase sorry.

In Bro Tools you just set up a send from the track you want to trigger. Then for example in the compressor plug in you just select the side chain feature and all is a go.





When are people going to learn...everything in Pro Tools makes life so much easier ;)

Yeah Pro Tools is really great. Especially with pro tools 9 not needing an interface to mix, it's getting even better.

I was actually recording a vocalist today who said she wanted the pro tools file, but also the seperate audio files in a different folder. She said she wanted to be able to do it in pro tools but then bring it in to garage band to make it way better. I just laughed to myself.

what do you think of my cover? D:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtWMkpCPXEI

Ya know, I think you definitely have to have a nice front end, quality mic, preamp, D/A...I mean, you are absolutely not going to sound good if your front end sucks. But monitors, I'm not so sure. The most important thing regarding monitors, IMHO, is to know them, know what they sound like in reference to your headphones, your car, home laptop, your home stereo, etc. Like, who cares if they're flat? What environment is flat, anyways? Save your money, and spend some extra time getting to know your monitors, and your room.

[quote=interluder;18486421]But monitors, I'm not so sure. The most important thing regarding monitors, IMHO, is to know them, know what they sound like in reference to your headphones, your car, home laptop, your home stereo, etc. Like, who cares if they're flat? What environment is flat, anyways? Save your money, and spend some extra time getting to know your monitors, and your room.[/quote]

You're ignoring the possibility that the monitor/room chain might do some terrible, terrible things that make it impossible to get any sort of accurate sonic picture.

For example, you might have a large node in the fundamental speech frequencies. No amount of "learning" is ever going to make up for the fact that certain important frequencies [I]just don't exist[/I] in your work environment. This is also true the extremes of frequency range as well: if they aren't getting output there's no way you can work with them in the first place.

I agree (more or less) about the "flatness" issue, but you gotta have a reasonable starting point to build from. Also keep in mind that having a dynamite front-end means diddly if you can't hear those differences anyway because of your horrible monitoring (i.e., from your perspective, you've just wasted your money on the premium stuff).

i agree with moseph, a neuman u87, through a1073 with an 1176 using the apogee a/d d/a converters isn't going to mean shit if you cant hear what it really sounds like.

I'd also like to add that a flat room is key to making good recordings/ mixes. Micing up a snare top with an sm57 is common and can make for an amazing snare sound, the main problem most new engineers run into is room sound, not only live room sound but their monitoring setup as well, if your room is reflecting all over the place and phasing out your monitors (which are also coloring the sound) you're not going to know what it actually sounds like to the mic

[quote=Xomblies;18487557]I'd also like to add that a flat room is key to making good recordings/ mixes. Micing up a snare top with an sm57 is common and can make for an amazing snare sound, the main problem most new engineers run into is room sound, not only live room sound but their monitoring setup as well, if your room is reflecting all over the place and phasing out your monitors (which are also coloring the sound) you're not going to know what it actually sounds like to the mic[/quote]

I definitely concede that "flat" is the best conditions for your monitoring environment. It's the closest approximation of a "generic" room because its neutrality means you're mostly hearing just the audio. I don't agree that it's [I]absolutely[/I] essential: I'd rather have a decent-sounding room for $1500 worth of work than a perfect room for $15,000. There are more critical things to spend the money on than a "perfect" listening space.


One thing I'm less certain of, however, is how treatments should affect sound transmission in terms of reflections/diffusion. "Live" and "dead" both have their advantages, and neither one seems like the clear winner to me.

How many people listen to music in a dead room

shitty post nm

[QUOTE=Kuffuffled;18487613]How many people listen to music in a dead room

shitty post nm[/QUOTE]

it's not about listening in a dead room it's about getting a neutral sound so that way it doesn't matter what kind of room you listen in ;)

Yea I couldn't make a sentence to fix my statement so I said f it

That works^

[QUOTE=Moseph;18487597]I definitely concede that "flat" is the best conditions for your monitoring environment. It's the closest approximation of a "generic" room because its neutrality means you're mostly hearing just the audio. I don't agree that it's [I]absolutely[/I] essential: I'd rather have a decent-sounding room for $1500 worth of work than a perfect room for $15,000. There are more critical things to spend the money on than a "perfect" listening space.


One thing I'm less certain of, however, is how treatments should affect sound transmission in terms of reflections/diffusion. "Live" and "dead" both have their advantages, and neither one seems like the clear winner to me.[/QUOTE]

moseph, when you hear my shit in its entirety you'll shut the fuck up and stop half agreeing with me :p

[quote=Xomblies;18487666]moseph, when you hear my shit in its entirety you'll shut the fuck up and stop half agreeing with me :p[/quote]


I don't know man, I've heard this spiel before: big overture, moderate show :)

[QUOTE=marielaurette;18473354]what do you think of my cover? D:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtWMkpCPXEI[/QUOTE]

How did you end up in this cesspool? Song was listenable. Your vocal phrasing needs some work, and timing. Guitar is pretty harsh in the recording

[QUOTE=Moseph;18487855]I don't know man, I've heard this spiel before: big overture, moderate show :)[/QUOTE]

all i've posted thus far have been demos with Di'd guitar, bass and aren't mixed at all ;)

[quote=Xomblies;18488481]all i've posted thus far have been demos with Di'd guitar, bass and aren't mixed at all ;)[/quote]

Does that include the links to The Chase and Hear Chaplin? Because that's what I'm talking about. If you didn't actually do the work on that stuff, then I withdraw the comment completely.

Both sounded fine, and I wouldn't argue if somebody said they sounded [I]good[/I], but nothing in those blew me away or anything.

And before you get all pissed off about it, please understand that this isn't coming from a place of anger, or spite, or jealousy or any other negativity. It's just my honest assessment.

I imagine a big part of it is that we have different aesthetic preferences.

Your tendency to hype/upsell the audio probably influences things quite a bit as well (hence my ribbing). If I were going to give any actual advice on the matter, I'd suggest cut that out.

I anticipate alot of kick drum

nah he like the ultra snare

it's new shit, the chase and chaplin are 2 years ago. I'm talking about something that wasn't recorded on a digi003 and mixed in the box...

Lmao even for 003 and ITB it sounded pretty dece!

don't mean to spam this but it's appropriate in this thread

[url]http://soundcloud.com/pwen_wilsons_nose[/url]


not as much kick drum as you guys anticipated eh?

Needs more tbh. You've failed me again Nick :(



jk :D I liked it, post when donez

it's almost there, we upped the vox by a db and a half cause it was hard to hear brandon's articulations in this one, rounded out some of the eq on the guitars' lower mids so there is more definition in what i'm doing with guitars brought up the kick by .5 db ;)