No description

Use this forum for discussing music in general, rather than specific Acoustica products.

Moderators: Acoustica Dan, Acoustica Greg, Acoustica Chris, Acoustica Eric

Post Reply
User avatar
Mark Bliss
Posts: 6552
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:59 pm
Location: Out there

No description

Post by Mark Bliss » Mon Apr 24, 2017 4:48 pm

Because I cant describe it.

Never been a big fan of the way out there jazz. But if someone can simply draw me a map to the place Hiromi goes at about 5:35 here..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXsuPkyFQuQ

I'd strut right on down to the crossroads and pick it up from the devil himself.
Just in awe!
Stay in tune, Mark

Image

My SOUNDCLOUD Page

User avatar
Acoustica Greg
Posts: 19820
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: No description

Post by Acoustica Greg » Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:05 pm

Wow, fusion jazz lives on! I hadn't heard of Hiromi Uehara.
Mixcraft - The Musician's DAW
Give it a try here: http://acoustica.com/mixcraft/
Check out our Mixcraft University video tutorials.

midimoose
Posts: 149
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 12:22 pm
Location: Owls Head, Maine, USA

Re: No description

Post by midimoose » Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:53 pm

Killer stuff Mark, thanks for sharing this! Oh, to have just 10 % of her keyboard skills.... While I have your good ear, I'm working with m-audio bx5 carbon near-field monitors, and I've noticed on my last few mixes that when they sound pretty good, after burning a disc and playing it on other systems, they sound muddy-- too much bass and weak in the mid/highs. My monitors are obviously giving me an exaggerated sound in the mid to high range, and not enough bass. The speakers are on isolation pads, about 3 feet apart, forming an equilateral triangle to my listening position. These speakers have an "attenuator" switch with 3 settings-- "flat", -2db, and -4db. Due to space limitations, the rear of the cabinets are about 6" from the back wall. I've found the "manual" for these speakers amazingly lacking in detail regarding these settings. I've been using them in the "-2db" setting for a while, but not happy. Which of these 3 settings might be best for upping the bass, or lowering the high range? I know there are a thousand variables involved, but, in general? Many thanks for any suggestions.

By the way, going back a few weeks, thanks for the loan of the erhu! It was right where you said it would be. When I put it away, I did slack the bow and wipe down the strings. I really wasn't able to play it much-- what the heck! How do you keep the durn thing under your chin? :wink: Thanks, Rick
"Creativity is the residue of wasted time." Albert Einstein

User avatar
Mark Bliss
Posts: 6552
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:59 pm
Location: Out there

Re: No description

Post by Mark Bliss » Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:00 am

Hi Rick

I believe the pads are designed to attenuate the crossover below 200Hz, with the idea that it might compensate for monitor location that is less than ideally located near a back wall and thus lead to inaccurate bass level reproduction. I kind of find it odd, in that all small monitors tend to be lacking in bass reproduction more often than not......

Anyway, you are not alone, getting bass levels sorted out is frustration shared by "bedroom" producers everywhere. Where the higher frequencies can usually be learned, compensated, etc. via referencing and familiarity, how do you compensate for frequency info that's generally just not there?

Some people add sub woofers (kept at modest low levels) but good ones kind of kill the budget. Others revert to headphones for the sole purpose of referencing bass, (I do that to some degree) then others consider headphones a mistake for bass.

If you want to get fancy, you can use one of the available EQ plug ins that allow you to solo a selected frequency band, and a/b your mix to a reference mix for comparison. (I like that method, but its tedious and time consuming) Some people use a spectrum analyzer similarly, I did that for a while but got inconsistent results.

Theres also a plug in that is dedicated to bass level comparison that I have been experimenting with. So far I have used it to reference a commercial mix and then test results with mine, and check on headphones, and mix down a test mix and play it in my car, etc. etc. repeatedly......... It seems to be a constant circle at times. 8)
Stay in tune, Mark

Image

My SOUNDCLOUD Page

midimoose
Posts: 149
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 12:22 pm
Location: Owls Head, Maine, USA

Re: No description

Post by midimoose » Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:05 pm

Hi Mark,

Thank you for the response. Glad to hear that I'm not alone on this. I've done some playing around with my mix today, re-did EQ settings, and have made some good progress. I think simply a matter of training my ears more carefully to these monitors, and knowing what to expect from them. It seems, with the current setup, the mix needs to sound almost "screechy" on my monitors to sound good on other systems. I can live with that. Just part of the fun, and learning experience. I saw another post in the Mixcraft section of the forum regarding calibration of monitors, and as a (very) casual hobbyist, I have to agree about not going too deeply into the math/science end of this. If I wanted a job, I wouldn't have retired. :lol: Overall, I'm pretty pleased with these speakers, since I bought them at a ridiculously low sale price a year or so ago from Musician's Friend. House maintenance, family obligations, yatayata, all prevent me from spending more time on Mixcraft, but I do enjoy it, and have leaned a tremendous amount from these forums. I know what you mean about this being a circular process-- kind of like chasing one's tail. I do often compare monitors to headphones, but it's such a vastly different listening environment that it's difficult for my aging ears to be objective. I'm trying to spend some more time listening to some favorite "reference" CDs through the monitors for comparison. On we go! Have fun--Rick.
"Creativity is the residue of wasted time." Albert Einstein

User avatar
Mark Bliss
Posts: 6552
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:59 pm
Location: Out there

Re: No description

Post by Mark Bliss » Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:06 pm

Many good near field monitors are considered "harsh" to the point of being irritating, but they serve a purpose. One of the most commonly used over the last 2 decades or so, are Yamaha NS10's, (Obsolete now, and still sought after) and if you talk to many mixing engineers from the last few decades, you will often get the response "yeah, I hate those things" yet at the same time they were considered a mandatory tool. I call it "harsh reality"

Sometimes you need to clearly hear and judge frequencies that require a monitor that doesn't sound "pretty".
If we benefited from "pretty" we would just use some 3-way home stereo speakers to monitor, get the results pretty and call it a day.
Well, that has its utility as well.......

IMO, the best tool is probably familiarity.

A/B references in your DAW session. Mix down a version, sandwich it between two reference tracks and pop it in your car. Listen for a few days. TAKE NOTES, tweak and revisit.

Rinse, repeat, lose faith, keep trying, believe it or not, the harder you try the harder it gets at times.
Then you go back to some old work you thought was pretty good and you realize you've gotten better by leaps.....


Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised to get some flak from the haters, debaters and "know it all's" on the monitor calibration comment, but that's OK. Its an opinion, I own it. And the question is pretty general. Calibrate what aspect? Levels? Frequency response? Location relative to the lava lamp?

These might be important details! 8)
Stay in tune, Mark

Image

My SOUNDCLOUD Page

User avatar
AHornsby
Posts: 1169
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 7:42 pm
Location: NE Oklahoma

Re: No description

Post by AHornsby » Sat May 20, 2017 7:06 pm

It's called "off the tracks" @ 5:35. haha

Post Reply