Studio last night. Doin' the mixin' thang. Of the three songs we mixed, I'm unhappy with one. It's such a small thing, but of the say, 10 minutes of recorded music, roughly 15 seconds of it drives me nuts. Ben's cool with it, but he says if I'm not, we can mess with it. He can hear my complaint, but he takes it as a stylistic choice, and not an pissue. But I see it as an issue. And I know it can be fixed. If it can sound better, I guess it should sound better. He agrees with that.
But at what point to you accept what you have? And at what point do you keep trying to improve it? I mean, you can edit to oblivion, but eventually you have to say, "This is what it is. This is good. And it's good enough."
Luckily, this particular instance does not fall into this category. I was listening to the same three songs last night repeatedly, so I might have some listening fatigue. I'll give it a shot tonight. Let an objective party listen to it. If I'm still unhappy, or they mention the problem without me prompting them, and Ben's cool with it, it's getting changed.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Don't Knock Garageband - Michael
I know, I know, it's a free program that comes with every Mac. It's got gimmicky features, cartoony graphics, and tired samples. How could anyone take this program seriously? The big bands use Pro Tools, right? Shouldn't I be using that?
Here's the truth: Garageband is an amazing, underrated tool that everyone should use. Especially those on a small budget. I've been using it for years, and I've also been in several recording studios, have spoken with engineers and producers, and have learned tons about recording. Some of this stuff you won't read in guitar mags, and you'll only discover through experience. I'll share what I know:
1. Logic-al Mixing Engine
That's right. Logic, Mac's big bad recording software that costs like 500 bucks uses the exact same mixing engine as Garageband. This means that while GBand might not have the bells and whistles (some very much desired bells and whistles, I might add. Cross-fade and punching in, please?), it uses the same method of creating your final mixdown. So while your editing capabilities are limited, how the two programs combine tracks is identical.
2. Audio Unit (AU) Software
AUs are little add-on programs that work with your recording software. GBand comes with a bunch, hence why the drop down menu under the Details section of a track has things called, "AUBandpass" or "AUMatrixReverb" (awesome reverb, btw). You can actually buy more, and there are a bunch of free ones for download all over the net. Like I said, the stock loops/instruments that come with GBand, except for a few, are pretty weak in the sauce department, but some of the synths are tangy as hell. Then get some JamPacks and expand your set. The orchestral pack is solid as hell, and the instruments therein beat the stock instruments every damn time. For example, "Steinway Orchestra Piano" literally rapes "Grand Piano On Stage." Really. Just rapes it all over the place.
One AU that will REALLY help you SAVE CASH when you're ready to go into a studio? MIDI drum software. The drum instruments that come with GBand are pretty lame and fake sounding, but Ben bought a software called Addictive Drums (and there are others) for about $250 bucks. It takes real drum samples that were recorded from real kits and lets you use a MIDI keyboard to recreate them. It has multiple kits, mic set ups, reverbs, EQs, and even humanizes the samples so it sounds natural. Think about it. The software costs a couple hundred bucks. You can set it to the exact tempo you need and record the drums exactly how you want it. Then, create an uncompressed file of every single drum mic (snare, tom 1, overhead, room, etc.) and save them. (I recommend taking off all effects too, let the producer do that, unless you're dead set sold on teh sound you created). Give all the files to your producer and let him mix and affect. You just saved yourself tons of money that you would've spent on studio time (MSRP $50/hr.) trying to record the drums in real time. Some studios even charge you to rent the kit and charge for the time it takes them to set up and mic the kit! Forget that. Do it yourself. Take your time. Save your money.
3. Tracking
As long as you save each track as its own uncompressed file, GBand is a HUGE money saver when it comes to tracking all synthetic instruments (including drums as mentioned above). I wouldn't recommend it for recording miked guitars or basses or vocals, because your producer at the studio is likely to have better mics and a better recording environment than you do. I personally don't think that line in guitars using GBand's amp simulators sound all that great, but if you have good hardware, you might be able to get an ok sound. But for synth stuff? Always perfect.
4. The Big Guys Use It
Ok, if you care about name recognition and celebrity endorsement, I've got some news for you. Tons of big names in the industry use it. In the recent documentary, It Might Get Loud, The Edge shows you his lair where he goes to create some of his awesome sounds. And wait, what's that glowing on his laptop's monitor as he does so? That's right, Garageband.
You hear about Tommy Lee's massive recording project, The Public Record? This is a project for his band, Methods of Mayhem, in which people are allowed to submit their own tracks for his album, or edit his, and if he likes the sound, he puts them on the album. And guess what? One of the types of files they allow you to download for editing/upload for content? GBAND.
Now, are the big guys mixing and mastering down from Garageband? Eh, no. Highly unlikely. The editing features just aren't there. But so what? You're poor. And you can get away with having a decent sounding recording using only Garageband.
Proof? Go to YouTube and check out the channel, GaragebandandBeyond. That guy has made some really impressive sounds using only Garageband, and I'm thoroughly impressed.
But if you're like me, and have a touch of the purist in you, you'll want that in-studio time for things like guitars, bass, and vocals. Still, combining both Gband and studio time CAN get you a recording that sounds like it was 100% recorded in the studio. It's a freebie, and a goodie.
Here's the truth: Garageband is an amazing, underrated tool that everyone should use. Especially those on a small budget. I've been using it for years, and I've also been in several recording studios, have spoken with engineers and producers, and have learned tons about recording. Some of this stuff you won't read in guitar mags, and you'll only discover through experience. I'll share what I know:
1. Logic-al Mixing Engine
That's right. Logic, Mac's big bad recording software that costs like 500 bucks uses the exact same mixing engine as Garageband. This means that while GBand might not have the bells and whistles (some very much desired bells and whistles, I might add. Cross-fade and punching in, please?), it uses the same method of creating your final mixdown. So while your editing capabilities are limited, how the two programs combine tracks is identical.
2. Audio Unit (AU) Software
AUs are little add-on programs that work with your recording software. GBand comes with a bunch, hence why the drop down menu under the Details section of a track has things called, "AUBandpass" or "AUMatrixReverb" (awesome reverb, btw). You can actually buy more, and there are a bunch of free ones for download all over the net. Like I said, the stock loops/instruments that come with GBand, except for a few, are pretty weak in the sauce department, but some of the synths are tangy as hell. Then get some JamPacks and expand your set. The orchestral pack is solid as hell, and the instruments therein beat the stock instruments every damn time. For example, "Steinway Orchestra Piano" literally rapes "Grand Piano On Stage." Really. Just rapes it all over the place.
One AU that will REALLY help you SAVE CASH when you're ready to go into a studio? MIDI drum software. The drum instruments that come with GBand are pretty lame and fake sounding, but Ben bought a software called Addictive Drums (and there are others) for about $250 bucks. It takes real drum samples that were recorded from real kits and lets you use a MIDI keyboard to recreate them. It has multiple kits, mic set ups, reverbs, EQs, and even humanizes the samples so it sounds natural. Think about it. The software costs a couple hundred bucks. You can set it to the exact tempo you need and record the drums exactly how you want it. Then, create an uncompressed file of every single drum mic (snare, tom 1, overhead, room, etc.) and save them. (I recommend taking off all effects too, let the producer do that, unless you're dead set sold on teh sound you created). Give all the files to your producer and let him mix and affect. You just saved yourself tons of money that you would've spent on studio time (MSRP $50/hr.) trying to record the drums in real time. Some studios even charge you to rent the kit and charge for the time it takes them to set up and mic the kit! Forget that. Do it yourself. Take your time. Save your money.
3. Tracking
As long as you save each track as its own uncompressed file, GBand is a HUGE money saver when it comes to tracking all synthetic instruments (including drums as mentioned above). I wouldn't recommend it for recording miked guitars or basses or vocals, because your producer at the studio is likely to have better mics and a better recording environment than you do. I personally don't think that line in guitars using GBand's amp simulators sound all that great, but if you have good hardware, you might be able to get an ok sound. But for synth stuff? Always perfect.
4. The Big Guys Use It
Ok, if you care about name recognition and celebrity endorsement, I've got some news for you. Tons of big names in the industry use it. In the recent documentary, It Might Get Loud, The Edge shows you his lair where he goes to create some of his awesome sounds. And wait, what's that glowing on his laptop's monitor as he does so? That's right, Garageband.
You hear about Tommy Lee's massive recording project, The Public Record? This is a project for his band, Methods of Mayhem, in which people are allowed to submit their own tracks for his album, or edit his, and if he likes the sound, he puts them on the album. And guess what? One of the types of files they allow you to download for editing/upload for content? GBAND.
* * *
Now, are the big guys mixing and mastering down from Garageband? Eh, no. Highly unlikely. The editing features just aren't there. But so what? You're poor. And you can get away with having a decent sounding recording using only Garageband.
Proof? Go to YouTube and check out the channel, GaragebandandBeyond. That guy has made some really impressive sounds using only Garageband, and I'm thoroughly impressed.
But if you're like me, and have a touch of the purist in you, you'll want that in-studio time for things like guitars, bass, and vocals. Still, combining both Gband and studio time CAN get you a recording that sounds like it was 100% recorded in the studio. It's a freebie, and a goodie.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Full Frontal Shrewdity - Michael
We're leading the assault. As far as the current schedule goes, we should be ready to send the studio heads our prosposal and demo in 3-4 weeks. This week, the last song should be recorded. Next week, final mix and mastering. 3rd week, print demos send to lawyer and copyright songs. 4th week, finalize letter with lawyer and send it to the studio heads.
Up until now, our plan has been to get the rights from the studio to go through with our adaptation, before moving ahead with the project. I've been doing some reaserch, and found the contact information for a few stars from the film, as well as the producer. So rather than one front, we're going to attack all fronts possible. Hell, maybe we'll get an agent.
One bit of news, slightly inspiring and yet, disconcerting. The film, The Goonies, is being considered by Richard Donner to be made into a Broadway musical. The article I found featured some fans that have already started work on a Goonies musical. It was stressed the the fan-based musical and the Donner project were not connected in any way, so I assume that Donner's version is not going to be using the songs from the fans.
This could be seen as inspiring--seeing a film get made into a musical---if it happens for The Goonies, it could happen for us, but it's also diheartening for two reasons: One, it could lead to somebody having the same idea about adapting the film we're adapting, and two, and here's the really irksome thing, these guys have written their songs and made music videos to them on YouTube using footage from The Goonies. Here we are, painstakingly trying to avoid all copyright issues, and these wipes have an article in Slash Film written about them. Their videos are direct copyright violations, and haven't been taken down. Annoying.
In other news, a tiny hiccup this past week: the Venezuelan singer, after sending us a mere one track of him singing his song, has vanished. Can't be reached. It's caused us to buckle down and finish writing another song that we're having recorded this week. I mean, sure we get another song in the bag, but it's more work, more money, more time that we don't have, plus if we never hear from the guy again, we have to find yet another singer.
So time to introduce a new singer. Her name is Samantha. She's recording with us this week (along with the perpetually stellar Jones) and she's amazing. This woman was born for Broadway, and I'm exceptionally excited to be working with her.
And now for something completely different, I get bothered when people try to extend words when they type to show you how they're saying it, but then do it incorrectly. Like when someone writes "cool" as "coollllllllllllllllllllllllll" instead of as "coooooooooooooooool," or for "anyway," you get, "anywayyyyyyyyyyyyy" when it should be "anywaaaaaaaaaaay."
Just sayin'.
Up until now, our plan has been to get the rights from the studio to go through with our adaptation, before moving ahead with the project. I've been doing some reaserch, and found the contact information for a few stars from the film, as well as the producer. So rather than one front, we're going to attack all fronts possible. Hell, maybe we'll get an agent.
One bit of news, slightly inspiring and yet, disconcerting. The film, The Goonies, is being considered by Richard Donner to be made into a Broadway musical. The article I found featured some fans that have already started work on a Goonies musical. It was stressed the the fan-based musical and the Donner project were not connected in any way, so I assume that Donner's version is not going to be using the songs from the fans.
This could be seen as inspiring--seeing a film get made into a musical---if it happens for The Goonies, it could happen for us, but it's also diheartening for two reasons: One, it could lead to somebody having the same idea about adapting the film we're adapting, and two, and here's the really irksome thing, these guys have written their songs and made music videos to them on YouTube using footage from The Goonies. Here we are, painstakingly trying to avoid all copyright issues, and these wipes have an article in Slash Film written about them. Their videos are direct copyright violations, and haven't been taken down. Annoying.
In other news, a tiny hiccup this past week: the Venezuelan singer, after sending us a mere one track of him singing his song, has vanished. Can't be reached. It's caused us to buckle down and finish writing another song that we're having recorded this week. I mean, sure we get another song in the bag, but it's more work, more money, more time that we don't have, plus if we never hear from the guy again, we have to find yet another singer.
So time to introduce a new singer. Her name is Samantha. She's recording with us this week (along with the perpetually stellar Jones) and she's amazing. This woman was born for Broadway, and I'm exceptionally excited to be working with her.
And now for something completely different, I get bothered when people try to extend words when they type to show you how they're saying it, but then do it incorrectly. Like when someone writes "cool" as "coollllllllllllllllllllllllll" instead of as "coooooooooooooooool," or for "anyway," you get, "anywayyyyyyyyyyyyy" when it should be "anywaaaaaaaaaaay."
Just sayin'.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
The Opportunity to Say Yes - Michael
I have a friend who's also doing the whole "follow your creative dreams" (barf) thing, and through her philosophy of "training your gut to listen to the universe" has increasingly been successful. I asked her if I should write a letter to the producer of the film that we're adapting.
She said, "You need to give people the opporunity to say yes."
"So yeah, do it." she added.
Not terribly original, I realize. As my girlfriend pointed out, it's the whole "You will miss 100% of the shots you don't take," thing. Hell, my friend even admitted that she got it from her friend. But it was important to hear. I'm not sure where I stand on the whole "listen to the universe" thing; I like to think I bend it to me, and not the other way around. It seems, however, to be working for her, so maybe it couldn't hurt.
Now that I think about it, the universe did throw the guy's address into my lap...
I'm writing the letter.
She said, "You need to give people the opporunity to say yes."
"So yeah, do it." she added.
Not terribly original, I realize. As my girlfriend pointed out, it's the whole "You will miss 100% of the shots you don't take," thing. Hell, my friend even admitted that she got it from her friend. But it was important to hear. I'm not sure where I stand on the whole "listen to the universe" thing; I like to think I bend it to me, and not the other way around. It seems, however, to be working for her, so maybe it couldn't hurt.
Now that I think about it, the universe did throw the guy's address into my lap...
I'm writing the letter.
Friday, June 4, 2010
The Lovely Couple - Michael
Is it working? Is it happening? Can it be?
Last week, Ben and I found our leading couple for LBM. Yes, the leading man and leading girl have both been found, and this Tuesday, June 8, we'll FINALLY be recording the musical's main duet. This is one of the songs to be included on the demo, and one of the staples of the musical in general, as it incorporates musical themes from the film, and it establishes themes that are incorporated throughout the album.
Moreover, these two singers bring vibrancy to the roles. And I've never used the word vibrancy before EVER.
For one, the characters are 18 and 17, respectively. We had originally auditioned singers who were older, between 25-40, thinking that their professionalism and experience would win out, that if Anthony Rapp could pull off sounding 20ish, it'd work. This wasn't the case. With the exception of a few instances, their voices were not believable as teenagers. Plus, there was an excitement missing.
The singers we've hired, Jones (guy) and Denny (girl) are 16. They both come from a magnet school for the arts and it shows. Professional, talented, and self-aware (not self-conscious). They are distinctly realized when it comes to feeling a song, and knowing their place in it.
Either that or they fake it really effing well.
Jones has got a classic sound, a bit like Roger of Rent when he wants to be, but more well-rounded. What's great about this kid is he's a music dork, and that makes him awesome. Ben played a diminished fourth chord on the guitar the other day and Jones got goosebumps. Seriously. Tubular. (Did he just write tubular?)
Denny's voice has a signature quality that is crucial for her role: dynamics. Denny can give you a pop rock boldness, but adjust the tone controls (located on her left shin) and she backs off her voice to a sweet, willowy sound. She adds personality to the song instead of just hitting the notes. And she reads good books; it matters.
Each of these singers has a unique voice that doesn't sound like we slammed Kristen Chenowith's or Michael Crawford's vocal chords into a copy machine and cloned their love children. (Wait, I'm confused. The vocal chords have kids?) And that's a good thing. We don't want this to sound like everything you've ever heard. Sure, the formula is similar, but the ingredients are different, and I think that'll make the difference.
Behind on schedule, ahead on anticipation. Let's go.
Last week, Ben and I found our leading couple for LBM. Yes, the leading man and leading girl have both been found, and this Tuesday, June 8, we'll FINALLY be recording the musical's main duet. This is one of the songs to be included on the demo, and one of the staples of the musical in general, as it incorporates musical themes from the film, and it establishes themes that are incorporated throughout the album.
Moreover, these two singers bring vibrancy to the roles. And I've never used the word vibrancy before EVER.
For one, the characters are 18 and 17, respectively. We had originally auditioned singers who were older, between 25-40, thinking that their professionalism and experience would win out, that if Anthony Rapp could pull off sounding 20ish, it'd work. This wasn't the case. With the exception of a few instances, their voices were not believable as teenagers. Plus, there was an excitement missing.
The singers we've hired, Jones (guy) and Denny (girl) are 16. They both come from a magnet school for the arts and it shows. Professional, talented, and self-aware (not self-conscious). They are distinctly realized when it comes to feeling a song, and knowing their place in it.
Either that or they fake it really effing well.
Jones has got a classic sound, a bit like Roger of Rent when he wants to be, but more well-rounded. What's great about this kid is he's a music dork, and that makes him awesome. Ben played a diminished fourth chord on the guitar the other day and Jones got goosebumps. Seriously. Tubular. (Did he just write tubular?)
Denny's voice has a signature quality that is crucial for her role: dynamics. Denny can give you a pop rock boldness, but adjust the tone controls (located on her left shin) and she backs off her voice to a sweet, willowy sound. She adds personality to the song instead of just hitting the notes. And she reads good books; it matters.
Each of these singers has a unique voice that doesn't sound like we slammed Kristen Chenowith's or Michael Crawford's vocal chords into a copy machine and cloned their love children. (Wait, I'm confused. The vocal chords have kids?) And that's a good thing. We don't want this to sound like everything you've ever heard. Sure, the formula is similar, but the ingredients are different, and I think that'll make the difference.
Behind on schedule, ahead on anticipation. Let's go.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
