Didier

Hi John, I'm not sure I can talk of "prefered site" to promote my music, but rather of "most efficient site". I precise this, because my prefered site is Songstuff, but not for promotion, and that's why I like it I guess: most discussions do not occur on the basis of self promotion. As for efficiency, MP3.com boards were an obvious place. Now that it's over, the obvious places are the boards where your music is hosted. The issue is that none of the challengers have enough of an audience, so people really keen at promoting have to be present on 5 or 10 or even more boards, which is a full time job As for myself, I stick to the two "OMDs" where I'm present: IC and SongPlanet. SongPlanet is a specific case. Because it is more (currently at least) an online radio than an OMD. And to have your songs in the playlist, it is recommended that your songs are hosted there. I do post on the boards on SongPlanet, mostly because I have friends who are regulars, and because my songs are in the playlists I am not so eager to have song reviews. Just the way I am. Some people love it, I don't. Must be partly because I'm very critic myself with my music, and perhaps I don't need/want to hear the same thing from others : Of course, when someone writes something nice about my songs, I like it This could be very valuable. Provided your various hosts allow only a limited number of space/songs, artists without their own website will be able to have all their songs in a single place. For instance, 10 songs on IC, plus 25 Megs on SongPlanet (about 5 or 6 songs). If the sites allow deep linking (as IC and SongPlanet), and Songstuff provides a field for streaming/download URL, then it would be even better. Good idea. But I think you should consider "screening" the review, i.e., "reviewing" the reviews. Otherwise some people would post horrible things, as I've seen on other sites. Great And, as usual, thanks for your work. Didier

Hi Steve, I don't know too much about music software and Linux, but it seems there's no version of Cakewalk or Cubase. I found what seems a rather complete article from Sound On Sound on the subject: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Feb03/arti...a97df6d14dd3de0 Didier

Hi John, Beethoven? Horrible soft romantic It has to be Glen Gould playing Bach, and perhaps the Prelude, for it's incredible simplicity. Didier

Thanks Rudi, That what I thought initially, and then I thought "John surely knows the basic of intonation, then what is he asking for?" Yes, passed the basics (which John surely knows), I'm not sure what kind of advice he's seeking. The only thing I know for sure (from very experienced repairmen and guitar makers), is that intonation is the thing that you're supposed to do last, after everything you intend to do on the guitar has been done: Frets, neck setup (if the guitar allows that), bridge condition, whatever, and new strings. The other thing I know is that, when comparing the open string and the 12th fret, the pressure has to be *very* light on the 12th fret, even lighter than you would use to play normally, just short of buzz. Thus said, none of my guitars are really tuned, there's always something a little too sharp or flat on at least a few strings. And that's not because they're in bad condition. They are at the limit of what can be possiblity done given the guitars. Didier

Hi John, Pardon my poor English (and lack of technical words on subjects I never discussed in English). What "setting up the intonation" would mean? Because, for this one, I might have a clue, who knows? Didier

Hi John, Hopefully for you you're not me Otherwise my only advice would be: give it to a professional. And even then. I had a guitar nearly "killed" by a so-called guitar maker. Fortunately, I am now able to use the services of one of the best French guitar maker, if I need too. I don't know much about frets. Only that it depends on the depth of the string marks (and on the initial highness of the frets), whether or not it's possible to dress frets. When it's too deep (or the frets were very flat to begin with), you have to re-fret completely with new frets. But I suppose you already know that. Didier

Hi John, Amps are very much a question of personal taste. I never dug too much Marshalls (but yours must have been different, I only know Marshalls from 80s and after). Not the kind of crunch I'm comfortable with. I have (of course) to recommend my amp It's called a Dakota, from 76. I believe it was some kind of Italian "copy" of Oranges. Mine is a supposed to be a Bass/Organ amp. The corresponding ones for guitars were called Brooklyns or Manhattans. It's a full valve amp (preamp and amp), with no gain, only a volume. Which means, if you want to have a more distorted sound, you must play louder On stage I produce the high distorted sounds with an effect. But, for recording, I do change the volume to obtain the level of crunch I want. The cab is a separate 3 x 10 (or 12, I never measured). I just love the sound of that amp. It has do to (I think) with the fact that it is supposed to be a bass amp, like guitarists playing Fender bass amps instead of the "normal" Twin reverb. On stage, I use it both for the electric and the acoustic (but I'm using EQ correction from an effect, my Ovation has too much highs). On the transistor kind, I never had one, but was always very impressed with the sound of the Roland Jazz Chorus 120. It's a single unit, enormous for a single unit, and really heavy. Didier

Hi John, Yes, I saw you there, and said hello Am I the only one with OMD experiences and recommandations here? Didier

I can't speak for Illusionist, but you know I will Didier

Hi Illusionist, I just saw that, and said hello. But please continue to post here Didier

You're welcome. I think it is. Time will tell how it evolves. If you post in the forums (it is customary to post for new users on IC, once the account is up and running), I will recognise your name (unless you take another nickname on IC), and say hello Didier

Hi Davlan, Like most living things (or things made out of living materials). Didier

Hi John, I suppose that by Online music services you mean OMDs (I think that's the more widely accepted term). If you meant something different, then my answers will not be very meaningful My experience is this domain is limited to MP3.com (RIP) and InterConnected. "What benefit were they? " Exposure, to parts of the world I would have never reached otherwise. Contacts, which leads to collaborations, which is a very good experience too. Otherwise, most of my "fans" were put off by adverts and the fact that you had to register to listen on MP3.com. With InterConnected, these two issues are solved, so I do expect more people will actually listen to my online tracks. "Were they value for money? " When I signed for MP3.com, it was free, so that's good "bang for the buck". My current OMD (InterConnected) is free too (with a limit of 10 songs) *and* allows deep linking, which means my own site can allow streaming transparently for the users. And you can't beat the price So I can definitely recommend IC. Apart from your time, you have nothing to lose anyway. I, too, would be interested in reading other users' experiences and feedback. Didier

Alas, yes. You keep the fundamentals easily, but the speed, timing, smoothness, and left/right hand coordination is lost very fast. In England? Seriously though, it doesn't have to be a real humidifier. When I was a kid, it was just the bottom of a cut plastic bottle, with some water in it, near the piano. In my current location, as it isn't that dry, I don't use anything. Which means, as I wrote, that you should have tuning at least twice a year. Didier

Now, Bongstuff, since you're moderator, you should move all the piano discussions to the new board Didier

You're welcome Sorry about my assumptions then. You're probably more a pianist than I am For me, the main difference is in the basses. When I try a piano, a hard hit of the left hand usually tells me a lot whether I would like a piano or not. Mind you, I don't train enough to break a string with my little finger but the transition from very light touch to very hard "strokes" is something I would really miss in the digital world. As far as possible, but dew level is important too. It shouldn't be too dry, otherwise the wood suffers, and you get out of tune quickly. The "rule of thumb" of tuning twice a year is related to turning heating on and off. Tuning should be done 1 to two weeks after, once the combination of temperature and dew level is stabilised. Perhaps, if you live in a cold enough country (where heating is always on), you don't have to tune at all Providing you manage to get the girls where the piano is. That's probably why I took on the guitar Didier

Hi Bongstuff, Welcome to the world of real wood (and not only to make it pretty like on old synths). I do agree on this one. Only reputation (or someone really knowledgeable) can tell you that. Maintenance is fairly the same for all pianos, unless they are crap to begin with. Tuning (at least twice a year), and mechanical revision every 5 to 10 years is my experience. But I'm not playing 10 hours a day. If you have only played synths before, I guess *any* piano can take it As for the baby, depends on the weight, providing he walks on the keyboard. Any normal upright would be nearly the same to this respect. Didier

1. They weigh a ton. Agreed. 2. They don't necessarily sound better than a really good sampled job unless you are looking at a non upright model. It depends on what kind of upright we're speaking of. I wouldn't trade my 1900 (but with a "crossed" metal frame fitted in the 70s) Mahogany Elcke for anything. It's sure that most new upright I've tested do not make it for me. 3. It will sound more characterful. That's why I love my piano. If the aim is a "general purpose" instrument, then I would agree you might as well go for a sampled job. It's the same with old guitars and amps. If you want something all purpose, it's better to buy a Pod. 4. They're a bitch to mike up. I didn't find that too difficult. And I have only mid/low quality electrets. It sure requires a lot of experimentation. 5. Attempts to emulate a weighted action keyboard are fairly good now. Apparantly the new Kawai is a stunner. No comment on that. 6. Steinberg's "The Grand" is REALLY good. Have a listen. And a play before you do anything. You can cart this one about in laptop. Same here, I haven't tried this thing. 7. Much of the piano's expression is derived from the keyboard action. Partly, but not only. The sound itself, with all the "defaults" produced by real wood and steel is part of it too. 7. But a decent dig piano might cost you more than an upright. I suppose it's true. 8. I would imagine the real thing is less consistant than it's digital counterpart. I've played a few ( even some really good ones - Bosondorfer) that just don't feel very good. You'll have to spend some time shopping around. I do agree. I've tested pianos which were suposed to be great (the price was high enough, anyway), which I really disliked. The best compromise I have tested are "1/4 grands" (don't know how one calls that in English), some of which (to my tastes) were better than full size grands. Just as for a guitar, you just don't read the brand and the specs. You have to try it for real, each one can be different. Just my 2 Euro cents. Didier

Hi Bongstuff, As a piano player, I do agree I never managed to get interested by synths as long as they were strictly monophonic. Not sure the pianos need a new board, though. But I'm not sure where they belong. Didier

Hi John, OK, I see what you mean. Something between final "raw" mix, and mastering. The answer for me is still no (I don't do it) because, until I decide to release a "real" CD, I only do "raw" mixes. I consider what I have issued so far as demos, and only that. Didier

Must be the language barrier. For me post-production is related to video (or movies). This is where you add music, sound effects, or even all the dialogs (cheap Italian movies) corresponding to the images. I suppose you mean something else. Nope, based on my answer above. Didier

You don't need any excuses. I was joking (about you), and trying to give our friend some basic, but sound advices. As you know, my failures in the industry are my only experiences So thank god you have come back to your usual self, to help giving meaningful answers And while I have your attention, how about giving your wisdom on near field monitors to Bongstuff and I (in the the Recording board)? Didier

Sometimes, even if it hurts, that's worth it If I knew a magic recipe, I would be using it for myself That was part of my reply. First, you have to prove locally (by any means possible) that you are something worth to consider. Build a fan base, and create a "buzz". If you are not able to do that on your own, it's very unlikely any record label (even the smallest) would be interested in you. Doing the same thing online wouldn't hurt either. Thanks to the Internet, you can now build an online presence, and get heard. You have also to show and display a very serious commitment to what you want to achieve. I said above, and I'll say it one more time: "if you don't take what you do seriously, why should others?" I would suggest that you read first all the marketing articles available on Songstuff, as a starter. After that, read anything you can find on line on "how to land a record deal". I wrote read, not signing to any shark promising (for a fee, of course) to do that for you. Next, reflect on your strengths and weaknesses. I think (personally) it's always best to play your strengths, unless some of the weaknesses are too important. After you have done some of this homework, you are still, of course, welcome to discuss here. Didier

Hi Bongstuff, So, no answers? (and I'm, too, interested by the answers) Where are the pros gone? : Didier

Hi Dr_Death, I do agree with John's questions. First, define what you want to achieve/be. "How do I go about making a big enough dent for someone to notice me? " You'll know when you have achieved it Seriously though, either you have already strong (or even loose) relashionships in the business (a foot in the door) or you have first to make a reputation all by yourself, before people start to notice you. I check your pages. Not so bad. But relating to your question: if you don't take what you do seriously, why should others? My wisdom of the day, since Mad Finns influence on John starts to show, someone has to stay serious Didier