Audio Projects And Recording Set Ups

[john]

Hey

How do you work? One all encompassing project? Separate projects for recording, mixing, production, mastering? What is your base DAW?

I use Sonar 1.0. Old now but still does the basic job.

I have two systems of working.

1. A single project. I keep everything as midi and live effects as long as possible. I then create new audio tracks in the same project and use them for mixing. This I find the most effective, although for large numbers of tracks there can be a lot of scrolling

2. For more fluid projects I use a two project file set up, one for recording and preliminary treatments then a second project for audio only mixing.

In both cases if I look to be experimental or want to do some radical editing I would create a branch project file and work on that. It can be an interesting way to create re-mixs.

In both cases I will create output audio for treatment in Wavelab which I use mainly for mastering, although I do use it sometimes for conditioning of input tracks.

Cheers

John

[FinnArild]

Hi - as some of you know, I have a Cubase setup.

I have different types of projects:

First it's the idea projects where I just record in ideas and try to stick them into a folder structure of categories. After I had 2-300 ideas I found out it was smart to make .mp3's of all ideas so I can easily listen and put them together. Opening Cubase just takes too long.

Then there's the song projects, where I have more or less a finished concept. If it's not for an album, I have this in another folder structure of categories.

Then there's the album projects - here I create folder structures like "need lyrics", "to drums" - "with bass" and this changes as I work through the project.

When I work out stuff, I start out with roughly arranging stuff so I have a pretty much working mix with bass, keyboards and all. Often I just record a refrain and verse and copy it around, stretch the time and play with it to get it just right.

When done with that and lyrics, I start on recording phase. This time I had live drums, so I had to prepare the tracks for the drummer first. This meant recording some bass again and making sure nothing was out of beat for him.

Then it's nitty, gritty work getting the bass on first, move on to the keyboards and guitar that doesn't need my Marshall amp.

Then it is into studio getting grand piano, guitar solos and vocals on it. For this I need to mix it up again, so we don't waste time in the studio on that.

Finally get the backing vocals and all extra arrangement in at home and send it off to mixing and mastering (with a LOT of guidelines). I usually oversee both pretty closely but try not to be too much of a pain in the butt.

During this I will probably have played the same bass, keyboards and guitars 2 or 3 times ... it's a slow process, but it works for me.

[Lazz]

I wish I could do all that - you guys make me envious.

My way of working is to write things out on paper and eventually have people play it. Works fine for gigs - but nowadays they are few and far between. Works perfectly for studio recording, too - but that involves patient readiness to wait for a project opportunity or need and money to hire the players. What doesn't get satisfied in the mean-time is the desire to listen to sound shapes for songs ahead of either of those circumstances happening.

One day I plan to install some kind of techno-muso software and gizmoid stuff - personal ideal is to be able to pre-hear and critique and modify written arrangements which I have been scribbling - and then print-off neat notation - seems it would be a great tool for me - but I have been postponing and procrastinating for a long while due to my grave concern that the opening of pandora's box may seduce me into disappearing up my own bum.

Guys I know teaching musoid courses at Middlesex and the Royal Academy always stress to their students that they should always know what they are going to do before they switch-on the computer - there has to be a purpose - random noodlage and fooling is frowned upon. That kind of rigor would seem to avoid or restrict the risk of anal disappearance - but how do you guys deal with the problem ? Or has it simply not become an issue for you ?

My other question is about package recommendations for my purposes.

The notation software choices seem to be either Sibelius or Finale.

But maybe Band-In-A-Box will handle all I want.

Only ever known BIAB before as a practice tool - which is why I always think so highly of it - but it has now developed way beyond those origins and might be just the job for multi-stave notation too.

Any opinions or input or experience ?

If and when I did move into the 21st century, I see no reason for my filing system to change much:

Large brown envelopes marked with song-title and containg full score and duplicate parts.

Pads/books for each instrument with individual parts for the pieces.

On a computer I would name those same files by song-title

[Lazz]

I think this depends on the context...

Their context appeared to be (without me being in actual attendance, I mean) one of battling against aimless noodlage from the kids and stressing the greater importance of general musicianship and ensemble playing.

I also think that play-time is a perfectly legitimate purpose.

That's how we learn, isn't it ?

But getting lost in play-time is exactly what I'm fearful of - and, knowing myself as I do, with good reason too.

Guess I'll have to jump off that bridge when I get to it.

Maybe I'm just an oddball,

You know we are both convinced already.

I seriously doubt you'd enjoy band in a box.

I love Band-In-A-Box.

The original intent was to extend the approach of those Jamie Aebersold and 'Music Minus One" play-along type series and I think they did that really well. Initially for jazzers (like those play-alongs), it meanrt that you could practice improvising or patterned exercises productively for specific repertoire without having to call your friends in as rhythm section - and you could do it in any key, feel, or tempo you wanted. Plus - because top-line jazz players and educators were involved in developing the package - it was absolutely fit-for-purpose. Whether, with all the latterly added bells and whistles, it's actually fit for my currently envisioned purpose or not - I have no real idea yet. I can see that it prints damn good lead-sheets - which is definitely what I need. But in, say, scoring out a musical for eight instruments - does it automatically transpose from score into the different instrument keys ? Does it place a limit on the number of staves ?

Guess I'll just have to ask 'em - they are local lads, after all.

But if you can expand on your doubts for me first, Steve, that would be a good start.

(I know Finale and Sibelius can do what I want - even though the learning curve will be steep - but BIAB comes at one quarter their price, and already that plays better on the jewish piano.)

Oh - Sorry for being such a Luddite - but, what's a DAW ?

[Lazz]

Have you looked at G7?

I think it should go to a C.

(..... thanks for the suggestion.)

[Lazz]

Great idea, Steve.

But I was hoping for someone else to have already done that work for me - I am typically short of the tiime needed.

Oh - and it was not my intention for you to be 'corrected' about BIAB.

That was just my opinion about its earlier incarnations.

I am sincerely interested in knowing more about your serious doubts.

That would be helpful.

I think I'm going to ask Peter and Ollie Gannon directly.

As well as my mates at those academies.

[FinnArild]

Wow! I thought I had a high-maintenance setup. How do you keep track of what project is what? Do you keep a master index or do you just keep creating subfolders and such?

I've been seriously toying with the idea of creating an HTML menu file.

I use Excel a lot in projects just to have an overview of stuff and to plan out what an when.

[Prometheus]

Guys I know teaching musoid courses at Middlesex and the Royal Academy always stress to their students that they should always know what they are going to do before they switch-on the computer - there has to be a purpose - random noodlage and fooling is frowned upon. That kind of rigor would seem to avoid or restrict the risk of anal disappearance - but how do you guys deal with the problem ? Or has it simply not become an issue for you ?

It's not really an issue for me because I have my own studio setup and consequently time isn't money. I can spend as much time noodling to my hearts content and not pay a penny. If I was planning on recording in a studio that I was paying for, I would certainly make sure I knew precisely what I was doing before I went in...

[Prometheus]

I've got a Cubase Nuendo setup. Old, but still highly functional. I also have a lot of outboards and do a combination of plugin and outboard processing. I tend to keep mixing in one project until processing power becomes an issue, then I'll save a new project and start bouncing.

I use CoolEditPro for processing of sound files and for mastering. I used to master through a SPIRIT STUDIO 24-8-1 Desk and use outboards, but now the mastering suites and plugins are so good I don't see any need to do that anymore... Hooray for Harry Nyquist!

If I need an anechoic studio, there's one in Kilmarnock that I sometimes use, and there's Sound Magic in Ayr for doing live stuff. I take a FOSTEX 8-track HD machine to capture the sound...