|
Post by 4real on Jan 7, 2013 1:38:58 GMT -5
Well....there are more sophisticateed ways of doing noise suppression...your basic effects 1-10 suppersor is a simple gate. If you did do the noise suppression by cancelling out the footprint, you can do this in recording software graphically and easily...cuts through compression selected frequencies, one could even have this 'automated' by sampling the 'silence/noise' and applyign that...HOWEVER
now you are cutting out important frequencies out of teh si9gnal of the guitar!!!
It's not that all guitars sound 'the same' though some effects, effectively do...as you say yourself...
'almost'? Depends on the style and extent of distortion, but the effect does take out a lot of the character because it is compressing everything and tehn cutting off teh top of the waves to make 'squares'...
I'm not sure what you mean by 'harmionics' in your context or explanation but distortion will compress all harmonics up and then cut them off...so yes, you lose some of those 'spikes' perhaps and perhaps to compensate for the single coils you are having to boost more to get closer. It all depends what you want to achieve.
Anyway...are you suggesting that your 1-10 NR in your effects things uses forier analysis or is sampling and squashing certain frequencies...and if so, don't see some fundamental problems of this...say compared to a silent gutiar? Remember, if there is noise in the signal and you use an extreme distortion, the noise is boosted just as much and up to the fundamental level and cut off too! Most noise is likely to be higher frequencies and so cut significantly...
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Jan 7, 2013 2:33:55 GMT -5
Personally, the only use I've ever had for noise gates were on mic'd drums. I suppose we could argue about defining terms, but it always seemed a certain amount of tangible presence was lost using a noise gate on a guitar or bass. I have used X-Hum in post processing and was impressed with the 50hz and 60hz presets...although there was still a noticeable loss of presence, though not as bad as experienced live. And just to toss my 2 cents in on the pickup, I have the DiMarzio YJM, which is now the HS-4 ever since Yngwie jumped ship to Seymour Duncan, in the neck position and I like it. It's quite, clean and doesn't overdrive the amp...unless I work at it. I think this is another case of pickup "tone" being a subject thing. I'm with 4Real on the noiseless pickups. Having had single coil pickups on my basses for decades I have never liked dealing with the hum. I have become a big fan of the noiseless bass pickups and that's carried over to my guitars as well. To each his own. Happy Trails Cynical One
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2013 2:34:39 GMT -5
you can do this in recording software graphically and easily...cuts through compression selected frequencies, one could even have this 'automated' by sampling the 'silence/noise' and applyign that...HOWEVER now you are cutting out important frequencies out of teh si9gnal of the guitar!!! I think you are thinking "analog" again. In the sense of having a circuit/processor/function engaged *all* the time. You just can't easily make a analog circuit sometimes work, sometimes not and the transition to be smooth. Such things take a genius to make in the analog world (and we have a lot of them here), but in the digital world it is 1st year ugrad student peanuts! This thing i doubt it works like a noise gate based on a band of frequencies. It works as a noise detector. I can easily hear the noise/hum at the end of the note sustain, and then brutally silenced. What they do is to detect and nullify the signal if and only of it is pure noise. So they are not engaged all the time. Therefore the hum/noise is in the signal, always. No processing there. No loss (noise included). Its only when the input becomes pure noise that this is engaged. And the definition of what we mean pure noise is controlled via the 1-10 setting. This is not so simplistic if you think about it. Its not a circuit implementing some signal processing function, it is a program clever enough not to ruin your tone. What i mean by harmonics, is this : Having an adequate level of distortion, (i don't have the exact fret numbers so i might be a little off) : 1) we play G on 2nd string (B) on 8th fret 2) We slightly tap at 20th fret (again B string) We hear the natural harmonic right of the G note of 1) multiplied by two right? Ok, now what i am talking about is having the same effect without tapping at 20th fret. Having the note evolve into its own harmonic.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 7, 2013 2:41:52 GMT -5
It sounds to me exactly like a stock noie gate to me...when tehre is sufficient signal everything is let through, when it fall below the treashold (set by 1-10) it 'gates' all signal.
What makes you think it is any more than that?
Just as I originally described, you suggested it had some sophisticated fourier analyis going on. I not only have a fair number of effects, but several digital processors and all this is very standard and basic NR stuff.
The criticisms originally described still applies then...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2013 3:07:16 GMT -5
You suggested:
This is not what i described. What i perceive is not dealing with signal level, but with recognizing noise. This is not the same thing. That is why extreme hum is eliminated. Extreme hum has a generous signal level. If your model-theory was correct then strong hum would make its way even with the NG engaged. There are certainly times when the hum is heard louder than weak notes played softly. Even then, at least my ,me-25, let some musical note to be heard and then silence the whole thing. What i mean that music has precedence over noise even if noise is louder than music. Its about software really. NG are just DSP software. And this software must be clever enough to distinguish between music=information=signal and noise.
Any opinions on the harmonics issue as described above?
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 7, 2013 3:16:59 GMT -5
hmm, then regarding noise gates, what is the basic criticism? Any opinions on the harmonics issue as described above? I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the 'harmonics thing'... It's a personal thing and depends on context. I've done sophisticated noise reduction with a computer analysis to take out things like tape hiss of of old cassette tapes and such, so I know how far digital can go...this is not it.... as described before... see the post earlier. Basically, it needs to hear the signal to open (so a tracking issue) and then lets all the nosie through, then closes at a threashold when the signal goes below the setting and so the noise to signal gets large...where i'd want to hear the signal trail. Does that make sense? There are only a few ways of doing teh signal cancelling and all have an 'effect'...the more silent the signal (ie free of noise) the less NR you need, or preferably none at all...unless you are phil collins and want that sound! Beware of thinking that some how digital is 'magic' or in anyway more sophisticated, even if the detection and operation is done' digitally' the effect is exactly the same!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2013 8:01:34 GMT -5
In all respect, by trying to manually edit the waveform to eliminate the hum-buzz-hiss in digitized samples from old audio cassettes, allow me to say, is far from what a decent specialized DSP processor/software would do. So not only you didn't get how far DSP can go, you didn't even get close. It is like comparing image editing with e.g. Gimp or ImagePro with the software of Google+ which detects which foto belong to which person, by detecting faces/shapes. Its so good, its almost evil! We are talking something much more sophisticated here, or at least the potential to be one. At list in Roland's world (COSM), and specifically in my processor, it seems that even signals of equal strength (hum vs sound) are treated differently. Weak musical signals are let through, even if they are noisy, while strong hum is cut-off completely. So its not so simple. I think me-25 cuts off the output only if its pure noise. What pure noise means is left to the user to fine-tune. Remember, those processors are not there to let you do the job (like a waveform editor), those processors are there to do the job for you, and do it right. You can't compare your or mine editing abilities with the program wrote by an army of elect.engineers/software scientists @roland. And even if your result was better, it would be hard to make it real time, right? It would cost money (human), whereas the other one is fixed for unlimited usage.
About the harmonics, i explain this 2 posts above.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2013 8:30:54 GMT -5
mine (me-25) i guess has a subset of features of this : www.bossus.com/gear/productdetails.php?ProductId=151me-25 has the threshold setting but not the decay. From the above site : So, its not so trivial, and this thing costs as much as a new cheap guitar (100 EUR range).
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 7, 2013 13:10:17 GMT -5
Well, I don't want to argue with you, I'm not familiar with that particular effect. As for editing digitally, and army of specialists created the programs to analyse the noise and then allow to compress those bands as required, I did not write it, but have the advantage of being able to use such tools post production. How is this possible before a note is played? What you described is typical NR, but hey, if the roland copy says it's special I am sure it is.
All that matters is what you think is it not..to you...I just stated my opinion and you sked me to elaborate.
If it is some kind of 'intelligent' NR, so not a simple gate, it may well be hearing, analysing and suppressing background noise. This is generally high frequency and so, may well be suppressing the high harmonic content with it. It might be doing this on the SC's over an HB because the HB does not have the background noise. It is a reasonable hypothesis, make of it as you will.
On the other hand, you linked and quoted from the specilized NS-2, three knob Noise suppressor...it says nothing about being 'digital' and clearly not a 0-10 program. The ME-25 that you actually have is a mid level mini multi digital effects box, somilar to 3 I have here with what I can only assume, with a similar basic control, to be familiar with.
COSM amp sims and other effects all add noise, often the manufacturers do have some noise control to make that palitable, if you are adding nise with the guitar, there is also the NR, which is typically a gate (which is not a 'bad thing' it absolutely cuts in in silence and lets all through when not and the threashold adjustable)
It is disigenuous to assume what I am trying to say or my knowledge of things, counter with marketing 'mystery mojo' advertising copy and to top it off, quoted from a completely different device than from teh one you are using...which is a comparatively low-mid level 'entry level' (as roland describes it) digital COSM multi effects device with a simple 10 stage programing possibility.
So if there is some kind of NR that I am not aware of mmy appologies, if you can actually say that something that by your definition sounds exactly like a 'gate' which would be usual in such a device and perfectly acceptable...but that roland also made some other device does not make 'good copy' for another and unless that 'quote' actually says something about how it achieves this, then jumping to conclusions about what a full featured spectrum analyser and multi band automated studio compressor can do...or even what your mobile phone can do (also not an ME-25) then it is to say at least misleading.
GN2 is a place to share and to learn, if you know the answer to your satisfaction then you don't need me to chip in. If you are happy with your devices and purchases then that's all good then, but you asked me to elaborate...my original thoughts were remarkable succinct...just three words!
Basically QTB or my desire for a silent guitaror the pedantic wiring of other projects comes down to the oft repeated adage, "garbage in = garbage out". If youliked 'noise' you'd not be using NR to kill it, I personally feel that if you step back to first base and have no noise, you have no need to kill anything. My experience with a bunch of similar kinds of devices and even studio digital equipment is that such measure inherently has to cut something...and if you think it through logically, or graphically/audibly on recording software you will see/hear what happens to the sound.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2013 16:32:57 GMT -5
If it is some kind of 'intelligent' NR, so not a simple gate, it may well be hearing, analysing and suppressing background noise. This is generally high frequency and so, may well be suppressing the high harmonic content with it. It might be doing this on the SC's over an HB because the HB does not have the background noise. It is a reasonable hypothesis, make of it as you will. I think you nailed it. Thanx. Also you nailed it about NS-2, it *is* analog it seems, and me-25 tries to model it. And yes, although i dont see nose suppression as evil, the noise does not need to be there in the first place. grrrr most probably the tone hunting season is not over
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 7, 2013 17:50:41 GMT -5
Ok...well you are starting to get teh idea...beware teh 'hype' too...that's just marketing speak...
I'm certainly not 'anti digital' though distortions are frequently sub par, but it is worth understanding exactly what is going on in things like 'amp modeling and such...
Plus my priorities on things are not everyones...so when I say "evil' I mean, for me...though there is a basic principle and reaosning behind it. "Noise in always means noise out".
See, "tone" is the mojo word...it effectively 'means' nothing...
You can't have 'everything' and the is no 'perfection' only what you set as your criteria. I know I can sound hyper critical quite often, but it is rare for people to set out with a clear idea of what they want their destination to actually be. There is a lot of 'mis-conceptions' as well as just different opinions on how to perhaps reach those goals I guess.
I do have some general 'ideas' and so procedures and 'standards' that I seek for my instruments and the music I inspre to play...this will be completely different for others of course.
# Reliability is a must and an un-fussy useful layout # Tuning stability is a must, especially with trems # Playability is a must, but again for me...this means a higher than shredding kind of thing and thicker strings generally # It needs to be able to do clean really well, anything can be dirtied up # as close to silent and silent in operation as possible # It needs to look good and the 'part' and even if heavily modified, that it seems 'meant to be' # It should have some 'uniqueness to it' otherwise, why build it if you can just buy that 'sound' # should be made to serve the music intended to be played on it
So...a few things off the top of my head there...
So, that means 'locking tuners' (on my new gutiar, likely to be going 18:1 locking) ideally. If a trem as most of my electrics are, there is a certain 'floating' feel I like and so there is generally some neck tilt. Roller or graphite nuts and other things to help at the nut end. But regardless, tuning is vital...so intonation and even string spread is something to consider. Ideally I'd go for a much wider neck, but that is not generally an option, hence my new guitar. Clean on electric generally means a lower output and wider frequency pickup. To be noise free, you need to consider noiseless pups as an option obviously...along with as much shielded cable inside the guitar and all that. Cable, effects and amps...all that matters.
Looks do matter and something 'versitile' is a good thing. A solid body would have been a better platform for my last project, but that kind of thing needs the 'look' of something acoustic, even if it has 4 preamps and all that. If making something for yourself, then make it 'yours' or at least, don't believe the 'hype' on a lot of products or artist endorsements and all that, you are not 'them' so...you know, be yourself. That last project is an example of making something the really served what it was designed to do, as best I could and regard it as a 'prototype. If I were completey happy with it, I'd not have bought a new guitar...but alas, a lot of bugs in the electroincs still and a thin neck that makes it hard to impossible for so much. The other guitars tend to 'look good' and been admired. This does make an 'impression' and changes the perception of some people. A lot of the 'ladies' for instance really love my blue tele...it's percieved to sound 'nice' cause it looks 'nice'...know what I mean? I don't want to look like some wanky poser with the thing (I don't have the clothes to match so it would look a bit silly to go all 'goth') or to have the look provide unrealistic expectations either. It needs to be versitile too in that regard, to work with whatever I might end up playing in and not look out of place...and that over many years of ownership too, so things change a lot over the lifetime of things.
Generally my projects have non-generic pups and combinations of pups, the combination selections are important to me, so the N+B on the strat is great for that and not usually heard or even available. The last project really did work to instantly change from one tuning to the next and a bunch of other features and willl return ti it eventually. One day, I'd like to take the essentials of that into a better version perhaps as the ideas are eally good, for those kinds of things. Failing that though, I'm trying to work with a far more convential acoustic for the wider neck and the sound and deal with the tuning and other stuff in other ways. I'm going to ahve to do some kind of work on the amplified sound as well, but this entails a whole system approach, not just a 'pickup' and quite difficult on this kind of instrument. I've got some thoughts and even parts that I'd like to have a go at....perhaps future big thread and in need of some heavy duty advice on...as always...
...
So yeah, experiement and making the 'have it all' experiement s and do all that for sure, avoid the 'mojo' or being blinded by the purchase or cost of it.
It is pure speculation and often the 'parallel' thing can sound really good, so I don't know what a stacked pup like that might sound like in parallel, but it would be interesting to find out and you are in teh perfect position for such a simple experiement perhaps. If you li8ke the 'tp doil' sound, well then perhaps consider a switch or pot control to bring in the mids and noise cancelling of the lower coil maybe.
...
As for thins like modelling and such, some are incredibly goo and certainly useful and in a lot of contexts more than enough for any average audience. The things they hear are things like 'noise' you know...not the finer points of what kind of distortion you are using let alone pups or brands. For most, it it looks enough like a strat, it is you know! But realistically, most like me are playing for themselves and for 'this audience' this can matter a lot and part of an overal approach to the instrument that I try these days to maintain. And all the tiny things do add up. A guitar player in tune will always sound better than one that is not, a guitar without noise will always sound better (all things being equal) than not and all this will enhance the experience of both the player and the listener...especially if they are one and the same!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2013 5:43:06 GMT -5
Thanx for your time and knowledge. Just one objection. I am not a "mojo"-"hype" type of man. I am rather anti-conformist. When the other kids were listening to disco or greek music, i was into classic rock, when they were discovering classic rock i was into metal, when they got into metal i was into thrash, when they discovered metallica i was already into rap-hiphop/techno/house/acid/etc/.... and i am talking late 80s here. Then i got back to thrash and formed a band. I am not stuck anywhere , 80s, 90s, you name it. I just like good music and nice guitar, although guitar will become a retro thing some time in the future. What has got me great interest about single coils, is this early malmsteen tone. I was shocked that with cheap single coils i can shred more clear, faster and just nicer than with fat active humbuckers. The attack on the strat is something not to be found so naturally in LP/HBs. I was shocked that with almost no distortion i could play and sound fast. With the exact same settings i wouldn't sound so good with the EMG81/EMG60. Also with this current setup, the guitar can squeel like there's no tomorrow. Strong "pick" squeal/artificial harmonics for me is a sign of health for a guitar. But as you might have found out, i am just an extreme amateur (ok with some adequate playing skills) who at times suffers from "know it all" syndrome
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 8, 2013 11:09:56 GMT -5
Well, keep an open mind. That was just a reference to quoting 'roland' at me There are some good HB sounds about, you rearely hear HBs clean these days, but they can sound great too. The thing is that a lot of thes generes do thrive on the idea of 'excess' you know...faster louder, mean, more balck than black (as spinal tap might say) and all the rest. It is the most suspetible crowd to the mojo syndrome. And we are all, me included just as much, influenced by such things...
|
|