|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 26, 2017 14:32:42 GMT -5
LOL
Actually, there are differences heard, even on your distorted sample.
You give me the impression as someone who tried to use good practices when investigating. Perhaps you don't feel this exercise warrants that....
It appears I have hit a brick wall limiter..... ROTFL
I'm done with it. I have better things to waste my time on.
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 26, 2017 14:08:36 GMT -5
Of course the problem remains with your file, even when you have reduced the level. There is no way you will remove the distortion in your file! Just as you cannot refocus an unfocused photograph....... The distortion came about during recording, I'm guessing. It took me 3 minutes to record a strummed G chord with my Strat! If you are gonna offer a test situation, the parameters for your recording should be laid out, i.e. how you recorded that sound sample. Simple, really..... Regardless of what is shown on any DAW, the sample is distorted. Sorry about that. How about explaining how it was recorded, type of input used, etc. How about stating the type of normalisation used..... Wikipedia explanation
Normalising to near 0dB can often introduce 'intersample effects' (red arrow), in which case, clipping will occur during reproduction. And so, distortion........ Your 0dB sample seems to be causing this effect, at the very least.
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 26, 2017 13:23:16 GMT -5
Reducing that same sound sample won't take you back to pre-normalisation, whichever kind of normalisation is used. An fresh, unchanged signal would be ideal?
And your input path is....?
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 26, 2017 13:05:48 GMT -5
It falls short because it has a lot of distortion within the sound sample. Quite simple, really. All I can say, is, I hear a lot of high frequency distortion from your sound samples when listening with my (professional quality) headphones. It sounds very much like input mismatching, but I can't be sure, of course....
Perhaps describing your input path would help. What input are you using to your computer recording system? The audio interface I use is set up to accept instrument inputs (why I mentioned it)(in fact, my set up is for recording and mastering music), which the average computer is not.
What kind of normalising are you doing in Adobe Audition? And from what original peak signal level?
Both of the above could cause distortion in your signal.
May I suggest using Audacity (also free) as your recording DAW for this experiment? I can assure you, it comes very highly recommended.
Perhaps not normalising would be better.
Please don't take my comments as a sleight, they are not intended to be.
Believe me, I would not have commented if I had not heard serious distortion.....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 26, 2017 7:08:05 GMT -5
I decided to try this test, myself, since I have a pretty good sound system and was sure I would be able to hear any differences, if there were some. With the file loaded into Audacity and later Sonar, playing through a Komplete Audio 6 interface, into Soundcraft close field monitors and also AKG K702 pro monitor headphones, with a suitable quality amplifier. Before listening, I took a sneaky look at the wave forms, and noticed that the audio appeared to have been seriously over recorded, that is, the levels were way too high within the sound file. Off the meters, which max out at +6dB! Nothing can be done about that, since it's very much like having an out of focus negative, no way you can focus it after the event. The expected result was distortion. As a rule, digital recordings should never pass 0dB. Generally, a 'recording' level of no higher than -6dB is acceptable. At 'mastering', i.e. end result sound file, -3dB is considered high, but will be free of distortion. We are talking peak levels, here, not average. Passing 0dB is definitely a no-no, since digital distortion is not a pleasant sound! So, in my opinion, this recording should be considered null and void. As expected, all three sounds were muffled through the monitors and severely distorted through the headphones (damn, those ear muffs are good!). An unpleasant experience...... Fortunately, I had lowered the levels, having seen the wave files. Very fortunately!By the sound of it, the input was way overloaded from the start, or at least mismatched. Sorry, I don't think you can call this a very effective test procedure. I would suggest, (a)using a decent audio interface, or, if you did, (b)reducing the input levels considerably, or, if you did, (c)matching the input characteristics to PU output, or, if you did, (d)not increasing the levels so much during processing of the file. My ears are mostly recovered, now. No serious damage done to my audio equipment, though it sounded like it, initially.....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 4, 2017 18:22:36 GMT -5
b4nj0 There are server side apps that will resize images, automatically.
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 4, 2017 16:47:02 GMT -5
JohnH Yeah, that's pretty much what I was thinking, all of what you said. col Sorry, I didn't read the threads you linked to (went all cloudy, LOL), my bad! Yup, upload only. They would probably need to log in, giving a user name and password, but these they can get at 'the door', just as they would at any image host. Not sure I can code the PB button either, yet..... Nothing ventured....., etc. I'm wondering, what would the attachments button be used for? If clicked, where would it take you, that is? In theory, to the portal of the image host facility, I guess, where you can sign in or join up..... But, then you need to log in, load images to host, then, somehow, get them linked back to the page you were on..... Or, am I missing something. It is late, and it's been a long day, for me...... Would not having both the current attachment facility and an image hosting for embedded images work out better? Or maybe not.......
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 4, 2017 14:39:52 GMT -5
Resizing, I 'm guessing, will be the least of the problems..... I doubt that modifying the PB code would be the way to go. If they don't supply the facility, the won't want us to shoe horn it in, I'm sure. Currently, folk use their own image hosting and link to it. If GN can offer the image hosting, it'll be just as easy....... I'm looking into the best program to use to do the job efficiently and cleanly.
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 3, 2017 7:50:28 GMT -5
Me and my big mouth....... Of course, I'd be happy to help. Being retired, I seem to have a lot of time on my hands......... I'll be in touch, Newey.
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 2, 2017 17:47:50 GMT -5
I might be a little rusty, so don't go too far, things move fast on the Interwebs...... Yup, shared hosting, but very reliable, hardly any down time or glitches. In fact, my host took charge of Internet traffic and hosting during the floods in southern U. S, some years back, to keep things running..... They were based in Texas, I was living in Spain and my main traffic was from U.K. What a small world...... Not too long ago, they offered unlimited space, bandwidth and email accounts for $9 pm, paid annually. Even had facilities to host other sites, too. Logging in to the photo gallery just needs one user name and password. That can be posted in the forum, someplace, for members to use as and when. I use a musician's forum (actually a moderator, LOL) and we have a similar system for using the ftp file sharing system. You need to be a member to get to see the password. Trust is the word. And a spring clean, now and then..... Ted
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 2, 2017 13:08:13 GMT -5
$5 a month should get around 125 Gb, or more, of disc space, with cPanel and bunches of software thrown in........ I'd be happy to help, too, if needed. Started web design some 25 years ago. Stopped about 5 years ago, being fed up with the BigG taking over the Interwebs and the world...... LOL. The only downside to setting up a hosted forum is the possible difficulty in importing the current forum posts.......... Perhaps, as an alternative, a photo album site could be hosted. That is, get hosting and load a free photo album program and keep the forum where it is. The upside to this is that very little maintenance would be needed. No update worries, no hacker worries, nor spammer worries, etc..... proboards do quite a good job at these..... If you wanted, you could add pages with general information, reference articles, and all sorts of other stuff, just keep the forum as is and link to it. And, of course, members could log into the photo album to upload their images and link back to them from the forum. Just thinking out loud.......
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Apr 20, 2017 3:04:39 GMT -5
You may need to tweak the midi files, GD, just to add a little realism......
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Apr 14, 2017 17:22:26 GMT -5
Here are a couple (or 7) Hammond VSTIs for you to mess with. Hammond VSTi filesI think they should work with Anvil...... (I use Sonar 8 Pro on Windows 7, they work fine for me..... Here is another free DAW that gets very good reviews.... Reaper Technically a 60 day free trial, but after that time you will still be able to use it, but will get reminders to purchase.......) Drop the dll file into the vst folder withing Anvil's program files, or follow any instructions that come supplied. You should then be able to open the VSTi and play/record away........ There is some nice piano VSTi stuff about, too..... not to mention sax, well, anything really..... Have fun. Oh, and a merry Easter to yourself and the other members, too.....!
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Feb 21, 2017 5:33:22 GMT -5
But if that's still too much wood for you, then we'll just trot right back down memory lane (I was there, when both of these were introduced to the world), and visit the much more rare Alan Gittler's masterstroke, the Purity. (It wasn't called that back then, but even now, mixed names keep coming up for it.)
Yes, I could also grant a dispensation and provides links, but what the hey, I enjoy watching people use the Bible method of learning (Seek, and ye shall find.) Still, just for greekdude's edification, here's a short video of one of Gittler's main proponents:
Go ahead, try to find how wood is contributing to that guy's tone.....
Trusting that I've made my point.....
sumgai
[/quote] Sorry to say this (but, I will anyway... ) But, to me, that's toneless....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Feb 20, 2017 12:29:26 GMT -5
No thoughtful person would claim that wood doesn't matter at all- as you noted, play it acoustically to test that. But compared to other factors, it's a minor component overall. In the real world, we plug into an amplifier and play, often through one or more effects devices. Are you going to hear the contribution of the wood then? Of course, any testing of two different guitars will have a number of confounding variables involved- fit at the neck joint, variation in the mounting of the bridge screws, other things could arguably skew ones results. But imagine a thought experiment: Two guitars, one with a plywood body, the other with (your choice of) exotic "tonewood", same neck, same pickups, bridges, nuts, etc. Plug them both into the same Marshall stack, turn the volume up to a level one would be using in a small club gig, and run it through a Boss Super Distortion pedal with the gain at about a "2", just enough to give it some '80s-style crunch. Blindfold 10 guitarists who claim that "tonewood" matters- and the guitarist and those administering the test likewise don't know which guitar is which, for a true double-blind scenario. Can you honestly say that you could tell the difference? Do you honestly think that the average scores of the 10 subjects would show a difference that was statistically significant? I know I sure as heck couldn't tell the difference, and I'm dubious of anyone who claims that they could do so. Hmmmm, although I pretty much agree with what you are saying, I doubt you would judge a serious malt after adding ice and, dare I say it, coke.....? The thought experiment, to my mind, would be a waste of time, therefore. I rarely use 'crunch', or any other distortion, other than that which my amps produce when driven, and even then in small quantity. And my malt neat, preferably in a crystal glass! But then, I'm one of those who turns his nose up at mp3s, too....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Apr 24, 2016 6:15:00 GMT -5
Hey folks! Been missing in action for a long while......... Still missing, but no action..... Well, using decent speakers will go a long way to helping you hear what's going on, oz.... Seriously, 'puter speakers aren't normally of a very high quality, sound wise. I doubt they're designed to be. You needn't spend a fortune on monitors, but, in my opinion, it's well worth getting a pair of speakers designed to be used as monitors. They won't be the most satisfying for relaxed music chill sessions, but, they will show up details in the audio spectrum. I've been messing around at recording at home for the last 8-10 years and moved from hi-fi speakers, to JBL Control 1s to Soundcraft Spirit Absolute 2 monitors. I noticed improvements each time I moved on. The Absolutes cost me about 120 GBP, used, so not much at all. The difference is like using a magnifying glass on the sound.... This is a good place to get tips about recording/mixing/mastering, the free stuff I found very helpful and there's loads of useful info there..... The Recording Revolution
Hope this helps....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jul 17, 2015 17:22:14 GMT -5
My vote is in........
Sibelius have scoring software, and I believe there is a free lite version, if it helps...........
I know I found a free scoring program, can't remember what or where....... age is taking it's toll... LOL
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on May 13, 2015 11:45:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on May 11, 2015 12:46:57 GMT -5
Except for the snagging....... Here in Spain, it follows this kind of route...... You: What happened to the tiles in the bathroom? We wanted flowers above the bath and there's a cracked one, by the door, just where you notice it, and there is no balustrade on the 'Naya'...... Contractor: Ahh, yeah, well the flower tiles didn't arrive until after we tiled the bathroom. We left them in the underbuild for you, the bill for them is included in the final...... And, I know the cracked tile looks bad, but you really don't understand how difficult it was to tile that wall. It would be too hard to change out the broken one....... And your neighbour payed extra for the balustrade, didn't I mention that, when I said yours would be like his.....? You think I'm joking.....? I wish..... LOL
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on May 5, 2015 12:26:51 GMT -5
I hope you guys are pronouncing it Porsch e.......
Sorry, nothing to add to the other topic here............
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Apr 23, 2015 14:38:08 GMT -5
Well, I'll be a guitar nut......... I just checked my profile, and it seems I moved over here on April 30th 2005! I don't post very often, but I really enjoy reading about all those amazing guitars and things you guys are fixing or putting together. Kudos to the handful of members that just seem to have so many answers. Having just a basic knowledge of electronics (more of a fitter, myself, LOL), I'm usually left scratching my head when the theory papers come out...... No favourite threads, here. I enjoy most of them........ So, congrats to the Nutz, and here's to the next 10!!
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Mar 23, 2015 19:00:28 GMT -5
......and I thought the secret was to eat more pond weed......
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Feb 10, 2015 13:33:33 GMT -5
Yassoo, GD! Now, if only NASA would do some research on this we might get even further.....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Feb 10, 2015 10:44:00 GMT -5
I just found this pdf of experiments done by the Institute of Mechanics, Faculty of Aerospace Engineering at the University of The Federal Armed Forces in Germany. Why, exactly, they would be studying guitar string vibrations,, in the military aerospace department, completely baffles me, but then, that's not hard to do.... LOL Guitar string deadspotsMaybe not totally on topic, but I think it might add food for further thought to this fascinating thread..... Isn't the foto from the scanning vibrometer amazing? The info in this report kind of leads to the probability of 'changes' to string vibration properties as the string is fretted higher up the neck, due to the amount of neck which is, consequently, left out of the 'direct' resonance circuit. I think.....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jan 1, 2015 8:40:05 GMT -5
Ahhh, they look like a good idea, for what you're looking for.
It'll be interesting so see if the sustain is affected, one way or the other.....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jan 1, 2015 4:11:05 GMT -5
Well, that's an easy fix to try, without making any serious changes to your axe. I wonder if Teflon coated springs would help reduce spurious vibes.....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Dec 31, 2014 18:41:33 GMT -5
Happy new year, to you all. Let's make it a good one!
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Dec 31, 2014 16:00:20 GMT -5
I think, with any float trem system, you are gonna lose energy, in order for it to work. Firstly, in order to improve energy transfer at the pivot connection, you'd need to look at locking it down as the best energy transfer. But then you lose the trem action....... Secondly, if you use heavier spring material, to reduce spring vibration (and so, energy loss), or ultimately, use a solid bar, again, you lose the trem action...... A bit of a 'chicken and egg' situation......... More trem = less energy transfer = less sustain Less trem = more energy transfer = more sustain But, I'm just guessing. Ensuring that any other possible points for energy loss are optimised may help, of course. A good neck, good bridge, good neck fixing, a good body, etc... Just follow the circle of energy within the guitar and make sure it's all as good as it can be. Another thought occurs to me............ Uh Ohhh..... LOL. So, the string's vibrational energy must continue to run around the guitar with a minimum of loss, to create sustain. At some point it will meet itself and continue traveling round and round. But, what if components of the guitar change this energy movement, in some way, in that the vibrations are partially canceled out, either by materials used having a damping effect or just a change in the phase of the vibrations? Like I said, I'll be up all night thinking about this.....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Dec 31, 2014 13:42:39 GMT -5
I'm no expert in these things, but, I'm thinking that the springs above would still receive the energy, but it will be damped by the 'wrap'. So, the energy will be lost, rather than returned or passed. Probably lost as thermal energy. Perhaps, rubber damped spring mountings would be a little more efficient at stopping the energy from entering the springs. Though I doubt it'd do much good to the vibrato action.... In fact, I'd think they wouldn't last very long at all. As an after thought, I'm sure that much of the kinetic spring energy is passed through the bridge fixings, particularly since they are close to the bridge contact points with the body. Of course, since the bridge piece has no 'concrete' connection, due to the 'loose' fixings to the body, energy will be lost there, too, but not so much. I guess, if you could isolate the springs from the equation, using isolated fixings, that more energy would pass via the bridge fixings...... but, this might well have an effect on the tonal characteristics of the guitar.............. Just thinking out loud, here...... This had got me thinking about what the springs do to the energy, as it passes through....... bearing in mind that they will be acting in a very similar way to reverberation springs, but, perhaps, with a different frequency range...... I'm not gonna sleep tonight...... LOL Concise, reTrEaD, and quick.....
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Dec 26, 2014 17:24:13 GMT -5
|
|