|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 7, 2008 13:28:10 GMT -5
Greetings - I was sitting around last night in my never ending quest to get Continuum right (a fool's errand at best) and had an idea. Deep water, granted, but hear me out... We had location issues with the Potluck Guitar, as our friends across the pond have shipping cost concerns. This a valid issue and limits participation. What about a Potluck Jam? Everyone pitches in a lick, a rhythm track, a bass run, a fill or a blistering solo... Obviously we all have computers. (There is no slate and chalk version of GuitarNuts2.) Computers can record, process, mix and e-mail tracks back and forth. Big acts do this all the time. We pick a key or progression and build on it from there. We could pick a standard, pick an agreed favorite or work up an original. Hell, maybe some of us can actually read music... Someone out there is probably good on a drum sequencer, so the whole thing is built on computer and mixed digitally. I used to mix track for years...a little rusty, but I'm sure others out there can do it too... This could build into several different styles if necessary... God only knows, there's no shortage of instruments around here... What do you say? Any takers? Happy Trails Cynical One EDIT: 12/17/08[/b] Per Ash, please read the following RULES for uploading your tracks for the Jam. Please feel free to post any questions or comments you may have regarding these rules. Thanks  "The first step is to download the WiP mix in .wav format. To begin with, it's just the drums. Going forward I'll be adding in each track as I recieve it. This is a .zip file which includes a 16bit, 44.1K mono .wav file which you will import into your DAW of choice. Make sure it starts at the beginning. If you set your tempo to 132, the grid will line up, though you'll be counting 2 measures per in the slower section. You could build a tempo map for yourself, but I don't think it's necessary.
I'd like to receive back from you .wav files at 44.1K sample rate, 16 bits or better. I think for reasons of bandwidth, server space, and upload/download times, it's best to keep them mono. Stereo placement is going to be determined at mix time anyway. If you absolutely can't live without some whizbang stereo effect and really want to hear it implemented in the final mix, you could either try to describe it to me so I can recreate it using plugins, or as last resort send a stereo file. Just remember the first rule! If it doesn't work in the mix it will be altered and/or eliminated.
Oh, and let's have the files start at the beginning of the song. Doesn't have to go to the end. And please only send me your track! Don't mix in the drums."EDIT: 12/29/08[/b] For reference, here's the duly voiced, seconded and passed progressions for the Jam
132 BPM Progression
Em - Am - Em - Em
Am - Am - Em - Em
Bm - Bm - Em - B7
66 BPM Progression
Em7 - Em7 - Em7 - Em7
Am7 - Am7 - Em7 - Em7
C7 - B7 - Em7 - B7
Thanks
EDIT: 2/1/2009[/b] We have achieved bass! Both the mp3 preview and the WiP .wav have been updated...
Now there's something pretty solid to pile guitars on top of it. Get to it!
Read the first post in this thread. Contact me or cyn via PM for info on how to upload you finished track.EDIT: 3/6/2009[/b] We have rhythm! Ash has done a great job mixing in the three rhythm tracks we have now. Both the mp3 preview and the WiP .wav have been updated with these new tracks.
We can still squeeze in more rhythm, but all you lead players need to come out of the alley and step up.
Read this first post in this thread, which should answer most of your questions. Contact Ash or cyn via PM for info on how to upload you finished track.EDIT: 3/10/2009[/b] We have lead, too! Ash has mixed in the two lead tracks we have for the jam. Both the mp3 preview and the WiP .wav have been updated with these new tracks.
There's rumors of another track on the way, but the song is filling up fast. If you wanted to play in this jam now is your moment. I'd hate to see anyone get left out.
Read the other updates in this post for information. That should answer most of your questions. Contact Ash or cyn via PM for info on how to upload you finished track, or if you have other questions. |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 7, 2008 15:07:13 GMT -5
I think this is a great idea. Although I, personally, don't know how much I can contribute as I have a computer, but no recording software (apart from what's included with windows) or USB/guitar interface. But, coincidentally, both are on my Xmas list this year, so maybe I'll be up to speed on this stuff when the time comes.
Would we need to reach agreement first on a uniform mixing software platform as well as track formatting?
Could we use some freeware download for the software end so all can use the same stuff?
+1 for the idea, however!
EDIT: On further reflection, we should make it an original composition to avoid any rights issues. I know, everyone does it on the net, and darn few bar bands pay ASCAP for their cover tunes, etc. But we don't want to invite trouble.
|
|
|
|
Post by andy on Dec 7, 2008 16:22:50 GMT -5
Hmmm, that could work. I don't think the programme used matters too much, so long as it uses outside files to work (.wavs or MP3s rather than some internal saving). MP3s won't give us pro sound quality, but will be a lot easier to email than massive great .wavs. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 7, 2008 17:27:24 GMT -5
Could we use some freeware download for the software end so all can use the same stuff? I haven't looked around much, but this looks promising. audacity.sourceforge.net/It even has plugins to support .vst...and it's free. Works in Wndows, MAC and Linux. I'll dig around some more. Like Andy said, it doesn't matter as long as the app can export to .wav, .mp3 or other common formats. I've got stuff here that can convert anything to anything, then back again... Stay tuned.. Happy Trails Cynical One |
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Dec 7, 2008 19:38:09 GMT -5
This could be fun. I'd be happy to contribute in any way I can. I've even got some server space we might be able to use, but I'll have to look into that a bit. Since this isn't probably destined for commercial radio, I think you could get away using whatever onboard soundcard you've got installed. Just keep in mind these are usually low impedance inputs, and the line in usually wants something a bit hotter than instrument level. Also, all the other caveats re: DI recording of guitars. Specifically, there's no speaker to roll of the highest frequencies, which can often make it sound kind of nasty. Of course, there are ways around this. Boogex, for example, is a freeware VST amp sim that really sounds good. As for software, andy's right. Doesn't really matter what everybody uses so long as every track starts from time zero. Even if your part doesn't start till 15 minutes in, we need the file to go all the way from the beginning so it's easy to line up. I'd say you'd want to use something which is multitrack capable, in order that you can import the base mix and record your track seperately. So Windows Sound Recorder aint gonna work. As mentioned above, Audacity is free and is well spoken of. I tried it early on, but that was years ago. Reaper is fully functional in free demo mode, dirt cheap if you decide to register, and is very highly praised on the TapeOp message board. .wav format is best. I'd prefer 24bit/44.1K, and I'll explain why if you'd like, but we'll take what we can get. .mp3s are smaller, but they are not sample accurate timewise. Remember that whole thing about recording from the very beginning of the song so things line up? Yeah, that doesn't work if the compression algorithm randomly drops a tick or two along the way. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 7, 2008 19:59:18 GMT -5
...mp3s are smaller, but they are not sample accurate timewise. Remember that whole thing about recording from the very beginning of the song so things line up? Yeah, that doesn't work if the compression algorithm randomly drops a tick or two along the way. I never knew that. I go back to the old analog day...if we wanted a delay on a drum machine we stripped the towels out of the bathroom, but a practice amp in the tub and set the mike to outside to door...using it as a damper... This is a good point...and it would be a nightmare for whoever mixes and sequences it... If we had server space then the files could be FTP'd up to it... Too bad about the .mp3 issue because otherwise we could all open a SoundClick account and push the tracks up to it. I guess the next hurdle is a working title to keep the tracks straight...how about Nuts2UHappy Trails Cynical One |
|
|
|
Post by andy on Dec 8, 2008 4:17:23 GMT -5
Hee hee.  Ash, good point about the MP3 compression. Didn't think of that. I know for a fact that I can't email all but the tiniest and worst sounding wavs due to thier size, so others may have the same problem. I did use yousendit.com, which will handle pretty big files to be downloaded by the reciever. The files are available online for seven days, I think, but I must find out whether using the free trial period once precludes you from using it again in future. Oh, and congratulations on your deification! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 8, 2008 10:50:32 GMT -5
OK, did a little testing and came up with the following: 1 minute of bass and drum track exported to .wav through Sonar 6 Time: 1:00 min Rate: 44100/stereo Size: 23 MB ZIP: 19.6 MB (.wav files don't allow a tremendous amount of compression) Now, if we can find an agreeable free website to deposit these files temporarily there is a way to get around a maximum file size on these sites. There's a freeware app called The File Splitter (clever, huh...) that allows you to break up any file into as many pieces at whatever size you want. Once it splits the file it creates a 1 KB .bat file that you run to re-construct the file at the other end. I'll dig around later today and see what I can find for free repositories for laying off our files. ...of course, we could always go "old school"and find a university with a slack admin and use his FTP site...but I would never think of suggesting that...  Ain't technology cool?... Happy Trails Cynical One |
|
|
|
Post by D2o on Dec 8, 2008 11:11:28 GMT -5
That seems like a helluva big file to me for just one minute of recording.  I use MP3myMP3, which creates about a 10 MB file, and then edit it with Wavepad, which seems to cut it donw to about 4 MB. I believe both are still available for free 30 day trials. You can check out more in this thread. D2o |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 8, 2008 12:46:16 GMT -5
I use MP3myMP3, which creates about a 10 MB file D2O Check out Ash's earlier post about the time sync problem with .mp3 files. I've never mixed an .mp3 file, but if Ash has had a problem with them I don't want to re-create it on a grand scale with each track... Happy Trails Cynical One |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 8, 2008 13:00:21 GMT -5
OK, I found a service where you can stash up to 1 GB of data for free www.drivehq.comYou need to sign up and set a password, but it took me a whopping 2 min to set-up and activate my account. Unless you're laying down all of Vivaldi's Four Seasons and everything the Stones ever did then 1 GB should be more then enough space to upload tracks. Happy Trails Cynical One |
|
|
|
Post by D2o on Dec 8, 2008 13:12:45 GMT -5
I use MP3myMP3, which creates about a 10 MB file D2O Check out Ash's earlier post about the time sync problem with .mp3 files. I've never mixed an .mp3 file, but if Ash has had a problem with them I don't want to re-create it on a grand scale with each track... Happy Trails Cynical One Cyn, I found it, thanks. You mean this: When I use Wavepad, I just mix in whatever screeching cat noise I need, wherever I need it. That is simple enough for me to do on my own, since I have my own ability to "quality control" and undo it and re-do as many times as required until I am happy with it ... with a whole boatload of folks involved, I see where this can get messy. Besides, I have also heard lots of good things about audacity and reaper ... factor in that you and Ash and others likely do a lot more recording than I do anymore, and I am sold on whatever you guys say, el capitan. D2o |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 8, 2008 13:28:54 GMT -5
D2O -
I agree that if your track is 5, 10 or 15 minutes in it can be sequenced in pretty easy digitally.
My concern if that let's say the track is 100 BPM and runs 30 seconds. And lets say the .mp3 algorithm changes it to 97 BPM and cuts at 29.5 seconds, hypothetically... This, or course, can be maniplulated to fit the 30 second window, but it will sound just a hair off...and it's a b__tch sort out if there's multiple tracks all over the place. Especially if your part has rest at the beginning or end of the first or final measure...
This was a real pain in analog, but probably not as bad in digital. I just don't want to create a problem before I start...
That aside, what's the tally so far? I'm in on bass and can mix if needed.
Anyone want to send up a riff for sacrifice?
Any ideas on a name for this ensemble? How about Loose Nuts...or Loose Nutz for all you guys stuck in the 80's...
Happy Trails
Cynical One
|
|
|
|
Post by D2o on Dec 8, 2008 13:40:00 GMT -5
I hear you, especially on the digi-squish stuff. In my opinion, once saved at a hypothetical "97", it can never be returned to the original "100" that it once was. Ensemble? ... 1980's ... hmmm ... "The Unusually Large c  k-Rock Band"?  D2o P.S. I am still waiting for my drivehq account activation email - it's been a good 15 minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 8, 2008 14:16:30 GMT -5
This project seems to be taking off. Before we get too far along, I think we need a few ground rules. We want to keep this as free form and open as possible, without it degenerating into a free-for-all.
As my late father used to say: "One man can only do so much damage. To really screw something up, you need a committee!"
So, while all will contribute their parts, I think we need to appoint someone as the Producer, who will have final say over the final mix.
The second rule would be "No whining". If you spent a few hours contributing what you think is a terrific guitar lead, but ultimately the producer thinks it doesn't fit with the rest and cuts it, chalk it up to experience w/o whining about it.
Of course, once a final mix is done, if someone else thinks they could do better, they can have at all the remixing they want.
There may be other ground rules others could suggest. The above 2 are just that, suggestions. What say you all?
|
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 8, 2008 14:35:06 GMT -5
As my late father used to say: "One man can only do so much damage. To really screw something up, you need a committee!" Amen to that, brother. This is very similar to something my Grandfather said... "The only way to get three men to agree on anything is to make sure two of them are dead..."I would suggest we give it a set amount of time for people to sign on. Once the core is established then we can set responsibilities based on time and resources. I agree, too much "casual organization" leads to chaos. And I second the whining issue. This should be a fun little side project. It doesn't have to be great, just fun. Once they sign us to a multi-million dollar contract then we can draw egos and fire... I'm sure we all have horror stories of bands self distructing over ego and petty issues...let's commit to staying friends over this. There's a saying in horse training that "the enemy of good is better". Let's strive for good...or at least not God awful... I'm open to suggestion. Happy Trails Cynical One |
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Dec 8, 2008 14:53:28 GMT -5
To be honest, I've never tried it with mp3s, but I've heard horror stories. I'm sure it would be possible to stretch things to fit well enough, but it doesn't sound like fun to me, and it'll definitely effect sound quality.
As far as placing things further into the song, I guess it wouldn't be that terrible without the silence at the beginning, but it would require fairly accurate information about where it should start. Starting every file at the very beginning of the project has become the standard both for online contribution as well as if, for example, you were to track in one studio and then take the files to another for mixing. Just saves headaches, you know.
Looking down below this "Post Reply" box, I see that Newey has posted at some point since I last refreshed the thread. I agree wholeheartedly, and would like to "humbly" nominate myself in the role of Producer. I've got all the software necessary, have been recording and mixing for as long as I've been playing (something like 20 yrs), and have been making computer music since Windows 3.1.
We need to pick a general style and tempo. I could then generate a basic drum track to work from. The easiest way to do it would be to just have it run for the expected length of the song. That means we have to choose a running time now. It wouldn't be too difficult to extend later on down the line if necessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by D2o on Dec 8, 2008 14:59:02 GMT -5
I second the other gentleman's nomination (that's you, Ash ... no matter how you interpret it).  Ash participates on recording forums and says stuff I don't understand, so he gets my nod. D2o |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 8, 2008 16:30:15 GMT -5
OK, Ash, it's all yours if no one else chimes in...
As far as style...it's always been my experience that when a band gets together for the first time it's usually a blues tune they jam to.
We can just keep it a simple blues progression in either a blues minor (my favorite) or a blues major...or both...
If you agree, Ash, we can lay down the drums and bass first, then let everyone throw in their two cents accordingly. We can possibly throw a few different tempos to make it easier for everyone to pick their speed...you know, vary it on multiples of 12 bars...
Just my two cents...well, about .875 cents adjusted...
Happy Trails
Cynical One
|
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 8, 2008 16:54:17 GMT -5
I agree, Ash for producer. Lord knows I don't know anything about this stuff. I'll be lucky to figure out enough recording to upload anything to this effort, much less do a mix down.
|
|
|
|
Post by D2o on Dec 8, 2008 17:04:02 GMT -5
I would say just lay something down, a beat or a riff or whatever, and see if it inspires anyone. For reference, a similar idea was discussed here - I am glad this one is progressing along a little better than when it was discussed at that time. If you're desperate, I gots an (incomplete) idea ... it's a quirky song that I never completed because I can't do anything with it because it requires an ensemble of rank 1980's amateurs. ;D Actually, the way my schedule has been lately the concept part may be about the extent of my involvement in this project anyway. D2o |
|
|
|
Post by andy on Dec 9, 2008 20:37:06 GMT -5
Ummm... No Stairway???
Ash if you're producing, you get the say on how it works anyways! But I'll stick up for you on that one, it not only makes it a no-effort job to line things up that way, but as I'm sure you know, the slightest shift in timing can make a set of great licks sound very odd indeed, and even change the whole musical meaning of what was played. Let's all find a way of starting at zero!
The one style that all guitarists agree on! And it will work on whatever each of us plays it on, from Danelectro to Jackson.
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Dec 10, 2008 6:14:09 GMT -5
This sounds like fun. I'd recommend Audacity to anyone short of a recording program. Its good and free and free is good.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on Dec 10, 2008 16:46:48 GMT -5
Well, compromise is always a three-way street.
|
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Dec 11, 2008 0:37:09 GMT -5
The only two specific votes for a style are for blues. I have to say I agree with that.
I'm thinking of incorporating a faster and slower section. Either like a jumping shuffle thing with a half-time break, or a downtempo thing with a double time freak out. So which do you think should come first? Should we come back before the end?
And then, how long should I make this thing? Like I said, the drum part won't be too tough to expand afterward. The guitars/basses will be a touch trickier, but by no means impossible.
I'm working (but not real hard) on a web page to host this project. I will incorporate a .mp3 "preview" of the mix in progress, as well as download of a .wav of the same thing for use in tracking. Then there will be a file upload form so's y'all don't have to mess around with these other sites. I'll keep you posted on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 11, 2008 3:23:18 GMT -5
The only two specific votes for a style are for blues. I have to say I agree with that. Sounds good to me. Is this official? As long as you asked...start fast and maybe a little funky, slow it down, then pick it up on the way out Somewhere between 3-5 minutes is probably pretty close. Depends on how many want to play. What a guy. Good idea. Did you want to put the drum track out first to get the bass(s) laid down so the guitarists can wax prolific? Staying tuned (pun intended) Happy Trails Cynical One |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 11, 2008 6:45:57 GMT -5
I would agree, fo a first go-round the blues is best. And 5 minutes sounds good, I think 3 would end up being too short and you'd have to extend it anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Dec 14, 2008 2:55:52 GMT -5
I'm sorry I've been kind of quiet lately. I wanted to have something exciting to tell you guys. Unfortunately, I've had several days of frustration from all kinds of angles. For some reason, I can't seem to be able to upload large files via ftp from my home machine. The file upload page I built works great for smaller files, but doesn't work reliably for the types of transfers we're going to need. I wouldn't be surprised it worked for others. At this point it's kind of the principle of the thing. I'd ought to be able to drag the file onto CoreFTP, walk away for a half hour and it's done. I've done it before from this machine, using the same software, to the same server.    I finally looked into the drivehq, and initial tests show that I am able to transfer to them without any trouble. It actually goes pretty fast! I'm a little worried, though, about this mysterious bandwidth limit they talk about. Anybody know where it's going to top out? I fear that it'll be 50M/month. Since the drum track is 22M, that ain't gonna get us very far! Somehow, I did manage to get an mp3 preview of the drum track up to my server. The funny thing about that is that I used my file upload page, and it told me the upload failed with a script error. It's there, though, and intact. I haven't been able to do it again. Anyway, if you want to get a listen to what I've put together, suggest changes, or just start jamming on it, you can dowload it here (nutzwip.mp3, 8.3M). WIP is for Work In Progress. The intention is to replace this each time I add tracks to the mix, so that each new contributor can play off of those who've come before, and so everybody can an idea of where it's headed. Here's what it does: Tempo 132 msr 1 (silence) 1 bar 2 count 2 bars 4 intro 8 bars 12 upbeat verses (12 bars) x 4 = 48 bars 60 halftime verses (12 bars) x 4 = 96 bars 156 upbeat verses (12 bars) x2 = 24 bars 180 (or so) end We'd probably better settle on a key before we get much further. It's been my experience that the obligatory blues jam is usually in E minor. Gives us all the open strings and whatnot... |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 14, 2008 4:10:14 GMT -5
Ash -
Don't feel too bad about the upload issue. I've been dinking with Jftp trying to push to an Easy-Share or DriveHq ftp site...and getting nowhere... I can get the app to initialize on the local machine, but it fails to connect. To add more frustrations - the Jftp app fails to intialize on my live test site...or from the DriveHq website as well...
I wonder if I had a real FTP site to connect to and a real webhost to run the page from if I would see better results... Doing this on the cheap is tough...
It is beginning to strike me that unless we can bury this somewhere on a stable FTP site we're all going to have to open Drivehq or Easyshare accounts and swap files that way...or just use Isohunt and P2P them around the Internet...
Let me throw this out for a quick minute... What is the general comfort level with all of you brave souls planning on joining in with this little soiree when it comes to using an FTP client or setting up a DriveHq or EasyShare account?
Anyway, I liked the drum track...if it wasn't so late I might be inclined to plug in and diddle around a little bit...
As far as the key, whatever the consensus agrees on is cool with me.
Happy Trails
Cynical One
|
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 14, 2008 7:09:47 GMT -5
No experience, so no comfort or lack thereof. I'd probably need a walk-through, or directions to "ftp for dummies" or some such.
|
|
