Is this too mellow?
 

Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments and/or criticisms
when I post little 'fun' recordings and vinyl transcription clips but
this time I'm curious - anybody got any comments on this one:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?

Is this too mellow?
 

Keith Garratt wrote:

Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments and/or criticisms
when I post little 'fun' recordings and vinyl transcription clips but
this time I'm curious - anybody got any comments on this one:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?


Dunno about that but it had a good sound stage listening through the X-Fi sound
card and Sennheisers.

Is this too mellow?
 

"Keith Garratt" wrote in message

Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments
and/or criticisms when I post little 'fun' recordings and
vinyl transcription clips but this time I'm curious -
anybody got any comments on this one:
http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?

Yes.

Sounded better with a broad dip around 100 Hz, and a linear 15 dB rise
starting at 1 KHz and ending at 15 KHz.

Is this too mellow?
 

On 10/01/2010 21:12, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Keith wrote in message

Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments
and/or criticisms when I post little 'fun' recordings and
vinyl transcription clips but this time I'm curious -
anybody got any comments on this one:
http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?

Yes.

Sounded better with a broad dip around 100 Hz, and a linear 15 dB rise
starting at 1 KHz and ending at 15 KHz.



OK.

Is this too mellow?
 

"Keith Garratt" wrote in message
...
On 10/01/2010 21:12, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Keith wrote in message

Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments
and/or criticisms when I post little 'fun' recordings and
vinyl transcription clips but this time I'm curious -
anybody got any comments on this one:
http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?

Yes.

Sounded better with a broad dip around 100 Hz, and a linear 15 dB rise
starting at 1 KHz and ending at 15 KHz.



OK.


No. Not OK.

An EQ slope starting at 1kHz and rising to +15dB
at 15kHz makes the track glassy and unnatural.

Arny should be taught how to evaluate a track by listening, not
by looking at a frequency analysis plot on a PC, and trying to fill
in what he thinks might be missing.

One should listen carefully to the instruments in their own
acoustic environment before even attempting to capture them
in a recording.

EQ on overall mixes is best kept to very moderate amounts,
perhaps 2-3dB. Larger changes need to be made on individual
instruments if they are required. For example, an attempt to
brighten the piano on a overall mix can easily turn the clarinet
(woodwind) into a glasswind instrument.

I thought your clarinet sound was good, Keith - clean,
sufficiently bright, and nicely woody.

Iain

Is this too mellow?
 

On 11/01/2010 10:39, Iain Churches wrote:
"Keith wrote in message
...
On 10/01/2010 21:12, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Keith wrote in message

Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments
and/or criticisms when I post little 'fun' recordings and
vinyl transcription clips but this time I'm curious -
anybody got any comments on this one:
http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?

Yes.

Sounded better with a broad dip around 100 Hz, and a linear 15 dB rise
starting at 1 KHz and ending at 15 KHz.



OK.


No. Not OK.

An EQ slope starting at 1kHz and rising to +15dB
at 15kHz makes the track glassy and unnatural.

Arny should be taught how to evaluate a track by listening, not
by looking at a frequency analysis plot on a PC, and trying to fill
in what he thinks might be missing.

One should listen carefully to the instruments in their own
acoustic environment before even attempting to capture them
in a recording.

EQ on overall mixes is best kept to very moderate amounts,
perhaps 2-3dB. Larger changes need to be made on individual
instruments if they are required. For example, an attempt to
brighten the piano on a overall mix can easily turn the clarinet
(woodwind) into a glasswind instrument.

I thought your clarinet sound was good, Keith - clean,
sufficiently bright, and nicely woody.


Thanks, Iain - that's the AKG 'SolidTube' valve mic through the 'ultra
low noise' SS mic amp I mentioned on here a few months back.

(I prefer the idea of not using 'valve on valve'...??)


Anyway, here's the original again:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


And here's Arny's suggestion (EQ is not *my* work):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So, it's a simple case of 'better or worse?'...??

What does the team think?

Is this too mellow?
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2010 10:39, Iain Churches wrote:

I thought your clarinet sound was good, Keith - clean,
sufficiently bright, and nicely woody.


Thanks, Iain - that's the AKG 'SolidTube' valve mic through the 'ultra low
noise' SS mic amp I mentioned on here a few months back.

(I prefer the idea of not using 'valve on valve'...??)


Anyway, here's the original again:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


And here's Arny's suggestion (EQ is not *my* work):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So, it's a simple case of 'better or worse?'...??

What does the team think?

Hmm. In comparisons, brighter, just like louder, is
found by many to be better. One also needs to compare
both with a real clarinet, to decide which sounds more
like the real thing.

A clarinet is made of wood, not glass:-)

Iain

Is this too mellow?
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Keith Garratt" wrote in message
...
On 10/01/2010 21:12, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Keith wrote in
message
Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments
and/or criticisms when I post little 'fun' recordings
and vinyl transcription clips but this time I'm
curious - anybody got any comments on this one:
http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?

Yes.

Sounded better with a broad dip around 100 Hz, and a
linear 15 dB rise starting at 1 KHz and ending at 15
KHz.

OK.

No. Not OK.

An EQ slope starting at 1kHz and rising to +15dB
at 15kHz makes the track glassy and unnatural.

I'm buying some of that, but notice that I only said it sounded better than
the origional which is excessively mellow. If someone wants me to really fix
something, they can pay my going rate. What I did for free was provide some
guidance.

Of course in your world Iain, no good deed goes unpunished.

Arny should be taught how to evaluate a track by
listening, not by looking at a frequency analysis plot on a PC, and
trying to fill in what he thinks might be missing.

You're shooting off your mouth again, Iain. I did both.

One should listen carefully to the instruments in their
own acoustic environment before even attempting to
capture them in a recording.

You're shooting off your mouth again, Iain. I currently spend more time
every week listening to instruments in their own acoustical environment than
you do, and probably more than you did before they riffed you out of Decca.

EQ on overall mixes is best kept to very moderate amounts,
perhaps 2-3dB.

That depends on how bad the problem is and where, Iain.

Iain, you are obviously ignorant of the fact that the ear's sensitivity to
equalization changes varies with frequency. A change of 2-3 dB is
significant over broader bands like an octave or several octaves between say
100-5000 Hz. Outside that range, or over narrow bands changes of 2-3 dB
might not be heard at all. I can cite JAES papers that say this, but they
would probably be over your head, Iain.

Larger changes need to be made on
individual instruments if they are required.

And that is one of the charms of multitrack recordings.

However, I'm guessing that the recording that was brought to us was
undesirably altered during production, after it was mixed. Therefore, there
should be some equalization curve that can be applied to the whole recording
that would improve it.

Is this too mellow?
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Hmm. In comparisons, brighter, just like louder, is
found by many to be better. One also needs to compare
both with a real clarinet, to decide which sounds more
like the real thing.

The fallacy here is that a clarinet has only one timbre. In fact, its timbre
is highly dependent on its environment.

A clarinet is made of wood, not glass:-)

Based on the recordings that Iain has brought to us, his monitoring system
is on the bright side. My *reference system* on this PC is a pair of ATH-M50
headphones, well known for their neutrality.

Again Iain's problem is that he's judging a quick shot for the purpose of
guidance as if it were a finished recording, and probably doing so on a
playback system that would be too bright for me.

Is this too mellow?
 

On 11/01/2010 12:59, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Iain wrote in message

"Keith wrote in message
...
On 10/01/2010 21:12, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Keith wrote in
message
Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments
and/or criticisms when I post little 'fun' recordings
and vinyl transcription clips but this time I'm
curious - anybody got any comments on this one:
http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?

Yes.

Sounded better with a broad dip around 100 Hz, and a
linear 15 dB rise starting at 1 KHz and ending at 15
KHz.

OK.

No. Not OK.

An EQ slope starting at 1kHz and rising to +15dB
at 15kHz makes the track glassy and unnatural.

I'm buying some of that, but notice that I only said it sounded better than
the origional which is excessively mellow. If someone wants me to really fix
something, they can pay my going rate. What I did for free was provide some
guidance.



For free? Guidance?

Streuth, I only asked for an *opinion* - for free!

I already know what *I* think of both the original and EQ'd versions,
needless to say, but I was/am still interested in the opinions of others
here (includes Poochie's milkman)...

(But I ain't paying any damn *consultation fees*..!!! :-))

Is this too mellow?
 

On 11/01/2010 14:01, Keith G wrote:

Righty ho, I have had a bit of a to-do with the new computer swap over
and the 'Georgia' links might have gone missing for a while - these
should work, if I haven't cocked it all up:

Original:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


EQ'd as per *free* recommendation by Arny!:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So let's be having the 'overly mellow?' vs. 'glassy?' votes then!

:-)

Is this too mellow?
 

Keith G wrote:
On 11/01/2010 14:01, Keith G wrote:

Righty ho, I have had a bit of a to-do with the new computer swap over
and the 'Georgia' links might have gone missing for a while - these
should work, if I haven't cocked it all up:

Original:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


EQ'd as per *free* recommendation by Arny!:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So let's be having the 'overly mellow?' vs. 'glassy?' votes then!

:-)



OK, no takers (no surprise)....

Well, I prefer the original version - the brighter version sounds a
little too 'paper and comb/Kazoo' in places for my liking but I can see
why some people might prefer it.

(I don't think Arny did too bad a job on it - for *free*!! ;-)

Interestingly though, for 'too mellow' on the original version, there
are a pair of the supposedly 'overbright' C1000s in the mix!!

Maybe another one soon...??

Is this too mellow?
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2010 14:01, Keith G wrote:

Righty ho, I have had a bit of a to-do with the new computer swap over and
the 'Georgia' links might have gone missing for a while - these should
work, if I haven't cocked it all up:

Original:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


EQ'd as per *free* recommendation by Arny!:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So let's be having the 'overly mellow?' vs. 'glassy?' votes then!

:-)

It would be interesting to know what the performers think.

Is this too mellow?
 

Iain Churches wrote:
"Keith G" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2010 14:01, Keith G wrote:

Righty ho, I have had a bit of a to-do with the new computer swap over and
the 'Georgia' links might have gone missing for a while - these should
work, if I haven't cocked it all up:

Original:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


EQ'd as per *free* recommendation by Arny!:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So let's be having the 'overly mellow?' vs. 'glassy?' votes then!

:-)

It would be interesting to know what the performers think.


OK, the clarinettist prefers the original and thinks the second one is
too bright, but then somewhat controversially says the instruments sound
more real in the EQ'd version!!

(Is what I was told..??)

How about the saxophonist..??

:-)

Is this too mellow?
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2010 14:01, Keith G wrote:

Righty ho, I have had a bit of a to-do with the new
computer swap over and the 'Georgia' links might have
gone missing for a while - these should work, if I
haven't cocked it all up: Original:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


EQ'd as per *free* recommendation by Arny!:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So let's be having the 'overly mellow?' vs. 'glassy?'
votes then! :-)

It would be interesting to know what the performers think.

Intersting but irrelevant. Performers are generally too close to their
instruments to hear the same thing as their audience hears.

That's one of the neat things about both being a recordist and/or live
sound tech - the instruments keep playing when you walk away from them and
try to listen to what the audience hears.

Is this too mellow?
 

Keith G wrote:

just how much *authoratitive tosh* gets sprayed about by the few
self-appointed 'mandarins' in this group!!


Yeah, too true blue, I've only been here a short time but I see that the
'mandarins' must hang around their computers waiting for any casual aside or
slightly ambiguous comment so that they can pounce to demonstrate their utter
technical superiority. I see all the 'usual' tricks..selective post editing/I'll
avoid the hard or challenging bit...straw men...deliberate misinterpretation to
bolster their 'case'...deliberate ambiguation....reversion to insults/snide
insinuation...assumptions that they *know* are unchallengeable...etc. Still
seems to be an amusing little froup and some of the peeps obviously do know
their onions. :)

--
Bill Coombes

Is this too mellow?
 

bcoombes wrote:
Keith G wrote:

just how much *authoratitive tosh* gets sprayed about by the few
self-appointed 'mandarins' in this group!!


Yeah, too true blue, I've only been here a short time but I see that the
'mandarins' must hang around their computers waiting for any casual
aside or slightly ambiguous comment so that they can pounce to
demonstrate their utter technical superiority. I see all the 'usual'
tricks..selective post editing/I'll avoid the hard or challenging
bit...straw men...deliberate misinterpretation to bolster their
'case'...deliberate ambiguation....reversion to insults/snide
insinuation...assumptions that they *know* are unchallengeable...etc.
Still seems to be an amusing little froup and some of the peeps
obviously do know their onions. :)



Well, in the short time you've been here you seem to have got it all
pretty well weighed-up - a few of the clowns really do see themselves as
omniscient 'guides' and 'advisors' and they get awfully ****ty if you
won't let them pat you on the head! You probably already know who they
are, but the real worry now is at least one of them sees himself as a
*consultant*!! So watch what questions you ask, or you could find
yourself getting an *invoice*!

Let's face it, you can't guarantee the ****ing silly courts won't rule
that asking questions on newsgroups constitutes a tacit offer of a
remunerated contract for 'technical services'...!!

:-)

Is this too mellow?
 

Keith G wrote:
bcoombes wrote:
Keith G wrote:


Let's face it, you can't guarantee the ****ing silly courts won't rule
that asking questions on newsgroups constitutes a tacit offer of a
remunerated contract for 'technical services'...!!


A few years ago I'd have laughed at that suggestion and said it was ridiculous..
but now we are living in an era where a symptom of the general stupidity is that
it's safer not to clear the snow and ice of your own bit of pavement in case you
could be held liable if you do and there is an accident...****ing unbelievable!

--
Bill Coombes

Is this too mellow?
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Hmm. In comparisons, brighter, just like louder, is
found by many to be better. One also needs to compare
both with a real clarinet, to decide which sounds more
like the real thing.

The fallacy here is that a clarinet has only one timbre. In fact, its
timbre is highly dependent on its environment.

The clarinet has three very distinctive timbres irrespective
of "environment" (did you mean acoustic?) They are
associated with the three registers: the first, "chalumeau"
up to Bb4 , the second "clarion" from B4 to C6. The third,
altissimo covers about two octaves above C6.
They all sound totally different, irrespective of "environment"
Much of what Keith recorded is clarion.

He achieved a pretty good sound IMO even though he
probably didn't have access to any tutorial info. But he
listens to a lot of good music, and probably hears the clarinet
at home on a daily basis, and so knows how it really
sounds.


A clarinet is made of wood, not glass:-)

Based on the recordings that Iain has brought to us, his monitoring system
is on the bright side. My *reference system* on this PC is a pair of
ATH-M50 headphones, well known for their neutrality.

So you evaluate on headphones?

Try a pair of B+W 802D loudspeakers, the choice of most
UK recording companies.


Again Iain's problem is that he's judging a quick shot for the purpose of
guidance as if it were a finished recording, and probably doing so on a
playback system that would be too bright for me.

An unkinder man than I might suggest that you are piling on the HF
to compensate for hearing loss. I of course, would not
dream of making such a suggestion:-)

Iain

Is this too mellow?
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Keith Garratt" wrote in message
...
On 10/01/2010 21:12, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Keith wrote in
message
Normally, I don't solicit (or usually get) comments
and/or criticisms when I post little 'fun' recordings
and vinyl transcription clips but this time I'm
curious - anybody got any comments on this one:
http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


Is it *too* mellow?

Yes.

Sounded better with a broad dip around 100 Hz, and a
linear 15 dB rise starting at 1 KHz and ending at 15
KHz.

OK.

No. Not OK.

An EQ slope starting at 1kHz and rising to +15dB
at 15kHz makes the track glassy and unnatural.

I'm buying some of that, but notice that I only said it sounded better
than the origional which is excessively mellow.

A clarinet in the clarino register *is* mellow.
A tenor saxophone *is* mellow* in all but
altissimmo register.

Do you have a clarinet in your Baptist ensemble?
If so, stand in front of him/her so that your head is
in an approximate equilateral triangle between the
bell of the instrument and the first open hole while
he/she plays E2 (that's only the first hole at the
top covered) Then listen -mellow isn't it? Try to
keep the two bottom angles of the triangle equal
and pull back even further. What do you notice?

If someone wants me to really fix something, they can pay my going rate.

Nobody asked you to "fix" anything, AFAIK.
Going rate? You are a volunteer church worker -
there is no "going rate" :-))

What I did for free was provide some guidance.

Misguidance? :-)


Arny should be taught how to evaluate a track by
listening, not by looking at a frequency analysis plot on a PC, and
trying to fill in what he thinks might be missing.

You're shooting off your mouth again, Iain. I did both.

Clearly not. Your recommendation "looks" passable but
"sounds" awful!

One should listen carefully to the instruments in their
own acoustic environment before even attempting to
capture them in a recording.

You're shooting off your mouth again, Iain. I currently spend more time
every week listening to instruments in their own acoustical environment
than you do.

Most unlikely. But your 1 000 projects do add up to
many more than most professional recording engineers
work on in a lifetime. But it is quality not quantity that
matters.

I's not how many hours you spend, but what accomnplish
and learn from those hours, and how you put that knowledge
and experience to use. I am pretty sure that any formally trained
professional recording engineer would be able to teach you
more in a few hours than you have been able to teach yourself
in a *dozen* years:-)


EQ on overall mixes is best kept to very moderate amounts,
perhaps 2-3dB.

That depends on how bad the problem is and where, Iain.

No. That's a general rule. You cannot apply large amounts
of EQ to overall mixes without adverse effects instrument to
instrument, section to section. That's were CD mastering
can, and sometimes does, goes wrong.

Larger changes need to be made on
individual instruments if they are required.

And that is one of the charms of multitrack recordings.

So why did you suggest a "total destruction EQ" for an
overall mix?

Iain

Is this too mellow?
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Keith G wrote:
bcoombes wrote:
Keith G wrote:


Let's face it, you can't guarantee the ****ing silly courts won't rule
that asking questions on newsgroups constitutes a tacit offer of a
remunerated contract for 'technical services'...!!


A few years ago I'd have laughed at that suggestion and said it was
ridiculous.. but now we are living in an era where a symptom of the
general stupidity is that it's safer not to clear the snow and ice of your
own bit of pavement in case you could be held liable if you do and there
is an accident...****ing unbelievable!

You can be held liable for *not* clearing it too, Bill.
If it is really "your bit of pavement" and not the responsibility
of the council.

I live in Helsinki. We have 30cms of snow here at the
moment. Such accidents, rare as they are, are
normally covered by household insurance policy.


Iain

Is this too mellow?
 

bcoombes wrote:
Keith G wrote:
bcoombes wrote:
Keith G wrote:


Let's face it, you can't guarantee the ****ing silly courts won't rule
that asking questions on newsgroups constitutes a tacit offer of a
remunerated contract for 'technical services'...!!


A few years ago I'd have laughed at that suggestion and said it was
ridiculous.. but now we are living in an era where a symptom of the
general stupidity is that it's safer not to clear the snow and ice of
your own bit of pavement in case you could be held liable if you do and
there is an accident...****ing unbelievable!




Exactly!

And where does all this crap come from?

Is this too mellow?
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2010 14:01, Keith G wrote:

Righty ho, I have had a bit of a to-do with the new
computer swap over and the 'Georgia' links might have
gone missing for a while - these should work, if I
haven't cocked it all up: Original:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


EQ'd as per *free* recommendation by Arny!:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So let's be having the 'overly mellow?' vs. 'glassy?'
votes then! :-)

It would be interesting to know what the performers think.

Intersting but irrelevant. Performers are generally too close to their
instruments to hear the same thing as their audience hears.

In this case the opinion of the performers is of the greatest relevance,
as Keith's wife played the clarinet, and I played five of the other tracks
including the tenor saxophone solo on this title. Keith made an admirable
job of recording the clart in the UK to a rough mix of the backing track
which I sent to him, and I assembled the whole thing, synchronised the
tracks and mixed it:)

I am tickled pink by the fact that the tenor saxophone (on a track which
you pronounced as too mellow, was recorded with a mic, which,
although you had never heard it, you stated as too bright:-)

If Keith had entitled the thread "Is this too bright?" I am sure your
reply would still have been "Yes". Damning with faint praise seems
to be one of the few things you are good at.

Well done, Arny:-)

Is this too mellow?
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Keith G wrote:

just how much *authoratitive tosh* gets sprayed about by the few
self-appointed 'mandarins' in this group!!


Yeah, too true blue, I've only been here a short time but I see that the
'mandarins' must hang around their computers waiting for any casual aside
or slightly ambiguous comment so that they can pounce to demonstrate their
utter technical superiority. I see all the 'usual' tricks..selective post
editing/I'll avoid the hard or challenging bit...straw men...deliberate
misinterpretation to bolster their 'case'...deliberate
ambiguation....reversion to insults/snide insinuation...assumptions that
they *know* are unchallengeable...etc. Still seems to be an amusing little
froup and some of the peeps obviously do know their onions. :)


Bill. You seem to have got the feel of UKRA very quickly:-)

This whole recording project started out as a totally innocent
endevour, and something that a few of us here have been talking about
doing for at least ten years.

There used to be a good number of talented all-rounders here,
with a genuine, practical interest in audio. Many of them were pretty
competent musicians, and also enjoyed valves and vinyl, for their sins.
They were gradually weeded out :-(


But the recording idea took a new twist when I borrow a couple of
budget range AKG condensers for evaluation. Our resident "expert"
Mr K pronounced this mic as "sounding like ****"
even though it was clear that he had never used one.

So it seemed like an amusing idea to record a track with a
clarinet recorded with Keith's tube mic (the experts here will
tell you that tube mics are cr*p too!) and a saxophone solo
on the hideous overbright microphone and offer it for evalution.

You know the rest.

To put what Mr K writes into try perspective, you should listen
to an example of his own work, "Domine":-) I am sure he
will be ahappy to supply a link. If he cannot then someone
else will be happy to oblige, I am sure.


Iain

Is this too mellow?
 

Iain Churches wrote:
"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Keith G wrote:
bcoombes wrote:
Keith G wrote:

Let's face it, you can't guarantee the ****ing silly courts won't rule
that asking questions on newsgroups constitutes a tacit offer of a
remunerated contract for 'technical services'...!!

A few years ago I'd have laughed at that suggestion and said it was
ridiculous.. but now we are living in an era where a symptom of the
general stupidity is that it's safer not to clear the snow and ice of your
own bit of pavement in case you could be held liable if you do and there
is an accident...****ing unbelievable!

You can be held liable for *not* clearing it too, Bill.
If it is really "your bit of pavement" and not the responsibility
of the council.

I live in Helsinki. We have 30cms of snow here at the
moment. Such accidents, rare as they are, are
normally covered by household insurance policy.


Sounds like the Finns don't do 'health and safety' in the obsessive way we do in
the UK now and may even still have some 'common sense'; something which has all
but disappeared here. ...****.. I seem to have engaged grumpy old man mode..it's
Keith's fault.. :)

--
Bill Coombes

Is this too mellow?
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Iain Churches wrote:
"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Keith G wrote:
bcoombes wrote:
Keith G wrote:

Let's face it, you can't guarantee the ****ing silly courts won't rule
that asking questions on newsgroups constitutes a tacit offer of a
remunerated contract for 'technical services'...!!

A few years ago I'd have laughed at that suggestion and said it was
ridiculous.. but now we are living in an era where a symptom of the
general stupidity is that it's safer not to clear the snow and ice of
your
own bit of pavement in case you could be held liable if you do and there
is an accident...****ing unbelievable!

You can be held liable for *not* clearing it too, Bill.
If it is really "your bit of pavement" and not the responsibility
of the council.

I live in Helsinki. We have 30cms of snow here at the
moment. Such accidents, rare as they are, are
normally covered by household insurance policy.


Sounds like the Finns don't do 'health and safety' in the obsessive way we
do in the UK now and may even still have some 'common sense'; something
which has all but disappeared here. ...

I doubt that health and safety is much different here. As regards winter
conditions
things are much better organised - even at -25C trains and buses still run
on time,
and all roads are kept open and gritted (no salt!)

I remember once in the UK missing a plane because the Gatwick train
was cancelled due to leaves on the line!!

Iain

Is this too mellow?
 

Iain Churches wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Hmm. In comparisons, brighter, just like louder, is
found by many to be better. One also needs to compare
both with a real clarinet, to decide which sounds more
like the real thing.
The fallacy here is that a clarinet has only one timbre. In fact, its
timbre is highly dependent on its environment.

The clarinet has three very distinctive timbres irrespective
of "environment" (did you mean acoustic?) They are
associated with the three registers: the first, "chalumeau"
up to Bb4 , the second "clarion" from B4 to C6. The third,
altissimo covers about two octaves above C6.
They all sound totally different, irrespective of "environment"
Much of what Keith recorded is clarion.

He achieved a pretty good sound IMO even though he
probably didn't have access to any tutorial info. But he
listens to a lot of good music, and probably hears the clarinet
at home on a daily basis, and so knows how it really
sounds.



'Fraid not Iain - 'clart sessions' are few and far between here, due to
various distractions. It means that when we do get to do a bit of
recording, it's always a 'from Square One'/stone-cold start every time!!

Is this too mellow?
 

Iain Churches wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2010 14:01, Keith G wrote:

Righty ho, I have had a bit of a to-do with the new
computer swap over and the 'Georgia' links might have
gone missing for a while - these should work, if I
haven't cocked it all up: Original:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


EQ'd as per *free* recommendation by Arny!:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So let's be having the 'overly mellow?' vs. 'glassy?'
votes then! :-)
It would be interesting to know what the performers think.
Intersting but irrelevant. Performers are generally too close to their
instruments to hear the same thing as their audience hears.

In this case the opinion of the performers is of the greatest relevance,
as Keith's wife played the clarinet,


OK Iain, a technicality - Moira and I are 'partners' (of summat like 15
years standing, I suspect)!



and I played five of the other tracks
including the tenor saxophone solo on this title.


:-)



Keith made an admirable
job of recording the clart in the UK to a rough mix of the backing track
which I sent to him, and I assembled the whole thing, synchronised the
tracks and mixed it:)


An international *Internet Ensemble*...!!

Perhaps we could rope Laurence in on the trombone for the next one? Who
else is there who can hold a tune on an instrument?

:-)



I am tickled pink by the fact that the tenor saxophone (on a track which
you pronounced as too mellow, was recorded with a mic, which,
although you had never heard it, you stated as too bright:-)



I said as much elsewhere - goes to show what utter claptrap is paraded
as 'expertise' before this group, doesn't it?




If Keith had entitled the thread "Is this too bright?" I am sure your
reply would still have been "Yes". Damning with faint praise seems
to be one of the few things you are good at.

Well done, Arny:-)



Yep. Ole boy done good - as *usual*....

Is this too mellow?
 

bcoombes wrote:
Iain Churches wrote:
"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Keith G wrote:
bcoombes wrote:
Keith G wrote:

Let's face it, you can't guarantee the ****ing silly courts won't rule
that asking questions on newsgroups constitutes a tacit offer of a
remunerated contract for 'technical services'...!!

A few years ago I'd have laughed at that suggestion and said it was
ridiculous.. but now we are living in an era where a symptom of the
general stupidity is that it's safer not to clear the snow and ice of
your
own bit of pavement in case you could be held liable if you do and there
is an accident...****ing unbelievable!

You can be held liable for *not* clearing it too, Bill.
If it is really "your bit of pavement" and not the responsibility
of the council.

I live in Helsinki. We have 30cms of snow here at the
moment. Such accidents, rare as they are, are
normally covered by household insurance policy.


Sounds like the Finns don't do 'health and safety' in the obsessive way
we do in the UK now and may even still have some 'common sense';
something which has all but disappeared here. ...****.. I seem to have
engaged grumpy old man mode..it's Keith's fault.. :)



I'm sorry - I can't help it! Try as I might to ignore *rampant
stupidity* and not get into 'grumpy mode' on a daily basis, I've usually
lost it by the time I've heard the news for the first time each day!

I blame the 'digital era'...!!

;-)

Is this too mellow?
 

On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:01:02 +0000, Keith G
wrote:

Anyway, here's the original again:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


And here's Arny's suggestion (EQ is not *my* work):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So, it's a simple case of 'better or worse?'...??

What does the team think?


The original is definitely not mellow. The composite nature is
revealed however. Clarinet sounds roughly as one would expect but the
saxophone is rather too breathy (on axis?) for my taste. This latter
may be due to microphone positioning or the characteristic of the mic
itself, with which I'm unfamiliar. The piece comes over as being put
together, rather than existing in a natural acoustic setting.

The EQ'd version sounds awful to me. Excessive HF lift to the point
that it becomes annoying - completely destroys the musical
cohesiveness and tonality of the piece.

We all hear things differently, so my comments are purely personal
observations.

Who am I? - A retired sound recording engineer approaching his
sixties.

What was I listening on? - Playback from PC using Opticom (Fraunhofer)
mp3 codec. Monitoring via ATC SCM100A primarily, but also checked via
Rogers LS5/8 and Genelec 1031A.

Is this too mellow?
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Hmm. In comparisons, brighter, just like louder, is
found by many to be better. One also needs to compare
both with a real clarinet, to decide which sounds more
like the real thing.

The fallacy here is that a clarinet has only one timbre.
In fact, its timbre is highly dependent on its
environment.

The clarinet has three very distinctive timbres
irrespective of "environment" (did you mean acoustic?) They are
associated with the three registers: the first,
"chalumeau" up to Bb4 , the second "clarion" from B4 to C6. The third,
altissimo covers about two octaves above C6.
They all sound totally different, irrespective of
"environment" Much of what Keith recorded is clarion.

Good to see that you were able to study up and correct yourself, Iain.

He achieved a pretty good sound IMO even though he
probably didn't have access to any tutorial info. But he
listens to a lot of good music, and probably hears the
clarinet at home on a daily basis, and so knows how it
really sounds.


A clarinet is made of wood, not glass:-)

Based on the recordings that Iain has brought to us, his
monitoring system is on the bright side.

Note that Iain has no response to this issue.

My *reference
system* on this PC is a pair of ATH-M50 headphones, well
known for their neutrality.

So you evaluate on headphones?

I evaluate using the appropriate reproducer and sonic environment for the
purpose. One key to production is knowing how a short list of common
reproducers and environments translate into a synthetic baseline system.
Headphones are good to have on that list because they tend to be less
dependent on the working environment and are more portable.

Try a pair of B+W 802D loudspeakers, the choice of most
UK recording companies.

If you haven't noticed Iain, I live in the US where most of the studio
monitors aren't B&W.

Again Iain's problem is that he's judging a quick shot
for the purpose of guidance as if it were a finished
recording, and probably doing so on a playback system
that would be too bright for me.

An unkinder man than I might suggest that you are piling
on the HF to compensate for hearing loss.

Iain, my benchmark evaluating my ring loss is whether or not I obtain
results that are amenable to far younger and often female people who are
hearing the same thing that I do. I've always suspected that you prefer the
rolled-off music that you seem to prefer because you can't hear what you are
missing.

Is this too mellow?
 

"Audix" wrote in message

On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:01:02 +0000, Keith G
wrote:

Anyway, here's the original again:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


And here's Arny's suggestion (EQ is not *my* work):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So, it's a simple case of 'better or worse?'...??

What does the team think?


The original is definitely not mellow. The composite
nature is revealed however. Clarinet sounds roughly as
one would expect but the saxophone is rather too breathy
(on axis?) for my taste. This latter may be due to
microphone positioning or the characteristic of the mic
itself, with which I'm unfamiliar. The piece comes over
as being put together, rather than existing in a natural
acoustic setting.

The EQ'd version sounds awful to me. Excessive HF lift to
the point that it becomes annoying - completely destroys
the musical cohesiveness and tonality of the piece.

We all hear things differently, so my comments are purely
personal observations.

Who am I? - A retired sound recording engineer
approaching his sixties.

What was I listening on? - Playback from PC using Opticom
(Fraunhofer) mp3 codec. Monitoring via ATC SCM100A
primarily, but also checked via Rogers LS5/8 and Genelec
1031A.

Obviously someone that Iain brought in since no regular was supporting him,
probably a member of that unknown audio group that has excluded me. ;-)
(dev.nul = autobiographical?) has posted here only once
before in the history of Usenet, according to google.

Is this too mellow?
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk

Yeah, too true blue, I've only been here a short time but
I see that the 'mandarins' must hang around their
computers waiting for any casual aside or slightly
ambiguous comment so that they can pounce to demonstrate
their utter technical superiority.

Thanks for describing the behavoir of yourself, Kitty and Iain so well!

I see all the 'usual'
tricks..selective post editing

One of your tricks - completely ignoring posts with relevant questions that
would embarass you were you to respond truthfully.

Is this too mellow?
 

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:49:08 +0000, Audix wrote:

Anyway, here's the original again:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


And here's Arny's suggestion (EQ is not *my* work):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So, it's a simple case of 'better or worse?'...??

What does the team think?

Returning to what really matters...

Pity the sax is restricted to playing footballs under the clarinet
melody. How about writing some two-part voicings in unison rhythm?
The clarinettist is obviously a reader more than a jazzer, so this
might also help her in developing her jazz phrasing.

Is this too mellow?
 

Audix wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:01:02 +0000, Keith G
wrote:

Anyway, here's the original again:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


And here's Arny's suggestion (EQ is not *my* work):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So, it's a simple case of 'better or worse?'...??

What does the team think?


The original is definitely not mellow. The composite nature is
revealed however. Clarinet sounds roughly as one would expect but the
saxophone is rather too breathy (on axis?) for my taste. This latter
may be due to microphone positioning or the characteristic of the mic
itself, with which I'm unfamiliar. The piece comes over as being put
together, rather than existing in a natural acoustic setting.

The EQ'd version sounds awful to me. Excessive HF lift to the point
that it becomes annoying - completely destroys the musical
cohesiveness and tonality of the piece.

We all hear things differently, so my comments are purely personal
observations.



Of course - understood perfectly.



Who am I? - A retired sound recording engineer approaching his
sixties.


Isn't everybody in this group?

:-)



What was I listening on? - Playback from PC using Opticom (Fraunhofer)
mp3 codec. Monitoring via ATC SCM100A primarily, but also checked via
Rogers LS5/8 and Genelec 1031A.



OK - good of you to have made the effort!


Thank you for you response and very interesting comments - I prefer the
'original' myself so that's two of us, but even my partner who played
the clarinet thought Arny's suggested version was interesting and said
it made the instruments a little more realistic in one or two places!! (??)

Personally, I thought it was a little 'tizzy' but, either way, it's a
pity he had to try and make it yet another of his obnoxious/bombastic
but utterly futile attempts to get the better of Iain!!

;-)

Is this too mellow?
 

Laurence Payne wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:49:08 +0000, Audix wrote:

Anyway, here's the original again:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


And here's Arny's suggestion (EQ is not *my* work):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So, it's a simple case of 'better or worse?'...??

What does the team think?

Returning to what really matters...

Pity the sax is restricted to playing footballs under the clarinet
melody. How about writing some two-part voicings in unison rhythm?
The clarinettist is obviously a reader more than a jazzer, so this
might also help her in developing her jazz phrasing.


You are quite correct - the clarinettist is indeed a *reader* and, in
her own words, *doesn't do busking*!!

What about you - can you record yourself playing the clarinet? I'm sure
the more the merrier and it would give Iain a chance to construct more
of a 'big band'sound!!

Speaking of which, if any big band enthusiasts were to look on my Show N
Tell page right now, they might find summat of interest:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/show.html


If they are a) quick enough and b) can live with 'vinyl transcriptions'!!

;-)

Is this too mellow?
 

Keith G wrote:


What about you - can you record yourself playing the clarinet?


Oops - meant *trombone* of course...!!

Is this too mellow?
 

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:13:50 +0000, Keith G
wrote:

Pity the sax is restricted to playing footballs under the clarinet
melody. How about writing some two-part voicings in unison rhythm?
The clarinettist is obviously a reader more than a jazzer, so this
might also help her in developing her jazz phrasing.


You are quite correct - the clarinettist is indeed a *reader* and, in
her own words, *doesn't do busking*!!

What about you - can you record yourself playing the clarinet? I'm sure
the more the merrier and it would give Iain a chance to construct more
of a 'big band'sound!!

I'm trombone, not clarinet. And, sadly, more ex-trombone. It's one
of those things that aren't worth doing unless you do them every day,
and work moved in other directions many years ago.

Is this too mellow?
 

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:49:08 +0000, Audix wrote:

Anyway, here's the original again:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaM.mp3


And here's Arny's suggestion (EQ is not *my* work):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/GeorgiaMEQ.mp3


So, it's a simple case of 'better or worse?'...??

What does the team think?

Returning to what really matters...

Pity the sax is restricted to playing footballs under the clarinet
melody.

It's a four part "curtain" The reason is that the arrangement is
for trio plus solo instrument, so the addition of second and third
parts tends to distract. I did try this, and sketched out a few bars
of Miller type clarinet lead 4 part saxophone harmonies, but
decided to keep to the original plan. I got my 15 seconds of
glory in the second chorus:-))))

The other thing is that Moira is a classically trained clarinet
player. I play jazz saxophone, with all that entails regarding
difference in vibrato, intonation etc. Moira's reading is
impeccable. Mine is improving with playing in a big band
where Kenton and Ellington are held in great esteem. We
have five saxes but no clarinet double. Maybe Moira will
come and sit in one day on "Moonlight Serenade".

How about writing some two-part voicings in unison rhythm?
The clarinettist is obviously a reader more than a jazzer, so this
might also help her in developing her jazz phrasing.

Hmm. That's an interesting suggestion, but rather getting away from the
original idea. I very much like the contrast between the two styles.

If we do a sequel, would you care to take part Laurence?
Do you play valve, or slide trombone?

Iain

Is this too mellow?
 

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:13:50 +0000, Keith G
wrote:

You are quite correct - the clarinettist is indeed a *reader* and, in
her own words, *doesn't do busking*!!

So that's where she is now. Things can progress. If she likes
"Georgia" enough to take the trouble to make that recording, I expect
she likes it enough to work on learning the style?