Comments for Music Production Tips - The Stereo Bus Blog

Comment on Hammond B3 and Leslie Recording Techniques by Dan Connor

Dan Connor — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 08:21:22 +0000

Thanks for reading, Chris!

Comment on Kanye West: An Inspiring Look at Recontextualizing with Samples by Chris Codish

Chris Codish — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 05:59:14 +0000

I enjoyed the side by side comparison, nice post.

Comment on Hammond B3 and Leslie Recording Techniques by Chris Codish

Chris Codish — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 05:38:54 +0000

Great tips! Thanks for sharing.

Comment on How to Bounce or Consolidate Tracks for Archiving or Mixing by thomas

thomas — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:14:27 +0000

Im still confused on how you would do this, can you further explain or put up a how to please thank you

Comment on How to Create Depth in a Mix by Dan Connor

Dan Connor — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 23:56:57 +0000

Chris – you can achieve a lot of depth simply through panning and volume alone. A sound source panned between 100% and 50% with reduced volume will sound further away from the listener than a sound source panned hard center, left, or right. Pop a song into mono and you’ll note that the song sounds much flatter than its stereo counterpart. You are correct about early reflections vs. direct signal and reverb provides a notion of depth, but panning either source appropriately will change the way the the depth information introduced by the reflections is leveraged in the context of the recording.

Comment on How to Create Depth in a Mix by Chris Jackson

Chris Jackson — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 03:31:57 +0000

I don’t understand how panning can give the impression of depth. With microphone placement, its giving the impression of depth by balancing the volume between the direct sound of the instrument and the early/late reflections of the space the instruments in. Thats the same purpose of a reverb fx isn’t it?

Comment on Sample Rate and Bitrate: The Guts of Digital Audio by David

David — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 22:03:14 +0000

Typo at end of second paragraph:

2,000,000,000,000 = 2THz (terahertz)

2,000,000,000 = 2GHz (gigahertz)

(you have one extra block of zeros too many)

Comment on Properly Wrapping Cables: The Roadie Wrap (Video) by Aaron D. Hall, Minnesota

Aaron D. Hall, Minnesota — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 13:07:01 +0000

As a licensed lawyer in the Twin Cities, Minnesota, working in a handful of areas of law, your blog is a benefit to my legal practice. Thanks for your good content. Good luck with your site.

Aaron Hall
Twin Cities Law Firm, LLC
2812 Anthony Lane S, Suite 200
Minneapolis, MN 55418-3234
http://www.aaronhall.com/
http://MinnesotaAttorney.com/

Comment on Mono Sources in a Stereo World – Michael Franti @ RNC by G. Ometrik

G. Ometrik — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 20:53:15 +0000

At this point even traditionally mono sounds like kick, bass, etc… is being laid out as stereo in digital audio recording programs like pro tools. I think mono is pretty much dead at this point all together.

Comment on Visual Analogy to High Definition Sample Rate Conversion by Dan Connor

Dan Connor — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 02:31:36 +0000

Yeah, MBIT+ is a great dithering algorithm. I doubt the sound would be smoother perse. I associate smoothness more with bit depth than sample rate. If anything I think the dithered conversion would be smoother, as the photo is smoother, but the undithered conversion would be clearer. But I suspect the ultra-high frequencies might be less smeared going from 88.2 to 44.1.

I don’t have any gear that produces tones above 22khz, so I doubt I’d hear much. The high sample rates are definitely worth it to reduce any resonances or harmonics introduced by a low-pass filter, but you’ll end up with artifacts if you have to dither the result. The point is that for 88.2 to 44.1 you just throw away half the samples and you get exactly what would have been recorded at 44.1, if I understand it correctly.