« January 2004 | Main | July 2004 »
If I ever say "we'll fix it in the mix", somebody smack me. Hard. Part of the problem is I wasn't present for all the tracking, and the vocal tracks ended up with some buzz/noise on them. I can denoise it, but it kills the tone. So we retrack...
There is an old saying that age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill. I didn't used to believe that (when I was 20), but now that I'm over 40, I hope it is true. Today I had an example firsthand. I try to play basketball every weekend to get some exercise. I play at the local playground on the outdoor courts, and the pickup games range from spirited to...ummm....*spirited*. There are plenty of people out there who's ego is wrapped up in the score of the game. But I've yet to see a full on fight, so I have to say it could be worse.
At any rate, I was on a team with mostly older (30-40) guys, and we had just won our second game on court. So on comes a new team to challenge us...5 young kids who obviously play together regularly (they started out running a zone....NOBODY does that in pickup games), and they were all between 17 and 22. And fast. REALLY FAST. Our team had distilled down to only 30 and 40 something players, so it was kindof a joke amongst us. And sure enough, the kids started out quick, going up 4-1 before we blinked, stealing passes, picking off dribbles, etc. But then something started to happen. We continued to make jokes about how old we were, and they got a little cocky. One of our guys started talking, and upped his game. There there were the calls, the arguments about the score, out of bounds, etc. The thing is that all these little items help to take a good (or young) player out of his game. And gives us old timers a chance to catch our breath.
So we catch up, and the kids start getting pissed. They start pressing. and play better for a bit, but then they press too hard, and start making mistakes. One too many passes, or going for the "Kobe" drive instead of kicking out to the open guy. And we keep slogging away, getting a rebound here, a tip there, a little talking here. When all is said and done, we kick it out to one of the graybeards open off a pic, he squares up and sinks the winning shot. Sit down kids...age and treachery just beat youth and skill.
Being trained as a scientist, I end up having some interesting metaphors rise up from the ooze that is my psyche. For awhile I've been working on a DNA replication metaphor for education in the 21st century, and have fleshed out a metabolic pathway metaphor for sucessful communication in the digital age. But for now, let me briefly talk about using physics to understand digital life. This is in part due to a blurb here
I have been thinking about quantum mechanics for some time, and the relationship to multimedia. That led me to string theory, and how that can tie in (pun intended). I'll flesh these out in another installment, as I want to talk about GUT, or the Grand Unification Theory. Einstein spent the better part of his career looking for an answer to how one can justify gravitational and quantum theory into one big answer. String theory looks like it might be a route to do that, but I want to think in terms of media. Right now we have a number of types of media elements (still image, moving image, music, sound, text, etc), and other parameters (temporal, spatial, interactivity, etc). These have been somewhat aggregated and disseminated in a couple of standard forms including the classic textbook, the electronic book, the song (and album), tv/movies, interactive computer media, etc. The problem is that each medium has it's own set of technological and social/psychological requirements, needs, and biases. While the objects used to create the media might be the same, how they are assembled, and how their meaning is manipulated and adjusted varies depending on a number of factors including the medium, juxstoposition in time and space, as well as the "reader" and their biases.
Part of the solution comes in thinking about media elements from an object model approach (yet another paper I'm working on). That hopefully can lead us to some central tenets about how things exist with each other within a "document" (whatever that is). But since each platform (the song, the movie, the book) are so different, is there a unifying theory that we can come up with to explain how media works in each? That's one of the things we're trying to figure out. And when you add devices into the question, things get even more dicey. The iPod was a clear hit with "the song" platform. But will it be with the video? Is it with the book (audio form, or read along with text)? Too many technologists try to leverage a sucess in one area, and create a version to do things it really shouldn't do. I don't have all the answers (yet), and I appreciate that sometimes you have to just "do the experiment", but I find there are too many people who don't even know what questions to ask before they start their answer.
Well, the iPod is a huge sucess. Apple has the highest market share for both hardware and software/content. Now people are talking about PVP (personal video players), and rumors of the next iPod with this capability (ZDnet article). Then they talk about the video equivalent to headphones (another ZDnet article).
This stuff illustrates a fundamental problem with some technology companies, content creators, and nearly ALL journalists. Audio/music isn't video. Period. Yes, video has audio content, but the act of partaking of music is DIFFERENT than partaking of video. Situations are different. Usage is different. Psychology is different. Jobs gets it...he is quoted talking about how people will listen to their favorite song thousands of times over the years, but only watch their favorite movie 6 or 7 times.
As "convergence" takes hold, we are in a dangerous position where people making the stuff don't understand the fundamental crossover points as well as DIFFERENCES between various types of media. This goes along with an arguement I've been making lately that we need to think about having a number of different "platforms" for communicating and entertaining. For instance, the book metaphor is one, and can be realized in physical space as well as electronically (see http://www.nightkitchen.com). The movie/video is another platform or space for creating and disseminating the massage. I would argue that music or the song is another platform, and that is can also contain other elements (meta data in the form on liner notes, videos of the performance, etc). Yes, all the various media elements exist on each, but the central metaphor is different between the three, and as such, the construction, design, and presentation (think devices) needs to be different. Or perhaps there is a "grand unified theory" for media platforms? Not sure about that one yet...but we're working on it.
Well after going back and forth and back again, I've finally decided (for now) to finish the album project using Logic. There were a number of things that went into the decision. Among my items floating through my transom:
ProTools has better "ergonomics" for mixing. The solo and mute buttons are well placed and colored, and when you mute a track the meter is still active, showing you if there is a signal. In Logic muting the track kills the meter. Otoh, soloing a track in PT gives you only that track...if the signal is bussed anywhere (like to a reverb) you still only get the dry track. Logic solo gives you the track and any busses. I'm not sure which of those I prefer...depends on the day.
Editing across tracks is easier in PT. This is important if you need to tweak a number of tracks at once (like all the drums or guitars). PT is dead simple in this area...click and drag. Logic is more convoluted. For this project though, I don't forsee editing across multiple tracks.
I have a bunch of virtual instruments for Logic (organ, ePiano, sampler, etc), and the implementation is flawless. I think I'll end up adding some keyboard sweetening bits as I go along, so this is an argument to use Logic.
Editing single tracks is easier for me in Logic, since it has a separate sample edit window. I will likely use this to pull out guitar riffs to loop, and I find I have an easier time in Logic than in PT.
Plugins. I bought VintageWarmer from PSP Audioware. Great plug. I got the VST so I could use my converter from FXpansion and use it in Logic. I will have the RTAS for PT available in a day or so though. Other than that, it is a push...Waves v4 work in both (RTAS for PT and AU for Logic), although the internal plugs for Logic are a bit better than the ones in PTLE I think.
Sound. I had some weird smearing going on in PT two nights ago. It was driving me nuts. I haven't been able to replicate it, and it seems to have cleared up, but it didn't give me a warm fuzzy.
Processing power. In PTLE on my dual 1 gig G4, a session with about 15 tracks, a few reverbs, and a few compressors is at about 50% CPU use. That actually is beginning to push it, as PT doesn't tolerate processor spikes well. The problem is that I will likely end up needing a few more plugs to tweak things to make up for some tracking problems. Doing it in PT would be dicey. In Logic, I can "freeze" tracks that I've used with plugins, and that effectively frees up the CPU for other plugs. A very cool feature.
So when push came to shove, I decided to go with Logic. And bought a new Logic Control extender so I've got 16 tracks of control surface. Hazaa!
Well, with the power of the web, various BBSs (including osx audio and the DUC, my ProTools system seems to be stable and noise-free. I still don't have the 002r working, but I have a very sano setup. I am using a MetricHalo ULN2 interface for both A/D and D/A, thus avoiding the rather weak converters in the MBox.
So the setup goes: source inputs into the ULN2, which sends converted digital signal via spdif to the MBox. This just passes the signal on to the computer and ProTools. Then I take signal back out for monitoring by spdif out of the MBox, into the ULN2, and have my Adam p11 speakers connected directly to the ULN2. Very short signal paths, very good A/D-D/A, everyone's happy. So far.
I'm mixing an album right now, and the original tracking was done in ProTools (LE). Now I've got a ProTools LE system, but have been using Logic for most of the past year. Digidesign (who make ProTools, and is owned by Avid) is the 800-lb gorilla of the audio world. And like most 800-lb gorillas, there is some good, and a lot of bad.
PT is pretty much the de facto standard, but a "real" TDM system costs about $10K. You can get an LE system (which uses the computer's CPU to do all processing as opposed to a TDM system which has a PCI card with DSP chips to help with the burden) for $500 or so. The problem is, you get what you pay for. I'm running a dual 1gig G4 machine with tons of RAM, and my PT system is having a tough time. Add a few reverbs and compressors into the mix, and it starts gagging (actually, it just stops). And the most annoying thing is this gawd-aweful digital white-pink-fuschia noise that randomly emanates from the system. When you bounce to disk, about every other time you have to cancel becuase one or more channels are in full noise mode. And to top things off, Digi's core audio driver does not allow you to run more than one app at a time that accesses the audio system.
My Logic system with Metric Halo ULN-2 interface otoh, runs like a dream, no noise, no squonk, no squeal. And I can have other apps running, and even other interfaces.
So what to do? Easy...even though it is a pain in the arse, I'm transferring the audio files out of PT and will mix the album in Logic.
So as some of you might know, Napster is back and too legit to quit. They are making news as they try to penetrate the college market through partnerships with the schools. The labels are all for this, as they are desperate to try and stem the Kazaa tide of illegal downloads. The schools must be desperate too, although one could argue that it isn't their problem. The courts don't seem to think so (pdf of court decision and an online article).
Who are the winners and losers here?
The latest buzz word to come out of the digital age. Of course everyone hate Micro$oft, but now that SCO has laid claim to a bunch of Linux source code...well, that was just too much for some people. This whole MyDoom.A virus was all about launching a DOS attach on the SCO website. And it worked...shut down today. MyDoom.B is supposed to shut MS down tomorrow.
So this is being termed the acts of "hacktivists." It's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it. Or not. More interesting times...