Topic: New to tracking ect...

[Nielsen81]

Hi guys.

Since I just recorded my 2 first shows with my own equipment (Muse both nights in Copenhagen), and I don't want to bother people asking them to track for me every time, I record a show (which will be 5-6 more in the next month), I wanted to ask a little thing here.

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/9501/rE0Fin.jpg

I attached an image (a snip) from Adobe Audition 3.0, and my question is: In the more quiet parts of the show, do you "mark" a part of the audio and turn up the volume so it "fits" the rest of the show? It's clear to see where the quiet parts are in my image.
And if you do, how do you make sure the volume is as close to the rest of the show as possible?

Regards
Nielsen81

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

Not 100% I understand the question.

For levels I would just increase the highest point to 0db (or close to it). Not sure how to do that in Audition, but I'm sure it's possible.

For tracking I would save your complete file after you are happy with the post-production and then use CD-WAVE to track it out. It's super easy to use and only costs $15 (you can try it for free).

http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/

[swordfish]

Hi guys.

Since I just recorded my 2 first shows with my own equipment (Muse both nights in Copenhagen), and I don't want to bother people asking them to track for me every time, I record a show (which will be 5-6 more in the next month), I wanted to ask a little thing here.

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/9501/rE0Fin.jpg

I attached an image (a snip) from Adobe Audition 3.0, and my question is: In the more quiet parts of the show, do you "mark" a part of the audio and turn up the volume so it "fits" the rest of the show? It's clear to see where the quiet parts are in my image.
And if you do, how do you make sure the volume is as close to the rest of the show as possible?

Regards
Nielsen81

lower some of the high süikes, than mark the whole track and normalize to -2db...and use CD Wave to track mark the file ....you will find the normalize function under effects

[gewwang]

Hi guys.

Since I just recorded my 2 first shows with my own equipment (Muse both nights in Copenhagen), and I don't want to bother people asking them to track for me every time, I record a show (which will be 5-6 more in the next month), I wanted to ask a little thing here.

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/9501/rE0Fin.jpg

I attached an image (a snip) from Adobe Audition 3.0, and my question is: In the more quiet parts of the show, do you "mark" a part of the audio and turn up the volume so it "fits" the rest of the show? It's clear to see where the quiet parts are in my image.
And if you do, how do you make sure the volume is as close to the rest of the show as possible?

Regards
Nielsen81

The only time that I'll boost the levels more on a quiet portion of a show is when the artist goes into say an acoustic set and the average dBs are around 10dBs or more less than the average for the plugged in part.

For an act like Muse, I probably wouldn't boost the quieter portion any more than the whole show as I don't believe they do any extended quieter set during their shows.

[bombdiggity]

Hi guys.

Since I just recorded my 2 first shows with my own equipment (Muse both nights in Copenhagen), and I don't want to bother people asking them to track for me every time, I record a show (which will be 5-6 more in the next month), I wanted to ask a little thing here.

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/9501/rE0Fin.jpg

I attached an image (a snip) from Adobe Audition 3.0, and my question is: In the more quiet parts of the show, do you "mark" a part of the audio and turn up the volume so it "fits" the rest of the show? It's clear to see where the quiet parts are in my image.
And if you do, how do you make sure the volume is as close to the rest of the show as possible?

Regards
Nielsen81

I think you mean "editing" rather than "tracking" (tracking = splitting the file into song length segments)?   

I (and most others here) tend to apply a more or less uniform amount of increase (gain) in editing.  If there are a few transient spikes that impact what you can do with it you might work on lowering those individually before applying gain.  You can also hard limit to apply a bit of compression if there are more than a handful but not a huge number of hot spots.  If there is an extended segment that is low for some reason you can zoom in on that section and raise it but one should consider before changing the natural dynamic if there was some artistic reason it is the way it is. 

Most rock shows tend to run at a fairly consistent volume, which makes them easy to adjust (assuming they're louder than the crowd so you don't really need to deal with the dynamics of crowd noise vs. the musical content. 

The best way to learn is to practice.  Always remember to work on a copy and backup the raw master file some place else.  You may get better and then decide you want to return to older projects to apply different approaches... 

[firemt66]

I never paid for CD wave before, when did they start charging $15?

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

I never paid for CD wave before, when did they start charging $15?

It was always $15, but it works 100% without paying.

I've used that thing so much I paid. Sure I could have $15 extra bucks in my pocket, but I figured I've gotten WAY more than $15 out of it.

[nulldogmas]

The only time that I'll boost the levels more on a quiet portion of a show is when the artist goes into say an acoustic set and the average dBs are around 10dBs or more less than the average for the plugged in part.

I've done it occasionally for Yo La Tengo, since otherwise their quiet songs would be near-inaudible if the loud songs were played at non-earsplitting volume. For the 98% of acts that don't have that dynamic range, yeah, just reduce the aberrant spikes and then normalize the results to the max volume it will fit.

[admkrk]

$15 is not far from free these days either, it amounted to a lot more (tank of gas) when I payed for it.

I never paid for CD wave before, when did they start charging $15?

It was always $15, but it works 100% without paying.

I've used that thing so much I paid. Sure I could have $15 extra bucks in my pocket, but I figured I've gotten WAY more than $15 out of it.

[Nielsen81]

Hi guys.

Since I just recorded my 2 first shows with my own equipment (Muse both nights in Copenhagen), and I don't want to bother people asking them to track for me every time, I record a show (which will be 5-6 more in the next month), I wanted to ask a little thing here.

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/9501/rE0Fin.jpg

I attached an image (a snip) from Adobe Audition 3.0, and my question is: In the more quiet parts of the show, do you "mark" a part of the audio and turn up the volume so it "fits" the rest of the show? It's clear to see where the quiet parts are in my image.
And if you do, how do you make sure the volume is as close to the rest of the show as possible?

Regards
Nielsen81

I think you mean "editing" rather than "tracking" (tracking = splitting the file into song length segments)?   

I (and most others here) tend to apply a more or less uniform amount of increase (gain) in editing.  If there are a few transient spikes that impact what you can do with it you might work on lowering those individually before applying gain.  You can also hard limit to apply a bit of compression if there are more than a handful but not a huge number of hot spots.  If there is an extended segment that is low for some reason you can zoom in on that section and raise it but one should consider before changing the natural dynamic if there was some artistic reason it is the way it is. 

Most rock shows tend to run at a fairly consistent volume, which makes them easy to adjust (assuming they're louder than the crowd so you don't really need to deal with the dynamics of crowd noise vs. the musical content. 

The best way to learn is to practice.  Always remember to work on a copy and backup the raw master file some place else.  You may get better and then decide you want to return to older projects to apply different approaches...

Haha, apparently I'm also new to the "language" :p
Anyway, I ended up with only normalizing -3dB and now I'm splitting up the file in tracks (I see there's an autosplit in CDWave? Is it any good?), but will like the opinion from someone inhere, who could DL it through Dropbox, before releasing it, if anyone wants to

Other than that, I have saved the raw file, and is editing a copy of the raw file. I had in mind, that someone might be better than me and give it a shot, if my work was horrible

Thanks for your input

[bombdiggity]

^

If all you're doing is adjusting the ending level it is hard to go wrong...  3 dB would mean you recorded not far from the overall peak (which can be done but it often isn't so easy to get so precise). 

Most of it is subjective (track splits can also be very subjective - as I recall there is a three or four page at least thread on that here with pluralities on each side of any approach). 

I don't really know Muse but suspect they're not really my thing.  I'm often happy to check but have been pretty busy.  If it is something I can listen to I would do that but may not get to it... 

[hi and lo]

I never paid for CD wave before, when did they start charging $15?

Paging /u/Brian Skalinder, we need a Shareware explanation in here, stat!

[Brian Skalinder]

I never paid for CD wave before, when did they start charging $15?

Paging /u/Brian Skalinder, we need a Shareware explanation in here, stat!

I'm in agreement with Mike B:  AFAIK, CD-Wave has always charged a license fee.  They simply chose not to cripple the software if you didn't pay after a period of time.

I think historically people either have been ignorant of the license or willfully ignored it.  As I understand it, if you've had the program > 31 days and haven't paid, you're not supposed to use it any longer without first registering.  But, as already discussed, there's intentionally no enforcement mechanism.

Some people may think this pushes CD-Wave into the realm of donationware, but I don't think that's accurate -- donationware provides fully functional software, with a request for an optional donation.  As I interpret the CD-Wave registration, it's not optional...but, again, there's no enforcement mechanism.  Splitting hairs, perhaps, but I'm sure in a proper legal case the distinction could be important.

FWIW, registration details from the CD-Wave page with a few key excerpts:

http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/register.html

What does registration buy me?

Actually, all you'll get is a clear conscience. I decided against putting effort into a copy-protection scheme that would be defeated anyway. I dislike software with disabled features too. I feel that people that don't pay for this version wouldn't pay anyway. Maybe I'm wrong, but I have a basket full of envelopes to prove me right.

In short, there is no special registered version, registering it just removes the "Unregistered" notice from the title bar and gives you a slightly different 'about' box.