Topic: Pre/Post Processing?

[jeromejello]

i should possibly clarify, i do EQ if necessary, but just thru my playback.  my point is that i dont EQ the file that i seed b/c of the differences (and lets face it, i am barely holding on to the craft of taping, let alone a whole new skill of post production) that can be experienced across the board.  i find most people prefer to have the sound in as close to a 'as it was' form and provide thier own tweaking with their own equipment for thier own taste.

but my point is there is not 'as it was' form.  Move your mic stand 10' to the left and you've got a potentially totally different sound than where you set up at, run a different pre, run a different polar pattern, 16/24 bit, small/large diaphgram, schopes/oktava all can do WAY more to the recording than some corrective mastering. You're the taper, be empowered (if you want to); do what ever you want to the recording that you think sounds good, seed it that way.  If people don't like they can tape it themselves, or you can learn from the critizisms. 

Either way, do what makes you happy. 

extremely valid points... that said i still suck at post 

+t for the empowerment

[zowie]

I have a Radio Shack spl meter.  It serves several purposes for me, but I don't think it's accurate enough for adjusting eq.  Probably the cheap mic is far from flat.  I got better results eq-ing by ear with sweeps and white noise. 

That was back when I had a mid-fi playback system.  With a good hi res system, adding a $20 or $100 equalizer plus an extra pair of cables does more harm than good, IMO.


I eq recordings sometimes in post.  A dab of eq can go a long way with a tape done with cheap or badly positioned mics or a bad room.  More than a dab is usually a bad thing.

[VA_TAPER]

I have a Radio Shack spl meter.  It serves several purposes for me, but I don't think it's accurate enough for adjusting eq.  Probably the cheap mic is far from flat.  I got better results eq-ing by ear with sweeps and white noise. 

That was back when I had a mid-fi playback system.  With a good hi res system, adding a $20 or $100 equalizer plus an extra pair of cables does more harm than good, IMO.


I eq recordings sometimes in post.  A dab of eq can go a long way with a tape done with cheap or badly positioned mics or a bad room.  More than a dab is usually a bad thing.

Today's $20 EQ is yesterdays $1000 eq, why? Because most systems (most non-audiophile systems) are multichannel and having 3 EQs to set is impractical.  That doesn't mean you can't find a reference grade EQ on the cheap.  And if you think an extra pair of cables is going to harm a line level signal, god help the poor snakes that the puny mic / instrument signals were run through in the studio.

I would also argue that a dab of eq is required in most circumstances because you are not (I say this generally, it is possible you have a V-DOSC array) playing the recording back on the same type of system it was originally played on.  In the studio is different, you can eliminate the need for EQ because the is no intermediary playback system, but to ask even a pair of $6k towers to play with the response of a bandwidth limited, compression horn driven concert PA is not realistic, let alone a car stereo (wait, make that factory car stereo =)  There is also the compensation for the fletcher-munson curve and bring the EQ in line with a reasonable playback volume.  Most music is not listened to at concert levels for home playback, so the sensitivity of different frequencies changes with respect to volume.

And about the RS spl meter, it might not be perfect, but it can be used to improve system response, it uses a panasonic omni type cap that is very flat, but very noisy.  If you use a computer to feed your DAC with nice low jitter SPDIF, I would highly reccommend renting an earthworks omni, and Lunatec V3 to run a full set of tones, sweeps and impulses through WAVES convolver, you can set it up to create and inverse acoustical image of your room approching the quality of some very expensive DRCs.  Then it's mearly a few plug-ins to route all audio playback through the inverse image and suddenly things become quite clear =)

peace, chris

[zowie]

I have a Radio Shack spl meter.  It serves several purposes for me, but I don't think it's accurate enough for adjusting eq.  Probably the cheap mic is far from flat.  I got better results eq-ing by ear with sweeps and white noise. 

That was back when I had a mid-fi playback system.  With a good hi res system, adding a $20 or $100 equalizer plus an extra pair of cables does more harm than good, IMO.


I eq recordings sometimes in post.  A dab of eq can go a long way with a tape done with cheap or badly positioned mics or a bad room.  More than a dab is usually a bad thing.

Today's $20 EQ is yesterdays $1000 eq, why? Because most systems (most non-audiophile systems) are multichannel and having 3 EQs to set is impractical.  That doesn't mean you can't find a reference grade EQ on the cheap.  And if you think an extra pair of cables is going to harm a line level signal, god help the poor snakes that the puny mic / instrument signals were run through in the studio.

I would also argue that a dab of eq is required in most circumstances because you are not (I say this generally, it is possible you have a V-DOSC array) playing the recording back on the same type of system it was originally played on.  In the studio is different, you can eliminate the need for EQ because the is no intermediary playback system, but to ask even a pair of $6k towers to play with the response of a bandwidth limited, compression horn driven concert PA is not realistic, let alone a car stereo (wait, make that factory car stereo =)  There is also the compensation for the fletcher-munson curve and bring the EQ in line with a reasonable playback volume.  Most music is not listened to at concert levels for home playback, so the sensitivity of different frequencies changes with respect to volume.

And about the RS spl meter, it might not be perfect, but it can be used to improve system response, it uses a panasonic omni type cap that is very flat, but very noisy.  If you use a computer to feed your DAC with nice low jitter SPDIF, I would highly reccommend renting an earthworks omni, and Lunatec V3 to run a full set of tones, sweeps and impulses through WAVES convolver, you can set it up to create and inverse acoustical image of your room approching the quality of some very expensive DRCs.  Then it's mearly a few plug-ins to route all audio playback through the inverse image and suddenly things become quite clear =)

peace, chris

I saw a test about 5 years ago that showed audible peaks and valleys in the freq. response of the RS SPL meter.

If you can show me a $1000 eq for $20, I'm interested.  I see $300 eqs for $20 but I don't think they're adequate.

I am utterly convinced that cables change the sound of line level signal; change may or not be "harm."  Cheap cables do harm it.  But I don't want to have that hackneyed debate here.

[RebelRebel]

might want to be careful linking to discounted software..
I only know because I got reprimanded for it here.

[momule]

On the nicer tools, do they do extra dithering for you when you process or is that all left up to user? I have a cheapo wavelab student version it's pretty basic in terms of features. If you were doing several things it would be best to do them all at once and only requantize at the end is that possible??

That's one of the Big Differences In Wavelab and SF for me. Is that Wavelab A. allows to you hear your effects Real time and B. adds a group of Effects at one time .

As for UA-5 meters, I have a suggestion. Take it to some shows you don't really care about and run it so hot it makes you want to cry. The light should be blinking fairly regularly during the loud parts of the show but not on every beat and not glowing. Try it a little hotter during the 2nd set, remember you don't care if you limit or not. Get a feel for different brightness levels that it blinks and it gets a lot easier. I guess the led just tics on at -3db or so, is that right?

This has been My experience.  I found out after running the UA-5 for just one show that the clip light was not really its clipping point.

Your goal should be to just clip a few samples from time to time during the show IMO. The UA-5 handles a few clips with no problem but over all the time will wreck it. Any other opinions on that?

I would say if your not seeing the clip light blink every few sec's your prolly not running hot enough.  Im amazed at how low some folks run. 

Just for the record I agree With VA taper.  +T

I would also argue that a dab of eq is required in most circumstances because you are not (I say this generally, it is possible you have a V-DOSC array) playing the recording back on the same type of system it was originally played on.  In the studio is different, you can eliminate the need for EQ because the is no intermediary playback system, but to ask even a pair of $6k towers to play with the response of a bandwidth limited, compression horn driven concert PA is not realistic, let alone a car stereo (wait, make that factory car stereo =)  There is also the compensation for the fletcher-munson curve and bring the EQ in line with a reasonable playback volume.  Most music is not listened to at concert levels for home playback, so the sensitivity of different frequencies changes with respect to volume.

[grtphl]

I know this thread is _old_, but it's been a really great reference for me.  I thought it was worth a bump so others can read it and in-case anybody has anything else good to add.

Edit: This thread has been really helpful too.