Topic: Taper Lament; I Wish For More DAW Knowledge

[stevetoney]

I really don't have anything technical to say in this forum other than I really wish that there was an easy way on TS.com for the people that really know how to use the power of their software to teach the rest of us.

I'm constantly wishing I knew more about my software because I feel like I'm probably leaving stuff on the shelf WRT mastering my recordings and getting the best out of my masters, but I just don't know what all of those tools are and even though I've looked around, I just haven't found anyplace that does a good job explaining the tools.  Oh I don't know...where is it better to use Parametric EQ vs. conventional.  What does DC bias do and when should it be corrected for?  Just routine stuff like that.

FWIW, I use Audition and the manual is good at describing what you need to do to use the tools, but it assumes that you know what each tool does and where you'd use it.  Therein lies my problem. 

Bottom line is that I only use a small number of the tools in my software when I master my recordings...but I'm pretty sure I'm only tapping into a fraction of what I could do if I only knew how to use the software.

Sigh.

[hi and lo]

Definitely a great idea! I would love to know more about Izotope Ozone and Izotope RX as those programs have done wonders for me, but I'm sure I, too, am leaving things on the shelf.

Normally I work in Wavelab and have experience with CEP (pre-Adobe), but have failed miserably with other DAW's. Audacity, Samplitude, and WaveEditor for mac have really been frustrating for me to try and learn.

[flipp]

Can't say anything about the others but Samplitude has a couple of good sections in the Community tab on their website:
Tutorials - http://www.samplitude.com/en/tutorial-videos/introduction.326.html   and
Workshops - http://www.samplitude.com/en/tutorial-videos/introduction.326.html http://www.samplitude.com/en/workshops/introduction.315.html

I recommend spending some time exploring there if you have, or are thinking of trying, Samplitude.

< always a good idea to proofread and preview before posting >

[page]

FWIW, I use Audition and the manual is good at describing what you need to do to use the tools, but it assumes that you know what each tool does and where you'd use it.  Therein lies my problem. 

Bottom line is that I only use a small number of the tools in my software when I master my recordings...but I'm pretty sure I'm only tapping into a fraction of what I could do if I only knew how to use the software.

Sigh.

Matt Quinn once said that he was starting to enjoy post-proc more then taping and I understand that now. Part of it for me is that I'm still learning and improving.

This has been the one great reason for me to troll gearslutz; for the general knowledge. Second, for a lot of packages, there are instructional youtube videos or manuals which get a good start (Ozone and Reaper come to mind here). After that I'll pick a recording and just experiment to listen to hear both what different types of settings and functions do.

Definitely a great idea! I would love to know more about Izotope Ozone and Izotope RX as those programs have done wonders for me, but I'm sure I, too, am leaving things on the shelf.

Normally I work in Wavelab and have experience with CEP (pre-Adobe), but have failed miserably with other DAW's. Audacity, Samplitude, and WaveEditor for mac have really been frustrating for me to try and learn.

I've found for audience recordings (or recordings that I can't control the mix/placement), Ozone is one of the best bang/buck plugins out there. I'm still learning new stuff about it (like, in the EQ window on a mac, hold ALT while having music playing through the plugin and then click in the EQ window to isolate the frequency so you can work toward verifying resonances).

RX has amazing capabilities that I'm still working through myself (like the feedback removal) or "azimuth correction" which is really just interchannel delay, but the price tag jumps astronomically if you go for the Advanced version which has better noise reduction. 

I cut my teeth in Audacity (and CEP pre-Adobe as well) so I'm very familiar with it's quirks. It makes a nice substitute for CDWave on the Mac, but I'm to the point now where I do just about everything else in RX. Tempted to learn Reaper just for the mixing of multi-channel stuff. Didn't like WaveEditor, was even less intuitive than Audacity to me.

Again, usually there are no problems there, but especially with a live source the infrasonic info is often just muddy garbage anyway.

I concur, there are only a handful of occasions I've wanted to save anything below 20-30hz, usually a special effect at the show in a song or something, but >90% I'm content to ditch everything sub 30hz.

[Gutbucket]

I feel the frustration.  The source of that for me has been my limited ability to navigate around and figure out how to do operations within the structure and 'unique culture' of each piece of software, as well as making sure that it is then really doing what I want it to and not other things I may have overlooked in a miriad of detailed settings.  I generally know what I want to do and how to do it in an audio sense, but I often have a hard time figuring out and remembering how go about achieving even simple things with the software.  I suspect I just have not dedicated enough time to figuring out the particulars of the programs, but when I want to just do simple things like navigate, make selections and move them a few milliseconds, split stereo tracks to mono, simple stuff like that, it's gets frustrating.  I generally get it done and then either forget how I did it, do it some other way, or just put it off for another day for when I've found more time to better learn how to navigate the program.  The last option seems to be my most usual choice.

To add to what Jon stated about the real world causes and remedies for DC offset by hopefully helping to clarify what it is conceptually- consider the constantly alternating polarity of an audio waveform.  That alternation makes it an AC signal.  The average of the waveform value swings in either direction should match up with the 'zero crossing' polarity change point of the electrical signal, but it is sort of like a floating ground defined by the difference between positive and negative values of the signal.  That average and the actual zero voltage point of the electrical system may not be exactly the same and the difference between them is DC offset.  It doesn't sound like anything, but reduces the available headroom.  Even if the offest is present in the digital signal but not corrected, it's still usually filtered out at some point in the analog part of the signal chain by a decoupling capacitors and other means, but if it occurs in an direct coupled amplifier and is severe enough it can can cause a strain on things like voice coils by passing current through them constantly (the DC component) so that instead of the 'at rest' center position being the mechanical middle point of the speaker's travel, the DC component tries to constantly push or pull the coil on way or another, both reducing the overal available travel and heating it up.

[page]

And if you ever wade into a thread there where the principles of digital audio are being discussed (with the exception of threads where Paul Frindle participates) . . . well, they have the facepalm smiley there for a reason . . .

The Geekslutz board there is good; the Remote board is good, the rest is mostly facepalm territory.

noted. I do browse the remote board though.

[dlh]

Yup, though one.
For me, the best way to learn was to pick one DAW and stick with it.  I hopped around for a while and settled on one for multitrack and another for 2 track mastering.

(Although I think you could master just fine with a regular DAW.  And I don't even want to start the discussion {argument} of how one DAW sounds better than another; have that T-shirt)

I got a lot of help from tutorial software; there's one major company that does a lot of DAW's; don't know if it's appropriate to mention names.
I was also fortunate to sit at the right hand of two superb Nashville musicians/engineers for a 2-week crash course in a studio I used to work at.
After seeing how fast and efficiently they worked, I decided it's more about knowing one piece of software very well; I think no one can know it all.

So I say pick one.  Find a good tutorial or book if you prefer hard copy.  (I used to read 500 page instruction manuals cover to cover )
 . . . and practice

I enjoy playing around with old files when I think I've found something new that the software can do.
(Just found a great 2-channel mastering compresser that does parallel compression by itself - it's new to me anyway - now I want to redo all my old stuff!)
I did find that debating the minutiae of different software just creates "noise".  Mute that channel.
So pick a good piece of software that you can afford -lots of good free stuff- and play.

Just my .02

[Gutbucket]

I got a lot of help from tutorial software; there's one major company that does a lot of DAW's; don't know if it's appropriate to mention names.

Why not? It's what we're here talking about.

(Just found a great 2-channel mastering compresser that does parallel compression by itself - it's new to me anyway - now I want to redo all my old stuff!)

Which? I've been playing with something similar which has had the same effect on me.  Very simple interface, not sure it is actually parallel, but sounds like it. 

[dlh]

I got a lot of help from tutorial software; there's one major company that does a lot of DAW's; don't know if it's appropriate to mention names.

Why not? It's what we're here talking about.

(Just found a great 2-channel mastering compresser that does parallel compression by itself - it's new to me anyway - now I want to redo all my old stuff!)

Which? I've been playing with something similar which has had the same effect on me.  Very simple interface, not sure it is actually parallel, but sounds like it.

I like ASK Video tutorial software.  I would just run it along with Cubase and try everything they did on an experimental project.

The compressor is the elysia alpha mastering comp.  Lots of buttons 
and a convenient "mix" control with defeat switches.  Does MS.  Like it a lot.
It has a "soft clip" that allows me to tame wild drummers/cymbal payers without having to "pencil out" their peaks.
Don't ask me how it "sounds"?  I don't think it has a sound. (never cared for shaping sound with a comp)
My stuff is usually classical, jazz etc. so I like transparency.
The alpha has a max ratio of 2x but that's plenty for volume leveling. (even has a preset for upward leveling which is a good place to start)
I haven't messed with the eq section much, but this comp seemed easy to use even with its flexibility.


Oh, it's the plugin, not the hardware piece
Here's one review:
http://everythingrecording.com/reviews/review-elysia-alpha-compressor-plug-in/

[Gutbucket]

My stuff is usually classical, jazz etc. so I like transparency.

Same boat.  I'll check that out.  The simple one I've liked recently is the PSP Oldtimer, which came as a freebe with their MasterComp when it was in early release.  The MasterComp has the all the bells & whistle controllability, but I haven't really used all that. I just pulled out the simple Oldtimer on a whim a few weeks ago and at near minimial settings it brings out details and clears things up nicely (clear mode, ratio~1.5 , time~3, comp~3). It's easy to get good clean sounding results without a bunch of fidgeting.  It's subtle enough and the interface so simple it makes me feel guilty after struggling somewhat with the built-in comps in Samplitude.

[OFOTD]

Have any of you checked out YouTube?   

Tons and tons of tutorials on all sorts of post processing, mastering, etc for all sorts of different packages.   

Search izotope ozone 4 and the first few pages are full of useful and insightful easy to follow tutorials.  SoundForge, WaveLab, Audition, etc.   All there and all covered.

They are all great starting points.

[stevetoney]

Have any of you checked out YouTube?   

Tons and tons of tutorials on all sorts of post processing, mastering, etc for all sorts of different packages.   

Actually, I hadn't even thought to look on YouTube <smacks forehead>!  Thanks.

[Sloan Simpson]

I was looking around on iZotope's site for info on Ozone, and noticed this tutorial PDF:

http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/ozone/OzoneMasteringGuide.PDF

I've just started reading it, but it looks really helpful. It's obviously slanted toward working in Ozone, but explains things in a way that I think you could translate it to other DAWs/plugins.

[dorrcoq]

Thanks for the link, Sloan

[Sloan Simpson]

Having finished reading that PDF, I'm finding it (and Ozone) incredibly useful.