and, now, for whatever reason, it sounds right again - through multiple buffer rates.
i think maybe i was going through a sense of existential loss at the final completion of this track, which i am confident will not require another revision. i've been working on this off and on for thirteen years. but this is final. and maybe that schized me out.
i'm back to finishing final touches. if there's an issue with a final render, i think i'm better off trying to find a way to manipulate the render rather than continue to fuck with it in cubase.
that ethernet cable is remaining unplugged until i'm done, though.
Saturday, December 6, 2014
i don't think disconnecting it helped.
following the logic i was working with, i changed the buffer size on the maudio card and got the effect i wanted...
i can't upload this with a note to change the buffer size to 1024. not for the least reason that i don't understand *why*. but it's consistent across two cards. i don't get the right warble at other buffer sizes.
i'm slowly coming to the conclusion that i must be taking advantage of something unusual. i mean, i thought i was just driving the bass a little into the red. it seems to be something more complex than that underlying the effect. it may be out of phase or something.
i need to do a little research. i can't let this into the wild until i'm sure it's going to be audible at more than one buffer size.
following the logic i was working with, i changed the buffer size on the maudio card and got the effect i wanted...
i can't upload this with a note to change the buffer size to 1024. not for the least reason that i don't understand *why*. but it's consistent across two cards. i don't get the right warble at other buffer sizes.
i'm slowly coming to the conclusion that i must be taking advantage of something unusual. i mean, i thought i was just driving the bass a little into the red. it seems to be something more complex than that underlying the effect. it may be out of phase or something.
i need to do a little research. i can't let this into the wild until i'm sure it's going to be audible at more than one buffer size.
i'm not able to make sense of this. it sounded "right" this morning through the mixer as a soundcard, now it's gone wonky on me...
i noticed that changing the buffer size when using the mixer as a sound card is modifying the bottom end, which doesn't make any sense to me. it's almost proof that i'm running through an external server, and it's put a limiting effect on everything i'm playing. that's about the only thing that explains this.
what the buffer size does is tell your operating system how often to look for the next piece of the stream. this is primarily going to make a difference when recording, because it introduces a delay. however, it can also make a difference in the way that plugins calculate the sound, which is why i can hear the difference when i'm monitoring the mix.
it really, really shouldn't make any difference at all when i'm simply streaming a song. nothing's being calculated. whether it takes 256 or 512 or 1048576 samples at a time, it's taking exactly the same thing one way or another.
the fact that it *is* making a difference indicates that something *is* being calculated. and, while i may be uncovering some hidden algorithm in foobar or a stealth effect on the unit, i don't think either of these things are true.
again: it sounds like a limiting effect. and it's fucking up the bottom end. and i don't really know what to do about it....
i'm considering just disconnecting that computer from the internet altogether.
there's no wireless card in it. i made sure of that.
waveforms on the bottom end are longer. so, if you're calculating something on the bottom end, you could conceivably erase it if you take chunks that are too small. conversely, a distortion effect on the low end could conceivably smooth itself out if you take chunks that are too big. so, it seems like i'm running into a contradiction: i want a smooth bass part and a jagged guitar part.
but none of that should happen when i'm playing an already calculated part.
i noticed that changing the buffer size when using the mixer as a sound card is modifying the bottom end, which doesn't make any sense to me. it's almost proof that i'm running through an external server, and it's put a limiting effect on everything i'm playing. that's about the only thing that explains this.
what the buffer size does is tell your operating system how often to look for the next piece of the stream. this is primarily going to make a difference when recording, because it introduces a delay. however, it can also make a difference in the way that plugins calculate the sound, which is why i can hear the difference when i'm monitoring the mix.
it really, really shouldn't make any difference at all when i'm simply streaming a song. nothing's being calculated. whether it takes 256 or 512 or 1048576 samples at a time, it's taking exactly the same thing one way or another.
the fact that it *is* making a difference indicates that something *is* being calculated. and, while i may be uncovering some hidden algorithm in foobar or a stealth effect on the unit, i don't think either of these things are true.
again: it sounds like a limiting effect. and it's fucking up the bottom end. and i don't really know what to do about it....
i'm considering just disconnecting that computer from the internet altogether.
there's no wireless card in it. i made sure of that.
waveforms on the bottom end are longer. so, if you're calculating something on the bottom end, you could conceivably erase it if you take chunks that are too small. conversely, a distortion effect on the low end could conceivably smooth itself out if you take chunks that are too big. so, it seems like i'm running into a contradiction: i want a smooth bass part and a jagged guitar part.
but none of that should happen when i'm playing an already calculated part.
ok, no. this is a sound card issue. when i play the rendered file through the mixer as a sound card, it sounds "right".
no two sound cards are going to sound identical. the fact that i can tell the difference here is just a function of my meticulousness.
but, it's a general point that is accurate. if you want to hear it exactly the way i'm making it, you need to use exactly the same equipment. that's true of everybody that makes music.
it's an alesis 16-track multimix that connects via firewire. i use an m-audio "audiophile" card that's designed to connect to old fashioned stereo systems for general playback. normally, the difference in the render is minimal, but because the effects here are so subtle it makes the difference in that bit of bass distortion....
i guess that means that some people aren't going to hear the mix properly. i already knew that. but i guess the upside is that the distortion is more likely to disappear than overpower, which is probably preferable.
i still need to do things, and it's still going to need to wait until i come back, but i'm not going to have to take anything apart....
everything sounds good except that last acoustic...
no two sound cards are going to sound identical. the fact that i can tell the difference here is just a function of my meticulousness.
but, it's a general point that is accurate. if you want to hear it exactly the way i'm making it, you need to use exactly the same equipment. that's true of everybody that makes music.
it's an alesis 16-track multimix that connects via firewire. i use an m-audio "audiophile" card that's designed to connect to old fashioned stereo systems for general playback. normally, the difference in the render is minimal, but because the effects here are so subtle it makes the difference in that bit of bass distortion....
i guess that means that some people aren't going to hear the mix properly. i already knew that. but i guess the upside is that the distortion is more likely to disappear than overpower, which is probably preferable.
i still need to do things, and it's still going to need to wait until i come back, but i'm not going to have to take anything apart....
everything sounds good except that last acoustic...
yeah. it's nulling across
latency levels, so if the output is different on the monitor (and i
think it is), it isn't on the render. that's psychological.
and the bottom end simply does not appear to be there. unfortunately.
i think they overlap about 736, but i need to be playing back about 4096 with the current array of plugins..
i have to go the drugstore and get groceries. i'm going to wait until i come back before i play with anything.
but if somebody is doing this purposefully, they're really just wasting my time.
i mean, latency shouldn't matter when you're just playing back wave files. but it does seem to have an effect on the monitor out in real time when effects are being calculated, which is of course what i want recreated in the render. if i have to monitor the plugins at 4096 to prevent crackling, i'm going to get a different output. it's the kind of thing that 95% of musicians won't notice. but what i do is very intimately tied into the sound production. it's not the two note power chord riff that's of value here, it's the eight guitars i've got playing it through different effects paths.
the key thing is monitoring it at the same level it renders at, so i get what i'm hearing. i mean, there was one song a few years ago that i actually recorded out with analog instead of rendering because of the mismatch.
and the bottom end simply does not appear to be there. unfortunately.
i think they overlap about 736, but i need to be playing back about 4096 with the current array of plugins..
i have to go the drugstore and get groceries. i'm going to wait until i come back before i play with anything.
but if somebody is doing this purposefully, they're really just wasting my time.
i mean, latency shouldn't matter when you're just playing back wave files. but it does seem to have an effect on the monitor out in real time when effects are being calculated, which is of course what i want recreated in the render. if i have to monitor the plugins at 4096 to prevent crackling, i'm going to get a different output. it's the kind of thing that 95% of musicians won't notice. but what i do is very intimately tied into the sound production. it's not the two note power chord riff that's of value here, it's the eight guitars i've got playing it through different effects paths.
the key thing is monitoring it at the same level it renders at, so i get what i'm hearing. i mean, there was one song a few years ago that i actually recorded out with analog instead of rendering because of the mismatch.
yeah, it's....
it's supposed to break up on the bottom end.
1) it's hard for me to know if the plugin disappearing thing is actually making it sound different, or is causing me to think it sounds different. so i need to be careful in not overreacting, and really listen closely.
2) i can't listen to it in the daw without taking out tracks. it's consequently hard to know if i'm missing that bottom end in the daw, too, or if it's a mild render issue.
i'm going to try rendering at a few latency points and checking different volume levels to be sure. if i can't convince myself that it hasn't changed, i'm going to have to start taking tracks out, isolating all the tracks with effects, rendering them individually and putting them back in.
i know i have issues. but i can't shake the idea that this is being done on purpose. and i'm not allowing for another opportunity to fuck with it.
it's supposed to break up on the bottom end.
1) it's hard for me to know if the plugin disappearing thing is actually making it sound different, or is causing me to think it sounds different. so i need to be careful in not overreacting, and really listen closely.
2) i can't listen to it in the daw without taking out tracks. it's consequently hard to know if i'm missing that bottom end in the daw, too, or if it's a mild render issue.
i'm going to try rendering at a few latency points and checking different volume levels to be sure. if i can't convince myself that it hasn't changed, i'm going to have to start taking tracks out, isolating all the tracks with effects, rendering them individually and putting them back in.
i know i have issues. but i can't shake the idea that this is being done on purpose. and i'm not allowing for another opportunity to fuck with it.
again, i wake up and everything's corrupted. and, again, a reinstall seems to look like it fixes it. but, again, it doesn't quite sound right.
i keep setting the distortion levels to be very "grunge" and "shoegaze" sounding, and they keep being reset to be very "metal" sounding, which i emphatically don't want. if i didn't know i'm schizophrenic, i might start thinking there's a fucker at a mixing desk that is a fan of judas fucking priest or something....
*sigh*. i may have to spend the day retweaking. again: i have no understanding of what's doing this. it seems file related, at least. that is, other projects aren't having the same problem. but it's very odd to me that it only happens when i wake up.
i think the fucker at the mixing desk is comic book guy, basically - somebody with absolutely no concept of taste that is just completely convinced he knows what's right for everybody else. or, a typical 80s metal fan...
i keep setting the distortion levels to be very "grunge" and "shoegaze" sounding, and they keep being reset to be very "metal" sounding, which i emphatically don't want. if i didn't know i'm schizophrenic, i might start thinking there's a fucker at a mixing desk that is a fan of judas fucking priest or something....
*sigh*. i may have to spend the day retweaking. again: i have no understanding of what's doing this. it seems file related, at least. that is, other projects aren't having the same problem. but it's very odd to me that it only happens when i wake up.
i think the fucker at the mixing desk is comic book guy, basically - somebody with absolutely no concept of taste that is just completely convinced he knows what's right for everybody else. or, a typical 80s metal fan...
it's done. i must eat. i'll probably sleep on it and upload it tomorrow.
this is my fourth symphony, and the last piece in what is now a three hour "double ep". the track has a long journey attached to it. the release is three hours and has a lot of overlap in order to present the path it took...
it's been through every rethink you can imagine. but it has to be done, now. there's nothing left to do, except maybe turn it into an opera.
(there's no chance i'm going to turn it into an opera)
fast forward three years, to when i turn it into an opera....
no, seriously. it exists in every form possible. it's DONE.
now, sure. i'm sort of apprehensive about putting a three hour release up that consists of a single song. but it's such a long journey, and goes over so much ground, that i'm sort of bewildered by it, myself. as crazy as it sounds, it's the proper way to present the thing.
like i say....i'll put it up tomorrow....and if you have three hours to spare, it's a fun journey.
i mean, i grew up listening to remix discs. something like the closer single by nine inch nails may seem self-indugent to some, but i loved the way it pulled the song apart every which way for an hour, and warped it all over the place.
what am i doing if not making something i'd want to listen to? it may be a niche thing, but i'd have been ecstatic to stumble upon something like this in late adolescence, and many years after as well.
a 25 minute track may not be the best track to pick to go about exploring in 11 different ways, but it's what happened, and it's what i have to share.
this is my fourth symphony, and the last piece in what is now a three hour "double ep". the track has a long journey attached to it. the release is three hours and has a lot of overlap in order to present the path it took...
it's been through every rethink you can imagine. but it has to be done, now. there's nothing left to do, except maybe turn it into an opera.
(there's no chance i'm going to turn it into an opera)
fast forward three years, to when i turn it into an opera....
no, seriously. it exists in every form possible. it's DONE.
now, sure. i'm sort of apprehensive about putting a three hour release up that consists of a single song. but it's such a long journey, and goes over so much ground, that i'm sort of bewildered by it, myself. as crazy as it sounds, it's the proper way to present the thing.
like i say....i'll put it up tomorrow....and if you have three hours to spare, it's a fun journey.
i mean, i grew up listening to remix discs. something like the closer single by nine inch nails may seem self-indugent to some, but i loved the way it pulled the song apart every which way for an hour, and warped it all over the place.
what am i doing if not making something i'd want to listen to? it may be a niche thing, but i'd have been ecstatic to stumble upon something like this in late adolescence, and many years after as well.
a 25 minute track may not be the best track to pick to go about exploring in 11 different ways, but it's what happened, and it's what i have to share.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)