Re: Garageband Opinions

Lumpy wrote:
Roland wrote:
I am leaning towards Garageband because I
need a laptop computer (Refurbished Mac Pro 15") and Garageband comes
preinstalled. My son has a iMac and absolutely loves it....way better
than a Windows based system. He says that it is more intuitive.

Whichever software/platform you settle on, there will
always be a big learning curve. NO software will simply
take mediocre playing and "fanagle" it into sounding great.
You'll need to learn an entirely new set of skills to
operate the software. Like learning a new instrument.


I pretty much learned everything I know about making a decent recording just dubbing vinyl albums to cassette back in the 70s/80s - that gets you the basics of how to print signal. If you know that, going from two tracks to 24 isn't really that much of a leap...at least it wasn't for me. But yeah - it helps to be able to relate the software to operating a tape transport, because that's the way most of it's written - as a tape transport emulator. I still tell newbies today that if you don't know how to work with tape or at least something about it, you're really missing out on the education...even if all you're going to use is digital hardware.

You can do much the same with a Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) - preferably, take a vinyl album and your turntable (i.e. - an analog signal) and practice making the best reproduction of it that you can with your DAW (which is also a whole biz unto itself). Once you learn to do that, you'll also have learned to make the best print of a raw signal that you can - remember, this part is about learning how to handle and process the signal, and not about how to play, like Lumpy said - you're only going to play as good as you play, and you may just learn to make a damn fine recording of crap. But it's basic - and as I'm finding out now, a very marketable skill. Learning to post-process, mix, and master to stereo comes later...

There's also a couple schools of thought on how you get your signal printed to tape or HD - #1 (and the first thing I tried) was to input every signal I could directly - this is what you are doing when you dub a vinyl record to tape or HD, and it saves you having to buy microphones. It also stops you from annoying the neighbors because you can do everything through headphones or at reasonable listening levels. You get a very clean signal, but you also lose natural ambiance and the recording can sound "dry" or "plastic". But it's not a bad way to begin when you're learning.

#2 is to mic everything - which can get a bit trickier, because you need to learn a few things about matching mics to both what you are trying to capture, and to the mixer and other electronics as well...and the room. And you also have to buy some mics. Notice I said "mics" and not "mic". Buy pairs - you'll need at least pairs - if not quads - of the same mic to do a "decent" job. And cables...you'll NEVER be done buying cables, IMO...you wouldn't think a piece of wire could "go bad", but they do...

But that said, since I started working with mics vice doing things direct, I think it's more fun even if it is more complex. And expensive.

And the ability of the program to "print out musical
notation", I guarantee will be mediocre at best. You
will STILL have to be well versed in reading and
writing standard notation. You will have to tweak
the note values and especially the rhythmic placement
of the notes, in ANY notation software.

Recording and transcribing, two very different skill sets.
And neither one particularly related to your ability to
play the guitar or piano.


Agreed - more dependent on your ability to listen...which begs another thread, something I've been thinking about....

If you're not currently good at transcribing what you
hear/play, notation software will NOT make it easier.
It will make it MORE difficult.


Depends on what you believe about notation - if you take notation as "gospel", you'll be in trouble. Big trouble. But if you consider it to be just a framework or road map, you'll likely do better.

If you ARE currently good at transcribing, notation software
will NOT make it easier. It will only make the finished
product look neater.


Agreed. Nice thing to hand to someone else, or if you think you'd like to publish or copyright your work, but there's also more than one way to do that.

The software will NOT "simplify" your music production.
It will "complicate" it. It will add several layers of
things to consider, things to go wrong, things to learn
about.


Lumpy

In Your Ears for 40 Something Years
www.LumpyMusic.com




Multi-track recording ain't simple...but it ain't all that hard, either...so don't let anyone tell you that it is. In fact, it's getting easier (and more widespread) every day.

The worst thing about using software and digital processing audio is the possibility of tracks slipping synch or producing digital artifacts during playback - which is why I've kept my 8 track on cassette analog mixer/recorder around - a TASCAM 688. It's impossible to drop synch if all of your tracks are printed on the same length of tape (unless you stretch the tape, and then you're just plain screwed anyway...).

Remember - a stereo cassette deck or VCR is just a two-track recorder, and if you want a mono print you don't even have to feed it in stereo. SO - if you have a cassette deck (or even a VCR you're not using) consider dumping tracks to it, or at least using it as a stereo mastering recorder and then printing your final CDs/MP3s from that analog source - or using it as a safety backup of your mixes during master for if/when a digital track does slip - that way you'll always have a synched backup to use and not have to start over from complete scratch. A good stereo VCR works best for this, IMO, because you can essentially use it like an open reel tape recorder - turn it on and forget about it for 4 to 6 hours. That way you can concentrate on your mix work, let it capture everything, and edit it down later...or not.

I'm going to start doing this sort of thing every time I pick up an axe for practice - just plain let the tape roll and sort out my noodles later.

Go roll tape, kiddies...

--
- Rufus
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Whats so great about a matched pair ?
    ... Matched pairs become an issue if you're attempting true stereo mic ... if the mics are not matched, ... Lots of two mic techniques used for acoustic guitar are not true stereo ... Do you want/need a matched pair for recording solo acoustic guitar? ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)
  • Re: Why do these mikes exist?
    ... take their word for how the recording was performed. ... but perhaps because the Rhodes were LD mics. ... from a definite point in the stereo field. ... I wanted to see if I could achieve pinpoint stereo imaging. ...
    (rec.audio.pro)
  • Re: Zoom v Yammy
    ... has directional mics - most of these units have two omni mics an inch ... or two apart - they're recording two tracks of mono, not stereo. ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)
  • Re: Zoom v Yammy
    ... has directional mics - most of these units have two omni mics an inch ... or two apart - they're recording two tracks of mono, not stereo. ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)
  • Re: Music download sites offering CD quality.
    ... whole band is not usually quite so exaggerated. ... were the early days of stereo. ... Between ten and twelve mics probably. ... The band for such a recording is ...
    (uk.rec.audio)