Mellotronists

off topic?  What is the topic?

Does anyone know of audible differences between recordings made at 
44,100 sample rate and recordings made at 22,050 sample rate?  Are 
all MP3's 22,050 ?

At 44,100, SoundForge allows equalization up to a 16K band, and when 
recording at 22,050, SoundForge only allows equalization up to an 8K 
band.  Why?

Has anyone had poor results with MP3 conversion?  Some recordings 
convert well and sound great, while others have a pronounced flange / 
warble effect.

Clay

HI folks,
   I personally do not care for 22.5khz as a sampling frequency if it is to represent a full bandwidth recording.  Bit reduction and lower fs are great for "lofi" stuff.  I have sampled my tron and converted to a number of bit length/sampling rates and 22.5 sucks.  Mp3 encoders are not all the same.  I rely on Bias Peak for mp3 encoding and I always make 'em as large as I can, they still end up being pretty small.  Interestingly, itunes does a pretty good job of mp3 conversion.
    Just bought the Yamaha CRW-F1 cd burner with "Audio Master recording" mode and yes, the difference is stunning compared to a cd burned on a conventional  drive.

Fritz

In a message dated 12/19/2002 1:19:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
fdoddy@... writes:


> Subj:Re: [Mellotronists] digital recording 
> Date:12/19/2002 1:19:03 PM Eastern Standard Time
> From:<A HREF="mailto:fdoddy@...">fdoddy@...</A>
> To:<A HREF="mailto:clay123@...">clay123@...</A>, <A HREF="mailto:Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com">Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com</A>
> Sent from the Internet 
> 
> 
> 
> HI folks,
>    I personally do not care for 22.5khz as a sampling frequency if it is to 
> represent a full bandwidth recording.  Bit reduction and lower fs are great 
> for "lofi" stuff.  I have sampled my tron and converted to a number of bit 
> length/sampling rates and 22.5 sucks.  Mp3 encoders are not all the same.  
> I rely on Bias Peak for mp3 encoding and I always make 'em as large as I 
> can, they still end up being pretty small.  Interestingly, itunes does a 
> pretty good job of mp3 conversion.
>     Just bought the Yamaha CRW-F1 cd burner with "Audio Master recording" 
> mode and yes, the difference is stunning compared to a cd burned on a 
> conventional  drive.
> 
> Fritz
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Mellotronists-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> 

Speaking of all this digital recording stuff, I know that there are a lot of 
you out there who would like to know more about the ins and outs of digital 
recording so that you can record your mellotrons.

There's a new CDROM from Synth-Tek for $20 which goes over the setup and use 
of a digital home studio in great detail.  This company puts out similar 
CDROMs for learning how to use Kurzweil keyboards, and they do an excellent 
job.  I've used them, and they are much more interesting than reading the 
manual, and are a very effective training tool.  The graphics are accurate 
and the tutorials are worth every penny.   If they have done a similar job on 
this "Digital Home Studio" CDROM, it will be well worth the 20 bucks.  It's 
on my Christmas list.

Here's the link:

<A HREF="http://www.synth-tek.com/mhs.html">http://www.synth-tek.com/mhs.html</A>

Then, once you learn how to do all this, you can record a tune for the <A HREF="http://www.tronsounds.com/updates1.htm">
Mellotron Project CD</A>.

Ken M.

From: kenmerb@...

To: mellotronists@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 1:49 PM

Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] digital recording

I am in the process of creating a digital recording workstation. I have come across a Presonus digital interface that has 8 class Mick pres headphone stereo out and cubase software. It works with mac and pc  and you can "daisy chain" them  together to create 16, 24, etc. tracks.
Best of all it is 599.00. I also have presonus mic pres which are great sounding with a very low noise floor.
Does anyone one the list have any experience with one?
I am not digital savvy and I know alot of you are.If you go to Presonus.com and highlight firepod you can see it and the specs.
                                 Jimmy

I keep hearing the myth that mellotron sounds are always degraded in
some way when using digital recording methods.  It may have been
always true 25 years ago.  (using poor converters, low resolution
filters, short word length and low sample rates).

With modern, good quality digital recorders, you can still end up with
a cold / harsh  "digital sandpaper" recording. (degraded).  OR you can
get results that are pure and sweet.

The initial recording at 24 bit / 96k sample rate will always sound
great.  The trouble is, engineers fuck with the recording over and
over and over again....and the sound quality deteriorates ever so
slightly each time it's processed.  (There may be no generation loss
when making digital copies, but there is generation loss when
processing the signal).  In addition, some of the processing that's
intended to improve the sound, degrades it.  

EQ, gain adjustment, Downward compression, reverb, upward expansion,
EQ, upward compression, downward expansion, more EQ, more gain
adjustment, a pinch of Q sound, a dash Aphex Exciter....run it through
the DA - AD converter just one more time and presto!  Harsh digital
sandpaper!  

No problem... We can always use an Analog tube (valve) emulator to fix it.

Clay

> I keep hearing the myth that mellotron sounds are always degraded in
> some way when using digital recording methods.

Crap. All the Mellotron parts for SFIM were rcorded digitally and I
think they sound outstanding. As you say, it's post-recording fucking
about (PPFA) that messes up the sound and *that* is because digital
recording makes PPFA that much easier.

Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/