Emu XL-7 & MP-7 User's Group

What pc software would you suggest for recording. I lost logic on a 
crash and am using wavelab, but it seems to come out at a rather low 
volume although in the wave view it appears to have very little room 
left. Are the top and bottom edges of the graph not the clipping 
points. Can I set a hard limit for recording or is it only for post 
recording processing? I know these questions are kind of newbie and 
not e-mu, but you guys/gals seem to be able to explain anything:)
Here I'll add some e-mu stuff to stay in topic... Also my e-mu 
requires much more volume through the mixer than other channels. I 
have to turn the gain all the way up on it and about half way down 
on my tables to even them put. Is there a simple solution like a 
master amp level in the mp-7. I know the layer amps, but this is not 
a good solution.
 To avoid a string of thank you posts from me, please refer to the 
next line after posting your reply.
 Thank you for your reply your help is greatly appreciated.
     Tom

--- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "dj 61" <dj61@d...> wrote:
" What pc software would you suggest for recording."
I use wavelab for sample editing. If the volume is levelled of at 0db 
it should send out 0db - check your pc soundcard level settings.

"Also my e-mu requires much more volume through the mixer than other 
channels."
As rEalm suggested in an earlier mail - its posible to give your 
presets more "umph" if you copy the layers on top of oneandother.
(press the save/copy button and scroll down to copy layer x to layer 
x.

:P

I use Wavelab extensively (almost daily for my "post" work), so maybe I 
can help.  Answers below:



I lost logic on a crash and am using wavelab, but it seems to come out at 
a rather low volume although in the wave view it appears to have very 
little room left. Are the top and bottom edges of the graph not the 
clipping points. Can I set a hard limit for recording or is it only for 
post recording processing?

>>>The output from the XX-7's can be a bit low, and as always you shoudl 
go by what you hear, versus what you see in wavelab.  That being said, I'm 
not sure what you mean by the "top and bottom edges of the graph".  Do you 
mean the waveform display, or are you referring to the FFT or peak meters? 
 As long as you're not clipping, you should be fine.  On question, are you 
recording digitally, or via the main analog outs?  What's your soundcard 
too? (ok, that's two questions) <<<

Also my e-mu requires much more volume through the mixer than other 
channels. I have to turn the gain all the way up on it and about half way 
down on my tables to even them put.

>>>Yeah, I find that when I use the XL-7 in my DJ sets, I need to crank 
the channel gains up all the way, probably twice as hot as the channels my 
tables are going through.  This is normal, after all the records you're 
listening to have been compressed many times, and most definitely squashed 
during mastering too, so they'll always be hotter than a direct out from 
the XX-7.  I find a compressor to be almost essential in helping the XX-7 
fit into a DJ set better, other wise when you go from records to the XX-7, 
the difference in sound is very noticeable, even at the same volumes. This 
is due to the fact that the signal from the XX-7 is much more dynamic than 
the records.

The only solution I've found (and what I'd do even if I wasn't using the 
XX-7 with myu DJ set up), is to layer up your drums with two percussion 
layers, and use the AmpVol in the Preset Edit menu too.  you can get a 
pretty hot signal that way.  Let me know if you need more info on this. 
<<<

rEalm






The information transmitted is intended only for the person(s)or entity 
to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or legally 
privileged material. Delivery of this message to any person other than 
the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive privilege 
or confidentiality. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other 
use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you 
receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.

For Translation:

http://www.baxter.com/email_disclaimer


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks Andy,
 I have more!
  As you pointed out things change with the zoom and
it sems quite drastic, a spike may shrink to less than
half the height as I zoom. This does not really make
sense to me. So from what you said the closer zoom is
the more true the amplitude? It seems to continue to
shrink as I zoom As for cool edit I have thought about
working with taht after watching the speed at which it
was able to do processing at my friends... my wavelab
seems substantially slower on a similar pc. I usually
record and then compress gain compress as necessary,
but I decided I prefer the sound of my hardware
compressor. On my last set of recordings I set the
mixer output to were the peaks would hit near zero. I
then set the compressor ~2:1. I can't recall the
decibal setting at the moment, but I can check next
time I am near my compressor; I don't think it has
been adjusted again. It was probably between 15 & 20.
Smoothing the peaks, but not completely squashing the
sound (maybe I should hop on the bandwagon) I then
adjusted the output gain to where the signal peaks
were near the same level on the mixer. Next I recorded
into wavelab. Afterwards, I adjusted the gain until
the peaks appeared near zero. And everythinfg sounds
fine on my monitors. I burned to cd put in an internet
connected computer and uploaded to soundclick. Sounded
fine, until I compared with others on the charts and
most of them sound 2-3 times louder as in I have to
adjust the volume to ~30%.
 I am going to cc this back to the board as well.
--- electrolama <andylama@...> wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> I'm not using Wavelab, but I'll take a shot at your
> question:
> 
> Disclaimer:  I'm not a professional recording or
> mastering engineer--
> just a hobbyist who has learned a thing ot three...
> 
> I use Sonar 3 for recording and CoolEdit2000
> (shareware) for editing 
> and mastering.
> 
> The top and bottom edges of a graph ARE the clipping
> points, BUT 
> there's a few things to understand about this:
> 
> Graphs are 'roughly representational' and the peaks
> that appear to 
> touch the 0dB point may not in actuality.  Case in
> point: zoom all 
> the way in to the sample level and see how high it
> really goes.  
> Remember that when looking at a waveform on a graph,
> that any given 
> peak may represent dozens or hundreds of samples at
> all different 
> levels.  These are all glommed together and
> displayed by a single-
> pixel-wide spike.  Can be visually misleading at
> first.
> 
> "Setting a hard limit during recording" is the job
> of a 
> compressor/limiter.  Although I own a limiter, I
> avoid using it this 
> way because it can make changes to the incoming
> music that cannot be 
> undone.  The solution is to record a little quieter,
> then boost the 
> recorded signal.  Read on:
> 
> Let's say you have a waveform that isn't very "wide"
> onscreen.  Do 
> not automatically interpret this as being "quiet". 
> Volume is not 
> determined entirely by the overall amplitude or
> "fatness" of the 
> visual waveform.  Loudness has more to do with the
> overall dynamics 
> (difference between the average low point and
> average high point of 
> the waveform).  Some folks may simply recommend that
> you "normalize" 
> the waveform, but I think you'll find that this
> doesn't actually make 
> the wave louder because it doesn't do anything to
> the dynamics (a bit 
> like suggesting that you will be taller if you stand
> at the top of a 
> staircase).
> 
> Case in point: take a few commercial CDs and rip a
> few tracks at 
> random and look at them in your wave editor.  The
> waveforms aren't 
> always huge, are they?  But they are all LOUD,
> aren't they?
> 
> Now, when I'm "mastering" a track, I use a feature
> in CoolEdit 
> called "Hard Limiting".  This is actually a limiter,
> but it does 
> actually do something to widen the dynamics and make
> the track 
> louder.  I set the settings so that the waveform is
> boosted JUST 
> SHORT of the point where the peaks start to get
> crushed down.
> 
> The important lesson:  don't overdo it. (compression
> and limiting)  
> Read a book about recording and mastering
> engineering (there are 
> several out there).  One thing that masterers gripe
> about is the 
> current fashion of overcompressing recorded music to
> make it as 
> bloody loud as possible.  This actually makes the
> music suffer.
> 
> Have fun--I certainly do.
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
> --- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "dj 61" <dj61@d...>
> wrote:
> > What pc software would you suggest for recording.
> I lost logic on a 
> > crash and am using wavelab, but it seems to come
> out at a rather 
> low 
> > volume although in the wave view it appears to
> have very little 
> room 
> > left. Are the top and bottom edges of the graph
> not the clipping 
> > points. Can I set a hard limit for recording or is
> it only for post 
> > recording processing? I know these questions are
> kind of newbie and 
> > not e-mu, but you guys/gals seem to be able to
> explain anything:)
> > Here I'll add some e-mu stuff to stay in topic...
> Also my e-mu 
> > requires much more volume through the mixer than
> other channels. I 
> > have to turn the gain all the way up on it and
> about half way down 
> > on my tables to even them put. Is there a simple
> solution like a 
> > master amp level in the mp-7. I know the layer
> amps, but this is 
> not 
> > a good solution.
> >  To avoid a string of thank you posts from me,
> please refer to the 
> > next line after posting your reply.
> >  Thank you for your reply your help is greatly
> appreciated.
> >      Tom
>

1) Waveform display
2) Analog
3) Delta

Yeah, I got a compressor to try to bring them e-mu-records together. 
I have just been using it on the master insert, but maybe this is 
not the best approach. Perhaps I should add a heavier compression to 
the e-mu sends and then a lighter compression to the master for 
final smoothing. I have also been informed that a little work with 
the normalization in wavelab should allow me to maximize the 
recording without clipping or continous trial and error.

--- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, erik_magrini@B... wrote:
> I use Wavelab extensively (almost daily for my "post" work), so 
maybe I 
> can help.  Answers below:
> 
> 
> 
> I lost logic on a crash and am using wavelab, but it seems to come 
out at 
> a rather low volume although in the wave view it appears to have 
very 
> little room left. Are the top and bottom edges of the graph not 
the 
> clipping points. Can I set a hard limit for recording or is it 
only for 
> post recording processing?
> 
> >>>The output from the XX-7's can be a bit low, and as always you 
shoudl 
> go by what you hear, versus what you see in wavelab.  That being 
said, I'm 
> not sure what you mean by the "top and bottom edges of the 
graph".  Do you 
> mean the waveform display, or are you referring to the FFT or peak 
meters? 
>  As long as you're not clipping, you should be fine.  On question, 
are you 
> recording digitally, or via the main analog outs?  What's your 
soundcard 
> too? (ok, that's two questions) <<<
> 
> Also my e-mu requires much more volume through the mixer than 
other 
> channels. I have to turn the gain all the way up on it and about 
half way 
> down on my tables to even them put.
> 
> >>>Yeah, I find that when I use the XL-7 in my DJ sets, I need to 
crank 
> the channel gains up all the way, probably twice as hot as the 
channels my 
> tables are going through.  This is normal, after all the records 
you're 
> listening to have been compressed many times, and most definitely 
squashed 
> during mastering too, so they'll always be hotter than a direct 
out from 
> the XX-7.  I find a compressor to be almost essential in helping 
the XX-7 
> fit into a DJ set better, other wise when you go from records to 
the XX-7, 
> the difference in sound is very noticeable, even at the same 
volumes. This 
> is due to the fact that the signal from the XX-7 is much more 
dynamic than 
> the records.
> 
> The only solution I've found (and what I'd do even if I wasn't 
using the 
> XX-7 with myu DJ set up), is to layer up your drums with two 
percussion 
> layers, and use the AmpVol in the Preset Edit menu too.  you can 
get a 
> pretty hot signal that way.  Let me know if you need more info on 
this. 
> <<<
> 
> rEalm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person(s)or 
entity 
> to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or 
legally 
> privileged material. Delivery of this message to any person other 
than 
> the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive 
privilege 
> or confidentiality. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or 
other 
> use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information 
by 
> entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you 
> receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the 
> material from any computer.
> 
> For Translation:
> 
> http://www.baxter.com/email_disclaimer
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

So I don't have to use links it will double up to just copy the 
layers. I assumed the copy would just replace the previos one. 
What's that saying? "Assumption is the mother of all F___ ups"



--- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "phest2k" <tuttle@l...> wrote:
> --- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "dj 61" <dj61@d...> wrote:
> " What pc software would you suggest for recording."
> I use wavelab for sample editing. If the volume is levelled of at 
0db 
> it should send out 0db - check your pc soundcard level settings.
> 
> "Also my e-mu requires much more volume through the mixer than 
other 
> channels."
> As rEalm suggested in an earlier mail - its posible to give your 
> presets more "umph" if you copy the layers on top of oneandother.
> (press the save/copy button and scroll down to copy layer x to 
layer 
> x.
> 
> :P

I discovered Cool Edit Pro a few months ago.  Now they are owned by Adobe and have been
renamed Adobe Audition (they are just downt the street from me).  I have a friend here in town who
wrote the manual and he's pretty up on the whole schtick.  Anyway, CoolEdit is an amazing tool.  I
hate software written by nerds for nerds.  CoodEdit was written by engineers for engineers.  If
you know your way around a recording studio, CoolEdit will make maximum sense.  Very few software
programs out there work this intuitively.  As for speed, I've never used Wavelab so I don't know
how to compare the two.

     CoolEdit does not work for everything.  If you want to do multitracking on your computer,
CoolEdit will do it though it's not optimized for it.  It is optimized for mastering, editing,
recording in stereo, and splicing and dicing.  If multitracking is what you're after, check into
Nuendo.

     Stephen

<<<<As for cool edit I have thought about
working with taht after watching the speed at which it
was able to do processing at my friends... my wavelab
seems substantially slower on a similar pc.>>>>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus

>      CoolEdit does not work for everything.  If you want to 
> do multitracking on your computer,
> CoolEdit will do it though it's not optimized for it.  It is 
> optimized for mastering, editing,
> recording in stereo, and splicing and dicing.  If 
> multitracking is what you're after, check into
> Nuendo.

Try Sonar 3 instead. Best of both worlds, and it integrates with
CoolEdit seamlessly.

-m@

Nope, you don't have to use the Link Presets function.

rEalm





So I don't have to use links it will double up to just copy the 
layers. I assumed the copy would just replace the previos one. 
What's that saying? "Assumption is the mother of all F___ ups"



--- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "phest2k" <tuttle@l...> wrote:
> --- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "dj 61" <dj61@d...> wrote:
> " What pc software would you suggest for recording."
> I use wavelab for sample editing. If the volume is levelled of at 
0db 
> it should send out 0db - check your pc soundcard level settings.
> 
> "Also my e-mu requires much more volume through the mixer than 
other 
> channels."
> As rEalm suggested in an earlier mail - its posible to give your 
> presets more "umph" if you copy the layers on top of oneandother.
> (press the save/copy button and scroll down to copy layer x to 
layer 
> x.
> 
> :P


 

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xl7/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 







The information transmitted is intended only for the person(s)or entity 
to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or legally 
privileged material. Delivery of this message to any person other than 
the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive privilege 
or confidentiality. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other 
use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you 
receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.

For Translation:

http://www.baxter.com/email_disclaimer


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

As you pointed out things change with the zoom and it sems quite drastic, 
a spike may shrink to less than
half the height as I zoom. This does not really make sense to me. So from 
what you said the closer zoom is
the more true the amplitude? It seems to continue to shrink as I zoom 

>>>I've seen this a couple of times, but again, you can't judge music with 
your eyes or a waveform display.  IF you think there's still a spike 
there, and it's not just a weird glitch, use the FFT meter to confirm it. 
<<<

It was probably between 15 & 20. Smoothing the peaks, but not completely 
squashing the sound (maybe I should hop on the bandwagon) 

>>>Please don't, over-compressed music is not a good thing, regardless of 
how many people are doing it. Drives me nuts hearing music squashed to 
shit...<<<

I burned to cd put in an internet connected computer and uploaded to 
soundclick. Sounded fine, until I compared with others on the charts and 
most of them sound 2-3 times louder as in I have to adjust the volume to 
~30%.

>>>Probably a lot of people are using things like Finalizers or other 
peak-limiters to get a higher RMS level, which is different from the peak 
level. Normalizing only goes off of the peak level.  <<<

I have also been informed that a little work with the normalization in 
wavelab should allow me to maximize the 
recording without clipping or continous trial and error.

>>>Normalizing is something that takes place after the fact (recording), 
so it's not going to help you with that at all IMVHO. I do a lot of post 
work lately, so if you have questions about "Mastering", please let me 
know and maybe I can help.<<<

rEalm
 







The information transmitted is intended only for the person(s)or entity 
to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or legally 
privileged material. Delivery of this message to any person other than 
the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive privilege 
or confidentiality. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other 
use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you 
receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.

For Translation:

http://www.baxter.com/email_disclaimer


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]