x
MeLuvsLafs 26 May 2006

I was thinking of recording my tracks at 22kHz/12bit instead of higher rates to reduce CPU load while recording and subsequent processing.

I understand that I will lose on the dynamic aspect and that the recording will sound a bit dull. But according to JP22's school of recording, I guess I can make-up for the lost dynamics with an EQ, and make the recording clearer with some limiter/compression. And with the added effect of lessening the load on the required processing.

One of the reasons I need the processing headroom is to use this beta version of a transformer emulation software to replace the one I took out of my microphone.

What do you think? Thoughts and advice please.

PS: Could I also reduce the CPU load even more if I recorded my tracks mono and then copied pasted them in my DAW software to make them stereo again?

Comments

RemyRAD Fri, 05/26/2006 - 10:16

I love to laugh as well! And I am laughing my butt off at your post.

Give me an I? I!
Give me a d? D!
Give me an I? I!
Give me an o? O!
Give me a d? D!
Give me an I? I!
Give me a c? C!
What's that spell?? IDIOTIC!

My recommendation? Put the transformer back into your microphone.

Why would you want to emulate something that you have removed?? It's not like you can put poop back into your butt after you have removed it. Although you might want to try that if this is your standard modus operandi? (don't forget to wash your hands with a good antibacterial soap)

Reduce the load of your CPU? What? Are you running a 75MHz Pentium I with 8MB of RAM? If so, screw the audio equipment and buy yourself a good new computer.

You are speaking of completely compromising the quality of your recording to replace a transformer you removed. This makes just about as much sense as electing George W. Bush. None whatsoever. And if you went to JP 22's school of recording I would ask for my money back. What you are doing may quite be fine for simply awful pornographic web site??

I actually know some Mike's that have had their transformers removed. They are now WOMEN!

You can not make up for lost dynamics with equalization. Whoever told you that was an amateur. You cannot make a recording cleaner with limiting and compression as that only makes the dirt denser!

My thoughts and advice to you are: see a psychiatrist quickly.

Is this what they meant by convolution reverb??????
Ms. Remy Ann David

MeLuvsLafs Fri, 05/26/2006 - 11:08

RemyRAD wrote: And if you went to JP 22's school of recording I would ask for my money back

Check this [[url=http://[/URL]="http://recording.or…"]link[/]="http://recording.or…"]link[/]. This guy knows his stuff inside out.

RemyRAD wrote: You cannot make a recording cleaner with limiting and compression...

For the record, JP22 says clearer, not cleaner.

With all due respect, I don't understand why you are being rude to me. Was any of the language in my post offensive to you? (The only part I understand I could have offended might be your hearing).

JoeH Fri, 05/26/2006 - 11:19

Watch out, Remy......my BS detector is pinging wildly on this one.
No profile, no information, no nuttin, and he's quoting JPP22. eeech.

When you read a statement like this:

I guess I can make-up for the lost dynamics with an EQ, and make the recording clearer with some limiter/compression

it's time to break out the eleven-foot pole* with the bug repellant on it.

Don't crush that dwarf.....hand me the pliers. :twisted:

*for people you wouldn't touch with a TEN foot pole.

anonymous Fri, 05/26/2006 - 22:58

oh jeez....... i love this forum!!!!

i dont think she was being mean or condescending.
this forum is just a little hard (not much) on (i hate this word) newbies.

and for the record..... jp22 and his "school" haven't got a clue.

you both need to research a little.

and stop taking shit out of your microphone!

x

User login