Very nice Janet. I love piano pieces like this.

I hear the buzzing sound too. It's an artifact from the file being converted when you upload it to soundclick. That's why I use box.net ... I can upload high quality mp3's with no loss up to 25mb each, which I've never hit.

Soundclick converts the tracks to mp3, so if you upload an mp3 I 'think' it's being converted twice. Maybe try uploading the exported wav file and see if that helps maybe?

Hi, Janet,
 
A belated Happy New Year to you!
 
Beautiful composition and amazing playing, as always from you.
 
Very nice job, have a great night!
Bob

Janet
bub could very well be on to something here.

sound click is verry brutal to your music.....it's hard to get a good sound going there...

In fact I cannot convert to mp3 inside sonar either cause that actually does something very very weird to my conversion....

so I have to render to 16 bit wave from Ozone and then import into Audacity and convert there.....

My one problem right now is I can only get 320 kbps out of audacity...I have looked several times how to choose a different kbps rate but no luck.....oh well....

but more than likely it is the soundclick site providing the additional sound source

Clifford

I had problems some time back with Soundclick's conversion process. Unless you have a paid account, ALL files are reduced to 128kb... I was uploading 128's and in a few the piano had a phased sound.

I tried uploading a 320kb even though SC will convert it down, and that solved the problem.   So be sure to load the highest value possible.

The only time I drop back to a lower value, is if the 320kb file exceeds the 10mb limit to free accounts. Then I'll upload  the next resolution down.

   Janet wrote:

     OK, Jimmy, new mix up.  I tried to make it less bouncy (I thought the exact same thing about the original version and thought maybe you would too, but decided to try it anyway.)  Thanks for helping me with this one too!  I put it in a concert hall (is it too much?) and added extra resonant sustain to Ivory (I haven't used that very often so I'm wondering how it translates), I took out a lot of the bouncy chords, changed a few notes just 'cause, changed the eq.  (you recommended a cut at 3K.  I had a bump at 4K. lol), brought all the velocities down, etc.  Anyway, I hope it's warmer and more lush.  It's still not exactly how I envisioned it, actually, but it's closer. 

........................................................................................

   In simple terms this isn't as good as the version before it. To have (all) the notes
have the same or similar tone leaves no diversity in the persona of the song and
or the piano sound. As a listener I would "live with" the "issues" on the previous
mix to hear the "persona" in the music over having the sound that this does.

  This brings to mind something I think is actually a step forward for you. I think
your previous mix was one where you "raised the bar" on your piano tone. It's
just that as we "get a new" and improved sound it takes time to work out some
things.

  What I think is "most important" is that you, me or anyone who can "get a great"
sound can have a point of reference. I know that sounds cliche but it seems that
things "change" in a persons mindset once they hear themselves in some new and
improved tonality.

   One of the many reasons that I don't post much anymore is for that reason.
Of course that's only me. In my mind I feel that I have to meet or exceed the
last piece that I did in one or a number of ways. Things get worked out when
a song gets written, performed, recorded, produced etc.

  I would speculate to say though that certain inspiring and motivating things
"happen" during" the recording/performing process that really brings the end
result to life in the end. We are "hearing" the tone and character etc of the
player and performance much more like it will sound as an end result.

   On piano I don't do any "across the board" settings of for example "setting
a limit to velocities". I've tried "so many" things in the piano roll view to try and
fix or make "something" sound right and the more I did the worse things got.
I do edit the piano in the piano role view (if) I have too, but in my mind I "now"
try and do that only if i have to. Before, I would easily and quickly reach for
the quantize, or velocity or something tools finding myself left with a "fixed" and
un human sounding track.

  As for your question of, is it more warm or lush? No, It's actually more dull
sounding. I think your idea of boosting an eq at 4k was good from what I heard.
It's just that that frequency got a little "strong" at times. If this piano sample
is different from the last one I would got back to "that last one" and see if there
is a way to work on it instead.

  I went back and looked at my last song in Sonar "without saying a word". I had
the sonitus EQ and the Sonitus multiband comp (in that order) on the track and
that was it and no master buses or effects.  (but) in the Piano vst I also eq, comp
and verb.

   I'm wondering if you can use an eq first and then a multiband comp in the piano
track and set to your taste if you might get the nice sound that you had on the
earlier version.

   I generally set the multi bands settings on
          Ratio 15.2
          Knee 9
          Attack 0
          Release 200
          Type Vintage

      If need be you can also use the multi band comp as an eq as well because
the band levels are adjustable.

   Although many things can be a trade off as far as velocities go I prefer using
the comp over editing the piano velocities in piano role (although I do).
I edit in piano role if nothing else works. So I do do that when I have to.

   It seems to me that the "better" piano samples have a bit of brightness
on the lower keys and even though the higher keys do too as well "that sound"
is so much more rich and life like. It's just hard to control that brightness
when the piece is dynamic.

  


 

lotsa input on the mix amoung other things...so I'll just add..


lovely peice!!

thanks for the share!

Thanks Herb.  I'll look into that.  I can't figure out what would have changed with the way I've done things forever.

Not yet, Charles. 

  Janet whatever you did worked. This sounds very good. The soft passages have a nice
flow and the stronger playing has a nice ring without being overbearing. Overall it's very well balanced in a way that shows off the feel of the playing.

lovely piece, janet!  maaavelous!

at first I didn't hear the "buzzing" everyone was talking about.  I could hear the piano soundboard resonating and thought maybe that was what they were complaining about, but closer listening in the cans (don't go there robby) I could hear some digital distortion - kind of faint, but it's there.  that must be what everyone's talking about.

try encoding at a higher rate and see if that works. 

it's just barely noticable, IMO, tho. 

this is an excellent piano piece!  I love the 3 handed parts!!! :-)