I volunteered my way into a session as a redundant taper of a cool little opera(tic) recording session today. I think I'm gonna get a nice lunch and have some pleasant conversation too.

 
If this is true, and exactly what I think it is, I'm glad ... and congrats.
 
I get so tired of the rock knowledge, and not spreading it ... everyone knows compression ... but not how to use it in a larger context than 2 or 3 instruments ... maybe even 4 ... ! ... only!

Guitarhacker


Just don't cut out early.....

it's not over till the fat lady sings.

 I generally try and clear out before that happens.

Beagle

mike_mccue


I'm gonna get reminded, or reschooled in the nitty gritty details of what preamps can and can not do. I'm excited about that.



best regards,
mike
 

Mike - what does this mean?
 
have fun with your opera!

 
It means that McQ's flavour of this week is Opera so it follows that he's started writing libretto.
Fa la la lala la la luh laaaar.

The experience exceeded my expectations. The artists were wonderful and the composer is one of the world's great gentleman.

They accepted me as a welcome guest and we had a great day.

It was fun and educational to hear people speak to each other about their careers and experiences in the casual way that colleagues do some times.

It was also incredible to get to witness the level of introspection that these classically trained artists bring to their interpretation of written music. Listening in on discussions about music by people that are so well versed at discussing it is an inspiration to me and my admittedly crude sensibility. It's inspiring to see that discussing stuff in such detail results in more fully engaged and emotionally charged performances for artists of this mindset.



I think the recording tech thing I learned today is that you need a really really big room to get the best sounding loud passages of opera. The gear was fine... but the room got filled up acoustically and I think it clouded stuff up a bit. When the performance was quieter I was listening in a state of sonic bliss. It's hard to say until we listen to a real mix instead of the tracking monitor mix. I think we got enough good stuff to make it all work nicely.



Anyways, once again... I'm just enthused and babbling.


best regards,
mike

sounds like a great time!

I think the recording tech thing I learned today is that you need a really really big room to get the best sounding loud passages of opera. The gear was fine... but the room got filled up acoustically and I think it clouded stuff up a bit. When the performance was quieter I was listening in a state of sonic bliss. It's hard to say until we listen to a real mix instead of the tracking monitor mix. I think we got enough good stuff to make it all work nicely.

 
This, I think, is the part that gets me in the newer and more digital way of doing things ... the "ambience" of a lot of music has gone away ... you know that the CHB is not out there amidst the howling trees, and a running river, and you hear someone's fart go from here to there and smell up the joint ... in a way that drums up your imagination to no end!
 
In the early operas, that you can hear, and if you can listen to Gigli (compare his Tosca to Pavarotti --- not even close ... one is power and the other is smooth!)operas, or the really good Leinsdorf recordings of Turandot, you will find that the stage has to be gigantic for the whole thing, and some things are too far out for the microphone, but that gives it a reality that is acceptable to your ear ... if you stand here and place 5 people each 5 ft further from you and each other (5-10-15 and so on!), the listening values for each of them are different for your ear ... but the DAW process ... is not capable of discerning your addition of a new track, and you have to make do with some details ... that might add/subtract to the whole thing. This subtlety is often lost in a DAW! And a lot of the recording stuff you hear is also missing this "I'm there thing" ... which some folks are trying to make0believe with a little echo and such.
 
Seeing these at work, is a wake up ... and a nice one ... and I'm glad to see you mention this ... it is the ONLY difference for me between analog and digital ... I kinda like to say that the difference is/was that you were there for one, and you were not there for the other! Now you know why I tell people ... go listen to Revolution #9, and then go ahead and play with your DAW ... check out the distances and such ... because there you can easily name 15 to 20 of them! Or use compression to bring up that thing way back there ... when it might sound better if it stays back there ... but in rock'n'roll ... it's everything here and now within 5 feet of you ... end of story!
 
Hard to do what you saw on a DAW, these days! But I bet that Bapu has his ears perked up, though I think that he is pretty good about this detail, in general ...  and my early comments on the CHB were relating the recording and the sounding of it ... to a lot of something like this, which I am not sure it was quite heard.
 
It's still too much DAW, for me! It needs to be more "analog" as in my definition above!
 
Congrats ... Mike!