Week 2 - CC

Well I've gotten this far... I left it until now because I was pretty sure I was going to quit, but hey, might as well give it all a go!

So we're using Plogue Bidule to make a synthesizer. It's a pretty awesome program, it's really versatile, but hard to understand the first couple of times you try and use it.

Still learning, but I've done most of the first tutorial... I got stuck on the MIDI keyboard part because I don't have that. I'll use the university computers tomorrow and fix it all up.

I've pretty much only done what the tutorial says, because I'm not entirely sure what else to do to make it different. Not really understanding it yet. Once I finish the whole thing on the computers at Uni it'll be fine. I hope!

The tutorials are really useful and helpful! I wouldn't have got half the stuff we need to know, or what different things do without it. I sure wish every program had these. And possibly uni in general...

OK, so pictures and recordings and things... Well, because I haven't finished it entirely yet, I'll have to do it tomorrow. But you can have a picture of what I've got to so far.

And the patch.

Ok, so no picture until tomorrow either, mostly because I don't know how. Windows help is not as helpful as you'd assume.

But the bidule seems to work fine

There we go. As much as I can do until tomorrow.

Week 3 - AA

For this weeks task I chose to analyse a short piece of 'The Mummy'. It was released in 1999, and became a bit of a favourite in the horror scene.

My exerpt goes from 10:40 to 13:18. I chose this part, because it has a really big action scene, and then a kind of creepy part, and then goes to a really innocent simple scene. I thought it showed a lot a variety and so it would be a useful one to analyse.

The first scene is all action, set in the desert with a war of sorts going on. You can hear horses galloping, and lots of them. You can hear two different kinds of shouting, something Arabic and English/American. There's narration by a man with an arabic accent over the top, and dialogue between two characters. There is also dramatic music playing. The backgrond noise gets quieter when the two men are talking, and the music and narration are clearly non-diegetic. Even though the man narrating is present in the scene. I'd say the gunshots are foley, because they can't have been actually shooting guns on set.

The creepy part is really quiet with a sort of ambient hum in the background, that develops into jackal noises. I don't really know what to call it, because there aren't any animals, but the sound is apparently coming from a statue... sort of. So it IS sourced, so i suppose diegetic? Anyway, then some sand shoots up, and the sound of that is obviously foley, because sand wouldn't make whooshing noises like that. And the scream, well, it's been edited and added in over the top, but I don't know exactly what to call that.

The really innocent scene has lively Egyptian music and the sound of a busy city at first. Then a female voice starts talking before the audience can actually see her. I think it's a good effect. Other than that, most of the sound seems pretty average. It's just her talking to herself, and echo noises. Seems fair though, because she's in a big library.

I think this exercise has helped me realise how much there is in making sound for movies. There's so many things that you have to take into consideration.

_________________________________________________

Christian Haines - Audio Arts Lecture, 7/8/07

The Mummy film, copyright 1999, Universal Studios

Week 2 - AA1.2

This week was a fairly simple week for the task. Unfortunately, I can't upload the zip file telling me what exactly to do, so I'm just going to do as much as I remember and hope for the best. The idea was to record some sound from the environment, whether a pool hall, park or shopping centre, and then draw a geographical map showing where everything is sound wise. My recording is pretty shocking, but I decided to keep it anyway, and just make sure I use the university recorders from now on. It was done in a popular cafe in the morning. You can't hear all the sounds on the recording I made, but I'll be putting all of them into the map. Again, because I can't open the .zip file I'll just have to go on memory to make the map, but I'm pretty sure it'll be fine.

The map is shown at the top of the post. I'll explain the symbols here, as opposed to making another picture with a key on it. Easier to read I thought.

1: the X marks my position in the room.
2: the diagonal lines represent an electrical hum, quite low, and as shown, heard in various parts of the room. There was also the same sort of sound heard outside the room, which is why I used the arrow.
3: the rectangular boxes represent a clanging, banging noise, again heard in multiple places in the room. It was a mechanical, metallic noise.
4: the swirls denote conversations and people talking and making noise in general. The thicker the lines the louder the person was or the closer they were to me.
5: the jagged, step-like line is footsteps. Everynow and then someone would walk past, and the sound of their feet is quite loud. The floor sounded hollow.
6: the wavy line under the arrow was a scraping, harsh noise, probably chairs on the ground or soemthine similar. It was outside again, but the sound was definitely similar to the sound made when metal chairs are scraped across a hard surface flooring.

And last but not least the actual recording, although as I said before, it's really bad. From now on, I'll be using the university recorders.

Recording of cafe environment

______________________________________________________________________________________

Christian Haines, Audio Arts lecture, Tutorial Room, Schulz, 31st/7/07

Week 1 - Forum

This week's music tech forum task was to make a speaker make noises by attaching leads to a battery and touching different metal things. To do that, you attach 2 different leads to the positive and negative side of the battery. Then attach one of them to the leads of the speaker and with the other touch the other side of the lead. It makes the speaker pop up each time it happens, so the aim is to do it repeatedly and get it to go fast enough to make a sound. That's the simple part. After I mastered that, I started looking for other objects to test.

After using the suggested paper clips and getting really carried away with that, i moved on to some safety pins. I was wondering if the separated metal bits would have any effect... They didn't really, but it was still something I wanted to test.

I also tried them on the speaker itself, which made a horrid screechy sound. It was interesting though. The recording of it is a bit dodgy, but you can still hear what I did. First of all it's just me touching the two safety pins together and then it's them both on the actual speaker cone. You can hear it below:

Safety Pin Scratch

_____________________________________________________

Week 1 - AA1.2

(picture from www.transport.polymtl.ca/.../RIVERA-TAMA/)


For this week I chose my analysis of sound design to be on the sound of the lightsabers in the Star Wars movies. Everyones heard the sound but for reference, I have a clip on youtube of DarthVader and Luke Skywalker battling it out.(*1) Here: >> STARWARS LIGHTSABERS <<

You only need to watch the first 30 seconds or so to get the basic gist.

I consider it sound design because the producers and sound engineers had to come up with a sound for something that doesn't exist. So they had to DESIGN a sound that fit a certain criteria and general imagined idea. It's purpose would be to make a distinctive and memorable sound that fits and compliments the action and idea of a lightsaber. More simply, they needed a sound that a) was easy to remember and b) easy to associate with a giant, deathly, futuristic laser.

It's clearly quite an electrical sound, and generated on a computer. I found that "the original sound effect was created using a mix of an old projector’s hum and the warm feedback from a microphone passing an old television set.(*2)" It isn't a pretty or beautiful sound, but personally I think it has certain elements that make it pleasant to the ear. Like the harmonics and the tones of it. It definitely seems to fit the idea of a giant laser beam, and has become the standard sound for other movies and productions with the same idea.


___________________________________________________________
(*1) Youtube video of Star Wars Episode VI, by roboperson, accessed 29th July, 2007

(*2) The Lightsaber Sound Effect, Blue Distortion http://www.bluedistortion.com/2005/09/17/lightsaber-sound-effect/ last updated September 17, 2005

Audio Arts Final Project

My ORIGINAL final project was a grunge rock band, but that one got deleted so my NEW final prject is a jazz quartet from the university. The song they're playing is called Oleo, and the actual song is 5 minutes long. Luckily for you, I faded it out at 3 minutes, but if you would like to hear the full version, feel free to ask.

The song is mostly improvised which made things a lot easier for me, and being jazz, didn't require a whole lot of producing.

No major troubles were encountered during this exercise, apart from the obvious one of losing my entire project. So despite the steep learning curve this semester has been, I think I've been successful in completing the task.

So here are all the final products! ::

PDF FILES OF DOCUMENTATION

OLEO

Creative Computing - Final Project

Program Note :

Speaking In Tongues :-
Amy Sincock
2`04

This composition was made using vocal reproductions of mobile phone conversation’s heard on the bus, or in Rundle Mall. They were reproduced by Meghann Sunners and Sarah Melrose. The material was heard and noted, and re-recorded later in a studio. Not only the words, but also tone of voice, pauses, and dynamics of the caller were noted. Also recorded were standard ringtones of a Nokia phone. The idea for this project came after being on a crowded bus in which 7 phone conversations were taking place. The fact that it is a very distinct mash of sound that people don’t even seem to notice was interesting and I wanted to highlight this. Most of the piece is simple and hardly edited, because I wanted to keep it fairly similar to the actual sound you would hear. Some effects were put on the vocals to further emphasise the confusion and unintelligible effect of the conversations.


SCORE FOR SPEAKING IN TONGUES

And the final piece of music itself:: SPEAKING IN TONGUES



Over and out, happy holidays!

Week 11 - Creative Computing

This weeks task was to use Metasynth's other rooms that we didn't use last week. The Image Synth, Spectral Synth and Montage Room. As usual, it was interesting to see the different effects you can make with something as common as the human voice.

For my soundscape, I basically just took snippets, almost randomly warped them until I found something I liked. Because this is so late, and because I doubt I'll be able to be marked on this anyway, I'll jsut post the pictures of what I did without to much written explanation. They show what I did better than any misguided words anyway.













And here is the sound itself. I like to think of it as Montage Of Doom. It sounds a lot better if you turn it up loud. I think I should have fixed that in the program actually. Anyway, here it is:

MONTAGE OF DOOM

___________________________________________________________

Lecture presented by Christian Haines, 31st May, 2007, Adelaide University

week 12 - CC

This weeks task was simply to complete the preproduction form for the major project. It was a bit confusing knowing what to write but I tried to address what it said on the sheet. I originally wanted to make recordings of lots of different water noises, like the rain, drains, and things like that, but it would've been too hard to make the recordings in the set time. So I settled on what is on the form. Any thoughts on the idea greatly appreciated!

Pre production form

Week 11 - AA

This week was learning about mixing. This week was an awesomely fun week! Ok, not very professional there, but I really enjoyed the mixing side of things.

The lecture showed us how to basically go about it *(1), and then we just had to do three different mixes of an Eskimo Joe song, "New York".*(2) The first mix was to be a basic mix, with the only thing done is using the faders in the mix window. For this I decided to make the bass guitar and piano extra loud, and the vocal that sung the bridge loud. Some of the parts I didn't include because it was simply too much and I felt it was a little cluttered. I prefered it with less instruments, but those instruments being fully appreciated.



The second mix I put panning in. I tried to do what Steve said in the lecture and make it so the instruments aren't all cluttered in the middle. I put the drums to the left and the guitars to the right. The three verse vocals I split up, with the lowest to the right, the highest to the left and the mid-range, more important voice centred. I thought it gave it a more open sound, which I liked.





The final mix was putting in the EQ. This was the best par, because I haven't actually used the EQ before, and I found it really interesting to try and do different things. I made the bass mroe bass-y, and the piano more bright. I thought the drums were a little dull, but couldn't work out how to fix it. Changing things ere just knocking other important parts of the drums. Also, I made the bridge vocals really bright so it really stood out. It's meant to sound really obviously tampered with, so that's why it does. Personally, I like in songs when the vocals are warped to the point it sounds like they're coming through the radio or some such. So that's what I attempted to do, by raising the higher frequencies and lowering the lower ones.

MY FINAL MIXES:

MIX 1: ONLY FADERS

MIX 2: FADERS AND PANNING

MIX 3: FINAL PRODUCT - FADERS, PANNING AND EQ


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*(1) Steve Fieldhouse, Audio Arts Lecture, EMU, Tuesday 22nd May, 2007

*(2) Eskimo Joe. 2006. “New York” Black Fingernails, Red Wine (album). Mushroom Records

Week 10 - CC

This weeks Creative Computing class was all about the wonderful program known as Metasynth. *(1) It's a program (only for Macs annoyingly) that allows the user to easily manipulate sounds using general effects. It's easier than ProTools and other programs I thought, because the effects are right there, and are easy to use and understand. It's all fairly self-explanatory which is always a good thing.

This week we used two of the possible effect rooms, 'effects room' and 'image synth'. I didn't spend as much time in Image synth as Effects Room, but both have a lot of awesome things to do with changing the sounds.

The basic idea was to change around the vocal sample from last week in the program to make a minute long soundscape. The way I did mine, was to copy and paste various sections almost randomly and see what it gave me. However, one problem with this is it can be difficult to change something back. But that was overcomeable. One of the main things I did to make my soundscape was repeat sequences backwards. It gives a different sound, but feels familiar to the audience. I also used a lot of harmonics, mostly because they were just great fun! Volume helped to correct a few sound issues, and pitch and time made a lot of the sounds that little bit weirder.

In the end, I think my soundscape is a little creepy... but I like it. So here I present: Chape No More!

And of course, a picture of the Metadynth window...


>>>CHAPE NO MORE<<<

Week 10 - Forum

This weeks forum was based on constructing and deconstructing music. It's a pretty general topic to have and so the presentations were all quite different. I'll focus this on one of them.

Freddie presented his on how to write a hit record. He gave us lots of different ways and formulas to write this record. His point that was by deconstructing other hit songs, you could find the golden way to write your own. I don't think that could work. If there are specific elements that are apparent in every hit song, then it would have to be hugely generic and so not very useful. Otherwise how could we explain how such different songs like Me and You by Cassie and Another Brick In The Wall by Pink Floyd could both be hits. Then you have to define a hit. Is it something that gets number 1 for a week and then disappears, or the song that never quite hits mainstream but has cult-like following below the media line? Both are considered hits. For example, a hit on triple J might have no such title on Nova, because the audience is so different.

Overall, I thought the presentations were interesting this week. Always good.

Week 10 -- AA

This weeks class was drum recording. *(1) The class was long, but really interesting as always, and I learnt lots about the drums I didn't know. Not just in a recording sense, but the tuning and placement and things.

I'm very proud of myself this week actually, because I did everything myself. No-one was there to help me at all, which is a first. So everything, from the set up (although my drummer helped with that) to the recording to the pack up I did. I wasn't sure I could actually do it all, but I worked it out fairly easily and quickly. Always good.

And the sounds are :

FIRST RECORDING

For this one I used 2 KM 84's (Possibly not the right mic, definitely KM something, but I didn't write it down, and now I've forgotten... sorry) as overheads, and a Shure 56 (?) Beta just outside the hole of the bass drum. I quite like the sound, but some sounds are being drowned out, and the toms aren't as prominent as some drummers would probably like. Also, this technique has the problem of being un changeable as we discussed in class. If the drummer wants more toms, then it's too bad. It's set as it is.

SECOND RECORDING

The second recording is a lot the same as the first, except I used U 87's (?) as room mics instead of the overheads, and the bass mic was inside the kick. It's not too bad, same problems as the other one. Except I clearly needed to turn it up more, because it's really quiet, and there are hardly any cymbals. Not a choice I'd use often, I prefer the other to be honest.

I also forgot to take photos, so here is a picture of the ProTools window, as helpful as that may or may not be.







________________________________________________________

*(1) Steve Fieldhouse, Audio Arts Lecture, Monday 14th May, 2007

Week 9 - CC

Well, after last weeks success I semto have fallen massively downhill. Due to a culmination of events, this week has been really hard. The lecture *(1) was about doing the same sorts of things we did in the previous weeks, except using the effects in ProTools.

I recorded my human voice, and was all set to go. But first I couldn't hear the sounds in Peak. I assumed that someone had played around with the settings, and as I had no hope of fixing that myself had to leave it there for the time being. I then tried it in the mac lab and hey presto it worked, but the computer didn't have enugh disk space. So I changed computer, and then couldn't get my sounds to play from Peak to ProTools.

I think that my main problem with all this, is that I don't understand ProTools at all. I've tried to sort it out by myself, but I think I may need some background help before I can really come to grips. A lot fo the things we're learning I can do, it's the simple things that I need to have pointed out to me. So this week there is no sound, or pictures, because I wasn't able to complete the exercise. But I hope that the blog has at least shown that I attempted it. I did actually understand a lot of the lecture, it's just putting it into play from scratch is proving difficult.






____________________________________________________________

*(1) Christian Haines, Creative Computing Lecture, Thursday 10th of May, 2007

Week 9 - Forum

This weeks forum was presented by Tristan, and was about his masters degree.

It was really interesting to see what he's doing, and what it's all about. The idea that resonant frequencies can be enhanced into making music all of its own is an amazing thought. I have to say, I'm a bit of an over-thinker when it comes to these things, but the theory would imply that then EVERYTHING has a resonant frequency, and so there is always music everywhere around us. So really, what Tristan is doing, is exploring the sounds of nothing. Amplified nothing. And that is an awesome thought.

Also, despite not really understanding the idea of focused listening, the way it sat with me made me think of it as a pretty interesting idea too. The way I took it was that it means focusing your listening to music on certain aspects. Which is a good way to look at it. I mean, I wouldn;t want to do that to all my music, but sometimes its good to really concentrate and think about what you're listening to.

There isn't too much I can say on the topic, because I dont know enough about it. I just think it's a really interesting idea, and I hope to be able to hear the final composition.

Week 9 - AA

Ok this week, Audio Arts was based around bass guitar recording. *(1) As usual we went over the different mics, recording techniques, and a few examples. Bass is one of those instruments that has so many different possible soudns and recording techniques that it could take ages to understand them all. However we had a go.

Unfortunately, this week I had a lot of problems securing a bass player. The two people I asked to play, and who said they could play, bailed on me. So I despite having time booked on friday night and saturday afternoon there was nothing I could do. Which is highly annoying. However, I will write about what I thought I should've done, and what would've been the plan.

I was going to do one with the D/I, because I thought that had the best sound. There was no outside noise and the recording is crisper. The bass is more... well, bassy.

I was also going to use the Shure 56 Beta, because it makes a grungier rock sound, and that's what my band for my major project is.

I'm sure if I'd made it into the studio I would've had time to experiment with more mics, but seeing as my bass players bailed I didn't have the chance. A dodgy excuse I know, but there you have it.












*(1) Steve Fieldhouse, Audio Arts Lecture, 7th May 2007

Week 8 - CC

This week Creative Computing was a continuation of the ideas and concepts presented in the last class. *(1) Last week we learnt how to use and manipulate Reason for DigiDesign, and this week we were supposed to use FScape and Soundhack to make our soundscape. Again, not many problems were involved with this weeks exercise, so I managed to get through it fairly easily, which is making me more confident that I'm on the right track. Problems I encountered were the keyboard not getting through to Reason, which Doug showed me how to fix. Preferences and then keyboard and everything. Also FScape wasn't loading. Or it was, and was crashing. I'm not entirely sure, but after an email stating that it wasn't my fault and we could go on without it, happily went to play around wth SoundHack.

Mostly I just used the Phase Vocoder program, because that gave the most obvious sound difference, and was easiest to understand. We'd also been over it in class so I wanted to make sure I was familiar with it. I liked that you can change the time scale by either specifying the time you want the sound to be, or doubling it. I think that'll be useful when it comes to the creative computing project.

In the end, I manufactured all my sounds and played it through the NN19. One of my sounds was really percussive so I used that as a background noise, with the other sounds built around it. I tried to give it some form this time, and a repeating pattern, but it's still not a really understandable piece. I think I actually like my Chape piece better... But anyway, here is the finished product and a picture of the Reason window.



NOT THE CHAPE







*(1) Christian Haines, Creative Computing Lecture,

Week 8 - FORUM

This weeks forum has the same topic as last weeks. Gender in Music Technology. And again, it felt weird to be the only girl in the room. Well, I was once Laura had finished her presentation and left.

I thought that this week it was even harder to sit through. Mostly because I didn't have the chance to say what I thought about everyone else's thoughts. A lot of the things said could be taken one of two ways, and it just felt awkward again.

One of the views presented was that the technology is a sexual thing for males, which is why a lot of girls aren't interested. That was a little hard to hear. Well, hard to hear and not get up and tell everyone what I thought in loud and certain terms. As much as I've decided that it is an issue if people want it to be, I still dont see it as a problem. If I have many troubles in the industry because it's such a male oriented career, then I'll just have to work around it. The way they said that it's sexually male made me feel like I was doing something wrong for loving tech so much. I mean, as much as I don't want to put this on here, I think it's relevant... It's like saying that because I'm bi-sexual, that's why I'm attracted to the area. When I'm almost entirely certain that ISN'T the case.

However, the idea that women should stop worrying about number equality and aim for ability and acceptance equality is still what I believe should happen. So despite feeling awkward for 4 hours for a few weeks, I hope this topic has given the boys something to think about. In a good way.

The end...

Week 8 - AA - Electric Guitar

This weeks class was on electric guitar recording *(1) Laura and I worked together again, with Doug playing the guitar for us. Apart from not managing to get the studio booked on time, we didn't really have many problems with this one. Which is always a good thing. I like that you can have the guitar in the recording room with you. That makes a lot of things easier. Especially because you can have the amp up louder and it doesn't burt your ears. Ok, and now for the sounds... AND a picture of our ProTools window:



RECORDING 1

This recording was done with a Sennheiser 421. The mic is placed right in the sound hole of the amp. There's a lot of distortion from the amp, which is picked up well by the mic.

RECORDING 2

This one was done with the same mic but with it sitting just on the edge of the sound hole, facing sideways to the amp. There were no effects from the amp at all, and I thought it sounded muddy and basic. Not a technique I'd use on many recordings I don't think.

RECORDING 3

For this we used a Neumann U89 condenser mic about 6 inches away from the sound hole. It was facing it straight on. There was lots of crunch on the amp, so the sound was good with that on it. I preferred the Sennheiser tho.

RECORDING 4

Again, using the U89, but this time from 1.5 metres away. I actually like the live sound it gives, bouncing off the walls and everything. I'd use that technique for a solo guitar recording if they wanted it really raw. Wouldnt use it for a whole band recording though, it would sound unprofessional. But for a certain part I could see it working well.

RECORDING 5

The final recording was done with the same mic, but this time right up close to the sound hole. I thought it was a little boomy, but that would be because it was so close to the amp.

Over and out, sorry for it being late!



__________________________________________________________________________


*(1) Steve Fieldhouse, Audio Arts Lecture, Monday 30th April, 2007.

CC - Week 7

This weeks class was on Sampling *(1). The idea was to use a recorded voice to alter and make into an electrtonic instrument.

First I had to get the voice. I used Orator on the Macs, to read out the quote. I used one of the female voices, because I thought it sounded the most interesting. I then loaded that sound into Peak to choose which of the phrases or sounds I could use for my samples. I pretty much jsut chose random ones that were interesting. Now I'm thinking I should have chosen a few longer ones, because all my sounds bar one that was looped anyway were really choppy and short. Which I didn't feel was as interesting.

A picture of the Peak window:


The idea was then to translate the sounds into Reason and use the sampler NN19 to make them go to the keyboard so you can play it. After a few troubles I managed to work out how to do it. At first the keyboard was picking up the wrong program within Reason. I changed it over and was set. For awhile I just mucked around with the settings, seeing what I could and couldn't do. I looped two sections forwards and one other, the bass part, forwards and backwards. I did this to create a kind of background for my soundscape, a sound that would continue on while the other sounds were being played.

Here is a picture of the Reason window after I'd finished manipulating my samples:




I've named my soundscape 'The Chape' because one of the only sounds thats recognisable is a chape noise. It doesn't really have any meaning, I just played things until it sounded interesting. And here it is... Presenting, THE CHAPE!!

THE CHAPE!






*(1) Christian Haines, 'Processing', Creative Computing Lecture, 26th April, 2007

Week 7 - AA

This weeks lesson was about vocal micing techniques*(1) It's obviously an interesting one to do, because it's such a major topic. It really gets me excited about the course, and just shows me how much I really want to do it. I partnered up with Doug for this one.

This was the Avalon setting for all the recordings:



Our first recording was done on the Neumann condenser mic. It sounded a little bland to start with. Clear but bland. Sung close to mic

So to try and fix that, we used the compressor. Altered 1st recording

And a picture of the settings on the computer and the position of the mic and pop filter:





The last one we did on the condenser was without the pop filter and was sung off-axis. See the picture. (I look stunning as always... hmm...)



This one has no effects. I don't like it as much as the first recording, but I'd feel pressed to say why. It just doesn't feel totally right.

Condenser sung off axis

The final two recordings we did were on a Shure SM58. We wanted to compare the dynamic mic to the condenser. Personally, I thought there was too much boom, and it was too bassy for my liking. Also the plosives and sibilance was more obvious, but that could be because of the pop filter.

Singing into the dynamic

We then recorded Doug speaking into the dynamic mic, making the pops even more apparent, but then went overboard on the EQ, making a radio, almost static sound. I really like this sound as an effect in music, and now can re-create that when I'm recording my major piece.

Spoken into dynamic, EQ to the max

And a screen shot of the EQ plug in:



I really enjoyed this exercise. It's good to see how these things work, and to work it out myself. Of course, the chance to be recorded was pretty awesome too!

Over and out.







*(1) Steve Fieldhouse, Monday, 22nd April, 2007. Audio Arts Lecture

Wk 7 - Forum

This weeks forum was a controversial one. "Gender in Music Technology" when there are only 3 girls doing the course is kind of difficult. As one of the only girls, I felt awkward, especially as the two first male presenters focused on why women don't want to do music technology or why they are disadvantaged in the area. Until this forum, it didn't feel like an issue. I hadn't thought about the fact that I'm majorly out-numbered, and if I had, it wasn't because it was a bad thing, it was just a thing. It's also now thrown light on the fact that I am a female, and because of some of the opinions thrown around, (though I know it's not what they intended),I felt like I had to justify why I was in the course. Which wasn't a pleasant feeling. But anyway, on to what I thought of the presentations...

Well the first 2 presentations were interesting. Mostly for the fact that a lot of the things said we either didn't agree with, or thought were mis-informed. Which I realise is much the same thing, but with a subtle yet important difference. When I disagreed it was entirely opinion based, but mis-informed I knew certain things better. I am a girl, so I know that some things said were so generalised as to be wrong. That said, they were still interesting to hear and everything, if sometimes awkward.

My presentation was also interesting. For me. I went up there with a few facts and a lot of opinions. I was so nervous. My hands were shaking so much I couldn't turn up the volume on the CD. However, I think I did ok. I like to think I made the point that feminism has no place in the music technology industry, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be able to do it. I found it hard to fnid the right words to say what I meant without ust repeating myself and contradicting myself.

Hopefully my presentation was successful. I enjoyed doing it once I got over my nerves. I still think it was a bad topic though.

test eg

WHATEVER RICKI (LABEL)

Week 6 - AA - Acoustic Guitar

This week would have to have been my favourite exercise so far! Doing this one as a group helped us I think, and we managed to get through it relatively quickly and easily.

So the idea was to record 5 different acoustic guitar samples using different positioning techniques.

1:

For this one the mic was angled up near the frets. I didn't think this one had a very professional sound, it sounded tinny and you could hear Ben's fingers.

2:

This one was ok as well, with the mic pointing up near the body of the guitar. You can kind of hear breathing though and the sound has a fair bit of boom.


3:
This one was almost straight at the sound hole so there was a lot of boom and it wasn't a very good recording.

4:
This was away from the guitar pointing up at the ceiling. You can hear the reverberations of the walls, and despite it sounding less clear than some of the other recordings, I actually like the natural sound. It sounds more live, and that could work with some recordings and bands.

5:
This was my favourite for professional quality and clarity. I think if I was recording a classical musician on acoustic guitar I'd go for the XY technique.

Week 5 - Forum

This weeks forum was again on collaborations. And again, this week most of the presenters were exploring where collaborations have been applied and have worked.

Although, like last week, one person made a presentation that caught my attention and I'm going to base my blog around that as I have limited word count. Darren's presentation was exploring whether collaborations is always the appropriate term.*(1) For example, if two people are collaborating together to try and make a mix of two different ideas or styles then it would be justified in being called a collaboration. However, if the collaboration is based on one persons independant idea that is only able to come into existence because of another persons involvement, is it really collaboration? When people are collaborating through necessity rather than through choice.

According to Darren, this is fairly common and is still a useful tool. For example, when a classical composer wants to take his arrangements to a new level, and introduce drum beats but can't play that, then he has to get in another musician to 'collaborate'. However, this musician has no real input into the final product except to play what the original composer wants.

Darren gave many examples of what he believed wer real collaborations and collaboration through necessity. It was an interesting way of looking at it, and I hadn't thought about it that way before.

Of course, there is then a line that needs to be drawn: How much joint collaboration IS through necessity? Whether the necessity to improve the sound of the music, or the necessity to gain a bigger audience.

As usual, forum has proven to show more questions than answers.

*(1) Darren, Music Technology Forum, 29/3/2007

CC - Week 5 - Sequencing (2)

This week we did much the same as last week except it was more based on the plug-ins in ProTools*(1). I used Lauras noises this week because I've been having so much trouble with mine, and the result was pretty interesting. The way that paper can be distorted is really amazing and by the end is hardly recognisable.

This week I used a variety of things, like the reverse, the volume control, lots of different parts of AudioSuite (like the moogerfooger and delay) and duplictaed parts to make it sound more interesting and full. I didn't use any time dilation effects, but I wanted to. I just didn't really have the time to fit it into the soundscape.

Here is the finished product:

This is the screenshot of the ProTools window:

Unfortunately, I can't get hold of a camera, so the picture won't be available. I was going to rip it in an order... it's actually too hard to describe. Hopefully the rest of this will work though.

Week 5 - AA

This week was about learning the different types of microphones and what they can do. We learnt abut the many different types of microphone and the different patterns that they can record. For example, some mics can pick up sound from any direction, known as omni-directional, but some lose the power to pick up sound as you turn the face away.

The exercise was to record different patterns and mics to see the difference and work it out. Laura and I did it together, so rather than record two different sets of 5 sounds that would be almost exactly the same, and that we both would've done, we used the same sounds. We also roped Nathan in to m ake sure we were doing the right thing and had it all covered.

We used a Shure SM58 dynamic microphone, and an AKG condenser, changing the settings. I personally don't really notice much difference, except that when we recorded the 4th recording Laura rotated the mic and you can hear it fade in and out.

THE FIRST RECORDING:

This one is the condenser mic using the first setting. It is recorded with a cartoid pattern. You can't hear much of a difference, except that the mic is being pulled away and toward the sound source.

THE SECOND RECORDING:

This one is using the 2nd setting on the mic, the hyper cartoid pattern

THE THIRD RECORDING:
This is the omni directional setting on the AKG, so it makes no difference where it's pointing, the mic will still pick it up.

THE FOURTH RECORDING:
The final recording we made using the condenser used the figure eight pattern. As Laura turns the mic around, you can hear the change.

THE FIFTH RECORDING:
This recording was done using a shure SM58 dynamic mic and is a pretty simple and easy recording. We just pointed the mic straight at the radio.

Sorry there are no pictures, but I couldn't find any relevant ones, and this page is already a fair bit to download.

Week 4 - CC

This weeks task was to make an abstract soundscape of the previously recorded and edited paper noises. Then to represent the sound scape with a piece of paper. So a very abstract week really.

Being unable to really get any time in the lab until today, I've really left it too late, and let me tell you, I won't make that mistake again. I've been having a LOT of problems with this. For starters, ProTools doesn't seem to be able to read any of my files. I don't know if that's my old problem with SPEAR playing it up or what. I can't even open the copies in SPEAR. I've tried changing the format of the sounds to .wav and .mp3 and even .ptf, but the program still can't read it. So basically I'm in trouble because if I can't even get my sounds into ProTools, I'm not going to be able to make a soundscape obviously, and of course, can't make a representation of it with the paper. I'm very frustrated at the moment. Maybe it's just me, but I can never get anything to work. I'm going to come in on friday or something for this weeks task so I'm not leaving it late, and if I have these problems I can work it out. Definately going to have to see Christian to work this out. I'm really over being one of the only people that has trouble with all this to be honest.

Well, just to demonstrate that I DO know what's going on, if only to a small extent, I'll say what I was going to do. From what I understood, the idea was to put all the different sounds in ProTools, and layer it so it made a connection of different sounds as one. Not a very good explanation but it's close to what I meant. I was going to base it on building up from the quieter sounds and adding the different parts until it was all big and climatic, and then taking them away the same way I added them. However, clearly I can't do that. I know that you need to get the new session and then new track and import the sounds and everything, but why can't I actually do it in practise?? I really hope it's the sounds and not me. Maybe if we still use the sounds next week I'll re-record them and start from the word go.

That's that. I've tried to not be stupid, but i can't avoid it, it would seem.

Week 4 - Forum - Collaborations

This was the first week of student presentations in forum, and I think they got off to a good start! Collaborations is an interesting subject to pick, because there are so many different possibilities to choose from. However, most presentations were based on successful collaborations.

The one I'd like to focus this blog on was by David, and involved the collaboration between Michael Karmen and Metallica. Symphonic metal is an interesting concept, especially with a band like Metallica that has complex rhythmic and harmonic patterns. The presentation reminded me of an album I own, which is symphonic Pink Floyd. It differs to the collaboration between Karmen and Metallica in that the end product is Pink Floyd music played in an orchestral arrangement, instead of an orchestra playing with the band.

The arrangements and performance is stunning, and allows the audience to see how intricate the music is. I liked this presentation because hearing metal and rock music played with a symphony orchestra is almost an ironic idea, but seems to work so well.

The other presentation that was especially interesting was Sanad's. He talked about the collaboration of two styles, world and western music. He used the topic to start a political argument, which soon became farily charged. His idea was that the collaborations between world musicians and western musicians should be more equal. As it is, the world musicians change their music to fit western structure and rules to be more commercial. His point was that Western musicians should be adapting as well. I'd agree, but not through a real understanding of the problem. More because I'd like to hear the different styles that could be created through such collaborations.

Looking forward to hearing more opinions from the group! We are a rather opinionated bunch it seems.

Week 4 - AA

This week was an extension of week 2's exercise. It was meant to be the week after, but due to the week swap it all got a bit confused. However, I have done it. Not only that, but I actually think that it makes sense!! That's close to being a first.

The idea this week was to show that we know what's going on with getting the signal from the microphones, to the mixer, to the computer, to the speakers. Despite being a little confused during the lesson, I came back and had a quick look one afternoon and worked it out.

So on my plan, which is mostly based on my session plan of week 2 (I changed the bass and first guitar to D/I to stop the mic picking up the drums as well. A tip from someone else in the class), I basically just made a diagram of the birds-eye view of the recording area. I put the vocalist and his guitar in the dead room, because I'd want the vocals to be pure, and not picking up the other instruments.

One problem though, I'm not sure if I could actually set this up properly. I'd have to have a good go of it, which I intend to do as soon as possible. I think I could probably set it up, but then getting the signal through to ProTools and the computer could be more difficult. Although, I did do it last week, so that has to be a good sign. I think that's all that there is to say. I didn't have any problems with the diagram side of it. Which is always a good thing!

Week 3 - CC - SPEAR

This week's task was another that had me a little dubious about my skills, or lack of. The general gist seems easy. Edit the frequencies of the paper sounds from last weeks exercise in SPEAR to make new sounds. I have in fact managed to do this, if a little late. Of course, there has to be a 'but'. Unfortunately, I can't seem to really navigate SPEAR. I'm hoping it's for some reason not my fault, but let's be honest, it probably is. I'm not doing too well at this. I can't seem to get it to playback the sounds. I've used the playback scrub button on the tools window, with many different combinations of other buttons, but can't get anything to play.

Also, when I upload it to ripway, its only saving the data of it. I don't know if thats right or what. So I figure if I jsut change around the structure and post that, you should be able to play that on a MAC. Maybe. Hopefully. It's not really the point though. I'm supposed to be learning what makes it sound different. Well, I'll get into the computers this weekend or friday or something and try it on there. I think that's going to be the plan from now on, until I get my own MAC. To do the exercises at uni. That would solve a whole lot of problems. OK, so here are the edited versions of my original sounds (also thanks to everyone for giving me hints on how to make the link work. I know what I did wrong now. It was stupid. All fixed!):

I hope I've completed this task correctly, despite yet more computer problems. I'm really starting to worry that my computer problems aren't the computer's fault at all. I need to get into the lab at uni to really work out if I'm having trouble, or if my computer is just a bit confused. So there we go. The sounds, in edited form. I hope it actually sounds half decent, but I won't know until tomorrow or later. Fingers crossed.

Week 3 - Forum

This weeks forum was about defining music. Trying to define music is incredibly hard. It really depends on the individual, but still, even then it's hard to decide what you think. Music can be any sound, or a combination of sounds that is pleasant, or a combination of soudns that has tonality and harmony, or none of these. Personally I find it hard to put a definition on what I believe to be music. It's hard to define it without letting preference get in the way. I mean, as much as I hate american hip-hop and generic pop music, I still acknowledge that it is, in fact, music. That said, I love the spoken word, especially to the backing of music, but are the words described as music? Or is it just the music backing that makes it music.

The activity that we did in forum this week divided the class. I think it's one of those things that you either love or hate. We each had a part that was basically different to everyone elses. I believe there were some double ups, but I don't know for certain. Then the rest of it was basically random. There were high noises, low noises, mid-pitch noises, guitar, bass, weird percussion, and people speaking. The idea was that in the time frame given, we would play a part improvised on what the piece said.

The end result was really weird, but interesting. To be honest, I quite like the effect it made. There were periods of utter noise and cacophony, and then almost silence. The complete removal of any rhythmic or harmonic sense made it hard to view as a piece of music, but it was. It did rather go on a bit, considering it took 45 minutes to do much the same thing over and over, but it actually got to a point near the end where I was actually really into the music/sound/noise.

I thought that the way people were divided over the exercise was really interesting. The way our opinions can vary on something so seemingly simple as this is showing how different individuals can be. It's just that there isn't a way to put a definite definition on music. What sounds appealing to you, or what strikes a chord within you can count as music. And that very much relies on the each persons taste, background, and feelings.

Week 3 - AA - QuickStart

Apologies for this one being late, but I had a fairly hard weekend, with a highschool friend passing away in a car accident. It's going to be hard to come to terms with, but I think I'm back on track now.

This week was based around being able to start up and shut down Studio 2. Laura and I did it together, and actually managed to complete a task without too many hassles, making a nice change. We booked in, and turned everything on, going by the DORA anagram. We almost thought that was everything until Freddie came and rescued us from humiliation. So we set everything up again and attempted to get a signal through ProTools. We put the mic in the dead room and picked up an awful radio station. Getting a signal through to the mixer proved to be no problem, once we'd worked out that I'd pressed the wrong button for Main Mix, quite foolishly. It was all going well, and we thought we'd managed to get through a whole exercise without needing outside help. But it wasn't to be. As much as we tried, we couldnt get the signal from the dead room microphone through to the computer, or in fact to ProTools. It was in the mixer, but didn't seem to be getting any further.

In the end, despite us trying everything we could think of on the mixer, we had to get Peter in to see if he could fix it. Apparently, there was something wrong on the input. It was on +4 dBu instead of -10dBV. So once that was fixed up we were set. The computer was picking up the signal and everything worked. I'm almost completely sure I could work it out again. As long as the basic setup is already done properly.

Week 2 - CC - Paper Noises

Well, this has been a troublesome exercise. The idea was to record 5 different noises made with a piece of A4 paper, record them and then edit them using Peak LE 4. After some confusion, such as an M-Box that wouldn't connect, and various other connection problems I managed to do this. I am now attempting for the second time to post this, as last time it deleted half the words. I don't know why. You'd think it would explain. OK, well here are the sounds. They have been uploaded to an outside site (ripway) and I'm hoping that they link properly.

(it can't seem to post this with this link in the file. This is the direct URL lnk though, so maybe that will still work? In fact none of them work, the tag is broken. I'm hoping that if I just post these URL's you will still be able to find the recordings) That sound was made by punching the piece of paper. I then used Peak to change it around and see what different sounds I could make. The finished product has a reversed middle section, and a changed gain envelope. I wanted to slow it down and hear it in slow motion, but couldn't work out how.

- This sound was made by rubbing the paper on the desk. The only edit I did was to put random fades through it. I found that putting a lot of fade ins next to each other created an interesting effect. This one was hard because any effect I put into it wasn't obvious.

This one was just scrunching the paper quickly. I did it slowly as well because I wanted to see if there was any difference. Again, most of the effects used weren't detectable, but I managed to make an interesting effect by fading in and out around major sound parts, like where the sound was the loudest. It made it choppy, and interesting I thought.

This was the slow version of the scrunch, and to be honest, didn't really make much difference. All I did was invert random sections, which didn't seem to do much n this situation, changed the gain, and added something called a boomerang effect. I still don't really know what this does, but I left it there anyway.

This one was a simple tear down the length of the paper. All I really did to this one was reverse the second half. What I'd hoped for was to have it sound like it was tearing, and then repairing itself, but it wasn't as obvious as I'd hoped.

The main problems I encountered were trying to make the sounds sound different to the originals. Most of the noises were too crackly and unsteady to have any real effect from the gain envelope or reversing. And also, posting this blog is becoming difficult. To start with, I couldnt get the music files to load. Now it's having errors posting what I have here. Next time I think I'll write all this on Microsoft Word so at least it won't delete everything again.

I was surprised that I understood Peak though. Even though it was explained during class, I usually don't familiarise myself with programs like this for a fair while, but I'm getting the hang of it pretty quickly.

Now I'm just hoping this posts properly...

Week 2 - Forum - Originality

This week's forum was based around the idea of originality. Steven Whittington held the presentation and explored the many areas involved in the concept of originality. The basic definition of the original was generally accepted to be something that has never been done before. Questions were raised and attempts were made to answer them, but in the end these decisions can only be made by the individual. Where does originality spring from, what is the value of originality, and can originality be created from the synthesis of already formed elements were questions asked during the session.

Where does originality spring from? Well, according to Steven, from one of two places; innocence or experience. The way I saw it, innocent originality was through no idea or preconception of what music is supposed to be like. Innocent of all the rules associated with music. This makes sense to me in one way, because to the composer, it would all be original. But the music may not be original to outsiders who have heard other music. If the composer is just making music that sounds good to them, and they haven't heard many other styles, then who's to say that what sounds good to them didn't sound good to a composer years before? To put it more simply, two people could have much the same idea completely separate to each other. Is that still a form of originality?
On completely the opposite side of the page, originality could also spring from experience. A person experienced in the rules and standards of music could use that knowledge to create something new and different. Knowing those rules means the composer can break out of those boundaries and create something that he knows is different. However, maybe he would be conditioned to use those rules, and could even use them without knowing. If so, is the product still original? Even if some elements are old rules?

This brings us to the question: What is the true value of originality? Why do we place so much store behind original music? Is it the search for the unknown? Or an attempt to explain yet more using music? Maybe it's just an un-ending search to further push the boundaries of music. As much as I try to think of an explanation, I can't. I think that maybe we just like to hear new things, and to create new things. It makes us feel special.

But how original do you need to be to have your work claimed as original? Does every element have to be completely new? Or can an original work simply be a new way of putting together old ideas? The latter was the impression given by Steven in the forum; that an original work could be anything from a piece of music composed without form or rules, to a mesh of already composed songs in a different format. I like this interpretation best, because it allows for a flow of ideas, without a boundary. Considering the definition of originality, I think something that's never been done before can include a new way of putting old ideas together.

The topic of originality is an interesting one. Although a lot of the questions it brings up just leads to more questions. I think I'll be considering this one for a fair while.

Over and out.

AA - Week 2 - Session Planning

This week in Audio Arts we looked at the preparation needed before a recording session. In particular, we looked at devising a session plan.

The first thing the engineer needs to do before a recording session is make sure it is all planned and can run smoothly. To do this, he or she needs to have a clear idea on what the musician wants from the recording. For example, the style of music, the sound they are looking for, and the instruments used. They would also need to know of any effects the musicians wanted in the music.

Once they have gathered this information it needs to be put into a session plan. I can see that this would make everything faster and more efficient, and makes a lot of sense. The session plan is a record of all the instruments and their microphones.

I decided to use a band that I would like to record as the project later in the year. The band is called The Nameless and is a punk rock band. They have 4 musicians, a vocalist who also plays the rhythm guitar, a bass player, the lead guitarist and a drummer. Because their sound is so grunge and rock, i put emphasis on the drum microphones. Many of their songs are well driven by the bass and drums, so I needed to make sure those two instruments in particular had sufficient microphones. I'd also have to talk to the boys, because sometimes the bass player sings a harmony line. So whether he needed a microphone would depend on the song being recorded. I assumed this one wouldn't need it.

Other notes I would need to remember is that they like to use effects. So I would have to find out what, if anything, they wanted done and allow for that in the plan.

The other points brought up in class involved mike placement. Things like making sure the microphones aren't getting any feedback, or catching the other instruments.

With this session plan, I would be feeding it directly into DigiDesign's ProTools, eliminating the need for the mic amp/EQ/Patching mentioned on the example sheet given to us in class.

MusTech Forum - Wk 1 - Introduction

The first week of Music Technology Forum was basically an information session to let myself and the other first-years know what the purpose of the forum was. It combines all the years, and sometimes the VET and degree students. As far as I can see, the basic formula is that the first half is to talk and discuss problems and interests we have encountered during the week. Having the second and third years there will really help I think, as they have the experience to help with any minor problems or confusion. It’s also good to know who else is doing the program, especially for the extra support.

The second half of the forum is for the presentations. Each week a group of people will present their ideas and research on a certain topic. I assume then that the group discusses the ideas, or at least the presentation is entered into their online blog for comments. The different topics seem interesting, and I have been allocated “Gender In Music Technology”. This is something I have an interest in, being one of the only women doing the degree, and am entering a male dominated field of work. However, I don’t think it is an important issue because I can’t see that a male or female engineer would have many different ideas or styles, considering we’re trained in the same way. Of course, I can use that as part of my presentation. I’m looking forward to hearing other people’s opinions on the topic too.

I like the idea that we mix with the VET students, if only once in awhile, because it’s just another whole lot of people to meet with the same interests. It also builds contacts which might be useful. They might also be experiencing the same problems as me, so that could be another way of working things out without needing to interrupt the lecturers with small matters. I’m looking forward to forum and getting other peoples opinions on certain ideas and topics.

AA1 - Week 1 - Facilities Introduction

The first blog of many is going to be used to describe what we did the first week of Audio Arts. Most wasn't very practical, so we just went through the course outline. It all sounds very exciting, and I'm really ready to get into it. I have almost no experience in the area, so even the small amount we learnt was new to me. Learning the studio protocol was easy, and the rules like the no eating or drinking policy and the booking sheet are already set in my head. All the microphone care was graspable and I can even put away a stand correctly now. From what I've seen so far, which admittedly isn't much, the studio has everything a studio needs. I haven't had enough of an oppurtunity to come to grips with anything yet, but it all seems to be top quality. I'm looking forward to experimenting with ProTools and the other software and hardware that I haven't seen.

The main problematic areas I've seen would be the timing issues. I don't think it will be a problem until the ends of semesters, but it will be hard to fit everyone in for all the time they will want and/or need. The only other problem I can see, is that with so many people doing the course now, the area will be harder to keep organised.