[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference napalm::commusic_v1

Title:* * Computer Music, MIDI, and Related Topics * *
Notice:Conference has been write-locked. Use new version.
Moderator:DYPSS1::SCHAFER
Created:Thu Feb 20 1986
Last Modified:Mon Aug 29 1994
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2852
Total number of notes:33157

81.0. "Recording techniques for keys" by KATADN::BOTTOM () Wed Apr 17 1985 14:38

Hi. I'd like to start a discussion on how others who are into multi-tracking
are recording their synths. I've been using the line out of my roland but
it doesn't quite sound the same as when I run it through my amp. But,
using the line out gets a much better bass response. The string sound seems
to be much thicker using the line out. Has anybody been mixing the line out
with something off of a michrophone at the same time? I also have been using 
the "stereo" output and taping one send into my digital delay and then mixing
that back in as well.
 Second question for those keyboard palyers who are out working, what amp(s)
do you recommend for a synth and why? What are the advanatges of one over the
other and what  limitations/drawbacks if any are there? Selection of speakers 
could be included here as well.

					thanks alot......*db*
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
81.1OLORIN::CZOTTERMon Apr 22 1985 18:3422
I used a mix of direct versus miked input once, ostensibly to pick up
some room ambience. I found it to be a waste of time. Unless you work
in a real studio with well designed acoustics, I don't think it buys you
anything. And, as you observed, the output of an amplifier picked up by
a mike tends to do strange and undesirable things to frequency response.
Also, you can't run your dishwasher or garbage disposal while recording
and television is right out. But seriously folks...

I recently (last week) bought the Roland Midi keyboard controller and
Super Jupiter synth module. The sounds are excellent but I felt something
was still lacking. Aspiring to have the ultimate home recording system
(I have a Teac 4-track reel-to-reel and Tascam 6-channel mixer, so I'm close)
I decided to blow another $725 for a digital reverb. This turned out to be
the most important component in my system. I have it hooked into the effects
send and return from the mixer so I have complete control over the mix between
pure and doctored signals. It has turned my Roland TR-909 drum synth into
something that sounds about 4 times as expensive and what it does for my
piano and harp patches has to be heard to be believed. My suggestion to any
serious home studio hacks - whatever you invest in synth modules, plan to spend
as much on tape deck, mixer, and digital reverb and delay. You'll be pleased
when you play one of your songs from cassette and your friends ask for the
album.
81.2SAUTER::SAUTERMon Apr 22 1985 19:152
What brand of reverb are you using?
    John Sauter
81.3HELOS::MALIKTue Apr 23 1985 15:3317
Subj; how do you use your reverb?

	I assume your reverb isn't stereo.  So, just when in the 
recording pass do you use it?

	Do you add reverb on each individual track?  Of course,
then you have to guess how they will all sound in the final
mix.

	You can't really add it afterwards, since you will be
mixing down to (I assume) a stereo master.

	How are you using it?


			Thanks, Karl

81.4OLORIN::CZOTTERTue Apr 23 1985 21:41160
Ok. Here's the scoop on reverb and how I use it.

I have the XT Digital Reverb from ALESIS in Los Angeles, CA.

Connections:

Input:	1/4" phone jack, 500K OHM, max level +20 dBV. Front panel input
	pot varies level suitable for direct connect from guitar, synth,
	or mixer/tape deck.

Output:	Stereo, 1/4" phone jacks, 600 OHM, max level +12dBM.
	Connectors are switched together so that mono output will result
	if only one jack is used.

Controls:

Pre-Delay:	Sets reverb apart in time from dry signal. Adds to illusion
	of space, enhances clarity. (Great for drums)

Size:	Large/Small - Basic program select. Small for percussion, small room
	simulation and special effects. Large for general purpose, smooth
	reverberation.

Slap Back:	Long/Short - Adds to illusion of space. Extends minimum decay
	time. Actual delay is function of Size.

Diffusion:	Fills in spaces between individual echoes. Extends minimum
	decay time. Most noticeable with percussive sounds.

Decay Time:	Variable from .05 to 10 seconds (depends on Size, Slap Back,
	and Diffusion). Use large program for very long decay times. Shorter
	decay times lead to more clarity and less confusion. Minimum decay
	time for fattening drums.

H.F. Damping:	Reduces decay time of high (14+ KHz) frequencies. Simulates
	air absorbtion in natural spaces. Unlike H.F. Cut (see below), H.F.
	Damping temporarily preserves high frequency program such as sibilant
	speech.

L.F. Cut:	Removes bass, which adds to illusion of space but clutters mix
	at long decay times.

H.F. Cut:	Reduces system bandwidth, leaving a softer sound. Used in
	situations where high frequency content of program causes a problem.

Defeat:		Turns off input to reverb. Allows easy with/without
	comparison while not affecting carefully set controls.

Input Level:	Controls input circuit amplification.

Mix:	Controls ratio of dry signal to reverb signal at output.

Output:	Controls overall level at output.


My impressions:

	This is one of the most featuriferous (you'll have to forgive me)
digital reverbs for the money. Admittedly, I don't use them all the time but
they are useful when they're useful. (Know what I mean?) With my drum machine,
I set a noticeably long pre-delay and short decay, a sound that is becoming
increasingly popular on the radio. With piano, strings, harp, xylophone, etc.
I use the large model with long but quiet reverb. Caveat: the specs say it
won't distort until the input reachs +20 dBV. Not true. I hear distortion
at 0 dBV so you have to be very careful with levels. (There is an LED display
on the front showing input level.) This isn't a big problem since reverb 
typically should be about 20 dB lower than the dry signal.

A word about digital versus spring reverb. The spring reverb was developed
as a cheap but acceptable device for adding ambience. It is so prevalent in
guitar amps that a guitar just doesn't sound right without it. However,
the spring reverb is only an approximation (and not a very good one) of
room ambience. The digital reverb uses a much more complex software algorithm
to simulate actual room reverberation. As such, it is much more versatile
and able to produce both realistic ambience and special effects. I use the
different algorithms as extensions of my synthesizer's tonal capabilities,
and the realistic settings for final mix down.

So much for my product review. Now how do you use the damn thing?

I have a 6-in/4-out mixer. There is an additional channel called Effect.
This channel has one 1/4" output and input. I connect the Effect Send to
my digital delay (Effectron) input, D.D. output to Reverb input, Reverb output
to Effect Return on mixer. Each input channel has it's own knob to set how
much signal from that channel goes to Effect Send. There is also a level
control on overall Effect Send volume and another on Effect Return. The effect
return signal can then be gated to any or all of the 4 output program jacks.
From my 4-track deck, the four outputs go to channels 1 through 4 on mixer
input. Program channels 1 through 4 outputs go into tape channels 1 through
4 input. Again, each of the six input channels can be gated to any or all of
the 4 program outputs. Each channel has multiple input selectors so some
channels serve double duty. Channel 3 is the mike input. Channel 4 is my
Korg Poly-61. Channel 5 is my Roland Super Jupiter. Channel 6 is my Roland
TR-909 drum synth. On the output side, there is YET ANOTHER output amplifier
called the MONITOR. This monitor circuit has left and right outputs like
a tape deck and can listen to pairs of program channels (1 and 2, 3 and 4,
or AUX and EFFECT). (Also, a single channel can be sent out left and right).
What? What is AUX? Oh yes, that is ANOTHER input to output
mapping. On each input channel is a knob which determines, much like EFFECT
SEND, how much signal goes to a circuit called AUX OUT. AUX OUT is connected
to a headphone distributor amp allowing four people to listen for cues. Anyway,
the two monitor outputs go to my stereo's Tape 2 inputs. Now that all the
wiring is straight, here is a typical recording sequence.

Drum machine is programmed for the entire song. DD set to straight through.
Reverb set to appropriate setting for type of music. (May be straight through
also.) Channel 6 input set to output on program 1 (to tape track 1). Monitor
listening on channel 1, playing over room speakers. Tape set to record on
track 1 only. Start tape, start drums, and wait for song to finish. (Aside:
Sometimes, the reverb is set to outrageous slap back for snare and is too much
for high-hat cymbal. No problem. Drum machine has individual outputs for each
instrument. I connect cymbals to other mixer inputs and reduce the amount of
these signals going to Effect Send while keeping outrageous reverb for 
remaining instruments.) (Am I spelling "cymbal" right?)

Rewind tape. Set recording track 2. Set desired keyboard for piano sound
with small amount of reverb for fullness. Tape track 1 plays into mixer
channel one, is heard through speakers, as is keyboard. Record background
keyboard track.

Rewind tape. Set recording track 3. Using guitar amp miked into channel
3 mixer input, send 3 to program out 3 (tape track 3). Use guitar amp
reverb because even though it's not as natural as the digital reverb, we're
going for traditional guitar sound. Use headphones to keep room silent except
for guitar amp. Record background guitar track.

Rewind tape. Set tape recording track 4. Play tape tracks 1-3 into mixer,
mapped to channel 4 program out going into deck. All effects set to zero.
Start tape, monitoring channel 4 over speakers. This is the MIX DOWN to free
up some tracks.

Rewind tape and listen to track 4. If not right, repeat last step. When
correct, rewind tape and erase tracks 1-3 twice to clear out old signals
real good.

Using similar procedures (always with little or no reverb) record solo tracks,
vocals, punch in special effects, etc.

Play completed recording about 16 times, all the while practising any final
level adjustments on individual tracks for final mix down. This is also when
the reverb is used not for tonal effect on individual instruments, but to
give general room ambience to all sounds. At completion, the right amount
of reverb is set for each track and filter equilization is done. 

Set channels 1-4 inputs to program outputs 1 and 2 (left and right). Monitor
set to program outputs 1 and 2 (left and right). Left/right pan controls
on each channel used slightly to give solos more spacial clarity. Check
recording levels on cassette deck. (Amplifier tape-2 to tape-1 dubbing being
used.) Play 4-track, record cassette, all the while carefully adjusting
input levels on mixer to smoothly bring in and out solos, special effects,
etc. 

Rewind cassette, play it, and drink many beers.

This process, assuming you have already written the song and worked out all
the patches and solos, takes between 3 and 10 hours.

And there you have it! It quickly becomes obvious that what is needed is
a 12 to 24 track tape deck. Then, each drum could be recorded separately
and any guesswork on the first mix-down would be unnecessary.
81.5OLORIN::CZOTTERTue Apr 23 1985 21:5526
Please forgive spelling errors (equilization?). I am, after all, a
computer programmer.

Anyway, this is obviously a very complicated subject and I am anxious to
here other techniques that y'all are using. I never received any training
here. This is all from experience. Still, some questions plague me. Using
my effect send going through both the digital delay and the digital reverb,
it's sometimes hard to fine tune the combined effect of the two devices.
I tried reversing the order of the devices, but then the digital delay only
gets to work on the reverb, not on the dry signal. Another alternative is
to wire the digital delay into the INPUT of one of the channels for more
separation of controls. Unfortunately, that means constantly plugging and
unplugging each device that will use D.D. As it stands now, I never have
to unplug anything in my system and that saves wear and tear on the
jacks. I do however, have a 32 port patch bay on order.

One other observation. I use the reverb at so many different settings, I
can't remember where the knobs and buttons go for each effect. Clearly,
one of the new MIDI devices with 64 reverb preset patches is in order.
Roland is (or did already) coming out with a MIDI controlled digital delay
unit that you can consider an extension to your synth. I'm getting one of
those, soon.

	awaiting your responses,

	Ted
81.6OLORIN::CZOTTERMon Apr 29 1985 19:4227
Flame On:

This "discussion" looks more like a monologue. Doesn't anybody else do
recordings? I'd hate to see this notes file be deleted due to lack of use.
I'm still kind of new at DEC and don't know any other people to point
at this file but there must be hundreds of people who would be interested.

Flame Off:

Needle On:

A new observation:  before I got my mixing board, I plugged my vocals mike
right into the mike input on my 4-track. Now that I use the board, I here
a lot less noise and it does a better job of limiting signal peaks. Conclusion:
(a completely rude and stupid statement designed to generate discussion)
If you don't have a mixing board, your recordings suck.

What have you got to say for yourselves now?

Needle Off:

	Ted (bored with Rainbow Notes which has been reduced to a symposium
	     for naive users with stupid questions that have been answered
	     thirty times in the notes file despite the fact that 90% of them
	     are answerable in the documentation which naive users think is
	     for computer gurus only who, as we all know, already know the
	     answers)
81.7PIXEL::COHENMon Apr 29 1985 20:2218
OK, Ted, you goaded me into it!  (Just kidding)

I have several guitars, keyboards, mikes, etc. These I usually send straight
into my 4 track.  I have also miked up a drum set.

The sound is pretty horrible.  First of all, there is no control over EQ
or panning. Also no delay or reverb. It is also very noisy. However, the
recordings don't "suck", as that would also be a reflection on the musician,
and I have a higher self regard than that! Until I can afford such luxury as
a mixer and a deley unit, I usually am content to play live music with real
people, and just record the event "as is", which is why I haven't contributed
much to this particular discussion until now.

	I also am in total agreement with you about the Rainbow notes file.
What a yawner lately!  

	- Rick

81.8NOVA::RAVANTue Apr 30 1985 15:5169
Well, I consider my setup rather vanilla from a recording engineer's point of
view, but since we have been asked to contribute, I'll contribute. 

I have two keyboards, a DX-7 and a Mirage.  My deck is a Fostek A-8 8 track and
the mixer is the companion Fostek 350 (I think that's the number) which is an
8x4x2 board.  For effects, I have an Effectron II digital delay line and a
Fostek stereo spring reverb. For monitoring, I have two Nikko stereo amps and
four Pro 4As.  I got used to 4 track mastering in college and can't settle for
stereo.  But I must admit that the few things I've done for external
consumption have been stereo since the folks I've done them for have stereo
equipment. All this stuff is sitting in our master bedroom; my wife has
graciously consented to let the equipment take over the larger of the two
bedrooms. 

The four speakers are mounted on waist-high stands in the four corners of the
room. The tape deck, amps, effects, and an as-yet-unbootable S-100 Compupro
68000 computer with two 8" floppy drives are mounted in 3 19" relay racks along
one wall. The computer and amp 1 are in rack 1. The effects, amp 2, and a Teac
patch bay are mounted in rack 2. The tape deck is mounted in rack 3.  The
keyboards and the mixer are sitting on a Sear's workbench oriented at 90
degrees to that wall about 2 feet away with a homemade cable walkover
connecting them to the racks.  Everthing except the 8 tape out lines goes to
the Teac path bay.  I thought I was going to hate the all-phone-plug patch bay
since I was used to 1/4" phone jacks, but I have gotten used to it and the
phono plugs aren't nearly as fragile or tempermental as I was expecting and I
do a fair amount of repatching during a typical recording session.  The 8 tape
out lines go through the walkover directly to the mixer tape in lines so I can
monitor recorded tracks simply by flipping any of the 8 input switches to
"TAPE". 

I also recently bought a Korg drum machine.  That is sitting on a nearby table
where I can plug it into the mixer with a minimum of repatching.  Maybe someday
I'll buy a better drum machine (like the Yamaha RX-11, which sounds real good,
by the way), but not unless I get the urge to write top-40 charts or find a
drum machine which allows me to create 'hyper' drums. I have resisted the
temptation to buy a better drum machine since I expect the Mirage folks to come
out with drum sounds.  That and the computer interface (I have a Roland MPU 401
waiting in the wings for the computer to boot) should provide me with
modifiable drum sounds. 

As you can see, all my recording is done at line level; I have no mikes.
Patches usually run from synth to bay to deck to board to bay to amps.
Sometimes they go from synth to bay to delay to bay to reverb to bay to deck to
board to bay to amps.  With this setup, I have two problems. 

First for the effects patch, I have a hard time setting the levels of the
synth, the delay, and the reverb to avoid overloading the reverb inputs and
still get good saturation on the deck.  I hesitate to used the board to boost
the reverb output because I don't want to miss monitoring a channel, but I may
be forced to do that.  What I would like to find are some VERY clean simple
mono amplifiers to apply after the reverb and before the deck. Then I can have
enough signal strength to saturate the tape.  If anyone knows of a preassembled
or kit IC mono amp, let me know. 

Secondly, since most things go through the bay, signal lines are long (over
15') between the deck and the mixer.  This (I think) is causing a large amount
of the noise I'm getting during recording.  I'm going to do a check on the
nominal record levels on the A8 with a 0db box.  When that reads 0db, I'll
record something and see if the noise still exists.  If it's still there, I'll
have to physically rearrange everything to make the lines to and from the deck
as short as possible. 

When I get the 68000 to boot (I am currently having trouble interfacing the 8"
floppies with my floppy controller), I'll build an S-100/MPU 401 interface card
and write some MIDI software.  All that will have to wait until after my
nephew's wedding next month; I'm writing something for his ceremony.  So I'll
have to lay down all the tracks without computer assist. 

-jim
81.9HELOS::MALIKTue Apr 30 1985 20:1735
Here's my 2 cents also;

	I made do without a mixing board for many years.  Now I
have one and the improvment in flexability and control is a welcome
change.

	One of my frustrations is the difficultly in getting
information from people knowledgable in recording.  It appears to
be a folk art; learned via apprenticeship; passed on by word of 
mouth.

	Unfortunately, most of us are not privy to this knowledge
and are forced into the position of reinventing the wheel. While
learning everything 'from scratch' is, no doubt, an educational
and entertaining process, it is also a time-consuming one which
can easily overshadow the point of the whole undertaking; making
music.

	So, perhaps CZOTTER's frustration at our lack of response
stems, in part, from the frustrating suspicion that somewhere
out there is some really good advice which could save us much
time and effort.

	I don't believe there are any multi-track recording guru's
contributing to this file (if so, please identify yourselves). As
knowledgable as some of the participants are in certain areas, when
it comes to making a really clean, well-balanced final tape, we are 
all, to some extent, still stumbling around in the dark.

	Any suggestions on increasing the level of useful advice?
Assuming there is any interest in this type of 'meta-discussion',
I'll be happy to add my own suggestions. However, I've said enough
for now.

						Karl
81.10OLORIN::CZOTTERTue Apr 30 1985 23:5028
Re .8

Jim, you implied you don't have much use for your drums because you do
drumless music. Although I have been doing "top-40" type stuff lately because
my girlfriend listens to them in her car, I also like to do orchestral stuff.
Do you do orchestral arrangements? I have been toying around lately with
Bach preludes and fugues rearranged for strings and horns. I have tried
other styles of music but my biggest problem has been number of tracks and
synchronization. Orchestral voices can't play through all the time and so
it often is required that a track be silent for many measures. Invariably,
I can never get the first track down because I don't know how long to wait.
I have tried recording a "timing" track using piano (because it's easy to hear
over the strings) and picking out different
voices so that there is something to hear throughout. Still, this doesn't
work all the time because I tend to interpret a line differently when I do it
with the instrument that actually is to play it and so lead in lines and
solos with fermatas get all screwed up. I suppose MIDI scores will make this
problem go away, but I haven't had time to interface my MPU-401 yet and write
software and who knows when I will. Also, guessing the levels on the mix-down
is terror. I usually give up on these things because I end up being 
dissatisfied unless I start from scratch. I have a feeling that an 8-track
makes life a lot easier. Anybody got any tricks to recording orchestral
music? Do you do the strings first? Which ones? Do you set up a "conductor"
track? How about singing or talking into another track during rests? 
(I just thought of that one. I bet that would help when all music stops and
then everybody comes in on the same chord.)

	Ted
81.11OLORIN::CZOTTERWed May 01 1985 00:0011
You know, Karl's remark about lack of information on recording struck a
chord. (If you'll pardon the pun) I constantly hear about the
"Kurzweil clinics" and "Roland clinics" and "Korg clinics" but have never
heard of a Teac, Fostex, Tascam, et al clinic. Have any of you been to or
heard of a clinic held by tape and/or mixer and/or effects manufacturers?
I know the keyboard clinics exist not because of demand, but because they
sell keyboards. After you hear the rep do something amazing and he shows you
how to set it up, why buy something else? If a recording clinic hasn't been
done before, maybe we could get one of the local retailers to set one up.

	Ted
81.12SAUTER::SAUTERWed May 01 1985 13:2761
I think there was a multi-track clinic a few months ago at Daddy's in Nashua.
I'm not sure of this, though, it was quite a while ago and my memory is fuzzy.
Daddy's sells multitrack recorders.

Since Ted is interested, here is my configuration:

	An Apple II+, connected to
	a Roland MPU-401, connected to
	a Yamaha DX-7, connected to
	a Fostex 350 mixer, connected to
	a Fostex 8-track 1/2 inch recorder, connected back to the mixer and
	my old stereo system, with amp/tuner, cassette transport, and speakers

A pretty simple system.  I'm not coordinated enough to play the DX-7 in real
time so I have a lot of software to edit the song buffer.  I did a lot of
work for the ALF music synthesizer, so I also have a translator that converts
ALF songs to MIDI.

Someday I figure on getting a reverb and/or delay.  I need to understand
better what these units do before I invest.  I, too, have felt the need for
more tracks on my recorder.

I do a recording as follows: I translate an ALF song into six instruments,
one for each ALF voice.  The DX-7 is connected to the mixer as input #3,
and the sync output from the MPU-401 as input #1, so I route those inputs
to tracks 1 and 2 of the recorder, and have the Apple play the first voice.
I generally have to play it a couple of times to get the peak amplitude set
up right.  For the sync track I have discovered that I can record it at -10
and still synchronize to it later.

For the second voice I route mixer input #3 to track 3, rewind the tape,
set mixer input #1 to "tape", to pick up the sync track, and set the MPU-401
to accept rather than give sync.  The sync input to the MPU-401 is connected
to the mixer's direct output jack for input #1, so I don't have to let the
sync track get any further into the mixer than input #1.  I then play voice
2 onto track 3, and similarly voice 3 to track 4, etc.  Voice 6 goes to track
7, so I have one free track.  I have been experimenting with merging all
of the voices into a single polyphonic song and putting it on track 8, but
I have a bug in the merge subroutine, so this hasn't been very successful
so far.

I listen to each voice when recording using the mixer's monitor function.
When recording voice 1 I also listen to the sync track, so I can tell where
on the tape the song ends.  When the recording is complete I set all of the
mixer inputs to tape and use the pan and gain controls to route each of the
six or seven tracks to the monitor output (obviously the sync track is routed
to oblivion).  Because of the way I originally recorded the ALF songs I can
usually get away with simply spacing the voices evenly between the speakers.

Frequently I decide that a voice was done with the wrong patch on the DX-7.
In that case I can go back and record just that voice using a different patch,
because of the sync track.  Because of the way the mixer controls are organized
I can do this without disturbing the mixdown settings.

I have found that it takes a lot of work to produce good music entry software
for a person who is all thumbs when it comes to playing the piano.  Maybe
I'll buy some.  In anticipation of that I have been making my software read
and write the same file format that Roland claims the other software packages
are using, but I will need a file produced by one of those packages to verify
my format: Roland's documentation is sometimes hard to interpret!
    John Sauter
81.13PIPA::JANZENWed May 01 1985 15:1329
I recently recorded a new piece of mine for piano duet.  I don't remember how
I did it because I make it up and adapt to available resources as I proceed,
but this is probably how I did it.

This piece was a minute 20 long; it took about an hour and a half to record.
I played the metronome into a mike a long way from the piano.  I put the other
mike inside the piano.  I recorded the first part on an old stereo open reel.
I transferred this recording to a metal cassette with dbx.  I then played this
back into the open reel while using the mix/line mix on the open reel to live
mix the mikes the the output of the cassette.  I matched levels by looking at
the meters during a level check and also by listening, because I was monitoring
the tape source, which had the mix.  Even then I came out a bar off.
It has an odd repetition pattern and is a moto-perpetuo piece.

When I made a recording of O,Superman for my own amusement, I made a tape loop
with 12 edits in it to make the rhythm track, which should be done with
digital delay on hold.  To enhance reliability of this track, I put it on a
metal cassette.  I Tried different ways to dub the other tracks, but ended
up laying down the voice on the stereo open reel next to the tape loop.
I played this back into the metal cassette, vocoding the synth with the
taped voice.  This was after trying to vocode the voice while speaking
the part about 10 times.  It was easier to control and adjust the vocoder
and get a good vocode by not having to play and sing and engineer at the
same time.  The equipment is spread all over creation, by the way; on the
floor, all over.  After this, I sent it all back from the cassette to the
reel to reel and mixed in the synth bridge figures and the guitar for a
bass (scordatura) to the bitter end.
whew
Thomas
81.14NOVA::RAVANWed May 01 1985 16:4197
re .10

Yes, I do 'orchestral' arrangements.  I also do what I have always called
'burp-kleek' electronic music, you know, the kind that everybody who 'knows
what kind of music they like' hates because they can't dance to it, sing to it,
or even HEAR THE MELODY ('But, Mr. Ravan', they say, 'where's the melody?'). 

The last couple of things I have done have been for folks with more typical
musical tastes than my own so I had to teach myself how do to syncing of many
polyphonic lines sort of 'by hand'.  I had never used a sync track before but,
like yourself, I understood the concept. 

So as I started my last project, I played a cassette tape of the music I was
arranging and played the DX-7 flute voice on the top C of the keyboard on every
beat.  My idea was to "capture the rhythmic nuances in the piece" so my
arrangement wouldn't sound so "mechanical".  The experiment with this kind of
'human' sync track was a FAILURE.  Maybe it was because I was unable to follow
the rhythmic pulse very well... Whatever the cause, the human timing track
varied so much in the space of any two bars that I was unable to get a
'natural-sounding' bass line.  It sounded like the poor bass player was trying
to follow a student conductor destined to get a D- in the course. 

Well during this time I got the Korg drum machine. The beginning of the piece
had 16 bars without drums, bunches of bars with drums in the middle, and ended
without drums.  Like most drum machines, you can program an entire sequence of
different drum licks and then play the result back.  So I programmed 2 bars of
lead-in rim shots, 15 bars of rim shots to sync the other tracks to, one bar of
rest before the proper drum line started (this measure of rest was IMPORTANT),
and the 40-or-so bars of drum line. 

This turned out to work GREAT!  The two bars of lead-in allowed me to get the
feel of the rhythm before a track started.  As more tracks were laid down, I
still listened to the rim shot click track to keep a good overall sync. Using
the rim shot sound was good since it was still audible through thick textures. 
The one bar of rest before the drum track proper was there so I could erase the
rim shot click track when all the parts in this first portion of the
arrangement were laid down without having to worry about erasing the drum line
that followed. 

A click track was not necessary for the interior 40 bars since the drum was
playing enough to keep everything together EXCEPT for a 3 bar break somewhere
in the middle.  Here, as you were worried, nobody was playing enough to keep a
strong sync, so I recorded a measure of rim shot eighth notes in the middle
(1 bar rest, 1 bar eighth notes, 1 bar rest) to try and keep the other parts
together.  When this bridge was completed, the bar of timing rim shots would
again be erased with the 'buffer bars' on either side allowing me room to erase
without fear of blowing away the real drum part on either side.  It was a life
saver!  The piano takes this short solo and then the drum leads him into the
next verse on beat 4 of the last solo measure.  If I hadn't had that interior
click to keep the piano solo synced, I'm sure I would have strayed enough to
make the drum seem as if it was coming in late (I always tend to rush the beat
since I'm pumped up to get things right...) 

The one problem I did have was with the final four bars.  All the parts sit on
a fermata on the last beat of the measure before the final four bars.  So I
found myself at the end of the piece with no way of gauging 'how long to
fermat'.  I did not think ahead to this part of the arrangement like I had with
those interior rest bars above.  What I should have done after the final bar of
drums (he plays on beat 2 of the fermata bar) is record some number of beats of
fermata time on the bass drum so that the instruments that played after the
fermata would know when to come in.  It turned out that since it was only the
piano and bass, it was not too hard to just do by ear. Why use a bass drum as
click instead of rim shots?  Well at this point in the piece, all lines hold a
fermata and then wait for a couple of beats IN SILENCE. A couple of beats of
DEAD AIR.  If I had used rim shots, there would be a good chance that the high
frequency energy in the rim shots would have bled over into the adjacent tracks
and would have been audible.  Using the bass drum sound which has very little
high frequency information would have made the 'wait this many beats' timing
track easier to erase. 

A short aside on how I layed down this long piece.  I definitely did NOT record
most tracks all the way through.  The only exceptions to this were the drum
line on the Korg and the bass line.  Those I did record from beginning to end.
After they were down, I began to record the other lines in short 8 bar
segments. This was where I was glad I had 8 tracks.  It always left another
open track to dovetail to when I had to continue a line that was not finished. 
But by recording only one voice 8 bars at a time, I could quickly go back and
re-record any mistakes. 

I was worried that using such a mechanically exact timing track and drum line
would make the final arrangement sound very mechanical.  My fears were
unfounded. The steady pulse of the drum line allowed me to play ahead or behind
the beat with the other lines as necessary and always return to a steady pulse
later. As I said, I was pleased with the final result. 

How would I handle something like a Chopin Nocture that 'rubatos' all over the
place?  That would be more difficult since it is impossible to program retards
or accelerandos with this drum machine.  I would program a click track of rim
shots or bass drum beats for the entire peice. Then to record that click, I
would play with the metronome pot in real time while recording it.  That would
probably work.  When I get my MPU-401 working, I will definitely allow accels.
and rits. to be programmable. 

Hope this helps.

regards,
jim
81.15HELOS::MALIKWed May 01 1985 18:4125
Re; click-tracks (more tricks)

	Instead of erasing the drum cues from the master, you can
(if your tape machine has tape/input switches on each channel) simply
switch the track to 'input' during those times when you do not want
to hear the drum. Kludgy but effective.

	I usually handle fermatas by determining exactly how long
the fermata will be.  And, then adjust either the click or the
drum to allow for that extra time.  For example, if I have a fermata
on the 4th beat of a 4/4 measure, I might decide that I want to
hold the note for 2 1/2 beats, have a beat of silence and then resume
the normal measure pattern - If I am using just a click pattern,
I would just count the clicks, with a drum machine I would program
that measure to be to 13/8. 

	Another suggestion - if your drum machine has separate outputs
for the various instruments, and there is one you are not using at
all, you can use that instrument as a cue. Run it to a separate
track.  Or, if you have sync to tape, you can run it to a separate
amp (the tape will drive the drum, you'll hear the 'cue', keep
the other drum sounds turned off).
							- Karl

p.s. relatedly; Has anyone used any of the Doctor Click boxes?