Jump to content

Cubase test - Closer to the Heart

Rate this topic


ronws
 Share

Recommended Posts

I got one of the computers from work that is way newer than mine and I was able to install Cubase 5, given to me by a friend.

Granted, my mixing is rough, here, but just accomplishing being able to record is neat. Plus using the virtual mixer console. I still don't have the level right for vocals on the mic, even with a bit of compressor after the fact. But uI was having fun.

It's not the whole song. And I am used to playing and singing this at the same time but I decided to record separate tracks so I could teach myself some things about mixing.

cubase test with RUSH

https://app.box.com/s/aeodm3lof8maugvpvpw0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D This was pretty neat. I enjoyed it-- it sounds like you had fun playing with the software. Great energy, and I love what you can do with your voice. [Also listened to the original Rush song and it's fantastic, can't wait to hear when you record the full version!]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounding good Ronws. :D

It is a whole new animal recording different parts at different times but it gives you a chance try try new things without having to worry about screwing up other parts that you like.

You may be the kind of guy who believes in one take start to finish but having to rerecord the whole song because you had a lapse of memory is a pain in the *** . I have spent hours recording one song because of false starts and stupid interuptions and finally just posting a flawed effort just to get it on the board for feedback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why many of the pros record everything on separate tracks. I made the same mistake in the past. Flub after 5 minutes of song then have to redo it...many times. That's why I now record one phrase at a time on separate tracks. Any mistakes, you only have to re-record a short part, not the whole song again. If you want better results, try that. Just offering recording advice...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. That's why I now record one phrase at a time on separate tracks. Any mistakes, you only have to re-record a short part, not the whole song again. If you want better results, try that. Just offering recording advice...

I read somewhere that is how Axl Rose records vocals. Probably for the same reason. If he doesn't like it, he only has to work on a 3 or 5 second snippet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty cool recording...love Rush!! :)

I never thought about recording vocal tracks like that...although I have done something similar anyways. I have tried to pull off 1 really good take of the whole vocal track, and then I go back and pick out the worst phrases and sections and re-record those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Basslord.

I was watching a tutorial on recording vocals. And the guy made several good suggestions. A singer can sing complete takes, which is really wearing on the singer. And then, later, you can slice and dice and copy and paste.

Or, a quicker way is to start recording. And when you get to a foul-up, start recording again only from where the foul-up was, rather than the whole thing, again. You get through the vocal recording much quicker. The singer remains interested. Later, you just mix down the partial tracks into the final recording. And it is no more laborious to apply auto to each track than several complete tracks.

Or, you could do as my brother suggested, record each phrase of lyrics separately. For recording purposes, it is not "cheating."

Now, for me, performance wise, I would still work on a single vocal but when it comes to recording a good run, that requires a different (slightly) perspective than live performance.

On the other hand, I still get my performance practice when I record guitar and vocals as one track and one mic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Basslord.

I was watching a tutorial on recording vocals. And the guy made several good suggestions. A singer can sing complete takes, which is really wearing on the singer. And then, later, you can slice and dice and copy and paste.

Or, a quicker way is to start recording. And when you get to a foul-up, start recording again only from where the foul-up was, rather than the whole thing, again. You get through the vocal recording much quicker. The singer remains interested. Later, you just mix down the partial tracks into the final recording. And it is no more laborious to apply auto to each track than several complete tracks.

Or, you could do as my brother suggested, record each phrase of lyrics separately. For recording purposes, it is not "cheating."

Now, for me, performance wise, I would still work on a single vocal but when it comes to recording a good run, that requires a different (slightly) perspective than live performance.

On the other hand, I still get my performance practice when I record guitar and vocals as one track and one mic.

Hey, Bro, what you are referring to there is called punching in. Timing has to be precise when doing so because it still gets recorded onto your "one" vocal track. Trust me. Try both and you will see why I suggest it. Using multiple tracks is much easier than punching in. Also, as a note, punching in was invented as a means of re-recording tracks back in the analog tape recording days, which also had much fewer tracks available for recording. You had to make every track count. A particular size tape only allowed so many tracks. I still have a Tascam 8 track recorder that uses Type II Chrome Tapes for recording. That size tape has only enough space for 4 tracks on each side. When recording, it records your 8 tracks on both sides of the tape simultaneously. Therefore, you cannot flip it over and use the back side. It also allowed for mixing everything down to one track this opening up the remaining 7 again for recording. But, due to the physical limitations of tape, it becomes a copy of a copy. Which means the more you do it, the less the audio quality. The proverbial recording piper has to be paid. Digital recording allows for much more freedom in controlling every aspect of recording. Easier to add effects digitally as well, than with analog.

Told ya, I'm a wealth of info on this subject. Thinking about putting together a home studio program with video instructions on how to do things......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's ok. I was just giving definitions to the above mentioned recording techniques and suggesting which one is easier to use. Trying to make everyone's recording life easier. People will learn that when the punch in technique sometimes doesn't key up when it's supposed to, one gets frustrated quickly as one sings the best track of one's life just to discover it didn't record...takes the wind out of one's sales from time to time.

Just trying to give others the benefits of my recording mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. Rather than trying to record a patch and line it up, better to re-start on another track just before the foul-up and go from there, of course, after deleting the foul-up so that it doesn't mess you up when monitoring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's exactly what I am saying. Also, when you record digitally, the better software will allow you to adjust timing as well. Basically by dragging the track as necessary. How do you think I incorporated your vocal tracks when we collaborated on "Heaven on Their Minds"?

I imported the tracks, then "dragged" them to where they needed to be, then added effects to the tracks.

As far as editing out sounds, good software allows for editing the track, highlighting a section and basically muting or silencing that small section.

But yes, you will be less stressed and frustrated when you only have to re-record a small section rather than an entire track. As comparison, in one of our last posts here, when you punch in(re-recording a part using the same track as the entire vocal line), if you make a mistake, it still affects the entire track. Or as sometimes happens, it doesn't kick in like it's supposed to and doesn't record. If you are like me, then that one time it doesn't record will be the time you sing it your absolute best as if your life depended on it. And the only one who got to enjoy your awesomeness, is you. Because the next take isn't as awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doing "closer to the heart," I did not have to tempo adjust the second track or line it up. It came out like what you hear.

Kind of like an aggie. When he quits beating his head against a brick wall, it feels better. Though I went to UT at Arlington, which makes me a longhorn by extension.

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...