How do you know which Peaks & Valleys to change?
How do I get rid of the writing at bottom of screen so I can see Freq. Range?
How do I recall a saved Song?
I'm using Audiograbber{Ripper} & Real Player. I've connected Computer to Tascam 2488 outs to Monitors. Still sounds sub-par compared to The same Recording on 2488 via Monitors or Headphones. What can it be?
Where is the Edit Function?
Where's the Meter Light?
How do I record a copies of finished Songs? Can I record an Album straight from Har-Bal?
Thanks in advance,
Lucky
Questions, Questions Questions
-
Gordon Gidluck
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 7:18 pm
- Location: Arkansas
- Contact:
Hello,
For a cd extraction tool (ripper) I would recommend ExactAudioCopy from www.exactaudiocopy.de . It's the best.
After extracting the file, why don't you just open the file with Har-Bal and play it?
Other free options for playback are Foobar2000, or Audacity. Much better than Realplayer!!!
You will need a good monitoring system to master your tracks. I prefer flat sounding studio monitors, but you can get by using other speakers so long as you are familiar how other audio sounds on them.
What I tend to do is leave the high end alone and adjust the lows and mids until it sounds right. Then use a little high-shelving if it needs it.
Gordon
For a cd extraction tool (ripper) I would recommend ExactAudioCopy from www.exactaudiocopy.de . It's the best.
After extracting the file, why don't you just open the file with Har-Bal and play it?
Other free options for playback are Foobar2000, or Audacity. Much better than Realplayer!!!
The steepest ones. But, you still have to use your ears. The software gives you some visual clues to help you. But let your ears be the final judge.How do you know which Peaks & Valleys to change?
You will need a good monitoring system to master your tracks. I prefer flat sounding studio monitors, but you can get by using other speakers so long as you are familiar how other audio sounds on them.
What I tend to do is leave the high end alone and adjust the lows and mids until it sounds right. Then use a little high-shelving if it needs it.
Gordon
Last edited by Gordon Gidluck on Thu Aug 24, 2006 12:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lucky,
Did you read the tutorial in the help file?
You get rid of the text over the frequency scale with the "options/show tips" menu item.
I've asked plenty of times before but what sound device are you using on your laptop! It sounds like the intergrated one and it also sounds like your pluggin through your headphone out (as most integrated sound cards don't have line out). That is the most likely cause of the discrepancy in sound quality. Your best solution is a USB sound card as I suggested before!
You also say that you've tuned your room flat with an RTA and presumably a 1/3 octave equalizer. That is bad! Don't do it. It will destroy the clarity of the sound you get. The only way to treat room problems is with appropriate acoustic treatment. EQ'ing compromises the "direct to your ear sound" response for the sake of compensating for the reverberation anomalies in your room. That is why it may sound balanced but also ill-defined (because you've compromised the speakers frequency response).
The other thing you said is that you adjusted it flat (using pink noise I presume) which again is not optimal. Most good mastering studios will not have a flat pink noise response, they'll have one that tappers off at the top. It comes about because the best sounding rooms for music have shorter reverberation times for higher frequencies than they do for low frequencies. With your room adjusted as is you are likely to create mixes that will sound muddy on the average system.
The other thin you mentioned is that you have auralex in your studio. I'm rather wondering if you have too much. It seems to me to be quite common that people over-do the amount of absorption that that put into a listening space and end up with a dry and lifeless environment with narrow sweet spot. You'd probably be far better off replacing some Auralex with wide band diffusers.
To give some perspective on room acoustics and treatments, my room has few specialist highly absorbant materials in it. Most absorption comes from heavy curtains, a rug on a solid floor and ceiling suspended drapes (to kill floor to ceiling flutter). The only specialist absorption that I have is home made panel absorbers to mop up excess reverberant energy around the 3kHz region. The treatments that convert my average sounding room into an excellent sounding room are 4 quadratic residual diffusers (home made). Two on either side and two behind set at the primary reflection points to scatter early reflections. I've been doing some analysis of it lately and will probably put together some sort of documentation about the room and its characteristics so that other may possibly get some ideas about how to go about treating their room.
Cheers,
Paavo.
Did you read the tutorial in the help file?
You get rid of the text over the frequency scale with the "options/show tips" menu item.
I've asked plenty of times before but what sound device are you using on your laptop! It sounds like the intergrated one and it also sounds like your pluggin through your headphone out (as most integrated sound cards don't have line out). That is the most likely cause of the discrepancy in sound quality. Your best solution is a USB sound card as I suggested before!
You also say that you've tuned your room flat with an RTA and presumably a 1/3 octave equalizer. That is bad! Don't do it. It will destroy the clarity of the sound you get. The only way to treat room problems is with appropriate acoustic treatment. EQ'ing compromises the "direct to your ear sound" response for the sake of compensating for the reverberation anomalies in your room. That is why it may sound balanced but also ill-defined (because you've compromised the speakers frequency response).
The other thing you said is that you adjusted it flat (using pink noise I presume) which again is not optimal. Most good mastering studios will not have a flat pink noise response, they'll have one that tappers off at the top. It comes about because the best sounding rooms for music have shorter reverberation times for higher frequencies than they do for low frequencies. With your room adjusted as is you are likely to create mixes that will sound muddy on the average system.
The other thin you mentioned is that you have auralex in your studio. I'm rather wondering if you have too much. It seems to me to be quite common that people over-do the amount of absorption that that put into a listening space and end up with a dry and lifeless environment with narrow sweet spot. You'd probably be far better off replacing some Auralex with wide band diffusers.
To give some perspective on room acoustics and treatments, my room has few specialist highly absorbant materials in it. Most absorption comes from heavy curtains, a rug on a solid floor and ceiling suspended drapes (to kill floor to ceiling flutter). The only specialist absorption that I have is home made panel absorbers to mop up excess reverberant energy around the 3kHz region. The treatments that convert my average sounding room into an excellent sounding room are 4 quadratic residual diffusers (home made). Two on either side and two behind set at the primary reflection points to scatter early reflections. I've been doing some analysis of it lately and will probably put together some sort of documentation about the room and its characteristics so that other may possibly get some ideas about how to go about treating their room.
Cheers,
Paavo.
Gordon; I went to Exactaudio.com and downloaded their Ripper, and ended up with ExpressRip & WavePad. Does that sound right?
It must have been the Audio Grabber Ripper because the sound is equal to my Tascam 2488's Sound.
Made a new master of 2 songs and it sounded really good. Not a whole lot different but better. I think in time when I understand how to use all the features I'll achieve Pro results.
Paavo; I did read the Tutorials both for the freebie & the 2.2 I purchased. I'm reading it over & over to understand it as best as I can. Neophyte that I am.
Auralex designed a treatment for a Room with the same Dimensions as mine & I used that design for my Studio. When the Engineer came to Tune my Studio to Flat he didn't have to tweak it much. But in the World of sound a little is sometimes alot.
I'll try a different noise.
How do I tell what the volume level is on the Har-Bal so I can adjust it to commercial level?
Is there a way to tell what Instruments or Vocals are where? I want to make adjustments on certain ones but not really sure how to key in on them.
Where is the Meter Light & the Edit function?
Thanks,
Lucky
It must have been the Audio Grabber Ripper because the sound is equal to my Tascam 2488's Sound.
Made a new master of 2 songs and it sounded really good. Not a whole lot different but better. I think in time when I understand how to use all the features I'll achieve Pro results.
Paavo; I did read the Tutorials both for the freebie & the 2.2 I purchased. I'm reading it over & over to understand it as best as I can. Neophyte that I am.
Auralex designed a treatment for a Room with the same Dimensions as mine & I used that design for my Studio. When the Engineer came to Tune my Studio to Flat he didn't have to tweak it much. But in the World of sound a little is sometimes alot.
I'll try a different noise.
How do I tell what the volume level is on the Har-Bal so I can adjust it to commercial level?
Is there a way to tell what Instruments or Vocals are where? I want to make adjustments on certain ones but not really sure how to key in on them.
Where is the Meter Light & the Edit function?
Thanks,
Lucky
-
Gordon Gidluck
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 7:18 pm
- Location: Arkansas
- Contact:
In Har-Bal you might find the average db value useful which is to the upper right of the frequency trace.How do I tell what the volume level is on the Har-Bal so I can adjust it to commercial level?
If you are comparing two recordings, you can use the Equalizer->Match Loudness feature and Har-Bal will adjust the Limiter Gain slider up so that both match in level.
Other than that you would need to use other software and get RMS readings from your track and a comparable commercial track. RMS is a good indication of the relative loudness of your recording. However, I would shoot for a great sounding recording with good dynamics vs making it loud.
Sorry, but I'm not familiar with those. I am quite happy with Exact Audio Copy. Glad to hear that your extracted file is sounding better now. If you have spent money on improving your listening space I would take Paavo's advice and check into upgrading your computers soundcard too.Gordon; I went to Exactaudio.com and downloaded their Ripper, and ended up with ExpressRip & WavePad. Does that sound right?
I totally agree that it's not too good to have too much sound absorbant material in your control room either. One thing I did come across that was both interesting and related to this subject was Ethan Winer's method of absorbing low freq waves using baffles. See the article on "Building a Better Bass Trap". http://www.ethanwiner.com/articles.html
Here is a direct link to that article: http://www.ethanwiner.com/basstrap.html
Gordon
To figure out which hardware you have ho to windows control panel, double click on the "sounds and multimedia" icon, click on the Hardware tab of the dialog box. In the devices list you should find the name of the sound devices (among other things).
As I said before, the issue of quality is not so much the DAC, which are all pretty good these days, but the fact that laptops typically only have a headphone/speaker out jack and not a line out jack. As such, the signal is going from the DAC through an op-amp power amp which will compromise the signal somewhat. If your laptop has a line out and your using it then you don't have to worry but most laptops that I've had dealings with don't have line outs or line ins for that matter. It is somewhat bewildering that they don't as I can't see that it would cost much to include them in the design but they typically don't.
cheers,
Paavo.
As I said before, the issue of quality is not so much the DAC, which are all pretty good these days, but the fact that laptops typically only have a headphone/speaker out jack and not a line out jack. As such, the signal is going from the DAC through an op-amp power amp which will compromise the signal somewhat. If your laptop has a line out and your using it then you don't have to worry but most laptops that I've had dealings with don't have line outs or line ins for that matter. It is somewhat bewildering that they don't as I can't see that it would cost much to include them in the design but they typically don't.
cheers,
Paavo.
-
Gordon Gidluck
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 7:18 pm
- Location: Arkansas
- Contact:
The frequency trace is simply the har-bal graph.lucky wrote:Wonder why it didn't download Exact Audio???? That's what I thought I was downloading???? I'll try again.
Thanks for the Acoustc info. Familiar with those articles.
Where is Frequency Trace?
How can I tell what Souncard I have and if it's any good?
Where is the Meter Level?
Thanks,
Lucky
Paavo answered the question about how to find details of the soundcard, so I will skip that one. If you were to record silence from the soundcard, I think that you will find that the noise level is quite high compared to a soundcard with a line output. However, it may be good enough to work with. I use a laptop sometimes too. Only I don't record from the output jack, of course, just for listening. I bounce to a file and copy that over a network connection or move it to another computer using flash media and a card reader.
Har-bal doesn't provide metering of the playback signal. To do that you can use another tool called VUmeter.exe . Here is a link to a thread about it...
http://www.har-bal.com/ipw-web/bulletin ... .php?t=664
Gordon