Hi guys,
HarBal has been helpful, but quite often intuitQ suggests something that destroy my mix. The reason...very likely that my original mix was bad. Here are the details: -
Here's a screenshot of my HarBal. www.see-consulting.com/temp/HarBal.jpg The circle represents either a bad EQ or is something intuitQ doesn't like. Cos if I press the button, it looks like this http://www.see-consulting.com/temp/HarB ... ntuitQ.jpg
And usually after intuitQ, the music sounds muddy or very undefined. Is this a correct predictions of intuitQ or is there something wrong with my mix. 5 of my mixes that I've done always ended up with this region being reduced automatically by intuitQ.
I usually have to manually adjust it back to look something like this http://www.see-consulting.com/temp/HarB ... Adjust.jpg in order to get the sound that's decent. BUT, is this eq really OK? This is a rock/metal+rap tune. FYI, I use Spectralive as an enhancer prior to using HarBal.
Love to hear your comments.
Thanks.
Help in intuitQ suggestions: Usually cause bad sound
Help in intuitQ suggestions: Usually cause bad sound
Warm regards,
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
Jess,
IntuitQ isn't perfect. The current algorithm has a bias associated with it that I'm working on fixing by use of a slightly different approach.
Be that as it may, I would say with some certainty, that I would find your mix very difficult to listen to at length. The problem is you have very high relative output from 3-5kHz, no doubt from a distorted guitar, which corresponds to the region where human hearing is most sensitive. As such, it would make my ears, and probably a lot of others start to want to switch off as the track progresses.
It appears that you have also propped up the bottom end (around 100Hz and below) to compensate for the extreme lead guitar and the subdued midrange. Overall I'd suggest you would be better off with a mix in which the lead guitar and the bass and drums wasn't so prominant, which a fuller mid-range. In this case I tend to agree with the direction of the IntuitQ (even though it is perhaps a bit too far), though I'd also lower the bottom end as well. The high level of the bottom end is what is responsible for the muddiness that you are referring to.
My recommendation to you would be to consider re-mixing it to give a more balanced mix. Take a look at a good recording in the same genre. A good one that comes to mind is "leaning to fly" by "the foo fighters".
The other thing that concerns me is your monitoring environment. At a guess I think it may be adding quite a bit of bias to your mixing. What do you think about the balance of your mix when you listen to them through good quality headphones. I hope your hearing is in good shape too. Hearing loss has a tendancy to show up most at the regions of highest normal sensitivity (ie. around 3kHz) which is another reason why I don't want to expose myself to anything particularly extreme in that area. I'm hoping the quality of my hearing will last a long time.
Cheers,
Paavo.
IntuitQ isn't perfect. The current algorithm has a bias associated with it that I'm working on fixing by use of a slightly different approach.
Be that as it may, I would say with some certainty, that I would find your mix very difficult to listen to at length. The problem is you have very high relative output from 3-5kHz, no doubt from a distorted guitar, which corresponds to the region where human hearing is most sensitive. As such, it would make my ears, and probably a lot of others start to want to switch off as the track progresses.
It appears that you have also propped up the bottom end (around 100Hz and below) to compensate for the extreme lead guitar and the subdued midrange. Overall I'd suggest you would be better off with a mix in which the lead guitar and the bass and drums wasn't so prominant, which a fuller mid-range. In this case I tend to agree with the direction of the IntuitQ (even though it is perhaps a bit too far), though I'd also lower the bottom end as well. The high level of the bottom end is what is responsible for the muddiness that you are referring to.
My recommendation to you would be to consider re-mixing it to give a more balanced mix. Take a look at a good recording in the same genre. A good one that comes to mind is "leaning to fly" by "the foo fighters".
The other thing that concerns me is your monitoring environment. At a guess I think it may be adding quite a bit of bias to your mixing. What do you think about the balance of your mix when you listen to them through good quality headphones. I hope your hearing is in good shape too. Hearing loss has a tendancy to show up most at the regions of highest normal sensitivity (ie. around 3kHz) which is another reason why I don't want to expose myself to anything particularly extreme in that area. I'm hoping the quality of my hearing will last a long time.
Cheers,
Paavo.
Thanks for your feedback. You're right, it causes ear fatigue.
My guitar comes from a Line 6 Guitar POD. It has 3 knobs. The middle being the lowest. I shall turn down the treble and compensate them with the middle.
The EQ settings for the guitars were mainly influence from this article http://www.digidesign.com/digizine/arch ... /index.cfm
Notice they like to push the 2-4KHz higher. I thought that would be normal. I try to reduce it, though.
As for the bottom end. Hmm, yeah, maybe I turn down the bass and bass kick a bit. What's the definition of too high on the bottom end? Based on the screenshot you saw, what's the recommended bottom end to be?
Thanks for your advice, again.
My guitar comes from a Line 6 Guitar POD. It has 3 knobs. The middle being the lowest. I shall turn down the treble and compensate them with the middle.
The EQ settings for the guitars were mainly influence from this article http://www.digidesign.com/digizine/arch ... /index.cfm
Notice they like to push the 2-4KHz higher. I thought that would be normal. I try to reduce it, though.
As for the bottom end. Hmm, yeah, maybe I turn down the bass and bass kick a bit. What's the definition of too high on the bottom end? Based on the screenshot you saw, what's the recommended bottom end to be?
Thanks for your advice, again.
Warm regards,
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
Jess,
Take a look at the rock.anl reference file supplied with Har-Bal. That is a spectrum analysis of "Learning to Fly" by "The foo fighters". You should note that the spectrum is pretty much flat from 50Hz up to around 2kHz at which point it starts rolling off fairly gently. That is a typically good spectrum shape for rock/metal songs. If you want a fuller bass you can slope it down slightly from 50Hz up to 2kHz and then increase the roll off there after but if you look at your track you'll find you have a saddle in the mid-range. That is, it is high at the LF end and rolls off into a valley and then rises at 4kHz again. That gives rise to a thin mid-range sound made harsh by the over prominant top end which might sound OK on systems with poor bass response but on ones that do well at low frequencies it will be hard to listen to. You should really aim on getting the mid-range up a bit so the spectrum is more of a straight line from the peak LF point to the 3kHz point, whether flat or sloping down.
Cheers,
Paavo.
PS - By the way, if my description of the rock.anl file doesn't quite match it's because I'm describing it from memory without having it in front of me. The R & B reference is another worth looking at as well.
Take a look at the rock.anl reference file supplied with Har-Bal. That is a spectrum analysis of "Learning to Fly" by "The foo fighters". You should note that the spectrum is pretty much flat from 50Hz up to around 2kHz at which point it starts rolling off fairly gently. That is a typically good spectrum shape for rock/metal songs. If you want a fuller bass you can slope it down slightly from 50Hz up to 2kHz and then increase the roll off there after but if you look at your track you'll find you have a saddle in the mid-range. That is, it is high at the LF end and rolls off into a valley and then rises at 4kHz again. That gives rise to a thin mid-range sound made harsh by the over prominant top end which might sound OK on systems with poor bass response but on ones that do well at low frequencies it will be hard to listen to. You should really aim on getting the mid-range up a bit so the spectrum is more of a straight line from the peak LF point to the 3kHz point, whether flat or sloping down.
Cheers,
Paavo.
PS - By the way, if my description of the rock.anl file doesn't quite match it's because I'm describing it from memory without having it in front of me. The R & B reference is another worth looking at as well.
Thanks. You have been very helpful. I went back to my mix, lower the EQ on all those guitars with 2KHz-4Khz. I then....arbitrarily shift the EQ higher at around 500Hz to 1KHz (Good idea?). I then push it to Ozone Izotope for mastering and put a slight EQ drop at 3Khz. The result, when I view the graph at Harbal...it's much better than before. But, still InituitQ drops quite a bit more at 2-5 KHz. But I undo it and I think it's OK now.HarBal wrote:Jess,
Take a look at the rock.anl reference file supplied with Har-Bal. That is a spectrum analysis of "Learning to Fly" by "The foo fighters". You should note that the spectrum is pretty much flat from 50Hz up to around 2kHz at which point it starts rolling off fairly gently. That is a typically good spectrum shape for rock/metal songs. If you want a fuller bass you can slope it down slightly from 50Hz up to 2kHz and then increase the roll off there after but if you look at your track you'll find you have a saddle in the mid-range. That is, it is high at the LF end and rolls off into a valley and then rises at 4kHz again. That gives rise to a thin mid-range sound made harsh by the over prominant top end which might sound OK on systems with poor bass response but on ones that do well at low frequencies it will be hard to listen to. You should really aim on getting the mid-range up a bit so the spectrum is more of a straight line from the peak LF point to the 3kHz point, whether flat or sloping down.
Cheers,
Paavo.
I strike to achieve what you told me above in my next mix. THANK YOU.
Pretty much you described except at about 70-80Hz it goes up and then back down at 150Hz. I'm not sure how to achieve that in the mix, but I certainly can craft that EQ out in HarBal. I guess, the question here is, when does one draw the line to say, "OK, go back to your mix to produce as close as rock.anl" OR "It looks pretty OK, just craft it in Harbal to be closer to rock.anl"?HarBal wrote: PS - By the way, if my description of the rock.anl file doesn't quite match it's because I'm describing it from memory without having it in front of me. The R & B reference is another worth looking at as well.
Warm regards,
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
Jess,
As far as the peak in the spectrum of that rock reference, I'd guess it is a combination of the tuning of the kick bass plus the mic positioning that gives that response. I'm pretty sure it is the kick bass resonance.
As to what you should do, definitely do not match the spectrum but make it look similar to it and don't be afraid to do something different if you think it sounds better. Likewise, don't be afraid to disagree with intuitQ. Like I said, it isn't perfect and has an inherent bias in it that tends to overcompensate in the mid to upper mid range on certain spectrum shapes. It is something I am working toward fixing but haven't as yet. Oh, and if you haven't already done so I'd recommend reading the tutorial in the manual (select the "help/example tutorial" menu item). It covers a lot of dos and don'ts as far as using Har-Bal.
Cheers,
Paavo.
As far as the peak in the spectrum of that rock reference, I'd guess it is a combination of the tuning of the kick bass plus the mic positioning that gives that response. I'm pretty sure it is the kick bass resonance.
As to what you should do, definitely do not match the spectrum but make it look similar to it and don't be afraid to do something different if you think it sounds better. Likewise, don't be afraid to disagree with intuitQ. Like I said, it isn't perfect and has an inherent bias in it that tends to overcompensate in the mid to upper mid range on certain spectrum shapes. It is something I am working toward fixing but haven't as yet. Oh, and if you haven't already done so I'd recommend reading the tutorial in the manual (select the "help/example tutorial" menu item). It covers a lot of dos and don'ts as far as using Har-Bal.
Cheers,
Paavo.
Do you play in a loud band You are a guitar player)? Do you use headphones a lot at high volume. You may have hearing damage and need to 'boost' these frequencies so that, to you, it sounds well-balanced. And then when Har-Bal makes the correction the results sound bad to you.
You may also have speakers (monitors) that are not 'flat' so therefore you need to compensate by boosting the EQ.
Har-Bal isn't going to 'fix' these problems - only point out the weaknesses/deficiencies in you playback environment (your room), your monitors or your ears.
You may also have speakers (monitors) that are not 'flat' so therefore you need to compensate by boosting the EQ.
Har-Bal isn't going to 'fix' these problems - only point out the weaknesses/deficiencies in you playback environment (your room), your monitors or your ears.
Hi Jess and everybody! 
Thanks Jess for the post plus the link examples....You made me rethink a possible solution to my problem
Just in general I seem to have problems with my high end even without adding or boosting if anything I am a cutter... I think my problem may be a build up of sounds sharing the same frequencies...and I still am intrested in the SpectraLive plug in you mention and even their EQ But for now I'm a reformed GearSlut and I want to fix my first problem (magically through Har-Bal )but now I'm going to have to use it as a working tool and not magic 
(I was going to use SpectraLIve like that but I guess I'll try hard to get better sound to add that to 
before I buy it 
(I am reformed!)
Thanks for the inspiration to remix and fix
I was getting lazy and no one thinks a brittle mix is a hit!
Trina
Thanks Jess for the post plus the link examples....You made me rethink a possible solution to my problem
Just in general I seem to have problems with my high end even without adding or boosting if anything I am a cutter... I think my problem may be a build up of sounds sharing the same frequencies...and I still am intrested in the SpectraLive plug in you mention and even their EQ
But for now I'm a reformed GearSlut and I want to fix my first problem (magically through Har-Bal )but now I'm going to have to use it as a working tool and not magic (I was going to use SpectraLIve like that but I guess I'll try hard to get better sound to add that to before I buy it (I am reformed!)Thanks for the inspiration to remix and fix
I was getting lazy and no one thinks a brittle mix is a hit!
Trina
Trina,
Are you sure the problem you are having with the high end is affected by problems with your room acoustics? What is your monitoring situation? If it is compromised it can be very difficult to mix satisfactory results by ear and whatever Har-Bal or any other tool you buy will not fix that perception problem. I know treating rooms correctly is a rather black art but it is really imperative if you want to get the best results and above all, the greatest enjoyment from your endevours. I just had a great article emailed to me discussing the benefits of diffusion in studios. Take a look, it is very interesting reading and tallies with my experiences with sound.
http://www.electroacoustics.co.uk/article/essroom.htm
By the way, I have prototyped a new and improved IntuitQ algorithm that is so close to spot on it isn't funny. It even works for restoration work and individual instruments. It'll probably take 4-6 weeks before I'm ready for beta though. Hope you enjoy it when it is ready for release.
Cheers,
Paavo
Are you sure the problem you are having with the high end is affected by problems with your room acoustics? What is your monitoring situation? If it is compromised it can be very difficult to mix satisfactory results by ear and whatever Har-Bal or any other tool you buy will not fix that perception problem. I know treating rooms correctly is a rather black art but it is really imperative if you want to get the best results and above all, the greatest enjoyment from your endevours. I just had a great article emailed to me discussing the benefits of diffusion in studios. Take a look, it is very interesting reading and tallies with my experiences with sound.
http://www.electroacoustics.co.uk/article/essroom.htm
By the way, I have prototyped a new and improved IntuitQ algorithm that is so close to spot on it isn't funny. It even works for restoration work and individual instruments. It'll probably take 4-6 weeks before I'm ready for beta though. Hope you enjoy it when it is ready for release.
Cheers,
Paavo
Ahh, great to know you're putting more intelligence into the system. Will that be a free upgrade or is this a question for the marketing department?HarBal wrote:
By the way, I have prototyped a new and improved IntuitQ algorithm that is so close to spot on it isn't funny. It even works for restoration work and individual instruments. It'll probably take 4-6 weeks before I'm ready for beta though. Hope you enjoy it when it is ready for release.
Cheers,
Paavo
I've got one silly question: I added violins into my rock track and everywhere I go, people tend to say to boost a little on between 2K to 5K region. THat's the ear fatigue region. If I use HarBal and analyse the whole mix, then there's surely some peaks in that region due to the violins(at least). If I press record within HarBal then, would my guitars be boosted by 2K-5K regions as well?
I guess my question is really if I cut or boost X Hz within Harbal, it would affects all tracks isn't it...especially at tracks that resides mainly in that X Hz region?
Warm regards,
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
Free upgrade and you're spot on about boosting or cutting a final mix. It affects all instruments that reside in that band of frequencies you are adjusting. That is why if a track is way off you should re-mix and why it can also be helpful to EQ each track part independently.
The tricky bit with doing each part on its own is the difficulty of maintaining correct perspective. If you take a part an solo it you'll find that it sounds quite different to the way you think it sounds when acompanied by the other parts so you might be led into making the wrong EQ decisions.
Probably the best approach in EQ'ing individual parts is to just control errant peaks without altering the overall instrument character much. Then just mix to taste and cross-checking the outcome with Har-Bal before settling on a final mix.
Cheers,
Paavo.
The tricky bit with doing each part on its own is the difficulty of maintaining correct perspective. If you take a part an solo it you'll find that it sounds quite different to the way you think it sounds when acompanied by the other parts so you might be led into making the wrong EQ decisions.
Probably the best approach in EQ'ing individual parts is to just control errant peaks without altering the overall instrument character much. Then just mix to taste and cross-checking the outcome with Har-Bal before settling on a final mix.
Cheers,
Paavo.
It's no wonder they say the hardest part is mixing (not recording & not mastering)
If you could be so kind, I did another mix. This time, the bass and drums are tone down a little and the electric guitar, well, I created a valley of -3.25db at 2.9KHz. However when I view the entire mix, it looks like this http://www.see-consulting.com/temp/My_Mix.jpg
I can't seem to get rid of the ear fatigue 3KHz. When I bounced with JUST the acoustic guitar, drum and bass it has a slope from the bass region till a hump at 5KHz. (Yes the acoustic guitar was boosted at 5Khz). So, it confirms that the electric guitar is the main culprit for that bad 3KHz region.
Anyway, if I use IntuitQ, I get a graph like this, http://www.see-consulting.com/temp/After_IntuitQ.jpg
Well, it sounded OK and not bad this time. BUT, I would still appreciate if you can advise me what can be done to ensure my mix do not have such ear fatigue region prior to IntuitQ executing such dramatic fix.
FYI, the electric guitar is recorded from Line 6 POD 2.0 and is really just a rhythm guitar (no lead guitar in the mix) and only kicks in during chorus. I usually like 'metal' sound during chorus but the rest of the song is just pop-ish sound. Appreciate your kind advise.
If you could be so kind, I did another mix. This time, the bass and drums are tone down a little and the electric guitar, well, I created a valley of -3.25db at 2.9KHz. However when I view the entire mix, it looks like this http://www.see-consulting.com/temp/My_Mix.jpg
I can't seem to get rid of the ear fatigue 3KHz. When I bounced with JUST the acoustic guitar, drum and bass it has a slope from the bass region till a hump at 5KHz. (Yes the acoustic guitar was boosted at 5Khz). So, it confirms that the electric guitar is the main culprit for that bad 3KHz region.
Anyway, if I use IntuitQ, I get a graph like this, http://www.see-consulting.com/temp/After_IntuitQ.jpg
Well, it sounded OK and not bad this time. BUT, I would still appreciate if you can advise me what can be done to ensure my mix do not have such ear fatigue region prior to IntuitQ executing such dramatic fix.
FYI, the electric guitar is recorded from Line 6 POD 2.0 and is really just a rhythm guitar (no lead guitar in the mix) and only kicks in during chorus. I usually like 'metal' sound during chorus but the rest of the song is just pop-ish sound. Appreciate your kind advise.
Warm regards,
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
- Jess
Win XP SP2
2GB RAM
Novation Speedio
Cubase SX 3.1.1
FXPansion BFD 1.5.X
Lotsa of other VSTi
Paavo,
You have to be crowned the king now!
"By the way, I have prototyped a new and improved IntuitQ algorithm that is so close to spot on it isn't funny. It even works for restoration work and individual instruments. It'll probably take 4-6 weeks before I'm ready for beta though. Hope you enjoy it when it is ready for release."
I'm so happy my eyes are tearing! I will be able keep my mind focused on the writing and production instead of trying to polish my turd mixes...maybe they will start sounding like they hit someone and the person liked the hit instead of dying! 
Enjoying writing and production was my first love before I started having to somehow engineer! I get lucky occasionally and some big mixer will throw me a bone and mix my crap for a production point but then nothing has made it yet so then they wane cold and I don't blame them when they have paying right now gigs with big stars! I'm struggling to keep from drowning and you have now thrown me the biggest stick of the century! I'm trying out for a pop publishing deal very small almost no money involved... $20,000 for the year and at the same time a local brand new gospel record company (who needs the it's already done contemporary female stuff) is knocking at the same time...point being, I'm split into pop/r&b and contemp/urban gospel and need to write faster in order to hopefully get enough money to eat food to fuel my brain so I can write faster so I can buy and eat more food in order to gain enough weight to be seen on tv which does add 10 pounds surviving to get that first grammy (dreaming big here!) You probably changed my life! My mom will even thank you (not so secretly beleives I'll never make it!)
I cringe at the thought of you or anybody seeing my make shift monitoring situation! I have Mackie HR824 and Krk rockit5 and whatever they add to the bottom or so they are facing a closet wall with a wooden overhang / 4 ft from facing wall and overhang 3 ft over top of speakers! It's cramped but it's at my really slow commision only job as part of the trade off for not having much bussiness I get to do some music and all night too (no neighbors) so of course I have a sleeping bag here! It's sorta a compromise! SOoYES you , Paavo are a God send!
I know I'll be thanking you more so try to get used to it!
Trina (now checking out the link you gave! Thanks for that too!)
You have to be crowned the king now!
"By the way, I have prototyped a new and improved IntuitQ algorithm that is so close to spot on it isn't funny. It even works for restoration work and individual instruments. It'll probably take 4-6 weeks before I'm ready for beta though. Hope you enjoy it when it is ready for release."
I'm so happy my eyes are tearing!
I will be able keep my mind focused on the writing and production instead of trying to polish my turd mixes...maybe they will start sounding like they hit someone and the person liked the hit instead of dying! Enjoying writing and production was my first love before I started having to somehow engineer! I get lucky occasionally and some big mixer will throw me a bone and mix my crap for a production point but then nothing has made it yet so then they wane cold and I don't blame them when they have paying right now gigs with big stars! I'm struggling to keep from drowning and you have now thrown me the biggest stick of the century! I'm trying out for a pop publishing deal very small almost no money involved... $20,000 for the year and at the same time a local brand new gospel record company (who needs the it's already done contemporary female stuff) is knocking at the same time...point being, I'm split into pop/r&b and contemp/urban gospel and need to write faster in order to hopefully get enough money to eat food to fuel my brain so I can write faster so I can buy and eat more food in order to gain enough weight to be seen on tv which does add 10 pounds surviving to get that first grammy (dreaming big here!) You probably changed my life! My mom will even thank you (not so secretly beleives I'll never make it!)I cringe at the thought of you or anybody seeing my make shift monitoring situation! I have Mackie HR824 and Krk rockit5 and whatever they add to the bottom or so they are facing a closet wall with a wooden overhang / 4 ft from facing wall and overhang 3 ft over top of speakers! It's cramped but it's at my really slow commision only job as part of the trade off for not having much bussiness I get to do some music and all night too (no neighbors) so of course I have a sleeping bag here! It's sorta a compromise! SOoYES you , Paavo are a God send!
I know I'll be thanking you more so try to get used to it!
Trina (now checking out the link you gave! Thanks for that too!)
Thanks for the praise but don't speak too loudly in case you over-inflate my ego. I'd like to keep my feet on the ground please, or else I may become rude and unpleasant!
As to your monitoring situation, well we all have to start somewhere and live within the limitations of our own circumstance. It sounds like your doing fine.
The only other thing I'd add is that it is clear you are passionate about music so just make sure you stay true to that passion. What is important is your passion for music and not whether you'll become a mega star. If that happens to you and you want it to all well and good but if it doesn't don't let it bother you. It is the music and your self expression that is important, not the commercial success.
Fame + Success = Happiness ?
I think not. In my experience,
Happiness = Contentment
The more content you are, the more at peace you are with yourself and the world the happier you feel. It seems many in the entertainment industry end up being unhappy as they struggle for more fame and success. The seeds of their failings lie in their ambitions. I think everyones principle ambition should be to be happy but it seems that far too many people have the wrong idea about what brings happiness. For you I believe composition, self expression and performance gives you happiness so don't lose sight of that and give in to greed. If more comes of it then take it as a gift but I wouldn't like to see you get caught up on the fame bandwagon.
Sorry for getting carried away. Your last post was too emotive for me to stay silent.
Cheers,
Paavo.
As to your monitoring situation, well we all have to start somewhere and live within the limitations of our own circumstance. It sounds like your doing fine.
The only other thing I'd add is that it is clear you are passionate about music so just make sure you stay true to that passion. What is important is your passion for music and not whether you'll become a mega star. If that happens to you and you want it to all well and good but if it doesn't don't let it bother you. It is the music and your self expression that is important, not the commercial success.
Fame + Success = Happiness ?
I think not. In my experience,
Happiness = Contentment
The more content you are, the more at peace you are with yourself and the world the happier you feel. It seems many in the entertainment industry end up being unhappy as they struggle for more fame and success. The seeds of their failings lie in their ambitions. I think everyones principle ambition should be to be happy but it seems that far too many people have the wrong idea about what brings happiness. For you I believe composition, self expression and performance gives you happiness so don't lose sight of that and give in to greed. If more comes of it then take it as a gift but I wouldn't like to see you get caught up on the fame bandwagon.
Sorry for getting carried away. Your last post was too emotive for me to stay silent.
Cheers,
Paavo.