That’s it! When there are multiple pieces in a session, or a piece with multiple movements I dedicate some time to place CD markers (or simply ranges) for multiple export.
I am curious, though, why do crossfades get a click? It should be possible to trim the ends of the regions, and, since regions are semitransparent, to align overlapping regions in faze. There are, also, multiple types of crossfades in Ardour (right click on a crossfade…). Finding a right place to make cut and edit sometimes take time and effort, but it is certainly possible in Ardour - just make sure layering is correct.
That’s probably it. The renamed file was looking for the associated peak files, couldn’t find them so recreated them. That’s my best guess, at least. Again, if it no longer does that on re-opening you are good to go. Perhaps in future, saving snapshots of the file would be a better workflow? Your original files won’t be damaged by any editing so you can always return to original state easily.
I always aim for about 3 times myself too but only do the patches after I’ve listened through so I know exactly what I still need. On location, if the conductor has a sense that something needs patching of course we do it there and then. When I’m musician and engineer I find it difficult to focus on both so try to separate my roles as much as humanly possible. What is your incoming sample rate and bit depth?
As noted above, I don’t archive given that snapshots in Ardour and any editing in the DAW is going to be non-destructive. Your original files will always still be there. I do keep the original files off the recorder in a separate location during my work so that if the worst happens and my hard drive dies, I can always start again with the raw files.
Noise reduction, reverb, EQ and compression/limiting for me most of the time.
I agree with @vasakq. I’m not quite sure I follow so feel free to explain some more. One of the things that helps me tremendously is the transparency of waveform on overlap. In a typical edit I can precisely align a transient and then tweak the crossfades either side of the region to occur just before the transients. Works almost every time without further editing given the default short crossfade is like the source-destination fades in Sequoia and Pyramix and invisible to the naked ear (!). Of course, there are instances where a longer crossfade and type is better but easy to do as a follow-up as necessary.
I export to 44.1/16 FLAC, MP3 (can never settle on bitrate but 320kbps sounds safe) and for cd creation a wav+cue and DDP. I’m interested in using Opus format in the future.
I’m in a similar boat. I only have RX Standard because everything I need for classical is there aside from the new loudness stuff. However, I’m still on version 4 because I refuse to pay for upgrades that will make little difference to my classical workflow. That being said, psychologically, it hurts my brain every time a new version comes out and wondering if the spectral editing has improved any. Acon Acoustica Premium seems like a fantastic deal. I’ve used the demo enough to know that spectral editing is great plus you get all those amazing plugins like restoration, mastering, verberate etc. I don’t believe there’s anything lacking in the Acon software at least for classical. I’m going to purchase Acoustica Premium next major version number. Upgrades at $79 sound sweet!
Thanks! It does seem great, although I have to say that the Acon tools I’ve used so far (declick, deverberate, etc.) don’t seem quite as effective as the same tools in RX 7. But I’ll give Acoustica a try as I like the interface
I use WaveArts Master Restoration (and Power Suite) for the plugins and think those are still up there with the best. RX or Acon would be for manual spectral editing, loudness conformity and resampling/dither as necessary. Honestly, with Acoustica I’d also be excited to get Verberate 2 as part of the deal. The unknown for me is the resampling engine (doesn’t look as good in the tests but “looks” may not translate to audible). But to be honest, I’d probably be coming out of Acoustica in 32-bit float.
It varies. WaveARTs is great, but in general I find RX does tend to get better results, not that WaveARTs is bad at all, they aren’t, and they run in realtime which makes them a different tool as well. I have and continue to use both on occasion obviously. I do believe that WaveARTs does a bit better on cleaning up HF material in broadband noise reduction though to be honest. I also prefer their expander IIRC.
If I could only pick one, I would go with RX between those two. But WaveARTs is a close second, not quite as flexible but what it does it does well.
I think I know how to do a crossfade more or less. I only get the clicks when I merge all the regions in only one. The option in Spanish is “Combinar” (my Ardour is tranlated) maybe in English could be “Merge”? Maybe I only just should not do this.
About crossfades: In a musical phrase do you use the other modes of curves or only the predeterminate? The fast crossfade is very useful for the end and the start of the piece.
Of course… I should study more deeply the Ardour manual…
Should I use for my project noise reduction or compression?
If this is repeatable, go ahead and create a simple session that you can recreate it in and report it on the bug tracker. I don’t use the combine function much myself, but this sounds like an issue with it if you are getting clicks that you wouldn’t otherwise get.
Most of the time I use “Constant power” type, in fact I set this type as default in the Preferences. But I may use any other type depending of the situation. If the crossfade lasts for a tiny fraction of a second then I suppose the type does’t matter so much as when you want to make crossing over some longer note or a longer chord.
Only if necessary and, for flute, compression is all a matter of taste. There’s a Sound-on-Sound review of Flux Syrah and apparently he has great success using it on solo flute. However, this isn’t your average compressor and seems to work more program-dependent magic.
I’m an organist and harpsichordist as well as choral conductor and composer.
As per @seablade, stick to 24-bit during recording, editing and mastering and only move to 16-bit at export. You want to take advantage of the extra headroom and lower noise floor.
As I mentioned earlier, most of the time the default crossfade in Ardour/Mixbus is short enough that it is almost perfectly matched to the fades used by Sequoia and Pyramix for source-destination. For many edits I don’t need to adapt the length, only where the crossfade happens (almost always just before a transient to take advantage of the cool masking effect). As @vasakq stated, for longer fades over sustained chords and such, constant power is generally what you want. I find that for fade-ins and outs, there are better fade curves as described in the manual. How much silence to leave at the beginning and ends and fade length is another classical dilemma.
No takers on the loudness questions I posted earlier?
The next piece I will record have ppp in the low register and FFF in the highest, maybe could be useful a compressor for it. I’d like to try Flux Syrah. On other good compressor? Loudmax?
Edit: Not longer available and not for Linux:
Compressor in the master or in a bus?
Great! can I listen you or your music? You should have music for flute…
Yes, I think that the time could be similar to the anachruse of this movement. Each piece can be different, but I can be wrong.
I would like to discuss about this, but I have not a technical basis for do it…
On the subject I can say that I find small differences of level between each one of the pieces that I have recorded, perhaps I should equal the LUFS, they are close in all the pieces but not exactly the same…
Today I am much more critical of the results I get…
I’m listening to previous commercial recordings of mine and the sound I get with these mics is much worse. For a single flute record the result is not really professional.
Yesterday I managed to cancel a lot of wheezing with a multiband compressor, but still the sound of my flute is much worse than if I compare with previous recordings.
I think that without good microphones all this work is a waste of time…
It could be the mics, but there are several variables at play, such as the mics, the room, the preamps, the A/D converters. I’m not sure the CM-4 would make a huge improvement (I like it for my flute, but I’m playing in a completely different genre, traditional Irish, where there is little dynamic range and in the first octave the Irish flute is generally played at the edge between the first and second octaves so there are lots of harmonics and overtones). You could get much better mics, but you have to identify the limiting factor: is it the mics? The preamps? The distance from the flute to the mics? The room? When comparing home recordings to studio recordings there are a lot of variables that could be causing the difference and it’s hard to determine which one (or which combination) is key.
Is it possible for you to rent mics from a music store in Seville? If for example you rented a pair of Schoeps cardioids and put them in ORTF, then see whether that makes a difference, you can at least determine the role that the microphones are playing. One simple option, if it’s available for rent, is this https://schoeps.de/en/products/stereo/stereo-microphones/mstc-64-u.html (the mics are already set up in ORTF).
If they don’t make much difference see if you can rent a recorder like the Sonosax R4+, which has amazing preamps and by most accounts has now surpassed all the Nagras as the field recorder of choice. If that sounds better, perhaps your interface is the limiting factor.
Thank you @bradhurleyI think that level of equipment is going to be hard to find here for rent. And if there is, I think it’s going to cost me more than buying the CM4s.
The Audient preamps seem to be decent, I also think it has to be a mix of everything: the place where it was recorded, the placement of the microphones, the recording level, the artificial reverb and the microphones.
I find it very complicated to make a single flute cd on a professional level myself…
I’ve been traveling since Friday AM and will not have chance to respond properly until tomorrow. I hate typing on my phone but I will at least say this: don’t be discouraged! I think there are easy steps to take to improve the sound by discussing your workflow from the very start. That probably means revisiting your stereo array. I will also say this too… Your recordings sounded good to me especially given your recording venue and current microphones. More later!
Well, I compared “03.Sunayama.mp3” with the “Syrinx - Luis Orden - Eq2.wav” (my favorite of your recordings on this thread)… there are distinct differences, but I wouldn’t say that Syrinx is unprofessional compared to Sunayama. Sunayama has got this beautiful bright open sound to it without being harsh, if I’d have to guess I’d say there were some room microphones involved in the mix, which totally changes perspective and begs the question whether investing in much more expensive microphones will make the difference you are looking for. Syrinx sounds very different. The first improvement that comes to my mind would be to move microphone at least twice the distance from the flute and to record in the space large enough for the sound to develop and not to bounce back from the walls immediately. But, as I said before, it does not sound bad at all.
