Video in SHS

Something that I haven't played around much is the video import/export of Sonar Home Studio. Part of the reason is that, from what little I've monkeyed around with it, this feature seems really limited. Basically, you can import a video file (.avi, .mpg, .wmv, .asf, .mov), edit the accompanying sound track, and export it as a .wmv or .mov video file.

SHS provides zero video editing capabilities; you can't even insert an extra measure or two before the video begins. And I'd like to be able to export to .mpg or .avi files, but of course Cakewalk doesn't like MPEG. (But it can be made to work; see my entry on using the LAME mpg encoder.)

That said, if you just need to add a good quality soundtrack to existing video, SHS should work fine. To get started, just open a new file, then select File -> Import -> Video... and choose the video file you want to import. There are options for importing the audio and importing audio as mono; since the video files off my camera are all mono anyway, I didn't have to worry about that. It opens the video in a new window with the video enlarged, but because I do most of my work in the track view, I close this window. At the top of the track view will be the video track; choose the video thumbnail button to see frame-by-frame thumbnails in this track.



Below this will be the audio that was imported with the file; depending on what you're trying to do, you could use this as a reference, then mute it once you've created your own audio.

Once you've finished (and at intermittent points along the way, just to be safe), save the Cakewalk file so you can go back and edit later, if need be. To use the new video file, choose File -> Export -> Video and select the correct options.

If you have any other tips/tricks, I'd love to hear from you; either leave a comment below, or send me an e-mail. Have a great day!

Apple: Unlimited Music?

I just read an interesting article about Apple negotiating with the major labels to offer unlimited downloads for the iPhone and (possibly) the iPod. This is huge, and as a consumer, it definitely gets my heart racing.

The problem I have with it is that, assuming they sell a device with this option for maybe $50 extra, will this mean even less money goes to the artists and songwriters? According to the article, Apple wants to pay just $20 per device to the record companies - and that's collectively, not individually.

I don't like being pessimistic, but it seems that it's going to be harder and harder to make a living as a musician in the coming years. But am I missing something? Let me know what you think!

John Lennon / Paul McCartney

Seems to be Beatles week for me:

• Last week the American Idol contestants had to perform songs written by Lennon and/or McCartney,
• This week they have to perform more Beatles songs,
• And plus there was the whole divorce settlement thing for McCartney in the news. (And by the way, Mills complaining that she didn't get enough?!? If I had a tenth of what she got, that would make my decade!)

So with all that, I've been thinking about the Beatles and their music. Just listening to the range of songs chosen by the AI contestants has given me a renewed appreciation for the amazing range of styles and feels performed by the Fab Four. It's inspiring, but at the same time depressing when I think about how many songs I haven't written. Sigh...

Three-hour Song: The Result

To recap: Computer Music ran an article on recording a song in an hour, but I wanted to see if I could actually write the song and record it within a 3-hour time limit. After all, if you already have a song written and arranged, laying down a few tracks should actually be the easy part.

So, how did this experiment turn out? I'd say it was a mixed success. Although I ended up not timing myself (what was I thinking?), I'd estimate that the total time was somewhere between 3 and 4 hours, which is still not bad. But even finding those very few hours over the course of a week turned out to be more of a challenge than I expected, and finding time when the house was quiet enough to get some recording done was even harder. (You should see the black circles around my eyes this morning from staying up late to get this finished.)

So what did I learn? I guess there were some key points:

• Limiting yourself to a set time period won't do it for a multi-platinum selling CD, but it is a good way to force yourself to focus and get a song written and recorded.
• Templates rock. I had a couple track templates set up in Sonar Home Studio for vocals and guitar; after this, I'm going to also create templates for backing vocals, bass, and whatever else I can think of. This is definitely the fastest way to work, for me.
• One thing that worked to my advantage was my familiarity with my recording setup and with Sonar Home Studio. If I hadn't taken the time in the past to learn the program, this would have taken much, much longer.

So I'm sure you're at least slightly curious to hear the finished product. I'll get it posted and provide a link tonight. In the meantime, have a great day, and if you have any questions or comments, please don't hesitate to drop me a note!

Click here to take a listen. Hope you like it!

3-hour Song: Update

So, the 3-hour song hasn't happened, yet. Blame it on attending Grandpa's funeral last weekend and on the constant care required by a brand-new baby, along with the normal work and commuting responsibilities. Welcome to life, right?

I'm not giving up, though. I did have at least one good idea, and the next step is just writing up the lyrics and getting it arranged. Hopefully this week will go a little more smoothly (fingers crossed).

3 Hour Song?

In the January 2008 issue of Computer Music, there was an article about how to record a track in an hour. I thought that sounded fantastic, but then I realized that the really hard part – actually writing a song – wasn’t included in that hour. Granted, getting a song recorded in an hour is already quite a feat, but that’s really more about the technical side of the process.

What I’d like to do is try writing a song in a short amount of time. Like most people I know, I’m pretty busy most of the time. I’ve got a seven-year-old and a brand new baby, which both take up a fair amount of my time. And of course, it’s a priority to spend at least a few minutes with my wife every day. And then there’s work, studying for the CPA exam, and hanging out with friends… That doesn’t leave a lot of time for making music.

But the article made me think. What if I said that of the 168 hours in a week, I’d give three of those to making music? Surely that’s doable. Granted, I won’t have the next “Thriller” done in 3 hours, but at the very least I’d start building a library of complete ideas that I could later develop or rework, if I decided they were worth it. And that would be 52 songs in a year, which, for someone that’s on pace for about one song annually, is quite an increase in productivity.

So, here’s the challenge: Starting this week, I’ll set aside 3 hours to write and record a complete song. I figure there’s not really any chance that it’ll turn out a top 40 hit, but it will be a good exercise and improve my songwriting and recording skills.

The Computer Music article broke down the recording process by time: 20 minutes for rhythm guitar, 15 minutes for bass and drums, etc. Here’s my breakdown:

• Write lyrics – 45 minutes
• Write the melody & chords – 30 minutes
• Arrangement – 15 minutes
• Record rhythm guitar(s) – 20 minutes
• Record bass & drums – 15 minutes
• Record vocals – 20 minutes
• Record any solos – 20 minutes
• Final mix and tweaks – 15 minutes

Looking at that, that’ll cut things pretty close, but it might actually be doable. I’ll start the process this week, and let you know next week if I actually succeeded, or if I was completely overwhelmed.

Basic Recording Studio

My theory is that these days, the average consumer has access to equipment that is perfectly capable of producing CD-quality recordings. What is often lacking (in my music, for example) is the requisite knowledge and experience. If a professional recording engineer was stuck on an island with the most basic of setups, he or she could still produce a fantastic recording.

So what does it take to set up a decent workable recording studio? Here’s a list of what I think is the foundation for a perfectly good studio:

Mic (MCA SP-1)	$40
Mic Stand	$20
Mic Cord	$10
Pop Filter	Free	I used an old pair of pantyhose stretched (clean, of course) over a wire hanger.
Mixer (Soundcraft Compact 4)	$100
E-MU0404 SoundCard	$100
Misc. Cables	$100	Just a guess… I’ve built up quite the collection over the years.
Altec-Lansing Speakers	$70
SHS6XL	$210	Or $80 for the upgrade from earlier versions...
Computer	$700	Rough price for a fairly basic Dell desktop.

So let’s see… That’s a grand total of $1350, but over half of that is for a computer. If you already have a half decent computer, you’re already halfway there!

Of course, I'm also a big fan of using what you have, and slowly building up. For example, I've been using the Altec-Lansing speakers for a while now, but an upgrade to higher-quality monitors will probably be my next purchase.

For me, Sonar Home Studio provides a big part of the studio. Along with providing a sequencer and MIDI editing capabilities, many, if not all, of the necessary effects and processors are included. With SHS, I have access to reverb, eq, compressor, etc. And because it supports VST effects and instruments, I can also find a huge number of effects free on the web, some of which are quite good.

Feel free to drop me a note and let me know what you think. Am I totally wrong? Do we really need mics that cost thousands of dollars, tube compressors, etc? Or can a high-quality recording be produced on a setup as basic as that described above?

Made-to-Order MIDI

There's a program called Band-in-a-Box that's a good complement to with Sonar Home Studio. If you haven't seen it before, BiaBit basically generates MIDI based on a bunch of different styles included with the program. You just enter chords at the appropriate place, tell it how long the song is, how many times to repeat, and the style, and it creates the appropriate music.

I have a really old version of the software... In fact, I think it was written for Windows 95 (or maybe even 3.1... Anyone remember Windows 3.1?). Obviously, they've made a lot of changes to it since then, but the basic idea is still the same. The reason I say it's useful is that you can easily create scratch tracks using Band-in-a-Box, and then replace and add to them as you see fit. This is especially good for drum tracks, since BiaB includes drum fills, style changes for the chorus, etc.

The only thing I really didn't like about BiaB was the quality of the MIDI sounds. Unfortunately, this was a function of the use of the General MIDI Map in Windows, so BiaB couldn't change much about that. Using the soft synths included in SHS makes a huge difference in the sound.

To create a scratch track, just create the song in BiaB, export the MIDI file, and then open SHS and import the MIDI file. Send the outputs to TTS-1 or another synth (see my earlier posts on TTS-1 and Session Drummer 2) and you're ready to start recording your own stuff.

Note: Doing this won't make the next platinum-selling hit, but it's a good way to generate ideas and feels for a song, and it provides a good starting place. It's also good as a practice aid if you're learning an instrument, or just trying to keep in playing shape; in my case, I mute the bass part and use create my own part, or even just try to play in the style of the track.

Babies and Music

I've proven conclusively that it's next to impossible to get much accomplished when there's a new baby in the house. Apparently they like to cry when they're hungry, when they're sleepy, when they need a diaper change... Who knew? :-p

So that's my excuse for not trying to do much musically - that and having to go back to work this week.

Mics

An admission: I know next to nothing about microphones. For years I've used a cheap dynamic mic that I picked up while living in Taiwan.

But then, a couple weeks ago I saw a recommendation for a $40 condenser mic on the Cakewalk forums, and I thought, "Wow, even I can afford that!" (Barely.) So I went ahead and ordered it.

So it arrived last week, and what a difference it makes!!! I don't know if my old dynamic mic is just too old, but I'd have to turn the trim and gain on my mixer way up to get a signal loud enough to use. Unfortunately, doing this introduced a ton of noise, since my little Behringer UB802 mixer doesn't have the greatest quality.

But when I plugged in the MCA SP-1, I didn't have that problem at all. It recorded at a great level, and my voice actually sounded halfway decent with it (halfway decent is about as good as my voice gets...). I'm going to play around with it a lot more in the next few weeks, especially with vocals and my acoustic guitar. Who knows, I might even dig out my trumpet and see how that records.

A couple basic things to keep in mind for condenser mics:

1. Condenser mics, unlike dynamic mics, require phantom power. My mixer has the required 48k phantom power, and it seems to work just fine.
2. Condenser mics are more susceptible to plosives (like the "p" sound), so it makes sense to either buy or make a pop filter. They're easy to make: Just take a nylon stocking and stretch it over a wire hanger shaped into a circle. I made it with about an 8" diameter, and have it set up about 3" from the mic; I then stand about 3" from the pop filter, so that it's about halfway between me and the mic. Using a pop filter is also recommended to prevent excess moisture in the mic from the vocalist's breath (and spittle in some cases).

By the way, I'd really like to hear your comments on anything I've written about. Please drop me a note and tell me what you think!

Buses - Reconsidered

I've been doing a little reading up on mixing techniques, and realized that my use of buses might be a bit over-complicated for what I do, and that I could be using them more effectively.

To start with, for what I do, I realized that it doesn't really make sense to have a Sum Bus, a Monitor Bus, and a Headphone Bus. That would make sense if you want to send a different mix to a vocalist, for instance, but since I'm the only one using my micro-studio, it's not really necessary. So, I've made a move to just use a Master Bus, and change the output on that to either the monitors or the headphones as needed. I'll also use the Boost 11 on that bus, and any other effects that I want on the entire mix.

But here's the new stuff I learned. I'd been reading in Basic Mixing Techniques that delay-based effects (reverb, chorus, etc.) should be used with Aux Sends. So I went into SHS to figure out how to achieve this. After a little playing around, I figured out that you can achieve this using the following steps:

1. Create a new bus and label it; in my case, I just used Aux 1 and Aux 2, but Aux: Reverb and Aux: Chorus would have been more descriptive.
2. In track view, right click in the appropriate track pane, select Insert Send, and choose the appropriate bus.
• 
3. Make sure that the send is on (click the little box in the lower left) and adjust the send level to the desired amount.
   
• 

Really not that hard, and using this method will save on CPU usage, since you'll have several tracks making use of one effect, rather that having a separate effect for each track.

On the other hand, processors, such as compressors and equalizers, should be inserted in each individual track. That's where one would make use of the FX bin in the track pane.