You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Guitar chord forum - chordie → Posts by jerome.oneil
So is Reaper. If you don't pay for it, all you end up with is a bit of a counter on startup reminding you that you have been using the software for X days.
If you want to pay for it, it's $60 if you're an amateur shmoe like me, and $225 if you're putting out commercial records with it. While it's not quite Pro Tools, it's pretty close.
Garage Band is awesome for one fact alone: The video guitar and piano lessons that come with it. If you want to bang out a quick rhythm track to jam along with, it's pretty good at that, too. If you're looking for more full featured DAW software, I don't think you can find a better value than Reaper from Cockos.
Well, isolating a space that small would be really tough, and would most likely result in a space even smaller than you've got now. Isolation means you have to absorb a whole lot of sound energy, and you do that by using very dense materials like rockwool and double layers of sheet rock, and through construction techniques like hanging the ceiling, doubling the walls, and floating the floor. A lot of studio walls are actually filled with sand in order to provide isolation.
If what you are looking for is a practice space for just you, you will probably have more luck (and more fun) with a good set of headphones plugged into your amp.
And get to know your neighbors. Let them know you play guitar and if it's ever too loud to come on over and let you know. You might be surprised at how people react to that.
jerome.oneil wrote:bunbun wrote:"....I would never submit to binding arbitration as it eliminates my right to appeal if I don't like the outcome,..."
Isn't that a waste of time and cost then? I would not want to go into a non-binding arbitration situation as it can take forever or, if you are an employer, it allows you to rule by fiat. If the employees then went to arbitration over, lets say a contract or employee issue, the employer, even though he may have been found on the wrong end of the decision, can impose what he wants.
We have Non-binding arbitration where I am employed due to a stupid decision by the firefighters association years ago. A few years ago I was denied my step increase because the chief heard a rumor. Though the rumor was untrue and the investigation found the rumor was baseless he decided to deny me my increase anyway. I grieved it and lost. I did not take it to arbitration because the chief, after he lost, would have denied the decision anyway.
My point is that you have binding arbitration or you don't arbitrate. Often contracts require arbitration in lieu of lawsuits. If the arbitration is not binding how does one who is wronged get their opportunity to right the wrong?
If you have non-binding arbitration and don't like the outcome, you can always take your issue to the courts (which is where you can still go). Since the arbiters are generally paid by the employer, there is an inherent conflict of interest and bias with them. Would you really prefer to arbitrate a dispute with your employer and be forced to abide by the decision of the arbiter when the arbiter is being payed by your employer, too?
Binding arbitration offers no appeal. It is putting all of your eggs in one basket, and hoping the fox in the hen house is honest about counting them fairly. I would *never* deny myself the option of the courts.
Why arbitrate then? In my book if one is going to go the route then why not just go to court? Again: Arbitration, especially non-binding arbitration is merely a waste of time. I realize many contracts require arbitration in-lieu of tort but I feel that is a way for a party to extend an issue an indefinite amount of time until the other party goes away.
Arbitration is supposed to be a way of dealing with a legal issue without tying up the courts time yet it has been bastardized as a tool to waste a person's time. Non-binding arbitration is one more way to avoid judgement even if you are wrong as it allows you, if you are the "guilty" party, to continue to tie up the other parties money and time until you get the decision that fits you.
How is that right?
I know, I know...I the legal sense there is no right or wrong just winners or losers. Perhaps the legal profession should get back to right and wrong.
Non-binding arbitration offers a way to come to a satisfactory resolution without tying up the courts. In many cases, it can and does just exactly that. Most disputes (contractual, anyway) are not %100 right/wrong scenarios, and arbitration can offer up an easy way to find the middle ground. If the parties are satisfied with the outcome, then it's done. If they're not, they can then go to the courts. With binding arbitration, you deny yourself that avenue.
Yep, absolutely. http://tascam.com/product/us-122/specifications/
Multitrack recording with these things requires a little bit of knowledge about your DAW software, but once it's set up, it's a cake walk. It will also let you hook up higher end mics, rather than using USB mics. Here is a good article on selecting an audio interface. http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/nov04/a … sician.htm
Regarding your comments on getting close to the mic, dynamic mics like yours are intended for vocal and close amp use and are designed to handle high volumes. Getting right up on it is how you will get the best sound out of it. If you're looking for a "room" mic, then a condenser mic like I listed above is what you want. Those things will pick up every footstep and gnat belch within 50 feet.
What software are you using to record with?
"....I would never submit to binding arbitration as it eliminates my right to appeal if I don't like the outcome,..."
Isn't that a waste of time and cost then? I would not want to go into a non-binding arbitration situation as it can take forever or, if you are an employer, it allows you to rule by fiat. If the employees then went to arbitration over, lets say a contract or employee issue, the employer, even though he may have been found on the wrong end of the decision, can impose what he wants.
We have Non-binding arbitration where I am employed due to a stupid decision by the firefighters association years ago. A few years ago I was denied my step increase because the chief heard a rumor. Though the rumor was untrue and the investigation found the rumor was baseless he decided to deny me my increase anyway. I grieved it and lost. I did not take it to arbitration because the chief, after he lost, would have denied the decision anyway.
My point is that you have binding arbitration or you don't arbitrate. Often contracts require arbitration in lieu of lawsuits. If the arbitration is not binding how does one who is wronged get their opportunity to right the wrong?
If you have non-binding arbitration and don't like the outcome, you can always take your issue to the courts (which is where you can still go). Since the arbiters are generally paid by the employer, there is an inherent conflict of interest and bias with them. Would you really prefer to arbitrate a dispute with your employer and be forced to abide by the decision of the arbiter when the arbiter is being payed by your employer, too?
Binding arbitration offers no appeal. It is putting all of your eggs in one basket, and hoping the fox in the hen house is honest about counting them fairly. I would *never* deny myself the option of the courts.
If it's packing foam, it probably isn't fire retardant. If it's furniture foam, it might be.
The fire that killed 100 people at a Great White concert a while back was fueled primarily by packing foam hung on the walls.
Either way, the acoustic properties of the foam aren't going to do much for you. It might shave a bit off the very high frequencies, but it wont do anything for the low freqs where most recording problems are.
Small booths are good for vocals, as you want vocal recording to be as "dead" as possible. Isolating the booth (as opposed to acoustically treating it) is a matter of adding density. Make the walls as thick as you can with the densest material you can find. If isolation isn't at issue, then buy good quality acoustic foam (designed for purpose) and deaden the room as much as possible. Since the space is too small to ever give you that "live" sound, go the other way, get the dead sound as much as you can, and then treat the recording in post-processing.
Just how much space in the shed are we talking about?
I'm gonna disagree with Phill on the egg crates and furniture foam. It isn't effective at all for isolation and it's a pretty massive fire hazard. Isolation needs to manage long wavelengths in low frequencies, and acoustic foams are designed to dampen those. Egg foam in speaker cabs can be effective, but for a studio space you'll want something a bit more effective and safe.
There is an awesome book about how to build recording areas in small spaces by Rod Gervais that I'd recommend. Great stuff for spaces of every size and shape.
Guitars and motorcycles all make beautiful sounds, so it's totally on topic. 
toots they were known as Pocket Rockets then,I had a Kawasaki 500 triple one of the fastest bikes for that time,my friend had the 400 and he kept up with me till I hit fourth gear.
That was the 2 stroke, wasn't it? Those things were insane (and loud (and smoky)).
I'm sorry I got to this late, but I would suggest starting with a good audio microphone rather than the camera. Buy a cheap camera. Start recording both audio and video at the same time, and then simply merge the two. You'll get a much better finished product. Remember, you're recording a song. The video quality should be secondary to the audio quality.
Good quality condenser microphones are cheap, and will give you orders of magnitude better audio quality than you will get with whatever mic comes with your camera.
http://www.amazon.com/MXL-990-Condenser … mp;sr=1-15
funny dino and jerome.I have 3 yamaha acoustics,a mex strat and an epiphone dot. Cheap is good.I also have a 1992 f-150.Altogether,wouldnt be worth the price of a good american strat or les paul.
I've owned Yamaha acoustics (well, borrowed one and didn't want to give it back) and I absolutely love my Dot. I've also owned an F-150 (with the 351c and extended cab) but it was an '81. Other than the 12MPG, I loved that truck.
jerome.oneil wrote:Zurf wrote:OK. You might convince me to buy a Triumph.
- Zurf
The Speed Triple is one of the greatest achievements on two wheels.
Indeed it is, but it's not £2500 better than the screaming Street Triple and STR which use a very slightly detuned version of the engine from the 675 Daytona, try one, I promise you'll be grinning from ear to ear.
Jerry
I haven't ridden the Street Triple, but I have ridden the 675, and, uhhh, yeah! Loved that bike. Still grinning.
OK. You might convince me to buy a Triumph.
- Zurf
The Speed Triple is one of the greatest achievements on two wheels.
I haven’t splurged yet...but I’m being honest with my preconceptions. I’m trying to get a few basic rhythms down and I’ve been strumming every guitar I can get my talons on. I feel a bit nervous in the humidified back rooms taking down the Martins that cost more than my car.
That's the best way to do it. Play as many as you can, and you will eventually find one that "fits" you. You may also want to play a lot of different instruments of the same make and model, particularly at the lower end of the price range. You might get three different QA people with very different standards all looking at the same production run, and the result will be three very different guitars. That is why I always tell people that they should never buy a guitar they haven't played.
dino48 wrote:I have a yamaha acoustic and a stratocaster made in mexico,they are both very good guitars. The japanese make some good guitars,yamaha,takamine etc.
If I wanted a motorcycle I'd buy a Harley. Ok, I doubt it's the same Yamaha company, but unless you're into music it's as ridiculous as buying a Honda or Toyota acoustic.
It’s like a novice chess-player trying to choose an opening repertoire that fits his play-style…he has no style.
It's the same company. Yamaha is massive. In addition to motorcycles and guitars, they also build industrial robots and golf clubs.
And if you're too young to ride slow motorcycles.
Expensive doesnt always mean good.Example,a 1967 gretsch corvette.The worst guitar I ever owned.350 in 1984.It was awful.Poorly balanced, didnt sound that gooe,just a nightmare.I wanted a gretsch so bad I bought the first one I found.Its long gone and I dont miss it
Yup. The flip side of that: Epiphone Dot. $300 is the best value in guitars out there.
If you aren't sure, buy a Strat. It's probably the most flexible "jack of all trades" axe you can get. Lots of pup configurations available, and they're everywhere so you can get them cheap.
After a while, you'll learn where your tastes lie, and you can go chase that.
I'm doing alright, but business is tough. We bought a new house last year, but other than that, it's my only debt. Car is paid for and I haven't used a credit card for going on seven years. I have bought a lot of little gizmos (USB interfaces, loop pedals, effects console, etc...) but I haven't made any major purchases. I am hankering for a lap steel guitar, though.
A "tote-loader" is a type of industrial machine used for filling small bags (totes) with some form of goods. Think of the plant that puts your breakfast cereal in the plastic bag and then puts it in a the box. That's done by a tote-loader.
One might surmise that a tote-loader shaker would be used to rattle the bags to settle the contents.
Or alternatively, perhaps the lyric is something else?
I was just looking at the website Pete posted. That guy has a pretty sweet collection. But really, would you actually play a 1930's or 40's vintage guitar if you had one? I don't think i could do it. That's like a piece of history.
If you hang it on the wall and look at it, it's not a guitar, it's a sculpture.
That would rock. I've seen BB a number of times over the years, and he never fails to entertain.
Get pictures.
Thanks Jerome,
I had wondered if there may be an agreement by both parties to abide by her desisions. I only hope that they honour them otherwise a proper court case with expensive solicitors will be needed.
Still it is fun to watch.
Roger
Legal contracts have the force of law, and the fairness of an agreement isn't something the courts consider. They're only interested in if a contract exists, and what the intent of the parties was. That being the case, they must honor them. It's binding arbitration, which means that the contract states the arbiter's decision is final. If someone doesn't like it and tries to sue in the courts, the other party just need show the binding agreement and the court won't hear the case.
There is a huge difference in winning the case and collecting the money, though. The judge may award you money, but it is entirely up to you to collect it.
Preseason is meaningless, but having said that, I can't believe the Sadhawks beat the Chargers.
Just a TV show. She was an actual judge but isn't now. Both parties agree to abide by her decision, and they all walk away with nifty new $100 bill and a trip to the studio.
In legal terms, what she offers is contracted arbitration of small claims. That is, the parties to the dispute agree to allow her final judgment in the dispute. This is called "Alternative Dispute Resolution" and is quite common in the American legal system. I would never submit to binding arbitration as it eliminates my right to appeal if I don't like the outcome, but a lot of people do it because it is cheaper and less time consuming than using the courts directly.
Guitar chord forum - chordie → Posts by jerome.oneil
