post processing

I notice, interestingly enough, that although I was *very* interested
in using "post processing" effects such as reverb, flange, etc.,
etc., in my _Tempest_ theatre piece, I am hesitating using these
effects on my blackjack piece!

It's amazing, the difference in the worlds. For the theatre thing,
it seemed the *more* reverb and effects, the "better..." Of course,
I was trying to evoke a kind of "spiritual" world of _The Tempest_
which lent itself to a "misty" fuzziness...

However, in the blackjack piece, I'm finding that reverb is
distorting the precision of the tuning and of the rhythmic
placement. In several of my previous electronic efforts I used *no*
post-processing at all, for this same reason.

I may use *no* or very limited "post-stuff" on the blackjack piece...
so it will be very "flat" but I like the "primary colors" of that
approach... particularly when matched with a live instrument.

Anybody have any commentary on this... any similar experiences or
suggestions??

I would appreciate it.

I'm hoping to upload the blackjack piece to mp3.com very soon. There
is a slight problem with them, now, though. It takes forever unless
one is a "Premium Artist" which costs $20 per month. It costs $20
for *EACH* separate artist page one has... I have *THREE* now... so I
would be paying $60 per month if I wanted the "quickie" service...

So, I'm willing to wait, unless it takes *months* for approval...

_________ _________ ______
Joseph Pehrson

In-Reply-To: <9mg720+t5ur@...>
Joseph Pehrson wrote:

> I may use *no* or very limited "post-stuff" on the blackjack piece...
> so it will be very "flat" but I like the "primary colors" of that
> approach... particularly when matched with a live instrument.
>
> Anybody have any commentary on this... any similar experiences or
> suggestions??

I always prefer a bit of reverb added to a TX81Z. The built in effects
are shoddy, so don't touch them. If you're talking about it being used in
a concert hall, presumably you won't need to add anything then, but may
like to when optimising the patches or recording demos.

Graham

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., graham@m... wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_738.html#739

> In-Reply-To: <9mg720+t5ur@e...>
> Joseph Pehrson wrote:
>
> > I may use *no* or very limited "post-stuff" on the blackjack
piece...
> > so it will be very "flat" but I like the "primary colors" of that
> > approach... particularly when matched with a live instrument.
> >
> > Anybody have any commentary on this... any similar experiences or
> > suggestions??
>
> I always prefer a bit of reverb added to a TX81Z. The built in
effects
> are shoddy, so don't touch them. If you're talking about it being
used in
> a concert hall, presumably you won't need to add anything then, but
may
> like to when optimising the patches or recording demos.
>
>
> Graham

Thanks, Graham, for the commentary! Yes, I've stayed away from
the "built-ins" after toying with them...

JP

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., jacky_ligon@y... wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_unknown.html#740

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., graham@m... wrote:
> > I always prefer a bit of reverb added to a TX81Z.
> > Graham
>
> I'll second that.
>
> What one must do is finely tweak the dry/wet balance with any
reverb.
> This way one doesn't saturate to original signal.
>
> In this case less *is* more.
>
> JL

Thanks, Jacky...

I'll play with this a bit more and see if I get anyplace...

JP

<snip>
> I'm hoping to upload the blackjack piece to mp3.com very soon.
There
> is a slight problem with them, now, though. It takes forever unless
> one is a "Premium Artist" which costs $20 per month. It costs $20
> for *EACH* separate artist page one has... I have *THREE* now... so
I
> would be paying $60 per month if I wanted the "quickie" service...
>
> So, I'm willing to wait, unless it takes *months* for approval...
>
> _________ _________ ______
> Joseph Pehrson

It has been taking about 10 days for me the old slow way.

John Starrett

Hi Joe

Don't forget EQ. It can do a tremendous amount to color a piece
without distorting the harmonics. You can also use a little bit of
delay with speakers panned hard right and left to add some depth.

I also use Waves Rennaissance plugins for post processing, usually a
parametric EQ with some mild compression. And when I post samples to
the web I usually roll off the bass under 31 since you can't hear
that on computer speakers and it just makes them work harder.

Peace,
Mary

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "John Starrett" <jstarret@c...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_738.html#745

> <snip>
> > I'm hoping to upload the blackjack piece to mp3.com very soon.
> There
> > is a slight problem with them, now, though. It takes forever
unless
> > one is a "Premium Artist" which costs $20 per month. It costs
$20
> > for *EACH* separate artist page one has... I have *THREE* now...
so
> I
> > would be paying $60 per month if I wanted the "quickie" service...
> >
> > So, I'm willing to wait, unless it takes *months* for approval...
> >
> > _________ _________ ______
> > Joseph Pehrson
>
> It has been taking about 10 days for me the old slow way.
>
> John Starrett

Thanks, John! Well, that's not *too* bad... certainly worth the $20!

JP

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., nanom3@h... wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_738.html#747

> Hi Joe
>
>
> Don't forget EQ. It can do a tremendous amount to color a piece
> without distorting the harmonics. You can also use a little bit of
> delay with speakers panned hard right and left to add some depth.
>
> I also use Waves Rennaissance plugins for post processing, usually
a
> parametric EQ with some mild compression. And when I post samples
to
> the web I usually roll off the bass under 31 since you can't hear
> that on computer speakers and it just makes them work harder.
>
> Peace,
> Mary

Thanks, Mary! EQ is a point. Definitely worth a try. Well, I can
certainly see that what I need has to be of the "subtle" variety....
Otherwise, I'd just as soon "forget about it..."

Joseph