|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129
Expert
|
OP
Expert
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129 |
I would like to use a Skype-like program to 'jam' in real time with someone located remotely, record our sessions, and use it as the basis for producing a final recorded product. Now, the obvious limitations are: 1.) bandwidth - the phone connection will not allow the instruments' full frequency spectrum to travel across 2.) latency - most musicians respond very quickly to what their partner's are playing - to create interplay and interesting counterpoint rhythm in the music 3.) recording in real time (related to the latency issue, but maybe can be worked around in a different way). So, the questions : 1.) Has anybody done this and been able to work around the 3 issues above - if so, how ? 2.) regarding the bandwidth limitation preventing the remote recording of a quality signal - I have no idea on how to overcome this for an acoustic instrument. But as the next best thing, I thought how about if player 1 (the sending player) sends MIDI information to player 2 - possibly by driving via remote desktop a Midi Input on player 2's side ? 3.) Regarding the latency issue for playing counterpoint rhythms - as a limited, uni-directional workaround, I was thinking perhaps Player 1 could be the 'lead', and the Player 2 could be the accompanyer, or 'sweetener, as Eddie would refer). Player 2 would play against Player 1, and the recording would take place on Player 2's end. This way, Player 2 is playing against the already 'latent' transmission, and since the recording is taking place on Player 2's computer, where Player 2 is playing against the latent signal in real time, the recording on Player 2's computer would have no latency in it. (did I explain this clearly ? - it felt confusing as it came out : ) If anyone is interested in exploring and tinkering with these ideas, I would love to work on them. Respond in the forum or shoot me a private message. You can imagine the opportunities it opens for collaborating musically across the internet 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 886
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 886 |
If it has four legs and moos...it MIGHT be Mr Moohead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129
Expert
|
|
OP
Expert
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129 |
Wow - amazing ! Almost any thought I have that I think is interesting and innovative has been thought of, explored, and implemented by somebody else. It's just a matter of finding the product. I'm not even sure I would have known what to google for that product, but it fits the bill to the tee (or T?). But, given cost, I guess the question still stands - is there a lower cost hack or workaround that can accomplish almost the same thing using free or low-cost services and existing gear that I own
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
This is a built in feafure of iOS Garageband but I have yet to try it out. Asynchronous collabs happen here all the time. Ive collabed with Ray Thigpen (RIP) and occ. Haad great fun with it and on one of the songs I think I surprised Mac with some semi-authentic country electric geetarpickin.
-Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129
Expert
|
|
OP
Expert
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129 |
Quote:
Asynchronous collabs happen here all the time"
what tools and process do you follow for your asynch collab ? are there any limitations ?
I feel like the real-time live interaction with another musician is an important part of the creative process and inspiration; that action/reaction, and feeding off of each others' energy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
There are several methods in play: 1. Folks send BIAB/RB/PTPA project files back and forth. These can be enormous, particularly if there are lots of audio files at play. Probably easiest not to try to do this through upload/download. 2. For quick turn-around of collabs, the best 'product neutral' way of collaborating is to use audio files, preferably loss-less compressed files. Audio files have no dependency on the DAW software being used on either end of the collaboration. One successful method used in the collabs I mentioned above is to use Monkey's Audio files, which are similar to FLAC, but slightly smaller and the process is entirely without cost - other than upload/download bandwidth. http://www.monkeysaudio.com/The person that is asynchronously 'adding' to the collaboration uses the sent audio file for cues, play-along, etc., then records their part and saves just their part as it's own Monkey's Audio file back to the person coordinating the project, and that person then integrates it into the overall mix as they see fit. The reason to use lossless is twofold: 1. The audio quality is not affected by the process. 2. Some report that compression can fiddle with the timing internal to the file. Other methods items that are critical when doing things this way: 1. The passed audio file must have some type of time reference, handwritten notes, etc. so that when it's used by the recipient, it can be time aligned properly. No 'elimiate silent section' type of stuff that can be common in DAW track render to audio processes. Example of such notes: "Guitar Solo should come in at bar 33, which should be xx:yy:zz in timecode." 2. BPM and/or must be exactly known and likely should not have any variation throughout the song, because it will be very difficult to keep alignment on the receiving end. This last one can be a sticking point if tempo changes are a feature of the composition, and points back to why sharing the original project files might be a better choice for this particular application.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
Quote:
...I feel like the real-time live interaction with another musician is an important part of the creative process and inspiration; that action/reaction, and feeding off of each others' energy.
You are not alone in that <grin>.
However, I must stress that the art of multitrack recording, whether done inside a studio or at home using web-transferred tracks, is yet another aspect of performance that in a lot of cases can still be made to work, in the sense that the total may be able to have a listener draw the conclusion that every performer was indeed in the same room at the same time in performance.
The proliferation of so many "tracked" recordings that do indeed impart that kind of sensation is testament to the different but equal art and craft of the "session man" (or woman) and their knowledge of what it takes to create that illusion successfully.
When I think back to the first time I had to deal with overdubbing some Trumpet parts in a recording studio, well, it was rough going for the kid. Lots of retakes, an old guy on the other side of the glass losing patience. That was the point when I realized that I really needed to work on my counting, internal clock and a few other things. Again, that deep desire kicked in and it was time to inundate self with whatever it takes to be able to move into another and different world that, while using familiar tools and methods, was different from what I had been used to doing.
Fast Forward to years later, when yours truly was now the grumpy old fart on the other side of the glass, I've witnessed many good musicians fall on the same face when first confronted with multitracking, in the booth alone with the sound others have already made only in the headphones. Some hit the woodshed and became great at it, others preferred the easier path of feigning apparent anger, etc. over the issue. Of course, the latter don't get the call next time, nor the money.
It is worth noting that, to date, every single musician who has decided to declare that multitracking is all wrong and that the best way to do it is to put all musicians in the same room, etc. have fallen on their faces when and if they were given that situation. Yours truly inclusive.
Surprising that, when in the studio, no audience, no background noise, nothing but you and your instrument, what we think we sound like and the harsh reality of what the recorder plays back afterwards rears its head.
Turns out that recording an ensemble together inside a studio is an even more difficult task to pull off than separated multitracking can be.
Consider that it only takes the mistake of one person to tie up the time of 16 others...
And those other musicians don't make it any easier on the retake, what with musicians being such emotional types in general.
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 883
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 883 |
In my studio I prefer APE files instead of FLAC when passing files back & forth. They are less glitchy than FLAC files IMHO and sound every bit as good as the original .wav's when collaborating or sending proofs.
Reaper use to? a native function where folks can jam back & forth over the net called Reajam...I think...I never used it, tho a lot of folks said it worked OK.
i5 3.20GHz, 32gb RAM, 1tb SSD OS, 12tb HDD, 4gb gForce vid card, 32" monitor, Audient id44, Win10 x64, BiaB/RB 2023, Reaper 6,IK Multimedia Total Studio 3.5 MAX, Waves 10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holiday Weekend Hours
Our Customer Service hours this weekend are as follows:
Friday, April 18: 8:00 - 4:00
Saturday, April 19: closed
Sunday, April 20: closed
Monday, April 21: Regular hours
Thank you!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 French Version is Here!
Bonjour à tous,
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 pour Windows est disponible en Français.
Le téléchargement se fait à partir du site PG Music
Pour ceux qui auraient déjà acheté la version 2025 de Band-in-a-Box (et qui donc ont une version anglaise), il est possible de "franciser" cette version avec les patchs suivants:
BIAB 2025 - francisation
RealBand 2025 - francisation
Voilà, enjoy!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 German Version is Here!
Update Your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 to Build 1128 for Windows Today!
Already using Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 1128 now from our Support Page to enjoy the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
Stay up to date—get the latest update now!
Update to RealBand® 2025 Build 5 Windows Today!
Already using RealBand® 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 5 now from our Support Page to ensure you have the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
Get the latest update today!
PowerTracks Pro Audio 2025 for Windows is Here!
PowerTracks Pro Audio 2025 is here! This new version introduces many features, including VST3 support, the ability to load or import a .FLAC file, a reset option for track height in the Tracks window, a taller Timeline on the Notation window toolbar, new freeze buttons in the Tracks window, three toolbar modes (two rows, single row, and none), the improved Select Patch dialog with text-based search and numeric patch display, a new button in the DirectX/VST window to copy an effects group, and more!
First-time packages start at only $49. Already a PowerTracks Pro Audio user? Upgrade for as little as $29!
www.pgmusic.com/powertracks.htm
Video: Summary of the New Band-in-a-Box® App for iOS®
Join Tobin as he takes you on a tour of the new Band-in-a-Box® app for iOS®! Designed for musicians, singer-songwriters, and educators, this powerful tool lets you create, play, and transfer songs effortlessly on your iPhone® or iPad®—anytime, anywhere.
Band-in-a-Box® for iOS® :Summary video.
Check out the forum post for more information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics83,898
Posts771,956
Members39,486
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean