the drivers are totally stable, finally. i'm a little apprehensive about rebooting, but for now everything seems ideal.
but, because i'm neurotic, the mixer issue presents a big challenge. i have multiple possible mixes, resulting from the mixer doing weird things. a little bit of further testing suggests that saving the mixer file separately produces corruption on the save, but saving it with the project produces corruption on the load. it's bizarre, frankly. the only dlls it's pulling are in the kernel; it's not even reading any of the C libraries. my best guess is that's probably a mathematical error in the code. but, knowing that doesn't address the issue at hand: which do i use? do i start over?
when i go over this for the already finished tracks, i'm going to be very selective in what i replace. i know that most of the songs were saved repeatedly before i exported, meaning i've verified that the final out is desirable. and what i'm noticing is that i often can't tell the difference between the mixer error on an a/b. i've tested it quite a bit at this point. it comes out in the null, but i can't actually hear it.
but, i'm neurotic.
so, for these songs that i'm approaching with a fresh understanding of the software, i have to work each of these parts out on an a/b basis.
there was never a benefit in the fading highs. but, when the subbass was floored, it made me think about a few things a little differently. and i'm going to want to work a bit of that in.
it might work out as a net positive in the end. but, i'm bloody happy that this mess is done with. it's just that putting the pieces back together is not going to be that quick, after all. lots of listening. lots of comparing.
lots of being neurotic.
Saturday, August 15, 2015
i am finally convinced that i'm stable. i suspect that the problem was in fact the bios and that the perception of other fixes having an effect was probably due to these things resetting the sync, temporarily.
i think i should get most of this done by the end of the weekend.
for my own reference....
this is my workflow for the next little bit:
1) finish inri007-inri009. this should be fairly quick.
2) finish aleph-0 (period 1) dvd disc. this should be fairly quick.
3) finish remaining dvd discs. a week or two.
4) as i am finishing (3), i'll want to go through and finalize the remaining period 2 discs. similarly.
5) start on period 3. i'm well behind schedule, but this is when the next collection of big projects will begin.
i think i should get most of this done by the end of the weekend.
for my own reference....
this is my workflow for the next little bit:
1) finish inri007-inri009. this should be fairly quick.
2) finish aleph-0 (period 1) dvd disc. this should be fairly quick.
3) finish remaining dvd discs. a week or two.
4) as i am finishing (3), i'll want to go through and finalize the remaining period 2 discs. similarly.
5) start on period 3. i'm well behind schedule, but this is when the next collection of big projects will begin.
deathtokoalas
never did get into the beach boys. more of a beatles fan. but this song really hit me just the right way when i was about ten or so.
their bassist was actually a rather substantial musical influence on me and, along with mccartney, still really forms the crux of how i approach the bass guitar, underneath however many other influences.
jim m
+deathtokoalas beetles? stones
deathtokoalas
+jim m the rolling stones created almost nothing of any lasting value. their legacy will die with their fan base.
the beatles-stones debate is an anachronism. people will follow their parents. bloody wankers. but anybody under 40 (if not 50, nowadays) can clearly here that the stones were not in the same league as the beatles. it's the same thing with the beach boys, really.
we can have beatles-floyd debates - and i may side with floyd, depending on the context. or maybe beatles-byrds debates, if you're so inclined. but a beatles-stones debate is pointless. it's like arguing the relative merits of thomas pynchon v. dr. seuss.
Anonymous User
+deathtokoalas Nothing of lasting value? The Beatles are undeniably a major influence to many artists, but to act like the Rolling Stones made nothing of lasting value is hilariously wrong. I'm not even a Rolling Stones fan, I would also rather listen to The Beatles, but let's not kid ourselves.
Jake Britt
+deathtokoalas Brian Wilson is the guy The Beatles went to for their inspiration...
deathtokoalas
+Anonymous User they never even released a mediocre record. their one attempt at doing something interesting - satanic majesties request - is just laughably bad.
they were talentless hacks. they were always absolute followers - there's not an original idea in their discography. they may have some place in the history of fashion. but, they will be lucky to get a footnote in the musical history of the period. the beatles, on the other hand, will be remembered for quite some time.
it's all ** or * records - out of ten stars.
they'll have a better chance in a paragraph on the mahavishnu orchestra.
"john spent his early days loosely attached to a clownish group of bohemian village idiots called 'the rolling stones' before he began his career in earnest. remaining information about this group is scarce, but it is known that they were of great popularity in their day amongst the uneducated, rural underclass."
deathtokoalas
+Jake Britt that's a poor way to express the relationship between brian wilson and paul mccartney. there was a kind of a rivalry. brian wilson was very impressed by revolver, and made pet sounds in response to it. mccartney was impressed by pet sounds, and countered with sgt. peppers. his inability to top sgt. peppers is the actual reason that brian wilson never released another record. it drove him insane.
fwiw, mccartney has since acknowledged the importance of the session musicians on pet sounds. he was not initially aware that the bass parts were mostly written and performed by carol kaye, for instance. and, he seemed to be a little taken aback by that, as though a fraud had been exposed to him.
never did get into the beach boys. more of a beatles fan. but this song really hit me just the right way when i was about ten or so.
their bassist was actually a rather substantial musical influence on me and, along with mccartney, still really forms the crux of how i approach the bass guitar, underneath however many other influences.
jim m
+deathtokoalas beetles? stones
deathtokoalas
+jim m the rolling stones created almost nothing of any lasting value. their legacy will die with their fan base.
the beatles-stones debate is an anachronism. people will follow their parents. bloody wankers. but anybody under 40 (if not 50, nowadays) can clearly here that the stones were not in the same league as the beatles. it's the same thing with the beach boys, really.
we can have beatles-floyd debates - and i may side with floyd, depending on the context. or maybe beatles-byrds debates, if you're so inclined. but a beatles-stones debate is pointless. it's like arguing the relative merits of thomas pynchon v. dr. seuss.
Anonymous User
+deathtokoalas Nothing of lasting value? The Beatles are undeniably a major influence to many artists, but to act like the Rolling Stones made nothing of lasting value is hilariously wrong. I'm not even a Rolling Stones fan, I would also rather listen to The Beatles, but let's not kid ourselves.
Jake Britt
+deathtokoalas Brian Wilson is the guy The Beatles went to for their inspiration...
deathtokoalas
+Anonymous User they never even released a mediocre record. their one attempt at doing something interesting - satanic majesties request - is just laughably bad.
they were talentless hacks. they were always absolute followers - there's not an original idea in their discography. they may have some place in the history of fashion. but, they will be lucky to get a footnote in the musical history of the period. the beatles, on the other hand, will be remembered for quite some time.
it's all ** or * records - out of ten stars.
they'll have a better chance in a paragraph on the mahavishnu orchestra.
"john spent his early days loosely attached to a clownish group of bohemian village idiots called 'the rolling stones' before he began his career in earnest. remaining information about this group is scarce, but it is known that they were of great popularity in their day amongst the uneducated, rural underclass."
deathtokoalas
+Jake Britt that's a poor way to express the relationship between brian wilson and paul mccartney. there was a kind of a rivalry. brian wilson was very impressed by revolver, and made pet sounds in response to it. mccartney was impressed by pet sounds, and countered with sgt. peppers. his inability to top sgt. peppers is the actual reason that brian wilson never released another record. it drove him insane.
fwiw, mccartney has since acknowledged the importance of the session musicians on pet sounds. he was not initially aware that the bass parts were mostly written and performed by carol kaye, for instance. and, he seemed to be a little taken aback by that, as though a fraud had been exposed to him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)