harryharry wrote:Wouldn't that sound bad to have a tiny silent parts in rythm guitar? But I will definitely try that.
harryharry wrote:The thing is I mainly work with cubase 5, because I have only the lite version of cubase 7. Is it true that the older Cubase doesn't have a group editing?
marQs wrote:Group editing was introduced in Cubase 6 I think. In former Cubase versions you can group events though (i.e. all drum tracks) and use the same slide through method. Of course you can also move the grouped events and fill the gaps with crossfades. Both methods do the same actually.
harryharry wrote:Thanks! One more question - I am trying to sync a really complex rythm guitar. I am not able to do anything with amp signal - it is just too fuzzy. Fortunatelly, I have a clean signal from microphone, that was directly recording guitar strings (player was in different room then the amp). This signal is much more readable - can I edit this signal in time warp and have the amp signal affected by the same editing?
harryharry wrote: I tried that crossfade/slicing method and it works fine, but it is too slow.
harryharry wrote:Thanks again, you were very helpful.
To sum up this topic - I have three options how to get a perfect projects.
1) Spend many hours in my old Cubase trying to get everything sliced, moved and crossfaded smoothly
2) Buy newer Cubase (or other DAW) which makes my work a bit easier
3) Make a perfect records, that don't require any editing
harryharry wrote:How do you think that professional audio enginers do this? It's so hard to get perfect records and nearly ipossible in my opinion. I've recorded a very good guitarist, but as I said before - the record is far from perfect. Especially acoustic guitars have so many bad noises such as fret ringing, string slides etc..
From listening to some track I get a feeling that sometimes the acoustic guitar is just a loop of perfectly played part - do you think that is possible?
For example The Smashing Pumpkins - Landslide http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5bznN76xRY or Green Day - Good Riddance http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnQ8N1KacJc
GargoyleStudio wrote:Oh, finally again, yes, even though I have the latest Cubase version and I work with excellent musicians, I spend hours tidying up takes towards perfection, and it pays dividends. Sometimes people ask me to listen to their CDs before release and my usual comment is that it's not bad but it needs tidying up, vocals and solos tuning, pops removed, timing tightened, bum notes fixed, etc. So for me, it's a way of life that I picked up working with a top mixing person - to tidy things to a great degree, I think it's worth it. Also your average listener doesn't always know why a song sounds better or worse but chances are if it's off tune or out of time then they'll know that it's not so good. Things just come into focus when you address all the details.
harryharry wrote:Thanks for very helpful post, Mike.
Regarding the use of 'slip' - you mean that I need to avoid 'non zero crossing' of the waveform? In the first printscreen there is an example od 100% grid accurate guitar track and the second is slightly moved to have a zero crossing (but it is just a tiny bit off beat). Will I get a better results with the second solution?
So should I watch the waveforms crossing insted of trying to make it 100% grid synced to get a more natural, 'ear friendly' sound?
But thanI played the mix in my car and I still thought it sounds fine, until I switched to the radio and heard some mainstream song. It sounded much more tight and accurate. So I need to edit my tracks anyway.
GargoyleStudio wrote:One thing I find about correcting timing is that you can often be led down the wrong path, for example you might think a note is out of time but it can actually be the previous note(s) that are wrong. Worth looking, tweaking and listening before and after the bit that sounds odd. Say someone is rushing into the chorus and that makes the chorus sound slowed down but in fact it's the rush that needs correcting.
GargoyleStudio wrote:Another idea would be to double track a section, this can disguise the discrepancies. A quick way of double tracking is to dup/cut/paste the same track but different bars, e.g. swap two choruses in the song (only works it recorded to a steady tempo of course!).
GargoyleStudio wrote:Finally, once you've started to time up some instruments it will usually reveal problems in others. I proceed methodically through the tracks: drums, bass, guitar, keys, vocals, BVs, whatever, and it takes time. I use the screen to do things quickly but I always use my ears to review the result.