|
|
CHICAGO子ollie
Registered User
Joined: 05 May 2003
|
Posted: Sat Aug 14 2004 06:52
|
|
Walter Vos wrote: |
CHICAGO子ollie wrote: |
(...) If you're mastering, it'd be nice to get the instrumets by themselves easily, instead of ticking every track you need for the melody, drums, or whatever. (...)
|
Mastering and mixdown are different things Lollie, Mastering is two channels (left and right (or 6 if mastering for 5.1 I guess)), and mixdown is probably what you're talking about, with all channels separately.
|
Whoops, mixdown, that's the one. My bad!
*edits*
Walter Vos wrote: |
Yes I **** ants (they should introduce this word in English, it means that you're real precise about things).
Edit: funny, the forum is censored
|
Really? Shit, when the fuck did that happen?
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
CHICAGO子ollie
Registered User
Joined: 05 May 2003
|
Posted: Sat Aug 14 2004 06:58 Re: I see... |
|
MC Project wrote: |
Well, Chicago Lollie, I didn't mean any offense and I also know that there shouldn't be a limit to tracking, but I think that professional trackers should know how to organize their tracks. Sure it would be handy to export by instruments, but on the other hand you can seperate a melody in several parts. That is the way I make melodies though. I'm used to the annoyance of using many tracks for a melody and I think it is a good thing, so you can learn to manage your stuff. Just my opinion. It is not a must have to me.
|
Ah, ok, fair enough. Guess it all depends on how someone structures their tunes.
*ends up having them half-messy like*
MC Project wrote: |
I don't freaking care about the smileys. You still understand it right? So there is no problem, lol
|
Yeah yeah... still bugs me though.. I'm a smiley nazi, so to speak. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Walter Vos
Registered User
Joined: 04 May 2003
Location: Groningen, The Netherlands
|
Posted: Sat Aug 14 2004 18:19
|
|
Quote: |
Really? Shit, when the **** did that happen?
|
and how the **** is that possible?
Edit: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! |
what is hip?
www.waltervos.nl
Last edited by Walter Vos on Sun Aug 15 2004 10:31; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MC Project
Registered User
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Location: The Hague
|
Posted: Sun Aug 15 2004 09:39 Lol... |
|
CHICAGO子ollie. Yes, structure your tunes. It sounds kind of strictly doesn't it? Actually everyone has a structure in their songs. It is a pain in the ass to learn, I know, but once you are used to it, it has the advantage that you have an overview and you are able to 'understand' your song, which has its advantages again. I don't wanna act smart or start a discussion by the way. Just thought that maybe this would help in some way
I'll use the smileys then if it bothers you. A small effort |
Sure......I am the MCP....Or just MC...Uhmmm...I make battle music...There....That is more then enough... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CHICAGO子ollie
Registered User
Joined: 05 May 2003
|
Posted: Sun Aug 15 2004 11:50
|
|
Walter Vos wrote: |
Quote: |
Really? Shit, when the **** did that happen?
|
and how the **** is that possible?
Edit: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
|
Haha, dang, this censored diddly's fucking bugging you, ain't it?
Try quoting my post. You'll then see the method behind madness.
MC: Oh yeah, yeah, I see where you're coming from. Only real reason why I'm supporting the IBI export, apart from the idea of a optionally slightly more complex system, is that the structure I've developed is quite compact. I try to use as few tracks as I can, and I rarely ever reach 32 tracks because of this instrument/track interlinking I've come used to. [/sidetopic]
And hehe, nah, don't worry about the smiley diddly, I'm just being a pain in the ass. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Page 3 of 3 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 |
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
Copyright © 1998-2005 Yannick Delwiche All rights reserved | |
| | |