Todd of Urban Sound Studio tackles everything from music tech questions to new gear. When he is not found on the stage or in the studio, he can be found presenting educational workshops on mixing, synthesis, and production techniques. Todd is Apple Certified in Logic Pro and known for his curriculum development of Pro Tools degrees for multiple universities. He instructs students via Zoom on Logic, Pro Tools, Ableton Live and other DAWs by teaching production, recording, and mixing techniques.
Пікірлер
Terrific demo illustrating the tradeoffs inherent to stereo processing alternatives.
Thank you Peter!
Cloud all day 🙌
I actually love the first amplifier, Damn.
Thanks! If you check the link to the full video, you will hear a ton of placements on the same amp, which changes everything
Taking a look with no explanation is a bit worthless.
There is a link to the full video that takes you through all the positions in detail.
It is well known that the Cloudlifter is an exceptional product and very clean, fundamentally these are different products by nature of their designs. There are no clips or audio comparisons of the Cloudlifter included, despite the unfounded assertions made about its sound that prompted this response. This clearly does have the appearance of being a one sided marketing video, in contrast to the title. The Cloudlifter is innovative because it literally becomes part of your preamp electrically. The fact that the Cloudlifter has less components present in the actual audio path is a feature and benefit. The CL-1 has been long established as the market leader and is further evident in the fact that Shure licensed the Cloud Patents for the new active SM7. More components means more coloration, which is fine if that's the sound you like but they are distinctly different products. The Cloud becomes a modification to the circuit within your preamp in a sense, thus avoiding the need for additional capacitors and resistors in the audio path (that add coloration to the sound), and is more pure in nature than any device that has a large number of additional components in the audio path. Other devices like this one are more like preamps by nature in that they have additional capacitors and resistors in the audio path. Every preamp with phantom power already has capacitors in the audio path of the input, the nice thing about the Cloud is it avoids adding even more, and electrically utilizes those that are present in the preamp to electrically complete the circuit. The result is way more of the actual microphone signal itself, prior to being altered fundamentally by passing through capacitors and resistors.
Hi Cloud. Thanks for the response. First off, I have (and use) your boosters. They hold the position as the standard in the industry. So therefore, the objective here was to outline some of the differences between a new product in the category, rather than state one is superior to the other. Regarding an A/B example, it would make some great content. That being said, the differences between boosters can be subtle without crafting specific examples - typically with upper frequency extension to highlight the differences. I’m happy to discuss that content if you would like. That being said, thanks again for your comment and input here and for helping to push the industry forward with innovative products.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply and clarification on the purpose of your video.
Avalon & Manley 4 the win .
Why did I like the 102 the most
Well, it is still a great mic. One reason could be that it captures more of a specific frequency range than the others, which have larger frequency extension. Therefore, it might help get something such as a guitar to sit properly in a mix.
Awesome!
Thanks. It was obviously just for fun, but the control over the plugins is great.
I went with the MBT. Blue and red silk at the same time. Gives the mix the same sound 🔥 good video.
MBT is a killer product too and has some unique versatility
I like both but the TLM 49 gives me that true Neumann sound
Around the eighteenth century, the use of the triangle began to expand; its sound started to bring about new musical connotations and associations. Influenced by ambassadorship, diplomacy, “Turquerie” and the new sounds of their own military bands, European operatic and orchestral composers began to incorporate the triangle as a means of emulating the sounds of the mehterân-the metallic sounds of the zil and cevgen, combined with the rhythmic pulse of the kös, davul, and nakkare.[4] The early use of the triangle in an operatic/orchestral setting was often not notated, and simply performed by ear.[4] When a triangle part was notated, it was in steady, repetitive figures providing a march-like character.[7] The triangle was the available instrument in Europe for composers to write rhythmically, and with a metallic color.[4] However, the triangle was not used in functional mehter music, nor was it used by Janissaries or mehteran while providing music for battle.[4] In the early nineteenth century, Romantic-era composers began to seek new colors, and explored the sustaining qualities of the triangle.[4][8] Preference was given towards a long, sustaining sound that only triangles without rings could provide.[4] Thus, the jingling rings associated with the triangle for five centuries prior, fell out of use
i did not hear a difference with the miking. i just put my phone on the piano 🎹
🤩☠🫁🤺🍤🥌🏴☠What is up🤫🧏
wait i don't hear the difference
The difference will be in how synced the instrument is to the grid, rather than a tonal one. Listen to the decay of each chord.
Is it possible to load old session from the previous console? Thank you
Yes. My old sessions still load. 😃
Looks cleaner but its insane that they just deleted LiveTrack DSP monitoring on the update
Great examples. Love the 184s on guitar!
I love the extra growl you are able to get out of this rather than a thuddy tone.
Yes! It helps get a classic tone to cut through a band, which is essential to have that extra edge when using the instrument in a modern setting.
Nice video... I see you've read the non-existent manual : ). Just kidding of course, but I do wish they ship with a nice paper copy. Dropped the ball here. I did hae one question... can you enlighten us on the MOD Paddle up portion of the controller. Was this a carry-over from the prior synths (OB-8, the most prior, I believe), or is there some magical way to enable it and use it for good (not evil?). Thank you!
The non existent manual. lol. Love it! As for the mod paddle, as much as I am aware, this is the functionality of the original. I am not sure if it can be wired to have bidirectional control if you did some sort of mod. I would assume it is the same as the pitch lever, but would need to ask sequential, (or open it up myself) to be certain.
Man, your videos are fantastic. I’m looking to get into analog summing and using more outboard gear, and this was a really great rundown. Keep up the great work!
Thank you for watching. Analog summing doesn’t make the mix, but it does change the workflow and allow for the separation of stems, integration of analog gear, and the ability to push your circuitry harder if wanted. (Which in this case is a massive benefit due to the transformers in my box). So for me, I do find it is a nice benefit compared to ITB mixing.
🤘🤘🤘
🔥 🎸 🔥
That first patch sounds a lot like one of Madonna’s first singles: Holiday. I’m pretty sure there was a lot of Moog in that song, including the bass line.
I would be confident that there was Minimoog all over a lot of her early work. But I’m not positive as to what was specifically used on each song. And of course, looking it up will lead to 10 different answers! Anyway, thanks for watching and the feedback. 😉
Oh, but also, I should point out that in the first example, the WASP is the Oscillator and it is using the filter of the Mini D.
[sad]
But classic! 😉
Nice short! Love the different tones.
@grinsko6741 thank you!
These videos are so well done. Thank you so much!
Thank you for the comment and for supporting the channel. 😃
I have the Mke600. Super Mike. Not worth the extra cost to upgrade. Little eq and hard to tell the difference. Option of battery is a great option. Great video. Thanks.
I agree. The 600 is an incredible value. And honestly, the battery and shoe mount option sometimes makes it more appealing on location. Thanks again for watching.
Hi, no need for background drums!
I appreciate your feedback on that and will take it into consideration. Thanks for watching.
I see this in studios all the time and I gotta disagree. Quite frankly, I think it sounds like sh*t. It's really bad on bass & vox. It seems like no matter how mild you set that compression, it overreacts to low end input. I mean listen to that stingray. Would be a lot safer to use on guitar
I appreciate the input. Yes, for vocals, it is way too grabby sounding. I would never use it. And for snares and other sources I stick to a 160. But for basses, I think the key is to use it minimally. It is a one trick pony. It does the Motown sound well in terms of introducing distortion. And for anything too transient heavy, you need to be super subtle in the settings.
Thanks, I realize my setup can be clearly optimized! Can’t wait to reopen PT this we!
Thank you. I thought the mcm 114’s sounded fantastic. I was so impressed I bought a matched pair. I get them in a week. I was surprised I like the sound under the bridge of the instruments… Can you share where you prefer the positioning? Thank you again.
So was I! For double bass and cello , they sound fantastic under the bridge, but when it comes to traditional miking, I usually get a condenser back from the instrument to get a more full picture of the instrument. In regards to violin, the biggest thing for me is to avoid too much rosin sound and get the mic out of the way of the player. I think it completely changes based on the instrument and playing style, but typically about 2 inches above the bridge pointing toward the f-hole will give a nice full sound. Hope that helps.
Excellent way to bring out the machine
The machine is the perfect way to refer to it! 💥
Thanks great video I learned something
That's why I make these. Glad it helped to share some of my thoughts. :)
Love the next level of geekiness. So awesome. Can you do bass amp mic tricks next please. Thanks
Thanks for watching. Bass amp mic tricks? Do you mean how to mic a bass amp, or something else? I have a video on phase alignment, which discusses the mixing of mic and DI, which is what I do 90% of the time. But it might be fun to cover something different if you have another idea. 💡
Excellent mic comparison video! Kudos!
Thank you!
Thanks, and the SONG IS AWSOME !!!!!
Thank you!
Thank you for making this overview of the Core Mixing Suite, there is very little demonstration of this Console 1 plug-in on the inter-webs.
Glad it helped! 😃
If the printing is finished bounce or export ??? In logic x
You can do either. But I just use command + B to bounce it. Many times even after printing, I might use something such as a plugin for digital limiting on the print, so bouncing works well for me.
Please stop putting the mics in front of the cabinets it’s pointless to do this,
Why? The point here is to capture the sound of a bass through an amp, pushing a cabinet.
@@ToddUrban because you can’t truly here the cabinet from a distance another KZreadr put the mic away from the speaker and the sound
Great video! Very helpful!
Thank you for watching!
Great demonstration of the different making techniques.
Thanks Pontus! It was a crazy room to try and capture live. I considered treating it, but then realized, let’s work with the limitations to get a real example, rather than a typical perfect studio setup.
So if recording 2 mics on a cab, would it be best to just flip the polarity of one mic while recording? Or only if a polarity issue seems to creep up? It'd be nice to know how to just prevent it from happening before it hits the daw
Eventually, you will learn to hear phase cancellation. If you mute one and it gets louder, you will know the other mic is taking away from the first mic. But in the meantime, ALWAYS invert the polarity to check for a phase issue until you can hear this. But the other point I make here is that a 180 flip doesn't always correct it. And in these cases, moving the 2nd mic or angling it will help to correct or adjust the combined sound you are getting. Just always make sure to check in mono, as the only time we usually hear these cancelations are when they are summed to the same signal.
@@ToddUrban Thanks for the reply. I bought the UA IBP phase correction plugin that has variable phase and time correction, but it's a good idea to switch polarity when setting up to see if one sounds better. I guess if you look at the waveforms, you'd see it too right?
@Archlegan the IBP is interesting. The IBP was originally meant to commit the sound, so having it as a plugin is unique. But always use your ears. I do visually check phase, but once again, listening is my ultimate decider.
@@ToddUrban thanks! =]
Great video as I never understood those controls when I've recorded these instruments in the past. I love the different tonal qualities you can get out of this instrument. It has much more character than just a typical hollow body would usually have with a boring thud. There is a lot more character and edge.
So I have a Townsend labs microphone and the vocals are stereo in the daw after recording well that stereo vocal still work with all the plug-ins does the plug-ins need to be stereo or mono?
that's some real buzzy bass.
There is a certain sound with a great growl if you play with a harder technique. And the tailpiece is resonant too, which lends itself to a unique sound. As an upright player, I’m definitely more aggressive than most people, so you might hear more of this quality than the typical player. But it is a great bass with a unique sound that I go to for that exact reason.
Excellent video!
*For me, a good analogy to the SM57 and SM58 is an oldschool four string Fender P Bass. A plain ol' P Bass with a midrangey single split pickup and only a single passive volume and tone knob, and just a plain ol' stamped metal bridge. It was first developed and released in 1957, and in the over six decades since then, companies such as Alembic and EMG, and many many others, have really developed and progressed the art and science of manufacturing basses and bass hardware... That being said, since hundreds of thousands of recordings, and millions of live performances, were performed with an ol' Fender P Bass. And since many of the greatest bassists in history played some of the best bass lines ever recorded on many of the most popular and famous songs of the last six decades, even though it has a much narrower frequency range and less strings and frets than modern active 24 fret neck-throughs, for millions of musicians..., and even more importantly, hundreds of millions of non-musician regular music listeners..., associate the narrow ranged nasal sound of a P Bass with the sound of all those great players playing those killer lines on so many of those classic songs... So, because the non musician masses of listeners out there, as well as many bassists themselves, equate the lo-fi, (relative to modern basses), sound of the P Bass as THE sound of classic quality... THAT's why I feel the P Bass in analogous to the classic SM57 and SM58. They not be as clear or refined as other more modern mics, but since singers, as well as the population at large itself, have heard the 57 and 58 on so many recordings and at so many shows, that tonality, whether too nasal or too wooly or whatever compared to better modern designs, is now deeply ingrained into the minds of millions as, "good".* 🤔
Great analogy! :)
Thank you!
The phase shifter…please don’t.
And on top of it, it was an EVH Phase 90. 😉
what a horrible comparison video for vocalist.
Being more specific would help to create content that was more useful moving forward.
@@ToddUrban it was just bad vocals.. and nothing showcasing the product. I just did a shootout of 3 mics all running through a new preamp and was more informative than this.. sorry. Not bashing, just giving my opinion.
@@kevinmiracle8233 Sure. You are entitled to your own opinion. Both are actual full time session vocalists featured on several recordings, so it is a bit surprising for you to feel that.
Such a shame it's still got the 1995 GUI and you can't access the plugins GUI. and again we don't want a video on what a plugin does. And on UA Console the inputs you've hidden on UA Console come up in the Console 1 GUI. Really frustrating if you're not using 8 ADAT channels so the faders on Console 1 Fader don't follow Console. seriously guys for the top Dollar you've got on these you really need to sort out some basic problems. ever wonder why there's so many on the second hand market. and again we don't want a video and how to mix or choose reverb sounds,
I appreciate your feedback here. The benefit that most Console 1 users share with me that helps their workflow is that you do not see the GUI of the loaded plug-in. Instead, you get more direct feedback of exactly what is going on sonically so you are listening to what is going on, rather than being influenced with your eyes. But I know some people want to see a GUI, and in those cases, it is best to use the plug-ins as an insert if you find the GUI inspiring or creative. I personally need to work as efficiently as possible to make deadlines, so for me, the OSD is way faster.
It seems like you are picking up a great deal of the room as opposed to the pick. It might be a better test if the room was isolated
Thanks for the comment. Actually, the placement was intentional to get a mix of both. We specifically positioned the artist over a hard wood floor to capture the reflections as well as the pick. Isolating the pick sound felt too artificial. We tried only a room mic and even a shotgun, but that didn’t get enough pic, so this was the odd compromise. EVH actually captured it all with only a room mic from what I understand. But the room obviously has a large impact on the final result.