I can maybe see one on the lead but three? - bonfire time :?~:-?~:???:.
So you autotune the vocalists. Then you have the inverse where they don't play well because they are focusing on singing, so you use sampled backing tracks for their instruments. And along the way what happens to the 'live' performance.I hear plenty of bands with lead singers that have issues hitting notes cleanly. Sometimes this isn't the singers fault entirely because he/she can't hear the vocals well. Other times the singer may be doing something difficult on the instrument while singing and their attention to detail on the vocal slips here and there.
It is just another tool to make things sound better IMHO.
What tools are allowed and which tools should never be seen? We add reverb and stuff a lot of the not to make the voice sound as if it is in a particular room, but to get a fuller sound. We eq out that annoying sharpness or nasality or what have you, we process drums beyond recognition etc. Why do bassplayers have frets on their instruments, that must surely be cheating? Sometimes, a bit of autotune to make vocal harmonies sit better can be in order, and sometimes covering a chart song might mean that you absolutely need it.
Not specific, I didn't quote because it was more of a general reply.I'll presume this is in reply to my post...
As soundguy, rigger, lights guy I definitely prefer the singer/songwriter act with two lines for the guitar, one vocal mike, maybe a headset, a single monitor and a single spotlight. However, I also appreciate the big, impressive productions with technology gone wild and taken to the limit, including any tools eployed to make that production as impressiveand mind boggling as possible. There is room for both.<snip>
Per, I don't give a fuck what people use... but I'm free to lament about the old days when singers could sing and players had a functional, artistic command of their instruments. Hell, I remember concerts before moving lights or video... and we still had sold out arenas and stadiums.
/nostalgia
So you autotune the vocalists. Then you have the inverse where they don't play well because they are focusing on singing, so you use sampled backing tracks for their instruments. And along the way what happens to the 'live' performance.
There definitely seems to be two basic camps; those who want live performances to sound just like the studio versions and those who want live performances to be live and thus not always the same as the studio version. To each their own but personally, if I want to hear the studio recording I can stay home and listen to it with a full fridge and clean, functional bathroom nearby.
Indirectly relevant, I was recently at a venue that incorporates both a studio space and a live performance space. When it was built one of the goals was for the two to be integrated to allow recording and editing audio and video of live performances in the studio space but while there has turned out to be great interest in the studio space and good use of the performance space, there has apparently been limited interest in high quality recordings of live performances to the point that the related video production capability has been ripped out and replaced with an additional audio edit suite.
Good question. As a present DL1608 user I'm more interested in the X32 Core with an S16. The X32 Rack would be interesting if they hadn't hidden the inputs on the rear - am I the only one that thinks that's wack :roll: ?
The Core/S16 combo takes the same rackspace and has the inputs on the front.it also keeps the foot print down.
Then I guess you have options... Just no screen....The Core/S16 combo takes the same rackspace and has the inputs on the front.
The DL1608 I have now has no screen.Then I guess you have options... Just no screen....
Exactly.... Are you arguing for me or against me... LolThe DL1608 I have now has no screen.
6 of each actually - plus a talkback input.Just remember that you loose 8 aux inputs and 8 outputs and spend $400 more for that privilege.
True, but gives you your inputs buried in the back of the rack :?~:-?~:???: .The Rack [...] <is> on a I/O count the most cost effective.
Actually I'd prefer no display and no controls at all (except a headphones level maybe) on a 2U X32 - less stuff to break 8)~~ .Exactly.... Are you arguing for me or against me... Lol
Yup nothing yet. I bet Uli wished he started that new factory project a year earlier. He can't keep up with the demand for all the new products as is. I'm all for repackaging the rack and calling it iX32. Nice iPad/notepad tray on top. Saves on a lot of development and support cost. Make the AES50 and P16 a plug in option to reduce cost.So have there been any updates that I've missed on the ix16 release date? As far as I can tell there's been nothing.
Greg
Four traditional aux's and two record/play I/O's. I was to quick just counting connectors. :blush:6 of each actually - plus a talkback input. True, but gives you your inputs buried in the back of the rack :?~:-?~:???: .