Dirty-South Blues Harp Forum: For blues harmonica players, students, and fans

Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! > A forum "How To"

A forum "How To"

Page: 1

GermanHarpist 155 posts Mar 21, 2009 7:07 AM	Obviously there are a couple of people on this forum that are not so familiar working with computers or the internet: How about the people that know how to do so write a couple of quick tutorials on how to: -post videos, pictures, song files, links, etc. -record a video, sound file, incl. the programs necessary -sound dubbing, etc. I don't have too much time at the moment, but in a couple of days my exams are over and I would be happy to contribute my part. We could then ask adam to post the tutorials in his little intro section for the forum. ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
Buddha 154 posts Mar 21, 2009 7:17 AM	all of that stuff is on youtube and via google.
GermanHarpist 158 posts Mar 21, 2009 7:38 AM	Yeah, of course the people can search for it themselves. The idea was to to facilitate/summarize it. Some people are simply not that computer/internet savvy... and I wouldn't mind working on it... ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
Tryharp 172 posts Mar 21, 2009 7:41 AM	We appreciate your efforts GH, Buddah doesnt understand, dont listen to him! Everyone else knows you are just trying to help, and you are helping! Last Edited by on Mar 21, 2009 7:47 AM
mickil 109 posts Mar 21, 2009 7:56 AM	Although I'm fairly cumputer savvy - well, with some web design stuff - I must admit that what I know about sound recording technology could be written on the back of a stamp. I wouldn't mind some sort of 'Idiots' Guide'. That would be much appreciated. It would save everyone having to do all the research individually. ---------- 'If it sounds GOOD to you, it's bitchen; if it sounds BAD to YOU, it's shitty' - Frank Zappa
KC69 93 posts Mar 21, 2009 7:57 AM	Thanks GH: I get a lot out of the postings here. Be great for ya'll who have the time and knowledge to help those of us born before the computer age. The you'll never be as old as I look age. And I Thank You. K.C.
Buddha 155 posts Mar 21, 2009 8:24 AM	if you can find this forum, post and harass others on this forum, then you can go to www.google.com or www.youtube.com and enter your keywords. What more is there to understand? The only thing I understand is many of you are part of the world-wide TV culture, if it doesn't come to you then it's not worth knowing. Quite honestly, I find that method of learning to be highly inadequate. TryHarp is correct though, why listen to me? after all I was born into a family of world class harmonica players and never had to discover anything for myself so what the hell would I know?
GermanHarpist 163 posts Mar 21, 2009 8:28 AM	Take it easy, Buddha. Many people on this forum respect you, and your contributions. As you said before: you're a big fish in a small pond. There will always be frictions... ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
KC69 96 posts Mar 21, 2009 8:32 AM	And I Thank You!! At my stage of learning blues, I don't necessary know what to search for. Some of the post here lead me to other great vids/etc. keep the post coming. I'll keep learnin. Never to old to work hard and learn more. By the way whats a TV? Way to busy in the business world to even think I got time to watch. Unless its Ohio State Buckeye Football. Watching TV has nothing to do with it !! Last Edited by on Mar 21, 2009 8:33 AM
Buddha 156 posts Mar 21, 2009 8:40 AM	You guys take it easy, there shouldn't be friction.... you guys create it, all I do it show you the correct path and you fight it. BUT let me make it easy for you. ProTools for recording. It's the industry standard. Go get yourself an M-Box to interface with your computer. Get a good mic. Very good and very inexpensive mics are made by a company called studio projects. http://www.studioprojects.com/ The have decent pre-amps too but you don't need that if you go with the m-box system. For video, get a camera, shoot your video, upload it to your computer, windows movie maker works great, create all your pretty little titles and what not, then upload to youtube. There is nothing more you need to know other than how to play your instrument.
GermanHarpist 164 posts Mar 21, 2009 8:40 AM	Nope, no tv either. The internet changed that. Btw: I think us playing harp and this whole forum say: We do what we want and the f**ing way we want! Go Harpfriends...! :) ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
KC69 97 posts Mar 21, 2009 8:50 AM	Thanks Buddha: Buts whats a M-Box and the interface thingy. You must have not been born in th 50s. Its kind of like me telling my non harmonica freinds what 11th position is. Flew right over their heads. Then i need someone young enough to hook it up for me. Thanks again, but please guys don't stop posting. K.C.
GermanHarpist 165 posts Mar 21, 2009 8:54 AM	Delivered, "in your face", as usual. But a good answer... True, there should be no friction - but there always will be (because there will always be people as "in your face" as you). Nothing wrong about being "in your face", but you have to live with the consequences - which unfortunately become very visible on a platform like a forum... "all I do is show you the correct path" ... and I thank you for that! KC69, I think a M-box is a Midi-box... ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube Last Edited by on Mar 21, 2009 8:59 AM
tookatooka 158 posts Mar 21, 2009 9:30 AM	I covered posting sound files to the forum on this thread. http://www.modernbluesharmonica.com/board/board_topic/5560960/401797.htm But as German Harpist said it would be good to have all these information threads in one location. ---------- When I'm not blowing, I'm drawing. Last Edited by on Mar 21, 2009 9:31 AM
Buddha 157 posts Mar 21, 2009 12:21 PM	M-box http://www.digidesign.com/index.cfm?navid=104&langid=100&itemid=23596 http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/FastTrackPro.html All any of you guys will ever need for a simple home studio. It comes with protools and a computer interface. All you need is a mic. I would get a C3 from Studio Projects. I actually use the LSD-2 but you don't need that. I also have a sennheiser 441 which is the best dynamic mic you can get. http://www.studioprojects.com/c3.html Last Edited by on Mar 21, 2009 12:26 PM
djm3801 51 posts Mar 21, 2009 12:57 PM	I am feeling the love. Funny, in the midst of all this emotion, I picked up a lot of good information. To Buddah's point, I am pretty good at using search engines and find a lot of really good stuff along the way to what I want. On links paqes or other references, you never seem to be able to answer all teh questions in one place, but they are handy. Oh well. There are good points in most of these remarks. To the title of my favorite cookbook, I wish you all "Peace, Love, and barbecue". Got to go - Lassie reruns are starting (not!).
isaacullah 117 posts Mar 21, 2009 9:05 PM	Aha... Me these days I refuse to buy corporate produced software like pro tools. Yes it's good, yes it works. But they are NOT making that software for YOU. They are making what they make to make MONEY. That's why I do everything with free and open source software. Audacity is opensource audio suite that is meant to compete with Protools. Open source sooftware is made by people that use it for people that use it. Best thing about it is, if you like the software or find it useful, then YOU can join the development team and help guid the course of future developments. I do this with GIS and other software I use for my work as an Archaeologist. It's the wave of the future my friends. BTW, I'd be happy to contribute some short tutorials. Infact, I've left a few already on some other threads. We can collect them all here if people are interested.... ---------- -------------- The magnificent YouTube channel of the internet user known as "isaacullah"
Buddha 164 posts Mar 21, 2009 9:11 PM	isaacullah, I generally agree with you, but in some cases like Music, it's best to learn and use the industry standards. When it comes time to do a studio session, they will ask if you know or use pro tools. You'll get a lot more work if you're compatible
Zhin 162 posts Mar 22, 2009 4:51 AM	Isaac, I used to exclusively use Audacity as well... but as I progressed and needed to do more complex stuff but with greater ease, I moved on to the industry standard tools. It was then that I realize why people pay for them and use them. It's damn well worth it. There are too many reasons I can't even list them down. But basically, Audacity CANNOT do a lot of things that are more specific unlike other software. Pro Tools is indeed the main one. The "Photoshop" of the audio world. Lets put things into perspective... One guy I used to listen to a lot who is an audio software/hardware wizard is Trent Reznor, the brains behind NIN and the killer sound designer for certain computer games like Doom3. He's a perfectionist and no bullshit type of guy who spends millions on his studio. I think his is actually the most expensive in the world. He's one of those guys who own those super rare and expensive Metasonix audio hardware "toys". People like that really don't $@#% around! What software does he use? Apparently ONLY Pro Tools and he makes sure those who work with him only use it. Why? Because he says it's the fastest and most effective way when you're on a deadline. I don't care where he stands in society, just looking at him as a sound wizard and nothing more. So just to keep the record straight, I'm not open to discuss about his taste in music, just talking about what he uses. Personally, I use Adobe Audition because I've been taught to and I never use Audacity ever since. In the future, if you ever need to analyze your sound frequencies, software like Pro Tools and Audition are inexpensive ways to really understand your sound. Audacity is childsplay in comparison. Or perhaps you want more complex filters, or a 30 band graphic EQ... Things like that... There are even ways to actually remove noise from an old track (like the old Little Walter ones)... very accurately while retaining all other sound details without altering them. Not the instant crap where you use a blank spot of sound from the same track and then it does this automatic EQ which kills the sound entirely. Though, if all you really intend to do is record, do a quick mix, Audacity is all you really need. If you want more control, more FREEDOM, and durable software that is useful for recording tracks and doing post production work, start thinking about the "bigger" commercial software. In the end of the day, those guys who are trying to make money off you, still have to meet certain standards and needs otherwise they won't be able to run a monopoly! That's a win-win situation in my opinion. ---------- My Videos
Zhin 163 posts Mar 22, 2009 5:02 AM	To be fair I'll make a good point in regards to the harp tone when you record it. One piece of advice that everyone will tell you is that using a compressor can really help bring out the details of a harp tone. Audio compression by the way, are the reasons why BLUES guys sound the way they do. Guitar and harp... That "forward" and punchy in your face kinda rumbly tone with the highs scrubbed off a little and the bass also scrubbed off a little.. like Little Walters tone... is achieved by using compression based on how he plays, cups, what mic he's using, and what amp. Personally though I don't really use any software compressor for electric tone for tha reason. Because I want to be able to do all that on stage instead of just in a recorded track. Buuuuuut, when I record acoustic stuff or vocals, I usually use them since I am limited to my simple and inferior recording setup! (Beta 57a with a Behringer MIC100 mic preamp...) Also, kinda related, compressors are usually used for vocals. From what I understand, essentially anything that has been recorded through a microphone can use a compressor. Audacity has a simple and rather inferior one compared to the other commercial software. For example with Audition you get far more attributes to mess with, some detailed info on what it does, and even boatload of SPECIFIC presets designed to compress specific instruments or voices so that when time is of the essence, you can at least make a compromise by just using the presets instead of tweaking the settings all day! ---------- My Videos Last Edited by on Mar 22, 2009 5:10 AM
oldwailer 611 posts Mar 22, 2009 5:19 AM	OK Isaac, so--I just found this new software that is free, open-source Archaeologist-in-a-box--it can do a whole bunch of stuff that archys do--I guess there will be no reason to hire you for my next dig! Just joking!--at least--mostly joking. I find it a little trying sometimes when people condemn others for being motivated by MONEY. Of course they are motivated by filthy lucre--how else would they make a living? You can be committed to creating the best possible product and making a living doing it and not necessarily be a corporate asshole, IMHO. I don't want to start any arguments here--just making a point that is simply another of my myriad opinions. That said, I'd still be using Audacity if I hadn't changed to a Vista based computer that won't run it--now I use N-track or Reaper, They both seem about the same to me, and they work fine for my needs. I prefer Reaper, which was about $25 to register (there is a free version to try out). Of course, with these softwares, you need a mixer with a fire-wire connection to get real multi-track--I use an Alesis Multimix8--available at Guitar Center for about $100. If I had known what to buy when I bought this stuff--I would have gone with the pro tools--industry standard. . .
Zhin 164 posts Mar 22, 2009 6:14 AM	Ugh Vista... I skipped that "Upgrade" and going straight for Windows 7 when it's stable and out. Vista is the wost possible OS for any kind of audio application and work. Even for gaming audio... OW, if you have an old original copy of XP lying around, you can install it and get the free updates from Microsoft (leave it on overnight there's LOADS). It's all almost automatic so it's very straight forward. Problem with Vista, they added a lot of bullshit in the software audio signal chain. Think of it as an amplified player with 20 pedals but only uses 2 of them.... That's what Vista is. And there's no way to fix that because the whole thing was built on a lousy software foundation. XP has a shorter and more efficient signal chain. Of course, there are better choices than that but I like what I got so nyeh! :p From what I heard, they figured out how pissed off the audio industry got and to make amends they're going to further simplify and optimize the signal chain for Windows 7 and make it as short as possible! :D ---------- My Videos
Zhin 165 posts Mar 22, 2009 6:22 AM	Just to note though, I still have Audacity because it's good to have it around. For those who just want to get into a little bit of everything without too much, it is an excellent choice. Also, Audacity has the biggest user-based support community. There's SO MUCH cool things you can learn about it for free on various audio forums and websites! Heck, I think even Youtube has a bunch of tutorials if you look. It's very simple in it's own respect but easy to install add ons for specific filters and effects or features. The only thing is that you need to be a handy type of person and be able to decipher what these forums and websites are saying when they tell you how to set something up. It can be frustrating and a lot of time wasted if you're impatient! If you're someone who's actually investing a lot on becoming or being a musician... well, you know what you need to do. lol ---------- My Videos
isaacullah 118 posts Mar 22, 2009 1:29 PM	Hey guys... I'm not saying you should NEVER pay for software. I'm just saying that you should really examine what it is you are paying for, and what kind of deal you are getting. Having been around in an field where the "industry standard" geospatial software is ESRI's "ArcGIS" (tm copyright, etc) the direction of the field of GIS in Archaeology is largely driven by what ESRI as a company is willing to put out. What are they willing to put out? Only software that will be commercially successful. So, in order to progress as science and as a discipline, more and more computer-savvy archaeologists are looking for another solution. To a large extent that solution has been FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) software, mainly a GIS suite called GRASS . Once I realized the great potential of a piece of software that is accessible AND extensible, I never looked back. I'm now on the development team of that and other FOSS GIS software, and we are moving ahead so quickly it boggles the mind! ESRI charges several thousand dollars for liscencing and requires the use of obnixious "usb dongles" or networked liscense checking jsut to use the damn thing. Then, not only is the program complicated, but the "hide" all the stuff that an advanced user would want to manipulate. In short, they, like many large software firms (microsoft, Apple, etc) have decided that the average user is fairly incompetent, so things need to be simplified and hidden so they can't screw them up. Well that's just well and dandy for begining users, but as you advance and progress, you need to have access to the innards of stuff, and it's a huge pain to have deal with someone's cryptic way of hiding that stuff away (sound familiar? anyone who's started working on their own harps and amplification equipment will know what I mean. By the way, if you use a pedal. Look up what the circuit is. Look at what the compnents cost. Do some math, and then look at waht you paid for it. Is it worth it? Maybe, maybe not.). Most FOSS software does have that initial "software for dummies" mode that helps you learn it. That is good. But what most FOSS programs then allow you to do that most commercial softwares do not is to TURN THAT MODE OFF (via plugins, option controls, or mode controls). And the leave you with an interface that is still easy to use, but that is also much more advanced. Another examle is Microsoft Office. It's the industry standard. The latest version is a piece of sh*t that doesn;t let you do anything. It tries to "do it for you" all the time, and that is really annoying. The FOSS competition is OpenOffice.org. That piece of software does everything MS office does and much more (save direct to PDF, free Database tools, equation writing, etc) while letting you read and write MS office files as well. I have MS office 2000 as well as Open Office on one of my machines. MS office 2000 WILL NOT open the newest MS office file format (docx), but Open office WILL! Another example: Internet Explorer and Safari are the windows and Mac "standard" web browsers. Firefox blows them out of the water. No competition at all. I could go on with example after example (Linux anyone?), but I'll turn to Audacity now. Yes, Audacity as you download it does not have everything that Pro Tools has. I don't own pro tools, but I am familiar with it (my best friend teaches video production in a highschool, and they have shelled out some of their precious money for this software). Audacity has many plugins that add functionality. These are seperate downloads, but they are essential. With these plugins, you can load Pro Tools filters, dsp effects, ectetera into Audacity. Not to mention a whole bunch of free ones too. Add Audacity to a streamlined Audio friendly computing environment (eg. http://ubuntustudio.org/, or http://jacklab.net/jacklaborg/english/, or http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ProAudio, and there are several more linux distros streamlined for audio editing and recording), and you get a whole different experience than using just the base Audacity install on a windows machine. Don't like audacity? Have a Mac? Want something more like pro tools? Try Ardour (http://ardour.org/). These operating systems and tools are all FREE. And they are PROFESSIONAL. So why let the "industry" define to YOU how to make your music, write your documents, surf your web, etc? There is no need for it these days. Anyway, that's probably the one and only emotional rant you'll ever get from me on this forum. If there's one thing I can't stand, it's to be ripped off. I really feel that most large sofware firms are in it to rip you off. I'm not condeming all of them, certainly not the little guy's. Many do provide good quality products at a reasonable price. These are great, and I would probably pay for them if I had a use for them. On the other hand, many offer their products (which may or may not be sub-par products) at an exorbabtant price, and then tell you "tough cookies, this is the 'industry standard'" when you try to complain or try to get them to add something you need. Well, now you have another option, and by refusing to spend your dollars with them, you can make your voice be heard. At the same time you'll be investing a little more in your own knowledge and understanding of software and what it was you were trying to do in the first place. Anyway, I've ranted too long, I'm done for now... ---------- -------------- The magnificent YouTube channel of the internet user known as "isaacullah" Last Edited by on Mar 22, 2009 3:06 PM
mickil 113 posts Mar 22, 2009 2:32 PM	isaacullah, I hear you loud and clear. I use OpenOffice. I'm sick of Microsuck. As far as I'm concerned, they're a bunch of crooks. There used to be a site called fuckmicrosoft.com, where they told you about MS's scams, e.g. built-in backward incompatibility to make EVERYONE have to buy the latest version all the time. It worked, still does. fuckmicrosoft changed its name: http://www.microsuck.com/ Visit their home page and see what's there now. Maybe some paid heavies at MS did a few kneecaps in. That Billy boy ain't gonna let go of the reigns of power without a fight. ---------- 'If it sounds GOOD to you, it's bitchen; if it sounds BAD to YOU, it's shitty' - Frank Zappa Last Edited by on Mar 22, 2009 2:42 PM
isaacullah 121 posts Mar 22, 2009 2:44 PM	Just let me quickly add some quotes and links to better illustrate my point. First off, a quote that is specific to the issue faced for musicians. This is from the Ardour website: Ardour is not just a digital audio workstation. Let's compare it with an automobile. Imagine that you bought a car and were told that the manufacturer was the only place you could get it fixed. None of your friends are allowed to use the car, and there's a good chance that it won't work on certain kinds of roads. As for customizing it: neither you nor your car-wise friends could do anything, because the hood is welded shut ... If this sounds a little odd, that's because it is. But if you already own a digital audio workstation, you know all about products that work this way. Only the company that created it can fix it. Only that company can improve it. The company doesn't trust you as a customer, requiring product activation keys and hardware dongles. The list of inconviences goes on and on. A New Approach Ardour is here to fix all this. How? No Copy Protection We'd like you to pay for Ardour - we've put a lot of work into it, and we'd like to keep doing that (you can use that PayPal button over there on the right). But whether you pay for Ardour or not, you are welcome to make copies for your friends. Hopefully, they'll want to pay for it too. No dongles, no activation keys, only trust. Open Development Process Anyone can participate in the development of Ardour. Because everyone can get the source code, Ardour will continue to be developed and supported with or without the involvement of its original authors. Contrast this to the collapse of a company, or a discontinued product. Moreover, anyone with programming skills can add features to Ardour, or fix problems. Platform-Neutral Technology Ardour will can be ported to just about any system that complies with the POSIX operating system standard. It has already been ported to Mac OS X with very few changes. Rather than being a product of a particular company, it's a center around which a community can focus its interest and effort. A program for which new releases can happen as often as necessary to bring new functionality and improvements. A program to build the future with.' Now how does that sound to you? Would you want to be part of something like that? Here are some informative links to articles discussing the pros and cons of FOSS, as well as comparing science done with commercial software versus "open source" science. If you read just one of the links I'm providing, read this one. It's goes straight to the point about Pro Tools being the "industry standard" and what that term actually means to you: http://www.recordingreview.com/blog/digidesign-pro-tools-rethinking-the-industry-standard-mentality/ Here's an linux perspective on the debate: http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2007/102607-arguments-open-source-commercial.html Here's an interesting article about "commercial" and "open source" science. http://www.smarteconomist.com/insight/63 Here's the wikipedia entry that describes what "open Source" software actually is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_software Here's a great resource to learn more about Linux and open source audio software: http://linuxaudio.org/ ---------- -------------- The magnificent YouTube channel of the internet user known as "isaacullah" Last Edited by on Mar 22, 2009 2:55 PM
Honkin On Bobo 41 posts Mar 22, 2009 2:57 PM	isaacullah, That was a great rant. I'm the furthest thing from a computer geek, and even I was stoked reading it.
Zhin 166 posts Mar 22, 2009 8:34 PM	Isaac I think you're completely missing my point. Now, you know my stand on Audio software right? Here's what you probably don't know. I been using OpenOffice since it's first release. I've also been Firefox since it's first release and before that I used any kind of browzer using the Mozilla engine. I hate Winamp and I use Foobar2000 which is completely customized to my liking. Free source, open source, it's all good. But you know what? It's a pain in the ass to use those kind of software for every bloody application on my computer. I might as well stop using Windows and Apple too. I should probably download some free Linux based OS... And it's all free and open source. All their software are like that. But you know what? I can't be bothered. The reality of it, they're not perfect either and have their own set of problems. The pros and cons are pretty even. So where do I stand? ON THE FENCE. I use what I can use. I don't give a shit if I'm supporting "the man" or about "keepin it real" with open source software. I need what WORKS at any given time. Convenience isn't a sin. When you take on too many projects, and if you want to be excellent with them, using too much of these kinds of software will only spread you thin because you have to WASTE A LOT OF TIME figuring out how they work and looking for the right plugins, manually installing them, and making sure they work... Open Office is NOT professional. It's a joke. I'm a trained layout designer and page designer (went to the AAU in SF, CA) and I can tell you it's CRAP. Yes you can read files and view them. But are they displayed ACCURATELY? Nope. I don't know about you but when I'm paid a 1000$ commission to design stuff like letterheads, businesscards, company prospect, etc etc for some business I need absolute accuracy on what I put on the page and what prints out. I also need something that is compatible with my clients. Microsoft office is the only way for that kind of thing. The same applies to audio. I have A LOT of friends in the audio industry here. Non of them use Audacity. They usually laugh and shrug it off when someone insists that Audacity is better. You can rant all you want and believe what you want but do understand that your crusade against commercial software can be very detrimental to anyone who actually wants to come up in the industry and work with lots of people. Compatibility isn't just about being about to read the files. It's really about if you are going to be allowed to work with people do quality work. If you use Audacity, you're incompatible and you'll be forced to learn how to use something different. That was my experience with Adobe Audition. What's my point? I'll use whatever the hell it takes to help me meet and work with REAL PROS. So far, it's working out quite nicely. I'll use what gets the job done RIGHT and as accurately as possible. To me, they're all software. I don't care WHERE THEY COME FROM. I care about HOW ACCURATE/FLEXIBLE it is and WHO uses it so I can work with them. ---------- My Videos Last Edited by on Mar 22, 2009 8:40 PM
MrVerylongusername 203 posts Mar 23, 2009 3:55 AM	I try to stay out of these fierce arguments, but here's my two pennies. Buddha and Zhin are bang on. Walk into any pro studio and you'll find them using Protools for recording. It's what they know and trust and it's what their clients know and trust. They are developed by big companies who have the resources to ask the professional directly what they need. You'll never go to a design house and find them using Open Office. I'm a designer. I work in Quark, Indesign, Photoshop, Illustrator and Dreamweaver. Those are big, powerful, and expensive programs. There are much cheaper alternatives, but those are the industry standards. Just like Logic and Protools are the industry standards in recording. If you want to be taken seriously in those professions you need to be able to use them. Try going for a job interview as a graphic designer and saying "Well I've never used Photoshop, but I have used Microsoft Paint". Professional vs. Amateur Nothing wrong with being amateur. Amateur does not mean crap. I don't expect Adam uses much more than the built in camera on his Macbook and the iLife software that came bundled with it to create his YouTubes and we all know how they've turned out. They are fit for purpose. It's not about flashiness, it's about the information they contain. He could spend thousands on a broadcast quality high definition camera, and dedicated DV workstation. Spend months/years learning how to operate it. He could create the flashiest clips ever seen on YouTube, but the important bit - the actual words of wisdom that he shares with us would be no different. Amateur video is good enough for Adam; in the recording studio though, I'm sure it is a very different story. So it boils down to what you want out of life. If you just want to do stuff for fun and to share with a few friends then go ahead and use the open source/shareware/bundled software that you have. You don't need to spend a fortune to get good results. If you aspire to greater things. If you want to be taken seriously by the big boys then you have to use what they use. There is a reason that they use it. Those programs are designed by people who know what designers need (try accurate colour matching in Microsoft Publisher). They've evolved to be the absolute best for the job, because they are used by tens of thousands of professionals every day.
Honkin On Bobo 42 posts Mar 23, 2009 4:58 AM	OK, let me be the first (actually second I guess) to call the Protools vs. Audacity "debate" a draw, with Issac and Zhin both making impassioned, well reasoned arguments in support of their respective positions. I am a totally unbiased observer as I use none of the audio products that they have discussed (haven't done recording on any level), yet I asked myself, if I were thinking of heading down that road which way would I go? Couldn't come up with a definitive answer. I think MRVLUN's final three paragraphs says it all. Then again, what the hell do I know? Highly entertaining, informative discussion, though I should have spent the time working on the blue third.
GermanHarpist 174 posts Mar 23, 2009 5:23 AM	I think the answer is actually rather simple: If you feel like going into pro recording someday, its probably not a bad idea to get used to the tools. If you don't want to spend the money, or don't feel like going into pro recording anyway, well then Audacity is probably the right choice. I for one will go with Audacity. btw. MRVL: I know that there is a FOSS alternative to Photoshop... (don't ask me for its name though). + I don't know about Amateur or Pro stuff , all I know is that many of my IT friends use FOSS software. ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
mickil 115 posts Mar 23, 2009 8:08 AM	The trouble I had with MS Office is that when I tried to open an older Word document in a newer version of Word, it wouldn't have it. I spent absolutely ages trying to fix the document, which was an important one. I know about XML, I know what it is. The trouble is that the programs themselves have the last say on how to display a document. If you doubt this, just do a few searches in a web designers' forum for "browser compatibility". Most guys now would use XHTML, which is just a subset of XML. But, it's still not possible to guarantee that the same code will display in the same way in different browsers. I know, I've been there. I did an online database driven shop for a friend. But it's true what's been said about industry standards. Go for a web design job and say, 'I can't use Photoshop, I use GIMP instead,' and they'll laugh their heads off. ---------- 'If it sounds GOOD to you, it's bitchen; if it sounds BAD to YOU, it's shitty' - Frank Zappa Last Edited by on Mar 23, 2009 8:09 AM
isaacullah 124 posts Mar 23, 2009 9:48 AM	Just a quick add. GIMP is the FOSS alternative to photoshop. It IS professional. Just as professional as photoshop, and MANY MANY professionals are using it. If you don't believe me, just take a look at the GIMP community pages. If they laugh at you, then you may want to reconsider your decision to work with them because they are either under-educated or they are charlatans. It's the same for the FOSS alternative to Illustrator (Inkscape)... If someone is telling you that if you don't use the same software as them, then you you are not professional, then you have to consider the fact that they might not know the profession they're in as well as they think they do. Also, Zhin is right. I would never use Open Office for professional layout design. I would never use Microsoft Office either. Believe it or not, I supported my self through college as a layout designer for various campus publications. At that time I had to use either Quark or Adobe Page Maker (or whatever that adobe layout one was called, I can never remember). These programs were okay, but they were still very complicated and EXPENSIVE. These days, I use Scribus for layouts (although I don't do it nearly as much as I used to), which is the FOSS alternative to these kinds of things. It's just as good, just as complicated, but it's FREE. And there is large community online where I get help almost immediately (just like this forum). I know numerous scientist who use Latex (completly FOSS) to write and layout their papers. It gives you more control than ANY other software, commercial or free. And many major journals are starting to make that their defaul submission format. Anyway, my main point is that it would behoove one to examine WHY you use the software you use. Are you REALLY using the software that is the best and most cost effective solution for your application, or are you using that software because you think it's some sort of "standard" and you have to do it to fit in? Well, just think a bit. Who sets the "standard"? Is is it professionals in the business, or is the software companies? Do businesses buy siftware becasue it is the best software, or are the incentives to go with one company for all their software needs? Look at the price of commerical software. Is it priced within the realm of possibility for an individual, or is it priced so that only companies with large expense accounts and big tax write-offs can afford it? Do they pursposfully make it only read their own proprietary format? What's so good about that format? Do they charge for every little addon? What makes "profesional" software professional? What it can do or who sells it? There are many many more questions to ask about these kinds of things. Read that article I posted about pro tools. It may change your perspective about it being "industry standard". Like he says in that article, there ARE two situations where you should learn protools, but for the majority of folks out there, there is NO REAL REASON to learn it as opposed to another just as functional alternative (and there are PLENTY of alternatives, both commercial and FOSS)... I'm not trying to tell anyone what to do here. You are all free to use whatever you like. I'm just hoping to get a few people questioning somethings, and hopefully re thinking what they've accepted as standard practice. And what's the only way to change standard practice? To not accept it as standard anymore. Anywho... I'm kinda done with this topic... I don;t want to start pissing folks off around here. I LIKE the diversity of opinions on here, and I think it would be VERY boring if we all thought the same about everything! Viva la differance!!! ---------- -------------- The magnificent YouTube channel of the internet user known as "isaacullah"
Tuckster 135 posts Mar 23, 2009 9:49 AM	Man, I go away for a couple days and it seems all hell breaks loose. This seemed like the appropriate thread for my question: my buddy uploaded a video of us playing. Its on Y-T. How do I get it "over" to harpfriends? Sorry if that's a stupid question,but I am a dinosaur.
GermanHarpist 178 posts Mar 23, 2009 10:46 AM	Tuckster, when you open the video in youtube, just right from the video (under the description) there is box called "Embed". Click in it and copy the whole text into the forum. It will be a paragraph of text, put in the forum it will appear as a video. ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
Tuckster 138 posts Mar 23, 2009 10:58 AM	OK Thanks,GH. I'll try that. But do you mean this forum? I think I can do that. I can't figure out how to get it into "harpfriends". I not real keen to post it on this forum.
GermanHarpist 179 posts Mar 23, 2009 11:20 AM	Ah, sorry. I don't think that there is a direct way of just getting it "over" to harpfriends. So you would have to get a copy of the clip and upload it again. (you could download it, but I don't know about the quality and you would need a program for that). The alternative would be to create a playlist (e.g. "linked harpfriends stuff"), add the video and show the playlist on the channel page. However, the video wouldn't really be with the others (i.e. in chronological order, etc.). OR add it as a favorite... However, I think thats not what you were looking for... ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
Tuckster 139 posts Mar 23, 2009 11:29 AM	Yes,you're right. I just wanted to put it in "harpfriends" playlist and avoid splashing my ugly mug on this forum. I managed to put it on my Y-T home page,but it doesn't seem worth the hassle to put it on "harpfriends". It's just that I feel like a harp voyeur,watching some of the forum members,while I remain a name without a face,
GermanHarpist 180 posts Mar 23, 2009 11:56 AM	Suit yourself. ;) ---------- germanharpist, harpfriends on Youtube
MrVerylongusername 208 posts Mar 23, 2009 11:59 AM	Gimp does not have full, native support for CMYK - 'nuff said. Not pro. Let's get back to talking about harps.
isaacullah 126 posts Mar 23, 2009 5:55 PM	MVLUN: that is true. But you can get a plugin for it. Still it doesn't help me play my harmonicas, so I guess not every thing is perfect! :) I agree, let's get back to harps... ---------- -------------- The magnificent YouTube channel of the internet user known as "isaacullah"

Post a Message

Modern Blues Harmonica supports

§The Jazz Foundation of America

and

§The Innocence Project

Follow @AdamGussow

ADAM GUSSOW is an official endorser for HOHNER HARMONICAS