SOPA

An Act of Congress for the sake of preventing piracy of movies that aren't worth watching and music that isn't worth listening to.

"To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation [for gigantic entertainment corporations] by combating the theft of U.S. [corporate intellectual] property, and for other purposes [such as general-purpose censorship and repression of grass-roots and non-corporate, free-thinking culture]."

Smells Like Brickwalling

"Smells Like Teen Spirit" - vinyl (top) vs. CD remaster

An increasingly common discussion on forums concerning music production is of the "Loudness War" and the phenomenon of "brickwalling" audio in order to render it ostensibly "louder" while utterly destroying the dynamic range of the overall recording and of every element therein.

Although I have attempted to write about this, myself, I managed to come up with an image which says most of what I'd have to say on this matter. In the image above, on top is the waveform of a rip from the first song from the vinyl edition of Nirvana's Nevermind album; below it is the waveform of the same song, from the recently-issued "remastered" four-disc 20th-anniversary edition of the album.

Myself, I never use compression in mastering my CDs. I do use compression, judiciously, on individual tracks within a recording, and very rarely on the overall mix of a recording – but in such cases, I never permit clipping. Well – if and when I might, it is with the intention of creating abrasive, abusive audio, expressly to cause the listener discomfort.

Thanks to Reaper 4, I am a .mogg Sympathizer

Reaper 4's basic GUI design

It started, I seem to recall, with discovering, on some blog, .WAV rips of the original 24-track master recordings of Queen's "Bohemian Rhapsody." Then I stumbled upon the multitrack "stems" of Nine Inch Nails that Trent Reznor himself had posted on nin.com, for people to liberally make their own mixes and post them to the site. Then I found audio rips of the multitrack masters of songs by David Bowie, Marvin Gaye, and Stevie Wonder. What an education in studio recording (and the applied technology thereof); what a moving experience to hear the voices of such great singers, and the characteristic elements of the songs' iconic arrangements, laid bare. I confess to having burst into tears at such times.

Now I find (perhaps a bit behind-the-curve of me, but I have a lot goin' on) sites posting multitrack recordings by all manner of bands, mainly rips of recordings licensed to and used in the video games Rock Band and Guitar Hero. Thus far, by such means, I've dissected rock and R&B recordings going back 45 years, from Marvin Gaye to Peter Gabriel to Animotion to Blur. Many of the recordings licensed to the video games come with between four to a dozen tracks, often with original tracks sub-mixed (such as "extra instruments" in with the vocal tracks), but not only do these rips give one enough to mess-around with one's own mixes of the songs, it's enough to gain new appreciation of the songs and how they had been recorded.

An interesting thing to discover among all this is that the recordings appearing in the video games are in the .mogg format – multitrack Ogg Vorbis, that is. I recall imagining, a decade or two back, that in the future, musicians would someday release their music in not just stereo recordings but also in some multitrack format, and with the .mogg format, such is now possible. Thanks to the excellent Vorbis compression, good-sounding (at 48,000 kHz sampling rate, even) recordings of a song can be presented at around twice the file-size as stereo audio files of the respective songs. It may be soon obligatory that musicians serve-up some of their songs in multitrack format, with elements distinct enough for the listener to feel a sufficient amount interactive influence – say, to be able to completely deface the artist's work with techno drums, electronic blips, and auto-tuning the bejezus outa the vocals.

How to open and play .mogg files was, however, one of those vexing mysteries that I have come to view as a challenge rather than an impediment, as is necessary when dealing with this computech stuff, lest one go apeshit and punch the screen of one's computer or bawl like a bitch. Applying some saintly patience and an adult attention-span, I found that not only do the more recent versions of Audacity open, play, and export into more universal formats, these newfangled .mogg files, but that a DAW program called Reaper would import (and export) them, dealing with them like they weren't dirty foreigners or red-haired stepchildren. Even more fortuitously, there are versions of Reaper for Windows, Mac and Linux under WINE.

I gotta tellya, "Don't fear the Reaper – embrace it." This application is too cool for words. Here are my first squeals of delight about this program:

• Reaper is unbelievably lightweight for a DAW application; it opens swiftly and runs gingerly on CPU resources.
• Although Reaper has pro-level features, it is designed for efficiency, without so many tools and GUI gizmos in your face. For example: one cursor tool for every function; no distinction between MIDI and real-audio types of tracks, with tracks used as busses as well.
• Non-destructive editing of various formats of audio files – at different sampling rates – at once, simultaneously, so one doesn't have to convert files to a common format prior to importing them.
• Selectable and customizable visual themes, to accommodate one's aesthetic taste and/or failing eyesight.
• Support for Audio Units (Mac-native) plug-ins in addition to VST and other formats.
• Audio editing for video, with a video window.
• Appealing to my personal audio-fetishism, the GUI has a vari-speed control slider, at the bottom of the GUI, that affects both tempo and pitch at once, simulating the vari-speed control on a pro tape deck, or that on better turntables. This vari-speed control can be assigned an automation curve (as can volume, pan, effects, et al.), for getting wacky with it in the timeline.

I could go on about this program, but I recommend reading about it on the manufacturer's site. The manufacturer also encourages users to upload their own themes, extensions and such to a resources and sub-site, and also links to a third-party developer of extensions for Reaper. Native Instruments also does this sort of community-building user-resources development; not only is this sort of thing good for publicity/customer relations, encouraging users to be more involved in using the software, it's a sign of a company's showing that it's not principally interested in proprietary monopoly, following the open-source model of developing software and technological community at the same time. I myself do ultimately use Logic Pro, but this Reaper thing is already becoming a complementary staple along with Audacity.

Although it should go without saying, no one pays me to blab positively about any software; when I do, it's because I'm truly grateful for its existence.

Also: if you'd like to hear what I've been doing with the multitracks I've obtained, click here. I could trip all over my own tongue in giving disclaimers about how they are presented under "fair use" and "educational/personal-entertainment purposes," but in sincerity, as one can tell by listening to them that I have paid respect to the musicians' original recordings by not mucking them up, mostly using just what was there, I am intending to promote the musicians and laud their works in the process. Some of the recordings of which I have made my own mixes had influenced me in how I make my music by me, so in coming full-circle to the mutltitrack sources, I feel as though I am making a creative pilgrimage and paying artistic homage.

Google's in the Music Industry - and Vice-Versa

Pardon me for not having posted in a while. I've been too busy using my tech to write about it.

A recent e-mail from Tunecore informed me that one of its distribution channels will be via Google Music, the internetric megaloctopus's newest tentacle. Google already owns the North American assets of Spotify, but is now endeavoring to compete with iTunes. Additionally, Google Music is in direct emulation of Apple's iCloud service in regard to distribution and ownership of digital music files. Google Music will let one store up to 20,000 "songs" (files) in one's personal Music Library.

Tunecore informed me that I could add Google Music as a distribution option for an additional charge of $1.98 for each existing release via Tunecore, and at no additional cost for future releases - if I go through Tunecore. Alternately, if I should go directly through Google Music to post my music for sale there, Google would charge me $25 for the privilege of establishing my presence there. (Does Google charge people to establish Google+ pages? No.) Moreover, Google Music also wants 30% of each sale (roughly equivalent to iTunes' cut). The most heavily-funded internetric entity in the world is trying to cash-in on musicians' fear of not having enough exposure, of missing-out on yet another market-opportunity – namely, Android Market, Google's competitor to iTunes.

All over the Internet, such "markets" are being created, and although they ostensibly (that is, they claim to) provide independent musicians with opportunities to get their music "out there," Music Industry be damned, these marketing sites are flooded with front-page ads and buy-links of major-label artists, with no sign of any independent music, save for the token "hip" band that broke-out big and was embraced by the Music Industry for the sake of "cred" and is used to jerk-off the dreams of independent musicians, suggesting, "(your picture here)."

The carrot of the Big Time is dangled in front of musicians' faces on almost every online music-sales venue. In some cases, it's an overt implication that, in today's egalitarian internetric market, anyone can become an overnight success – minus the 30% or so that some gigantic corporation stands also to reap, as it takes credit for and draws legitimacy from having been responsible for your fame and fiscal viability. In a subtler variation, article/discussion blogs, such as Tunecore's, pep-talk the seul-contre-tous attitude of today's musicianhood, while alluding to "that chance" of being scooped-up by a Major – at no compromise to one's artistic integrity, of course. It feels to me that musicians are being railroaded into believing that everyone has a chance to have his or her music heard, and bought, by everyone in the world, while the Music Industry has developed a sophisticated filtration system whereby it ensures the survival of its corruption by corrupting others. Major labels co-opted indie labels in the late '80s; that's what the Music Industry is doing to the Internet now.

Will my music by me really reach a broader audience via Google Music/Android Market, and thereby, will more of it be sold? Or, is it just another waste of aspiration, given that the first thing I see on Android Market's page is a photo of Rihanna's long, wet cunnilingual implement? Playing songs on the unpaid service tier of Spotify is interrupted by advertisements for major-label "product." And the "staff picks" releases on Android Market and other sites – have they been sponsored from the deep pockets of the Music Industry?

Presence on prominent music-distribution sites is at once something to do if one wants to be taken seriously, a gesture of potentially creating a world-wide market for one's music, and an act of pissing in the ocean. Therefore, it is equally important for musicians to post their music on sites which have yet to be co-opted by the Music Industry, and which, consequently, allow one to post for free and to keep almost all of the proceeds from sales. But, of course, no one knows about them, so why bother?

"+" What?

Yesterday I gained entrance to Google+. As I was going through the steps to fulfill the account, I was shown several candidates with whom to start establishing my "Circles," among them being some personal friends, some "douchebag"-lookin' types, and Richard Branson. Go figure. As with the Facebook account that I reluctantly acknowledge having established for myself (because some kid somewhere had made a bogus profile for me - go figure that, too), The Google+ page is an obligatory "presence" and a "detour" sign to my main blog/site, a staked-off demarcation of my virtual 40 acres , whatever. Certain experiences and insights in regard to "social-networking" sites lead me to leave them at that. I shall say, however, that to its benefit, Google+ isn't as creepy as Facebook.

My Music App by Me (Jumping on the Bandappwagon)

Not usually an "early-adopter," I just had to hit this while it was still young: Bandapp looks promising. Read an article about its inception and methods here. What "sold" me on the service is that it's a rare medium of promotion and dissemination that offers revenue to the artist, and I am partial to musicians of "hardcore" or "fringe" pedigree (as is this service's developer). Fits well with my "Telecommunist" principles.

Get the bandapp for My Music by Me by Steve Fitch here.

You can preview my app in a browser (Safari only) here.

There are currently six songs available on the app; I shall add more as traffic warrants.

My world just got a little weirder.

I swear on a stack o' Bibles that I have no idea wherefore my site's second-greatest referring site/URL would be what it is, according to the accompanying graph chart (screen shot taken of this sites Stats > Traffic page), below. I had not known of the site's existence until I saw the stats a few minutes ago. All I can say is that this world gets weirder by the minute, and I've stopped trying to explain or understand it.

[click to enlarge]

No Tools HD 9

Over the weekend, I did a ground-up re-installation of the operating system and software on my Macbook Pro. Rendering the hard drive more commodious, and thus amenable to the inclusion of non-essential software (meaning that I had more space for crap I may or may not use), I made a second go at Pro Tools HD 9, going so far as to install the PT-proprietary RTAS versions of the plug-ins (AU and/or VST) that I installed for use with Logic Studio. Since I've been at this DAW thing for only a couple of years, I imagined that familiarity with Pro Tools might lend me some old-school cred, and besides, using it might jog my creativity somewhat.

Well, pooh-pooh: I encountered the legendary "system overload" error message when trying to play but one track of MIDI drums in Pro Tools HD 9. Although the message advised one (as I can hardly take an error message personally) to defeat effects and automations which might be demanding too much of the CPU's resources, the project – a stock Pro Tools template – consisted of but one MIDI drum track with no effects nor automations applied. In a search of web forums related to this specific error message, I discovered that this is a disturbingly common problem, even among users of computers with more processor cores and GB of RAM than my Macbook Pro has. Among solutions suggested were to designate, in Pro Tools' Preferences, half the number of processor cores to Pro Tools, leaving half for the operating system, and to increase the amount of RAM for Pro Tools to use to at least 1024GB. Check; check – and still, that dad-blamed, motherfathering "system overload" message.

Well, nice meetin' ya, Pro Tools – but Logic and my other trusty stalwarts have got my back; I ran App Delete on Pro Tools, and can now boast, while mustering my most patiently world-weary tone, that, "I used to use Pro Tools, but it just got too limiting for me."

The New Noise of Audacity 1.3.13

What I Did Early This Morning in Audacity 1.3.13

Normally, I'm leery of beta-version software, even in the case of open-source applications, whose development (not its developers, as in a corporation's leeching free R&D from its clients) benefits greatly from users' feedback. However, when I read-up on the latest version of Audacity (1.3.13), I had to suck it down onto my computer and open it. Among its new features is the ability to sync-lock tracks, which renders recording and editing multiple-track projects a lot surer and stabler. What jazzed me, upon inspection of its updated menus, was the addition of several more sound-generating controls. I have used this feature of Audacity to create sounds to aurally complement musical compositions and to create a couple albums of "noisic" whose sounds had been entirely generated from scratch by this means. Seeing these new sound-generator features goosed me into fiddlin' with 'em; my verdict is that my fun has just been doubled.

Although I am reticent to tell people what they "should" do, I cannot stress enough that anyone remotely interested in digital audio recording/editing must get familiar with this program. It is as easy as possible to use; its more advanced features do not obscure its basic functions, and realistically, unless one needs software instruments and multiple-bus effects, this is the onliest application to run. Not only that, its developers (who are also professional-level users) keep expanding and debugging it all the time. Being a labor of love has made this "the" application to form a basis for one's experience in digital audio.

If the reader might be interested, my Cerebration and Zsborgqbew albums are of sounds entirely originated in Audacity; Autistic License and Breakfast of Creepazoids are good examples of music complemented by Audacious sounds. One can listen to them here and purchase them here.

Google Ga-Ga

I have five Google accounts. What a waste.

The first was established for a Gmail version of my Yahoo e-mail account, into which I imported all the e-mails and contacts from the Yahoo account, making the "migration" in order to use a POP e-mail client with an e-mail account in order to bypass the web GUI. Into this Gmail account I could conveniently receive forwarded from and "send as" a couple other non-Gmail accounts, a consolidation sparing me both time and vigilance.

The second Google account was to be used to catch e-mails from my original, now-defunct, website and music-related concerns in general. Upon establishment of this blog/site as a custom domain (for but $10 a year, I should note), I received another Google account, with access to Google Apps and as many as 50 custom "user" e-mail addresses "@" this domain address. However, I still had to, and still must, log-in to this blog/site with the Gmail user ID associated with my former website, as I had established this blog with that Google ID. Until yesterday, I had been able to also log-in to this blog/site using a specific "____@domain" address, but, after having authorized some "transitioning" of my custom-domain realm into full integration with Google's so-called "products" (some of which, such as Google Voice and Google Chat, had been lacking up to that point) because that "@domain" e-mail address was no longer considered a secondary e-mail address for the Google account associated with my former site, such is no longer possible. (If you had trouble following that, consider what it must have been like for me.) Now I am scratching my head as to how to properly associate this blog/site with the "@ domain" e-mail address, although I fear/expect that such may not be possible. My custom domain for this blog/site is now, due to aforementioned "transitioning," a full-fledged, distinct Google account.

A few months back, YouTube/Google announced that in order to continue using the YouTube account for my videos by me, I had to link it to a Google account. Since somehow my other two Google accounts had become associated with YouTube accounts already, and because I could not "migrate" the name of the YouTube channel to either, I was obliged/forced to establish a distinct Google/Gmail account for my official YouTube channel. Next, it became apparent that I should have a distinct e-mail address for PayPal and other financial concerns, so along came another Google/Gmail account for that express purpose.

A by-product of this mess has been that I have three Google Voice numbers (with area codes for three different parts of the country, just for fun) and the potential for two more, given my total of five Google accounts. I use a Google Voice number for free telephone calls placed and received through my computer, and another for the Voicemail widget found in the Contact section of this site. I might use the remaining of the three, or one of the two potential GV numbers, to give to annoying people I meet in bars or at parties, or are otherwise not interested in seeing again. Google Voice is convenient, however, in that it has provisions for not ringing during hours when women might be drunk-dialing me, and for sending calls from particular numbers straight to voicemail or to a "no-longer-in-service" message. It may sound as though I lead a more "libertine" life than I do, but such elements, even in negligible proportions, are assiduously insidious and warrant some discrete filtering.

Another benefit, as it were, is 1GB of free storage in Google Documents per account, among other so-called "products" that Google is constantly generating. For some reason, when I upload a file to the Docs section of this domain's account, I am not permitted (even after the aforementioned "transitioning") to make the file available to anyone with the URL (and not having to sign-in to Google, themselves), so I have to upload and "share" it on the Google account established for my former site.

Despite having all these toys to play with, it would be great to consolidate five Google accounts down to three, but it looks like I'm stuck the five. Not only is this cumbersome and confusing for me, I can't help feeling "guilty" for hogging resources which could be more efficiently distributed among others. Might I be depriving someone else of Googleage or contributing to a scarcity of Google "products"? In the not-so-distant future, shall I be standing on a street corner, murmuring, "Hey, kid – wanna buy a Google Voice number?"

My Audience by Google

. . . and, as of this morning, my MySpace page's views-count was 6669.

Ever-Self-Glutting with Mediocrity

For how much the Internet is "democratizing" the presentation of musical and video artists, it also is being used to apply and enforce new standards and means of commercialization. Although independent artists (mainly musicians, as such is my own main concern) presenting their work on the Internet embrace that the Internet and other newer technology level the field for creation of and public access to one's work (circumventing entirely the auspices of the big, arrogant old Music Industry), it is also that the Music Biz and its ancillary concerns are, in turn, doing whatever they can to exploit the new condition of "every man for himself in the vast no-man's land," utilizing the Internet to market to musicians gimmicks, social media networking, and promotional scams purpotedly designed to give "your band" the edge amongst the infinite competition for the eyes, ears, time and money of the internetric audience.

Although the Internet allows any everyday schmoe to post his or her music online, online marketeers are doing everything they can to reinforce conditioning of the public that "quality" entertainment doesn't come from everyday schmoes or obscure nobodies, but from commercially groomed-and-packaged "acts" who rock the look and look the rock. This, conversely, reminds musicians that they have to look and sound "competitive" in this context, or else the public won't take them seriously enough to click on their links. Especially in America, artists – musicians particularly – and their works are not taken seriously unless exhibiting signs of ambition for commmercial success, and displaying characteristics within parameters of recognized viability: appearing to play The Game, seeming a "contender." Anyone else is written-off as a "loser" for not even wanting to play The Game – which the Internet was supposed or expected to nullify.

The forces of internetric marketing are crowding everyday schmoes – potentially, authentic artists – right out of public view or consideration. Furthermore, rather than a polyglot of musical visions at one's cursor-tip, one sees (at least at first glance, which is enough for the impatient and lazy general internetric public) a vast array of similar-looking and -sounding young "aritsts" with nothing new nor revolutionary to offer, playing The Musician Game because their college degrees are worthless or because there is so much hyped "potential" on the Internet. The expanded potential of the internetric marketplace is ever-self-glutting with mediocrity.


So, congratulations and thanks for finding my site.

Optimal Compressor Plug-In

Finally, I have found a compression plug-in that is not only easy to use but which sounds not just acceptable but excellent: the PSP oldTimer. As the blurbs on the webpage for the plug-in declaim, this compressor not only "looks" like but sounds and "feels" like an analog valve (tube) compressor. This virtual gizmo renders compression as I very selectively prefer it. I have applied it to some acoustic-bass tracks and a couple of drum kits in the piece on which I am currently working, and I can almost claim that this compressor has iced that cake.

Amadeus Pro vs. Audacity

For several years, I have been using Audacity for recording, editing, and even mastering audio, as well as occasionally mixing tracks and generating sounds "from scratch." Several days ago, someone told me about Amadeus Pro, which has some features which I'd found lacking in Audacity:

• Looping playback of selected audio
• Toolbar buttons for adding/splitting/deleting tracks, fading in/out, and access to metadata/info
• Customizable colors of waveform, background and other features
• Ability to join a batch of files together at once
• Controls for extending sound to particular marker-points
• More explicit control over fading by selection of methods
• Statistics menu item is useful for analyzing the sound "on paper"
• Seeking/finding clipped samples in the audio waveform
• Trim Silence is a labor-saver, and has custom controls for how to treat silences
• De-noising controls are more particular to what kinds of noises to remove, incidentally or overall
• "Whole Sound" view (toggleable) shows the overall file (as on Soundcloud) along with the editor view
• Mac-native GUI

It seems that AP might be good as a simple mastering application, with the ability to utilize markers to distinguish selections, set gaps, and include CD Text. For this reason, I wish that I'd known of this application much earlier.

Even so, there are features of Audacity which enable one to do more with or to the sound – more specific and varied tweaking. Additionally, Amadeus has no level meters; one has to watch the waveforms in real time, and can't pre-test recording with a level meter. Also missing from AP's controls bar is a "pause" button, although the spacebar on the keyboard should suffice in lieu of that.

It may seem like either a flaw or an asset, but one can export to iTunes, say, a single file of an album's tracks, divvied-up with markers, as individual tracks, but the exported formats are Mac-native – even to the exclusion of AIFF. Since the Burn to Disc feature does not include the option to "burn" to an .ISO image, exporting individual CD tracks to iTunes as AIFF would seem an appropriate work-around, but instead, to achieve this result, one has to export the files as Apple Lossless and convert them to AIFF, which isn't exactly "audiophilic."

It should be noted that "Export" in Audacity pertains to outputting files, in whatever format, and in Amadeus Pro, that command pertains to adding to the iTunes Library or as an iTunes ringtone (given this application's Maccentricity). In AP, "Save As" pertains to exporting/saving the file to a selected file formats and their settings.

If I can convince Amadeus Pro to share Audacity's plug-ins folders, then it will be even more functional. What I find most glaringly lacking in Amadeus Pro, in comparison to Audacity, is the provision to generate sounds. Additionally, although AP has a Normalize control (conveniently, treating track independently, if one chooses), I really like the Leveling control of Audacity for the sake of the music I produce. Happily, like Audacity, Amadeus Pro readily extracts audio from video files just by opening them in the GUI.

All in all, Amadeus Pro is a most welcome addition to the general population of my computer's OS/applications partition and a complement, of not a rival, to Audacity.

Looking Back at Four-Track

As I am not very nostalgic, it almost had escaped my personal-historic vigilance that in a couple of weeks will be the "silver" anniversary of the first four-track recordings that I made by myself. I don't recall much about the events of the occasion, but according to the notes that I had made of the recordings, they were made over a week's duration. I rarely listen to those recordings anymore, as to associate myself (apart from the rights of and publishing thereof) with them is also to associate myself with the person who had made them; both "he" and the recordings seem very remote to me. Although the recordings were pretty good for someone's first efforts, after a reluctant sentimental twinge come a shudder and a cringe. That there are some people who are still a lot more attached to them, as listeners, than I am, as creator, is rather unsettling. (I have been finding that there are, in fact, people who prefer to remember rather than to discover.)

Looking back at making recordings with analog tape decks, I am glad for the lessons in creativity and discipline that it yielded. However, while using Logic, last month, I had just completed something of which I was rather proud, and then put my head in my hands and moaned, "Why didn't they have this 20 years ago?!" What a shame; what a waste. For one thing, at the very least, I'd like to have restored to me all the time lost to waiting for the tape to rewind. I'd also like to recuperate all the moments of inspiration lost to waiting for the tape to rewind. Add to that discrepancies in tape-drive speeds (and thereby in pitch between originals and copies) between tape decks patched together, tape hiss and/or the loss of fidelity from the necessary evil of noise-reduction, sound lost to "drop-outs" due to flaws in the oxide coatings on the tape, compromised sound and control from having to bounce tracks, incompatibility of inches-per-second tape speeds and/or noise-reduction modes between models of multitrack decks, and tapes' stretching (resulting in aberrations in pitch, speed and fidelity) from overuse or poor manufacture — or tapes' breaking or being "eaten" by the transport mechanism after having worked all day to meticulously perform and record a four-minute, nine-part masterpiece.

For those of you too young or too wealthy to have experienced the joys and the travails of four-track cassette recording, here is a primer of how it was done:

1: Signal you record should register between LED scale -15 to -20 (not enough level = hiss) and LED scale +6 (too much level = distortion).

2: How loud or soft a level you want to hear in the headphones has no effect on the recording level. To hear Track 1, ADJUST MONMIX Gain up. Pan in center.

3: To record on Track 1, set CHAN A REC TRACK Selector to 1, Input Select to MIC or LINE. Connect CHAN A Input and adjust main level conteol and tone controls.

4: Make your basic recording, rewind and listen. If necessary, you can repeat the whole thing or fix a mistake by "punching-in" (see manual for details).

5: Now turn up Track 2 MONMIX Gain, leaving the Trackl 1 controls as the are; turn up CHAN B main level and turn CHAN A down. Rewind to beginning and sent 000 reference.

6: Switch CHAN A REC TRACK off (center) and CHAN B to 2. Wsitch CHAN B Input Select to MIC or LINE and connect the corresponding Input.

7: Make this overdub, rewind to 000, and listen to both parts. As before, repeat the whole take until it's righ, or fix a mistake. (See manual for ways of combining tracks for overdubs.)

8: When you're ready to mix, switch both REC TRACL Selectors off (center) and both Input Selectors to REMIX. Set the main level controls to about 2/3 travel (normal posotion).

9: Now adjust the MONMIX Gain and Pan controls,. the main level controls and the tone controls for the best stereo blend f the 4 tracks. Patch to another cassette recorder an d make a copy of your final mix.

"Dumb Things I Gotta Do"

This is a lotta work. Not in the least am I complaining; it's just that every so often, I sit back from my normally indefatigable travailing and exclaim to myself softly, "This is a lotta work," as though realizing it for the first time. Here is what is a lotta work:

• Creation/production of My Music by Me. That devours its share of my time, although I'm not exactly punching a time-clock in that regard. Creating music involves losing track of time.
• Mastering and editing of the audio for CD/MP3 release. That can take longer than it "should," but satisfaction with the final results redeems that.
• Creating graphics for CD packages and promotional usage.
• Uploading audio and graphics to Createspace/Amazon, and contending with their Customer Service bureaucracy.
• Registering with BMI the titles of tracks of a new album.
• Editing the album samplers and full-album programs for online streaming: creating MP3 versions of each song.
• Uploading MP3 versions of all the individual songs (with corresponding graphics) to MySpace and to Reverbnation.com and some neutral MP3-hosting site.
• Uploading audio and graphics files to update my Catalog on Last.fm, filling-in info about the albums, and attending to other details on that site.
• Populating my Flickr page with CD-artwork files and tagging and arranging them appropriately.
• Keeping my Discography and Lyrics sub-sites current with text, graphics, and links.
• Maintaining the HTML table of my mE-Commerce albums presentation, which includes creation of graphics, adding sales and samplers links, and adjusting code to the vicissitudes of the several sites on which I have the motherfather embedded.
• Checking-in with my tertiary/auxiliary concerns, such as on Tumblr, Twitter, and YouTube; ignoring that Facebook page I created but about which I couldn't care less.
• Researching software, installing it, experimenting with it; sometimes creating with it.
• Reading-up on technical info and techniques related to whatever it is that I "do."
• Posting to this very blog/site and revising its pages, links, graphics, and layout.
• Wishing that I had the time and a second computer for making more music videos and short films.

Certainly I have omitted some things by dint of feeling overwhelmed. I must confess that I don't do the social-media thing well, in part because it requires too much time, partly because I am once-bitten, twice-shy about it, and due also to my being too old to be fully acculturated (or indoctrinated) to the mentality of it. I do this all myself, and have taught myself every aspect.

Just writing this has taken a lot outa me. Time for a nap before bedtime.

At Perpetual Random, Both My Decisions and My Noises Made for Me

Latest encumbrance on my computer's hard drive: Native Instruments' Reaktor 5.5. I installed it principally to use as an "Audio Unit" in Logic, and run its Instruments and Ensembles within it, yielding a wonderful wealth of new and exciting sounds.

Suddenly presented with a virtual third dimension to the GUI of the DAW, I stared into an abyss of possibilities, paralyzed by potential. I don't know what the motherfather to do. I longed for the day, back in '77, when I patched the circuits of a cassette deck the way I shouldn't've and the thing wailed and blooped at perpetual random, both my decisions and my noises made for me.

Well, my quandary evaporated when I discovered the Native Instruments User Library, to which users all over the world have contributed bazillions of their own Instrument and Ensemble creations to use with Reaktor. It pleased me to find that some have uploaded virtual gizmos which generate sounds at-random and ad nauseam – perfect for daring experimental dream-induction while sleeping or for those small gatherings of absinthe-minded friends wanting something to induce "colors."

New Software and Live Mix by Me

Out of curiosity, the other night, I was browsing around for some Audio Units plug-ins and bits of software, one which was UVI Workstation, which is available for both Mac and PC, and which operates as a stand-alone application or as a sequencer for MIDI tracks and/or loops running under a DAW application.

Apart from its official or intended uses is how it immediately struck me as a sort of live loop-mixer, whereby I found myself doing this today.

I am hereby available for live improvised chill-out lounge DJ gigs.

"Fanny once a day goes really quickly."

 has lots of interesting features, among which is text transcriptions of voicemail messages. Added to this is the bonus of the misrepresentations of voice-to-text transcription. For example, a recent voicemail message left by a woman with an Italian accent was presented to me as such:

Steve running unit aromas. I have no way to go any anonymous, Fanny once a day goes really quickly. So call me back in the front door. That's where relocating. Okay bye.

Fortunately, Google Voice also records the messages and saves them as MP3 files, so one is free to mis-hear them as one might.

DAW Software: ProTools 9 & Some Open-Source Hotties

My own screenshot of ProTools 9.

Another piece of significant software for my resumé, I suppose: ProTools HD 9. Although I am content with feeling overwhelmed by the complexity of Logic Pro 9, PT9 became available to me, so I decided that I should familiarize with what has been, and remains, an industry-standard digital-audio program.

Prior to installing PT9, I searched for discussions of LP9-vs.-PT9, hut no one with any opinion had equivalent familiarity with both. For example, some would maintain that PT is better for syncing audio with video, while others would contend that Soundtrack Pro, included in Logic Pro Studio, is specifically for that task, and then others would argue that since PT does both, why bother with a second app for video sync? Whatever. Sometimes such discussions come down to users' preference of GUI design – simple visual aesthetics or ergonomic ease. Significant between PT and LP is the difference in plug-ins used, but I figure that using both programs is having the best of both worlds.

An advantage of familiarity with ProTools is that there are versions for both Mac and PC platforms, so that one's familiarity with the software translates across the platforms. Version 9 of ProTools is the first to not require a proprietary-hardware interface device; on Mac, it will use Mac's native Core Audio. Drivers for M-Audio interface devices can be installed optionally.

ADDENDUM, 26 FEB.:

Here are some open-source audio workstation applications which one can legally and liberally obtain and use for free or at next-to-no cost:

Frinika is a platform-independent digital audio workstation application which runs on Java. What a great idea: an essentials-only DAW, for either newcomers to such software or experienced users who aren't in the mood for the noise of visual bells and whistles. Being familiar with Logic and similar DAW applications, to me, Frinika was at first confusingly simplistic.

Hydrogen is a really cool drum-machine program, for Linux, Mac and maybe Windows (newer version is not supported for the last). There are separate GUI knobs for ADSR (Attack, Delay, Sustain, Release) and other controls for each voice; I can't really get into how complete and user-friendly this MIDI drum-program is. Although I tend to de- and re-construct beats from loops or compose them myself on Logic's "piano roll" window, I can see how this program might broaden my rhythmic horizons. My enthusiasm would be even greater if not for the black-on-dark-gray GUI theme (the reason why I decided to forget about the otherwise-remarkable latest edition of Garageband). DAW designers should give users a choice between a "light" theme (for using the apps) and a "dark" theme (for showing-off when they have company).

Although I have mentioned this DAW application before, Ardour is a real knockout, designed for Linux and Mac users familiar with ProTools. For Mac, there are both Intel and PowerPC versions available. Fortunately, there is a choice between "light" and "dark" themes, and some users have posted their own custom variations. Just as fortunately, Ardour uses the audio plug-ins native to Linux and Mac, respectively, and provides visual support for their controls. The full-featured version of this software is available for whatever price you prefer to pay; as little as $1.00. That's quite generous of its developers, since this is pro-level software.

Linux Multimedia Studio is an application that I would be using if I were operating on Linux or Windows, as there is no version available for Mac. LMMS was designed as a cross-platform alternative to FL Studio, and will allow importing that app's proprietary FLP files, as well as importing and modifying MIDI files. LMMS is fully extensible with all the relevant plug-ins, such as VSTI.

Last, but foremost, there is Audacity, which I have been using for several years and have watched grow into maturity as a formidable and indispensable tool. Mainly intended as an audio recording and editing app, I myself have used it for making simple audio mixes (involving levels and cross-fades), audio mastering, effects post-processing, and even the generation of sounds for a couple albums of experimental music - Cerebration and the Kleinabermein album. Audacity was and is developed by users for users, so it keeps on growing. One of the recent additions to its functions is simple extraction of audio from video files (of virtually any format) just by dragging the video file into Audacity's GUI. Too easy, huh? For Linux, Mac and Windows.

Despite that I am quasi-monogamous with Logic Pro 9, there are reasons why I'm all crushed-out on open-aource audio applications:

• They are designed by users themselves, so the applications and their GUIs are generally user-friendlier (even with "dark" themes) than commercial/semi-proprietary DAW programs.
• They install with a smaller "footprint" on the hard drive, and run with less demand on system resources, than their big-name counterparts. For example, they should run on 1GB of RAM when their commercial counterparts require at least 2GB of RAM; similarly, concerning the demand on the CPU.
• They are generally available at no cost, and are also modifiable by the users themselves (provided one's facility at tweaking source code) - and are not necessarily lesser copycats of big-name commercial applications.