Originally posted by hoserama:Well you can always compare RMS of a recording, which may get you in the ballpark. But really...just turn DOWN the volume of the U2-2, since they cranked it to a painfully high level.
Originally posted by hoserama:Well you can always compare RMS of a recording, which may get you in the ballpark. But really...just turn DOWN the volume of the U2-2, since they cranked it to a painfully high level.
Originally posted by hoserama:Gotta start somewhere! I was a bright eyed ambitious 15 year old when I first started and knew nothing.
Originally posted by hoserama:It ain't about the age, but about just starting somewhere.
I had this discussion with another taper friend of mine (taping seriously since 2009). He gets intimidated about the mixing/mastering process. I told him if he had just started messing with it since 2009, he'd already be well past the initial intimidation and learning curve. Just accept that all your initial efforts will be bad and rough, but you have to keep experimenting through it.
Originally posted by hoserama:Can you clarify on the rating system?
Do you mean vintage three stars like that recording would have been three stars in 1987 but not so today?
I know a stars based rating system in inherently subjective (I'd rank most recordings released with one to two stars), so I guess I need to ask for narrative based review too!
5 stars: Near-Perfect Proper Recording; could be released as a proper live album (it may have already).
4.5 stars: Good Proper Recording; recording sounds great, but doesn't properly represent event i.e. improper mix/incomplete soundboard (poor audience to band ratio/one sided to a certain performer).
4 stars: Excellent Audience Recording; top-tier recording of the show from the crowd with all elements clear and audible, as it should be.
3.5 stars: Great Audience Recording; quality recording of the show from the crowd but minor problems start occurring (screaming or talking/shifts in quality/age or poor handling).
3 stars: Good Audience Recording; fine recording of the show but the minor problems begin occurring more frequently.
2.5 stars: Average Audience Recording; the performance is there but major problems begin popping up (too much screaming or talking/unwieldy shifts in quality/source damage beyond repair).
2 stars: Fair Audience Recording; no performance just problems with the source.
1.5 stars: Poor Audience Recording; you were standing outside the performance area, weren't you?
1 star: Abysmal Audience Recording; mind as well be two hours of you babbling your finger against your lips.
Originally posted by hoserama:Can you clarify on the rating system?
Do you mean vintage three stars like that recording would have been three stars in 1987 but not so today?
I know a stars based rating system in inherently subjective (I'd rank most recordings released with one to two stars), so I guess I need to ask for narrative based review too!