recording classical singer ,help buying new home to record..

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Crazy but maybe the most important question I've ask from any newsgroup. I
live in Brooklyn, NYC, I may moving (very soon) and buying a business out
of the city, I want to buy a house where I can record my wife and I ,
Classical singing and guitar also Classical singing with Piano. I know
there is some do's and don'ts I just don't know what they are. Like what
dimensions are better in what size rooms, are vault ceilings better , is
there a perfect size.

One house I know has a living room that's 27 L 20w 12 h, with doors that
closes the rooms up pretty tight, is that what I looking for? .An other
house has a living room that has cathedral or is it vault ceilings that is
huge but there is no doors to close . I can't see all the houses so I would
like to take some out of the picture.

Where I'm going, I have three days , to pick a house and I'm not that
bright about sound. I have many chooses , but if I had some "blue print"
in my head , it would help. I want the living room be our Sanctuary when
the 4 kids are in school. We always enjoy practicing in different
sanctuaries in Brooklyn.

The family living, recording and practicing for us is a quality of life
issue to be come better musician/parents among other things .I know a
studio in house is not "profession" sounding as a great sounding sanctuary
but still I want to do my best.

FYI, Oh yea ,, you all at rec.audio.pro, creamed me when you heard how
small of a room I have us practicing in and try to record in , so I listen
and I thank you for any help this time too.


Ed Bridge
Brooklyn N.Y.
http://www.bridgeclassicalguitars.com/

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Paul Stamler" <pstamlerhell@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:tHy6e.559744$w62.525405@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

>
> That 27x29x12 room works out nicely in terms of standing waves. If it were
> me, I'd go for that one, all other things being equal. Prepare of course
to
> do acoustic treatment to get the reverb times you want, but from a basic
> shape point of view that one's a very good start.

Cool, that place has the five bedrooms too!.. . .umm . is there a pretty
way to do acoustic treatment ?
Peace,
Ed Bridge
Brooklyn N.Y.
http://www.bridgeclassicalguitars.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Edward Bridge" <edbridge@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:LmA6e.5286$sp3.5237@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...

> > That 27x29x12 room works out nicely in terms of standing waves. If it
were
> > me, I'd go for that one, all other things being equal. Prepare of course
> to
> > do acoustic treatment to get the reverb times you want, but from a basic
> > shape point of view that one's a very good start.
>
> Cool, that place has the five bedrooms too!.. . .umm . is there a
pretty
> way to do acoustic treatment ?

The wooden-framed absorbers with cloth covers that F. Alton Everest shows in
several of his books look fairly innocuous in a Danish Modern sort of way.
Acoustic tiles on the ceiling are unobtrusive, especially 12' up.

Peace,
Paul

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
> Note that you can never remove reverberation once it's recorded.


Now there is an interesting signal processing challenge.

Would there be a market for this if it could be done?


Mark

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mark <makolber@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Note that you can never remove reverberation once it's recorded.
>
>Now there is an interesting signal processing challenge.
>
>Would there be a market for this if it could be done?

There would be several different markets for different kinds of
dereverberation. This has been something of the holy grail of DSP
for the past 20 years, and every now and then somebody claims to have
a working solution but it never seems to pan out.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news3gqo2$nu9$1@panix2.panix.com...
> Mark <makolber@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Note that you can never remove reverberation once it's recorded.
> >
> >Now there is an interesting signal processing challenge.
> >
> >Would there be a market for this if it could be done?
>
> There would be several different markets for different kinds of
> dereverberation. This has been something of the holy grail of DSP
> for the past 20 years, and every now and then somebody claims to have
> a working solution but it never seems to pan out.

I've noticed that cutting low eq seems to reduce it significantly.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:37:57 +0200, Paul Stamler wrote:
> "Edward Bridge" <edbridge@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:LmA6e.5286$sp3.5237@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>> is there a pretty way to do acoustic treatment ?
>
> The wooden-framed absorbers with cloth covers that F. Alton Everest
> shows in several of his books look fairly innocuous in a Danish Modern
> sort of way. Acoustic tiles on the ceiling are unobtrusive, especially
> 12' up.

If you want to use acoustic tiles, better leave some room behind the
tiles, this improves absorbtion in the low end. Often special acoustic
tiles with about 50% absobtion (like ecophon master), mounted 1' below the
ceiling are better for a recording environment.
http://www.ecophon-us.com/template [...] __4778.asp

--
Chel van Gennip
Visit Serg van Gennip's site http://www.serg.vangennip.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

please reply to edbridge@earthlink.net
"Jay Kadis" <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:jay-A1365B.07451712042005@news.stanford.edu...
> In article <d3f4en$nll$1@domitilla.aioe.org>,
> Joe Kesselman <keshlam-nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Edward Bridge wrote:
> > > is there a pretty way to do acoustic treatment ?
> >
> > Hang tapestries and quilts on the walls? It's not exactly textured
> > studio panels, but it beats BBC egg crates... and it can make a real
> > difference. (A few years ago, I had to work with a room which had about
> > a second-and-a-half reverberation in specific frequencies -- rather
> > painful. Hanging curtains along the two long parallel walls made a HUGE
> > difference.)
> >
> > Note that you can never remove reverberation once it's recorded. You
> > *can* cheat it in. If the room doesn't have *exactly* the sound you
> > want, deader is probably better.
>
>
> Bookcases make reasonable diffusers and look like... bookcases.

Plenty of those, So instead of having the cases against the wall, maybe have
them sticking out , sort of like a partisan?
--
Peace,
Ed Bridge
Brooklyn N.Y.
http://www.bridgeclassicalguitars.com/

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <kyV6e.4580$go4.1500@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Edward Bridge" <edbridge@earthlink.net> wrote:

> please reply to edbridge@earthlink.net
> "Jay Kadis" <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote in message
> news:jay-A1365B.07451712042005@news.stanford.edu...
> > In article <d3f4en$nll$1@domitilla.aioe.org>,
> > Joe Kesselman <keshlam-nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Edward Bridge wrote:
> > > > is there a pretty way to do acoustic treatment ?
> > >
> > > Hang tapestries and quilts on the walls? It's not exactly textured
> > > studio panels, but it beats BBC egg crates... and it can make a real
> > > difference. (A few years ago, I had to work with a room which had about
> > > a second-and-a-half reverberation in specific frequencies -- rather
> > > painful. Hanging curtains along the two long parallel walls made a HUGE
> > > difference.)
> > >
> > > Note that you can never remove reverberation once it's recorded. You
> > > *can* cheat it in. If the room doesn't have *exactly* the sound you
> > > want, deader is probably better.
> >
> >
> > Bookcases make reasonable diffusers and look like... bookcases.
>
> Plenty of those, So instead of having the cases against the wall, maybe have
> them sticking out , sort of like a partisan?
> --

They'll work along the wall. The books should be arranged randomly so they
stick out different distances and create a fairly random reflective surface.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Edward Bridge" <edbridge@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:lvV6e.5989$sp3.902@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...

> > The wooden-framed absorbers with cloth covers that F. Alton Everest
shows
> in
> > several of his books look fairly innocuous in a Danish Modern sort of
way.
> > Acoustic tiles on the ceiling are unobtrusive, especially 12' up.
>
>
> Danish Modern, umm maybe I could pull that one off, how are his books?

Excellent; well-written, remarkably understandable. Don't start with "Master
Handbook of Acoustics", though; begin with one of his less fancy books and
work your way up. When you think you get the idea, then check out the Master
Handbook. It'll knock you back a couple of notches, but it will teach you a
lot of new things too.

Peace,
Paul

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:12:10 +0200, Mark wrote:

> I would think that if one can collect the impulse response of the room,
> dereverberation should be do-able. But just for that one mic location
> and one source location at which the impulse response was collected. I
> guess those limitations make it not usable in practice.

The limitations are a bit more strict. The sound source should be a
point, to get a good impulse response, as should the actual sound source
you are recording. The mic should not only at the exact same location,
but should be the same mic (at least completely identical polar and other
curves) at the exact same location.

--
Chel van Gennip
Visit Serg van Gennip's site http://www.serg.vangennip.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> There would be several different markets for different kinds of
> dereverberation. This has been something of the holy grail of DSP
> for the past 20 years, and every now and then somebody claims to have
> a working solution but it never seems to pan out.

It's theoretically possible if you have a complete model of the
reflective environment and exactly where the sound source is originating
from. Of course that just reduces it to another unsolved problem, not
least because performers move.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 23:32:48 +0200, Scott Dorsey wrote:

>>It's theoretically possible if you have a complete model of the
>>reflective environment and exactly where the sound source is originating
>>from. Of course that just reduces it to another unsolved problem, not
>>least because performers move.
>
> Right.
>
> Most of the systems out there rely on some method to approximate the
> impulse response of the room so they can convolve an inverse response.
> This turns out to be hard to do even if you have good percussive sounds
> to work with, and it turns out to be really, really hard to do with only
> voice samples.

For reverb reversion the sound should orginate from a well defined source.
Even a trangle would be difficult, not to mention cymbals, drums or a
piano soundboard.

--
Chel van Gennip
Visit Serg van Gennip's site http://www.serg.vangennip.com