Karaoke Forums

Ok, I'm trying yet again. I've tried to pay attention to the suggestions folks have been making and I hope to show improvement each time I submit. I plan to prove that a person CAN improve by listening to critiques!!!

Or not...

The mushiness is from compression unfortunately... I just couldn't get that file size small enough without getting some mush (although I did get a tip for a better compression method I hope to try).

I did all the backup vocals myself (nothing to brag about really) and yes, the 'chorus' is supposed to be a bit 'deadpan' (at least it was in the original), but hopefully the rest of the sub shows better emotion. I'm trying folks!!!

Thanks (as always) to anyone who takes the time to listen and comment.

Are you submitting stereo or mono?? Often it is better to sub a mono (or reduced stereo) with lower compression than a stereo version that is strongly compressed.

You might even want to use an external encoder such as "LAME" which provides better sound quality at the same compression ratio. Also using VBR instead of CBR might be a good idea.

Morten

96 kHz and up sounds pretty good. Compression really only becomes a problem below that level.

Morten

Strmbreeze - I dunno if you'll see this, but it's worth a try.

I listened to my sub again, and I did finally hear what you're talking about... the 'drifty' quality. I think the compression problems made the words a little more difficult to understand, but the driftiness is definitely just my way of singing. Might be something I need to improve though. Some people have expressed liking it, so I'm not sure what to do!!! !!

I guess it's not a big deal if my words are 'clear', so no matter what I'll have to work on that and make sure I can be understood easily. I do suspect, however, that the sub would have been much more clear (if drifty!!) if it had been compressed using a better method or something.

Heck I dunno!! But thanks again for the nice comments and feedback!

Stereo! So that might be a good idea. Thanks for the suggestion!

well Seby, I thought it sounded fantastic..... my fave by you so far... as for the mix... *shrugs* what the heck do I know? !

I personally like the "drifty" sound.... makes you different

_________________

Thanks Crystal It is so gratifying to 'improve' bit by bit. Very interesting for me to hear 'outside' feedback on things I need to improve and things people like. This 'drifty' quality is a good example, I never knew I had it until people started commenting on it here. Kind of a bit of my personality coming through I guess. I'm a pretty 'laid back' person.

I've kind of felt like (if you know what I'm talking about) that guy from American Idol 3 "Jon Peter Lewis" (the 'pen salesman' guy). Not that my voice is as good as his, but everyone kept telling him he needed 'more energy' in his performances, so he kept trying to do more and more upbeat things... ... Well, I know how he felt BUT!! It's a fun way to learn about your own voice, isn't it? I know you enjoy getting feedback and improving yourself too.

This site is such a great resource!! Thanks gal Love ya!!

I fully agree with you, in fact, it's impossible to get a great sound using a commercial encoder even at 320k!! If you are using the latest Lame dll version 3.96 you'll get a better sound at 128k versus 320k using a commercial encoder!! Some people will tell you that the WMA format will be superior than the mp3, but that will again only apply in the case of a commercial encoder NOT with the Lame encoder!

Make sure to update the dll with the latest version 3.96, most software are still using an older key!!

Micky - I've checked the LAME website and they list quite a few applications which already integrate LAME technology. Any suggestions on which one would be the best to grab? I can't compile source right now, unless I go digging through boxes to find the CD with one of our compilers on it and get it reinstalled on my system. :p

You might want to check this software, I'm told it's excellent but you'll need to overwrite the Lame dll, it uses the 3.93 version!
Another good software to convert the wave files to mp3 using this encoder is WaveLab Essential, this software has the option to encode by lot and it has a Lame encoder design for them, CAN'T USE THE 3.96 version, it's in fact the software I use, it's the best I've tried so far!

[quote="Micky"]You might want to check this software, I'm told it's excellent but you'll need to overwrite the Lame dll, it uses the 3.93 version!
Another good software to convert the wave files to mp3 using this encoder is WaveLab Essential, this software has the option to encode by lot and it has a Lame encoder design for them, CAN'T USE THE 3.96 version, it's in fact the software I use, it's the best I've tried so far!


Thanks so much!!

FOR THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED, THE SOFTWARE IS CALL: CD'GO

Phil removed my link, don't know why we can't do that but anyway...

Hey syb, just saw the post... Hey, yeah, the drifty thing is cool, like I said kind of a 'dreamy sound' until ur voice gets a bit darker during the chorus... I super liked it, chicka!! (Hope I didn't come off like a big meany or make u think I didn't like Sometimes my brain thinks one thing, but hands write another

Hey wow, I found a really cute smilie that signifies 'moi'!!
isn' he cute!

Awww thanks!! (see how much I like it? ) No, I wasn't offended or thought you were being mean or anything. I just really think it's interesting when people can tell you things about yourself you didn't know... like the first time a person says you have an accent !!!

(don't know if you've ever experienced that, but I have... I was like "whut?") heheheh It's kind of a cool thing, like when certain folks here were talking about trying to discover their own 'voice'. I've been in a similar process and now I'm starting to understand what my 'voice' is like (and what I want to change about it, or leave alone). It's a hard road ahead, but fun when you can actually see progress being made.

Thanks so much