The practical side of this...

Doctor J

This is a swish idea for a forum but it'll turn to ****e unless some form of protocol is agreed fairly early on.

For example, the potential issues which spring to mind are

Copyright ownership

Intellectual property - do participants agree to their work being open?


Recording - How and where

For example - digital recording to be agreed as 16bit 44.1kHz wav files to ensure whoever gets the task of mixing isn't spending time resampling or wasting their time getting things in order. This makes things awkward for the people who have stand alone multi-tracks and analogue recording.


Mixing

How and where. Will disk space be needed to host files?


Projects getting started

Everybody can't be the lead guitarist all the time. Backing tracks will be needed first and I would assume whoever starts each project and provides the backing track (or track idea) is the captain (for want of a better word) of that project and decides who plays what on their track?


I would think that sort of stuff will need to be agreed on before a track proceeds. Any more that anyone can think of (it's late)?

John

One thread per project. Stop things getting untidy.

Also maybe no covers as this could lead to sticky copyright issues.

feylya

I think copyright of the piece that was written and played by each user should stay the property of the user.

Whoever creates the backing track or requests ones should be the track "coordinator" for want of another word. They should then look for help with whatever they may need.

I don't see why .wav's should be used. These won't be commercially released songs (more than likely) so 196kbps mp3's should be good enough quality imo.

As for uploading, Gmail offers 2 gigs of storage. Maybe everyone could have a gmail account for each of their projects. Then each user uploads their stuff to there.

Doctor J

I wouldn't want to mix mp3 files or apply effects and the like. It'd sound... well... the opposite of :v:

There would need to be a minimum quality level of sound to make it worthwhile for everyone to invest their time into it.

feylya

How many people have the ability to upload 50+meg wav files though? I think people's recording hardware or possible lack of it will make the quality issue void. If you don't want to use MP3, what about FLAC or Ogg Vorbis or other lossless compression?

Doctor J

A two minute mono wav file of that spec would be little more than 10mb.

Again, I'm thinking about mixing, applying effects, etc to already compressed digital audio is a bad thing. A real bad thing. As well as finding a program or piece of equipment that will mix them.

To record along to, a high sample rate mp3 is fine, but the whole thing would just be fruitless, IMO, unless the basic tracks are of a reasonable quality. If you're not striving to make it at least listenable then why?

This is why I think it needs to be addressed here and now. Say someone has an analogue four track?

feylya

Which is quite a bit tbh. But we're splitting hairs here about compressions. I do agree though that guidelines need to be set up. Perhaps make a selection of guidelines and let the project coordinaters chose which they wish to follow?

Doctor J

I think perhaps a list, stickied, of musicians and engineers and their resources (voluntarily of course) as a resource list for prospective participants....


ie need a bass player, ask... etc

need it mixed, choose from... etc

feylya

I don't know if that'd work. People like Eoin (if he put his name down) would probably get barrages of requests. It may be better if someone posted what they needed in the first post of their thread and editted the post during the course of the project to update who they need.

John

feylya wrote:

It may be better if someone posted what they needed in the first post of their thread and editted the post during the course of the project to update who they need.

Just a quick point, the edit function disappears after a few days. Just makes things a little messy in that thread if you have to keep putting up new posts with what you still need in it in my opinion but it looks like the best way to me, rather than harassing people to try and help you.

feylya

I'll ask the admin to extend the edit time on this forum if I have to. Alternatively, the project leader people could pm a mod and request that it be changed. If it's the latter, more than one mod is definately needed!

John

Good point.

-=al=-

high quality mp3 files! wav's would take forever for me im on podssibly the slowest connection in western europe........ =/ + yea count me in! sounds fun

LundiMardi

ok, question.. i'm happy to put up a backing track, but if i like the backing track myself, i'll most likely want to use it with my band too, so as long as i stick to my backing track and leave out any other tracks on it..

cool and the gang?

DiamondJQuimby

I don't think anyone has mentioned tunings

ie: Standard, Open D, Dropped etc..

Just thought I would mention it.

I know how big a pain in the ar$e it is if you have recorded something on a guitar whic was slightly out of tune and then you come back to it a coule of days later to lay down another track and realise that the first guitar was not in tune..


Cheers

D

Doctor J

LundiMardi wrote:

ok, question.. i'm happy to put up a backing track, but if i like the backing track myself, i'll most likely want to use it with my band too, so as long as i stick to my backing track and leave out any other tracks on it..

cool and the gang?

This is where it gets messy. If you submit a backing track and people put stuff on it and you decide you like it and want to use it, you have to ensure what you do with the band isn't drawn from what someone here has put onto it, unless you want to allocate the appropriate songwriting credits to whoever here.

I would think that you're better off to keep your band and your collaborative efforts separate wherever possible.


Regarding the whole w.av vs .mp3 vs .flac vs .etc thing.... wavs are universal, they'll work on macs, linux and windows. Wavs are supported by all the multitrack software and the majority of the hardware that's out there. These files don't need to be uploaded. To record, you just need an mp3 of the backing track but I would urge that tracks that are to be included in a mix are the wav spec I posted. You can put your wav onto cd and post it or, god forbid, actually meet up in the Real World™ to hand over files on cd. It would put me off recording something if I knew the drum track, for example, was mp3 on it's way to be mixed. If people are going to invest time and effort into projects, they need to do so with the chance that it might actually sound good at the end of it all. Chances are, whatever software people will use to record will natively record to wav anyway, and some encoders are better than others, regardless of the sample rate. Wav works, there's no messing around, no resampling to be done, it willwork on any system, it's a bigger file but the end result is definitely worth it IMO. Recording to mp3 is a waste of time tbh.

I still think web space is needed to initially share files, rather than the co-ordinator of a project mailing out mp3s to everyone who requests a copy. The way I would see it working is that someone puts up a track. The track is there to be downloaded by anyone at their leisure (and then a mix posted at the end of it all). People can offer to contribute to the track musically or by offering their engineering services. The co-ordinator would liase with the engineer (if they are not the same person) to decide what they want and how they go about getting it.

DiamondJQuimby wrote:

I don't think anyone has mentioned tunings

ie: Standard, Open D, Dropped etc..

Just thought I would mention it.

I know how big a pain in the ar$e it is if you have recorded something on a guitar whic was slightly out of tune and then you come back to it a coule of days later to lay down another track and realise that the first guitar was not in tune..

It is up to the participants to ensure what they contribute is in tune, I reckon. Not everyone has a TU-2 and some tuners are calibrated differently, so people will have to use their ears to make sure it's right, just like they make sure their fingers hit the right notes too. Regarding different tunings, dropped D doesn't make much of a difference to a keyboard player or a trumpet player. If the chord is D, the chord is D, regardless of how you tune.

Steoob

em.. i love the idea for this forum...but its going to be total chaos.. theres no way 5 human brains can coordinate themselves properly at different times without even being able to disscuss it properly...

but i hope im wrong coz if it turns out good it will be KICKASS

about the file format/bitch for uploading thing... is there any website that has like a recording thing on it that comes from your line in and is recorded onto the net as opposed to your computer??... probably not but you never know...

Doctor J

It can be done. The co-ordinator just needs to know what they want and invest the time in making it happen. I'm contributing to a few tracks with Trev from gigsmart the same way. I get the guitar and drum track as an mp3. I send him my bass track as a wav file, he mixes and records vocals with whoever. It works, just somebody needs to be in control of each project and make it work. I agree though, the potential for it going arse over tit is huge, but it can be done if people walk the walk as well as they talk the talk, which is why I think the format for doing it needs to be agreed before anything else happens. It's all good. If you have any ideas, let's hear them

Regarding the streaming of the file as you record, there's none that I'm aware of and the very prospect of it makes me shudder. It wouldn't be good engineering practice to record over something as ficcle as your average home net connection.

LundiMardi

ok.. well i have a basic backing track for anyone who wants it... it's 7mb though:o

Ok, so if this is to work out AT ALL!! then all tracks have to be recorded seperatly yes? as in, i send a track, they record their track, send THEIR track ONLY back to me, where i can mix it with my track etc... then send that track onto someone else..

LundiMardi

obviously i can make my track less than 7mb's!!! i'll do so now

Steoob

Doctor J wrote:

It can be done. The co-ordinator just needs to know what they want and invest the time in making it happen. I'm contributing to a few tracks with Trev from gigsmart the same way. I get the guitar and drum track as an mp3. I send him my bass track as a wav file, he mixes and records vocals with whoever. It works, just somebody needs to be in control of each project and make it work. I agree though, the potential for it going arse over tit is huge, but it can be done if people walk the walk as well as they talk the talk, which is why I think the format for doing it needs to be agreed before anything else happens. It's all good. If you have any ideas, let's hear them

Regarding the streaming of the file as you record, there's none that I'm aware of and the very prospect of it makes me shudder. It wouldn't be good engineering practice to record over something as ficcle as your average home net connection.

we'll have to just wait and see i guess... and ya i guess your right about the stream recording thing

Rustar

Here's my ideas....

MP3's are the way to go. If the mp3 can't be directly imported into your software, any recording software should be able to *record* the mp3 as a 'scratch track'....for example, in Windows XP, just turn on 'What U Hear', start a track recording, and play the track in your file player.
It won't be highest quality, but you don't NEED highest quality, as you will only be making a separate track. Make 2 versions, the one with the 'scratch track', and then one with your track only once it's finished. At this point you'll mix your separate track down to a 196k mp3.

If the song is of any length, make up a poor-man's chord chart....
|--A--|--G--|--F#-| , etc.

Above all - Most Important - do NOT use fadeouts!
They're impossible to match, and multiple fades will get very messy.


Edit: If something turns out to be that good...I.E., it's going on a Boards CD, then tracks can easily be re-recorded at a higher quality, different file format, etc.

John

Or save a copy in both wav and mp3. Email the mp3's and use them to make a rough mix for the collaboration purposes. When all is done and dusted send the wav files either by email if you have the connection for it or on CD by post. Then do the final proper mix.

Rustar

John2 wrote:

Or save a copy in both wav and mp3. Email the mp3's and use them to make a rough mix for the collaboration purposes. When all is done and dusted send the wav files either by email if you have the connection for it or on CD by post. Then do the final proper mix.

Good Shew!

Another point - People doing vocal tracks will probably want to add them when all the rest of the parts are assembled. We might want to think about how to deal with that.

John

Well they can check the song as it progresses to get a feel for it and start composing for the main bits and then refine the whole thing when the song is assembled.

Rustar

Sounds good....

Hey, they're only singers anyway....
They should feel lucky that they get to hang around with musicians! <badabing!> <crash>

Only kidding, I'm a vocalist too. :v:

DiamondJQuimby

I would agree with Doc, If you are going to mix anything then use wav files at least they are universal and you know what you are getting,So many mp3 variants argghhhh

For listening to ideas maybe mp3's might be an option smaller and you can easily discard something you might not be interested in collaborating on.

At the end of the day if you like what you hear in the smaller mp3 version then it might be worth your while getting the higher quality wav version and having it mixed well.

D

Eoin Madsen

2 quick points...

Wavs compressed with Rar seem to be pretty common on similar filesharing forums I've visited. If it really is a problem, I would suggest people pass around MP3 copies for the recording and then all post CDs with their original Wavs to the mixer at the end.

If you create a song with clear intent to collaborate with a specific person, you cannot legally separate the original part from the collaborative additions later without mutual consent. To the best of my knowledge there's legal precedent for this, and things may be a little grey on either side of the line. Pay attention to the terminology you use when posting, and try to cover your ass. Honestly, I'd suggest that someone consult an expert in music law before proceeding.

Rustar

A couple of ideas on your points, Eoin....

Why not just start an agreement thread, wherein it states that all tracks and finished songs become property of The Boards Musical Collaboration Group (Copyright)(tm)....and have all interested musicians sign it. That would mean that you may not contribute or use tracks without signing the agreement. The starters and other musicians in each collaboration would be able to use the tracks/song with implied and express permission from the Group. I would think that the agreement and it's mention in the charter should hold up in a court of law, if ever needed.

"But," you say, "can't other people just come to the forum, steal the tracks, and put them into their own songs?"
They can.....unless we make the forum by invitation (or by application) only.
The need to apply can be sticky posted in relevant forums such as Instruments, Pimp your Band, and the various music type forums.

Eoin Madsen

Rustar wrote:

I would think that the agreement and it's mention in the charter should hold up in a court of law, if ever needed.

I would most seriously doubt that.

However, it's not really an issue. There is no copyright dispute here unless both parties agree to collaborate and the original creator later changes their mind about the collaboration. Passing through and poaching someone's song is a simple copyright violation. And not that hard to prove, given the number of witnesses who will have seen the creation here first.

Doctor J

Eoin Madsen wrote:

Wavs compressed with Rar seem to be pretty common on similar filesharing forums I've visited. If it really is a problem, I would suggest people pass around MP3 copies for the recording and then all post CDs with their original Wavs to the mixer at the end.

Spot on.

John

Isn't that what I said earlier?

Doctor J

Isn't it what I said initially?

John

Maybe there's an echo in here

krd

Doctor J wrote: »

Copyright ownership

Intellectual property - do participants agree to their work being open?

Why do people worry so much about copyright -- this is bum idol -- not pop idol

PaulBrewer

I have NO idea what this thread is about!

sei046

Paul man Im really with you here. Not very clear,


I take it your talking about collabs! Its just a lot of guys here are not usually here so im all over the place! Thats a good thing though!

So if its collabs its easy enough to set standards and get things organized but there has to be a clear leader. I dont mind playing my part as mod in projects regardless of if im involved or not.

PaulBrewer

Ah yes .... MP3s aren't an option as they won't sync to tempo right

fitz

This forum started out as a Production/Collaboration board if I remember correctly, then evolved into Music Production. This is a 2 year old thread that krd decided to bring back to life. Can't see why mind you.

PaulBrewer

fitz wrote: »

This forum started out as a Production/Collaboration board if I remember correctly, the evolved into Music Production. This is a 2 year old thread that krd decided to bring back to life. Can't see why mind you.

Aha! Now it makes sense ........ sort of

jimi_t

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Ah yes .... MP3s aren't an option as they won't sync to tempo right

Come again? Audio is audio is audio.

PaulBrewer

jimi_t wrote: »

Come again? Audio is audio is audio.

Not So!

If you convert a Wav that's absolutley steady tempo wise, say done with a drum machine , to Mp3 and run it with the original you'll find minor tempo flucutations.

If you drop it into Ableton Live and do the 'Warp' thing you'll see a ton of variation.

I guess it's only to be expected with MP3s as their creation involves just 'throwing' away some of the raw data.

jimi_t

PaulBrewer wrote: »

If you convert a Wav that's absolutley steady tempo wise, say done with a drum machine , to Mp3 and run it with the original you'll find minor tempo flucutations.

Never found that myself - and I do that on a weekly basis. Any info to back that up? There might be a perceived flux due to the 'smearing' of the hats at lower bit-rates, but I'd challenge you to be able to spot the difference between two filtered rhythmn sections - one WAV one 256 mp3 - playing on consumer level equipment.

Even if that was the case, you get that with Vinyl and that has never stopped people tempo-syncing them :rolleyes:

If you drop it into Ableton Live and do the 'Warp' thing you'll see a ton of variation.

Different kettle of fish altogether - nothing to do with the mp3 standard.

I guess it's only to be expected with MP3s as their creation involves just 'throwing' away some of the raw data.

True, but not in the same way you're implying and, barring the ID3 tags, not in any way that would make any impact on the tempo.

sei046

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Not So!

If you convert a Wav that's absolutley steady tempo wise, say done with a drum machine , to Mp3 and run it with the original you'll find minor tempo flucutations.

If you drop it into Ableton Live and do the 'Warp' thing you'll see a ton of variation.

I guess it's only to be expected with MP3s as their creation involves just 'throwing' away some of the raw data.

Interesting.....esplain.......

PaulBrewer

sei046 wrote: »

Interesting.....esplain.......

I just found it on a couple of times when I was mucking about with doing Mash Ups, so it's a more casual observation!


When I dropped a steady wav into warp in Live and set the right tempo it didn't make any 'warp' marks i.e. pulling it into tempo wheras the MP3 version did.

If in the context of sharing tracks, say the L + R of overhead as 2 independent MP3 tracks any variation would cause phasing which may not be desireable.

I don't expect one would notice any difference on a single vocal track for example.

It happened to me a couple of times , and I did mention it to our very own tweeky here, who had found the same.

sei046

Another day in the classroom!

PaulBrewer

sei046 wrote: »

Another day in the classroom!

As I say I've not gone into it in huge detail but when I had those exeperiences and had the same thing happen to someone else I just presumed it to be the case.

cornbb

I dunno if I agree with you Paul. I know an MP3 encoding of an uncompressed recording won't be sample-accurate but I'm fairly certain the encoding process doesn't interfere with audio in the time domain. Again it won't be sample-accurate, but it shouldn't be anything the ears would pick up... maybe you were dealing with some sort of dodgy codec that added/removed something at the beginning of the audio file?

jimi_t

cornbb wrote: »

I dunno if I agree with you Paul. I know an MP3 encoding of an uncompressed recording won't be sample-accurate but I'm fairly certain the encoding process doesn't interfere with audio in the time domain. Again it won't be sample-accurate, but it shouldn't be anything the ears would pick up... maybe you were dealing with some sort of dodgy codec that added/removed something at the beginning of the audio file?

Exactly my thoughts. You kinda side stepped the argument to go on about phasing Paul :P

Get a CD. Rip a track to WAV and to high bitrate MP3. Burn the resultant files to a separate CD each. Play side by side. If you find a tempo fault I'd be absolutely shocked.

sei046

jimi_t wrote: »

Exactly my thoughts. You kinda side stepped the argument to go on about phasing Paul :P

Get a CD. Rip a track to WAV and to high bitrate MP3. Burn the resultant files to a separate CD each. Play side by side. If you find a tempo fault I'd be absolutely shocked.

Which argument would this be now?

jimi_t

sei046 wrote: »

Which argument would this be now?

The argument regarding the mp3 format being intrinsically flawed as regards maintaining the tempo of the original medium. You know, the one about 7 posts up? No need to get snarky like.