So I started with an email to the webmaster.  Nothing.

Then sent an email to every faculty member at Leeds Met (or Leedsmet?) with the word “audio” in their description.  Nothing.

So what’s going on Leeds?  Am I linked to your site?  What for?  Show yourself!

Oh well.  I hope my website has provided you with the information you were looking for and I hope you drop me an email someday with questions or comments (or job offer) about the site.

My wife has a Macbook Pro.  Now, on another part of my website I have a A/D converter test which clearly points how out terrible computer converters are; obviously not something I want to use.  But what if I could bypass those onboard converters using a digital signal?  Did you know the Macbook Pros have optical in/out?

I own a Mytek A/D, which does the analog to digital conversion and is fed from two tracks of Millennia preamps usually from B&K 4006 microphones.  The Mytek has both an RCA and optical SPIDIF output (which both work, unlike Digidesign gear).  So I take the RCA into ProTools (003), and the optical split into the optical in on the Macbook Pro (running Garageband!) and wala..... pristine two-track backup.  This drops the need for 2 splitters, 2 additional XLR cables, mixer, “X” to unbalanced RCA to 1/8 mini into the MBP’s converters.

A Glitch
There is one large glitch.  The Macbook Pro is not capable of recording at every sample rate between the typical 44.1k—96k.  As the knowledge base article 306513 points out, models are able to record at 44.1, 48, and 96.  I typically record at 88.2 to make the down-sampling easier on my older Powerbook, and using the same A/D, I can’t sample at different frequencies between the primary and backup computers.

Update: The Mytek is in for repair after thinking it’s probably something in that box.... we’ll see....

My Recording Rig with both ProTools and Garageband using optical audio through the Mytek (below the computer on the right).

For anyone who owns a Macbook Pro, I would highly recommend taking a look at purchasing optical cable for both incoming and outgoing audio (it supports surround sound!).  It’s not as expensive as you think.
http://www.stsi.net/storefrontprofiles/processfeed.aspx?sfid=104074&i=151204666&mpid=7584&dfid=1

Being able to release my dependancy on ProTools in two-track recordings while maintaining the identical quality with existing equipment is great.  As more equipment starts to migrate to open digital standards I’m sure the locked-in standards will diminish.  But for now, having a small, portable and extremely powerful two-track rig from gear I already own is a relief to have both on my budget and my back.

As a fan of the sphere technique, but lacking in the chance to use one I had a lot of fun listening to the sphere.  What amazed me was the sound from the sphere alone.  The separation was amazingly good for omnis that close together, and the clarity was well, clear for off-axis pickup.  What I liked the most about the overall sound was the localization of each instrument reminded me more of blumlein than spaced omnis.  Being able to locate each section, even instruments including the center brass was an aspect I did not know was so solid.

The Schoeps 360 is actually a surround rig with a pair of figure-8’s flanking the omnis.  I’d love to hear a sphere in a good surround room (trip to Banff!).  In addition to the sphere were a pair for soloists, and another pair for chorus.  The mics were fed into the smallest, most powerfully compact boxes I’d ever seen.  Sound Devices, who I’ve heard associated more with film/TV/location applications, built these dual hard drive/SD card 4-track recorders (named the 744t) I could almost put in my pocket (if that says something about either the size of these devices or the size of my pockets!).  With a few flat mixers and the Schoeps matrix box, I’d say it was the smallest high-quality 8-track I’d ever seen.... and I want one.

And I would also like to point out my experience at the University of Colorado was anything but pleasurable thanks to the unlit signs, and a warm parking ticket.  Thanks for that.... I’ll be sure never to do volunteer work for them.

Big thanks to Jerry for letting me crash his room and bug him about audio… and no Bob, I was not allowed to bounce his Sphere.

This year Awstats reported almost 15,000 unique people visited my website, with 38,000 visits total serving over 194,000 pages with a bandwidth load of 20gigs.

Analytics says about 8,000 visits from 1700 cities (and is not able to track bandwidth) with about a third being returning visitors.

Any way you look at it my site continues to attract a significant amount of hits.  Conversations with other engineers who email me reveal that most audio manufacturers, especially the smaller ones, have heard of my site and have looked it over.  Keywords still tend to fall under gear [microphone] models, especially Neumann, but many of those browse many pages and become returning visitors.  Some of these searches have resulted in face-to-face meetings with other engineers and has had the potential for jobs.

If this doesn’t signify having a web presence is extremely important, especially in recording, then I don’t know what would.  If anyone asks me why I spent time and energy creating recordingvitale.com it was for this reason and to give other engineers exposure to the net.

The base response in the new headphones was extremely boomy and full of low end I had been likely missing from broken drivers.  Weird.  I’ll have to get used to re-tuning my ears for them.  Never thought a new pair of identical headphones could sound so different!

There are plenty upon plenty of hate-articles circulating in published works and around the Internet about Internet Explorer.  If you don’t quite know what I’m talking about, look at these two examples below of two websites.

The Left is Internet Explorer 6, the Right is Firefox (v2)

Quite simply, the browsers differ on their approach to Standards and when using the same code, some elements appear differently.  Fixes involve hacks, or altering a layout approach and none are pleasant.  I started charging extra to make these fixes, and unfortunately many people still use this browser.  So should designers continue to support it?  Many try, but I have yet to see a designer have enough balls to let their site fall to a poorly looking site.

So as an Internet surfer, you really need to be using a Standards-compliant browser that renders code according to the consortium which sets standards for the Internet.  Websites will look better, and cost less.

Users can select a color in the Edit Categories menu by a simple drop-down list created using a preset of colors. Those colors are put directly into the CSS. Of couse there are more complicated additions to this idea, and different styles other than colors could be used. But... this is simple.

1. In the Admin -> Category Management -> Manage Custom Fields, add a field with a dropdown list of all 16 worded colors. I use the word colors because hex is complicated, and this is a simple example.

2. In the template add this to the head CSS: {exp:weblog:categories weblog="events" style="linear"}
div.catColor{category_id} a {color:{events_category_color}}
{/exp:weblog:categories}


3. Then in the template put this [this is an example from the calendar]. {entries}


That's it!

Let’s start with what he had: a pair of Octavas, Behringer mixer/pre and a Nakamichi recording devise.  Octavas are bright suckers, as many mid-level microphones are.  A fellow engineer uses them and says about 500hz needs to come down 5db.  Next is the Behringer - a company that mass produces audio gear.  Cheaper preamps and circuits sound thin, hollow, and unsupported, and Behringer is notorious for making gear sound this way.  Last is a consumer A/D will also give the same results.  His signal chain is lined with equipment that will distort low frequencies, alter the mid-rage and make the recording sound bright.

If you look at my list of gear, everything is specifically selected to do a job by sounding a certain way.  Yes, some of it is expensive, but some isn’t.  By knowing my system I could make a bright hall sound darker or change the blend of a group, and it’s recorded digitally.  Recording at higher resolutions also improves the accuracy and signal-to-noise ratio, and using selected dithers will also change the sound.

I’m not going to debate the digital/analog argument.  However, for classical music the benefit to tracking on tape does not outweigh the simplicity of moving a microphone.  Want a darker sound?  Move the mic back, put a piece of tissue over the top, face them the other way or change what they are!  Tape is good for driving rock music into....

Yes, this guy is totally right that his digital recordings sound thin - they probably do.  But do digital recordings all sound this way?  No.  Better gear can make all the difference, as well as careful microphone placement.

Of course telling someone this is different, especially when they have an ORTF almost 40ft from a group in a rather dead space - why bother recording in stereo?

While Nathan’s work was very good, it needed an extra tweak to give that last professional look.  Not having much experience in design having devoted most of my life to music and sound, the slight tweaks take time and lots of site-surfing.  In a few weeks from this post I should have final changes in effect, and have the last Expression Engine sections finished (including a new homepage and calendar).

http://www.stlukehas.com

I Hate iPhoto.

I Hate iTunes.

What do I use for photo organization on my Mac?  Finder & Preview.  Yep - its really that simple and with Photoshop I haven’t had a need for anything more.  For my PC I also use Explorer and a simple file system.  I suppose the only annoyance with Preview is rotating images is a “tag” vs actually rotating the image.  It’s really the best way to go, and involves NO installation of additional software (aside from PS).

But Apple likes to push this program called iPhoto on all us Mac users.  It’s this “amazing” software that intuitively organizes photos, edits and shares, and even creates calendars, books, and albums.  This couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Lets start at the beginning.
*iPhoto is a resource hog.  Any action in iPhoto stalls completely on my 1.5ghz G4 Powerbook; already my Mac feels slow and clunky.  Every other app open also suffers lag.  Yes, photos require rendering, but Finder can handle it just fine.

To add photos to the library, you must scan the folders.  This means, by default, iPhoto copies every photo to its own location.  Once you’ve shut off this feature, iPhoto still used a GIG of space for about 1500 photos.  Based on the folder sizes, iPhoto needs 35% of the master folder’s size for what I can only assume is thumbnails (which I could swear were made on the fly by the slow performance).  To add additional photos means to manually rescan each directory, and tell iPhoto to disregard the duplicates.

*What I consider one of two very poor ideas is when a user deletes photos from Finder, say .psd Photoshop files, and then reopens iPhoto.  What happens?  iPhoto gives a message that the file is missing, though you only realize this when trying to enlarge the photo.  This message is simple: Cancel or Find Photo.  Say you deleted not one, but 100 pictures.... prepare to hit Cancel 100 times. And when this is over, good luck remembering which files were deleted, because there is no noticeable difference in the view windows. Oh, and this error occurs every time the software does anything, stopping things like “Autoflow” when making a book or calendar.  Want to drag and drop?  Want to run a slideshow?  Forget it.  One missing photo and you’re screwed.

The second of two poor ideas is the red X to close the window.... or if you’re in iphoto, the WHOLE PROGRAM!  Every app (exp: isync, dictionary, fontbook and syspref) in my app folder behaves the same way - X closes the window, then the program must be closed in the Dock.  I use Apple+W to close windows frequently, and I expect the app to stay open!

*Why can I not import files directly to an Album, new or existing?
Where is the auto-expand, auto-close for “Photos” view?
When I change a title in iPhoto why doesn’t the file name change?
Can streaming photos through Shared not suck in Front Row?

My last slap on the forehead is this idea you can make calendars, books and albums.  Yes you can, but for additional money and only through Apple’s website.  Wish to publish these on the web?  BUY a .mac account.  We all know its less expensive to export the book as a PDF and print at Kinkos.  This makes half of the buttons (6) completely useless without more $$ and becomes a textbook definition of fresh-install from a Dell restoration CD/Windows software; a bunch of fluff.

There is a beautiful program most Mac users may not know about made [bought] by Google called Picasa.  It looks exactly like iPhoto, does all the same things and does one thing amazingly well - Auto Updates as seen in the photo.  Picasa can also be told which folders to rescan, and does not create nearly the amount of crap/thumbnail data needed to function.  Problem is its a Windows-Only program.... for now..... Google, Hurry Up and Fix that!

*This problem is echoed in iTunes

I took one of these panoramas at a concert being recorded in surround of 4 quartets playing at the 4 corners of the room.  Not a shot I thought would be amazing, but I put it online and people loved it.... now it’s hanging in both the studio manager and the director of audio’s offices.  Kind of interesting how my side hobbies play a role…

Although, having your biography opposite a featured conductor… that’s just cool.

Adding More So I Can Do Less
“If” statements are stupid easy to do in E.E.  Like really… everyone should be using them.  Its another dynamic measure of control, and can also help to fix things when you forget to fill out a form or some procedure doesn’t go right.  Since my design is so heavily dependent on images, I always have to have them even if just for a placeholder.  So in every location I have put a fall-back incase certain pieces of data do not appear.... I can be lazy and not fill stuff in later and not worry about the structural integrity of the website.

Here’s an example of the code I use for listing microphones:

<li><a href="{title_permalink=microphones/mic}">

<img src="http://www.blairliikala.com/images/noimage.jpg" alt="{title}" title="{title} - No Image.” />
{title}
</a></li>

... The idea is to use the image of the microphone along with the title of the mic.  But sometimes I don’t always have the image ready.  So if there isn’t an image, EE will display my “No Image” image.

Another One?

<a href="{title_permalink=recording/entry}">

<img src="http://www.blairliikala.com/images/noimage.jpg" alt="{title}" title="{title} - No Image.” />
</a>

... Again, if I don’t have an image ready for the recording blog entry, it will display the “No Image” picture.

The other If statement I use is the one that depends on my mood.  There are sections of the site I would like to block out unless I’m on it, therefore logged in.  There is a general statement for Core that is (if logged_in) that can be used to block stuff.

So the code I use(d) this logged_in tag for is to block access to the microphones within a blog entry and to block links from the microphone page back to entries (that way people can see the images, but they don’t link).

<h2>Blogged Concerts:</h2>
<ul>
(reverse_related_entries sort="desc" orderby="title" )
<li>