Why not just use Audacity - after all?
While finding that LMMS could do some of the job required I discovered some problems. Maybe I'll come back to these later. One problem is not being able to get very precise timing on samples, though possibly that issue has been addressed in more recent version of LMMS. Another is trimming each track - but I haven't used the latest version.
It is possible to get quite good results with LMMS - though perhaps not for the kind or music or situation envisaged here.
Here is a list of project outputs from 2018 - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...Ljg/edit#gid=0
and here is one of the results (number 3 in the list) https://soundcloud.com/davisjacobym/...s-original-mix - this one doesn't sound too bad.
I think a lot of work might be required to get good/acceptable results, though way back in the 1960s/70s hit songs were produced with tape recorders - gradually moving over to multi-track recorders, and really rather crude methods by today's standards. It should be possible to do things slightly more easily using LMMS than the tape kit which was common then, though might require some ingenuity and determination.
Out of devilment, I thought I'd go back and test Audacity (which is usually pretty good on precise timing) to see if I could handle multiple tracks, which would be required for the particular application. In fact it turns out to be rather easy, so that is perhaps actually another way to do the job. I was able to create half a dozen or so tracks, and then mix them, either muting individual tracks, or soloing them.
Clearly "pro" people would rather do things differently, and some will have a lot of experience, and tools to do the job, but I wouldn't rule out trying Audacity.
One other option for the choir - and I've noticed this even with professionals - is to delegate the work. There might be one or two people in the choir who will like doing this sort of thing, or know how to do it - and if the objective is to get the job done, then maybe that's a way forward. In the case of one audio pro studio, I noticed recently that although one member is clearly capable of doing all the work, he was very happy to pass things over to someone else who seemed to have more time to do it. The same might apply for the choir members.
Of course our OP here may really want to find out how to do this stuff, and enjoy it, but if the objective is simply to get a result then consider delegating to others. However, that doesn't always work as they may not actually do the work - or do it in a timely or quick enough fashion - but that's a different issue.
While finding that LMMS could do some of the job required I discovered some problems. Maybe I'll come back to these later. One problem is not being able to get very precise timing on samples, though possibly that issue has been addressed in more recent version of LMMS. Another is trimming each track - but I haven't used the latest version.
It is possible to get quite good results with LMMS - though perhaps not for the kind or music or situation envisaged here.
Here is a list of project outputs from 2018 - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...Ljg/edit#gid=0
and here is one of the results (number 3 in the list) https://soundcloud.com/davisjacobym/...s-original-mix - this one doesn't sound too bad.
I think a lot of work might be required to get good/acceptable results, though way back in the 1960s/70s hit songs were produced with tape recorders - gradually moving over to multi-track recorders, and really rather crude methods by today's standards. It should be possible to do things slightly more easily using LMMS than the tape kit which was common then, though might require some ingenuity and determination.
Out of devilment, I thought I'd go back and test Audacity (which is usually pretty good on precise timing) to see if I could handle multiple tracks, which would be required for the particular application. In fact it turns out to be rather easy, so that is perhaps actually another way to do the job. I was able to create half a dozen or so tracks, and then mix them, either muting individual tracks, or soloing them.
Clearly "pro" people would rather do things differently, and some will have a lot of experience, and tools to do the job, but I wouldn't rule out trying Audacity.
One other option for the choir - and I've noticed this even with professionals - is to delegate the work. There might be one or two people in the choir who will like doing this sort of thing, or know how to do it - and if the objective is to get the job done, then maybe that's a way forward. In the case of one audio pro studio, I noticed recently that although one member is clearly capable of doing all the work, he was very happy to pass things over to someone else who seemed to have more time to do it. The same might apply for the choir members.
Of course our OP here may really want to find out how to do this stuff, and enjoy it, but if the objective is simply to get a result then consider delegating to others. However, that doesn't always work as they may not actually do the work - or do it in a timely or quick enough fashion - but that's a different issue.
Comment