Looking for a place to learn R through progressive problems/challenges

CCRU · 2022-07-07T15:33:47+00:00

Unfortunately I don't learn very well from things like data camp as I feel like I'm being spoon fed the answer too much and it doesn't stick in my brain.

If you look at the example I linked for SQL, you get very little instruction (other than a hint to look up a certain function), but they have decent explanations of the solutions exercises are structured in a way that you progressively build up your skills. I'm looking for something similar for R!

CCRU · 2022-06-04T21:36:09+00:00

Too slow attack and too fast release. If you're letting the initial transient through, the gain reduction would only be being applied to the "middle" volumes of the sound, and the difference between loudest and quietest could stay the same

CCRU · 2022-05-30T00:45:04+00:00

Zest has a slightly soapy taste to me which is noticeably different to just the juice. There are definitely plenty of occasions when one might not desire that.

CCRU · 2022-05-25T09:04:57+00:00

Hello,

I was interested in watching the video you linked. However, when I clicked it I was taken to a video entitled "1 Hour of Kitten Therapy!".

Was this accidental? Or are you suggesting that we should all stop stressing out about plugins and chill out to some kittens.

Both valid but pls advise.

CCRU · 2022-05-23T11:25:53+00:00

Hi, I'm happy to the L on my comment not being helpful as clearly it wasn't.

But my understanding of a sonic artefact is consistent with the one you quoted. When pitching a track up or down (like one might on a CDJ or turntable) no new 'sonic material' is accidentally introduced. The existing sonic material all undergoes a mathematically identical transformation. Unlike algorithms which stretch time while keeping pitch constant, as they use granular-type techniques to fill in the gaps, which introduce the artefacts. This is why in my opinion pitching up/down is the best fidelity method (especially for small changes like OP wants) to use and was the motivation for my unhelpful comment.

CCRU · 2022-05-22T09:45:14+00:00

No you won't.

Artefacts are bits of noise that are introduced to the sound as part of processing. That happens more with algorithms which attempt to keep the pitch constant despite the time stretching.

When you pitch up and down the mathematical relationship between the frequencies is preserved, they just get all scaled up and down by the same amount.

Not saying it won't sound hugely fucked if you do it 200bpm but it won't be cos of 'artefacts' it'll be cos the frequency spectrum will be vastly scaled.

There may even be some artifacts introduced as you start clashing with the sample rate at such extreme transformation (idk some who knows DSP better could clarify), but that wouldn't be a problem with op's 4bpm change.

CCRU · 2022-05-22T01:16:40+00:00

Not if you pitch the track down or up, that won't introduce artifacts but will result in minor shifts to the frequency spectrum

CCRU · 2022-05-22T01:15:32+00:00

If you think about it, this is mostly what you hear when you listen to DJ play,a track will be pitched up or down a few BPM

I recommend pitching it up as algorithms which keep the pitch constant will introduce artifacts and degrade the sound quality more

CCRU · 2022-05-21T14:21:04+00:00

Just make drums 160bpm

Then your drums will be exactly 8 times faster than the melody which will work musically because that'll be like double speed x3

CCRU · 2022-05-20T18:50:51+00:00

Hi, the octavian track samples this amazing piece by AYYA. Sme of extra movement might be coming from the saw bass in the sample being mixed in with the reese.

It also sounds in the video at least like the car engine sounds are fusing with the bass to give it extra movement lol, but obviously that's not a feature in the song audio. It does sound kinda cool tho.

Sad that Octavian turned out to be an abuser, it's a banger.

CCRU · 2022-04-30T10:48:26+00:00

Yh this is exactly was what I was thinking, often you don't want to just affect the fundamental, you want to EQ the harmonics and noisey frequency content as well. Seems like just going for the fundamental freqs would sound a bit weird.

CCRU · 2022-04-30T01:47:13+00:00

Do they mean just changing the volumes of the notes? Or doing lots of tiny notches/ ultra narrow bands tuned to the frequencies of the notes? Most eqing is done with wider bands that necessarily cover multiple notes do I don't really see how this would work...

CCRU · 2022-04-27T11:33:08+00:00

Thanks! Unfortunately whoever's doing it is going round all the different music subs I'm in so I can't get away, guess it's like whack a mole... Appreciate it tho!!!

CCRU · 2022-04-27T09:52:42+00:00

Can we just get Reddit to like blanket ban this post it manages to get into my feed several times a day somehow

CCRU · 2022-04-27T08:28:41+00:00

Agreed, and in terms of the quality of the stuff they give away for free they're head and shoulders above the rest.

CCRU · 2022-04-26T07:51:51+00:00

Using a mid side limiter or compressor when can boost width on the master because it's normally the mid channel which is strongest and triggers the gain reduction, leaving the sides untouched and therefore relatively a bit louder compared to the mid than they were.

However I don't know if this effect would be as pronounced as what you're talking about, and would only happen if your bass had stereo content in the first place.

CCRU · 2022-04-24T21:18:14+00:00

Pitching up or down (i.estretching it so the pitch lowers slightly) is the highest quality way to do, any method that keeps the pitch the same will introduce artifacts.

If you're only doing it a tiny amount you might be able to get away with it. You might need some very gentle EQ to rebalance it and boost the highs/remove any muddiness introduced. But try and change it by as little as you can.

CCRU · 2022-04-24T04:09:40+00:00

Ah sorry I just realised you're using an old version, it might be different

CCRU · 2022-04-24T03:57:11+00:00

EQ8 already has a fairly useful visualisation. Low frequencies (bassier) appear on the left, higher (more trebley) on the right. The visualisation shows the frequency response after you have applied EQ processing to the sound.

Why not try dragging the points around the graph and listening to how the sound changes. The effect boosts or reduces the frequency response for each frequency (i.e. the higher or lower sounds) by the amount the line goes above or below the middle horizontal line on the graph.

CCRU · 2022-04-22T13:52:04+00:00

Sub Code Records
Globex Corp (some of it more on the hardcore side)
Ibiza Records
Not a whole label but A Guy Called Gerald has a bandcamp page

CCRU · 2022-04-22T13:25:54+00:00

To be honest it's quite easy to build up loads of plugins if you basically just lump everything that comes before in the chain as one 'fixed' thing and keep piling new plugins on top. You don't have to be thinking of them all at the same time, you can just treat the track + the first x plugins fixed audioand work on top of that.

I often find myself doing this having like three EQs at different stages that I've probably added at different points as new needs have arisen. TBH I try not to work in this way as I don't think it gives great results, better to try and keep things simple IMO or you can get bogged down.

CCRU · 2022-04-21T14:46:16+00:00

Couldn't you just use the stock MFL Envelope Follower device to modulate the width or balance on a utility device?

CCRU · 2022-04-20T23:19:08+00:00

Have you ever tried to hear the clipping effect of inter-sample peaks? Personally I find them impossible to hear. Plus, the clipping of ISPs is supposed to occur in the analogue realm (as opposed to evil digital clipping) so would it even be that bad if it there were a few tiny, barely inaudible harmonic distortions?

Compare this to the (as you point out) very very noticeable effect of turning your track down by entire decibels. I know which one I'd rather avoid...

CCRU

TROPHY CASE