Questions About Soundclips

[ken]

Hello all...

I have a couple of questions about soundclips.

1) What is the best way to record soundclips for your website?

2) What is the best/most effective musical length for a clip?

3) How much or what part of a recognizable song can be recorded before there is a copyright issue?
For example, let's say I have a 'blues' pickup I want to record part of a SRV song with for a soundclip. How much of this song can I use before I have a copyright issue? Or, would I be better off just using original music?

Thank you,
Ken

[Steve Conner]

IMO (not a great deal of experience, really just hoping to provoke some debate)

The best way is probably to use an amp and speaker appropriate to the genre of music you're marketing the pickup at. Either mic the amp the way you would in the studio, or if you have a reasonable sounding room, use room mics or a handy recorder. But check that the recorder can handle the sound level without distorting. (In my experience, most camcorders and consumer grade gizmos can't.)

This raises the philosophical question of how much of the "pickup's sound" is really caused by the amp. For instance, people say that a hot humbucker has a distorted sound, but that's not true. It's simply making the amp distort more. Rather than try to explain that to the customer, make the confusion work for you by using an amp that sounds bitchin'.

As for copyright, really depends where you post it. I'd be surprised if you couldn't get away with posting an entire cover song on Youtube, especially if you didn't mention the song title.

[David King]

Copyright on youtube is up to the publisher or original artist as to whether they want residuals or to not allow it at all. I would stick with a song that is already well represented as you can assume that it's been allowed before and you won't have your version evicted.
I have a friend at Youtube/Google who is in charge of negotiating all song copyright cases. I'm sure he has a huge team of lawyers behind him but he has been amazingly successful at persuading the rights holders to take a few pennies per play. Happily some of those artists are now getting more money from Youtube than they ever made during their active careers though that's probably the exception.

[ken]

My home's acoustics are impossible for recording... damn these modern houses! I'm thinking about building an isolation speaker box for recording if I can find a good plan.

Copyright on youtube is up to the publisher or original artist as to whether they want residuals or to not allow it at all. I would stick with a song that is already well represented as you can assume that it's been allowed before and you won't have your version evicted.
I have a friend at Youtube/Google who is in charge of negotiating all song copyright cases. I'm sure he has a huge team of lawyers behind him but he has been amazingly successful at persuading the rights holders to take a few pennies per play. Happily some of those artists are now getting more money from Youtube than they ever made during their active careers though that's probably the exception.

I wonder how the samplers get away with it? I think it's fifteen seconds or less, but fifteen seconds is an awfully short clip.

ken

[Bill M]

For what its worth, here's my take on sound clips. I've listened to a lot of customers and potential buyers and came to the conclusion that people do not trust what they are hearing when they listen to professionally made sound clips, as thats not what the pickups are going to sound like when they play them. I took the approach of unaltered video clips. I have a camera that has an external mic input and I use a shotgun condenser mic and try to accurately capture the sound that I am hearing while recording with no after mixing what so ever. I believe this gives potential customers a more accurate depiction of what they can expect their pickups to sound like if using a similar guitar and amp.

[Steve Conner]

That's fair enough, but maybe not so good if the place has terrible acoustics. Close micing the amp would work better because you get mostly direct sound and hardly any of the room acoustics.

But then you have to add reverb, and before you know it you have a "professionally made" sound clip.

I think in the case of video, it's all moot because YouTube uses heavy MP3-style data compression that makes everything sound like gargling in a swimming pool. Submitting your work in HD might help, maybe they feel it deserves improved audio too.

[Bill M]

That's fair enough, but maybe not so good if the place has terrible acoustics. Close micing the amp would work better because you get mostly direct sound and hardly any of the room acoustics.

But then you have to add reverb, and before you know it you have a "professionally made" sound clip.

I think in the case of video, it's all moot because YouTube uses heavy MP3-style data compression that makes everything sound like gargling in a swimming pool. Submitting your work in HD might help, maybe they feel it deserves improved audio too.

I do notice that youtube compresses the heck out of clips so I have been recording them a little brighter than normal to try counter act this. I'm still experimenting with good results.
Your point is well taken on close micing, but rarely does anyone listen to their amp with their ear against the speaker. To me close micing is good for album making and to get a consistant result in recording. I've played around with doing pro audio clips as I have a friend with a studio and the point I'm getting at is I can make a tweed champ sound like its the size of a Marshall stack with professinal recording.I've done it. It's to easy to deceive people with this technique and why I chose to do unaltered video clips straight to the camera. Now you have to have a video camera that has external mic input and also manual level controls otherwise you get that static clipping that I cann't stand in some videos.

[FunkyKikuchiyo]

Answer: find a local studio and walk in on a slow day with lots and lots of donuts.

In all seriousness though, if we're talking clips for advertising, I'd pick instruments/set ups/amps that are industry flagships. That gives people enough of a reference. If you have some handmade thing with oddball tubes and off brand speakers, then no one will know if what they're hearing is the amp or the pickups, but if you just have a Twin, then since many people know what a Twin sounds like already, they can listen through it. If you want to use a pedal, make it a stock Tube Screamer, or something else well recognized.

When I see clips like this on youtube, I like it when the rig is explained. It is a bit tedious sometimes, but it can make all the difference.

Same thing with playing styles. A brilliant eclectic player can have a sound all his own, but if someone is just doing basic riffs (or is really good at chameleon playing) that works better.

I've also seen some clips with before/after bits with stock pickups, but that may not be practical.

If you're not playing an entire song but just playing a few licks from a song, I REALLY doubt anyone will go after you for copyright. It is one of those things where it depends on how much effort the lawyers want to put into it. I personally wouldn't be afraid to post covers for the sake of a demo video. The only scenario I could imagine seeing legal problems is if you did the whole song AND it was widely circulated and clearly commercial AND the lawyers were real hawks. Even the major pickup makers are rinky-dink in the grand scheme of things, and I don't see anyone really caring.

[fieldwrangler]

I thought the ThroBack pickup demos in the Pickup Makers' Showcase definitely gave me a pretty good idea of what those things sound like, which is Really Good Versions of what they're supposed to be.

[David Schwab]

Just record good tones. It doesn't matter how you do it, because recordings are made all kinds of ways these days.

[Steve Conner]

I thought the ThroBack pickup demos in the Pickup Makers' Showcase definitely gave me a pretty good idea of what those things sound like, which is Really Good Versions of what they're supposed to be.

Did you buy a set and verify that? Otherwise it's kind of a circular argument. You can make anything sound good using Funky's trick with the doughnuts.

I still get the impression that the Throbak pickups couldn't fail to sound good just from reading about the work and research that went into them.

[ken]

Answer: find a local studio and walk in on a slow day with lots and lots of donuts.

Sooo... that's what I've been missing! I heard somewhere you had to bring in lotsa pizzas, and don't spare the spices. Funky, were you following along a couple hours behind me with the donuts???

Anyways, the acoustics around here are so bad I'm leaning toward either recording straight into a computer or building an isolation cab.

For what its worth, here's my take on sound clips. I've listened to a lot of customers and potential buyers and came to the conclusion that people do not trust what they are hearing when they listen to professionally made sound clips, as thats not what the pickups are going to sound like when they play them. I took the approach of unaltered video clips. I have a camera that has an external mic input and I use a shotgun condenser mic and try to accurately capture the sound that I am hearing while recording with no after mixing what so ever. I believe this gives potential customers a more accurate depiction of what they can expect their pickups to sound like if using a similar guitar and amp.

How would recording with a camcorder be any different than recording straight into a computer? I like the idea of a soundclip recorded 'flat' (no EQ tweaks or reverb) since that way the pickup is recorded in basically the most unflattering light possible. I always think the idea of a soundclip is sorta strange anyway, since most people listen to clips with the sound system supplied with their computer. I wouldn't buy a pickup myself based on what the quarter-sized speakers in my HP laptop sound like.

ken

[Steve Conner]

The most unflattering light possible is straight into a DI box, no amp.

Actually, into a mixer line input channel with 10k impedance would be even more unflattering.

I have my computer hooked up to my hi-fi, but I'm in a minority.

[David Schwab]

The most unflattering light possible is straight into a DI box, no amp.

Unless you are recording bass pickups. That's the way to go IMO.

Actually, into a mixer line input channel with 10k impedance would be even more unflattering.

Ugg! That awful boxy dark tone... I can hear it now! Unless you have an active guitar of course.

I have my computer hooked up to my hi-fi, but I'm in a minority.

My iMac IS my hi-fi! I have a very nice set of Monsoon speakers hooked up to it. My wife's Mac Mini is plugged into a big Sony boom box.

All of our music is stored on a big networked hard drive, so everyone in the family just plays music through their computers. It's a nice system. Being able to search for a song is better than looking though the wall of CDs in the hallway!

[fieldwrangler]

Did you buy a set and verify that? Otherwise it's kind of a circular argument. You can make anything sound good using Funky's trick with the doughnuts.

I still get the impression that the Throbak pickups couldn't fail to sound good just from reading about the work and research that went into them.

I just decided to throw out an opinion, without getting rigorous about the unassailability of it all.

Really, I kindof feel like I need to play a guitar with the Pickups In Question installed, then I usually (but not always) have a pretty good idea of what they're all about.