- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Rename and Keep Eluchil404 05:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete original research. --Danielrocks123 04:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I have no idea about sound editing, but this appears to be a bona fide notable technique (see the 21,700 Google hits). Needs cleanup and sourcing, though. Sandstein 04:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. (But I would say that wouldn't I!) I added this because there was a poorly written paragraph on the Genesis page referring to "reverse Noise Gate" which I changed to the correct term "Gated Reverb" wikified & then found out there wasn't a page for it. Created the page because it's one of the all time classic drum recording techniques, added a couple of categories, wandered off rationalising the categories on a number of other webpages related to sound recording techniques & when I returned to Gated Reverb I found it was marked for deletion. Well, 10/10 for speed, 0/10 for actually GOOGLING, finding out it IS a legit technique & then helping me by making some changes so it does meet quality standards. I've added a few links to other internet articles on the subject hopefully to pacify the "original research" nazi. I agree with Sandstein that it needs a cleanup but it's a really trivial matter to verify that this is not original research so let's untag it. In future, DanielRocks123, there's this way cool website called Google that can stop you looking stupid ;) Megamanic 04:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- When I first marked this page for deletion I had done a google search that produced a lot of hits that seemed to be advertisements. If this technique is actually a legitimate technique then I stand corrected, although I would suggest citing some sources. In addition, please refrain from calling people Nazis as somebody could get quite offended. Thanks. --Danielrocks123 05:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Point taken, no offense intended. Didn't see any advertisments myself on Google. Lots of references to things like "I am trying to create the gated reverb effect - used on many productions like Genesis and ..." The first article listed is to a reputable recording magazine (Sound On Sound) with the following Quote:- Probably the simplest form of change you can add to reverb is to call up a gated setting. This has no natural counterpart, so the abrupt cessation of reverb at the end of the gate period attracts attention. Getting a gated reverb sound is usually just a matter of calling up a suitable preset or creating your own patch using the editing parameters in your effects, but it can help to keep in mind how the effect was originally engineered.
- When I first marked this page for deletion I had done a google search that produced a lot of hits that seemed to be advertisements. If this technique is actually a legitimate technique then I stand corrected, although I would suggest citing some sources. In addition, please refrain from calling people Nazis as somebody could get quite offended. Thanks. --Danielrocks123 05:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The gated effect was first applied to drums, and involved putting up ambience mics in a very live room to capture the reverb sound. These mics were then fed through a conventional stereo gate, which was externally keyed from the close mics on the drum kit. Setting a hold time of half a second or so, followed by a fast release time, causes the gate to allow only the first half second of reverb to pass though after each drum hit, before closing again. Figure 1 shows how gated drums can be created using the traditional method. A compressor was often used to maintain the level of the reverb, and this is shown in the illustration. The result is the gated drum sound that has become something of a cliché, though the effect doesn't have to become stale if you use it sparingly.
- Which is pretty much what I put in the article. My point is that you went off half cocked. I'm happy to admit the article needs work, I'm a computer programmer/Musician not a copywriter Jim. I contributed it with the intention of seeing it evolve & hopefully improve with the contributions of others. I'm delighted to accept the suggested name change to lose the Camel Caps (and I note this for any articles I may add in the future) but I want you to be a little more discerning when it comes to tagging articles for deletion - especially in areas that you aren't knowledgable. The fact that it was tagged within 2 minutes of creation puts an absolute limit on how long you could have spent researching before making the decision... Megamanic 09:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- ...to err is human: Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.107.0.73 (talk • contribs)
- Which is pretty much what I put in the article. My point is that you went off half cocked. I'm happy to admit the article needs work, I'm a computer programmer/Musician not a copywriter Jim. I contributed it with the intention of seeing it evolve & hopefully improve with the contributions of others. I'm delighted to accept the suggested name change to lose the Camel Caps (and I note this for any articles I may add in the future) but I want you to be a little more discerning when it comes to tagging articles for deletion - especially in areas that you aren't knowledgable. The fact that it was tagged within 2 minutes of creation puts an absolute limit on how long you could have spent researching before making the decision... Megamanic 09:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - but retitle it to Gated reverb. Richardcavell 05:30, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, but move to Gated reverb. -Medtopic 05:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as Gated reverb - a notable studio recording technique, but cleanup as the text is far too demotic at the moment. (aeropagitica) (talk) 06:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, retitle, and clean up per above. --Coredesat 07:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've "Moved" Gated Reverb to Gated reverb as that's the concensus of just about everybody & it makes sense. I've done a little bit more cleanup but I'm not best qualified to do this so it's over to the community. I'm new to this stuff, how long before we lose the deletion tag? Megamanic 07:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Megamanic's work. Kevin 10:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Needs to be verifiably sourced as well...--Isotope23 14:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Contra the nominator, this is a bona fide audio production technique which, as the article suggests, has been used extensively in a variety of formats. That said, the article could use sourcing and more information. In expanding / editing this article, I would refer to Flanging, which is a good model for this sort of article. -- Docether 15:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This isn't the place for the discussion but although Flanging is an exemplary article it would be very hard to do the same thing with Gated reverb as it's what I would call a "derived" effect (the result of chaining two effects one after the other) whereas Flanging is a particular type of delay effect. If you examine anything you're going to do to a sound it drops into one of two camps - alteration (probably not the right term) or delay. A distortion pedal basically hard clips the signal which is an easy example of altering the timbre whereas a 1 second digital delay is a clear example of the latter. Flanging is the result of a very short delay and the way I remember from my copy of "The Digital Delay Handbook" it goes 1-3ms = Phasing, 4-10ms = Flanging, then in through Chorusing & ADT to slapback echo so maybe we need an article on the theory of signal processing that brings all of these primary & secondary effects together & more importantly is linked to by all of these articles. Megamanic 08:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, renaming to Gated reverb. It's a well-known audio recording / processing technique. I'll mark this article on my TODO for further expansion. --GreyCat 12:37, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.