 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Forums - Mixing & FX
Subject: engineers... help me!
Original Message 1/11 12-Dec-02 @ 05:38 PM Edit: 12-Dec-02 | 05:40 PM - engineers... help me!
Steve Roughley
Posts: 1178
Link?: No link
File?: No file
OK, here's the drill. I am coming to the final stages of arranging my latest track, and feel that I am ready to start learning the secrets of good mixing/engineering.
I have 32 tracks of audio, and my first observation is the feeling of crowding between the sounds of the track. Don't get me wrong, they are in the right place but they do not have enough breathing space to really stand out.
Now, I know one of the tricks to giving your sounds their own space, is to shelve the sounds so that only the necessary frequencies remain. While this sounds simple, I know there will be more to it. Any ideas??? Also, all of my sounds have been compressed to fit in their given space, but are there any other alterations to the dynamics of the sounds that I should be applying?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Regards.
Steve.
I have 32 tracks of audio, and my first observation is the feeling of crowding between the sounds of the track. Don't get me wrong, they are in the right place but they do not have enough breathing space to really stand out.
Now, I know one of the tricks to giving your sounds their own space, is to shelve the sounds so that only the necessary frequencies remain. While this sounds simple, I know there will be more to it. Any ideas??? Also, all of my sounds have been compressed to fit in their given space, but are there any other alterations to the dynamics of the sounds that I should be applying?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Regards.
Steve.
Message 2/11 12-Dec-02 @ 06:58 PM - RE: engineers... help me!
"all of my sounds have been compressed to fit in their given space"
Well that's probably part of your problem. Compression, imo, should only be used to level out a sound with wildly varying dynamics, or to change the attack of something to give it a "sound." If you rely on compressors to do these tasks for EVERY track, it's gonna be a mess. Basically, I wouldn't use compression to get a track to 'sit right in the mix.' Use EQ and automation for that (let a track be on the quiet side, but still audible... if certain notes get lost, give em a little automation level bump just at that part, but don't just compress the whole thing).
Start with just your rhythm tracks and get them good and clear and THEN start adding all the other elements. You may find some just get in the way of the groove. My old boss was a true asshole, but one great thing I leaned from him is that you have a finite amount of energy in a mix, and every element eats away at that. If something isn't working, don't just lower it so it "doesn't bother me," just get rid of it altogether. A tune's gotta have space between the notes or else it's just gonna be too much to enjoy, you know? Let it breath...
Can't offer much more without listening to the tracks. When I worked with Dexter Simmons, he told me every song wants to be mixed a certain way and if you just listen to the raw tracks honestly, you will know where they all belong. It's really changed how I approach mixing...
psylichon
Well that's probably part of your problem. Compression, imo, should only be used to level out a sound with wildly varying dynamics, or to change the attack of something to give it a "sound." If you rely on compressors to do these tasks for EVERY track, it's gonna be a mess. Basically, I wouldn't use compression to get a track to 'sit right in the mix.' Use EQ and automation for that (let a track be on the quiet side, but still audible... if certain notes get lost, give em a little automation level bump just at that part, but don't just compress the whole thing).
Start with just your rhythm tracks and get them good and clear and THEN start adding all the other elements. You may find some just get in the way of the groove. My old boss was a true asshole, but one great thing I leaned from him is that you have a finite amount of energy in a mix, and every element eats away at that. If something isn't working, don't just lower it so it "doesn't bother me," just get rid of it altogether. A tune's gotta have space between the notes or else it's just gonna be too much to enjoy, you know? Let it breath...
Can't offer much more without listening to the tracks. When I worked with Dexter Simmons, he told me every song wants to be mixed a certain way and if you just listen to the raw tracks honestly, you will know where they all belong. It's really changed how I approach mixing...
psylichon
Message 3/11 12-Dec-02 @ 07:41 PM - RE: engineers... help me!
aye, get the rythm section pumping first, nice and phat, then start adding other things on top of it. iŽll be back with more laterz, gotta run! 
Message 4/11 12-Dec-02 @ 08:52 PM - RE: engineers... help me!
another way of being psylicho's boss (heh heh) is to say every element should be there for a reason, except maybe not so many people look at it like that because they don't really know the reasons, don't have enough reasons. they're just not reason enabled, really, is what it comes down to.
i'm not really into this 'you gotta dig a little niche for your sound with eq on other sounds' thing.. i like a bit of masking.. but another way to look at it is not to see it as a situation requiring the mechanical 'eq and processing of tracks for mix supremeness' but a bigger picture.. ie. if you've got a part that's obscured (a) it may be for a reason - speaking more musically than dancically - and (b) you can make an obscure sound more perceptible by leading the attention to it in some way.. without changing it.. but see, that's composition i suppose, mor ethan engineering. if these words even mean anythnig to an evolved being.
i'm not really into this 'you gotta dig a little niche for your sound with eq on other sounds' thing.. i like a bit of masking.. but another way to look at it is not to see it as a situation requiring the mechanical 'eq and processing of tracks for mix supremeness' but a bigger picture.. ie. if you've got a part that's obscured (a) it may be for a reason - speaking more musically than dancically - and (b) you can make an obscure sound more perceptible by leading the attention to it in some way.. without changing it.. but see, that's composition i suppose, mor ethan engineering. if these words even mean anythnig to an evolved being.
Message 5/11 12-Dec-02 @ 10:13 PM Edit: 12-Dec-02 | 10:17 PM - RE: engineers... help me!
Steve Roughley
Posts: 1178
Link?: No link
File?: No file
"Basically, I wouldn't use compression to get a track to 'sit right in the mix"
THANK GOD, I bounce my processed audio to a new file! Pheeeewwww. But where I get lost is how to use the EQ to give the overall track space. The sounds are far from interfering, except where desirable, with eachother, but they don't have much space around them either.
I have read several interviews with producers/engineers who swear by shelving (not cutting) sounds to the point where they still sound as they should but they give more room to the track, making it appear more dynamic and open. One of these interviews was with Pete Martin (Cass & Slide) and his tracks are a testament to space. His tracks are full of really dynamic warping sounds that seem to occupy a massive frequency range, but don't take up much space in the track. I've tried the technique, but just end up slaughtering my sounds.
I am just wondering how this can be achieved with some success? I do keep my tracks full only of sounds that 'work' with the groove to the best of my abilities, which I think are alright. But I still have the issue of space. Perhaps I am missing something obvious.
But, I was already thinking about re-mixing (not a new version of the track, just re-doing the levels etc from scratch) from the drums up. It seems to have your agreement so, I'll get on with that tomorrow and see if I can find what it is that is missing in my technique.
Anyhow thanks for your help guys!
Stee.
THANK GOD, I bounce my processed audio to a new file! Pheeeewwww. But where I get lost is how to use the EQ to give the overall track space. The sounds are far from interfering, except where desirable, with eachother, but they don't have much space around them either.
I have read several interviews with producers/engineers who swear by shelving (not cutting) sounds to the point where they still sound as they should but they give more room to the track, making it appear more dynamic and open. One of these interviews was with Pete Martin (Cass & Slide) and his tracks are a testament to space. His tracks are full of really dynamic warping sounds that seem to occupy a massive frequency range, but don't take up much space in the track. I've tried the technique, but just end up slaughtering my sounds.
I am just wondering how this can be achieved with some success? I do keep my tracks full only of sounds that 'work' with the groove to the best of my abilities, which I think are alright. But I still have the issue of space. Perhaps I am missing something obvious.
But, I was already thinking about re-mixing (not a new version of the track, just re-doing the levels etc from scratch) from the drums up. It seems to have your agreement so, I'll get on with that tomorrow and see if I can find what it is that is missing in my technique.
Anyhow thanks for your help guys!
Stee.
Message 6/11 12-Dec-02 @ 10:33 PM - RE: engineers... help me!
Please allow me to indulge myself yet again on the shelving thing. I think it works beautifully for certain recordings. Especially those recordings that the producer didn't make. Honestly, especially in electronic music, the sounds introduced to the track during compostion should be tailored to the track so that shelving be unnecesarry. It's just like EQing, you should have eq'ed the individual sounds used in a track so that they fit together WAY before mixdown...
my $.02
e
my $.02
e
Message 7/11 12-Dec-02 @ 10:38 PM - RE: engineers... help me!
Steve Roughley
Posts: 1178
Link?: No link
File?: No file
That's pobably what I am missing. I don't pay that much attention to the EQing and dynamics when a sound is introduced. I have always left that 'till pre-mastering and focus more on getting the track going and grooving instead.
Steve.
Steve.
Message 8/11 13-Dec-02 @ 01:14 AM - RE: engineers... help me!
sorry, didn't mean for the original post to sound like I know better... I should not say "you should". It's just a different way of doing it I'm sure... I just find for me'self that the "sound" is as important as what it's doing. So I tend to write the sound as I write the track!
e
e
Message 9/11 13-Dec-02 @ 02:38 AM - RE: engineers... help me!
i tend to take that "i use shelving eq" sorta stuff as (a) it's something to put in a magazine (b) it gets magazine readers to try somethnig different. perhaps saying it like that is missing the point, but, well xoxos woz here.
as a totally useless side note, i had this soft synth mono patch that had a building dc bias.. ie. after 5 or 6 seconds the waveform drifted entirely off the dc 0 line...!!!! since it was my bass it kinda really sucked.. ultimately, the curve this dynamic presented would have been like .001 Hz.. low shelf cured it w/o resorting to a dc correction process.
weird.
as a totally useless side note, i had this soft synth mono patch that had a building dc bias.. ie. after 5 or 6 seconds the waveform drifted entirely off the dc 0 line...!!!! since it was my bass it kinda really sucked.. ultimately, the curve this dynamic presented would have been like .001 Hz.. low shelf cured it w/o resorting to a dc correction process.
weird.
Message 10/11 13-Dec-02 @ 02:51 AM - RE: engineers... help me!
just to drive home my point about how obsessive i am about communication, went back and read original post..
since i do more listeningy than dance (stereo not mono) might not be the best thing but might generate further ideas? :p my knee-jerk reaction to having two 'close' sounds is to slap a chorus or such on one and move it 'around' the other. delay, comb filter, subtle dfx, mda stereoiser? (can't say i find it useful, but that sorta thing)
since i do more listeningy than dance (stereo not mono) might not be the best thing but might generate further ideas? :p my knee-jerk reaction to having two 'close' sounds is to slap a chorus or such on one and move it 'around' the other. delay, comb filter, subtle dfx, mda stereoiser? (can't say i find it useful, but that sorta thing)
Pages: 1 2
There are 11 total messages for this topic
Reply to Thread
You need to register/login to use the forum.
Click here to Signup or Login !
[you'll be brought right back to this point after signing up]
Back to Forum
