Showing posts with label Studio Tips. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Studio Tips. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Zen and the Art of Strong Stereo Imaging | Audio Issues

This is a guest post from mastering engineer Barry Gardner who operates SafeandSound online mastering
From time to time I hear a mix that has dubious stereo imaging.  This can affect both acoustic or electronic mixes.
For acoustic mixes it is often the mic technique that creates problematic stereo images. For electronic mixes, there are a variety of reasons why bad stereo imaging occurs.
By dubious I mean the stereo image does not have the traits of a professional mix-down. It may be too narrow with many monophonic sources or it might be too wide sounding with possible phase problems, e.g. not mono compatible. This can be due to over use of stereo width enhancers or it may suffer from blanket application of effects across multiple mix tracks.

Make Sure It Works in Mono

When you mix your track it is important to mono the track and make sure that the track does not sound excessively different in mono.
It should maintain a similar tonal balance in mono with some sources even sounding slightly louder. If you have a serious phase issue for any sources they will tend to lose bass or drop significantly in level when summed in mono. At worst, they’ll vanish from the mix entirely. So make it a habit to check your mix in mono as it builds.
In some instances there may be a single stereo source that is out of phase between the channels and goes unnoticed. We all want to have wide, punchy sounding mixes and this can be a challenge for the beginning engineer.
After all, there are many technical aspects to learn when you’re first starting out. One common issue I have found is the application of a single effect across multiple mix tracks. Reverb is the most common stereo enhancing effect in people’s mixes. I would like to take the stereo image aspect of mixing back to the starting point and look at the sound selection. (drum hits, samples, synths, vocals, effect sweeps and other elements that make up your music)
In many instances people tend to start their track by picking sources that they like the sound of. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, it’s what we all do. However, it is worth introducing another layer of selectivity when you choose your sound sources.

Stereo for the Electronic Musician

For electronic musicians it is important to understand whether your source samples and sounds are monophonic or stereo. If they are mono they will have exactly the same information in the left and right channels and if they are stereo they will have a sense of space.
If you are unsure. try mono-ing some sources in your DAW and see if the stereo image changes. If there is no change then the source is mono but if the source loses some depth and space then it is highly likely to be stereo.
The reason I suggest this is so that from the outset you will be building an appropriate stereo perspective into your music. Sounds that are commonly stereo (the technically correct term being pseudo-stereo) would be synth patches (pads, leads and some basses), synthetic snare drums, sweeper effects. Sounds that may more commonly be mono may be kick drums and instrumental samples. There is no hard and fast rule so use the mono-ing technique above to find out if the sources are mono or stereo. Doing this results in less problems with phase as you will be avoiding these pseudo-stereo creating techniques.

Avoid the Unnatural

One of the most unpleasant techniques some people use to artificially enhance the stereo imaging is to put a short stereo reverb on all the drums, the synths and bass line which are all from mono source samples. This produces a slight sense of extra depth. However it also produces an unnatural and unpleasant global coloration to all the sources and has a somewhat “cheap” and subtly metallic sound to the mix. So from the outset, pay attention to your choice of sounds when you are building the track.
If you want to create a pseudo stereo image for a specific mono source, you can use a few different techniques. In fact adding a little reverb is perfectly OK, but limit it to one sound source and don’t apply the same reverb to every single source you have.
  • You may wish to double up the mono source on 2 channels, pan hard left and right and delay one side by a few milliseconds. (always double checking mono compatibility by mono summing or checking on a correlation meter)
  • You can add a subtle stereo based delay to a sound which can widen the sound (often a subtle ping pong with hard left panned delays can do the trick).
  • Another technique is to double 2 mono sources panned hard left and right and apply two separate digital graphic EQ plug-ins. Create opposing EQ boosts and cuts to each signal so they don’t have the same sounds. At any given frequency the left channel gets a boost and the right gets a cut through all the available bands.
Stereo imaging enhancers rely on already available stereo information in a source. By all means use them sparingly to assist width creation but be aware in over-use since mono compatibility may fail. All these enhancements can be used with care and in moderation with actual stereo sources to give a deeper and wider mix sound. Also, do not be afraid to leave a mono source strictly mono as it all adds to fill the stereo image in a natural way.

Know Your Sources

As well as sources that are very narrow it is worth being vigilant towards overly wide sources.
For example, many factory synth patches are created to sound big wide and lush. In some instances this is overdone and when summed to mono they can sound very different. In such instances, knowing how to program your favorite synthesizer comes in handy.
When these techniques are applied with care and respect to mono compatibility, they should produce a fuller, stable, mono compatible and more euphonic stereo image for your mixes.
None of these pseudo stereo image enhancing techniques replace good source selection but they can help with adding some subtle and extra width to a mix-down that is otherwise lacking stereo imaging.
It is highly recommended that all experiments are checked for mono compatibility either through mono summing your stereo bus or checking on a freeware phase scope like “Flux stereo tool” or “Voxengo Span”. Selecting from a wide palette of sound sources helps bring a natural depth and separation to your mix-down.
Image by: pittaya


Zen and the Art of Strong Stereo Imaging | Audio Issues
Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Bobby Owsinski's Big Picture Production Blog: 6 Tips For Balancing The Bass And Drum Mix

6 Tips For Balancing The Bass And Drum Mix

Perhaps the most difficult task of a mixing engineer is balancing the bass and drums (especially the bass and kick). Nothing can make or break a mix faster than the way these instruments work together. It’s not uncommon for a mixer to spend hours on this balance (both level and frequency) because if the relationship isn’t correct, then the song will just never sound big and punchy.

So how do you get this mysterious balance?

In order to have the impact and punch that most modern mixes exhibit, you have to make a space in your mix for both of these instruments so they won't fight each other and turn into a muddy mess. While simply EQing your bass high and your kick low (or the other way around), might work at it’s simplest, it’s best to have a more in-depth strategy, so consider the following:

1) EQ the kick drum between 60 to120Hz as this will allow it to be heard on smaller speakers. For more attack and beater click add between 1k to 4kHz. You may also want to dip some of the boxiness between 200-500Hz. EQing in the 30-60Hz range will produce a kick that you can feel, but it may also sound thin on smaller speakers and probably won’t translate well to a variety of speaker systems. Most 22" kick drums are centered somewhere around 80Hz anyway.

2) Bring up the bass with the kick. The kick and bass should occupy slightly different frequency spaces. The kick will usually be in the 60 to 80Hz range whereas the bass will emphasize higher frequencies anywhere from 80 to 250Hz (although sometimes the two are reversed depending upon the song). Shelve out any unnecessary bass frequencies (below 30Hz on kick and below 50Hz on the bass, although the frequency for both may be as high as 60Hz according to style of the song and your taste) so they're not boomy or muddy. There should be a driving, foundational quality to the combination of these two together.

A common mistake is to emphasize the kick with either too much level or EQ, while not featuring enough of the bass guitar (see the graphic on the left for a good visual of what it sounds like). This gives you the illusion that your mix is bottom light, because what you’re doing is shortening the duration of the low frequency envelope in your mix. Since the kick tends to be more transient than the bass guitar, this gives you the idea that the low frequency content of your mix is inconsistent. For Pop music, it is best to have the kick provide the percussive nature of the bottom while the bass fills out the sustain and musical parts.

3) Make sure that the snare is strong, otherwise the song will lose its drive when the other instruments are added in. This usually calls for at least some compression, especially if the snare hits are inconsistent throughout the song. You may need a small EQ boost at 1kHz for attack, 120 to 240Hz for fullness, and 10k for snap. As you bring in the other drums and cymbals, you might want to dip a little of 1kHz on these to make room for the snare. Also make sure that the toms aren't too boomy (if so, shelve out the frequencies below 60 Hz).

4) If you’re having trouble with the mix because it's sounding cloudy and muddy on the bottom end, mute both the kick drum and bass to determine what else might be in the way in the low end. You might not realize that there are some frequencies in the mix that aren't really musically necessary. With piano or guitar, you're mainly looking for the mids and top end to cut through, while the low-end is just getting in the way, so it’s best to clear some of that out with a hi-pass filter. When soloed, the instrument might sound too thin, but with the rest of the mix the low-end will now sound so much better and you won’t be missing that low end from the other instruments. Now the mix sounds louder, clearer, and fuller. Be careful not to cut too much from the other instruments, as you might loose the warmth of the mix.

5) For Dance music, be aware of kick drum to bass melody dissonance. The bass line over the huge sound systems in today's clubs is very important and needs to work very well with the kick drum. But if your kick is centered around an A note and the bass line is tuned to A#, it's going to clash. Tune your kick samples to the bass lines (or vice versa) where needed.

6) If you feel that you don't have enough bass or kick, boost the level, not the EQ. This is a mistake that everyone makes when their first getting their mixing chops together. Most bass drums and bass guitars have plenty of low end and don't need much more, so be sure that their level together and with the rest of the mix is correct before you go adding EQ. Even then, a little goes a long way.

While these aren't the only mix tips that can help with the bass and drum relationship during your mix (you can check out either The Audio Mixing Bootcamp or The Mixing Engineer's Handbook for more), they're a great place to start. Remember, go easy on the EQ, as a little goes a long way.

----------------------------------
Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating social media and the new music business.


Bobby Owsinski's Big Picture Production Blog: 6 Tips For Balancing The Bass And Drum Mix
Share/Bookmark

The Three Inglorious Gangsters of EQ | Audio Issues

Written by Björgvin Benediktsson in Uncategorized - No comments
gangster-eq
share

Say hello to my little friend!

Or rather, say hello to my three little gangsters that do your dirty EQ work for you.
1. The Thug

The thug is like Joe Pesci from Casino. He’s the hired hand that does all the dirty work for the family. He doesn’t hesitate to get rid of you any way he can.

Use the thug when you need to cut unwanted frequencies from your mix. He’ll cut anything that’s causing you annoyance: snare rings, muddy bass or hissy guitars.

The thug gets rid of pests without making a mess. He likes it clean and untraceable. Like surgical EQ with a high Q. Just scoop in there and get rid of what’s annoying you.
2. The Godfather

The godfather is like Al Capone. Everybody knows he’s the boss, but the cops can’t prove it. He uses legal businesses as a front for his criminal enterprise. They all know he’s dirty, but they can’t pin it on him.

Think about the godfather when you mask frequencies. Masking is when you boost a higher frequency to hide the problematic frequency below. Say you have a really nasally vocal at 1 kHz or but you can’t cut it without making it sound unnatural. By boosting 3 kHz you mask that nasal sound by covering it up with a more flattering frequency.

Sometimes you need to hide the problematic frequencies. Mask them and none will be the wiser.
3. The Undercover Cop

Think about Tim Roth as Mr. Orange in Reservoir Dogs. When things start getting real ugly, everything’s gotta go. When you get a bunch of low-lives together in a room, there’s gonna be a stand-off and that’s never gonna end well.

Because sometimes you gotta get rid of everything. If you have problems with your low-end, you need to grab that EQ and filter everything out. Make sure that the only things left are the instruments that belong there in the first place.

The undercover cop gets rid of the criminals in the most dangerous way possible: by infiltrating their midst. The same goes for your EQ’ing. Use the filter carefully. Get rid of the scum, but don’t hurt the frequencies around them.



Maybe I’ve been watching too many gangster movies between mixing sessions, but these are the three characters that continually resurface.

Similarly, these are the three things to always keep in mind when you’re using EQ. Know when to cut, filter and boost and EQ’ing will be easy for you.

For a great guide on knowing when to use each of these thugs….I mean things, check out Understanding EQ.



The Three Inglorious Gangsters of EQ | Audio Issues
Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

How to Minimize Noise In Your Mixes

How to Minimize Noise In Your Mixes
Share/Bookmark

Saturday, March 17, 2012

How to Use a Reference Track to Improve your Mixing | Audio Issues

How to Use a Reference Track to Improve your Mixing | Audio Issues
Share/Bookmark

Friday, March 16, 2012

Gary Noble Show: Tech Tuesdays: Stereo Imaging Tips

Gary Noble Show: Tech Tuesdays: Stereo Imaging Tips: Tech Tuesdays: Stereo Imaging Tips
Share/Bookmark

Saturday, March 10, 2012

Best Plugin Order For Mixing? [Reader Question] » The Recording Revolution

Best Plugin Order For Mixing? [Reader Question] » The Recording Revolution

 If you’ve mixed for any length of time you might have thought to yourself if it matters in what order you insert plugins on your tracks. Or maybe the thought has never crossed your mind. You simply always reach for the same plugins in the same order on each mix. In either case today I want to answer a reader question regarding the subject and give you a few things to consider as you mix.

"In what order should my plugins go in the insert? I usually start with a compressor/limiter and then move to EQ, possibly delay or reverb then desser if necessary…granted this is for vocals. I would really like to know what a good general guide is for tracks. – Michael R."

There Is A Difference

The first thing we should be clear about is that there is a real difference in how your track will sound depending on the order of your plugins. You can take 3 plugins on a vocal track, swap them around and the vocal will sound different. I know it sounds obvious, but plugin inserts (much like their hardware counterparts) operate on a simple input/output basis. What comes in gets processed and sent out.
Why is this relevant? Because you need to simply be aware that if you change the order of plugins you are changing the inputs and outputs of the signal. You are changing what a plugin receives, processes, and then eventually dumps back out. So, plugin order is important and does make a difference.


There Is No Right Way

Now all of THAT being said, there technically is no “correct” plugin order that you must follow. Some mixes call for certain plugin chains and some mixing engineers prefer certain methods as well. It doesn’t matter what anyone else does, it matters what makes the track sound amazing and fit in the mix.

How I Handle EQ And Compression

Personally I use two main plugins on almost every track, EQ and Compression. I’ll use more effects on certain instruments but I can guarantee there will likely be EQ and Compression on everything. I prefer to place my EQ first in the chain and the compressor immediately after.
The reasoning? I personally view EQ as a tool to carve away and “fix” the recorded sound while on the other hand I view compression as a tool to change or enhance the now “fixed” sound in order to sit in the mix better. If I’m going to do a lot of subtractive EQ, then I’d rather remove the unwanted frequencies before I go turning them up with a compressor.

The Rest Of The Effects

After I’ve EQ’d and compressed, then and only then will I add other effects dessers, modulating effects (chorus, flanger, phaser), etc. Again, I don’t want to effect or enhance a signal that still has unwanted frequencies in it, so I’ll make sure to insert these types of plugins AFTER my EQ and Compression. As asked by Michael in the original question, as it relates to delay and reverb effects, I don’t actually insert these effects right on the tracks. Rather I’ll use sends and busses to blend in the amount of wet effect that I want. And this usually comes after the insert plugins.
The only exception to this might be if I’m using some kind of distortion or tape saturation effect. These can work really well as the first insert in your chain as it’s acting as part of the initial sound, which then can be EQ’d and compressed to taste. Again, this is my personal preference and is very characteristic of how I mix. I have many friends who are mixers and they do things very differently. It truly is a matter of taste.
Share/Bookmark

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Recording: Tips For Effective Bus Compression (Includes Audio) - Pro Sound Web

Explanations of effective and ineffective ways to shape your sound

Bus compression is certainly not a new concept, however, it is an effective and reliable engineering tool and its basic principles are vital considering you are affecting multiple voices.

When approaching bus compression, there are two essential tools at your fingertips: Attack and Release – these two tools, when properly utilized, will have the ultimate say in the outcome of your efforts.

The attack and release functions of a compressor will tell its detector how to react to signal that passes through. An effective use of attack and release will essentially allow you to make conscious envelope changes to the signal rising above the threshold at the detector.

This brings about the main philosophical concept behind compression, which is to shape the signal, rather than merely restrict its dynamic range (dynamic restriction is part of shaping the signal, not the end purpose). The attack and release controls are what really provide the push and pull effects of compression.

With this in mind, I have provided examples of effective and ineffective bus compression, focusing on attack and release settings, for a few simple approaches.

FULL POST:
Recording: Tips For Effective Bus Compression (Includes Audio) - Pro Sound Web
Share/Bookmark

Friday, March 2, 2012

Understanding what does RMS stands for in Audio


OK so you have encountered a lot about “RMS” in audio recording, mixing and mastering. You might have read it many times in different tutorials featured in this blog or in recording forums. So what is really RMS?
RMS is Root Mean Square

It is assumed you are not a mathematician or have strong engineering knowledge so let’s explain this term in the easiest way. RMS stands for Root mean square. Do not confuse with those squares or means; the easiest way to understand RMS is simply it’s just an unique way of finding out the “average”.

Why not simply use the word “average” instead of “RMS”? Well, technically RMS is used to characterize the “average” of continuous varying signals such as audio, electrical signals, sound, etc.

Like any properties of a continuous signal such as audio or electrical signals. It can be characterized as having a maximum, minimum and average. In audio waveforms, these maximum is often called “peak” signal and often measured in dB in digital. In digital audio, the maximum allowable is 0dB. If it exceeds that amount, distortion would occur.

Between the minimum (the quietest sections of the audio) and the loudest section (towards 0dBFS, the peak) is where the RMS value can be found. It would be depicted on the screenshot below:

Full Post
Understanding what does RMS stands for in Audio
Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Compression Mistakes

5 Compression Mistakes That Keep Even “Smart” People Stuck
Share/Bookmark

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Recording: In The Studio: Tips For Mixing Toward Loudness - Pro Sound Web

Recording: In The Studio: Tips For Mixing Toward Loudness - Pro Sound Web

In The Studio: Tips For Mixing Toward Loudness
In order to deliver the most musically effective loudness, that goal must have been addressed in the mixing process

February 28, 2012, by Rob Schlette

studio
[Click to enlarge]
This article is provided by the Pro Audio Files.


Some people want their music really loud, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

If loudness is part of their aesthetic and the audience likes it, then I say let’s go for it.

In order to deliver the most musically effective loudness, that goal must have been addressed in the mixing process, but not as directly as you might think.

It’s important to remember that there are mix masters, and then there are replication or download masters. Your project isn’t finished until it has been mastered, so the relative loudness of a mix does not represent the final level of the project. Comparing the loudness of a mix master with a finished commercial CD is not particularly useful.

However, there are a lot of aspects of mixes that directly contribute to the eventual loudness of a finished master. So what should you be listening for while you’re mixing? Here’s an example scenario:

My client has brought me a set of five multi-track recordings to mix. The client is very concerned that her project should fit in with the latest release from “Artist X” as much as possible, including being equally loud.

Here are some things I would be sure to pay attention to while mixing her project:

1. The Loudest Instrument

What is the loudest instrument in Artist X’s mixes?

The answer is probably pretty consistent across the whole CD; and I’ll be sure to use a similar approach with my client’s project.

This may not seem like a pivotal factor, but the relative loudness relationships within a mix establish a lot about the eventual absolute volume of the mix (and the project). If one hip hop mix has a lot more vocal content than another, the relative loudness of the two mixes will be confused.

If I’m mixing in a drum-heavy genre, I’ll be careful to reference that primary balance benchmark. If my next project is a vocal-driven style, I’ll simply re-establish my benchmark. In either case, I’ve setup the balance relationships within my mixes so that they can directly compare with other albums in the presumed audience playlist.

2. Relative Loudness Relationships

What are the relative loudness relationships between kick, snare, bass, and lead vocal?

Before you start cranking around on piles of processing, set up these simple balance relationships. They go a long way toward establishing the fundamental structure of mixes in many musical genres.

Try starting by mimicking the balance between the lead vocal and the snare drum from your reference. Once that makes sense, add the kick at a level that is referenced from the snare drum. Finally, rough in the bass level relative to the kick drum.

Beyond just setting up the framework for balance within your mix, these balances establish a lot about how you will work with these instruments tonally. A loud vocal, for example, may get a totally different EQ treatment than one that is buried (however appropriately) in a sea of guitars.

Do some reference listening; you might be surprised.

3. Tonal Contrast

What is the brightest instrument in Artist X’s mixes?

Articulation is a big component of apparent loudness. Pay particular attention to tonal contrast between instruments to get the most impact out of any particular tone choice.

To put it simply, it doesn’t matter how bright the drums are; it matters how articulate they are compared with other instruments. A mix with built-in tonal contrasts can be more effectively managed in the mastering process.

4. Panning and Depth

Apparent dynamic range can have a lot to do with panning and depth.

Do Artist X’s mixes have a lot of subtle panning, or are they essentially 3-channel stereo? What is the contrast between the instruments that seem nearest to the listener and furthest away?

If your goal is blaring, ‘too loud,’ loudness, it’s important to note that these spatial contrasts survive aggressive mastering much better than subtle differences in level or tone do. It is not uncommon for even the most critical listeners to initially mistake spatial contrast for audio dynamics.

Mastering

These types of musically relevant aspects of mix structure will help you create consistent, engaging mixes that fit into a genre in a lot of fundamental ways. The mastering process can then more effectively finish preparing those mixes for their commercial audience, including addressing their market loudness.

Rob Schlette is chief mastering engineer and owner of Anthem Mastering (anthemmastering.com) in St. Louis, MO, which provides trusted specialized mastering services to music clients across North America.

Be sure to visit the Pro Audio Files for more great recording content.



Recording: In The Studio: Tips For Mixing Toward Loudness - Pro Sound Web
Share/Bookmark

Computers in the Studio (Part 1)

Computers in the Studio (Part 1)
Posted in Brandon Ryan, Educational Resources, SONAR, Tips, Windows 7 by Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk] on 10 Feb 2012


Musician or IT professional?

It seems today’s musicians must be part artist and part IT professional. It’s a difficult dance that requires knowledge, time, and patience in order to achieve a level of success. The intention of this series of blog posts is to help with the IT part or the equation. My goal is to help with questions related to system optimization, maintenance, organization, networking, and other IT-related concerns important to musicians in the 21st century.

In this first post I’d like to talk about basic practices for achieving a smooth running PC-based DAW. I’ll also offer my thoughts and suggestions on OS “tweaking” or “tuning”. In subsequent posts we’ll get deeper into specific areas and talk about other aspects like organization and networking. Most of these tips will assume you’re running a PC with Windows 7 installed.

Here are some general rules of thumb I’ll offer right off the bat:

1. Have an exit strategy. Consider a backup imaging system like Acronis or at least set a System Restore point for a stable system configuration. It will allow you to get back to a stable working system in the event of something going terribly wrong. I’ll say this though: this seems to happen increasingly rarely with modern setups and I wouldn’t get too hung up about making backups unless you rely on your system for paying clients. For me, System Restore has generally been sufficient.

2. Keep your system updated. While the latest driver isn’t always the best driver, it’s substantially more likely to be better than an old driver. In the vast majority of cases, the latest driver for your hardware is the best option and probably offers the best performance, stability, and compatibility. This is particularly true of on-board system devices but also likely true of your audio devices, MIDI controllers, etc. I say stay updated , and only revert to an older driver if you have a problem. Outdated drivers are quite often the cause of problems and not vice versa.

3. Check your DPC Latency. Improperly implemented drivers can cause delays or latency in what are known as Deferred Procedure Calls. This is often the cause of crackles, pops, and dropouts in your audio software. Wireless adapter drivers are notorious for this kind of thing, but other system drivers can cause it as well. Luckily, it’s free and easy to check for. Just run DPC Latency Checker or LatencyMon. Either of these tools will give you a good idea whether or not you should be able to expect proper, low-latency performance from your DAW. If you see problems, fix these first.

4. Keep Windows updated. Sure, every update may not be absolutely necessary and you might want to pick and choose. But a woefully out-of-date Windows installation won’t help anybody. Your mileage may vary, but I always keep my Windows 7 installation up-to-date with the latest patches and I believe this is the best practice in general.

5. Keep your software updated. SONAR update available? Install it. Kontakt update available? Install it. Sure you can do some cursory research to see if it’s posing problems for others, but in general, updates fix more problems that they cause. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but I can’t think of anything I have on my system at this very moment that isn’t updated to the latest and greatest.

6. Only install what you need. This is a big one. The more stuff you have on your system, the more potential for problems. Don’t deny yourself a cool instrument or effect that you think you’ll need, but beware of that extra level of virus protection, or download manager, or free plugin that you’re not sure what it actually does. Ideally a DAW should be a DAW and not share duty as an office computer or general purpose machine for web-browsing and social media. This is where a lot of problems start. Can it be on the net? Sure, with certain precautions and judicious use. Should you install Norton and Office and dredge around in the backwaters of the internet? I certainly wouldn’t recommend it. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

7. Careful with that tweak Eugene. There’s a lot of information on the internet about tweaking or tuning your OS for audio. A lot of it is outdated (applies to older operating systems and hardware) and some of it is downright erroneous. So take it with a grain of salt. To tweak, or not to tweak, that is the question. If you follow the other steps in this list you’ll do more good than most any OS tweak can do. But there are some valuable changes you can make that might make your system run more efficiently and predictably. Going deep into this is outside of the scope if this post, but I’ll say a couple things on the issue: 1) Don’t stress over this if you have modern computing hardware and Windows 7. Windows 7 is pretty lean and should at least function practically well out-of-the-box, and modern hardware systems can handle minor background tasks far better than their brethren of yore (see point #8). 2) If you do want to tweak the OS, get familiar with MSConfig, services.msc, and perhaps most of all Black Viper. The latter is very well researched and has become the de-facto authority on information about various Windows services. Use it to identify what a service does and what effects, if any, disabling it will have on your system. Service tweaking can seem like a black art. When you’re ready head down that path, Black Viper can help lead the way. Be careful and be aware of what you’re doing in case you run into trouble (see point #1).

8. Consider an upgrade: If you’re running a single core system with Windows XP from early last decade you’re going to need to squeeze as much as you possibly can from it and that probably means heavy tweaking. If you’re running a 64-bit, multi-core monster with dual digit RAM and SSD you probably don’t have much to worry about. Many users fall somewhere in between. But if you find yourself having to constantly tweak your system in order to enjoy making music then consider upgrading. Massive leaps in performance can be had for a lot less than you might think. Your music deserves it and you’ll be happy you did.

9. Stay Organized: If you find installation files and sound banks and plugin folders strewn all over your system you’re just asking for trouble. Devise a system and stick to it. Keep your installation, updates, and drivers organized and in one place. Clean up your downloads folder. Sort your loops, sound banks, and sample content. Keep your plugin folders to a minimum and know where these kinds of things are without thinking. Nobody likes to work in a messy studio – and your DAW is at the heart of your studio. In fact, you could argue that your DAW is really a microcosm of a complete physical recording studio. So keep it tidy and know where to find stuff. You’ll work faster and better if you do.

10. Stay on top of things. Know your DAW intimately and keep it maintained. This means everything from checking for updated drivers to opening the computer and blowing out the dust now and again. I generally hate computer/car analogies, but sometimes they’re inevitable. This is one of those times. Maintain what you have if you want it to get you from point A to point B reliably.

Careful consideration of these points, some of which are common sense, should serve you well in pursuit of a fast, reliable DAW that suits your creative needs. In future posts, we’ll get deeper into some of the individual points and delve into other areas like networking and asset management for the personal studio.



The Cakewalk Blog » Blog Archive » Computers in the Studio (Part 1)
Share/Bookmark

Computers In the Studio- Part 2

Computers In the Studio (Part 2 – Going Online)
Posted in Brandon Ryan, Educational Resources, SONAR by Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk] on 21 Feb 2012

Going Online

It has long been held that connecting your DAW to a network, or worse, to the internet is something you should never, ever do. But is it really all that dangerous to your security or detrimental to performance? What kinds of precautions should be taken? Let’s find out.

First of all, why would anyone want to connect their DAW to the internet?

The Advantages:

1) Maintain system updates with less hassle

2) Maintain driver updates with less hassle

3) Perform software authorization with less hassle

4) Transfer samples, mixes, projects, etc via FTP and file sharing sites for collaboration or delivery

5) Search the internet for music theory questions like how to play a diminished chord or engineering questions like how to use a multiband compressor

In other words, it’s much easier to keep your system updated , authorize software and to search and share when your your DAW has internet access. The need to download everything on another machine and then manully transfer it to your DAW goes away.

But if it’s so convenient, why do people so often recommend against it? These are the most common reasons I hear:

The Concerns:

1) You might get a virus

2) You have to run software that will bog down your system

3) Your system might become unstable

4) You might get hacked

5) Wireless drivers can have a negative effect on DPC Latency negatively (see Computers In The Studio – Part 1)

The good news is that with the proper precautions you can connect a DAW to the internet with a relatively high degree of safety while maintaining performance and reliability.

Now you’re probably wondering what these “proper precautions” are. Let’s go through them one by one.

1) Keep a secure network: This goes for anyone with a home network. If you have a wireless network, never leave it unsecured. Configure your network to use proper encryption like WPA2, and set a strong password – preferably with a combination of letters, numbers, and special characters. Also, make sure your router’s built-in firewall is enabled. This “hardware firewall” is your first line of defense against intrusion. This stuff is actually pretty easy to do and it’s worth learning about even if you don’t plan to connect your DAW to the internet. Your network should be secure regardless of whether you are connecting a DAW or not.

2) Keep a secure computer: Your DAW, and the rest of the computers on your network, should generally have the latest Windows upddates as many of these address security risks. I also recommend enabling the built-in Windows Firewall for the extra level of defense it offers in addition to your router’s firewall. On modern computer hardware, you shouldn’t notice a performance hit, and because it’s built-in, there’s no software to purchase or install.

3) Run virus protection (but don’t overdo it): If you aren’t using your DAW for general computing like email and web browsing (HINT: Don’t!), you probably don’t need heavy virus protection as it can be quite intrusive and some packages may indeed hinder performance due to their background processes and scanning activities. But some protection is probably not a bad idea. USB drives and locally transferred files can potentially contain viruses and I’ve found sometimes people have a false sense of security simply because their DAW isn’t connected to the internet. So find a happy medium between having no protection at all and locking your system down like Fort Knox. Personally I’ve found Microsoft Security Essentials to be just that. It’s free, unobtrusive and works quite well. Every once in awhile I perform a manual scan using a program called Malwarebytes. Malwarebytes is also free and very effective at not only detecting malware, but removing it. A few years back I had a machine infected with a particularly nasty trojan virus introduced from an infected USB key drive, and Malwarebytes was the only thing that would remove it. It’s free, scans quickly, is updated frequently, and only runs when you tell it to.

4) Wired or wireless?: Depending on the location of your studio, using a wireless connection to your network might be the most convenient solution, or it might be the only solution – but it has some potential pitfalls. The biggest potential problem is the wireless hardware adapter and its drivers. Many wireless adapters cause DPC spikes and this can interfere with your DAW’s low-latency operation (see Computers In The Studio – Part 1). It might manifest itself as clicks, pops, dropouts or other anomalies. These will be especially apparent at low latencies. And some wireless adapters don’t perform very well when it comes to transfer speeds. So the best solution is to use an Ethernet cable directly into your router. But what if your router is far away from your studio? Thankfully there’s a good solution available - and it’s called a wireless bridge. Basically it’s a little box that handles the wireless connection to your router while offering wired, Ethernet ports for all your studio computers. As far as your DAW is concerned, it thinks it’s just connected to a good old fashioned wired Ethernet port – and it is. No extra software to install and no wireless hardware polling the network and potentially hurting performance. The bridge handles all the wireless connectivity and security itself. I use a D-Link DAP-1522 in exactly this way and it works great. Connecting the DAP-1522 to my router via wireless N, I get wired performance with wireless convenience, and all without adding any hardware or drivers to my DAW. If you have a dual-band router, you can reserve the 5GHz band for your studio and keep the 2.4 GHz band for all your other devices (laptops, tablets, phones, etc). This way you keep a dedicated high performance network just for your studio without any interference from other devices in your home. I’ve been using this kind of setup for a few years now and it works like a charm!

5) Use it judiciously: Don’t go trawling the backwaters of the internet or go opening random email attachments. A DAW connected to the internet is best used for visiting reputable sites, downloading driver and software updates, performing authorizations, FTP transfers, and the occasional Google search or email check. It’s highly recommended to have another computer for general web browsing, email, office work, etc.

In my opinion and in my experience, putting a DAW online isn’t the “no-no” it once was. I’ve been running a DAW connected to the internet for years now without incident and I’d find it very hard to give up the convenience and go back to no internet connectivity. One might also argue that keeping your DAW up-to-date via the web is a great contributor to having a stable DAW. If the hassle of manually downloading updates and moving them from one machine to another is keeping your from updating regularly, then having the DAW offline might be causing more harm than good. I’m not necessarily saying to run out right now and put your DAW on the internet as some folks get along just fine staying disconnected. But it’s something to consider, and personally I feel it comes with its own distinct advantages. Frankly I don’t believe it poses the inherent danger it used to – as long as you carefully consider the precautions I’ve outlined above.


The Cakewalk Blog » Blog Archive » Computers in the Studio (Part 1)
Share/Bookmark

Sonic Varnish | Allen Farmelo

Sonic Varnish | Allen Farmelo

Sonic Varnish_

When I was about ten years old my father drove an old-school Mercedes with a wooden dashboard that I thought was one of the most beautiful things in the world. Its glassy finish fascinated me because I could see every detail of the wood grain. I asked my father how it got like that and he explained varnishing to me, claiming that “Mercedes probably put at least twenty coats on.” Not long after that I bought an old skateboard that was horribly beat up, and I told my father that I wanted to varnish it to look like the Mercedes dashboard. Down in the basement we stripped the nasty paint off that wooden skateboard and started applying thin layer after thin layer of varnish with careful wet sanding and cleaning between each one. It was taking forever, and after twelve coats I proclaimed that the skateboard was done. It was glossy – not quite glassy – and I’d certainly learned about varnishing. It’s a lot of subtle work, and no one layer really seems to do all that much.
Harmonic Distortion is Sonic Varnish – Today when people ask me how I achieved certain sounds in the records I work on, I struggle to answer the question because it’s such a multi-faceted thing. Then it occurred to me that you could think of it like applying many small layers of varnish, except that instead of applying clear-coats of lacquer I apply layers of very subtle harmonic distortion. The word ‘distortion’ here is nothing like the overdrive and fuzz we talk about when discussing guitar pedals and amps. In fact, most people with untrained ears can’t hear a single layer of truly subtle harmonic distortion because it only gently changes the sound, and sometimes it’s so subtle that it’s basically inaudible.

All audio equipment (including most plug-ins) imparts a small percentage of harmonic distortion, and this percentage is called total harmonic distortion, or THD. THD can be understood as the amount of extra sound generated by the electronics in the piece of equipment itself. Some audio gear is sought solely for the character of its harmonic distortion and is said to be very “musical,’ meaning that we humans tend to like how thing sound when it goes through these circuits. Equipment famous for harmonic distortion includes Neve preamps, Fairchild compressors and Pultec EQs. These are units that people will run sounds through just to pick up harmonic distortion that the circuit generates even when it’s not particularly doing anything to the signal. We call it tone, vibe, mojo, fairy dust, goodness, sweetness, fatness, warmth, size, girth, a sonic halo and all kinds of other names, but what we’re basically describing is that subtle percentage of extra sound that the circuit adds to the signal. For this article I’m calling it sonic varnish.

It’s important to remember that most undeveloped ears wont be able to tell the difference between a sound going through a Pultec EQ set at neutral and a sound that isn’t. Over and over again I’ve inserted pieces of gear in and out of signal chains to show people the difference. If their ear is untrained, or still developing, they squint intently at the speakers for a bit then open their eyes, lean back in their chair and say, “I can’t really tell the difference.” Could I tell the difference between a Mercedes dashboard that had twenty-one coats of varnish as opposed to twenty? I’d probably squint at them and give up as well, but a professional wood worker might be able to see the difference. And – far more importantly – a pro will know which varnish to use, how to apply each coat, and which of those coats should be the last in order to achieve the desired result. It’s the same with sonic varnish. One layer doesn’t do all that much, but many layers add up to a finished sound that anyone can hear and say, “Yeah, that sounds really cool.”
Applying the Layers - I believe that one of the reasons we love the sound of records from the 60s and 70s so much is that the sounds were achieved by the (often unintentional) application of many subtle layers of harmonic distortion. Take a Beatles record like Sgt. Peppers recorded on 4-track – a classic example. I’m not sure of the historical accuracy of this explanation, but lets assume that Ringo’s drums were tracked early on. Then those drums were bounced back and forth between the four tracks of tape as they made room for further overdubs. For the sake of argument, let’s guess that Ringo’s drums made two bounces after they were tracked. Each time they bounced, they picked up the sound of the console’s electronics, the tape machine’s electronics and the sonic character of the tape itself. If you count each stage as a layer of varnish, that’s roughly seven layers (preamp, compressor, tape, preamp, tape, preamp, tape). Then you mix the record, which adds another layer, then master it, then play it on your home system (which will have a THD rating, too), and we’re somewhere in the realm of twelve layers of sonic varnish before you hear Ringo’s drums.

RINGO’S DRUMS

Layer 1: mic
Layer 2: console preamp
Layer 3: compressor
Layer 4: tape machine
Layer 5 & 6: bounce 1 (console and tape)
Layer 7 & 8: bounce 2 (console and tape)
Layer 9 & 10: mix to mono tape (console and tape)
Layer 11: mastering
Layer 12: your home system

Now compare that to a modern home recording. Typically the signal is recorded into a consumer grade preamp, processed with a compressor plug-in and bounced to disc.

TYPICAL MODERN HOME RECORDING

Layer 1: mic
Layer 2: preamp
Layer 3: plug-in compressor
bounce
Layer 4: your iPod

The way I see it, this signal has had two chances to receive a coat of sonic varnish. During the recording it hit the preamp and then the compressor plug-in to achieve a second layer. Someone with only two layers of consumer grade varnish will still want to make the most of the recorded sound, so she or he is likely going to try to make each of those two layers as thick as possible. I see this all the time, and a slew of common amateur techniques have evolved. What I see most of is way too much compression, double and triple tracking of parts to add dimension, and the use of distortion plug-ins for a lo-fi sound that is more often a final ditch effort at sounding interesting than an aesthetic choice. People will try anything to make those two or three layers as thick as possible.

The temptation to overuse any one of these stages is strong because the sound just isn’t going to pop out of the speakers if you’re doing subtle work. This lack of sonic excitement is confounded by the lower quality components in consumer grade equipment, too. When you start to overuse any of these layers you acquire obvious sonic artifacts that will change the nature of the source sound to such a degree that the characteristics of the processing itself can overtake the characteristics of the original sound. A kind of haze emerges between the sound and the listener, and when you multiply that by however many tracks you have in the mix, things can get downright foggy. I hear it all the time and the result is simply unremarkable. As my father will still tell you, thick layers of low-quality varnish look horrible. They don’t dry evenly, bubbles get trapped in the varnish, and brush strokes are often visible. Rather than showing off and accentuating the amazing colors, details and depth of the original wood, you end up seeing the varnish and the artifacts of its application. The exact same thing happens with thick layers of consumer grade sonic varnish. There’s no short cut. You want your skateboard to look like a Mercedes? Start layering. You want your mix to sound like a great classic album? Start layering.
Modern Varnish Mixtures – I use a combination of digital and analog gear to achieve my layers of sonic varnish, and I chose each layer very carefully to emphasize a particular quality in the sound that I think serves the artistic vision of the project. And I always have my eye on the final mix. For example, if I know I’m going to mix to tape, I have that in mind as I compress the vocal because I know the vocal will “sit down” a bit more once the mix has hit tape. As I apply each coat of sonic varnish, I have the next layers in mind so that I don’t apply any one layer too thickly. I’m interested in the cumulative result of many subtle layers. Let’s take a look at a particular vocal sound to get a sense of what I mean. This is from a very sparse record of which I’m particularly proud of the vocal sound:

TRACKING
Layer 1: Vintage Telefunken U47 (tube microphone)
Layer 2: Chandler TG2 mic preamp
Layer 3: Tube Tech CL-1B Compressor
Layer 4: Cranesong HEDD converter (a touch of its Pentode processing)
INDIVIDUAL TRACK PROCESSING DURING MIXING
Layer 5: API 550a EQ
Layer 6: Tube Tech CL-1B hardware compressor
FULL MIX PROCESSING
Layer 7: API 2500 stereo bus compressor
Layer 8: Dangerous Audio BAX EQ
Layer 9: Studer A-80 1/2″ tape recorder
ANALOG TO DIGITAL PROCESSING
Layer 10: Studer output stage
Layer 11: Cranesong HEDD A-D conversion (with a touch of Pentode processing)

Each and every one of these eleven layers is doing something so subtle that very few people can really hear the difference. But, each and every one is just as important to the overall sound as the one before it or the one after it. Use a different mic and the sound will change. Use a different preamp and the sound will change. Use a different converter into the DAW and the sound will change. Use a different bus compressor or tape machine and the sound will change. Each and every layer is equally important, while no single layer is all that important on its own.

My personal theory about why this technique works is that you’re never letting a single piece of gear overtake the original sound. Instead, you’re letting each piece of gear impart just a little bit of harmonic distortion – a little mojo, a small halo, a bit of warmth, a little extra size – and then moving on to the next piece of gear that’s going to impart another kind of harmonic distortion. Maybe the preamp warms up the mic a bit, and maybe the compressor puts a little halo around things, and maybe the tape machine adds a certain depth, and maybe the converter adds a little something-something. Layer by layer the varnish becomes thicker while each layer remains relatively transparent. The original sound is still in tact, but it has acquired all of these wonderful, subtle qualities along the way.
Gain Staging – The Craft of Varnishing – With wood, layers of varnish go on rather simply, one at a time, but there is still a craft to it. My coats of varnish on that skateboard weren’t nearly as well applied as my fathers because he had years and years of experience with a brush in his hand. He had the craft that told him how far to dip the brush, how hard to push that brush against the edge of the can to remove excess varnish, where to begin and end his strokes and how hard to push as he made them, and he knew when enough was enough. He knew how to varnish.

In audio, how you varnish is called gain staging. Gain staging refers to the rather complex craft of knowing where the optimal (or intentionally not optimal) operating levels are for any piece of gear in the signal path. How much signal you feed into a piece of equipment will elicit a certain amount and kind of harmonic distortion out of that circuit. Whether it’s tubes, tape, solid state or even a digital plug-in, the way you set the gain will determine the sound. To make matters more complicated, the way one gain stage is behaving will effect how the next one behaves in real time. Add to this that many pieces of gear can be calibrated to different levels, and that every sound you record is going to change how the gear is going to react, and you start to see the endless complexity. Gain staging is not trying to hit a moving target; it’s trying to hit a moving target from a rotating platform on the back of a speeding pickup truck on a hilly, winding road.
Developing Your Brush Stroke – So how do you learn how to gain stage properly? Practice, practice, practice and get great teachers who can guide you. It took me years to know how to get a good, solid signal happening with just a pre amp, more years to learn how to send that signal to a compressor properly, and more to learn how to get a tape machine to react the way I wanted it to. And I’m still learning all the time. My aim in writing this essay isn’t to pretend to be able to teach you how to do gain staging – how do I know which target you’re shooting from which pickup truck on which road? My aim is to stress that as you apply sonic varnish you need to really be aware of how you’re applying the layers.

My best suggestion is that you begin by simply considering the concept of sonic varnish when you’re making a recording and start to train your ear to hear subtler and subtler layers of harmonic distortion. And if you’re using a DAW to do recording, you can try to emulate more and more stages of sonic varnish using plug-ins. Believe me, it’s not a great idea to stack up a bunch of the same plug-in and expect them to do what a vast combination of great hardware and software can do together. Nor can you expect too much out of consumer grade gear. (Yes, the signal path I describe above costs thousands of dollars, and I don’t expect everyone to have access to that kind of gear). But, you can learn a lot by trying different things in the box. Here are some ideas:

Use a plug-in that emulates analog gear (a compressor, an eq or other will be fine) to try to put a tiny halo on a guitar sound, or a little girth into a bass sound, or a bit of sweetness into a vocal. Don’t try to engage much of the processing – only enough to apply the smallest amount of harmonic distortion you can hear. Work in very very small increments and see what you can hear.
Try using a few different plug-ins to achieve subtle harmonic changes in the sound without changing the essential nature of the original sound. See if you can get the sound to come to life while sounding just the same.
Try to get 3db of compression out of two compressors doing 1.5db each. Then try three doing 1db each.
Try remixing something you know you’ve put a few big layers of varnish on and see if you can achieve a less hazy result with more sonic impact by using more subtle layers.

In other words, take the concept of sonic varnish and experiment with it. There are really no hard and fast rules to follow, but hopefully the concept of sonic varnish will help you have a general guiding principle to follow. I’m sure you’ll come up with all kinds of ways to play with the concept.
What About Sonic Paint? – I need to recognize that there are many times when one is going to want to slam the hell out of something with a compressor, or distort something to the point where you can’t tell what it is, or eq something so drastically that its very nature is transformed. That’s not varnish – that’s paint. However, remember that most paints also need to be applied with great skill and are typically finished with a few very thin layers of clear varnish in order to add depth and brilliance to the color beneath. So, even if you’re going to slam a sound against a wall until it bleeds, those gaping, bloody wounds will be all the more gory if you can get a few coats of varnish on there to show it all off.

What About Lo-Fi? – Everything I’m saying would apply to achieving lo-fi sounds. If you’re interested in making a lo-fi recording, one of the most important things you can take away from this essay is that multiple layers of distortion will get you better results than one single lo-fi distortion layer. Some of my favorite lo-fi recordings are by Guided by Voices on four track recorders that imparted a lot of THD, but they also bounced their tracks back and forth quite a bit, layering the sounds and slowly degenerating the original sound. Compare that approach to sticking a distortion plug-in on a single digital track and most people will agree that the vibe is with the layered approach. Also, no matter how distorted a lo-fi record is, the layered approach will allow the original signal to acquire its new vibe and sound in lighter layers that will allow the original sound to maintain its character.

What about Genre Specific Sounds? – Absolutely work toward the aesthetics of the genre you’re working in, but keep in mind that in any genre the concept of sonic varnish will help to achieve great sounds. Techno may be a genre where digital sources never leave the computer, but even the sampled sounds will go through multiple manipulations to come to their finished luster, and many subtle layers will often serve that goal well. Black Metal may want to achieve an endlessly muddy distortion, but any guitar player will tell you that the pickup, the amp, the speaker, the mic, the preamp and the rest of the recording chain all go into making those sounds. Again, trying to achieve that sound in one or two small stages isn’t going to get the pro results. Extend the logic to any genre and I think the concept of sonic varnish will still prove a useful guiding principle.

What about Honest Recordings? – Classical and jazz recordists often talk of transparency and of “honest recording,” but the very fact that THD is present in every piece of gear makes “honest recording” a myth. Perhaps using fewer layers of sonic varnish will help keep the original recorded signal less tainted, but I think its important to keep in mind that the original recorded signal just passed through a rather tiny diaphragm or ribbon and became wiggling electron waves in a long thin piece of metal called a cable. To think of a recorded sound the way we think of a live sound isn’t going to help one grapple with what it takes to make a recording appear natural when it comes out of two speakers. More often than not, subtle harmonic distortion has helped me render sounds more honestly because the recorded sound can take on an added complexity, richness and 3D quality that got lost in the act of capturing it. The tendency in making these “honest recordings” is often to try to apply as little varnish as possible, but the counter-intuitive move of adding more harmonic complexity might bring the sounds of the instruments to life in ways that the thinner layers might not be capable of. As always, experiment and see what works for you.

It’s a Concept - Sonic varnish is a concept, a guiding principle, an idea. It’s something to have in mind when you’re recording and mixing that can help keep the bigger picture in focus. There are so many stages to recording, and no single one of them is any more or less important than another. As technology changes faster and faster our tools are going to change as well, yet our methods for recording seem to stay more or less the same. We still have to put a mic somewhere near a source, amplify it, get it onto a medium of some kind, then take that recorded sound and process it in some way in preparation for it’s final format. No matter how careful you are, you’ll be introducing some level of harmonic distortion at every stage, so it’s good to be aware of it. Even better to really know how to apply that harmonic distortion in a way that’ll get you the sounds your after.


Sonic Varnish | Allen Farmelo
Share/Bookmark

My mastering chain – signal flow

My mastering chain – signal flow-Ian Shepherd
Share/Bookmark

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Live Sound: How To Read (And Better Understand) Microphone Specifications - Pro Sound Web

Live Sound: How To Read (And Better Understand) Microphone Specifications - Pro Sound Web
Share/Bookmark

Thursday, February 23, 2012

6 Steps to Fixing the Muddiness in Your Music Mixing | Audio Issues

6 Steps to Fixing the Muddiness in Your Music Mixing | Audio Issues

Define clarity?

Something that sounds clear and pristine? In the music mixing world at least, clarity is when you hear all the parts of a mix clearly.

Now define muddiness?

A muddy mix is when the lower mids of your mix get cluttered up and all the bottom end seems to lack definition.

You can’t hear the differences between the bass drum and the bass guitar because they take up the same space, resulting in a cluttered and un-clear mix. Even the lower end of the vocal is trying to pull some weight down there, way out of it’s league.

So what can you do when your music mixing lacks clarity?
1. Start With Your Drums

Start by soloing your drums and see if you notice any abnormal boominess. The bass drum is a big contender for this so make sure it isn’t occupying too much low end space.

Also, there is a buildup of potential low mid energy when you have all of your drums soloed at once, so be sure to listen to them has a complete instrument.
3. Go Through Your Other Instruments, one by one

After soloing your drums, add in other instruments and see if they are the ones causing the boominess. Bass guitars, keyboards and other instruments that have their fundamental frequencies in the low end are all good options.

Maybe two different instruments are competing for the same spot in the frequency spectrum, which results in an even muddier sound.
3. Filter Where You Need

After finding the offending instruments, filter out what you don’t need. Vocals can be filtered out quite high, depending on the range and sex of the singer.

Guitars can be filtered up to 200Hz or more if they aren’t playing a major part in the song. Filter out the unnecessary low end in all the instruments and see if your mix sounds better.
4. If You Can’t Filter, EQ Correctly

Now if you have tried filtering and it doesn’t quite cut it, you have to resort to some corrective EQ. Low end thickness is often caused by a bump in the 120Hz range and a boomy mid-range character can be caused by too much 200-250Hz.

So by cutting a little bit in those frequency areas you can clean up an instrument quite nicely. Set your EQ to a narrow Q and see if you can’t sweep any of those annoying frequencies off the table.
5. An Analyzer Over the Stereo Bus

If you can’t hear where the low end is and you can’t seem to be able to pinpoint it with EQ, use a spectrum analyzer on the stereo bus to see where the frequency build-up is.

Frequency analyzers can come in handy when you want to see if you are representing each frequency range clearly. And by using it to see your boomy build-up, you can take corrective steps to better your music mixing.
Spectrum analyzer
6. Cut the Boominess From the Master Bus

If you have gone back to every instrument and tried EQ’ing and filtering without avail there is one more solution. You can slap a stereo EQ over the master bus and clean up the boominess of the whole mix.

But be careful, those boomy frequencies are also the ones that keep the mix thick. Cutting too much can result in a thin mix, so you have to be subtle in your master bus cutting.
Conclusion

So there you have it. Boomy and muddy music mixing is definitely a problem for many. You want all your tracks to sound full and thick but when you end up putting them all together, what you get is a pile of unclear muddiness.

So use these tips the next time your lower mids need some tweaking. You might end up with pristine clarity instead of unclear boominess.
Share/Bookmark

Get Rid of That Oh-So Unnecessary High-End with the Low-Pass Filter | Audio Issues

Get Rid of That Oh-So Unnecessary High-End with the Low-Pass Filter | Audio Issues



Not everything needs to be squeaky clean and filled with high-end sheen.


Sometimes it’s useless to add “air” to certain instruments. You don’t need to, and your mix might suffer for it. In some cases, too much high-end just adds hiss and noise instead of those clean highs you wanted.
Give the Low-Pass Filter Some Love

If the high-end isn’t there to begin with, it’s redundant to try to add it with EQ.

Some instruments benefit from low-pass filtering. Either there’s something there that you don’t want to interfere with something else, or it just adds noise and unnecessary energy.
Distorted Electric Guitars

Tighten up your thick rock guitar mix by deleting some of the higher frequencies.

If you’ve recorded them with a dynamic microphone, with the distortion to the max, chances are the high-end is really only noise and hiss.

Add a low-pass filter and filter until you start hearing the signal suffer, then back off a little. You might even clean the sound up a little, since you probably added way too much distortion to begin with. :)
The Kick Drum

The beater is basically the highest-end of the kick drum. And the sound of the beater is most prominent around 2-4 kHz.

You can clean up the bass drum quite nicely by low-pass filtering everything above, say, 8 kHz. Especially if the kick drum has a bunch of cymbal and snare drum bleed. You really cut the amount of extraneous drums getting into your bass drum mic if you filter out some of that high-end.
The Bass Guitar

Filter out the high-end on a bass track if you want a smoother sound. If the bass is just a low sounding groove then you don’t need the high-end.

If your bass just acts as a grooving pad-type sound with a bunch of other instruments taking care of the rest of the arrangement you can safely filter out its high-end. It’s also a good way to get rid of the string sound of the bass, for a smoother sound.
Reverbs

Sometimes, reverbs add annoying sibilance to vocals. Some reverbs can also sound just a tad too bright.

If you like the reverb, then EQ it and make it fit better. Either filter out the high-end or cut it with some high shelving. You want the space the reverb gives you, but you don’t need the sibilance or the brightness bouncing off the walls.
Don’t be Afraid

Hey, don’t be afraid of filtering. Some instruments just don’t need all that high-end, and being a little drastic on the filter can make your mix sound better.

Try the low-pass filter the next time you’re having high-end or hiss issues. It just might work.
Share/Bookmark

The Electronic Musician Guide to Doing Everything Better

The Electronic Musician Guide to Doing Everything Better
Share/Bookmark

Sunday, February 19, 2012

The Expensive Vocal Sound And Other Unicorns

The Expensive Vocal Sound And Other Unicorns
Share/Bookmark

Independent Musicians on the Internet


Flickr Feed

Roy Tanck's Flickr Widget requires Flash Player 9 or better.

Get this widget at roytanck.com