Vid courtesy of The DSP Project
Showing posts with label Tips and Tricks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tips and Tricks. Show all posts
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Saturday, January 26, 2013
get-better-mixes-by-going-for-the-big-wins
Posted in: Mixing, Tips
| by: Graham
Want some mixing advice? Don’t spend too much time focused on the little details. Sure all the fine tuning is important, but you don’t want to overspend your time and energy there. Instead, pour the majority of your mixing brain power into these three core areas and you’ll get big results. Trust me.
Build A Killer Static Mix
Full Post Here:
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
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
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Tips for Controlling Vocal Sibilance - theproaudiofiles.com
Tips for Controlling Vocal Sibilance Posted on March 7th, 2012. Written by Rob Schlette.
This problem is usually caused by the actual vocal formant, but can also be exaggerated by microphone placement and technique. This article will discuss some ways to control vocal sibilance, and keep the problem from becoming a musical distraction.
This pressurization causes some amount of noise that forms the consonant sounds we would recognize from a phase like, “Sally sits sideways on the tennis trolley.” Sibilance is a very necessary feature of human speech, but when there’s (subjectively) too much noise created during these consonants, we get a very distracting harshness.
It isn’t really practical or productive to address micro-muscular vocal technique during a session, so your best bet to mitigate sibilance at the source is microphone selection and placement. Here are a few suggestions:
‘De-essing’ is the classic compressor technique used to address vocal sibilance through processing. In fact, de-essing is just one example of many uses for compression that is conditioned on a limited frequency band, or a modified harmonic profile.
The de-esser technique typically uses a narrow peak EQ in the sidechain path to boost the most offensive sibilant frequencies. This EQ exaggerates the dynamic difference between the sibilant band and the rest of the vocal waveform, making it much easier to achieve gain reduction during those consonants (and only then).
A pre-configured de-esser may provide an interface as simple as a compressor threshold and the peak EQ center frequency. These often work just fine. For more detailed control, one could patch an EQ into the sidechain of a relatively fast compressor, or use any number of compressor plug-ins that provide detailed EQ in the sidechain path.
There are lots of great techniques based on this signal flow, so spend some time with it. Frankly, de-essing is the least of what you can do by adding frequency conditions to your gain reduction.
The same applies to the mixing process. Once you’ve done your best to control vocal sibilance, try using a fader and automation to maintain a consistent vocal volume in the mix. If you simply must instantiate a compressor on every vocal track, keep the attack time slow (> 30ms), and the ratio low.
Finally, don’t listen too loudly when you mix. That’s good general advice, but quality control issues like sibilance highlight its importance. Try a control room volume of 78-83dB(C) SPL. You might be surprised how much detail you’re suddenly able to hear.
Source Post:
http://theproaudiofiles.com/vocal-sibilance/
Tips for Controlling Vocal Sibilance
Vocal sibilance is an unpleasant tonal harshness that can happen during consonant syllables (like S, T, and Z), caused by disproportionate audio dynamics in upper midrange frequencies. Sibilance is often centered between 5kHz to 8kHz, but can occur well above that frequency range.This problem is usually caused by the actual vocal formant, but can also be exaggerated by microphone placement and technique. This article will discuss some ways to control vocal sibilance, and keep the problem from becoming a musical distraction.
Sibilance at the Source (best read with sibilant whistle)
In phonetic terms, sibilance comes from a type of vocal formant called a fricative consonant. During these sorts of utterances, the airway (usually the mouth) is drastically constricted by two anatomical features, like the teeth, tongue, or palette.This pressurization causes some amount of noise that forms the consonant sounds we would recognize from a phase like, “Sally sits sideways on the tennis trolley.” Sibilance is a very necessary feature of human speech, but when there’s (subjectively) too much noise created during these consonants, we get a very distracting harshness.
It isn’t really practical or productive to address micro-muscular vocal technique during a session, so your best bet to mitigate sibilance at the source is microphone selection and placement. Here are a few suggestions:
- Every vocalist is remarkably different, so don’t pre-suppose that anything you’ve tried before will or will not work again.
- Be sure to leave some space between your vocalist and the microphone. Twelve to eighteen inches would be a nice starting point.
- A pop filter won’t do anything to help with sibilance.
- Once you find a microphone and distance combination that helps, try angling the microphone downward 10 to 15 degrees to place the 0-degree axis toward the throat instead of the sibilant source.
Audio Dynamics Processing
Vocal sibilance is a phenomenon of disproportionate dynamics within an isolated frequency range. In other words, it is a problem of too much loudness contrast within a small frequency range of a waveform that has a dynamic profile of its own.‘De-essing’ is the classic compressor technique used to address vocal sibilance through processing. In fact, de-essing is just one example of many uses for compression that is conditioned on a limited frequency band, or a modified harmonic profile.
De-esser Signal Flow
Audio dynamics processors like compressors and expanders contain two signal paths:- The audio path, which is subject to conditional gain reduction and;
- The sidechain or ‘key’ path, which the gain reduction is conditioned on.
The de-esser technique typically uses a narrow peak EQ in the sidechain path to boost the most offensive sibilant frequencies. This EQ exaggerates the dynamic difference between the sibilant band and the rest of the vocal waveform, making it much easier to achieve gain reduction during those consonants (and only then).
A pre-configured de-esser may provide an interface as simple as a compressor threshold and the peak EQ center frequency. These often work just fine. For more detailed control, one could patch an EQ into the sidechain of a relatively fast compressor, or use any number of compressor plug-ins that provide detailed EQ in the sidechain path.
There are lots of great techniques based on this signal flow, so spend some time with it. Frankly, de-essing is the least of what you can do by adding frequency conditions to your gain reduction.
Other Precautions
When you’re recording a vocal performance that may have a sibilance problem, resist the urge to compress the signal in the channel path. Over-compression can exaggerate sibilance. Instead, try using a fader to level the vocal performance, or just record with an adequate amount of headroom.The same applies to the mixing process. Once you’ve done your best to control vocal sibilance, try using a fader and automation to maintain a consistent vocal volume in the mix. If you simply must instantiate a compressor on every vocal track, keep the attack time slow (> 30ms), and the ratio low.
Finally, don’t listen too loudly when you mix. That’s good general advice, but quality control issues like sibilance highlight its importance. Try a control room volume of 78-83dB(C) SPL. You might be surprised how much detail you’re suddenly able to hear.
Source Post:
http://theproaudiofiles.com/vocal-sibilance/
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
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
Practice (and perform) your parts – don’t just sequence them | Kim Lajoie's blog
It’s pretty easy to sequence. You’ve got a computer chock-full of samplers, romplers, synths, loops and other sound sources. You start every project with an empty timeline that’s as inviting as a swimming pool on a hot still day or an untouched carpet of autumn leaves. It’s pretty easy to sequence – dragging in plugins and audio and placing them on the grid in neat patterns like lego blocks. And like lego blocks, it’s easy to arrange them neatly and be satisfied with the result. But you can do better.
Full Post:
Practice (and perform) your parts – don’t just sequence them | Kim Lajoie's blog
Full Post:
Practice (and perform) your parts – don’t just sequence them | Kim Lajoie's blog
Sunday, March 4, 2012
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
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
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)
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)
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)
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)
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Recording: In The Studio: Top 10 Countdown Of Mixing Myths - Pro Sound Web
Let’s debunk some mixing myths today, David Letterman style. smile
Here are 10 common myths about mixing:
#10 – “I need big 8-inch monitors and a subwoofer to adequately mix the low end.”
Yes, bigger loudspeakers produce more low frequencies, but that doesn’t mean you NEED them. I’ve never owned anything bigger than a 6-inch speaker, and I know lots of engineers who mix all day long on 5 and 6-inch monitors.
#9 – “I need to compress every track in the session by default.”
You can substitute the word “compress” with anything. Doing certain things “by default” is lazy. There are tracks I almost always compress, but I … get this … LISTEN to them before slapping on a compressor.
Make sure it actually NEEDS what you’re about to do to it.
#8 – “I don’t need anyone to critique my mixes.”
What about the client, silly? If your mix makes YOU happy but makes the client (or artist) SAD, then something needs to change.
Ask for critiques. They’re like brussel sprouts — kinda gross and sometimes make you want to hurl, but they’re good for you.
#7 – “It’s impossible to get good mixes in a home studio.”
Home studios certainly have their challenges, but you can absolutely get great mixes from a home studio.
#6 – “Good mixes require hours and hours of time.”
When you’re first starting out, this might be true. But the more experience you gain, the faster you should be.
It’s completely reasonable to expect to be able finish a mix in just a couple of hours.
#5 – “Mixing in mono is old-school and doesn’t apply anymore.”
Listening to your mix in mono is one of the BEST ways to reveal issues in your mix. What may sound like a nice, solid mix might sound muddy when you flip it to mono.
The solution? Leave it in mono and deal with the muddnyess.
I believe one of the main reasons people can’t get their mixes to translate to other systems is that they don’t spend enough time mixing in mono.
#4 – “If I just had ______________, my mixes would be better.”
What’s in that blank for you? A new interface? Plugin bundle? New studio monitors?
I hate to break it to you, but talent trumps gear every time.
Every. Time.
#3 – “Deadlines inhibit creativity.”
This one you’ll simply have to try. Have you ever used a timer while you worked on a mix? You may think it keeps you from being able to work effectively.
The truth is it makes you focus on what’s actually important for that mix.
Set a timer and just see how much you can get done in even one hour.
#2 – “I can learn everything on my own.”
I’ve got so many little techniques that I use when I mix a song…hundreds. Did I figure out some of them on my own? Sure.
But most of them came from simply talking to other engineers or watching them work.
You don’t have to break the mold with your mixes. There are a lot of really talented people out there who use tried and true techniques. Learn from them however you can.
And, the #1 myth – “I can just ‘fix it in the mix.’”
I believe it’s programmers who always say “garbage in, garbage out.”
It’s true in mixing, too. If your tracks sound like garbage, your mix will sound like polished garbage.
If your tracks sound amazing, then the mix is already halfway done. Don’t settle for “fixing it in the mix.” That’s not what mixing is for.
Which myth are you guilty of believing? (Hint: I’ve believed ALL of them at some point.)
For some good old-fashioned mixing practice AND training (a killer combination), check out Mix With Us.
Joe Gilder is a Nashville-based engineer, musician, and producer who also provides training and advice at the Home Studio Corner.Note that Joe also offers highly effective training courses, including Understanding Compression and Understanding EQ.
Recording: In The Studio: Top 10 Countdown Of Mixing Myths - Pro Sound Web
Here are 10 common myths about mixing:
#10 – “I need big 8-inch monitors and a subwoofer to adequately mix the low end.”
Yes, bigger loudspeakers produce more low frequencies, but that doesn’t mean you NEED them. I’ve never owned anything bigger than a 6-inch speaker, and I know lots of engineers who mix all day long on 5 and 6-inch monitors.
#9 – “I need to compress every track in the session by default.”
You can substitute the word “compress” with anything. Doing certain things “by default” is lazy. There are tracks I almost always compress, but I … get this … LISTEN to them before slapping on a compressor.
Make sure it actually NEEDS what you’re about to do to it.
#8 – “I don’t need anyone to critique my mixes.”
What about the client, silly? If your mix makes YOU happy but makes the client (or artist) SAD, then something needs to change.
Ask for critiques. They’re like brussel sprouts — kinda gross and sometimes make you want to hurl, but they’re good for you.
#7 – “It’s impossible to get good mixes in a home studio.”
Home studios certainly have their challenges, but you can absolutely get great mixes from a home studio.
#6 – “Good mixes require hours and hours of time.”
When you’re first starting out, this might be true. But the more experience you gain, the faster you should be.
It’s completely reasonable to expect to be able finish a mix in just a couple of hours.
#5 – “Mixing in mono is old-school and doesn’t apply anymore.”
Listening to your mix in mono is one of the BEST ways to reveal issues in your mix. What may sound like a nice, solid mix might sound muddy when you flip it to mono.
The solution? Leave it in mono and deal with the muddnyess.
I believe one of the main reasons people can’t get their mixes to translate to other systems is that they don’t spend enough time mixing in mono.
#4 – “If I just had ______________, my mixes would be better.”
What’s in that blank for you? A new interface? Plugin bundle? New studio monitors?
I hate to break it to you, but talent trumps gear every time.
Every. Time.
#3 – “Deadlines inhibit creativity.”
This one you’ll simply have to try. Have you ever used a timer while you worked on a mix? You may think it keeps you from being able to work effectively.
The truth is it makes you focus on what’s actually important for that mix.
Set a timer and just see how much you can get done in even one hour.
#2 – “I can learn everything on my own.”
I’ve got so many little techniques that I use when I mix a song…hundreds. Did I figure out some of them on my own? Sure.
But most of them came from simply talking to other engineers or watching them work.
You don’t have to break the mold with your mixes. There are a lot of really talented people out there who use tried and true techniques. Learn from them however you can.
And, the #1 myth – “I can just ‘fix it in the mix.’”
I believe it’s programmers who always say “garbage in, garbage out.”
It’s true in mixing, too. If your tracks sound like garbage, your mix will sound like polished garbage.
If your tracks sound amazing, then the mix is already halfway done. Don’t settle for “fixing it in the mix.” That’s not what mixing is for.
Which myth are you guilty of believing? (Hint: I’ve believed ALL of them at some point.)
For some good old-fashioned mixing practice AND training (a killer combination), check out Mix With Us.
Joe Gilder is a Nashville-based engineer, musician, and producer who also provides training and advice at the Home Studio Corner.Note that Joe also offers highly effective training courses, including Understanding Compression and Understanding EQ.
Recording: In The Studio: Top 10 Countdown Of Mixing Myths - Pro Sound Web
Monday, February 20, 2012
4 Ways to Create Depth WITHOUT Reverb | Home Studio Corner
This is a guest post by Björgvin Benediktsson of Audio Issues.
Reverb is the #1 way to make your mixes sound amateurish. I’ve done it, you’ve done it. Hell, even those master mixers went through a whole decade doing it.
Although reverb is really useful to create depth and space in a mix, it’s easy to go overboard. So how can you add depth and space to your instruments without piling on the reverb?
1. Use Delay
Look at delays like Reverb Lite. It’s like reverb in the way that it creates a sense of space, but it lacks the reverb trail that often clutters up a mix. You see, 2-second reverbs sound great on vocals, but the decay and tail is so long that it clutters up everything else that’s going on. So next time, use delays to create a sense of depth around your instrument instead of cluttering up your mix with long reverb trails.
2. Re-amp
Re-amping is a great way of creating depth without adding unnecessary space. Re-amp a guitar part with a different microphone, through a different amp, or from a greater distance away. Miking up a guitar part using distant miking creates a sense of depth without making it sound too “reverb-y.” Use it for other instruments as well, keyboards, bass and synths can all benefit from re-amping.
If you don’t have an amplifier at your disposal, turn off one of your monitors and record the other one. Adding a miked up bass part underneath a DI’d signal will give you a rounder tone. The microphone picks up the movement of the air from your monitor, creating realistic depth without muddying up your signal.
3. Modulation
If delay is Reverb Lite, then modulation effects are Reverb Extra Small. Modulation effects such as chorus and flanger are great for creating a little depth without adding any space. Send your instrument to a auxiliary send and insert a chorus effect underneath the untreated signal. Just a tiny bit can give you the depth you need.
4. Create Stereo with EQ
Automatic double tracking is a simple trick to create depth, but you can enhance it with EQ. If you EQ both signal differently, there will an even more apparent stereo effect, more like two different guitar parts are playing rather than the same one being played twice. Try it for doubled acoustic guitar or hard rock riffs. Adding a touch of different EQ boosts and cuts to each signal separates them more than just simply delaying one.
No Need for Reverb
You don’t always have to resort to reverb for depth. Next time you need to separate your instruments and create some depth, try avoiding the reverb altogether. Delays, double tracking and modulation effects can work just as well.
Björgvin Benediktsson is an audio engineer, musician and online entrepreneur from Iceland. He’s been involved in the music and audio industry for almost a decade, playing in bands, working as a sound engineer and recording music
4 Ways to Create Depth WITHOUT Reverb | Home Studio Corner
Reverb is the #1 way to make your mixes sound amateurish. I’ve done it, you’ve done it. Hell, even those master mixers went through a whole decade doing it.
Although reverb is really useful to create depth and space in a mix, it’s easy to go overboard. So how can you add depth and space to your instruments without piling on the reverb?
1. Use Delay
Look at delays like Reverb Lite. It’s like reverb in the way that it creates a sense of space, but it lacks the reverb trail that often clutters up a mix. You see, 2-second reverbs sound great on vocals, but the decay and tail is so long that it clutters up everything else that’s going on. So next time, use delays to create a sense of depth around your instrument instead of cluttering up your mix with long reverb trails.
2. Re-amp
Re-amping is a great way of creating depth without adding unnecessary space. Re-amp a guitar part with a different microphone, through a different amp, or from a greater distance away. Miking up a guitar part using distant miking creates a sense of depth without making it sound too “reverb-y.” Use it for other instruments as well, keyboards, bass and synths can all benefit from re-amping.
If you don’t have an amplifier at your disposal, turn off one of your monitors and record the other one. Adding a miked up bass part underneath a DI’d signal will give you a rounder tone. The microphone picks up the movement of the air from your monitor, creating realistic depth without muddying up your signal.
3. Modulation
If delay is Reverb Lite, then modulation effects are Reverb Extra Small. Modulation effects such as chorus and flanger are great for creating a little depth without adding any space. Send your instrument to a auxiliary send and insert a chorus effect underneath the untreated signal. Just a tiny bit can give you the depth you need.
4. Create Stereo with EQ
Automatic double tracking is a simple trick to create depth, but you can enhance it with EQ. If you EQ both signal differently, there will an even more apparent stereo effect, more like two different guitar parts are playing rather than the same one being played twice. Try it for doubled acoustic guitar or hard rock riffs. Adding a touch of different EQ boosts and cuts to each signal separates them more than just simply delaying one.
No Need for Reverb
You don’t always have to resort to reverb for depth. Next time you need to separate your instruments and create some depth, try avoiding the reverb altogether. Delays, double tracking and modulation effects can work just as well.
Björgvin Benediktsson is an audio engineer, musician and online entrepreneur from Iceland. He’s been involved in the music and audio industry for almost a decade, playing in bands, working as a sound engineer and recording music
4 Ways to Create Depth WITHOUT Reverb | Home Studio Corner
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Transients vs Loud Mixes
Full Post:
Transients vs Loud Mixes
There's a good reason the big boy mixes are loud as hell but still pound like crazy and don't sound distorted. They aren't chewing up their peak level.
One of the trickiest parts of being a home recorder these days is getting mixes that are loud AND still sound good. Old timers may not agree, but I'm in the camp that only a few big boy recordings have been screwed up by taking the loudness gig too far, but I have to say that I'm impressed by how loud AND GOOD so many major label recordings are these days. (That's my view, take it or leave it. I like a lot of modern music.)
Pan vs Balance vs Mono vs Stereo
(True) Panning
true panning would be if you actually took the audio signal from one side and really did move it over to the other side ...
Balance
is when you adjust, raise or lowwer volume levels on the left side or right side of a two channel track. your not moving anything around your just raising or lowering volume of one side or the other of that track.
what is a MONO track
its actually a two channel track that has the exact same audio signal on its left side channel as it has on its right side channel. since both left and right side are identicle(clones of each other) the overall sound is therefore mono. You cant tell that there are two channels, since they both sound Identical it sounds like just one mono signal(but its really two ).
what is a STEREO track
like the mono track above a stereo track also has two audio channels, But the big difference is that the channels on a stereo track each carry a different audio signal. They are not two identical audio signals like the mono track has. In a stereo track the right side audio signal is a different signal than the left side audio signal, so the sound that you hear in this situation is refered to as stereo sound.
Panning vs Balance vs Mono....(panning a mono signal)
almost all panning that we do is done using volume manipulation to give the illusion that the audio sound is moving from one side to the other, its not really (true) panning since nothing is really being moved at all.
All that is done in most panning is that a two channel MONO track is being manipulated using a volume balance, to raise and lower the volume of one side or the other so that it sounds like the mono signal is moving form one side to the other, but its not moving at all, we just percieve it as movement when we hear this volume manipulation happening to a mono track.
Therefore because you need two identical audio channels to be on the track all panning we do is done using a two channel MONO track...its basically using a form of Balence control to create the illusion of moving or Panning the mono signal form one side to the other.
(True) Panning vs Panning vs Stereo....(panning a stereo signal)
If you wanted to actually move the audio signal from the left side of a stereo two channel track over to the right side of that stereo two channel track. you could not do this with just normal panning that uses volume manipulation. The panning that acts like a Balance and uses volume manipulation to simulate movement on a mono track wont work the same way for a stereo track that has two different audio signals on each channel. This type of panning that uses volume manipulation will not create the illusion of movement or panning when used on a stereo track, it will only act like a volume balance and just shut off the volume of one of your channels and not move that channel at all..
So what you need in this case is something or a way to do (TRUE)Panning, to actually be able to move the audio signal on one channel of a stereo track over to the other channel of that stereo track. And since most recording software programs only use mono type panning the manipulation of volume levels to simulate movement/panning of a mono signal you will have to probably look outside for add on programs or vst programs or pluggin programs to help you acomplish (TRUE)Panning on your stereo two channel track........( I call it TRUE panning for lack of a better word, probably just referring to it as stereo panning would suffice)
Stereo Panning.......(the old school way )
there is a way to (True)pan a pair of stereo audio signals using just your recording software as it is. To do this you need to have your stereo audio signals separated, and have each one sent to its very own separate track. That way each of those signals can then be treated as a MONO signal in its very own two channel mono track. So now that you have one of the signals as a mono signal in its own track you can use the normal Pan thats in your recording software program (the volume manipulation type pan fader that behaves like a balace) to pan it just like you would any other mono signal in the usual way. you do the same to the other half of the original stereo signal and you end up with two separate tracks that each have their own pan fader, now you can use those two pan faders to start moving and position (panning) each of those two signals that came from the original stereo source.
Tip - You could have recorded your original stereo source onto two separate mono tracks right from the beginning, or if you had originally recorded your stereo source onto just one two channel track as a stereo track, then you can use your recording softwares features to separate that track into two separate mono tracks, one that has one signal form your stereo source and the other that has the other signal from your stereo source.....
Just remember all tracks have two channels that you can record audio signals onto, if you record two Identical audio signals onto a tracks two channels then that track is what most of us call a mono track. But if you record two Different audio signals onto to the two channels of a track then that track will be what most of us refer to as a stereo track...so all tracks have two channels...(thanks Till)
(I think that about sums up the difference between Balance and Pan in very basic genneral terms...as far as i understand it anyway)
Post Source:
By suprosuperman via Cockos Reaper Forum
true panning would be if you actually took the audio signal from one side and really did move it over to the other side ...
Balance
is when you adjust, raise or lowwer volume levels on the left side or right side of a two channel track. your not moving anything around your just raising or lowering volume of one side or the other of that track.
what is a MONO track
its actually a two channel track that has the exact same audio signal on its left side channel as it has on its right side channel. since both left and right side are identicle(clones of each other) the overall sound is therefore mono. You cant tell that there are two channels, since they both sound Identical it sounds like just one mono signal(but its really two ).
what is a STEREO track
like the mono track above a stereo track also has two audio channels, But the big difference is that the channels on a stereo track each carry a different audio signal. They are not two identical audio signals like the mono track has. In a stereo track the right side audio signal is a different signal than the left side audio signal, so the sound that you hear in this situation is refered to as stereo sound.
Panning vs Balance vs Mono....(panning a mono signal)
almost all panning that we do is done using volume manipulation to give the illusion that the audio sound is moving from one side to the other, its not really (true) panning since nothing is really being moved at all.
All that is done in most panning is that a two channel MONO track is being manipulated using a volume balance, to raise and lower the volume of one side or the other so that it sounds like the mono signal is moving form one side to the other, but its not moving at all, we just percieve it as movement when we hear this volume manipulation happening to a mono track.
Therefore because you need two identical audio channels to be on the track all panning we do is done using a two channel MONO track...its basically using a form of Balence control to create the illusion of moving or Panning the mono signal form one side to the other.
(True) Panning vs Panning vs Stereo....(panning a stereo signal)
If you wanted to actually move the audio signal from the left side of a stereo two channel track over to the right side of that stereo two channel track. you could not do this with just normal panning that uses volume manipulation. The panning that acts like a Balance and uses volume manipulation to simulate movement on a mono track wont work the same way for a stereo track that has two different audio signals on each channel. This type of panning that uses volume manipulation will not create the illusion of movement or panning when used on a stereo track, it will only act like a volume balance and just shut off the volume of one of your channels and not move that channel at all..
So what you need in this case is something or a way to do (TRUE)Panning, to actually be able to move the audio signal on one channel of a stereo track over to the other channel of that stereo track. And since most recording software programs only use mono type panning the manipulation of volume levels to simulate movement/panning of a mono signal you will have to probably look outside for add on programs or vst programs or pluggin programs to help you acomplish (TRUE)Panning on your stereo two channel track........( I call it TRUE panning for lack of a better word, probably just referring to it as stereo panning would suffice)
Stereo Panning.......(the old school way )
there is a way to (True)pan a pair of stereo audio signals using just your recording software as it is. To do this you need to have your stereo audio signals separated, and have each one sent to its very own separate track. That way each of those signals can then be treated as a MONO signal in its very own two channel mono track. So now that you have one of the signals as a mono signal in its own track you can use the normal Pan thats in your recording software program (the volume manipulation type pan fader that behaves like a balace) to pan it just like you would any other mono signal in the usual way. you do the same to the other half of the original stereo signal and you end up with two separate tracks that each have their own pan fader, now you can use those two pan faders to start moving and position (panning) each of those two signals that came from the original stereo source.
Tip - You could have recorded your original stereo source onto two separate mono tracks right from the beginning, or if you had originally recorded your stereo source onto just one two channel track as a stereo track, then you can use your recording softwares features to separate that track into two separate mono tracks, one that has one signal form your stereo source and the other that has the other signal from your stereo source.....
Just remember all tracks have two channels that you can record audio signals onto, if you record two Identical audio signals onto a tracks two channels then that track is what most of us call a mono track. But if you record two Different audio signals onto to the two channels of a track then that track will be what most of us refer to as a stereo track...so all tracks have two channels...(thanks Till)
(I think that about sums up the difference between Balance and Pan in very basic genneral terms...as far as i understand it anyway)
Post Source:
By suprosuperman via Cockos Reaper Forum
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Getting Proper Vocal Sounds-Live Sound Touring Engineers Give Mix Magazine Tips on Getting a Proper Vocal Sound Onstage
When you're working with a vocal-oriented artist or group, time is a major factor. A fix for placing a vocal in a group is to assign all instrumentation to two groups so that the stereo image remains the same as it was in the stereo bus. Bring those up to two group-out masters panned hard-left/right. Leave all of your vocals, lead and backgrounds on the stereo bus. Insert a digital delay on the left and right of that stereo group and increase the delay setting between 2 and 6 ms for left and right. (Remember to turn off any feedback gain settings.) You can then tune the distance between the band and your vocals. Then, time-delay your entire P.A. back to the drums using the delay inside the house crossover or EQ.
—Howard Lindeman
With the SiDD software for the XTA DP324, I can pull up each channel individually in my laptop and fine-tune it to each vocalist's specific needs. For instance, when I identify very particular frequency points in a singer's voice, such as 2.5 kHz or 3 kHz that are accentuated when they hit certain levels, using the dynamic EQ feature, I can attenuate exactly those frequency points without deleting that frequency content when the level falls below threshold. The memory presets are also valuable for the bass vocal artist, allowing settings for each bass vocal application, as well as the artist switching to lead vocal on certain songs. I route the extra output from that particular channel on the SiDD to a separate channel on the mix console, which assists in the cue/listen function.
—Dave Farber
We have all faced the problem at some point in our career where your vocal mics are grabbing a lot of the backline and cymbals from the kit. A cool little problem-solver for this is to use a product called Mic-Mute (www.micmute.com). These are infrared-activated gates that plug in between the microphone and the cable right at the mic stand. They are easily adjustable with trim pots for threshold and decay, and they also run off of phantom power. These are great for cleaning up your mix. I've had great success with these with a number of bands — especially when a singer or guitar player stands in the center of the stage in front of the drum kit.
—Fabrizio Del Monte
Getting Proper Vocal Sounds-Live Sound Touring Engineers Give Mix Magazine Tips on Getting a Proper Vocal Sound Onstage
—Howard Lindeman
With the SiDD software for the XTA DP324, I can pull up each channel individually in my laptop and fine-tune it to each vocalist's specific needs. For instance, when I identify very particular frequency points in a singer's voice, such as 2.5 kHz or 3 kHz that are accentuated when they hit certain levels, using the dynamic EQ feature, I can attenuate exactly those frequency points without deleting that frequency content when the level falls below threshold. The memory presets are also valuable for the bass vocal artist, allowing settings for each bass vocal application, as well as the artist switching to lead vocal on certain songs. I route the extra output from that particular channel on the SiDD to a separate channel on the mix console, which assists in the cue/listen function.
—Dave Farber
We have all faced the problem at some point in our career where your vocal mics are grabbing a lot of the backline and cymbals from the kit. A cool little problem-solver for this is to use a product called Mic-Mute (www.micmute.com). These are infrared-activated gates that plug in between the microphone and the cable right at the mic stand. They are easily adjustable with trim pots for threshold and decay, and they also run off of phantom power. These are great for cleaning up your mix. I've had great success with these with a number of bands — especially when a singer or guitar player stands in the center of the stage in front of the drum kit.
—Fabrizio Del Monte
Getting Proper Vocal Sounds-Live Sound Touring Engineers Give Mix Magazine Tips on Getting a Proper Vocal Sound Onstage
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)