bduffy's tip - cutting 500 hz. im actually amazed

[bduffy]

bduffy i think rockwool slabs covered in muslin will do what you need. At least here in the uk, they're the best option i've found for a definite improvement of acoustics, although careful placement is required.

cheap too. (compared to the ready made solutions and foam.)

but i still can't quantify compressors as you have,
if it sounds right........
i'd still like a better grip on them

joe

Insulation...yeah, I'm going to make my own baffles, bass traps one of these days. I've actually got some decent absorption stuff, probably not decent enough; I'm still experimenting with my setup. As for compressors - there was a really good thread here where someone explained compressors excellently, even with visual aids! Maybe I can dig it up. But "if it sounds good", indeed!

[Kingston]

I try my best to track the best sounds, use the highest quality instruments and effects, but still the frequencies bunch up. I just don't think my signal chain is up for it yet.

they'll bunch up no matter what your chain looks like, and regardless of your mic choices, although a certain purist school of recordists will tell you a different story.

My point was only in regards to boosting vs. cutting, and that either will do. Just that think kung fu when doing those moves. One ridiculous boost in just the right place might equal two scoops. efficiency and all that.

[bduffy]

"Two scoops of raisings..."

Cool - but wouldn't a boost be worse than a cut with a shit EQ? We're assuming that the EQ is up to the task, right?

[Kingston]

yes. we're indeed assuming there are no shit EQs in sight. Any of the usual culprits will do, the ones that get recommended round here on weekly basis.

[bduffy]

Oh, we know what those are!

[dalor]

My thought is this (which might be total crap but works good for me): There are frequencies in the Center (Mono), and again the same frequencies in the stereo field (M/S). So if instruments are overlapping, you have to decide which one to keep in the center (make it Mono) and which one to move to the stereo field. For example a Bass and Bassdrum might have the same frequency - it most likely sounds pretty muddy, a solution could be to make the bassdrum straight mono (maybe with a 5% very very short reverb) and move the Bass by using your favourite stereo effect into the stereo field, a chorus with 40% mix could do. The important part i've found is that the Stereo effect needs to me 'moving', meaning, a static Left/Right sample delay might not do the trick, rather than Reverbs, Chorus, Flangers, etc. This is just a start, then you can still cut off dramatically frequencies, e.g. cut all below 50 hz from the bass etc.

[ouroboros]

Oh, we know what those are!

man, let the rest of us in on it!

[bduffy]

Oh, we know what those are!

man, let the rest of us in on it!

Seriously? You've been around long enough to know what the A-list, KVR EQ's are!

Electric-Q
Nyquist EQ
IIEQ

I think all the payware is controversial...

[Compyfox]

...a solution could be to make the bassdrum straight mono (maybe with a 5% very very short reverb) and move the Bass by using your favourite stereo effect into the stereo field, a chorus with 40% mix could do. The important part i've found is that the Stereo effect needs to me 'moving', meaning, a static Left/Right sample delay might not do the trick, rather than Reverbs, Chorus, Flangers, etc. This is just a start, then you can still cut off dramatically frequencies, e.g. cut all below 50 hz from the bass etc.

This does only work part time and is (IMO) more like an effect to make stuff sound wider, more spread out. You still run into clashing frequencies - the one way or another. In some genres this works, for example with orchestra music. Here, even though the instrument ranges overlab, we still have some kind of frequency "separation" due to the different instruments, not only due to the seating position.

A lot of synths don't have that separation, but fill up the frequencies unless edited with EQ/lowpass or highpass. Once again, this can work for certain genres, but in pop and rock, where the drums alone cover almost the full spectrum, the bass/chord guitars cover the lower end and middle section, lead the upper end - where to put the synth then? Exactly, into the higher ranges, or cut the low end to not mud up the soundspectrum. And that's independent of the panning.

If you listen to recordings from the 60ies, they're still fairly mono-ish, but you can hear a lot of clarity, due to the frequency limitation.


Sometimes you don't need drastic cuts. Slight roll offs can work too. You still have the full sound of your synth, but due to the volume drop (for example from 500Hz below with -3dB to -5dB), you make room for another instrument.

Same can work if you have a synth that wants to shine through a piano in the section where it's playing (a dip in the frequency range).


Of course, there's still Elevayta Space Boy, if regular ways don't work to make room for the instruments.

[ouroboros]

Oh, we know what those are!

man, let the rest of us in on it!

Seriously? You've been around long enough to know what the A-list, KVR EQ's are!

Electric-Q
Nyquist EQ
IIEQ

I think all the payware is controversial...

I just get so worried I'm not l33t enuf sometimes! Can we add EQ22 to the list?

[bduffy]

Oh, we know what those are!

man, let the rest of us in on it!

Seriously? You've been around long enough to know what the A-list, KVR EQ's are!

Electric-Q
Nyquist EQ
IIEQ

I think all the payware is controversial...

I just get so worried I'm not l33t enuf sometimes! Can we add EQ22 to the list?

Oh yes! And Overtone GEQ totally 0wn3d!

[rockstar_not]

As long as we're sharing generalized EQ tips....

I read a BT interview (don't laugh) where he said he HP filters nearly all tracks in a song at somewhere around 200 Hz, unless they are kicks and bass. It was the one tip he gave in a fairly long interview.

Cracking good tip that is for mic'ed instruments. Vox, acoustic guitars, etc. - I've found that most of my mic'ed tracks benefit from this high pass (not always at 200 Hz, but somewhere around there). I don't record mic'ed drum kits, but just acoustic guitars and vocals for the most part. Tames plosives quite a bit and muddy acoustic guitars.

-Scott

[dalor]

I just made a quick example, all instruments have been 'seperated' by using ms encoding only, no additional EQ has been used. Compare before stereo effects have been applied and after.
http://www.mediafire.com/?b3tjymjx2zj
Far beyond perfect (as its just a quick demo), but it definately helped some instruments to stand out, especially the rhode type synth. No limiter/compressor whatever has been used. Both tracks only have been normalised only.

[Compyfox]

Well, it is more "spreaded out" compared to the "normal track", but the bass still conflicts with the kick (the bassline, that's a copy of the gnawling synth line is definitely hard to hear), the synth in the back is covered with everything else.

Futhermore, due to the M/S editing you created spreading on all instruments, including the bassdrum, which looses it's punch if checked with mono compatibility (due to the phase shifting), and if you listen closely, the hats also sound different, as if they were pitched now (unless they were, but that could have been handled by the drummachine, too - unless it was a loop).

It might work in some cases, but I'd still prefer individual panning and proper EQ rather than putting the material in the middle and then use M/S encoding to seperate the instruments.

[No name]

As long as we're sharing generalized EQ tips....

I read a BT interview (don't laugh) where he said he HP filters nearly all tracks in a song at somewhere around 200 Hz, unless they are kicks and bass. It was the one tip he gave in a fairly long interview.

Cracking good tip that is for mic'ed instruments. Vox, acoustic guitars, etc. - I've found that most of my mic'ed tracks benefit from this high pass (not always at 200 Hz, but somewhere around there). I don't record mic'ed drum kits, but just acoustic guitars and vocals for the most part. Tames plosives quite a bit and muddy acoustic guitars.

-Scott

I can say that, out of any tip, this is one is one that I feel is good for any sort of track, regardless of the different variables in an individual song. I do this to everything.

One more tip, since we pulled some tips off of Kim from esoundz. His tip that putting saturation on everything except the vocal seems to work well for me too. I particularly don't like compressing everything to a T, so what I tend to do is put a saturation on a return, and I send it to every track except vocals. It allows you to get everything to a desired loudness without all the quirks of compression. This of course is what I do, and you should do it to figure out if you like it or if you would rather stick to compression. I put it on a return in the first place for CPU efficiency, as dozens of copies of a saturation plug on individual tracks can take it's toll on my CPU. He suggested Kingston's Retroband, which I have yet to try but will very soon. The tracks Kim shows us sounded good, and I think that the saturation played a part in that.