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

[Dayl]

Hi Guys,

Need Help Here
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2418038

Instead of going off topic (but not too far)

[Kim Lajoie]

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.

Be aware the using a saturation plugin on a send bus will have the following effects:

1) You can't tailor the saturation for each sound individually;
2) The saturation sound is mixed with the original sound, rather than modifying the original sound; and
3) Sounds will interact and affect the saturation characteristics of other sounds, in a largely unpredictable and uncontrollable way.

I consider all these effects to be detrimental to the mix. I think multiple instances as inserts is the way to go.

-Kim.

[No name]

Hmm, I was aware of the first few of your statements, but I suppose I never considered the 3rd statement. It's worked well for me so far though, but perhaps I've yet to run into that brick wall.

Let me try running multiple instances, and see what it sounds like then. I'm sure your advice is sound though, regardless of whether or not i've run into those specific problems yet.

[Sascha Franck]

2) The saturation sound is mixed with the original sound, rather than modifying the original sound;

This, at least sometimes, can be a desirable effect. There's even compressors with dry/wet controls these days.
I like the "split saturation" approach on things such as guitars. But admittedly, it's more of a different way of doubling them, rather than actually saturating a single signal. You can however use a higher amount of saturation, as you still have the original, clean signal to mix in for more clarity.

and
3) Sounds will interact and affect the saturation characteristics of other sounds, in a largely unpredictable and uncontrollable way.

Defenitely. Becomes really obvious once the saturation is driven hard.

[bduffy]

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.

I had exactly zero success with that. I have Retroband, and I just couldn't figure out what kind of settings would sound reasonable in a mix. I also find Retroband extrememly mysterious! I tried doing it with Ozone, but again, it started sounding like crap so I backed off. I'd have to hear a more comprehensive discussion of it to be comfortable with it - but I do like the idea of adding to the sound, and de-sterilizing it, for sure.

I'd be curious to hear what it sounds like when you send all your tracks to a distorted send! I'm even less comfortable with that!

EDIT: Hey, I wonder if Nick Crow's TubeDriver is up for the track-saturating thingy...

[Kim Lajoie]

I had exactly zero success with that. I have Retroband, and I just couldn't figure out what kind of settings would sound reasonable in a mix. I also find Retroband extrememly mysterious!

Indeed - RetroBand can be very ... tempramental sometimes. It likes some sounds and doesn't like others. You really need to spend some serious time getting to know it to get the best out of it. I consider myself a fairly advanced user, and still I hardly use the transient de/emphasis and mid/side processing!

I'd have to hear a more comprehensive discussion of it to be comfortable with it - but I do like the idea of adding to the sound, and de-sterilizing it, for sure.

It might take a bit of practice (seriously, what in mixing doesn't?). It happens to work for me because my personal taste in sound veers towards the hairy and dirty.

-Kim.

[Kim Lajoie]

2) The saturation sound is mixed with the original sound, rather than modifying the original sound;

This, at least sometimes, can be a desirable effect. There's even compressors with dry/wet controls these days.
I like the "split saturation" approach on things such as guitars. But admittedly, it's more of a different way of doubling them, rather than actually saturating a single signal. You can however use a higher amount of saturation, as you still have the original, clean signal to mix in for more clarity.

Indeed, this is how RetroBand works - by adding (or subtracting!) a focussed distortion to the original signal. Using a send bus is just a roundabout way of doing that.

-Kim.

[bduffy]

I had exactly zero success with that. I have Retroband, and I just couldn't figure out what kind of settings would sound reasonable in a mix. I also find Retroband extrememly mysterious!

Indeed - RetroBand can be very ... tempramental sometimes. It likes some sounds and doesn't like others. You really need to spend some serious time getting to know it to get the best out of it. I consider myself a fairly advanced user, and still I hardly use the transient de/emphasis and mid/side processing!

I'd have to hear a more comprehensive discussion of it to be comfortable with it - but I do like the idea of adding to the sound, and de-sterilizing it, for sure.

It might take a bit of practice (seriously, what in mixing doesn't?). It happens to work for me because my personal taste in sound veers towards the hairy and dirty.

-Kim.

Yeah, I guess I'l have to see whether I'm dirty or hairy (Dirty Harry?!?) or something else. It's just a little freaky to get a mix to that point, then go process every single track; lots of new files, and then you'd have to go back and start over if you mess up. But I guess we be thankful we live in the era of large drives! And like you say: practice. Don't I know it.

[Kim Lajoie]

It's just a little freaky to get a mix to that point, then go process every single track; lots of new files, and then you'd have to go back and start over if you mess up. But I guess we be thankful we live in the era of large drives! And like you say: practice. Don't I know it.

I don't do any offline processing - it's all realtime.

Mind you, my rig is powered by an AMD dual core 4800. It lets me do crazy things like my current song I'm working on - about 30 Voxformers so far, and I'll probably add another 10 more and end up with as many RetroBands as well (never mind the 24 SampleTank2 tracks, four guitar tracks with Amplitube2 each, and about 20 vocal tracks, and various FSU processes, all running realtime). I'm planning to add some acoustic guitars and more voices too... I might be going a little overboard adding the orchestral strings.

-Kim.

[Kingston]

Indeed, this is how RetroBand works - by adding (or subtracting!) a focussed distortion to the original signal. Using a send bus is just a roundabout way of doing that.

-Kim.

That's a decent nutshell you put it in, but the add + subtract thing isn't as straightforward as it may seem, which is also the reason it's so temperamental. You may think you're only adding distortion, when in fact it's already subtracting a sideband at the same time. There goes the control. That send trick is a very clever thing to do by the way.

for heavy technical details google "class A/B switching distortion".


I fully admit I didn't manage to make the controls as intuitive as I wanted to. During the GUI design phase the thing mutated and grew a second head... and started speaking chinese when I did my best to teach it english.


Sorry.

[bduffy]

It's just a little freaky to get a mix to that point, then go process every single track; lots of new files, and then you'd have to go back and start over if you mess up. But I guess we be thankful we live in the era of large drives! And like you say: practice. Don't I know it.

I don't do any offline processing - it's all realtime.

Mind you, my rig is powered by an AMD dual core 4800. It lets me do crazy things like my current song I'm working on - about 30 Voxformers so far, and I'll probably add another 10 more and end up with as many RetroBands as well (never mind the 24 SampleTank2 tracks, four guitar tracks with Amplitube2 each, and about 20 vocal tracks, and various FSU processes, all running realtime). I'm planning to add some acoustic guitars and more voices too... I might be going a little overboard adding the orchestral strings.

-Kim.

Holy GOD you are kidding!!!

Man, I tank out with a few insert EQs and a couple of decent reverbs. Good lord...I need to sit down. Oh wait, I am.

[bduffy]

Indeed, this is how RetroBand works - by adding (or subtracting!) a focussed distortion to the original signal. Using a send bus is just a roundabout way of doing that.

-Kim.

That's a decent nutshell you put it in, but the add + subtract thing isn't as straightforward as it may seem, which is also the reason it's so temperamental. You may think you're only adding distortion, when in fact it's already subtracting a sideband at the same time. There goes the control. That send trick is a very clever thing to do by the way.

for heavy technical details google "class A/B switching distortion".


I fully admit I didn't manage to make the controls as intuitive as I wanted to. During the GUI design phase the thing mutated and grew a second head... and started speaking chinese when I did my best to teach it english.


Sorry.

Hey, the thing challenges me to figure it out. And I can make it sound good on tracks. I think.

[kilroy]

You know, I have to say...when I read some of the posts on this forum, I am absolutely *stunned* at the number of plugins some of you lot use.





Like...bollock punching stunned, kind of stunned.

[Kim Lajoie]

You know, I have to say...when I read some of the posts on this forum, I am absolutely *stunned* at the number of plugins some of you lot use.





Like...bollock punching stunned, kind of stunned.

Ain't modern technology great?

-Kim.

[bduffy]

Remind me to get a dual core.