Working with digital sound

[TonyCrazyMan]

Hi!

 

For a while now I've been experimenting with mixing and sound quality. I've learned a lot but now I'm feeling stuck on a plateu. Basically the only time I get forward in sound quality is when I try some new plugin or similar thing that affects the sound. Basically I don't know what effects to apply on what and when. Yesterday I tried some new theories of mine. The goal was to notice that by getting the drums in the back (by adding much reverb,compression and chorus, panned center) I would achieve a deeper sound. It didn't have the effect I was thinking it would have, it just became irritating to listen to. My weakest part of mixing is the use of EQ effects. When I apply an EQ effect it feels like I'm adding tons of distortion too and I don't know which type of EQ to apply when.

 

What should I do to break this plateu? How can I get better control over the use of the EQ? Basically I tend to add too much bass, too little mids and too little highs. When I then adjust the EQ to meet the needs I end up with a blurry distortion type of sound, it's really noisy! (I use EQ in waves platinum bundle) I listen in two speaker systems: Mackie HR824 studio monitors and a Denon 5.1 Surround System. The sound in these two systems is really totally different. In the Mackie HR824 I hear much more highs and little less lows, in the Denon I hear less highs, a little more lows and much more mids. I've tried tweaking the settings of the Mackie monitors but I don't know if it has helped... I never listen to these systems at the same time, maybe I should start doing that to get something "in between"?

 

I would like to find some information on how you should think as a mixing engineer, what tools you want to use when, what digital plugins are worth having in the chain etc... I don't yet use microphones when I record, I only record my keyboards and electric guitar.

 

Well, right now I will visit the local library and read some studio magazines, maybe I'll find some clues... Please help me break the plateu I'm on!

[where02190]

The key to great tracks is capturing the sound as close to the original as possible. right mic-pre-converter, mic placement, tuning, musical style, dynamics, all play a vital role.

 

As a tracking engineer, my goal is to get tracks that sound great with only two controls, pan and volume. I NEVER eq when tracking, that's for mix. I use little to no dynamics when tracking, unless I need the dynamic headroom. Of course I never ever print effects to a track either, with the exception of electric guitars that have a nice amp spring reverb, or a specific effect they know they want.

 

Great tracks in means less work to get them to gel in the mix. A minute touch of eq, a slight hint of dynamics processing, and your tracks spring to life. I utilize alot of room sounds, elminiating the need for artifical reverbs drastically, especially on drums and percussion.

 

It all starts at the beginning. if it doesn't go in right, it'll be a battle to the end.

[TonyCrazyMan]

 

Originally posted by where02190 The key to great tracks is capturing the sound as close to the original as possible. right mic-pre-converter, mic placement, tuning, musical style, dynamics, all play a vital role. As a tracking engineer, my goal is to get tracks that sound great with only two controls, pan and volume. I NEVER eq when tracking, that's for mix. I use little to no dynamics when tracking, unless I need the dynamic headroom. Of course I never ever print effects to a track either, with the exception of electric guitars that have a nice amp spring reverb, or a specific effect they know they want. Great tracks in means less work to get them to gel in the mix. A minute touch of eq, a slight hint of dynamics processing, and your tracks spring to life. I utilize alot of room sounds, elminiating the need for artifical reverbs drastically, especially on drums and percussion. It all starts at the beginning. if it doesn't go in right, it'll be a battle to the end.

 

 

Thanks so much for helping me out here! I don't know what tracking is. So I should focus more on what's going in than before. Since I don't use any mics I don't think this is an issue for me right now even though it might have been if I would have miced the keyboard. However, there are treble/bass/effects/eq/compressor on most of the sounds I record so maybe I have to first of all clean it up some and then focus on the EQ setting in the keyboard to make the sound natural and soft. I hate sharp/hard/unnatural rhodes pianos, I have noticed though that much of this sharpness is really inside the samples so I can only polish it by using EQ techniques. Sometimes the compressor can make it softer too.

 

But what you are saying makes sense and seems important. When an instrument is recorded in the keyboard I really don't have any control over the EQ settings, so in this way I probably end up with a mix that is very unbalanced EQ wise, which puts lots of demands on the EQ in the mixing phase, which in combination with my limited EQ skills will result in mud. I think you pointed out something really important! Of course I don't want to lose any natural characteristics of the sound by EQing too hard in the keyboard before I record, but I just have to smooth it out a little to make the EQ tweaking a lot easier in the mixing phase. So I will try focusing a little more on the tracking, getting the signal loud enough, playing with presets that are clean, cut away sharp peaks in the EQ and try to get the sound as natural as possible without ruining the sound quality.

 

Tonight I've been reading a book and recorded new sound samples. I start to realise that it's in the EQ department where I have to improve in order to create a better result from here. I am now sure my EQ skills are very low but I realise I am heading towards the right direction now! I might also have been doing things in the wrong order. I have to panpot before I use effects.

 

Here is my plan, for breaking my plateu:

 

1. Focus more on tracking, especially doing things in the correct order. Panning should take place early in the mixing process since it can automatically eliminate EQ issues that otherwise would have been necessary to process. Since EQ seems to be extremely important and extremely difficult, I have to start doing things early in the process that might actually automatically eliminate certain EQ related issue. A slight compressor might smooth it out a little going in.

 

2. I have to learn the sound of different frequencies as well as learn how to create a certain sound or to eliminate it so I can succesfully apply the EQ effect on the tracks I want. Basically I have to learn what frequencies should be used on what instruments where.

[Kiwiburger]

I frequently hear comments about using pan to solve eq problems. Even from people who should know better.

 

Your mixes should always be mono-compatible - so have a little think about what that means.

 

Try to get things right from the source. I guess you are talking about keyboards and samples, more than mic's, but the principles are still the same. You say you don't have any control over the keyboard sound - but I would suggest you have the most control at the keyboard end. Examples:

 

Don't compress audio if you haven't compressed midi first.

Don't savagly eq with software, if you can tweak the synths filter.

Don't pitch shift, if you can detune the sample.

[Kiwiburger]

What is your keyboard?

 

Do you record in mono or stereo? Often its better to turn off the keyboard effects, because cheesy 16 bit effects are often way inferior to some of the excellent freebie VST effects which are all 32 bits to start with. That means you can often record in mono.

 

Do you maximise the keyboard volume, to maximise the signal to noise ratio? Even sounds that you will have lower in the mix should be recorded as hot as you can. That way, when you lower the fader, you lower the noise floor too.

 

Are you recording midi notes? If not, you can really tidy up your recording by learning midi and being able to correct mistakes, compress midi velocity data, quantise (carefull!). Even transpose - if you can solo better in a different key, why not.

 

EQ can't solve bad arrangements or bad instrumentation.

 

If you have to cut or boost more than 6dB, seriously question what you are trying to achieve. If you are boosting more than cutting - serious question what you are trying to achieve.

 

Generally, the sounds coming from keyboards are compressed to hell. So seriously question the use of compression on midi sounds.

 

If you have a mic - try mic'ing up some keyboard sounds. It can add a real dimension that might work for you, or not - hard to say.

[where02190]

Agreed, mono compatibility should always be considered. Many keyboards that claim to be stereo are really dual mono with one side out of phase, which, when colapsed to mono, simply dissapear.

 

It doesn't matter if you are recording a source from mic or direct, getting the correct tone going in is crutial.

[TonyCrazyMan]

Ok thanks, let's see here what conclusions I can draw from your informative replies. BTW, I record with the Yamaha Tyros keyboard, that's a very professional sounding keyboard with a great DSP engine (even though it is in 16-bit)

 

Let me first tell you what I HAVE tried. Because of the issue with "big mono" I have lately merged the stereo track into a mono signal and instead overdubbed the track to another track with a 3 ms delay. I lower the volume on the slapback track about 1 dBFS and usually pan the left to point to 10 and the right channel to point to 4 and the other way around to create balance. I also vary this pan ratio between different elements in the mix as much as I can to not get tracks fighting for their frequencies. Some instruments like the bass and the kick drum are set at about 10%L and 10%R, just to have them centered but with some space. From doing this I noticed I was actually getting about the same kind of stereo effect as when I record in stereo, only not quite as wide and without heavy phasing/cancellation, which seemed to be working better when adding more tracks. So I noticed this technique might actually work. I read that you could cut some mid frequencies on the slapback channel to create the realism of having the head taking out some of the sound... I haven't tried that yet.

 

So I should pay attention to the output volume on the keyboard to maximize the signal to noise ratio. I have to test that to see if there's any difference. It's a good point because I guess theoretically I can lower the noise floor by getting out as much amplitude of the bet soudning pre amplifier in the chain, maybe the sound source, as I can and then I wouldn't have to trim the signal as much in the mixer which then would yield a better signal-noise ratio. This is not true though if the quality of the pre amplifier in the keyboard is worse than the pre amplifier in the analog Mackie 1604 VLZ-PRO mixer. Then I would actually win by taking out as little amplitude as possible from the Tyros keyboard and amplify the signal much in the Mackie mixer. To tell you the truth I am not sure if the pre-amplifier in the Yamaha Tyros is better than the pre amplifier in the Mackie mixer. What's your thoughts about this? Tonight I will test recording with the output level on the keyboard set to max and see if I get a cleaner and better result that way. I expect to not hear any difference though...

 

BTW, I have several times recorded my keyboard as dry as I can, however lately I found out that I might actually get a little better result by using the built-in compressor, I noticed that I was able to get a fatter accoustic piano sound that way... But this might be very element sensitive, I might actually win by not using the compressor on so many different instruments.

 

Let me tell you about what happened yesterday. I was actually for the first time getting an unboxed sounding mix! The result was really completely different, much more clear and balanced, actually much more professional - like! A little louder too! That made me realise a bit more that the RME Fireface 800 AD converter might actually be better than I've thought before... That or the keyboard or the way I play seems to emphasize the 400 Hz area, because when I took a parametric EQ and lowered the 400 Hz band with 5 dBFS the boxyness dissapeared! That's when I realised EQing is what I'm bad at and need to improve in order to get a more balanced mix and better sound quality.

 

Today I will try some other EQ techniques as well. I will try to cut off at 100 Hz on tracks that are not using these frequencies so much to get some room for the kick drum and the bass guitar. This will hopefully result in a little less boomy and muddy sound picture and hopefully give me a little louder result. One thing I will try too is to not gain as much as I usually do in the mid/treble range, but rather cut other lower problem frequencies instead to avoid phase shifting. This should have a similar effect as when I would gain these frequencies, only now I am able to control the EQ more because of not introducing phase shifting in the mix.

 

I have realised that currently I can improve my sound further by becoming more skilled at using the EQ and also by maximizing the quality of the input signal as well as avoid recording all tracks in stereo. Right now I will avoid using the pan to compensate for bad EQ. Instead I will focus on becoming good at using the EQ no matter what. I think using the EQ properly is really one of the keys to a great sounding record!

 

Let's see what I learn tonight!

 

Thanks for the help guys!

[Will Chen]

Man, your posts are so long!!!!!!

 

It's great to see someone with the level of enthusiasm and willingness to experiment that you posess. If you are constantly tweaking the pan, radically boosting/cuting EQ, adding multiple layers of compression, applying false stereo imaging with modulation and delay, and constantly adjusting for phase issues just to make a piano sound like a piano then you are missing the point. As I progressed through my learning curve I began stripping away many of the bad habits I had developed for overprocessing sound. There is a time and place for all the techniques you are uncovering, the secret is knowing when to use them.

 

Parden the Zen quote but: If you cannot hear the truth, where do you expect to find it?

[The Audio Cave]

The key to great tracks is capturing the sound as close to the original as possible. right mic-pre-converter, mic placement, tuning, musical style, dynamics, all play a vital role. As a tracking engineer, my goal is to get tracks that sound great with only two controls, pan and volume. I NEVER eq when tracking, that's for mix. I use little to no dynamics when tracking, unless I need the dynamic headroom. Of course I never ever print effects to a track either, with the exception of electric guitars that have a nice amp spring reverb, or a specific effect they know they want. Great tracks in means less work to get them to gel in the mix. A minute touch of eq, a slight hint of dynamics processing, and your tracks spring to life. I utilize alot of room sounds, elminiating the need for artifical reverbs drastically, especially on drums and percussion. It all starts at the beginning. if it doesn't go in right, it'll be a battle to the end.

 

Listen to where01290...

 

He knows of what he speaks.

 

Lawrence

[TonyCrazyMan]

So I went into my home recording studio and guess what, it ended with a new best sound quality record! Much thanks to your great advices Kiwiburger I was really able take a huge step forward in mixing quality this evening! Just by setting the volume on the keyboard to the max it felt like the dynamic range was much better!

 

The EQ is so extremely important in recording! When it comes to EQ it seems to be an effect that you need to tweak throught the whole recording process, it's not something you set once, a little and then it's good. Even though there are certain frequency ranges that are very effective to target it seems like the dB you have to apply is rather different from times to times. I noticed that the best way of succeeding with the EQ was actually to use your ears and really try different things against an idea that you have. If you are constantly aware of the worst sounding part of the frequency range you constantly have something to improve. Sometimes you end up with a weird frequency curve and it sounds weird too, then it's time to reset the EQ and start over. I also noticed that the higher up on the frequency range the more careful you should be with increasing amplitude on a certain band. Instead of increasing the top a better way was to decreasing the bottom marginally. I got the feeling that doing a lot of EQ on the tracks will actually make the sound quality worse, so for instance cutting 5 dB at 400 Hz with low bandwidth could be more useful than a combination of modifications on other bands. Another thing I learned was that I tended to get better result by cutting instead of boosting and by cutting many bands close to each other you would get another type of sound whereas boosting some EQ level could actually just color the tone in a certain way.

 

When it comes to EQ I think you should be really free in the way you work. Try to get a good picture of how you want every element to sound and tweak against that, first in solo then in group. Also pay attention to different notes played and the way the EQ effects them. You could for instance boost in the 200 - 250 Hz area to make the electric piano thicker and think the electric piano sounds great when you all of a sudden notice that a note is breaking through the whole mix, then it's time to lower the amplitude a little on the band you had been boosting until it's not breaking through. I also found it useful to tweak against different volumes and different speaker systems, actually I was able to get a much better result by combining the speaker systems. However I noticed that this was easy to fail on because if the volume on each system is not at the correct level you will actually not be able to take advantage of the speaker combination and you get the opposite effect. I also tried a couple of professional methods in doing EQ. One was to cut off the whole bottom end and start tweaking in the middle. After that you would marginally start increasing the bottom until it sounds full enough yet not too muddy or boomy. Then in the end you would increase the high frequencies to get in some air. I thought this was really hard because it felt like there were certain relationships between different bands so when I started to increase the bottom I also wanted to lower some mids... Another technique I tried was to use fishing, for instance cutting a band 8 dB and then search for the right frequency for such a cut. I thought that technique was more difficult than using your ears and target the area that seemed to be too loud.

 

I tested recording the stereo sampled piano in mono, but I noticed that it was not as good sounding when I tried to create a stereo image from a pair of mono tracks. I would say using EQ is more important after effects are applied than before, even though you should EQ both before and after.

 

To sum it all up I think you need to learn the characteristics of different sounds so that you can actually tell how much lows, mids, highs that are present and know how to achieve a certain sound from such a beginning.

[where02190]

Yes eq is important throughout the process, but when tracking don't eq the input to get the sound, eq the source. This happens via amp tone controls, mic and preamp selection, position of the mic, room environment, string selection, head selection and tuning, etc.

 

Console/preamp eq is for mixing, not tracking imho. Less is more, mic-preamp-converter-record medium.

[The Audio Cave]

The most difficult thing to teach a person new or inexperienced to recording is to leave things alone. With all of the knobs and buttons calling it's sometimes hard to not just grab something.

 

One thing I was taught about eq early on was this...

 

"Never grab an eq control unless you know what you want to do."

 

Now, you may not know what exact freq or Q you'll eventually use but you should have a specific intent. Reduce masking, more precense, less muddy, or some specific reason for turning an eq knob.

 

If not leave the eq alone until you do. Your recordings will sound much more natural.

 

Lawrence

[TonyCrazyMan]

 

Yes eq is important throughout the process, but when tracking don't eq the input to get the sound, eq the source. This happens via amp tone controls, mic and preamp selection, position of the mic, room environment, string selection, head selection and tuning, etc.

 

 

 

The most difficult thing to teach a person new or inexperienced to recording is to leave things alone. With all of the knobs and buttons calling it's sometimes hard to not just grab something. One thing I was taught about eq early on was this... "Never grab an eq control unless you know what you want to do." Now, you may not know what exact freq or Q you'll eventually use but you should have a specific intent. Reduce masking, more precense, less muddy, or some specific reason for turning an eq knob. If not leave the eq alone until you do. Your recordings will sound much more natural.

 

 

These are great advices, they match pretty well with what I've read about it in the Mixing Engineer's handbook. Thanks! A part of this is because there are dithering issues involved in amplitude changing effects(because of the digital quantization rounding errors), even though dithering in 24-bit processing is not as necessary it still can make difference if you add a lot of effects on many tracks. Also, you don't want an unnatural sounding instrument after you've recorded and EQed, it's much better to try achieving a natural sound and eliminate EQ issues by using a good recording technique. But according to the pros one should not be afraid of using the EQ much if something requires that. EQ has much to do with what kind of sound you want to achieve on a certain element together with other elements in the mix. Sometimes a well recorded instrument can be very unbalanced because it occupies room for other instruments. Then you need to EQ to make some room for the instrument to sound on instead of having them to fight for frequencies.