Making Recorded Songs Sound "Fuller"

First of all, Shailat... THANK YOU. I hadn't made it back to this thread in a little while, and realized I'd be writing a bit... it's also worth noting, to everyone, that Hard Limiting (or Limiting, or whatever) is basically a compressor with "look-ahead," and so simulates the punch you can't get with compression alone. But that's dynamics, and what you're looking for, gumboots, is range of sound. That's where that four-band compressor comes in, because it reads only that band and affects only that band, and in changing the mix of these four bands (low, mid, presence, high) you can approach the balance that you're looking for.

I didn't think about it until this weekend (heavy tracking week), but getting the kick drum to sound right has a lot to do with your "fullness." When the bass and kick start working together, there's a feeling in the root of your gut that allows you to "feel" the beat while actually listening to the melodies. So, get the kick to sound right and you're halfway there. Unfortunately, I'm not even to that point... :(

Also, play with your reverb. :eek: Most reverbs (one way or another) allow you to change the amount of bass that's bouncing around. I do it by ear, just playing around (cuz I SUCK), and pretty much just "find" the warmth I'm looking for there sometimes. I'll catch hell for this particular suggestion, but I LOVE reverb, and I'm not ashamed to show it off. :D Listen to www.mp3.com/high-tide "Funky Jam" and you'll catch what I'm talkin' about... the song, btw, doesn't have a bass in it, but certainly gets that feel...

Um... oh, SoundCracker: you've had the luxury of messin' around in studios, probably with the added bonus of turnin' the knobs yourself. It's totally different to get paid practical minimum wage and try and approach that level of recording. We're doin' the best we can with what we can afford (and understand!), but it doesn't mean that we won't necessarily find the sound we're looking for. I'm more of a "discoverer" type of engineer more than anything else, and I'm proud to include the "hiccups," imperfections, and spontaneous grace that comes from such "flawed" equipment. It sounds like you might enjoy the article, "What Have They Done To My Art?" on www.mercenary.com 's Police Blotter. That article depressed the fuck out of me until I realized that guy was simply unhappy and blowin' off steam. I hope you're not in the same boat, you're destined for disappointment on that road... (but i do appreciate the info, i think we all do. we just don't have that kind of equipment, or the experience to really use it yet)

Guhlenn-- Hard Limiting IS the last thing I do (for the application at hand). The kick drum thing is something I'm trying out now to isolate the kick from the rest of the kit (yes, the other stuff is there but the punch of the kick still "hits" and I get around the "more other stuff" problem by turning down the overheads and snare/hats.

Peter Miller-- I like your avatar too, dude. If you don't mind, I'll probably copy that "cuban cat" and put it on our mp3 site as a song icon. That seems to be the theme so far... (check it out)

One more thing... we started getting into a discussion about noise floors there for a minute, I'd like to jot down this idea real quick... SoundCracker might attest that sometimes cymbals are processed by adding a wave of pink noise over them, EQed to the general frequency that the engineer likes in the cymbals (totally dropping the mids and bass). I think it gets vocoded in at a low level, adds a bit of "shine" to them. I do use minidisk in recording the source, and it certainly fucks the cymbals on occasion (mp3 is HORRIBLE about it if you've got the wrong encoder). Anyway, if you're lookin' for a way to get the cymbals to shine, try vocoding a little high-end noise in there, it's something I'm about to try here in a bit.

And for another reason why the cymbals are inherently fucked on digital equipment, check out the article at the above link. It basically addresses how three or four digital points of data cannot relay a curve in the waveforms of high-frequency sounds (it becomes very "angley" and "sharp").

I suppose the best way to get a full sound is to start with a tube pre-amp, do something with a condenser mic next, and listen to many different "scenarios" of compression and reverb. (I'm still waiting on the pre-amp, btw... :()

I'm pooped. Off to bed for ol' pointy-ears...
 
sound cracker---excellent points man....


shailot...

i was asking kelly why he/she said hard limiting makes a mix fuller....it was sort of a rehtorical question to someone who said that hard limiting would make a mix sound fuller....your response was something i think we all sort of know, but i was wondering why he said that....also...i can only try to be respectful...there are thousands of people posting and everyones idea of respect is different..so it was sort of a pre-emptive "sorry if im so blunt and dont take this the wrong way" sort of remark...and also....i re-read kelly's cmment about hard limiting and i can understand what he/she was saying now....guess i was reading a bit too quickly...

excellent points about gear, PETER.....
 
I´ve lost on replies...

Hi there.

Well, I´m not a monster on recording, but, folks, did you realize that GUMBOOTS hasn´t posted nothing during these last 15 days? His thread had become to a fight between professionals, and he´s just starting with a MD4 (I guess it´s a little Minidisck multitracker) and an effects processor.

Maybe listening to Beatles records is not the best example to make recordings with digital gear.

What kind of music is he trying to record? Pop, grunge, gothic, hip-hop, salsa or black metal??? Maybe this would be orientative to give an opinion.

I´m sure many of us have recorded lots of times at professional studios full of equipment that has not been used in our recordings. I don´t mind if my sound engineer has lots of tube amps and compressors if I´m not going to use them...

So I think the best thing Gumboots can do is paying attention on a drum track, listening to it and equalizing/compressing/whatever SOLO until he feels comfortable with it; and add another track (p.e. bass track), repeating the process over and over as he adds tracks to mix with the first ones he worked on.

Sorry for this bad English,

Al.
 
Re: I´ve lost on replies...

Onyria said:
So I think the best thing Gumboots can do is paying attention on a drum track, listening to it and equalizing/compressing/whatever SOLO until he feels comfortable with it; and add another track (p.e. bass track), repeating the process over and over as he adds tracks to mix with the first ones he worked on.
Al.
Click to expand...
No... that's not a great idea - it's never wise to adjust track processing while solo'd. You may make the track sound great on it's own, but it ends up no longer fitting in the mix. It's much better to make tonal adjustments to a track in the context of the other tracks surrounding it in the mix.

This (along with "CUT, rather than boost EQ") are two of the hardest lessons for the recording novice to understand and work with - 'cos the initial inclination is - "gee, if it sounds good alone, it should sound great in the mix..." Paradoxically, this line of reasoning doesn't work in the studio...

Bruce
 
Sure

I´m sure that´s not a great idea, but I don´t know if this guy has a mixer... as he says, I guess he´s recording every instrument directly to MD4, so that way he can´t do many changes on every track, as I guess he´s forced to bounce some tracks on his machine to be able to record the rest of instruments... Anyway, I´m not sure. Let´s wait for more info.
 
background

I posted a couple of songs here a while back and have been working on my technique for a while. What I have learned about making a song sound more full and big and not simply layering tracks. We must add to the background. Listen to some pop and almost any type of dance song and you will here barely audible parts; rhythmic clapping, low frequency swishing or whoosh sounds etc. Make sure that the sounds you add fill the spectrum of an equalizer. Put some higher and mid end effects as well. Take the synth you may have wanted to use but is too powerful/weak or whatever and harmonize it in the background as well. Basically once you mute all your main parts, kick, snares guitar, synth etc. it shouldn't be dead silent. There should be quite but background filling sounds in there. These sounds can be omitted during quieter parts which will help give the song more dynamics.
 
Gidge said:
In memory of Ed(Sonusman), i shall reply....If you want near studio quality recordings, you will need near studio quality gear....the big boys probably paid more for one mic than all of your gear put together.....
Click to expand...

You hit the nail on the head. Without getting into a pissing contest from anyone, I upgraded from many well known digital recorders to a RADAR unit. I also upgraded to all Lexicon PCM 60, 70, 80, 90 as well as a bunch of very good parametric eqs, mic pres, new studio monitors etc. I spent a year on eBay. The difference in sound with no other changes in how I engineer is totally dramatic. My new album is very close in sound quality to the later Pink Floyd productions. For all those who keep the old adage "It's not the equipment but the engineer" I say it's both. But without one, you cannot get a GREAT sounding product.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top