best way to retain high end?

[FALKEN]

hey all,

I am going to start a new recording project this weekend. I think one of the main differences between one of my mixes and a mix I hear on the radio is that my mixes seem to lose high end and have low mid buildup. these two aspecs probably compound each other. This question could have easily gone in the "recording techniques" forum or similar, but since our aesthetics are similar I thought I would post here. What have you done in order to solve this problem that plagues home studios?

[Farview]

My mixes tend to do that as well. It gets taken care of in mastering.

[Dr ZEE]

Originally Posted by FALKEN

hey all,

I am going to start a new recording project this weekend. I think one of the main differences between one of my mixes and a mix I hear on the radio is that my mixes seem to lose high end and have low mid buildup. these two aspecs probably compound each other. This question could have easily gone in the "recording techniques" forum or similar, but since our aesthetics are similar I thought I would post here.
What have you done in order to solve this problem that plagues home studios?

What have you done?
...since you've asked, here are some ideas:
1. Stop comparing your mixes with what you hear on the radio.
2. Make great mixes (so they sound great, while you are listening to YOUR mixes, that is)
3. Let somebody else to worry about solving the "problem", after they compare their mixes with yours.
*******
...yeah, I know.... this is "no help"
/respects

[rayc]

Radio often isn't a good medium for comparison.
How do the amp & speaker of your monitor set up compare to the radio?
If what you do sounds good to your ears on a couple of different sepakers, amps, boomboxes, then you're ahead.
Cheers
rayC

[arjoll]

Originally Posted by FALKEN

I think one of the main differences between one of my mixes and a mix I hear on the radio is that my mixes seem to lose high end and have low mid buildup.

Remember that most, if not all, FM radio stations use units like the Orban Optimod, omnia.fm, Inovonics David III, Aphex 2020 and all manner of other units to sound 'louder' than anyone else on the dial, all within a mandated maximum deviation and a frequency limit of 15 kHz (necessary to protect the stereo pilot and the various subcarriers).

Different stations use different processing but generally use a slow AGC, multipole filter to make the level more symmetrical, stereo enhancement, multiband compression, split band or multiband limiting and clipping. After that there's stereo generation and occasionally (particularly nasty) composite clipping. All of this means that the sound coming out of your radio sounds quite different to what's coming off the on-air desk or from the playout system.

Don't compare your sound to commercial FM radio - and don't try to process to make it sound like FM (that actually makes it sound like crap if its played on-air and processed again). Record it so it sounds great to you - get the mix sounding good, everything in its place, nice and clean. Then look at mastering - but compare it to a well recorded CD, not to what you hear on the radio.

[foreverain4]

by chance, are you using the same mic/preamp over and over again for every track?

[The Ghost of FM]

Originally Posted by arjoll

Don't compare your sound to commercial FM radio - and don't try to process to make it sound like FM (that actually makes it sound like crap if its played on-air and processed again). Record it so it sounds great to you - get the mix sounding good, everything in its place, nice and clean. Then look at mastering - but compare it to a well recorded CD, not to what you hear on the radio.

Stop the presses!

That's the best advice you're ever going to get on this topic right there.

Cheers!

[SteveMac]

Originally Posted by Dr ZEE

What have you done?
...since you've asked, here are some ideas:
1. Stop comparing your mixes with what you hear on the radio.
2. Make great mixes (so they sound great, while you are listening to YOUR mixes, that is)
3. Let somebody else to worry about solving the "problem", after they compare their mixes with yours.
*******
...yeah, I know.... this is "no help"
/respects

Actually Zee, That IS good advice. There are so many different ways something can sound that you can drive yourself crazy listening to other mixes. Thinking "OH that snare is clearer" or what not. As my favorite Stuart Smiley saying goes "Compare and Despair"

Not everyone likes to EQ while tracking but I usually try and find a slot for each instrument with eq so everthing has it's little space. Trying to get it nearest to mixdown while I'm tracking. First by getting the best drum sound then getting the bass and drums to sound great together then guitar. ..etc

[FALKEN]

Thanks everyone. All really good responses.

Just want to clear one thing up: by "songs on the radio" it could have been songs in my CD collection; I was just trying to qualify which CDs in my collection..... my bad....should have clarifyed.

What have I done? I have built some acoustic treatment to treat my control room and tracking room. And no- not the same mic on each track. I have a pretty good collection going now, with some akg, beyer, sennheiser, ev, and AT. Even though my monitors are not the best I like them and trust them.

As to each instrument 'fitting in place' via eq, many times I will be recording just one guitar track and one vocal track. I have been recording that way to my 32 this week, and then mixing to the pc. I'm using a 4050 on vocals and a beyer m531 on guitar. going striaght to the 32.

Anywayz, just thought I would chime in. I am interested to hear some more responses.

[citizenkeith]

I have this problem as well, and I'm convinced that it's the acoustics in my basement studio. Check it out:
http://www.ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html

This will help you fix a lot of the problems you are having with your mixes. I've witnessed this first hand: a friend applied a lot of these treatments and suddenly his mixes greatly improved.

Also, hitting the tape hard will cause a loss in the high end.

[Farview]

If the recording is as sparse as a guitar and vocal, you might try different placement for the guitar mic. Someplace that makes the guitar sound a little thinner. Or just EQ everything after the fact, there is a lot of stuff in the low end that is not needed in a voice or acoustic guitar.

[Beck]

Falken, do you rely very heavily on your spring reverb? I know I’ve mentioned that in an old thread. In days of yore those were a limitation, IMO, and could contribute a considerable amount of muddiness. On the other hand some digital reverb programs are too bright and need to be tamed. Anyway, professionally mastered recordings shouldn’t be awash in reverb of any type.

As others have mentioned, the acoustics of the monitoring environment are everything. Great link, by the way, from citizenkeith. I’ve got a couple old EQ and Electronic Musician mags with Winer’s original articles; a lot of the info on his web site. His opening line struck me though when he said even five years ago you didn’t see a lot in print about acoustics. It’s funny because 20 years ago that’s all we talked about.

An untreated room can lead to certain frequencies being reinforced and others suffering from cancellation, giving a false picture of your mix. Great monitors in a bad room = a poor monitoring system.

As for recording acoustics, I close-mic or run direct. I really try to keep the room out of it and create spatial treatment with processing. But that’s because I don’t have one good room in the house. My rooms are acoustically small with terrible ringing reverberation. Of course my main room is treated with Sonex panels and I use a combination of nearfield monitoring and checking with headphones (AKG 240’s). My monitoring sweet-spot is no more than 6 feet in front of the speakers. (Yorkville YSM-1is w/Yamaha P2050 amp).

I’m not sue of your exact circumstances, but I can’t emphasize enough that a combination of a bad room and spring reverb can be a honkin’ mess.

[FALKEN]

Beck and others,

I rarely use any reverb of any sort.

yeah, ethan winer is a really cool guy. he sells the stuff but teaches everything you would want to know to diy it for free. That's what I did. I've got a good RFZ going for my mix position, and some added treatments on the back and side walls for the tracking that I do in the control room. yeah; my rooms suck too. I really should move but now I've got a lease for 10 more months. The whole place is tile so I've got all the "natural" verb I need, if I set up room mics.

Funny tidbit, two weekends ago the woman and I rented one of those steam cleaners from the grocery store to do the furniture and some of our rugs and our cars. so after we did that she decided she wanted to clean the floor in the jam room, so I hadda get everything out of there. when we were done cleaning she went out to the store and told me to put everything back in.

instead I spent about an hour and a half moving acoustic treatments around, taking them in and out, and clapping frantically like a retard. It was great.

it *is* possible that I didn't build the optimum treatments for my rooms and so I am treating the wrong frequencies. but if anything's a problem it has to be the 8' ceilings.

Maybe I oughta just post some pics already.

[Dr ZEE]

Originally Posted by citizenkeith

Check it out:
http://www.ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html

This will help you fix a lot of the problems you are having with your mixes. I've witnessed this first hand: a friend applied a lot of these treatments and suddenly his mixes greatly improved..

Excellent!
Checked it out and got a dose of inspiration. Got a title ideas for new dub-tracks out of it: "U Can't trap my bass" and "Trap this!"
******
booms' 'n bums...ta-ta...booms' 'n bums
Doctor OnTheGo (from heavily "treated" and acoustucally "challenged" LSP's studio) sais: "You'gotta get some cream"

[Dr ZEE]

ah,
P.S.
I'm not trying just to make some useless noise. seriousely.
I don't think that "the acoustics of the monitoring environment are everything." Not even close to "everything".
ATTITUDE IS everything.
If you are going to run around with the pocket tape measure, comparing and calculating - you'll always be at the best a few inches behind.

..well, however, if hanging a pillow or two in the corner makes the difference, - then why not?
/respects

[FALKEN]

Mike,

check this thread

I was sooo skeptical of this. But I built the stuff anyway. I can't tell you what it will do for your specific situation but I can tell you what happened with mine. In the "control room" (office) mixing was easier. I can't say that my mixes are any better necessarily but I can definitely get the same results in a shorter amount of time. And I don't go back and forth from the car to the mix either. Once and its done.

For tracking, its a little more subjective. Vocals sound better in the treated office. In the jam room, the live recordings sound less "live" meaning they are more clear and defined. but I can still adjust the amount of ambience.

But I will say that building them was a total bitch and was easily 3x the cost of what I originally anticipated. If I were to do it again I would do it totally differently.

Its funny, I never really heard the problems till I took all the treatment out.

I've been thinking about it and listening and I think if you want bright sounds you just have to concentrate on capturing it that way. end of story.

[Dr ZEE]

Originally Posted by FALKEN

I was sooo skeptical of this.

Skepticism is important. It keeps a person's mind alerted about perpetual knowledge deficit.
Get informed, but never say "End of story" ...sort of

I'm not arguing against possible "benifits" of effect, that pillows in the corner can provide. I'm trying to point out, that in respect to the task of making great mixes, with or without treatment you are pretty much still there, where you have been before/after hanging pillows or before/after throwing pillows away.
Can you notice the "difference" in what you hear with and without pillows? hmmmm.? - You better notice it, so to confirm that you are able to hear things and so you are able to do work, such as recording/mixing
Now, if you view the "great mix"-concept as measurable entity, which you can approach by matching ingradients and parameters as long as you are equipped with trusty and capable tools and as long as you find the way to avoid environmental interference during the process, then you less likely may have a chance to be bothered by a second thought. Then you more likely will march on toward "succeess" following the recipe.
The elements could be layed out as:
1. Gain maximum control over as many elemnts/parameters as possible
2. Obtain "perfect" sound reproduction system (no coloration).
3. "Eliminate" acoustic environment.
*********
4...?
To follow up, you also may consider replacing your own ears with "perfect" (flat response) acoustic pickup devices.
.....next? hmmmmmm
Would not hurt to replace temporal lobes with advanced sensors and processors as well and , what the hell, the cortex gotta go too !

Nop. No exaggeration here at all. Some day software program will be mixing it all perfectly. It's just a matter of time.
As for "sound engineers", well, they probably still be "clicking" here and there.

/respects

[Beck]

Originally Posted by FALKEN

...clapping frantically like a retard

That would just be a swooshing sound as your hands miss each other on each attempt, which isn’t ideal for evaluating the sonic character of a room.

[Dr ZEE]

Originally Posted by FALKEN

Mike,

check this thread

I was sooo skeptical of this. But I built the stuff anyway. I can't tell you what it will do for your specific situation but I can tell you what happened with mine. In the "control room" (office) mixing was easier. I can't say that my mixes are any better necessarily but I can definitely get the same results in a shorter amount of time. And I don't go back and forth from the car to the mix either. Once and its done.
.....

ah... sorry, I forgot to mentioned that I did check that thread. Had to sort of make myself to keep reading but coud not keep going when have reached:"...get off your high horse and try and learn something.... dont be ignorant man..". I just can't stand this kind of crap.

I don't remember where did I hear it (maybe on one of pink floyd's retrospective dvd(s)...??), - I've heard a comment about rock-music (not word to word): "Maybe The reason why early rock was so interesting and rich when comparing with later and modern rock was because early rockers did not have any rockers to learn from." Another words there were no such thing as "rock music" before them, and so they had to and did base their music on their own "non-rock" musical roots and had to and did it their own way.
I think such comment would be applicable for recording engineering as well.
*********
"Hey, dudes! What's the f*CK are you doing!?!!! what the f*ck are you playing?!!!! Can't you rock? !!! Why don't you get off your high horses and try and learn something....?!!!!

actually: -

/respects

[FALKEN]

Originally Posted by Beck

That would just be a swooshing sound as your hands miss each other on each attempt, which isn’t ideal for evaluating the sonic character of a room.

LOL.

actually my room had this really strage noise going on...u ever do that spaceship sound with an analog delay?

[citizenkeith]

Originally Posted by Dr ZEE

ah,

ATTITUDE IS everything.

I guess you have that covered.

[Farview]

Originally Posted by Dr ZEE

"Maybe The reason why early rock was so interesting and rich when comparing with later and modern rock was because early rockers did not have any rockers to learn from." Another words there were no such thing as "rock music" before them, and so they had to and did base their music on their own "non-rock" musical roots and had to and did it their own way.
/respects

I think this is a good way to approach a mix. That mindset will lead to interesting productions. However, if the listening environment is too flawed, the only place the mix will work is the room it was mixed in. The whole point behind any of this is to have the creativity translate to different environments so you can communicate it to other people. Otherwise it's just masturbation. (not that there is anything wrong with that)

[Dr ZEE]

Originally Posted by Farview

The whole point behind any of this is to have the creativity translate to different environments so you can communicate it to other people.

And so you create an environment in your mixing room which non of "other people" (people, you are trying to communicate with) have. So who's masturbating?
The key is not in what environment you are mixing in and not in how to build "correct" or "right" environment, but in knowing how what you hear in what ever environment you mixing in translates from yours to various listening envirnments (covering at least! those environments, which you target (by musical genre as example)). In simple terms - producer's experience.
***********
and,citizenkeith, why don't you go back to your imaginary classroom?....
...ok, I gotta walk my dog, get some fresh air ...and you know.

/respects

[Farview]

Originally Posted by Dr ZEE

knowing how what you hear in what ever environment you mixing in translates from yours to various listening envirnments (covering at least! those environments, which you target (by musical genre as example)). In simple terms - producer's experience.

I agree. However, the fastest and easiest way to do that is by mixing in an environment that doesn't lie to you. I've worked in basements, attics, bedrooms, crappy control rooms and great control rooms, I can get the job done anywhere. It's always much easier and faster in a well controlled environment. There is nothing more maddening than having to mix against what you are hearing.

And to your other point about "mixing in a room that no one else has": That's the point, taking the room out of the equation. You don't have my living room and I don't have your car. I am not a big fan of 'smiley face' EQ settings, a lot of other people are. So, you are always mixing in a room no one else has, why make it one that lies to you?

[FALKEN]

Look,

the point Dr. Zee is trying to make is one I can understand. Ethan's site reads like you HAVE to have this stuff. Which isn't true. You don't have to. Apparently Dr. Zee doesn't have to. I don't even have to. But for me in my current room I prefer it. and Zee doesn't. why is there so much bickering on this board about personal preferences??? why don't we just argue about analog vs. digital too?