I think I know what I did wrong

Hi Clam. Again nice singing. The seems to be some phasing on the guitar? Not sure what you did to cause it. If you used two mics it could be phasing, but I've quite heard it like that before. Or it could be send to reverb, compressor effect that's out of phase? Just guessing. Nice song though.
 
phriq said:
Almost adding a Wah effect to the acoustic.
Click to expand...

Bingo!

Clipping is something I have learned about and really try to guard against.

I took two guitar tracks ... an original and a duplicate and dialed the EQ differently into each of them hoping it would sound like two different instruments.... then on one of the tracks I loaded it up with some reverb, flanger, and mono-stereo effects... really went overboard. But it was sounding cool in the DAW.

While I was mixing it down I noticed that as I passed the effects guitar volume through the set volume of the regular guitar, it had a "wah wah" sound.... and it sounded kind of cool so I mixed it that way - using the volume knob up and down and up and down.

When I transferred this file into wav format I noticed that it didn't sound as good. Rather than sounding like the wah, it started sounding like a foot on the other track everytime I topped the volume.... muffling the other rather than harmonizing with it. This got way worse when I made it into mp3.

I put a lot of time in to screwing up this song..... but I think I can fix it - though I'll lose the wah sound for now.
 
Well, you just learned what "duplicating" a track accomplishes. If you want something to sound like 2 different tracks, then record 2 separate tracks. All you did by duplicating was make the same mono track louder. It simply doesn't work.
 
RAMI said:
Well, you just learned what "duplicating" a track accomplishes. If you want something to sound like 2 different tracks, then record 2 separate tracks. All you did by duplicating was make the same mono track louder. It simply doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Yep... that's true too. I've been doing it the way you suggested until recently, but I thought I might have found a "time saver" .... you're way right. Same with my voice - I much prefer two takes for fabric.
 
Clam Soup said:
I thought I might have found a "time saver" ....
Click to expand...

I am sure we have all been there ;)

One mistake of newer home recorders is that they tend to "overdue" things. When they EQ, they dont just reduce a few dB here or there, but they tend to CHOP off an entire frequency range. Then when they add reverb, instead of going for a natural sound, they end up singing in a auditorium. Things like this are tough to over come because you always think adding these "effects" will make your msuic better. But often, less is more.

I heard once that the secret to putting makeup on is to make it look like you have nothing on at all. Often this "idea" can transfer over to editing and mixing. When you listen to many recordings, you know there are these effects applied, but they are done in a method to make the music still sound pure or realistic. Often less is more.
 
phriq said:
I am sure we have all been there ;)

One mistake of newer home recorders is that they tend to "overdue" things. When they EQ, they dont just reduce a few dB here or there, but they tend to CHOP off an entire frequency range. Then when they add reverb, instead of going for a natural sound, they end up singing in a auditorium. Things like this are tough to over come because you always think adding these "effects" will make your msuic better. But often, less is more.

I heard once that the secret to putting makeup on is to make it look like you have nothing on at all. Often this "idea" can transfer over to editing and mixing. When you listen to many recordings, you know there are these effects applied, but they are done in a method to make the music still sound pure or realistic. Often less is more.
Click to expand...

The best recordings I have ever made were done last year with a little handheld recorder (Olympus LS 10). There were no effects on the music, but what I could find with the natural reflections off of the walls... single take with guitar and voice. When I wanted less reflection in a song, I modified a styrofoam cooler and mounted it around the little recorder so the capture was all in that space... agreed - less is more!

If I could figure out how to do that same thing with this system, I'd be all over it. Right now it's like driving a new car. You think you're turning on the blinker but the wipers go on.
 
I agree. We have all been there. When I started recording, I thought that the reason every "effect" exists is so that it will be used. So, I applied everything I read about on everything. As time goes on, you realize that less is more, and that if you get as close as you can to the sound you want before you even look at the RECORD button, you're half way there. The next thing I learned is that there are no "time-savers".
 
Hi again Clam. The different processing would have introduced tiny, tiny little dealys in the signal that start phasing. ironically you could get the shortcut effect your after by introducing a longer delay. If you send to about 50ms delay so it sound like two instruments, but before it sounds too much like an echo. This is how George Martin did it. You can keep them together, or pan the clean signal and the delay L and R. A pitch shifter with the fine tune set slightly higher can do the same thing. It doesn't sound quite the same as recording two takes, but it's a fair approximation if it's the effect you want.
 
toad_uk said:
Hi again Clam. The different processing would have introduced tiny, tiny little dealys in the signal that start phasing. ironically you could get the shortcut effect your after by introducing a longer delay. If you send to about 50ms delay so it sound like two instruments, but before it sounds too much like an echo. This is how George Martin did it. You can keep them together, or pan the clean signal and the delay L and R. A pitch shifter with the fine tune set slightly higher can do the same thing. It doesn't sound quite the same as recording two takes, but it's a fair approximation if it's the effect you want.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what I want - I was just trying to fill up some space and sort have accidented into a sound that I thought was kind of cool when I first heard it. I may end up liking it more in it's absence.

At the heart of all of these songs is a single voice and a beat up guitar..... they tend to be thin on their own, so when I hear something that fattens it up a bit, I gravitate that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top