Making Recorded Songs Sound "Fuller"

gumboots

New member
I have some questions about tequnique. I'm trying to make near-studio quality recordings of about 10 songs of mine, and after making test recordings of all of them, noting what seemed to work and not work, and getting some new equipment (a drum machine for perfect rythm, and clearer definition of rythm tracks, an FX processor for some smooth reverb to blend the vocal tracks into the mix better) I think I'm finally ready to lay down the final versions of everything. But before diving into this final stage of the project, there was one detail about the test recs that I may not have the knowhow (or the technology) to remedy. I notice that on studio recordings, no matter how simple/complex a song tends to be, they have a way of making the sound really fill the headphones or the space around the speakers, and really immersing the listener INTO the song. On my finished recordings, although most of the music itself was satisfactory, I couldn't help but feel sort of detatched from the full 'sonic aura'. The recordings as a whole sounded flat as compared to professional tracks, despite the use of effects, such as reverb, chorus, etc.
I was wondering if there are any tricks, or simple techniques I could employ WHILE recording that would make the finished product sound more rich, full and engaging. I don't have the money to buy any more fancy tech, but I have had some thoughts on what might work. I am looking for some advice or input BEFORE I start recording, find out that I screwed it up, and have to do everything over AGAIN.

One idea was simply employing the FX processor a little more. Just adding slight reverb to instruments as WELL as vocals. I use accoustic guitar mainly for rythm on all the tracks. So instead of just recording the natural sound, which may end up kind of flat, if I add a touch of reverb behind the instruments, perhaps all will blend a little nicer, and the overall sound would be beefed up. I tend to notice this teqnique on a lot of recordings. Even some of the most purely 'accoustic' artists have SOME touch of reverb on the guitars to give it that 'studio ambiance'.

Another thought I gathered, listening especially to some Beatles recordings, was to pan different instruments to the left or right of the stereo, rather than recording everything 'down the middle'. Often, the rythm accoustic will play in the left speaker, strumming a few chords to get the song going, and then bass would pop up in the right speaker, lead guitar in the left, drums on right, and vocals eventually smack in the middle. The teqnique provides a nice effect, but does this also give the audio illusion of a 'Band' playing, with the different players on either side of the listener? Would panning individual instruments make the listener feel more surrounded by the music, rather than just listening to all the sound coming straight from the center? These are just thoughts I've had, but are wary to try before I can get some sage advice. Perhaps with my limited technology, I simply can't reproduce that full studio sound. If that's the case, then give it to me straight, and I'll do the best I can with what I have. But if you can give me any tips as to how to improve the overall ambiance of a recording, I'd be very greatful.
I'm using a Yamaha MD4s minidisk recorder, and the main components of the music are primarily accoustic guitar, electric guitar, electric bass, drums, vocals, backup vocals. Thanks in advance for any help, and my apologies for being so long winded!
 
I'm new to recording myself and I too am very interested in this topic. So I'll leave a real explanation to the more experienced engineers, but I'll try to give you some ideas to go on, then they can add to it or correct me. In regards to panning the instruments, panning will help get a fuller sound but I wouldn't pan whole instruments to one side or the other like drums left, guitar right, vocals dead center, ect… What I would try would be to double track certain instruments, by either copying the instrument (I'm not sure if you have this capability on your mini disk recorder, I'm not to familiar with those) and placing it on another track and adding a slight delay of just a few milliseconds. You can also try recording the exact part twice, or write a part that compliments it and pan one to the right and one to the left, this I think is the best way. When recording live drums, record in stereo by placing an overhead mic on the left and right side of the drum set then pan the left overhead to the left and the right overhead to the right and the kick drum mic slightly to one side or the other (about 10 O-clock or 2 O-clock). On the bass guitar pan slightly to the opposite side you panned the kick drum. Don't double track bass, kick drum or other low instruments because it will only muddy up the mix. Vocals should be dead center and if you have more than one background vocal then pan one to the right and one to the left.

EQ is an important essential to getting everything to blend together. When you boost a certain frequency on one instrument, cut that same frequency on another instrument, because when a lot of instruments have the same frequencies they tend to step on each other. Space the frequencies out and "make room" for the other instruments so they don't crowd each other.

As for effects try to get your mixes sounding good without using any or very little effects and "then" add them. If you can get them sounding good without anything then they will be great when you do add them, but no amount of effects can fix a bad mix.

Also keep in mind that you probably won't get the "exact" professional sound that you're looking for, but this will hopefully get you a little bit closer to it though. I hope this helps.

Here is a link to another message board that had a "Great" conversation on the subject, it's very long and very good, take notes :-)

http://www.audioforums.com/

(click on the forums tab at the top, scroll down to the Production Tips and Techniques Forum, then Mastering Unit)
 
technique is cool,but feel is what sells a song

One of the difficulties with recording by layering the instruments carefully is that the musicians don't interact realtime and so find it hard to (here I resort to cliche) groove or sit down or get in the pocket.
The solution is the rhythm bed;drums,guitar,bass, keys and scratch vocal recorded live to separate channels.With lead vocal,harmony vocals,horn hits,solos etc. overdubbed later.
This is a lesson that should be absorbed as soon as possible,that feel and soul trumps technique and polish every time.Example,Led Zeppelin I.Pagey is Mr. First Take to the extent of leaving obvious clams in the final product.
Don't get me wrong,pay attention to all the technical details.But the magic is in the spontanious interaction of the artists.


Tom
 
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.....
 
...but you can make some decent recordings...just keep practicing and pluggin away...keep reading and learning and experimenting....have fun because thats what its all about anyway.....
 
"Fuller"

By saying the word "Fuller" it just makes me think you haven't recorded enough tracks. . now alot of people will tell you that "back in the old days" we made it sound good with analag equipment and blah.. blah.. not to say I'm the world best recording engineer since I've been doing it for like 3 months.. but layer all of your tracks, and the song will be more full. It's like a cup of water, the more you put in it the "fuller" it will be. I actually just finished my first professional mix. email me if you want to hear it.
 
..and

oops and... Make sure you pan your mix correctly.. bass drum and snare drum dead center, high hat to the right a little, any doubled guitar or vocal tracks hard right and left, etc..
 
gumboots,

i had kinda the same problem. i hooked up my mtr to my stereo system, dialed in a radio channel with music in 'my genre', hit play on the mtr and then kept switching on my stereo between receiver and the aux where the mtr was plugged in. i know i can't compare home studio recordings to pro ones on the radio, but some BIG weaknesses in my recordings became very obvious. the bass wasn't fat and enough, the guitars wasn't clear enough, my drum programming was stiff and cold like a... whatever. the mix was also really crappy and thought i might as well throw everything out the window.

i stripped down the recording to a bare minimum with only drums, bass and no frills what so ever. tried to get all those details down in the drum beat, things you hardly can hear but that make all the difference. i spent half a day getting the bass to sound as good as it can with the stuff i use. only when this basic stuff could really stand on its own as a recording i would start jamming to it, trying out different guitar stuff (i mean, never think: 'it'll sound much better once i get all the guitars down'). i would listen to the drum and bass tracks and i could hear the other intruments in my head: 'yup, guitar here, no guitar there, fill here, vocals come in here, everything here!' , etc. the recordings kind of unfolded themselves after the ground work had been done. to make guitars, keyboards and vocals work well together instead of interfering too much with one another (they're often very close in the soundspectrum making it a big 'mid frequency meeting' being held in your speakers), became much easier. the dynamics just swelled, it sounded like it was air in the recordings.

being a guitarist, it took me a while to admit to myself that the foundation of a recording is in the drums and the bass. it's like drum and bass are the house and guitar is the paint you put on it.

i guess what i'm saying is that there's no effect box, no easy trick that's gonna make your songs fill the speakers and immerse the listener into the song. if you get each instrument to sound excellent you will still have to arrange the instrumentation throughout the song to get that ambience. effects will help you get there if you learn to how to work them, but they will not solve your problem. it's what you put in that decides what comes out.

when you do get it to sound great, it's an unbelievable feeling.
good luck with your recording.

cheers,

mm
 
I'm gonna give you guys a one word answer:
COMPRESSION!

How many times have you been watching TV, and a Commercial comes on that seems like it's 3 times louder, and just really "thick" sounding?

The answer is COMPRESSION!
The same goes for Radio..they compres the hell out of stuff that hits the airwaves.

I recorded for 6 or 7 years, doing everything under the sun trying to get a certain Kickdrum sound, but I could never achieve a "pro" sound-I bought a dbx 166a because everyone kept telling me I should get some compression.

So, I put it on the kickdrum and started playing around with it-BINGO! The thing I was missing was Compression.

Compresion will also help fatten up your Bass Guitar tracks, and tame "unruly" vocals.
Now, I love Compression and Noise gates-the sound sculpting tools/processors....in the old days, I used to lay on the reverb trying to at least make my recordings sound more "pro", but what I was after was gate and compression.


Tim
 
Originally posted by Tim Brown
I'm gonna give you guys a one word answer:
COMPRESSION!
How many times have you been watching TV, and a Commercial comes on that seems like it's 3 times louder, and just really "thick" sounding?
That's nice, but who wants to sound like a commercial???


Originally posted by Tim Brown
The answer is COMPRESSION!
The same goes for Radio..they compres the hell out of stuff that hits the airwaves.
That's NOT a good thing...


Originally posted by Tim Brown
I recorded for 6 or 7 years, doing everything under the sun trying to get a certain Kickdrum sound, but I could never achieve a "pro" sound-I bought a dbx 166a because everyone kept telling me I should get some compression.

So, I put it on the kickdrum and started playing around with it-BINGO! The thing I was missing was Compression.

Compresion will also help fatten up your Bass Guitar tracks, and tame "unruly" vocals.
Now, I love Compression and Noise gates-the sound sculpting tools/processors....in the old days, I used to lay on the reverb trying to at least make my recordings sound more "pro", but what I was after was gate and compression.
Tim
Compression is a useful tool, WHEN IT'S NEEDED.... it's very easy to overdo and squash the hell (and the life!) out of a mix........

(And 'verbs are easy to overdo too, as Tim pointed out...)

See my posts in this thread (https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=23953) for more info on the use of space in a mix...

Bruce
 
Blue Bear Sound said:
That's nice, but who wants to sound like a commercial???


That's NOT a good thing...


Hi Bruce,

I guess it depends upon if you want your recordings to have that "In Your Face" sound that Commercials have-which I do. Playing the kind of music that I do-does require compression..I compress everything using 2:1 as if were no compression (or 1:1), so if I wanted a 2:1 ratio, I have to give it a 4:1 ratio...a trick I learned from Tom Lord-Alge....along with his infamous statement that "Compression is your friend! I'm a compression and gate fiend. (also considering the fact that I'm recording a full band in a 24' x 20' room- no separation)


Compression is a useful tool, WHEN IT'S NEEDED.... it's very easy to overdo and squash the hell (and the life!) out of a mix........

(And 'verbs are easy to overdo too, as Tim pointed out...)


See my posts in this thread (https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=23953) for more info on the use of space in a mix...

Bruce
[/B]

Tim
 
No disrespect Tim...

...I agree with you, but that only applies if the person knows how to use compression in the first place. A newbie wouldn't know what overcompression was if they were setting 20:1 @ -50db!!!

If you're just starting out with compression, it is much better to be very spare with it until you know exactly what it's doing to your signal..........

Bruce
:)
 
depending what software you have .I like to double up(triple even) the track of one instrument and delay about1/96 of a second this gives it a fuller sound for me.
Logic has an option for this and plenty of other ones probably do too.
 
speaking of compression...

since you guys are on the topic, let me ask a question:

I'm new to the recording scene and my band and I finally have a few songs we want to mix down (from ADAT to CD)...I have a compressor (RNC) and plan on using it across the mix BUT I've never really used compression before and I don't know exactly what I should be doing. Please...any helpful hints, tips, tricks, etc..any insight at all into what my goal should be and a "person who's done it" explanation of the settings would be GREAT!!!

Thanks!
 
Before you lash the RNC across your main mix inserts -- you need to ask yourself one (maybe 2) questions.......

Does the track even NEED compression????

...AND...

What is wrong with your mix that you think the compressor is going to give you????


As much as the RNC is a phenomenal compressor, you don't want it in the chain unless it's needed!

As far as a starting point, for a main mix, try a 2:1 ratio, supernice mode, medium attack and release. Threshold at max, then reduce slowly to hear what it's doing......

Bruce
 
Uhm, kick me when I'm down but, in many of the posts the top engineers here say that the most important is the actual recording of the individual instruments. What I mean by that is the quality of each track, making sure that the recording is as WOW as possible for each instrument. Each instrument must first sound "FULL" in its own capasity. The only way to insure that is to put more effort into the recording than the mastering or fiding with effects and stuff.

I would worry about mic pre-amps, mic placing and quality of the mics first, and get a good full track down before one should try and enhance. One can only work with what ones got, what I mean by that is that any effect one uses to better a "sound" (like putting in effects that do not naturally exist) could just threaten to make it sound plastic.
 
Hi Guys,

Great thread, but I really think Tim hit it on the head. With proper deference to Bruce, I have found myself going through three stages concerning compression.

!. What is compression? At this point I was experiencing exactly the problem this thread was concerned with. My vocals, and to a lesser extent the guitars did not sit in the mix because their dynamics were too wide.
Equipment: dynamic mike into a portastudio.

2. Aha! Compression: Bought a 3630, squashed everything, and solved my initial problem. THings sat better, but I lost a lot of life in the content.
Equipment: Alesis 3630 compressor, dynamic mike,
Later: dynamic mike, cakewalk, FX1 (compressor)

3. Compression when needed, in the proper measure (I hope): As I learn more about using compressors, I find I'm compressing less. But on certain types of tracks (vocals & acoustic guitars) I still use it more often than not.
Equipment: Aark Direct Pro, Shure KSM, Wave PP1.
Coming Soon: DBX 500 series!

I'm not sure how I would have come to the conclusion I reached without working through steps 1 & 2. I also found that moving to a condensor mike helped add some space to the recording, allowing me to back off a bit.

Everyone's milage may vary, but this is what I have learned, and I could have easily been the person asking this question a year or two ago.
 
Yikes....

If you are using a 3630 for compression, then you STILL don't know what compression really is.... that has got to be one of THE MOST useless pieces of rack gear in the world...

I'm not poking fun at you here schwa (after all, how could you have known since you were a compression novice!), but you really need to get yourself a real compressor -- for your music's sake!!!!! Suggestion --- the RNC.......

Bruce
 
Thanks for the absolution...

I gave up of the 3630 pretty quickly (I gave it up after step 1), I bought when it first came out ('93 I think), and didn't know any better. Currently, I'm using the on board compression on the Aark Direct Pro, and Waves c1 once its in the computer. The c1 is pretty transparent, and has loads of features, but it doesn't help me when I need to compress pre-digital. The Aardvark is passable, but lacks a makeup gain, so it takes some work to get a good signal at input. I'm going to go with a stereo "gold channel" soon, the DBX 5 series. The RNC is also in the near future, but my Aark makes it necessary to add pre-amps as well, since there's no insert point for the internal pre.

On this forum, I like to bring up the 3630, partially for the sympathy, partially to warn others.
 
Back
Top