Open sounding recordings.

M

mindwave_21

New member
Ok, I did a few searches on this board and couldn't find what I was looking for.
I have a problem with the boxiness/"sounds like it was recorded at home" of my recent recordings. I thought if I panned the tracks and adjusted levels, I could get the sound that I was looking for.
Here's a recording of a song my band recently did:
Wave Array Music Page

I guess I should say that what I'm A/B'ing this against is Coldplay's "Don't Panic". I realize the songs have different vibes, but I'm just referring to the openness/3D sound of the overall recording. For some reason, when the intro for Don't Panic comes in, I feel surrounded by the sound that's put out. It's behind, above, and around me on a 3D landscape. When I listen to my band's recording, I feel like it's either in front of me, or only 2D (L/R and Forward/Rear as opposed to 3D).

My question is, where do I go from here?
What's the biggest factor of many that causes my problem?
Do I work on the panning and levels again?
Do I need better/different track recordings? Mic placement etc.?
I strongly feel that I'm limited by my abilities and not my equipment, but should I be thinking that (i.e., is gear a limitation)?
Any suggestions or similiar experiences (with a possible solution) would be helpful.

Thanks!

Eq. used:
Mac Laptop with Garageband
Firepod
SM57
Oktava MK319
Other misc. mics (I think a Shure Highball, Audix OM-3, Audix Fusion 6 drum mic kit, and a few other Shures)
BOSS GT3 (some guitar tracks direct)
 
Good topic. I struggle with it too. Here's my $.02 based on my experiences:

I try to plan the front-to-back imaging before tracking. Draw a map of where you want things to be in the 3D field (Left/Right & Front/Back).

I try to use a stereo pair on everything except vocals and bass. The more up-front something will be in the front-to-back image might mean closer mic'ing. If something is toward the back, try a stereo pair of mics on the other side of the room, etc.

The boxiness is probably more from recording in a so-so room. It's often caused by comb filtering.

I would find a good pair of small-diaphragm condensers to use on most sources, and work on treating your room better.

Looking forward to hearing other responses as well.
 
I too look forward to other responses, but I will throw a few ideas out there.

One way to end up with a 2d mix almost guaranteed is to try to mix so that each instrument or voice is the same volume. If you listen to almost any commercial mix, some "voices" are up front and some are not (as alluded to in the previous post). Lately I have been listening to the pixies which has from my listening the drums the loudest, bass is #2, 3rd is guitars and the lowest is vocals. More current trends put the vocals loudest and the guitar the quietest. Most 90's rock had the guitars blasting and the drums drowned out. You sort of have to pick the mix you want and go with it. Everything is always a compromise.

Another thought is movement. Meaning that while the song is playing you want to do volume swings and panning swings and even reverb return swings. bring out the reverb and the drums on the chorus and back them off in the verse, for example. this is by no means necessary, just an idea. from what I've heard on the radio, coldplay has a lot of this.

Also too much compression can really kill a mix. limiting is worse.

most likely it is a million little things adding up. if I had to pick one which is most important I would go with my first comment which is mixing ability. I don't know how much whoever did the coldplay album got paid but I 'm sure its more than I make in a year. A good monitoring system is where I would start. My current monitors are a pair of M-Audio BX8's. They made a HUGE improvement in my mixes. Probably not as huge as actually doing probably close to 100 mixes, but my next investment is definitely going to be in even better monitors than what I have now.
 
So, you are vastly less experienced than the guys that worked on the Cold Play (yuk, hate their stuff...anyway...), and you used JUNK gear in comparison, and you are wondering why your recordings don't sound as good?

Dude, seriously, come back after you have recorded for a year or two, and have tried EVERYTHING you can think of to achieve the sounds you want. By then, you will be much closer, and will have a MUCH better question to ask than this one.

You are closer than you think. But, some of the tracking decisions you made don't lend itself to a good mix.
 
I am going to focus on drums here, since drums MAKE a track for me. They always seem to define overall sound. Big concert-hall drums make for big, epic sound. Small, dead drums make for small dead sound. The rest of the instruments, sometimes even the voice, just fill in what the drums cannot do. I am a guitarist/vocalist so I don't think I'm drum-biased.

The SINGLE most important part of a recording is the material. You have good material. The drums work as...A drum part. The second is the room in which your record vs the equipment you're recording with. Your Firepod/300 dollar Audix drum mics are matched well for eachother. You can't record with 2000 dollar mics into an 80 dollar mixer, but the quality of the preamps and the mics is well-matched. Nothing spectacular, but worthy IF they are matched with a good room. I think that is where you should first look. Get the room to sound as live as possible for a drum kit. I am guessing you recorded drums in a carpetted room. I don't be reverberant, I mean bright. Put some plywood down under the drums and hang some blankets on the walls. You need to create a balance. So get some wood/hard surfaces on the floor and soften the walls.

I doubt you want to re-track though, so this would be my next attempt: EQ.

I am just guessing here, but I imagine that if you cut the area from 200-500hz down by maybe 2db at fairly narrow Q and boosted everything above 5k on a shelf going up, so it peaked at a 4db increase at 20khz, the mix would have alot more air to it.
 
It doesn't sond all that bad for a home recording.

You keep using terms like "problem," and that you're looking for a "solution," etc. etc.

The reason it has that "recorded at home" sound is because ... well, it was recorded at home ! :D I'm pretty much with Fordvan on this one. The only major problem is your expectations. What you have is a pretty good home demo recording. Be happy with it. Keep trying to get better, etc. But don't try and use a major label recording as your yard stick right now. You'll drive yourself batty.

I like the vocal sond, by the way. Nice presence without overdoing it. Is that the Oktava?
.
 
sounds like you needs some eq cuts, volume adjustments, and different effects decisions. everything sounds like it's trying to be upfront, which doesn't work for an "open" sounding mix. Also the drum and guitar tracking leave a lot to be desired. Cut some mids on that kick, man.
 
chessrock said:
It doesn't sond all that bad for a home recording.

You keep using terms like "problem," and that you're looking for a "solution," etc. etc.

The reason it has that "recorded at home" sound is because ... well, it was recorded at home ! :D I'm pretty much with Fordvan on this one. The only major problem is your expectations. What you have is a pretty good home demo recording. Be happy with it. Keep trying to get better, etc. But don't try and use a major label recording as your yard stick right now. You'll drive yourself batty.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was just frustrated I guess. I am proud of this recording, and it is just a demo, I was just wondering if there was an aspect of mixing/mastering I had missed in the process of finishing this recording. Thanks for putting it in perspective.

chessrock said:
I like the vocal sond, by the way. Nice presence without overdoing it. Is that the Oktava?
.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the Oktava. I've had that mic the longest, so I feel most comfortable with it. Thanks for saying that, as I was really aiming for that "up front but not in your face" sound.
 
mrhotapples said:
I am guessing you recorded drums in a carpetted room. I don't be reverberant, I mean bright. Put some plywood down under the drums and hang some blankets on the walls. You need to create a balance. So get some wood/hard surfaces on the floor and soften the walls.

I doubt you want to re-track though, so this would be my next attempt: EQ.

I am just guessing here, but I imagine that if you cut the area from 200-500hz down by maybe 2db at fairly narrow Q and boosted everything above 5k on a shelf going up, so it peaked at a 4db increase at 20khz, the mix would have alot more air to it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the EQ advice. I'll look into that to see if I can hear a difference. Surprisingly, your guess about the room is the exact opposite. We recorded in a room that had all insulation, carpeting, and part of the walls removed (it's in a house that's getting redone). I don't know why it sounds so dead; I guess I'll have to look into that.
 
the thing that sticks out to me in the mix the most is the drums......they soun d like they were recorded from about ten feet away with a condencer mic, in a basment with nothing on the cement walls.
 
Do I need better/different track recordings? Mic placement etc.?
I strongly feel that I'm limited by my abilities and not my equipment, but should I be thinking that (i.e., is gear a limitation)?
Click to expand...
It sounds like you're using your gear well.

IME great gear (and a good room) used well gets a more open, musical sound. Well, as long as it's not squashed during mixing. Next best is budget gear used well. That's kind of where it sounds like you're at. Next best is great gear used badly. And lastly, low quality gear used badly... all too common.

You should upgrade your gear (room acoustics too).

Tim
 
My choice to create the 3D effect is reverb. Room effects. The stuff I want in back gets more of a big-room effect. Makes it seem farther away. The stuff in front gets less effect and the little bit I add is more small-room. Makes it seem closer than the stuff in back. Final mix gets a little reverb, too. My favorite reverb tool is a VST named GlaceVerb. Still not pro sounding, but definately makes things sound less home-made.
 
Well that is a problem in itself. If the room is as reflective as you make it out to be, you get a similar problem. Balance my friend, balance. A wooden floor with a carpetted ceiling is probably the best environment to record a drum kit in. But after you telling us that, I'd reeeally look into EQ...Or less EQ. What kind of processing have you done? Could you get us a mix with just volume and panning changes?
 
I listened to the recording. Really not too bad at all. One thing I noticed is that your drums have that miked-not-too-close-in-a-small-room-with-lots-of-ugly-reflected-sound sound. If you could tame the ugly reflected sound around the drum mikes, that would improve things some. If it were me, I'd mix the vocals louder and the guitars quieter, but that's a matter of taste. Also, looking forward, think of trying to create more space in your arrangements by not having all the tracks be so full, i.e., have the guitar parts leave a little more space. But really, you've got a good start there.

Cheers,

Otto
 
You are really going to torture yourself by A/B-ing your home demo tracks with Coldplay. Yes, that is actually an outstanding thing to do from the point of view of educating and improving yourself. But you are using budget home studio gear and recording in your home. That will only take you so far, so you can't beat yourself up too much over it.

Coldplay can and do use whatever wonderful gear they want and no doubt record in some great rooms. Those two factors alone are going to go a long way toward creating that 3d sound you like. There are no mixing tricks that you can pull that will make up for those two factors.

Better gear sounds better. That seems obvious, but it gets debated ad nauseum here on homerecording.com by people that think the gear doesn't matter, that the budget brands sound just as good as gear costing 10 times as much.

The other factor is experience and engineering chops. Again, Coldplay can and does hire pro audio engineers and has recording studio staff that do it for a living, have tons of experience and are at the top of their game. Couple that with the gear and the room and you have a larger than life sounding recording that is wide and deep. So again, don't beat yourself up too much if you haven't got "that sound" yet.

One approach that I do think a home studio person can use to great effect is the concept of two channels of world class audio. This allows you to record mono or stereo tracks with the kind of audio quality that big studios have, assuming you can find a room or recording space that's good enough.

The concept, depending on your needs, is to buy a channel or two of an incredible mic, preamp, and converter. If you really want to finish that off you also pick up a top notch compressor and eq. The key being that the gear is top quality, no "good for the money" type of equipment.

Once the tracks are in your computer then you will have a much easier time mixing them and getting the sound that you want. The important thing is that you are listening to the "competition" and comparing it to your own stuff and thinking about it. Everything you are doing is right, except the expectations you have for the kind of results you can achieve with ultra budget audio gear.
 
I'm going to second what several others have said here; I just think you're expecting too much. You're mix sounds pretty good to me and with the suggestions you've gotten here so far, you can improve it even further.

Here's something I try to keep in mind when I compare my recordings to major label stuff. I've done session work at several of the pro level studios in LA and I've done a lot of recording in my own studio. In those pro studios I saw gear that probably cost as much as every piece of gear in my whole studio. Plus the engineers in those studios have years and years of experience, not just as hobbyists but as professionals. They probably get about the same amount of hands-on experience in a week on the job as the typical hobbyist gets in 6 months (roughly).

I just tell myself that they'd probably be as frustrated trying to design aerospace fasteneres in Pro-E (my main gig) as I am when trying to get the results they do recording :)
 
no sound card here, so i can't hear your sample, but consider this factor. Musical arrangement. Sometimes you have to let the song breathe. I listened to my old recordings recently, and i was chugging away, jamming things up. I think you can maximize your sound with your equipment if you are careful about what's goin in. I will have a listen tomorrow at a real computer.
 
Recording actually sounds really good with the exception of the drums! Really good. I love the song too...it sounds like a cross between Static Prevails era Jimmy Eat World and Domestica era Cursive...two of my favorite discs.

A big part of what I would do is use the soundscape a little more...everything seems panned in the middle...bring the guitar off to one side and toss a little delay on it that will bounce it opposite. And the heavier guitar that comes in should be quieter.

The drums are a bit stale...probably because of the room and tuning. I'd like to hear a darker snare on this track...go try some of the Puresound bronze snare wires and get a little bit of tape on the top head. If you can, I'd like to hear either a condenser or a dark dynamic on the kick as I think it would work well...and loosen up the heads a bit. And then add a little bit of room sounding ambiance reverb that more make the drums open up. And I'd agree that maybe taming the highs on the kit would make it sound bigger.

But really I'm nitpicking on what I think is a pretty well recorded and very well written and arranged song. One of my faves that I've heard on HomeRec.
 
Nate74 said:
Here's something I try to keep in mind when I compare my recordings to major label stuff. I've done session work at several of the pro level studios in LA and I've done a lot of recording in my own studio. In those pro studios I saw gear that probably cost as much as every piece of gear in my whole studio.
Click to expand...


To add on to that idea and take it in a slightly different direction ...

I've worked with professional session drummers who's rigs were probably as expensive as my entire studio. One guy's crash cymbal (that I worked with) probably cost about the same as my most expensive vocal mic, easily. Possibly even more.

I think a lot of us on this board are very guilty of focusing so much on the recording aspect ... i.e. you've got Sonic Albert touting his "2 channels of world class" and similar obsessions over the studio and the gear, etc.

People forget that the whole world class studio and engineer aspect is only one part of the equation. A band like Coldplay has access to kickass gear on the other side of the mic. Getting back to the session player with the thousand-dollar crash cymbal: You don't think that guy's kit -- along with the fact that he tunes it impecably -- makes a huge difference in the quality of the recording? :D

It does. A LOT. You can record wherever you want and use whatever mic you want. But your drum kit will not touch this guy's. None of our drum kits will ever touch this guy's ... so we might as well go sulk and take up another hobby as far as I'm concnerned. :D Maybe go take up knitting.

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top