Creating the illusion of distance

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ily Itassi
  • Start date Start date
I

Ily Itassi

New member
Hi. First Post. I am a Tascam 2488 Neo user. I was wondering if anyone could tell me how to mix tracks so that selected tracks sound like they are "in your face" and others "way in the backround". Kind of like Pink Floyd "The Wall" where a plane sounds like its flying right into you and then the crash or scream fades into the backround. You don't have to answer on how to do it on the 2488, I just need to know what I should be manipulating and to what degree. Thanks!
 
Generally, distance is created by a few things.

One is actual distance. If you record everything one inch away from a mic, it will be hard to make it sound distant no matter how much reverb you add, for example. So, mic placement is very important. Which means that it helps to know what you want before you start recording it.

Another tool used to create distance is reverb, either natural reverb from the room you're recording in, or adding digital/analog reverb later.

I'm sure others will come in with other ideas and methods that they use. But what I said above is a good starting point.
 
RAMI's bang on there.


Ambience can be added with reverb/delay tools.
It can't really be removed though.
If you want something very dry and close, then a well treated or acoustically dead environment, and close mic proximity, are the key.
 
I'm interested in the answer to this question, too. For a variety of reasons, I have no choice but to be fairly close to the mike (recording in a variety of relatively noisy, untreated and highly reflective rooms). I use reverb to add distance, but it doesn't really sound that distant. I was thinking of using a combination of fairly strong compression and dropping the low end with EQ to get a flattening effect. Would that work?
 
EQ can work subtley for up/down placement...but for distance/depth you might want to just try a combination of delay, reverb and dry/wet level balance.

Yeah, it's harder when you close-mic, but still convincingly doable if you get the right combination of delay/reverb during mixing.
There are a LOT of reverb types....experiment.
 
miroslav said:
Yeah, it's harder when you close-mic, but still convincingly doable if you get the right combination of delay/reverb during mixing.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Didn't mean to imply it can't be done with close micing. Reverb/delay,etc....can go a long way. Many home-recorders have no choice but to mainly close mic, so effects will definitely help alot.

As a side note, and not the most effective way to create distance. But EQ can play a part. I've never used it for that reason, but I'm thinking that something far away might sound further away if the high's were cut, but it's not something I've ever experimented with.
 
Last edited:
The farther away things get, the duller and less defined they sound. Some of that is he ambience, some is from certain frequencies not carrying as well as others. Midrange tends to carry, while the highs really don't. There is also a dynamic smoothing that happens with distance.
 
You can add artificial distance to a close mic'd track with reverb by using a roomy sound but with minimal decay. It'll sound like it's way back in the room. Rolling off the highs helps too.
 
RAMI said:
As a side note, and not the most effective way to create distance. But EQ can play a part. I've ever used it for that reason, but I'm thinking that something far away might sound further away if the highs were cut, but it's not something I've ever experimented with.
Click to expand...

I also have not deliberately messed with EQ as a localization tool...but I seem to recall reading something ages ago about the whole Left/Right, Back/Front, Up/Down manipulation of the image space...and that for stereo, L/R of course, is easy with panning, Back/Front (or close/distant) can be manipulated with dry/wet processing, which can also affect the L/R if you use a stereo reverb that can also be panned.....of course, levels also play into it...louder always feels more in your face....
...but there was a comment about the Up/Down, as the hardest for stereo systems to create, but that EQ could help give some location information. I think the info said that the highs for Up and lows for down, which seemed to make sense.

Funny thing, the song I just did as a duet with a female vocalist, with both our vocals panned center in the stereo image, her voice just seems to be up above my baritone voice while in that center panned position. You can actually get the sense that it's higher up in the space, so there seems to be some validity to the EQ thing, though as I said, I've never deliberately tried to use it for localization of sounds, and you may be right though, that it also can work for the front/back placement in conjunction with delay.

For more precise placement and feel, you can also record stuff with all stereo mic techniques, and during tracking place your source in its position in the image.
Bruce Swedien did a lot of stereo tracks when recording MJ's albums. It's one of his signature recording SOPs.
I'm sure it takes a lot of good planning and thought to position your sources in the L/R image during tracking, so that it all falls into place during mixing, but I think that's a way to get some nice textures that mono-panned tracks can't.

I've wanted to try it on a song....but never got around to it.
 
Good thread. Distance is tough to achieve sometimes. One techniques already mentioned is dulling the high end, that is effective as high freq material in nature (real acoustic space) carries less energy then low freq info. Try a mono reverb return with low pass filter panned in the same space as source and mixed wetter than dry. If you are a Reaper user do a google search for "wrap around panning" and play around with the amount of mix between voices (channels). I run into the same issue too. I frequently have mixes that are WAY to in my face before some EQ and pan, verb etc. Also remember the speed of sound is a factor. approx. 1130 fps. use this figure to play around with. Move something back 10 ft. 11.3 ms. Short delays are very effective. I choose a delay over verb most often.
 
Thanks for all your excellent ideas. I will spend some tim with these features on my 2488. Somone also said Pan and FAde can give good atmospheric results.
 
a switch from mono to stereo should mimic movement away from you. you'd have to have a nice stereo file to start so when you mono it, it retains a good fidelity. then as mentioned use eq and delays to make it sound far off.
 
Not to hijack the thread...actually, it's not a hijack, it's pretty related.

So, do you guys usually cut some high's off your back vocals just to move them back a bit? Is that a "general rule" for back vocals, or just something that might be done if needed?
 
I never EQ'd with the intent to try and place/move the location of something in a mix...but I do EQ it based on how it sounds in whatever location it's supposed to be in...which is more for the overall balance in the mix.

That said....I have rolled off the highs on reverb in order to pull it back more in the mix.
 
i thought of two more phenomena you can employ.

1. the proximity effect.

2. the Doppler effect.

both are characteristics of distance or movement.
 
RAMI said:
Not to hijack the thread...actually, it's not a hijack, it's pretty related.

So, do you guys usually cut some high's off your back vocals just to move them back a bit? Is that a "general rule" for back vocals, or just something that might be done if needed?
Click to expand...

I've been doing that quite a bit and it usually works. It also allows the lead to have the shine to it without it competing too much. It's simple but it does work
 
I've been doing a low shelf cut with a roll off around 400Hz to 1kHz to push things back in the mix a little but leaving the detail intact. It simulates the lack of proximity effect. Often things with too much in that area sound too close.
 
RAMI said:
Not to hijack the thread...actually, it's not a hijack, it's pretty related.

So, do you guys usually cut some high's off your back vocals just to move them back a bit? Is that a "general rule" for back vocals, or just something that might be done if needed?
Click to expand...
Not me. I EQ my backing vocals the same as I would my main vocals.
 
Not a thread hijack but creating distance for a sound effect (like the Pink Floyd plane mentioned in the OP) is very different from adding space to a backing vocal--like Greg_L I wouldn't use EQ for the latter.

However, for effects, distance is something I often have to achieve for theatre sound effects and it's always a pain.

In order, the things I adjust are:

Level. Well, duh, things get quieter as you move away from them (or louder as they approach you).

EQ: In normal still air, the farther you get from a sound source, the more HF information is absorbed, leaving you with LF info only.

Reverb: The farther you are from something, chances are the number of surfaces for reflections goes up. This means you want a messy, muddy reverb. Also, as with the main signal, it's good to use a reverb that lets you roll of the HF part selectively.

Finally, movement. It's not always suitable but the perception of distance is usually best if you can hear something getting gradually closer (or start close and get gradually farther away). For whatever psychological reason I don't understand, this seems to make the point better than simply having something sound distant.
 
Singing through a cone of rolled up newspaper or what have you (like a mega-phone) can achieve distance in a recording.
There are many other illusion studio tricks. Google up Foley Artistry. Learn some tried and true tricks of the trade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top