Any Advice? Dull Sounding mixes

[Blue Bear Sound]

Re: The Second tune

Alright Ladies and Gentlemen here is the song I really wanted the advice on. Please give it a listen and if you have any suggestions on making the mix a bit better I would love to hear them.

http://artists.mp3s.com/artist_song/2573/2573638.html

Reminds me a bit a lo-fi sounding Stones tune!

You still have a way to go to get the balances right, as well as the clarity to many of the mix elements.......

For example, the drums sound cloudy and over-ambient (too much 'verb?)... the guitars don't sound very well-defined - kinda buzzy in a few spots.... I don't care for the blend of the background vocals... and as I'm getting towards the middle of the tune, that snare is really bad - loud and glaring, and doesn't have the snap it needs!

The lead vocal is not sitting quite right and that piano sounds like it might have been compressed a bit too much.

Aside from sound quality issues - I did notice a few performance issues regarding timing in a few spots......

Tighten-up the performance, rebalance the mix and you'll have yourself a pretty decent tune!

Keep at it...........!

 

[twonky]

Blue Bear, thanks for the response! A few answers to your findings, however.

I not sure how I feel about the "lo-fi" qualifier in front of the Stones reference, as I was definitly not going for a lo-fi sound, so thats leads me to believe that you think the whole mix is Low Fidelity, which I do not agree w/. But thats cool, thats why I posted here.

Overly ambient drums, well they were recorded in the main room of a big ol church in Southern VA, that would explain that, I used Earthworks TC30Ks as overheads and a CAD E200 in the middle of the room in order to apprximate the "Whats Goin' On" drum sound. But no extra verb added.

The Buzzy guits, definitly, the track is doubled one thru a Pro Reverb and one thru a very buzzy little fender something, I cant remember. We liked that sound cause we thought it sounded like a George Harrison lead.

No compressor on the Piano, it is a digital piano, maybe thats the source of the sound?

Timing, well hats off to you for noticing any timing changes, but thakfully most people will have left their metronome implants out when they hear this song!

Anyway, thanks for the feed back feep it coming!

Twonky

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Twonky -- I didn't mean "lo-fi" in the sense you took it...

I said "lo-fi Stones tune" because the song itself reminds me of a Stones song that wasn't particularly mixed well, as opposed to intentionally going for the "lo-fi" audio quality style........

I should learn to be careful of the terms I use, so that they are not misinterpreted!
Sorry for the confusion...


In addition, I think you're right about the piano -- that's what I'm hearing - overcompressed digital samples! I'm a bit hyper-senstive to it at the moment because I'm currently working a project that has a lot of that kind of piano sound in it, and I'm constantly having to "punch-up" the piano tracks because they sound too "flat" -- it's a sample sound quality issue as opposed to performance ('cos the musician who performed the piano tracks is an outstanding player!) But Roland piano samples seem to always be on flat-sounding side.........!

My issues with the drums were two-fold -
...the snare sound is very murky and overly loud in the mix
...the overall capture of the drums is washed out with the 'verb... you've got too much ambience there, making the drums sound indistinct and very distant.........

Contrast that to the flat-sounding piano samples that don't have a similar ambience and you've got a mix that is disjointed.........

While you don't want to use the same reverb and ambience on your tracks, the general idea is to create the illusion that the tracks are cohesive and the musical event occurred in a single "space"... so when you've got huge reverb on the drums, there is some sonic realism that dictates other tracks should be on that same distance plane, and when they aren't, you get an unbalanced mix, where all the tracks don't seem to really blend together well......

 

[chessrock]

Yea, Twonk, that type of drum sound really takes some getting used to, but it is starting to grow on me.

I might want to try a different micing technique next time, though. The earthworks mics you used are omni-directional, so they will pick up a lot of room sound anyway. They probably don't need any help from your CAD. I would try bringing them in really close to the kit and ditch the room mic. You'll still get that sound you want.

Also, the snare doesn't have a real good center focus . . . seems to be skewed to the Right. Would be better if it was more in the center of the stereo field. Boosting around 2.5K might help bring out a little bit of crack in the snare.

I like how the vocals cut through the rest of the mix and fit in to their own pocket. The guitars sound a little different, but I like it. Artistically, I get what you're doing with them.

If you aren't after a low-fi sound, then I think that, in general, you need to become comfortable with bass-cutting and rolling off. I am hearing a lot of bass (and seeing some subsonic stuff) in the drums and keys in particular, that may not need to be as prominent. And clearing some of that up would help the overall clarity of the mix a great deal and bring it to life.

 

[twonky]

Chess and Blue Bear, thank you guys, you both have opinions I trust.

The snare is sort of off to the right you are correct. And you say that you are hearing/seeing some subsonic stuff in the keys? Wow, I am not doubting you, I am just trying to figure that out. Because obviously I want the "piano" to sound nice and full so I dialed in some lows there, so I guess I will need to adjust that.

I am still at the phase in my mixing, where I tend to add rather than cut. Do you think that cutting some lows out of the pianos might define the bass a bit more? I guess I'll just try it and see.

As far as the roominess of the drums, I guess that is just a taste issue, I personally love the way they sound, but I do understand that they may be subtracting some clarity to the mix.

Ok, well, cool you guys have given me something to chew on. I am going to take another whack at these mixes and then repost.

Twonky

 

[chessrock]

Maybe it isn't so much a matter of boosting being bad. Boosting can be good, as long as you are selective about what you are boosting. And there are two ways to boost certain frequencies. You can either boost them or you can cut everything else. Both will accomplish essentially the same thing, but cutting everything else is more difficult but ultimately sounds better.

If you boost around 2.5 k or so, that will bring out some definition to the snare, the bass drum click, and to a certain extent, the definition of the bass guitar.

Think of it like this: Drums have about five primary frequency ranges that contain important audio information. 80 hz (kick), 200 hz (snare), 350 hz (toms), 4,000 - 10,000 hz (hi-hat and crash). The fifth will probably reside somewhere around 2.5 khz (definition to the snare and beater click). Everything else is expendable - sort of. Every kit will vary in exactly where these regions will be, depending on it's unique sound.

The region between the toms and the cymbals (400 hz to 4,000 hz) is a wide area, and it contains a lot of important audio information. Unfortunately, this region is much more important to the vocals and guitars. This is where the drums need to take one for the team. But don't just cut out all of this region. Find the range that gives the drums the most definition, usually around 2.5 khz, and boost that. Then cut everything else.

The region between the kick and snare, with 125 hz or so being the median, is usually a lot of unnecessary muck. Cut it. By doing so, they will sound much better when mixed with the bass guitar, which just so happens to fit pretty nicely within that pocket.

Now, all of a sudden, you can hear much better energy in the kick and snare, as well as the bass guitar. Speaking of the bass guitar, there's another instument that contains a lot of muck. Find out where the bulk of your energy is coming from on the kick and snare. Chances are it will be somewhere around 80 hz and 200 hz. Now, go to your bass guitar track and cut a nice gouge out of both frequencies, and suddently you will be able to see through all the muck and the mud. The kick and snare will be revealed, as will the bass.

Now on to the keys. The problem here is you want to boost the bass to make them sound fuller. Well, in order to do that, you have to be careful of what you are boosting. Anything in the 80 hz range you boost will muck up the kick. Anything in the 100hz range will create muck with the bass. So find yourself a narrow frequency range that will add some beef without mucking up other things and boost that.

It's tricky, there's a learning curve, and it takes a lot of trial and error, but that's why Mutt Lange is rich and married to Shanai Twaine.

 

[ausrock]

Hope you don't mind Chess, but I just printed out those gems of yours. I have 8 tracks of drums done last week which that advice may prove handy for


BTW, your comment elsewhere about "skin armour" is one of two choices.............the other is for the admin here to grow some balls and start moderating this site properly............somehow I doubt that will happen, so skin armour it is.

 

[VotaIdiota]

I realize that drum sound is really coming back in. We were talking that up on the "Wilco Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" thread. That sound is really starting to grow on me now, and it's really because of that particular CD.

I knew you'd come around!

 

[Shailat]

The region between the kick and snare, with 125 hz or so being the median, is usually a lot of unnecessary muck. Cut it. By doing so, they will sound much better when mixed with the bass guitar, which just so happens to fit pretty nicely within that pocket.

I don't agree.
cutting at 125Hz will not get rid of "unnecessary muck" but rather you might loss some of the bottom and possibley the power.
The muddy part you will find around 250-800Hz

Now, all of a sudden, you can hear much better energy in the kick and snare, as well as the bass guitar. Speaking of the bass guitar, there's another instument that contains a lot of muck. Find out where the bulk of your energy is coming from on the kick and snare. Chances are it will be somewhere around 80 hz and 200 hz.

Not on the snare it's not. Below 100Hz the snare freqs arent extremly important although you can get a fatter snare from 70- 100Hz at times. But rather at 150-300Hz... you will find the body of the snare.

Now, go to your bass guitar track and cut a nice gouge out of both frequencies, and suddently you will be able to see through all the muck and the mud. The kick and snare will be revealed, as will the bass.

Although a opposite cut might work, it might also turn your bass into a thin and wimpy sound.

Now on to the keys. The problem here is you want to boost the bass to make them sound fuller. Well, in order to do that, you have to be careful of what you are boosting. Anything in the 80 hz range you boost will muck up the kick.

I disagree strongly. 80 Hz is a great boost for many kicks to add a low power thump.

Anything in the 100hz range will create muck with the bass. So find yourself a narrow frequency range that will add some beef without mucking up other things and boost that.

Again I disagree. Sometimes you have the low solid foundation in the 100Hz in a bass. You can hear it on most stereo systems of manyt kinds and it provides a good feel for the bass on many situations.

This technique has to be thought out more then a simple cut here so boost there kind of thing.
You need to hold the body and the natural sound of the instrument as well. Imagine a thin sounding vocal that was cut to make room for some guitars. You need to combine several things to achive a seperation from compression to delay to panning to reverb to phasing to levels and more.... Not always a cut versus a boost works well or is the solution. You might damage the body thin out a sound, get a wimpy sounding kit...or an exsessive thumpy and boomy bass or kick etc...

 

[twonky]

Piano Samples

Hey Bear, what are you doing in order to make your Roland piano samples sound more life-like?

Twonky

 

[participant]

I disagree strongly. 80 Hz is a great boost for many kicks to add a low power thump.

Sorry if I'm misinterpreting Shailat, but I believe Chessrock was saying to not boost the KEYS in the 80 Hz range. I don't believe he said not to boost the KICK in the 80 Hz range... (IOW leave the kick alone at 80Hz -- don't boost something that would compete with the kick's 80 Hz energy).

Ditto for the other disagreements you listed.

I apologize if it appears to me your post got off track... but... (I'm probably wrong; Chess will straighten this out anyway ) Besides, you seem to be one of MISTERQCUE's favorites -- which means you rule!!!


Chad

 

[chessrock]

Originally posted by Shailat
Not on the snare it's not. Below 100Hz the snare freqs arent extremly important although you can get a fatter snare from 70- 100Hz at times. But rather at 150-300Hz... you will find the body of the snare.


That's actually pretty much what I said. I probably didn't explain myself very well, Shailat. What I meant to say was the bulk of the kick's energy will be around 80 and the snare's energy (or "body" as you put it) will be around 200. Or rather "the kick and snare at 80 and 200 respectively. Sorry if I was vague on that one.

Although a opposite cut might work, it might also turn your bass into a thin and wimpy sound.


Okay, how about "cut just enough to give the kick and snare some breathing room - if they need it - without wimpifying it.

I disagree strongly. 80 Hz is a great boost for many kicks to add a low power thump.

No you don't disagree, actually, because that's exactly what I said.

Again I disagree. Sometimes you have the low solid foundation in the 100Hz in a bass. You can hear it on most stereo systems of manyt kinds and it provides a good feel for the bass on many situations.

Uh . . . are you reading the same post? Seems the more you say we disagree, the more I think we agree! We do agree, because what I am saying is that if you boost the keys at 100hz that you might interfere with the bass, precicely because the bass has it's "solid foundation" as you put, down there.

So far the only thing we actually disagree on is the 125 hz thing on the drums. And that's mostly a matter of taste, anyway. I tend to hear greater power out of the kick and snare if I boost (roughly around) 80z to bring out some more of the kick, and (again roughly) 200 hz to bring out some more of the snare. You can accomplish the exact same thing by cutting out the muck between the kick and snare.

Okay, so maybe it isn't just muck, but it can turn in to muck pretty quickly if there is too much there, expecially considering that the bass guitar has most of it's beef in the 100 hz area (another thing you and I agree on), and could benefit from some added breathing room.

Keep in mind, Shailat (and others), that I am speaking in general terms, and most of what I say are suggestions. Like Shailat says, every instrument has it's own unique character, so you have to play with what you have in front of you.

These are merely some suggestions that I have found work in some cases, and it's a good example to illustrate the general types of boosts and cuts that help improve clarity in a mix. They shouldn't be considered universal laws to be used in all instances.

If anyone is interested, feel free to check out an example where I employed these very cuts and boost that I am taling about, exactly and to a "t" the way I described them in this thread. The tune is called "Stargazer" (2nd tune down):

http://www.nowhereradio.com/artists/album.php?aid=1298&alid=-1

In my opinion, it worked out pretty well on this tune. But keep in mind, it's all subjective, and some of you may think the balance of bass, drum, and keys on that tune sucks for all I know.

And Shailat, I am sorry if my explanations were vague. I do hold your thoughts in high regard, so I'm actually flattered that our thoughts seem to coincide.

 

[Shailat]

Chess will straighten this out anyway )

And so he did....

Besides, you seem to be one of MISTERQCUE's favorites -- which means you rule!!!
Chad

[/quote][/b]

Cant take that as a compliment as EVERYBODY is MISTERQCUE's favorite (unless your FT)

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Re: Piano Samples

Hey Bear, what are you doing in order to make your Roland piano samples sound more life-like?

Twonky

Draw out some mid-range punch with a compressor whose attack/release settings are set to pump with the rhythm/tempo of the song... and some selective EQ as well, depending on the track.... the most effective I've found is using the compressor pumping technique... doesn't mess with the tone, just adds zing!

 

[chessrock]

Too bad you can't get a compressor with a "tap function" like you can a delay.

 

[twonky]

Side chain virgin

So, can anyone school the Twonk on how to use a side chain in the world of plug in compressors? I have the Waves stuff if that helps.

 

[crosstudio]

Twonky,

I've got Samplitude Master and the FFT freq. analyzer will help you SEE what you are hearing... especially if your room has standing waves and such from parallel walls, etc...

Samplitude Master also has a multiband compressor that you can apply to each object. but, before you go messing around with the multiband compression on your final mix, you need to get your individual instruments in the right place.

two things you said stood out:

1)you need to learn how to use that compressor if you want for things to sit in the mix better.
2) boosting the mids on your instruments is causing you to lose the high end because you are throwing the balance of your mix off.

for each instrument other than the bass and kick, figure out the lowest range that you want for that instrument to contribute to and then low-cut it from there.

use the appropriate amount of compression (with the right attack/release) on the individual instruments. be sure to allow enough of the initial instrument sound to come through the compressor before the clamp down or you'll again be throwing off the balance of your mix. i set my compressor attack such that it follows the tempo of the song. for instance, i may have the vocal attack set to a 32nd note, and the bass attack set to an 1/8 note, and the guitar attack set to a 16th note.

get the volume of each instrument such that it plays its role in the song (you do have the instrument's role defined right??? every instrument can't be the lead).

pan the instruments so that they live in their own space in the stereo spectrum. pay particular attention to like sounding instruments and pan them opposite one another (not a hard rule, but a good one).

oh yeah, and every instrument can't have a wide stereo sound.

 

[crosstudio]

hey, i wouldn't mind seeing that also.

i've never used the sidechain of a DX fx.

 

[Kramer]

Twonky,

I've got Samplitude Master and the FFT freq. analyzer will help you SEE what you are hearing... especially if your room has standing waves and such from parallel walls, etc...

Samplitude Master also has a multiband compressor that you can apply to each object. but, before you go messing around with the multiband compression on your final mix, you need to get your individual instruments in the right place.

two things you said stood out:

1)you need to learn how to use that compressor if you want for things to sit in the mix better.
2) boosting the mids on your instruments is causing you to lose the high end because you are throwing the balance of your mix off.

for each instrument other than the bass and kick, figure out the lowest range that you want for that instrument to contribute to and then low-cut it from there.

use the appropriate amount of compression (with the right attack/release) on the individual instruments. be sure to allow enough of the initial instrument sound to come through the compressor before the clamp down or you'll again be throwing off the balance of your mix. i set my compressor attack such that it follows the tempo of the song. for instance, i may have the vocal attack set to a 32nd note, and the bass attack set to an 1/8 note, and the guitar attack set to a 16th note.

get the volume of each instrument such that it plays its role in the song (you do have the instrument's role defined right??? every instrument can't be the lead).

pan the instruments so that they live in their own space in the stereo spectrum. pay particular attention to like sounding instruments and pan them opposite one another (not a hard rule, but a good one).

oh yeah, and every instrument can't have a wide stereo sound.

Thats one of the best straight up and down informative posts I've seen here.

 

[OneWatt]

I second that.

Indeed - very true!