Dead vs Echoey?

T

TheAquired

New member
Hi
I have worked very hard taking my little space I had and turning into the best acoustic space I could. It is pretty dead. I would say there is an air to it, but no reverb or echo per say.

My friend, who is also into recording and has a larger space and much fancier equipment, is using a pretty much untouched space that echoes when you walk in it. (It has wooden floors). He complained that my room was much too dead to be any good as a tracking environment. He insisted that his room was almost perfect, just needed to damped it a tiny bit.

So what do you guys say? Have I done myself out of a quality tracking space? Or is he just trying to make his tracking environment seem like its better?

I would appreciate all forms of feedback or comments :)
Thanks!
 
TheAquired said:
My friend ... has a larger space
Click to expand...

That's the key: Large rooms can sound good with more ambience and reverb. Small-room ambience sounds lousy - boxy, hollow, and off-mic unless the mics are very close. You can easily add good quality reverb and ambience when mixing, but you can't remove the lousy sound of a small room.

--Ethan
 
Yeah.. Coming from basically a smallish' situation, I'm totally jealous of rather than being boxed’ in, having the option of an open sounding space. You can always set up for tighter control when you want it!

I guess there's always that rig Bob Weir went with -deadened and some sort of variable ambience souround 'space simultaion..
..$$$$$

...Got bucks'?
;)
 
thanks for that guys :) well, I consider his room to have a bad amount of reverb as it seems like you couldnt possibly get a recording that didnt have amounts of bleed coming through. We recorded drums at his place once, and they had large amounts of bleed.

I completely understand what you are saying, but the other half of my question is, do I have a non ideal tracking room because there is no reverb?
 
I am not sure I would equate the term 'bleed' having anything to do with a room that drums are recorded in. Not in the way I record anyway. Bleed is something that actually works in a beneficial way, when recording drums. Well, unless you are doing new metal type stuff that most drums are replaced anyway. Even then, the natural sound of a room can give life to a recording.

I have recorded in, and worked in studios with completely dead rooms. It was a nightmare in my opinion. It was almost impossible to create a sense of space with VST effects. Actually, I will change that to TOTALLY impossible.

My current drum room is rather small (13X26'X9' tall). But I have an open joist ceiling and 3 concrete walls and floor in basement. I stuffed the whole ceiling with Roxul 80 4" thick insulation, then covered with cloth. I added 5 2X4'x4" panels on the walls to tame the flutter echo. No bass traps. The room has a live feel to it, and IMO, sounds bigger than it is. When I use a room mic, it actually gives something to the drum mix. A room mic in a 'dead' room, is just a delayed/out of phase mic.

The room itself will tell you if it is worthy. A drywal enclosed 12X12' room is not going to have a beneficial reverb IMO. I am lucky that my space is not square, and have the ability to reduce reflections from the ceiling. It works for me.


What size is your room, and how do you have it treated now? 'Small and large' are way to vague of terms to make judgment on. Even then, dimensions, construction materials, and juju have a bunch to do with whether the room works or not. Treating of a room is specific to each, and what it's purpose is.
 
TheAquired said:
I completely understand what you are saying, but the other half of my question is, do I have a non ideal tracking room because there is no reverb?
Click to expand...

No, not necessarily. I've used the "dead room" model for decades with artificial ambiance from plate verbs, springs, tape echo, digital echo/reverb, etc. It's a different way of doing things, and not better or worse than a good live room. The key is to make sure your room is dead in all the right ways... free of any flutter echo that would end up being recorded. And as Ethan said, close miking.

You close mic everything and add the perceived distance with outboard processing. The ratio of direct sound to processed (reverberant) sound gives you that feel of how far away the instrument is and what size of space you want it to sound like its in. The trends have gone back and forth from dead rooms to live rooms in the last few decades. Now days just do it your way because they both work if you know what you're doing.

For the way I like to work a dead room gives me more creative control... and digital reverb has sounded great for three decades now, so no problems with using a good digital processor to help create an illusion of space for the listener.
 
As with so many things, it depends.

For recording music, a large, slightly live room with a variety of shapes and corners can be lovely. You put your vocalists or instruments in spaces you know sound really good. Taken to an extreme situation, picture recording a choir in a 16 century cathedral or a totally dead space--the cathedral will win hands down.

The trouble is, most domestic spaces don't have a pleasant sounding atmosphere. The wall are all parallel as are the ceiling and floor, resulting in a boxy, boomy echoey sound. Acoustic treatment can improve this but square or rectangular rooms are rarely very nice.

So...some rooms can sound great, some okay and many downright rubbish. It depends on the room (and also mic placement and the furnishings within the room). Unless you're lucky enough to have a good sounding room, "dead" is probably the way to go--at least this gives you the opportunity to add electronic atmosphere/reverb while mixing.

And, of course, the above applies to music. If you're recording the spoken word you almost always want "dead".
 
Ok I now have a much better idea of how these things work than before. Well, I suppose to some degree it is personal opinion. We used a room mic at my friends place and it sounded aweful. Like Bobbsy said, it has a huge reverb, almost like a cathedral. And I doubt recording drums in a cathedral is a good idea.

My room is about 4 meters by 4 meters. (not sure what that is in American, sorry) I have heavy curtains hanging on two of the walls, and some homemade acoustic paneling on the other walls. The inside of the paneling is filled with Rockwool. I also have triangular shaped ones which are in the corners of my room to remove the 90 degree of the wall. It has no echo, but I suppose there is a hint of reverb. I maintain it still has "Atmosphere"

My friends room is about 3 times the size of mine, and is completely irregular in shape, but he has done absolutely nothing to treat the room.

I suppose for my small space, the control a dead room gives me is more useful.
 
Bobbsy said:
As with so many things, it depends.

Taken to an extreme situation, picture recording a choir in a 16 century cathedral or a totally dead space--the cathedral will win hands down.
Click to expand...

Maybe, while I agree with the premise, placing a choir in a totally dead space makes that space totally un-dead. And I’d have to hear the recordings before I proclaim a winner hands down. Many large spaces are so reverberant that clear voices are hard to discern.
 
TheAquired said:
Ok I now have a much better idea of how these things work than before. Well, I suppose to some degree it is personal opinion. We used a room mic at my friends place and it sounded aweful. Like Bobbsy said, it has a huge reverb, almost like a cathedral. And I doubt recording drums in a cathedral is a good idea.

My room is about 4 meters by 4 meters. (not sure what that is in American, sorry) I have heavy curtains hanging on two of the walls, and some homemade acoustic paneling on the other walls. The inside of the paneling is filled with Rockwool. I also have triangular shaped ones which are in the corners of my room to remove the 90 degree of the wall. It has no echo, but I suppose there is a hint of reverb. I maintain it still has "Atmosphere"

My friends room is about 3 times the size of mine, and is completely irregular in shape, but he has done absolutely nothing to treat the room.

I suppose for my small space, the control a dead room gives me is more useful.
Click to expand...

Yes, for your space some absorbent material is a helpful thing. What you want to tame are the flutter echoes, those pesky tails that make the room sound like, well, a small room. As mentioned add artificial reverb thru plug-ins.
 
What exactly do flutter echoes sound like? My room originally had what seemed like a ring to it. That has been greatly reduced after the acoustic treatment. Thank you for all the help guys, without you, there would be many people far worse off in their hobby.
 
TheAquired said:
Ok I now have a much better idea of how these things work than before. Well, I suppose to some degree it is personal opinion. We used a room mic at my friends place and it sounded aweful. Like Bobbsy said, it has a huge reverb, almost like a cathedral. And I doubt recording drums in a cathedral is a good idea.

My room is about 4 meters by 4 meters. (not sure what that is in American, sorry) I have heavy curtains hanging on two of the walls, and some homemade acoustic paneling on the other walls. The inside of the paneling is filled with Rockwool. I also have triangular shaped ones which are in the corners of my room to remove the 90 degree of the wall. It has no echo, but I suppose there is a hint of reverb. I maintain it still has "Atmosphere"

My friends room is about 3 times the size of mine, and is completely irregular in shape, but he has done absolutely nothing to treat the room.

I suppose for my small space, the control a dead room gives me is more useful.
Click to expand...

Like many things it's also a matter of degrees, and 'flavors. And you're sort of comparing from two different rather extreme examples- 'big washy uncontrolled, and a smallish box with a bunch of nasty ring tones in the low mids..? How about neither. :D

And a few additional thoughts-
Regarding our 'close micing part of the solution? Yes it is a way to help keep a room's effect reduced.
But, putting a mic up close and adding 'distance via fx'.. on most instruments, voices, in many ways is not at all the same as moving a mic back!
A guitar or bass cab, 2", 8" eh, no big deal and they fall into that group where highly manipulated' + FX fits.
But things don't just 'live in the 2-8" range. They radiate in different ways from different points (and various directions. And.. Lets not forget. They mix together. Oooo. Now that dreaded 'bleed..? Hmm the sound of a band -in a room. Now it's called ambiance. Ding! :)
I happen to think that when we're considering the close reflections that cam naturally hand you distance and depth'..? In a small room they're all mostly within the Hass' distances (time). Look it up if need be. > about 20ms or so the sound 'attaches to the source. = 'blur' of image. Ok when you want it, or to 'spread/thicken'. But it's just gunk when you don't. That alone is not trivial at all IMHO.
This -this lack of the option is the thing I've really started to notice. When you get to those points where you go 'what next?, or 'what's holding things back, to improve the situation? :>) I see that line clearly now particularly trying to record my acoustic band is a real good example. Close enough for isolation/ 'bleed, vs uninteresting or restricted room tone. Heck you'll notice (if you haven't yet :) how much more fun it is to play let alone be easier to record nicely in nice spaces!
Hide and seek' vs nice sounding appropriately sized and tone for how you want it to sound LOL.


Here's a couple links you might find interesting to plug your rooms into. Both similar but from different views.
hunecke.de | Room Eigenmodes Calculator
http://www.bobgolds.com/Mode/RoomModes.htm
 
Last edited:
mixsit said:
Like many things it's also a matter of degrees, and 'flavors. And you're sort of comparing from two different rather extreme examples- 'big washy uncontrolled, and a smallish box with a bunch of nasty ring tones in the low mids..? How about neither. :D

And a few additional thoughts-
Regarding our 'close micing part of the solution? Yes it is a way to help keep a room's effect reduced.
But, putting a mic up close and adding 'distance via fx'.. on most instruments, voices, in many ways is not at all the same as moving a mic back!
A guitar or bass cab, 2", 8" eh, no big deal and they fall into that group where highly manipulated' + FX fits.
But things don't just 'live in the 2-8" range. They radiate in different ways from different points (and various directions. And.. Lets not forget. They mix together. Oooo. Now that dreaded 'bleed..? Hmm the sound of a band -in a room. Now it's called ambiance. Ding! :)
I happen to think that when we're considering the close reflections that cam naturally hand you distance and depth'..? In a small room they're all mostly within the Hass' distances (time). Look it up if need be. > about 20ms or so the sound 'attaches to the source. = 'blur' of image. Ok when you want it, or to 'spread/thicken'. But it's just gunk when you don't. That alone is not trivial at all IMHO.
This -this lack of the option is the thing I've really started to notice. When you get to those points where you go 'what next?, or 'what's holding things back, to improve the situation? :>) I see that line clearly now particularly trying to record my acoustic band is a real good example. Close enough for isolation/ 'bleed, vs uninteresting or restricted room tone. Heck you'll notice (if you haven't yet :) how much more fun it is to play let alone be easier to record nicely in nice spaces!
Hide and seek' vs nice sounding appropriately sized and tone for how you want it to sound LOL.


Here's a couple links you might find interesting to plug your rooms into. Both similar but from different views.
hunecke.de | Room Eigenmodes Calculator
http://www.bobgolds.com/Mode/RoomModes.htm
Click to expand...

While I found some of what you said a little confusing as I am not very familiar with all the jargon, I completely understand the concept. The funny thing is, before I asked this question, I was completely under the impression that recording rooms have to be completely dead. I don't really have a choice to add some nice ambiance or "Life" to my room, but if I ever have the opportunity to get a bigger space to turn into the studio, I now know what to listen for, and what to want from a tracking room.

Is having a dead environment more useful for mixing?
 
IMO Ethan's diffusion video is the best explanation of this area of acoustics anywhere on the web. Watch it a few times and study it carefully, and you'll be leaps ahead of the majority.
 
TheAquired said:
While I found some of what you said a little confusing as I am not very familiar with all the jargon, I completely understand the concept. The funny thing is, before I asked this question, I was completely under the impression that recording rooms have to be completely dead. I don't really have a choice to add some nice ambiance or "Life" to my room, but if I ever have the opportunity to get a bigger space to turn into the studio, I now know what to listen for, and what to want from a tracking room.

Is having a dead environment more useful for mixing?
Click to expand...

Probably not. The ideal space is reflection free.
 
Beck said:
IMO Ethan's diffusion video is the best explanation of this area of acoustics anywhere on the web. Watch it a few times and study it carefully, and you'll be leaps ahead of the majority.
Click to expand...

Agree totalee, I just watched the one on comb filtering the other day.
 
TheAquired said:
The funny thing is, before I asked this question, I was completely under the impression that recording rooms have to be completely dead.
Click to expand...

A lot of people new to recording have that same misconception.....and one reason why 100% dead, small vocal booths are such a big hit with newbs.

You certainly have to take care of ambiance in smaller rooms, as it can be troublesome....but it's best to have some combination of dead and live surfaces so the room doesn't go 100% dead.
You want to hear that "warmth" (to use an overused word) in the ambiance of smaller rooms, but without the pesky slap/flutter echo. So that when you speak, you can feel and hear the sound move out into the room, and just sort of "swell" back a bit, but without the repeating waves.
It's a very diffused, gentle live sound that is on the dry side, but not like an anechoic chamber, as some people think it should be.

I've dreamed of building out my studio into a much bigger space with like 14' or higher ceiling, etc....but cost outweighs my needs, and I found that with the right treatment, the smaller space with lower ceiling can work well..and like Ethan said, I just add my ambiance later, and I'm sure that the fact my studio is not 100% dead-dry, the ambiance I apply later sounds more natural than when you add it to tracks done in 100% dead rooms....at least that's my perspective.
I could still use just a little more bass trapping behind my mix postion...but the space sounds real good overall as it is now. I already spoke with Ethan about the additional bass trapping I want to get....now I just have to break out the $$$ and follow up on it...but money is tight right now. :)
Maybe in the fall.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top