D
R
RAMI
Guest
Like I said in my last response to your PM's, I only started getting pissed off at you when you started stalking me.
As far as this quote goes:
"You even agree with me but don't realize it. Look what you said above .... "it's one sound louder". That's a significant difference. "..........
THAT"S what we've been saying for 5 pages!!!!! That's the difference. Did you really get from this that anyone was saying it DOESN'T make it louder???? This is what you've been arguing about??? The fact that it simply gets louder is the significant difference that you're trying to convince everyone of????
Or are you simply back-tracking and changing your story just like the other equally ignorant fool who was trying to argue while claiming he agrees at the same time???
What a waste of bandwidth.
TyphoidHippo
1Trillion K Platinum User
Glad you enjoyed it...it took me almost two minutes to draw that, and it only took that long because I kept laughing and making my lines crooked.
I felt this may be a situation where a picture says more than (literally) a thousand words.
Y
yaknski
DR. PHILGOOD
RAMI, I'm done with you. It's louder and there's two kick drums. That's what I'm saying. That's the difference. You're saying it's just louder. I dunno how I can say it any simpler. 1 + 1 = 2. I agree to disagree with you. It's not the end of the world. Grow up!
Last edited:
R
RAMI
Guest
Y
yaknski
DR. PHILGOOD
I think Nixon once said that to Cox.
I'm sure Nixon said more than that. I'm really sorry I pissed you off, that wasn't my intention at all, really. I don't get where you think I'm stalking you. If you've got big tits, a nice ass ....well then maybe.
G
Greg_L
Banned
There's not "two kick drums" if it's the same waveform. It's one kick drum, doubled. That doesn't equal two drums. That equals two tracks. Identical tracks of the same drum. What's so hard to understand about that? If you do nothing else to it, you've got the same drum, just louder. Woopdy shit. EQ one track differently, and you still got the same old drum, just louder. You're not magically creating another drum. You could get the same effect by EQ'ing the one track properly, and dropping everything else in the mix if you can't hear it. Now we're to the point of parallel/multi-band compression and stuff. Only now does it alter the sound beyond just being louder. Originally, the debate started with just duplicating one kick track and EQ. That yields nothing but volume. Later, people started amending their points to include compression, samples, and all sorts of other whacked out shit..
Let's go back to 5th grade math: you can only add things that are alike.
1 orange + 1 orange = 2 oranges
1 orange + 1 apple = 1 orange and 1 apple
So...
1 kick track + 1 kick track = 2 kick tracks.
1 kick track + 1 kick track DOES NOT EQUAL two kick drums.
Y
yaknski
DR. PHILGOOD
Greg L.,
I appreciate your input and the way you conveyed yourself. I'm not having trouble understanding. Going back to the original topic for discussion - to me two identical kick tracks are not only louder but sonically different than one kick track turned up to an identical summed volume. I just did a blind A/B with a kick clip (I toggled clip mutes between 1 kick with 2 kicks adjusted to the same volume visually via metering). Then I repeated it with 1 guitar note. 85% of the time I correctly guessed if it was 1 or 2 clips playing. Try it yourself and see what you come up with. For me two kick clips sound distinctly different (thicker) at the same volume as 1 kick clip. That's just how I hear it.
5th grade math? I wasn't at the apple/orange level until college.
G
Greg_L
Banned
I have tried it. I used to try to implement that line of thinking all the time when chasing an idea of what I thought my drums should sound like. It doesn't work like some of yall are claiming. It just louder. I'd always end up going with just the one because two tracks of the same waveform is basically the same as just making the one louder. I never tried it with guitars, because again it's unnecessary. If I wanted thicker guitars, I'll just double-track them with another take.
B
boingoman
New member
+6dbSPL= 4xpower, not 10.
Dogman
Unkle Ticklefingers
D
donkeystyle
New member
ahh you're right. I just looked it up and 10 times the power would get you 10 dBspl.
I had 2 different teachers that claimed 2 different dBspl was doubling in volume. One claimed a 10dBspl addition was a doubling in volume and the other said it was 6dBspl.
The one that claimed it was 10 dBspl must have claimed it took 10 times the power to get twice the volume and that was the guy I chose to remember. The weird thing is, I always knew he was wrong about it being 10dBspl. Weird.
so anyway........ for anyone interested....... Boingoman is correct.
Y
yaknski
DR. PHILGOOD
We just hear things differently I guess.
F
Fooling Pirates
New member
In the digital realm, things are different
First of all, there is no such thing as a faulty or invalid method, if you can make it work.
I have found that doubling or even tripling a weak track is far more effective than simply turning it up.
When I mix kick and snare, I usually drag the file into 1 or 2 more tracks. This does increase the overall volume, but is not the main reason for duplicating tracks.
With this many duplicate tracks, the Master will peak.
For optimum effectiveness:
The original track is left as is, except I pull the volume fader down.
The first duplicate is EQ'd for optimum PUNCH or ATTACK and volume is pulled back less than the original.
The second duplicate is EQ'd to a complimentary frequency (experimentation required) then pulled back to a proper volume.
Play around with all 3 track's volumes until you get a nice blend. If you can, group the tracks after a blend is achieved, then push the volume of the group up as far as necessary to not overwhelm the rest of the mix, as well as to not peak.
Using this method, you can achieve a far more well rounded sound than simply pushing the volume and/or EQing of 1 track.
And yes, I am talking about keeping it all mono. Kick and snare should be up the middle.
check out myspace.com/xyravyvol to hear what I'm talking about.
"Antagonus" is a basic mix with no duplicates on kik or snare.
"Blood Sister" uses the technique I just mentioned. You decide.
First of all, there is no such thing as a faulty or invalid method, if you can make it work.
I have found that doubling or even tripling a weak track is far more effective than simply turning it up.
When I mix kick and snare, I usually drag the file into 1 or 2 more tracks. This does increase the overall volume, but is not the main reason for duplicating tracks.
With this many duplicate tracks, the Master will peak.
For optimum effectiveness:
The original track is left as is, except I pull the volume fader down.
The first duplicate is EQ'd for optimum PUNCH or ATTACK and volume is pulled back less than the original.
The second duplicate is EQ'd to a complimentary frequency (experimentation required) then pulled back to a proper volume.
Play around with all 3 track's volumes until you get a nice blend. If you can, group the tracks after a blend is achieved, then push the volume of the group up as far as necessary to not overwhelm the rest of the mix, as well as to not peak.
Using this method, you can achieve a far more well rounded sound than simply pushing the volume and/or EQing of 1 track.
And yes, I am talking about keeping it all mono. Kick and snare should be up the middle.
check out myspace.com/xyravyvol to hear what I'm talking about.
"Antagonus" is a basic mix with no duplicates on kik or snare.
"Blood Sister" uses the technique I just mentioned. You decide.
F
Fooling Pirates
New member
The point is NOT to have TWO kick drums, but to have ONE Kick sound that far surpasses anything you can achieve with a single track.
Some of you guys need to experiment with digital recording and mixing a little more before you try to come off as "experts".
Try reading Mix, EQ, Future Music, or any other magazine on the subject and you will find that you are uninformed.
Jon Baz - AKA Fooling Pirates Productions
R
RAMI
Guest
Oy vei!
Don't claim that other people don't experiment just because you let your ears fool you.
Last edited:
TyphoidHippo
1Trillion K Platinum User
Ok...since the picture didn't work, I whipped something else up for you.
If you can actually, accurately pick out which of the following samples is a single track, and which is two identical tracks with their volume faders at -6db, then we will all believe you.
Here's a couple of screens showing exactly what I did:
-Edit Window-
-Mixer-
Here's four samples of kick, four of snare, and four of the entire drum track. In each group of four, some will be a single sample set at 0db, and some will be the mixdown of two identical samples - each set at -6db and mixed down.
Kick_A.wav
Kick_B.wav
Kick_C.wav
Kick_D.wav
Snare_A.wav
Snare_B.wav
Snare_C.wav
Snare_D.wav
Drums_A.wav
Drums_B.wav
Drums_C.wav
Drums_D.wav
I'm not trying to trick you or anything - I wouldn't have gone to all this trouble (I spent almost 11 minutes on this!) just to trick you. I am genuinely interested in seeing if you can actually tell the difference between two identical samples and one of those samples with the volume turned up. Surprise us!
G
Greg_L
Banned
Thank you for going through all that trouble to agree with what I already said. Next time, maybe you should read what's being asked and what's being said before you go all internet-superhero on us.
TyphoidHippo
1Trillion K Platinum User
Huh, are you talking to me? I proposed the experiment to Yaknski so he can prove that he can hear a difference - I'm obviously agreeing with you, what's the superhero stuff?
G
Greg_L
Banned
Sorry then. This debate has gotten so convoluted it's hard to tell exactly where people are coming from. My bad. Carry on, I'm done with it.