How do I make sounds sit BEHIND sounds...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chrisulrich
  • Start date Start date
C

Chrisulrich

Member
Dear Anyone.

Every so often I turn up here with a totally dumbasserino question, and you guys are always very patient with me and give me great answers that sort me out. Here's the latest one!

I'm a wannabe New Age music writer. As anyone who's been in a shopping mall knows, that means you make a nice bed of strings/synth pads and drop the tune in front of it. Thing is, I can't make the tune sit in front of the backing, they always sound like they're on the same level bashing into eachother. If I make the backing any quieter, it doesn't push it backwards, it just makes it sound quieter but still in the front row with the tune. If I use more reverb, it just gets too 'echoey'. I've been trying the more reverb thing that another site suggested, but it just makes the backing sound like it's in a cave - or worse, an underwater cave - and the tune - on a flute, usually - sound like it's drowning in there with it.

By itself, the backing sounds good - fairly decently mixed (I'm NOT good at mixing, but that's another issue - it's passable.) Again, by itself the flute/lead instrument sounds good. It's just making the backing sound like it's BEHIND the tune, not playing bumper-cars with it.

Please, be detailed with any answer, I'm not good at the mixing controls thang yet! Just telling me WHAT to do is great, telling me HOW to go about doing it would be utterly magnificent - that's the bit I'm still having trouble with.

Last bit of this question, and it IS related to the above. If you've got an intro that becomes the backing if you see what I mean - like a guitar riff intro that becomes the tune the lead singer sings over - how do you make it start off foreground (as an intro) then retreat INTO the background to let the lead singer (or flute, in my case) take over the lead positioin, without his voice masking the backing or the backing masking out his voice (or masking out the flute, in my case!!) So you can hear them both separately, yet together, with the backing behind, if you get what I mean.

If it's to do with EQ or GAIN, I've got those two as plug-ins I can use while I'm writing the piece. I've got a parametric EQ plugin and a Kjaerhuis GAIN plugin. I'm just not good at parametric EQ using yet, I know it's simple to you guys, I might be male but I'm also a blonde...

Yours puzzledly

Chrisulrich
 
In creating your 'sonic stage', depth and space are a function of reverb, volume and EQ, which is probably what the other site said.

In differentiating between 'background' and 'foreground' sounds, make sure that you have room to move, i.e. keep the background quiet enough so that the foreground has plenty of room to poke through.

Instead of using a lot of reverb (which can turn it into a mess), try using a very big room setting (e.g. concert hall or whatever), but use it sparingly. Do this on the background sounds first so that you can get a good sense of space without turning it into sludge.

Then bring up the foreground sounds until they are sitting where they should be, and add the same type of reverb, but a bit less of it to give them presence.

To make an introduction prominent, then for that instrument to sit comfortably in the background, there are a couple of things you can try. Firstly, most DAWs have 'envelope' functions, which allow you to determine what levels a track will be throughout its duration. Make use of this to give the intro a bit more level at the start, then bring it down for the rest of the track. You can also apply envelopes to the reverb send, which emans you can use an envelope to give the intro a bit less reverb at the start, and a bit more for the rest.

However, you need to be subtle about this. If the transition is to big it will sound unnatural.
 
Chrisulrich said:
By itself, the backing sounds good - fairly decently mixed ... Again, by itself the flute/lead instrument sounds good. It's just making the backing sound like it's BEHIND the tune, not playing bumper-cars with it.
Click to expand...
This may be a really, really long shot that I may not even be experienced enough to let out in these surroundings, but... to me, it *could* sound like something timing-related, like the melody instrument being a bit too "laid-back" and letting the backing track set the pace, so to speak. This has got practically nothing to do with mixing or recording, but solely with actually *playing*. I may be completely out the window here tho, so if someone more knowledgeable could tell me wrong, I will stand corrected:)
The other thing I thought of was my old SQ-R 32voice, which has, among other things, a piano patch that sounds very nice by itself but is all but inaudible in a mix unless you are very careful what you mix it with. My point is that experimenting with different variations of backing and lead sounds might help, and that a patch sounding good by itself can have little to do with how it fares in the mix.

good luck
/C
 
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by the voice being more prominate in the mix. Do you mean like a side chaining effect where when one speaks the music reduces volume immediately and returns to the original volume when the voice stops speaking or are you talking about just plain compression? Have you tried compression? You could compress the voice or add an exciter effect that would make the voice stand out. The problem with compression is more compression = less dynamics.

Using reverb to create spatial relationships only works well with convolution reverbs (converbs) but not so well with the algorithm reverbs, at least in my experience. So it would depend more on what type of reverb you are using.

I would suggest exploring some of the effects on your DAW and see what they have to offer.
 
when you use 'verb to push something 'back' in the mix ..... you have to use it sparingly as gekko said.
By sparingly we mean very little 'verb.
IF you can actually hear the ;verb, then it's too much. It should just be enough to make it sound like a room in real space.
Do you actually 'hear' 'verb in every room you walk into?
No, but it's there.
That's how you should use it for this purpose. You should never actually hear the 'verb as a separate thing in the final mix.
 
Make sure you use reverb as a send...dont put reverb right on the track...Send the verb to the track.

Another good way to put things in the back is with a an imager plugin like wave s1 imager...I adjust width and make wider then send verb and that puts things like keyboard in the background.

Plugin screenshot

http://www.wavesuniverse.com/images/sshot_big_s1_01.jpg
 
Take some of the midrange out of the pads. The further something gets away from you, the thinner it tends to sound.

If everything in your mix is lush and full range, it turns into the type of mess you are talking about. Figure out what frequency range the stuff in the foreground needs to occupy and cut that out of the pads in the background.

If you listen to the background stuff by itself, it will probably sound thin and weak. That's good, that leaves room for the stuff in the foreground.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top