Mixing a group of sounds - inconsistant levels

  • Thread starter Thread starter pure.fusion
  • Start date Start date
P

pure.fusion

New member
Hi all. A question for you about mixing a group of sounds.

I recorded some backup vocals on the weekend. Three part harmonies in the chorus and a few backups in a non chorus part. I grouped the three tracks to a group track so I can add effects and control volume at one point (‘cause I guessed this was what you do).

I listened to the three chorus tracks (in mono) and mixed them till they sounded balanced. No problem, sounds good. I then listen to the non-chorus part with these settings and it doesn’t sit right and the balance between the tree needs changing, just for that part. I imagine that if I sang any further backup bits, I'd further increase this problem.

I’m done singing it, so I have discounted re-recording the parts as an option – they were hard enough for me to do in the first place.

What would you do to solve this problem? Auto fade for the one bit that needs attention? Compress each of the 3 tracks so the levels are more even and predictable? Something else?

Cheers,
FM
 
Hey there Elton123. Thanks for reply!

I also thank you for it's brevity, not taking up the time of myself and fellow readers with redundant waffle about why you suggest this particular solution or perhaps how you came to being in a position to feel as though you have the experience to advise other people in forums.

Well contributed info to Home recording here!

Cheers,
FM
 
pure.fusion said:
Hey there Elton123. Thanks for reply!

I also thank you for it's brevity, not taking up the time of myself and fellow readers with redundant waffle about why you suggest this particular solution or perhaps how you came to being in a position to feel as though you have the experience to advise other people in forums.

Well contributed info to Home recording here!

Cheers,
FM
Click to expand...

My bad. Yeah, if you have the choruses blended the way want them, but the non chorus sections are not, then take your volume automation and and blend the non chorus sections to taste. I would not think compression is a good fix for this situation, although there are times depending on the source material that I will bus similar tracks to an aux track and compress them "slightly" for cohesion. If I read your situation correctly, I think the volume automation is the best solution.
Good luck and happy mixing.
E
 
Appreciate it guys. :p

Yeah, I was trying to avoid compression because (as you probably already know) it's the mix between the three tracks that I want to get more consistant. So compression will only achieve this if you compress each track individually, then combine. Compressing the output of the grouped channel will not alter the balance of levels of teh three parts.

So, would you guys set up automation on the 3 faders to keep the harmony mix right, but *still* group the output to a single fader for level adjustment ( and effects & compression if necessary) ? Or woulld you actually manage 3 faders for the backups full time?

Cheers,
FM
 
pure.fusion said:
Appreciate it guys. :p

Yeah, I was trying to avoid compression because (as you probably already know) it's the mix between the three tracks that I want to get more consistant. So compression will only achieve this if you compress each track individually, then combine. Compressing the output of the grouped channel will not alter the balance of levels of teh three parts.



So, would you guys set up automation on the 3 faders to keep the harmony mix right, but *still* group the output to a single fader for level adjustment ( and effects & compression if necessary) ? Or woulld you actually manage 3 faders for the backups full time?

Cheers,
FM
Click to expand...

Yes. U could set your your "blend" with the individual faders, and your overall "backup vocal" volume with a stereo aux channel.
 
pure.fusion said:
Hi all. A question for you about mixing a group of sounds.

I recorded some backup vocals on the weekend. Three part harmonies in the chorus and a few backups in a non chorus part. I grouped the three tracks to a group track so I can add effects and control volume at one point (‘cause I guessed this was what you do).

I listened to the three chorus tracks (in mono) and mixed them till they sounded balanced. No problem, sounds good. I then listen to the non-chorus part with these settings and it doesn’t sit right and the balance between the tree needs changing, just for that part. I imagine that if I sang any further backup bits, I'd further increase this problem.

I’m done singing it, so I have discounted re-recording the parts as an option – they were hard enough for me to do in the first place.

What would you do to solve this problem? Auto fade for the one bit that needs attention? Compress each of the 3 tracks so the levels are more even and predictable? Something else?

Cheers,
FM
Click to expand...

It's not unusual to have to automate rides. Yes, compression will even out some of these issues, but that doesn't mean you still won't have to use a different balance for the different sections. If you don't want to automate, you can merely make new tracks, keep the chorus vocals on your first three, and place the "non-chorus" vocals on the next three, but that still doesn't necessarily mean you won't have to do rides.

Rides are a part of mixing. As much as your static mix is often about 80% there, it's the automation that can make the difference between a good mix, a very good mix, and a great one.

From Zen and the Art of Mixing:

"There are two unique balance functions within the context of the mix that must be reconciled. First, there are the balances that are relative to one another at any given moment within the context of the mix. These are the balances that determine whether the overall mix sings. Then there are the balances relative to what comes next in the mix. These relative balances are what generate excitement and push the listener forward through the mix.

A good way to start—which will greatly simplify the mixing process—is to work by section first.Work the intro (or whatever the song starts with) so that the balances within the section itself are working. Move through the song section by section, setting your balances with automation. This, of course, includes placing your vocal."

Enjoy,

Mixerman
 
pure.fusion said:
Appreciate it guys. :p

Yeah, I was trying to avoid compression because (as you probably already know) it's the mix between the three tracks that I want to get more consistant. So compression will only achieve this if you compress each track individually, then combine. Compressing the output of the grouped channel will not alter the balance of levels of teh three parts.
Click to expand...

Sure it will and can. It just depends on the compressor and your settings. Why, exactly, are you avoiding compression? Compression is your friend.

So, would you guys set up automation on the 3 faders to keep the harmony mix right, but *still* group the output to a single fader for level adjustment ( and effects & compression if necessary) ? Or woulld you actually manage 3 faders for the backups full time?

Cheers,
FM
Click to expand...

You can do either. The best reason for putting the three vocal outputs to a bus is so that you can control the overall level and processing of the group as a whole. This doesn't mean you don't need to compress the individual channels, nor does it mean you will never have to ride the internal balances on those faders.

Enjoy,

Mixerman
 
Mixerman said:
It's not unusual to have to automate rides....... Rides are a part of mixing. As much as your static mix is often about 80% there, it's the automation that can make the difference between a good mix, a very good mix, and a great one.
Click to expand...

Awesome. This was the basic info I was after. For some reason, I though going to automation was a bit of a cop out and was fixing something that wasn't done right in the first place. Much thanks!

Like the book......

Cheers,
FM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top