Mixing Questions - Should i do this?

  • Thread starter Thread starter raximus
  • Start date Start date
R

raximus

New member
Hi guys, i have a few questions. Last night I recorded at the Music and Audio Institute here where i live in Auckland City. I recorded on a Protools HD setup.

The sound engineer did some things which surprised me because I myself usually wouldn't do what he did.

1) He panned the overheads 100% as if you were sitting behind the kit. - It there are correct way of doing this, should they be panned all the way, and should they be panned as if you were behind the kit or standing and watching the drummer?

2) He compressed the overheads.

3) He bussed the whole set and compressed the whole set.

4) He also used this technique with the overheads. They were very close in on the set, and he used the mic cable to measure the distance between the mics from the middle of the set to see that they were the same. Is this a good technique, as i would usually use the 3:1 Rule.

Thanks for your time!

James
 
Well...did you like the way it sounded? If so, then experiment with these techniques and learn from the experience. There are no rules in recording, it either sounds good or it doesn't.

All subjective of course.:)
 
raximus said:
1) He panned the overheads 100% as if you were sitting behind the kit. - It there are correct way of doing this, should they be panned all the way, and should they be panned as if you were behind the kit or standing and watching the drummer?
Click to expand...
Actual panning during mixing is entirely to taste; there is no absolute right or wrong there. Same thing with the whole audience vs. drummer's perspective; we have a whole thread arguing that very thing here in this forum that refuses to die. It can go either way.

As far as full panning the OHs during tracking, that allows him to listen to the full-spread stereo image, which could help with listening to the tracking details, but remember, this does not necessarily mean that is how the panning will go in mixing.
raximus said:
2) He compressed the overheads.
Click to expand...
The typical advice in these beginner forums is to track w/o compression so you always have an "undo option" should you get the compression wrong. That's very good advice.

But it's not necessarily advice that needs heeding by those with the practice and experience to already know exactly and technically what sound they want and exactly what they need to do to get it. If this guy had that knowledge and experience, and had a plan fromthe strt before even hitting the record button as to what sound he was planning to construct, there's nothing wrong with saving time and money by getting the sound down right out of the gate.
raximus said:
3) He bussed the whole set and compressed the whole set.
Click to expand...
Combine the answers from the first two questions; there are no rules of right and wrong here and if you got the experience and know how to get it right on the first take, then knock yourself out.

The trick to all this is really *knowing* whether you have the knowledge and experience that you think you do. It takes self-honesty and a setting aside of ego on the part of the engineer to come up with the right answer.
raximus said:
4) He also used this technique with the overheads. They were very close in on the set, and he used the mic cable to measure the distance between the mics from the middle of the set to see that they were the same. Is this a good technique, as i would usually use the 3:1 Rule.
Click to expand...
It's a fairly common technique.

The 3:1 rule does not apply to stereo pairs. It is only and solely meant to address potential phase bleedover issues between separate mics grabbing separate sources. 3:1 would come into play when close miking individual elements of the kit (e.g. snare mic vs. tom mic) but is not relevant when considering a stereo pair.

G.
 
raximus said:
Hi guys, i have a few questions. Last night I recorded at the Music and Audio Institute here where i live in Auckland City. I recorded on a Protools HD setup.

The sound engineer did some things which surprised me because I myself usually wouldn't do what he did.

1) He panned the overheads 100% as if you were sitting behind the kit. - It there are correct way of doing this, should they be panned all the way, and should they be panned as if you were behind the kit or standing and watching the drummer?

2) He compressed the overheads.

3) He bussed the whole set and compressed the whole set.

4) He also used this technique with the overheads. They were very close in on the set, and he used the mic cable to measure the distance between the mics from the middle of the set to see that they were the same. Is this a good technique, as i would usually use the 3:1 Rule.

Thanks for your time!

James
Click to expand...

Hi James,
One rule I always go by is that there are no rules. :)
If something sounds good then it's right. Personally I always pan the OHs 100% but that's just me. You can use 1 mic to record a whole kit if placed right but I like to use as many mics as I can get my hands on for more control of the Mix.
For OH mic placement I tend to get the snare sounding close to the middle and make sure that there is no phasing.
A simple way of checking for phasing on OHs is to listen to them panned 100% then change your main out to mono and if there is a big loss of low end then that's when you know there is phasing between the 2 OH mics

Eck
 
I can see both sides to the overhead from the point of the listener and the audience thing. A lot of people wouldn't know the difference. Myself being a drummer should know the difference, but I think if it sounds good then that's what matters. Recording is on open forum.
 
Hey Guys, thanks for the great replies! They have helped me alot!

The other thing i saw him do (i'm expecting a taste based answer) is he rolled off the frequencies in the overheads so they literally contained almost all cymbals and no drum set.

Is this adviseable? I always thought that the overheads were to catch the whole set and that they gave the drums an added presence in the mix and a more natural sound?

I suppose you are going to say - no rules here, but i thought its worth asking anyway.

Thanks alot!

James
 
There are *always* rules. They just are usually far more fundamental rules based on the science of how things work rather than higher level rules on how to apply the science to create the art. For example, the 3:1 rule is a rule (actually more of a general guideline - sometimes 2.7:1 works fine, sometimes you need 4:1 - but it's all based upon the laws of physics, which themselves cannot be broken), but whether you decide the phase bleed issues are acceptable or not is a matter of taste.

As far as the OHs being used to mostly capture the cymbals, that is just one method. It of course assumes one is picking up the slack on the rest of the kit with more close mics; it's usually not something you'd do if you had a full kit with only a kick mic to augment the OHs.

It's also something that can be done when one is setting up an abstract pan space for the drums. By that I mean one that does not resemble a natural stereo spread, whether it's from the drummer's perspective or the rest of the world's perspective. If you listen to a fair mix of contemporary music styles, there's a LOT of songs out there where the kick may be panned here, the snare way over there, the cymbals back this way, and the toms only God knows where. Using the OHs as "cymbals mics" gives more freedom in their panning.

Also, if you are stuck recording Animal from the Muppets on the drum throne who just bashes the shiite out of the cymbals to the point where you can't hear anything else on the OH's anyway, you might just play to that hand and run with it.

G.
 
raximus said:
Hey Guys, thanks for the great replies! They have helped me alot!

The other thing i saw him do (i'm expecting a taste based answer) is he rolled off the frequencies in the overheads so they literally contained almost all cymbals and no drum set.

Is this adviseable? I always thought that the overheads were to catch the whole set and that they gave the drums an added presence in the mix and a more natural sound?

I suppose you are going to say - no rules here, but i thought its worth asking anyway.

Thanks alot!

James
Click to expand...

Personally I like to use the OHs as much as I can. I tend to boost a little of the high end, maybe cut some low mids (if muddy) and boost the low end to bring out the kick and toms.
But it does all depend on what style you are going for and how well the OHs were recorded.
The key to any good recording is getting the source sounding good, in the case of drums, a new(ish) set of skins, a dynamically solid drummer and a well tuned kit.

Eck
 
raximus said:
Hey Guys, thanks for the great replies! They have helped me alot!

The other thing i saw him do (i'm expecting a taste based answer) is he rolled off the frequencies in the overheads so they literally contained almost all cymbals and no drum set.

Is this adviseable? I always thought that the overheads were to catch the whole set and that they gave the drums an added presence in the mix and a more natural sound?

I suppose you are going to say - no rules here, but i thought its worth asking anyway.

Thanks alot!

James
Click to expand...

I tend to roll out the lows in the overheads, under 100hz, as it seems to help with kick and low end clarity in the overall sound, I sometimes roll out some frequencies if say the snare is a bit loud in the overheads and it is upsetting the overall balance of the kit. This again depends on the style of music and the type of drum sound you are after. In Jazz I would use more overhead than a rock band. However a large percentage of the final drum sound is obtained by the overheads.

Cheers

Alan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top