Modify volume of a track during a song ?

bagpipe

bagpipe

New member
Heres what I want to do: during a song, I want to drop the volume of a certain track, but only for parts of the song ie I have a guitar track which repeats at certain times during the songs, but, I want it to be quieter in some parts and louder in others. I've seen this done in analog recordings during the mix down, but I'm not sure how to do it in digital. I've seen mention of automated fader control in Reaper, but I'm using a wimpy CPU and I'm already pushing it to its limits. Any other options?
 
Not specifically an automated fader, but an automation envelope. This will do exactly what you want and the CPU hit is nothing. Now, I don't know specifically how to do it in Reaper, but look up envelope and you will find it.
 
On each track there is a button marked "env" (or it may have just an icon, depending on which skin you use). Clicking on this gives you a "track envelope" dialog box. Select "track volume". An envelope line under the respective track. You can use 'shift - click' to add points to this line. You then move the points up or down to change the level of the track at desired places.
 
While I'm all for RTFMing, this particular manual is 300 pages, and Gecko got it right.

I still recommend reading the manual, but in this case, the track automation is the way to go.

Another shortcut for opening the automation for the current channel is the 'v' button.
 
Hey Vomit,

I noticed you've been pretty helpful to newbies with questions so I figured I give it a whirl and ask a question.

I'm a bit hazy on automation. Take for instance envelopes, volume or panning specifically, so as to have an example to work with. What makes these processes fit into the term "automation"? In other words, what's automatic about it? I still have to create points and adjust the levels (volume), so why do they fit into what is called "automation" if I'm doing the work?

Thanks,

-laz.
 
laz777 said:
Hey Vomit,

I noticed you've been pretty helpful to newbies with questions so I figured I give it a whirl and ask a question.

I'm a bit hazy on automation. Take for instance envelopes, volume or panning specifically, so as to have an example to work with. What makes these processes fit into the term "automation"? In other words, what's automatic about it? I still have to create points and adjust the levels (volume), so why do they fit into what is called "automation" if I'm doing the work?

Thanks,

-laz.
Click to expand...

I'll jump in.

There are two main ways of mixing: manual and using automation.

Manual mixing is what you see an engineer do at a live mixing job; adjusting levels on the fly. It is what happened in a studio (and still happens in an analog studio) when mixing from multi-track to two-track tape.

This doesn't translate well to a computer screen and mouse. It is finicky, imprecise, and difficult to switch from one track to another quickly (or deal with multiple track changes) when attempting to do it on the fly.

The process of automation allows the engineer to deal with necessary changes by programming them in (e.g. by using envelopes and setting points for various things to happen). By repeatedly playing back and making compensatory adjustments, the engineer can get the level changes and so on just right before committing the work to a final mixdown.

Automation does not mean "automatic". It just means getting the computer to do the work once you've decided what that work is to be.

There is no way of opting out of the responsibilities that an engineer has to deliver the best result, and considerable judgement and work is needed, whether you mix manually or use automation.
 
Thanks Gecko,

You're another member that's gone above and beyond to help out people.

I think I understand now, thanks to your very clear and concise description of what automation actually is.

So, in the old days or in analog studios they had to pan manually, while the track was being recorded? That's pretty interesting.

I was just listening to Black Sabbath's Masters of Reality and noticed some serious panning during a Tony Iommi guitar solo. Back then, after they recorded that solo, after getting the track down, once they decided to commit it to the final recording the engineer had to manually adjust the pan fader from left to right during the final recording/mixing, correct?

Thanks,

-laz.
 
laz777 said:
So, in the old days or in analog studios they had to pan manually, while the track was being recorded?
Click to expand...

No, not quite. The track would have been recorded to tape first. The panning would have been done during the subsequent mixdown.

laz777 said:
I was just listening to Black Sabbath's Masters of Reality and noticed some serious panning during a Tony Iommi guitar solo. Back then, after they recorded that solo, after getting the track down, once they decided to commit it to the final recording the engineer had to manually adjust the pan fader from left to right during the final recording/mixing, correct?
Click to expand...

Spot on! During the mixdown, someone (maybe even Mr Blackmore himself!) would have been had their fingers on the panpot, sending it left and right while the tape was running and the engineer was looking after the main adjustments.

Edit: Richie Blackmore was, of course, Deep Purple, not Black Sabbath. I could never get my colours sorted out!
 
Last edited:
Haha!

Yeah, Deep Purple and Rainbow right (Richie Blackmore)? I remember watching a Rainbow concert on cable (probably MTV or HBO) with the big eyes above the band back when I was a kid. It was probably 1980 or somewhere thereabouts. Life sure does move along.

I probably should have edited out the first part of the post. My second comment was more on the money about how they used to manually pan in the last phases of recording. You explained it well I just didn't express myself very well the first go round.

By the way Tony Iommi from Sabbath is missing two of his fingertips. Some sort machine shop accident, probably got in a fight with band saw or something. The guy can play extremely well considering his handicap. He designed faux fingertips (probably due to his machine shop background, ironic huh?) so he could play guitar somewhat like a person with normal digits.

Thanks man.
 
laz777 said:
By the way Tony Iommi from Sabbath is missing two of his fingertips. Some sort machine shop accident, probably got in a fight with band saw or something. The guy can play extremely well considering his handicap. He designed faux fingertips (probably due to his machine shop background, ironic huh?) so he could play guitar somewhat like a person with normal digits.
Click to expand...

"The Machine Took My Fingers. I Took Them Back." Sounds like a great name for a metal song!
 
He used The Machine to make new ones; close enough. You usually have to stretch the truth a little to get a good song out of it.
 
I've found that, when I automate volume, I often have to re-do it a few times by the time the mix is finished, which is a hassle.

So, what I find myself doing now is duplicating my track, and keeping just the parts I want to turn down (or up) in the duplicated track, while cutting them out of the original track, obviously. That way, if I need to make changes to that, it's just a matter of adjusting the volume of the duplicated track.
 
RAMI said:
I've found that, when I automate volume, I often have to re-do it a few times by the time the mix is finished, which is a hassle.

So, what I find myself doing now is duplicating my track, and keeping just the parts I want to turn down (or up) in the duplicated track, while cutting them out of the original track, obviously. That way, if I need to make changes to that, it's just a matter of adjusting the volume of the duplicated track.
Click to expand...

I just snip the track at the beginning and end of the piece I want to change, and manually slide the volume down in that section. I don't ever seem to need to go louder.
 
Greg_L said:
I just snip the track at the beginning and end of the piece I want to change, and manually slide the volume down in that section. I don't ever seem to need to go louder.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that too. But sometimes, if there are a lot snipped parts and I have to keep re-adjusting, I just say "fuck it", and give them their own track so that one volume adjustment takes care of all of them.

I never have to increase volume either. It's always parts that have to come down.
 
RAMI said:
But sometimes, if there are a lot snipped parts and I have to keep re-adjusting, I just say "fuck it", and give them their own track so that one volume adjustment takes care of all of them.
Click to expand...

Snipping and adjusting is a lot easier and quicker than setting an envelope, so doing that is usually my first choice when adjusting volumes. And it's probably what I use most when making compensatory adjustments, i.e. dealing with variations in levels between takes or between tracks.

I mostly use envelopes when I'm changing levels for artistic reasons (e.g. introducing swells or fades) and need progressive and gradual changes. Or when, as Rami notes, the snipping and adjusting becomes messy and it's easier to put up an envelope.
 
I use Reaper and I'm new to recording in general. What exactly is the difference between a track and a take? Are takes simply the parts that make up the track as a whole?

Thanks.

-laz.
 
gecko zzed said:
Or when, as Rami notes, the snipping and adjusting becomes messy and it's easier to put up an envelope.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not what I said. :)

What I do, if there are too many snips, is just copy them onto their own track, which is a duplicate of the track they came from. That way, I just adjust the volume of that track and take care of all the "snips" with one volume control. That, to me, is the easiest way to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top