Theory on artificial BANDWIDTH achievement

[Abomination]

Allright! some results.

Gave it a try on a stereo MASTER track. I added reverb and delay and a stereo widener. I mixed the original untouched track with the effected track making sure the effected track was quite a bit louder than the original track. Here is the result.

Track: "TEST"
Click on link below.

It does sound whole alot like my final mixes. A wider spectrum is definately there. Also, there are some strange TR-like but with no decay toms or something that sound too much like a bad encoding glitches. On my speakers, they come out too strong and too upfront in the mix, but that is my only negative find. And yes, I would like to clarify, that my stuff was applied on "master" tracks as well, simply because I use 1 (ONE) sound module for EVERYTHING. The mixdown is done from L/R tracks and then vokills are added. That is why precisely I felt like there was more f-ing around needed after the tracks are recorded because all I do is simply record two tracks. And yes, it is "GOATTUNNEL 23" (in fond memory of John Balance). Patent pending.

 

[bennychico11]

Woah MAJOR flange when trying this out. I used left delay at 6ms and right delay at 7ms. Couldnt get rid of any middle or vocals but. Just got very very thick flange which would be cool as a guitar effect.

a 1ms difference between the channels is too much
i actually use exactly 6ms in the L and 6.21ms in the R.

it doesn't get rid of anything in the stereo field. I said I use this when doing commercial work. the music is licensed music with just instruments in a stereo file (no vocals in commercials because the vocals will clash with the VO). then i record the voice over on top of that. keep it panned center and then add the delay to the stereo music track

 

[ecktronic]

sometimes it doesn't always work perfect, but many times it cuts a whole in the center of the field leaving room for the voice over to do his stuff while pushing the music back. of course, you have to check for mono compatibility.

Not following you really. It cuts a hole in the centre. How?
I would like to try it again but i dont have a good enough delay to try it. I am only using the one that comes with Wavelab.

 

[bennychico11]

Not following you really. It cuts a hole in the centre. How?
I would like to try it again but i dont have a good enough delay to try it. I am only using the one that comes with Wavelab.

you know, i really don't know the whole reason it does it technically. i guess it's just has to do with the way delays work. take a look at this:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/7/bennychico11_music.htm

listen to Delay. you'll hear two chords at the beginning which is the unaffected version. the next version is with the delay added to it. you should be able to hear it pretty well with headphones or a correctly placed speaker setup.

 

[Abomination]

If i want a mix to sound wide, i combine near and far mics , double tracking, phase correction(nudging), creative compression, and of course the occasional extreme panning scheme.

-Finster

Dude that is like a lifetime of trial-and-error. And if you can record your technics down to a t or at least give basics, you might as well be working on publishing a book about it. Pro Tools users = obsessive compulsive schizofrenics, and THIS IS a compliment. I could never do anything like that.

 

[bennychico11]

Dude that is like a lifetime of trial-and-error. And if you can record your technics down to a t or at least give basics, you might as well be working on publishing a book about it. Pro Tools users = obsessive compulsive schizofrenics, and THIS IS a compliment. I could never do anything like that.

we'll mixing isn't just something that happens perfectly the first time. it is trial and error....which is the coolest thing about mixing: finding new techniques to try. It's so much fun to sit with a mix, with no client around and go "you know, i wonder how this might sound"
if it sounds like shit, take note of it and move on. over time you build up an arsenal of different things to do to get certain sounds. Finster's does those things because he's probably done them over and over again. He knows what sound he's going for and which technique gives him a certain sound.
I guess it's not really a Pro Tools user specific thing, but a thing that only a person who is obsessed with audio would take the time to do