|
Post by tonycamphd on Mar 30, 2015 14:39:12 GMT -6
Great anecdote Bob! OK, so, here's my Relab 480XL, the EQ's right there, and works nicely. Would EQ work better than De-Essing? I will try both, just curious what your experiences are, I won't have time to try this til tomorrow. I like de essing because it dynamic eq, and it doesn't rob those freq's when s's/t's aren't present. It all depends on where I want it to sit in the image.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Mar 30, 2015 15:00:50 GMT -6
Great anecdote Bob! OK, so, here's my Relab 480XL, the EQ's right there, and works nicely. Would EQ work better than De-Essing? I will try both, just curious what your experiences are, I won't have time to try this til tomorrow. Man, Logic looks weird. Haha. I've always EQ'd after my verb, but I like the idea of doing some carving of the signal before it. That way you're not filling up space with crap you want to cut anyway. Looking forward to testing it out. Here's a tip for everyone: Get yourself a live sound gig at a small venue (that isn't super loud). It's a really good way to work out your chops and there is always something new to try.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Mar 30, 2015 16:34:22 GMT -6
EMTs were relatively noisy so I always eq'd before it and brought it back on two channel inputs.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Mar 30, 2015 19:00:59 GMT -6
Great anecdote Bob! OK, so, here's my Relab 480XL, the EQ's right there, and works nicely. Would EQ work better than De-Essing? I will try both, just curious what your experiences are, I won't have time to try this til tomorrow. I like de essing because it dynamic eq, and it doesn't rob those freq's when s's/t's aren't present. It all depends on where I want it to sit in the image. Ahh, I see Tony. But wait, wasn't the theory that higher frequencies aren't naturally present in real reverb situations at the same level they are in plug-in reverb's? If that's true, the EQ would handle the issue because the EQ is hitting the "S" frequencies anyway, no? I do believe I hear and feel a slight reduction in harshness with the De-Essed reverb. Also, a 'slight" difference when quickly A-B'ing something can amount to something huge when listening for longer periods of time, like an entire song, or album.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Mar 30, 2015 19:39:51 GMT -6
I think the frequency response curve of most natural reverb is more like /\_/|__/---\/\/\/\/\/\/ not -------------------------- unlike most digital reverbs.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Mar 30, 2015 19:43:47 GMT -6
How would we best correct that ward?
I think one reason I chose the Relab is they have a high definition mode that uses much more advance algorithms, and maybe it's more along the lines of your post, because it did sound way better to me than the UAD 224XL. So much so, that when I had an offer to get the UAD reverb for $133, I chose the Relab at $400, and it was quite a stretch for me at that time.
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Mar 30, 2015 19:58:07 GMT -6
I think the frequency response curve of most natural reverb is more like /\_/|__/---\/\/\/\/\/\/ not -------------------------- unlike most digital reverbs. lmao! I love the graphics man 8)
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Mar 30, 2015 20:15:00 GMT -6
I like de essing because it dynamic eq, and it doesn't rob those freq's when s's/t's aren't present. It all depends on where I want it to sit in the image. Ahh, I see Tony. But wait, wasn't the theory that higher frequencies aren't naturally present in real reverb situations at the same level they are in plug-in reverb's? If that's true, the EQ would handle the issue because the EQ is hitting the "S" frequencies anyway, no? I do believe I hear and feel a slight reduction in harshness with the De-Essed reverb. Also, a 'slight" difference when quickly A-B'ing something can amount to something huge when listening for longer periods of time, like an entire song, or album. Yes, this is mostly true, I very often roll off well below 6-8k, but it depends on where you're placing the depth of the verb or effect, de essers usually work in the 6-8k range (technically midrange), so depending how far back you set things, sometimes you want that info, but generally I NEVER want to hit anything with s's and t's and reverberate them, even on the odd occasion when a verb/effect is right in your face with lots of high freq info, sibs are just plain unpleasant, so i just don't do it... if that makes sense?
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Mar 30, 2015 20:23:39 GMT -6
It does Tony, you have more options your way. It did sound a little better when I tried it, so I'll be a little bolder in my next production, and try some variations on this reverb EQ/De-Ess method. This was a great tip Tony, thanks.
In general, I try not to use on EQ any tracks, except pultecs on drums. For those of you who use EQ to get a heftier bottom, do try what I mentioned earlier regarding the settings of record and output on tape sims. When I need some oomph in the low end, I use "tape" first, and usually don't need any extra EQ.
I must admit though, much of my low ends lack of "oomph", is my mediocre bass playing !
|
|
|
Post by ben on Mar 31, 2015 4:30:23 GMT -6
I must admit though, much of my low ends lack of "oomph", is my mediocre bass playing ! Sounds like you may have an issue getting the low frequencies out of the middle of the mix. That can very easily muddy the low end, and things like reverb can be responsible for that. Solo your bass guitar. If it sounds clearer than when it is in the mix, then something is competing for frequency and you have to move it. You can roll off the lows on things like reverb, which may help, put a delay on the reverb to get it out of the way a bit, or put a very short delay on the bass (in mono) to make it pop out of the speakers, but not enough to sound like a delay.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Mar 31, 2015 6:04:14 GMT -6
How would we best correct that ward? I think one reason I chose the Relab is they have a high definition mode that uses much more advance algorithms, and maybe it's more along the lines of your post, because it did sound way better to me than the UAD 224XL. So much so, that when I had an offer to get the UAD reverb for $133, I chose the Relab at $400, and it was quite a stretch for me at that time. Well, for starters deal with the high end and low end damping. Reverbs in the natural world don't carry much high end content above 4Khz and little to nothing below 141hz. Secondly, despite the talk of pre-eqing reverb with the send, EQ the return also, but tailoring out anything below 141 with a HPF and anything above 4K with a gentle slope downwards, and also they can cloud around 400-600hz, where your main voice range for guitars and vocals is. carving out a little bit in there helps also. And the other thing... is it really necessary for so much music to sound like it is as much reverb as direct sound? It's too much!
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Mar 31, 2015 6:05:02 GMT -6
I think the frequency response curve of most natural reverb is more like /\_/|__/---\/\/\/\/\/\/ not -------------------------- unlike most digital reverbs. lmao! I love the graphics man 8) I do my best to impress with my crafty ascii graphics depictions! LOL
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Mar 31, 2015 8:00:42 GMT -6
ward said," And the other thing... is it really necessary for so much music to sound like it is as much reverb as direct sound? It's too much!
Man, do I know what you mean. Ever since My Morning Jacket arrived, reverb's been louder than the main. I get it, it's a sound, a vibe, etc. I still cringe when I hear it though. That said, I had that same response to the fantastic "Lost in the Dream" album by The War On Drugs, but grew to like it that way, I guess the depth of content trumped the depth of the reverb in that case, ha!
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Mar 31, 2015 8:27:33 GMT -6
Well, for starters deal with the high end and low end damping. Reverbs in the natural world don't carry much high end content above 4Khz and little to nothing below 141hz. Secondly, despite the talk of pre-eqing reverb with the send, EQ the return also, but tailoring out anything below 141 with a HPF and anything above 4K with a gentle slope downwards, and also they can cloud around 400-600hz, where your main voice range for guitars and vocals is. carving out a little bit in there helps also. And the other thing... is it really necessary for so much music to sound like it is as much reverb as direct sound? It's too much! I agree with most all of this with the 1 exception that I have found to be is in a great room. Often some of the lowend comes from the room itself. So for example when recording drums in a nicely balanced big room, I often get some of the best lowend out of the room mics. It can be very tight and big. But yes in the case of most plugins or other verbs and delays. Treat the returns like any other track. EQ, compress, de esse, send to other FX. Whatever makes it work.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Mar 31, 2015 8:47:09 GMT -6
We should state, dandeurloo, that there are distinctions needed to be made between room tone, ambiance, and reverb!
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Mar 31, 2015 10:38:06 GMT -6
I should clarify, I de ess VOX feed into reverbs/effects, not everything. Dans right on with that IMO, I agree that lows can be pretty reverberant because of their power( think of a big garbage truck or a bomb/firework off in the distance, in the absence of highs, u totally feel and hear the bottom end), with careful use of reverberant bottom, u can totally create distance and size. Sibs are/should always be solely owned by the main vox track IMO, they never travel distance, and create havoc everywhere else they show up IMO, so in my world they are 86'd on send to anything else. I will eq verbs primarily AFTER they are generated and developed, so.. De ess-verb-eq, it kinda gives it a more natural, real world representation this way to me. Like it or not, we instinctually interpret verbs and delays as locators and spacial cues, if ur ambient mix defies the laws of physics, the ear becomes confused, and the verbs are then re classified as a special effect.... And "special" can be good or bad lol
There could be things inserted before and after those as well, skin a cat rule always 8)
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
Post by ericn on Mar 31, 2015 12:51:15 GMT -6
I found EQing any digital reverb a must, unless your carefull there is just too much weird lowend build up unless you EQ the send, with the EQ you can emphasize a band to add or subtract depth. For years a AudioArtts Parametric lived on my reverb send.
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Apr 1, 2015 22:31:37 GMT -6
I will sometimes eq the verb to the key of the song in places to create atmosphere that is subtle through eq automation. I will use subtractive eq to rid the mix of tones in the verb that clash with the key of the song as well. It's amazing once you get some of those frequencies out, how much good verb you can use without overwhelming the mix at all and keeping the verb a subtle thing.
R
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 2, 2015 8:14:33 GMT -6
That's bad ass Randge.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Apr 2, 2015 8:24:26 GMT -6
I will sometimes eq the verb to the key of the song in places to create atmosphere that is subtle through eq automation. I will use subtractive eq to rid the mix of tones in the verb that clash with the key of the song as well. It's amazing once you get some of those frequencies out, how much good verb you can use without overwhelming the mix at all and keeping the verb a subtle thing. R That's an awful lot of work! I spend hours on other things in mixes to bring in clarity and dynamics. I hear way too many mixes these days with zero headroom, harsh vocals and drums that just sound like thuds.
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Apr 2, 2015 8:27:50 GMT -6
I use this quick reference chart and it takes less than a couple minutes. It helps me when we are in A-flat or E-flat. R
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Apr 2, 2015 17:03:37 GMT -6
Ward, I think that thud thing you are describing is a massively gross over use of compression, especially in regards to snare drums. I know those top tier mix guys doing that are gonna look back a few years from now and be ashamed. It sucks. R
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Apr 2, 2015 17:31:06 GMT -6
I hate the sound of modern snares. Snare only sound like that if tuned really bad!
|
|
|
Post by brucerothwell on Apr 2, 2015 23:34:58 GMT -6
Here's one of the first rules you should know about mixing, whether it's in the box or on a console: Never have a fader above zero. If you feel the need to raise even one thing above 'zero', bring the other faders down instead. This is so very true. If you don't follow this rule, you will end up driving your DA converter to hard, and quickly eat up all your headroom. My tip, related to that one is: Add a TRIM plugin to every track, and set all of them uniformly to at least -6db -- this will force you to run all your tracks just a bit quieter.
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Apr 2, 2015 23:49:44 GMT -6
That is a good move on heavy track counts especially. Makes life easier at the end of a mix rather than fighting peaks and red lines.
|
|