Gear related (please don't judge me!) questions... [Archive]

DeyBwah

10 Nov 2009, 20:06

Mixwell

10 Nov 2009, 22:06

Hi everyone!

Just wanted to start off by saying how happy I am to have found you guys. More accurately, I had a friend refer me to Mercenary because I'm amidst a big life changing decision.. To make it short, I'm looking to pursue music on a professional career level, DIY-style. :D

I'm a bit wary posting a "gear-related" thread, as it seems you guys are more concerned with the art of recording and I know how "newbs" often concern themselves with gear more than other oh-so-important aspects to recording...

Nevertheless, I'd rather direct my questions to this forum than any other as I have a lot of respect for the regulars in here from what I've read thus far!

Welcome to Move The Mics!

So all introductions aside...

I'm basically looking to get a decent rig going that won't destroy my budget and send my wife and kids on the next train to brokeville. Here's what I have so far...

I'm running Pro Tools 8 LE on Digi002 (not using those pres)
Presonus DigiMax LE 8 Pres
Rode NT1A Condenser (used for vocals, guitars)
Rode Matched NT5s (drum overheads)
Shure SM57 (snare)
Shure Beta 52A (kick)

The very first question I would ask;

Are you happy with the recordings you have done with this equipment? Second question would be;

How is your monitoring environment? Do you have a decent set of monitors that you trust?

I would also take that into consideration.

I've already decided on getting a Lunchbox and filling it with as many API 512c Pres as I can afford as the upgrade to the Presonus DigiMax.

As for mics, I'm stumped... not sure which ones I should upgrade. The only thing I'm sure of is my budget... which is around 2k. I know that isn't much, but I've heard some incredible mixes on set-ups far shabbier than my current, so I'm not planning on depending on my gear THAT much!

There are SO MANY wonderful microphones I can recommend in this price range. You have some good ground covered thus far. Of course, if you like these options that is. Its definitely hard to suggest things blindly to people, without really identifying with them personally, but I am confident you can find a workhorse microphone [or a couple workhorse microphones] for 2K. Indeed, I strongly believe that MICROPHONES are SECRET weapons, and debatably THE most important part of any chain. They are sacred for what they accomplish, which can be many things to many people. So, at the end of the day, I think just listing options would be counterproductive to this thread. Instead, I would ask you to outlay more details about your preference and musical taste as best as possible with whatever clever identifiers you believe will translate what it is you are seeking in a product. At least for a minute, we can break down your situation, and dissect the investment into purchases that make sense for you.

That being said though, I still would like to get some decent mics considering this will be my lively-hood and every little bit helps! Up until just now, I always thought I had pretty good mics, but after reading around and seeing the price tags on the mics mentioned by Mercenary, I'm realizing that I might need to upgrade them after all. I could really use some perspective on this topic.. Am I right assuming that the mics will be a large bottle-neck in my rig once I upgrade my pres?

Don't upgrade just because of the price! The perspective is: you don't have HORRIBLE microphones. You've got to give us some perspective about how you feel about the actual audio you are capable of recording/mixing and delivering to the client. Sure there are many options that "I" or "postbot1000" might like better, but what I can tell you is that your microphones are workable. Workable to certain point yes, but a good starting point for sure. Yes, A GREAT preamp is a wonderful thing, but a GREAT microphone cannot be described in words.

As for musical style, I am more toward Alternative-Rock, with a little bit of Jazz/Fusion influence. I like variety, so transparent gear sits right with me, as I like to do all the tonal-shaping post-recording.

The end goal is to record, mix, master something that I can market completely independent of the larger forces at play!

Oh and if anyone has some good book recommendations, I'd greatly appreciate it. I saw some earlier while reading the forums, I'm looking for anything that will aid me in all stages of recording. (mic placement/techniques, mix techniques, mastering, etc)

Thanks everyone,
Dey

http://www.mercenary.com/whathavtheyd.html
http://www.mercenary.com/soliithnobma.html
http://www.mercenary.com/balofmidarby.html
http://www.mercenary.com/apnoemfaqand.html

Zachg

10 Nov 2009, 22:10

I'd say your source is more important than anything else you've mentionned. Good gear sure helps, but if you have some real good musicians performing, that'll be a lot more important. Your gonna hear this speech a lot BTW. hahaha :)

A pretty good book on recording is "Modern recording techniques," actually there's a thread on here of some of us discussing some good recording books. But, the best way to learn is to go to a pro studio, and learn from pros that work there, they are a realy, really good source of information and experience.

Welcome to the forum !!!

Cheers,
Zach

DeyBwah

11 Nov 2009, 14:04

"The very first question I would ask;

Are you happy with the recordings you have done with this equipment?"

I'm pretty satisfied with my recording quality right now, I know that a lot of improvements can come from expanding my mixing skills and "moving the mics". My mentality right now is that I should make sure to maximize all the areas that will positively affect my sound in the end. I'm reading and watching tutorials on mixing, experimenting with mic positions and that leaves upgrading my gear to the highest level I can afford.

I feel like the sound I'm recording right now has enough clarity, but it lacks a certain punchiness. I'm hoping that the API 512s will help out with that. Other than that, I don't really have any substantial complaints about my sound.

Second question would be;

How is your monitoring environment? Do you have a decent set of monitors that you trust?

I would also take that into consideration.

I "think" my monitors are great, I made sure to invest in a good pair that has a flat response. I'm using Yamaha HS80Ms with the matching sub unit, the HS10W. The sub unit was added recently and I'm debating whether or not I should use it during mixing... still getting used to how my mix sound translates to different systems, like my radio, car, etc...

What are you thoughts on a sub unit for mixing?

As far as the environment goes, I did a half-way decent job of acoustic treatment, you know, bass traps, pyramid foam.. The room still needs some more treatment, like a rug for the Bamboo floor and some more pyramid foam for the ceiling and walls, but at least the bass frequencies are tamed. I've attached some photos of my set up. The control room and tracking room are one and the same, but I do have iso booths for vocals and drums.

I'd love to get some feedback on my set up.

There are SO MANY wonderful microphones I can recommend in this price range. You have some good ground covered thus far. Of course, if you like these options that is. Its definitely hard to suggest things blindly to people, without really identifying with them personally, but I am confident you can find a workhorse microphone [or a couple workhorse microphones] for 2K. Indeed, I strongly believe that MICROPHONES are SECRET weapons, and debatably THE most important part of any chain. They are sacred for what they accomplish, which can be many things to many people. So, at the end of the day, I think just listing options would be counterproductive to this thread. Instead, I would ask you to outlay more details about your preference and musical taste as best as possible with whatever clever identifiers you believe will translate what it is you are seeking in a product. At least for a minute, we can break down your situation, and dissect the investment into purchases that make sense for you.

I hear you on the difficulty in suggesting equipment to someone you don't know personally.. but you did nail it on the head with "workhorse microphone". I'm looking for something versatile enough to be used in as many different applications as possible. Not really looking for a specific tonal color because I like to do all my EQ and Compression in my DAW. (can't afford to have it any other way)

So to break it down into identifiers... I'm mainly looking for clarity, transparency, versatility and tube warmth (if that is applicable for a mic).

At this point, who knows, just upgrading my pres might do the trick! And that is definitely where I'm going to start, but I have a feeling a nice mic or two will go a long way as well.

Don't upgrade just because of the price! The perspective is: you don't have HORRIBLE microphones. You've got to give us some perspective about how you feel about the actual audio you are capable of recording/mixing and delivering to the client. Sure there are many options that "I" or "postbot1000" might like better, but what I can tell you is that your microphones are workable. Workable to certain point yes, but a good starting point for sure. Yes, A GREAT preamp is a wonderful thing, but a GREAT microphone cannot be described in words.

Hahaha yes the price is probably not the best judgement in all things, not just mics, but I can't help but imagine what a 1k mic sounds like.. Truth is, I like the sound my mics are recording, but I'm very curious to hear what higher-quality versions of my current mics would sound like.. Is that an incorrect mentality? As in, does mic quality really travel linearly like that, or is it a completely different framework?

I suppose I haven't recorded nearly enough mics to fully understand what you mean by, a GREAT microphone cannot be described in words. Back when I purchased my Rodes, I thought they were AMAZING, but that was just in relation to what I was using before that... But going off your comments, I'd like to expand on my "good starting" point and experience that feeling of "knowing" that I have a GREAT microphone that I cannot describe in words.

Does that make sense? :)

http://www.mercenary.com/whathavtheyd.html
http://www.mercenary.com/soliithnobma.html
http://www.mercenary.com/balofmidarby.html
http://www.mercenary.com/apnoemfaqand.html

These are amazing articles!

I know I missed out on a very important age of recording and music production being relatively young (24), and because of that, I'm somewhat lacking in my level of maturity for truly excellent recorded sound, but I so very much would like to change that! That first article was a real eye opener and even a tear-jerker at some points, realizing how naive and limited my perspective was of music production... It's hard to describe, but I was truly humbled reading about the evolution and in some ways, the destruction of a beautiful culture in music and production.

I'm ready to make the jump into what seems like a secret society of true tonal warriors and master the art of recording the true essence of music. I hope what I said makes sense, because it is hard to describe this feeling in words..

Dey

DeyBwah

11 Nov 2009, 14:10

I'd say your source is more important than anything else you've mentionned. Good gear sure helps, but if you have some real good musicians performing, that'll be a lot more important. Your gonna hear this speech a lot BTW. hahaha

Haha yep, it seems we hear it a lot because it has a tendency to be over looked, especially by the uneducated.. but sometimes, even the well-educated. In the big picture, I realize that there are many variables that go into the end result. I just want to maximize all those variables, not overly obsessing but also not completely dismissing any factor that influences the end sound.

A pretty good book on recording is "Modern recording techniques," actually there's a thread on here of some of us discussing some good recording books. But, the best way to learn is to go to a pro studio, and learn from pros that work there, they are a realy, really good source of information and experience.

I'll have to check that book out! And that thread as well...

I have a few buddies who engineer for a living, I think you're right. I should just go hang out with them as much as I can. I learn better by watching and experiencing first hand than reading books.. who doesn't though lol.

Thanks for the recommendations Zach!

Dey

DeyBwah

11 Nov 2009, 14:14

Forgot to attach my images, here they are!

Dey

Sandyrb

11 Nov 2009, 14:21

Hey Dey.
I feel like the sound I'm recording right now has enough clarity, but it lacks a certain punchiness. I'm hoping that the API 512s will help out with that.
I would think you can pretty much bet your shirt that API will add more punch to your recordings. In the typical "desert island" situation where I was only allowed a single kind of pre, API would be the one for me every time. They're just wonderful. I could go on and on about my love for API but it might start to look like I'm on their payroll.

I'm still trying to pester the boss to get some in here, but he's not a dealer so there's a little resistance there. But I know where his daughters go to school.... "Buy me a 3124+ or the kid gets it!" :eek: ;)

Cheers,

DeyBwah

11 Nov 2009, 14:37

Hi Sandy!

I would think you can pretty much bet your shirt that API will add more punch to your recordings.

That's fantastic!

I can't wait to make the purchase... VERY excited to hear the difference between those pres and my DigiMax lol. I'm guessing there won't even be a comparison. For the price though, the DigiMax is great, it was a huge upgrade from the crappy Digi002 pres... don't even get me started with the 002 pres... yuck!!

I'm still trying to pester the boss to get some in here, but he's not a dealer so there's a little resistance there. But I know where his daughters go to school.... "Buy me a 3124+ or the kid gets it!"

LOL, let me know how that works out for ya. ;) Regarding the 3124+, is it basically the 512cs in a compact rack mount or does the difference go beyond that? Which is considered "better" if that is the right word...

Thanks!
DK

Sandyrb

11 Nov 2009, 14:45

Regarding the 3124+, is it basically the 512cs in a compact rack mount or does the difference go beyond that? Which is considered "better" if that is the right word.

I must confess a certain degree of ignorance here. I *believe* the 3124+ is four 512Cs in a box. If there are differences, I wouldn't know what they are. It may sound simplistic, but what I do know is that there's a 3124+ my friend Besko has that I borrow sometimes and it's freakin' brilliant. My ears love it, so I guess I don't mind too much about the technical details.

The Mercenary lads who run this forum will be able to tell you, I'm sure. :)

Cheers,

DeyBwah

11 Nov 2009, 15:12

Hmm, the price difference between opting for a lunchbox with 4 512cs and opting for a 3124+ is staggering... Close to 1.5k, anyone know the practical real-world difference between the 2 roads?

I suppose with the lunchbox, you have room to add more modules, but even then, say I added 4 more 512s, that would be $3200ish, while adding another 3124+ is $2600ish...

Dey

DeyBwah

11 Nov 2009, 15:19

Tomasz

11 Nov 2009, 15:19

Have you considered a variety of preamps? can't hurt to have some different flavors. Desert island pre or not, if I could afford four or so I might go two and two. Just a thought... And not that any one book does a master mixer make, this is a good one: "The Mixing Engineers Handbook" by Bobby Owsinski.
Intelligent, well thought out high end hardware purchases are rarely regrettable. Unlike the newest season of cartoons... These are just my opinions, nothing else. Good luck and having fun.

seaneldon

11 Nov 2009, 15:32

Have you considered a variety of preamps? can't hurt to have some different flavors.

A little variety is okay in my book...but I think people get too caught up in having every different preamp texture that they think exists. I personally prefer to use one kind of preamp for almost everything, and then have a couple "extra special" devices on hand for overdubs and stuff that needs a particular highlighted quality or something that mates unbelievably well with one or two particular microphones. In our room that'd be the Earlybird 2, Adam's DW Fearn pre, Mercury or TAB stuff...things like that. They bring something to the party.

Other than that I pick a texture/device and roll with as many channels I can get my hands on. API, Great River, NPNG... I wish our console had nothing but pres of this caliber...I'd just cut through the console and call it a day as I've done in other studios with API boards, well-maintained vintage Neves...even cutting entirely through a Trident 80B or other good chip-desks can sound great if you whisper in its ear the right way.

The microphones are where you make the meat'n'potatoes as far as recorded timbre of source X. The preamp's main job is to make the microphone louder, at the end of the day.

What's with the plexi-glass-church-style-iso-thing around the drums? Doesn't it cause all kinds of horrible reflections and cymbals zipping around a small space? I once worked at a studio that had something like this and tried it for one session because the owner insisted it was the only way to "get enough isolation". He was pretty floored at the improvement in sound quality when we (permanently) folded it up and packed it in a storage closet.

Tomasz

11 Nov 2009, 16:03

[QUOTE=seaneldon;1043]A little variety is okay in my book...but I think people get too caught up in having every different preamp texture that they think exists. I personally prefer to use one kind of preamp for almost everything, and then have a couple "extra special" devices on hand for overdubs and stuff that needs a particular highlighted quality or something that mates unbelievably well with one or two particular microphones. In our room that'd be the Earlybird 2, Adam's DW Fearn pre, Mercury or TAB stuff...things like that. They bring something to the party.

Other than that I pick a texture/device and roll with as many channels I can get my hands on. API, Great River, NPNG... I wish our console had nothing but pres of this caliber...

The microphones are where you make the meat'n'potatoes as far as recorded timbre of source X. The preamp's main job is to make the microphone louder, at the end of the day.]QUOTE

Fantastic points... I was just pointing out that a couple flavors in the beginning may help him find that one flavor he wants to roll with..
Also i agree that if your getting something new, It better bring something to the party..... Pres of that caliber are all i would even consider. It's hard to go back from that kind of quality.. I record mostly stoner/doom, and certainly 16 channels of great river (or API or Burl etc. etc.) would be the cat's meow.. but i wouldn't mind i or two other colors even single channels..
And mics, yeah, mics, alright I best go salivate.....

DeyBwah

11 Nov 2009, 16:08

Have you considered a variety of preamps? can't hurt to have some different flavors.

I considered it, but I don't have the cash to lay down on a variety of pres... I definitely want at least 4 pres that match for the sake of my drums (I use a maximum of 4 mics). After that, I may look into a bit more variety, depending on how things progress over time...

Thanks for the book recommendation, I'll add that to the cart at Amazon. :D

I personally prefer to use one kind of preamp for almost everything, and then have a couple "extra special" devices on hand for overdubs and stuff that needs a particular highlighted quality or something that mates unbelievably well with one or two particular microphones.

This is where I'm at personally as well.. If I need to down the road, I'll look into some "extra special" devices much at my wife's dismay! :P Actually, she's really supportive, even though she doesn't understand the difference between a pre, compressor or eq lol.

The microphones are where you make the meat'n'potatoes as far as recorded timbre of source X. The preamp's main job is to make the microphone louder, at the end of the day.

I'll post some sound clips eventually of my mics, curious to get some feedback on them.. I'm still a little in the dark with placement, but I suppose that comes with years of experimenting and experience.

What's with the plexi-glass-church-style-iso-thing around the drums? Doesn't it cause all kinds of horrible reflections and cymbals zipping around a small space? I once worked at a studio that had something like this and tried it for one session because the owner insisted it was the only way to "get enough isolation". He was pretty floored at the improvement in sound quality when we (permanently) folded it up and packed it in a storage closet.

LOL church-style haha! You know I haven't explicitly noticed my drum sound suffering, but that's probably because I have yet to record without the iso booth... That makes me wonder now.. but also a bit sad because the sound isolation is great, I can lay drums at 2am with little worry of noise throughout the house. I'll have to post some clips of the drum sounds as well, get some feedback on if it is terrible or not.. Damn, that really worries me! I do have some absorbers in there that do a pretty decent job of soaking of the reflections.. do you think piling on more acoustic treatment could be an option? I guess you'd have to hear what I got going first. I'll record a sample tonight.

Thanks for the feedback!

Dey

seaneldon

11 Nov 2009, 16:24

You know I haven't explicitly noticed my drum sound suffering, but that's probably because I have yet to record without the iso booth...

Bold added for emphasis.

That makes me wonder now.. but also a bit sad because the sound isolation is great, I can lay drums at 2am with little worry of noise throughout the house.

Really? Is there a "roof" on that thing, too? Is it sealed somehow? How thick is the plexiglass? I would imagine this thing is designed more for somewhat-notable reduction of spill from other instruments, and definitely NOT something that can effectively isolate your drums from your wife. Maybe she's going deaf. Has she ever been in there for long periods of time while cymbals were zipping around?

I do have some absorbers in there that do a pretty decent job of soaking of the reflections.. do you think piling on more acoustic treatment could be an option?

Anything and everything is an option. This one will almost undoubtedly make whatever sounds you are currently getting sound more closed-in. I find most small booth environments to have a lot of standing waves and comb filtering...very hollow, boxy, "boothy" sound.

Definitely try losing that thing and recording the drums with a little more room to breath. This will be a huge difference.

DeyBwah

11 Nov 2009, 16:33

Really? Is there a "roof" on that thing, too? Is it sealed somehow? How thick is the plexiglass? I would imagine this thing is designed more for somewhat-notable reduction of spill from other instruments, and definitely NOT something that can effectively isolate your drums from your wife. Maybe she's going deaf. Has she ever been in there for long periods of time while cymbals were zipping around?

Yep, there's a sorber roof on the booth. The drums are also on HoverDeck risers, so the tone doesn't get zapped into the wood floors. The back of the booth is open, but I covered the whole top with some thick velvet curtains.

I wonder how much the cymbal types makes a difference.. I have all special K dark cymbals. They're not as bright and tinny, I'm sure being isolated though, as you mentioned, is no doubt affecting the sound tremendously. For better or worse, I suppose it depends on the context. But you're definitely right, it doesn't sound a bit boxy, which I correct with EQ in post. But now I'm VERY curious to record without it, although I'm not sure if I could "permanently" store it in the closet...

This is a link to the booth I have...

http://clearsonic.com/IsoPacA.htm

Those sorbers are no joke, they are like a blackhole for sound absorbtion!

Dey

DeyBwah

12 Nov 2009, 00:37

So I've attached a quick drum recording. There's two clips in this one file...

The first clip has a wider overhead mic position (2 overheads are spread out more, about 3.5 feet apart) and the Beta 52 is inside the bass drum about 3 inches.

The second clip has a narrower overhead mic position (2 overheads are closer together, about 2 feet apart) and the Beta 52 is about 2 inches from the kick hole.

What do you guys think?

There are no plug-ins or even volume adjustments. Only a 80 pan left and right on the overheads.

Dey

Sandyrb

12 Nov 2009, 09:46

I definitely want at least 4 pres that match for the sake of my drums.
But OTOH have you considered that two *pairs* of pres would be the way to go? Much as I love API till it hurts, these spangly new NPNG things are a-freakin'-mazing. A really nice combination would be API for your close mics and NPNG for the overheads. There are some very good preamps about these days as has been said already.

This is not to cut across my earlier endorsement of your all-API approach but you know, it might not be a bad idea. There's no harm in flexibility. Anyway.

As Sean said the mics are really where the love happens. :)

Cheers,

Ken Morgan

12 Nov 2009, 10:14

I must confess a certain degree of ignorance here. I *believe* the 3124+ is four 512Cs in a box.

Cheers,

The unit is actually 4 312s (hence the name 312-4) and a summing circuit.

As for the variety debate, I am of the school supporting one kind of pre, one kind of EQ, IE a console, but that is of course strictly an opinion.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Mixwell

12 Nov 2009, 10:31

The unit is actually 4 312s (hence the name 312-4) and a summing circuit.

Hi Ken, Let me explain the differences of the two products you mention.

The API 3124+ = 4, 312 mic amps with a PAD/PHASE FLIP/48V.

The API 3124MB [Mix Buss] = 4, 312 mic amps with PAD/PHASE FLIP/48V. It also features an AUX buss with stereo AUX return, a MIX buss with output faders pan/per channel, and Insert Send and Returns per channel BEFORE the mix buss.

Much different animal.

seaneldon

12 Nov 2009, 12:23

Only a 80 pan left and right on the overheads.

Don't be scared...bring 'em all the way left and all the way right.

Ken Morgan

12 Nov 2009, 14:22

Thanks for the clarity, Adam. Regardless of feature differences, if drum tracks don't sound right using these, it ain't the gear's fault.

DeyBwah

12 Nov 2009, 14:48

This is not to cut across my earlier endorsement of your all-API approach but you know, it might not be a bad idea. There's no harm in flexibility. Anyway.

Those do look quite enticing! I wish it came in a module though.. I'm betting I might have to peep those down the road after I fill up my box to add some flexibility.

Btw, does the 10 space lunchbox fit in a normal rack space? I didn't check the measurements yet, if it doesn't.. what is the recommended housing for that? Just curious.

The API 3124+ = 4, 312 mic amps with a PAD/PHASE FLIP/48V.

Thanks for clarifying that Adam!

Don't be scared...bring 'em all the way left and all the way right.

Haha I usually do, but for some reason I decided to try something different..

So what do you think of my current drum sound? Any recommendations on improving the sound? I noticed with a tighter mic arrangement, the hi-hat is less prominent while the snare kicks up a bit. I suppose it is all personal preference and what you're going for in a specific song.

Dey

Dan

12 Nov 2009, 14:59

Btw, does the 10 space lunchbox fit in a normal rack space? I didn't check the measurements yet, if it doesn't.. what is the recommended housing for that? Just curious.

The 10-space API 500-V is rackmountable out of the box, but not "portable" like the lunchbox - i.e. it doesn't not have a handle or rubber feet.

-Dan.

DeyBwah

12 Nov 2009, 15:02

Thanks Dan, don't plan on moving the hardware enough to warrant a handle anyway... I guess that's why they call the 6 space a "lunchbox". Does it come in a Captain Planet edition? (custom graphics) :D

Dey

seaneldon

12 Nov 2009, 16:26

So what do you think of my current drum sound? Any recommendations on improving the sound? I noticed with a tighter mic arrangement, the hi-hat is less prominent while the snare kicks up a bit. I suppose it is all personal preference and what you're going for in a specific song.

Dey

Aside from the fact that I definitely hear a plastic booth (the booth is resonating and it gives the drums a certain ring/tone that in my opinion is undesirable. I'd have to hear it in context with music, I guess...but that's what I hear), your kick drum sound needs some help.

First off, this drum isn't tuned very well. In general it seems to be tuned too high for that particular drum, and you can hear that the batter and resonant heads don't really have much to do with each other as far as pitch. Tune the drum down a couple-three pitches and try to match the two heads a bit closer. It doesn't have to be exact, and a lot of the magic in kick drum tuning is having the beater head or the resonant head SLIGHTLY lower than the other.

It also sounds like you've got problems with the phase relationship between the kick and the overheads. Have a look at the "Four Mic Drums + IBP" video on the Meth Lab (http://www.methlabstudio.com) site. Then again, this could definitely be caused by reflections inside the booth, but whatever may be is causing the drum to sound very hollow (not as in an empty drum with no damping inside, but hollow as in tone).

If you invert the polarity on the kick drum mic does it get better, or worse?

Snare's a little tight for my taste, but again, that's a decision that gets made based on the rest of the instruments.

It's not the worst drum sound I've heard but there's a lot of room for improvement. It doesn't sound like a single instrument/entity. It sounds like a lot of different drums and cymbals.

Lose that booth for a minute and post up what you get!

DeyBwah

12 Nov 2009, 18:24

Wow thanks Sean for the great feedback!

I'll try tuning the kick when I get home tonight and record another clip.

It also sounds like you've got problems with the phase relationship between the kick and the overheads.

I checked out that video, very cool set up and great sound! So I'm not "schooled" in the realm of phase relationships.. I'll do some research via Google.

If you invert the polarity on the kick drum mic does it get better, or worse

How do I invert the polarity? Is it via a switch on the mic or a plug-in? I hope I don't sound completely inept asking this, I'm still a baby with recording in a lot of ways! But we all start somewhere right? :D

Lose that booth for a minute and post up what you get!

Losing the booth will have to be a weekend project most likely! That thing is F'ing heavy!!! I'm sort of crossing my fingers and hoping that it doesn't make a HUGE difference.. because the booth is so practical for my set-up. Do you have any advice on fixing the glaring issues the booth introduces? I'll work with the tuning and polarity as well as the positioning of the mics.

I noticed your overhead positions are radically different than mine. Mine are "hanging" facing down from the cable positioned directly above the low tom and the hi-hat/snare about half a foot in forward from my head. They're up pretty high too, above my head by about a foot.

Anyway, time to research this "phase relationship" you speak of!

Thanks Sean,
Dey

Zachg

12 Nov 2009, 19:06

I just thought of something, should I get a A/D converter along with the APIs?

I'm going to be running the API pres into my Digi002, not sure if I should relegate the task of conversion to my 002... would like minimize the damage of course. Anyone have any experience in this regard?

Thanks,
Dey

Another option would be the Black Lion Audio Mod for your 002. I've heard nothing but great reviews about it. As soon as I upgrade to an 003, I'm getting it modded. It's about $1,300 for the signature mod (i think), so it's pretty close to the price of the decent mid-priced converters. THe RME's, Lynx's. etc.... would be another option. Then you could get both the API's and the NPNGs hahaha.

I'll give the NPNGs another vote if you care, I've personally used the 4 chan one (thanks Snady :D) and it's amazing!

Edit: Inverting the polarity can be done on the preamp or some plugins can do that. The PT AudioSuite has an "Invert" function which I think would work too.

Mixwell

12 Nov 2009, 19:19

Another option would be the Black Lion Audio Mod for your 002

This is not the answer.

I hear the booth perfectly fine.

DeyBwah

12 Nov 2009, 19:22

Another option would be the Black Lion Audio Mod for your 002. I've heard nothing but great reviews about it.

What exactly does that mod do? I read people talking about it and how great it is, but haven't found a post that describes what it is exactly.. I'll look around some more tonight since it is getting another mention..

Inverting the polarity can be done on the preamp or some plugins can do that. The PT AudioSuite has an "Invert" function which I think would work too.

I'll snoop around tonight, did a bunch of reading on recording drums today, can't wait to experiment when I get home!

Thanks,
Dey

DeyBwah

12 Nov 2009, 19:23

This is not the answer.

I hear the booth perfectly fine.

Oh the BLA mod was to address the booth?

Dey

DeyBwah

12 Nov 2009, 19:28

Hmm looks like the BLA mod is only for the 002R/003R...? I have the 002 control board...

And of course I looked everywhere but the BLA web-site, which has all the info on what the mod exactly entails lol!

Does anyone know if the mod is limited to the rack versions?

Also, would it be worth it considering I don't even use the pres on the Digi?

Dey

Zachg

12 Nov 2009, 19:35

Yeah the mod is only for the rack versions. I didn't notice you didn't have the rack versions. Duh, sorry!

Mixwell, what do you mean about the 002r mod affecting the iso booth? I seem to be missing something here. :confused:

Mixwell

12 Nov 2009, 19:39

Zachg

12 Nov 2009, 19:44

I see, said the blind man....

I hadn't even noticed the part about the booth until you mentioned it.

Note self don't read and post in big threads when you're overtired.

Sandyrb

12 Nov 2009, 21:14

I hope I don't sound completely inept asking this, I'm still a baby with recording in a lot of ways! But we all start somewhere right? :D

Absolutely! And recording is one of those things where we never stop learning. Like Lindsey Buckingham from Fleetwood Mac said, "If you're any good at all, you know you can be better". I think you're asking a lot of the right questions here and it's obvious that you want to aim higher so be encouraged! :rolleyes: Fan that spark into a huge fire! :D

Cheers,

DeyBwah

12 Nov 2009, 21:38

Yeah the mod is only for the rack versions. I didn't notice you didn't have the rack versions. Duh, sorry!

So I found a pretty cool review of the BLA mod upgrade process, here's a link! I'm thinking of selling my 002 console, picking up a 002 rack on eBay on the cheap and going down the mod road. I'm a bit concerned with upgrading my pres and having it run through my crappy A/D converters in the 002... looks like the mod upgrades a LOT of stuff!

http://pearlsnapmusic.com/?p=98

Absolutely! And recording is one of those things where we never stop learning. Like Lindsey Buckingham from Fleetwood Mac said, "If you're any good at all, you know you can be better". I think you're asking a lot of the right questions here and it's obvious that you want to aim higher so be encouraged! Fan that spark into a huge fire!

Aww thanks Sandy, that means a lot to me because I am aiming to learn and better myself!

Just hope you don't regret encouraging me, I tend to be heavy on the questions and inquiries lol ;)

Dey

Mixwell

12 Nov 2009, 21:48

The equipment used is the furthest thing from the problem. There is a good drum sound to be had, minus all the ugly reflection and pinging resonance being picked up by every microphone placed inside that plastic frequency zinger. Its creating WAY more problems, and I will suggest to you that fixing it later in post is a bad move. You might try and get the sound that is needed before you even hit record. This is the best way to record stuff. A-B-M = Always Be Mixing. It has to sound like a record before the record button is pushed.

If you asked me to help you record drums in this situation, I would;

A) Remove the drum shield, STAT, and ask your wife if we could make noise for a couple hours to record a much needed drum part.

B) Find a inexpensive large carpet to cover your wood floors, so as to gently deaden the floor resonance. I would try and keep things as controlled as I could, keeping the room still somewhat "live", and not totally dead, meaning some decay time. It means absorption, but only in the right places to control problematic reflections, such as the ones bouncing back and forth at unacceptable levels inside your drum booth.

C) I would Put the Drums in the Middle of the space, or some variation of the middle of the room. You might put the plastic fence OUTSIDE the ROOM, KEEPING THE ROOMS BLEED FROM PISSING OFF YOUR WIFE. There it will serve a better purpose.

D) Bleed is your friend, but its your worst m/f'n enemy in a plastic drum throne.

Halfway Competent

12 Nov 2009, 23:57

Hey Dey,

Overall, I think it's pretty decent. The two biggest issues I heard have been called out already: The kick is out of tune and there are some phase relationship problems going on between the O/H and the rest of your kit.

First thing you need to do (after moving your drums out of the enclosure :D ): Your two overheads should be the same distance from the snare and kick. If one mic is 3' from the snare, so must the other mic be. Or, alternatively, you could position them in X/Y arrangement. Since the capsules are right next to each other, there are no phase problems.

One thing I like to do is put very short delays on the snare and toms... I'm talking a couple of ms. I solo the snare with the O/H and tweak the delay until the snare sounds fat again (until the phase cancellation between the very close snare mic and the more distant overheads is resolved in the lows). I then do the same for the toms. In your case, I'd also do the kick.

I was fighting some drum sounds myself on a recording and finally got them to a point where I'm happy with how the mix sounds. It's here: http://www.tewsnet.com/dropbox/FusionSample.mp3.

The drums were recorded in a church. If you're curious, I'll tell you the equipment that I used (I am intentionally not listing equipment because I want the listener to hear what it sounds like before preconceived notions of the gear affect how they like the sound), and how I ultimately ended up mixing it.

Your room looks sweet, by the way! My "studio" is my living room... :p Haha!

DeyBwah

13 Nov 2009, 02:03

The equipment used is the furthest thing from the problem. There is a good drum sound to be had, minus all the ugly reflection and pinging resonance being picked up by every microphone placed inside that plastic frequency zinger.

Ahhh!! Forgiveness please! :O

I feel like I'm a heretic owning an iso booth now lol.. :/

It's so crazy how I never noticed all the reflections until you guys mentioned it.. I ask myself, wtf was wrong with my ears? Seriously, my standards just went up 200%. I suppose that's the journey of training one's engineer ears.

Okay, so here's what I did.. I got all the extra foam and bass traps and positioned them strategically where most of the reflections were taking place and re-recorded a clip. I also tuned my kick according to the advice given by Sean, and placed the Beta 52 much further away. (about 8-10 inches) I'd like to get some feedback on if there was any improvement? I also "moved the mics" again.

Remove the drum shield, STAT, and ask your wife if we could make noise for a couple hours to record a much needed drum part.

I'm going to follow this advice for any serious drum tracks that need to be laid down... but before I do that I need to...

Find a inexpensive large carpet to cover your wood floors, so as to gently deaden the floor resonance. I would try and keep things as controlled as I could, keeping the room still somewhat "live", and not totally dead, meaning some decay time. It means absorption, but only in the right places to control problematic reflections, such as the ones bouncing back and forth at unacceptable levels inside your drum booth.

....get some type of rug that I can lay down to the massive reflections on the floor.. also need to put some foam on the ceiling I imagine. It's not a 12ft+ ceiling, but your standard home ceiling. On the bright side, at least it isn't a basement ceiling that's under 8ft..

I would Put the Drums in the Middle of the space, or some variation of the middle of the room. You might put the plastic fence OUTSIDE the ROOM, KEEPING THE ROOMS BLEED FROM PISSING OFF YOUR WIFE. There it will serve a better purpose.

I've got a good idea about drum placement in relation to the room after watching the video from the Meth Lab. Someday I hope to have a dedicated studio space with HIGH ceilings and luxurious square footage.. That studio is quite inspiring! Can't even imagine how many banks I'd have to rob to acquire a gear list like Meth Lab lol.

First thing you need to do (after moving your drums out of the enclosure ): Your two overheads should be the same distance from the snare and kick. If one mic is 3' from the snare, so must the other mic be. Or, alternatively, you could position them in X/Y arrangement. Since the capsules are right next to each other, there are no phase problems.

I busted out my tape measure and made sure the distance between the overheads and snare are equal, but it's not equal to the distance of the kick because the kick is to the right of the snare if that makes sense.. So the distance is uneven by about 2 inches.. Is that significant enough to cause phase issues? I'll try the X/Y arrangement tomorrow night after work.

One thing I like to do is put very short delays on the snare and toms... I'm talking a couple of ms. I solo the snare with the O/H and tweak the delay until the snare sounds fat again (until the phase cancellation between the very close snare mic and the more distant overheads is resolved in the lows). I then do the same for the toms. In your case, I'd also do the kick.

I used PT's TimeAdjuster plug-in and followed your advice, it's really exciting to hear when you find that sweet spot amount of delay that fattens the sound!! I could actually "hear" the difference! After about 20 minutes though, my ears started fatiguing out on me, I'm sure I could fine tweak it further, which I'll continue to do in future now that I know about it..

I was fighting some drum sounds myself on a recording and finally got them to a point where I'm happy with how the mix sounds. It's here: http://www.tewsnet.com/dropbox/FusionSample.mp3.

I heard this in your thread but this mix sounds so much cleaner and in the pocket! Looks like you really dialed it in.. great stuff! Man, the bass and drums are just butter.. and those keys are in the perfect spot light. Great arrangement, when's the CD slated for release? Let me know! I LOVE fusion, my favorite genre to watch live. Period.

The drums were recorded in a church. If you're curious, I'll tell you the equipment that I used (I am intentionally not listing equipment because I want the listener to hear what it sounds like before preconceived notions of the gear affect how they like the sound), and how I ultimately ended up mixing it.

I'd love to know how you recorded/mixed the drums, they sound so clean! I can't believe they were recorded in a church of all places... I don't hear any church-like verb or reflections like my church would produce.

Your room looks sweet, by the way! My "studio" is my living room... Haha!

I wish it sounded as sweet as it looked lol. Thanks for the wind in my sails though, I'm doing the best with what I got.

Thanks for all the feedback you guys, I really appreciate it and hopefully, I'm applying it properly!

Dey

P.S. I didn't mix or run any plug-ins minus the TimeAdjuster, so this clip is pretty much bare minimum. I did however pan the overheads 100 left and right.

Halfway Competent

13 Nov 2009, 03:18

Dan

13 Nov 2009, 07:41

How do I invert the polarity? Is it via a switch on the mic or a plug-in? I hope I don't sound completely inept asking this, I'm still a baby with recording in a lot of ways! But we all start somewhere right? :D

There are a bunch of ways to do it. While tracking, you can use a cable or barrel connector that flips pins 2 & 3, or you can use a switch on the preamp (where available). After the fact, most DAWs have an "invert" function that can invert the polarity of the track (i.e. flip it upside down). Also, many plugins (particularly EQ plugins) have polarity reverse switches. The icon on the button usually looks like an 'O' with a diagonal line through it.

-Dan.

DeyBwah

13 Nov 2009, 14:30

That sounds a lot better! The kick has a much more natural sound to it now, in particular! Is this without the drum shield? As far as placing your overheads, I have my doubts a couple inches will make that big of a difference. You can try if you want, but in my experience, mic stand adjustment just isn't that precise. (Of course, I use el cheapo mic stands...)

Thanks Adam! Yes the kick was WAY out of tune and could still use some fine-tuning I think. That recording was still with the drum shield in place, but positioned 2 bass traps strategically, one on top of the Beta 52 and kick, the other behind the ride and in front of the glass shield. I also placed 6 1'x1' wedge foam in areas where sound was reflecting into the over heads and etc...

I'm still definitely going to take down the shield, but since I'm not recording anything serious right now, I'll probably continue to experiment with the shield and try to get the best sound I can.

I'm not sure if there is an album coming out or not... This recording was an informal demo, and only four real tracks were laid down. But I'm glad to hear you like it! I'll pass your compliments on to the band.

I really do hope you release an album, seems like you've got a great connection with that band from what I'm hearing in that clip.

Details:
DAW: PTLE, Digi 002R
Drum kit: Pacific Drums w/ Pearl steel snare
Kick: EV Raven, dbx 386
Toms: EV Ravens, Presonus DigiMax LT
Snare: Shure Beta 57, dbx 386
O/H: Audio Technica AT4033, Presonus DigiMax LT
Bass: Behringer POS active direct box, Presonus DigiMax LT
Keys: Mono feed straight off the keyboard amp, Presonus DigiMax LT

Is your 002R modded with Black Lion Audio?

I really like the kick and snare sound you're getting from the dbx/raven/sm57. And of course the Presonus sounds clean as well. We have pretty similar set ups, I'm running a Digimax FS for everything right now.

So are you close mic'ing every tom individually?

I added some reverb, about 1 sec decay, to the snare, keys, and O/H... And a .3 sec reverb to the toms. I also did a little experiment with the toms, where I put a mono/stereo delay on them and panned them with delay as well as with level change. (If you want to pan to the right, delay the left a msec or so, etc.)

I like subtle verbs myself, gives it that "studio" sound! Maybe though, it's because I'm not good at getting a "big" sound with verbs yet.. I can't seem to dial in the mix and it always ends up sounding really amateur. Maybe it also has to do with the verb plug-ins I'm using. (Pro Tools D-Verb/Air Verb)

Anyway, judging from the difference between your two tracks, it sounds like you're on to something. Keep trying stuff out!

I definitely feel like I'm making progress, much thanks to the help I'm getting from this forum! Thanks again for the great feedback. :)

There are a bunch of ways to do it. While tracking, you can use a cable or barrel connector that flips pins 2 & 3, or you can use a switch on the preamp (where available). After the fact, most DAWs have an "invert" function that can invert the polarity of the track (i.e. flip it upside down). Also, many plugins (particularly EQ plugins) have polarity reverse switches. The icon on the button usually looks like an 'O' with a diagonal line through it.

My preamp doesn't have that feature, but I did see that 'O' with a diagonal line through it on my TimeAdjuster plug-in. So after I set the delay (in that plug-in, it reads samples instead of milliseconds), does it not take any effect until I flip the 'O' switch? Because I didn't notice anything to my ears unless I flipped the switch.

Dey

Halfway Competent

14 Nov 2009, 03:17

OK, yeah, I noticed that the second sample had a drier (less "live") sound... Your treatments to the shield definitely tamed reflections. I think you'll find that your sound opens up once you get the kit out into the room, even if the walls are treated.

I did mic the toms individually for that recording... A Raven on each. I don't suggest them for that use, though... It took too much work to get them to sound decent. And, no, my Digi-002 isn't modded. Don't think I'm gonna mod it; I'll save up instead for some HD stuff (the HD cards are fairly reasonable on eBay!).

Yeah, I'd look into getting some better plugs than the Digidesign stuff. I use the Waves Renaissance bundle. It's decent, and was around $200; the plugs are all better than the Digi stuff, but also not exactly top of the line. If you're going for the long, lush reverbs (like on the mid-90s pop stuff), you'll need a really good 'verb to start with. I haven't done a whole lot of research into this, but I've had the TC Electronic VSS3 (in the PowerCore X8 and System 6000) recommended to me.

When you're putting reverb on something, I've found it helps if you put the 'verb on an aux input with an EQ before it to roll off the highs and lows. This will reduce hiss and bass muddiness.

Then, keep the tails short, and turn the reverb up just enough that you don't really hear it as reverb, but whatever you're using it on has a nice sense of space. For example: http://www.tewsnet.com/dropbox/sample.mp3. This is how I personally do things... Of course, YMMV. :)

Tomasz

14 Nov 2009, 10:46

My preamp doesn't have that feature, but I did see that 'O' with a diagonal line through it on my TimeAdjuster plug-in. So after I set the delay (in that plug-in, it reads samples instead of milliseconds), does it not take any effect until I flip the 'O' switch? Because I didn't notice anything to my ears unless I flipped the switch.Dey

Are you certain that the time adjuster is a delay and not a latency compensation plugin? I suggest a little trip through the PT reference guide if you are unsure...
And lose those panels ASAP..... they are for broadcast, live, and marriages specifically. The sooner you track w/o 'em, the sooner you'll get a handle on you sounds......
peace

DeyBwah

14 Nov 2009, 13:33

Or, alternatively, you could position them in X/Y arrangement. Since the capsules are right next to each other, there are no phase problems.

I tried arranging my overheads in the X/Y arrangement, The difference is so subtle, but I think I like it! It notice a big difference in the snare and kick mainly. There more headroom, that's probably from dismissing the phase complications.

Yeah, I'd look into getting some better plugs than the Digidesign stuff. I use the Waves Renaissance bundle. It's decent, and was around $200; the plugs are all better than the Digi stuff, but also not exactly top of the line. If you're going for the long, lush reverbs (like on the mid-90s pop stuff), you'll need a really good 'verb to start with. I haven't done a whole lot of research into this, but I've had the TC Electronic VSS3 (in the PowerCore X8 and System 6000) recommended to me.

I'm just realizing I never really thought of picking up 3rd party plug-ins lately.. I did at the outset of getting my Pro Tools rig back when it was PT6, but the price tags were really unattractive considering I got the factory edition that claimed to come with over $2k worth of plug-ins. I figured the plug-ins I had were good enough. And actually most of them work well enough for me, except I always disliked the factory verbs...

The AIR verbs are imo a big improvement on the D-Verb, but it only raises my curiosity to what other verb plug-ins sound like that are out on the market.

And then there's hardware reverbs... It's truly mind-boggling how many options we have these days! And all to accomplish the same quintessential goal, the end sound. :)

When you're putting reverb on something, I've found it helps if you put the 'verb on an aux input with an EQ before it to roll off the highs and lows. This will reduce hiss and bass muddiness.

Hmm I'll have to try that, I usually put the EQ after the Verb to rid the high-low noise. Thanks for the idea!

Then, keep the tails short, and turn the reverb up just enough that you don't really hear it as reverb, but whatever you're using it on has a nice sense of space.

And once again, I didn't the opposite to you here as well. I would have a "high tail" then just turn it down enough that it is barely noticeable.. lol :D

I'll have to try that out as well!

Are you certain that the time adjuster is a delay and not a latency compensation plugin? I suggest a little trip through the PT reference guide if you are unsure...

You know.. I think you're right, it is a latency plug-in. But isn't a latency plug-in just a delay in essence? Meaning, couldn't you use it for the purpose of adjusting phase relationships? Whatever the case, I'm definitely hearing the difference when adjusting the sample/delay. I'll try experimenting with other delay plugs and see one stands out as the winner!

Dey

Dan

14 Nov 2009, 13:42

Are you certain that the time adjuster is a delay and not a latency compensation plugin?
peace

Latency compensation is delay. The only difference is that the delay parameter in Time Adjuster is measured in samples, not milliseconds.

-Dan.

DeyBwah

14 Nov 2009, 13:49

Latency compensation is delay. The only difference is that the delay parameter in Time Adjuster is measured in samples, not milliseconds.

-Dan.

Do you know what the conversion rate from samples to milliseconds are?

-Dey

Tomasz

14 Nov 2009, 15:14

Latency compensation is delay. The only difference is that the delay parameter in Time Adjuster is measured in samples, not milliseconds.

-Dan.

Thanks for clarifying Dan... so then on the time adjuster plug-in there are a the same parameters to adjust like a delay plug-in? ie; feedback, repeats, mix, etc... just curious....

DeyBwah

14 Nov 2009, 17:31

The only parameters are gain and samples + a phase invert switch.

-Dey

Sandyrb

14 Nov 2009, 18:22

Do you know what the conversion rate from samples to milliseconds are?

Well, say you're working at 48KHz sample rate, then there are 48,000 samples per second. With a millisecond being a thousandth of a second, it follows that there are 48 samples per millisecond. Or 44.1 samples if you're working at 44.1KHz, 96 samples at 96KHz and so on.

So at 48KHz if you change your Time Adjuster by 1 sample, you are making a 1/48th of a millisecond difference (or about 0.275" of sound travel distance under normal temperature and pressure conditions, if you prefer. :p )

Cheers,

DeyBwah

14 Nov 2009, 22:53

Well, say you're working at 48KHz sample rate, then there are 48,000 samples per second. With a millisecond being a thousandth of a second, it follows that there are 48 samples per millisecond. Or 44.1 samples if you're working at 44.1KHz, 96 samples at 96KHz and so on.

So at 48KHz if you change your Time Adjuster by 1 sample, you are making a 1/48th of a millisecond difference (or about 0.275" of sound travel distance under normal temperature and pressure conditions, if you prefer. :p )

Cheers,

Oh thanks for the great break down, that makes perfect sense. So my snare sounds great at about 4 milliseconds and my kick sounds about right at 1 millisecond... very interesting. Anyone know how fast sound travels? (how many milliseconds it takes to travel 1 ft?) I'm sure it depends on the frequency... bass travels slower I imagine...

-Dey

Sandyrb

14 Nov 2009, 23:19

Anyone know how fast sound travels? (how many milliseconds it takes to travel 1 ft?)

In 'normal' conditions, about 341 meters per second which is approximately 770mph / 1200kph. This translates to about 13.2 inches per millisecond although most people just use the 1ft / millisecond rule.

I always think it's funny on a movie how the sound of a distant explosion arrives instantly. Or travels through the vacuum of space. :)

Cheers,

DeyBwah

14 Nov 2009, 23:52

In 'normal' conditions, about 341 meters per second which is approximately 770mph / 1200kph. This translates to about 13.2 inches per millisecond although most people just use the 1ft / millisecond rule.

I always think it's funny on a movie how the sound of a distant explosion arrives instantly. Or travels through the vacuum of space. :)

Cheers,

Dang Sandy, are you a mathematician or what? lol! I just got "schooled". :p

So maybe my latency is incorrect... because snare mic and over head mics are only about 3.5 ft distance apart, which would break down to around 154 samples... I set my setting at about 180 samples.. Hrmmm... Hehe I love this stuff!!! It's great being a geek. :D

That's true about the instant explosion sounds... I always thought it funny how movies like Star Wars or Star Trek showed explosions in outer space... Which is also impossible with the lack of oxygen hah.

-Dey

Halfway Competent

15 Nov 2009, 01:02

Dang Sandy, are you a mathematician or what? lol! I just got "schooled". :p

So maybe my latency is incorrect... because snare mic and over head mics are only about 3.5 ft distance apart, which would break down to around 154 samples... I set my setting at about 180 samples.. Hrmmm... Hehe I love this stuff!!! It's great being a geek. :D

Well, I wouldn't say it's incorrect... You said they're 3.5' apart, so 3.5 msec... And you have your delay set at 4 msec. Really, the correct spot is where it sounds "right" to you.

Halfway Competent

15 Nov 2009, 01:09

I'm just realizing I never really thought of picking up 3rd party plug-ins lately.. I did at the outset of getting my Pro Tools rig back when it was PT6, but the price tags were really unattractive considering I got the factory edition that claimed to come with over $2k worth of plug-ins. I figured the plug-ins I had were good enough. And actually most of them work well enough for me, except I always disliked the factory verbs...

The AIR verbs are imo a big improvement on the D-Verb, but it only raises my curiosity to what other verb plug-ins sound like that are out on the market.

And then there's hardware reverbs... It's truly mind-boggling how many options we have these days! And all to accomplish the same quintessential goal, the end sound. :)

Ah, interesting. I haven't tried the AIR verbs. The Digi EQ is pretty OK, actually, but the Digi comp that I had been using (Compressor 3, I think it is), I'm starting to like a bit less. I haven't played with the Factory bundle since I bought my 002R right after it came out... They weren't doing the factory bundles yet, IIRC. I asked if I could get the factory plugs through a PT software upgrade and was told nope. So for me, it's all third-party plugs. :) Fortuantely, the Renaissance Maxx bundle has been good to me so far (though I'd love a better 'verb). The Sonnox EQ and Compressor are great... I loved my free-trial time with them! The 'verb, not so much.

Sandyrb

15 Nov 2009, 12:13

Dang Sandy, are you a mathematician or what? lol! I just got "schooled".
I'm just a humble little nobody and very happy to be that... but thanks anyway for the implicit compliment. :)
So maybe my latency is incorrect... because snare mic and over head mics are only about 3.5 ft distance apart, which would break down to around 154 samples... I set my setting at about 180 samples.. Hrmmm... Hehe I love this stuff!!! It's great being a geek.
I don't disagree with the latter sentence but this is what I have to say again and again to the 'fledgling' engineers at our studio:

THE SCIENCE MUST SERVE THE ART!

If we mixed by maths, and made recordings on physics principles we'd be making records with no soul, no personality, no vibe. So, whilst the science is good, it's only a tool isn't it? Real records are made by *people* with all their imperfections and idiosyncrasies, talents and abilities. Making a record that touches peoples' hearts isn't about things like choice of mic, latency, which EQ sounds 'warm' etc. (good though those things are), it's about having fun, passion, aiming higher, wanting to achieve something wonderful.

Now, I don't want to come across as a killjoy here because, personally, I really like the science. I love the way that facets of sound can be understood by scientific principles. BUT!! It has to take second place to the art. If my science ever comes within close proximity of ruining a good record then I am wrong, wrong, 100 times wrong. Because in the end it's not about achieving technical perfection - fun though that is - it's about creating audio art that touches people.

Anyway, sorry to rant, I guess you triggered the preacher in me. :) But I'll finish with the legendary words of Joe Meek: "If it sounds right, it IS right!"

Cheers,

DeyBwah

15 Nov 2009, 20:25

Ah, interesting. I haven't tried the AIR verbs. The Digi EQ is pretty OK, actually, but the Digi comp that I had been using (Compressor 3, I think it is), I'm starting to like a bit less. I haven't played with the Factory bundle since I bought my 002R right after it came out... They weren't doing the factory bundles yet, IIRC. I asked if I could get the factory plugs through a PT software upgrade and was told nope. So for me, it's all third-party plugs. :) Fortuantely, the Renaissance Maxx bundle has been good to me so far (though I'd love a better 'verb). The Sonnox EQ and Compressor are great... I loved my free-trial time with them! The 'verb, not so much.

Wow, that's interesting.. I don't know where I would be without the factory plug-ins I got... That would definitely change my whole entire sound I'm sure since they play such a large role in the end sound. I haven't bought ANY plug-ins since I got my 002 w/Factory plugs... but now I think I may do some research on some different verbs and compressors. I really like your verb on that vocal clip you posted. So subtle and "real".

Digi is such a corporation... it's really a love/hate relationship with them. I love PT's workflow but their hardware is junk! And the customer service is so black and white...

-Dey

DeyBwah

15 Nov 2009, 20:51

I'm just a humble little nobody and very happy to be that... but thanks anyway for the implicit compliment. :)

I don't disagree with the latter sentence but this is what I have to say again and again to the 'fledgling' engineers at our studio:

THE SCIENCE MUST SERVE THE ART!

If we mixed by maths, and made recordings on physics principles we'd be making records with no soul, no personality, no vibe. So, whilst the science is good, it's only a tool isn't it? Real records are made by *people* with all their imperfections and idiosyncrasies, talents and abilities. Making a record that touches peoples' hearts isn't about things like choice of mic, latency, which EQ sounds 'warm' etc. (good though those things are), it's about having fun, passion, aiming higher, wanting to achieve something wonderful.

Now, I don't want to come across as a killjoy here because, personally, I really like the science. I love the way that facets of sound can be understood by scientific principles. BUT!! It has to take second place to the art. If my science ever comes within close proximity of ruining a good record then I am wrong, wrong, 100 times wrong. Because in the end it's not about achieving technical perfection - fun though that is - it's about creating audio art that touches people.

Anyway, sorry to rant, I guess you triggered the preacher in me. :) But I'll finish with the legendary words of Joe Meek: "If it sounds right, it IS right!"

Cheers,

Amen to that Sandy!

It's interesting how Science really exists to support real application, but often times, in all fields of life, things get flipped upside down. I'm a Web Developer and see it day in and day out, people looking for techniques that are just a means to an end and just flat out impractical.

So to that regard, you're not a killjoy at all! Just a friendly reminder that what really matters is what really matters! Or as your quote of Joe Meek so elegantly put it.

Now I have a clip here.. I'm still working the mix and wouldn't mind a few more pairs of ears for feedback!

I'll follow in Adam's footsteps and leave the gear and methods a mystery until after you guys take a listen...

Thanks!
Dey

Halfway Competent

16 Nov 2009, 03:56

There's a lotta squish (compression) on that track... Try reducing the overall compression and see what that gets you. It will open up the mix and put a little air around the instruments.

DeyBwah

16 Nov 2009, 12:39

There's a lotta squish (compression) on that track... Try reducing the overall compression and see what that gets you. It will open up the mix and put a little air around the instruments.

I need to make it a habit of listening to tracks in my car... noticed how "squishy" everything was in there. Sometimes I wonder if my monitors are not the best for mixing, because they reproduce frequencies that normal speakers have more trouble with.. But then again, maybe I just need to get better at mixing with my monitors.

So as for compression, I have them running on about every track.. do you think it has to do more with the individual tracks or the master fader track? On the master fader, I have Maxim as well as a regular gentle limiter. And by reduce the compression, do you mean raise the threshold (making it kick at higher volumes) or reduce the gain.. or..

I could use some help with how to best apply compression.. It's still a largely unknown territory as I usually just go with presets with gentle tweaking.

Thanks for the input, I'll see what I come up with tonight!

-Dey

Sandyrb

16 Nov 2009, 13:57

I could use some help with how to best apply compression.

Okay, this may not be the answer you wanted but using the 'bypass' function is probably a good place to start. :)

Not everything needs compression, does it? For example, a big fat rock guitar is all distorted to snot so that's pretty limited in terms of dynamic range anyway... why compress it even further unless for effect? If it doesn't need to be compressed for effect, why compress it at all? :)

Much as we live in the days of the 'loudness war' I would argue that individual sources do not necessarily need automatic gain control. Perhaps try making a bunch of recordings / mixes without it and see what happens. I'm sure you'll immediately notice more 'space' and 'air' in your tracks. Once you know how to get the sound you want sans compression, then maybe start to experiment with it to see how it changes stuff.

One other point and I'm sure you know this anyway, but the digital plugin compressors are never as good as the real thing. My reason for saying this is that I think a bunch of data tables can only ever describe a physical machine, they can never become it. So, whilst they are a good tool with which to learn about the applications of compression I think your ears will suddenly be very pleased when you start to get into the real thing.

I wonder if anyone on this board can recommend DeyBwah some good places to start when it comes to hardware compression?

Cheers,

seaneldon

16 Nov 2009, 14:39

Okay, this may not be the answer you wanted but using the 'bypass' function is probably a good place to start. :)

Yep. And when the time comes to apply compression, starting with the controls pretty well flat and THEN tweaking based on what you need is significantly better than presets drummed up by some coder who has more experience coding than he does compressing.

Not everything needs compression, does it? For example, a big fat rock guitar is all distorted to snot so that's pretty limited in terms of dynamic range anyway... why compress it even further unless for effect? If it doesn't need to be compressed for effect, why compress it at all? :)

I was in this camp until recently. There's MUCHO dynamic swing in a lot of "heavy" playing. Single note parts will not have the power of 6 strings going at once, even with gain dimed on the amp. Palm-muted stuff is a whole 'nother territory and has a lot of low-frequency focus even if the palm-muted parts are on higher strings. Wanky McNoodles wants to tap, you say? There's another change in dynamics. More than half the time, these are things that can be much easier to deal with when you compress PROPERLY. If we're talking about heavy/hard guitar music, you can pretty much bet that the rest of the band isn't gonna come down in volume when Wanky does :D

Not to mention that tailoring the attack and release on a guitar to "land it in the track" is (or can be) just as important as doing it with any other source. You CAN get the effect of more pick attack with slow attack times. Doesn't always work, but frequently does.

Just one idiot's opinion...

Halfway Competent

16 Nov 2009, 23:41

I need to make it a habit of listening to tracks in my car... noticed how "squishy" everything was in there. Sometimes I wonder if my monitors are not the best for mixing, because they reproduce frequencies that normal speakers have more trouble with.. But then again, maybe I just need to get better at mixing with my monitors.

So as for compression, I have them running on about every track.. do you think it has to do more with the individual tracks or the master fader track? On the master fader, I have Maxim as well as a regular gentle limiter. And by reduce the compression, do you mean raise the threshold (making it kick at higher volumes) or reduce the gain.. or..

I could use some help with how to best apply compression.. It's still a largely unknown territory as I usually just go with presets with gentle tweaking.

Thanks for the input, I'll see what I come up with tonight!

-Dey

I would start by removing every compressor in your session... Let's start this over. :)

Your dry drum tracks that you had posted sounded pretty good to me. I don't think very much compression is necessary there. Vocals, in my experience, usually require a bit (the clip I posted with the girl singing had only a little compression on her voice, and it was paralleled at that... But she's a rarity in my experience).

When I say less, I mean a lower ratio and/or a higher threshold.

The way I decide whether to compress a track is if the dynamics sound really uneven and wide. I've noticed this effect mostly on recordings I've made of live performances using handheld type mics. If my drums are sounding a bit weak -- like, I can hear the attack but not so much the tone of the drum -- then I'll put some very fast compression on them to tame the peaks a bit. (I'm not sure what a better option would be... Better pres? Better mics?)

With the fusion track, there was no squish (well, very slight peak limit) on the kick track, a bit on the snare, quite a bit on the toms, a bit on the O/H... Then I had two drum bus returns. One had a lot of squish, the other almost none. The lotta-comp track was turned down to the point where taps on the ride, etc., weren't buried. Then I turned the non-comp track up so that accents/peaks still punched through and sounded big.

At one point there was some compression on the keys (don't know why I did that, actually), which I removed, and there's a bit of compression on the bass (mostly to tame the attack, get a bit more sustain).

Tomasz

17 Nov 2009, 09:12

I was in this camp until recently. There's MUCHO dynamic swing in a lot of "heavy" playing. Single note parts will not have the power of 6 strings going at once, even with gain dimed on the amp. Palm-muted stuff is a whole 'nother territory and has a lot of low-frequency focus even if the palm-muted parts are on higher strings. Wanky McNoodles wants to tap, you say? There's another change in dynamics. More than half the time, these are things that can be much easier to deal with when you compress PROPERLY. If we're talking about heavy/hard guitar music, you can pretty much bet that the rest of the band isn't gonna come down in volume when Wanky does :D

Not to mention that tailoring the attack and release on a guitar to "land it in the track" is (or can be) just as important as doing it with any other source. You CAN get the effect of more pick attack with slow attack times. Doesn't always work, but frequently does.

Just one idiot's opinion...

Hardly an idiotic opinion..... I deal with this alot

DeyBwah

19 Nov 2009, 16:33

Okay, this may not be the answer you wanted but using the 'bypass' function is probably a good place to start. :)

Not everything needs compression, does it? For example, a big fat rock guitar is all distorted to snot so that's pretty limited in terms of dynamic range anyway... why compress it even further unless for effect? If it doesn't need to be compressed for effect, why compress it at all? :)

Much as we live in the days of the 'loudness war' I would argue that individual sources do not necessarily need automatic gain control. Perhaps try making a bunch of recordings / mixes without it and see what happens. I'm sure you'll immediately notice more 'space' and 'air' in your tracks. Once you know how to get the sound you want sans compression, then maybe start to experiment with it to see how it changes stuff.

One other point and I'm sure you know this anyway, but the digital plugin compressors are never as good as the real thing. My reason for saying this is that I think a bunch of data tables can only ever describe a physical machine, they can never become it. So, whilst they are a good tool with which to learn about the applications of compression I think your ears will suddenly be very pleased when you start to get into the real thing.

I wonder if anyone on this board can recommend DeyBwah some good places to start when it comes to hardware compression?

Cheers,

Many great points Sandy and all valid as usual.

I went ahead and followed your advice and bypassed about %70 of the compressors I was running. It definitely cleaned things up a bit! I've attached a clip, let me know what you think.

I had an after thought as well... What do you think about using automation on volume for bringing tracks front and back accordingly? I'm starting to feel like compression should be used VERY lightly in most cases unless you're going for a special effect, and instead use things like automation or just sit things better in the mix with EQ'ing.

Any perspective on that is welcome with open ears.

As for hardware compression, I don't have any.. but I'm thinking of picking up a Presonus Eureka. It's a single channel pre with compressor and eq built-in. I saw one going for just under $250, which is a great deal!

I think I tend to rely on compressors for that extra boost that my current pres are not providing.. or maybe I need to move the mics? :P

-Dey

DeyBwah

19 Nov 2009, 16:38

Yep. And when the time comes to apply compression, starting with the controls pretty well flat and THEN tweaking based on what you need is significantly better than presets drummed up by some coder who has more experience coding than he does compressing.

I was in this camp until recently. There's MUCHO dynamic swing in a lot of "heavy" playing. Single note parts will not have the power of 6 strings going at once, even with gain dimed on the amp. Palm-muted stuff is a whole 'nother territory and has a lot of low-frequency focus even if the palm-muted parts are on higher strings. Wanky McNoodles wants to tap, you say? There's another change in dynamics. More than half the time, these are things that can be much easier to deal with when you compress PROPERLY. If we're talking about heavy/hard guitar music, you can pretty much bet that the rest of the band isn't gonna come down in volume when Wanky does :D

Not to mention that tailoring the attack and release on a guitar to "land it in the track" is (or can be) just as important as doing it with any other source. You CAN get the effect of more pick attack with slow attack times. Doesn't always work, but frequently does.

Just one idiot's opinion...

Thanks Sean,

I did just that, bypassed ALL compressors, then brought back a few with gentler settings.. then bypassed a few more lol.

I think membership to your camp requires a few more years of experience to "fit in". My ears are just not as fine tuned as most of the members of this forum, but that's why I'm here! Teach me the black arts! <offers soul> :eek:

Interesting observations on the dynamics of heavy playing. I used to be in a heavy metal band in high school, since then though, I've mellowed out after having kids and settling down. No more 40oz of Old E for me. What are you thoughts on mellower, alternative rock stuff? Maybe even acoustic pop..?

-Dey

DeyBwah

19 Nov 2009, 16:43

I would start by removing every compressor in your session... Let's start this over. :)

Your dry drum tracks that you had posted sounded pretty good to me. I don't think very much compression is necessary there. Vocals, in my experience, usually require a bit (the clip I posted with the girl singing had only a little compression on her voice, and it was paralleled at that... But she's a rarity in my experience).

When I say less, I mean a lower ratio and/or a higher threshold.

The way I decide whether to compress a track is if the dynamics sound really uneven and wide. I've noticed this effect mostly on recordings I've made of live performances using handheld type mics. If my drums are sounding a bit weak -- like, I can hear the attack but not so much the tone of the drum -- then I'll put some very fast compression on them to tame the peaks a bit. (I'm not sure what a better option would be... Better pres? Better mics?)

With the fusion track, there was no squish (well, very slight peak limit) on the kick track, a bit on the snare, quite a bit on the toms, a bit on the O/H... Then I had two drum bus returns. One had a lot of squish, the other almost none. The lotta-comp track was turned down to the point where taps on the ride, etc., weren't buried. Then I turned the non-comp track up so that accents/peaks still punched through and sounded big.

At one point there was some compression on the keys (don't know why I did that, actually), which I removed, and there's a bit of compression on the bass (mostly to tame the attack, get a bit more sustain).

Hey Adam,

I did just that, cut all the compression on the individual drum tracks, added gentle compression on the drum bus track. Same with the vocal tracks.

That's a good technique with the parallel compression, I read about that and have fiddled around a bit with it, but I'm still experimenting.

Haha, yeah I wondered the same thing about most of the compressors I was running, wondered why I did that. For some reason, I got it into my head that compressors were mandatory on every track to tame the peaks and valleys in order to reach that radio sound where everything is in your face. It's strange because before that got into my head, I used zero compression, preferring the open, dynamic rawness of my mixes.

Looks like I'm bouncing back and forth, slowly settling on a nice balance between the both, although I now more on the "no compressor" camp.

-Dey

Halfway Competent

21 Nov 2009, 04:27

Hey Adam,

I did just that, cut all the compression on the individual drum tracks, added gentle compression on the drum bus track. Same with the vocal tracks.

That's a good technique with the parallel compression, I read about that and have fiddled around a bit with it, but I'm still experimenting.

Haha, yeah I wondered the same thing about most of the compressors I was running, wondered why I did that. For some reason, I got it into my head that compressors were mandatory on every track to tame the peaks and valleys in order to reach that radio sound where everything is in your face. It's strange because before that got into my head, I used zero compression, preferring the open, dynamic rawness of my mixes.

Looks like I'm bouncing back and forth, slowly settling on a nice balance between the both, although I now more on the "no compressor" camp.

-Dey

The "radio" sound these days is one of serious over-compression, in my opinion. Most of the modern stuff I can't listen to. :)

I use automation often in mixes. None in the samples I've posted, but what you are describing -- bringing someone forward in the mix for a little bit and then sending them back -- is accomplished by automating fader moves. (Or, if you have an analog desk, by moving the fader yourself. Doesn't work in-the-box though. :D ) If you need to tame someone's really damn loud vocal crescendo or something, it helps to a) parallel compress (they got loud for a reason, usually, so do something to preserve that loudness a bit) and b) pull the fader back a bit if it gets out of hand.

I recorded this live Christmas show where the female vocalist sang one song she really got into... She got really loud, and really high pitched. She had a thin voice, anyway, but straining for the high notes... Egads! It was a challenge making her sound good at the low volumes (where she did sound good) and not blowing my eardrums when she got loud again (while still retaining some of those dynamics).

Sandyrb

21 Nov 2009, 12:06

The "radio" sound these days is one of serious over-compression, in my opinion. Most of the modern stuff I can't listen to. :)

Agreed. My ears love 'space', dynamics, 'air'... call it what you will, it works for me. Heck, the world we live in, the sounds we hear every day, they're not compressed! :) The crushed, distorted sound of modern recording and especially what is called "mastering" these days is a total turn-off for me. (Although, that being said, I'm fascinated by Vlado Meller's work... I think the guy's some sort of crazy genius.)

I was listening to a CD recently... some band left it at the studio as a reference track of what they'd want to sound like. It's by some band called "Emery" I think. Anyway... what a pile of over-compressed, distorted-to-snot crap. Just a vile, vile, horribly unattractive sound. :moon:

Anyway, so I don't diverge into another off-topic rant, the lesson here is: compression isn't always required. :)

Cheers,

Ken Morgan

22 Nov 2009, 11:21

compression isn't always required. :)

But is almost always used...expected...and daring to suggest otherwise often times leads to public lambasting because so many other rooms do it.

I've grown really fond of putting a touch of limiting only on a drum subgroup...a dynamic player can make a drum track sound like the song has a pulse...compressing it would make it sound like it had an SR16.

Seaneman

22 Nov 2009, 16:09

This is a great forum guys.....
As a drummer who has recorded twelve gazzillion tracks with Joe Shmo's in their bedroom, and Grammy award winning producers in huge commercial studios in NY, LA, Nashville, and Atlanta, there are a few things in common that have produced good results. Most on the list are not in the realm of engineering, but philosophy and performance technique.

SUBTRACTION- when tracking drums in general, the player should take what he plays live and cut it in half, then half again. Start there and add back what it takes to create excitement, or subtract anything that detracts. Everything should be executed with "Clarity" and "Deliberateness" in mind. I am a very "dynamic" drummer, to me dynamics is the third dimension of music and separates the men from the boys as players and producers. That being said, when cutting drum tracks I find that a moderate loud track with exaggerated dynamics in key transitional moments is best for the end mix phase. Too little dynamics is two dimensional, but much of mixing drums for most popular styles is spent "evening out" the tracks so they sit well in the mix. Do this when it's easiest, while tracking. Your songs will not suffer from lack of dynamics. Drummers need to remember, dynamics comes in two ways, by velocity and striking,....... or... sound source dynamics. Drums or cyms that have shorter decay, less attack and less notes in between. While mixing, this gives you an "apparent" opening of dynamics. In the modern world of over-compression, we sit there asking, "why doesn't the chorus pop, I'm throwing everything but the kitchen sink at it?" It doesn't pop, because we didn't 'Frame" it dynamically. Across the board, the best producers have compressed the least. I like a little squash on the overheads, that's about it. When tuning remember it's alot easier to pull than to add, so mic them up with the idea of getting every freq into the track, pull out stuff later. Most badly tuned drums are prone to weird high end things that can easily be killed with "very minimal" muffling within one to two inches of the bearing edge. Gel mufflers are a Godsend for selective freq removal. Put the tape away, it's a step in the wrong direction. I can also tell you that if you follow these simple things, you will not need to open "Sound Replacer", ever. Might as well call that, "cool remover". For the record, those stupid salad bar things are the worst thing to ever happen to the drum set. I have successfully talked everyone I work with, live or studio into getting rid of theirs. Find another solution. Sorry, got off on a bit of a rant there.

tuvokzeta9

22 Nov 2009, 20:40

Forgot to attach my images, here they are!

Dey

Nice dude! How does that plexi around the drums effect the tone and all... ya know reflections and brightness? Great studio.

seaneldon

23 Nov 2009, 10:51

a dynamic player can make a drum track sound like the song has a pulse...compressing it would make it sound like it had an SR16.

Not quite.

SR16's can keep time.

How does that plexi around the drums effect the tone and all... ya know reflections and brightness?

Read the thread. We'll find out exactly what's happening with the ChurchGlass when he makes us a recording without.

DeyBwah

23 Nov 2009, 12:47

The "radio" sound these days is one of serious over-compression, in my opinion. Most of the modern stuff I can't listen to. :)

I use automation often in mixes. None in the samples I've posted, but what you are describing -- bringing someone forward in the mix for a little bit and then sending them back -- is accomplished by automating fader moves. (Or, if you have an analog desk, by moving the fader yourself. Doesn't work in-the-box though. :D ) If you need to tame someone's really damn loud vocal crescendo or something, it helps to a) parallel compress (they got loud for a reason, usually, so do something to preserve that loudness a bit) and b) pull the fader back a bit if it gets out of hand.

I recorded this live Christmas show where the female vocalist sang one song she really got into... She got really loud, and really high pitched. She had a thin voice, anyway, but straining for the high notes... Egads! It was a challenge making her sound good at the low volumes (where she did sound good) and not blowing my eardrums when she got loud again (while still retaining some of those dynamics).

That over-compressed sound is what a lot of clients look for though.. As an engineer, I'd like to have as many arrows in my quiver as possible. For my own music, I'd like to leave the music as untouched as possible (new direction since the thread started), but in the case of client X, they may want that radio-ready sound in which I'd better be able to produce those results.

What do you mean "doesn't work in the box though"?

We're like plastic surgeons, except instead of boob jobs, we perform nasal tucks and thyroid stretches. But just like with surgery, we can only do so much right? :D

-Dey

DeyBwah

23 Nov 2009, 12:54

Agreed. My ears love 'space', dynamics, 'air'... call it what you will, it works for me. Heck, the world we live in, the sounds we hear every day, they're not compressed! :) The crushed, distorted sound of modern recording and especially what is called "mastering" these days is a total turn-off for me. (Although, that being said, I'm fascinated by Vlado Meller's work... I think the guy's some sort of crazy genius.)

I was listening to a CD recently... some band left it at the studio as a reference track of what they'd want to sound like. It's by some band called "Emery" I think. Anyway... what a pile of over-compressed, distorted-to-snot crap. Just a vile, vile, horribly unattractive sound. :moon:

Anyway, so I don't diverge into another off-topic rant, the lesson here is: compression isn't always required. :)

Cheers,

You must despise bands like Yngwie Malmsteen and Symphony X. :eek:

Sandyrb

23 Nov 2009, 18:38

That over-compressed sound is what a lot of clients look for though.. As an engineer, I'd like to have as many arrows in my quiver as possible.

Whilst there is some truth to what you're saying here and we definitely play to an audience, you should probably aim to make the best recording you can regardless of amount of compression used and then leave the uber-squash to "famous mastering dude". :)

I would dare to suggest that if you really want to sound like the commercial releases one hears on the radio, perhaps you're on the wrong forum! :p But that being said... I'm sure everyone here would agree that we're all here to help each other out.

You must despise bands like Yngwie Malmsteen and Symphony X. :eek:

I love Yngwie, he's the lad! Holy cow what a player. :)

Cheers,

seaneldon

23 Nov 2009, 20:35

I love Yngwie, he's the lad! Holy cow what a player. :)

Double ugggghhhhh. You seem to be a good lad, though. I'll pass it off as a "Canada Thing."

Ken Morgan

24 Nov 2009, 09:04

Double ugggghhhhh. You seem to be a good lad, though. I'll pass it off as a "Canada Thing."

Yup:D

Tomasz

24 Nov 2009, 09:18

Yup:D

On the bright side, Ingvays' runs on the six-shooter are so fast now that they almost resemble chords....

ha!;)

Sandyrb

24 Nov 2009, 14:09

You seem to be a good lad, though.
Thank you! It's very rare for anyone to say anything that nice about me so clearly I owe you a massive debt of honor / beer.

I'll pass it off as a "Canada Thing."
An adroit suggestion sir but I feel it's only fair to reveal that I am, in fact, a Brit who lives in Canada. :) Which I suppose makes it even worse! :eek: I don't like hockey though so it's minutely possible that there may be some hope for me. And I live in an apartment, not an igloo.

Cheers,

Ken Morgan

25 Nov 2009, 10:22

Not quite.

SR16's can keep time.

:D

Mine didn't...drifted 10-12 BPM over a 5 minute song before finding its way to the skeet range.

That aside, my gripe with compression in general (and I try not to be as guilty as everyone else) is that because compression abuse has been used as a sonic bandaid for so long, people have come to accept it as a norm. Same with ultra distorto guitars...same with rhythms locked so tight as to take all metric dynamics out of them, etc...

Its like going to a guitar store and listening to the demo warriors...how many of them are playing anything in clean mode, vs how many are playing in distorto mode? Its an entire new paradigm that seems (to me) to be counter intuitive to the way sound propagates and the way our brains interpret acoustic energy.

Is it wrong? I don't think so...do I need more caffeine? Most definitely.

hardtoe

29 Nov 2009, 15:54

Double ugggghhhhh. You seem to be a good lad, though. I'll pass it off as a "Canada Thing."

What, you dont have cheesy neo-classical metal in the USA? Try a trip to Germany.....

----

Seaneman - great drum tips - I will pass this along to some of the drummers that come into the studio on a regular basis....

Tomasz

01 Dec 2009, 10:41

What, you dont have cheesy neo-classical metal in the USA? Try a trip to Germany.....

----

Seaneman - great drum tips - I will pass this along to some of the drummers that come into the studio on a regular basis....

to the contrary, we may have too much neo-classical metal in the states.:D

Agreed on the drum tips as well.... one addition though... one could try "bunion pads' if no gel pads are available. less expensive, work very well for drums AND bunions... ;) I keep these around and use 'em if all else fails.

hardtoe

01 Dec 2009, 10:53

Bunions eh?

Say hi to Grannie Tomasz.

DeyBwah

13 Apr 2010, 15:41

What's with the plexi-glass-church-style-iso-thing around the drums? Doesn't it cause all kinds of horrible reflections and cymbals zipping around a small space? I once worked at a studio that had something like this and tried it for one session because the owner insisted it was the only way to "get enough isolation". He was pretty floored at the improvement in sound quality when we (permanently) folded it up and packed it in a storage closet.

I folded up my booth last night. I know I took my sweet time doing so but that's the average turn-around time to convince the "wife" it's for the good of our family! ....WELL IT IS! Better recordings = more clients = more $$ = little Jacob getting to sign-up for Summer camp! Ingenious I know! :D

It was late so I haven't recorded anything yet but you can bet your bottom dollar that's the first thing I'm doing when I get home tonight. I'll try to post a clip as well.

I figure instead of a claustrophobic booth, I can invest in some Gobos to offset the huge increase of noise in my space. They'll be more versatile and I could move them to create a quasi-sidewall when I'm mixing. (one side is open to the room) :eek:

Mixwell

13 Apr 2010, 22:04

Good Call on all accounts.

I would just try to isolate any machine noise and not worry to much about complete isolation for your control space. Its certainly helpful to have it isolated, but in this type of situation its probably helpful to leave it minimal and open. You can certainly build out the adjacent wall of your rooms entrance to control annoying bleed to transfer. Its probably more about that that screwing with more treatment in the room, I would only imagine. At that point the room will become deader and deader. I kind of like "liver" sounding spaces, so leave a little of that and you'll have something cool.

DeyBwah

14 Apr 2010, 01:16

Holy smokes!

The drums... they sound MUCH better! I've attached the file for all to listen. Although I did notice a pretty nasty flutter echo around the drum area, the overall sound is such an improvement. My ears tell me the tone is more lush and open, there's more clarity on the ride. The kick has a thick developed sound. The snare actually has tone/punch to it.

What do you guys think?

Thanks Mixwell, you can now say, "I told you so!" :D

DeyBwah

14 Apr 2010, 01:18

Anyone have some advice on addressing the flutter echo? It most likely happening between the ceiling and hardwood. I'm thinking diffusers but if anyone else has a better suggestion, I'm all ears.

Mixwell

14 Apr 2010, 12:26

Thanks Mixwell, you can now say, "I told you so!" :D

That file is pretty short to get an idea, but yea, I don't hear any annoying comb filtering anymore.

You can use carpets and various materials of different sizes and density's to knock down the reflections in the problematic areas. Maybe hang a rug on the ceiling above the kit, and any hard, reflective surface. Also, it might help to put a carpet under the drums, so nothing is shooting back up. Basically, It all depends on how you want to mike this kit and where it is the room [objectives of audio] and the desired tone needed. Again, its good to have a liver sound with drums [they are meant to ring], so the kit's acoustics can be extended into the environment nicely, but controlling the reflections and dispersion will be key. Shouldn't take more than $50 bucks, a trip to home depot, 2 hours of time, a ladder, and some cold beers [included in the $50 budget].

DeyBwah

14 Apr 2010, 12:58

That file is pretty short to get an idea, but yea, I don't hear any annoying comb filtering anymore.

You can use carpets and various materials of different sizes and density's to knock down the reflections in the problematic areas. Maybe hang a rug on the ceiling above the kit, and any hard, reflective surface. Also, it might help to put a carpet under the drums, so nothing is shooting back up. Basically, It all depends on how you want to mike this kit and where it is the room [objectives of audio] and the desired tone needed. Again, its good to have a liver sound with drums [they are meant to ring], so the kit's acoustics can be extended into the environment nicely, but controlling the reflections and dispersion will be key. Shouldn't take more than $50 bucks, a trip to home depot, 2 hours of time, a ladder, and some cold beers [included in the $50 budget].

Haha cold beers included! :p

Currently, the drums are sitting on top of a rug, that's on top of a AuraLex HoverDeck. As you mentioned, I'd love to keep the drums as "live" sounding as possible and only diffuse the reflections opposed to absorbing it and making everything "dead".

I'll try to take some pictures tonight of my arrangement, I've also been debating whether a complete rearrangement is in order for a better listening position. You'll see what I mean once I post some snaps of the space, but basically, the room is a big rectangle, I demo'd the cabinets that lined the long length of one wall which created a little nook about 2 feet deep and that's where I put my monitors (speakers and screen). This helps me save space, but I wonder how much it is affecting my frequency response that I have a wall to my right, but the rest of the room to my left.

Speaking of frequency response, what's the simplest way to measure my room's response?

Thanks for the helpful advice Mixwell!

<cheers>

Mixwell

14 Apr 2010, 13:20

DeyBwah

14 Apr 2010, 14:07

Maybe try taking the drums down off the riser, for a test, with a carpet on the floor.

The couple feet or inches gained might give the drums more hang time, and less reflections if the ceilings are low, and you need your OH mics above the kit.

The HoverDeck is actually only an inch tall, do you think that would make a big difference? It's not a huge riser or anything like that.

http://www.masacoustics.com/imatges/Auralex/HoverDeck/hd_3lr.jpg

Tomasz

14 Apr 2010, 14:36

only an inch tall, do you think that would make a big difference? http://www.masacoustics.com/imatges/Auralex/HoverDeck/hd_3lr.jpg

The makers of VIAGRA think so!!!!:p ha

Seriously though, it's worth a shot. I'd try Adam's suggestion of the ladder and cold beer. from the way you describe it, your mics are closer to the ceiling, the ceiling (if hard and reflective) will possibly smear some high frequency content. A suspended GOBO, if you will, outta rockwool 2X4's and burlap (treated with borax for flame retardant), and suspended from the ceiling by bungee cords works great..
One other thing you could try, and I use this when asked to do on location shit with low (less than 8 feet) ceilings, is use a piece of acoustic foam and cut a slit in it and slide the mic/mics through the slit, thereby reducing bleed from the ceiling.. Does this make sense? ( Actually, Auralex makes this exact thing, but you could make 'em for pennies really)

As to your "monitoring" situation, it has been my experience with my friend and fellow engineers mix environment, was that once he placed his monitors in a more symmetrical manner, his mixes that he brought to me seemed to have considerably better stereo imaging..
Just my hay-penny... I don't have two cents right now.. Just ask Adam Brass....ha
tomasz

Halfway Competent

14 Apr 2010, 15:00

Anyone have some advice on addressing the flutter echo? It most likely happening between the ceiling and hardwood. I'm thinking diffusers but if anyone else has a better suggestion, I'm all ears.

Diffusers would be good.

Indeed, the kick and snare sound big and fat! The toms sound good, too. I'm noticing that everything but the kick seems biased to the right a bit... Panning/levels gone awry?

Other than that, sounds good!

Mixwell

14 Apr 2010, 16:00

The makers of VIAGRA think so!!!!:p ha

BBBBBBBBBWWWWWWWWWAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAAAHHHHAAA!! !!

Inches matter! And this is a game of inches!

2-Cents is that INCHES EQUAL MILES IN A GAME OF INCHES.

Mixwell

14 Apr 2010, 19:01

The HoverDeck is actually only an inch tall, do you think that would make a big difference? It's not a huge riser or anything like that.

http://www.masacoustics.com/imatges/Auralex/HoverDeck/hd_3lr.jpg

That thing's not a big deal, I thought it was higher than that.

But, its also probably more ridged and dense than a carpet is.

Take this into consideration too.

Tomasz

14 Apr 2010, 19:30

BBBBBBBB
Inches matter! And this is a game of inches!

INCHES EQUAL MILES IN A GAME OF INCHES.

this why, according to the ball-n-chain that only men can read maps;
We've got the one inch = a mile thing down....
I'm polish, so i wouldn't know about that....... :p

Mixwell

14 Apr 2010, 22:37

Haha cold beers included! :p

Currently, the drums are sitting on top of a rug, that's on top of a AuraLex HoverDeck. As you mentioned, I'd love to keep the drums as "live" sounding as possible and only diffuse the reflections opposed to absorbing it and making everything "dead".

I'll try to take some pictures tonight of my arrangement, I've also been debating whether a complete rearrangement is in order for a better listening position. You'll see what I mean once I post some snaps of the space, but basically, the room is a big rectangle, I demo'd the cabinets that lined the long length of one wall which created a little nook about 2 feet deep and that's where I put my monitors (speakers and screen). This helps me save space, but I wonder how much it is affecting my frequency response that I have a wall to my right, but the rest of the room to my left.

Now DeyBwah, I'm no acoustician, but I'll address this with educated guessing. Its certainly not helpful for optimal speaker voicing when putting them up against the wall and more to a corner, but from your photos in the thread, its not that bad. You'll probably want to target areas of that corner with materials but you're still dealing with dimensions of the room no matter what.

Certainly the science of a build out for an ideal monitoring environment [which project studios don't necessarily have] is vastly complicated and intricate as hell. With your setup, I think some simple construction on the back wall and simple non-parallel baffle outlays [that aren't too obtrusive] will subdue possible issues in short time. I don't suspect this build will cost much at all. I'd build a larger baffle along the wall and then two tall, skinner side pieces that ran non-parallel to each other.

You just want to get to a place where you can trust what your hearing and know how to deal with the issues at hand. But, Just be aware of the reflections happening in that part of room with the back wall behind the speakers and the side wall to the right. So, again, with some patience and short money at l.o.w.s, or true value, you can build the back wall out a couple inches, with side panels that purposefully target problematic comb filtering.

Speaking of frequency response, what's the simplest way to measure my room's response?

Thanks for the helpful advice Mixwell!

<cheers>

I'd suggest there's no point in doing this. What would be helpful, is doing several different recordings with several different room configurations, and giving a listen to the microphones room pickup. Once you have several attempts and audio examples of how the instrument will sound in the room with your clever acoustic controlling apparatus, you can go about stapling the material to the wall, and building out your control room for mixing purposes. I think you'll find it quite easy to hear the affects of recordings and I strongly feel that VIEWING the way your room sounds will be FAR less helpful than HEARING the way it will sound when you put this OBJECT HERE _______.

I'd bet you'll also learn a lot more too.....

Mixwell

15 Apr 2010, 13:27

I forgot to mention I would angle the center baffle slightly like this - /

So as to knock down reflections.

DeyBwah

15 Apr 2010, 15:01

The makers of VIAGRA think so!!!!:p ha

Seriously though, it's worth a shot. I'd try Adam's suggestion of the ladder and cold beer. from the way you describe it, your mics are closer to the ceiling, the ceiling (if hard and reflective) will possibly smear some high frequency content. A suspended GOBO, if you will, outta rockwool 2X4's and burlap (treated with borax for flame retardant), and suspended from the ceiling by bungee cords works great..
One other thing you could try, and I use this when asked to do on location shit with low (less than 8 feet) ceilings, is use a piece of acoustic foam and cut a slit in it and slide the mic/mics through the slit, thereby reducing bleed from the ceiling.. Does this make sense? ( Actually, Auralex makes this exact thing, but you could make 'em for pennies really)

As to your "monitoring" situation, it has been my experience with my friend and fellow engineers mix environment, was that once he placed his monitors in a more symmetrical manner, his mixes that he brought to me seemed to have considerably better stereo imaging..
Just my hay-penny... I don't have two cents right now.. Just ask Adam Brass....ha
tomasz

LOL Tomasz! :p

Well played man haha!

I'll look into some form of diffusion for the ceiling then, it is an 8 foot, standard home ceiling height. And great suggestion on the foam with a slit, slid on to the boom stand, makes perfect sense! And I have the some 1 ft by 1 ft foam pieces lying around that I've been wondering where to place.

As for the monitor position, I'm definitely thinking I need to move my whole room arrangement around. (pointing the monitors longways, down the rectangle room)

Do you think I would need to diffuse the ceiling still if I'm using the slitted foam pieces? I'm currently recording my drums with 4 microphones. 1 kick, 1 snare, 2 overheads.

Thanks for the great ideas and suggestions.. and the chuckles. :D

Diffusers would be good.

Indeed, the kick and snare sound big and fat! The toms sound good, too. I'm noticing that everything but the kick seems biased to the right a bit... Panning/levels gone awry?

Other than that, sounds good!

You're probably right about the panning gone awry.. this makes me really want to move my arrangement. Maybe not having the left wall symmetrical with the right wall is screwing with my stereo mix more than I thought. Looks like I'll have to climb around in the attic again as my cables run through the walls and ceiling to avoid running across the room. Not looking forward to getting all itchy again from the insulation.. :P

The kit sounds pretty good considering the heads are OLD. I'll be replacing them soon enough though. Thanks for the feedback HWC!

BBBBBBBBBWWWWWWWWWAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAAAHHHHAAA!! !!

Inches matter! And this is a game of inches!

2-Cents is that INCHES EQUAL MILES IN A GAME OF INCHES.

:eek: lol...

That thing's not a big deal, I thought it was higher than that.

But, its also probably more ridged and dense than a carpet is.

Take this into consideration too.

It sure is more rigid, but I do have a rug between the hoverdeck and my kit. I don't mind some reflections as long as their diffusing properly. I'm totally 180'ing from seeking a small DEAD booth to a larger LIVE room sound. Especially for drums thanks to you guys. I'm looking to take advantage of the room sound, at least, give it some attention and try it out.

Now DeyBwah, I'm no acoustician, but I'll address this with educated guessing. Its certainly not helpful for optimal speaker voicing when putting them up against the wall and more to a corner, but from your photos in the thread, its not that bad. You'll probably want to target areas of that corner with materials but you're still dealing with dimensions of the room no matter what.

I'm a bit more concerned with the lack of symmetry as I don't know how to properly deal with that as well as speakers being close to a wall.. What I mean is, I don't have a clue as to how the stereo image is being altered when the left side is open and extends into the rest of the room, while the right side is obstructed with a wall. I'm currently working on assembling pictures and a diagram with the dimensions and shape of the room. I'll post those up here in the afternoon today.

Certainly the science of a build out for an ideal monitoring environment [which project studios don't necessarily have] is vastly complicated and intricate as hell. With your setup, I think some simple construction on the back wall and simple non-parallel baffle outlays [that aren't too obtrusive] will subdue possible issues in short time. I don't suspect this build will cost much at all. I'd build a larger baffle along the wall and then two tall, skinner side pieces that ran non-parallel to each other.

Maybe in 10 years, I can build a detached garage, or shall I call it, a detached studio with proper science and architecture for ideal acoustic properties. :D

Until then though, gotta work with what I have as you said.

By simple construction on the back wall, do you mean acoustic panels? Or something more elaborate (like smashing the walls lol).

Also what do you mean by simple non-parallel baffle outlays? Having a hard time picturing that.. the larger baffle across the wall, you mean the right wall correct? And then the skinnier side pieces running non-parallel.. do you mean those would go on the left side to form a sort of quasi-wall?

You just want to get to a place where you can trust what your hearing and know how to deal with the issues at hand. But, Just be aware of the reflections happening in that part of room with the back wall behind the speakers and the side wall to the right. So, again, with some patience and short money at l.o.w.s, or true value, you can build the back wall out a couple inches, with side panels that purposefully target problematic comb filtering.

I definitely am having issues trusting what I'm hearing right now. I know there's comb filtering going on as well as substantial standing waves. But the imbalanced stereo image is of equal concern. Once again, I'll post up those pictures and diagram and maybe there is an ideal rearrangement that would maximize the space I have. The thing that concerns me about my room is, it's not a perfect rectangle. You'll see in the diagram, but I wonder if I'll be able to secure a symmetrical stereo image even going long ways with my arrangement.

I'd suggest there's no point in doing this. What would be helpful, is doing several different recordings with several different room configurations, and giving a listen to the microphones room pickup. Once you have several attempts and audio examples of how the instrument will sound in the room with your clever acoustic controlling apparatus, you can go about stapling the material to the wall, and building out your control room for mixing purposes. I think you'll find it quite easy to hear the affects of recordings and I strongly feel that VIEWING the way your room sounds will be FAR less helpful than HEARING the way it will sound when you put this OBJECT HERE _______.

I'd bet you'll also learn a lot more too.....

So what you're saying it, just to be sure, I should focus on finding the optimal tracking arrangement -- put that as the highest priority and determining factor for the overall arrangement... and then once I find that, THEN fit in the control room arrangement in what ever way I can in that ideal recording arrangement. In other words, put the tracking on a higher priority than mixing? This is gonna take a while, I can already tell lol... And I have no problem with it as I enjoy moving my gear around and rearranging furniture, but having 2 boys clawing for my attention makes it difficult. :eek::eek:

That's interesting, because I was thinking the other way around. I was planning on finding the BEST control/mixing arrangement, then fitting in the best tracking arrangement that would work with the space left over.

It looks like I've got a few weekends ahead of me before this is all said and done!

Thanks for the food for thought A.B.!

Mixwell

15 Apr 2010, 15:36

DeyBwah

15 Apr 2010, 16:21

For the "Control Room" - reflection killers - I mean a Large Square panel made from dense material directly mounted to the back wall behind your control position, placed at a slight angle like this "/ " from the wall. Then two skinner in width on each side but taller [from the floor to the ceiling] panels on either side of that main baffle, with their position angled slightly outward, and non-parallel to each other.

|< { } >|

Now, I'm not suggesting one matter is more pertinent than another, becasue it certainly all matters equally, but the acoustic properties of the "live room" are certainly going to change your recordings for the better. I guess take it one day at a time and do what you can to make the room as useful as possible for both aspects of the work.

Ohh now I get what mean! Thanks for clarifying that. :)

I'll remember than when I start setting up panels. That reinforces what I read about parallel walls having a tendency to cause more problems than angled wall, for example, vaulted ceilings are better than flat ceilings.

I've attached photos of the space as it is right now as well as dimensions. Hopefully I can accrue some good feedback from you guys as these images will give you a pretty good idea of what limitations my space has.

Thanks again!

-Dey

DeyBwah

15 Apr 2010, 16:21

More images...

DeyBwah

15 Apr 2010, 16:22

Last batch...

Tomasz

15 Apr 2010, 16:34

As for the monitor position, I'm definitely thinking I need to move my whole room arrangement around. (pointing the monitors longways, down the rectangle room)

I haven't got a degree in acoustics, though I've studied it and gotten my "free education" from libraries (does anybody remember those?)over the last ten years. and worked at a proprietary acoustics lab, , but i will say this: however you end up setting up your mix environment, what you do not want are reflections on one side, and nothing at all on the other.. (though NO reflections, especially "early" ones are most likely best for all control rooms as evidenced by the the two most common pro designs: LEDE, that is live end dead end, and philip Newell style, which is essentially the opposite, though forerunner to LEDE). that is to say, that for proper stereo imaging, your response on the left should mirror the right.. that does not necessarily mean you need to be "walled in" on both sides. Faux walling with absorb /diffusion on both sides is a likely candidate for you to try. I think Adam's ideas are right on the money. Maybe we can get Adam to expand on the graphic, as i'm not sure i quite grasp the visual he was trying to create

Do you think I would need to diffuse the ceiling still if I'm using the slitted foam pieces? I'm currently recording my drums with 4 microphones. 1 kick, 1 snare, 2 overheads.
Your ears will answer this, though it can't hurt to have GOBOs, you could use it elsewhere for isolation when tracking if need be..
Thanks for the great ideas and suggestions.. and the chuckles. :D

To help you further grasp any suggestions that are offered here, I would strongly suggest picking up a book or two on the subject: One that I think would be a good starter would be "Sound Studio Construction on a budget" by Alton Everest.. yes the plans are for Studio construction, but the concepts remain.. If you can then adapt and reapply these concepts to your situation, you will be all the better for it..

Sweet, I'll look the pictures and certainly post up again...

Mixwell

15 Apr 2010, 17:06

DeyBwah

15 Apr 2010, 19:26

DeyBwah,

Your space is definitely a nice little area to create! Great work so far. It looks like the significant other is happy to parlay in your lounge without feeling like she is trapped in a plastic rubber room with zinging resonances. Vibe Brother! Gotta Have it! It looks to me like the room is already on its way. You do already have some trapping in key places, but you should think about sizing up some area specific wall hangers that are square baffle's to mount on the bare walls and ceiling in certain places. Just continue the theme you have going, without going OVERBOARD. I'd say some more panels here and there should help knock down the flutter echo, and control some hard reflections. You should also think about a triangular [or cleverly shaped] panel suspended above the kit, to help with the ceiling reflections. This is also a novel idea for your control space, along with the angled baffle. From there, you can target specific areas with smaller panels around the kit and room. Basically as long as there is some coverage over these reflective surfaces you'll have more control and neater room response.

Thanks Adam!

It's definitely coming together.. so glad I followed everyone's suggestions in here regarding losing the booth. And special thanks to Adam and Sean for being in my ear about it.

Not to mention, thanks for the book recommendation, "The Mixing Engineer's Handbook" Tomasz. There is a lot of great information in there! I liked Bobby Owsinski's writing style so much, I picked up "The Recording Engineer's Handbook" and "The Audio Mastering Handbook" as well. Also, "The Drum Recording Handbook". I like how there are interviews and comments from so many different engineer's in each of those books. That's a great idea to include a variety of takes on the subject and it just goes to show that people often have radically different approaches to recording with great success.

Another good book on mixing that I picked up recently is, "Mixing Audio" by Roey Izhaki. Books galore!

Getting back to the room, I was planning on selling the Auralex bass traps and either making DIY panels and/or picking up some GIK panels. The Auralex bass traps don't do much for the low frequencies and I think that's what has been influencing my mix decisions negatively.

The angled baffles is the new concept/idea I'll try out next. Thanks again for suggesting that. :D

Finally, the other upgrades I made in the past 4 months, I'm realizing now after re-reading this thread, all came from within MoveTheMics!

For example, I picked up a bunch of new plugs. Namely, Ozone 4, Alloy, EZDrummer/SD2, TL Space, Smack! -- I'm looking on grabbing the SoundToys Native bundle, IK Classik Studio Verb, and possibly an auto-tune plug like Antares Evo Auto-tune or Melodyne Studio.

The difference the plugs have made is very drastic. I think they we're a huge bottleneck in my workflow/production. (at least bigger than I was aware of)

I also modded my 002 with BLA Sig Mod. There is a distinct improvement when I'm mixing + the pres are actually usable now! I also picked up a used Presonus Eureka to hold me off until I could afford the lunchbox + API 512cs.

And finally, you can see it in the picture, I have a new rug! :D

I'm nearing the very end (or at least calculated stop) to my gear acquisition syndrome. The API+Lunchbox, acoustic panels, and a couple workhorse microphones, and there should be absolutely no reason why I can't produce great mixes.. well, beyond my mixing ability! :rolleyes:

So once again, thank you everyone! I'm so grateful for all the time and energy everyone has taken to help a complete stranger out, I promise to continue the ritual/culture of this art form by sharing my knowledge with tomorrows engineers. :):)