Recording advice needed

[Huh?]

I have been recording at home for over 20 years now, and have played guitar for well over 30. In that time I have gathered together some decent prosumer type gear..... Pro Tools DAW, decent monitors, lot's of plug in's and some very nice virtual instruments and drum software.
I have also worked as a session player many times in some very nice studio's, in addition to recording my own material in same.....so I know what is possible.

I do know of course, that I am nowhere near being a skilled professional engineer. I have absolutely no illusions that I am in the same league as some of you guys who have specialized in this as a career. I am the dreaded songwriter/guitar player with his finger on a fader.


The thing is, as hard as I try, I struggle to get that "transparency" and depth one hears when listening to a pro recording. My mixes always seem so dense and "in my face".

I know that I cannot expect to get the kind of results in my small prosumer home studio that are possible with high end equipment, well designed and treated rooms and of course the highly experienced and talented engineers that are out there.

Still, is there anything you pro's can suggest that will help me make better mixes that have that elusive transparency, depth and separation?

Any tips about what levels you track at, how and when you use compression, limiting and reverb to achieve depth and separation etc etc will be highly appreciated. Like I mentioned, I am not a rank beginner so it is on a sort of Intermediate level that I could use advice.


Thanks.

[John Sayers]

with high end equipment, well designed and treated rooms

most consumer gear is capable of producing quality sound but if you can't hear it then you are handicapped. Having a good pair of speakers and treating a room to improve the acoustics is not overly expensive if you do it properly and to a budget.

IMO that is the easiest and most cost effective way to improve the quality of your recordings.

[Phil O'Keefe]

I have to agree with John... the importance of the monitoring chain / system (which also includes room acoustics) can not be over-emphasized. EVERY decision you make in the recording process is based on what your ears are telling you, and if you can't trust your monitoring system, you're in trouble from the very beginning...

[Phil O'Keefe]

Levels? I track with the PT meters averaging somewhere "in the middle" of their range. If you're recording at 24 bits, there's no need to slam to the point just below 0dBFS. Leave yourself some headroom. Then, you won't have to drop the individual channel faders to silly-low levels when it comes time to mix.

Compression on the "way in" is something you should be cautious about IMO. You can always add more at mixdown, but once it's "printed" with too much, it is next to impossible to undo later. I use it regularly, but I tend to be gentle with it on the way in unless we're going for a particular "sound" - such as a slammed drum room mic.

[Huh?]

Thanks so far you guys.

The level thing was interesting Phil, that you are about 1/2 way up on the PT meters. I always thought the idea was to get close to 0dbFS with everything. So that is a good tidbit there.

I have a very small room. I read Ethans stuff and did a ton of research when I built the small room within the garage.... that got smaller when the missus saw how much room I was taking. I built the walls off square and the ceiling over the mix area has an angle in it. I also floated the floor.

Because the sg footage is so small I opted to deaden the room so I have Auralex acoustic foam and diffusers. I also have corner bass traps I know acoustic foam is frowned on but for sure they killed the flutter echo I had before I treated the room. If I could find rigid fiberglass easily I would build some of the Winer DIY bass traps. I still intend to do this.

I almost never print any effect to track. I have been suspicious of my Event 20/20 BAS's are too bottom endy, for a while. I have considered going to a power amp/passive speaker setup for a while.


Yeah there is so much to that whole aspect of it isn't there? Damn.....I need a bigger area to work in.

Thanks.

[Meriphew]

Remember that yellow is the new red when tracking in digital. Also, if your material sounds too in your face, try micing from a distance if you haven't already.

[Phil O'Keefe]

I'm not "anti-foam" - I have Auralex foam in several places, and it's a solid product IMO... but it is what it is: Foam alone is not a total solution, but when used for the things it does well - absorbing mid and high frequencies - it's fine.

Occasional peaks that go past that midpoint on the meters in PT are fine, but that's where I try to get / keep the "average" levels.

[Meriphew]

Originally Posted by Phil O'Keefe

Compression on the "way in" is something you should be cautious about IMO.

Agreed. I don't use any compression at all on the way in (other than a compressor pedal on the guitar every once in a while). I think unless you really know what you're doing, you can end up with a mess on your hands when it comes time to mix.

[Huh?]

Say you were well into a session as far as having drums, bass and maybe a keyboard track printed. If you were finding one or more of the the basic rhythm tracks to be too punchy or overly loud, not loud enough, for your taste..... say right before you track some guitars or vocals......... would you place compression, limiting or reverb plug in's, as inserts on selected tracks and sort of compensate for problem area's as you go?

You know, with a view to address everything later in the final mix

Or would you want to spend time tweaking the EQ of each track to almost perfection before you forward with more tracks?

Interesting about the Yellow being the new Red.I did not know that. I notice in PT 8 it seems more pronounced to my eye.

[Huh?]

Wow...... John, quite a cool forum you have going there. How long has that been there?(oh just went there again and noticed since 2006 or so) Just what I saw in a quick browse I can see it would take a while to digest all the info available.

Very nice.

[Meriphew]

Here's an interesting read on digital levels.

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/15038/862/

[Rekel]

Originally Posted by Huh?

Or would you want to spend time tweaking the EQ of each track to almost perfection before you forward with more tracks?

No, that's *not* what you want to do. One of most common mistakes I see is tweaking EQ on individual tracks to "perfection". You really need to take a look at the whole picture. Sometimes it's better to tweak e.g. acoustic guitars so they sound "like crap" when solo'd. For example a big dip around 300 Hz or even a steep high pass filter at around 150 Hz cut off, which leaves more room for other instruments in that frequency range to breath. A different approach to panning might work miracles, too.

Another thing that is equally, if not more, important is the arrangement. Just reduce or leave things out that may interfere with other licks or fills going on at the same time. Most often, less is more. And Phil is right, record your average levels (at 24 bit) at around -16 or so.

And as John Sayers already said, it is perfectly possible to get excellent sounding results with prosumer gear. Maybe you could post an example of one of your mixes so we could give some more specific advise?

[John Sayers]

Huh? - thanks for the kind words, I started with this back in 98. The forum was created in 2003. The forum is averaging 80,000 hits a day.

[Meriphew]

Originally Posted by Rekel

No, that's *not* what you want to do. One of most common mistakes I see is tweaking EQ on individual tracks to "perfection". You really need to take a look at the whole picture. Sometimes it's better to tweak e.g. acoustic guitars so they sound "like crap" when solo'd.

Very good point.

[Huh?]

Originally Posted by Rekel

Maybe you could post an example of one of your mixes so we could give some more specific advise?

LOL...I will take that under consideration but don't know if I could stand the embarrassment.

I do appreciate your advice about not spending too much time on EQ trying to get perfection too soon in the game. This is good 'cos this is how I try and work.

Mostly, since I have a tiny studio and no facility for live drums.... I use samples and loops...programs like Drumcore, EZ Drummer etc and one called Discrete Drums which has 8 individual 24 bit tracks that load into PT sessions.

It helps that these are mostly recorded in a better setting than I have and using way better equipment. It provides a good starting point I think.

I do find electric bass difficult to get a great sound on. Especially not being a bass player, so I do not have that bass tone mindset.

Good tip also about moving the mic's away a little bit, getting a tad more room yes?

[Meriphew]

Originally Posted by Huh?

Good tip also about moving the mic's away a little bit, getting a tad more room yes?

Yes. Sometimes a mic shoved right up on the cone is perfect, but other times you want more of the room sound in there. Just walk around while you're playing guitar and when you get to a spot where you really like the sound, put a mic there where your ears were. Keep in mind that if you're pretty far from your amp, you're going to get a lot of room sound, so you may not want to get too far away.

[Huh?]

I used to work with an engineer that would have me play sustained chords in the control room. While each played chord was ringing, he had an ear-muffed assistant move the mic around in small increments. When he found a sweet spot he would use that as a placement or mark it and keep going in case there was a better one. It could take a minute but he always got me a nice sound.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Originally Posted by Huh?

Say you were well into a session as far as having drums, bass and maybe a keyboard track printed. If you were finding one or more of the the basic rhythm tracks to be too punchy or overly loud, not loud enough, for your taste..... say right before you track some guitars or vocals......... would you place compression, limiting or reverb plug in's, as inserts on selected tracks and sort of compensate for problem area's as you go?

I'd use my faders (or a "trim" plug-in) to trim the levels, dial in a cans mix that made the musician(s) happy (and if that entails the quick application of EQ and / or compression, then so be it), and then proceed with the overdubs.

You know, with a view to address everything later in the final mix

Don't get me wrong - I do tend to do that; thinking about where we'll go with the final mix from very early on in the process. That is subject to change as we go along, but in general, I like to have a concept or idea of where we're going with the song before we start, and then as we go along, I do tend to work towards "the mix"; adding compressors and or EQ's and other plug-ins, changing levels and panning, etc. as we proceed, as time and circumstances allow... BUT...

Or would you want to spend time tweaking the EQ of each track to almost perfection before you forward with more tracks?

Not unless I want to bring the flow of the session to a grinding halt. There are few things worse to musicians who are all warmed up and ready to play than having the engineer say "hang on a bit while I tweak these EQ controls ad nauseum..."

I am far more inclined to spend that time, in conjunction with the musicians, in getting their sound happening in advance of hitting that big red button. I personally believe that while everything is important, the closer to the source you go, the more important it is. IOW, the musician, instrument and room tend to have a great deal of influence on how the recording will sound. Mic placement and selection are crucial from an engineering standpoint, etc. If the amp sucks and it's too bright, to me it makes more sense to turn down the highs there than to try to compensate with EQ on the way in via the recording path. GIGO! Fix the squeaky pedal rather than try to NR or edit it out later. Put new strings on the guitar, or use a different one. Fix that ground problem with the amp. Replace the microphonic tube...

Interesting about the Yellow being the new Red.I did not know that. I notice in PT 8 it seems more pronounced to my eye.

They made some cool changes with PT8.

I was so happy when they finally put calibration marks on the meters! I had been asking for that for a while. Now, instead of telling people to "put the meters into the middle", I can tell them to shoot for, on "average", -18dBFS on the meters instead - lower than that if you are recording something with an extreme dynamic range. For most home recording sessions, -18 dBFS should be fine. In addition to the faders being in a more usable / precision region of their throw, there are sonic benefits in terms of plug-in processing, the mix bus and the sound of the converters. Plus, you'll pretty much quit having to worry about "overs" too - and digital clipping is something I usually try very hard to avoid.

I need to do a video about this subject...

[Lee Knight]

For me, I approach engineering like I approached performing. The mindset, I mean. Allow me to get figurative for a moment. Some performers don't listen. They wank on their instrument and believe they're making music. They woodsheded those scales and riffs and they feel that now... they are making music.

They aren't.

Listening, on the other, means they are adjusting everything they do, thinking, responding to, based on the now. The making of this piece of music at this very second. What worked yesterday won't work today. What works today is what works today. Tone, attack, sparseness in playing, where do the finger on the strings pluck as a bassist for example, toward the bridge or the neck... let me listen and react.

The now is informing their split-second choices. And those choices come from trial and error experience, then listening and being aware of right now.

So... how do you get depth in your recording? What is the music you're making right now? Would 2 guys strumming acoustics around an omni give you the depth for the music you're making right now? Try. There's a difference between what two guys bring as opposed to one. Or three or four. Should the same scenario be stereo? Maybe, maybe not. Are you invoking the mood of a T Rex record or Jack Johnson? Or Beyonce? Lily Allen or Bod Dylan?

Does that 57 shoved into the grill remind you of Joe Walsh in the early 70's? And does that flavor seems right... for right now? Then that close 57 is going to bring depth to your recording.

I did percussion overdubs on an album. One guy played timbales and cymbals, the other, conga and chimes etc. They wanted to play separately so hhey could nail their parts. But to me... right then... the depth would come from these guys flying by the seat of their pants looking at each other. Lots of bleed and interplay. We tried it. It was magic. We did the albums perc overdubs as a mini ensemble that afternoon. No piecemeal. Done. And everyone was smiling.

"I struggle to get that "transparency" and depth one hears when listening to a pro recording."

I believe the depth comes from recording the right thing at the right time the right way. Except the right way to record can be many ways. You've got to try things, lots of different things so when a moment presents itself... you instinctively know the best way to approach this right now, for them and you, at this moment. That's the way.

But if you haven't tried these things, try them:

Move the mic back. Note the effect of different distances in different rooms. Proximity bass boost and dry vs. more natural and ambient. And everything in between. And too much at either extreme. Learn that. It's like a knob on a board. Twist and let the effects register.

Try some stereo techniques. Blumlien, XY, spaced pair.

Try different rooms. Figure a way to go to the different rooms. Neighbor have a high ceilinged room? A friend? Do you have a local Veterans Hall? What's your bathroom like?

Try to get more than one person playing things at a time And don't be afraid to get the background singers step away and shake a tambourine too while you're getting your BVs! Test it, put a mark on the floor and tell him to step back here when it's time to go ape shit on the tamb. Lots of performers are used to the mindset that the engineer going to be able to fix the blend. The idea is to ge them in on the fun of creating the blend right there on the floor. He's not loud enough so tell him, "Try moving right here". He keeps jumping out of the blend so tell the overzealous background singer in the group, "Try to take you loudest bits down a notch or two, they're popping out the blend with the other guys too much."

Try stuff and note the effect. Capture moments. Let the moment dictate how you capture it.

[UstadKhanAli]

There's a lot of great advice here.

Regarding the EQ, I would agree that in general you don't want to sit there tweaking away. Better to "EQ" by the choice of the mic/mic preamp, the position of the mic, and obviously the sound of the instrument (choice of pickups, amp, amp settings, guitar, drum heads, strings, the way that it's played, all that). OTOH, I have no problem putting in a high-pass filter or roll-off. Some of my mic preamps have an adjustable high-pass filter, and I love using these to reduce rumble and unwanted low end on instruments or vocals in which I know I don't want it. May as well just get rid of it then. I always try and get the sound as close to what I want as possible at the source, but high-pass filters are one thing that I like to use.

Acoustic treatment panels (in my case, RealTraps) has made an enormous difference in the sound of my recordings. I record in a small living room, which obviously doesn't sound all that great, and putting RealTraps around the drums, or around the mics for guitar amps, bass amps, and vocalists and a bunch of other stuff really makes such a huge difference. It also allows me to pull the mics back, allowing me to get distance without the mic interacting with the foul-sounding room so much.

Which leads me to the next thing: depth equals distance. Jimmy Page used to mutter it. But it does. And in my opinion, digital recording tends to "flatten" things out to my ear. I know this can be controversial, but I've noticed a difference. So I've taken to pulling my mics farther back in general. Not always, but in general. This is obviously an aesthetic thing, as there's nothing wrong with close-micing at all.