|
Post by gx on Feb 2, 2019 21:41:54 GMT
It being a general approach to reverb, those already 'in the know' may find it elementary.. (or maybe they'll tell us, he's completely off his rocker), but i certainly gleaned some insight, especially how he uses 2 reverbs, in conjuction w low/hi pass filters. I thought he stated things clearly, and perhaps worth a look. www.soundonsound.com/techniques/use-reverb-pro-1
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Feb 4, 2019 18:19:36 GMT
It being a general approach to reverb, those already 'in the know' may find it elementary.. (or maybe they'll tell us, he's completely off his rocker), but i certainly gleaned some insight, especially how he uses 2 reverbs, in conjuction w low/hi pass filters. I thought he stated things clearly, and perhaps worth a look. www.soundonsound.com/techniques/use-reverb-pro-1This is all good stuff. I have seen the EQ tip (rolling off the reverb's low and high ends) referred to elsewhere as the "Abbey Road reverb trick". I do find it difficult to find good advice on mixing orchestral mockups (as opposed to ubiquitous information on "how to give your kick drum more epic punch!") but I think the general principles hold true across genres: -Use reverb judiciously! -Reverb (almost) always as a send, not an insert (and when doing so, make sure it is set to 100% wet, 0% dry) -Roll off the reverb's high and low ends, especially if there is mud Since I mostly use the Spitfire Symphonic series, I have not been adding much additional reverb. But recently I picked up Spitfire's new (very dry) Studio Brass and I will need to do some work on integrating it with the other Symphonic libraries. I also picked up the Jake Jackson mixes and Orchestral Tool's Berlin Timpani late last year, so basically now have to rework my whole template...
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Feb 6, 2019 15:59:38 GMT
Good link Greg.
The best advice I could ever give on mixing would be to re-create a score which you also have on cd mixed in a space and sound you admire. Then, tweak every single parameter to see what happens. The piece I am working on at the moment (tonal believe it or not:-) is using all those samples you mention John, (except the dry SFA brass) and more. I have 3 reverbs on the go PLUS the recorded rooms. The trick as you say is not to swamp the sound but to sink it into a warm acoustic and homogenise the different samples into one communal space. This method is experimental and probably not the best way, but, I have got a good sound that compares favourably with the reference cd's I used. Just gotta finish it now - 25mins done out of a projected 30 mins. I might send you all a link to it and the score so far if you want to hear the sound...
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Feb 7, 2019 11:53:13 GMT
I'm going through a similar thing as I may have to mix and master the session myself, so doing a lot of despondent A/Bing of my music compared to similar Star Wars or Cutthroat Island scores. Why don't my horns sound like that? Obviously they recorded with the best musicians in the best space with the best stuff and the best team, but that's no consolation. I stopped being timid yesterday and went much more extreme with direction mixing and suddenly things perked up a lot. In terms of mix richness, I lose to current Star Wars but win over the 70s/80s recordings. I also have to remember that the studio-mastered orchestral work I've already done also doesn't match to these gold standards.
I'm using a single room reverb without trying to get clever by using different reverb delays to create depth, though I may try Proximity, as I don't have enough experience to know if it's working. I have about seven mics for the decca tree and other room feeds which give the air and space and provide the distance for things like percussion, then 35-odd close mics to balance. It's exhausting!
If I can listen to John Debney then myself without grimacing then I'm doing ok. But then there's mastering . . . it becomes hard to tell if a change caused by compression or limiting or stereo spread is better or just different. If I go by classical recording standards, I have a good sound; by score standards, less good. But listen to it for five seconds and you forget, I hope.
That's me done with the worry, and having heard your A/B of Britten I imagine your new tonal work (traitor) will sound great.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Feb 8, 2019 9:17:48 GMT
Crikey Dave, that's a lot of mic feed. How do you go about mixing that? Logically I suppose I would do close mic section pre-mixes with or maybe without room, then balance the sections and then add in the room and Proximity if needed, perhaps tweaking the close mic or pre-mix balance as depth is introduced. Then, maybe concentrate on section sends to artificial reverb if it is needed. What approach have you found that works well? I never had to mix every single mic, at best I got section pre-mixes made up in the studio and had them as stems for re-mixes and edits. Re compression, I don't use it anymore as there is no need unless I get carried away with my timpani, but when I did, I found that subtlety was best. By which I mean nothing more than a 2-3dB restraint on the very loudest bits - no sense in distorting the relationship between the musical dynamic levels. As you are live, unless your max levels are in the red, I personally wouldn't bother with compression as a lot of level correction/balance can probably be achieved in the mix, maybe with some automation. No doubt you may use the tracks in media eventually and as you know, you will have to judge if compression will benefit the tracks utility under fx and v/o. Even in those circumstances, the tracks ebb and flow is important right? Mastering...no bloody idea get someone else to do it...come back Ray.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Feb 8, 2019 11:21:06 GMT
I got the hang of it quite quickly, the principles are the same just much more information. Mixing the quartet and choral pieces was good practice. I keep decca and room mics centred and then direction mix - I could say pan but panning is more aggressive and cuts off more of the audio - the close and section mics according to the orchestral layout I like. So L (80-90) - violins, horns, tuned perc, flutes, clarinets - C - bassoons, oboes, violas, timps, trumpets, trombones, cellos, tuba, basses - R (80-90). Speaking roughly! The woodwinds took a while to decide on because they're normally seated centre but often mixed wide. The cuts within regions are to boost or lower individual passages and instruments, have to be careful depending on which mic and moment otherwise you boost the bleed from everything else and change the dynamic again. Woodwinds often get drowned. You can see there's gaps for horns, trumpets and harp, which I had re-recorded for some tracks. Then one reverb on the master, the one which I've always used and sounds closest to score recordings I love. As it's all real, I think the process is quite forgiving compared to trying to mix samples - the audio is already in its space without needing to be forced so it's 95% there for me. The latter 5% is where you need a seasoned engineer I've been in touch with someone and he thinks the mixes sound good so that's some relief. I agree with compression, the whole point is to go from a whisper to a roar and compression could kill it. I wouldn't worry if I was going EP1C HYBR1DZ but I'm not that kind of girl. The concern is keeping the volume up without breaking the subtlety, I don't want them too quiet. As ever, the stuff which keeps you or I tinkering for ages is unlikely to be noticed by an audience. Crikey Dave, that's a lot of mic feed. How do you go about mixing that? Logically I suppose I would do close mic section pre-mixes with or maybe without room, then balance the sections and then add in the room and Proximity if needed, perhaps tweaking the close mic or pre-mix balance as depth is introduced. Then, maybe concentrate on section sends to artificial reverb if it is needed. What approach have you found that works well? I never had to mix every single mic, at best I got section pre-mixes made up in the studio and had them as stems for re-mixes and edits. Re compression, I don't use it anymore as there is no need unless I get carried away with my timpani, but when I did, I found that subtlety was best. By which I mean nothing more than a 2-3dB restraint on the very loudest bits - no sense in distorting the relationship between the musical dynamic levels. As you are live, unless your max levels are in the red, I personally wouldn't bother with compression as a lot of level correction/balance can probably be achieved in the mix, maybe with some automation. No doubt you may use the tracks in media eventually and as you know, you will have to judge if compression will benefit the tracks utility under fx and v/o. Even in those circumstances, the tracks ebb and flow is important right? Mastering...no bloody idea get someone else to do it...come back Ray.
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Feb 8, 2019 15:14:17 GMT
I got the hang of it quite quickly, the principles are the same just much more information. Mixing the quartet and choral pieces was good practice. I keep decca and room mics centred and then direction mix - I could say pan but panning is more aggressive and cuts off more of the audio - the close and section mics according to the orchestral layout I like. So L (80-90) - violins, horns, tuned perc, flutes, clarinets - C - bassoons, oboes, violas, timps, trumpets, trombones, cellos, tuba, basses - R (80-90). Speaking roughly! The woodwinds took a while to decide on because they're normally seated centre but often mixed wide. The cuts within regions are to boost or lower individual passages and instruments, have to be careful depending on which mic and moment otherwise you boost the bleed from everything else and change the dynamic again. Woodwinds often get drowned. You can see there's gaps for horns, trumpets and harp, which I had re-recorded for some tracks. Then one reverb on the master, the one which I've always used and sounds closest to score recordings I love. As it's all real, I think the process is quite forgiving compared to trying to mix samples - the audio is already in its space without needing to be forced so it's 95% there for me. The latter 5% is where you need a seasoned engineer I've been in touch with someone and he thinks the mixes sound good so that's some relief. I agree with compression, the whole point is to go from a whisper to a roar and compression could kill it. I wouldn't worry if I was going EP1C HYBR1DZ but I'm not that kind of girl. The concern is keeping the volume up without breaking the subtlety, I don't want them too quiet. As ever, the stuff which keeps you or I tinkering for ages is unlikely to be noticed by an audience. Crikey Dave, that's a lot of mic feed. How do you go about mixing that? Logically I suppose I would do close mic section pre-mixes with or maybe without room, then balance the sections and then add in the room and Proximity if needed, perhaps tweaking the close mic or pre-mix balance as depth is introduced. Then, maybe concentrate on section sends to artificial reverb if it is needed. What approach have you found that works well? I never had to mix every single mic, at best I got section pre-mixes made up in the studio and had them as stems for re-mixes and edits. Re compression, I don't use it anymore as there is no need unless I get carried away with my timpani, but when I did, I found that subtlety was best. By which I mean nothing more than a 2-3dB restraint on the very loudest bits - no sense in distorting the relationship between the musical dynamic levels. As you are live, unless your max levels are in the red, I personally wouldn't bother with compression as a lot of level correction/balance can probably be achieved in the mix, maybe with some automation. No doubt you may use the tracks in media eventually and as you know, you will have to judge if compression will benefit the tracks utility under fx and v/o. Even in those circumstances, the tracks ebb and flow is important right? Mastering...no bloody idea get someone else to do it...come back Ray. Dave, you likely already know about this, but do you use true stereo panning? I do it in Cubase, but found an article on how to do it in Logic: ask.audio/articles/stereo-image-mixing-in-logic-pro-x
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Feb 8, 2019 18:20:23 GMT
That's a good article, but I'm still on Logic 9 - upgrading soon - and the plugin I'm using, direction mixer, is happily the previous equivalent to stereo panning. As they said, true panning just cuts the signal and as soon as I discovered direction mixing I preferred it in almost every context. Come upgrade time, I'll refer back to this though. Thanks. [/quote]Dave, you likely already know about this, but do you use true stereo panning? I do it in Cubase, but found an article on how to do it in Logic: ask.audio/articles/stereo-image-mixing-in-logic-pro-x[/quote]
|
|