Archives

  • Creating punch and width in your mix

    Creating punch and width in your mix

    Creating width in your mixes.

    By Sameer Sengupta

    A lot of producers I meet are very interested in getting ‘width’ into their mixes, but there’s a common mistake that I frequently encounter in the mixes I’m sent for mastering.

    All too often, the producer’s obsession for width sees them dragging ‘stereo widening’ type plugins onto nearly every channel, to… you know… get width right? Wrong.

    Nothing can make house music more bland than doing something like this. The foundation of house music is the kick drum, which, for best results, should remain dead centre, and without any image processing applied, certainly nothing below ~350Hz. Then build the rest of your elements upon that.

    The problem with widening plugins is that they tend to leave a big hole in the centre image, which is just as important as the sides.

    Another problem with image processors, is that they will tend to homogenise any natural stereo content when applied.

    Mixing for ‘Stereo’ in its simplest terms, means taking into account how sound affects us as two eared beings, in sonic, psychological and physiological terms. Ultimately, we want to create a sonic picture that provides pleasant stimulation for our brains.

    Our brains and ears identify sound in the stereo field through subtle tonal and phase shifts. Widening processors create a ‘fake’ sense of width by modulating the phase in unnatural ways. Controlling these phase shifts also makes a sound less ‘exciting’ to the ear, and ultimately, it will become part of the background, like wallpaper.

    Its the visual equivalent of placing a Guassian blur over every object. If everything has this filter applied, then the whole image just becomes a blur.

    flat550x550075f blur

    If you must use these plugins, leaving a few elements in their natural state to juxtapose the blurred background can greatly enhance the focus, or ‘Punch” of the sound.

    flat,550x550,075,f.u1

    Placing an image widener on a kick drum will have an adverse effect on what you may be hoping to achieve, so it’s best to leave it out, especially on the important sounds.

    In fact using these plugins will create width, but remove all depth and movement, trapping the sound in a thin sounding layer… not unlike these guys:

    supermanii-space2
    Help – I’m trapped in a flat box of emotion!

    Another Approach

    The real secret to getting a much better sense of width, is to actually ditch the image wideners for the old faithful Pan pot. Panning elements in creative ways will give your mix a much more natural, and ultimately wider sense of ‘true width’.

    Again going back to how the ear reacts to sound, our ears like sense of movement through tonal and phase shifts. Instead of submitting every bit of percussion, synth and vocal layer into this blurred fake stereo, try panning each element in ways that allow your ears to discover the sounds across the stereo field in musical ways.

    For example, supposing you have two percussion lines that are rhythmically syncopated off each other, place one off the left and the other to the right, or maybe at the centre. Then place the closed and open hats slightly apart from eachother. Next, place that big reverbed clap that only happens once every 8 bars way off the right, and perhaps a little loud. It only happens occasionally, but when it does, it creates this shock of harmonic colour off to the right, and keeps the ear tuned in.

    You can do the same thing with vocals, placing the lead in the centre and extreme Left/Right, but then add a little bit of random harmonics by placing only one of the vocal harmonies at the 3 o’clock position.

    Fig-09-stereo-mix-1-GOOD

    This technique will let your sonic picture sound harmonically richer and a hell of a lot more exciting.

    Play around with placing one off sounds in extreme positions, or using a dynamic panner that pans around the field slowly/quickly. Try placing musical lines that are a call & response in different areas. Pretty soon, you’ll find the frequencies ‘dancing’ around the whole stereo field, giving you true width.

    It’s fun…. go and play.

  • Mixing with your Mastering Engineer with Steve Smart

    Mixing with your Mastering Engineer with Steve Smart

    Mixing with your Mastering Engineer

    By Steve Smart

    To book Steve for your mastering project, contact Lynley on 02 9698 5888 or mastering@studios301.com.

    In most mastering situations, stereo mixes are used for the final mastering session. But sometimes I go a little further than that…  And the producer or mixer brings in their computer, with their DAW mix sessions, into my mastering studio with them.

    The advantage of this from a mixing perspective is that we can play the mixes in the mastering studio speakers and listening environment, where the engineer has the opportunity to listen to the mixes in a very accurate room with pristine converters, amps and speakers. From there, we can get into the project in its entirety to adjust any problematic aspect of the final mix (e.g. individual instrument levels, equalisation and compression). In doing this, we are able to make fine adjustments in the mix, without having any side affects that may occur to the mix by simply using overall mastering eq and compression. Overall, the mix sounds better, the master sounds better as a result, and the producer or artist hasn’t had to pay much more (if any) for a better sounding song.

    As an example, in a track I was recently mastering, we had a great sounding kick drum with nice sub energy, but the bass guitar had large amounts of sub frequencies in it as well. Under normal situations in a mastering session, I would simply use a high pass filter or equaliser to tighten this up for a firm rhythm section… But the side effect can sometimes be that in tightening up the bass guitar, we loose the energy in the kick drum. In the situation where we have the mix opened up in the DAW, we can easily go in and make the adjustments to the bass guitar only, without any side effects to the kick drum!

    In another instance, the vocal was too bright but the percussion was slightly dull, so we were able to go to the vocal eq in the mix and reduce the high frequencies. This then allowed me to add brightness to the whole track with my beautiful Sontec mastering eq.

    And in another situation, we had guitar parts that were recorded using two microphones, but unfortunately one of them was out of phase. This gave us a really weak guitar sound, but having the mix at our fingertips, we were able to go in, find it, and phase flip it – which immediately ended up in a really strong sounding guitar. This is something I simply could not have fixed in mastering a normal stereo mix.

    Overall, the common problems I hear when mastering – over compression, clashing eq and phase problems to name a few – can all be fixed much faster and more effectively in the mix, rather than trying to work around it in mastering.

    Lastly, the benefits of this process for many mixers/producers have had longer-term benefits. By having the “fixed mix” saved in their DAW, and then referencing it back in their own studio, they have been able to use it as a reference to tweak their own studio monitoring systems for better results.

    Here’s what to do If you want to mix in my mastering studio…

    In order for us to do this together, you’ll just have to bring your laptop or tower containing the software and relevant mix projects (but don’t forget your iLok and other dongles!). From there, we hook you into our USB > AES/EBU device that runs straight to my Prism Dream DA convertor… and into my analogue mastering chain from there.

    Displays, keyboards, extra peripherals, cables, etc. are all catered for at 301 – so you don’t need to pull your studio apart to make this happen.

    da2_fp_ang2

    How much does it cost?

    I charge my usual hourly rate to work this way. Sometimes it works out quicker when you bring in your DAW, because I can quickly fix a problem like above, and then keep on mastering without having to work around mix issues. On the flip side, lack of preparation, or half-baked mixes can cause a blow-out in time – so I strongly recommend that if you are considering working this way, to get your online mix sounding as best as you possibly can – and then I can simply enhance it, rather than having to re-“mix” it with you in my mastering studio.

    Finally, none of this is to say that all mixes need these adjustments, or this much intervention, but it’s a great option to have up your sleeve if you are looking for a lower cost way to improve the sound of your mixes (and thus masters.)

    All in all, stay confident in your mixing ability, take the mix to the point where you believe it’s at its best and then from there it can only get better…

    Steve.

    Lynley, our Mastering Coordinator, is happy to talk through this process with you in more detail if you are interested in mix-mastering with Steve Smart. You can reach Lynley on 02 9698 5888 or mastering@studios301.com.

  • Bass on a Budget

    Bass on a Budget

    I recently wrote this piece for our friends at Liveschool, but realised its relevant to our audience too.

    A wonderful thing about music production these days, is that you can do it without the need for a big studio. But if you’re interested in making bass heavy music, then there’s nothing more important than getting to know your bass better.

    kick-frequency-chart

    One of the main reason people struggle with getting their mixes to sound tight and punchy is because of poor monitoring environments, especially in the bottom end.

    test-environment
    Example of a simple home studio environment.

    One way to hear whats down there is to turn it up, and if you don’t have the luxury of an acoustically isolated space, you’re going to piss off your neighbours, girlfriend, parents, etc. Another way to do it would be to fork out on absurdly good headphones or a subwoofer (and again, piss off your….).

    But there is cheap and effective solution!

    I discovered this years ago by accident but got so used to it, that I still rely on it to this very day.

    I used to place my monitors on my desk in a fairly small room; this created all sorts of negative issues, such as causing the table to resonate, and given how close the speakers were to the back wall, the entire room would sometimes resonate at certain frequencies, especially at higher volumes.

    IMG_3287
    Another example home studio.

    But at lower volumes when the room didn’t resonate, I noticed something else. The speakers were sitting directly on the wooden table because I couldn’t even afford any acoustic sponge to sit them on. This in turn caused low-frequencies to vibrate directly through the table. Another way to do it, is to actually touch the speaker cone, ever so carefully. This gives you a very precise sense of any bass movement, but be sure not to apply too much force, or you could damage the drivers!

    Through this, I found myself *feeling* the bass. This became especially useful even when they were turned up, because even though I didn’t have a subwoofer, I could feel what was going on below 40Hz.

    Another way is to actually look at the woofer. If at a moderate volume, you can visibly see the woofer moving back & forth (~5-15Hz) then you need to hi-pass something.

    giphy
    Feel the bass!

    Doing this, I was able to have a sense of how fast the low-end was moving, or feel the separation between the kick and bass. I could also feel just how low the bass went. This in turn affected sound design and mix decisions… and when you get the low-end sounding good, the rest is a lot easier to build.

    At first, it takes some getting used to… ie, knowing how much movement is *just right*, but you eventually pick it up, and it never leaves you. In fact you’ll start to be more aware of sub-sonic in clubs and other loud spaces. Lastly, you may have seen this technique in this part of that film “It’s All Gone Pete Tong” – I still use do this today and swear by it.

    Written by Sameer Sengupta.

  • SSL vs Neve

    SSL vs Neve

    As I tour people through our recording facilities in Sydney, I usually refer to our Neve 88R and SSL 9000k consoles as the “Ferrari and Lamborghini of mixing consoles”…. They are both the best cars that money can buy, but it’s up to the driver as to which one they prefer to drive.

    Occasionally that remark satisfies my visitor and we move onto seeing something else, but more often than not, they ask what on earth do I actually mean – how do the two consoles actually compare?

    So, as a manager I can talk about the practical and technical differences, however I polled some of the engineers and producers at 301 as to their thoughts on the “sound” of the two consoles.

    The Audible Differences

    Leon Zervos was very quick to comment that the Neve 88R’s sound is “warm and thick”, with a nice element of presence when the EQ is enabled. The SSL is less coloured, but does have a certain “edge” to the sound.

    Mitch Kenny comments that when mixing, the SSL has more bandwidth and is more forgiving which allows more to be “fit in” to a mix run through this board. However, when recording, the Neve’s pre-amps have a very fast slew rate and as such respond incredibly quickly, which captures transients very openly.

    Jono Baker has recently had an experience where he ended up doing the same session on both the Neve and the SSL, and found that the SSL’s pre-amps are muddy compared to the Neve Pre’s – which are cleaner, detailed, and better suited to recordings where the sound needs to be as “open” as possible (such as orchestral music)


    We also asked some friends out there on their thoughts:

    “Track on Neve, mix on SSL.”

    Ivan Gough, Musician/Producer (TV Rock)

    “Tracking on a Neve is nice and creative, SSL for mixing. Having spent many years working with Spike Stent on his G-Series with non-linear summing, it’s a revelation!”

    Lee Groves, Producer/Mix Engineer

    The Technical Differences

    • The Neve has a transformer on the microphone input, whereas the SSL does not. This may be a factor in the “warm” sound that is attributed with the Neve – though bear in mind the transformers are on the mic input only, so tape or Pro Tools output don’t pass through these.
    • The Neve has much more sophisticated circuitry, because it’s routing is very flexible. This probably again contributes to the coloured “Neve” sound.
    • For the most part, though, the electronics on each board are quite similar.

    The Practical Differences

    • The Neve sound varies greatly between the eras of their design. We have a beautiful vintage Neve console in Byron Bay and a state of the art contemporary Neve console in Sydney – and they sound significantly different, not to mention that there have been several models in between that vary substantially in their design and sound between the classic and the current. Over in the SSL camp, whilst their sound has evolved, the similarities between E’s, G’s and K’s are more apparent than in the history of Neve’s designs.
    • The Neve’s automation is sophisticated, possibly not for any good reason. Despite the Neve being a fantastic sounding mix console, I’m sure engineers opt not to mix on it purely for the reason that you do need a degree in rocket science to operate the automation!
    • It takes us about an hour to boot up the Neve console, so we leave it turned on almost always. Unfortunately the Neve computer usually takes a few attempts at booting up and down to get full communication with the board, and with day-to-day pressure to keep sessions on schedule, we opt to leave it on 24/7. I estimate it costs us about $30 per day to keep the console powered – so if we kept it off for half the day, every day, our power costs would be reduced by about $6000 per annum. That’s about 5x times more than an average household per year! Not to mention the waste of energy and the effects on our environment.
    • Generally speaking, the Neve at our studio traditionally has been used as a “recording” console and the SSL a “mixing” console.

    At the end of the day, both these flagship consoles remain to have a highly desirable sound that continues to be emulated by the very best of plug-in manufacturers. While the digital versions may bring their sound accessible to a wider audience, it is hard to dismiss the real thing.

    As Mr. Ferris Bueller once said, “It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up.” or at the very least, using one!

    Want to record or mix in one of our studios? Contact us today

    written by Anthony Garvin

  • Dadalife  – Sausage Fattener

    Dadalife – Sausage Fattener

    This is one of my favourite distortion units and its amazingly cheap (get it here http://www.dadalife.com/sausage-fattener-plugin/). It’s great for creating super gnarly crunched up distortions, but one of my favourite things to do with this plug-in is to use it on the master bus, or even in mastering itself.

    If you have a mix that is overall a little bit dull, stick this little bad boy over the stereo mix leaving the Colour at 0 – then bring the Fatness up to between 1-4%. This will had some extra harmonic content giving your track life without noticeably changing the tone of your mix.

    Something to be aware of – the gain indicator is actually for the INPUT Signal level into the plug-in. If it’s going red, it means you are digitally distorting the plug-in’s input, which is (generally) a bad idea, so back it off till it’s not clipping.

    Jack Prest is an Inhouse Producer/Engineer at Studios 301.