How do I "clean up" the sound

Roar Oien · Post by **Roar Oien** » 20 Oct 2003 11:02 pm

These days I and my band is recording our 4. CD, and it's very interesting.
I'm wondering if someone could give their opinion about "cleaning up" the sound ...
I'm thinking of suggestions where to place the instruments in the mixing process, by using different effects and by placing them from "right to left" in the listeners ears ... I guess there's no "right way" of doing this, - but it would be very interesting to get some reply's from more experienced musicians than me. We're a regular, drums, bass, acoustic gt, electric gt, pedal steel, some fiddle/dobro and harmony vocals. The style is Country Rock.
Regards from Norway.

------------------

Dave Boothroyd · Post by **Dave Boothroyd** » 20 Oct 2003 11:44 pm

Your starting point should be where they would be if they were playing on stage.
Then there are a few technical things-
It doesn't matter too much where the bass is- human ears are not good at getting stereo information from very low notes.
One thing you are aiming for is separation. Use the stereo to separate instruments that sound in the same range,pitch and tone wise. If you have a fiddle and an acoustic guitar both positioned centre left, you have no problem hearing which is which, but a left-right separation between fiddle and electric steel would make it easier to follow the individual lines. We also find it conventional to hear the melody from the approximate centre. I've seen bands actually move round on stage to get this effect live.
Finally, consider the overall width of the stereo image- do you want the band to sound as if they are standing yards apart on a huge stage, or playing close together?
When you record kit drums, or any stereo instrument, you have this decision for individual instruments too.
The main thing is that you are either aiming for plausibility- so it sounds as if it could have been recorded live, or trickery,- so that the stereo effects deliberately attract the listener's attention.
Cheers
Dave[This message was edited by Dave Boothroyd on 21 October 2003 at 12:45 AM.]

Roar Oien · Post by **Roar Oien** » 21 Oct 2003 12:21 am

Hi Dave, - thank You for Your reply.
This is exactly what I'm looking for, I'm not quite sure how detailed this topic should be, - but when it comes to the stereo width, how wide should for example the dubbed acoustic guitar be mixed ? We've tried both full left/right and 10 o'clock/2 o'clock, of course we hear the difference, - but is there template/default setting here ?? You see, - Norwegian country records often sounds very different from American, - and we wonder why ...
Also I see the point about getting a nearby "identical" sound on the record as if You actually listen to the band live.
I have this idea about placing the instruments in a 3D "landscape", - not only right/left (stereo) but also "up front/deep behind" but how to actually do this ?? ... I'm most thankful for any tip about mixing what we've recorded.
Today it's minus 6 degrees celcius here in Norway, (about 20 Fahrenheit I think).
Roar.

------------------

mtulbert · Post by **mtulbert** » 21 Oct 2003 4:32 am

This sounds really strange but it will help you to clean up your sound considerably.

To get good definition of all your instruments, mix in mono!!!. I know that it sounds weird, but this is why it will help.

Most of the time a mix is muddy because there is poor definition in the bottom end or you have several instruments playing in the same register. By mixing in mono, you can work on the definition of each instrument and make sure that one is not stepping on the toes of another. This is particulary critical with the rhythm section and I suggest that you work on getting your rhythm section to the point where all instruments can be picked out indivdually but they are blended properly. If you achieve that, the rest of the mix is easy to do.

BTW when you achieve this great blend in mono and then go to stereo you will be amazed at how clean the sound will be.

Regards,

mark T.

Roar Oien · Post by **Roar Oien** » 21 Oct 2003 4:44 am

Thank You Mark,
.. and Yes, it sounds strange, but I'll try it. Am I right if there's not possible to pan the instruments from left to right then ? If so, - do I have to work with the frequenses only ? It sound like the right thing to start with, and then maybe switch to "stereo mode" and continue from there ??
This is very interesting for me as the band will be mixing the entire album within the next 4-6 weeks. Thanks again.
Roar.

------------------

Bill Hatcher · Post by **Bill Hatcher** » 21 Oct 2003 5:22 am

Cleaning up to me usually means going through each track individually and removing any excess crap from the track ie. erasing any noise that might be on tracks when a player was waiting to play a solo or something and you hear chair squeeks or picks hitting strings etc. Also check out the starts of phrases before punches and clean up so that only music is hear. If an instrument is not playing during a section, listen to the track for any junk that might be there. If vocalist are not singing in a section listen for goofy sounds they make while killing time. Lot's of things can be removed that will result in a clean track.

Roar Oien · Post by **Roar Oien** » 21 Oct 2003 5:40 am

A good tip, - thank You Bill.
The studio is equipped with a fully loaded ProTools, and the recording engineer knows how to use it, - and we try to "clean up" every track while recording, - after cross fading the different takes and so on.
But still, - we've often found "strange" sounds and noices, -it might sound OK listening to the tracks separately, but mixing them all together somethings weird happens and the music suddenly is not so pretty ...

So, after a struggling recording session; what You're saying is easy to forget, but very important to remember ... Please add more tip's to this, it's very useful, - ends up with a cookery book ...
Regards,
Roar.[This message was edited by Roar Oien on 21 October 2003 at 06:41 AM.][This message was edited by Roar Oien on 21 October 2003 at 06:42 AM.]

Larry Bell · Post by **Larry Bell** » 21 Oct 2003 6:37 am

There's another aspect here that should be addressed and that's whether tracks complement each other or fight each other at similar frequency ranges.

Listen to each track individually and EQ it so it sounds natural on its own. THAT MAY NOT BE WHAT YOU END UP WITH. For example, a big fat steel guitar can disappear into the bass guitar and lower register of the keyboards if you aren't careful. Sometimes it's better to thin the steel out a bit -- I love a fat sound as much as anyone, but the low mids and lows can 'fight' other instruments.

Once you're happy with each track, put it all together -- stereo, mono, whatever -- and listen to how the FREQUENCIES interact. Think about what frequency range is dominant for each. The cymbals are highs; fiddle might be higher freq than steel, then guitar, then keys, then drums, then kick drum and bass. Each should have its own 'domain' where it sparkles with little interference. It should 'lay well' on the track along with the other instruments.

Eventually, you'll want to arrange the stereo pan positions into a natural image. If you listen to the band and the steel's on the left, fiddle's on the right, bass and drums and vocals are more or less in the middle, then endeavor to get that same image in your recording.

We have some really talented guys on the forum who do this (Macy, Sarno, van Allen, and others). Hopefully they'll chime in as well. These are just relatively simple techniques that I've used in recording my own stuff for many years, with pretty good results.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps

JB Arnold · Post by **JB Arnold** » 21 Oct 2003 6:39 am

1: It's possible to have TOO much stuff going on. Get your drums right, put the lead vocal over the top of that (Should be a tad hotter than the Snare) and then start adding-bass-get that right, tight and punchy, no flab. Rhythym guitar. make sure that works then start adding the extra intruments.

WATCH YOUR EQ! this is critical. It's easy to keep "spicing up" the tracks with more mids around 2K. Big mistake. I hear lots of stuff that is just one huge midrange spike. I ususally dial the 2k back on almost everything, then add it back to certain stuff I want out front. Remember, the rule of thumb with EQ is addition by subtraction. And don't overdo the high end.

If things start to get too noisy, go back to your basics and start over again. Drums, bass r guitar and vocal.

Take breaks. Ear fatigue will fool you into thinking something sounds good when it doesn't.

and finally-The mix ain't done till it sounds good in the car.

Good Luck
JB

------------------
Fulawka D-10 9&5
Fessenden D-10 8&8
"All in all, looking back, I'd have to say the best advice anyone ever gave me was 'Hands Up, Don't Move!"
www.johnbarnold.com/pedalsteel
www.buddycage.net

http://www.nrpsmusic.com/index.html

Brad Sarno · Post by **Brad Sarno** » 21 Oct 2003 7:02 am

Yea, what Mark said. Mix in mono. Or at least check your mix in mono frequently. In mono you get a true representation of the relative levels of the instruments. In stereo, the width can trick your ears into perceiving different levels. Also, with regards to the 3D depth or spacial distance, reverb, reverb pre-delay, delay and most importantly, mic placement can help determine this. Near and far is even more important than left and right. If you mic an amp from 6 inches away, it will sound 6 inches from your ear. If you have an amp mic 8 feet away, the amp will sound 8 feet away. Use this theory for your depth of field aspect of the mix. Think about your mix when you record and place mic's. Dont expect to be able to fix it all in the mix. Keep bass in the middle so your speakers are working equally in that range. Also remember that a mono track will be perceived to be "inside" your head and a stereo track will sound "outside" your head. How wide the image sounds is determined by the mic spacing. Anything wider than 7" starts to sound very wide. Under 2" sounds closer to mono. Use this range for width control. You can use this spacial range to uncrowd a dense mix (in stereo of course). Tiny delays can help move an instrument further away in the mix without making it quieter. Also for snare drums, use the reverb on the snare to mix it's loudness. If you have an overhead mic on the drums, compress it.

------------------
Brad Sarno
Blue Jade Audio Mastering
St. Louis
http://home.earthlink.net/~bradsarno/

Don Walters · Post by **Don Walters** » 21 Oct 2003 7:33 am

Anything wider than 7" starts to sound very wide. Under 2" sounds closer to mono.

Brad, do you mean "inches" or "feet" ?

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 21 Oct 2003 8:47 am

All good advice above.
I will add : the sound for an isntrument comping with several others is not neccesarily the same when it is out front for it's solo,
or more exposed like an acoustic guitar intro etc.

Since you're on Protools, you can do Eq. level and frequency time lines also.
So and instrument can stay dipped in the lower mids for example during most of it's time in the mix, but when it's exposed you can bring it back to it's more natural sound.
This is just as valid in mono as stereo.

And some advice I got from Brad S. when I asked for his mastering engineer's take on a few mixes.
Pay particularly attention to your
Bass drum, floor tom, Bass, and snare, plus the mix as a whole
for sub sonic accumulation below 30 hz.

This robs power and isn't heard coming out of the playback system. Protools will pass freqs way below what you need.

Look for this in the mono mix also.

Use the Analyser plug in and put it as low in frequency as you can. i
If you need to create a very sharp 3 band high pass roll of filter and use it TWICE, do so.

band 1 rolls off lows real hard,
band 2 compensates for some frequencies you might loose in the top end of the taper,
band 3 holds everything above it flat.

You have to juggle this between what you see and what you hear.

Another big point. Many mixers get in the habit of always ADDING Eq, and this becomes cumulative in the mix.

You can cut a band just as easily and have the same effect of making space for other instruments.
Also eq works differently on an instrument at different times during a song. listen to see if your eq works correctly all through the song solo'd and in the mix.

PlusE q sometimes works in a different relationship when lowering than when boosting eq.
I theory they are mirror image, in reality no.

Brad Sarno · Post by **Brad Sarno** » 21 Oct 2003 12:20 pm

Don, I mean inches, NOT feet. 7 inches is roughly the ORTF standard for stereo miking. 7 inches and 110degrees I think. Since the human earholes are about 7" apart, that's the distance that provides the most realistic spread. It's all based on the subtle timing cues that the brain uses to detect where sound is coming from. Anything wider than that becomes unnaturally wide. You can sometimes do that for effect but the sense of natural location becomes unrealistic. Sometimes real wide miking is good though if the mix is crowded as it will help move things further out to the side and out of the way. If you put on headphones and hold a pair of mic's. Point them at least 90degrees wide and listen the the difference between coincident (mic's exactly on top of eachother, no spread) to a foot apart. You'll hear the image drastically change from narrow to way wide. One rule of thumb is that if the instrument is moving at all, like an acoustic guitar or fiddle, then keep the mics close together. If you mic wide and the instrument moves side to side, you'll hear the image dart all over the place. Sometimes you can get away with very very wide miking, like more than 15 feet, but that is more for orchestral zone miking where you're not really trying to create a cohesive image as much as isolate different instruments.

Also, I agree with JB about the 2kHz range. That is the first place to build up. That's where most instruments and voices get loud and it's also the place the ear hears most efficiently. If you crowd that midrange, your mix can get unpleasantly dense and harsh.

Also beware of "junk in the trunk". It's that subharmonic thumpiness that comes from acoustic pickups, active basses, kick drums, and anything that generates subharmonics that aren't musically useful. It often takes a subwoofer to detect these frequencies. They tend to be below 50Hz. If you have a lot of this stuff it will take away from the pace and timing of the groove and will also rob your mix of it's impact and power. It tends to be invisible without a subwoofer and people will wonder why their meters are so hot and the music is so lifeless. It's often safe to hi-pass most instruments. There's very little that belongs down below 80Hz other than bass and kick or low C6 stuff.

------------------
Brad Sarno
Blue Jade Audio Mastering
St. Louis
http://home.earthlink.net/~bradsarno/

Roar Oien · Post by **Roar Oien** » 21 Oct 2003 10:30 pm

... just arrived at office for a new day, hot coffee inside, and snow outside ...
Larry Bell, - thank You for bringing up the frequency issue, I find that very interesting. It doesn't seem easy to figure this out, but I think I understand what You're saying here.
JB Arnold, - long time ago I was told the 1K range could create "muddy sound" to the mix, -and I'm not so experienced, so I haven't been aware of this "addition by subtraction" way of thinking. Knowing about it makes it possible to try it ...
Brad Sarno, - 'Near and far is even more important than left and right' - we've now recorded all the drums, bass and acoustic guitars, and I've not been thinking enough about the placing of the microphones (wide or narrow miking). I know our sound/recording engineer is thinking of this, - but by reading Your post I suddenly discover that all these details should have been thought of by us, in front of the entire recording session ... We'll have to stop thinking: "We'll fix it in the mix" .. as You write ... You also brings up the reverb/delay/effects issue and that's very interesting I think.
Don Walters: Thank You for asking, here in Norway we count everything in millimetres or centimetres ... (BTW, Today, 71years ago, on the 21.October 1932, the length of an inch was determined to be 25,4mm. This decision was made in USA...)
David L. Donald: - On the previous recordings I know we've been "hiding" instruments by using volume, after You telling this, - I will try to use Eq. and maybe also Eq. together with effects, as mentioned above. About the very low frequencies, I knew they mostly were "useless", but I didn't think of them steeling (!) the power. It's reasonable it will, -and I will pay attention to this.

Thank You everyone for sharing these most useful and interesting ideas and suggestions.

Roar.

------------------
[This message was edited by Roar Oien on 21 October 2003 at 11:35 PM.][This message was edited by Roar Oien on 21 October 2003 at 11:38 PM.]

Roar Oien · Post by **Roar Oien** » 21 Oct 2003 10:53 pm

I just wondered if there is available any table or list, - telling which frequensies each instrument is most likely to appear within ?? As for the "most used" instruments in country music, - drums, bass, ac. guitars, el. guitars, fiddle, banjo, dobro, pedal steel, ... ?
If there's available any informations about where and/or when using short or long reverbs/delays/effects I would be most thankful to hear about it please.
Also informations about where to place the microphones while recording different instruments ...

I understand this is a huge area to discover, and I'll be glad if I manage to use just a few of Your good suggestions this time. Still I'm always interested in learning more about this.

Roar.

------------------

Alan Kirk · Post by **Alan Kirk** » 22 Oct 2003 4:44 am

Roar,

I've seen such tables of instrument frequencies in acoustics books. (Sorry, don't have a specific citation.) But even with such information, it's just a generalized reference. For example, one tune may use only a portion of a given instrument's range. So you might not want to be boosting or cutting the frequencies on either side of that given range (even though cutting unused frequencies can sometimes "clean up" a recording).

As far as mic placement, in my opinion, that's the essence of the art of recording. I've seen/heard guys with two mics and two tracks get a way better result than guys with a dozen mics and 24 tracks. The key: experiment. Move that mic around until you get a good sound. Change mics. Repeat until satisfied. There is no "magic" distance that will work in all situations and acoustical contexts.

Mic placement is the key to a great recording (assuming you have great players to begin with). Whenever you find yourself reaching to turn an EQ knob, stop. It's much better to get your desired sound through mic placement than by the "unnatural" method of turning a knob (all knob turning/signal processing colors/distorts the sound and removes it from the "natural" realm).

I've heard a lot of really great recordings that were ruined by excessive knob turning. The less signal processing you do, the better, in my opinion.

You don't need frequency tables and mic distance forumlas. Trust your ears.[This message was edited by Alan Kirk on 22 October 2003 at 05:47 AM.]

John McGann · Post by **John McGann** » 22 Oct 2003 7:05 am

Regarding panning (stereo placement)- don't neglect the "middle" picture- if you hard pan everything left and right there is no focus. You can create an image of musicians across a stage with some gentle panning, but try to keep the lead instrument of the moment focused in the middle (more or less).

Panning changes things as drastically as EQing does, so spend some time with it (this is where a home studio is a godsend- you can practice and experiment for free). My advice is to go very light on the EQ, try to print to tape the tones you want to hear without EQ. Good mic placement is absolutely the best way to go...what Alan said above![This message was edited by John McGann on 22 October 2003 at 08:06 AM.]

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 22 Oct 2003 9:59 am

Two other things with mics.
I often record acoustic things with 2 mics, sometimes the same, sometimes different
then I do partial pans to mostly one side, and then to off center the other side, and juggle the levels between them to fit the mix.

When doing a micing, it is often good to wear headphones and walk the mic or mics around till you like the sound... Then of course check it in the monitors.

Are you guys in Olso? I love Norway I did my honeymoon on Senya island.

I have a whole boatload of cousins on Nesoya island right there, and if you're mixing at Christmas, I might use that as another excuse to invite myself to an Oslo X-mas!
They are all very cool people and well known in Norway. The run Ferner Jacobson store.

Larry Bell · Post by **Larry Bell** » 22 Oct 2003 10:31 am

Roar,
A chart of instruments and frequencies is on my website. It includes the lowest and highest notes for bass, guitar, piano, and steel. The steel is for the E9/B6 universal, but all the notes are listed -- you can easily find the 10 string E9 and C6 stuff. I have the chart for horns, reeds, and other instruments around here somewhere, but can't find it right now.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps
[This message was edited by Larry Bell on 22 October 2003 at 11:32 AM.]

Brad Sarno · Post by **Brad Sarno** » 22 Oct 2003 5:08 pm

Larry, thanks for that chart!

Brad Sarno

Brad Sarno · Post by **Brad Sarno** » 22 Oct 2003 5:11 pm

For anyone interested in seeing how the western equal tempered scale relates to the "true" harmonically resonant notes that occur in nature, check out this chart. You can see why we flat our thirds on steel with this chart. You can also see how "out of tune" western tempered music is.

Brad Sarno
http://www.bazantar.com/grid.html

Roar Oien · Post by **Roar Oien** » 22 Oct 2003 10:16 pm

.. Back at work again, still cold here in Norway, the only comfort I can get is knowing it will be worse ...
Alan Kirk: - I think we will be able to experiment more than before now after being aware of the importance of microphone placement and use. Today we will be back in studio again to finish the recording of the acoustic guitars. I know we use 2 different microphones and we can mix this together with the direct signal from the internal pick-up on the guitar as well. And You're right, the ears, must do the final judgement prior to the "theoretical" stuff we're discussing here.
John McGann: About the panning, - I've been wondering of this fully right/left panning we've been using on the acoustic gt., I often find that a bit distracting, as the differences btw. the two takes is easy to hear and it's not as "punchy" as I would like. I've tried to place it about 20-30 % to each side, - and my ears like that better ... But I wonder, should the mix use the whole range left-right, or would it be a good idea to spread a slow ballade and to focus a Rock tune .. ? (Not generalizing here, just discussing a theory/tendency)
David L. Donald: Until now, we've panned the stereo takes equal on both sides, - it seems like a good idea to sometimes remove it from one side, for example to make space for a mandolin or similar playing almost the same as the ac.gt. ? - About Norway; It was nice to hear You've been here on Your honeymoon trip, we're seated nearby Trondheim, some 500km north of the capitol Oslo. The studio is in the city of Trondheim. I found 12 different "Nesoya" in Norway, - so I'm not sure exactly where Your relatives lives, but we'll find out. The studio schedule says we will be done recording/mixing before Christmas, - but we might consider being delayed if You're coming ..

Larry Bell and Brad Sarno: - That was amazing charts, - I thought the different instruments used more of the high frequencies, - I'm glad there's a forum like this, - an oasis of knowledge !
Ok, -I'm off to my studio session, please check Your e-mails everyone.
Roar.

------------------