[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index][
Author Index]
Re: Missing the third dimension (II)
Hi Rune!
Heres one from a Lo Fi enthusiast... I say.. forget the gear just for a while, forget the rules for a while, and start doing a few things wrong. I have a friend making Techno, and he is obsessed with getting eveyting perfect and just right, he has all the right convertors, and plugins and gold connectors on everything, and you know what?? He mixes like that too!!! His tracks sound like butter... smooth but boring.
What about shoving something really high in the mix..? what about removing ALL reverb for the chorus, what about no snare drum altogether.. what about putting the bass thru a time synched panner?? What about recording the vocals 10 times... What about singing in the shower...
NONE of these techniques have anything to do with recording techniques, and no one but a real ass will be able to tell the difference between your convertors... IF THE TRACK IS GOOD!!
If its crap, then .... I guess you´ll here lots of discussion about "what did u record it on, oh really, what convertors is that? Oh really, what DAW? oh really what reverb..." Basically... Your track sucks...
Ive heard your stuff... it doesnt suck so forget about the damn convertors, and come down and play in Oslo!!!
Mark
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Charles Zwicky
<cazwicky@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi Rune,
I've been a professional recording engineer / producer for over
25 years, and I will say that the answer below is number 4:
arrangement. The other concerns are trivial compared to
arrangement. I've mixed records that have been recorded in a
bathroom using a laptop's built in microphone. Those sounds are
made valid by their context, i.e. the arrangement.
The problem is usually "50 pounds of potatoes in a 10 pound
sack". No converter / clocking superstition will
solve that problem for you. Plugins and processing are not the
solution either, usually these just contribute to the mud caused by a
bad arrangement.
Have you heard the 1971 Javanese Gamelon recordings on
nonesuch? These have tremendous depth and were recorded under some
very difficult conditions on less than state of the are gear.
The recordings may be 'flawed' but this is one of the most captivating
records I've ever heard. External clocking cannot
remedy the issues with 7.5ips tape flutter, but it really doesn't
matter. It's all in the arrangement of the sounds.
-Chuck Zwicky
Hi again !
I misses depth and three dimensions in my
recording. I can get two dimensions - high and wide sounds - but its
hard to get any kind of depth. My recorded guitar or vocals often
sounds flat and lifeless. So I take the flat and lifeless sounds
(missing body) and put them in a room made up of a digital reverb. Its
still flat and lifeless (without body) - but now in a "flat room"
inside the computer, in lack of a better explanation. This is
difficult to describe. Shoulden`t it be possible to make the singers
head bigger - like a real head was singing to me, instead of this
onedimensional voice? In my one work I misses instruments/voices that
almost popps out of the speaker or that their in this nice ambient
that glue it al together. And because I read to many magazines on
sound and commersials, I`ve come to think; I got to buy better;
converters, word clock, reverb, delays, mics, preamps etc. From your
answers I understand this is a big topic.
1. Stereo recording
(micking)
2. Better converters
3. External word clock
4. Arrangement
5. Eq - panning - masking
6. Room acoustics
7. Enough dsp power (freeze
ableton)
1. Stereomicking.
The thing that got me wandering about
recording and the lack of the third dimensions or depth, was that my
liverecording with Edirol Field Recorder had a nice depth. A depth I
often misses on my mac/motu recordings. The fieldrecorder has a
stereomic and the recordings I make with it, has the sound of the
liveroom. This recording technique is limiting - its just one
track.Like Straschill writes, maybe stereo micking can get me some of
what I am missing.
2. Better converters - external word
clock.
I read inBehind the Glass
II - Howard Massey, that top producers uses a external word
clock (Ricard Sales also). Many uses Apogee Big Ben, even Pro Tools
users. This opens the mix and makes depth. Whats this?
If one is using just one interface, is
there a benefit of using external word clock or this a thing for
studios with many interfaces and hardware units?
The latest Apogee 16x AD/DA interface has
Big Ben word clock build in. I am thinking - maybe buying Apogee 16x
AD/DA would get me what I misses, greate converters and Big Ben word
clock and open mixes with depth? Any thoughts?
Sales, your not happy with Apogee, are
you refering to Apogee 16x AD/DA or earlier models? I read greate
things about Apogee, but I will check out Lynx, like you
recommanded.
A silly question? When Big Ben is
intergratet in Apogee 16x, is this a word clock good enough, or is
external the key thing? Is the important thing a great word clock, or
is external important?
7. Freeze functions - Ableton (enough
power for plugins - making depth).
Boysen, is it possible to use freeze
functions even when rendering the final mix? I have to admit - I have
come to think I need to buy better reverb unit then oxford plugins,
maybe the tc 6000. Any thoughts?
best regards Rune F.
Alt i ett. Få Yahoo! Mail med adressekartotek,
kalender og notisblokk.
--
--
www.markfrancombe.comhttp://vimeo.com/user825094http://uk.youtube.com/user/markfrancombe
http://www.myspace.com/markfrancombehttp://www.looop.no/shop/catlabel.php?q=Synch%20Non%20Synch