how to make AG stand out in a mix ?

[slooky]

Here is something to try and you can hear it in professional recordings if its one guitar. Record the guitar on track 1, and copy the track to track 2. Now move track 2 a milisecond, so you have a very slight delay. Pan hard left and hard right. Not sure if you can remove the grid lines, in Mixcraft,,so you can move the track freely.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by KevWind

But I think the OP original complaint was the guitar was getting lost in the vocal and was asking about increasing the distinction.

Okay. I think it may also be important to point out that it's really hard to make a mix that works from top to bottom if you just do your processing and then hit Play and let it sit there. In a good mix, there's usually quite a bit of moment-to-moment actual mixing involved. Moving faders. The trick is in doing it so that the ear is being led back and forth without it being obvious. With a guitar and vocal, it's easiest if you have a control surface so you can move both things at the same time. But it's possible with simply using two mice at the same time. It is with Pro Tools, at least.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by slooky

Here is something to try and you can hear it in professional recordings if its one guitar. Record the guitar on track 1, and copy the track to track 2. Now move track 2 a milisecond, so you have a very slight delay. Pan hard left and hard right. Not sure if you can remove the grid lines, in Mixcraft,,so you can move the track freely.

I've tried that. It's easy in mixcraft, simply expand the timeline and drag it. I've also tried using two separate sources for the same track , to get some frequency variation....my tak has two pickups with two separate jacks. thanks bro

[kurth]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

Okay. I think it may also be important to point out that it's really hard to make a mix that works from top to bottom if you just do your processing and then hit Play and let it sit there. In a good mix, there's usually quite a bit of moment-to-moment actual mixing involved. Moving faders. The trick is in doing it so that the ear is being led back and forth without it being obvious. With a guitar and vocal, it's easiest if you have a control surface so you can move both things at the same time. But it's possible with simply using two mice at the same time. It is with Pro Tools, at least.

guess I don't see the advantage over just mixing on the timeline using key markers. I thought that pretty well killed live mixing in the studio.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by runamuck

Here's what I do for one voice and an acoustic:

mic the guitar with two mics and pan them hard left and hard right. You'll need to experiment with mic placement depending on your room but something like 20 inches apart and 10" out, with one pointed below the bridge and away from the soundhole, about a foot up from the guitar and the other pointed toward the neck/body joint. You may need to highpass the one aimed below the bridge depending on the guitar.

Leave the vocal centered.

You say you use a VSTi but didn't say what it is so I have no advice on that.

thanks run....maybe I should give stereo recording a shot since I now have 2 mics. My usual strategy is record from two separate pickups and then use re-guitar on both individually , adjusting the re-guitar plugin both after a track and while mastering.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Very true -- Orchestra is an example where the sum total is more important than the individual instruments..
But I think the OP original complaint was the guitar was getting lost in the vocal and was asking about increasing the distinction.

But I do struggle sometimes with distinction vs more of a blended sound being the more desirable. For example in this production I seem to have gone back and forth a bit --- love to claim artistic prerogative (but maybe just indecision )

who wrote that song Kev?...nice rendition.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by kurth

who wrote that song Kev?...nice rendition.

Thanks, it's a Shawn Mullins song I guess the spiral effect on the credits at the start is a little hard to read

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

Okay. I think it may also be important to point out that it's really hard to make a mix that works from top to bottom if you just do your processing and then hit Play and let it sit there. In a good mix, there's usually quite a bit of moment-to-moment actual mixing involved. Moving faders. The trick is in doing it so that the ear is being led back and forth without it being obvious. With a guitar and vocal, it's easiest if you have a control surface so you can move both things at the same time. But it's possible with simply using two mice at the same time. It is with Pro Tools, at least.

Absolutely::
Although since I don't have a control surface with faders ,,in PT, I tend to do lots of different selections of clip sections and then use clip gain adjustments , as opposed to automating the track faders .

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by kurth

guess I don't see the advantage over just mixing on the timeline using key markers. I thought that pretty well killed live mixing in the studio.

Humm unclear what you mean by "key markers"

I am guessing in Mixcraft like other DAW's ? You have either "Key Shortcuts" which are ways of doing things with simple keystrokes as opposed to moving the cursor and using dropdown selections---- and then you have "Markers" which simply denote different song sections in the timeline ,,, like verse and chorus, or changes in tempo, or yes song chordal "key" changes.

In any case Markers are not going to help with what (I think in part ) Brent is talking about,, to bring out or highlight the guitar and or vocal and maybe alternate them with specific volume/level changes for a specific sections in the song (as opposed to simply leaving the one level on the entire song) and trying to get the any distinction with only using FX

Also note I always listen and very carefully consider to what the Pros on this forum (like Brent and Bob , et. al. ) are saying simply because they will have done more recording and mixing in a year, than most of us hobbyist will in 20 years

[kurth]

Kev....automating the volume and pan controls on the timeline. Isn't that all a mixer does? Maybe I'm doing it wrong...cause I never read manuals but seems to work for me.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by kurth

guess I don't see the advantage over just mixing on the timeline using key markers. I thought that pretty well killed live mixing in the studio.

This was mixed live in the studio -- check out the whole Soundcloud page while you're there. Lots of fingers moving faders. These things don't exactly mix themselves. :-)

[kurth]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

This was mixed live in the studio -- check out the whole Soundcloud page while you're there. Lots of fingers moving faders. These things don't exactly mix themselves. :-)

thanks. It's beautiful....l'm a sucker for solo strings. Brent...I'm certain you know alot more than me, that would be a given for almost anyone here, and Kev says your a pro, so obviously, since I'm just an amateur. But I'm an amateur at lots of different things from engineering , although I did get a patent that put me in the pro ranks, to artist, although I've shown in worldclass galleries and studied it in university, to amateur musician, writer, poet, videographer and photographer, although I supported my fam for 10 years doing it, and even an amateur father at times. Hard to be a pro at a moving target jaja. But if your not mixing live, is there a fundamental difference from using the automation features in a daw to mix. Genuinely interested to learn. Like I said I don't read manuals, not from my early fcp dayz, and I usually choose my software based around that video model...like Vegas as well. Same conceptual model. I look at something like reason and ain't interested, so that's the primary reason I chose mixcraft cause it's based on the same concepts. anyway thanks for sharing music and advice, and I'll definitely check out the soundcloud page.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by kurth

Kev....automating the volume and pan controls on the timeline. Isn't that all a mixer does? Maybe I'm doing it wrong...cause I never read manuals but seems to work for me.

Not a matter of doing it wrong more a matter of perhaps simply not knowing all the features available .
Modern full featured DAWs are a longterm learning curve.

But assuming you mean the mixer window portion of a DAW then no there more functions and features than just automating volume and pan.
However "Markers" is not one of the Mixer functions --that is a function of the Edit window portion of the DAW.
Lets back up a bit for clarity sake most DAW's have at least two different widows, the Mix Window and the Edit Window . Some DAWs you can display them separately or as separate sections in one main overall DAW window

I am not familiar with Mixcraft , However most DAW's mixer windows have, inputs and output routing... Virtual volume faders ... Inserts for plugins and hardware gear .. Sends with level controls .. signal meters... some DAWs display Automatic Delay Compensation numbers ... etc.


I guess I am a bit confused,,, If it "seems to work" for you, then why in your OP did you say

But as soon as I add even a voice track, I loose presence of the guitar. And when I add instrument tracks the guitar disappears even further. Usually I have only three basic tracks....guitar, voice, and virtual instrument.

Which kinda seems to be not working ?

[kurth]

Kev....the mud created in the middle vs clarity...but I'm making some progress with q3. Taught me alot for working with any parametric equalizer. I esp like it for getting rid of clicks. I recorded some stuff with my fender with it's fishman piezo , which created some clicks in some tracks. Using isotope click remover also reduced the dynamic range of the clip so that doesn't seem to be a route I wanted to take. Q3 is so easy to find the click frequency and reduce the filter window and it doesn't seem to affect the dynamics hardly at all. And in q3 you can compare the frequencies between tracks that have the plugin running and see the overlap that's creating the mud. Pretty cool plugin....but pretty expensive as well. It and their compressor would be over $300bucks. Anyone know another parametric equalizer that's is as good but cheaper...far cheaper? and usually I stay on the mainpage so not in a mixer window...on the timeline itself, reducing or lowering the volume....fading between different tracks etc. simply by automating the timeline.


'Not a matter of doing it wrong more a matter of perhaps simply not knowing all the features available .
Modern full featured DAWs are a longterm learning curve. '

....and longterm is something I'm definitely not interested in. I want fast , 90% effective, but now.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by kurth

... if your not mixing live, is there a fundamental difference from using the automation features in a daw to mix.

There is. When you've got your hands on either real or virtual faders, you can move more than one thing at once.