Second multi-track recording - better (I think)

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by buzzardwhiskey

Yeah, I'm sure you're right. I was doing it with the idea of giving some space for the bass player. Even my vocals I'd make more lush if I were a solo-singer.

Ah, if you're going to add bass, that may make sense.

[Trevor B.]

Originally Posted by buzzardwhiskey

Yeah, I'm sure you're right. I was doing it with the idea of giving some space for the bass player. Even my vocals I'd make more lush if I were a solo-singer.

But unless you're bass part is really (really) high up the fretboard a high pass filter at 200Hz is leaving a significant gap and thinning out the tone of your acoustic guitar. My understanding (albeit limited) is that most of the undesirable mud in the low end occurs under the lowest fundamentals on an acoustic guitar (around 80Hz).
Then again, if you want a brighter tone..............???

[buzzardwhiskey]

Trevor, your understanding is probably quite accurate. Were I to record just my guitar, I may very well have set the HPF at 100 or perhaps 120 so that frequencies below 60HZ or 80Hz will have fallen off more than 6dB to ensure that acoustic guitar muddiness didn't show up but the fullness of my single guitar is there.

When recording multiple instruments, (I have heard that) it's pretty common to reduce the frequency "play-ground" of each thus allowing them to be heard more separately.

However, I could be completely misguided here. I will have to experiment a lot when I get multiple instruments/vocalists recorded.

[paulp1960]

When I record my acoustic guitars and mixing them with an electric bass guitar track and drums I usually make a cut below 100 hz with quite a steep slope.

If you isolate and listen to what's recorded below 100 hz for an acoustic guitar it doesn't sound very musical but I would say 200 hz is too high as well.

Then again it depends on how steep a filter you are applying.

[buzzardwhiskey]

Originally Posted by paulp1960

When I record my acoustic guitars and mixing them with an electric bass guitar track and drums I usually make a cut below 100 hz with quite a steep slope.

If you isolate and listen to what's recorded below 100 hz for an acoustic guitar it doesn't sound very musical but I would say 200 hz is too high as well.

Then again it depends on how steep a filter you are applying.

Very good point. I'm actually not sure how to alter the slope (but I'm sure that I can). When set at 200Hz, the dB drop at 100Hz is -12db so I would say that's not very steep.

[paulp1960]

Yes that would be -12 db per octave. I use more like -48 db per octave when I cut the lows from an acoustic guitar track.

[buzzardwhiskey]

Excellent "rule of thumb". Thanks!

[Trevor B.]

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

The second recording is a bit better than the first, and the first was not bad. There is a bit more space in the second take, although I do notice perhaps too much processing (e.g., guitar mic compression).

One thing regarding both takes, and this has more to do with diction/clarity than with recording...I have a hard time understanding the words you are singing. I would suggest that you work on your singing diction so that listeners such as myself can easily understand each word you sing.

Originally Posted by jim1960

What does "pre-made" mean?

Granted, what makes a good mix is all very subjective and we all have different tastes, but when I listen to the song the attack on the guitar overwhelms everything else. If I were mixing that song, I'd try more compression to tame it, and if that didn't work, perhaps some subtractive EQ. Just my opinion, feel free to ignore it if you like the attack to be as present as it is.

Both of these quotes point to an issue I raised earlier re: the guitar track overpowering the vocal. It also occurs to me that you might be able to tame the attack of the guitar by moving your guitar mic back and to the left (away from your right hand). Worth a try, right?

[scripsit]

Originally Posted by buzzardwhiskey

Very good point. I'm actually not sure how to alter the slope (but I'm sure that I can). When set at 200Hz, the dB drop at 100Hz is -12db so I would say that's not very steep.

If you are using the default Studio One EQ, you can alter the amount and slope of the bass cut by using both the LC and LF controls.

'LC' automatically puts in a cut with a fixed slope, and all you can alter is the frequency at which it starts.

On the graphical interface bit of the EQ plugin, you can move the LH circle to the left, so it is close to the LC circle, and alter the Q setting from the knobs below to change the slope at which the cut line meets the horizontal line representing 'no EQ change'. With a bit of fiddling you can get a much sharper transition than the default cut.

Hope that makes sense.

I only work with solo guitar, and find that most of the mud (room noise in my case) is removed with the LC alone, if I let it come to horizontal about 80-90Hz.

I'd just do a low cut for now and look at adding in specific cuts in the guitar track at the frequencies you want to emphasise other instruments once you can actually hear and see where these instruments sit. I don't see how you can 'premix' expecting additional tracks to fit a predetermined frequency range.

Kym

[Trevor B.]

Originally Posted by scripsit

I don't see how you can 'premix' expecting additional tracks to fit a predetermined frequency range.
Kym

While I agree that it's impossible to map out exact EQ settings for multiple instruments and voices pre-recording/premixing, it is possible to make a general plan ahead of time based on the frequency ranges of what is being recorded. For example, if there's an alto sax line under a violin solo in the low register of that instrument it would make sense to dial back the alto sax above 196 Hz. I also believe it's important for anyone recording and mixing multiple tracks to know the frequency range of what they're recording before the session. Consider that the bottom 3 strings of an acoustic guitar, open to the V fret (82Hz-196Hz) bumps up against a bass guitar from the open A string all the way up to the XII fret on the G string (44Hz-196Hz). Of course these are fundamentals so, to your point, there's bound to be some tweaking required even with the best laid plans.

[buzzardwhiskey]

Originally Posted by Trevor B.

While I agree that it's impossible to map out exact EQ settings for multiple instruments and voices pre-recording/premixing, it is possible to make a general plan ahead of time based on the frequency ranges of what is being recorded. For example, if there's an alto sax line under a violin solo in the low register of that instrument it would make sense to dial back the alto sax above 196 Hz. I also believe it's important for anyone recording and mixing multiple tracks to know the frequency range of what they're recording before the session. Consider that the bottom 3 strings of an acoustic guitar, open to the V fret (82Hz-196Hz) bumps up against a bass guitar from the open A string all the way up to the XII fret on the G string (44Hz-196Hz). Of course these are fundamentals so, to your point, there's bound to be some tweaking required even with the best laid plans.

The whole thing is kind of half art, half science. I'll keep making recordings and mixing to get a feel for a thousand different things. And reading.

Next up for me is drums. I'll be recording congas, cajons and djembes.

Fun stuff!

[jim1960]

You might find this chart helpful.

[buzzardwhiskey]

What a cool chart! Thanks, Jim.

[Trevor B.]

Originally Posted by jim1960

You might find this chart helpful.

Hey Jim, This is a fabulous chart. Before I got interested in home recording I knew the frequency ranges by their "note" equivalents so bass=bass, mids = tenor and alto, high=soprano with baritone, countertenor and mezzo soprano covering the in-betweens registers.

[Trevor B.]

Oops, forgot to mention that the female version of a countertenor is called a contralto. No misogyny intended.