How do you use a Multiband limiter/compression tool?

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by Vindellama

I usually record direct in stereo... Is it better to record mono and pan?

The background noise comes from a water feature. I'll retry with a closer position.

Reason I asked it that the track R and L correlation (phase alignment) is virtually perfect (mono). Check out all
of your software settings. Keep R full right and L full left - do not pan.

Regarding multiband compression. That is so far down the list of things to do I would not consider using it, and
it can make things sound worse.

[FrankHudson]

I'll add another response as to preferring the raw to the processed track.

Are you aiming to raise the overall loudness of the track? Your processing did that, but the cost of blunting the transients, that is to say the notes' attack when they are plucked is blunted in a way that I don't find pleasing.

Yes, a simple leveler or "Normalise to -1 db" setting would likely be better.

For listening to in public spaces, or for commercial recordings and broadcasting there may be some need to raise the overall level of tracks. When producing that final track of natural sounding acoustic music your ears should not hear the nice plucked transients as if they are muffled, or if you are looking at the track's wave form with your eyes, you want a minimal amount of the peaks being flattened, and even then, only on the loudest passages.

[KevWind]

I tend to agree with the majority here a multiband comp is much more of a mastering tool and usually used to solve specific frequency problem issues and much more associated with multi instrument sessions as opposed to a single solo instrument .

Also like most here I prefer your unprocessed track for two reasons , your ambient noise floor is very problematic to start with and is made worse with the processing (something I have done myself) So your focus should be tackling that issue first as opposed to simply making the track louder.

Also consider that while a "professional" recording may sound louder..... but that is not what makes it "professional"

Keep this in mind.
It may sound louder "because it is professional "
It does not sound professional "because it is louder"

[Vindellama]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Reason I asked it that the track R and L correlation (phase alignment) is virtually perfect (mono). Check out all
of your software settings. Keep R full right and L full left - do not pan.

Regarding multiband compression. That is so far down the list of things to do I would not consider using it, and
it can make things sound worse.

I noticed it in the panel...
But It's probably the recording...
I record into the stereo file preset in the zoom...
Maybe the preset is to blame and it would be better to record in the "dual mono" preset?
At least when I add a panner. Everything seems to be 100% left/right.

Here is another attempt.
This time with a soft overall compression, hi-pass, soft limiter (instead of the multi-band), and binaural pan to try to correct the spread:

[Doug Young]

That sounds quite a bit better and seems to be stereo now. But why all the processing? You shouldn't need a "binaural pan", the raw track out of the zoom should sound good. Just adjust the levels (if needed) and add a touch of reverb to taste.

What Zoom are you using? I don't have any presets on the 2 that I have (H4 and H6), as far as I know, just a choice of what channels to arm for recording.

[Vindellama]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

That sounds quite a bit better and seems to be stereo now. But why all the processing? You shouldn't need a "binaural pan", the raw track out of the zoom should sound good. Just adjust the levels (if needed) and add a touch of reverb to taste.

What Zoom are you using? I don't have any presets on the 2 that I have (H4 and H6), as far as I know, just a choice of what channels to arm for recording.

According to rick the previous one sounded like mono...
So I used the "spread" option on the binaural pan to bring back the stereo image (since I don't know how to split a stereo track back into mono).
I'm using the H5.
On the menu there is the choice of recording directly into a stereo track either with the capsule or the channels 1 and 2.
Or to record on 2-4 mono tracks (left/right).
Maybe the stereo track recorded by the H5 isn't panned right?
Does the last one sound better than say... The raw + stereo with higher volume?
I thought that with the peaks from the strums being too high the rest ended up too low when bringing the peaks to 0.
So with a little bit of compression and using a limiter on -0,8 to 0 the volume of the non-strum parts would be better.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Vindellama

According to rick the previous one sounded like mono...
So I used the "spread" option on the binaural pan to bring back the stereo image (since I don't know how to split a stereo track back into mono).
I'm using the H5.
On the menu there is the choice of recording directly into a stereo track either with the capsule or the channels 1 and 2.
Or to record on 2-4 mono tracks (left/right).
Maybe the stereo track recorded by the H5 isn't panned right?

Maybe the H5 is different. On my H6, for the built-in mics, all I do is press the arm button for either track. They both light up, and it records a stereo file (XY). The external mic channels can be armed individually, which creates separate files, or pressed together to link them to create a stereo file. I don't see a menu option to change that behavior, but maybe the H5 has something different. In any case, there should be no problem with a stereo file - that's the easiest thing to work with in a DAW, and it's already automatically panned hard left and right. You should have a nice stereo image right out of the recorder, no need to create any simulated stereo.

Maybe you could post the original raw H5 file, no processing at all, and make it downloadable in sound cloud (under the permissions tab). That way others can load it into a DAW and see what's going on.

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Maybe you could post the original raw H5 file, no processing at all, and make it downloadable in sound cloud (under the permissions tab). That way others can load it into a DAW and see what's going on.

I just open Audacity, set it to record what you hear, and start playing the soundcloud file. Bit rate not as good as the original wav file but works out fine.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

I just open Audacity, set it to record what you hear, and start playing the soundcloud file. Bit rate not as good as the original wav file but works out fine.

Sure, but that way, you're going thru SoundCloud's low-quality streaming, and whatever processing soundcloud has done - when trying to help someone, I'd prefer to avoid whatever some 3rd party has done to mess with the file along the way.

[Vindellama]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Sure, but that way, you're going thru SoundCloud's low-quality streaming, and whatever processing soundcloud has done - when trying to help someone, I'd prefer to avoid whatever some 3rd party has done to mess with the file along the way.

Even better...
I made a dropbox link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p946s5ebyj...M0008.WAV?dl=0

And... That is strange.
From previous recordings I made in the last year before trying to improve the post-recording tweaks I think this issue was already present to some extent.

In this one the zoom was around 3 feet from the guitar.
It isn't the best placement considering the angle (and the ambient noise recording out), but I wanted to try to avoid messing much with the eq to reduce the low-end (considering my lack of experience and lack of a proper monitor).
Is it the positioning? Or it should be getting enough spread in this distance?

[Doug Young]

Thanks.. Your file is stereo, but it's not sounding very wide partly because you're so far away. 3 feet is great if you have world class acoustics (And I'd use spaced pairs at that distance) - for most of us recording at home you need to be closer, to reduce the impact of room acoustics, reduce the noise (relative to the guitar) and frankly to get a bigger sound. That "more professional" sound you're looking for can more likely be achieved with close micing. Most fingerstyle players I know record *very* close.

On this recording, you've still got a lot of noise, you've only got about 32 db signal to noise ratio (basically the level of noise below your signal). You want to try to get maybe 60. The noise sounds like maybe air conditioning? For home recording, we often have to shut things like that off while recording. You can remove the noise, (with something like iZotope RX), but once I do that on your track, the room sound becomes more evident, which is partly why the sound is a bit thin.

Try 12-16 inches from the guitar, directly in front of, but *above* the soundhole, about even with the waist of the guitar and see if that doesn't sound better (after shutting off the air, fans, whatever else is making noise). You may be able to go closer (8 inches), but 12 is a likely good spot.

[Vindellama]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Thanks.. Your file is stereo, but it's not sounding very wide partly because you're so far away. 3 feet is great if you have world class acoustics (And I'd use spaced pairs at that distance) - for most of us recording at home you need to be closer, to reduce the impact of room acoustics, reduce the noise (relative to the guitar) and frankly to get a bigger sound. That "more professional" sound you're looking for can more likely be achieved with close micing. Most fingerstyle players I know record *very* close.

On this recording, you've still got a lot of noise, you've only got about 32 db signal to noise ratio (basically the level of noise below your signal). You want to try to get maybe 60. The noise sounds like maybe air conditioning? For home recording, we often have to shut things like that off while recording. You can remove the noise, (with something like iZotope RX), but once I do that on your track, the room sound becomes more evident, which is partly why the sound is a bit thin.

Try 12-16 inches from the guitar, directly in front of, but *above* the soundhole, about even with the waist of the guitar and see if that doesn't sound better (after shutting off the air, fans, whatever else is making noise). You may be able to go closer (8 inches), but 12 is a likely good spot.

It's water noise.
I'll try to get closer on the next one, I've got some clean results, even with more noise on the background, with around 2 palms (14 inches?) from the guitar.
But I guess this will have to be good enough for now.
Won't be a great example of the qualities, but will be enough to have some idea.
I'll update the post with a better recording on a later date (next week).
And wait until I get a couple of external mics before going forward with other recordings.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Vindellama

It's water noise.
I'll try to get closer on the next one, I've got some clean results, even with more noise on the background, with around 2 palms (14 inches?) from the guitar.
But I guess this will have to be good enough for now.
Won't be a great example of the qualities, but will be enough to have some idea.
I'll update the post with a better recording on a later date (next week).
And wait until I get a couple of external mics before going forward with other recordings.

The built-in mics can sound fine. Here's an example I did a while back with the H6 and the built-in XY mics:



I don't recall exactly, but this was probably 12 inches away, placed as I suggested.

[Vindellama]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

The built-in mics can sound fine. Here's an example I did a while back with the H6 and the built-in XY mics:



I don't recall exactly, but this was probably 12 inches away, placed as I suggested.

I've been through some of my videos and found this one recorded in the same placement you described.
Pretty different.
Shame I don't take notes on how I tweaked each recording:

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Vindellama

I've been through some of my videos and found this one recorded in the same placement you described.
Pretty different.
Shame I don't take notes on how I tweaked each recording:

That sounds much better! Maybe just a tad boomy now and then, but you could tweak that with minor placement adjustments.