Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > Recording Technologies and Techniques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-11-2017, 06:09 PM   #41
jerome_oneil
Human being with feelings
 
jerome_oneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,621
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dug dog View Post
Here's a ReaEQ and ReaXcomp FX chain that I kinda like the sound of (bearing in mind that it's all a matter of personal taste.)

Attachment 32037
I want a feature where I can drag and drop these onto the FX Browser and have them import, like you can do with Themes.

Someone make that happen!
jerome_oneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2017, 05:30 AM   #42
BobF
Human being with feelings
 
BobF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 517
Default

This isn't a finished version, it's more of a setup to start tweaking with. It immediately adds a bit of width to the track, but the variations possible are almost endless. Much easier to share a small project than trying to describe it.

https://app.box.com/s/o001yb5ptuxi5e8g4r6vjxs1lbsjz0qo
__________________
--
Reaper 5 x64/SONAR Plat./Studio One 3P, Win10 Pro x64, UMC1820, Roland FA 06, FaderPort
i7-6700@3.8G/32G
BobF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2017, 10:52 AM   #43
dug dog
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: With Elvis Watching The Deflectives
Posts: 500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobF View Post
it's more of a setup to start tweaking with
An interesting approach that I would not have thought to try. (That's one reason why I love this forum.)
dug dog is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2017, 11:32 AM   #44
RDBOIS
Human being with feelings
 
RDBOIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: It changes
Posts: 521
Default

WowieZowie! Thanks guys for taking the time to send some EQ chains my way. I love it! I tried them out on some guitars in my current project.

*** CONTEXT ***

Because, like many of you keep saying, "it's all about context", I did a quick mix of the INTRO of the song I'm currently working so you can listen to the context. I know, it's pretty ridicule; trying to mixing six (6) guitars together!!! And I haven't even add the Bass and Drums yet. hehehe

So here is a sound clip:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/uvx9gom1fe...text.wav?dl=0\




Note: The first acoustic guitar in the very beginning it my soar spot (because it lives alone for a while...). I may need to track it again; there is a strange 'flanger-like' sound whirling by in the back that I can't seem to EQ out?! Could be the microphone was too close to the stings?

The guitar sounds and tones are not 'there there', but certainly 'getting there'. The bass should fill the bottom end, which will force me to re-EQ some bits.
RDBOIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2017, 12:05 PM   #45
BobF
Human being with feelings
 
BobF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 517
Default

Sounding pretty good in my monitors
__________________
--
Reaper 5 x64/SONAR Plat./Studio One 3P, Win10 Pro x64, UMC1820, Roland FA 06, FaderPort
i7-6700@3.8G/32G
BobF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2017, 01:20 PM   #46
dug dog
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: With Elvis Watching The Deflectives
Posts: 500
Default

Sounds pretty good to me, too. You have a great stereo image going there.

I do hear some pitched harmonics on the first guitar that are a bit harsh. They're on the F# and the A on your highest string. You could try deep, narrow EQ cuts at 3300 and 5100 (ish) kHz to take off some of the edge.

Some people will even go so far as to automate those notches so that they only come on when a certain note rings out.

Cheers.
dug dog is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2017, 02:32 PM   #47
RDBOIS
Human being with feelings
 
RDBOIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: It changes
Posts: 521
Default Mic test

One last thing, or not...,

I may have discounted something important, my acoustic guitar is a Yamaha FGX800C and it has a special kind of brace inside that makes the sound "very mid rangy", with some low-mids. That is good when playing outdoors by the fire; it cuts across background noise and that is why I chose it out of all the other ElCheapo guitars. But, it does create "issues" when recording...

Rather than spend all my time finding the right EQ, I spent a few hours testing the microphone location hoping this would help. Basically I tested the near in front (vanilla spot) VS everywhere else.

What I found is this (and it is also related to the microphone which is a Heil PR22:

1) There are some very specific spots where the microphone seems to pickup and amplify some harsh harmonics (if that is what they are called?). Simply moving the microphone 1/4 of an inch can either amplify or not a specific frequency coming from the guitar.

2) The vanilla spot is not so good for my guitar and microphone. Just goes to prove that there is no magic spot.

3) Things get better when the microphone is at least 3 feet away, but for a strumming type ballad it always sounds best when the microphone is located higher and pointing down at the guitar. I would say, sort of like, if you stood in front of me, three feet away, and looked down at me playing while I'm sitting on a chair. The microphone is placed where your head would be.

Anyway, that was a very educating (4) hours of fun.

For those who like samples here are two clips (note: I did add slap on some EQ and effects; the same for both takes).


CLIP 1 NEAR FRONT- VANILLA SPOT - https://www.dropbox.com/s/u07g62dqwn...t-001.mp3?dl=0


CLIP 2 TOP POINTED DOWN 3 FEET AWAY - https://www.dropbox.com/s/o52aqhqtq2...t-001.mp3?dl=0

There is still some harshness, but I will deal with it when I mix, relative to the other sounds in the song.

I'm not out of the woods yet, but I feel I'm pass the thick shrubby understory.
RDBOIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2017, 06:25 PM   #48
RDBOIS
Human being with feelings
 
RDBOIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: It changes
Posts: 521
Default

Today I tried something new and it helped tame some of the harshness without compromising the loudness too much (that's what worries me the most).

Normally I scan the frequency range with ReaEQ (you know that sweeping trick - boosting really high to find the nasties) and then do an EQ cut. But, that was starting to bother me, because I was loosing to much perceived loudness and vocal clarity, especially in the vocals. Well, also the guitar, but anyway.

I still sweeped to find the the harsh freqs with the eq, but I didn't notch or cut, instead I took note of the frequency and opened an instance of ReaCOMP.

In ReaComp I set HIGHPASS and LOWPASS slider so that the compressor is triggered only by the frequency I found sweeping with ReaEQ; give or take a few Hz around that freq. Then I played with the compress setting until I heard some nastiness was tamed. What I noticed doing this was that the red signal in the output window only occurred at certain times, not on all the times the sound signal was in the vicinity of that frequency. When I experimented with vocals, it was only certain 'words' in the lyrics that triggered the compressor (i.w. words that my intonation make that frequency range harsher?). I can also lower the DRY, which would be like an EQ cut? Maybe not... Hmmm...

Anyway this is a simple, very low CPU, way to get to what other things like a multiband compressor (ReaXcomp) or a parallel dynamic equalizer (TDR Nova) can do. I like this, it's easier for me to grasp and keep my instinct to overdo things under control. And, perhaps this doesn't affect phase, like cutting the freq would in ReaEq?

It did cut some harshness only in certain important places.

Ok, I back to more experimentation. I will get to the bottom of this...
RDBOIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2017, 08:37 PM   #49
ashcat_lt
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,531
Default

If it works, do it!

But it's NOT the same thing as multi-band or dynamic EQ. Those process turn down the specified band based on the energy in that band. What you're doing here is turning down EVERYTHING based on the energy in that band.

I almost never use this kind of sidechain thing (the filters are in the detector path) but I do use "pre-emphasis/de-emphasis" - putting an EQ before and a compimentary EQ after - which ends up having much the same effect.

I think you're right about the phase thing, though that's rarely an issue either way.
ashcat_lt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2017, 09:30 PM   #50
RDBOIS
Human being with feelings
 
RDBOIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: It changes
Posts: 521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ashcat_lt View Post

I almost never use this kind of sidechain thing (the filters are in the detector path) but I do use "pre-emphasis/de-emphasis" - putting an EQ before and a compimentary EQ after - which ends up having much the same effect.
EQ before and after what? A compressor?

Pre-emphasis/de-emphasis - never heard of that...

How does that work? Is the EQ before, a boost to trigger a larger response of the compressor? And after?
RDBOIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 09:25 AM   #51
ashcat_lt
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,531
Default

Yeah. EQ before and after the compressor. The one before you either boost what you want squished or more cut what you don't then after you basically undo that. A lot of times I'll set the first EQ (ReaEQ) and then copy it, right-click the graph and go Flip All Bands. It doesn't always have to be exactly opposite, though.
ashcat_lt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 10:23 AM   #52
RDBOIS
Human being with feelings
 
RDBOIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: It changes
Posts: 521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ashcat_lt View Post
Yeah. EQ before and after the compressor. The one before you either boost what you want squished or more cut what you don't then after you basically undo that. A lot of times I'll set the first EQ (ReaEQ) and then copy it, right-click the graph and go Flip All Bands. It doesn't always have to be exactly opposite, though.
Ahhh thanks.

On a side note, you wouldn't happen to know what this means:

"For the acoustic guitars, I simply used some compression to even them up a bit and then applied a UA Neve EQ plug-in to smooth out some upper-mid harshness"

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniq...rian-bannister

What I assume Paul is saying, and I've seen this in many other places, is that doing a frequency cut in the 2-5K Hz with the UAD Neve EQ is better at dealing with harshness than some other EQ plugins. People claim that the UAD Neve EQ does 'something else' that, say, ReaEQ doesn't do?

Do you know what this 'something else' is?

I seen people say it add 'color'. Yeah, like that's very useful... A better question is 'how can I emulate this 'something else'? Knowing this could probably help me deal with harshness. Yes?
RDBOIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 10:34 AM   #53
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 19,951
Default

Keep in mind that where recording acoustic guitar goes (electric too for that matter but more with acoustic) and various tips and tricks - the player has a *massive* amount to do with what the tone/sound is coming from the guitar and that can never fully be taken into account outside that person's environment.

Case in point, I have a very expensive Taylor which sounds absolutely incredible - until I tracked my keyboard player who plays some guitar, I couldn't believe my eyes/ears while tracking as I listened and watched him play as it didn't sound remotely like I'm used to hearing.
__________________
Choosing to play the simpler part instead of the fancier one, takes a lot of courage
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 10:54 AM   #54
ashcat_lt
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,531
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RDBOIS View Post
Do you know what this 'something else' is?
No.

What could it be? Either some euphonic, psychachoustic placebo effect? More likely, it's the way that the Neve fails to do exactly what it's supposed to do without doing anything else. It might add some distortion and very likely has some effect on the frequency response outside of the band you're actually adjusting. Or maybe it's just something in the particular shape and slope of the filter they implemented.

I honestly don't care. I can get what I need from ReaEQ, ReaComp, and a couple saturators.

karbo is dead on talking about how the guitarist is a huge part of the sound of an instrument - especially an acoustic instrument. I think you're actually a pretty decent guitarist, but we can always get better. That's why the top athletes in the world review videos of their performance.

But then too, I think we've already established that you can be a little over-sensitive to some of these things and get real nitpicky about things that in the big picture aren't all that important. Like, maybe nobody else in the world will even notice? It's not a bad thing to want and shoot for perfect and pristine and more importantly exactly what you want to hear. Sometimes, though, we need to step back and ask if what we have really is just fine as is. Sometimes funky can be fun. Sometimes the "flaws" are what make it unique and interesting.

It honestly sounds to me as though you might be fighting the presence peak built into your microphone. Most of the mics we end up using have something between a slight lift and a lot of hype right in the range where acoustic guitars piss me off. A different mic is worth a try if you can swing it. Else, I bet if you figured out the curve of the mic and made a ReaEQ preset to undo it, you'd be a step or two closer.
ashcat_lt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 02:58 PM   #55
RDBOIS
Human being with feelings
 
RDBOIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: It changes
Posts: 521
Default

Yeah how I play is important, I figured that out a while back.

I had some luck the other day recording in my new booth (bed sheets hanging everywhere), with the condenser mic set at OMNI, and placed at a certain distance, height, angle, etc....:



Here is a small clip of the INTRO of the song I'm currently working on:

Note: nothing here is really near a final mixed or mastered song, just a sample clip to hear the classical and acoustic guitar, as per my current set up...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2yrndgcpnt...-001.flac?dl=0


Note: I dialed in a bit of reverb, that's all
RDBOIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2017, 01:24 PM   #56
MikComposer
Human being with feelings
 
MikComposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Brighton
Posts: 1,779
Default

Hey, as some people noticed, producing sound depends on the composition you're working on.

I listened to you uploads, and I think there is a space for improvements. But is the music only guitars or are they part of bigger arrangement? Cause if it is, you got to spent more time on setting up guitar sound and mics. You see, I think first thing you should do is to play more gently. Secondly, If you're not in a treated room, look for a spot in your room where sound coming from the amp sounds sweet. Then mic it in such way it still sounds sweet.

As for in box production, all I hear in lower frequencies is just mud that you could easily get rid of, unless you're recording will be better. That's said, it's not bad, but I bet you're after a really good sound.

If those where two guitars, then then the rhythm could be hp from around 80hz and lp at around 4k, while the other guitar could be hp higher, and lp around 10k max. But it is a guesswork based on my experience, so you could use it as a starting point. Basically hp it at lowest musical harmonic.

if i remember correctly, most annoying frequencies in digital recordings are: 250, 1.2,1.4, 3.8 - 4.0. Use that too if that would be of any help to you.

And btw, is it baritone fender? Overall sounds nice.
__________________
My Royalty Free Music library
MikComposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2017, 02:53 PM   #57
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 11,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RDBOIS View Post
Here is a small clip of the INTRO of the song I'm currently working on:

Note: nothing here is really near a final mixed or mastered song, just a sample clip to hear the classical and acoustic guitar, as per my current set up...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2yrndgcpnt...-001.flac?dl=0
Hi RDBOIS, when I played it I could tell it had a lot of bass and sounded quite boomy. However, I thought I could hear some richness associated with a good acoustic guitar, so I DLed it to check it out more closely.

It really has a lot of bass so I brought that down. However, as I brought it down then some other things started to creep in, at first I thought it was just frett noise, like the strings were to close to the frett board. But then I also started hear what sounds like another distortion of some kind.

I'm not sure what else to tell you, it's pretty bad in some places.
__________________
Kontakt Vid Tutorials->Create Outputs / Create Templates -|- SMDrums Free drums
Elk Videos->Opening / Snooze / Bull Fight / End Credits
Tod's Music->Check out my playlist
Tod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2017, 06:08 PM   #58
RDBOIS
Human being with feelings
 
RDBOIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: It changes
Posts: 521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod View Post
Hi RDBOIS, when I played it I could tell it had a lot of bass and sounded quite boomy. However, I thought I could hear some richness associated with a good acoustic guitar, so I DLed it to check it out more closely.

It really has a lot of bass so I brought that down. However, as I brought it down then some other things started to creep in, at first I thought it was just frett noise, like the strings were to close to the frett board. But then I also started hear what sounds like another distortion of some kind.

I'm not sure what else to tell you, it's pretty bad in some places.
Yes you are correct. The sample is more a 'here is what the mic captured' thing. What happened is that I added a stretch marks to get a part on time, but it created a weird distortion. Then I think I tried to fix that... Long story, this is not the final guitar for the song. I have many other TAKES that don't have these artifacts.

Good ear!!!

[edit] - you were tallking about the acoustic guitar right? Also, not confusing that there is a very low cello in some places on top of the guitar?

Last edited by RDBOIS; 11-18-2017 at 06:24 PM.
RDBOIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 11:50 AM   #59
MikComposer
Human being with feelings
 
MikComposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Brighton
Posts: 1,779
Default

Noticed a while back that long time ago stretch markers didn't change the pitch and now they do. I'm not sure, but there might be a setting to change that.
__________________
My Royalty Free Music library
MikComposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 11:55 AM   #60
RDBOIS
Human being with feelings
 
RDBOIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: It changes
Posts: 521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikComposer View Post
Noticed a while back that long time ago stretch markers didn't change the pitch and now they do. I'm not sure, but there might be a setting to change that.

Right beside the BPM window box, in the bottom tool bar, there is a Time Signature box (most likely says 4/4), if you right mouse click in that box you can find a setting for the Playrate. You can change it to Preserve Pitch.
RDBOIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.