I am writing this as a live blog whilst taking advantage of some sky high WIFI (WI-FLI maybe in this case?) in response to the recent Music Week national poll. The poll is to "assess user interest in quality audio files for music." They state "This is your chance to make a difference and get rid of sub-standard MP3 files NOW".
This statement really got me thinking and I would welcome a discussion / feedback on the below to see what people really think?
I am someone who takes a keen interest in new technologies and especially new file formats, their history and their future. So I am keen to know just WHO is (or would be) developing this new file format being discussed?
By gaining support from professional musicians, engineers and producers what will the owners of the file format do with all the royalties they make if their new format is embraced by us all?
I am aware of how difficult it is to get a new format taken on by large manufacturers - it has to come from the biggest corporate powers otherwise it doesn't reach enough people and so therefore isn't adopted as a standard by the all important general public.
The thing is that none of these major corporations (like Apple) are keen on letting someone outside of their organisation make all that money, they would prefer if at all possible to create their own format to use on devices. However this of course also causes deadlock - unless of course one company has a complete stranglehold over the market.
I was once lucky enough to meet a gentleman whose company owned MP3 (M-PEG layer 3 patent) whilst on a trip to Japan. This guy earns a royalty for EVERY device in the world thats plays, reads or records MP3 format files. It seriously blew my mind.
He was at the AES Japan show launching his new MP3 HD format. I had got chatting to him as was the first person that day to correctly identify the different bit depths and sample rates of the files he was using for listening tests on his booth. The MP3 HD format offers exactly the same quality as CD (16 bit 44.1kHz) he said it would be the next big thing. This was back in 2008, 5 years later and nothing has changed as the industry didn't embrace it. i think perhaps they do not want to send him any more cheques!
Passing the new format onto someone else i'm not against; by all means let someone else forge a new format into our audio world with better quality. My main worry is a different issue.
I do not believe that any consumer or music maker likes sub-standard audio. I believe that its the money machine behind the consumer industry, the big corporations that are stopping the flow of a new format coming to market. The technology for better audio already exists.
So, let me pose this:
Imagine if a file format offering better quality audio was created, owned and patented by a not-for-profit organisation (maybe a fuse of industry organisations like MPG, APRS, AES, MU etc). If this was then embraced by the wider international community of industry individuals, imagine all the good that could be created by the profits from the format. If you let your imagination run, this could be a whole new form of income stream into the wider industry or used for research, education, community work, independent funding pools - options are vast.
I think this is also the best chance to get major corporations on board as they would then not be supporting a competitor but embracing an industry that gives them content and helps them sell and market their products globally. They could see it as a brand credible endeavour and embrace the format without fear of driving the competitors revenue, or making another single person incredibly rich.
It would need to be a format that DAW software titles allowed you to save / bounce down work to and that download stores offered for sale and that manufactures of hardware allowed compatibility with to read / play. A big task, but not impossible?
Thoughts?
Sarah x
Tuesday, 12 March 2013
Tuesday, 15 June 2010
SNAPSHOT OF SOUND
I glance from the window of the train, watching the landscape that cradles its inhabitants in various abodes stream past my vision. I consider that within each snapshot of time I am capturing a view of differing stories hidden within it. The patchwork of eccentricity contained within any town or city is embodied into a singular, momentary view.
There are a rollercoaster of emotions filled with positive and negative energies happening all at once.
Music is said to also capture a snapshot of society, echoing the emotion of the society it comes from and the social, political or economical status quo.
Songs which appeal cross genre, race and demographic tend to have the ability to take a more universal snapshot of the world highlighting and bowing to the most commonly apparent expressions of feeling.
When mixing and producing a record, it is important to endeavour to embody this flow of emotion. The exhilaration and misery, love and hate, excitement and angst. Let the record express itself colourfully and freely by taking care not to quash its expressiveness.
Dynamics are key to achieving this. The dynamic of a song can be affected by 3 main things; space, level and tone. These dynamic ingredients can be shaped by you through editing, level mixing, equalisation and compression (as well as other dynamic treatments).
Never underestimate the importance of silence, this alone can breathe tremendous dynamic and expression into a phrase – especially when you are trying to create tension or anticipation, or even just to tease the listener in a cheeky way.
Try cutting the last bar or few notes of a phrase, cutting the rhythm section works really well, or maybe even cutting all instruments and just leaving the bass part in, play around with your pauses and notice the different emotions that they help create. Don’t feel forced to have everything on the beat either. Having some parts coming in on the 3rd beat of the bar can add interest, or try having stabs or counter rhythm percussion coming in on the off beat.
As I’ve mentioned before, when starting to mix levels, I always like to start with the percussive elements of the track. I see the drums as the foundations of the audio track I am building – if these foundations aren’t right then my whole audio building feels unstable. I do not tend to play around with the drum parts once they are mixed, having snares pan round and kicks automated up and down in level is not something I think sounds good. Maybe some effects in places to add a stutter or delay, but I think it is more important to have a stable beat under your track. The excitement can come from varying beats, rhythms and parts rather than trying to make it sound like a drum kit is whirling around the listeners head.
The sounds you balance in level against your beats are then free to be more dynamically adjusting, allowed to roam more and be manipulated through automation and fades.
Use your automation of levels to signpost phrases in the lyrics or hooks in the guitar line. Use it to build excitement before the chorus or middle 8 section. Create a journey through the song that shies away from mono-dynamic monotony.
The tonal spectrum of your music can also be a way to manipulate the dynamics of a piece. This is something that is a favourite in dance music, with producers often using low pass and high pass filters to build excitement or create musical signposts.
Instead of increasing the volume of a part, you can add the perception of dynamic excitement by mirroring the phrase in a different octave or with a different instrument or indeed both of these variants. Also try automating between different equalisation settings for instruments as you move through the different sections of a song – maybe going for a sparse, thinner sound for the striking yet cold verse and a thicker, shaped sound for the more powerful chorus.
All of these aspects can help you create your snapshot of human emotion, a moment in time that can mirror the hidden stories of society and relate your music to the panoptic population.
There are a rollercoaster of emotions filled with positive and negative energies happening all at once.
Music is said to also capture a snapshot of society, echoing the emotion of the society it comes from and the social, political or economical status quo.
Songs which appeal cross genre, race and demographic tend to have the ability to take a more universal snapshot of the world highlighting and bowing to the most commonly apparent expressions of feeling.
When mixing and producing a record, it is important to endeavour to embody this flow of emotion. The exhilaration and misery, love and hate, excitement and angst. Let the record express itself colourfully and freely by taking care not to quash its expressiveness.
Dynamics are key to achieving this. The dynamic of a song can be affected by 3 main things; space, level and tone. These dynamic ingredients can be shaped by you through editing, level mixing, equalisation and compression (as well as other dynamic treatments).
Never underestimate the importance of silence, this alone can breathe tremendous dynamic and expression into a phrase – especially when you are trying to create tension or anticipation, or even just to tease the listener in a cheeky way.
Try cutting the last bar or few notes of a phrase, cutting the rhythm section works really well, or maybe even cutting all instruments and just leaving the bass part in, play around with your pauses and notice the different emotions that they help create. Don’t feel forced to have everything on the beat either. Having some parts coming in on the 3rd beat of the bar can add interest, or try having stabs or counter rhythm percussion coming in on the off beat.
As I’ve mentioned before, when starting to mix levels, I always like to start with the percussive elements of the track. I see the drums as the foundations of the audio track I am building – if these foundations aren’t right then my whole audio building feels unstable. I do not tend to play around with the drum parts once they are mixed, having snares pan round and kicks automated up and down in level is not something I think sounds good. Maybe some effects in places to add a stutter or delay, but I think it is more important to have a stable beat under your track. The excitement can come from varying beats, rhythms and parts rather than trying to make it sound like a drum kit is whirling around the listeners head.
The sounds you balance in level against your beats are then free to be more dynamically adjusting, allowed to roam more and be manipulated through automation and fades.
Use your automation of levels to signpost phrases in the lyrics or hooks in the guitar line. Use it to build excitement before the chorus or middle 8 section. Create a journey through the song that shies away from mono-dynamic monotony.
The tonal spectrum of your music can also be a way to manipulate the dynamics of a piece. This is something that is a favourite in dance music, with producers often using low pass and high pass filters to build excitement or create musical signposts.
Instead of increasing the volume of a part, you can add the perception of dynamic excitement by mirroring the phrase in a different octave or with a different instrument or indeed both of these variants. Also try automating between different equalisation settings for instruments as you move through the different sections of a song – maybe going for a sparse, thinner sound for the striking yet cold verse and a thicker, shaped sound for the more powerful chorus.
All of these aspects can help you create your snapshot of human emotion, a moment in time that can mirror the hidden stories of society and relate your music to the panoptic population.
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
THE SOUND BETWEEN THE SOUND
I am writing this months article whilst airborne heading towards the Frankfurt MusikMesse Trade Show. Whilst glancing out the window at the vast amount of air and space between the ground, and myself - I am reminded of the ratio of very little breathable air compared to the somewhat excessive and unusual facial hair that tends to fashion itself at this smoky, busy, industry trade show.
My current spatial position (and thankfully not the MusikMesse facial hair) has inspired me to really consider the concept of moving air in terms of transition of sound and how we think about it.
As you know when an instrument sounds, it sends out soundwaves, frequencies that ripple and resonate through the air. It is our job as an engineer to capture that movement of air using a microphone to reproduce and record its emitting patterns.
Due to the way that we interpret this movement of air into voltages and then often again converted into binary figures, it then tends to focus our mind very much onto a final precise value. We tend to forget about the variants, the subtle movements that weren’t picked up or were lost along the way. We also mask out the frequencies that have less content within the final sound capture. We disregard these things as “unwanted noise” or “interference”, but is that really the case?
As a comparison, if you were monitoring the sky as my plane flew threw your vision, the object that is seen as moving and most important is the actual plane. Your perception of the fact the plane is flying would be that it is not stationary on the one constant of your vision, the ground. However, if you were to just take note of the actual plane (the moving object) and the ground (the constant), you would be disregarding all the information in-between (in this case the air in-between, which is obviously quite important!).
What I am trying to say is that the sounds between the sounds that we noticeably perceive are arguably just as important. The human ear usually picks up frequencies from as low as 20Hz right up to 20kHz with perfect hearing (although in reality and also with age this number decreases). Even with these figures, it has been proven that humans can “feel” frequencies outside the realm of their hearing capabilities. This means we must be very sensitive to different frequencies and even if we cant easily pick them out in our hearing, we may still be aware of their existence and possibly even rely on them to make things sound “natural”.
In Physics and Astronomy, many have discussed “dark matter”, a fascinating topic that really is delving into the furthest reach of our understanding of the universe. Basically with dark matter, it is the “stuff” that isn’t there, the space between the space that must exist - and helps to explain the workings and expansion of our universe. It is said, that just because we cant see something, doesn’t mean it isn’t there and so should respect its existence. I think the same could be said with sound, that just because we cant hear all the sounds, between the sounds we can hear, doesn’t mean they are not there and we should have respect for them in the recording and mixing process.
You could look at the process of creating and capturing sound - right through to the mixing and monitoring of it - as an energy flow process, where the energy is the sound.
So now your whole system (your studio technique) and your task (as engineer) is to help this energy flow freely and passionately (yet controlled accurately by you) through your entire recording, mixing and monitoring process.
This should help you focus on elements that are all vitally important in creating a great record.
The recording space, the microphone, the pre amp, the mix bus, the converters, the processing power, the editing, the effects, the dynamics, and the monitors all play a part in how you can respect this flow of energy. Each element when explained in this way, can help make sense of why these separate considerations and processes are important and what effect they could each have on the sound energy flow process.
So next time you begin to venture into a fresh capture of moving air, or sit down to process your captured energy, be mindful and respectful to allow it to flow with the freedom and passion that nature intended, yet helped along with your inspired and creative hand.
My current spatial position (and thankfully not the MusikMesse facial hair) has inspired me to really consider the concept of moving air in terms of transition of sound and how we think about it.
As you know when an instrument sounds, it sends out soundwaves, frequencies that ripple and resonate through the air. It is our job as an engineer to capture that movement of air using a microphone to reproduce and record its emitting patterns.
Due to the way that we interpret this movement of air into voltages and then often again converted into binary figures, it then tends to focus our mind very much onto a final precise value. We tend to forget about the variants, the subtle movements that weren’t picked up or were lost along the way. We also mask out the frequencies that have less content within the final sound capture. We disregard these things as “unwanted noise” or “interference”, but is that really the case?
As a comparison, if you were monitoring the sky as my plane flew threw your vision, the object that is seen as moving and most important is the actual plane. Your perception of the fact the plane is flying would be that it is not stationary on the one constant of your vision, the ground. However, if you were to just take note of the actual plane (the moving object) and the ground (the constant), you would be disregarding all the information in-between (in this case the air in-between, which is obviously quite important!).
What I am trying to say is that the sounds between the sounds that we noticeably perceive are arguably just as important. The human ear usually picks up frequencies from as low as 20Hz right up to 20kHz with perfect hearing (although in reality and also with age this number decreases). Even with these figures, it has been proven that humans can “feel” frequencies outside the realm of their hearing capabilities. This means we must be very sensitive to different frequencies and even if we cant easily pick them out in our hearing, we may still be aware of their existence and possibly even rely on them to make things sound “natural”.
In Physics and Astronomy, many have discussed “dark matter”, a fascinating topic that really is delving into the furthest reach of our understanding of the universe. Basically with dark matter, it is the “stuff” that isn’t there, the space between the space that must exist - and helps to explain the workings and expansion of our universe. It is said, that just because we cant see something, doesn’t mean it isn’t there and so should respect its existence. I think the same could be said with sound, that just because we cant hear all the sounds, between the sounds we can hear, doesn’t mean they are not there and we should have respect for them in the recording and mixing process.
You could look at the process of creating and capturing sound - right through to the mixing and monitoring of it - as an energy flow process, where the energy is the sound.
So now your whole system (your studio technique) and your task (as engineer) is to help this energy flow freely and passionately (yet controlled accurately by you) through your entire recording, mixing and monitoring process.
This should help you focus on elements that are all vitally important in creating a great record.
The recording space, the microphone, the pre amp, the mix bus, the converters, the processing power, the editing, the effects, the dynamics, and the monitors all play a part in how you can respect this flow of energy. Each element when explained in this way, can help make sense of why these separate considerations and processes are important and what effect they could each have on the sound energy flow process.
So next time you begin to venture into a fresh capture of moving air, or sit down to process your captured energy, be mindful and respectful to allow it to flow with the freedom and passion that nature intended, yet helped along with your inspired and creative hand.
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
VOCAL PLACEMENT
One can sometimes forget the power that a single voice can contain. It has been a single voice that with the correct delivery can inspire a generation or inject fear into a nation. A voice can carry valuable information as well as hopes and fears and desires. A voice using speech, is one of the oldest forms of communication and has always been an essential basis for many cultures, passing on wisdom, skills and stories that in many societies formed the foundations of their modern religions, culture, beliefs and moral identity.
Within music, the vocal is also ever dominant. A badly mixed or balanced vocal can ruin the entire feel of a song and loose its power and charm. Often the vocal contains important lyrics to define the songs meaning, but even if not, the tone and placement of the vocal is in essence a primary colour within the songs sound canvass.
So where do you start in helping to achieve a well-mixed vocal? Let’s start at the beginning, the actual recording.
Choosing the correct microphone for your vocalist is not always as easy as you think. There is not one magic microphone that is perfect for every vocalist. Each studio microphone tends to have a slightly different frequency response and “sweet spot”. This means that in the same way your vocalists have a different tonal make up, so in turn do the microphones you can use to record them.
Don’t be put off from using a mic aimed at recording acoustic guitar or other instruments, for use on vocals, it may just work out as the best option. Try and get to know your mic collection and get accustomed to the tonal qualities of each one to make this process easier. Getting a good recording to start with is like making sure you have quality fresh ingredients before you cook, the end result will be much tastier and easier to achieve.
Once you have finished all your recording and are starting to mix, you need to have a general playback listen to account for obvious problems. Listen out for if the vocal gets lost on quiet passages or becomes overpowering on more energetic phrases; do you loose the vocal when the piano is playing or the guitar?
Getting the vocal mix right isn’t just to do with the level. Its how it balances against the other components of the track. Compression can help get a more consistent level on your vocal but sometimes people are guilty of over-compressing to try and cover up tonal clashes and imbalances in the mix. When compressing a vocal the ideal settings will vary dependant on the vocalist, but the compressor shouldn’t be making the track louder, just more even, preventing large peaks and troughs in the dynamics. Try to avoid using presets on plug ins, play around with settings or use a dedicated outboard unit to really get to know how the compressor you use works and sounds.
If you find that you are loosing the vocal on the verse because of the guitar, you could try two different solutions, firstly ducking. This is where you use a gate in “ducking” mode. Normally a gate acts almost like a switch in an electronic circuit or a binary digit, in that it has one of 2 values – open or shut. When open, a gate lets the sound freely through, when shut it mutes sound completely. The input threshold usually controls the gates parameters, so if signal goes below a threshold of so many dB, the gate is shut and sound muted. When a gate operates in “ducking” mode however, the sound isn’t muted, but instead is lowered in volume by several dB. In this mode the way in which you activate the process differs too. For the case of our vocal struggling with the guitar to be heard, we would insert a gate over the guitar track and set to “ducking” mode. We would then insert the vocal track into the sidechain input of the gate. This enables the vocal to become the trigger for the ducking gate and force the guitar down in level when the vocal sounds, creating manipulative automation.
Another method is one of my most used “mix tricks”. Using a simple EQ inserted on the vocal track, sweep up and down the spectrum to find the most prominent and favourable frequency. Have this frequency boosted by at least 3dB with a narrow Q of at least around 7. Then on the opposing track, set up the same EQ but this time cut the same frequency by the same amount. This method of mixing is sometimes referred to as spectral mixing or what I call a sound amnesty, allowing each frequency and instrument to be heard fairly and coexist in harmony within the frequency spectrum.
Once you have a well-balanced vocal, its important to add the correct dimension to it, this can be done using reverb to help place it in the mix. The less reverb, the further “forward” the vocal will sound. A vocal without any reverb added will sound unnatural and also as if it is just hovering aimlessly above the track. Too much reverb and the vocal will be swallowed into the mix, loosing power and intelligibility.
As a general rule, always use more reverb on backing vocals and keep the main vocal a little drier. Pay attention to the tone of the reverb you add and check it with just the vocal soloed and against the whole track, don’t be scared to layer reverbs either – sometimes layering reverbs can help the trail sound lusher and more natural.
Prioritise your vocal and use your ears and the tools of your trade to make sure it has the attention it deserves, help your mixes to stand out and be remembered through your commanding and enchanting, well balanced and mixed vocal. Strive to achieve a vocal that can communicate with the listener by resonating through the universal language of music in the most harmonious way.
Within music, the vocal is also ever dominant. A badly mixed or balanced vocal can ruin the entire feel of a song and loose its power and charm. Often the vocal contains important lyrics to define the songs meaning, but even if not, the tone and placement of the vocal is in essence a primary colour within the songs sound canvass.
So where do you start in helping to achieve a well-mixed vocal? Let’s start at the beginning, the actual recording.
Choosing the correct microphone for your vocalist is not always as easy as you think. There is not one magic microphone that is perfect for every vocalist. Each studio microphone tends to have a slightly different frequency response and “sweet spot”. This means that in the same way your vocalists have a different tonal make up, so in turn do the microphones you can use to record them.
Don’t be put off from using a mic aimed at recording acoustic guitar or other instruments, for use on vocals, it may just work out as the best option. Try and get to know your mic collection and get accustomed to the tonal qualities of each one to make this process easier. Getting a good recording to start with is like making sure you have quality fresh ingredients before you cook, the end result will be much tastier and easier to achieve.
Once you have finished all your recording and are starting to mix, you need to have a general playback listen to account for obvious problems. Listen out for if the vocal gets lost on quiet passages or becomes overpowering on more energetic phrases; do you loose the vocal when the piano is playing or the guitar?
Getting the vocal mix right isn’t just to do with the level. Its how it balances against the other components of the track. Compression can help get a more consistent level on your vocal but sometimes people are guilty of over-compressing to try and cover up tonal clashes and imbalances in the mix. When compressing a vocal the ideal settings will vary dependant on the vocalist, but the compressor shouldn’t be making the track louder, just more even, preventing large peaks and troughs in the dynamics. Try to avoid using presets on plug ins, play around with settings or use a dedicated outboard unit to really get to know how the compressor you use works and sounds.
If you find that you are loosing the vocal on the verse because of the guitar, you could try two different solutions, firstly ducking. This is where you use a gate in “ducking” mode. Normally a gate acts almost like a switch in an electronic circuit or a binary digit, in that it has one of 2 values – open or shut. When open, a gate lets the sound freely through, when shut it mutes sound completely. The input threshold usually controls the gates parameters, so if signal goes below a threshold of so many dB, the gate is shut and sound muted. When a gate operates in “ducking” mode however, the sound isn’t muted, but instead is lowered in volume by several dB. In this mode the way in which you activate the process differs too. For the case of our vocal struggling with the guitar to be heard, we would insert a gate over the guitar track and set to “ducking” mode. We would then insert the vocal track into the sidechain input of the gate. This enables the vocal to become the trigger for the ducking gate and force the guitar down in level when the vocal sounds, creating manipulative automation.
Another method is one of my most used “mix tricks”. Using a simple EQ inserted on the vocal track, sweep up and down the spectrum to find the most prominent and favourable frequency. Have this frequency boosted by at least 3dB with a narrow Q of at least around 7. Then on the opposing track, set up the same EQ but this time cut the same frequency by the same amount. This method of mixing is sometimes referred to as spectral mixing or what I call a sound amnesty, allowing each frequency and instrument to be heard fairly and coexist in harmony within the frequency spectrum.
Once you have a well-balanced vocal, its important to add the correct dimension to it, this can be done using reverb to help place it in the mix. The less reverb, the further “forward” the vocal will sound. A vocal without any reverb added will sound unnatural and also as if it is just hovering aimlessly above the track. Too much reverb and the vocal will be swallowed into the mix, loosing power and intelligibility.
As a general rule, always use more reverb on backing vocals and keep the main vocal a little drier. Pay attention to the tone of the reverb you add and check it with just the vocal soloed and against the whole track, don’t be scared to layer reverbs either – sometimes layering reverbs can help the trail sound lusher and more natural.
Prioritise your vocal and use your ears and the tools of your trade to make sure it has the attention it deserves, help your mixes to stand out and be remembered through your commanding and enchanting, well balanced and mixed vocal. Strive to achieve a vocal that can communicate with the listener by resonating through the universal language of music in the most harmonious way.
Thursday, 28 January 2010
SKY HIGH AUDIO
As we now enter the beginning of a new decade, we are able to look back at the achievements of the noughtie’s and the technology that they brought us.
The advancement in computer based hard disk recording, software integration, digital live consoles and affordable pro-sumer recording and mixing equipment has been substantial.
Now, with the consumer and manufacturer ever more conscious of money efficient solutions, will this halter advancements? I think not. Tougher trading and more competition for work amongst users will mean that there will be a newly generated demand for intuitive ideas and products that cater to the demands of the market.
Looking at the way technology and trends are moving in other industries, there is one very sensible progression I see coming to the world of audio in the very near future.
Cloud computing. Google are doing it, Microsoft are doing it, they’re all working towards it. When Global corporations such as these are championing a technology, you know it is just a matter of time before it is employed into business practise and then home computing too.
For those who have not seen the many articles on the subject, cloud technology basically enables you to store and share data in a dedicated virtual (online) ‘cloud’ space and access hosted services and software via the Internet.
Within the audio world, this could be very interesting. Although there are already some provisions for online music making and sharing data, they can still be a little clunky and there are no official services from the main audio software giants like Digidesign Pro Tools, Steinberg Cubase / Nuendo, Apple Logic, or Propellerhead and Ableton.
With the current economy driving the change of business models it would be a perfect time to adapt to a way of working that would benefit both the manufacturer and the consumer.
As a software manufacturer you suffer from software piracy and the constant pressure to attract new paying customers. These customers, through whom you receive a one off payment for the DVD installation disk, instruction manual, software license agreement and the packaging; form your only income stream. It is also a general expectation by customers to receive any minor updates to this purchase for free. Therefore it becomes ever harder to attract a constant, steady income beyond the initial purchase.
As a software user, keeping up to date with software becomes harder too. As new operating systems are released there are always compatibility concerns. Being left with an un-operational DAW because of version incompatibility between your software / plug-ins / OS is a worst nightmare.
Wouldn’t it be great to not have to spend hours installing new software, going through Challenge / Response and iLok complications and be able to access a session anywhere in the world, from any computer with Internet?
I think this would be a winner all round. Software companies could attract a steadier income stream by offering a “lite” version for free / demo, then a pro version either by utility type usage or via subscription fee. You could have features where you can access any plug-ins in real time with a trial or buy functionality. Whatever you need for your session available immediately at your disposal and without the need to clog up your personal computer with software, data files and unnecessary features.
As Internet technology speeds up and becomes more accessible worldwide it will make this technology even better. Imagine musicians working on a session in 5 different parts of the world simultaneously, linked via the Internet in an online cloud session, you then join the cloud and start comping and editing files ready to mix down the track in your studio later that day… A finished track in a day, recorded with musicians from around the world without any travel expenses. It also will make recording and production software available to anyone with an internet connection, this alone could tremendously diversify the creative output into the music world and offer us all some interesting things to think about. There are many possibilities with cloud computing, lets see who from our industry will be the first to harness it.
The advancement in computer based hard disk recording, software integration, digital live consoles and affordable pro-sumer recording and mixing equipment has been substantial.
Now, with the consumer and manufacturer ever more conscious of money efficient solutions, will this halter advancements? I think not. Tougher trading and more competition for work amongst users will mean that there will be a newly generated demand for intuitive ideas and products that cater to the demands of the market.
Looking at the way technology and trends are moving in other industries, there is one very sensible progression I see coming to the world of audio in the very near future.
Cloud computing. Google are doing it, Microsoft are doing it, they’re all working towards it. When Global corporations such as these are championing a technology, you know it is just a matter of time before it is employed into business practise and then home computing too.
For those who have not seen the many articles on the subject, cloud technology basically enables you to store and share data in a dedicated virtual (online) ‘cloud’ space and access hosted services and software via the Internet.
Within the audio world, this could be very interesting. Although there are already some provisions for online music making and sharing data, they can still be a little clunky and there are no official services from the main audio software giants like Digidesign Pro Tools, Steinberg Cubase / Nuendo, Apple Logic, or Propellerhead and Ableton.
With the current economy driving the change of business models it would be a perfect time to adapt to a way of working that would benefit both the manufacturer and the consumer.
As a software manufacturer you suffer from software piracy and the constant pressure to attract new paying customers. These customers, through whom you receive a one off payment for the DVD installation disk, instruction manual, software license agreement and the packaging; form your only income stream. It is also a general expectation by customers to receive any minor updates to this purchase for free. Therefore it becomes ever harder to attract a constant, steady income beyond the initial purchase.
As a software user, keeping up to date with software becomes harder too. As new operating systems are released there are always compatibility concerns. Being left with an un-operational DAW because of version incompatibility between your software / plug-ins / OS is a worst nightmare.
Wouldn’t it be great to not have to spend hours installing new software, going through Challenge / Response and iLok complications and be able to access a session anywhere in the world, from any computer with Internet?
I think this would be a winner all round. Software companies could attract a steadier income stream by offering a “lite” version for free / demo, then a pro version either by utility type usage or via subscription fee. You could have features where you can access any plug-ins in real time with a trial or buy functionality. Whatever you need for your session available immediately at your disposal and without the need to clog up your personal computer with software, data files and unnecessary features.
As Internet technology speeds up and becomes more accessible worldwide it will make this technology even better. Imagine musicians working on a session in 5 different parts of the world simultaneously, linked via the Internet in an online cloud session, you then join the cloud and start comping and editing files ready to mix down the track in your studio later that day… A finished track in a day, recorded with musicians from around the world without any travel expenses. It also will make recording and production software available to anyone with an internet connection, this alone could tremendously diversify the creative output into the music world and offer us all some interesting things to think about. There are many possibilities with cloud computing, lets see who from our industry will be the first to harness it.
Friday, 11 December 2009
AUDIO SENSES
After a bit of a break, I'm back with my latest blog!
For many, finding ways to arouse the 5 senses influence much of our leisure decisions. Finding ways to invigorate feeling through sensory indulgence, form the basic platform for the notion of pleasure in most humans.
Within music, we tend to link audio with vision, maybe originally from the association of seeing a band or orchestra perform in all their glory and also enjoying listening to their musical talents at the same time.
In current years, the music video generation has helped to continue the visual association with audio. However, I do feel that this focus transferred into the world of audio engineering, has actually become rather detrimental to the way that we work - especially over the last decade as we work more in the advancing digital domain.
There are many sessions I have both witnessed and participated in where we are all guilty of obsessively watching (staring at!) the cursor glide across the screen of the Pro Tools or Logic Arrange page whilst listening back to a mix. Somehow feeling that the colourful bars and pretty patterns of blocks from different instruments, takes and edits, are essential viewing to fully hear what is happening - like “how will I know when the second chorus starts or the string section comes in, unless I’m staring at my beautiful Apple cinema screen representation?”
I personally feel that the focus on the screen whilst mixing really takes away from the way that you listen to the mix, in several different ways. Firstly, when looking at the screen (especially in recent years where there is so much crammed onto the arrange page), there is too much distraction for the eye, to many other thought processes away from audio for the brain to do. Also, like when reading a book, the brain actually scans ahead of what you are looking at, so subconsciously you have already read / looked ahead of where you are focusing. This means that your brain is already preparing for the blocks of instruments its seen are coming in within the next 4 bars - so will you really notice if the second verse starts at the right level and balance, if you are already pre-empting and expecting the rather ‘triumphant sounding’ brass section that your added yesterday? Possibly not.
The focus on the screen can also force us to become far too precise, I remember smiling to myself watching an engineer turning a channel fader up by 0.5dB. I do not feel you are going to audibly notice that. If you were using a real console I doubt you would really turn something up by 0.5dB, if you were just listening to it rather than watching it.
Another big problem of sitting and staring at the arrange page whilst listening to a mix is the position of the computer screen within your set up. Is your screen located in a place where you can see it clearly whilst staying in the “sweet spot”? Are you in the ideal listening position when at your screen? Or are you, like in many set ups I see, located quite severely off centre and quite possibly at risk of encountering some phasing issues or sitting in a bass peak or trough? Listening to your mix in different parts of your room (or even outside the room) can be useful for detecting problem frequencies, but doing any major percentage of your listening off-axis cannot be helpful at all, and will make well balanced mixes a lot harder to achieve.
I want to start a mono sensory revolution – lets get back to focusing just on the sound and boycott the screens as much as possible when mixing. Just focus on the music and listen!
So I urge any guilty readers to come to your audio senses and try listening and mixing without staring at that beautiful arrange page with your carefully constructed edits, to come back into the sweet spot and mix in an easier positioned environment and not to let the ever so precise visual data to override what your ears are actually hearing. Helping us all to get one step closer to that better balanced audio world.
For many, finding ways to arouse the 5 senses influence much of our leisure decisions. Finding ways to invigorate feeling through sensory indulgence, form the basic platform for the notion of pleasure in most humans.
Within music, we tend to link audio with vision, maybe originally from the association of seeing a band or orchestra perform in all their glory and also enjoying listening to their musical talents at the same time.
In current years, the music video generation has helped to continue the visual association with audio. However, I do feel that this focus transferred into the world of audio engineering, has actually become rather detrimental to the way that we work - especially over the last decade as we work more in the advancing digital domain.
There are many sessions I have both witnessed and participated in where we are all guilty of obsessively watching (staring at!) the cursor glide across the screen of the Pro Tools or Logic Arrange page whilst listening back to a mix. Somehow feeling that the colourful bars and pretty patterns of blocks from different instruments, takes and edits, are essential viewing to fully hear what is happening - like “how will I know when the second chorus starts or the string section comes in, unless I’m staring at my beautiful Apple cinema screen representation?”
I personally feel that the focus on the screen whilst mixing really takes away from the way that you listen to the mix, in several different ways. Firstly, when looking at the screen (especially in recent years where there is so much crammed onto the arrange page), there is too much distraction for the eye, to many other thought processes away from audio for the brain to do. Also, like when reading a book, the brain actually scans ahead of what you are looking at, so subconsciously you have already read / looked ahead of where you are focusing. This means that your brain is already preparing for the blocks of instruments its seen are coming in within the next 4 bars - so will you really notice if the second verse starts at the right level and balance, if you are already pre-empting and expecting the rather ‘triumphant sounding’ brass section that your added yesterday? Possibly not.
The focus on the screen can also force us to become far too precise, I remember smiling to myself watching an engineer turning a channel fader up by 0.5dB. I do not feel you are going to audibly notice that. If you were using a real console I doubt you would really turn something up by 0.5dB, if you were just listening to it rather than watching it.
Another big problem of sitting and staring at the arrange page whilst listening to a mix is the position of the computer screen within your set up. Is your screen located in a place where you can see it clearly whilst staying in the “sweet spot”? Are you in the ideal listening position when at your screen? Or are you, like in many set ups I see, located quite severely off centre and quite possibly at risk of encountering some phasing issues or sitting in a bass peak or trough? Listening to your mix in different parts of your room (or even outside the room) can be useful for detecting problem frequencies, but doing any major percentage of your listening off-axis cannot be helpful at all, and will make well balanced mixes a lot harder to achieve.
I want to start a mono sensory revolution – lets get back to focusing just on the sound and boycott the screens as much as possible when mixing. Just focus on the music and listen!
So I urge any guilty readers to come to your audio senses and try listening and mixing without staring at that beautiful arrange page with your carefully constructed edits, to come back into the sweet spot and mix in an easier positioned environment and not to let the ever so precise visual data to override what your ears are actually hearing. Helping us all to get one step closer to that better balanced audio world.
Thursday, 13 August 2009
EQUALLY OPPOSITE
The entire environment we reside within is full of equals and opposites and parallels.
That statement can be taken in the most basic forms of light and dark, day and night, or hot and cold; or it could indeed be used to describe eastern and western culture, or the different variants of species that habitat our planet.
The fact remains that these aspects are not only part of everyday life, but also one of the reasons the planet can flourish, adapt and evolve.
It makes sense then that we endeavour to continue these patterns into our work.
The music industry is continually changing and evolving, usually playing catch up with modern society and cultural trends most of the time.
Although some aspects and requirements are a constant, it is important to evaluate the current state of play, the fluctuations, and be realistic. We should take advantage of the facilities we do have access to now, and be creative.
So what have the parallels of life got to do with making a record? I will explain.
Often modern budgets are being cut to a fraction of what they once were or even cancelled all together, relying on personal funding or development of an artist through their producer or management rather than from a record label.
Labels are understandably cautious about investing in new artists for fear of not making any return.
Artists are expected to have already created an underground following, have an image, a sponsor… and a guaranteed song placement and synch rights would go down nicely too.
The problem with taking an artist from their underground circuit and trying to turn them mainstream; or taking a new artist and trying to throw them straight into the commercial playground, is the aspect of retaining a 'cool' factor to them.
Doing this over a 10-15 track album is costly and timely, and a big commitment from a label, even if these days the Major labels at least more act as just a distributor / plugger.
I think we should look to go back to doing more EP style releases, 'projects' that contain around 5 or 6 songs.
This way the artist, management, producer and label, can focus n just generating the best songs for this mini project, rather than stuffing it with filler songs. It also helps focus the project towards a particular market. If the project doesn’t work, it also means there has been less money spent on making it.
Something that is also interesting to consider is that with this way of working, you also have the option to release
alternative projects, or remix projects alongside the main release, perhaps targeted more for the clubs or the underground circuit, or maybe just a live or acoustic project.
Not only does this expand your audience and exposure possibilities, it also means more revenue. Two different projects means a wider spread of radio play and club play and also if someone is a fan of one project, there is a good chance they will purchase the other too.
Remix and underground releases can also help with achieving this “got to be cool” requirement, adding credibility to an artist, by having this equal and opposite force present alongside the more mainstream focused project.
It is also good as a producer to split your work into at least 2 parts, under different aliases, one for your own independent projects and compositions and one for more commercial releases and remixes. Allowing you to take advantage of different types of work available whilst maintaining your name and credibility for your other projects. It is the same principle.
Taking the concept of equal and opposite throughout your work ethic can produce very creative work that helps you stand out.
Combining opposite music genres always works well, imagine rock and classical, drum and bass and opera, reggae and country and western… although it may sound unusual at first, you can quickly realise that there are endless possibilities to create something new and appealing.
Different textures and instruments compliment each other, like the different herbs and spices you can use in cooking, the flavours of the sounds come together sounding quite delicious.
Also in the structure of the song having for instance very hard sounding drums with a soft and chilled keys part over the top, or maybe a gentle and enchanting drone of an Indian Tambura, can be very complimentary and intriguing.
The principal can also be used in presentation of your music. If you are an electronic producer, try forming an acoustic live version of a track and video it, presenting it back to people on an electronic format.
So, focus your ideas, encapsulate your being and sound into an area, then diversify with an equal and opposite approach to your work and create a parallel project or piece of work and get in synch with the modern and diverse world in which we live.
That statement can be taken in the most basic forms of light and dark, day and night, or hot and cold; or it could indeed be used to describe eastern and western culture, or the different variants of species that habitat our planet.
The fact remains that these aspects are not only part of everyday life, but also one of the reasons the planet can flourish, adapt and evolve.
It makes sense then that we endeavour to continue these patterns into our work.
The music industry is continually changing and evolving, usually playing catch up with modern society and cultural trends most of the time.
Although some aspects and requirements are a constant, it is important to evaluate the current state of play, the fluctuations, and be realistic. We should take advantage of the facilities we do have access to now, and be creative.
So what have the parallels of life got to do with making a record? I will explain.
Often modern budgets are being cut to a fraction of what they once were or even cancelled all together, relying on personal funding or development of an artist through their producer or management rather than from a record label.
Labels are understandably cautious about investing in new artists for fear of not making any return.
Artists are expected to have already created an underground following, have an image, a sponsor… and a guaranteed song placement and synch rights would go down nicely too.
The problem with taking an artist from their underground circuit and trying to turn them mainstream; or taking a new artist and trying to throw them straight into the commercial playground, is the aspect of retaining a 'cool' factor to them.
Doing this over a 10-15 track album is costly and timely, and a big commitment from a label, even if these days the Major labels at least more act as just a distributor / plugger.
I think we should look to go back to doing more EP style releases, 'projects' that contain around 5 or 6 songs.
This way the artist, management, producer and label, can focus n just generating the best songs for this mini project, rather than stuffing it with filler songs. It also helps focus the project towards a particular market. If the project doesn’t work, it also means there has been less money spent on making it.
Something that is also interesting to consider is that with this way of working, you also have the option to release
alternative projects, or remix projects alongside the main release, perhaps targeted more for the clubs or the underground circuit, or maybe just a live or acoustic project.
Not only does this expand your audience and exposure possibilities, it also means more revenue. Two different projects means a wider spread of radio play and club play and also if someone is a fan of one project, there is a good chance they will purchase the other too.
Remix and underground releases can also help with achieving this “got to be cool” requirement, adding credibility to an artist, by having this equal and opposite force present alongside the more mainstream focused project.
It is also good as a producer to split your work into at least 2 parts, under different aliases, one for your own independent projects and compositions and one for more commercial releases and remixes. Allowing you to take advantage of different types of work available whilst maintaining your name and credibility for your other projects. It is the same principle.
Taking the concept of equal and opposite throughout your work ethic can produce very creative work that helps you stand out.
Combining opposite music genres always works well, imagine rock and classical, drum and bass and opera, reggae and country and western… although it may sound unusual at first, you can quickly realise that there are endless possibilities to create something new and appealing.
Different textures and instruments compliment each other, like the different herbs and spices you can use in cooking, the flavours of the sounds come together sounding quite delicious.
Also in the structure of the song having for instance very hard sounding drums with a soft and chilled keys part over the top, or maybe a gentle and enchanting drone of an Indian Tambura, can be very complimentary and intriguing.
The principal can also be used in presentation of your music. If you are an electronic producer, try forming an acoustic live version of a track and video it, presenting it back to people on an electronic format.
So, focus your ideas, encapsulate your being and sound into an area, then diversify with an equal and opposite approach to your work and create a parallel project or piece of work and get in synch with the modern and diverse world in which we live.
Friday, 8 May 2009
IN BALANCE?
This month it’s all about balance. Not just ones own equilibrioception that may suffer somewhat come closing time of your favourite haunt on a Saturday night, but of our general perception of placement, proportions and ability to coexist within an allocated space.
“Balance” may be an unmentionable and offensive word to the Chancellor of the Exchequer right now, as he frantically tries to make Britain’s income and expenditure books balance; but for us studio geeks, it really can and should be a much simpler process.
So where do we start in endeavouring to create a good balance in our mix? Well firstly, lets actually consider what a good balance is. As mentioned in one of my previous months articles, a good balanced mix should be like ‘Amnesty International’ for audio; a mix where each individual part has its own space to coexist with its neighbours, adopting a fair share of the frequency spectrum and given the right to be heard fairly and accurately.
So before we go off to paint up some protest banners to campaign for a better balanced audio world, lets discuss the first stumbling block of our auditory ideal – gain staging.
Getting the levels right during the recording process seems to be a bone of contempt for many. Poor management of input signals and recording levels can lead to an array of difficulties when trying to balance a mix, so here are a few points to consider. To start with, in the recording stage, make sure you use the appropriate microphone for your sound source. Condenser and ribbon mics are very sensitive to high-pressure levels, so not ideal choices for percussive sounds like a kick drum or high level sources such as the front of a guitar cab.
The sensitivity of some condenser / preamp combinations also means they are not always the best choice for some vocalists. If you are finding that your vocals are clipping or distorting you may try just turning the input gain down. However, if this just gives you a quieter source and a lot of background noise, try either applying a high pass filter on the preamp (to cut out some of the room noise and rumble), or use a dynamic mic which can be more capable of handling the dynamic changes of the vocalist and is also more directional - so should pick up more of the direct signal rather than unwanted noise.
The key is, never to overload your inputs on your DAW and make sure you always leave yourself with plenty of headroom. Your recording levels should not be at 0dB as some commonly presume, try maybe -6dB as a rough guide or even less.
If every source you have is already at a max it is much harder to balance these parts together without clipping the master track. You are also leaving no room for subtle fader movements to have an audible effect. During mix down, having as much headroom as possible on individual sources is great for when you start creating stem mixes or summing down your track.
On analogue equipment it is true that you can push the piece hard without causing huge problems. However in digital equipment, the signal should never clip as this produces a nasty sounding square wave cut off to your audio and once it has been distorted there is no way to undo it, so keep those levels controlled.
Another problem area for achieving balance tends to be EQ. If you find that your mixes are well balanced in level but appear a bit “foggy” or “muddy” it is more than likely due to a fight breaking out between two or more instruments all trying to be in the same frequency range. A method known as ‘spectral mixing’ that I refer to in previous articles is particularly useful here. This process involves cutting a space for each individual track using EQ, focusing just on the key frequencies of the instrument that you want to be heard and cutting unnecessary bass content, high frequency content, and problem mid range frequencies out.
EQ alone cannot always help with balancing your bass sounds though, sometimes some spectral mixing between the bass drum and bass guitar is all that’s needed, but this is not always the solution. Many seem to struggle to avoid mixing seriously bass heavy or seriously bass light. This is usually due to the mix environment causing you to end up sitting in a peak or trough part of the waveform and therefore not hearing an accurate representation when mixing. To check this, try listening to the material in other playback systems, like your hifi, car stereo or at a friend’s studio facility if possible. It will then be easier to identify any problems that exist within your mixing space.
It may be however, that the frequency content of your bass is too low and too narrow and is causing it to lack energy or excitement in the mix. Try adding some fundamental frequencies above, either by dialling back in some of the higher frequencies you rolled off, or by putting the bass through an exciter, or maybe by adding a mirror bassline in the next octave up slightly lower in the mix, or just by transposing the whole line into a different, more legible key. Always be wary of adding too much sub bass content. Most home and project studio systems monitoring facilities don’t extend to sub frequencies, so you may get a nasty surprise when played in a club or a kitted-out car system.
If you can get your bass and your drums “gelling” together piecing everything else on top becomes much easier, treat the beat and bass like the foundations of your audio building and if they are not correct anything on top of that will never be balanced.
Lastly another way to help create a good balanced mix is to start the habit of stem mixing. This is basically creating sub groups like many live engineers do, but it has several benefits for the studio engineer too.
Once you have a nice mix of your drums, it is much easier to control their overall level within one group fader than individual ones, same goes for any other instrument group. It also makes it easer if you are planning to sum your mix externally with analogue outboard or a console. Not only does it bring the channel count and required interface spec down, it again makes it less work to balance between the instrument groups and you can keep a closer eye on the changes you are making.
So pay attention to your gain staging, EQ spread, and find easier ways to balance the levels, like stem mixing, and you will soon find yourself feeling a lot more balanced and possibly “in tune” with your audio. Besides, let us not forget that balance is actually one of the most natural phenomenon’s of existence…
“Balance” may be an unmentionable and offensive word to the Chancellor of the Exchequer right now, as he frantically tries to make Britain’s income and expenditure books balance; but for us studio geeks, it really can and should be a much simpler process.
So where do we start in endeavouring to create a good balance in our mix? Well firstly, lets actually consider what a good balance is. As mentioned in one of my previous months articles, a good balanced mix should be like ‘Amnesty International’ for audio; a mix where each individual part has its own space to coexist with its neighbours, adopting a fair share of the frequency spectrum and given the right to be heard fairly and accurately.
So before we go off to paint up some protest banners to campaign for a better balanced audio world, lets discuss the first stumbling block of our auditory ideal – gain staging.
Getting the levels right during the recording process seems to be a bone of contempt for many. Poor management of input signals and recording levels can lead to an array of difficulties when trying to balance a mix, so here are a few points to consider. To start with, in the recording stage, make sure you use the appropriate microphone for your sound source. Condenser and ribbon mics are very sensitive to high-pressure levels, so not ideal choices for percussive sounds like a kick drum or high level sources such as the front of a guitar cab.
The sensitivity of some condenser / preamp combinations also means they are not always the best choice for some vocalists. If you are finding that your vocals are clipping or distorting you may try just turning the input gain down. However, if this just gives you a quieter source and a lot of background noise, try either applying a high pass filter on the preamp (to cut out some of the room noise and rumble), or use a dynamic mic which can be more capable of handling the dynamic changes of the vocalist and is also more directional - so should pick up more of the direct signal rather than unwanted noise.
The key is, never to overload your inputs on your DAW and make sure you always leave yourself with plenty of headroom. Your recording levels should not be at 0dB as some commonly presume, try maybe -6dB as a rough guide or even less.
If every source you have is already at a max it is much harder to balance these parts together without clipping the master track. You are also leaving no room for subtle fader movements to have an audible effect. During mix down, having as much headroom as possible on individual sources is great for when you start creating stem mixes or summing down your track.
On analogue equipment it is true that you can push the piece hard without causing huge problems. However in digital equipment, the signal should never clip as this produces a nasty sounding square wave cut off to your audio and once it has been distorted there is no way to undo it, so keep those levels controlled.
Another problem area for achieving balance tends to be EQ. If you find that your mixes are well balanced in level but appear a bit “foggy” or “muddy” it is more than likely due to a fight breaking out between two or more instruments all trying to be in the same frequency range. A method known as ‘spectral mixing’ that I refer to in previous articles is particularly useful here. This process involves cutting a space for each individual track using EQ, focusing just on the key frequencies of the instrument that you want to be heard and cutting unnecessary bass content, high frequency content, and problem mid range frequencies out.
EQ alone cannot always help with balancing your bass sounds though, sometimes some spectral mixing between the bass drum and bass guitar is all that’s needed, but this is not always the solution. Many seem to struggle to avoid mixing seriously bass heavy or seriously bass light. This is usually due to the mix environment causing you to end up sitting in a peak or trough part of the waveform and therefore not hearing an accurate representation when mixing. To check this, try listening to the material in other playback systems, like your hifi, car stereo or at a friend’s studio facility if possible. It will then be easier to identify any problems that exist within your mixing space.
It may be however, that the frequency content of your bass is too low and too narrow and is causing it to lack energy or excitement in the mix. Try adding some fundamental frequencies above, either by dialling back in some of the higher frequencies you rolled off, or by putting the bass through an exciter, or maybe by adding a mirror bassline in the next octave up slightly lower in the mix, or just by transposing the whole line into a different, more legible key. Always be wary of adding too much sub bass content. Most home and project studio systems monitoring facilities don’t extend to sub frequencies, so you may get a nasty surprise when played in a club or a kitted-out car system.
If you can get your bass and your drums “gelling” together piecing everything else on top becomes much easier, treat the beat and bass like the foundations of your audio building and if they are not correct anything on top of that will never be balanced.
Lastly another way to help create a good balanced mix is to start the habit of stem mixing. This is basically creating sub groups like many live engineers do, but it has several benefits for the studio engineer too.
Once you have a nice mix of your drums, it is much easier to control their overall level within one group fader than individual ones, same goes for any other instrument group. It also makes it easer if you are planning to sum your mix externally with analogue outboard or a console. Not only does it bring the channel count and required interface spec down, it again makes it less work to balance between the instrument groups and you can keep a closer eye on the changes you are making.
So pay attention to your gain staging, EQ spread, and find easier ways to balance the levels, like stem mixing, and you will soon find yourself feeling a lot more balanced and possibly “in tune” with your audio. Besides, let us not forget that balance is actually one of the most natural phenomenon’s of existence…
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
AUDIO IDENTITY
There are over 6 billion people that populate this planet, each having their own individual genetic make up. The sheer diversity enriches our cultures, traditions and inspiration and makes up this eccentric patchwork of identity that we possess as human beings. Although we indulge in our self-proclaimed title of being top of the food chain and the most powerful and intelligent mammal that inhabits our Earth, it is amazing how sheep-like many among us seem to be. Herded together following each other aimlessly through fields of fashions, fads and ideals.
If you want to be able to stand out from this flock and be heard by many (not just “herd” by Bo Peep), embracing your individuality is essential.
The same can be said with your approach to your music production and mixing.
If everybody had the same gear, the same software, using the same sounds, with the same rules, would that really be good for the music? I think not. Forming your own identity and sound by combining your choice of equipment and forming your own sound bank is how you really can express yourself creatively as an individual.
When choosing equipment, you should consider many factors. It is always hard to base purchase decisions on adverts or reviews but this is a good way of finding out information and narrowing your choices. It is also strange to base your decisions on listening to someone’s opinion that seems to spend more time on Internet forums then in their idyllic (?) studio.
Base your choices on what you are drawn too, what you understand and what inspires you. Audio shouldn’t be about snobbery either; there are great products and tools out there that do not break the bank. So do not disregard products thinking that low price equals poor quality, as this is not always the case.
Research is important. Many make poor decisions on equipment, as they don’t fully understand the process the equipment does or what they are trying to achieve, never be scared to ask, but if you have a question about a product, contact the manufacturer. They designed and built the product and probably have the gear set up within their building, if anyone should be able to give you an accurate response to your query, I feel it is more likely to be them.
For me, I always like to consider the end format, where will this music end up and how would I like it to sound? The other day I visited a studio that makes Drum and Bass and Electronic music, they had a PC set up and for monitoring had some cheap PC speakers and then general small club PA Speakers. The explanation for this was that they didn’t see the point in having “3 grand” studio monitors, as the music either ends up on a website, listened to on an ipod / computer speakers, or played out in a club. If they got it sounding balanced on the PC speakers and it transfers well in the bass frequencies to the PA set up, that’s all they needed. The sound they had was indeed very good and you would never know much was mixed on £40 computer speakers.
Having your own arrangement of gear not only should inspire you but should also help you to create your own sound. Try linking different pieces together, get out those patch cables and take advantage of inserts, sidechains and programmable effects. It is surprising how quickly you can discover new ways of working, new sounds and some cool effects.
Do not be scared to experiment in how you connect or use your gear, so long as you understand and respect the different levels of some inputs and outputs and that tweeters can be delicate things… what’s the worst that could happen?
Also try using products for different purposes than they are created for… how about feeding your guitar amp or pod with some piano or percussion? Maybe use a vocoder on strings? You can quickly get some interesting sounds that you can use in conjunction with the original audio, instead of the original audio, or just as an effect. Rules are there to be broken and forcing yourself to go against the grain can form some fantastic creations.
It is easy to get caught up in the equipment rat race, and also hard to keep up with what’s new or available, so of course we sometimes need to see what others are doing and choosing. Apply logic to your opinions though and research the technology and functions the gear offers. If I make denim jeans, it doesn’t matter what logo I put on the back pocket, they are still denim jeans. If I want a tube microphone, ribbon tweeter monitors or a discrete class A preamp, all products in those categories will use the same technology, but some will be mass manufactured, some made by hand, some will have a better frequency response and some will just rely on their “back pocket logo” to pull on the heart strings of consumerism.
Choose the products that are right for you and offer you the tools that you need to be creative so to put your individual stamp on the music you make. Technology is advancing daily and more and more options are available to the consumer, but remember, it is all there to get the job done better, or quicker or make what you do easier.
So break away from the herd and approach your work as a one in six billion individual, rather than just another lamb to the slaughter.
If you want to be able to stand out from this flock and be heard by many (not just “herd” by Bo Peep), embracing your individuality is essential.
The same can be said with your approach to your music production and mixing.
If everybody had the same gear, the same software, using the same sounds, with the same rules, would that really be good for the music? I think not. Forming your own identity and sound by combining your choice of equipment and forming your own sound bank is how you really can express yourself creatively as an individual.
When choosing equipment, you should consider many factors. It is always hard to base purchase decisions on adverts or reviews but this is a good way of finding out information and narrowing your choices. It is also strange to base your decisions on listening to someone’s opinion that seems to spend more time on Internet forums then in their idyllic (?) studio.
Base your choices on what you are drawn too, what you understand and what inspires you. Audio shouldn’t be about snobbery either; there are great products and tools out there that do not break the bank. So do not disregard products thinking that low price equals poor quality, as this is not always the case.
Research is important. Many make poor decisions on equipment, as they don’t fully understand the process the equipment does or what they are trying to achieve, never be scared to ask, but if you have a question about a product, contact the manufacturer. They designed and built the product and probably have the gear set up within their building, if anyone should be able to give you an accurate response to your query, I feel it is more likely to be them.
For me, I always like to consider the end format, where will this music end up and how would I like it to sound? The other day I visited a studio that makes Drum and Bass and Electronic music, they had a PC set up and for monitoring had some cheap PC speakers and then general small club PA Speakers. The explanation for this was that they didn’t see the point in having “3 grand” studio monitors, as the music either ends up on a website, listened to on an ipod / computer speakers, or played out in a club. If they got it sounding balanced on the PC speakers and it transfers well in the bass frequencies to the PA set up, that’s all they needed. The sound they had was indeed very good and you would never know much was mixed on £40 computer speakers.
Having your own arrangement of gear not only should inspire you but should also help you to create your own sound. Try linking different pieces together, get out those patch cables and take advantage of inserts, sidechains and programmable effects. It is surprising how quickly you can discover new ways of working, new sounds and some cool effects.
Do not be scared to experiment in how you connect or use your gear, so long as you understand and respect the different levels of some inputs and outputs and that tweeters can be delicate things… what’s the worst that could happen?
Also try using products for different purposes than they are created for… how about feeding your guitar amp or pod with some piano or percussion? Maybe use a vocoder on strings? You can quickly get some interesting sounds that you can use in conjunction with the original audio, instead of the original audio, or just as an effect. Rules are there to be broken and forcing yourself to go against the grain can form some fantastic creations.
It is easy to get caught up in the equipment rat race, and also hard to keep up with what’s new or available, so of course we sometimes need to see what others are doing and choosing. Apply logic to your opinions though and research the technology and functions the gear offers. If I make denim jeans, it doesn’t matter what logo I put on the back pocket, they are still denim jeans. If I want a tube microphone, ribbon tweeter monitors or a discrete class A preamp, all products in those categories will use the same technology, but some will be mass manufactured, some made by hand, some will have a better frequency response and some will just rely on their “back pocket logo” to pull on the heart strings of consumerism.
Choose the products that are right for you and offer you the tools that you need to be creative so to put your individual stamp on the music you make. Technology is advancing daily and more and more options are available to the consumer, but remember, it is all there to get the job done better, or quicker or make what you do easier.
So break away from the herd and approach your work as a one in six billion individual, rather than just another lamb to the slaughter.
Sunday, 1 March 2009
TIMELESS MUSIC
Time. A measurement of existence, a constant tied to an event of past, present and future or a common consciousness in which we participate? Without going to into one of those 4am conversations on the theories and ideals of philosophy, science and religion, I still would like to touch on the importance of the way we view time and its significance upon our approach to our activities.
In this current social and economic climate, I am constantly hearing that “times are changing”, well this is obvious is it not? Regardless off the constant fluctuation of exchange rates and the weak pound, the growing unemployment statistics and the divide in social standing between the rich and the not very rich, time is always changing. Fashions and fads come, go and are reinvented. Life starts, life ends and life is created. So how do some of our peers manage to create works that escape the constraints of time and a changing, evolving world?
“A timeless classic”, a common phrase for such works, and one we would be honoured to have associated with anything we create within our lifetimes I’m sure. What is it that allows certain songs, mixes, productions and scores to be remembered and praised long after their creation though? There is not a simple rule or formula to this; there are however some good points for consideration when starting work on your album project or production. So this month is a bit of theory for us to endeavour to put into practise.
A universally appealing track is one that people from different places, races, cultures and ages can relate to in some way. For them to be able to, the track needs to have strength to it and a power to be emotive.
I think as a producer of a project it is essential to recognise early on what the strength of the project is and make this the key feature of the sound and shape of the album. For example, if the singer writes fantastic lyrics, keep the music simple to focus the listeners ear on the words, go for a nice warm sound on the vocals, maybe using a ribbon mic and tube preamp combination. Add compression to bring the vocal upfront and closer to the listener, but keep a soft knee and try not to make it pump by keeping the release a little slower.
In my opinion, a mistake that is often made in recent times is to over-perfect a vocal line. Whilst some singers can only claim to be so with the help of Melodyne, others that are not so musically challenged should be left to sing songs more freely. In classical recordings, the aim is to capture the performance in the most natural way. When you are listening back to the recording and shut your eyes it should be like you are there, experiencing the drama, excitement, or beauty first hand. I think this should be the same with a good vocalist. The voice after all is another instrument and I think sometimes we are all guilty of not treating it as such sometimes. The emotion of a vocal is really heard when a singer is left to freely express themselves, even if they are straining a little on a high note or singing some notes softer, the little imperfections make it sound real. Of course you can give your singer guidance, but when working with a talented vocalist there is nothing more beautiful than listening to them sing from their heart the way that they feel to express it.
To capture this, try taking a different approach to the recording. Instead of having them standing up with a pop shield and condenser mic, headphones on, lights blaring and shouting instructions down the talk back to them, try creating a more ambient feel. In your live room or recording space, light some scented candles, put some cushions out, turn the lights down and try setting up some room mics instead of just a close mic. Play around with positioning as it will vary dependent on the size and shape of the room. I quite like using a coincident pair towards the corner of the room, facing inwards, with cardiod pick up patterns, and not too close to the wall. Then, if the room allows I also like to use a tube condenser mic on omni pick up placed higher up above the performer, a few feet away and facing downwards slightly angled towards them. Do not be afraid to experiment with different microphones and their placement.
Another important element when doing a project is simplicity. Have a theme for the album that is used by the band / act / producer for inspiration and guidance, sometimes the simplest ideas can create a masterpiece. I also think it’s important to decide whether you are creating songs, or pieces of art. I say this, as a “song” should have a simplistic structure, repetition, and a familiarity to it. These aspects help a song to be “catchy” and memorable. On the other hand, a track that is a piece of “art” should be a statement, a mood, an object, a situation – whatever it is, it should embody that expression fully and be an emotive journey for the listener. To give an example, a timeless and fantastic album of “songs” was Michael Jackson’s ‘Thriller Album’; a timeless and great album of “art” was Pink Floyd’s ‘Dark Side Of The Moon’.
Whatever you are trying to achieve with your project allow yourself to be creative and experimental, make music that means something to you and enjoy doing it! Don’t be afraid to try out new ideas, even if they don’t work, at least it is a lesson learnt.
There is no key to making great music, but so long as you are making something that you are proud of and that you enjoyed creating, you have already created something timeless in your eyes, regardless of how others view it.
Remember that with each 60 seconds you gain in life is also a minute lost. When you create an album for people to listen to, aim to make their seconds gained a joyful experience and their minutes lost only to fond memories.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
