Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
MY PROBLEM
I'm mixing or mastering a song until it sounds pretty good on the Dynaudio BM6a's and Sennheiser HD 600's in the studio, but when I hear the mix on multimedia speakers or televisions the song all of a sudden turns out to have a boomy low even the most bassy commercial releases don't. No amount of equalisation, compression or spectrum analysis have helped me get a good grip on how to deal with this. Let's say I'm working on a rap song. I put a spectrum analyzer on the master strip or at the end of my mastering chain, do peak and average measurements of, say Eminem which sounds OK pretty much anywhere, then I try to compare that with my own song. Even if my song is in the same key as the reference song, "copying" the peak and avg frequency response of my ref can still leave me with the same problems in the low end! MY EXAMPLE http://boomjinx.com/music/example.mp3 Although this particular mixdown is not the worst examples I've had on this song, I'm still not happy how the bass sounds. MY FINDINGS It seems to me like the unpleasant boomy area can be found somewhere between 120 and 180Hz, while things can get quite muddy if too much is going on around 250Hz. Dropping 3-6dB at 135Hz and 3-6dB at 250Hz on the entire mix pretty much always solve these problems for me, but that takes out too much from the low end and lower mids. After applying this less than ideal "quickfix" to my mix, the analyzer also shows a big drop at 120-140Hz and 250Hz when comparing to my reference songs. Considering I usually roll-off below 115-150Hz on everything but kicks and basses, those are the only two ingredients that seem to cause these problems in my mixes. HELP I am very interested in hearing your experiences dealing with or avoiding this in the mixing and mastering process. -BJ |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ wrote:
while things can get quite muddy if too much is going on around 250Hz. Dropping 3-6dB at 135Hz and 3-6dB at 250Hz on the entire mix pretty much always solve these problems for me, but that takes out too much from the low end and lower mids. This took a fair amount of time to investigate, thank you for including an example with the question. The low midrange, i.e. around 250 Hz, is the loudness perception area, which means that lowering it will lead to the perception that the bass as well as the upper midrange is elevated. Try using a small membrane omni on the kickdrum, the small Behringer measurement mic may or may not do just fine, and a pair of those could come in handy for you anyway. I am very interested in hearing your experiences dealing with or avoiding this in the mixing and mastering process. Having loudspeakers with a useful response down to 30 Hz helps, you might want to look into adding stereo subwoofers and verify the actual system response in the listening position. -BJ Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ wrote:
while things can get quite muddy if too much is going on around 250Hz. Dropping 3-6dB at 135Hz and 3-6dB at 250Hz on the entire mix pretty much always solve these problems for me, but that takes out too much from the low end and lower mids. This took a fair amount of time to investigate, thank you for including an example with the question. The low midrange, i.e. around 250 Hz, is the loudness perception area, which means that lowering it will lead to the perception that the bass as well as the upper midrange is elevated. Try using a small membrane omni on the kickdrum, the small Behringer measurement mic may or may not do just fine, and a pair of those could come in handy for you anyway. I am very interested in hearing your experiences dealing with or avoiding this in the mixing and mastering process. Having loudspeakers with a useful response down to 30 Hz helps, you might want to look into adding stereo subwoofers and verify the actual system response in the listening position. -BJ Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
hi bj -
i know another producer that's had problems mixing the bottom end with the BM6a's. so first off, i don't think those little speakers are telling you the whole story. (neither will the headphones.) sounds like you've tried referencing other stuff that you know sounds good on your system and tried matching it (eminem is nice for bottom - there are some killer erika badu tracks i reference for r&b and hiphop sometimes). referencing is key. what spectrum analyser are you using? if you're using the one from Waves, i think that's another problem. that thing is pretty hard to use for the bottom end. i have an analyser on my console that works fine for me. others say it's useless. i've watched so many mixes on it, i definitely recognize certain patterns. particularly for low end. several suggestions: 1) sounds like you have some speakers that demonstrate the boomyness better than your dynaudios. i'd recommend hooking them up to your system as another refernce point. i mix with tannoys, ns-10's, and a pair of super ****ty computer speakers in my mix room. (hardly use the soffit mounted double 15"ers.) 2) consider getting a sub for the dynaudios. the other producer i know seems to have better luck since he got his. i used to mix on BM15A's and i always had a hard time knowing what to do with the lower mids on those speakers. i don't know if the BM6A's are the same. but having moved over to the 10" Tannoy Elipse speakers, i'm much happier. 3) i think that a lot of the "boominess" in very small speakers shows up in the lower mids (280Hz - 450Hz). you might want to try cutting this area a little more on the big bass parts. it's easy to overwhelm small speakers with this range. 4) to get more apparent bass, try mixing in some 500Hz - 600Hz. that's the part of the bass that can poke out the most and get heard across virtually all speakers systems. if you study the Eminem stuff you'll see that there's a good bit of upper bass that links your ear to the sub parts. and on the spectrum analyser you should see that the lowest bass is actually pretty controlled and probably doesn't hit above -18dB. it'll look more subdued than say a U2 rock mix. but it'll sound huge because of the arrangement and the way they use the different frequency ranges in their bass -- for example think of each of these in the mix: 40Hz-60Hz, 80Hz-120Hz, 280Hz - 340Hz, and 500Hz - 600Hz. obviously, you'll need to do very different things to mix bass guitar than with synth stuff (synth is WAAAAAAY easier). i don't have much time to read the group anymore, if you have any questions feel free to send me an email. Tony Espinoza SF SOUNDWORKS www.sfsoundworks.com --------------------------------------------- Featuring the only SSL 9000 in San Francisco "BJ" wrote in message ... MY PROBLEM I'm mixing or mastering a song until it sounds pretty good on the Dynaudio BM6a's and Sennheiser HD 600's in the studio, but when I hear the mix on multimedia speakers or televisions the song all of a sudden turns out to have a boomy low even the most bassy commercial releases don't. No amount of equalisation, compression or spectrum analysis have helped me get a good grip on how to deal with this. Let's say I'm working on a rap song. I put a spectrum analyzer on the master strip or at the end of my mastering chain, do peak and average measurements of, say Eminem which sounds OK pretty much anywhere, then I try to compare that with my own song. Even if my song is in the same key as the reference song, "copying" the peak and avg frequency response of my ref can still leave me with the same problems in the low end! MY EXAMPLE http://boomjinx.com/music/example.mp3 Although this particular mixdown is not the worst examples I've had on this song, I'm still not happy how the bass sounds. MY FINDINGS It seems to me like the unpleasant boomy area can be found somewhere between 120 and 180Hz, while things can get quite muddy if too much is going on around 250Hz. Dropping 3-6dB at 135Hz and 3-6dB at 250Hz on the entire mix pretty much always solve these problems for me, but that takes out too much from the low end and lower mids. After applying this less than ideal "quickfix" to my mix, the analyzer also shows a big drop at 120-140Hz and 250Hz when comparing to my reference songs. Considering I usually roll-off below 115-150Hz on everything but kicks and basses, those are the only two ingredients that seem to cause these problems in my mixes. HELP I am very interested in hearing your experiences dealing with or avoiding this in the mixing and mastering process. -BJ |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
hi bj -
i know another producer that's had problems mixing the bottom end with the BM6a's. so first off, i don't think those little speakers are telling you the whole story. (neither will the headphones.) sounds like you've tried referencing other stuff that you know sounds good on your system and tried matching it (eminem is nice for bottom - there are some killer erika badu tracks i reference for r&b and hiphop sometimes). referencing is key. what spectrum analyser are you using? if you're using the one from Waves, i think that's another problem. that thing is pretty hard to use for the bottom end. i have an analyser on my console that works fine for me. others say it's useless. i've watched so many mixes on it, i definitely recognize certain patterns. particularly for low end. several suggestions: 1) sounds like you have some speakers that demonstrate the boomyness better than your dynaudios. i'd recommend hooking them up to your system as another refernce point. i mix with tannoys, ns-10's, and a pair of super ****ty computer speakers in my mix room. (hardly use the soffit mounted double 15"ers.) 2) consider getting a sub for the dynaudios. the other producer i know seems to have better luck since he got his. i used to mix on BM15A's and i always had a hard time knowing what to do with the lower mids on those speakers. i don't know if the BM6A's are the same. but having moved over to the 10" Tannoy Elipse speakers, i'm much happier. 3) i think that a lot of the "boominess" in very small speakers shows up in the lower mids (280Hz - 450Hz). you might want to try cutting this area a little more on the big bass parts. it's easy to overwhelm small speakers with this range. 4) to get more apparent bass, try mixing in some 500Hz - 600Hz. that's the part of the bass that can poke out the most and get heard across virtually all speakers systems. if you study the Eminem stuff you'll see that there's a good bit of upper bass that links your ear to the sub parts. and on the spectrum analyser you should see that the lowest bass is actually pretty controlled and probably doesn't hit above -18dB. it'll look more subdued than say a U2 rock mix. but it'll sound huge because of the arrangement and the way they use the different frequency ranges in their bass -- for example think of each of these in the mix: 40Hz-60Hz, 80Hz-120Hz, 280Hz - 340Hz, and 500Hz - 600Hz. obviously, you'll need to do very different things to mix bass guitar than with synth stuff (synth is WAAAAAAY easier). i don't have much time to read the group anymore, if you have any questions feel free to send me an email. Tony Espinoza SF SOUNDWORKS www.sfsoundworks.com --------------------------------------------- Featuring the only SSL 9000 in San Francisco "BJ" wrote in message ... MY PROBLEM I'm mixing or mastering a song until it sounds pretty good on the Dynaudio BM6a's and Sennheiser HD 600's in the studio, but when I hear the mix on multimedia speakers or televisions the song all of a sudden turns out to have a boomy low even the most bassy commercial releases don't. No amount of equalisation, compression or spectrum analysis have helped me get a good grip on how to deal with this. Let's say I'm working on a rap song. I put a spectrum analyzer on the master strip or at the end of my mastering chain, do peak and average measurements of, say Eminem which sounds OK pretty much anywhere, then I try to compare that with my own song. Even if my song is in the same key as the reference song, "copying" the peak and avg frequency response of my ref can still leave me with the same problems in the low end! MY EXAMPLE http://boomjinx.com/music/example.mp3 Although this particular mixdown is not the worst examples I've had on this song, I'm still not happy how the bass sounds. MY FINDINGS It seems to me like the unpleasant boomy area can be found somewhere between 120 and 180Hz, while things can get quite muddy if too much is going on around 250Hz. Dropping 3-6dB at 135Hz and 3-6dB at 250Hz on the entire mix pretty much always solve these problems for me, but that takes out too much from the low end and lower mids. After applying this less than ideal "quickfix" to my mix, the analyzer also shows a big drop at 120-140Hz and 250Hz when comparing to my reference songs. Considering I usually roll-off below 115-150Hz on everything but kicks and basses, those are the only two ingredients that seem to cause these problems in my mixes. HELP I am very interested in hearing your experiences dealing with or avoiding this in the mixing and mastering process. -BJ |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
tony espinoza wrote:
3) i think that a lot of the "boominess" in very small speakers shows up in the lower mids (280Hz - 450Hz). you might want to try cutting this area a little more on the big bass parts. He has cut it 6 dB too much already. it's easy to overwhelm small speakers with this range. It is more likely that the problem is that it is not easy to overwhelm those small Dynaudio boxes with anything, they just do it, except that they don't reproduce the 65 Hz hump of his mix in his room OR just reproduce it without agony while what other small stuff he listens on reproduces it with agony. 4) to get more apparent bass, try mixing in some 500Hz - 600Hz. Classic 2" midrange horns start getting usable at 500 Hz. Would you like to revise your statement or do you want it flak'ed as it is .... O;-) that's the part of the bass that can poke out the most and get heard across virtually all speakers systems. His mix already has too much 65 Hz, that is why it sounds boomy on a wide range system. What we appear to agree unreservedly on is that he needs a subwoofer for each loudspeaker. Tony Espinoza Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
tony espinoza wrote:
3) i think that a lot of the "boominess" in very small speakers shows up in the lower mids (280Hz - 450Hz). you might want to try cutting this area a little more on the big bass parts. He has cut it 6 dB too much already. it's easy to overwhelm small speakers with this range. It is more likely that the problem is that it is not easy to overwhelm those small Dynaudio boxes with anything, they just do it, except that they don't reproduce the 65 Hz hump of his mix in his room OR just reproduce it without agony while what other small stuff he listens on reproduces it with agony. 4) to get more apparent bass, try mixing in some 500Hz - 600Hz. Classic 2" midrange horns start getting usable at 500 Hz. Would you like to revise your statement or do you want it flak'ed as it is .... O;-) that's the part of the bass that can poke out the most and get heard across virtually all speakers systems. His mix already has too much 65 Hz, that is why it sounds boomy on a wide range system. What we appear to agree unreservedly on is that he needs a subwoofer for each loudspeaker. Tony Espinoza Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ wrote:
MY EXAMPLE http://boomjinx.com/music/example.mp3 Although this particular mixdown is not the worst examples I've had on this song, I'm still not happy how the bass sounds. I think the sample sounds very good, but I agree there is a bit too much around 200-300 Hz. I took out 2 dB around 200 Hz and added 1.5 dB at around 5000 Hz to make it sound a bit brighter. Sounded better ![]() Johann -- Begebe dich zu einen Spiegel, ich weiss das du zu einen Nachbarn gehen musst, weil du Spiegel nicht magst. Schaue einmal kurz rein (bitte nicht erschrecken) und du wirst erkennen, was "introvertiert" ist. (*Tönnes in ) |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ wrote:
MY EXAMPLE http://boomjinx.com/music/example.mp3 Although this particular mixdown is not the worst examples I've had on this song, I'm still not happy how the bass sounds. I think the sample sounds very good, but I agree there is a bit too much around 200-300 Hz. I took out 2 dB around 200 Hz and added 1.5 dB at around 5000 Hz to make it sound a bit brighter. Sounded better ![]() Johann -- Begebe dich zu einen Spiegel, ich weiss das du zu einen Nachbarn gehen musst, weil du Spiegel nicht magst. Schaue einmal kurz rein (bitte nicht erschrecken) und du wirst erkennen, was "introvertiert" ist. (*Tönnes in ) |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ,
It seems to me like the unpleasant boomy area can be found somewhere between 120 and 180Hz, while things can get quite muddy if too much is going on around 250Hz. Dropping 3-6dB at 135Hz and 3-6dB at 250Hz ... Aside from problems specific to those speakers, your room is surely the main offender. All small rooms have numerous peaks and deep nulls that riddle the entire bass range, and their frequency varies depending on where you are in the room while mixing. You didn't say anything about your room, but it's obvious your mix position is in a deep null. You need bass traps to solve this. Otherwise, you're doomed forever to guess what's really going on in the bass range. --Ethan |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ,
It seems to me like the unpleasant boomy area can be found somewhere between 120 and 180Hz, while things can get quite muddy if too much is going on around 250Hz. Dropping 3-6dB at 135Hz and 3-6dB at 250Hz ... Aside from problems specific to those speakers, your room is surely the main offender. All small rooms have numerous peaks and deep nulls that riddle the entire bass range, and their frequency varies depending on where you are in the room while mixing. You didn't say anything about your room, but it's obvious your mix position is in a deep null. You need bass traps to solve this. Otherwise, you're doomed forever to guess what's really going on in the bass range. --Ethan |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
First of all, let me say thank you _all_ for your replies.
It is more likely that the problem is that it is not easy to overwhelm those small Dynaudio boxes with anything, they just do it, I've been thinking the exact same thing. Although BM6a's and HD 600's are pretty accurate, their accuracy and abillity to reproduce sound well also makes it harder to identify the problems multimedia speakers and televisions reveal. His mix already has too much 65 Hz, that is why it sounds boomy on a wide range system. This is where I get just a little bit confused. 60Hz is, in my experience, one of the few "safe areas" in the low end. When I play a song with Windows MediaPlayer and adjust the simple graphic EQ while listening on TV at home, I rarely get more or less problems with the low end when increasing or decreasing 60Hz. 125 and 250Hz is a completely different story. Is 65Hz a particular area to watch if a mix has a low end? What we appear to agree unreservedly on is that he needs a subwoofer for each loudspeaker. Unfortunately this year's budget is spent, but I will put a sub on my wishlist for next year. Today's session left me with a mix that sounds reasonably well "everywhere", in the studio as well as at home, but composing, producing, mixing and mastering everything on your own leaves you kind of deaf to your own music. http://boomjinx.com/music/dark-0.mp3 If you hear room for improvement... I'm all ears! -BJ |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
First of all, let me say thank you _all_ for your replies.
It is more likely that the problem is that it is not easy to overwhelm those small Dynaudio boxes with anything, they just do it, I've been thinking the exact same thing. Although BM6a's and HD 600's are pretty accurate, their accuracy and abillity to reproduce sound well also makes it harder to identify the problems multimedia speakers and televisions reveal. His mix already has too much 65 Hz, that is why it sounds boomy on a wide range system. This is where I get just a little bit confused. 60Hz is, in my experience, one of the few "safe areas" in the low end. When I play a song with Windows MediaPlayer and adjust the simple graphic EQ while listening on TV at home, I rarely get more or less problems with the low end when increasing or decreasing 60Hz. 125 and 250Hz is a completely different story. Is 65Hz a particular area to watch if a mix has a low end? What we appear to agree unreservedly on is that he needs a subwoofer for each loudspeaker. Unfortunately this year's budget is spent, but I will put a sub on my wishlist for next year. Today's session left me with a mix that sounds reasonably well "everywhere", in the studio as well as at home, but composing, producing, mixing and mastering everything on your own leaves you kind of deaf to your own music. http://boomjinx.com/music/dark-0.mp3 If you hear room for improvement... I'm all ears! -BJ |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
This is where I get just a little bit confused. 60Hz is, in my experience,
one of the few "safe areas" in the low end. When I play a song with Windows MediaPlayer and adjust the simple graphic EQ while listening on TV at home, I rarely get more or less problems with the low end when increasing or decreasing 60Hz. That's because you can't hear what you're doing to the 60Hz on your TV. It's just not being reproduced, but you can certainly screw things up by adding 60Hz since its effect is going unnoticed on your TV speakers. There are no "safe" frequencies. You have to be aware of, & able to monitor all frequencies. Scott Fraser |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
This is where I get just a little bit confused. 60Hz is, in my experience,
one of the few "safe areas" in the low end. When I play a song with Windows MediaPlayer and adjust the simple graphic EQ while listening on TV at home, I rarely get more or less problems with the low end when increasing or decreasing 60Hz. That's because you can't hear what you're doing to the 60Hz on your TV. It's just not being reproduced, but you can certainly screw things up by adding 60Hz since its effect is going unnoticed on your TV speakers. There are no "safe" frequencies. You have to be aware of, & able to monitor all frequencies. Scott Fraser |
#18
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"ScotFraser" wrote in message
That's because you can't hear what you're doing to the 60Hz on your TV. It's just not being reproduced, but you can certainly screw things up by adding 60Hz since its effect is going unnoticed on your TV speakers. There are no "safe" frequencies. You have to be aware of, & able to monitor all frequencies. I see your point, but that's not what I mean. Even though multimedia speakers and televisions don't reproduce 60Hz in any reliable form, these are after all the systems that reveal the problems I bring home from the systems that do. Boosting 60Hz on a mix in the studio, both monitors and headphones will deal with that pretty well and fool me into thinking I'm having lots of sweet sub bass going on in my mix. I have to take one step back and keep multimedia speakers and televisions in mind, or obessively read analyzers not to overdo it. So... When I boost 60Hz playing a mix at home I don't seem to create these problems, but I definately get a bigger, non-boomy bass. Also, I've heard some really good mixes with enormous amounts of activity in the 50-60Hz area that don't suffer from any kind of boominess. BT's Tao of the Machine featuring The Roots is a perfect example of that, and this mix sounds rockin' on any system I've played it on. This is one of the reasons I believe the problem area is somewhere between 125 and 250Hz. -BJ |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"ScotFraser" wrote in message
That's because you can't hear what you're doing to the 60Hz on your TV. It's just not being reproduced, but you can certainly screw things up by adding 60Hz since its effect is going unnoticed on your TV speakers. There are no "safe" frequencies. You have to be aware of, & able to monitor all frequencies. I see your point, but that's not what I mean. Even though multimedia speakers and televisions don't reproduce 60Hz in any reliable form, these are after all the systems that reveal the problems I bring home from the systems that do. Boosting 60Hz on a mix in the studio, both monitors and headphones will deal with that pretty well and fool me into thinking I'm having lots of sweet sub bass going on in my mix. I have to take one step back and keep multimedia speakers and televisions in mind, or obessively read analyzers not to overdo it. So... When I boost 60Hz playing a mix at home I don't seem to create these problems, but I definately get a bigger, non-boomy bass. Also, I've heard some really good mixes with enormous amounts of activity in the 50-60Hz area that don't suffer from any kind of boominess. BT's Tao of the Machine featuring The Roots is a perfect example of that, and this mix sounds rockin' on any system I've played it on. This is one of the reasons I believe the problem area is somewhere between 125 and 250Hz. -BJ |
#20
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , BJ wrote:
I see your point, but that's not what I mean. Even though multimedia speakers and televisions don't reproduce 60Hz in any reliable form, these are after all the systems that reveal the problems I bring home from the systems that do. Boosting 60Hz on a mix in the studio, both monitors and headphones will deal with that pretty well and fool me into thinking I'm having lots of sweet sub bass going on in my mix. I have to take one step back and keep multimedia speakers and televisions in mind, or obessively read analyzers not to overdo it. So... When I boost 60Hz playing a mix at home I don't seem to create these problems, but I definately get a bigger, non-boomy bass. You are boosting a huge range when you use that filter. It's centered on 60 Hz, but it's very wide so there are many effects two or three octaves above. Also, I've heard some really good mixes with enormous amounts of activity in the 50-60Hz area that don't suffer from any kind of boominess. BT's Tao of the Machine featuring The Roots is a perfect example of that, and this mix sounds rockin' on any system I've played it on. This is one of the reasons I believe the problem area is somewhere between 125 and 250Hz. If you are having trouble in that area, I would start looking for problems both in your tracking room and in your monitoring room. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , BJ wrote:
I see your point, but that's not what I mean. Even though multimedia speakers and televisions don't reproduce 60Hz in any reliable form, these are after all the systems that reveal the problems I bring home from the systems that do. Boosting 60Hz on a mix in the studio, both monitors and headphones will deal with that pretty well and fool me into thinking I'm having lots of sweet sub bass going on in my mix. I have to take one step back and keep multimedia speakers and televisions in mind, or obessively read analyzers not to overdo it. So... When I boost 60Hz playing a mix at home I don't seem to create these problems, but I definately get a bigger, non-boomy bass. You are boosting a huge range when you use that filter. It's centered on 60 Hz, but it's very wide so there are many effects two or three octaves above. Also, I've heard some really good mixes with enormous amounts of activity in the 50-60Hz area that don't suffer from any kind of boominess. BT's Tao of the Machine featuring The Roots is a perfect example of that, and this mix sounds rockin' on any system I've played it on. This is one of the reasons I believe the problem area is somewhere between 125 and 250Hz. If you are having trouble in that area, I would start looking for problems both in your tracking room and in your monitoring room. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ wrote:
I believe the problem area is somewhere between 125 and 250Hz. I stand by what I posted. I know it is correct because I investigated what it would take to fix your mix and make it work on a system with good response to 30 Hz by doing just that. A single sub can not reproduce out of phase LF and thus not tell you whether out of phase LF is a problem with some recording some day and it will sound unnaturally dry on recordings with a real stereo image in the bass range. -BJ Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ wrote:
I believe the problem area is somewhere between 125 and 250Hz. I stand by what I posted. I know it is correct because I investigated what it would take to fix your mix and make it work on a system with good response to 30 Hz by doing just that. A single sub can not reproduce out of phase LF and thus not tell you whether out of phase LF is a problem with some recording some day and it will sound unnaturally dry on recordings with a real stereo image in the bass range. -BJ Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Also, I've heard some really good mixes with enormous amounts of activity in
the 50-60Hz area that don't suffer from any kind of boominess. Yes, & it's usually by clearing out some space in the next octave above. BT's Tao of the Machine featuring The Roots is a perfect example of that, and this mix sounds rockin' on any system I've played it on. This is one of the reasons I believe the problem area is somewhere between 125 and 250Hz. Yes, although 125 to 250 is a fairly big region. I find much of what muddies a mix in the presence of true low bass to be in the 140 to 180 range, sometimes up into 200 to 225. All depends on the harmonic structure of your bass instruments. Scott Fraser |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Also, I've heard some really good mixes with enormous amounts of activity in
the 50-60Hz area that don't suffer from any kind of boominess. Yes, & it's usually by clearing out some space in the next octave above. BT's Tao of the Machine featuring The Roots is a perfect example of that, and this mix sounds rockin' on any system I've played it on. This is one of the reasons I believe the problem area is somewhere between 125 and 250Hz. Yes, although 125 to 250 is a fairly big region. I find much of what muddies a mix in the presence of true low bass to be in the 140 to 180 range, sometimes up into 200 to 225. All depends on the harmonic structure of your bass instruments. Scott Fraser |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ wrote:
I am very interested in hearing your experiences dealing with or avoiding this in the mixing and mastering process. I didn't manage to download the song, but here's my experience: 1. If the song is poorly arranged or the bass sounds are not good, the end result will be no good, no matter what. 1. If the song is poorly arranged or the bass sounds are not good, the end result will be no good, no matter what. 2. I find EVERYTHING between 20 Hz and 8000 Hz matters. 3. Addendum to 2: ANYTHING with low frequency content (500 Hz) affects bass, this includes kick, bass, keyboards, (male) vocals, double bass, celli, low-tuned guitars, etc. 4. Cut low end (sub 80 - 120 Hz) from tracks that do not really need lots of bass. This will help the rest of them to cut through. 5. It's very easy to cut way too much around 200 - 300 Hz. (This is what I find many mastering engineers are often guilty of.) You'll end up with a harsh overall sound. 6. It's stupidly easy to boost too much at 50 - 70 Hz. Especially if you don't have speakers that extend to way below it. But there NEEDS to be enough of it if you're dealing with hip hop or electro or whatever. 7. I often find some added 80 Hz is nice on bass if it's going to be played in clubs, but you may have to cut at 50 - 70 or 100 - 250 to compensate. 8. Often, rule 7 is partially or completely wrong. Ears come in handy here. 9. Make sure you don't have similar "EQ curves" on both kick and bass. 10. Sometimes boosting as high as around 2 - 6 kHz may result in more defined bass (it's weird how our ears & brains work with harmonics). Sometimes I buss both kick and bass to a compressor (typically a Manley VoxBox) and set it to kill and mix that signal with the uncompressed one. Plus everything everyone else said about monitors and room. If you can't hear the bass, you can't mix it. If you are mixing for "big listening", you'll need propear speakers and preferably also a sub. Timo |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BJ wrote:
I am very interested in hearing your experiences dealing with or avoiding this in the mixing and mastering process. I didn't manage to download the song, but here's my experience: 1. If the song is poorly arranged or the bass sounds are not good, the end result will be no good, no matter what. 1. If the song is poorly arranged or the bass sounds are not good, the end result will be no good, no matter what. 2. I find EVERYTHING between 20 Hz and 8000 Hz matters. 3. Addendum to 2: ANYTHING with low frequency content (500 Hz) affects bass, this includes kick, bass, keyboards, (male) vocals, double bass, celli, low-tuned guitars, etc. 4. Cut low end (sub 80 - 120 Hz) from tracks that do not really need lots of bass. This will help the rest of them to cut through. 5. It's very easy to cut way too much around 200 - 300 Hz. (This is what I find many mastering engineers are often guilty of.) You'll end up with a harsh overall sound. 6. It's stupidly easy to boost too much at 50 - 70 Hz. Especially if you don't have speakers that extend to way below it. But there NEEDS to be enough of it if you're dealing with hip hop or electro or whatever. 7. I often find some added 80 Hz is nice on bass if it's going to be played in clubs, but you may have to cut at 50 - 70 or 100 - 250 to compensate. 8. Often, rule 7 is partially or completely wrong. Ears come in handy here. 9. Make sure you don't have similar "EQ curves" on both kick and bass. 10. Sometimes boosting as high as around 2 - 6 kHz may result in more defined bass (it's weird how our ears & brains work with harmonics). Sometimes I buss both kick and bass to a compressor (typically a Manley VoxBox) and set it to kill and mix that signal with the uncompressed one. Plus everything everyone else said about monitors and room. If you can't hear the bass, you can't mix it. If you are mixing for "big listening", you'll need propear speakers and preferably also a sub. Timo |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
mixing double bass, kick & el. bass | Pro Audio | |||
BASS_ Was: We're all a bunch of liars. | Pro Audio | |||
Taming boomy bass | High End Audio | |||
accurate bass from 6" monitor? | Pro Audio | |||
FS: SOUNDSTREAM CLOSEOUTS AND MORE!! | Car Audio |