| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
"Kalle L." wrote:
- if you have any additional thoughts/tips for me, I would be interested in hearing them! I'm not familiar with mixing live recordings, only done mixing of studio recordings before. Draw a map of the stage setup, you should aim for keeping the left-right placements of things, do not try to pan anything across the center-line, rather try to recreate the imaginary "no pa" panorama of the stage. Go easy on individual channel compression because it will modulate also the ambience contribution from that channel. Kalle Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 27 Sep 2004 10:27:25 -0400, (Mike Rivers)
wrote: Here's the most practical tip you'll get. Forget transferring the files to Cubase. Plug the recorder outputs into a mixing console, mix to stereo, and record the stereo mix in Cubase. Then edit and tweak. Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Surely this just tells us that YOU are happier mixing on a console? CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect |
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 27 Sep 2004 10:27:25 -0400, (Mike Rivers)
wrote: Here's the most practical tip you'll get. Forget transferring the files to Cubase. Plug the recorder outputs into a mixing console, mix to stereo, and record the stereo mix in Cubase. Then edit and tweak. Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Surely this just tells us that YOU are happier mixing on a console? CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect |
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 27 Sep 2004 23:57:19 -0700, (Kalle L.) wrote:
Plus with this project, I really want to tweak things, and try to make it as fault-free as possible, musically too. There isn't too much leakage, so I can keep the erroneous licks, notes etc. down a bit, while bringing up some other instrument(s). Having a 9-guy -band enables a bit of that, there's always something interesting going on. I hope the band approve of your musical megalomania. Perhaps they'd rather hear what they played? CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect |
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:05:58 +0300, "Kalle"
wrote: The main delay with this project is that I'm waiting my new soundcard from the supplier... should arrive next week. Meanwhile, I can't do anything about this. Except the transfer, which is now done. You can start mixing with any old sound card. As the end result will doubtless be a wav file, it's only being used for monitoring. CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect |
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:05:58 +0300, "Kalle"
wrote: The main delay with this project is that I'm waiting my new soundcard from the supplier... should arrive next week. Meanwhile, I can't do anything about this. Except the transfer, which is now done. You can start mixing with any old sound card. As the end result will doubtless be a wav file, it's only being used for monitoring. CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect |
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Laurence Payne wrote: On 27 Sep 2004 10:27:25 -0400, (Mike Rivers) wrote: Here's the most practical tip you'll get. Forget transferring the files to Cubase. Plug the recorder outputs into a mixing console, mix to stereo, and record the stereo mix in Cubase. Then edit and tweak. Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Surely this just tells us that YOU are happier mixing on a console? I'm happier mixing on a console too. I advise the original poster to try it. Either you'll find it easier or not, but you won't know until you try. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Laurence Payne wrote: On 27 Sep 2004 10:27:25 -0400, (Mike Rivers) wrote: Here's the most practical tip you'll get. Forget transferring the files to Cubase. Plug the recorder outputs into a mixing console, mix to stereo, and record the stereo mix in Cubase. Then edit and tweak. Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Surely this just tells us that YOU are happier mixing on a console? I'm happier mixing on a console too. I advise the original poster to try it. Either you'll find it easier or not, but you won't know until you try. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1096284470k@trad Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? |
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1096284470k@trad Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? |
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1096928927k@trad In article writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. |
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1096928927k@trad In article writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. |
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
|
Laurence Payne wrote:
On 27 Sep 2004 23:57:19 -0700, (Kalle L.) wrote: Plus with this project, I really want to tweak things, and try to make it as fault-free as possible, musically too. There isn't too much leakage, so I can keep the erroneous licks, notes etc. down a bit, while bringing up some other instrument(s). Having a 9-guy -band enables a bit of that, there's always something interesting going on. I hope the band approve of your musical megalomania. Perhaps they'd rather hear what they played? There is also the issue of the image changes that will be caused by gain riding, some of the very first advice in this thread was to aim for static faders so as to keep the ambience contribution constant. Sound engineering mostly is NOT about doing as much as possible, but rather about doing as little as possible. CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Laurence Payne wrote:
On 27 Sep 2004 23:57:19 -0700, (Kalle L.) wrote: Plus with this project, I really want to tweak things, and try to make it as fault-free as possible, musically too. There isn't too much leakage, so I can keep the erroneous licks, notes etc. down a bit, while bringing up some other instrument(s). Having a 9-guy -band enables a bit of that, there's always something interesting going on. I hope the band approve of your musical megalomania. Perhaps they'd rather hear what they played? There is also the issue of the image changes that will be caused by gain riding, some of the very first advice in this thread was to aim for static faders so as to keep the ambience contribution constant. Sound engineering mostly is NOT about doing as much as possible, but rather about doing as little as possible. CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote: "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1096928927k@trad In article writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. This is a problem, but it's also a problem when mixing with a real console too. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. Probably has more to do with the bands than your miking. Dealing with a heavy backline changes everything, and sadly not for the better. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote: "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1096928927k@trad In article writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. This is a problem, but it's also a problem when mixing with a real console too. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. Probably has more to do with the bands than your miking. Dealing with a heavy backline changes everything, and sadly not for the better. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#61
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#62
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter Larsen wrote in message ...
Laurence Payne wrote: On 27 Sep 2004 23:57:19 -0700, (Kalle L.) wrote: Plus with this project, I really want to tweak things, and try to make it as fault-free as possible, musically too. There isn't too much leakage, so I can keep the erroneous licks, notes etc. down a bit, while bringing up some other instrument(s). Having a 9-guy -band enables a bit of that, there's always something interesting going on. I hope the band approve of your musical megalomania. Perhaps they'd rather hear what they played? There is also the issue of the image changes that will be caused by gain riding, some of the very first advice in this thread was to aim for static faders so as to keep the ambience contribution constant. Sound engineering mostly is NOT about doing as much as possible, but rather about doing as little as possible. CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect Kind regards Peter Larsen Doing live recordings is nearly as thankless as live sound. Hard to satisfy people. I generally give client a rough mix that just sets pan and without a bunch of twidding around, but one that attempts, sometimes from a bit of equing and compression, to balance the sound. They often then want a bunch of tweaking but certainly if you do it without first giving them a shot at listening they may be ****ed. Next what happens is after head honcho says do this and mix that the other musicians a PO'd about their place in the mix etc. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#63
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter Larsen wrote in message ...
Laurence Payne wrote: On 27 Sep 2004 23:57:19 -0700, (Kalle L.) wrote: Plus with this project, I really want to tweak things, and try to make it as fault-free as possible, musically too. There isn't too much leakage, so I can keep the erroneous licks, notes etc. down a bit, while bringing up some other instrument(s). Having a 9-guy -band enables a bit of that, there's always something interesting going on. I hope the band approve of your musical megalomania. Perhaps they'd rather hear what they played? There is also the issue of the image changes that will be caused by gain riding, some of the very first advice in this thread was to aim for static faders so as to keep the ambience contribution constant. Sound engineering mostly is NOT about doing as much as possible, but rather about doing as little as possible. CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect Kind regards Peter Larsen Doing live recordings is nearly as thankless as live sound. Hard to satisfy people. I generally give client a rough mix that just sets pan and without a bunch of twidding around, but one that attempts, sometimes from a bit of equing and compression, to balance the sound. They often then want a bunch of tweaking but certainly if you do it without first giving them a shot at listening they may be ****ed. Next what happens is after head honcho says do this and mix that the other musicians a PO'd about their place in the mix etc. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#64
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1096928927k@trad In article writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. Maybe he is referring to a stereo mix? Or the drum mics? Not sure. You can definately hear the difference between tracks. But there is leakage. As I said before, too much leakage can make the recording sound muddy. Usually prettuy curable with equing. Gating can work to but as others stated it messes with teh ambient imagery. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#65
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1096928927k@trad In article writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. Maybe he is referring to a stereo mix? Or the drum mics? Not sure. You can definately hear the difference between tracks. But there is leakage. As I said before, too much leakage can make the recording sound muddy. Usually prettuy curable with equing. Gating can work to but as others stated it messes with teh ambient imagery. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#66
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1096928927k@trad In article writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. More likely the mics then the technique I would think? Heavier, louder rock, close micing becomes more important. Vocal mics can have massive bleed. Can turn into total mud. I had some people using side fill monitors on a shallow stage and they bled into the guitar cab mics a lot and totally ruined one guitar track. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#67
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1096928927k@trad In article writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. More likely the mics then the technique I would think? Heavier, louder rock, close micing becomes more important. Vocal mics can have massive bleed. Can turn into total mud. I had some people using side fill monitors on a shallow stage and they bled into the guitar cab mics a lot and totally ruined one guitar track. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#68
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote: arnyk writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. If this is the stuff happening in your church then given your previous discussion of what is being used for stage mons you haven't enough going on SPL-wise to meet the type of problems folks running sound for more serious backlines meet. -- ha |
|
#69
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote: arnyk writes: Live tracks aren't a particularly good source for learning how to operate a DAW as a mixer. Reason being???? Too much leakage to tell one track from another. I do mixdowns of live recordings all the time, and leakage just isn't a problem. You'll do too much fiddling on a DAW trying to fix this and you won't be able to do it. Nobody can resist. The force is too strong. IME, not a problem. Must be my micing technique. If this is the stuff happening in your church then given your previous discussion of what is being used for stage mons you haven't enough going on SPL-wise to meet the type of problems folks running sound for more serious backlines meet. -- ha |
|
#70
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have enjoyed reading this thread. A couple of weeks ago I recorded
a 6 piece jazz group in a club to a single DA88. A turned out quite well. Here are a few things that I can sha I mic'ed everything seperately. In otherwords, the PA had its set of mics and I had my set. With only 8 tracks (actually 7 since the keyboard was a split off the DI), this was not too awkward. This allowed me to use mics that would not have been appropriate for SR. Bleed is good. In fact, there were two horn players. The sax got a BLUE Lollipop/452EB and the trumpet got an MD409. The BLUE picks off tonnes of off-axis sound while the 409 has an extremely tight pattern and there was very little there but trumpet. I wish I had also used a BLUE Lolli on the trumpet because the bleed filled in very nicely on the sax, and having two up at the front would have served as a nice "main pair". I mixed from a harddrive through analog with automation. Being able to edit was good since I "fixed" some flubbed notes. I have to admit that it was the trumpet player, so having a tight pattern served me well. (Bleed is bad?). Automation is useful, as long as it doesn't slow you down. Next time, I will set up my postition further from the band. They were so damn loud that I couldn't really monitor much from the headphones. Basically once I figured everything was working correctly, I left the headphones on with no sound in them. To protect my hearing. Rob R. |
|
#71
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have enjoyed reading this thread. A couple of weeks ago I recorded
a 6 piece jazz group in a club to a single DA88. A turned out quite well. Here are a few things that I can sha I mic'ed everything seperately. In otherwords, the PA had its set of mics and I had my set. With only 8 tracks (actually 7 since the keyboard was a split off the DI), this was not too awkward. This allowed me to use mics that would not have been appropriate for SR. Bleed is good. In fact, there were two horn players. The sax got a BLUE Lollipop/452EB and the trumpet got an MD409. The BLUE picks off tonnes of off-axis sound while the 409 has an extremely tight pattern and there was very little there but trumpet. I wish I had also used a BLUE Lolli on the trumpet because the bleed filled in very nicely on the sax, and having two up at the front would have served as a nice "main pair". I mixed from a harddrive through analog with automation. Being able to edit was good since I "fixed" some flubbed notes. I have to admit that it was the trumpet player, so having a tight pattern served me well. (Bleed is bad?). Automation is useful, as long as it doesn't slow you down. Next time, I will set up my postition further from the band. They were so damn loud that I couldn't really monitor much from the headphones. Basically once I figured everything was working correctly, I left the headphones on with no sound in them. To protect my hearing. Rob R. |
|
#72
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Rob Reedijk wrote: I have enjoyed reading this thread. A couple of weeks ago I recorded a 6 piece jazz group in a club to a single DA88. A turned out quite well. Here are a few things that I can sha [snip] Glad to hear it went well! There's always a lot of hauling and sweat involved in remote recording, and it's nice when you get something nice for all your work. Next time, I will set up my postition further from the band. They were so damn loud that I couldn't really monitor much from the headphones. Basically once I figured everything was working correctly, I left the headphones on with no sound in them. To protect my hearing. I'm not sure you'll do much better trying to monitor far away, and you might have to use much longer mike cables. My plan is usually to roll a minute of them performing at soundcheck / setup and try to see how well it'll mix. I'll make adjustments, perhaps tweak their monitoring (if you're providing any) and try another short pass. After things have settled own, my goal is to listen for broken equipment or other exotic problems, and try not to futz with the knob settings so that the recording is technically consistent from start to finish. It's just not possible to monitor IMHO unless you're in another room entirely, so I basically forget about that and just print good tracks. In a club setting, the above technique might not be practical, so I'll just use "standard" mike positions and hope for the best. With a multimiked recording, this often works out just fine; it's with the array / single pair recordings that you really want to tweak the pair before you record, since there is so little you can do after the fact. Best of luck, Monte McGuire |
|
#73
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Rob Reedijk wrote: I have enjoyed reading this thread. A couple of weeks ago I recorded a 6 piece jazz group in a club to a single DA88. A turned out quite well. Here are a few things that I can sha [snip] Glad to hear it went well! There's always a lot of hauling and sweat involved in remote recording, and it's nice when you get something nice for all your work. Next time, I will set up my postition further from the band. They were so damn loud that I couldn't really monitor much from the headphones. Basically once I figured everything was working correctly, I left the headphones on with no sound in them. To protect my hearing. I'm not sure you'll do much better trying to monitor far away, and you might have to use much longer mike cables. My plan is usually to roll a minute of them performing at soundcheck / setup and try to see how well it'll mix. I'll make adjustments, perhaps tweak their monitoring (if you're providing any) and try another short pass. After things have settled own, my goal is to listen for broken equipment or other exotic problems, and try not to futz with the knob settings so that the recording is technically consistent from start to finish. It's just not possible to monitor IMHO unless you're in another room entirely, so I basically forget about that and just print good tracks. In a club setting, the above technique might not be practical, so I'll just use "standard" mike positions and hope for the best. With a multimiked recording, this often works out just fine; it's with the array / single pair recordings that you really want to tweak the pair before you record, since there is so little you can do after the fact. Best of luck, Monte McGuire |
|
#74
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rob Reedijk wrote:
Next time, I will set up my postition further from the band. They were so damn loud that I couldn't really monitor much from the headphones. Get some earplugs, wear them for the entire event, also under the headphones OR get etymotic headphones, reportedly they double as valid ear protection. Basically once I figured everything was working correctly, I left the headphones on with no sound in them. To protect my hearing. Commonly used, and frequently very well advised emergency ploy. You are generally better off wearing the ear protection in advance, so that your hearing has adjusted to it and keeping it on. It is very useful to put a wee tiny marker on the headphone volume control for max wise setting while at home or at the very least to make a mental note of it. A physical marker seems to stick better than mental notes .... Rob R. Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
|
#75
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rob Reedijk wrote:
Next time, I will set up my postition further from the band. They were so damn loud that I couldn't really monitor much from the headphones. Get some earplugs, wear them for the entire event, also under the headphones OR get etymotic headphones, reportedly they double as valid ear protection. Basically once I figured everything was working correctly, I left the headphones on with no sound in them. To protect my hearing. Commonly used, and frequently very well advised emergency ploy. You are generally better off wearing the ear protection in advance, so that your hearing has adjusted to it and keeping it on. It is very useful to put a wee tiny marker on the headphone volume control for max wise setting while at home or at the very least to make a mental note of it. A physical marker seems to stick better than mental notes .... Rob R. Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * ******************************************* |
|
#76
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rob Reedijk wrote in message I have enjoyed reading this thread. A couple of weeks ago I recorded
a 6 piece jazz group in a club to a single DA88. A turned out quite well. Glad that this thead could be of help and interest to you... it has been for me. I thought I'd give the update of where I'm now with this thing. Maybe boring for the real pro's, but at least they'll get a laugh out of it  I have now mixed roughly about 1/3 of the songs. I have to say that this project is a very interesting one: I get to mix the music I love, I have some kind of reference mixes (remember this is a cover band), and there was enough 'errors' in the performances & sounds to keep me busy while mixing  So, I did transfer all the tracks from the Alesis HD24. Alesis was perfect for the recording purposes, since this is a big band, and we needed a lot of mic's in the first place. So the mixer had to be big, and this particular one had insert points in all its channels. So every channel could be routed to dry to Alesis, each track separately. Pretty ideal. Especially for a band that hasn't rehearsed too much, and still is figuring who is playing what at what time. This way the post-gig mixing can have more of an arrangement role. Once the tracks were in DAW, I imported them into Cubase SX. Easy, and the tracks were in sync perfectly. I checked the waveforms...they were not perfect (in bass guitar's case far from it), but this was due a too short soundcheck and lack of time when checking the recording levels. Next, I panned the tracks, and did some serious eq'uing to find a place for all the instruments in the soundscape. Bleed didn't help, but wasn't overbearable. Next, I listened almost the whole gig, and set the rough levels, and experimented with plug-ins and tried to tweak the instuments some more to find their character which was more prominent in some tracks than in some others. I decided on the final drum sounds & levels. I find that I have now applied some heavy compressor settings to suprisingly many tracks, mostly vocals, sax and bass. I also created a 'solo instruments' track, where I would cut and paste all the solos (guitars, harmonica) to, and panned it center. For this track I used 'stronger' effects like delays. This helps me not having to automate the panning & effects of individual tracks while the instruments in them are playing solos. Plus it's easier to control one solo track. Now, having the whole gig in the Cubase project, I started to mix the songs, one by one. I use 100% automation. Basically, this phase doesn't seem to differ from mixing of studio recordings. I seem to mix about 2-4 songs in during an (intense) evening. I find that I edit a bit, using mute pretty often. Although there was bleed, muting certain tracks can still be done at times, although you have to pay attention when the mute starts and ends. I prefer to time them when a section of a song changes to another. Also, I've have copied and added some snare hits where some were missing, but only a few. The flow of the music has to be pretty natural-sounding, that what makes it sound like 'live' and good. IMHO, of course What I've learned so far? Many things, actually I'm learning all the time. But, in hindsight, I should have paid more attention to avoid bleed during mic'ing. Also, I should have put up some mic's pointing at the audience from the stage. Instead, I pointed them from the mixing desk to the stage. This way, I didn't get the audience response OR the reverbs of the room. Mixing with automation within DAW was definitely the right choice (for me). I'm used to it, at there are so many simultaneous tweaks, in too many instruments I have to do, that automating was the way to go. Also, I've found that applying reverbs to individual tracks seem to work well, insted of trying to re-create to room in the mastering phase. Best Regards, Kalle |
|
#77
|
|||
|
|||
|
I hope the band approve of your musical megalomania. Perhaps they'd
rather hear what they played? I guess I could make them a mix of only the room mic's, that way they could hear the mix as it was live. But this is precisely what they are bored of. Now we need a recording that sounds as good as possible, produced if needed...good both sound- and performance-wise, something that would could be listened over and over again. The energy was there when it was recorded, now we just need to release that on the CD in the correct light. I'm sure after years of audience recordings, there are no bloated egos with everyone wanting every note they played to be heard on the recording. regards, Kalle |
|
#78
|
|||
|
|||
|
Monte McGuire wrote:
In article , Rob Reedijk wrote: I have enjoyed reading this thread. A couple of weeks ago I recorded a 6 piece jazz group in a club to a single DA88. A turned out quite Glad to hear it went well! There's always a lot of hauling and sweat involved in remote recording, and it's nice when you get something nice for all your work. Actually, this was one of my lighter setups. I recently did a full 16 track remote at a cottage where I had complete setup: monitors, Multiple mix headphone system, talkback speaker, mixdown capability. I set up a separate control room. But I was there for a week. Now that fills a large SUV! But wow, did I have a some happy clients. No club gig was one SKB case, a smaller mixer, some mic stands and bag with some mics etc. It was almost as easy to haul as the classical recording rigs I do. Next time, I will set up my postition further from the band. They were so damn loud that I couldn't really monitor much from the headphones. Basically once I figured everything was working correctly, I left the headphones on with no sound in them. To protect my hearing. I'm not sure you'll do much better trying to monitor far away, and you might have to use much longer mike cables. I think you are right. My plan is usually to roll a minute of them performing at soundcheck / setup and try to see how well it'll mix. I'll make adjustments, perhaps tweak their monitoring (if you're providing any) and try another short pass. After things have settled own, my goal is to listen for broken equipment or other exotic problems, and try not to futz with the knob settings so that the recording is technically consistent from start to finish. This was pretty much what I did. Except we had a last minute change in that the percussionist had one of those boxes they use in Flamenco: they sit on it and there is a soundhole at the back. I grabbed one of the drum overheads and positioned it. But it was inappropriate for the instrument, and there is a suprising amount of air movement coming out of the sound hole. Live and learn... It's just not possible to monitor IMHO unless you're in another room entirely, so I basically forget about that and just print good tracks. In a club setting, the above technique might not be practical, so I'll just use "standard" mike positions and hope for the best. With a multimiked recording, this often works out just fine; it's with the array / single pair recordings that you really want to tweak the pair before you record, since there is so little you can do after the fact. Thanks Monte. Your posts are always very informative. Rob R. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| on topic: we need a rec.audio.pro.ot newsgroup! | Pro Audio | |||
| Artists cut out the record biz | Pro Audio | |||
| DNC Schedule of Events | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
