[James[_7_]]

I tried recording some horns on separate tracks in Cakewalk and find
that when playing unison, they sound very phase-y. Why is this? Even
very good players aren't laser locked in unison and they don't sound
like that when recorded as a section. What causes this in a digital
recording? And what's a strategy to avoid it?

Thanks for all input.

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:49:06 -0700 (PDT), James
wrote:

I tried recording some horns on separate tracks in Cakewalk and find
that when playing unison, they sound very phase-y. Why is this? Even
very good players aren't laser locked in unison and they don't sound
like that when recorded as a section. What causes this in a digital
recording? And what's a strategy to avoid it?

By "separate tracks" and "a digital recording" do you mean that they
were recorded at different times? If so, how?

All the best,
Chris Hornbeck

[James[_7_]]

On Oct 20, 10:18*pm, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

By "separate tracks" and "a digital recording" do you mean that they
were recorded at different times? If so, how?


Record one horn part on track 1. Record another horn part on track 2,
etc.

A digital recording as in using Cakewalk.

[Scott Dorsey]

James wrote:
I tried recording some horns on separate tracks in Cakewalk and find
that when playing unison, they sound very phase-y. Why is this? Even
very good players aren't laser locked in unison and they don't sound
like that when recorded as a section. What causes this in a digital
recording? And what's a strategy to avoid it?

How did you mike them? Did you do one horn in each pass, or two
horns? Did you move them around a bit?

Did you apply limiting during recording?

Some good players CAN be locked right in during overdubs, and the only
solution is to nudge the time on the track a little bit. Normally changing
the position with respect to the mike during tracking is easier, though.

Limiting will tend to make problems like this worse, but I can't give a
good explanation why.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:25:41 -0700 (PDT), James
wrote:

By "separate tracks" and "a digital recording" do you mean that they
were recorded at different times? If so, how?


Record one horn part on track 1. Record another horn part on track 2,
etc.

A digital recording as in using Cakewalk.

So, the answer is "yes"? As in, they were recorded at separate times?
("Digital" ain't got nuttin' to do wit' it.)

If so, how was the second musician listening to the first? Details
matter...

All the best,
Chris Hornbeck

[hank alrich]

Chris Hornbeck wrote:

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:25:41 -0700 (PDT), James
wrote:

By "separate tracks" and "a digital recording" do you mean that they
were recorded at different times? If so, how?


Record one horn part on track 1. Record another horn part on track 2,
etc.

A digital recording as in using Cakewalk.

So, the answer is "yes"? As in, they were recorded at separate times?
("Digital" ain't got nuttin' to do wit' it.)

If so, how was the second musician listening to the first? Details
matter...

All the best,
Chris Hornbeck

And were they real horns, or samples?

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[James[_7_]]

On Oct 20, 10:43*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


How did you mike them? *


Well, "them" is me. As for how, Marshall MXL mic at various distances
from the bell of the horn.

Did you do one horn in each pass, or two
horns? *Did you move them around a bit?


One pass per track. Changing the angle to the mic doesn't seem to be
the magic bullet.



Did you apply limiting during recording?


Yes.


Some good players CAN be locked right in during overdubs,


What I was getting at when I mentioned this is the phasiness seems to
occur because of the slight variations of intonation, but no players
are ever perfectly in tune, which is what makes them sound like a
section. The problem seems to be something to do with the fact that
the origin of the sound is sonically separate, instead of being
recorded at the same time.

I even thought about recording both myself live and the previous track
to a new track to see if the DAW would treat this as if it were two
horns in the same space but so far it appears the software won't do
this. I don't know if this is the same thing as using "blend sound" in
a single track - which doesn't help.

-a few minutes later-

I just found that adding a 3rd horn to the unison line seems to help
quite a bit. Apparently it somehow masks or breaks up the phasing
effect.

[James[_7_]]

On Oct 20, 10:49*pm, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

If so, how was the second musician listening to the first? Details
matter...


See my reply to Scott Dorsey below.

[James[_7_]]

On Oct 21, 12:03*am, (hank alrich) wrote:

And were they real horns, or samples?


Real.

[Mike Rivers]

James wrote:
I tried recording some horns on separate tracks in Cakewalk and find
that when playing unison, they sound very phase-y. Why is this?

Because they're very close in pitch and time. I've heard this occurring
with singers who double their parts. It's more likely to occur if it's
the same singer or player doing both parts (which was the case with your
horns) since you have the phrasing in your head and tend to play it the
same way each time. If you got a different player in to play the second
part, he'd probably do it enough differently so that you wouldn't have
the same notes right on top of each other.

The way to fix this is to nudge one track relative to the other by about
5 milliseconds. That's far enough away so that the comb filter notches
occur in a less noticeable range, but no so far that it sounds like the
players aren't playing together.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Anahata]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:43:52 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Limiting will tend to make problems like this worse, but I can't give a
good explanation why.

Could it be that the "phasiness" is most apparent when the two sources
are at the same level - so if you limit them to the same level, that will
happen more of the time?

--
Anahata
==//== 01638 720444
http://www.treewind.co.uk ==//== http://www.myspace.com/maryanahata

[Arny Krueger]

"James" wrote in message


What I was getting at when I mentioned this is the
phasiness seems to occur because of the slight variations
of intonation, but no players are ever perfectly in tune,
which is what makes them sound like a section. The
problem seems to be something to do with the fact that
the origin of the sound is sonically separate, instead of
being recorded at the same time.

IME, a good ensemble of just about any kind of musician seems to have a way
to "lock in" with itself, even if not everybody is perfectly on the same
page. True for both vocalists and instrumentalists. I think that is what you
are missing.

This is an interactive process, and it is often the first thing to be lost
when recording overdubs.

[William Sommerwerck]

This might very well be perfectly natural.

If two hornists hit the same note and hold it, why _shouldn't_ the very
slight difference in pitch between the instruments be audible as a beat or
wobbling phase effect?

[James[_7_]]

On Oct 21, 8:18*am, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:
This might very well be perfectly natural.

If two hornists hit the same note and hold it, why _shouldn't_ the very
slight difference in pitch between the instruments be audible as a beat or
wobbling phase effect?


Sure, with live horns you'll hear certain phenomena on unison parts -
with trombones I've heard it referred to as a "B-52" effect, but this
is different.

[Chris Whealy]

James wrote:

I just found that adding a 3rd horn to the unison line seems to help
quite a bit. Apparently it somehow masks or breaks up the phasing
effect.

Congratulations! You've just discovered the secret behind why a
"section" of instruments is never a "pair".

If any two instruments play the same part, they will /always/ sound bad
together. Its like death and taxes - its just one of those facts of life.
In your case, you describe the badness as being phasey, but nonetheless
you'll hear similarly unpleasant effects if you had a pair of violins or
clarinets or cellos.

This is because the ear is very sensitive to small pitch differences in
a pair of similar signals. The brain's perception of these differences
can be reduced by adding a third (and preferably a fourth) copy of the
signal. Now the brain cannot determine the difference between a pair of
these signals, because it is masked by the presence of the third signal.

Now add a fourth version of the signal and the brain will find it
totally impossible to distinguish the mismatched pair it heard at
first. Instead, it will simply perceive the overall average pitch - and
this is the sound we get from a section of instruments. If you add a
fourth copy of your trumpet line, you'll hear a real horn section sound.

I have exactly this problem at my church where we have two violins and a
cello. I have had to specifically ask the music arranger not to score
the two violins on the same part, but instead, give them separate
harmony lines. Even though they're both good violinists, if they play
the same part together, it sounds like the proverbial neighbour's cat on
the back fence serenading the ladies at 3AM....

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:49:06 -0700 (PDT), James
wrote:

I tried recording some horns on separate tracks in Cakewalk and find
that when playing unison, they sound very phase-y. Why is this? Even
very good players aren't laser locked in unison and they don't sound
like that when recorded as a section. What causes this in a digital
recording? And what's a strategy to avoid it?

Thanks for all input.

You get the phasey sound when they're TOO much in unison. If they're
sampled or MIDI sounds, use different patches for each sample, also
reconsider whether doubling a line sounds better than just having it
once.

If they're live - there's a few possible problems and you haven't
really given us enough information to know which one you've got.

If they were all recorded on one pass, but into separate microphones
this could be a spill problem.

Was it multi-pass, the same player on the same instrument each time?
How many times? One sounds good, two tend to just sound out of tune,
three and more start sounding better again.

[Mike Rivers]

anahata wrote:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:43:52 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Could it be that the "phasiness" is most apparent when the two sources
are at the same level - so if you limit them to the same level, that will
happen more of the time?

The comb filter notches are deepest when the two signals are of equal
amplitude.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Anahata]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:16:54 +0100, Chris Whealy wrote:

I have exactly this problem at my church where we have two violins and a
cello. I have had to specifically ask the music arranger not to score
the two violins on the same part, but instead, give them separate
harmony lines.

If a melody line needs to be reinforced by doubling the part, it's much
more effective if they are an octave apart. This would also avoid the
phase interaction problem as the harmonic structures are just too
different to create that sort of interference.

--
Anahata
==//== 01638 720444
http://www.treewind.co.uk ==//== http://www.myspace.com/maryanahata

[Chris Whealy]

anahata wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:16:54 +0100, Chris Whealy wrote:


I have exactly this problem at my church where we have two violins and a
cello. I have had to specifically ask the music arranger not to score
the two violins on the same part, but instead, give them separate
harmony lines.


If a melody line needs to be reinforced by doubling the part, it's much
more effective if they are an octave apart. This would also avoid the
phase interaction problem as the harmonic structures are just too
different to create that sort of interference.


True - that's another way of solving the problem if only two players are
available.

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Scott Dorsey]

James wrote:
On Oct 20, 10:43=A0pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

How did you mike them? =A0

Well, "them" is me. As for how, Marshall MXL mic at various distances
from the bell of the horn.

Did you do one horn in each pass, or two
horns? =A0Did you move them around a bit?

One pass per track. Changing the angle to the mic doesn't seem to be
the magic bullet.

Changing the distance will help. But the real key is to keep layering more
and more on.

Some good players CAN be locked right in during overdubs,
What I was getting at when I mentioned this is the phasiness seems to
occur because of the slight variations of intonation, but no players
are ever perfectly in tune, which is what makes them sound like a
section. The problem seems to be something to do with the fact that
the origin of the sound is sonically separate, instead of being
recorded at the same time.

No, because you can sometimes hear two performers doing the same thing live.

I just found that adding a 3rd horn to the unison line seems to help
quite a bit. Apparently it somehow masks or breaks up the phasing
effect.

Oh, I didn't realize you were only doing two layers. Try a minimum of
five.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

James wrote:
On Oct 20, 10:43=A0pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

How did you mike them? =A0

Well, "them" is me. *As for how, Marshall MXL mic at various distances
from the bell of the horn.


Are they both tracks of the same instrument? If so, all advice is out
the window : ) This will easily happen no mater what you do if it's
the same horn. Even same player, same mic, same everything will be
less phasey if you switch horns. Same horn and there will be more
phasiness even if you switch everything else.

[RD Jones]

James wrote:

I just found that adding a 3rd horn to the unison line seems to help
quite a bit. Apparently it somehow masks or breaks up the phasing
effect.

On Oct 21, 10:16 am, Chris Whealy wrote:
Congratulations! *You've just discovered the secret behind why a
"section" of instruments is never a "pair".

Now add a fourth version of the signal and the brain will find it
totally impossible to distinguish the mismatched pair it heard at
first. *Instead, it will simply perceive the overall average pitch - and
this is the sound we get from a section of instruments. *If you add a
fourth copy of your trumpet line, you'll hear a real horn section sound.

Isn't the traditional arrangement of a standard horn section
5 saxes, 4 trumpets and 4 'bones ? There must be a reason
it evolved this way and I don't think it's because the horns
couldn't be heard.

I think there have been times where I heard a bit of 'phasieness'
in Chicago stuff (2 trumpets).

rd

[Chris Whealy]

RD Jones wrote:
Isn't the traditional arrangement of a standard horn section
5 saxes, 4 trumpets and 4 'bones ? There must be a reason
it evolved this way and I don't think it's because the horns
couldn't be heard.

I think there have been times where I heard a bit of 'phasieness'
in Chicago stuff (2 trumpets).


True. Two higher pitched instruments tend to sound phasey together,
whereas with two lower pitch instruments, you'll hear a beat frequency.

'Bone players refer to this beat frequency as "B52-ing".

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[James[_7_]]

On Oct 22, 10:19*pm, RD Jones wrote:

I think there have been times where I heard a bit of 'phasieness'
in Chicago stuff (2 trumpets).


AFAIK Chicago's horn section has always been 1 tpt, 1 Sax, 1 bone.

[Randy Yates]

"Arny Krueger" writes:

"James" wrote in message


What I was getting at when I mentioned this is the
phasiness seems to occur because of the slight variations
of intonation, but no players are ever perfectly in tune,
which is what makes them sound like a section. The
problem seems to be something to do with the fact that
the origin of the sound is sonically separate, instead of
being recorded at the same time.

IME, a good ensemble of just about any kind of musician seems to have a way
to "lock in" with itself, even if not everybody is perfectly on the same
page. True for both vocalists and instrumentalists. I think that is what you
are missing.

This is an interactive process, and it is often the first thing to be lost
when recording overdubs.

I think you may be right Arnie, but I'm not sure. At first I thought the
other theory (the ear is more critical of just two pitches) was
feasible, but after thinking about it, it seems this could be the real
reason.

It's funny that someone already mentioned one of the examples I was
going to give - the old Chicago material; seems like there were several
instances when there were just two trumpets and, while they had a
"chorale", they still sounded damned good. Another example is the old
Average White Band piece "Pick up the Pieces." That definitely sounds
like just two saxes to me, but they sound *great*!
--
% Randy Yates % "Remember the good old 1980's, when
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % things were so uncomplicated?"
%%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon'
%%%% % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[Randy Yates]

Randy Yates writes:

the old Chicago material; seems like there were several
instances when there were just two trumpets and, while they had a
"chorale", they still sounded damned good.

The introduction to "Just You N' Me", for example.
--
% Randy Yates % "Watching all the days go by...
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % Who are you and who am I?"
%%% 919-577-9882 % 'Mission (A World Record)',
%%%% % *A New World Record*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[Geoff]

Chris Whealy wrote:
RD Jones wrote:
Isn't the traditional arrangement of a standard horn section
5 saxes, 4 trumpets and 4 'bones ? There must be a reason
it evolved this way and I don't think it's because the horns
couldn't be heard.

I think there have been times where I heard a bit of 'phasieness'
in Chicago stuff (2 trumpets).


True. Two higher pitched instruments tend to sound phasey together,
whereas with two lower pitch instruments, you'll hear a beat
frequency.

Even a double-tracked voice can easily sound phasey, especially if the
vocalist is consistantly very tight in pitch and timing.

geoff

[[email protected]]

On 2008-10-23 said:
It's funny that someone already mentioned one of the examples I was
going to give - the old Chicago material; seems like there were
several instances when there were just two trumpets and, while they
had a "chorale", they still sounded damned good. Another example is
the old Average White Band piece "Pick up the Pieces." That
definitely sounds like just two saxes to me, but they sound *great*!
SOmebody mentioned elseewhere this thread that CHicago might
have been 1 trumpet; 1 bone 1 sax. IF so I think the
trumpet player did some double tracking. SOmebody involved
with those sessions could correct me on this I'm sure g.

THe AVerage white band piece mentioned: SOmetimes those
saxes were unison and sometimes harmonizing with each other
iirc.

Btw that AWB tune ends up being brain worm music once in
awhile. still a good tune decades later!!!




Richard webb,
replace anything before at with elspider

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--- Benjamin Franklin, NOvember 1755 from the
Historical review of Pennsylvania