Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Piano Concerto - Mix UPDATE! Comparison with/without Slate VTM/VCC
#1
Hi,

I did a little update to my mix.

I used this to do a comparision between a mix with Slate Virtual Tape Machine and Virtual Console Collection and without these saturation plugins. I'm interested in what these plugins can do to a classical orchestral kind of music.

The two mixes are identical except the use of VTM and VCC.
Settings of VTM:
FG456, 15IPS, 16Track on all Tracks
FG9, 30IPS, 2Track on MasterBuss
No Noise

Settings VCC:
Brit 4k G on all Tracks and MasterBus
Noise Reduction

Levels are matched as good as I can.

Which one do you like more?

regards,
Guido



.mp3    PianoConcerto_Edit171129_VTM+VCC_level.mp3 --  (Download: 19.15 MB)


.mp3    PianoConcerto_Edit171129_clean_level.mp3 --  (Download: 19.1 MB)


Reply
#2
Wonderful. Can you explain your approach? Did you use only natural room or did you augment? Your piano is wonderfully present and the orchestra very wide, full and detailed.
PreSonus Studio One DAW
[email protected]
Reply
#3
Hi Mixinthecloud,

thank you very much for your nice comment!
Yes, of course I can explain.

I did not use the Outtrigger- and Hall-Pair microphones, just "Main" and "Spots".

I eqd the main mic by removing the midrange (-6..-7dB about 450Hz). Especially the piano has lot of energy in this range on the main mic. And adding a little bit of high frequencies. As a result the main mic should sound good on its own.

The spot mics should just add a little bit of definition and clearity. To achieve that, I took a highpass on all the spot between 250 - 400 Hz. Again reducing some mids around 700Hz and add highs.
To compensate the distance between the spots and the main mic, I delayed the spots by ear (6ms Piano, 10ms Strings and 12ms Horns)
The stereo image of the horns-spotmics is very wide, so I reduced it.

The fader of the spot mics are: Strings -16db, Horns -5db, Piano -2dB)

At the end there is a Lexicon PCM RandomHall 1,7sec on the MasterBus.

No compression or automation.

I hope this explanation was understandable. Smile

best regards,
Guido

Reply
#4
(28-11-2017, 10:19 AM)jphrameau Wrote: Hi Mixinthecloud,

thank you very much for your nice comment!
Yes, of course I can explain.

I did not use the Outtrigger- and Hall-Pair microphones, just "Main" and "Spots".

I eqd the main mic by removing the midrange (-6..-7dB about 450Hz). Especially the piano has lot of energy in this range on the main mic. And adding a little bit of high frequencies. As a result the main mic should sound good on its own.

The spot mics should just add a little bit of definition and clearity. To achieve that, I took a highpass on all the spot between 250 - 400 Hz. Again reducing some mids around 700Hz and add highs.
To compensate the distance between the spots and the main mic, I delayed the spots by ear (6ms Piano, 10ms Strings and 12ms Horns)
The stereo image of the horns-spotmics is very wide, so I reduced it.

The fader of the spot mics are: Strings -16db, Horns -5db, Piano -2dB)

At the end there is a Lexicon PCM RandomHall 1,7sec on the MasterBus.

No compression or automation.

I hope this explanation was understandable. Smile

best regards,
Guido

Guido,
Thanks for the info. Interesting you decided to do some time alignment and to eliminate to hall and 'outrigger' pairs. Can't argue with your results though.
PreSonus Studio One DAW
[email protected]
Reply
#5
Hi,

time alignment between spots and mains is a very established practice in recording and mixing orchestral music.

You can here the difference on the piano.
Try out different delay times and you will here the attack of the piano ist clearer and more defined with a right time alignment. In addition to that the piano will sound more in the front of the mix.

regards,
Guido
Reply