Girls With Glasses - HB Mix

[HbGuitar]

Bit of a Tom Petty vibe going on with this one
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New version, mix_02 uploaded

[klangbild]

Hi,
first, the mix of the instruments is very balanced.
For me the drums need more widening in the stereo field and the whole mix some more depth.
The sound seems a bit "metallic". It is the 4 khz?

Greetings,
Martin

[HbGuitar]

Thanks for listening and for your feedback

[The_Metallurgist]

yo Hb,
mind if ask what reverbs you are using to place the instruments, and whether you are using presets and applying EQ in any way, for example. this isn't really connected to Martin's "...mix needs more depth" statement though because i don't think it's so much a case of adding more depth per se, but perhaps more about employing a different strategy in order to deliver your illusion of space [in general], and how the instruments sit within it. if you get back to me with, i might be able to elaborate more and be of some use for once. incidentally, do you generally apply this particular reverb strategy as a basis for your mixes in general?

what reverb are you running on the snare (type, pre-delay, percent wet, decay, eq)? is it mono or stereo? also, how's it panned?

there's a low-mid issue that's clogging up your stereo here and adding some unnecessary bloat - e.g. it's very noticeable at 0:54. i'm also feeling some fatigue from somewhere but it's not immediately apparent to me what's causing it - could it be the organ?

i'm getting the Tom Petty vibe

[HbGuitar]

Hey Dave

I usually set up 4 reverbs. 3 for blending (vox, drums, instruments) and the fourth is applied universally for ambiance

vox : medium studio, pre-delay 15.6ms, 1.50s tail, 100%wet, 50/50 early/late
drums: medium club, pre-delay 15.6ms, 900ms tail, 100%wet, 50/50 early/late
instruments:plate pre-delay 15.6ms, 1.8s tail, 100%wet, 50/50 early/late
universal: convolution medium room pre-delay 62.4ms, 2.0s tail, 20%wet, 100% late

At 15.6ms these pre-delays are as short as I go - I like my pre-delays in a range of 15-30ms. I'll use the same basic set-up in each song but I'll vary all the pre-delays depending on song tempo plus I'll change the universal decay rate. This one is actually quite short as well at 2.0s - it can go as high as 3.5s - all depends on tempo. I usually keep decays of blending reverbs about the same.

All reverbs are set up as send/returns and as such are stereo and panned centrally. Each return has EQ set-up with both HP(400-600) and LP (4-10K) filters.
Once I'm happy with the basic set-up, I'll control degree of effect either through send levels or return faders, and automate accordingly - so i may reduce during quiet sections and push it harder in choruses. I'll also use a couple of haas delays, panned away from source, to fix instruments if they don't sit comfortably - usually on guitars and keys.

The bloat you refer to could maybe be the toms/kick and bass clashing.....there's a nasty bit of resonance going on at around 120hz...

i did push the organ up during solo...and brought it down again afterwards....maybe i should have hit mute....i'd already muted the wurly for most of the track so it wouldn't clash too much with organ

[The_Metallurgist]

thanks for the details, i understand what i was hearing now....makes sense. i wasn't believing your illusion of space and felt there was a white veil over not only this mix, but past mixes (and by inference, will have issues on subsequent ones). on closing my eyes, i was unable to imagine the panorama, suggesting the psycho-acoustic signals in your audio weren't delivering the messages to enable me to do so. since running an eye over the details herein, i can understand why. i think there's opportunity to make your work more believable and convincing. a mix that has contradictory psycho-acoustic signals within it, will risk alienating an audience....we understand space instinctively through our senses, but the challenge we have as mixers, is applying the concepts necessary to deliver the illusion convincingly. it's not a gift. and it's far from an easy skill to acquire.

m8, reverb/ambiance is a big subject. i'm not even going to be able to scratch the surface here. i think there are some points that will need a change of reference and a fresh perspective regarding your strategy. my recommendation to you would be to research your butt off.

the core concept of applying reverb and making an ambiance, is about understanding acoustics. without being derogatory, musicians, indeed most people generally don't have a clue about acoustics, unless they have a desire to read up and research the subject at their leisure. it's perhaps hardly surprising that many, if not most mixes in the forum, don't deliver in this regard. it's nothing to be ashamed of.....we all come into the world naked. i do, however, feel it's a subject which is all too often neglected in feedback. it's all too easy to spot a problem mix and let it pass than to try and do the Acoustics 101 thing. and it's also easy to miss the issues for those who haven't done the Acoustics 101 thing. you contribute so much to the thread, you should get something out of it besides 3 or 4 sentences of useless rubbish!

i've not read this link through....but there are also some references at the bottom of the page also, which in their own right will no doubt bring other references to your attention. this article was in 2008, so i dare say there will be newer ones also, but that's an assumption. this should please Mike, it's his article

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul08/ar...everb1.htm

i'm going to have to leave you to it because it's easier for you to access structured material than have me deliver a feeble attempt, and most likely in a very broken and fragmented, and hence utterly confusing post. other peeps can also spin off the reference material too, so the thread and this post will have a benefit to the community at large.

however, if you have a specific point you'd like me to address, if i can address it competently then i will gladly oblige. i'm not good at following threads so if you ask herein and i don't reply, it's because i'm not aware of it.....please feel free to PM me and flag it up!!!!

i think you will find, that when you get this nailed, your placement will be much easier, limiting your need to consider Haas. i think that's good news, because Haas doesn't do mono at all well, and it also brings with it some oddities in the sound because of the comb filtering that's inevitable. yeah, we get comb filtering in reverb too....but it's different to Haas.

my immediate advice would be for you to avoid stereo reverbs when mixing. they add far to much spectral crud and can overwhelm a mix very quickly, especially if you run in excess of 800ms decay. i never do....except when it comes to Mastering, but that's a different subject.

you also hinted about how you set pre-delays. if i'm not mistaken, you base it on tempo? this makes alarm bells ring in my mind. ambiance has nothing to do with tempo. indeed, pre-delay is the signal that tells us how far away the noise source is from the back wall, to all intents and purposes. so, the closer the subject to the listener, the longer the pre-delay (you don't want a pre-delay on anything longer than 35ms for technical reasons). the further away it is, the less the pre-delay....and do take note: ZERO pre-delay is what i use on my master buss reverb....with a decay of no more than about 1.2 seconds but that's me. convolution reverbs are considered dangerous because of the extra frequency content they generate VERY quickly, so i'd advise you to be careful when and where you apply them. they can stifle a mix with consummate ease.

the only time i think about tempo in terms of delays.....is when engaging a tap delay.

the HP filter at 400-600Hz is over done. bass exists in a room. yes, it needs HP'ing, but not this high up. what is valid, however, is putting a cut in the ambiance around the Mud Zone, to minimise the risk of build up. i hit the 350-450Hz area, down 3dB, with a Q about 2. i can't actually remember exactly because i set it up many years ago and haven't looked at it since. all my go-to ambiance/reverbs are in a template and i never touch them. if i have a project with additional creative needs, i'll set that up ad-lib. technically, you shouldn't need to fiddle with your main ambiance verbs once set. i only change how much an instrument gets fed to an emu in the send...if i want more depth placement, then i'll feed more to the "depth" send. i don't fiddle with pre-delays, decays, EQ etc. it's set up, job done. yeah, rooms vary....but i can vary the illusion of depth for example, by feeding the send more of the instrument.

because i never use stereo reverbs in the mix, i can place the location of the reverb anywhere in the mix, from behind the instrument, the middle, or to the opposite channel somewhere. if the reverb drops out during mix-down to mono, that's sometimes a bonus for reasons of space needed in a mono delivery. similarly, by making the placement of the verb optional, i can also avoid spectral congestion within the stereo panorama.

LP? 10kHz? wow....that's bright. if you applied this, AND had a long decay time beyond 1 second say, you are giving a contradictory signal which is totally ambiguous. sound that has only a 3.4cms wave length (10kHz) isn't going to last long in air. big rooms have a lot of air, eh? so that spectral element won't live. if you make it live in a big space, it will be your undoing! this is why it's important to have bass in the reverb signal, because bass lives forever! cut this out totally, and you will go to jail, won't pass go, and won't collect 200 pounds

let's go!

[ptalbot]

There should be a like option on this forum. I would have clicked it on your post, The_Metallurgist!
I like how precise you go with your explanations.
I'm incapable of such detailed comments from a few listens of a mix, but I find that I can learn things from your posts.
Thanks! Now off to read Mike's article.

[ptalbot]

Great article. It describes something similar that I've learned from Fab Dupont in one of his Puremix tutorial.
Fab usually set up 3 reverb and send various things to it at various levels.
He's got an 'Office' verb, which is similar to the short verb Mike's talking about, helps put thing more or less in your face and in a defined (although confined) space, then a Room or Plate one to fatten up some instruments, and a Short Hall similar to Mike's long verb, this one for depth and 'stage' placement.
All of this makes sense. Why is it so hard to put into practice reliably?

[ptalbot]

my immediate advice would be for you to avoid stereo reverbs when mixing. they add far to much spectral crud and can overwhelm a mix very quickly, especially if you run in excess of 800ms decay. i never do....except when it comes to Mastering, but that's a different subject.

I'm confused about that... Are you saying you are using mono reverbs only?
Or do you use stereo reverbs but pan the send away from the source, or what exactly?
And you are using reverb in mastering? That's quite unusual. What do you use it for, and how?
Sorry to ask so much questions, but ambience/depth/spatial placement is one of the (many) areas that I'm struggling with, and you seem to have developed some useful practices.

[pauli]

my immediate advice would be for you to avoid stereo reverbs when mixing. they add far to much spectral crud and can overwhelm a mix very quickly, especially if you run in excess of 800ms decay. i never do....except when it comes to Mastering, but that's a different subject.

I'm confused about that... Are you saying you are using mono reverbs only?
Or do you use stereo reverbs but pan the send away from the source, or what exactly?
And you are using reverb in mastering? That's quite unusual. What do you use it for, and how?
Sorry to ask so much questions, but ambience/depth/spatial placement is one of the (many) areas that I'm struggling with, and you seem to have developed some useful practices.

It's not too unusual to use a little stereo reverb in mastering, but you've got to be really careful with it. It's a great tool for subtly filling in some thin areas of the spectrum and subtly introducing a bit more stereo width without the consequences associated with stereo widening plugs.

If you're really slick (note: I'm not, Dave probably is though ) a panned mono reverb (or cleverly set up stereo reverb) can be employed at mastering to really transparently true up the tonal symmetry from left to right. Suppose throughout the track the mix as presented is noticeably brighter on one side... that's the sort of thing that should be corrected in the mix, but a really short tonal reverb panned to one side (zero predelay)
can fix this and nobody would even know you were doing it. Serious black magic, though... never seems to work for me.

Using verb in mastering for ambiance, though... I'm sure someone out there is doing it and it sounds great, but it sounds like asking for trouble to me.