|
Post by rabidgerry on Jul 22, 2010 12:49:30 GMT -5
Hello all, if your like me, and you like stuff that was recorded years ago because it wasn't dry sounding then you'll probably like reverb and ambience to your recorded drums and guitars and what not.
I however always struggle to find reverbs that match and suit with eachother, what I mean by this is, if I put some reverb on a snare, how do I get the guitars reverb and vocals reverb to match? i.e make it sound like its in the same place, without mucking it all up obviously.
Please stick all your reverb techniques and hoo haa here.
I personally strive for wet sounds from yesteryear, I hate the 90's and all that "dry" nonsense that came with it and has stayed right up until today so I'd love some useful hints and pointers on how to get good reverbs whilst mixing stuff down.
I've about 20 different vst reverbs and I'm always mucking around with 'em, but I struggle to get stuff to fit.
When one puts reverb on a snare, do they put it on the bass guitar?
Kick drum also?
Just the toms and snare?
I've probably opened a whole can of worms here but I'd thought I'd ask since I'm always experimenting.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Jul 22, 2010 15:59:05 GMT -5
If you’re looking to have the same verb on several instruments so that they sound like they’re in the same space you’ve got a couple of options.
Possibly the most obvious and intuitive would be to insert the same reverb plug on each track. Tweak the settings on one and then save the preset and load it up in all the others. Unless you’ve got some uber machine or just a very few tracks, this will start to bog down your machine pretty fast. Reverbs can really be resource hogs, especially if you’re going for an Impulse Response type plug.
Before the computers caught up to us, we used to be limited by the number of actual hardware units (and the number of inputs thereon). Back then we used Aux Sends to create a mix of the various instruments before sending them all to one single device for the effect. Most modern DAWs will allow you to do this one way or another. Many of them require that you create a group (or bus, or sometimes just a blank track), insert the reverb there, and then assign the sends from the individual tracks to this track.
I (being Nutz) often take this one (or more) steps further. I have been known to do a Save As… once I’ve got the mix pretty close to what I want. Then I work on the new file and adjust the mix, sometimes changing level, EQ, and panning of the various instruments to reflect what I want to come out of the verb. Insert the reverb (100% wet) on whatever passes for a Master Bus and render (export, or whatever your DAW calls it) this to a .wav. Import this track in alongside the others in the original project and mix in to taste.
Sometimes I’ll do this twice. Once with a shorter verb. The second has a longer verb with all the panning reversed. Mix the second one in quite a bit lower than the first to make it sound like the left hand wall is a bit further away from sources on the RHS, and vice versa.
A couple of times I’ve actually done 3 separate groups. With progressively less treble and more (longer, more predelay and wetter) reverb on each. So the “front row” is right there, pretty dry and fully bright. The “middle row” is a little darker and wetter, and the ‘back row” even more so. Helps to add a subtle sense of depth.
|
|
|
Post by lpf3 on Jul 22, 2010 17:32:32 GMT -5
rg-
I like to leave at least one instrument dry to serve as a reference point against the effected track. I think it gives the ear something to compare it (them) to.
I've had pretty good results by doubling a track & leaving one completely dry, then adding reverb to the second track & adjusting the volumes till it sounds good. (I like doing this with other effects as well, especially distortion). I also like to keep the decay times pretty short, I think long reverb trails can sound mushy.
Ash, I really like this idea for adding depth with reverb but I find it a little tricky to get right. I hadn't thought about messing with the EQ the way you described..... next time I will.
-lpf3
|
|
|
Post by rabidgerry on Jul 24, 2010 6:15:30 GMT -5
lpf3, I like the idea of reference point, I note this myself in many bands I listen to. However in my own music so far, I never know what to choose. However I have noted many leave the bass as a reference. I suppose have defaulted to the kick being a reference point.
I like yourself lp3f have also (in my case a snare drum) have double tracked and added verb to the secondary track, then mixed it according to effect, so I can still hear the natural sound of the instrument but ambience and depth too.
I suppose in fairness I struggle with guitar mostly and reverb when it comes to recording and mixing.
Live I'm a different animal, and this might be wrong, but I tend to have reverb on everything, a lot of the time subtle, and this is 'case I am partially using it to adjust my tone and feel, so when I go to record patches from my effects processor I'm usually getting poor results and in the end I'm back to Amplitube to fake it all up. I actually find it a little easier to play the guitar when it has reverb on it!! So another thing I personally hate is when I try to record a patch with no reverb on it and suddenly playing is not as easy. AND another thing, playing with reverb in my experience is slightly more difficult cause crappy noises and mistakes are often heard more and in the end you have to make sure your good otherwise you get defects thrown in too.
Anyways I was digressing there.
My usual routine at the mo is record with a distortion sound on the monitor mix, then I end up with just clean guitar, put the clean guitar into Amplitube and bam, guitar.
I usually have subtle reverb on a patch in Amplitube and then later want to add more and usually I struggle then.
ash when I double tracks and stuff like that, unless I re-do takes again, I get like a chorus effect, which is nice, but I'm not after that.
Also, I end up using more than one reverb plug in cause I find I never know where to shoot for when I say add reverb to a snare, and then try to get the guitar in the same zone, I end up haveing to use another plugin (I suck hence this thread).
Yes using reverbs especially on a very old machine like my home computer will kill your computer speed!!! I am a victim of this!!
To be fair, I'm ok with adjusting ambience reverbs at the minute (only just), but I still find it hard to get there if you know what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Jul 26, 2010 16:19:51 GMT -5
ash when I double tracks and stuff like that, unless I re-do takes again, I get like a chorus effect, which is nice, but I'm not after that. I'm not completely sure what this is about. I was talking about doing this in order to create a "reverb track" which is then mixed in with the full dry mix. The word "Chorus" to me implies a pitch change or pitch modulation. If that's what's happening, you've got a serious problem somewhere! What I think you're describing, though, is a sort of comb filtering effect similar to a "stuck flange" or very short delay effect. If this is in fact what you're getting, I'd guess that the cause is un-compensated plug-in latency. It takes a finite amount of time for the processor to do it's math and process the effect on your copy track. This makes the output (including the dry portion) come out some small amount of time after the un-effected version of the track. When you mix the latent effected copy with the original uneffected track, you'll get the combing. Any modern DAW worth anything will "compensate" for this - either by starting the effected track an appropriate amount of time earlier than the others, or by delaying all the other tracks a bit so that everything lines back up. You can do it manually. Probably easiest to nudge the effected track a little bit backward in time, so it starts earlier than the others. Might mean trimming a few samples off of the beginning of the track so there's room to slide it back. But if your DAW doesn't do it automatically, and you can't find a setting in there somewhere to get it to start doing it, then I say drop the outdated software and find something actually works correctly! ...BUT... This wouldn't be an issue in any case if the reverb plug on the copy track was set to 100% wet mix. It should just sound like a very short (mostly unnoticeable) pre-delay on the reverb. Some plugs have a wet/dry mix, while others have individual volume controls for the dry and wet signals. I think you can figure out how to get 100% wet in either of these situations.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgerry on Aug 5, 2010 10:39:42 GMT -5
I'm not completely sure what this is about. I was talking about doing this in order to create a "reverb track" which is then mixed in with the full dry mix. Yes I have done this also and not had that weird sound I was trying to describe. With drums I have had best results. The word "Chorus" to me implies a pitch change or pitch modulation. If that's what's happening, you've got a serious problem somewhere! Well may be I used the wrong choice or words to describe the effect, flange sounds more like it. I always lump my modulation effects together, yes flange is probably the word. Mind you, if you have two mono tracks and put them at slight different times from one another you can create a chorus like effect similar to that of a chorus pedal that has the rate turned down as low as it will go. I'm know Duran Duran did this with a bass track on a song. Again this is a similar effect to setting a delay very very short. What I think you're describing, though, is a sort of comb filtering effect similar to a "stuck flange" or very short delay effect. If this is in fact what you're getting, I'd guess that the cause is un-compensated plug-in latency. It takes a finite amount of time for the processor to do it's math and process the effect on your copy track. This makes the output (including the dry portion) come out some small amount of time after the un-effected version of the track. When you mix the latent effected copy with the original uneffected track, you'll get the combing. Any modern DAW worth anything will "compensate" for this - either by starting the effected track an appropriate amount of time earlier than the others, or by delaying all the other tracks a bit so that everything lines back up. You can do it manually. Probably easiest to nudge the effected track a little bit backward in time, so it starts earlier than the others. Might mean trimming a few samples off of the beginning of the track so there's room to slide it back. But if your DAW doesn't do it automatically, and you can't find a setting in there somewhere to get it to start doing it, then I say drop the outdated software and find something actually works correctly! ...BUT... This wouldn't be an issue in any case if the reverb plug on the copy track was set to 100% wet mix. It should just sound like a very short (mostly unnoticeable) pre-delay on the reverb. Some plugs have a wet/dry mix, while others have individual volume controls for the dry and wet signals. I think you can figure out how to get 100% wet in either of these situations. I dunno what you mean about the DAW stuff, I'm using Adobe audition 3 and find it very useful. It doesn't do anything automatically though, I mean it wouldn't start a track or know to start a track before another unless I hooked it up to do so and had an automated lane set up to do stuff. As for plug ins, most of the reverbs I have have wet/dry mix controls, I still find making a completely wet track and blending in to yeild better results. I think my main problem is having non clashing reverbs, when stuff is on its own with a reverb it might sound one way, then when its with other things that have reverb it might sound another way or get lost etc etc. Recently I'm getting guitar seperated from vocals and other mid range elements better, but I still can't do anything interesting in terms of ambience without messing it all up. I can only apply a little reverb to a guitar and get away with it. Solos aren't so bad, its mainly rhythm guitar tracks. Any examples of how you'd go about applying reverb to say a band mix of drums bass guitars and vocals to give a "playing in a big space" effect? Whats would you put reverb on and not? So far I'll have it on snare and a bit on vocals.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgerry on Aug 9, 2010 10:06:52 GMT -5
ash, here is another question, when I apply reverb to vocals, I get stereo spread. This is fine and sounds good, however............................ I keep my main vocals usually in mono and this is to keep them away from the guitars out wide, so when I get stereo spreading from a reverb plug in on the vocals it makes the vocals a little wider and I get "not as clear" sounding vocals. So recently I've been just putting another plug in on my virtual rack to keep the output from the vocal channel from spreading.
Just wondered how you apply to your vocals?
How can I get some stereo spread from the reverb and not have it interfere with the guitar or other elements?
Just wondering.
Feel free for anyone else to chip in.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Aug 16, 2010 17:51:15 GMT -5
I hope you don’t think I’ve blown you off here. I was thinking about my reply, and never got around to posting before I left for 8 days in the northwoods. I did have some reception on my iPhone up there, but we made a pact to avoid actually using such devices. Now I’m back, and can’t remember for sure what I was going to say. Re-reading the last couple posts, the first thing that comes to mind is the first two rules of mixing: 1) If it sounds good, it is good. There is no one right way to do anything. 2) Never listen in Solo. It really doesn’t matter what a track sounds like by itself unless it’s the only instrument in the mix. Context is the key. I’ll solo things for editing purposes and other surgical procedures, but it really is best to reserve most tonal decisions until you hear the instrument with everything else. I find it very difficult to give you anything approaching a formula the way you’ve asked. This is partly because of the first two rules (I don’t have any idea what you’re recording or how you want it to sound) and partly because I don’t usually mix straight-ahead “pop” type music. There are about as many different ways of doing these things as there are mixes. I know it’s not a very satisfying answer (especially after such a long wait), but you’ll have much better results if you just record and mix as much as possible and work it out for yourself. I can give a couple of tips which might help, though. Reverb makes things sound further away and/or louder. Use less reverb on things you want to sit “up front” in the mix. Many people fight to control and tighten the low end in their mixes in general. Reverb tends to smear and obscure things. Sending your bass, kick drum, and other low frequency instruments to the reverb can make a big mess down there in the lowest octave or two. On the other hand, it often sounds unnatural to have the kick and bass completely dry. They just won’t sound like they’re sitting in the same room as everything else. EQ, either before or after the reverb (or both) can help. I don’t always trust “stereo” reverb algorithms because I don’t know what the heck it’s doing in there. Some of them will sum the stereo signal to mono then do something weird to create a stereo output which loses or obscures your stereo placement. I sometimes will render the left and right sides of the “reverb track” separately, as individual mono tracks. Sometimes takes some doing depending on the routing capabilities of your system. This might help your issue with the vocals. This next one is something I heard or read a long time ago from somebody I must have respected at the time. No idea who or where though: Use less than you think you need. As you’re dialing in the ‘verb, turn it up until it sounds good, then turn it back down a notch or two. This is good advice for almost all of the processing done on a mix (EQ, compression, whatever) with the exception of real special effects which are specifically meant to be over the top. You might ignore this if you’re trying to record a Cure or Slowdive album…or a mid-80s hair-ballad...or a surf project…or maybe those are all in the camp of “real special effects which are specifically meant to be over the top”? Oh, that reminds me of something else I wanted to mention! Mix-Bus/Mastering Compression/Limiting. Everything you’re using as reference – every recording you listen to and try to compare to your own mixes – has been through at least one or two compression processes after it has been all mixed together and effected and before it was pressed for final release. This compression will tend to accentuated the reverb trails, making things sound a little bit wetter than what came off the mix desk. To my mind, if the mastering engineer has to do much of anything, there is something wrong with the mix, and the mix engineer should be handing off something that sounds almost identical to the “finished project”, but it’s something to keep in mind. It’s not a bad idea to strap a compressor/limiter across your 2-bus while mixing, even if you intend to bypass it before the final render. Then again, if it sounds good with the compressor… Of course, that leads to a completely different thread re: How to use compression and stuff like that well!! The ultimate answer to that thread is the same as this one: Practice!
|
|
|
Post by JFrankParnell on Aug 20, 2010 10:40:57 GMT -5
lemme just say that the Isotope Ozone pluggin (mastering plugin) has several great features, one of which being 'mastering reverb'. The manual says that a little of this reverb on the whole mix can help blend in different verbs on different tracks. And, the pluggin has great compression/loudness maximizer.
Having said that, I agree with the 'aux send' type reverb. Whether old school on the board mixing or in a DAW, I really prefer to have an 'aux' or a 'buss' with the reverb on it (with the reverb at 100% wet) and just send a certain amount of each instrument that you want verb'd to this 'reverb channel'. I really only use one reverb for all the instruments (not including 'amp' reverb on guitars).
Oh, and on the kick drum, I will usually let the bleed from other mics handle the verb from the kick. That is, whatever kick bleeds thru to the snare or overheads usually gets enough verb from the verb on those mics. If that makes sense...
|
|