Hi All,

Been recording my own stuff for a number of years now, in some areas, pre production & production i feel i have improved in leaps and bounds, things sound better up to the point of post production and by that I mean to the point were you might add the following:


Equalization:

Effects: Adding reverb, delay, and compression etc.

Mix down:

ie trying to get a refined/polished/finished sound.

At this point im finding the improvement is minimal and rather than making it complete, it still sounds unfinished ?
Ive read so much stuff on compresssion, mixing, eq, reverb and more importantly practised lots, but i dont seem to be getting anywhere. I guess one of the problems is that i cant properly identify what it is that is making my recordings lack that certain something. I guess someone with experience, would not only hear what it was that was missing, but also what would improve it.

Im pretty persistent and have not expected to do this over night or anything, i realise to get anywhere its practice practice, listening, reading etc etc I guess i dont mind putting the time in if it will yield results, but it doesn't seem to be ?

Point is I dont exactly want to give up on something I would love to be able to do, but its also important to know your limitations. Any ideas on how to address some of these issues...

--------------------

www.myspace.com/joekmurphy

Hi Joe

There's no doubt that great mixing can make a huge difference but so often in these situations the problem is that people are expecting processing to inject 'magic' into the sound. It's something that has to come from the instrument, player and recording. You can't create a good version of something that isn't right. You can twist it into something different that might be great, but fundamentally you need to be listening to your tracking thinking 'oooh this sounds nice!'.

The best way we can help you is to hear what you've tracked and have you explain what you'd prefer it sound like.

In my experience the instrument and the room are usually the things that need to change.

J

--------------------
www.jackruston.com

Jack is right. But the problem with 'home recordings' are often down to arrangements and production in the first place. This is made even worse by 'multi-instrumentalists' like me who are one-man-band.

We tend to 'perform' to ourselves without wearing the 'producer' and arranger cap to tell us: "don't add an accordion sound here, I doesn't go with a heavy metal track", or "you bass line is far too busy, lose this or the fifth guitar layer!", and so on and so forth.

If you listen to professionally produced songs the first difference that springs into.. ears... is not the quality of the individual sounds (a great guitar sound within a pop track is easy to produce nowadays with great plug-ins!) but the arrangements. A few, top sounding and complimentary instruments playing parts that DO NOT clash together! The result: you can hear, even on a busy mix ALL the instruments and parts. And the arrangements are simple: one guitar comes, one goes, the key playing a riff only on the bridge, and so on...

What amateurs need to do is to go back to basics, kind of write an arrangement before hand (at least in their heads) and approach even a basic and silly pop song as an orchestrator would: strings now, oboes later. This is mighty difficult to learn, but the attitude is possible to refine and absorb by listening carefully to professional products.
You will be amazed on how little 'goes on' musically in comparison to our arrangements!

Good luck!

--------------------
www.bugiolacchi.com
Songwriter/guitarist

Yep, plus one to that too.

J

--------------------
www.jackruston.com

Hi Guys,

Thanks for the responses, much appreciated, as ever good advice..

Jack

Quote:

---

There's no doubt that great mixing can make a huge difference but so often in these situations the problem is that people are expecting processing to inject 'magic' into the sound. It's something that has to come from the instrument, player and recording. You can't create a good version of something that isn't right. You can twist it into something different that might be great, but fundamentally you need to be listening to your tracking thinking 'oooh this sounds nice!'.

---

Agreed, all i would say, as an example of one of the things im talking about, is that there are many average singers out there, yet producers can make an average voice sublime, can they not ? How is that done ? Been listening to a few things lately, Belle & Sebastian, Fran Healy, and that highlighted the above, not fantastic vocalists, but very well produced ? Im guessing its down to a great mic, space, performance, arrangement and post production. Am I correct in assuming the better the vocalist the less the treatment ?

The best things ive recorded have indeed been things were ive felt magic unfolding with each addition. but then I have had it work the other way around and had to tweak things a bit more, but ended up with similar results.

Quote:

---

If you listen to professionally produced songs the first difference that springs into.. ears... is not the quality of the individual sounds (a great guitar sound within a pop track is easy to produce nowadays with great plug-ins!) but the arrangements. A few, top sounding and complimentary instruments playing parts that DO NOT clash together! The result: you can hear, even on a busy mix ALL the instruments and parts. And the arrangements are simple: one guitar comes, one goes, the key playing a riff only on the bridge, and so on...

What amateurs need to do is to go back to basics, kind of write an arrangement before hand (at least in their heads) and approach even a basic and silly pop song as an orchestrator would: strings now, oboes later. This is mighty difficult to learn, but the attitude is possible to refine and absorb by listening carefully to professional products.
You will be amazed on how little 'goes on' musically in comparison to our arrangements!

---

Some real good points again...

My son was playing that eminem song from a while back "love the way you lie" or something, its not exactly my thing but i could really appreciate the production, a very simple concept, with very little going on, yet the way it was blended/mixed was really good. Which goes back to what your saying about arangement, its a crucial part of the process. Also it must come down in part to the money spent on commercial material.

I have attached a snippet of current backing track here http://soundcloud.com/scouser-1/joe-reggae

It is a work in progress, Im currently addressing the issues I have : more interest with drums, ad main vox and bvox, even so it sounds like it needs help in the post production sense ?

See what you think

--------------------

www.myspace.com/joekmurphy

Sorry to multipost, but have to get these things out as they come to me

One of the things I suppose im driving at is that what commercial recordings have in common is that nothing seems to distract you, even things that you might think would if that makes sense. Also it seems like everything has its place where it lives and breathes, elements are introduced in such subtle ways that dont distact, a picture grows without you noticing. Quite drastic changes can happen, but they always sound right somehow. It fits together, each part is complemented. There is an element of polish.

I guess they are some of the things that im finding it hard to acheive...

--------------------

www.myspace.com/joekmurphy

Hey Joe

I'm away until Monday next week and I'm on 2G where I'm staying, but I will listen to your link and get back to you then.

J

--------------------
www.jackruston.com

Thanks Jack..

--------------------

www.myspace.com/joekmurphy

Hey Joe

You've absolutely answered your own question. Great vocals don't require the world's greatest singers. But what they do require is a voice that will deliver the song without without the listener feeling distracted by the technical aspects of the singing, and a decent interpretation of the song. The great vocals and singers are the ones we believe. Of course it's all tied up in how the track supports that message, but ultimately the singer needs to convince us. Springsteen could sing a line and make it sound like truth delivered straight from Heaven, where Beiber could make the same line sound plain silly. It's all about that magical combination of what's being said, by whom, and how. As producers and engineers our job is often one of removing things rather than adding them. We try to remove ugliness in the recording using mic placement, acoustic treatment and mic choice. We don't want sibilance, comb filtering or tonality changes to distract the listener. We try to remove tuning and timing issues IF THEY DISTRACT but not otherwise, by comping the vocal out of a number of takes, using tuning software or nudging words or syllables a tiny bit. We aim to build a track that supports the message, highlights the key points, the mood, the feel etc but doesn't tread on the vocal or present a mixed message (unless as a deliberate device to highlight something). Effects like reverb and delay are treated in the same mindset. How can we enhance this message? Are we enhancing and making this really cool, or disracting the listener? This might sound as if we always want to do the bare minimum. Not always. Sometimes you might overtune a vocal until it sounds more like a synth. Cut it to pieces, heavily compress, distort or eq it. You can do anything as long as it remains 'on message'.

I listened to your link. Without the vocal there's not much to say because once that goes down everything will be put into context. What I would say is that clearly you are able to record your sources nicely, and deliver a clean and flattering sound. The obvious issue with the track as it stands at the moment, is that nothing really happens. It's very linear to the point of being dull. Of course, once you put the vocals in there, what is now boring, may turn out to be inspired restraint. So keep going with it, but don't worry about the instruments any more until you get the main vocal done. You always want to get at least a guide vocal as early on in the process as is practical, because it's the reference for all the other little touches and points of interest in the track.

Are you working entirely on your own or with other musicians?

Jack

--------------------
www.jackruston.com

Thanks Jack,

Yeh I generally work on my own, sometimes I will get a friend in if it's something I can't do, or I want someone else's interpretation..

--------------------

www.myspace.com/joekmurphy

Ok well it's very common to get this sort of static result when you record music that needs to be played rather than programmed, by yourself. There's no interplay, and it's really hard not to follow rigid structures just because of how much there is to cover. Normally a band will react to each other in terms of accent and tempo, but as you can't do that, the tendency is to make it overly rigid. We can't all be Prince!

J

--------------------
www.jackruston.com

I'd start with the arrangement rather than the mix, which doesn't sound bad at all. You've already mentioned you're looking at adding interest to the drums, and the other backing parts like the bassline could also benefit from some variation.

It's becoming clearer,

The example recording is boring, and by and large that is down to arrangement, as I see it. However I'm going to address some of the responses I've had.. By doing so I'm aware I will be answering some of my own questions, however your feedback will be most helpful.

Quote:

---

Great vocals don't require the world's greatest singers. But what they do require is a voice that will deliver the song without the listener feeling distracted by the technical aspects of the singing, and a decent interpretation of the song

---

I suppose my point is sometimes the producer will be limited by the ability of the singer and or, musicians. So in a sense it becomes more about what the producer can do, to make things fit. He knows how to accomplish various things, how to make the vocal sit nicely in the mix, what processing would really support an average voice, how he could improve what he had by improving the arrangement. And at the end of it all have something which doesn't distract etc etc..

Quote:

---

Of course it's all tied up in how the track supports that message, but ultimately the singer needs to convince us. Springsteen could sing a line and make it sound like truth delivered straight from Heaven, where Beiber could make the same line sound plain silly.

---

I think when we are convinced, it's becomes something we like, nevertheless be it Beiber or Springsteen I would suggest there is a level of consistency in the production, which is what I'm kind of driving at.

Quote:

---

Effects like reverb and delay are treated in the same mindset. How can we enhance this message? Are we enhancing and making this really cool, or disracting the listener? This might sound as if we always want to do the bare minimum. Not always. Sometimes you might overtune a vocal until it sounds more like a synth. Cut it to pieces, heavily compress, distort or eq it. You can do anything as long as it remains 'on message'.

---

This is what producers are good at, and were I've got a lot to learn;)

Quote:

---

I listened to your link. Without the vocal there's not much to say because once that goes down everything will be put into context. What I would say is that clearly you are able to record your sources nicely, and deliver a clean and flattering sound. The obvious issue with the track as it stands at the moment, is that nothing really happens. It's very linear to the point of being dull. Of course, once you put the vocals in there, what is now boring, may turn out to be inspired restraint. So keep going with it, but don't worry about the instruments any more until you get the main vocal done. You always want to get at least a guide vocal as early on in the process as is practical, because it's the reference for all the other little touches and points of interest in the track

---

Agreed, completely..

--------------------

www.myspace.com/joekmurphy

I've just heard the end result of a song that I recorded some of the backing for a couple of years ago. The artist had a bit of a track record but, to be honest, the backing track sounded a bit trite and nothing special. I really wondered whether he had lost his songwriting skill. However, the end result is nothing like that as the vocals have totally transformed the whole thing. They're passionate, engaging and tell a great story.

Time and time again I've been reminded that a good recording has little to do with recording technology. Getting a great performance is by far the most important aspect of any production. If you aren't a great vocalist then you need to find where your strengths lie and play to those strengths.

I always remember hearing a Glyn Johns interview on the radio in the late 70's. He was given a band to produce and they were sounding like a dodgy American heavy rock band. Then, between takes, he caught them playing acoustic guitars and singing brilliant harmonies. He asked why they didn't want to record songs like that and they said that they thought the record company wouldn't like it. He had them record one of the acoustic songs and now the rest is history - the Eagles went on to be one of the biggest bands of the 70's.

James.

--------------------
JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration.
http://www.jrpmusic.net

Quote:

---

Ok well it's very common to get this sort of static result when you record music that needs to be played rather than programmed, by yourself. There's no interplay, and it's really hard not to follow rigid structures just because of how much there is to cover. Normally a band will react to each other in terms of accent and tempo, but as you can't do that, the tendency is to make it overly rigid. We can't all be Prince!

---

True. Few years back I recorded some songs with a band I had been a part of for 7 years and the results are certainly different to what one gets multitracking. You have hit on something about things becoming overly rigid, this is an area I need to work too

Quote:

---

You always want to get at least a guide vocal as early on in the process as is practical, because it's the reference for all the other little touches and points of interest in the track.

---

I think this will really help me most in the future, as I have been in a position were I have put the vocal down towards the end, due to a mixture of soundcard limitations and my own ignorance I could never get a good monitor sound as it was always dry and although this is not a bad thing for getting mic placement right, it doesn't do a lot for performance, or not in my case. I can now (after all this time ) have a little compression, if needed, and a splash of reverb. This amazingly, has made such a difference

Quote:

---

Time and time again I've been reminded that a good recording has little to do with recording technology. Getting a great performance is by far the most important aspect of any production.

---

Getting best performance is vital and leaves less to do I suppose, although a good recording doesn't exactly happen by itself. I heard a few of those bbc "the record producers" excellent series. And some of those guys can really make a song special, in many ways..

--------------------

www.myspace.com/joekmurphy

Quote Scouser:

---

You have hit on something about things becoming overly rigid, this is an area I need to work too

---

Most modern DAWs have methods for taking the "groove" from one part and mapping it to the others - groove quantising. It's not something I've tried, but might be worth a look.

Quote bugiolacchi:

---

Jack is right. But the problem with 'home recordings' are often down to arrangements and production in the first place. This is made even worse by 'multi-instrumentalists' like me who are one-man-band.

Good luck!

---

I have a set of 3 songs which were recorded several years ago and which suffer from just about every fault known to audio - poor timing, rattly bass, drums pre-mixed to stereo with no top (the top's all on the vocal track), massive mic bleed, vox and BV pre mixed, awful guitar playing (courtesy of yours-truly). Every year I dig the projects out and re-mix (usually with freshly re-recorded guitar parts). I'm currently running through 2 versions - one where I restrict myself to Cubase plugins only and one where I use anything I have - it's amazing how educational this is as an exercise.

A.

--------------------
Andi, www.thedustbowl.net Mixing, Mastering, Audio Editing at The Dustbowl Audio