squarepusher Mastering/EQ'ing/Compressing

[Guest Adjective]

*high paw*

hope it goes well

if there's an EQ in that multiquence, skim through this blog for some hints

http://www.em411.com/show/blog/79

[Fred McGriff]

oh nice thanks

[Fred McGriff]

that link shoudl be pinned

[Guest Adjective]

also check out this one http://www.recordingwebsite.com/articles/eqprimer.php

 

and yeah we need some threads pinned that cover that sort of info

[BCM]

BCM, thats pretty devastating.

 

Are you sure you can't improve the sound of that amen without spending ten motherfuckin grand on equipement? I heard here people with pretty good sound quality (this was posted on the drumprogramming thread, by Jubal: asbest.mp3 , sounds good imo.. NOT Chris Clark, but you got the idea (btw, I don't know what equipement Jubal uses, but sure its not a ten grand one).

 

Now that Chris Clark has been mentioned, I gotta agree with Fred. How the fuck he does that?

 

The sound quality on Empty The Bones Of You (which is the album I know more, still hasn't got Body Riddle and Ted) its fucking insane. Take any song (for example, Cob Goitus, one of my favs) and blast it throught a 5.1... everything sounds CLEAR, but at the same time, LOUD AS HELL, and without distorting/compression effect things etc.

Now compare that album with his previous work, Ceramics Is The Bomb. While still sounding amazing, you can hear that his "excellent sound quality" trademark begins with Empty The Bones Of You. Which means he improved in no time a lot, or bought a shitload of new equipement to acomplish such a sound quality.

 

What I find weird about this guy is that got the status of "electronic music pro" in no time, compared to the rest. How Clark started to get contracted by the most important record (WARP) in such a short period of time? Anyone knows the history?

 

Fuck, I write a lot and fast.

 

OK, maybe i was a bit harsh, the only way I can see to improve your amen sound (though I don't think it needs it IMO) is to get a really nice quality sample of the amen. Maybe buy a sample CD or something with 24bit high quality samples. That, or buy professional quality gear or professional quality computer equipment/soundcard/mixer etc...

[Guest 2780]

afaik you better not to use eq to boost sounds too much or at all cause it distorts the sound

better to cut frequencies around the point which you want to boost and turn the sound a bit louder

might be wrong but thats what ive heard....

[pylonbitch]

yeah, you're pretty spot on... the other kind of eqing.. boost, or 'hot' eqing was [popularised by detroit soul producers in the 70's.

 

tends top muddy a mix pretty quickly.

 

 

my advice... get good monitors and power amp.

 

learn PROPERLY how a compressor/limiter works.

 

separate your individual drums onto separate channels for more eq control.

 

panning can open your mix out a bit.

 

try doubling your bass with a subsonic sine wave that's low in the mix for extra power.

 

keep your bass mono and pretty much centre panned to eliminate any phasing issues.

[Guest stolemb]

"i still dont get how people like chris clark can have songs twice as loud as i can possibly make my songs without them warping all over the goddam speakers."

 

quality compressors / limiters on all the seperate tracks, + multiband compressor / limiter on master out. Check out the waves plugins, slap on the L.. limters on seperate tracks, throw on the L3 on the master..slide all the thresholds down a bit till you have the loudest results without unwanted artifacts + tweak the eqa if necessary -> this is a simplified mastering method, but instant result :) Btw loudness is defenitely not everything, I like to keep some headroom for dynamics.

 

fucking lol stolemb, you posted my pisstake :) I think you mean the other one.

 

So, what you tell me to do its to add on the "FX Channels" on FLStudio a Parametric EQ 2, quality compressors and limiters to every single VST, sample, etc etc? I toughth about that also but... isn't that going to eat a shitload of CPU? (I have a decent one, but you know, if you tend to use a lot of different sounds, it ends with CPU Usage at 90%, 100%)

 

Also if you use the FL Slicer for programming beats, every single hit here would need different values on the Parametric EQ 2, and the compressors/limiters. For example, take the amen break... if you want to do it "right", you just can't apply a determinated equalization on the Parametric EQ 2, since it affects the whole thing: it has hi hats snares and the initial kick, for example, and those would need diferent hz's. I'be tried doing that by appling layers, but its a terrific ammount of work, and not confortable if you are used to have "the whole package" on the same "piano roll", if you know what I mean.

 

About the using a "external mixer" (V-Rack was mentioned, also that one from one of the Winamp guys). I'be never worked that way, I also wouldn't know how to do it, and I don't know what are the exact benefits of it.

What I understand is (on my case) instead of rendering the whole thing, do it by parts: Every "sound/pattern" should be saved on wavs at the maximun quality you can, then re-construct the whole track on one of those mixers, and equalize etc. Amirite?

[Guest stolemb]

Still into this.

 

Please suport this thread.

[Guest ۞ Syntheme ۞]

can you post the bass and drums as two separate files to make easier to analyse? some tube distortion on the bassline will make it sound bassier (by adding harmonics) without increasing the volume of the subbass.

 

[Guest tv_party]

Your amen sounds low bitrate and mid-scooped.

[Guest ۞ Syntheme ۞]

this is my EQ correction, it's pretty drastic. EQ-ing the bass and drums in the mix would be better than trying rescue it post mix

 

 

the blue line is the fft after the EQ (as shown below)

 

[Guest ۞ Syntheme ۞]

this is my EQ correction, it's pretty drastic. EQ-ing the bass and drums in the mix would be better than trying rescue it post mix

 

 

the blue line is the fft after the EQ (as shown below)

 

 

 

P.S. i'll redo this tomorrow, I had to do it a low volume so my EQ boosts are a bit exaggerated i think

:O)

[perunamuusi]

if you're worried about getting the best sound out of your amen - my advice is don't use fruity slicer

its a fun tool but it savages the samples

 

also your red hot cock intro needs more cowbell / worm

[Guest stolemb]

this is my EQ correction, it's pretty drastic. EQ-ing the bass and drums in the mix would be better than trying rescue it post mix

 

 

the blue line is the fft after the EQ (as shown below)

 

 

 

P.S. i'll redo this tomorrow, I had to do it a low volume so my EQ boosts are a bit exaggerated i think

:O)

 

Nice paint work, I'll update this with more stuff soon.

 

if you're worried about getting the best sound out of your amen - my advice is don't use fruity slicer

its a fun tool but it savages the samples

 

also your red hot cock intro needs more cowbell / worm

 

When you say savage, are you refeering to the way FLSlicer cuts the sample in pieces? If so, you can re-select where the cuts happen if the automatic detection of those fails, since it uses .rex files. Usually it detects the hits pretty well.

 

About cowbells and worms, yeah, but it was basically about the bass there, so I thrown some amen and done.

[Guest ۞ Syntheme ۞]

I forget to mention I used a dynamic EQ (voxengo gliss). DUH!!

so the curve can't be transfered directly to another type of EQ.

 

daft of me, I know

 

;)

[Guest stolemb]

Those are the amen and the bass in different files, so you can analyze/modify/whatever properly.

 

basstest.rar

[awepittance]

BCM, thats pretty devastating.

 

Are you sure you can't improve the sound of that amen without spending ten motherfuckin grand on equipement?

 

almost every mastering engineer i know relies heavily on a set of VST plugins called Waves Diamond and the PSP warmer pack. These are basically free since they can be found on various illegal software sites on the internet. Getting expensive mastering equipment makes it a lot easier and faster to get the sound you want, but its equally possible to get that sound with using software and nothing else.

[Guest A/D]

It's more than possible to get a good, loud mix without expensive equipment or stolen plugins. (Not that one of those groups doesn't apply to me. Still.) Kjaerhus Audio have a good compressor and limiter for free (http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/classic-series.php). Find an EQ you like (the one that comes with Sonar is acceptable for me). Now get a decent spectral analyzer like Voxengo's SPAN.

 

Put SPAN on your master track and look at it with the tracks soloed and together. You'll get an idea of the spectral footprint of your sounds this way. When you can see two tracks overlap in a frequency area, it means they're making your mix muddy. Pick the important ranges for each sound and EQ them out of each others' way. Sweeten the sounds in their own areas of the mix. The kick and the bass are the most often conflicting and the most difficult to separate, since they play very well in similar areas. Try boosting the kick around 100-120hz and cutting it around 80 and then reverse that for the bass - increase 60-80 and cut at 100. Again all of these ranges depend on the sound you're trying to achieve.

 

One trick I use for fattening a sound is to apply a mild distortion, which will increase the overtones of a sound, and then softening it with EQ so it doesn't sound distorted. I don't recommend this for a bass sound (distortion at low Hz is usually muddy and gross), but if you use Izotope's Trash (not free), you can distort only the upper ranges. This can also be achieved by bussing the sound to an EQ'd track and distorting that. A distorted upper-range bass with a sine wave underneath it can be incredibly powerful, and easy to mix a kick into, since that 80-140 range will probably be free.

 

Compression will distort the sound in its own unique way. If you throw a compressor on your kick and slowly turn it all the way up, you'll hear how this happens. Distort/compress the kick until it's a little too punchy, and then you can back it off to mix with the bass.

 

I'm against using a master limiter on your mix except in particular situations. It's an easy way out and it will change your sound. If you like the way it sounds, perfect; but I think that the sound should be achieved in the mix. Personal preference.

 

One more thing - if you don't like the way one of your amen samples sounds, you're going to have to put it on a separate track.

 

Where's Dissolved? Now THAT guy could give a mastering lesson.

[Guest stolemb]

It's more than possible to get a good, loud mix without expensive equipment or stolen plugins. (Not that one of those groups doesn't apply to me. Still.) Kjaerhus Audio have a good compressor and limiter for free (http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/classic-series.php). Find an EQ you like (the one that comes with Sonar is acceptable for me). Now get a decent spectral analyzer like Voxengo's SPAN.

 

Put SPAN on your master track and look at it with the tracks soloed and together. You'll get an idea of the spectral footprint of your sounds this way. When you can see two tracks overlap in a frequency area, it means they're making your mix muddy. Pick the important ranges for each sound and EQ them out of each others' way. Sweeten the sounds in their own areas of the mix. The kick and the bass are the most often conflicting and the most difficult to separate, since they play very well in similar areas. Try boosting the kick around 100-120hz and cutting it around 80 and then reverse that for the bass - increase 60-80 and cut at 100. Again all of these ranges depend on the sound you're trying to achieve.

 

One trick I use for fattening a sound is to apply a mild distortion, which will increase the overtones of a sound, and then softening it with EQ so it doesn't sound distorted. I don't recommend this for a bass sound (distortion at low Hz is usually muddy and gross), but if you use Izotope's Trash (not free), you can distort only the upper ranges. This can also be achieved by bussing the sound to an EQ'd track and distorting that. A distorted upper-range bass with a sine wave underneath it can be incredibly powerful, and easy to mix a kick into, since that 80-140 range will probably be free.

 

Compression will distort the sound in its own unique way. If you throw a compressor on your kick and slowly turn it all the way up, you'll hear how this happens. Distort/compress the kick until it's a little too punchy, and then you can back it off to mix with the bass.

 

I'm against using a master limiter on your mix except in particular situations. It's an easy way out and it will change your sound. If you like the way it sounds, perfect; but I think that the sound should be achieved in the mix. Personal preference.

 

One more thing - if you don't like the way one of your amen samples sounds, you're going to have to put it on a separate track.

 

Where's Dissolved? Now THAT guy could give a mastering lesson.

 

Thanks for the awesome comment.

 

I'll upload how it sounds after some refining.

[Guest grinningcat]

Im curious to listen to the stuff in this thread when i get home. Mastering and compression is one of the things I find most frustrating and demoralising, you can spend days and days tweaking and yet only arrive back to square one. I usually have problems with the bass/kick drum all being muddy. I'm only using a laptop and the waves plugins.

 

I still cant find any decent video / audio tutorial where they actually start off with a duff sounding track, and show you how by applying the different techniques (splitting sounds and panning left and right, compressing, multiband compression etc ) on different channels it all make the tune sound tonk. That would be very useful.

 

someone on this board was saying how any released tune (aphex, sqp etc) all go through the mastering process with some expert dude with a huge mixing desk making the tunes sound good, whereas i was under the impression this shit was straight out of the laptop, and therefore feel mine should sound as clean.

[Guest welcome to the machine]

Im curious to listen to the stuff in this thread when i get home. Mastering and compression is one of the things I find most frustrating and demoralising, you can spend days and days tweaking and yet only arrive back to square one. I usually have problems with the bass/kick drum all being muddy. I'm only using a laptop and the waves plugins.

 

I still cant find any decent video / audio tutorial where they actually start off with a duff sounding track, and show you how by applying the different techniques (splitting sounds and panning left and right, compressing, multiband compression etc ) on different channels it all make the tune sound tonk. That would be very useful.

 

someone on this board was saying how any released tune (aphex, sqp etc) all go through the mastering process with some expert dude with a huge mixing desk making the tunes sound good, whereas i was under the impression this shit was straight out of the laptop, and therefore feel mine should sound as clean.

 

well, for a start, just having the waves plugs will do you just fine! they are never gonna sound super shiney special as a creative eq or whatever (in the way you might use a pristine hardware eq just to add glimmer to the sound, not really to change it much) but they are more than adequate for learning how to mix well, and if used well they can yield a perfectly god mix. they'll do the job just fine in other words.

 

the thing about a video tutorial is that every track will need different treament, sometimes radically different, i think the issue with a video tutorial is that it would be counter productive, people would see it and use those exact ideas on every track, but the essence of mixing is learn your tools and then just close your eyes, listen, and mold your ideas together specific to the exact sounds you are working with. you need to learn your gear so well you dont JUST follow conventions, you can just listen to your track and know exactly where to tweak to get it sitting nicely, without thinking too much about the actual knob fiddlings.

 

But thinking about it, it would be nice to see a REALLY good compressor tutorial, or eq tutorial, that goes through a number of tracks and sounds and shows you few of the basic techniques. so you can see all the situations you can use these two fundamentally (but not practically) simple tools.

 

with the mastering thing, I think you are thinking that it makes more of a drastic difference than it does. the thing with mastering is that its NOT a stage where any old tracks can be made to sound good provided you have an expert and a big desk! essentially, the mix is the REALLY important thing, a master can rarely fix a bad mix.

 

the mix you submit to mastering has to sound (at a decent volume) pretty much exactly how you want the finished thing to sound, ie it has to sound great. then, in mastering, a guy with, not a big desk at all, often just 1 channel strip or a set of good hardware coming straight from the computer (with great converters) can tweak it and push it in VERY subtle ways.

 

if your mix sounds a little bassy and not too bright, but the mix itself is nice and too your liking (ie you dont want to dive back in and add treble to certain bits because you feel it would wreck the balance) then mastering can do that. subtle boosts and cuts with (normally) very good gear can make a track glimmer in ways that you couldnt get in the mix. mastering also brings the track up (often) to the sort of 'loudness' level you get in most released tracks. it can reduce dynamics so that your track still sounds as it used to, but sounds loud and upfront even when played in a club or a busy room. on a hifi at home it can make it so you can hear all the parts nice and loud but without having the volume turned all the way up.

 

so, mastering is an extra process that does these things, as well as others, but isnt involved directly in the creative process. so even though its common for guys like aphex, sp etc to have there tracks mastered, they would have still had a GREAT mix before hand, mastering just gets it to sound how we are used to cd's sounding!

 

I think at points squarepusher may have done his own mastering, it wouldnt surprise me as he seems incredibly focused, and skilled with the equipment he uses, but i know some of his stuff, and most others, has been externally mastered! its just important to remember its not some magic process which makes your tracks sound amazing!

 

i may see what i can do with doing a vid on mixing techniques like you said, or maybe just a little one for a drum tracks, may be fun, if i do i'll post it here!

 

hope that helps,

 

o

[Guest welcome to the machine]

It's more than possible to get a good, loud mix without expensive equipment or stolen plugins. (Not that one of those groups doesn't apply to me. Still.) Kjaerhus Audio have a good compressor and limiter for free (http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/classic-series.php). Find an EQ you like (the one that comes with Sonar is acceptable for me). Now get a decent spectral analyzer like Voxengo's SPAN.

 

Put SPAN on your master track and look at it with the tracks soloed and together. You'll get an idea of the spectral footprint of your sounds this way. When you can see two tracks overlap in a frequency area, it means they're making your mix muddy. Pick the important ranges for each sound and EQ them out of each others' way. Sweeten the sounds in their own areas of the mix. The kick and the bass are the most often conflicting and the most difficult to separate, since they play very well in similar areas. Try boosting the kick around 100-120hz and cutting it around 80 and then reverse that for the bass - increase 60-80 and cut at 100. Again all of these ranges depend on the sound you're trying to achieve.

 

One trick I use for fattening a sound is to apply a mild distortion, which will increase the overtones of a sound, and then softening it with EQ so it doesn't sound distorted. I don't recommend this for a bass sound (distortion at low Hz is usually muddy and gross), but if you use Izotope's Trash (not free), you can distort only the upper ranges. This can also be achieved by bussing the sound to an EQ'd track and distorting that. A distorted upper-range bass with a sine wave underneath it can be incredibly powerful, and easy to mix a kick into, since that 80-140 range will probably be free.

 

Compression will distort the sound in its own unique way. If you throw a compressor on your kick and slowly turn it all the way up, you'll hear how this happens. Distort/compress the kick until it's a little too punchy, and then you can back it off to mix with the bass.

 

I'm against using a master limiter on your mix except in particular situations. It's an easy way out and it will change your sound. If you like the way it sounds, perfect; but I think that the sound should be achieved in the mix. Personal preference.

 

One more thing - if you don't like the way one of your amen samples sounds, you're going to have to put it on a separate track.

 

Where's Dissolved? Now THAT guy could give a mastering lesson.

 

listen to this guy, some good stuff! its all about having loads of techniques like this and knowing when to try them out, when one or the other might work. getting to know your gear is paramount, that way you dont think, 'i'll try that sending the kick to an additional track, eqing and distorting thing' you think 'that kick isnt present enough, lets add some overtones to its midrange'. you know, so you are thinking musically what you want first, and the process you have to go through to get it becomes second nature. its all about listening!

[pylonbitch]

just a thought.

 

 

you don't want to be too anal about "giving everything it's own frequency range".

 

ha;lf the joy of mixing is the way sounds that overlap affect each other... harmonic distortion/interfernce, phasing etc etc.

 

i know a few people who literally divide the full frequency range into bits, and make each section contain a single instrument.

 

sounds sterile as fuck to me.

 

of course you need to make space for individual instruments, but you don't have to be frull on about it.

[Guest welcome to the machine]

just a thought.

 

 

you don't want to be too anal about "giving everything it's own frequency range".

 

ha;lf the joy of mixing is the way sounds that overlap affect each other... harmonic distortion/interfernce, phasing etc etc.

 

i know a few people who literally divide the full frequency range into bits, and make each section contain a single instrument.

 

sounds sterile as fuck to me.

 

of course you need to make space for individual instruments, but you don't have to be frull on about it.

 

yeah yeah, for sure. you can also have fun mixing two sounds as one, like a guitar and a dirty synth line to create one big sound. weve been mixing the pads and the BV's as one in a band im in and it sounds great for the sort of slightly spacey bridge sections..

 

or in certain genres, jazz for example, it often sounds great having things barely seperated at all, just a few tweaks to make each instrument clear. in that way you keep the natural expressive sound of the players almost completely intact.

 

on the other hand if you want a MASSIVE sounding super heavy drum and bass track, you'll want to cram in as much sound as possible and eq everything massively to avoid a big mess.

 

blah blah, context etc.