5.1 mixing

[modey]

i'm really keen to try my hand at a 5.1 release, i've done a few mixes so far but nothing spectacular - just 5.1'ing some older tracks - but i'm getting some layers and recordings together for an ambient album, i figured that'd be the easiest genre to start with.

 

anyone else dipped their musical cock into the cake that is surround mixing? i'd be very interested in some ac3s or equivalent sound files, or even just some discussion.

 

 

ps. i'm using reaper for recording/arrangements, then rendering the multitracks out to separate wavs, to mix in vegas (a bit of a pain but i like using reaper) - and then from there, probably will use some kind of dvd authoring software once everything's done. might try to get someone to make some pretty visuals for it too, or maybe try it myself (it'll probably suck though).

[ryancolecreate]

hmmm never tried it but it would be cool to play with. Only problem is that i have no 5.1 system to even listen it afterwards (or during haha).

[acid1]

Only problem is that i have no 5.1 system to even listen it afterwards (or during haha).

 

This has been my problem as well.

[Guest maus]

i've done a few bits and bobs for TV and film that are 5.0 (5.1). mixing in surround isn't all that different from stereo, fundamentally. it comes down to not getting too carried away with the surround panning. in fact, most score that's mixed 5.1 relegates the rear channels to reverb or very occasionally to a decca tree or something used in the recording process (orchestrally speaking) that just adds some real ambience.

 

of course, mixing for score is supposed to be unobtrusive. i've been working on a 5.1 channel blu-ray maus release with visuals i've been collecting with my 5dII on various travels all munged together in aftereffects. mixing this type of affair is proving to be very different. when you're doing it creatively and without concern for subtlety, it becomes a lot more fun. panning front-to-back can be a cool effect, particularly if coupled with automating a reverb wet/dry signal in tandem.

 

monitoring is the key of course. only a few interfaces offer specific considerations for surround mixing. i'm using an apogee ensemble, but i think the motu traveler does surround, as well as the RME stuff. the main issue is setting the interface up so that volume is centrally controlled by the output knob. otherwise adjusting the levels in a software mixer is nightmarish.

 

beyond that, there are loads of surround-specific plugins you can play with. if you're looking to expand stereo material to surround, TC unwrap does some interesting things. then of course altiverb has surround modes, as do many synths and such now.

 

i'm in logic, which has pretty painless setups for surround, but YMMV with other DAWs.

[Braintree]

Yeah, I did a 5.1 composition for my final class in college. Here:

 

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=JOTMM5FM

[awepittance]

i like the way Cubase/Nuendo incorporates 5.1 and it's very easy to customize a surround configuration. Since most of the surround stuff i've done (which is very little) has been in quad i've rarely actually used a 5.1 setup. I think the center speaker is unnecessary. I've heard a lot of producers using the center speaker for vocals in a mix or the kick drum's high end. I like keeping what i do as 2 stereo pairs because it's easier for me to work with, especially when listening back to it. Maybe some day (has that day already come?) wave editors like adobe audition will be able to load waves/aiffs that have 5 or more channels in one file.

[modey]

Yeah, I did a 5.1 composition for my final class in college. Here:

 

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=JOTMM5FM

that's really awesome! just the kind of thing i want to hear in 5.1. did you include extra parts specifically for the LFE channel? it sounds like it when the main melody is played in the lower register.

 

i like the way Cubase/Nuendo incorporates 5.1 and it's very easy to customize a surround configuration. Since most of the surround stuff i've done (which is very little) has been in quad i've rarely actually used a 5.1 setup. I think the center speaker is unnecessary. I've heard a lot of producers using the center speaker for vocals in a mix or the kick drum's high end. I like keeping what i do as 2 stereo pairs because it's easier for me to work with, especially when listening back to it. Maybe some day (has that day already come?) wave editors like adobe audition will be able to load waves/aiffs that have 5 or more channels in one file.

yeah, i don't see myself using the centre channel separately, though braintree put it to good use in his mix. i had some ideas for interesting call/response stuff using the centre channel then spreading out to L/R and rear speakers, but that might not be worth the effort.

[modey]

when you're doing it creatively and without concern for subtlety, it becomes a lot more fun. panning front-to-back can be a cool effect, particularly if coupled with automating a reverb wet/dry signal in tandem.

yeah! this is one of the reasons why i wanted to get into 5.1 mixing. usually my stuff is fairly centred when it comes to stereo field, mostly because i'm obsessive when it comes to balance - i don't like having something in the left channel if there's not an equivalent in the right. with surround mixing however, i feel a bit more free to do wacky stuff, there's not so much of a balance issue when it's front/back as opposed to left/right - i can use the regular stereo field for reverb imaging and the front/back mixing for positioning. at least that's how i see it anyway.

 

monitoring is the key of course. only a few interfaces offer specific considerations for surround mixing. i'm using an apogee ensemble, but i think the motu traveler does surround, as well as the RME stuff. the main issue is setting the interface up so that volume is centrally controlled by the output knob. otherwise adjusting the levels in a software mixer is nightmarish.

yeah, that's one problem i'm running into, my software doesn't natively support 5.1. well, reaper *kinda* does, in that it can output channels to individual soundcards/soundcard channels, but i doubt buzz will ever support it. i think i'll just write with surround sound in mind and then mix in vegas later.

[Guest Promo]

Who knows could be the next big revolution in music.

[mcbpete]

i doubt buzz will ever support it. i think i'll just write with surround sound in mind and then mix in vegas later.

Au contraire my dear - With Polac's ASIO plugins Buzz has had multichannel support for a few years now. You simply route the machines into a Polac ASIO Stereo Out and when you right click on the machine, set which channel you want to output them too. If you use something like the free VST SpatReap 66 Mod ( http://acousmodules.free.fr/acousmodules_s_en.htm - which is meant for Reaper (hence the 'Reap' part of the name) but works just as well in Buzz) you then have complete 5.1 control over your tracks.

 

Here I've got a kick drum just routed through that 5.1 panning VST then outputted to the front and rear stereo channels (both machines are Polac ASIO Outs assigned to the front and back channels as I only have a 4.0 setup):

 

[modey]

i doubt buzz will ever support it. i think i'll just write with surround sound in mind and then mix in vegas later.

Au contraire my dear - With Polac's ASIO plugins Buzz has had multichannel support for a few years now. You simply route the machines into a Polac ASIO Stereo Out and when you right click on the machine, set which channel you want to output them too. If you use something like the free VST SpatReap 66 Mod ( http://acousmodules.free.fr/acousmodules_s_en.htm - which is meant for Reaper (hence the 'Reap' part of the name) but works just as well in Buzz) you then have complete 5.1 control over your tracks.

 

Here I've got a kick drum just routed through that 5.1 panning VST then outputted to the front and rear stereo channels (both machines are Polac ASIO Outs assigned to the front and back channels as I only have a 4.0 setup):

 

interesting. might have to try it! can it output to multichannel wav though? at the moment i'm just using a multi track hd recorder to output everything to separate tracks, which is a bit of a pain in the ass, but when set up properly works very well.

[mcbpete]

can it output to multichannel wav though? at the moment i'm just using a multi track hd recorder to output everything to separate tracks, which is a bit of a pain in the ass, but when set up properly works very well.

Mmm, I knew you'd ask that Unfortunately I think the multi track hd recorder is still the way to go for something like this. I tried to find a multichannel recorder VST but didn't have any luck - the only recording VST I know of is Voxengo Recorder but I think that only supports stereo files ...

[Braintree]

Yeah, I did a 5.1 composition for my final class in college. Here:

 

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=JOTMM5FM

that's really awesome! just the kind of thing i want to hear in 5.1. did you include extra parts specifically for the LFE channel? it sounds like it when the main melody is played in the lower register.

 

Yeah, I composed the thing from the ground up in 5.1. I wrote it so that you were always being bombarded by sound from all around you. There were channels in the drum machine that I routed specifically for certain speakers.

 

I used NI Battery 3 for the drums, and Kontakt 3 for everything else.

 

By the way, all of the sounds you hear in that composition come from my body. I spent a few months sampling and designing sounds for that piece of music. Lots of sweat and blood in there. Literally.

 

i doubt buzz will ever support it. i think i'll just write with surround sound in mind and then mix in vegas later.

 

It's much better to write in 5.1 from the beginning. I wouldn't have done so much with that song if I had to automate every single drum sound to come out of a separate speaker. That would've been a nightmare.

[awepittance]

 

It's much better to write in 5.1 from the beginning. I wouldn't have done so much with that song if I had to automate every single drum sound to come out of a separate speaker. That would've been a nightmare.

 

good advice, plus it sounds better to create a track with the intention of surround rather than converting a stereo song into surround. It should be thought of as an art form in and of itself not just a way to add an extra dimension to your music.

[modey]

yeah good point. i guess i'll use that polac asio out machine while also outputting to multitrack files for mixing later on, either that or set up two stereo pairs that each get rendered to a separate wav file, combining them later in vegas.