Didn’t get the memo? My blog’s now at blog.kimlajoie.com. Go there.
Ok, I’ve finally done it. I’m closing my blog here on wordpress.com and continuing it on my own website:
I’m going to keep writing about technique and maintaining the blog as a reference for composition, production and engineering tips. I’ll also be writing a bit more about my own projects and experiences. Hopefully this will illustrate some of the more practical aspects of the techniques I write about. There might also be some surprise goodies coming in the future.
What you have to do
You’ll have to resubscribe. Sorry.
Email subscribers: I can’t take all your email addresses and sign you up for something new. Not allowed.
RSS subscribers: I can’t reach into your reader and reconfigure it. I can only perform miracles on sound.
Fortunately it’s pretty easy to resubscribe. Head over the the new blog site and check the right-hand side. If you like email, use the ‘Subscribe by email’ section. If RSS is more your style, check out the ‘RSS feeds’ section just below. It’s pretty easy.
So, what are you waiting for? Head over there!
Also, there’s a new blog post about why I bought a new iMac and installed Windows on it.
You’ve used gates, right?
If you’ve ever recorded something with a microphone, you’ve probably had a situation where the background noise was just a little too high (or the acoustic sound was just a little too quiet) and the background noise was bugging you in the mix.
So you reached for a gate, eh?
Set the threshold, maybe adjust the attack and release (I usually prefer an instant attack and fairly gentle release) and call it a day. Bingo! No noise in between playing!
That usually works fine for busy mixes where there’s always something going on, or there is a rich background texture. But in sparser mixes, you might notice that the difference between the silent and non-silent sections of a track is rather uncomfortable. When the instrument is playing, you get a rich subtle ambience (or refrigerator hum, if that’s how you roll). When the instrument stops, the life gets sucked out of the track.
Pure digital silence.
What an expander does is reduce the level of the background noise without killing it entirely. It makes the quiet stuff quieter. It helps you push the background noise out of the way when it’s not needed, but doesn’t totally suck the life out of your track.
Just be careful that you’re not using heavy compression after the expander. Expanders can be quite subtle in their effect, and compressing the resulting sound can destroy your careful balance of threshold and ratio. If you like following your tail in circles, lower the threshold of the expander to compensate for the heavy compression. In general, though, it’s not a good idea to have two processes fighting each other. If you want to use an expander, it’s probably because subtlety is important to you. Use a gentle compressor.
It’s pretty awesome.
Which is why it’s used so much. Chances are, you probably use it yourself. Doubletracking makes things sound bigger and thicker. Who wouldn’t want that?
Do I need to count the ways?
On the other hand, doubletracking diffuses the sound as well. Doubletracking will make your instrument sound more blurry and indistinct. It reduces clarity. That’s awesome when you want your double tracked instrument to be a supporting part in the background (or middle ground). Giant walls of guitars fill all the frequency gaps left by the vocals and drums. Unison is a great way of softening synth pads and rhythmic comps.
When isn’t it awesome? Probably any time you want the instrument to be front and centre. Of course, there are some stylistic exceptions (have you ever heard a trance lead that wasn’t massively detuned?) but generally doubletracking will push a sound further towards the background, and that’s often not something you’ll want to do for a foreground instrument.
Have you worked with singers?
Have you worked with other musicians?
Have you found that singers – generally – are more sensitive than other musicians? Have you found that they respond differently to criticism? Perhaps they take it more personally?
If you’ve spent any serious time as a producer or engineer working with other musicians, this is probably the experience you’ve had.
And you might have assumed that it’s something unique to singers.
That’s kind of true, but not quite. It’s not because they’re singers. It’s because we usually see singers in the studio much earlier in their careers. It’s quite common to get a singer wanting to record some songs having only been seriously dedicated to their craft for a few years (oh, they may have been singing their ‘whole life’, but ask how long they’ve been taking lessons for…)
On the other hand, a session musician probably has about 5-10 years of playing in bands and gigging before they get anywhere near a studio. Even when recording bands (unless you’re working with teenagers).
Another difference, of course, is that singers are often singer their own songs. Song which represent their self-expression. And unfortunately many singers interpret criticism of their technique as criticism of their musical expression (which, by extension, is criticism of themselves as people). And again, experience is key. A singer/songwriter with ten years of experience is less likely to take criticism personally than one with two years of experience.
So what does this mean?
You probably need to be more sensitive with singers. But not because they’re singers. You need to be more sensitive with any inexperienced musician. And you need to be more sensitive with any musician that is expressing themselves in a very personal way.
Ok, this time a few quick tips to try out…
You probably all know about the delay-> filter technique to make the repeats darker and sink back into the mix. It’s so common that most delays have a built in lowpass filter to gently push the repeats into the background. But there’s a lot more you can do with a delay. If you haven’t already, try out the following techniques in your next project:
Simply, de-essing is a process for reducing the level of sibilance in a vocal recording.
What is sibilance?
Sibilance is characterised by ‘sss’ and ‘ts’ sounds (and, to a lesser extent, ‘t’ and ‘k’ and ‘z’ sounds) in the English language. Unlike vowels, sibilant sounds have a relatively low (in volume) pitched component and a high (in volume) unpitched noise component. The unhitched noise is also focussed strongly in the higher register (unlike ‘shh’ sounds).
Why would you want to reduce it?
Sibilance is essential for intelligibility. That is, we need to hear it in order to understand the words delivered by the vocalist. Too much, however, can unbalance a mix. Some singers naturally deliver sibilant sounds loudly (this often applies to singers who aren’t classically trained). Sometimes EQ or compression can enhance the sibilance in a vocal recording (especially when the high frequencies are boosted).
When listening to the voice on its own it can be difficult to know if the sibilance is too strong. This is because our brain naturally compensates for the difference in volume between the vowels and the sibilance. In a mix, however, you’ll notice when the sibilance is too strong. You’ll raise the vocal level until the vowels are at the right level but the sibilance is too sharp and ‘sticking out’ of the mix, or your’ll reduce the vocal level until the sibilance sits well but the vowels disappear under the mix. Sometimes strong sibilance can excite the vocal reverb, making the reverb much more noticeable.
How does de-essing reduce sibilance?
De-essers are usually set up as simplified compressors with a bandpass or highpass filter in the sidechain.
Most de-essors do not have the full compliment of compression controls (attack, release, threshold, ratio, makeup). Instead, there is usually just a threshold (and sometimes a ratio control). The other controls are tuned to work with sibilance and the human voice. De-essers are among the most specialised studio tools – they don’t need a lot of controls or a wide range of operation.
The filtered sidechain changes the compressor’s behaviour so that it only reduces gain when there is sibilance in the audio. The filter is tuned quite high (usually above 5kHz) so that the compressor doesn’t respond to energy in the low or mids (where most of the vowel energy is). The compressor, however, applies gain reduction to the whole signal – not the filtered version. This means that when the sibilance is being reduced, the actual tone of the voice is not changed. It’s just made quieter.
Some de-essors use dynamic EQ instead of a compressor. They’re usually designed so that instead of reducing the gain of the whole signal, they only reduce gain to the high frequencies. Imagine a high shelf or parametric cut that only comes in when the voice is sibilant. This kinds of de-essers require more care when they’re being set up because they work by changing the tone of the voice (rather than just the level). If not configured well, they can make the vocalist sound like s/he has a lisp.
How do I set up a de-esser?
I usually wait until the mix is almost completely finished before applying a de-esser. I’ll make sure the level of the vowels in the vocal are balanced well against the other elements of the mix. I’ll then use the de-esser just enough to bring down the sibilance to an acceptable level. Usually, I aim for the lead vocal sibilance to be at a similar level to the hi-hats, snare or other prominent high-frequency sound in the mix.
I almost almost insert the de-esser after EQ and compression (but before any time-based effects such as delay or reverb, of course). This is because I use the de-esser to slightly modify a sound that I’m already happy with. Applying compression after a de-esser can actually counteract the de-essing, as the rull-range compressor can bring the sibilance level back up.
What else is a de-esser useful for?
De-essers can be very useful for backing vocals. There are some situations where backing vocals (especially stacked backing vocals) are a little messy. Most of the time it’s fine, but it’s most pronounced in the sibilance. A de-esser will bring the sibilance right down, making the backing vocals sound less messy. Use this way, a de-esser can be applied much more heavily – the intelligibility and articulation is carried by the lead vocals. Just watch out for any sections where the background vocals are exposed – heavy de-essing will make them sound weird without the lead vocal.
De-essing can sometimes be useful on drum kits – particularly on overheads when balance of the kit is right but the crash cymbals are too loud. A de-esser can sometimes be effective in reducing the level of the crash cymbals while still retaining the sense of room and space. Again – subtlety is the key here. Too much de-essing will suck the air out and make the drums sound unnatural.