Re: Nur Ein XIII Round Zero "Trial By Fire"
Posted: Wed May 09, 2018 11:44 am
I appreciate the feedback (positive & negative). Hello everyone. Third Cat here!
Novum Stercore Non Vetus
https://songfight.net/forums/
I totally agree with you on the Eno thing. His vocal albums are some of my favorites ever. The ambient stuff is good, but there's too much of it.j$ wrote: Rob From Amersfoort – hell yeah all music should sound like this. A bit short but I just played it again. And again. This is how I wanted Brian Eno’s music to go post-roxy but he went all pretentious ambient rubbish instead. My Fellow judges have cloth ears.
arby wrote:I'm always amazed by how clear and loud (well-mixed) some of the recordings are. HOW do you get them to sound so good?!?!? Mine sound like they were recorded in a basement under a sackcloth by comparison.
Right. The production is doable (not going to say I'm good at it) but ONLY if you have recorded your tracks separately. Our biggest issue is we don't have the ability to record the tracks separately, so we went with a "live" recording in the rehearsal studio. Not under any delusion that it produced a great sound, more out of necessity. In fact, I recorded it using my iPod Touch with a Zoom mic attached. So not only did we not have separate tracks, we didn't have a great recorder.noma wrote:Fortunately, producing (i.e., assembling tracks, mixing etc) requires little to no money nowadays. You just need a good DAW. Audacity, which you can download for free, has most of the tools you need. I see you are using GarageBand, which is fine just as well. The key to a good production is in the use of limiting and compression, which helps with loudness issues, such as certain notes of your playing being louder than others, and enables you to increase the overall loudness and "oomph" of your tracks - be careful not to overdo it, though, or else your song will become a muddy mess (google "loudness war" and you'll see what I mean - compression can be highly addictive to the point where you believe you need more and more of it.)
The other main part of mixing is equalizing, i.e. decreasing or increasing certain frequencies. This can be a bit tricky, but it's essential to a good production. You can look up basic EQ settings for any instrument on the web, so you don't have to remember it all also, use high pass and low pass filters. On a bass guitar in standard tuning, for example, the fundamental frequency of an open low E string begins at 41 Hz, so you can apply a high pass filter that cuts down everything beyond that frequency, in order to decrease rumbling and muddiness.
I do have a laptop. Since we can only do drums in the rehearsal studio (none of us has a drum kit at home), could we still record the drums directly into said laptop? Also the studio has fairly decent vocal mics. It's just a question of how to get their signal into the laptop. What about this Blue Snowball that Nivs has? It has a USB interface. Could I plug that into an external sound card and then the latter into the laptop? Also what do you think about the Behringer U-Control Uca202, is that a good sound card?noma wrote:As for the recording, you need four things which will improve your sound a lot. Again, excuse me if you know all of this already and/or already use these four things.
First, the mic itself. I prefer a large diaphragm condenser microphone, which is a favorite in studio production. However, condenser mics require phantom power (which is not that much of a problem, but anyway), whereas dynamic microphones don't. The latter are the prefered kind of mics for live performance, but can be used in the studio just as well. A good and fairly inexpensive dynamic microphone would be the Shure SM57 (or SM58).
Second, you need an audio interface. This is basically an external sound card optimized for recording (there are internal ones as well, but an external one has the advantage of being portable, and the only way to go if you are recording with a laptop, MacBook or whatever.) For $100, you should be able to find a good audio interface, or even cheaper if you are on a budget. Any external audio interface, even the really cheap Behringers, should be an improvement over a standard sound card.
Also, some, but not all audio interfaces have built-in phantom power. If you are planning to record with a condenser microphone, definitely look for an interface that has phantom power, else you will need a preamp as well.
Third, the cable. As the cable is what transmits the sound from the mic to the interface, a good cable is essential. Klotz cables are what I prefer for recording. A lot of people buy expensive equipment and then skimp on the cables. Don't underestimate the importance of a good cable.
Fourth, you will need a pop filter on your mic for vocal recording. And that is basically all it takes!
Yeah I only had the one track, and it sounded a bit muddy on the low end, so I tried to EQ it to make it a bit cleaner, but then the whole thing just sounds quiet. And yes I agree about the overtones, I noticed them also on the Omnichord (the swoopy, theremin-esque sounding instrument throughout). But I didn't know how to EQ it to make those less annoying without also taking down the vocals, which I agree are too low in the mix. Distortion was NOT intentional. In case you are interested, here is the original recording that I had to work with. I got some additional siren sounds from my bassist separately that I did my best to mix in with Garageband, but for everything else I only had this one track: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ln27bo0sgtcr ... 9.m4a?dl=0.noma wrote:Now let me give you a review of your song's production.
The recording sounds a bit washy at times. Guitar would definitely benefit from some EQing, it's not prominent enough in the mix IMO. Drums are OK. The vocals are what kind of bugs me about it. Definitely some EQing needed. Also, they sound distorted at times, not sure if that was intentional. Try decreasing the output / gain level if this distortion was unwanted. Generally, when recording, it's better with less gain in order to not distort your track. You can always make it louder later via your DAW.
One more thing that is irritating about your recording is the amount of overtones in the siren part, which hurts my ears a bit. This is a common problem with synths (sawtooth, mainly). EQing, again, should help, or a low pass filter maybe.
By the way, I really like your song, apart from the production issues.
Hope this helped!
Well, there are a lot of benefits to recording a live performance as well. Basic tracks such as drums and bass are often done in just one take. Zoom mics are pretty good for this, definitely not a bad idea. I have used the Zoom H2 myself back in the 2000s, in a rehearsing studio where the band couldn't do separate tracks, so, same situation.arby wrote:Right. The production is doable (not going to say I'm good at it) but ONLY if you have recorded your tracks separately. Our biggest issue is we don't have the ability to record the tracks separately, so we went with a "live" recording in the rehearsal studio. Not under any delusion that it produced a great sound, more out of necessity. In fact, I recorded it using my iPod Touch with a Zoom mic attached. So not only did we not have separate tracks, we didn't have a great recorder.
Sure, the drums on your song sounded alright to me. Again, the Zoom mic (it records in stereo, right?) works very well here. It's much harder to get a good drum sound with a single dynamic microphone.arby wrote:I do have a laptop. Since we can only do drums in the rehearsal studio (none of us has a drum kit at home), could we still record the drums directly into said laptop? Also the studio has fairly decent vocal mics. It's just a question of how to get their signal into the laptop. What about this Blue Snowball that Nivs has? It has a USB interface. Could I plug that into an external sound card and then the latter into the laptop? Also what do you think about the Behringer U-Control Uca202, is that a good sound card?
Yeah... That's the problem with having only one track. If you can somehow manage to do two separate tracks, I'd definitely recommend one for the vocals and the other for everything else. Early Beatles recorded like that, with a two track tape recorder, and that still sounded alright.arby wrote:Yeah I only had the one track, and it sounded a bit muddy on the low end, so I tried to EQ it to make it a bit cleaner, but then the whole thing just sounds quiet. And yes I agree about the overtones, I noticed them also on the Omnichord (the swoopy, theremin-esque sounding instrument throughout). But I didn't know how to EQ it to make those less annoying without also taking down the vocals, which I agree are too low in the mix. Distortion was NOT intentional. In case you are interested, here is the original recording that I had to work with. I got some additional siren sounds from my bassist separately that I did my best to mix in with Garageband, but for everything else I only had this one track: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ln27bo0sgtcr ... 9.m4a?dl=0.
You're welcomearby wrote:Thanks so much for the kind words and helpful feedback.
Manhattan Glutton wrote:The New Ugly Reviews Round 0
Many thanks to Ben for editing and getting everything together.
Just listened to this, very much enjoyed hearing you disagree with each other and the various Dracula comparisons!bennyharv3 wrote:Hey everyone! This is Ben from The New Ugly along with Mike, and our coverage of round 0 is up and live! http://podcast.songlander.com/?name=201 ... in13-0.mp3
Also, Ben was noticeably lower in volume.vowlvom wrote:Seconded iVeg on not being able to hear you when you talk over the songs though.
I don't have a DAW so I'm just using a BR-900. The computer went pfffthtffhtht and I'm debating on buying a new one or repairing the laptop. Been debating for a month almost. So I'm sure the vocal recording could have been better, but the mix level was a compromise (and could be improved) but there is no EQ, compression or spacial effect except what was on the input when I recorded it. (Slight recording compression and room sound.) That's also why the intro is twice as long as it should be and some of the timing is a hair odd. I just recorded sounds and they are where I recorded them.lichenthroat wrote:Pigfarmer Jr.—This might be my favorite Pigfarmer Jr. song. The vocal mix doesn’t sound quite right, though. Can you do anything to make it sound fuller and maybe lower? Someone more experienced at the mixing board might be able to give you better ideas than I can. Anyway, the song is sweet.
You've already gotten a fair bit of feedback on that. I just listened to your recording, and part of the problem is that if you record the entire room, room acoustics come into play, too, and most rooms sound like crap. The best you can do in a crap room is record with near mics only (which can get a little more complicated than what you did for that recording) which eliminates most of the room sound. One reason people go to a proper studio is that those have rooms that are designed to sound good.arby wrote:I'm always amazed by how clear and loud (well-mixed) some of the recordings are. HOW do you get them to sound so good?!?!? Mine sound like they were recorded in a basement under a sackcloth by comparison.
iVeg wrote:Arby -
It's possible to get a great recording with 1 stereo mic into a recorder. Cowboy Junkies did it with "The Trinity Session". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trinity_Session
They had a great room with great acoustics. They had a $9000 Calrec Ambisonic mic into RDAT. They used a PA to boost the vocals. So it's doable
Hey, thanks so much for this! I agree, mine was lacking in low end. Your mix sounds much better. I will look into the resources Nick already provided about EQ-ing. Also I did get that Behringer Audio interface thing. No idea how to use it! And with only three hours of rehearsal time tomorrow (in which we also have to write our song!) I probably won't be able to figure it out for this week's challenge. Hopefully we'll still be in the running next week. Hahajast wrote:You've already gotten a fair bit of feedback on that. I just listened to your recording, and part of the problem is that if you record the entire room, room acoustics come into play, too, and most rooms sound like crap. The best you can do in a crap room is record with near mics only (which can get a little more complicated than what you did for that recording) which eliminates most of the room sound. One reason people go to a proper studio is that those have rooms that are designed to sound good.arby wrote:I'm always amazed by how clear and loud (well-mixed) some of the recordings are. HOW do you get them to sound so good?!?!? Mine sound like they were recorded in a basement under a sackcloth by comparison.
That said, even on a one-shot recording you can usually salvage a bit. I'm not a mastering engineer by any stretch of the imagination but still I've taken the liberty to apply a little EQ and compression for illustration, spent about ten minutes on this (result attached). I'm sure there's more to be done, but not by me.
In any case, due to the limitations in your recording setup you just won't be able to get the typical cut-through-the-mix studio sound on the vocals that you're probably used to from commercial productions. Sorry.
PS. I only saw your original, untreated recording after I posted this. I used the edited recording as my base version. I think you probably removed a little too much low end -- overcorrecting is always an easy mistake to make in mixing --, other than that you probably had the right idea.