MixTips

Recording a band with only 8 inputs

2011-09-05T11:39:00.000-07:00

Many modern audio interfaces come with around eight inputs and for not very much money. Some have mic amps built in, but often with just line inputs. This might be all that you can afford to start with (getting more than that is usually a big step in budget), but this doesn’t have to limit you from recording a band all together and getting to grips with recording.

Performance is the most important thing (see my ‘Performance is Everything blog) so being able to record together will help improve the overall take. Recording to an eight-track machine used to mean that you were limited in your number of recorded tracks. Even if you had eight mics on the drum kit you had to mix them down to a couple meaning that you were stuck with your recorded drum sound. Now, with powerful editing abilities in all the DAWs, you can record a band with eight inputs and not lose control over your mix, but still get that full band performance.

The Set Up:

If you’re recording a big band with 26 musicians you’re basically in the same position as you were with an eight-track take machine, but if you’re recording just the rhythm section or an average pop/rock band you can get control over your drums and still get the live band feel.

Let’s say we’ve got drums, bass, guitar and guide vocals. If you’ve got the mics and large mixer, you may use 16 or more mics to get the sound you want, but you don’t have to lose any of these mics with this method. Here’s how:

Kick/High Hat
Snare (top only)
Toms (all)
Overhead Left
Overhead Right
Bass (DI)
Guitar (DI)
Guide Vocal

Kick & Hats

Grouping the kick and hats together, might sound like an odd thing to do but if you think about it, these are the two mics that are going to cross over frequency wise the least. There is some sonic cross over but often you can get away with having them on the same track and leave EQ to do the rest.

To get complete separation, put a High Pass Filter (HPF) on the Kick and a Low Pass Filter (LPF) on the high hat, both with the same cut-off frequency, somewhere between 800Hz and 1kHz. Then once recorded you can copy the signal onto two tracks and apply the same filters for each respective channel. This will take out all the kick drum from the high hat mic and all the high hat from the kick drum mic.

To overcome having lost the top end of the kick drum after recoding your take, record a sample of your kick sound, but this time, if you used more than one mic, record each of them on a separate track. You can then do two things with these (only if you need to):

Replace the original kick drum with each of the sounds you’ve recorded and not use the original; or
Replace the kick, but apply the same filter to the samples as you did to the high hat and this will give you what you took out originally.

You probably won’t miss the low end on the high hat as there isn’t a great deal of useful stuff below 1kHz on a high hat, but if you did have a particularly deep sound, do the same thing but make sure you do it with a couple of different hit samples so that it feels a little more human.

Snare

Now I vary rarely use an under snare mic, but if you do like to record with one there are two ways you can do this:

Mix the two channels down to the one input and lose control over balance
Only record the top snare mic and then take samples of the under snare mic (soft, medium, hard) once you’ve finished recording, using sound replacer to add this mic in to the mix.

The first approach will probably be enough for most situations, but if you do want that extra bit of control the second approach will give you this. The under snare mic won’t be as dynamically accurate as in the first approach but you should be able to get good results, with control.

Toms

Again there are two ways of approaching this, but both are in the editing stages so you don’t have to make too many decisions early on and you can always use a combination of the two. For places where the drummer is playing two toms at exactly the same time you may need to use a combination of the two.

Edit each tom hit from the one tracks and separate onto individual channels; or
Take samples of the toms after recording and replace the toms using this recorded track as a guide for timing and dynamics.

Most of the time the first approach will be enough. You might not get that much overlap on the toms and what overlap you do get might be little enough to not notice any panning you do. The second approach is a little more time consuming but will give you control over the tails of each tom hit and allow better panning effects. It depends on the drum part you’re recording on which one you use.

Overheads & Room

If you’ve only got eight inputs on your interface, it’s likely that you’re not going to have the mics or mic amps to be able to record close mics, overheads and room mics, but if you do there’s only really one way of being able to do this… MONO.

You can either mono your overheads and have mono room as well, or
you can mix your toms into your overheads (or snare channel if you want to keep the overheads ‘pure’) and use the tom channel for the mono room.

Mono drums are underrated though and can be quite cool. It worked for The Beatles well enough.

If you do ad the toms into the snare channel, then you will have to edit them out of the snare track to make sure you have full control. It will probably be safer to EQ the bottom end out of the toms when recording this way so you just use them as triggers. Then take samples and record the full frequency spectrum. It’s unlikely that the snare and toms will be played exactly the same time, but just check first.

Bass and Guitars

Most of the time when recording I only take a DI for bass guitars and one mic on double basses or guitar amps, so one channel for bass wouldn’t be a problem. If you use more than one mic on double basses then you’ll need to combine these two when recording, but this should still give you enough maneuverability in the mix using EQ.

For bass and guitar amps however, you’d be best off getting the amps up and running to have in front of the players for the sound and the trouser flapping qualities, but only record the DIs and monitor with an amp simulator. Then once you’ve go your take and you’ve done your edits, you can re-amp the guitars and use as many mics as you want on them.

Vocals

Here I’d say take a guide vocal and not another instrument so that the band have some sort of guide to play to. This often gives the best guide and feel for a track, but it is also often the best take a singer makes. The one where they weren’t concentrating on their performance and they were just getting into the music.

It might just end up being a case where you drop in a couple of lines or fix a couple of notes with Autotune and you’ve got it. You don’t have to use it but you’ve got it just in case you need to. Make sure you’ve got no or minimal spill on the mic though, as you’ll find it hard to edit between take otherwise.

Overdubbing.

Once you’ve got your take and made the edits and drop ins you need to while you’re set up in this position, you can overdub till your heart is content. Double guitars (even to the point of replacing them if needs be); layer vocals; add string; brass and whatever else you like.

What’s important is that you’ve got a good feel in timing and dynamics from the original performance. This means that every overdub you do is being played to a great feeling track which makes the overdub feel great and everything just keeps getting better.

Reverb Chamber

2011-08-22T13:15:00.000-07:00

Before the invention of reverb plug ins, digital reverbs units or things like plate and spring reverbs, in order to add some ambience to a sound studios would have a dedicated room in which to make reverb. Some studios still have them as they have a characteristic sound and due to the fact it is ‘proper’ reverb, they often sound the best too.

The basic principle is, you have a speaker at one end of the reverb chamber and play source material through it. Then at the other end you have a mic (or stereo pair) picking up the sound in the room and then mix that back into the track. Depending on how far the mic is from the speaker and what the room is made of, determines the type of reverb. The distance of the mic determines the ‘pre delay’ and the bigger the room and the harder the surfaces the longer and brighter the reverb.

Your Very Own Chamber

Without spending thousands on going into a studio with one of these chambers, you can make use of this principle too. The best rooms for this are hallways, bathrooms, kitchens or you could even do it in churches or community halls. Anywhere with hard surfaces really as this means reverberant and bright, which is good. Put a speaker at one end of the room and the best mic you’ve got at the other end and use an aux send as your feed to your speaker and the mic input as your FX return. Experiment with the mic placement and furnishings in the room to get the right tone and length./

Using It In Mixing

This is ideally done when you have access to the same room all the time. It means that you can use it while you’re mixing and alter the sound to your tastes. If you can use the bathroom in your house while you’re mixing in your spare room for example, you’ve always got this natural reverb at hand. However this isn’t always possible so there are a couple of ways that you can get around having natural reverb.

The first way is to record the reverb. By playing each instrument into the room and recording the reverb, you’ll then have a reverb track for each instrument. This means you don’t have to set the level for each instrument but you will have to set the length and tone to a degree. You can adjust the tone slightly later on with EQ and the length by using a noise gate, but this will have minimal effect.

The other method would be to use a convolution reverb. There are many of these about and some programs like Logic come with this capacity included. Have a look into what suites your needs. This means you can get the sound of a room and save it for use later down the line. Find a nice sounding room and ‘steel its soul’. The benefit of convolution reverbs is that they are adjustable and you always have them, but that’s not as much fun as having your own chamber.

Performance Is Everything

2011-08-17T17:02:00.000-07:00

After working on a lot of sessions over the years, there are a few things that you learn are universal. No matter what genre you’re recording, or how good (or bad) your musicians are, they remain true regardless. One of those things is performance. No matter how expensive the studio, how many mics you use or plug ins you’ve got, if you’re performance is bad, your recording is too. On the flip side, it doesn’t matter that you’ve only got one Argos mic and 4-track tape recorder, you can still make a great record.

Never Sacrifice Performance

In the studio, especially an expensive one, you’ll want to get the best sound possibly and leave yourself options in the mix… and so you should. There’s no point going in the studio otherwise. However, you’ve got to know when to stop.

For me the place you stop is the musician’s comfort zone. I’m not saying you shouldn’t push to the edges, but don’t cross the line. That’s where things start to fall apart. You might want to get more separation between high hat and snare and one way of doing this would be to raise the high hat… DON’T… unless your musician is comfortable with it.

By adjusting a musicians playing position beyond their comfortable boundaries, you’re going to start making them think about how they are playing. That’s going to make them stiff and unable to get into the song, which will then make the take feel stiff and unloved.

Let The Performance Lead The Way

Sometimes in the studio, recording a track that always feels great live, for some reason you just can’t get it. Probably because the studio environment isn’t letting you. How often to people actually play in a studio? Unless you’re a pro session musician, it’s going to be an unusual atmosphere, so let the performance come first and the sound second.

A prime example for me was recording with ‘Her Make Believe Band’. All the guys were well-rehearsed musician, playing all over the world all the time. For the sound of the record we wanted everyone was in a separate room. For most of the songs, this was fine. The headphones sounded good, they could all see each other and playing was generally a pleasurable experience, until one song… ‘Having You Around’.

This is the most raucous song and everyone was playing loud and were used to ‘rocking out’ on stage. After 5 takes (when the other songs, were done in no more than 4), it still wasn’t feeling right. The headphones weren’t good, even though they hadn’t changed and no matter how hard I tried, I just couldn’t get them to. No one felt comfortable.

I had a feeling it was because of how they were playing off each other, so I said ‘f**ck it. Forget the glass doors and the separation. The reason this doesn’t feel right is because you can’t hear each other and you want to be loud and feel your trousers flap’. I walked into the studio, opened the doors and moved everyone closer to each other. Turned up the amps and thought ‘to hell with the spill on the double bas and accordion. Now they could see each other, they could hear everything, and they could even smell each others’ farts (one good thing about having a booth to yourself).

At first they were like rabbits in the head lights… ‘but what about the spill?’, ‘it doesn’t matter’ I replied ‘you’ve not got a good enough take as it is so we might as well try’. They reluctantly gave it go, but by the end of the first take they were loving it. Smiles all round. By the end of the second take they’d got it. Job done. Take in the bag… and drums on everything.

Trouble In The Mix?

You might think ‘you’ve got a great performance but how do mix when you have drums on everything?’. There were drums on everything, but that’s what gave it the sound it needed. The performance lead the recording and so it lead the mix too. There was a certain sound to that track that the others didn’t have, because there was a certain energy that the others didn’t have either.

There were time in the mix I thought ‘if I could just do blah’ and the band wanted to redo an accordion solo, but when we tried these things, they didn’t work. They just took away the magic we’d caught. By just pushing the faders, feeling the energy in the performance and being taken away by it, we came up with something special. I still listen to that track and smile at the feeling you get from it. And it sounds great too… I think. So much more in keeping with the song than if we had sterilised it.

Other Useful Situations:

This doesn’t just apply to bands and the odd song. This should be your approach to every recording. Make things as malleable as possible for the mix, but when you reach that point of affecting the performance, stop… or come back.

A good example is when you’re recording singer songwriters used to playing an instrument while singing. Usually as soon as you take their instrument away from them, or stop them singing, it all goes weird. You might get a bum not here there but you can always edit those from another take. Though when all said and done, they will probably pale to insignificance when you listen to the whole take.

Try it some time. Try recording someone doing a take of instrument/vocal together and then a take separately. Ask them how they felt and see what you think to the performances. It’s not going to be the same for everyone, some people can do it fine, but the vast majority will find it harder.

Building a Home Studio On a Budget

2011-08-14T14:00:00.001-07:00

Recording gear is getting cheaper and cheaper as well as getting better and better. There are so many companies making so many bits of gear that it can be pretty confusing when setting up a home studio, let alone start from scratch. Here are my top tips for putting together a system that’ll get you going, but won’t hold you back when you want to move on.

Computers v Multitrack Machines

Unless there is a really strong, personal reason not to, if you’re just starting off, I’d always go for a computer-based system. Multitrackers can be great fun, but as a starting point, you’ll learn the basics best on the computer. Plus you can check your emais.

You’ll probably already have a computer so you might not necessarily need to buy one, reducing your budget dramatically. If you are buying a computer for the job I’d recommend a laptop every time. Laptops are really powerful nowadays and you can upgrade them so cheaply that you don’t need to break the bank to have a super stable computer. It also means your system is portable, so you can record anywhere.

Audio Interfaces

The audio interface is probably the hardest to upgrade, without starting again, so it’s best to get it right to start with. As long as you get a good one, any laptop is fine, and with mic’s, you can never have too many. So think about your interface carefully before buying.

There are many makes and models around and maybe read a few reviews before you buy, but personally at the moment, Tascam are the winners. They make inexpensive, good sounding, flexible interfaces, but don’t rule others out if you can get a good deal on.

NOTE:

Try and buy interfaces new. They are pretty important pieces of gear and you need the guarantee of being under warranty when you buy them… just incase it goes wrong.

There are three brackets for interfaces at this level. The one you need is determined by what you’ll be recording and, of course, on how much you’ve got to spend.

Basic Overdubbing – Up To £100

If you’re just wanting to record basic tracks, such as vocals, guitars or piano, then all you really need is a couple of mic inputs and most cheap interfaces will have this. If they only have one (or none at all), then don’t bother. They maybe other applications, but you’ll need a workhorse… and mic recording facilities.

They’ll have a couple of outputs at least, to hook up your speakers and usually a headphone socket too. Usually both work simultaneously so you can give your musician a mix too, but not always so just check. You wont be able to give them a separate mix, but for the odd overdub (or if you’re the musician) this shouldn’t be a problem.

Mid Range - £100-£200

This is very much a halfway house. Personally I think you would be better either spending a little extra on an ‘Upper Range’ interface or saving the money and putting it towards your mic collection. You’ll get a few more mic amps (around 4-6) but not enough to record a band plus you’re not going to get any more outputs. That will stop you giving the musician a headphone mix, which will just limit your flexibility, especially if you want to record drums.

If you’re happy with only having one mix output, and you’d like more than 2 mic inputs (perhaps you’re recording yourself playing drums) then this might be your thing, but you might be better off spending a bit more.

Upper Range - £200-£400

To start with you don’t want to pay more than this as you’re looking at bigger systems then, but this will allow your system to grow with you. If you think you might want to record a full band at some point or just make sure you can record drums with enough mics, this is your range.

You’ll get around 8 mic amps on the interface itself, a couple of DIs for guitars or bass plus a few line and digital inputs (16 inputs in total). This means you can make a really flexible set up, by adding more mic amps later down the line.

There will probably be some extra outputs, (around 4 analogue and 2 digital). This means that you can use the extra two for musician’s headphones and if you ever need to do something involving digital (DAT transfers or something) then it’s there.

The mic amps and the convertors are more likely to be better quality than the lower priced models, so even if you’re just doing a few overdubs with the possibility of doing drums, then this is a better bet. With this and a few other ‘extra bits’ you could record a full 4 or 5-piece band, live… with good results.

DAW (Digital Audio Workstations… software recorders)

This is going to be your next biggest concern. Again, there are so many out there, but for longevity and compatibility there are only a few I’d consider. If all your friends are using one type, then you’re better off following suit. You’ll be able swap projects without getting tied up in knots.

Pro Tools: For Budding Audio Engineers

If you’re going to be looking to expand your knowledge and hopefully working in bigger studios, Pro Tools is the one. This is the industry standard and the most powerful for recording, editing and mixing. It is designed by engineers, for engineers and most of the features you’ll learn to use in Pro Tools will transfer other DAWs… plus it has more. It’s one of the most expensive, but if you’re considering really getting into recording and mixing and playing with plug in etc, this is the way to go.

Logic – For Composers

If you’re a composer and not doing much recording with mics, you’ll be better off getting Logic. It’s not as powerful as Pro Tools for recording and mixing, but you can do this with it. It comes into it’s own when using MIDI instruments. The MIDI editing is probably the best and you get bags of great sounding instruments included. Pro Tools does have loads of instruments now, which are very good, so if you’re going to be doing about half recording, half writing, stick with Pro Tools. Predominantly writing though and you’ll need Logic.

Free: For Learning With

There are lots of interfaces, including the Tascam ones, which come with free DAWs, such as Cubase LE5. There is also a completely free one called Reaper (or a minimal fee for the full thing). These are a great starter with many of the same functions as Pro Tools and Logic, just with a different feel. Cubase is what I started on then moved onto Pro Tools when I started working professionally. You can use them to learn the basics and get into it, then if you can upgrade when you know more about what you want.

Ableton Live – For… well, live

Without throwing too many options into the pot, there is one other consideration, Ableton Live. Designed for live sampling and processing, it’s really powerful and gives you a lot of editing, writing and programming features that you’ll find so intuitive to use. It’s cheap (the ‘light’ version is), and you can ‘ReWire’ it into other DAWs to make your system more powerful. However, the sound quality isn’t as good as the others and it’s not ideal for recording bands. This is only useful if you want a live application and supplement your other DAW.

Speakers

This can be another minefield. Powered or non-powered; if you get non powered, what amp do you get; cables, blah blah blah. For a budget studio, I’ve got one piece of advice; get some KRK RP6s. They are powered so you don’t need an amp; they are small enough to carry around, but big enough to give you a good bass. Plus they have that great KRK sound which most pro studios will have. So, if you ever want to upgrade or go into a good studio, you’re not going to be surprised.

They are only about £150 for a pair and I’ve used these to record and mix a couple of records. Anything cheaper really isn’t worth it and anything more expensive a bit of time spent on choosing the right pair for your style of music. When you do upgrade you won’t need to get rid of them as they will still be useful and useable.

Mics

This is probably the biggest minefield and all a matter of personal preference. You’ll find some people saying one thing and others saying another, but you’ll need to get using mics before you know what you like. Here’s my checklist of inexpensive mics, which will allow you to get to grips with the different types and allow you to make your own choices.

All these are mics that I still use today, so buying these won’t waste your money. You’ll building your collection over time so you’ll not need to get rid of them either (unless you need to pay the rent). I’ve written them in purchasing order so if you can’t by them all at once you can still build up to a full list.

Shure SM57 x 2 or 3 (vocals/guitars/snares/tom toms… anything really)
Large Diaphragm Condenser x 2 – e.g. SE 2200 (anything you want… honest
Kick Drum mic – e.g. Senheisser e602
Small Diaphragm Condenser x 2 e.g. SE 1A or SE 4 (Overheads, Acoustic guitars, High hats etc)
Ribbon mic x2 – e.g. SE Ribbon mics (Overheads, guitars, old vocals, saxes)
Bass Map mic – Beyer Dynamic Opus 65

That’s it. Start with these and you’ll be able to learn about polar patterns, capsule types, stereo micing techniques, plus you can record a full band.

Extra bits and pieces

For every mic you buy, you’ll need a stand and cable (always buy boom stands by the way). If you’re going to record drums and amps you’re going to want to have a couple of short stands too. These are great for getting to snares and down to the speakers on amps, so definitely invest.

If you’re going to be doing vocals you’ll need a pop shield. You could make one, but if you’ve spent the money on all this gear, an extra few quid on a nice pop shield will make your life easier and make your singer feel a little more special.

If you’re recording more than one person at once, you’ll need headphones and a headphone amp. You could get your musicians to bring their own headphones as most people have headphones they are used to listen to and that means you don’t have to fork out for headphones you’re not going to use much. As for headphone amps, you don’t need to spend a load. Samson do a four way amp for about £40 which will be enough. You just need to get the mix to people… louder. This’ll do.

Final Words

It’s best to start off small and build things up as you need them. Even if you’ve got £X to spend, building up slowly will mean you buy the right things at the right time. The main thing is to make sure you get the right interface. Think about what you might want to do in the future and if you can afford £250 on an interface, go for the Tascam US-1800 or something similar. It’s got everything you’ll need. No matter what you’re doing… until you need a professional studio.

Recording Live

2011-08-09T08:45:00.000-07:00

I’ve been getting a few questions about this and with all the gigs I’ve been playing throughout the recent festival period I’ve seen some of the pitfalls you come across when recording live. Live records can be great, capturing a blinding performance that you wouldn’t get anywhere else, and they can be a great extra stream of revenue for the bands that are midway between albums. Testing out new material as you write.

But they can also be detrimental to the perception of band if they aren’t done very well. It doesn’t have to take much to get a good live recording, so whatever you’ve got to record with (and don’t buy anything specifically for this unless you really want to) here’s a step by step method for going about it.

Start with the Stereo

If you’re recording a live band you’re going to want it to sound like it’s a live performance too and not just a one take studio performance, so you’re going to need ambience. Start off by using a stereo pair of microphones in the room, preferable far enough away from the band that you get some of the room sound but not too much as you’ll get too much talking and audience noise.

You can get simple stereo recorders with mics built in that can do the job if that’s all you’ve got to play with. Take the time to get as good a position as possible and you might not need anything other than this.

Live Mix

The next step would be to mix this ambient recording with a feed from the Front of House desk. Depending on the size of venue and the genre of music you’re recording, it’s likely that the instruments that need a bit of ‘reinforcement’ are going to be going through the desk. For example the vocals and quiet instruments like ukuleles or ones that you just want louder, like the kick drum.

This can simply be a copy of the stereo output of the desk, so there won’t be much room for mixing later down the line, but it means you can mix it with the ambient pair to thicken things and get a nice solid but wide stereo mix. It will obviously incorporate the live sound engineers mixing of the band live too so hopefully that’s an advantage.

Spot Micing:

The next step once you’ve done the above and if you’ve still got mics, inputs and the will, is to add spot mics. You might be able to take a feed of each of the mics going into the desk, but unless you’ve got the right equipment it’ll be tricky. You don’t want to do anything that’s going to jeopardise the live sound so you need to record a copy of the live signal not send the sound guy a copy of the recorded signal.

You could do this from the insert points on each channel of the desk, providing the desk has them. This means you have the sounds guy’s mic amp levels, which should be fine, but you won’t have control so watch for clipping. Otherwise you’re looking at splitting the actual mic line signal which means splitter boxes and unless it’s a big gig with a big budget, it’s not worth the hassle.

The alternative (or even in addition to) is to add your own spot mics. This will mean that you can place them exactly where you want them and get the control you’ll need for mixing. That is as long as you’re not doing the live sound as well. That’s you’re priority then. Doing this also means you’ll be able to use more expensive and sensitive mics as you won’t be putting them through the Front of House, increasing the likelihood of feedback. You could set up a nice pair of overheads for drums or mic up a string section from a little further away to get a more developed sound. Experiment… if you have time.

Substance over Style:

Above all, don’t do anything that is going to compromise the performance. This is going to be a live recording so it is what it is and anything that makes it harder to perform or make the band think about what they are doing is just going to negate the point of making a live recording. As soon as you get in the way and stop them from acting naturally you might as well go in the studio… or just the rehearsal room.

Also you can get away with murder on a live recording, that’s why we make sure we call them ‘live’ in the title. It means people expect a certain sound and aren’t buying them to critique the sonic merits of it. It’s about atmosphere and energy, so if you can’t put a mic somewhere because the singer is going to jump on it, don’t put it there. You’ll just have to do without the noise flute on that song.

Sonny

Free Downloads

2011-08-09T07:49:00.001-07:00

As a little thank you for being on the mailing list and to keep you informed of the new music I'm working with, I'm going to be releasing a free download each month. The first one is one I recorded in one take, with a couple of mikes in one room.

Hot & Cold by Dunny & Sonny

Sonny

The Microphone: First Time Techniques

2011-05-20T05:02:00.000-07:00

I've spent most of my working careering coming across instruments that I've never seen or heard of before let alone put a mic in front of, so In know exactly how daunting mic'ing up one of them can feel for the first time. All eye (and ears) are on you and you don't want to look like a fool. Also you might just not know where to start especially if it's an instrument made up from lots of other instruments... like a drum kit is.

The best way I have found is basically to use your ears. It sounds obvious maybe, but the number of times I've seen people mic'ing instruments where they think the sound comes out rather than actually where it comes out. Firstly go in the room with the instrument and listen to how the instrument sounds, particularly from there the playing is standing. As they are the one playing it they'll be altering the sound of the instrument according to how it sounds to them in the room.

Once you've got a good idea of what the thing sounds like in the room you've got to then have a think about what it's going to do in the track. It might be obvious like a tabla is going to be filling the very bottom and very top of the percussion range, but something like an Ngoni might not be as simple to place. They can be make to sound quite think and angular or round and warm and big, depending on the player. So place it in the track in your head before you place a mic.

Once you got an idea of how you actually want it to sound you then need to work out where the mic is going to go. The best way of doing this is to just put your ear where you think it should be and hear what it sounds like (obviously don't do this if it's a super loud instrument like a sabah or something). Actually getting down and putting your in the right place will help you pic a sweet spot. I do this for guitar amps all the time so it's a good practice to get into anyway.

When you're down there see what happens when you move from side to side or up and down. See how the high frequencies respond to your movements and how much bass you get and where and this is going to give you a really accurate way of placing a mic. You'll get it right quicker by doing this. Then go have a listen to the mic in the speakers. You might need to make a couple of adjustments but you'll probably be 90% there.

Don't be afraid to do this with other instruments that you do know too. I do this with Tubas all the time. The thing is with such a large instrument and a large sound hole where you place the mic can really affect the tonal content. Putting a mic straight over the bell doesn't always sound like you want it. To bright and hard and not bassy enough. So I always get up and have a listen, even when the Tuba playing says sarcastically, while pointing to the bell "the sound comes out of here"... just reply "the air does, but the best sound might not".

It's not always the most obvious place where the best sound is. Use your ears to find out.

What is Volume

2011-04-28T05:04:00.005-07:00

You should never underestimate the influence of volume on your perception of how something sounds... and even just 0.5dB difference. This isn't really a lesson you'd get chance to learn unless you do a lot of comparison work and even then it could be missed easily. I know of plenty of well established professionals who underestimate the power of volume and have probably been wronging influenced by it. Let me give you an example.

I learned this lesson from working with large format consoles and analogue tape. When working with these two formats mixing, in order to make any tweaks to a mix you have to do a 'recall'. This involves getting the settings of the desk back to how they were, but this is never 100% accurate first time. So what you have to do is run the 'recall' against the mix you are trying to get back and make sure that they sound the same. Making any little adjustments you need to.

When doing this, making sure that the volume of the two mixes has to be spot on otherwise you can think you need to make adjustments that you don't need. The mix that is quieter will sound weaker and brighter and the bass might appear to need turning up, but all it really needs is the whole thing turning up. This won't necessarily make the top sound louder but it will bring the reverbs out and make the whole mix sound fuller. It can have an effect on how much a song grooves too.

This obviously makes a real difference when comparing mixes to see which one you want to use, as it can really affect how a mix feels. Listening to one slightly louder will automatically make it sound nicer, fuller and basically just better, but then if you actually compare the mixes at the right volume they will sound exactly the same or the once quiet one will actually sound better. I've compared the exact same mix before, but with one version just 0.5dB louder. On a blind test the louder one was the one that everyone chose as the better mix. The bass was nicer, it was brighter, the voice sat better in the track... but they were actually exactly the same.

Tip: try running a couple of mixes of the same song side by side and just adjusting the levels slightly to see what effect it has. Switch from one to the next and see what you think is different. this will help you train your ear in hearing subtle difference in volume and therefore improve your ability to mix... after all mixing is really just about levels.

EQ

2011-04-26T03:21:00.001-07:00

EQing is a particularly important element of recording and mixing. In fact I would say that it is as important as balancing, as it is frequency specific balancing and really you should be able to get a good mix together with just levels and EQ. However it's something that people often struggle with but you shouldn't need to if you follow a few easy steps.

Listen First

It might seem a bit obvious but it's a much overlooked thing. Don't just reach for the EQ straight away. Sit back and have a listen and contemplate how you want that instrument to sound. Once you have an idea of how you think it should sound then you've got a target to aim for. Blindly EQing something will just mess with your perception of what sounds good. Then you're lost.

Subtractive EQ.

A lot of people automatically reach for the EQ and boost frequencies. They think something sounds a little too dull so they boost the top, but everything is relative and so cutting a little of the low end would have a very similar if not better effect. Better still a balance between the two. Whenever you EQ something, you introduce 'phasing'. The more you EQ, the more you add phase, so if you can add a little and subtract a little rather than the extreme of one of them, this will sound more natural.

Learn Your Frequencies

I don't mean you have to learn exactly what 12kHz and 12.23kHz sound like, but there are a few frequency bands that you need to know that will make EQ so much easier. As there are often 4 or 5 bands on a parametric EQ I tend to consider there to be 5 sections of the audio spectrum.

• Low (150Hz and below)
• Low Mid (150Hz - 800Hz)
• Mid (800Hz - 3kHz)
• High Mid (4-8kHz)
• High (8-20kHz)

These are just rough guidelines and will vary a little depending on the instrument and taste, but If you learn roughly what each of those bands does to a sound then you'll recognise how to solve a problem when you hear it. Learning them means you only have 5 choices to make too rather than any number between 20 and 20,000.

Favourite Frequencies

You'll have certain frequencies that sound nicer to you than others. I was once warned against reaching for these frequencies, but I find it makes EQing so much easier. For example, I like big dumpy snare drum sounds, which comes when you boost around 300Hz so I love to boost there. Also the kind of top end I like starts around 10kHz so that's where I boost in the high. At a lower frequency it starts to sound too 'hard' and higher sounds too 'pingy'.

If you learn what you like you can start from there and tweak if it's not quite right, but at least you're not blindly searching for a frequency. Remember a lot of great records from the 60s and 70s were made with EQs with set frequencies (100hz shelf for the low, 10kHz shelf for the high) so don't worry about using the same settings.

Context.

This is so so important. Don't EQ just in solo. You should solo an instrument to see what sounds are there but when you're EQing always put it in the mix to see what your EQ is actually doing. Once it's in with other instruments you might find that you can get away with a lot more, or that you don't need to do as much. You'll only know this when you listen to how it effects other instruments.

Remember EQ is a method of balancing. Don't think of it as something separate from level. Use it carve spaces out in a mix ready to be filled by other instruments, or to make something stand out and be heard.

Know Your Stuff

2011-04-21T03:20:00.000-07:00

I often get asked, by people getting into making records or musicians wanting to record their own demos/albums, questions about what piece of gear is best for this or what they should buy to record that, but I think they are often missing the point about what it is to use gear. Plus there are the age old arguments about valve vs solid state or in the box vs out of the box mixing that never seem to cease or come closer to a resolution. There's even a forum dedicated to arguing these points endlessly. Yes there are benefits to buying a rack of API mic amps over using the ones in your little Yamaha desk, but that doesn't really help you if you can't afford the APIs. More importantly it misses the point that knowing how to use your gear is more important. A brand new Mercedes is no more useful than a banged up old Ford Fiesta, to someone who can't drive.

I decided to 'note' about this after speaking to a friend this weekend about when he did some recording at a small studio in East London. A well versed studio player and accustomed to recording at home, he turned up to the studio and saw that the gear the studio had was old and not very special at all. Expecting this to be a complete waste of time, he was surprised that he came out with some of the best sounding stuff that he'd ever recorded. In contrast to that, I've heard some awful recordings from top end recording studios too.

This isn't due to the gear that people have, but due to the people using it knowing what to do with it. Getting to know your equipment and how it works and how it sounds is so much more important than what gear you actually have. Yes the mic amps in your four channel Yamaha mixer aren't as nice as a Neve or API, but that doesn't mean you can't do anything with them. It just means you need to adjust your techniques to balance any unwanted effects you get from them. For example, if they make things sound a bit harder or a bit duller than you want, use a mic that is soft, or one that's bright sounding. Sometimes a SM57 through cheap mic amp is better than a Neumann through and API. The Polar Bear album 'Peepers' is testament to that (Read my Recording Diaries: Peepers - coming soon).

By knowing how you're gear works you know how to get to where you want to be. The album I made with The Little Unsaid, 'Someone Else's Lullabies' was recorded using a small selection of mics (only one of them worth more than £200), a Soundtracs 16:8:16 desk and Pro Tool. I chose all of these because I new how to use them and I new what sound I could get. So before you go out an buy lots of expensive gear with money you don't really have, take the time to learn what your gear does and what it is about that gear that you'd want to change if you could. That means you're in a much better position to know exactly what you want to buy when you can afford it.

Avec Amps or Sans Amp?

2011-04-19T03:18:00.000-07:00

This is a very good Question asked by Ben Morgan-Brown so thanks for that.

There was a time a few years ago when I would have said that recording with an amp was always the better way of recording a guitar (bass I generally find DIing is better than an amp), but now with so many amp simulators around and with so much time and energy put into researching how a real amp actually reacts, the simulators are giving Amp a run for their money. To be completely honest if I had the time and money and the amps available to me when I want, I would always choose using the amp, just because it's more fun and feels like you're actually recording something, but that's not always possible in your bedroom.

Sound

Anyone who says they can tell an amp simulator from a real amp every time is lying. Either that or they are the person who wrote the algorithm for the simulator and in that case they need to go back and rewrite the program then. I've been given audio files to mix before with guitars recorded using amp simulators before and not noticed that they were amp simulators. They even add the hiss and hum that the amp would have made.

Sometimes you can tell that a simulator has been used, but that's because the person setting up the sound hasn't done it very well. There are so many settings on the simulators that you can get to the point where you don't know what to do or where to start, but if you spend the time to learn the settings and what they do you can get some very realistic sounds out of a simulator. Ideally, start with a preset and tweak.

Amps are often better to be able to 'plug and play' as they've probably been set up with a nice sound before hand and you just need to tweak the sound from there. This means Amps are somewhat limited in what sounds they can produce ie a Fender amp isn't going to sound like a Marshall stack. However, amps being things themselves and not just a bunch of 1s and 0s, change their sound overtime. As valves get older they get duller and warmer, speaker cones wear out and change the sound, all things unique to that particular amp. So if you want a specific sound then the amp you know will do it, is best. As a musician understanding you amp and it's sound is vital.

Practicalities

There are a few obvious ones like a simulator is dead easy to carry unlike a huge amp. Simulators have a greater choice of amps in one plug in, but the simulators don't have actual speaker cabinets. This is something you'd need to be aware of in the studio. If you're working with a band recording live it's best to put the guitarists in front of their won amp so that they can hear themselves louder that others and they can feel their trousers flap if they want. This really makes a difference to setting up headphones.

Also having a speaker in the room with the guitarist means that those wild screaming feedback solos are possible and it feels like it would live, so you get a good take. Loud amps don't affect the sound on mic, but they effect how the guitars reacts. Obviously you could plug your simulator through a speaker cabinet, but then it has to go through some sort of an amp to be turned up loud so for ease you might as well just stick to the real amp. If however you're just writing or doing overdubs where the loud amps isn't necessary and your guitarist can sit in the room with speakers and nice mix of the track, then use a simulator.

The advantage and disadvantage of simulators is their flexibility and the fact you're never stuck with one sound. Having the ability to change the setting in the mix can be quite useful, you can lift the crunch a little in certain sections or make it brighter to fit mix etc, but beware that too much tweaking can hinder more than it helps. Choosing a sound and taking the time to get it right when you record is vital for time saving and for ease of recording other parts. Amps force you to do that, but remember that when you're using a simulator and don't 'tinker' too much. Tinkering is the worse thing to do with a mix.

Conclusion

So don't think of choosing between an amp and a simulator as a compromise or or like you're cheating on your amp with a simulator, but more like you're choosing the right too for the job. You would consider using a spanner instead of a screw driver for the same reasons. Simulators are practical in one way and amps another. Sonically, as long as you know what you're doing with the controls, you're fine. But then that applies to both things.

It also depends on who you are too. If you're the engineer your tools of the trade are plug ins, so learn how to use the simulators. If you're using an amp, you should know the best way to mic it up but getting the sound out of it should be the musicians job. Plug ins on the other hand are there for you to tinker with. Musicians should learn their equipment too. If you've got an amp, learn what it can and can't do and how you can play with it to the best affect. If you're both, sorry, but you have to know both. Have fun.

Click Tracks

2011-04-13T03:16:00.000-07:00

This one comes at the request of Tobias Jacobs, so thanks for that one Tobias. It's a do's, don't's and maybes of using a click.

To Click or not to Click

Firstly, there is the issue about whether you/your musicians can play to a click track at all. If you're using a click because your drummer just won't keep in time then, a click isn't going to help. It's going to make them aware of their timing issues, lower their confidence and put them off the feel of the track. The number of times I've heard 'is the click track speeding up?'. So be careful about pressing too hard for using a click.

Practice Makes Perfect

Playing to a click is like anything, you need to practice it. It's not a magic wand that magically keeps everyone in time. Plus, playing to a click isn't always about getting bang in time with the click. A good musician should be able to play around the click, pushing and pulling the beat, but always coming back to the click. The best people at play to a click should make it sound like it wasn't placed to a click... in a good way. natural and unconstrained.

Even if you know you're not going to record to a click, practice will increase your ability to time keep and mean you're a better performer when you're not playing to the click. It will also get you well versed in the unfriendly world that is listening to a click which can be quite unpleasant and alien to what you are used to in the rehearsal room... but vital in the studio... so make sure you feel comfortable with it.

When to use a click is very song specific and shouldn't be used as a matter of course. There are a few factors you should think about when choosing:

Musical Style

What you are recording will determine whether a click is even practical. If the music is very free flowing and has moments where the timing stops or slows down/speeds up, then playing to a click might not work. Especially if this is all done with a wink and a nudge. Much of the folk and traditional African music I have recorded, although generally in a set tempo, has elements that are pushed and pulled to a degree that a click would put even the best musicians off. Get rid of these pushes and pull and you're getting rid of the whole ambience of the track.

Recording Style

The way you are going to record can help you make the decision about clicks or not. If you're recording a live band all together and you're not going to do any overdubs, or at least very few, what is the use of having a click? Most of the time, even with the most professional musicians, a click can be a distracting and unfriendly sound, tapping away at your ears. A bit like Chinese Water Torture... but with sound.

On the other hand if you're going to be doing a lot of overdubbing, particularly if you're just recording drums to start with and then overdubbing everything else, you'll find it much easier if you've got a click. It means you've got a count in, a rigid frame to work from and hopefully make it less likely you'll get lost when doing drop ins.

Editing After Recording

It's nowhere near impossible to edit a song without a track. I made my name by being able to edit songs that weren't recorded to clicks and making them sound right. Even between two takes from different days. That's all good and well though, if you're doing whole track edits (as in all the instruments in that section of the song), however, if you're doing lots of editing and moving things around you're going to need a click track. Otherwise it could get messy. It means you can make it easier for people to do remixes too and sample your tracks which is ideal in the days of social media and 'Content is King'

Creating a Click Track

Making a useful click track isn't as simple as just turning the metronome on in Pro Tools or Logic or whatever you use. What you uses as a click track can dramatically effect your playing whether you realise it or not. So much so that I did a degree on the effects of this. I could make brilliant drummers push or pull a beat without them even thinking about it. So what are the tricks.

Sound

Choosing the sound is very important. The standard electronic ticking is a really unpleasant sounding and can often make people tense and so unable to play freely. Choosing a nice sound that fits with the music can help them feel more at ease. Try a high hat sound or snare drum or wood block, but don't use something that's being recorded ie don't give a high hat to the drummer as they won't be able to decipher whether they are in front or behind the click. Cowbells are often good as they feel loud and present without getting in the way of their drums. Using a natural sound like a cowbell or woodblock also means are spill is much more easily hidden in the track. an electronic ticking is so obviously a click track.

Try not to use anything too low in frequency, such as a kick drum or bottom of a tabla. This is because the attack (the element of the wave form that makes it sound percussive) is much longer on low frequencies and so can be perceived as being later than they actually are. Also low sounds are much more easily drowned out by or get lost in the rest of the track. Try not to use too high an instrument though either as you'll tend to need them louder and so more audible on mic.

Tempo and Feel

Obviously you have to get the tempo right, but are you going to use half time or double time click? This is going to be song and performer specific but worth taking a little time to workout how the click should go. Just using a click on each beat might not be enough. Using a click that is too fast might make everyone push the beat and similarly a slow click could make you drag. This can be used to good effect rather than always being a hinderance. If everyone is feeling a bit lazy and behind the beat try a double time click to see if you can inject some energy into proceedings.

Delays

This is really my secret weapon that I'm giving you now and is what I did my thesis on predominantly. Rather than just considering a click to go tick tock tick tock, think of it as a part of the groove of your song. What I mean is make your click have an interesting rhythm. To do this quickly and easily you can use a delay on the click track. By changing the delay time you can make some interesting rhythms. This is the trick that makes you able to push and pull the timing of a good drummer without them noticing... trying using a click that isn't quite in time. I'll say no more.

Moving Clicks

Often you'll come across a song that you just can't get the tempo right for. When you play the verses it sounds good, but feels to drag in the chorus, but when you bump up the tempo, the verses feel like you're just trying to get to the end of the song... and the bridge... So why not use two clicks? It means you've got to have your arrangement totally worked out to bar and beat before you record, but then really it should be. Try nudging the temp up a couple of BPM in the chorus to breath life into it. That's what you'd do live only, without realising it.

Spill

Final note, if you are going to use a click track, make sure that you don't have it too loud. Your drummer might want it deafening in the headphones, but if you can hear it in the recording, you've ruined a take more than being out of time would have. Bear in mind too that when you mix and master you're going to compress each track, so by the time you've finished those quiet bits that you thought you'd get away with are now 40dB louder and the click is like the second percussionist.

The Microphone: Polar Patterns

2011-04-12T03:13:00.000-07:00

The polar pattern of a mic is visual representation of how a mic picks up sound. Not all mics pick up sound in the same way for reason we shall come onto, so you need to know what patterns they are. Some mics are multi-polar-pattern mics and have a little switch so you can choice, which you want.

General Principles

The point where a mic pics up most of the sound is called the on-axis and the point where no sound is picked up (known as total cancellation) is off-axis. The amount of 'cancellation' from the off axis and how 'directional' a mic is, is frequency specific. Bass frequencies, are much less directional that high frequencies so a small movement off axis will make an instrument duller, but not really affect the bass as much.

Most mics come with lovely diagrams that some person in a white lab coat has spend days recording and and testing levels of pick up at different frequencies, then plotting them on lovely graphs. You don’t need to look at them though… I never do. They aren't really that useful in a practical situation. You'll have a better idea of the mics performance by sticking it up and listening. To test a mic, plug it in and while listening on headphones speak into the on-axis point and then move the mic slowly round to the off axis. You'll hear how quickly certain frequencies get quieter and disappear.

The symbols are pretty self explanatory, and there are more variations of patterns, but here are the main ones.

Cardioid (directional or unidirectional)

This is the most common pattern and probably the most useful if I had to pick. It looks like an upside-down heart and basically means that the mic picks up everything from the front, nothing from the back and then gradually lessening amounts from the sides.

Some mics pick up more from the sides than others, which are called wide cardioid or sub-cardioid, but it’s enough to know its Cardioid and therefore picks up from the front mainly. You’ll get to know how directional they are as you use them.

Omni-directional (Omni for short)

This is probably the second most common and useful and means the mic picks up from all directions equally (‘Omni’ being Latin for ‘all’). In theory it doesn’t matter which way you face, but that's not quite true. Depending on the size of the mic you can get what's called an acoustic shadow, basically where the mic itself acts as like a screen for high frequencies. So just in case I always try and point the opening of the mic in the right direction… roughly… sometimes.

Due to the design they are usually the most accurate sounding and are really good for picking up ambient sounds. The symbol for these is just a circle, so don’t think they’ve forgotten to draw it on. It’s always good to have one or two of these in your collection, best of all if you have a multi-polar-pattern mic.

Figure of Eight (Fig. 8/Bi-Directional):

Again the symbol (and the name) says it all really. The symbol is to circles, one on top of another (like an 8, obviously) and they basically pick up sounds equally from front and back, but nothing from the sides. In fact the ‘cancellation’ at the side is better with these mics than any other. So good you can really use it to stop other sounds getting in (see my note on recording The Little Unsaid acoustic).

They are also really good for getting a close up sound but with a little bit of room sounds as it picks up from the back too. This can be really useful for recording vocals, so that you get that really nice intimate vocal, but some of the ambient sound still makes it feel real. Think of it like someone whispering in your ear, but you can still hear some sounds in the other ear.

The classic use for this is to have a group of backing vocalists round the mic with the strongest singers closer to the off axis and the weaker singers to the on axis. They are also used in many stereo micing techniques, which I shall cover in another post.

Hypercardioid

I’ve left these till last, as they are the least common and in my opinion least useful. Basically they are like a cross between a Cardioid and a fig. 8 mic and the symbol looks that way too. They pick up mainly from the front and are usually a bit more directional than cardioids, but oddly, they pick up a little from the back and a little from the sides, but nothing from between the back and side (see the diagram below).

They are useful for live sound vocal mics, as you could have two monitor wedges either side and you wouldn’t get feed back. For recording I don’t find them very useful, as they 'colour' the sound in a not very nice way. If you have one, try experimenting with it, but if you don’t, I’d stay clear to be honest. Having said that, there are two mics that are oddly hypercardioid ribbons that I would recommend, the Beyer Dynamic M160 and the M260. Popular ribbon mics and sound very good. Famously used on John Bonham's (Led Zeppelin) drums.

Tip: Which end is the Front?

It might sound like a joke but not all mics have the front in the same place and some are very confusing so do make sure before you take one back to the shop saying it doesn’t work. The direction they pick up from is called its ‘fire’, so you get ‘front-fire’ (or end-fire) and ‘side-fire’ mics. Most of them will give some visual clues, but there’s one mic called the Sennheisser MD421, which looks like a side-fire mic but is actually a front-fire. The number of times I’ve asked someone to put one of those up and it sounded a bit funny when I heard it.

Also with Multi-Polar Patter mics, they can look the same on both front and back as they are designed to pick up on all sides in Omni mode. But in Cardioid it will only pic up from one side, so best to check which that one side is. Some, like the AKG C414, will colour the metal grill differently... but then you've still got to remember which one is which. Have fun.

Choosing Instruments For The Job

2011-04-11T03:12:00.000-07:00

It might sound a bit odd, but an instrument that you love to play because it sounds great when you play it, isn’t always going to sound great when you're recording. Reversely, an instrument that sounds bad when you’re playing it doesn’t always sound bad on microphone. Let me give you an example to prove my point.

I used to play baritone acoustic guitar. A deep, rich, thick, warm sounding acoustic guitar… and I played it solo. So when I bought a really good deep, rich, thick, warm sounding guitar, my favourite guitar (a Lowden O10) I loved it. I’d spent near 2 years looking for it and tried everything, but nothing gave the same sound. It sounded good on mic too, when I recorded it for my own solo album with it. Surely it would be a great recording instrument full stop?

So I take it into the studio to use it with a band I’m working with. The guitarist only has a crappy cheap guitar and he knows I’ve got a Lowden and would love to use it, and we think it’s going to make our lives so much easier. But when we start recording with it, it just doesn’t sound any good. There’s no definition; it’s boomy and wiffly; it’s either too quite or drowns his voice out and now his voice kind of sounds thin and weedy.

Anyway, we go back to his crappy cheap guitar (a £100 Yamaha), which sounds thin and wispy compared to my Lowden when we’re just comparing them in the room, but when he sits in front of the mic… that’s it. That’s the sound. It’s big without being boomy; it’s defined without being to scratchy and it makes his voice sound as big as Frank Sinatra’s. It’s perfect… for that recording.

The reason for this is that the mix isn't listening to the guitar in the same way or place as you are so the frequencies it picks up are different. Also my lovely Lowden guitar was chosen by me to be a baritone solo guitar. Full of low end and designed to fill the whole audio spectrum. When you put it with other instruments it over powers them and just sounds wrong. It doesn't mean that my Lowden isn't worth the money.

So chose your instrument for the job in hand, not for how you want it be be when you're playing it on it's own... and be prepared to be surprised.

Sample Rates and Bit Depths

2011-04-10T03:09:00.000-07:00

This is a question often asked so well worth going over. Thanks @Michal Koprowicz for the question.

Bit Rates/Depth:

I'll start off with bit rates as this is the most easily answered. Basically whether you're recording, mixing, mastering or anything with audio, other than putting it on a CD... use 24 bits, not 16 bits. It doesn't take up too much more disk space and means any digital process you use in the chain sounds so much better.

It also means you can record a little quieter, meaning you won't clip your converters and you're not turning your faders down all the time when mixing, which means better quality. You only need to bit depth convert to put audio on CD.

Without being too technical, 24 bits means each sample is represented digitally by a series of 24 1s and 0s. That means it could be one of nearly 17 million audio levels. That's plenty for everyone, and unlike sample rate conversion (SRC), as we'll see later, bit rate conversion doesn't adversely affect the sound quality.

Sample Frequencies/Rates:

I won't go into the maths and principles behind sample frequencies (unless you really want me to in another post) as it's relatively complicated. Instead this is more to do with the practical application of them and how you should choose them.

Just quickly, the sample rate is the number of times per second a sound wave is recorded/sampled. In a similar way to how a video camera takes 25 still pictures per second to make a moving picture, or a digital camera uses pixels to make up a picture. So the more samples (stills/pixels) you take, the more accurate the recording.

Most audio interfaces these days are capable of sampling a wide range of sample rates, most commonly:

* 44.1 kHz
* 48 kHz
* 88.2 kHz
* 96 kHz
* 176. 4 kHz
* 192 kHz

For me however on a practical level there are only 2 to choose from: 44.1 kHz and 96 kHz. There are a couple of possible reasons why I would choose 48 kHz or 192 kHz, though so rare I generally don't consider them options.

Which to choose?

I'll come on to why only these two sample frequencies later, but for now the choice you've got to make is between three factors:

* Disk Space
* Sound Quality
* Musical Style

Disk Space

Some of you out there might be wondering why, if a higher sample rate is more accurate, why would you ever choose 44.1 kHz, but with higher sample rates comes higher disk space (96 kHz is over twice the size of 44.1 kHz). With the advent of Terabyte drives for pennies these days, you might think this isn't an real issue, but if you're transferring a whole album of many tracks and many takes between friends or to a mix engineer via the internet it can become a serious issue. With the mixing online service I offer, downloading a 12 song album 48 tracks per song is going to take me ages.

Also not everyone that's working on it might have a system that runs higher than 44.1/48 kHz. I still use my MBox one a lot for things that are 44.1, which doesn't work at 96. Also John the lead singer in The Little Unsaid likes to record his vocals at home, so he can do them as and when, and his system is only capable of 48 kHz maximum. Another very real consideration.

Sound Quality

So if you're only using your own drive and not transferring to anyone else, you might think that 96 kHz is the obvious choice, always... but no. The way you're going to mix your recordings effects your choice. This is to do with SRC. This is the worst thing (bar making it an mp3) that you can do to audio. Still, no one has come up with a good algorithm that makes SRC sound good... or even acceptable. Recording at 96 kHz and then sample rate converting down to 44.1 kHz for CD just undoes all the good work you did at 96 kHz altogether. In fact you're better off recording at 44.1 kHz to avoid the SRC. So if you're mixing in the box and never leaving the computer you're better off using 44.1 kHz always.

Don't despair though audiophiles, there is a way that you can maintain your 96 kHz quality. To do this you need to come out of your convertors analogue at 96 kHz and record your mix back into another system at 44.1 kHz. This could be when mixing on a desk or even just the stereo outs of your mix. This usually needs to be another system as convertors and DAWs can't do two sample rates at once. If you don't have another computer and audio interface handy, think about buying a DAT Machine or external hard disk recorder. You can record back into your computer digitally at 44.1 and reuse the DAT. Don't use a CD burner however, as it means that you have to go through error detection/correction if you want to get it off the CD... not good.

Better still record to 1/2 inch analogue tape then you can master at any sample rate you want. This can be quite expensive though

Why Not 48, 88.2 or higher than 96?

Firstly higher than 96 is to do with the disk space/sound quality balance. You really don't gain very much from recording at 192 kHz for doubling your disk space. The only practical use for 192 kHz is archiving... but I don't do that. I'm guessing you don't either.

Secondly why not 88.2? If you're going to have high disk space you might as well have that extra bit of quality from 96. The idea that sample rate converting from 88.2 kHz to 44.1 kHz is better than from 96 kHz is a myth. The maths of SRC isn't a case of just dividing by two. It's much more complex than that, so going from 88.2 is exactly the same as 96. Try it and see what you think.

Thirdly why not 48? Well for the same reason as 88.2. You're still going to have to sample rate convert, unless you're going out of the box analogue and back into another system... then you might as well use 96. There is one exception however. If you're using a system that doesn't run above 48 and you're not mixing in the box, I'd use 48. The only time I can think of this occurring is if I was using an Otari RADAR II. Those convertors are exceptional at 48, but most other convertors at 96 are better, so it would be very rare.

Style Over Substance:

One other consideration is the style of music you're recording. If you're recording classical music, folk music, jazz or something with very few instruments/mics then 96 would be best as long as you can mix into another system. If you're doing pop, rock or something with lots of instruments, big and loud, then 44.1 might actually be better sound wise.

People are getting used to the sound of lower quality digital to the point where I've recorded at 44.1 in order to get that 'crunchy' sound from the lower sample rates. One example of that is Cheikh Lô's album 'Jamm' and The Little Unsaid's 'Someone Else's Lullabies', which was a compromise actually. The acoustic tracks were at 96 and the rock tracks at 44.1.

Conclusion
* The only real choice is between 44.1 kHz and 96 kHz
* Bear in mind if you're going to be doing a lot of transferring. 44.1 could save you a lot of time.
* Classical, jazz or music with few instruments... use 96
* What it to sound crunchy and raw.. try 44.1
* Bear in mind how you're mixing. On to another system 96, on the same system 44.1
* Last but NOT least... Avoid sample rate conversion at all costs. Don't beat yourself up if you can't avoid it though.

The Microphone: Types

2011-04-09T03:09:00.000-07:00

I get asked ofter what microphones people should buy. There is no simple answer unfortunately as they vary wildly and new ones come out all the time, plus it really depends on peoples taste, application and more importantly budget. So rather then go into details about makes and models a little advice about mic properties and how it affects their sound is more useful I think. Then you can choose which mic suites what you're going to do. Anyone with a specific application is more than welcome to ask me on the wall what mic I'd use. I'll give away my secrets happily.

There are a few more types of microphones than the ones I’ve mentioned here, but these are the main ones you’ll come across. If you do get to use other mics you’ll probably have learned a bit more by then. These are just guideline, so you might find the odd mic that doesn’t quite fit into the category but most will. I use this way of thinking all the time… and it works for me.

Dynamic (or moving coil):

This is probably the most common microphone type as they can be very cheap to make. They are generally lower in level, not as sensitive and can be slightly duller/warmer sounding than condensers. Because of their design, they can cope with loud instruments so they are most commonly used on drums and loud guitar amps, but they can also be very useful on vocals (particularly Rock) and acoustic instruments. They are also pretty robust so dropping them isn’t usually too much of a problem and if you’re going to experiment with putting a mic somewhere close to something, try a dynamic first. You’ll do well to break it.

The diaphragm (the bit the moves and picks up the sound) doesn’t vary in size as much as condensers, as we’ll see, so it’s not something to be too worried about when considering how it will sound. They do often have very specific sounds and are tailored to or just naturally pick up certain frequencies better, for example the AKG D112 (commonly known as the egg) is tailored to kick drums having a good low end response and a pick where the click/attack frequencies are. If you’re not comfortable with ‘frequency diagrams’ don’t bother looking at them. Just plug it in and speak into it saying something in a low voice then something in a high voice and check for sibilance by saying words with lots of ‘S’ in. Very basic but you'll get a rough idea of how it sounds.

Condenser:

I’m also including Electret and back-Electret mics in this description, which technically work slightly differently but for this purpose they are the same. These are generally the most expensive mics, but they are probably the most varied in sound and most versatile. You’ve basically got two type, large diaphragm (around 2 inches/5cm) and small diaphragm (under 1 inch/2.5cm). This can make quite a big difference to the sound of a mic and the way you choose them.

Large diaphragm condensers generally pick up more bass and are more susceptible to knocks on the mic stand and so come with ‘cradles’ to help reduce this. Personally I think cradles are useless and just get in the way, so get rid of them if you can. Most condensers have a nice bright top end, some much more than other but they are generally quite bright and airy. Large diaphragm condensers produce better low end than small diaphragms so they are great for getting all that sub out of a double bass or huge warm vocal. Overall large diaphragm mics are accurate over most frequencies and ‘colour’ the sound less than dynamics. These are the reach-to mic if you don’t know where to start. If I've never seen an instrument before, I'll put a Neumann U87 on it, see how it sounds and change it from there if needs be.

Small diaphragm condensers generally pick up a little less bottom end so can be useful when micing something that a bit boomy or you want to make something a little thinner sounding. They are generally pencil mics (that means they are just long and thin) and can be very useful to get into tight spaces or go unseen. Often they come in pairs so that you can use them for stereo micing and so if you do buy a small diaphragm mic, try getting a pair. They can be really versatile like this. I use them for overheads on drums, ambient mics on pianos and acoustic guitars if they are a bit unwieldy in the boomy frequencies.

Ribbon:

These are generally older models of mics and because of that, and their physical design are a bit duller. However, more and more modern ribbon mics are coming out getting brighter and brighter. I’m not sure why people are making bright ribbon mics though as the advantage of them is that they give an authentic old sound to something and because of the way they sound, they are great for micing up very bright things to soften them a bit. Very bright hard pianos for example.

They are generally much lower in output level, so not ideal for very quiet instruments as the natural noise in the equipment will be turned up. They are very useful mics though and if you're getting a collection I suggest a Coles 4038. They are particularly good for brass instruments as they warm them up and take away some of the harsh top end. They are also useful for guitar amps to get a rich thick sound and if you want that big rich 1930's vocal sound this is what you reach for... but be careful.

Also due to their design (it is simply a strip of very fine metal – the ribbon – between two magnets) they are very heavy and very delicate. Don’t put them to close to very loud percussive sounds and always use a pop shield when recording vocals as Ps and Bs can break the ribbon… and your wallet doesn’t want you having to repair those too often. Over time the ribbon wills start to sag, so if they start sounding dull or thin or not very loud, it might be the ribbon needs changing… call a pro.

Unless otherwise stated on the box of mic, ribbon mics are usually figure of eight (fig.8) mics, (see Polar Patterns note later), but just so you know you can presume they all are figure of eight as most older ones won’t say that.

Valve Mics

Now these aren't really a separate type of microphone as you they are generally Condenser mics, though you can get valve ribbon mics now and I'm sure someone will come up with valve dynamic soon. So all the thinks that apply to Condenser mics (or ribbons depending on the design) apply to valve mics but it does change their sound so it's worth mentioning.

The valve is basically part of the inside of the mic that amplifies the signal to a usable level. So as with valve mic amps and guitar amps, it changes the sound the more you 'drive' it. They generally 'warm' things up and so make things sound a bit bigger, but that means that there is slightly less top end than FET condenser mics. They can also start to sound a little hard if you mic something that is very loud, which can be desirable, but not always, so bear it in mind.

They generally come with a big power supply that needs plugging in so they can be a little impractical for mobile recordings. Plus they often need a long time to warm up before they sound any good, so make sure you leave it on for an hour before you start recording. This warming up will change the sound quite dramatically so to be careful. So unless you're confident with them I'd stick to condenser mics at first. Many of the more popular condensers have a valve alternative so get used to the condenser version first then branch out. They can be great fun.

Mixing: Make life easy for yourself

2011-04-08T03:06:00.000-07:00

It’s A Balancing Act

In the early days, the job of 'mixing' was undertaken by the 'Balancing Engineer' and it was the most important link in the chain in terms of engineering. For me, balancing is a much more appropriate word as it is a balancing act between so many contributing factors. The word 'mixing', gives the impression that as long as you get set measurements of the each instrument, outlined by a recipe, and just mix it up, you're done. They will fall together however it is mixed because the elements are there and the amounts are correct. A little like mixing cake mixture. This couldn't be further from the truth. It's more like building a dry stone wall. Nothing fits together perfectly and small changes make big differences to the surroundings.

For example, when balancing Tony Allen's record Secret Agent, as it is Afrobeat and essentially music to dance to, it was important to make sure that the groove was the predominant factor. Also with it being Tony's record the drums needed to be loud and proud. However, it was also important to make sure that everything else was balanced so that it still sounded like a proper record and not just like the drummer's headphone mix. Turning the drums up loud definitely established the beat and made it groove, but turning them up too far made everything else sound small and weak. It was a fine balance between where the drums took over and the song distracted you from the groove.

You Can’t Have Everything.

So it's impossible to have it both ways. I couldn't have loud drums and have a loud band on top. Everything had an effect on your perception of how the drums sounded, and it's the same no matter what you're mixing. The intro of a song is so important in what you perceive the genre or mood of a song to be; the amount of kick drum determines how much you want to get up and dance; the horn level changes the excitement of a track and the vocal level determines how loud most people turn the track up.

It is all relative and you'll really have to choose what effect is the most important. You can't have something that's black and white, because it just ends up being grey and boring. For example, how can you say the kick is drum really loud, because if you turn the overall volume on your stereo down it's not loud really. It's due to it's relative loudness to the things around it. So you can't have a loud kick drum without having a quiet something else. You'll have to choose. Choosing doesn't have to be hard though.

Single Track Mind

Mix taught me one very important lesson, one that you can only really fully understand when you know how the ears actually work, but I'll spare you that technicality. Basically, the brain can only truly concentrate on one thing at a time. The rest of the sounds are just background sounds, giving that main sound context. This might sound a bit basic, but it really is true and it can help you mix.

There is one more division though, which is where the working of the ear comes in, but in musical terms we can be much simpler. Basically we can then divide this background sound into four frequency bands, within which you either have a main instrument of they just work as a unit. The four bands, including a rough guide as to what goes in them, are:

* Bass - Bass guitars, Kick drums
* Low Mid - Toms, hand drums, rhythm guitars keyboards
* Hi Mid - Vocals, guitars and most melody instruments
* Hi - Cymbals, hi hats, shakers etc.

This means you can have a loud kick drum, or a loud bass guitar or both of them mixed together as this pumping bass unit, but you can't have it so both of the kick drum and bass are loud. This means you've only got a few choices to make which is always god when you've got over 30 faders to move. You just need to choose your star instruments and the rest falls into place.

Star Instruments

Your star instrument is the important instrument (either in the whole mix or in a particular frequency band), but it isn't necessarily the most obvious. It can be any of the instruments in a mix, but it's the one that the whole mix hinges on, your favourite sound the one you don't want to miss. It could be the voice, but it could be the bass guitar or the glockenspiel or even the snare drum pattern. Choosing this instrument is very important though so you should do it early on.

Continuing the theme of Tony Allen, the star in this case was the snare drum. Odd perhaps, but Tony's groove lies in his Snare and everything else hinged on this constant rhythm. Plus his snare sound is quite unique. So everything was mix around this to the extent is was often as loud as the vocal... if not louder.

Once you've got the star instrument, balancing these around it is extremely important. Too loud and they become the centre of attention; too quiet and they no long support the star. Fine adjustments of these instruments will either hinder or aid your focus on the star. So when you're putting a new instrument into the mix, rather than listen to that instrument, listen to the star instrument and see how it affects it.

In The Lime Light

This balancing of the rest of the instruments you could liken to painting a picture, essentially you're just painting with sounds. If you make something too dull and flat (too quiet) it just fades into the background and doesn't give your star any context. If you make it too garish (loud) this it distracts you from the star instrument and you loose focus, to the point it gets annoying. Who actually knows what the background of the Mona Lisa is? We all know there is one though.

When you get these balances just right, they help to make the star blossom. Think of these instruments like clouds in a portrait. You want them to be bright and white, but not so they distract you from the face. That doesn't mean these background sounds can't be loud they just can't stand out above the star instrument. For example, in Motown records, the tambourines are often really loud when you concentrate on them, but it doesn't get in the way of the star (the voice in this case).

So my tips to take away:

• Find your 'Star' instrument and don't let it go.
• Listen to the star when mixing in another instrument
• Don't be afraid to make something really loud if it makes the star sound better
• Stand back and admire your work. Let a mix wash over you. Perspective is everything.

Sonny

Recording Diaries: The Little Unsaid Acoustic.

2011-04-07T03:01:00.000-07:00

While in Livingston Studios last month recording the Into The Faceless Night single from The Little Unsaid, I decided to record (and film) a couple of acoustic versions of the single. As you can both see and hear the fruits of our labour I thought I might share with you how I went about it and why I did what I did.

The Idea

For the sake of simplicity, but also for sound, I wanted to use as few mics as possible. Firstly it meant that there were fewer mics to get levels on, which was important as I was engineering and playing. Secondly and more importantly it was important for the sound. When you start using too many multiple mic'ing techniques, you start to get what's known as phasing. Without getting too technical for those not into the maths, it's where certain frequencies start to cancel each other out and other start to get louder. This means you hearing ringing or booming tones and other frequencies go missing. The fewer mics you use and the further they are away from each other the less this happens.

With that in mind I used the following list:

* Bass Amp: Neumann U47
* Guitar Amp: Neumann U87
* Acoustic Guitar: Geffel UM70
* Vocals: Neumann TLM170
* Ambient Pair: Neumann TLM170

Ambience

You can't see the ambient pair (or the amp mics) on the video, but the ambience are about 12 feet apart on Omni Directional (more on polar patterns later) and about 12 feet away from where we were playing. I used a pair of mics in order to pan them hard left and hard right and give a stereo image to what we were playing and create a more realistic room sound. The mics being this far away from us and each other meant that there was no unpleasant phasing.

Amps

The guitar and bass amp mics were placed about 6 inches away from the amps. I wanted a close sound from them and not too much spill from other sounds in the room, but also if you get too close to a guitar amp (most instruments really) the sound doesn't have chance to develop into the sound you hear in the room. Pulling the mics away a little allows all the frequencies to interact a little more and give a much nicer more 'together' sound.

It was also very important to get the amps so that they were balanced in the room properly too. It really doesn't matter how loud you have your amp for the mic, the tone doesn't change on mic it just get's louder so you have to turn it down on the mic amp. So we set the amps up to a level that was balanced in the room. Roughly the kind of level they were going to be in the mix. That meant the sound in the ambient mics was balanced and much easier to mix.

Acoustic and Voice

The biggest concern when recording like this is the acoustic guitar and voice, as they are so close together you can easily get phasing which does not make the voice sound nice at all. It's usually a problem with the voice more, as players tend to sing louder than they play the guitar, just because of self balancing. It can be reduced and put to good effect when you're doing just one whole take like these videos, as it means you've got a more realistic sound from both 'instruments, but if you try to redo the voice later you'll have no chance. So make sure it's the right take.

So to minimise the spill on to each of the mics and make sure what spill was there was useful, I tried to keep the mics as far away from each other as possible and as close to the acoustic/voice as possible. There's a general rule known as the 3:1 rule, where by the mic you don't want a sound to pick up on, should be at least 3 times further away than the one you do want it to pick up on. For example, the acoustic mic should be 3 times further away from the vocal as the vocal mic is from the vocal. This is just a rule of thumb so don't go getting the tape measure out. Sometimes it not always possible so just try your best and use your ears. Like everything in music it's a case of balancing things out to get the best sound.

Handy Hint

Another great technique is to use the off axis part of the mic (more on polar patterns later, but this is an area of the mic that pics up no sound) as much as possible to reduce spill. Figure of 8 mics are good for this as the off axis part is 90 degrees from the on axis. This means you can point the mic at your talent's mouth and the off axis is pointing automatically at the guitar (less spill). Bear in mind though that this tends to mean you get a little more ambient sound on the mics (because figure of 8 pick up from front and back equally) and usually a little less body from the voice but it can be very useful.

Mixing

With all the sounds balanced in the room and with spill reduced to a minimum I only had six mics to mix. Fairly easy really. Getting the recorded sound as close to how I wanted it in the mix, by using the right mics and positioning, meant that I hardly had to EQ anything. Just a few touches here and there. Some compression on the voice just to control the dynamics (the loud and the quiet bits) and the rest was done with moving the faders a little here and there to make sure you could hear all the nice bits. It really can be that simple. If you spend the time getting the recording right, mixing can be a doddle.

It's Not Rocket Science

Although I do this for a living and have done set ups like this on many occasions, hopefully this shows you just how simple getting a good recording can be for you and your band. Even if it's just for demos, with a few mics and not many input you can make a good sounding recording easily. This is really important to keep things flowing and not have too many technical difficulties.

You could reduce this even further 3 two mics (both guitars and voice) and a DI on the bass. That's only 4 channels and recording live. And if you did it to a click you could record the drums either before or after with the same 4 inputs. Demo done... and it means if you do get to go into the studio, your producer or engineer has a really good idea of what you want and what you can do. That will save you money.

Here's the video of the three songs we recorded on this session:

Into the Faceless Night
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZKbYz3Gj38

Ship Breaking
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwm_U8c-HT4

To My Lordless Sons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxnA_Beztv0

In the Beginning: Instruments

2011-04-06T10:58:00.000-07:00

You might think it’s a bit obvious that you would start with the instrument as the main source of the sound, but it’s so often overlooked when in the studio. The number of times that I have been in the studio with an image in my mind of how I want something to sound and no matter what I do it just sounds wrong. More often than not it is the source, not the gear or me (well sometimes it's me… no one’s perfect).

For example, once (OK more than once) I was recording a band, we got the drums set up in a room I knew sounded good, I put the expensive mics up and plugged up the expensive mic amps and compressors, nothing seemed to sit together properly. It sounded awful. I went out to the drums and move a few mics. Better... but still not great. I made sure everything was plugged up right, I changed a few mics and tried to EQ things a bit, but it still sounded awful. What’s going on? What was different? I used exactly the same set up with a drummer last week and I didn’t even put the mics up properly and it sounded good... no, great.

That was the difference . Last week I was working with a drummer that had been playing for years; had spent years and thousands of pounds finding the right bits of drums to make up a kit; had learned to tune them properly and, not least, could really play. Unfortunately this poor chap had a cheap drum kit he’d had for years, hadn’t ever changed the skins and when I asked him had he tuned his drum, he looked at me like I’d asked him what the flight velocity of an unladen swallow was (European by the way).

Get It Right At The Source

It’s going to save you so much time in the long run and is going to get you closer to what’s in your head. I really can’t stress this enough. You wouldn't expect to mic up a guitar and to hear a flute through the speakers, and so neither should you expect to hear that massive drum kit that’s in your head over the speaker, when you’ve put mics in front of what essentially a monkey hitting a collection of Tupperware.

Sometimes it not always possible to get exactly what you want. Maybe you just don’t have the drums that you need available to you and you don’t have the money, but here are a few tips on how to get a bit closer.

The Arsenal

Other than the player (which I’ll come to later) getting the right instrument for the job is the ideal solution. It’s great if you can have a selection of different types of instruments in front of you too because there isn’t one instrument that’s good for all things. Generally speaking the more you spend on an instrument the better quality it is and the better the sound you’re going to get out of it, but at the end of the day that one instrument is only going to give you a limited range of sounds. So if you’re actually looking for that ‘Monkey hitting Tupperware’ sound, you’re not going to be able to get it from a finely tuned Tama kit. Get the Tupperware out.

Think about the sound you want before you just reach for any old instrument. Do you want it to be fat sounding, thin sounding, big, small, bright, dull etc? Then have a look at what you’ve got and have a listen. Start by choosing the one that’s the closest and if needs be modify it.

Size Matters

The size of an instrument is going to play a massive part in it’s sound, because that determines what frequencies it can produce… and how loud. That’s because, without getting too technical here, acoustic instruments make a sound because they vibrate, and every instrument makes vibrations of certain frequencies/pitch no matter what note you’re playing (fundamentals) Generally speaking:

Bigger instrument; Bigger fundamental: bigger sound: Lower pitch
Smaller instrument: smaller fundamental: smaller sound: Higher Pitch

Easy! If you think about how we actually describe sounds, we always use words borrowed from how things look ie big, fat, chunky, thin, small, bright, dull, muddy, airy… So a really good rule of thumb, is:

An instrument sounds like it looks.

Think about it. A double bass is big, fat, and generally because the good ones are old, dull… and a triangle is small, bright, shiny, and thin. OK, a couple of obvious answers, but a wooden snare drum is going to sound warmer and softer than a tin one and a nine foot grand piano is going to sound bigger and richer than upright piano in the local pub. Like I said rule of thumb, but it really does work.

The Sound Of Money

Money makes a difference too. I know I said that your not going to get the ‘monkey hitting Tupperware’ sound from the expensive Tama kit, but when I say the more expensive the instrument the better, what I mean is, the more expensive the Tupperware the better the Tupperware sound you’re going to get. It really does help spending all the money you can on the instruments you want. If you’ve got £100, spend £100. They’ll last longer, they’ll give you more versatility in sound and they’ll stay in tune better… even if you want a slightly out of tune sound, they’ll stay in the right out of tune.

Now tuning is another issue all together.

The Microphone: We Don't Have Mics For Ears

2011-04-06T10:56:00.000-07:00

The brain is wonderful thing and although hearing is our most primitive of senses, apparently, the brain is still pretty clever at processing the sound. When you walk into a room, unless you’re thinking about it specifically or it’s a particularly reverberant/echo-y room, you don’t notice what the reverb of a room is like. That’s because your brain doesn’t really consider it reverb in the same way you do in music. Instead it separates the direct sound from the reverb and uses the reverb to calculate the size of the room. When the reverb you hear matches what you’re seeing it feels natural so you don’t notice it.

However, microphones don’t work that way. They can’t separate sounds at all. They pick up exactly (within reason) what sounds are being made in that room. So when you listen to a recording on speakers you hear reverb that tells you a different story to what your eye tell you… you notice the reverb. Plus you’re hearing the reverb of the room you’re in, so that’s the reverb your brain separates out.

So basically, what you hear when you’re in the room with the instrument, isn’t always going to get on recording. Just something to bear in mind when you’re picking a room to use. Listen to what it’s like through a mic first.

First Things First: Pre-Production

2011-04-05T10:59:00.000-07:00

This blog is designed to make musicians' lives easier and therefore engineers' and producers', whether that be in the bedroom or in a professional studio. So I'm going to address a few common problems that I come across quite a lot. Things that don't need to be a problem with just a little planning... and once you get used to doing it, you wonder why you didn't do it in the first place.

Pre-Production is basically being organised and knowing what you're going to record. In the studio this is paramount as time is money and you don't want to spend money on something you're not going to use. If you're in your bedroom you might think that you don't need to be that organise because it's not costing you anything? Wrong, it's costing you time, energy and atmosphere. If you spend hours messing around you can easily get bored and not inspired and give up.

Record has got to be fun and the best way to make it fun is to make it run smoothly and quickly. If you do all the organisation before you start recording then all you need to do is play and have fun. Here's a quick check list of things you should do before you start to record. They are flexible so don't worry if you're not right the first time, but you should be 90% there:

Which Song To Play - Make sure you know which songs you're going to play in the studio. It might sound silly but you should know the songs you want to record before you start recording. Make a list stick to it. If you've got time, maybe have an impromptu jam, but get the work done first.
Rehearse - make sure that you know the songs inside out. You can make alterations when you hear them record, but you're only going to get a good take if you don't have to think about what you're playing. You don't want to be writing and rehearsing in the studio
Instrumentation - Have a basic idea of what instruments you're going to record. That way you can plan out your time and done as much of one instrument as you can in one go. Flicking back and forth can be confusing and you forget what you've done and what you need to do.
Sounds - don't be too rigid with this as you want to be a little bit creative, but have an idea about how you want things to sound. Just making it up as you go along doesn't work. It's like building a wall, you don't just throw stones in a pile and hope they turn into a wall. Use reference tracks to help.
Know your instrument - I'm going to cover this in more detail later as it's so, so important, but for know... know your instrument and what it's capable of. Don't expect to get a great Jimmy Page guitar sound out of a Strat copy or Keith Moon drums out of the Argos kit you bought 10 years ago and haven't changed the skins on. More often than not, if something sounds bad recorded, it because it sounds bad anyway.

Just a few tips to start with. I'll probably cover these more as I go along, but they are really useful to bear in mind. When you go into the studio the producer and engineer have enough on their plate without having to help arrange songs, tune drums and work out what you mean when you say 'can I have the snare a bit more... red'.

Don't get too organised though... it's music after all.

Sonny