BGV "Bloom" and remedies?

natpub · 24th September 2004, 02:44 PM

I am asking the experienced mixers here about this problem I am finding.

For the sake of discussion, I am calling it "BLOOM," and I mean it to refer to BGV in particular.

I keep running into a problem where I am mixing a tune (usually one that is semi-complex) and there are punches of BGV on certain phrases (strophes? anyone use that word anymore?).

By "punches" I do NOT mean punch-in's, ala hitting the record button. I mean BGV meant to "punch-up" a certain line of Lead Vox.

OK, so anyway, as we probably can assume, such phrases tend to end on open vowels of one sort or another. And, subsequently, such vowel sounds tend to open up in volume and timbre---which I am, for purposes of this post, calling "Bloom."

My problem is this--Bloom sucks.

How can I fix it? Bloom overruns the lead vox, and causes unpleasant "beating" with sympathetic vibrations in the GTR and KBD ranges.

1. I have tried to write in subtle fades on the tails of the blooming vowels.---->result: The intensity and flow of the BGV and Lead Vox is ruined.

2. I have tried single and double compressing the tails of the Bloom--->result: The artifacts end up shining a nasty spotlight on the very thing I am trying to make more subtle.

3. I have tried to automate EQ against a very tight Q of the more nasty elements of the Bloom---> result: gets close to being correct, but takes sooooo much time and effort that I nearly go insane.

Does anyone have a better solution?

Thx,
KT

faeflora · 24th September 2004, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by natpub
My problem is this--Bloom sucks.

How can I fix it? Bloom overruns the lead vox, and causes unpleasant "beating" with sympathetic vibrations in the GTR and KBD ranges.

3. I have tried to automate EQ against a very tight Q of the more nasty elements of the Bloom---> result: gets close to being correct, but takes sooooo much time and effort that I nearly go insane.

Thx,
KT

If it's beating then is it in the right key??? Maybe the arrangement is bad. If it overruns the lead vocal, then turn the bloom vocals down. Try different micing techinique. Do you have FX on lead or BG? If not try making lead drier and BG wetter. Try chorusing or pitchshifting BG or verbing it or something so it doesn't fight with the lead. If you have to automate EQ, something is wrong.

Gregg Sartiano · 24th September 2004, 07:22 PM

You can try frequency-specific compression (C4 or set up a side chain compressor to an EQ of the frequencies that are giving you trouble).

Find a reference mix with a similar BGV approach and ask yourself, "what are they doing that I'm not?" How long is the reverb? How prominent are the lows? What is the doubling like?

If your tracks have tuning or diction problems, you may have to re-record or do serious Pro-Tooling. Can you post an mp3?

tINY · 24th September 2004, 09:04 PM

Too late now (maybe), but it sounds like a rehersal/directing problem. If the piece was never rehersed as a group and the tambre refined as an ensemble, it can be a real nightmare...

I think you found the only way to fix it "in the mix": use an EQ to change the forments at each "bloom".

Of course, what you have now is an accurate repersentation of the group's (or groups') performance(s). Maybe the bloom was what they were after.

-tINY

RKrizman · 25th September 2004, 12:17 AM

Try shelving off all of the BV low end you can possibly spare.

-R

natpub · 25th September 2004, 08:29 AM

A combo of side-chain compression, more reverb (oddly enough, though I changed reverbs), and killing everything below the very bottom edge of the open vowels saved the day. I used a combo of the ideas presented here. Thx very mucho.

Indeed it was a rehersal problem, since it was tracked as fast as the ideas were developed, thus there was no rehersal to begin with,

. Another big part of the problem was the reverb plug-in. I really am getting sick of verb plugs, and have deep fantsies about an EMT 140, lol!! I would settle for a KSP8 if anyone can spare the change?

Anyhoo, I asked the band if I could post a before and after sample here and they said fine once we finish. I will revisit with the samples later.

Thx all, very kindly :-)

tINY · 25th September 2004, 11:12 PM

Cool. I'll have to remember that - drown it in reverb and kill the bottom end. I guess having a couple of 'verb around is a good thing.

I still am at a loss as to why having singers and musicians available to retrack parts that don't blend is so uncommon. If it was a studio-creation effort, time should be alotted for retracking parts if they don't work together so well.

I guess there are some things we lost from the days of three ribbon mics in a big room going straight to 2-track with maybe a couple of overdubs. You know, when 'bands' were ensembles...

-tINY

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PART 2:Must have "MICS"under 1k pr? Favorite "Sleeper" "ROOM" Mics? "Out of the Norm"	betsy	Low End Theory	27	5th January 2008 02:49 PM
When do you go for a "plate" verb vs. a "hall" or "room"	fuzzmike	High end	35	9th January 2007 04:37 AM
"Truth" or False? Why the hush? "I want my "Mapo""! - I mean monitors!	spiderdragon	So much gear, so little time!	11	8th March 2006 01:29 AM
"I'm Not in Love" bgv methods?	natpub	So much gear, so little time!	9	1st September 2005 07:30 PM

24th September 2004, 02:44 PM	#1
natpub More cowbell! Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 1,710	BGV "Bloom" and remedies? I am asking the experienced mixers here about this problem I am finding. For the sake of discussion, I am calling it "BLOOM," and I mean it to refer to BGV in particular. I keep running into a problem where I am mixing a tune (usually one that is semi-complex) and there are punches of BGV on certain phrases (strophes? anyone use that word anymore?). By "punches" I do NOT mean punch-in's, ala hitting the record button. I mean BGV meant to "punch-up" a certain line of Lead Vox. OK, so anyway, as we probably can assume, such phrases tend to end on open vowels of one sort or another. And, subsequently, such vowel sounds tend to open up in volume and timbre---which I am, for purposes of this post, calling "Bloom." My problem is this--Bloom sucks. How can I fix it? Bloom overruns the lead vox, and causes unpleasant "beating" with sympathetic vibrations in the GTR and KBD ranges. 1. I have tried to write in subtle fades on the tails of the blooming vowels.---->result: The intensity and flow of the BGV and Lead Vox is ruined. 2. I have tried single and double compressing the tails of the Bloom--->result: The artifacts end up shining a nasty spotlight on the very thing I am trying to make more subtle. 3. I have tried to automate EQ against a very tight Q of the more nasty elements of the Bloom---> result: gets close to being correct, but takes sooooo much time and effort that I nearly go insane. Does anyone have a better solution? Thx, KT __________________ Vibrational Arts, Inc. Blue Sky Way Sonic Sorcery Studios Austin, Texas/Columbus, Ohio

25th September 2004, 08:29 AM	#6
natpub More cowbell! Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 1,710	A combo of side-chain compression, more reverb (oddly enough, though I changed reverbs), and killing everything below the very bottom edge of the open vowels saved the day. I used a combo of the ideas presented here. Thx very mucho. Indeed it was a rehersal problem, since it was tracked as fast as the ideas were developed, thus there was no rehersal to begin with, . Another big part of the problem was the reverb plug-in. I really am getting sick of verb plugs, and have deep fantsies about an EMT 140, lol!! I would settle for a KSP8 if anyone can spare the change? Anyhoo, I asked the band if I could post a before and after sample here and they said fine once we finish. I will revisit with the samples later. Thx all, very kindly :-) __________________ Vibrational Arts, Inc. Blue Sky Way Sonic Sorcery Studios Austin, Texas/Columbus, Ohio

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

24th September 2004, 07:22 PM	#3
Gregg Sartiano Lives for gear Join Date: May 2004 Location: Lost Angeles Posts: 1,783	You can try frequency-specific compression (C4 or set up a side chain compressor to an EQ of the frequencies that are giving you trouble). Find a reference mix with a similar BGV approach and ask yourself, "what are they doing that I'm not?" How long is the reverb? How prominent are the lows? What is the doubling like? If your tracks have tuning or diction problems, you may have to re-record or do serious Pro-Tooling. Can you post an mp3?

24th September 2004, 09:04 PM	#4
tINY Lives for gear Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Orygun Posts: 5,821	Too late now (maybe), but it sounds like a rehersal/directing problem. If the piece was never rehersed as a group and the tambre refined as an ensemble, it can be a real nightmare... I think you found the only way to fix it "in the mix": use an EQ to change the forments at each "bloom". Of course, what you have now is an accurate repersentation of the group's (or groups') performance(s). Maybe the bloom was what they were after. -tINY

25th September 2004, 12:17 AM	#5
RKrizman Lives for gear Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Monica, CA Posts: 2,778	Try shelving off all of the BV low end you can possibly spare. -R

25th September 2004, 11:12 PM	#7
tINY Lives for gear Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Orygun Posts: 5,821	Cool. I'll have to remember that - drown it in reverb and kill the bottom end. I guess having a couple of 'verb around is a good thing. I still am at a loss as to why having singers and musicians available to retrack parts that don't blend is so uncommon. If it was a studio-creation effort, time should be alotted for retracking parts if they don't work together so well. I guess there are some things we lost from the days of three ribbon mics in a big room going straight to 2-track with maybe a couple of overdubs. You know, when 'bands' were ensembles... -tINY