2 Questions ABOUT: Harmonics... and MONO

[redstudio]

Originally Posted by woomanmoomin

... Now, there's only so much heaviness you can get from a cheap CD radio thing like that anyway; with bass guitar, probably most of what you hear on the radio is harmonics, because the fundamental tones tend to be too low for the speakers to reproduce them. A super-clean bass tone therefore doesn't always translate well to cr@ppy little speakers, and that's probably worth bearing in mind.

Also, if you want a big sound on all possible systems, it's best to use reverbs etc. that translate well to mono. If you use a lot of stereo reverbs mostly based on phasing, for instance, the reverb and the whole sound of the instrument or voice in question are going to collapse if the thing gets played in mono (e.g. on a piece-of-cr@p radio), because there's going to be obvious phase cancellation.

How do you create extra harmonics? or what does this exactly mean? Any links for further reading?
I know what they are, but how would you apply or take away...

In Pro Tools, how would you check in MONO of your mix you've done already?
How would you apply reverbs in mono, I thought reverbs was for stereo use... Can some one further explain this as well??

Thanks,
C

[Darius van H]

There's 2 different aspects to the harmonics thing.

One is the natural harmonics produced by the vibrating bass guitar string:

Harmony Central - Understanding Harmonics

The other is the use of distortion, eq or other FX to boost these harmonics or introduce new ones.

In your quote, woomanmoomin (interesting name!) is saying that the stongest (fundamental, lowest) bass sine (all sounds can be ultimately reduced to combinations of sine waves: google "fourier") will not necassarily be audible on a crappy little system (say a fundamental of 50 hz on a system with a steep roll-off below 100hz), therefore boosting the upper harmonics will create more audible bass.

[redstudio]

nice...

now about that MONO stuff...

understand why you do it... and so forth,

but how exactly do you take a console or DAW to mono is another question...

I've been shown before... just for get

I'm using pro tools....

Thanks,
C

[jordanstoner]

If you don't have a console or monitoring device that has a simple Mono switch, then you would have to sum in PT. The only way to do this is to bus everything to an aux and change the stereo panning of both L/R to '0' (or you could use sends on all tracks to a seperate mono aux which you can mute or solo). But you can also check out Brainworx RTAS plug-ins - they make some really great M-S plug-ins, and they have one called Solo (for FREE!) that you can put on the master fader and up the "Mono-Maker" knob to listen in mono. You can also solo just the mid or side (sum and difference) of your session. All-in-all, handy stuff. Check them out!

MS-Mastering Tools by Brainworx-Media

Solo can be downloaded here:
MS-Mastering Tools by Brainworx-Media

I've dealt with Dirk personally, and he's a really awesome guy - can't wait to see some of their new products.

[sedohr]

Or if you have stereo imager from Waves you can put it on your master fader and turn Width to 0.

[Marbarbaar]

A mono vst! :D

mgAudio.de

[Greg Reierson]

Originally Posted by redstudio

How do you create extra harmonics? or what does this exactly mean?

It's not about extra harmonics. It's about natural harmonics.

I hear mix after mix from basement studios (and others who should know better) that put each instrument in a spectral band and either ignore or actively try to reduce their harmonic content outside of that band.

For example, rolling off the HF harmonic content of bass guitar or kick drum. What they are left with is just the fundamental pushing a lot of air around but having no musical value left. All of the important musical cues (timbre, articulation, etc.) come from harmonic content.

Eliminating this harmonic content is exactly the wrong way to make instruments blend. The more natural the harmonics of the captured sound, the more the instruments will mix themselves. The more you try to carve, hype or band limit each element of a mix the more you will fight for spectral balance and blend.


Greg Reierson
Rare Form Mastering

[uros]

For adding harmonics to the original bass track you can use Waves MaxxBass plug-in.

Hope it helps.

Cheers

[smoke]

Originally Posted by Greg Reierson

Eliminating this harmonic content is exactly the wrong way to make instruments blend. The more natural the harmonics of the captured sound, the more the instruments will mix themselves. The more you try to carve, hype or band limit each element of a mix the more you will fight for spectral balance and blend.


Greg Reierson
Rare Form Mastering

Wow. That is the 1st time I've ever heard this argument! I'm no expert, but can I assume that this may depend on the type of sounds in a mix? or the type of music?

Surely, excessive carving/separation thins out natural (or artificial) harmonics... but sensible cutting and/or boosting prevents a muddy, or nasal mix, no? When I started mixing, I didn't bother with EQ at all. Now that I pay attention to where my elements sit in the freq spectrum, the overall clarity is much better.

Still, there does seem to be room for my mixes to gel better... and I am subtle with adjustments.

Do you mind giving some specific examples or situations where you allow elements to share bands? How many elements in the same space before they compete sonically?

I know this forum can get uptight. I'm just asking a question, not challenging the way you work. Just trying to learn.

[Greg Reierson]

Yeah, I suppose the more organic the source (guitar, vocal, drum, violin, etc.) the more this applies, and the less organic (electronic or synthetic sources) the less it applies. I've certainly heard synth bass that was way to fat to fit in the mix, for example. But for the vast majority of sounds and musical styles, a natural harmonic content is the best place to start, even if the final representation of the sound will be significantly altered. Best to start with more and work your way towards the sound you desire rather than starting with less and trying to fill in the gaps.

EQ was originally developed to compensate for unnatural tonal balances. It was a corrective tool that has since become a very powerful creative tool. If you feel that elements in your mix are muddy or nasal then it's likely that they are not tonally balanced in the first place. Muddy and nasal are terms to describe sounds that are not natural. Why they sound that way is another story. THAT they say that way is the problem EQ is meant to address.

You also asked about blends getting to crowded. Consider a symphony orchestra. There's no carving or shaping of harmonic content. It just blends naturally. Of course, this has a lot to do with the arrangement. Now consider the best small club live show you can remember. Each member of the band was probably trying to make their instrument sound as good as possible. I'd be willing to be the bassist and the drummer weren't comparing notes on what to cut out of the kick so the bass could be heard. It all worked together because each element sounded natural.

Now consider a great recording from any genre. You should be able to reach out and touch each element of the mix. That realism comes from capturing the harmonic content of each element in the recording process. You can choose to emphasize or de-emphasize spectral content for artistic reasons, but relying on carving or band limiting to make things work together in a mix probably points back to problems with the recorded sound itself.

I certainly can't take credit for this concept. It's one of the most basic ideas behind realism and clarity in recording. The basic idea of allowing each instrument to breathe gets lost in the modern world of over production and five plug-ins on every channel. Less is very often more.


Greg Reierson
Rare Form Mastering

[lord_bunny]

If the key is A and you've got an electric bass, you set up your eq appropriatley, center frequencies around 110, 220, 440 etc... fire up the song, find out what needs boosting or cutting in context, then check a mono speaker (preferably smaller, crappier than your monitors). Boosting 600-800-ish might help bring out articulation that can help it speak in a dense mix. All fairly regular moves eq-wise.

You might have to rethink your eq if your losing it in the mono mix. Nothing wrong with making room for stuff, as long as it still sounds appropriate for the tune.

HP and LP conservatively. HP to 45 and your probably not going to miss it. You could also likely get away with a LP to 5k... again depending on the song/arrangement.

The point being I suppose is that if you truncate the signal to just the fundamentals it's going to sound odd to say the least, but sometimes boosting the fundamental and cutting the 2nd or 3rd octave to make room for guitar, or piano helps make room for everyone.

[Andy Krehm]

Originally Posted by jordanstoner

If you don't have a console or monitoring device that has a simple Mono switch, then you would have to sum in PT. The only way to do this is to bus everything to an aux and change the stereo panning of both L/R to '0' (or you could use sends on all tracks to a seperate mono aux which you can mute or solo). ...

Don't forget that the resulting mono audio has to be turned down 3 dB (IIRC) in order to level match with the stereo file.

[jordanstoner]

Don't forget that the resulting mono audio has to be turned down 3 dB (IIRC) in order to level match with the stereo file

.

D'oh! That's correct - and a good reason to use sends to a separate aux that is set to a -3 reference point compared to the stereo mix.

[smoke]

yeah, I agree plug-ins and effects do sometimes detract from the purity of an original sound. It's really a case by case basis. I appreciate a pure sounding mix as much as I enjoy a mix that has the flavor of effects, and "embellished" harmonics.

The key is in controlling a mix that does incorpororate effects. Taming the artificial harmonics. If I happen to want to do something stupid, like put multi chorus on strings, the marginal artifacts from the chorus will begin to interfere with, say the sustain of a soft piano element. Here is where I have to make a decision of what to dial back on. I could increase the sustain on the piano note, but that contradicts the soft nature of it. I can lower the level of chorus, but that takes away from the richness that I like. Panning can create problems of it's own. It's like I have these 2 things sounding the way I want, but for a bit more clarity. This is where I decide to "unnaturally" separate the fighting frequencies. With subtlety, of course.

I guess I'm looking for pure and clear sound, while still using effects and untraditional instrument combinations. The "problem" in the mix, might just be something that I like, but want definition. Something I've been trying to get for some time now. I think I will keep what you said in mind, and start off with less, and see if the final product satisfies.... never know!

Orchestral instruments were made to sound great together. To me that is musical perfection, but it's not a given. They know what they are doing, and each element is well thought out. Each instrument is designed/chosen to to blend with the group. Throw in some 808, and see if those staccato cellos still sound as sweet and crisp!

As for live bands, I think our ears are accustomed to the sound and are forgiving to any unintended sonic distortion. In a way, we expect and enjoy the imperfections of live music. I listen to lots of live bands, and when I show my "ignorant" friends, they think it's off beat and too much is happening at once. I think... Thats's the best part!

[jordanstoner]

I guess I'm looking for pure and clear sound, while still using effects and untraditional instrument combinations. The "problem" in the mix, might just be something that I like, but want definition. Something I've been trying to get for some time now.

That's where M-S can help - don't sacrifice the natural qualities of the piano, and don't lose your chorus - just push the "fx" to the outside, which can make everything settle into its own natural pocket. Of course, that's if you're going for a more natural approach and not 'designing' the overall sound.

[smoke]

Originally Posted by jordanstoner

That's where M-S can help - don't sacrifice the natural qualities of the piano, and don't lose your chorus - just push the "fx" to the outside, which can make everything settle into its own natural pocket. Of course, that's if you're going for a more natural approach and not 'designing' the overall sound.

If only my Cubase had M-S on the master buss. I'll probably download that VST brainworx solo mentioned.

What do you mean "push" the fx to the outside? Pan out the FX send?

[redstudio]

HOW DO YOU SEND YOUR FX THEN if you are going down to mono, so you don't lose that effect ...??

[redstudio]

Originally Posted by smoke

If only my Cubase had M-S on the master buss. I'll probably download that VST brainworx solo mentioned.

What do you mean "push" the fx to the outside? Pan out the FX send?

you can do a MS configure without a plug-in. Just copy your S mic, then invert it. Pan accordingly, then bring it up... WA-LAH! Try it out... its pretty sweet

C

[jordanstoner]

you can do a MS configure without a plug-in. Just copy your S mic, then invert it. Pan accordingly, then bring it up... WA-LAH! Try it out... its pretty sweet

True, but that's for mic input (unless you want to set up some very complicated routing, and that's still going to have discreet timing issues that your DAW might not be able to compensate for). And you still need a Mid in your example, otherwise you just have two anti-polar waves on each channel cancelling each other out.

Basically, you need a MS-Matrix encoder / decoder (also referred to as sum/difference, or lateral/vertical). Aside from Brainworx, the Fairchild 660/670 plug-ins will work, and there are several hardware manufacturers that either make independent MS Matrices, or include them in other gear (the Manley Vari-Mu, for example) - don't know about AU or VST plugs, I use mostly RTAS or TDM. Anyway, if you start pulling back your phantom center, you can really screw around with the stereo width of your fx returns. Depending on the parameters of the plug-in or gear you're using to achieve this effect, you can increase the stereo width so much that your chorus exists 'outside' the speakers, and your piano fits nicely between them. It's a psychoacoustic trick, and it carries it's own problems - but for the most part it can prevent those "two things" you really like from stepping on each other, while still allowing you to enjoy the effects of both.

You can also take the insert or send of a track to an MS encoder, patch an effect or processor in-line, then patch the output of that to an MS decoder to get back to stereo. There's lots of fun to be had, and a lot of sound stage to work with. Give it a shot, have fun. Just remember.. NEVER CROSS THE STREAMS.