The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
That Sheen Condenser Microphones
Old 26th July 2014
  #421
Oh, I just meant because of the forbidden topics angle.
Old 27th July 2014
  #422
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
As a matter of fact they came ready and recorded most of their songs very quickly, that is well known. It wouldn't take a week to mic' up the guitar. More likely 5 minutes. I have no idea what you are even trying to argue. Then again I've been confused about that from your first post.
posting a video with no comments is a great argument?

but to clarify my point of view, I am simply stating the Beatles used the best studios and the best equipment and the best producer It should have sheen and lots of it, and it does...

Secondly my point is you need good equipment to get sheen and nice texture on the mixes, and the Beatles are proof of this. People pay truckloads of money for the old equipment similar to what they used and by no coincidence it has the same exact sound. Those TG micpres, reddi, v72, u47s have that sound, that is sheen, also 1in 8 track or 1/2 4 track helps BIGTIME.

So basically I'm not trying to argue I'm just informing you that their ultra smooth production sound came from the equipment and studio they used.
Old 27th July 2014
  #423
Gear Guru
 
kafka's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptoolate View Post
Here are a couple of mixes. I would love suggestions on what I might do to improve them.
Sweet Communion - there's a couple of different ways I might approach this. One is to give it a little more space. People have suggested reverb and delays. Yeah, that could help. The first thing I think of is that the low mids are really stepping on each other. When the vocals aren't cutting through, there's a lot of information covering them up. Try to clear out some space.

You're looking for sheen - well, I think you start to get some of it when the vocal picks up after 3:30. You're getting some power there when they start to cut, and it seems to bring the rest of the mix into balance.

Joseph's Lullaby - you say no comp, but what's going on with that piano? It sounds crushed and distorted. Do you just mean no comp on the 2buss? Those vocals are pretty gritty on the high end, and are also pretty thick at the same time. I don't think I like that mic on this singer. Also, your tempo is too fast and too rigid. There's just no room to breathe in this arrangement. You don't give anything any of these long notes time to decay.

I think the one thing I hear in common between the two is a lot of accumulation in the low mids. That's probably the stylistic element I'd work on first. And get rid whatever is distorting in cut #2. There's just a lot of grit in there overall.
Old 27th July 2014
  #424
Gear Head
 
futura2012's Avatar
 

Quote:
Sweet Communion - there's a couple of different ways I might approach this. One is to give it a little more space. People have suggested reverb and delays. Yeah, that could help. The first thing I think of is that the low mids are really stepping on each other. When the vocals aren't cutting through, there's a lot of information covering them up. Try to clear out some space.
Nice post > so just to clarify what your saying here is likely one of the issues with communion is the over crowding of the lower mids. Kind of the chest of drawers concept wont work until it all fits in the drawers correctly with everything having a place?

Quote:
You're looking for sheen - well, I think you start to get some of it when the vocal picks up after 3:30. You're getting some power there when they start to cut, and it seems to bring the rest of the mix into balance.
This is also an interesting point so your thinking here the technique in the vocal can have a large impact to the perceived "sheen"? Just out of interest does an engineer normally get involved with effectively "directing" the singer in what to do or is it a case of of you say nothing, let them get on with it and tidy up the mess or lack of mess depending on the quality of the band? At this point can you argue there is a thin line between the engineer almost becoming part of the band?

Quote:
Secondly my point is you need good equipment to get sheen and nice texture on the mixes, and the Beatles are proof of this. People pay truckloads of money for the old equipment similar to what they used and by no coincidence it has the same exact sound. Those TG micpres, reddi, v72, u47s have that sound, that is sheen, also 1in 8 track or 1/2 4 track helps BIGTIME.
Although you have had a lot of stick throughout this thread chainrule (me too infact lol) I think you have a valid point too. I am very convinced that gear has a large part to play in this. I dont think if you put Neil Dorfsman (the direstraits brothers in arms engineer btw) infront of a limited desk, basic D>As A>Ds, fairly naff effects, average mics etc that album would sound anything like it does.

I also did some research on what studio was used to make that album Air Studios West Indies.

Here is the mic list:

Mic List - AIR Studios

Here is the kit list:

Toy Cupboard - AIR Studios


Now some have made the point that give Neil (or someone of equal caliber) a setup like mine and he could still create this kind of sound. i am under no illusions of this mans ability:

Neil Dorfsman - Producer / Engineer / Mixer

but im kind of thinking along the lines of chainrule here I think it would kind of be like me trying to solder some surface mount boards with a nasty soldering iron. Simple fact I cannot do it as I don't have the correct tools.
Old 27th July 2014
  #425
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by futura2012 View Post

Mic List - AIR Studios

Here is the kit list:

Toy Cupboard - AIR Studios


Now some have made the point that give Neil (or someone of equal caliber) a setup like mine and he could still create this kind of sound. i am under no illusions of this mans ability:

Neil Dorfsman - Producer / Engineer / Mixer

but im kind of thinking along the lines of chainrule here I think it would kind of be like me trying to solder some surface mount boards with a nasty soldering iron. Simple fact I cannot do it as I don't have the correct tools.
Air studios is Sir G.M. studio..... sure you know . If you want to check what I think its the best sounding record of all time it was done at AIR.
It's called Apocalypse by a jazzrock/fusion guitar player called John McLaughlin. Sort of a slow moving record perhaps boring to some people but the color of the record is just smooth as it gets. The Air live room and console is what this sheen biz is all about. Don't get me wrong you still need the talent playing in the room.

I know this sounds off the wall and is hard for some to believe but if an inexperienced person went in to place like AIR and used common micing techniques from textbooks it would be pretty tough for it to sound bad with even a decent band. It really would. It's not like recording gets more difficult the better the studio you are working out of, to the contrary...the easier it gets. Try making amazing sounding records like The Wall or Kiss destroyer in a bedroom with a FF.....sorry....... not gonna happen.

Mic it all up at the Record Plant through a Neve, how can it not sound good? The fact of the matter is it will always sound good. That is the beauty of a professional room and a professional desk.
Old 27th July 2014
  #426
Gear Head
 
futura2012's Avatar
 

Quote:
Air studios is Sir G.M. studio..... sure you know . If you want to check what I think its the best sounding record of all time it was done at AIR.
So if we removed the human factor for a moment (not suggesting its not a MAJOR factor). There is clearly stuff in that kit list you wouldn't need to make a nice polished sounding track. what would be in essence your desert island kit list for sheen assuming that list is the only gear you can choose from? Ie the minimal amount of stuff you could get away with but still feel you would be in a position to make a nice track.
Old 27th July 2014
  #427
Gear Guru
 
kafka's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by futura2012 View Post
Nice post > so just to clarify what your saying here is likely one of the issues with communion is the over crowding of the lower mids. Kind of the chest of drawers concept wont work until it all fits in the drawers correctly with everything having a place?
Pretty much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by futura2012 View Post
This is also an interesting point so your thinking here the technique in the vocal can have a large impact to the perceived "sheen"? Just out of interest does an engineer normally get involved with effectively "directing" the singer in what to do or is it a case of of you say nothing, let them get on with it and tidy up the mess or lack of mess depending on the quality of the band? At this point can you argue there is a thin line between the engineer almost becoming part of the band?
You work with what you have. It's up to the producer and performer to give you their best. How well that all works won't be 100% apparent until you're done tracking. You may need to ride the vocal to get it to sit well throughout the song. Take it phrase by phrase. Don't think you can just put a compressor on it and let the level sit.
Old 27th July 2014
  #428
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by futura2012 View Post
the minimal amount of stuff you could get away with but still feel you would be in a position to make a nice track.
If I had 1 good condenser mic, some 57s some Neve LBs or Api 512s and a nice converter like an apogee rosetta I could make an album I would be happy with no problem. I wouldn't need any plugins or samples either.

If I couldn't have neves I could use a cheap midas console and be happy. Honestly as long as I don't have a cheap interface I would be content.
I use cheap mics out of choice so I don't need good mics, I don't need compressors or reverbs. Maybe if I didn't have Neve pres I would need a compressor for drums. But I would only need 1 for snare drum I wouldn't need it for vocals or anything else. Now this is providing I have a decent band with a great drummer and a good room. If I had to record a crappy band it may require some other things. If I was in a bad room I would need some gates for the drums and a reverb of some type perhaps.
Old 27th July 2014
  #429
Gear Addict
 
takka360's Avatar
 

I was just messing mastering a track, i used a different comp and limiter and the sheen went BAM.
I could be wrong but I believe a lot of it is clearing mud and getting the mids bang on.
Old 27th July 2014
  #430
Lives for gear
 
Arichlsss's Avatar
Anyone want to guess the converters used on this ITB project

Http://soundcloud.com/kortweldon/kis...ss-single-edit
Old 27th July 2014
  #431
Here for the gear
 

yeah, my guess is you used an Mbox
Old 27th July 2014
  #432
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by takka360 View Post
I was just messing mastering a track, i used a different comp and limiter and the sheen went BAM.
I could be wrong but I believe a lot of it is clearing mud and getting the mids bang on.
Actually I think the Sheen is just a mix buss comp that gives it that sheen.
Old 27th July 2014
  #433
Lives for gear
I think Jules needs to have his IT guy create a protocol for this site that deletes your post as soon as you type the word "converter".

Really….it would save all of us a lot of time !

The biggest issue I have with my mixes and mixes of people at about my same level is probably what you are struggling with too. They are decent. You know, nothing really nasty jumping out at you . And that's the problem isn't it . If they really stink you can fix them but when they are 90 % there you find yourself at a loss. You just know they are not as pro as what you are wanting them to be. ( this tell me the problem is me ) I can fix a really garbage mix in 20 minutes but I can't make it sound like the pro mixes with exactness and certainty.

Great mixes are that balance between separation and cohesion. The sounds seem to bleed out of each other but they have some element of definition that sets them where the ear can define them when it needs to. Too much separation and the mix becomes stark. Too much blend and it becomes mud.

Your stuff is good. Really close, but I hear what you are hearing. Not sure I could tell you what to fix . Not sure I could fix it either. Some good suggestions in previous threads. I say keep this mix, make a duplicate and try some of the ideas presented here and see what you get. Without a pro mix person sitting beside you guiding your choices I think you just need a healthy dose of trial and error to get you that final few percent you are seeking.
Old 27th July 2014
  #434
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by targa2 View Post
I think Jules needs to have his IT guy create a protocol for this site that deletes your post as soon as you type the word "converter".
Along with:

"Mac or PC"
"Hardware vs Plugins"
"Analog or Digital synths?"

Plus any thread with the words, "New from Slate digital!" should automatically get moved into the "Older than 2 months" subforum so that the regular forum isn't tied up with a thread with 8,000 posts arguing about a program that, in all likelihood isn't going to be released for at least 9 months after it's announced.

It would also make this site a much more professional place to visit.

But something like that would make 75% of the posts here disappear overnight. And with it would also plunge Jules' ad revenue. And so the chance of such a protocol being written is slim to none.

But it is a nice thought!

Regards,
Frank
Old 27th July 2014
  #435
Lives for gear
Or the protocol could move the thread automatically to the " CONVERTER, MAC VS PC, DIGITAL VS HARDWARE ENDLESS FUTILE ARGUMENT SUBFORUM "
One could visit on days when they are just in the mood for a good fight. It would of course need a "warning!!!! visit at your own risk " disclaimer.

That would keep the site volume up and clear out some sludge in the process.

Hey .....everybody wins.

I like using the " it's my gear " excuse too when it suits me, but still deep down I know it's me.
Old 27th July 2014
  #436
Gear Addict
 
spurratic's Avatar
I haven't read this thread since it was on the first page of comments. When I noticed this morning that it was in page 13 I said to myself.....

Bet any $$ it has devolved into a conversion and sample/bitrate war. And a bunch of FF jokes.

Gearslutz....you never fail to deliver on that front!!

OP, just try out some different Eq , some good master buss compression, and maybe pass the mix through some transformers or tape if you have access.

Lots of good suggestions in here about tasteful reverb to create an environment as well.

Don't waste any time worrying about your convertor or whether or not you put anything through 192khz sample rate. All you are doing is distracting yourself from the real tools to get what you are looking for; production choices, eq, comp, and verb.
Old 27th July 2014
  #437
007
Lives for gear
 
007's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arichlsss View Post
Anyone want to guess the converters used on this ITB project

Http://soundcloud.com/kortweldon/kis...ss-single-edit
Does it matter what converters were used?

Could be a FF/Mbox/M-Audio in the hands of someone who did a 'decent' job at the mix.
Could be a Big fvcking Ben or Burl in the hands of someone who didn't know how to bring out the best of it all.

Song is meh, mix is just ok, lacks depth, has an 'essence of sheen', in that mainstream pop/loud/modern-radio/crappy kind of way.
Not my thing at all, but this is the pop sound of today, the American Idol generation eats this stuff up, and imo, a fine effort if hoping to pitch to A&Rs at labels.

Converter argument: fail.
Old 27th July 2014
  #438
Lives for gear
 
Virgil's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arichlsss View Post
Anyone want to guess the converters used on this ITB project

Http://soundcloud.com/kortweldon/kis...ss-single-edit
It's obviously meant to sound upfront, and I guess it could benefit from more depth with reverbs and stuff, but those are mixing decisions and a matter of taste.

Sounds great to me, myself I couldn't tell if it was mixed ITB or on SSL console. Please, say it was tracked and mixed with FF800 and logic plugins.
Old 27th July 2014
  #439
Lives for gear
 
Jazz Noise's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 007 View Post

Song is meh, mix is just ok, lacks depth, has an 'essence of sheen', in that mainstream pop/loud/modern-radio/crappy kind of way.
Not my thing at all, but this is the pop sound of today, the American Idol generation eats this stuff up, and imo, a fine effort if hoping to pitch to A&Rs at labels.

Converter argument: fail.
This thread, in fairness, is about methods to obtain a particular aesthetic rather than the validity of it. In Pop these sounds and structures are lingua franca.

I don't like it either. But on the service end of the creative industry it's a little unrealistic to expect to get your way.
Old 27th July 2014
  #440
Lives for gear
 
12tone's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazz Noise View Post
This thread, in fairness, is about methods to obtain a particular aesthetic rather than the validity of it. In Pop these sounds and structures are lingua franca.

I don't like it either. But on the service end of the creative industry it's a little unrealistic to expect to get your way.
very true, but not all pop strives for the same aesthetic...and those that do is emblematic of a certain lack of creativity imho...

on a rhetorical note: Can a dead horse be beaten any further?
Old 27th July 2014
  #441
Lives for gear
 
Jazz Noise's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12tone View Post
very true, but not all pop strives for the same aesthetic...and those that do is emblematic of a certain lack of creativity imho...

on a rhetorical note: Can a dead horse be beaten any further?
Yes. It's in many ways an advertising format, with the structure leaving space and also a construct in which the audience can expect talk of love, good times, brands of phones and speaker, alcohol company namedropping. It means it's not outrageous to sing about loving who you are, doing what feels right and then directly relating that to your 'favourite' clothing brand who may or may not be paying you to feature them in your lyrical content or video.

Competing with this is financially difficult, and the few cases we've seen where it really took off are either rare [Somebody I Used To Know] or simply wildly untrue [Gaga's discog but in particular Born This Way, watch the video without the music]. But this is off topic so I'm going to shut up now. My point was that you can't call a painting the worst movie you've ever seen, that's a misjudging of the medium and its intent.
Old 27th July 2014
  #442
007
Lives for gear
 
007's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazz Noise View Post
My point was that you can't call a painting the worst movie you've ever seen, that's a misjudging of the medium and its intent.
If in reference to my comments, I think my post was misunderstood, or simply unclear.
Old 27th July 2014
  #443
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by targa2 View Post
I think Jules needs to have his IT guy create a protocol for this site that deletes your post as soon as you type the word "converter".
I was thinking the same thing yesterday but seek and destroy the"skill" keyword . I mean after all this forum is called "So much gear, so little time!"
Old 27th July 2014
  #444
Lives for gear
 
Swurveman's Avatar
The problem I have with these kind of threads is you get people with 4 pages of posts knocking some gear, praising other gear, talking authoritatively about gear but they don't post one song that they tracked/mixed. The benefit though is that (for me) it is a good indicator for judicious use of the ignore list.
Old 27th July 2014
  #445
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swurveman View Post
The benefit though is that (for me) it is a good indicator for judicious use of the ignore list.
I guess you will never see this post so I won't respond in great detail, but no one has posted one good fireface recording..... ya know to be fair
I stated earlier if someone posts a good FF recording I will post a bad one. I think that's fair... Offer still stands but the FF recording has to be really good...as in major label quality, and I will post home demo quality I have a long list of those.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Swurveman View Post
talking authoritatively about gear but they don't post one song that they tracked/mixed.
but your post here is very "authoritative" why don't you post something you recorded and mixed? do it .....be the better man!!

The thing is you guys can make egotistical claims about your awesome skillsets and how you don't need good equipment, where are your recordings
done on all this cheap equipment? shouldn't we be able to hear those? really.... You should be able to back it. I stated I NEED good gear and recommended a few pieces dear to my heart. Turn on your radio you will hear these units I am referring to. Go over to highend and they will school you on them. As of now I have read 15 pages of how FF is a great unit. Well let's hear all those great recordings...really..... lets go!!! you guys have been making claims for 15 pages how great these units are and skill is the key. so let's hear em'.

No one has posted anything and It pretty much proves my point, if FF was so great it would consistently provide great recordings, yet the skill crowd can't post one great recording done with a FF? there should in theory be thousands, I only want to hear ONE........... just one. A whole recording done on a FF unit. Not at all too much to ask. I will no problem post a bad recording I did on one but it won't prove anything, the burden of proof is on you.
Old 27th July 2014
  #446
Lives for gear
 
Arichlsss's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil View Post
It's obviously meant to sound upfront, and I guess it could benefit from more depth with reverbs and stuff, but those are mixing decisions and a matter of taste.

Sounds great to me, myself I couldn't tell if it was mixed ITB or on SSL console. Please, say it was tracked and mixed with FF800 and logic plugins.
No I was waiting for someone to tell me they heard crappy conversion.

I've had a ton of converters and friends with tons of converters.

My production "kiss kiss" was supposed to be that radio pop country vibe and I thought it was decent but not on par with pro Nashville guys

Apogee symphony . Blue bottle b6, sta level, distressor , aurora audio gtq

I've got a friend doing arguably better mixes than me on a motu that's 10 years old.

In my experience .... And I've done lots of poor work.

It's the incredible song and performace with competent engineering that will translate better than mediocre song performace with great engineering
Old 27th July 2014
  #447
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arichlsss View Post
motu
MOTU is often good stuff, very underrated in general. While not all their units are comparable quality, overall they are fine sounding units. But this is not about MOTU or apogee its about FF since the op uses one of those.
Old 27th July 2014
  #448
Lives for gear
 
Arichlsss's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chainrule View Post
MOTU is often good stuff, very underrated in general. While not all their units are comparable quality, overall they are fine sounding units. But this is not about MOTU or apogee its about FF since the op uses one of those.
Fair enough... I've never owned that unit.

But thought the capture of the OP's songs were good enough

That sparse of a production needs a treated room and stellar mic before even thinking about conversion IMHO
Old 27th July 2014
  #449
Lives for gear
 
12tone's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chainrule View Post
MOTU is often good stuff, very underrated in general. While not all their units are comparable quality, overall they are fine sounding units. But this is not about MOTU or apogee its about FF since the op uses one of those.
MOTU better in terms of sound quality than RME?

That's a new one...
Old 27th July 2014
  #450
007
Lives for gear
 
007's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arichlsss View Post
No I was waiting for someone to tell me they heard crappy conversion.
The following is in no way a criticism towards you, just generally speaking.

You post a song via Soundcloud, and while I totally get what you were trying to do, instinctually, as the song starts playing, I'm not listening for what the "conversion" is doing.
Whether crappy AD/DA or high-end, no, I'm listening to the song, and if anything techie, I'm listening to the mix, as a whole, depth, dynamics, space, instrument separation, etc.

Everyone who listened to it is likely playing back the link on different systems, so it's hard to gauge, much less listen for 'crappy conversion'.
Maybe it's just me, but DA only shaped the mixer's decisions at mix time.
Once out into the world, all, I'm now listening to the mix, for the conversion itself has no sound.


Quote:
My production "kiss kiss" was supposed to be that radio pop country vibe and I thought it was decent but not on par with pro Nashville guys

Apogee symphony . Blue bottle b6, sta level, distressor , aurora audio gtq
That is some very decent kit my friend.
If the mixes aren't on par, the converters are certainly not the issue.

Quote:
I've got a friend doing arguably better mixes than me on a motu that's 10 years old.

In my experience .... And I've done lots of poor work.
There you go.
So while some posters mock the thought that this thread has turned into a skill vs. gear debate, it can't be stressed enough.
That song, in the hands of a great mixing engineer, using great monitors in a great room, even mixed through a FF, can certainly be 'on par' with the big guns.

Quote:
It's the incredible song and performace with competent engineering that will translate better than mediocre song performace with great engineering
Well said.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump