Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Remaster my recording?  (Read 1696 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Remaster my recording?
« on: September 27, 2022, 12:11:47 AM »
I have a recording I'd love for someone to enhance and explain to me what steps they took so I can learn.  I'm happy to compensate fairly for the lesson. Is there anyone here that has the time for that?  Thanks!

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #1 on: September 27, 2022, 02:32:35 AM »
I’m happy to help, but you need to ask yourself some questions first

1.  What Do You Want to Achieve?  Put another way, what’s wrong with the recording?  Is the source clean enough that a remaster will be worth it?

2.  Do You Have Money to Buy Software?  Yeah, some is free but the good stuff costs money or take the risk of downloading pirated Russian versions.  You’ll need about $1,000

3.  Do You Have the Time to Learn This Software?  50-100 hours practicing, screwing up, and trying different techniques is part of the learning process.
Regards,
Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline morst

  • I think I found an error on the internet; #UnionStrong
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5324
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #2 on: September 27, 2022, 03:08:04 AM »
Does it need level boost?
Spectral re-balancing? (EQ or perhaps multi-band compression?)
Click and pop removal?


Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2022, 08:55:37 AM »
Thank you for the replies. 

I think I made this one worse instead of better, for example:
https://archive.org/details/goose2022-03-04.nashville

I recorded The War on Drugs last night and it probably needs a little EQ, levels adjusted, etc.  Nothing really wrong with it but I'd rather set levels low at the concert and fix afterwards. 

Often if I get to record it isn't from the right spot in the room, etc. and so I'm just trying to learn how to make things a little better in those situations.  I don't have a lot of time to dramatically improve a recording but if I knew what generally works in Audacity then I can replicate that. 

Thanks!

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #4 on: September 27, 2022, 10:26:09 AM »
First and foremost, good mastering requires really accurate monitoring.  Secondly a good ear and mindful awareness.  The importance of everything else pales in comparison to those two things.  Really accurate monitoring is equivalent in importance to good location when taping - it represents the first, second and third most important things in the process!

If your monitoring is not accurate, your corrections will not only target those inaccuracies overlaid upon those of the recordings. You may not notice, or be aware of, problems in the recordings which become apparent elsewhere, and might even make them worse.

Simple corrections of obviously wrong things like noises, balance problems, drop-outs can be fixed more easily. Those are in the realm of initial raw file processing and mixing rather than mastering.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #5 on: September 27, 2022, 12:11:34 PM »
Isotope RX7 for the heavy lifting and Goldwave for volume and compression. Reaper for most of my plug ins   Adobe CC for some plug ins and time alignment.

I use the JEMS method.  I start on RX7 with de-click, azimuth adjustment, and phase. Then render and figure out specifics.

RX7 took me 100+ hours to figure out, watching videos and experimentation.  I emphasize experimentation because you’ve gotta know what the settings do and whether a little tweak or something more aggressive is necessary. 

There are some good books. Geoff Emrick, Tom Dowd, Ken Calait, Rudy Van Gelder, Bobby Owsinski, but these are overviews of theory, not hands on, how do I do “x” with “y” software.

Most remasters screw up recordings in my opinion.
Regards,
Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #6 on: September 27, 2022, 01:05:24 PM »

Simple corrections of obviously wrong things like noises, balance problems, drop-outs can be fixed more easily. Those are in the realm of initial raw file processing and mixing rather than mastering.

This is an excellent point and you are right, I’m really just talking about raw file processing, not true mastering.  I just want to efficiently spend an hour after a show normalizing, eq, etc., cutting tracks and uploading to archive.org.   I’m in no way qualified nor have the ear to do much more…..

Offline Dirtybiz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • *
  • Posts: 64
  • Gender: Male
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #7 on: September 27, 2022, 02:02:15 PM »
I have a recording I'd love for someone to enhance and explain to me what steps they took so I can learn.  I'm happy to compensate fairly for the lesson. Is there anyone here that has the time for that?  Thanks!

I have been in your shoes most recently and a now good buddy has helped me with the workflow.  I'm happy to share what I've recently learned to help you! 
Feel free to send me a DM and we can try and get you up to speed.

Dennis
Mics:  DPA 4022's, AKG CK1X, CK3K & Oktava MC012's
Recorder: Sound Device Mixpre 6ii & Tascam DR-44WL

Offline goodcooker

  • Trade Count: (41)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3913
  • Gender: Male
  • goes to 11
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #8 on: September 27, 2022, 03:14:09 PM »

Simple corrections of obviously wrong things like noises, balance problems, drop-outs can be fixed more easily. Those are in the realm of initial raw file processing and mixing rather than mastering.

This is an excellent point and you are right, I’m really just talking about raw file processing, not true mastering.  I just want to efficiently spend an hour after a show normalizing, eq, etc., cutting tracks and uploading to archive.org.   I’m in no way qualified nor have the ear to do much more…..

I'd be happy to share my fairly straightforward post show workflow with you. Send me a PM if you like.

There are a few threads here about this sort of thing that can point you in the right direction. What freeware people are using for what tasks and so on.
Line Audio CM3 || ADK A51 type IV
SD MixpreD || Oade Warm Mod UA5
Tascam DR680 || Marantz PMD661 || Korg MR1 (homebrew internal battery mod)

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/goodcooker

"Are you the Zman?" - fan at Panic 10-08-10 Kansas City
"I don't know who left this perfectly good inflatable wook doll here, but if I'm blowing her up, I'm keeping her." -  hoppedup

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #9 on: September 27, 2022, 04:25:48 PM »
Thank you all for your advice and help!  In the past I would share what I have and then take the time to make it better later.  Now with archive.org it seems so "permanent" that I feel the need to get it right before I upload.  Honestly I was the only one recording (which is often the case) and I just want to get the music out.  You can hear the recording I am trying to improve and post on archive.org here:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KuXBj2eiz-_WSJXVIR_6BVPpOZoXJEVb






Offline nulldogmas

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1408
    • How I Escaped My Uncertain Fate
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #10 on: September 27, 2022, 06:00:53 PM »
You can hear the recording I am trying to improve and post on archive.org here:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KuXBj2eiz-_WSJXVIR_6BVPpOZoXJEVb

It sounds pretty good and clear to me, just a bit heavy in the midrange. Using my tried-and-true EQ method of closing my eyes and moving the sliders up and down until it sounds better, I came up with the settings below, but your mileage may very much vary.

Now with archive.org it seems so "permanent" that I feel the need to get it right before I upload.

I've recently upgraded several of my recordings that are on archive.org after figuring out better ways of doing postproduction on them. If anything, archive.org is so easy to replace files on that it feels a lot less permanent than bittorrent, where I would have to chase down everyone who torrented my recording to let them know I have a new version.

Offline bonghitwillie

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 127
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #11 on: September 27, 2022, 08:01:17 PM »
i have asked this question on another forum in the past. i would think you need a flat response monitor(s). what speaker(s) does everyone use? on the other site, someone used headphones instead of speakers.

Offline Dan33185

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 286
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.midwestsoundsrecordings.com/
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #12 on: September 27, 2022, 08:10:13 PM »
i have asked this question on another forum in the past. i would think you need a flat response monitor(s). what speaker(s) does everyone use? on the other site, someone used headphones instead of speakers.

I always use headphones when mastering recordings, it allows you to hear things you may not hear on speakers until after the fact.

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #13 on: September 28, 2022, 03:19:49 PM »
Basic Mastering for Uploads:

RX7:  De-Click (Removes Clapping) > Azmuth (Removes off axis artifacts from moving the recorder's position) > Phase (Not necessary, but to my ears this makes a difference, don't know why)

Compress, Limit or Normalize:  On Audacity, Goldwave or other simple DAW, makes sound more balanced and boosts quiet parts, limits or compress loud parts

Gain Adjustment:  On Audacity or Goldwave, I tend to reduce the volume after a song is over to remove whoops hollars, clapping etc, which is often louder than the song

Splits:  On Goldwave, I drop a cue, name the song, and Goldwave does a nice job splitting the file

Flac Conversion:  On Media Monkey, also it names the tracks the way I like them (Artist - Track Number Song Name)

This whole process takes about an hour for a typical show. 
Regards,
Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #14 on: September 28, 2022, 04:36:25 PM »
You guys are awesome, I learned so much (and now have a reference for when I forget).  I miss the days where I could skip class and spend all day on trial and error.  For now, I have a replicable process to get these recordings out and shared before I forget about it or get too busy.  Thanks!  One day I'll go through my closet of DATs and finally share some of those. 


https://archive.org/details/twod2022-09-26

Thanks again!

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2022, 04:46:29 PM »
If you have a list of your DATs, please post them!  There are 3-4 folks here who will transfer them digitally for you for free, depending on the band. 
Regards,
Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline morst

  • I think I found an error on the internet; #UnionStrong
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5324
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2022, 11:00:07 PM »
i have asked this question on another forum in the past. i would think you need a flat response monitor(s). what speaker(s) does everyone use? on the other site, someone used headphones instead of speakers.
I prefer a "front loaded" three-way speaker system without ports or horns (soft dome tweeter), or alternately a two-way system plus subwoofer, but I was not satisfied with my ported subwoofer so I went back to the three-ways.
Mine are a/d/s "monitor" speakers, model M-12.
I also compare with headphones using the Sony V6 (my second pair but I got my first pair in 1990!) and I find them to sound very much the same as my speakers, inasmuch as I know what part I am hearing is the speakers and what part is the signal.
You could get acclimated to *any* full-range system, but it's a good practice while learning to test your mixes on many kinds of playback devices until you figure it out. Everything from a mono cube speaker, to a car stereo, to a laptop, to an audiophile system... boom box, check one of your favorite recordings on EVERYTHING, so you can really hear what you are getting.

Offline daspyknows

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8957
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #17 on: September 29, 2022, 02:03:23 AM »
You guys are awesome, I learned so much (and now have a reference for when I forget).  I miss the days where I could skip class and spend all day on trial and error.  For now, I have a replicable process to get these recordings out and shared before I forget about it or get too busy.  Thanks!  One day I'll go through my closet of DATs and finally share some of those. 


https://archive.org/details/twod2022-09-26

Thanks again!

Great band.  Need to give this a listen.  Caught them at Hyde Park and Rock Werchter this past summer.

mountainhop

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #18 on: September 29, 2022, 04:36:22 AM »
not a bad recording. has a distant sound. assuming it was taken near FOH per the pic, i would prob try mk41s or absent those, a PAS pattern vs whatever was used there (which sounds to be 90 degrees or more)

in any case, you are at the mercy of the FOH engineer. GIGO.

Offline rumbleseat

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 100
  • Gender: Male
    • Sonicsational Audio
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #19 on: September 29, 2022, 07:27:57 AM »

This is an excellent point and you are right, I’m really just talking about raw file processing, not true mastering.  I just want to efficiently spend an hour after a show normalizing, eq, etc., cutting tracks and uploading to archive.org.   I’m in no way qualified nor have the ear to do much more…..

There are two schools on posting shows - You're leaning toward what I call the "cut and post" school.  That can be done in an hour.  But some other folks labor for hours to make the recording sound as good as possible.
I'm in the latter school and typically burn about 8 hours getting the show to where I want it.  To do so, you'll need either sophisticated software or Audacity and a raft of plugins such as a spectrum analyzer (e.g. Voxengo SPAN), variable single channel delay (Voxengo Sound Delay), compression (Reaper Tools Reacomp and Reaxcomp), notch filters for feedback (Reaper Reaeq), bass centering (Tone Projects Basslane or Sanford Bass Tightener), stereo flipping (MAAT 2GusControl) and  maybe more.
If you go this route, you'll need a good listening setup as others have pointed out.  It's best to check on several different playback systems.  Don't laugh, but if a recording doesn't sound good rolling down the road in my 2013 Dodge Grand Caravan, then it isn't finished.

How about picking one of the songs from your TWOD show and have a mastering bakeoff?
AKG C480B CK61 cards or AKG C568EB or Church CA-11 cards >  Canare L-4E6S with Neutrik EMC > Tascam DR-680 MKII or DR-44WL > memories

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #20 on: September 29, 2022, 07:51:36 AM »
not a bad recording. has a distant sound. assuming it was taken near FOH per the pic, i would prob try mk41s or absent those, a PAS pattern vs whatever was used there (which sounds to be 90 degrees or more)

in any case, you are at the mercy of the FOH engineer. GIGO.
Thank you.  Yes, that was the mk4 in XY.  Would love a pair of mk41s!  I put it where I could (corner of the soundboard) but this venue has noise ordinances and a curfew so it isn't that loud and closer would have been much better.

There are two schools on posting shows - You're leaning toward what I call the "cut and post" school.  That can be done in an hour.  But some other folks labor for hours to make the recording sound as good as possible.
I'm in the latter school and typically burn about 8 hours getting the show to where I want it.  To do so, you'll need either sophisticated software or Audacity and a raft of plugins such as a spectrum analyzer (e.g. Voxengo SPAN), variable single channel delay (Voxengo Sound Delay), compression (Reaper Tools Reacomp and Reaxcomp), notch filters for feedback (Reaper Reaeq), bass centering (Tone Projects Basslane or Sanford Bass Tightener), stereo flipping (MAAT 2GusControl) and  maybe more.
Thank you, I'll check out the audacity plugins!

I've learned a lot in this thread, thanks!


Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2022, 11:49:06 AM »
I have a couple contrary thoughts

First, given the OP's desire for a quick and dirty master to upload, an 8 hour session by a guy with gobs of experience on this type of software and plug ins, probably means 50+ hours for the OP.  My plug ins often have multiple versions of the same type, like 3-4 EQs, 2-3 Compressors and Limiters, not to mention RX7's Spectral program, which takes 25+ hours just to figure out. 

Second, like others, I go with headphones for most of the process, because I honestly do not want the room or a specific speaker to add color to the mix.  As for a Dodge Caravan, well funny you should mention that--I have a pair of Auratones, little 4" drivers in my stack.  I know if the mix sounds good over those rascals and sounds good on headphones, it will sound pretty darn good.  These under appreciated speakers have a storied history as mixing monitors, often as a primary speaker for mixing.  See:  https://tapeop.com/reviews/gear/111/5c-super-sound-cube-speaker/    https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/auratone-5c-super-sound-cube  Indeed Tom Dowd mixed Layla with these little speakers, and some help from  JBL Monitors. 

Anyway, not to make any one's opinion wrong, there are many ways to accomplish a mix, and no single "right" way, but I thought I would offer a contrary opinion. 
Regards,
Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2022, 11:59:23 AM »
I use the BeyerDynamic DT 770 pro 250 ohm headphones and have been very happy with them.  They work fine for some simple EQ, normalize, etc. for me. 

Again, appreciate the helpful dialogue!

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2022, 12:08:50 PM »
Yep, most headphones have a very flat response
Regards,
Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline capnhook

  • All your llamas are belong to us....
  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4588
  • All your llamas are belong to us....
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2022, 12:40:32 PM »
Yep, most headphones have a very flat response

Very FLAT?  I call bullshit.

Sennheiser HD600, one of the de-facto monitoring cans.




Here's a great resource, with graphs for hundreds of headphones....

https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/




« Last Edit: September 29, 2022, 12:49:36 PM by capnhook »
Proud member of the reality-based community

BSCS-L->JB-mod [NAK CM-300 (CP-3) and/or (CP-1)]->LSD2->CA CAFS-Omni->Sony ECM-907**Apogee MiniMe Rev. C->CA Ugly II->**Edirol OCM R-44->Tascam DR-22WL->Sony TCD-D8


"Don't ever take an all or nothing attitude when it comes to making a difference
and being beautiful and making the world a beautiful place through your actions.
Every little bit is registered.  Every little bit.  So be as beautiful as you can as often as you can"

"It'll never be over, 'till we learn."
 
"My dream is to get a bus and get the band and just go coast to coast. Just about everything else except music, is anti-musical.  That's it.  Music's the thing." - Jeb Puryear

mountainhop

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #25 on: September 29, 2022, 02:06:39 PM »
Yep, most headphones have a very flat response

Very FLAT?  I call bullshit.


yeah "flat" is a poor choice of words for headphones. all of them exhibit responses like those above

speakers/ monitors as well, for what its worth

i dont think people understand the amount of engineering correction that goes into designing microphones that have flat frequency response. Particularly in regard to directional mics which are a compromise in range. as the selection of the upper frequency response affects the lower frequency response

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #26 on: September 29, 2022, 03:06:55 PM »
Headphones have a notoriously non-flat response, partly on purpose!  They actually cannot be flat if seeking to provide something that emulates flat response, due to close-coupling with the ear.. complicated by the fact that everyone's ear shape and ear-canal resonance is different.  No single headphone on its own could work for everyone.. and that is true to a degree far greater than any one pair of speaker monitors (where there exists plenty of subjectivity in which may be sufficiently accurate and right enough to do the job).

Headphones are great for hearing detail and doing initial editing stuff, and can work fine for the "cut and post" school of recording processing as rumbleseat refers to it.  Great for aligning, hearing problematic stuff, making fades, placing track markers, etc. All the things that basically translate automatically to any other listener using any other playback system.

If you learn to "know them" well enough, headphones can work okay for general EQ correction (addressing obvious problems) and dynamics, but be careful going too far with those. Those things do not automatically translate to other listeners and systems.  EQ correction is the most powerful and generally useful tool tapers have available to them, capable of turning something meh or even yuck, into a wow.  Yet for the reasons mentioned, headphones make it difficult to really dial that in objectively.  Its really temping to keep going with what you are doing until it sounds awesome.  But at that point one actually ends up compensating for the headphones, and headphone listening itself, as much as correcting the recording itself.  This is one reason why checking in the car, various speakers, and other playback systems becomes so important.

If you can avoid that trap by sticking only with the "cut and post" basic fixes and tasks, headphones can work great. Same goes for most speaker monitors, actually. I like the better open-backed Sennheiser headphones: HD600, HD650 (the masdrop HD6xx is similar), HD700.  The Sony, Beyerdynamic mentioned already, and other headphones are good candidates too.  But more so than choosing speakers, when choosing headphones you really, really need to listen to them carefully yourself to determine which sounds natural and might work well enough for you in this role.

There are ways of correcting headphone frequency response, even ways of emulating speaker listening to the extent that one can make proper soundtage decisions, but for them to really work well enough for this kind of work involves measuring and correcting not only the headphone response itself, but also measuring your own Head Related Transfer Function or HTRF (crucially unique to each listener) and applying that in addition to correcting the raw headphone response, usually via a special plugin in the DAW output.

Really good monitoring with speakers makes EQ, dynamics and soundstage decisions more universally applicable and easier.  Best speaker monitoring these days similarly includes DSP correction based on measurements made with a mic at the listening position.  There is some convergence going on with both headphone and monitor speaker correction toward a "monitoring you can truly trust" level in that way. Speakers in your room corrected in such a way will work for anyone sitting in the sweet spot, where as headphone correction is unique to each listener.

That kind of DSP correction is what we really need to get accurate enough monitoring sufficient to make "mastering like" level decisions.  It is analogous to putting most of your investment toward really good microphones on the recording equipment side.  All the other gear mostly just needs to work in support of the microphone output.

The only thing more important than the microphones themselves are where you place them and how you arrange them.  Same goes for headphones and speakers used to make decisions on the opposite end of the recording chain.  The acoustic transducers at either end of the signal chain and how you implement them have more influence than any other piece of equipment.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2022, 03:43:43 PM »
I stand corrected.  I thought headphones were made to be reasonably accurate, e.g., flat. 

So is there any headphone or speaker that is reasonably flat? 

Beyerdynamic DT 770, Sony MDR 7506, and Sennheiser HS 600 are three popular demands with studios here in Los Angeles, if you ask Coffee Sound aka Trew Audio which supplies many of the local studios.  Sony seems to have the edge, Trew sells more Sony MDR 7506 than any brand by far, and they come back for repair most often.  By coming back for repair, I mean the owners thought enough of the cans to replace pads and cords rather than tossing them out.  Yes, pads and cords wear out. 
Regards,
Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

mountainhop

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #28 on: September 29, 2022, 03:53:26 PM »
I stand corrected.  I thought headphones were made to be reasonably accurate, e.g., flat. 

So is there any headphone or speaker that is reasonably flat? 

no as they are designed for the human ear, the response of which is not flat

mountainhop

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2022, 03:55:16 PM »

Thank you.  Yes, that was the mk4 in XY.  Would love a pair of mk41s!  I put it where I could (corner of the soundboard) but this venue has noise ordinances and a curfew so it isn't that loud and closer would have been much better.

try PAS (or very slightly wider), and failing that, get closer

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #30 on: September 29, 2022, 05:10:46 PM »

Thank you.  Yes, that was the mk4 in XY.  Would love a pair of mk41s!  I put it where I could (corner of the soundboard) but this venue has noise ordinances and a curfew so it isn't that loud and closer would have been much better.

try PAS (or very slightly wider), and failing that, get closer

Yes! But rather, get closer first as long as there is any way to do so within the limits of practicality, and in addition to doing that (or instead, if not practically possible to get closer) Point At Stacks, using a spacing between the two microphones that is derived from whatever that PAS angle between the mics ends up being.  See the >>Improved PAS table<< link below in my signature for details and an easy to refer to table indicating optimal spacing.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #31 on: September 29, 2022, 05:38:06 PM »
I stand corrected.  I thought headphones were made to be reasonably accurate, e.g., flat. 

So is there any headphone or speaker that is reasonably flat? 

Beyerdynamic DT 770, Sony MDR 7506, and Sennheiser HS 600 are three popular demands with studios here in Los Angeles, if you ask Coffee Sound aka Trew Audio which supplies many of the local studios.  Sony seems to have the edge, Trew sells more Sony MDR 7506 than any brand by far, and they come back for repair most often.  By coming back for repair, I mean the owners thought enough of the cans to replace pads and cords rather than tossing them out.  Yes, pads and cords wear out.

Some are intended to be and are closer to perceptually flat than others, at least in a generic sense, but for the reasons mentioned, how much closer that ends up being for each individual user is going to vary from person to person (sort of like how everyone has similar fingerprints, yet all fingerprints are unique), which is why it becomes necessary to use personalized corrections to make any good quality candidate headphone close to flat.  Even then, perception of low bass will be different than with speakers, due to the lack of bass vibration sensation in the body.

The headphones you mention are all good ones.  Most studio phones are used for isolated monitoring - folks listening while playing, or singing, or doing voice-overs or whatever - stuff where keeping outside sound out and inside sound in is important.  Same as tapers would need if attempting to actually monitor with headphones while recording at a show, except that in our case keeping the outside sound out is harder because its louder - so difficult that i don't consider bringing headphones along when recording worthwhile, unless needed for trouble shooting ahead of the show. Instead, just confirm things are working right via the visual meters and listen later.  The Beyers and the Sonys are both closed-back style headphones that can work for this kind of studio use. 

The Senn HD 600 and the other Senns I mention above, along with different models from Beyer, AKG, Sony, etc, are open-backed.  They won't keep any outside sound out at all, and others around you will be able to hear what you are listening to.  Open backed headphones tend to sound more natural and, well.. more open, which makes them a good choice for taper post-recording work as long as isolation isn't needed.

This open-backed / closed-back differentiation is the most important single differentiation in headphone types
« Last Edit: September 29, 2022, 05:48:29 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #32 on: September 29, 2022, 06:27:30 PM »
Yes! But rather, get closer first as long as there is any way to do so within the limits of practicality, and in addition to doing that (or instead, if not practically possible to get closer) Point At Stacks, using a spacing between the two microphones that is derived from whatever that PAS angle between the mics ends up being.  See the >>Improved PAS table<< link below in my signature for details and an easy to refer to table indicating optimal spacing.

I agree, thank you for the feedback. If not possible to get closer, would the mk41s help cover instead of the mk4s?  Thanks!

Offline opsopcopolis

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1988
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #33 on: September 30, 2022, 01:36:50 AM »
2.  Do You Have Money to Buy Software?  Yeah, some is free but the good stuff costs money or take the risk of downloading pirated Russian versions.  You’ll need about $1,000

At this risk of starting this whole thing up again, you don't need $1000 worth of software to work on audience tapes, sbd tapes, or any other kind of recordings. Unless you have something specific you need (like rx for de-clip/click/noise) the stock plugins on almost any daw will be more than enough to make great sounding tapes. RX is great, but definitely not necessary for day to day mastering of show recordings.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2022, 01:51:46 AM by opsopcopolis »

Offline DavidPuddy

  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2022, 07:13:47 AM »
2.  Do You Have Money to Buy Software?  Yeah, some is free but the good stuff costs money or take the risk of downloading pirated Russian versions.  You’ll need about $1,000

At this risk of starting this whole thing up again, you don't need $1000 worth of software to work on audience tapes, sbd tapes, or any other kind of recordings. Unless you have something specific you need (like rx for de-clip/click/noise) the stock plugins on almost any daw will be more than enough to make great sounding tapes. RX is great, but definitely not necessary for day to day mastering of show recordings.

Seconded. Although RX and other programs do a fantastic job at improving recordings, you can get the job done with free programs like Audacity and CDWAV if running Windows. Once you get the hang of it, I would then recommend to start branching out to the previously recommended programs.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #35 on: September 30, 2022, 10:59:35 AM »
If not possible to get closer, would the mk41s help cover instead of the mk4s?  Thanks!

Somewhat. If not as much as one might wish. 

The tl:dr-
Yes, supercards like mk41 can help from somewhat farther back if they are pointed directly at the source.  But the farther back you go the less effective microphone pattern directionaly becomes with regards to focusing on a distant source.


The longer story-
As supercardioids, the 41s are less sensitive to sound arriving from far off-axis than the cardioid 4s.  Seems obvious that would be a help when pointed at the PA and stage sources, and it can.  The problem from farther back is that the indirect reverberant sound arriving from all directions becomes louder than the sound arriving directly from the PA and stage, and because of that the difference in pattern sensitivity no longer makes a much difference as it would from closer.  Think of it this way- from closer, the sound arriving at the mics from the direction of the PA is strongly dominated by the direct sound from the PA, while the sound arriving from the back of the room is dominated by reverberant sound.   In that case, a supercardioid pointed at the PA will pickup a smaller proportion of reverberant sound than a cardioid. Moving farther back, the direct sound dominates less and less in comparison to the reverberant sound even in a straight line to PA. Remember, the reverberant sound is arriving from all directions, including from the same direction as the PA and stage.  Because of that, the choice of pattern to achieve "focus on the source", makes more of a difference when placed at a position close enough that the direct sound dominates sufficiently in that direction.

The distance from the sound source where the direct sound and reverberant indirect sound are equal in level is called the critical distance. In professional recording, that is were a main pair of microphones are typically placed so as to achieve a good balance of direct and hall sound. Any close-mics need to be much closer than that.  In non-PA amplified performances the critical distance varies with room size, but tends to be much closer than most tapers record from, unless recording from right up front at the stage-lip.

The use of PA amplification doesn't change that basic acoustic truth, however the directional nature of the PA pushes the critical distance much further out into the audience.  That's one of the primary reasons for using a PA, other than achieving sufficient loudness and a good balance between the sources.  And this is a large part of what makes amplified live concert taping different from non-PA amplified stuff such as classical music recording.  Take for example when a PA-amplified band walks out at the end of the night and does an non-amplified acoustic tune at the front of the stage at the encore.  From a close enough recording position it may sound great.  From a distant position that might have been satisfactory when the band was playing through the PA, that acoustic tune is likey to sound overly distant, reverberant and far too quiet.

Moving farther and farther back, at some point the more natural sound of more open patterns may end up being a better choice, as most of the sound is diffuse and more open patterns do a better job with that, but it might also depend on any reflected sound (another form of direct sound) arriving from other directions.  From way far back outdoors for instance, omnis often sound best.

[note- an additional complication to be aware of is the inherent low-frequency roll off of directional mics at at distance, which can serve to "reduce the apparent reverberant mud" in reverberant rooms.  Supercards have more of that roll-off than cardioids, omnis have none.  But this is a function of the inherent frequency response roll-off that comes along with the difference in pickup-pattern and not really related to the microphone's directional sensitivity in the room. You could achieve the same with a more open pattern if you EQ'd a similar roll off]
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #36 on: September 30, 2022, 03:21:34 PM »
I'm sure there is a reason but I don't know it. why not just use shotguns with PAS?  I suppose that's why back in the 90s sometimes the best recording for the tapers section would be a nak 300 shotgun, especially in stadiums. 

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #37 on: September 30, 2022, 05:05:56 PM »
It's that same issue of the fundamental acoustics problem described above which any microphone you choose to use is up against.  The situation is damned by that acoustic reality that the ratio of direct sound to indirect sound is just not high enough for even highly directional mics to clearly parse the clean direct sound out of the indirect sound arriving from all directions, including the same direction as the weak direct sound.  Being too far back just sucks.

But that doesn't keep us from trying to make a recording anyway, so lacking the ability to record from a closer position where the sound is good and the microphone's directional pattern is actually able to effectively help focus on the desirable direct sound, use super/hypercardioids or shotgun-mics in PAS (trying to get as much of that weak direct sound as possible) or go with less directional mics which are more likely to produce a recording that sounds distant yet more natural.. like it actually sounds to someone standing back there.

Sure shotguns can work, sometimes well. But in comparison to super/hypercards they generally have a very ragged, badly behaved off-axis response, which makes the reverberant indirect sound arriving from all directions other than directly on-axis colored and weird, and that indirect sound is the majority of what is being picked up at a distant position even with the somewhat increased directionality imparted by the interference tube.  Shotguns are intended to function as close spots where there is plenty of direct sound for them on-axis, and this situation is in many ways the direct opposite of that.  IMO, the cases in which they worked best back in the day for stadium shows was when they were combined with an omni in the middle, as that served to mask the off-axis problems of the shotguns and compensate for their lack of bass response. The omni provided the ambient naturalness that covered the ambient weirdness of the shotguns and two different patterns helped support the deficiencies of each other.

For that reason I think PAS shotguns can have a place in combination with other mics in an multi-microphone array.  But even then they can't work magic and overcome the underlying acoustic reality described above. Moving farther back just represents an increasingly uphill battle in terms of the underlying acoustics.  Super/hypercards that are better behaved in an overall sense are probably a better answer in most cases, particularly as a single pair.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.137 seconds with 61 queries.
© 2002-2022 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF