Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Post Production of Tapers Recordings  (Read 16264 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2008, 12:27:17 PM »
but if you're in a part of the venue that has a bit of a bass trap

As a n00b I'm curious what is considered a bass trap.

A bass trap as its often refurred to is a place in a room where there is alot of low end build up. This can happen for a lot of reasons 1- Its the point in the room where the left and right speakers sum at low frequenceys... Usually dead center...2- Or there is something about the room that traps the low end and allows it to build up. Usually hard surfaces and hard walls in a small area. If you want to reduce bass you can always go off to one side or the other. Often its not a big deal to do so because the sound guy is usually off to one side as well. I never like to mix a show dead center.. Because of the bass build up. I like to be somewhere off to one side. That way I am not getting "fooled" into thinking there is more bass then there actually is. There are always acceptions to the rule but generally speaking dead center will always have the most amount of bass..

Chris
« Last Edit: March 17, 2008, 12:52:40 PM by Church-Audio »
for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

easy jim

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #16 on: March 17, 2008, 12:46:29 PM »
I agree with the gist of aegert's comments, but also understand where Moke is coming from.  As tapers, I think we have to ask ourselves what our vision or 'listening goal' is in capturing the audio of a show and the techniques we use to do that.

I record SBD+AUD 4track or multi-mic mixes a lot more often these days than stereo AUD.  

With my 2 track stereo AUD recordings, the only post work I'll do is to peak normalize (add gain to -0.2dBFS) and maybe a high-pass filter if called for.  My 'goal' with 2 track AUD is to capture the room as it was that night.  I'll only adjust the EQ further using a ParaEQ in the rare circumstances that it sounded so awful in the room, or my recording location, that the EQ adjustment is called for to make it listenable on mediocre playback systems.  With multiple AUD pairs in the same location (on the same stand, etc.) being mixed to stereo, I'll rarely add more than a limiter or some light (2:1) compression to reduce just the highest transients that tend to be increased by the summing effect of mixing the sources.

For anything other than ambient stereo AUD, however, I will apply some 'light' post-production as I feel it's called for since I consider my 'goal' a little differently.  With multi-source recordings that are not full multitracks (i.e., stage + PA AUD, SBD + stage + PA, SBD + AUD, etc.), I see the goal as more like using the tools at hand to make a shorthand type of multitrack recording where I'm trying to represent a 'sweet spot/front row' type sound that is more than the component stereo sources may convey.  I want the crispness of the direct sound if I have the SBD feed, yet I still want it to feel like you're in a room with other people and to represent what it was like to be at the show in a way that the SBD tracks alone would not be able to do.  With these recordings, I typically add 'light' (2:1 - 2.5:1) compression with the threshold set a little under the average peak level.  I follow that with a ParaEQ, typically adding a high-pass filter and possibly using a notch or shelfing filter to reduce a bit of some frequency/frequency range as my ears - and maybe RTA viewing - indicate is needed.  Depending on the peaks of the strongest transients, I may add a limiter before I peak normalize to -0.2dBFS.  I like the average rms levels to be in the -20dB to -16dB range, thus leaving space to somewhat accurately respresent the dynamic range of the show as it may have been heard in the audience.

*edits for spelling
« Last Edit: March 17, 2008, 01:16:37 PM by easyjim »

Offline Sloan Simpson

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4013
  • Gender: Male
    • Southern Shelter
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #17 on: March 17, 2008, 01:04:55 PM »
I think what easyjim mentioned about goals gets to the heart of it.  I personally don't care as much about representing what happened that night as I do making the CD (or whatever) as enjoyable a listen as possible.

Offline heath

  • Laugh it up, Fuzzball...
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 24817
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm score!!!!!!
    • The Upstream Mend
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #18 on: March 17, 2008, 01:07:53 PM »
I recorded PA for 18 years (17??), in the nastiest, dankest of clubs, and stadiums, before I first pushed record in a classical setting.
Classical, and especially chamber has been the most challenging music I've ever recorded. Not only do you have room anomalies, ensemble stage layout, changing sets and player arrangements with each and every song; you also have dynamic swings of 60dB swings of musical signal, or more, in the single drop of the baton.
I'd be surprised if PA systems see a 5db swing between any muscially played moment.

Back to altering the recording,....
Its totally out of the question, except, with the rare need to take the bass off a bit below 75hz, to remove some boom, they never get touched (remember, my background was deeply into live reggae and african contemporary before my chamber era).
I'd say that less than 5% of my recordings get any sort of HPF, and thats all they'd ever get. Anymore, if I record grossly distorted bass (the kind that makes you want to vomit), the HPF switch gets turned on, on the V3, in an instant, without hesitation, to eliminate the need for post processing. I'm very comfortable with V3 HPF2 in the ultimately rare circumstance that I'd need it.

moke said dankest.  hehe

anyhow...I rarely, if ever, do/did any sort of post-processing to my recordings.  They are what they are.  Kind of weird considering the studio equipment/tools I have at my disposal, but I guess I am a taping "purist" like Moke in that regard.  The studio is the studio, and the 2track concert recordings are another ballgame.  Not that I even tape anything these days, but I thought I'd chime in with 2 cents.
And the Sultans... yeah the Sultans play creole

 The Upstream Mend

Offline Dede2002

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1217
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #19 on: March 17, 2008, 01:23:38 PM »
I think what easyjim mentioned about goals gets to the heart of it.  I personally don't care as much about representing what happened that night as I do making the CD (or whatever) as enjoyable a listen as possible.

Same thing here.
I'm not a huge fan of the " the-room-as-it-was-that-night" recording approach. For one thing," as-it-was" for whom? My mics or my ears? I'll always give preference to my ears. My mics do not seat in my living room with a cold beer to listen to a recent recording. I do.
Minor adjustments with features like  Normalize ou a light EQ wouldn't alter anything. You're not adding anything that wasn't already there. It's just a matter of tonal balance.
But I'm just a newbie. I respect different opinions.  ;)
Mics..........................SP-CMC-8, HLSC-1 and HLSO-MICRO
BB and Preamps........MM Micro bb / MM Custom Elite bb / Church 9100
                              
Recorders...................Tascam DR-100MKIII, Marantz PMD 620 MKII, Edirol R-09

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #20 on: March 17, 2008, 01:56:40 PM »
My attitude towards this is simple. If you really know what your doing and you have good reference monitors and you can make your recording sound better WHY NOT? Do what you can to make it more enjoyable for you and anyone that might want to listen to it. If recording engineers took the attitude of not fixing things.. Well every record out there would sound like a huge pile of shit. Why because very few guitar players for example ever crouch down to the same level as the speakers in the amps they use to hear that asstone... They stand up and hell it sounds good blowing past my knees it must sound good down there lol... But as far as the recordings I make to show people what my mics sound like.. I leave them as is unedited.. Why because some of you might not have the gear/skill I do to make a huge difference that I can make to just about any recording. And its not a true representation of my product. So if your not selling your mics... I think you should do what ever you have too to make your recordings sound better in the process you will learn the difference between 5k and 8k * frequencies * and hell that's not a bad thing.. I apologize to the people here that already know the difference :) hehe...

I learned how to do live sound not by leaving things as they are but my changing them. In the begginging most of the things I changed made it sound like ass.. After a while I leaned how to spin the knobs correctly. You always have undo in a recording that your editing.. I wish I had undo as a live engineer :)


for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline nic

  • Big In Japan
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4700
  • Gender: Male
    • half dead batteries
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2008, 01:57:54 PM »
I do post-processing on everything I record; standard 2 track ambient, multi mic ambient, sbd, matrices and multitracks.
then again, my recordings are not for my personal enjoyment or to "archive" in general. my recordings are almost always for the band to possibly release in the future and they only want the best possible sound.

there is a give/take with clubs/theatres when using amplified PAs. the sound is mixed for the room, not for a recording. unless you are doing a full multitrack, or submix out certain channels and mix/eq/compress on the fly you will HAVE to do at least some post-production in order to get the recording to sound its best.
even being in the "sweet spot" in any given room will still have some deficiencies.


the water's clean and innocent

Offline Dede2002

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1217
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #22 on: March 17, 2008, 02:01:43 PM »
My attitude towards this is simple. If you really know what your doing and you have good reference monitors and you can make your recording sound better WHY NOT? Do what you can to make it more enjoyable for you and anyone that might want to listen to it. If recording engineers took the attitude of not fixing things.. Well every record out there would sound like a huge pile of shit. Why because very few guitar players for example ever crouch down to the same level as the speakers in the amps they use to hear that asstone... They stand up and hell it sounds good blowing past my knees it must sound good down there lol... But as far as the recordings I make to show people what my mics sound like.. I leave them as is unedited.. Why because some of you might not have the gear/skill I do to make a huge difference that I can make to just about any recording. And its not a true representation of my product. So if your not selling your mics... I think you should do what ever you have too to make your recordings sound better in the process you will learn the difference between 5k and 8k * frequencies * and hell that's not a bad thing.. I apologize to the people here that already know the difference :) hehe...

I learned how to do live sound not by leaving things as they are but my changing them. In the begginging most of the things I changed made it sound like ass.. After a while I leaned how to spin the knobs correctly. You always have undo in a recording that your editing.. I wish I had undo as a live engineer :)




+T  ;)
Mics..........................SP-CMC-8, HLSC-1 and HLSO-MICRO
BB and Preamps........MM Micro bb / MM Custom Elite bb / Church 9100
                              
Recorders...................Tascam DR-100MKIII, Marantz PMD 620 MKII, Edirol R-09

Offline Kevin Straker

  • The Shogun of Easley
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2310
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #23 on: March 17, 2008, 03:03:08 PM »
I edit every show...

IEvery one of your favorite live records have been mastered... Thats what we are talking about here..



Most of those are live multitrack, not live 2 track. Obviously, remastering a multitrack recording is more productive.
People on ludes should not drive...
J. Spicoli

mk4,mk21>kc5>cmc6>V3>SD722

Offline RobertNC

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 620
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #24 on: March 17, 2008, 03:43:55 PM »


Most of those are live multitrack, not live 2 track. Obviously, remastering a multitrack recording is more productive.

Exactly.

I'm not micing separate musical and vocal instruments.  I'm micing "a show" - the PA, the room the crowd, all with an approximation of stereo image based on mic techniques.  That's what we are really talking about here.  I am basically already doing some of what a lot of people have mentioned - I rolloff bass in the analog chain instead of in post.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2008, 03:45:26 PM by RobertNC »
SD:  Microtech Gefell M210 > Silver Clad XLRs > SD722
LD:                   ADK A51 TL > Silver Clad XLRs > SD722
Guns:               DPA 4017    > Silver Clad XLRs > SD722

****************************************************************

Offline aegert

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #25 on: March 17, 2008, 03:54:07 PM »
I edit every show...

IEvery one of your favorite live records have been mastered... Thats what we are talking about here..



Most of those are live multitrack, not live 2 track. Obviously, remastering a multitrack recording is more productive.

It isn't remastering as it was never mastered.. All the records of yore and cd releases of today are mastered..what is sent to the mastering engineer is a 2 track mix down.. This is then mastered not remastered... Ala my 2 channel recordings that are then mastered..

In the end you listen to these... It is your prerogative there are no rights or wrongs as it goes for taste or opinion... I would say that if most people listened to a raw pull vs an well edited mastering you would fall on the editing side of the argument... And that is opinion and you know what opinions are like.. :-)

I have heard very few recordings that could not benefited at least by a level increase... Most all BY an eq a limit/compress and gain increase... Another opinion... But if you look at any and I mean any live rock album you will see a mastering engineer and there is always one there...

a :D

:-)
B&k 4022's > Grace Lunatec V3 > Self Built  Neutrik/ Mogami XLR to TRS > Korg MR1000

Schoeps CMT44's > Self Built Neutrik/ Tuchel 2 ch Snake > Switchcraft Phantom to T-power Adapters > Grace Lunatec V3 > Sound Devices 722

www.motb.org

The bus came by and I got on....

easy jim

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #26 on: March 17, 2008, 04:13:47 PM »
which is exactly why I've bought exactly one commercial release in a decade??
maybe one and a half decades??
I can't stand what happens to recordings when they get over worked.


The last 15 years is really the timeframe of the onset of the 'loudness wars.'  As such, there has been an increasing tendency among both studio engineers (during initial mixing) as well as mastering engineers to severely compress and limit recordings to achieve average rms peak levels in the -12dB up to even -6dB range.  Thus, the dynamic range is mostly squashed out of the recording and the result is 'lifeless' in terms of dynamics, and possibly (very) harsh sounding to the listener that is used to recordings produced and mastered during the analog days.

In spite of the loudness wars, however, there still is something to a trained ear and mind carving out the rough edges of what might otherwise be a relatively 'raw' recording.  IMO, the problem is that post-production is just way overdone too often these days in commercial releases (including the 'live' ones).  "Instant Live" is probably especially prone to this, too, due to a strong incentive to rely on compressor/limiters during the capture to get solid levels while truncating any reasonable mixing and mastering to put out the disc immediately after the show.

Some folks in the recording industry have a hard time, I guess, with the concept of less is more and resisting the urge to over-tweak  :hmmm:

Offline aegert

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #27 on: March 17, 2008, 04:19:06 PM »
Don't assume over done... We are not talking about heavy duty work here we are talking light touch... The only thing you are doing is enabling your recordings to have the starting volume they need to play on a system with out driving it hard.. Its a pre volume control that you cannot do with your deck because there are the 1 or 2 transient hits that you do not even here that are a good 3-4db over the musical peaks...so you are killing 2 points in the recording that last 1/100th a second and that you don't hear anyway....


If you do  this either: normalizing or better yet limit and gain increase, get a louder recording with exactly the same dynamics.

Now for eq... Studies have shown that there is a very pleasing relationship between frequencies to the human ear... If you a line your frequency spectrum closer to that you will have an easier to listen to recording... we are not tossing out  full parts here but gently nudging a frequency band a couple of db down to bring them into line.... This enables the previous gain adjustments to be evenly done without over doing one or another frequency.....

This is all said with the utmost respect and understanding of opinions.. No harm meant here. I just think that when people hear the difference they like the edits more often that the raws.. This is not exclusively the case but most of the time it holds true...

A :D
B&k 4022's > Grace Lunatec V3 > Self Built  Neutrik/ Mogami XLR to TRS > Korg MR1000

Schoeps CMT44's > Self Built Neutrik/ Tuchel 2 ch Snake > Switchcraft Phantom to T-power Adapters > Grace Lunatec V3 > Sound Devices 722

www.motb.org

The bus came by and I got on....

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #28 on: March 17, 2008, 04:20:41 PM »
which is exactly why I've bought exactly one commercial release in a decade??
maybe one and a half decades??
I can't stand what happens to recordings when they get over worked.


The real problem with commercial releases as we all know is they want to be able to make them "pop" on the radio so they compress the "ratshit" out of the recording.. Imo anything overworked sounds like shit. But I think if you try really hard you can tweak things just enough to make them really great with out needing to sound overworked.

for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline aegert

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #29 on: March 17, 2008, 04:37:04 PM »
which is exactly why I've bought exactly one commercial release in a decade??
maybe one and a half decades??
I can't stand what happens to recordings when they get over worked.


The real problem with commercial releases as we all know is they want to be able to make them "pop" on the radio so they compress the "ratshit" out of the recording.. Imo anything overworked sounds like shit. But I think if you try really hard you can tweak things just enough to make them really great with out needing to sound overworked.



+T Mr Church

Your vinyl records were mastered with compressors and eq too... Just not as hard as the mega pop shit of today!

These effects are your friends not your enemy... Its funny how the pendulum will swing far to the opposite side Its not that the compressors are evil.. Its some people who use compressors are evil ;-)

That was the true version of Guns don't kill people people kill people! LOL

But really light work sounds great... Major swings suck.. One square of dark chocolate or a shot of whiskey or a glass of wine a day is healthy but the whole bar or bottle ain't :-)

Love a

B&k 4022's > Grace Lunatec V3 > Self Built  Neutrik/ Mogami XLR to TRS > Korg MR1000

Schoeps CMT44's > Self Built Neutrik/ Tuchel 2 ch Snake > Switchcraft Phantom to T-power Adapters > Grace Lunatec V3 > Sound Devices 722

www.motb.org

The bus came by and I got on....

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.07 seconds with 39 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF