Topic: How much post production work does everyone do ?

[spearheadtaper]

just curious how much people around here master and adjust there recordings.......

so far with my first two.... i have just tried to adjust the volume so that its the same all the way through.....so I don't have to adjust the volume when watching
and no clicks pops or dropouts, or problems with levels being to high so other than that not sure what I might be looking to do...



just curious as to how much you guys tweak your recordings and how many just upload it and flac it     try to get some ideas as to what to be doing

[Brian Skalinder]

I would do whatever editing you feel makes it sound good to your ears.  Then seed whichever you prefer - the master, or the edited version.  Just remember, if you do edit - always keep your unedited master!

[bconnolly]

I always keep the raw wav from the Microtrack in its own folder (with all the soundcheck and what have you) and an MD5.  For the mastering process, I'm limited in knowledge to doing normalization, cropping, and fades.  I'm in the process of learning how to properly boost volume and compress recordings but I'm not in too much of a rush.

I find that, with my recordings at least, just running Replay Gain (in FB2K) on the FLACs boosts the volume to an acceptable level.  Most of my shows come out too low (better than too hot, right?) so all they ever need in my opinion is a kick in the volumetric pants.

[Roving Sign]

I think Replay gain is a no-no and shoud be noted in any text file...

Isnt replay gain a RMS normalization...?

[rowjimmy]

uhg on un-documented replaygain.

I resample, put fades at the beginning and end and, barring nasty sonic illness (snap crackle & pops) track & seed.
If it's not good enough, the people on the othe end can fix it to their liking or press delete.

I'd consider normalizing an all-around quiet recording but i'd absolutly document it.

[greenone]

uhg on un-documented replaygain.

I resample, put fades at the beginning and end and, barring nasty sonic illness (snap crackle & pops) track & seed.
If it's not good enough, the people on the othe end can fix it to their liking or press delete.

I'd consider normalizing an all-around quiet recording but i'd absolutly document it.

Bingo. Just the facts, ma'am.

[bconnolly]

Foobar2K's replaygain is just metadata.  It doesn't actually alter the waveform in any way (you can remove it just like any sort of ID3 info)

[kfrinkle]

I would do whatever editing you feel makes it sound good to your ears.  Then seed whichever you prefer - the master, or the edited version.  Just remember, if you do edit - always keep your unedited master!

A-men.  I listen to my recordings more than anyone else does probably.  I am gonna tweak with my recordings till I get em exactly how I want to hear them for my listening enjoyment at the office.

[willndmb]

NONE
imo if you are a taper you tape
if it comes out good, good
if not, oh well better luck next time

if you take a recording and "play" with it to make it sound good/better then you are not giving people the real recording, thus imo you are no longer a taper and now a producer

so any and all adjustments to a recording should be noted in the text file -- again imo

[willndmb]

uhg on un-documented replaygain.

I resample, put fades at the beginning and end and, barring nasty sonic illness (snap crackle & pops) track & seed.
If it's not good enough, the people on the othe end can fix it to their liking or press delete.

I'd consider normalizing an all-around quiet recording but i'd absolutly document it.

[spearheadtaper]

NONE
imo if you are a taper you tape
if it comes out good, good
if not, oh well better luck next time

if you take a recording and "play" with it to make it sound good/better then you are not giving people the real recording, thus imo you are no longer a taper and now a producer

so any and all adjustments to a recording should be noted in the text file -- again imo

actually I guess I kinda mistated the end result would be for audio for a dvd....so that is a totally produced product and I would like for it to sound the best it can.....  but from what I have tried so far I like my original unedited recordings best....via decibel changes in final cut at a few points 

[Brian Skalinder]

if you take a recording and "play" with it to make it sound good/better then you are not giving people the real recording, thus imo you are no longer a taper and now a producer

I enjoy sharing my recordings with others, but - call me selfish - I'm not especially interested in whether or not I give people the "real recording".

So I'm a "producer" and not a "taper" if I do one or more of the following...

• add fades at the start/end of each set?
• apply compression to reduce thunderous applause between songs during an acoustic performance?
• normalize because my levels were off?
• apply a HPF in post as opposed to on my preamp at the time of recording?
• mix my SBD and AUD sources in post instead of on-the-fly?
• use a parametric EQ?

All of the above are "playing" with the recording to make the recording more pleasing to my ears, i.e. "make it sound good/better".  I guess I'm a "producer" and not a "taper", then, whatever that means.  Not sure why the label matters...

[BayTaynt3d]

Depending on the artist, venue, purpose (was I specifically asked to do something vs. taping for personal use), my mood, etc., I will use some, all, or none of the following post edits (typically in this order of workflow, and ALWAYS saving an original in addition to the mastered files):

1. Fix any clipping that might have happened with Sony Clipped Peak Restoration & Waves X-Crackle VST
          (that combo can salvage the unsalvagable sometimes)
2. Unwind/reverse/level-off any riding of the levels I might have done at the start with volume envelopes
          (i.e., started too hot, so dialed levels down, in post, I'll bring the opening down to the levels I eventually stabilized on)
3. Adjust left and right channel level if one was run a little lower/hotter than the other
          (this is NOT panning, which may blend the channels depending on s/w and setting, I just add a slight bump to one channel all by itself)
4. EQ if needed (typically rolling off some bass, but sometimes brightening up the mids, but not too much EQ if any usually)
5. I might use Waves S1 Stereo Imager to expand soundstage or rotate it a tiny bit if my seperation sucked or I was asymetrically positioned
6. I might add a tiny bit of Waves R3 reverb if it sounds flat/dry (usually only do this with small classical ensembles in a dead room)
7. Always normalize if I can get anything out of that
8. Might possibly compress a tiny bit using the Waves L3 MultiMaximizer (never that much, but sometimes use this instead of normalizing by going just a bit farther than I could have with a straight normalize, I basically flatten out some of the big peaks without doing much more)
9. This is the point I'd mix AUD/SBD parts together if doing a matrix in post (I'd have mastered each seperately first, then mixed)
10. Then of course, I track it, and depending on gig, maybe fades in/outs on tracks or only at beginning of 1st song and end of last

But like I said above, I might not do ANYTHING just as easily as I might mess with it all -- but the key is not to do too much of any one thing, just a tiny bit here and there, otherewise, you'll end up ruining it more times than not. It just depends on a bunch of factors...

[midside]

Right on Brian, I'm on the same page as you.  An unmastered recording is a 'raw' recording that could almost always use some post production.  I prefer to be a 'producer' as it was mentioned earlier.  Why?  Because a 'raw' recording just doesn't shine the way something properly handled in post does.
The recording you pull will never sound the way your ears pick it up.  The mics you pick as well as the way you set them up change the way you capture the show.  Proper post production will actually make a recording sound more like the actual event than what you have on your raw recording.
But, most tapers don't know these techniques and cop out by saying that you are doing something wrong by 'playing' with it.
That's bogus.  Just ask the pros what they want to hear.  You know, the people that get paid BIG bucks to master.....because it sounds better.
Audiophiles use 'the best' recordings to test their playback system and all of these recordings are 'produced'.
Anyhow, to talk someone down because they know how to use professional tools properly is lame.  This takes years if experience combined with good sensibility.
I think post gets a bad taste in people's mouth because of the amount of people out there that don't know how to do it properly and end up trashing a good recording.......

[momule]

Right on Brian, I'm on the same page as you.  An unmastered recording is a 'raw' recording that could almost always use some post production.  I prefer to be a 'producer' as it was mentioned earlier.  Why?  Because a 'raw' recording just doesn't shine the way something properly handled in post does.
The recording you pull will never sound the way your ears pick it up.  The mics you pick as well as the way you set them up change the way you capture the show.  Proper post production will actually make a recording sound more like the actual event than what you have on your raw recording.
But, most tapers don't know these techniques and cop out by saying that you are doing something wrong by 'playing' with it.
That's bogus.  Just ask the pros what they want to hear.  You know, the people that get paid BIG bucks to master.....because it sounds better.
Audiophiles use 'the best' recordings to test their playback system and all of these recordings are 'produced'.
Anyhow, to talk someone down because they know how to use professional tools properly is lame.  This takes years if experience combined with good sensibility.
I think post gets a bad taste in people's mouth because of the amount of people out there that don't know how to do it properly and end up trashing a good recording.......

+T's   ya took the words right out of my mouth.

[shruggy1987]

if you take a recording and "play" with it to make it sound good/better then you are not giving people the real recording, thus imo you are no longer a taper and now a producer

I enjoy sharing my recordings with others, but - call me selfish - I'm not especially interested in whether or not I give people the "real recording".

So I'm a "producer" and not a "taper" if I do one or more of the following...

• add fades at the start/end of each set?
• apply compression to reduce thunderous applause between songs during an acoustic performance?
• normalize because my levels were off?
• apply a HPF in post as opposed to on my preamp at the time of recording?
• mix my SBD and AUD sources in post instead of on-the-fly?
• use a parametric EQ?

All of the above are "playing" with the recording to make the recording more pleasing to my ears, i.e. "make it sound good/better".  I guess I'm a "producer" and not a "taper", then, whatever that means.  Not sure why the label matters...

i whole-heartedly agree with this.  if you have a good tape, why not make it sound better?  if taping stops after you hit "stop," then I don't want to be called a taper. 

[Aaron41]

I normalize, reduce loud clapping between songs for quieter shows, and resample.

[Depechemode1993]

let see I don't do much. I resample when I am not taping in 44.1 kHz, Normalize the show to -.5 db, usually boost the highs and lows a bit as I get the right ammount of vocals, and if I have a cassette master I do a slight hiss redux.

[willndmb]

haha i knew my opinion on this would not be to popular

if you tape things then you are a taper
if you edit shows then you are a producer

if you tape shows then edit them to make them sound better you are still a taper however the final product is the result of good producing, not ness good recording

i look at it kinda like if someone asked me who is the best taper vs who releases the best tapes
the answer maybe the same however it may be different

the label doesn't matter really, i just feel any and all editing should be noted in the text file

here is a example of what i am talking about (this even came up in a thread at ufck which got deleted yesterday because of the same issues in this thread)
Taper - willndmb
source - 391 > ua5 > jb3
*no editing was done so there is none noted

now if i edit the show, or worse yet someone else edits the show without asking, as happened at ufck
IMO you can not keep the text file the same as above, it should have the editing notes included
Taper - willndmb
Source - 391 > ua5 > jbs
Notes - fades at the beginning and end of show applied, normalize (whaetever)

thats all i am saying is if you edit the recording in any way it should be noted, again imo

[spearheadtaper]

does anyone have a good page for reading up on this subject about what can be done....so I i will know what normalize means and be able to have a grasp on things before i start messing around with things.....
would be nice to read get a link to a page like www.larryjordan.biz for audio..... 

first two recordings came out great just want to make sure that they are the best they could possibly be also have some spearhead sbds we have taped that have quite a bit of echo that for sure needs to be worked out a bit

[rowjimmy]

I think you guys make excellent points in defense of post-production.
I know more than a thing or two about the post=production tools that I have available to me (and am using them in my home-studio work) but I find that, with live recordings, the improvements can be more subjective than with studio work.

A prime example is EQ. perhaps my minor hearing loss leads me to think that the highs need to come up so that the deedle in the guitar will shine.
Then joe-bob@nowhere.net posts back to etree, "this recording sounds like it was recorded on a tin cain and string! Where's the bass?" Well, generally speaking, I don't care what joe-bob thinks because i'm kind of an a**hole, but he might be right. If I didn't eq it and he said that then he could REALLY be right but at least the flacs he downloaded have the potential to be eq'd properly or at least to his liking. Once you save a change like that, the only undo is to go back to the master files. (We all keep our un altered masters, right?)

This is a neverending debate. Those who regularly do post-producion work make a good case for why and I don't entirely disagree with them. the example above is just one reason why I, generally don't/won't do more than fades or -maybe- normalize.

the label doesn't matter really, i just feel any and all editing should be noted in the text

There it is. Imo, the producer/taper distinction is bogus. But not notating your edits, doubly so. If you make notes, then, it's all good and I think most folks here are going to maintain good info. That means that when I dl your recording and hear how good it sounds, i know that it sounds that way as a combination of the gear, placement, pa, and post-production. Just one more element in capturing and spreading the best sounds.

[balou2]

if you take a recording and "play" with it to make it sound good/better then you are not giving people the real recording, thus imo you are no longer a taper and now a producer

I enjoy sharing my recordings with others, but - call me selfish - I'm not especially interested in whether or not I give people the "real recording".

So I'm a "producer" and not a "taper" if I do one or more of the following...

• add fades at the start/end of each set?
• apply compression to reduce thunderous applause between songs during an acoustic performance?
• normalize because my levels were off?
• apply a HPF in post as opposed to on my preamp at the time of recording?
• mix my SBD and AUD sources in post instead of on-the-fly?
• use a parametric EQ?

All of the above are "playing" with the recording to make the recording more pleasing to my ears, i.e. "make it sound good/better".  I guess I'm a "producer" and not a "taper", then, whatever that means.  Not sure why the label matters...

Ditto.

[spearheadtaper]

you own that echo now. not much can be done to work it out, without overprocessing the daylights out of stuff.

that sucks...

 I was original  hoping to matrix the audio recording to the sbd but do to the echo it sounds horrible that way

looks like I might be ending up just using the audio that was made right back by the boards

[winisp]

I'd second the request for any pointers to good overview doc. My google searches have turned up weak advice at best that doesn't apply as well to live recordings.

From reading this thread and others, it seems like people generally use at least two post production programs. For the sake of discussion, which one is best and why?

[Brian Skalinder]

it seems like people generally use at least two post production programs. For the sake of discussion, which one is best and why?

There's a variety of programs people use:  Audacity, Audition (Cool Edit), Soundforge, Wavelab, Sonic Foundry, Peak, etc.  It's mostly personal preference as many perform the same or similar functions.  Some do, though, perform better than others.

I'd second the request for any pointers to good overview doc.

Overview docs are helpful, but there's LOTS of trial and error involved.  Read the Help file and experiment.  I'd say the most useful functions for minor editing :

• normalizing, or amplitude / gain adjustment (includes fades)
• high pass filter
• compression
• parametric EQ

A good rule of thumb as you experiment:  less is more.  It's real easy to over-do editing in post.  One way I experiment is by applying a function with a very high factor so it's very easy to hear the impact.  Knowing what the function does in the extreme helps understand how it will effect the recording when applied more subtly.

I'm reasonably comfortable with normalizing, HPF, and compression - all of which I use sparingly - but really haven't sorted out the parametric EQ yet.  I know how it works theoretically, but what frequencies to draw back, how much, and with what width still largely eludes me.

[RebelRebel]

for multiple channels(over 2), samplitude/sequoia is my favorite because it is really intuitive and has a really nice interface and has POW-R dither built in , which I love.
for 2 channel editing, I Like wavelab or soundforge.

there isnt a "best" but its all a matter of preference. No magic bullets.

I dont really care about pleasing Joe Blow (you never will anyway..they will always bitch) but I edit it till it sounds good on my monitors and playback gear. Though I  obsess a  LOT more on mic placement and mic selection ..etc....the more emphasis I place on that stuff, the less I worry about editing.  The most crucial things happen before you ever press record.

[Roving Sign]

Post? As little as possible!!!

Lately - I feel like I have my level control down pat...

So my recordings only need tracked and fades...

If it needs more - I consider it flawed - perhaps very listenable - but flawed...

[mmmatt]

I love it when this subject comes up!  I like to do post on my recordings.  The more I record, the better my skills, the better my gear, the less I do.  The is a lot to be said for a recording that requires no post work.  There is a certain purity to a well done recording that is un touched.  That all being said, there are times where post work is warrented.  I do a lot more matrix recordings that ambient so my mindset is a little different than most.  My goal in doing a matrix is to make it sound better than it did at the show or as it did in the best spot of the venue.  Something as simple as light compression can really even out some of the inconsistancies in the engineer's mix, and it can help blend 2 sources together.  However an uncompressed recording often times sounds best fedelity-wise.
     One of the biggest things I do in post on ambient recording is to take out the room-boom.  Reflections and standing wavs can really muddy up a recording.  Sometimes this is as easy as running bass roll-off, but sometimes you have to find the room/pa's resonant frequiencies and manually pad them down with a notch filter.  Viewing a spectral anaylizer while playing back a wav where there is obvious bas abnormalities will allow you to see about where that resonance is. (ie every time the bass player hits a certain note it sounds very boomy and out of place)  Then you can (in most software) loop that one little section and then open up your eq and start making adjustments to take it away.  A good parametric eq plugin will allow you to do a very narrow notch where you are almost singling out a particular frequency.  Pad it down a bit then back up and play the passage again to see if it sounds more natural.  This is what I spend most of my time doing post-wise on ambient recordings, and can make a world of differance.  Sometimes you will find 4 or 5 resonancies and sometimes you can't seem to find any, in thoes cases I will do a general eq or a lhigh-pass filter and call it a day.
     After doing this type of post work, if the room boom was a big factor in the recording you may notice your levels dropped 3 or 4 db!  Then I will most definately normalize and bring the recordeing up to the level it should have been recorded at.  It is for this reason that I am a proponant of using a low-cut while recording if you are sure the situation warrants it.  If you set your levels hot (but not overdriven) to the part of the music that you are keeping, you will have less noise in your recording when completed.  Keep in mind you can bring the bass back up just as easily as bringing it down in post, but best case scenario is to get it right on the original recording.  Obviously setting up in the perfect spot (being a good taper as stated earlier) and chosing the right config, etc makes all the differance in the world as well.
A little light compression can help sometimes to even things out, but keep in mind while bringing down the louder passages, you are also bringing up the quiet ones including the noise that is underneath the recorded music.
     As for noting the text file.  Yes.  I have been guilty of not noting some of mine, but I have gotten back in the habbit.  I don't list everything I do but I may say "typical effects added" or "only sample rate conversion" to let people know that I did or did not do post work on the show.  I don't feel the need to list every step I took.  Especially since most of the recording I do anymore are post mixed multitrack/matrix recording and the act of mixing them in post alone is a ton of post work.  ALWAYS keep your original masters.  I have original masters on every show I ever recorded.
     As for information on how to do this stuff... good luck!  Most of the information out there is for live sound production or studio recording.  People trained in thoes two areas without actual experience in ambient or live recording typically have no clue of how to do it.  Unfortunately there isn't much good information out there on the subject.

     As brian says, less is more.  Do an extreem change to hear how it works and then go back to zero and slowly ad it in.


Matt

[RebelRebel]

an excellent book that is full of good information on mastering recordings :

Mastering Audio by Bob Katz

[F.O.Bean]

i usually never do any post, thats why i invested in high-q gear so i can leave the shows w/ a great representation of what went down, if i have to, i normalize/add gain, but thats few and far between, you get what i recorded w/ me

[Josephine]

I'm a wannabe producer . . .  with much to learn.

[Chuck]

I just wrote a HUGE explaination on why I don't do anything more than add fades at the beginning and end of sets, but I somehow lost it before it got posted...

Anyway, I'm with Moke or Mr. French... (I loved Family Affair)

For those that do post-processing on their recordings I appreciate that some do actually note what was done in the source file.

[terrapinj]

whatver you gotta do to make it sound good to your ears.

for me that is usually nothing or very little. i will normalize on a rare ocassion the levels are way too low or uneven. in fact i don't think i've ever messed with the eq for any of the shows i've taped (except on my playback)...but then again i haven't had the time to give all my shows the proper attention they deserve. i don't  know what i'm doing well enough or have a good enough playback to mess with anything that's gonna get shared with others but mainly i've got too many shows i've taped and not enough time to do it right. plus it makes it easy for me to evaluate the variables when I listen to them (venue, location, config, rig etc)

my $ 2/100

[(((KB)))]

Overview docs are helpful, but there's LOTS of trial and error involved.  Read the Help file and experiment.  I'd say the most useful functions for minor editing :

• normalizing, or amplitude / gain adjustment (includes fades)
• high pass filter
• compression
• parametric EQ

A good rule of thumb as you experiment:  less is more.  It's real easy to over-do editing in post.  One way I experiment is by applying a function with a very high factor so it's very easy to hear the impact.  Knowing what the function does in the extreme helps understand how it will effect the recording when applied more subtly.

I'm reasonably comfortable with normalizing, HPF, and compression - all of which I use sparingly - but really haven't sorted out the parametric EQ yet.  I know how it works theoretically, but what frequencies to draw back, how much, and with what width still largely eludes me.

I totally agree. I try not to over do it, but sometimes I feel I should tweek it alittle.
Usually, all I do is even out the channels, a small 2db or so gain, 5 sec fade-ins/10 sec fade-outs at the beginning and end of each set. If I choose to tweek it, I subtly use an EQ with the Freq's that I felt was lacking (mostly w/ SBD's).
For the EQ'ing, I generally do it by ear and use this chart as a reference that I found in a book of mine.

Hope everone finds this useful.

(((KB)))

[halleyscomet8]

track it, flac it, upload. that is all

[carlmeanwell]

I'm guessing that the majority of people here who are currently tapers mostly tape for their own enjoyment.  Post-production is just a bonus of taping, I tend to enjoy the process of getting the best out of my recordings.  If you muck up a perfectly good recording by simply over producing then don't worry about it, so long as you've kept the original master.  Seed the altered version, and if you get some bad feedback just try try again.  At the end of the day you have recorded it in the first place so enjoy it as much as possible.  Of course, always let the people know whats been done in the text file.
My advice is just to keep an open mind and an open ear when post producing, just make sure you enjoy it at the same time.

[capnhook]

I'm guessing that the majority of people here who are currently tapers mostly tape for their own enjoyment.  Post-production is just a bonus of taping, I tend to enjoy the process of getting the best out of my recordings.  If you muck up a perfectly good recording by simply over producing then don't worry about it, so long as you've kept the original master.  Seed the altered version, and if you get some bad feedback just try try again.  At the end of the day you have recorded it in the first place so enjoy it as much as possible. 

+t

truer words never spoken...........................................prophet in our midst   

[BayTaynt3d]

I just wrote a HUGE explaination on why I don't do anything more than add fades at the beginning and end of sets, but I somehow lost it before it got posted...

Anyway, I'm with Moke or Mr. French... (I loved Family Affair)

For those that do post-processing on their recordings I appreciate that some do actually note what was done in the source file.

I've had this happen so many times over the past ten years (not just here, but everywhere), that I now have a routine I do before posting if it was a massive treatize that I wrote. I press CRTL-A, then CTRL-C, then post. It's only two keystrokes, and then I have a backup in the clipboard. Sometimes <BACK> works, but sometimes not. And like I said, I only do it for long posts, otherwise who cares...

[nihilistic0]

I almost always do a bit of post work

1st off, Ill usually sit on the recording for a day or 2, listening to it many times over, sometimes quiet, sometimes loud, sometimes on headphones, sometimes on speakers.  This helps me pinpoint what the flaws are

After this, Ill dump it into wavelab, and start tweaking a little bit.  Nomrally I have to remove a little of the bass so its not so boomy, and sometimes Ill boost some of the higher frequncies for added sound clarity

Ill then sit on this, and listen to it at mulitple volumes and on speakers and headphones.  This helps me to deicde if the changes I made were satisfactory.  Maybe I boosted the highs too much, and after a few days listening, things like that becomes apparent

With the right work, just about any recording can be made to sound better.  I never understand why, if someime tapes and it comes out all muddy, why they dont tweak the higher frequencies al ittle bit.  The audio is there, it just needs to be brought out

SO yea, with the recent addition of some pretty decent headphones, post work has become even easier.  I can make out subtlties much easier, and adjust accordingly.  I go back and forth on hte headphones and speakers, searching for a good balance that will sound good on both.  I love post processing, and always like to get the most out of my recordings

[Sparge Master]

I feel editing a recording is a tricky thing. Fade-In Fade-Outs are fine because theyt dont really change the recording

EQing (Bass roll off aka High Pass Filter) changes the whole recording. Every instrament sits on a range of frequencies and because of this if you want a guitar to stand out you are going to change another instrament. I stay clear of eqing for this very reason unless I have a multitrack of the recording and can change each instrament individually.

Compression can be used but you only want it to affect the noise like clapping and not the rest of the music. Compression ruins the dynamics of a recoring the loudness and quietness of a music.

When I do edit my recording I always leave the original on my computer till I have listened to the edited version in a variety of places. Each system will have its flaws in the reproduction of the sound.

[midside]

Compression can be used but you only want it to affect the noise like clapping and not the rest of the music. Compression ruins the dynamics of a recoring the loudness and quietness of a music.

Actually, compression is a very generic word and there are sooooo many ways to go about using a compressor.  So, I would have to say that this is not always the case.  Plus, you can use 'multi-band' dynamics, a compressor that you can set to specific frequency ranges.  There are tons of ways to use today's tools and I would stay away from generalizing.

[Sparge Master]

Compression can be used but you only want it to affect the noise like clapping and not the rest of the music. Compression ruins the dynamics of a recoring the loudness and quietness of a music.

Actually, compression is a very generic word and there are sooooo many ways to go about using a compressor.  So, I would have to say that this is not always the case.  Plus, you can use 'multi-band' dynamics, a compressor that you can set to specific frequency ranges.  There are tons of ways to use today's tools and I would stay away from generalizing.

You are right that compression can be used a varity of ways to improve the overall sound but when playing with just two tracks it can be very difficult to use correctly since you have everything combined into one. I have used compression in a tape of mine to help improve the untalented asshat singing since he could not seem to sing.

[CHURCH-AUDIO]

( always keep a copy of the orginal file untouched ) That is the tip of the day. I use a good set of reference monitors that I know very well, and do a little eq here and there nothing major. I first run it thru winaudiomls and take a look at the wave file see if there are any peeks that run thought the whole show, if there are I remove them gently,
With a parametric eq plugin with in Nuendo. Then after I have removed any peeks that run thru out the show, that I don’t like the sound of. The last thing I do is normalize, that’s it. I also make sure left is left and right is right by switching them and listing. A big time mistake is getting your left and right mixed up, that can cause you to think you have a bad recording. It has happened to me lots of times. But in the end I also as the last- stage use my ears and listen to the final product, and go back to the original. If I feel I have done more harm then good I will start over. Sometimes I use a graphic eq plugin, sometimes a notch filter plugin sometimes, a parametric. like I mentioned before, It all depends on how fine of a detail I want to repair. Some people the "purists" do not like to touch the recording at all,  I agree if you have a great venue, with a great mixer, and great mics / recording gear, that should be possible. But if not and I would say 70% of the time a recording can be improved IMO.

Chris Church

4474#msg794474 date=1140716588]
I would do whatever editing you feel makes it sound good to your ears.  Then seed whichever you prefer - the master, or the edited version.  Just remember, if you do edit - always keep your unedited master!
[/quote]

[jdawg]

I'm guessing that the majority of people here who are currently tapers mostly tape for their own enjoyment.  Post-production is just a bonus of taping, I tend to enjoy the process of getting the best out of my recordings.  If you muck up a perfectly good recording by simply over producing then don't worry about it, so long as you've kept the original master.  Seed the altered version, and if you get some bad feedback just try try again.  At the end of the day you have recorded it in the first place so enjoy it as much as possible.  Of course, always let the people know whats been done in the text file.
My advice is just to keep an open mind and an open ear when post producing, just make sure you enjoy it at the same time.

Well said!  And for those quieter shows, especially bluegrass, I usually lower the appluase levels. Like someone else mentioned above, no one listens to my recordings more than me, so why not make it as enjoyable as possible. I've never "normalized" a recording though. Hell, I don't even know what does   For shows that I think my wife might enjoy, I simply remove all the space between songs, add fades if necessary, and make it more like a studio cd. On another note, there have plenty of shows where I just track & flac!

 




 
 

[Chrisedge]

I'd really like a tutoral on compression. I have Audition, and have "fooled around" with some of my recordings, but when I listen to a "normal" cd, then mine, I would just like the volume in the same neighborhood, without having to normalize to 200%

There was a very good overview on STG a long time ago, but obiviously is no longer there.

Any step by step help on compression around?

[wbrisette]

Can't believe I missed this thread before... Me, I do everything! I have to no matter how I record it, I still end up with 4+ separate tracks that have to be mixed down. I could do it "on-the-fly", but guess what, I'm still mixing and modifying so it ain't "pure"... I also compress, limit, eq, (insert plug-in here), to the recording.

I guess I'm not a taper and that's why I hate that label. I haven't considered myself a taper for a long time because I don't just tape. I record, produce, and master.

Wayne
(for the record, my business cards read: On-location Sound Recordist <-- use to be used in the US for film sound mixers, now it seems most of them are called mixers and only in the UK are they still referred to as Sound Recordist).

[Sparge Master]

Compression is a way to keep levels more consistent.

   Compression Ratio basically shows how the input and output will be compared so if the ratio is 2:1 then the output of something 2db will be 1db

  Threshold is the level you want compression to kick in.

  Attack time is how fast the compression will kick in after the threshold is hit

  Release time is how fast the compression will go away after the threshold is met

  Make up gain just boosts all levels by a certain dB after it goes through compression

Thos are just the basic info on some of the settings used by a compressor just play with it till you find a setting you like.

[John Kary]

Depending on the artist, venue, purpose (was I specifically asked to do something vs. taping for personal use), my mood, etc., I will use some, all, or none of the following post edits (typically in this order of workflow, and ALWAYS saving an original in addition to the mastered files):

Right on, this is how I do things and with about the same process and plug-in usage.  I love the Waves RVerb plugin and usually use it on my soundboards to both spread out the soundstage and take a bit of the dryness away from it.  The key is the wet/dryness of it.  I will usually throw it all the way wet and then back down until I get a good part of the attack back, about 15-30 depending on the tape.  About a decay time of 180ms and early reflection of about 10-15ms.  This is actually a HUGE secret for how I get the majority of my recordings to go from nice to WOW.

If I have an audience, I don't need to do it as much.  It's always case-by-case basis.  I don't mind giving an "altered" recording as I think it should sound as good as it can if the person mastering it knows what they're doing.  I always try to stay within the real of it still sounding "LIVE" as opposed to produced.  Most official "live" CDs I hear from bands sound overproduced and do not capture the live feel well enough.

[Geoff G]

Compression is a way to keep levels more consistent.

   Compression Ratio basically shows how the input and output will be compared so if the ratio is 2:1 then the output of something 2db will be 1db

  Threshold is the level you want compression to kick in.

  Attack time is how fast the compression will kick in after the threshold is hit

  Release time is how fast the compression will go away after the threshold is met

  Make up gain just boosts all levels by a certain dB after it goes through compression

Thos are just the basic info on some of the settings used by a compressor just play with it till you find a setting you like.

That is a quick tutorial!  Thanks.

[Sparge Master]

That is a quick tutorial!  Thanks.

Your welcome