Sample Buried in Parts of the Mix

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
Post Reply
User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

17 Sep 2017

Hi All!

I'm working on a track and it has a short vocal sample in it. When it first comes in it's perfectly loud enough but later on in the track there is a lead sound and strings added to the mix too and it's buried in the mix at that part now. I've added Saturation Knob to louden it (I know, wrong device for this job) but what would others do here?

I'm just about to try EQ'ing some things out of the way frequency-wise obviously and try the M-Class Maximizer too.

I've just listened back to where it first comes in where there is only drums and a bass happening and now (because it's louder) it's way too overpowering / loud at that point in the song. What should I do, automate the Saturation Knob or Maximizer on at the point where it becomes buried perhaps?

Also, after trying both...The M-Class Maximizer doesn't seem to be making it as loud and audible in the later part of the mix as good as Saturation Knob.

Any tips here?

Thanks!
Last edited by Creativemind on 17 Sep 2017, edited 1 time in total.
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
CaliforniaBurrito
Posts: 574
Joined: 11 Nov 2015
Location: San Diego, CA
Contact:

17 Sep 2017

Sidechain the vocal stab to a strings/lead channel or frequency duck the strings/lead channel to make room for the vocal stab. Saturation is likely to make things messier in this case but if it's working for you then feel free to automate it according to the arrangement. I change the level or blend of things all the time.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

17 Sep 2017

Grab that fader and ride it - that's what they're made for!!! ;)
If it's not loud enough, never overlook the possibility it simply needs to be turned up…
Sometimes you can find a static solution, but just as often you need a dynamic solution.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

17 Sep 2017

CaliforniaBurrito wrote:
17 Sep 2017
Sidechain the vocal stab to a strings/lead channel or frequency duck the strings/lead channel to make room for the vocal stab. Saturation is likely to make things messier in this case but if it's working for you then feel free to automate it according to the arrangement. I change the level or blend of things all the time.
Excellent idea. Never thought of that. Gonna get back on it soon and see if I can remember how to sidechain in Reason lol!
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

17 Sep 2017

selig wrote:
17 Sep 2017
Grab that fader and ride it - that's what they're made for!!! ;)
If it's not loud enough, never overlook the possibility it simply needs to be turned up…
Sometimes you can find a static solution, but just as often you need a dynamic solution.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
I did try turning it up but the fader seems really near the top on Reason. Not much headroom there, or fader room to be more precise.

So you think I should automate it selig? else it might be too loud in one place as to the other.
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
CaliforniaBurrito
Posts: 574
Joined: 11 Nov 2015
Location: San Diego, CA
Contact:

17 Sep 2017

Creativemind wrote:
17 Sep 2017
Excellent idea. Never thought of that. Gonna get back on it soon and see if I can remember how to sidechain in Reason lol!
Audio out to Spider Splitter with one split going back to the original channel and the next split going into a sidechain input on the string/lead channel compressor. Start with max threshold, max ratio, fast attack, long release and smooth it out.

As for my frequency ducking suggestion, this is to let the fundamental range of the vocal through the string/lead channel while allowing the rest of the string/lead spectrum to continue. This is a technique I use with bass and kicks because traditional sidechaining is too cheesy for techno. :lol: I frequency duck via midi and CV but in your case, which is probably a wav file, I would look at the fundamental range of the vocal stab in the spectrum EQ and manually automate a channel EQ on the string/lead channel to dip in that same range whenever the vocal hits. That way you don't lose so much of the strings and lead.

User avatar
aeox
Competition Winner
Posts: 3222
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

17 Sep 2017

Always best to drop a sample of what you're working on. That way people can clearly hear what's going on in your mix.
The suggestions above are good. Although, it could be the arrangement that is cluttering that frequency range. In my opinion a female vocal would be considered a lead, they generally occupy the same frequency range. So having them at the same time is going to be a battle. You could eq duck the lead out of the way, but it just won't sound right because the two sounds are almost trying to fill the same role at the same time. It could work if the lead was following the vocal or harmonizing with the vocal perfectly, then it would just be gain adjustments.

Think about a orchestra, each group of instruments has it's own spot in the frequency spectrum. Theres no EQ being done to make all those instruments fit nicely, it's just the balance of frequencies. I find it best to approach a song this way.

I'm not saying what you're doing can't work, it would just be better to hear what you're working on to give proper advice.

User avatar
CaliforniaBurrito
Posts: 574
Joined: 11 Nov 2015
Location: San Diego, CA
Contact:

17 Sep 2017

aeox wrote:
17 Sep 2017
...
That is some damn good advice! If I was a betting man, which I am, I'd wager that the OP is a an old school house kind of guy in which the vocals aren't so intrusive but rather grooving with the rest of the composition. Harmonization is a great idea. Don't have the vocal stab at a C when the lead melody hovers around a C. Have them playing at different intervals. Or do like the house guys do and pitch the vocal stab down so it's not clashing with the higher register. You can start the vocal stab off high and then bring it down low when the high octave elements hit. Oooh I'm getting inspired just thinking about it.

User avatar
aeox
Competition Winner
Posts: 3222
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

17 Sep 2017

CaliforniaBurrito wrote:
17 Sep 2017
aeox wrote:
17 Sep 2017
...
That is some damn good advice! If I was a betting man, which I am, I'd wager that the OP is a an old school house kind of guy in which the vocals aren't so intrusive but rather grooving with the rest of the composition. Harmonization is a great idea. Don't have the vocal stab at a C when the lead melody hovers around a C. Have them playing at different intervals. Or do like the house guys do and pitch the vocal stab down so it's not clashing with the higher register. You can start the vocal stab off high and then bring it down low when the high octave elements hit. Oooh I'm getting inspired just thinking about it.
:thumbs_up: That's the right idea.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

17 Sep 2017

Creativemind wrote:
selig wrote:
17 Sep 2017
Grab that fader and ride it - that's what they're made for!!! ;)
If it's not loud enough, never overlook the possibility it simply needs to be turned up…
Sometimes you can find a static solution, but just as often you need a dynamic solution.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
I did try turning it up but the fader seems really near the top on Reason. Not much headroom there, or fader room to be more precise.

So you think I should automate it selig? else it might be too loud in one place as to the other.
"Riding" a level is very common, even before automation. Sometimes you'd have all band members standing around the console each with their hands on a different control.

Sometimes you get lucky and a mix works at static levels. Other times the automation for a track looks like a city skyline!

A talented mix engineer 'plays' the console like a musician plays their instrument. I remember the first time watching guys ride vocals, line by line, getting each line to sit just right in the mix - doesn't mean they took all the dynamics out, it means they made it come alive while still allowing the listener to hear every word. It was a sight to behold, seriously.

If you've run out of room on the fader, then one thing to try is turning up the input at the top of the channel by a specific amount between 5-10 dB, then turning down the channel fader by the same amount (before starting to automate the channel). If any channel dynamics change, adjust their thresholds down by a similar amount. The goal is to have the track remain at the same level but give you more 'positive' gain on the fader.

You will probably only need to make changes section by section, keeping the track where you want it relative to the rest of the tracks.

As always, I'm typing all of this in a vacuum, with no knowledge of the specific mix in question, so I may be totally off base with these suggestions!

Would be happy to give more feedback based on the track, as it could be other things keeping things from working as expected for you - and therefore other solutions will get you the results you seek.
:)


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

18 Sep 2017

selig wrote:
17 Sep 2017

A talented mix engineer 'plays' the console like a musician plays their instrument. I remember the first time watching guys ride vocals, line by line, getting each line to sit just right in the mix - doesn't mean they took all the dynamics out, it means they made it come alive while still allowing the listener to hear every word. It was a sight to behold, seriously.

If you've run out of room on the fader, then one thing to try is turning up the input at the top of the channel by a specific amount between 5-10 dB, then turning down the channel fader by the same amount (before starting to automate the channel). If any channel dynamics change, adjust their thresholds down by a similar amount. The goal is to have the track remain at the same level but give you more 'positive' gain on the fader.

Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Thanks Selig.

So what do you mean by 'ride a fader'? turning it up and down accordingly during track playback? isn't that automating it?

And as for room, you mean the Gain? I saw a video once that said you should use this first, is this correct?
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

19 Sep 2017

Creativemind wrote:
selig wrote:
17 Sep 2017

A talented mix engineer 'plays' the console like a musician plays their instrument. I remember the first time watching guys ride vocals, line by line, getting each line to sit just right in the mix - doesn't mean they took all the dynamics out, it means they made it come alive while still allowing the listener to hear every word. It was a sight to behold, seriously.

If you've run out of room on the fader, then one thing to try is turning up the input at the top of the channel by a specific amount between 5-10 dB, then turning down the channel fader by the same amount (before starting to automate the channel). If any channel dynamics change, adjust their thresholds down by a similar amount. The goal is to have the track remain at the same level but give you more 'positive' gain on the fader.

Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Thanks Selig.

So what do you mean by 'ride a fader'? turning it up and down accordingly during track playback? isn't that automating it?

And as for room, you mean the Gain? I saw a video once that said you should use this first, is this correct?
Riding a fader is what folks did long before automation existed. Automation is simply a way or recording fader rides, much as MIDI is a way of recording piano performances (and much more).

If you have followed best practices and are keeping your levels where you want them, then there's no reason to adjust input gain. If you are not doing this then the input Gain knob is one of many places where you can fix this. It's best not to do this after adding insert or channel dynamics if possible because then you need to compensate those devices as well (as I indicated earlier). Like I said, that's one way to get more room on the channel fader.

You could also add an insert device (last in the series) to do the same, and IF your inserts are not pre-dynamics you won't have to worry about any dynamics adjustments.

What is happening in this case is we are trying to help you fix a problem at the end of the production process (that probably should have been addressed at the beginning), but we have no idea exactly what the problem is and what's causing it. So we're shooting in the dark to some degree because there may be a much simpler 'fix' to what you're experiencing.

With audio production, things are SO contextual it's difficult to say exactly what you should do in a specific case without knowing all of the details or having the song file in front of us. Even then there are going to be multiple solutions to most issues, compounding the problem!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
demt
Posts: 1357
Joined: 16 Sep 2016
Contact:

19 Sep 2017

automate the compresser output nob having put it in the add fx unit
Reason 12 ,gear4 music sdp3 stage piano .nektar gxp 88,behringer umc1800 .line6 spider4 30
hear scince reason 2.5

User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

19 Sep 2017

selig wrote:
19 Sep 2017
Creativemind wrote:
Thanks Selig.

So what do you mean by 'ride a fader'? turning it up and down accordingly during track playback? isn't that automating it?

And as for room, you mean the Gain? I saw a video once that said you should use this first, is this correct?
Riding a fader is what folks did long before automation existed. Automation is simply a way or recording fader rides, much as MIDI is a way of recording piano performances (and much more).

If you have followed best practices and are keeping your levels where you want them, then there's no reason to adjust input gain. If you are not doing this then the input Gain knob is one of many places where you can fix this. It's best not to do this after adding insert or channel dynamics if possible because then you need to compensate those devices as well (as I indicated earlier). Like I said, that's one way to get more room on the channel fader.

You could also add an insert device (last in the series) to do the same, and IF your inserts are not pre-dynamics you won't have to worry about any dynamics adjustments.

What is happening in this case is we are trying to help you fix a problem at the end of the production process (that probably should have been addressed at the beginning), but we have no idea exactly what the problem is and what's causing it. So we're shooting in the dark to some degree because there may be a much simpler 'fix' to what you're experiencing.

With audio production, things are SO contextual it's difficult to say exactly what you should do in a specific case without knowing all of the details or having the song file in front of us. Even then there are going to be multiple solutions to most issues, compounding the problem!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
If you would let me send you the track and you give me some valuable input thatt'd be great but I understand if you're busy.
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
Zac
Posts: 1784
Joined: 19 May 2016
Contact:

19 Sep 2017

Another thing that may work is making the lead / strings wide whilst the vocal sits in the middle. A number of ways of doing this, adding subtle chorus often works well. If you then use mclass stereo widener to spread the string freqs above say 800hz even more this tends to kill the centre image somewhat which is beneficial here.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests