# Keep gettin stuck / writting myself into a box (with examples)



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

There are 2 problems I keep running into. The first is simply I suck at mixing and am learning very slowly, the second is that I keep getting stuck and don't know where to take the music. Normally when I write music I'm either writing on actual paper or I'm writing into a notation software because I like to see notes on staff paper, but recently Ive been writing into cubase some because apparently thats "how its done" in film scoring and other mediums that I like. I actually like writing this way, the 2 pieces Ive posted below are FAR FAR FAR from my "best peices" but they are my favorites so far, why? because I'm actually attached to them, they actually have some meaning to me. But I keep running into the problem of not knowing where to go, maybe its a lack of planing beforehand, but I generally don't do that much anyway (probably should). So yea ,here are the 2 peices, what do you think, what can I do to improve on them, but more over, how do I keep from getting in this situation in the future where I Just don't know what to do.

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/textu ... project-v3

you can kinda hear where I couldn't figure out what to do right after everything but the piano dropped out.after that I couldn't figure anything out.

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/piano-violin-thing

The end where it slows down, yea I didn't know what to do so I just grabbed each note, made it hold out, copied the cajon part again, and slowed it down :/.


----------



## Stiltzkin (Nov 30, 2014)

Learning to mix is something the thing I hate most about my progression in to film music - your ears start to be so incredibly nit-picky that you can't accept something you would have before - not the note, the note is fine, but the SOUND of the note or whatever is just wrong! Then you go off on mini-mission to fix it and before you know it you've completely gotten lost and can't get back in the vibe.

Making a good template is a very good place to start, something like spitfire or orchestral tools will allow you to think far less about mixing and more about the music.

I learned classically so I still start either on the piano or on paper and then orchestrate either in my mind now, or if its really complicated i'll go to paper and then the DAW, but I'm getting closer to being able to no longer need paper and instead go straight to the DAW, that's mostly template limitations.

If you write well with paper or sibelius, USE it - keep doing what you know and dabble a bit with DAW, or just move to DAW to create the production once the writing is done.

I find writing in a DAW makes music that comes out feeling improvised, as in layers of improvisation as apposed to a crafted piece.


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

There are just problems from top to bottom. 

The ideas are actually pretty good. But, your technical implementation leaves a lot to be desired both musically and mixing.

For mixing, you're doing too much. To many drastic things that are altering the sound too much. It's better to do a lot of little tings than to do one big thing. So the first thing that I would do, is to undo everything you have done in terms of EQ and panning, ect.... It's all poorly done and you'd be better off not doing anything but level adjustments. All your sounds sound squashed and mono.

Musically there's a lot to discuss, but since it's more subjective I'll leave that alone for now.

But if you could post the piece with nothing done. Just plain, no panning, no eq, no dynamics and also post what libraries you are using, that would be a start.


----------



## jneebz (Nov 30, 2014)

Stiltzkin @ Sun Nov 30 said:


> I find writing in a DAW makes music that comes out feeling improvised, as in layers of improvisation as apposed to a crafted piece.


This is so true, and well-said. I was classically trained but pop music ruined me :wink: I tend to write in "improvised tracks" and my arrangements are much less creative when writing directly into my DAW. I'm forcing myself to sketch more in Notion, even if just for the main theme and some variations.


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

sketching makes a big difference over here. I went from writing in full score, to writing in DAW. Sketching before I get to my Daw has made a big difference. Even if the sketches are only that. At least it gives you time a way from your DAW to get your musical ideas together before you start tweaking patches.


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

Yea no problem, I understand they arn't exactly the best music to ever grace the earth lol. Anyway, below is each track without effects best I could manage. Guitars still have the stuff use to make the tone, amps sims and stuff, and the fad in its pretty rough with automation turned of lol. For some reason my project was messed up when I opened it, some midi just vanished, so, I fixed what I could its not EXACTLY the same but its close enough for our purposes.

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/textu ... roject-raw

I forgot to flatten CC data on this one, so its still has dynamics (i'm not concerned a whole lot with this piece, its on the back shelf so to speak, I'm actively working on the second one i posted though) . Also, in the other peice the drums had a lot of reverb on them and then I automate it down. I wanted the drums when they come to have a very distant kind far sound to them. Sorta like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CsOXC4dU3s

or this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt-QIRBQAJs

Kinda a distance roaming type of feeling. 

Sample library use:

Hollywood strings (before piano break, I've separated them into actual individual instruments so I have more control over each separately. after its just a full string section patch. I use both tremolo and normal patches)

Shreddage 2 (guitar, various free amp sims, though I just got guitar rig 5 a day ago so I'll be using that in the future)

EWQL orchestra - piano comes from this.

ministry of rock 2 - Drums (just got addicting drums 2 and will be using it for most stuff in the future)

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/piano ... -thing-raw

I flattened cc data on the instruments for this one, so that should be good. There is still some reverb stuff on the piano, its part of the patch, was the preset I was using, its called "emotional" but it had the kind of feel I was going for,nice and soft.

Sample library used:

Hollywood strings -violins,cello, bass 

NI Giant - piano

Addicting drums 2- Cajon 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was surprised to hear you say I had done to much, i tried to use a light hand, just making small changes. Especially in regards to eq, mainly just added small dips, though apparently it wasn't as light handed as I though. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BTW: I'll take all the help I can get, don't worry about if my pieces sucks or not, if you think that, tell me (just make sure to say why ). I'm wanting to improve, can't do that without criticism!


----------



## G.E. (Nov 30, 2014)

Sounds to me like this is another one of those problems that can be fixed just by transcribing and studying other pieces. It could also help to follow a structure template like A-B-A-B or whatever. After studying other pieces for a while, you'll begin to see that most of them are quite predictable and use common tropes which are tried and true. Of course you will internalize those tropes and call upon them when you need them.

Here's an example of what I mean by predictable tropes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeUYzDgs498

If you listen from the beginning, you'll hear the first part which is focused on brass. Then, at 24 seconds, the second melody comes along (played on strings), which sounds like it's answering a call made by the first brass melody.
I must've heard that hundreds of times, but it's an effective way to keep your piece going. Will that win you any awards for originality? Probably not. But it's a good place to start.



jneebz @ Sun Nov 30 said:


> Stiltzkin @ Sun Nov 30 said:
> 
> 
> > I find writing in a DAW makes music that comes out feeling improvised, as in layers of improvisation as apposed to a crafted piece.
> ...


There shouldn't be any reason why you can't write like that in a DAW as well. DAW tools like multiple track editors should help you do it.


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

Well now that we know what we're dealing with. I would say that a lot of it sounds a lot better, but the naked versions have exposed something that is fundamentally wrong at the core of your setup. Sounds to me, especially in the piano vln thingy that only 1 channel of your strings is being recorded. So check your setup. There's something going wrong. Either you have it bussed to a mono channel or you have one side fully panned or something. Return all pans to the center for now.

Once that's done then you want to match the rooms a little better with reverb. But, you can't do that until you fix the panning issues in the strings.

Pno sounds good as is. The performances need tweaking but you're a long ways from worrying about that for now.

Basically what I'm hearing is that fundamentally you're messing up the overall sound. And since you turned off all fx then it's in your setup or you still have pan information going in the strings.


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

Ok, so panning is fixed (took forever to find, apparently I found some obscure pan knob and decided I wanted violins panned left and some other instruments right :/)


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

G.E. @ Sun Nov 30 said:


> Sounds to me like this is another one of those problems that can be fixed just by transcribing and studying other pieces. It could also help to follow a structure template like A-B-A-B or whatever. After studying other pieces for a while, you'll begin to see that most of them are quite predictable and use common tropes which are tried and true. Of course you will internalize those tropes and call upon them when you need them.
> 
> Here's an example of what I mean by predictable tropes:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeUYzDgs498
> ...



Any good place to find scores to study? Aural theory is hardly my strongest area (I'm taking the class this semester....again). Rythms I can figure out without to much struggling but pitch material is very hard for me to transcribe for some reason.

My composition teach likes to just, ignore stuff like this, and instead have me writing in the style of proportional notation, because I'm going to use that SO much (not against learning it, against spending an entire semester on it which seemed like a waste of time, I can write stuff like that and without a tonal center for days, but tonality is a struggle area, why can't he help me with that! /endrant)


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

newbycomposer @ Sun Nov 30 said:


> Ok, so panning is fixed (took forever to find, apparently I found some obscure pan knob and decided I wanted violins panned left and some other instruments right :/)



It's not as simple as that to place samples that are recorded in stereo. If you do it that way what you'll do is collapse the stereo field. There is a better way to do it. But, it's kind of advanced and probably best not to mention until we get the basics straightened out.


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

Haha alright then, you the boss . 

Ive been trying to get reverb to sound like the instruments are all in the same room, only one that really sounded out of place was the cajon, so ive been working with it, I'm using QL spaces vs just the reverb programs that came with cubase 7.5. Frankly, there are a lot of knobs on those, and I only have a very general idea what they do, and I like the sounds I'm getting out of ql spaces. The strings are using the reverb built into Hollywood strings , all using the same settings (the default, original, I know) 


I added the audio file to this post instead of uploading to soundcoud this time, I hope that works faster

Edit: can't figure it out, here it is

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/piano ... ith-reverb


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

newbycomposer @ Sun Nov 30 said:


> Haha alright then, you the boss .
> 
> Ive been trying to get reverb to sound like the instruments are all in the same room, only one that really sounded out of place was the cajon, so ive been working with it, I'm using QL spaces vs just the reverb programs that came with cubase 7.5. Frankly, there are a lot of knobs on those, and I only have a very general idea what they do, and I like the sounds I'm getting out of ql spaces. The strings are using the reverb built into Hollywood strings , all using the same settings (the default, original, I know)
> 
> ...



The piano sounds really nice. But the strings are still messed up. The stereo field is collapsed. There's something in the software that you've got messed up. Turn off all reverb for now. It's not helping you to sort it out.


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

ok here it is once again, no reverb except on piano (can't really remove it, if youve used giant you know its kinda weird and the reverb is sorta built into the sound). I watched my faders on the mix screen when this played, every channel has both left and right audio, and sometimes one is a little higher than the other for whatever reason but it fluctuates, left might be just barley higher but in a second the right will be just a little higher.

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/piano ... verb-again


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

Ok. Now the fun begins.

Next you need to decide where you want to place your elements. Not left and right but front to back. What do you want up front? What do you want in the background.

Personally I would put the piano upfront, then I would decide if drums would be just in back of piano or strings. In this piece I might actually put the drums behind the piano and then the strings kind of in the back.

Remember the strings are prepanned so if you want to change the panning just flipping the pan nob won't do it.

Once you decide where you want to put things, then let me know and we'll talk techniques to do that.


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

I'm not really sure what you mean by front to back (I'm not use to working in fixed media, but with chamber music, not that I LIKE working with chamber music, but nature of the assignments has always been chamber music in school, all this stuff is what I'm doing outside school lol)

This is how In my head I had them placed, since the string patches are sections, not just solo strings (I wish I could have them solo, but the solo strings I have don't sound very good lol, sounds better with sections). so below is kinda how I imagined it setup.

I know I want the cajon to be fairly up front, I mean, its a box with a guy sitting on it lol, its not exactly got a lot of weight and projection. Its not really going to cut through, which means it needs to be a little more forward, piano is kinda i[/img][/quote]n the middle, with other stuff coming around in it.








Btw: Can you go into detail a little more about what you mean by stereo field, I think I have a general idea of what your talking about, but at the same time, I don't. Also, do you have any kind of resources (websites and such) I could use, I really appropriate this help(you have no idea lol) but obviously, I can't run to this site like this for every single project I work on, and I'm such a beginner need some sort of a resource I can use.


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

Stereo field is left to right spread. The samples you are using are recorded in stereo so if you pan hard left like you were doing all you're actually doing is squeezing the spread. If you do it too much, it collapses the field and you get a monoish sound.

Set up a large hall reverb. Set a group channel for your strings and assign all your strings to that group. Then pull up a send on your group channel and send a portion of that signal to your reverb and back. Make the strings sound like they're back on a stage. Use your ears to determine how far back.


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

ok , so your saying, make a fx channel and put the reverb on it, then route the strings to that, ok, I can do that, routing back though? I'm in cubase, when I change the send from stereo to the fx channel then the output comes straight from the fx channel, it doesn't "go back".


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

Ok, so This is what I did. I routed the 3 string channels to a group channel ("strings") then I sent from there to a fx channel with nothing but QL reverb. However, I'm not really sure what I'm suppose to be doing there. I Feel like what your telling me to do is basically generate reverb, and still have a "dry" channel, then mix the 2 together correct, that way I have the sound and the reverb both playing. QL is pretty simple, there are 4 knobs and I have no idea what to do, because it basicly generates reverb already with a dry and wet and mixes it. Picture below. So I'm a little confused on what to do, because anything short of dragging dry all the way down and wet all the way up, I cant get a difrence in sound by bringing that channel up or down.

http://i.imgur.com/JSl5FJz.jpg?1


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

Yeah that's it. 

A send sends a portion of the dry signal to the reverb fx channel and then returns the wet signal (w/ reverb) back to the channel and mixes the dry with the wet. That's what you want a mixture of dry and wet how wet determines how much of the signal you send to the fx channel.

You want to make it sound like it's in a hall without making it washy and sounding like it's in an echo chamber.


----------



## newbycomposer (Nov 30, 2014)

so,do I really need to send it to a seperate channel then , since the reverb I'm using has a dry/wet knob built in? Come to think of it, MOST of the reverbs I have have that ability? If I DO need to send it to that channel, does that mean I need to turn the wet all the way up and dry all the way down in the reverb itself?


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2014)

newbycomposer @ Sun Nov 30 said:


> so,do I really need to send it to a seperate channel then , since the reverb I'm using has a dry/wet knob built in? Come to think of it, MOST of the reverbs I have have that ability? If I DO need to send it to that channel, does that mean I need to turn the wet all the way up and dry all the way down in the reverb itself?



Yes because that's not the only thing that will be sent there. Think of this as your main hall that all of your instruments will sit in to a greater or lesser degree depending on two factors a) how much natural room is already in the samples and b) what space front to back you want to put your instrument in.

Next send a lesser portion of the piano to the reverb. Make it sound like the piano is in front of the strings though.

Make sure your fx reverb is set to 100% wet.


----------



## newbycomposer (Dec 1, 2014)

Ok, I think I understand. So, for piano, what do you mean by "send a lesser portion" of piano. Do I send it to the exact same channel I'm sending the strings to for reverb, or create another identical reverb track to send the piano to, and then go through the same process so it seems closer than the strings?


----------



## José Herring (Dec 1, 2014)

Use the same reverb. That's your hall. So imagine that the piano is closer to you. How would that sound in the Hall? You would hear more of the direct sound and less of the hall. So you send less of the piano to the hall. You've picked a good piano sound that you won't have to do any other tricks but just send a little bit to the reverb to pick up a slight hint of hall.


----------



## Eric George (Dec 1, 2014)

This is a good thread. Jose - when are you going to teach a class? I'll definitely attend.


----------



## José Herring (Dec 1, 2014)

I started a facebook group a while back to discuss such things, but it kind of died from lack of attention. I could get it going again if people would be interested.


----------



## Eric George (Dec 1, 2014)

I'd be into it. The language and examples you are using in this thread is very helpful.


----------



## newbycomposer (Dec 1, 2014)

josejherring @ Mon Dec 01 said:


> Use the same reverb. That's your hall. So imagine that the piano is closer to you. How would that sound in the Hall? You would hear more of the direct sound and less of the hall. So you send less of the piano to the hall. You've picked a good piano sound that you won't have to do any other tricks but just send a little bit to the reverb to pick up a slight hint of hall.




But what do you mean by "send a little" of it? Like, as it is right now, I have my 3 strings mixed to the levels I want them compared to each other and I'm sending that signal to a group channel called "strings", then I have a send from "strings" to the reverb channel, I can raise the volume of the reverb channel to get more/less reverb, but...................


(I'm leaving that up there because I was confused and if someone else reads this it might help them).

I just realized that "sending" isn't done with the faders on the mix screen.

http://i.imgur.com/Qkym0qL.png?1

White arrow= how I'm sending the desperate strings to the group channel. 
Black arrow= How I thought I "Increased the send"
Yellow arrow= How I turn up the send (just realized that) 

If I understand it now, I raise the fader I have the reverb on to detriment the overage reverb effect , its in effect the "wet" and the instruments are the "dry". However, if I change volume of the instruments with their faders, won't that mean they get a bigger push into the reverb channel, so If later I say decide I want the cello a little louder, and pull up on its fader, won't the reverb be thrown off as well?

Ive fiddled with the piano some, removed its built in reverb because combining them was WAY to much. and I adjusted the "hardness" of the piano as well, originally it was a very soft sound, its still soft closer to middle of the setting now because with the reverb it had very VERY little attack at all.

This is a screenshot of what mix screen looks like with its settings

http://i.imgur.com/O0wRZ65.png?1

Here is what it sounds like now

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/pvt-unraw


----------



## arielblacksmith (Dec 1, 2014)

Im also new to this and learning a lot from it too. Thanks!! made a quiick string mock up to keep up with the examples


----------



## José Herring (Dec 1, 2014)

Ok. You're confusing me. It's easy to try and make this stuff more complicated than it actually is.

To "group" means that you combine the signals of mulitple channels, like your vln, vla, cellos, to one group channel. Which you've done. 

To send a portion of the signal means to use that group channel or individual channel, and on the right side of your channel mixer you bring up your reverb send, and use the slider to send a portion of any channel that has audio to the fx channel. Raising and lower the fx fader is only going to raise and lower the overall level of the fx channel. Sending a portion of another channel mixes that audio signal with the fx channel.

So sending goes from your group channel, in your chase strings, to the fx channel and then it returns that portion of the signal back to the original group channel with reverb. That's the wet signal and it gets mixed with the original signal.

Now you can do the same for your piano channel. Send a portion of it to your fx channel and it will return back to your piano channel the piano with fx to mix back into the original channel.

Here's a video that might explain it more. I haven't seen it but it's pretty basic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yjnVqjufs0


----------



## José Herring (Dec 1, 2014)

btw the way the latest version is starting to sound pretty good. Once we get this send return thing straightened out, I'll help with a bit more of the programming. But let's get everything sitting in a nice space first. 

Strings and piano are almost there. Probably just add just a touch of reverb to the piano. And the cajon thing we'll need to do just a bit more to get that riight.


----------



## newbycomposer (Dec 2, 2014)

alright, so what next, I added a little more reverb to the piano


----------



## José Herring (Dec 2, 2014)

Make the drums sound cooler by adding a little delay to the rhythm, splash a little reverb on it to help the room. Here's where you can use room works on the track and get a nice room and use the wet dry mix to 25% or so. Just a tad. But not the main hall verb, that will be too much. Find a place for it panning wise possibly slightly right and place the piano slightly left. To do this you'll need to use the Haas effect. 

The Haas effect is to pull up the mixer delay and delay one side of the signal by a few ms. Psychoacoustically the side that hits the ear first is perceived as the side that the instrument is on. So by delaying say the left side you'll pan to the right, ect..

Look up Haas effect on you tube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQOkSF8auFc


----------



## newbycomposer (Dec 4, 2014)

Man, that haas effect is cool. So question though, does that mean I need to duplicate every track I'm going to use this type of panning on? which means I will need to duplicate them, pan one all left, one all right, then use the hass effect. Then I need to remix the levels?

Is there any time when this WOULDN'T be the best way to pan?


----------



## José Herring (Dec 4, 2014)

If your instrument is panned up the center which it sounds like the pno and cajon are, then you can just bring up Cubase's mixer delay plugin and delay one side. Put on the instrument or output channel for the instrument. That way you don't have to record the track to audio and all that.


----------



## newbycomposer (Dec 4, 2014)

Here is what it sounds like now

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/pvt-stero

One thing I would like to do (Though I don't know how) is make the "bass" hits on the cajon a little beefier, In live performances where Ive heard it they have been so I know they can be, maybe it was the sample they used but maybe I can eq it or something?


----------



## José Herring (Dec 5, 2014)

Starting to sound pretty decent. I like the panning on the pno. 

I don't know what you're using for the drums, but you might be able to isolate the lower hits in the software and use EQ on that. If you EQ the track it's always a bit tricky, but it can be done. There's a lot that can be done, you can use drum replacement software to layer in a low kick.

I would suggest just trying to find an eq or eq with compressor to boot the frequencies. Vlad sounds has a dynamic EQ for free. Sonalksis has a dynamic EQ that works well, but of course cost.

Once you get the drums the way you want it, then work the piece for more interest adding more instruments, getting a dynamic arrangement, ect.... but since this was just a mix exercise, You've learned some basic tools that you can use to set things up and get a mix going.

To answer and earlier question, I find using the standard pan pot only really works on mono materials. If you're working in stereo the simulated Haas effect works out better for me. Just know as a technical point, though everybody calls it the Hass effect, it's not really the Haas effect, it's more technically called the "Precedence effect". If you ever want to learn more about how it works.


----------



## newbycomposer (Dec 5, 2014)

Alright man this is what it sounds like now 

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/pvt-close

I added a little pan via that effect to the bass and violin, so they don't sound right in the middle but a little off to each side respectively (but not more than piano/cajon)

I used an multiband eq on the cajon to give the hits a little more, not sure if i'm going to keep it our not yet, but I think it sounds a LITTLE better like this. 

So 2 questions

1) what would you suggest next

2) Do these techniques also work when mixing say, a rock band type set up, or is the thought process completely different.


----------



## José Herring (Dec 5, 2014)

HS is already recorded in place and shouldn't sound like the vlns are coming up the middle, or that the basses are coming up the middle. The vlns should already sound like they're on the left, and the cellos and basses should sound like they're on the right without you having to pan anything. 

So there's still something wrong. That's why the strings still sound monoish. Check the routing on that before you do anything else. Post pictures so that we can see what you did. Post pictures of your play instance, your mixer, ect. anything that is even associated with your strings and the signal path you setup.


----------



## José Herring (Dec 5, 2014)

I should also ask what version of HS are you using and what mic positions you are using if you're using HS Diamond.


----------



## newbycomposer (Dec 16, 2014)

Sorry its taken me so long to respond man (I really appreciate the help). Ive been dealing with some person stuff and on the side ended up working on another project. 

I have HS Diamond. I'm the 3 non vintage mic positions for violins, and just main for the cello and base. 

here is a picture, you should be able to zoom in and see everything (I fixed some of the pans, I had them in the middle I put them back to the default and I will reupload the audio)

http://i.imgur.com/GaBzoNs.jpg?1


----------



## José Herring (Dec 16, 2014)

newbycomposer @ Tue Dec 16 said:


> Sorry its taken me so long to respond man (I really appreciate the help). Ive been dealing with some person stuff and on the side ended up working on another project.
> 
> I have HS Diamond. I'm the 3 non vintage mic positions for violins, and just main for the cello and base.
> 
> ...



Not a problem. I needed the break any way :lol: 

Looks good from the pictures. Everything looks as it should. Looks like everything is setup correctly. Not only that, but it looks like you're starting to think a little bit which I like to see.

Good on the panning. If I recall I think it was just the violins that were horribly out of phase and in the wrong position. Looks like it's ok now with the close mics slightly panned to the left and the mains and far mics set to center. 

Looking forward to hearing how it sounds now.

Also, if Spaces is using or has a quad stereo IR you should use it for sure and flip the switch true stereo. But only if the IR is quad channel. It will make a difference in the size of the hall.


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 1, 2015)

Thanks, I really appropriate the help. I totally forgot about this because of the holidays, I'm pretty much done with that one, I like how it sounds, basicly its just the same but with everything panned correctly. 

I had a question ,how do you do the same thing for say, a rock band setup? Ive been working on a song and can NOT get it to sound good. Like musically I feel like its ok, not hit song, but ok, the mix is killing me. its "ok" in the begining when its just piano, strings, and a little synth, but after everything comes in It just feels wrong and I can't get it fixed no matter what!

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/crapo ... al-unmixed


----------



## José Herring (Jan 1, 2015)

newbycomposer @ Thu Jan 01 said:


> Thanks, I really appropriate the help. I totally forgot about this because of the holidays, I'm pretty much done with that one, I like how it sounds, basicly its just the same but with everything panned correctly.
> 
> I had a question ,how do you do the same thing for say, a rock band setup? Ive been working on a song and can NOT get it to sound good. Like musically I feel like its ok, not hit song, but ok, the mix is killing me. its "ok" in the begining when its just piano, strings, and a little synth, but after everything comes in It just feels wrong and I can't get it fixed no matter what!
> 
> https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/crapo ... al-unmixed



There's a lot not quite right and not all of it is mix. Some if it is just programming related.

First thing I would do is decide what you want to be the main upfront instruments. Everything right now is competing with everything else.

One of the hardest things to do, when you're mixing your own music, is to realize that not every precious part you write is of equal importance. So decide what is the most important and design a mix around that.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Jan 1, 2015)

Just going to pitch in here, the topic took a turn for some of the more technical stuff pretty quickly, but I'm pretty familiar with the idea of writing myself into a box... It was a big problem I had. 

I think the thing that helped me the most was listening to as much music as often as I could. Somehow in my excitement for composing I had stopped listening to music as much as I had before, and it really hurt my inspiration.


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 1, 2015)

What do you mean programing related?

Well, its primarily a metal song so guitar, drums, and vocals should be in the for front(I still have to add vocals to it, but I suck at writing lyrics and it being holidays my family has been around a lot so I haven't had a chance to scream in a mic anyway ) 

This is really my first attempt at this style. The last 4 years have been spent writting chamber music, so, the song isn't especially great, its maybe the 4th Ive written in this style, and the first Ive gotten this close to complete, I know its pretty bad so just be blunt lol.

The guitars are shreddage 2 through guitar rig 5 with rammfire addon. So, being a midi instrument, I'm kind trying to use some of the other effects (choirs, synth) to help draw attention away from that fact, not sure if its working or making it worse honestly, but I like it so, there is that.

One thing I wanted was in the intro the guitars/synth as they come in to have a low fi oldschool sound. then you get a moment of clarity when it all "kicks" in. In an old version (below) it worked fairly well

This is an older version I exported to send to a friend for advice (he is a guitars and pretty decent at mixing) to see what he thought. its an older guitar tone (I like the new one better anyway) but it also had a better "kick" at :26 (in this version, the version I posted earlier its at :50something)

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/crapore-the-sequal

These two examples (just listen to the beginning part of each) are what I'm wanting to do with the guitar/synth as it comes in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T-5MP6QiLA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFHwr0Qo-g8

As far as for what the mix for THIS song. This is kinda what I'm shooting for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwjp8-9iPAQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTLCnRAjAVs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pwbguNb_FY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQCzALJSl-I

What I DON'T want to mix like is pretty much anything from rise records in the last 2 years lol, or like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAuPpoXlrKs

Where everything just seems flat, like there is no depth

same here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKqG2EVzUrg

Thats a LOT of examples, but I think its important to kinda tell you the sound I'm trying to go for, EVENTUALLY I want to be doing some stuff like epica but thats way in the future

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8y99z5EVtY

Anyway, I like how in all the examples (especially the first 2) that all the instruments are "sharp" (in sense of texture, not pitch), they are all clear and kinda pop out, in mine, everything seems dull, muddy, like your hearing it through a door or something. 

Anyway, thats kinda what I"m trying here, sorry if thats a little long

@Zhao Shen- Haha I like the technical stuff man, thats what I'm looking for, I listen to music ALL the time, not just metal, or heavy stuff, but also film scores as well (Howard shore is a genius).


----------



## José Herring (Jan 1, 2015)

Double the rhythm guitar track so it's pumping out of both speakers equally. You may need to delay one side if it starts to phase. But, you may not.

run a compression scheme on the drums and bass like described here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXJ6-G55JuY


----------



## José Herring (Jan 1, 2015)

Oh, and "programming" means the way in which you sequence your midi parts and design your sounds.


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 1, 2015)

josejherring @ Thu Jan 01 said:


> Double the rhythm guitar track so it's pumping out of both speakers equally. You may need to delay one side if it starts to phase. But, you may not.
> 
> run a compression scheme on the drums and bass like described here:
> 
> ...



Ok, so I think I get the concept with the compression (which I'm actually not doing at all on this). What is it exactly that the compression is going to accomplish?

The rhythm guitar is currently coming out of both speakers, using the stereo delay to make it seem like its coming from the right, did the same with the lead to make it seem like its coming from the left, but its still coming out both speakers at the same volume. So I'm not sure what you want me to do to it. Do you want me to just duplicate the track and have 2 of the exact same sound? what purpose does that have? (not trying to be a pain, just want to understand it so I can apply it better)


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 1, 2015)

oh and what would you change as far as the programing? I know the lead guitar needs some work at the breakdown at 2:24 some, but other than that I'm not sure what more I should (or can) do.


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 2, 2015)

Here is a soundcloud playlist

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/sets/ ... ompression

the first 2 are the bass and drum soloed with and without the changes, the 3rd is with the changes to bass and drums, but with the other instruments


----------



## José Herring (Jan 2, 2015)

Hmmm..sounds like you just slapped a compressor over the bass and drums, did you parallel compress at all?


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 2, 2015)

No, I didn't realize there was a difference, I'll go rewatch the video lol

I put a compressor on the drums and bass individually, then I had them go to a group channel where I put another compressor on them. The drums also already had some compression on each individual piece of the kit as I was using addicting drums and it has the ability to do some of that within the vst itself.


----------



## José Herring (Jan 2, 2015)

The trick is to do compression in stages so that no one compressor has to do the heavy lifting.

Do just a tiny bit on the track. If it has it in VST then take it off or don't put any on the track. Then put it in a group, do a little more compression on the group as well as putting a compressor on a fx channel and sending the group to the fx. That way the drums will pop out and be loud.

Look at the video again and it should clear it up.


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 3, 2015)

Alright I watched the video again, honestly, I'm really confused as to what I'm suppose to be doing. So this is what I did.

I left the compression on the various channels I had, and created another effects channel with compression on it, and then sent it back to the group channel. So this is what it looks like.

The drums have a little compression on it and outputs to a group channel with the bass in it as well, did the same to the bass. Then THAT channel is the one I'm doing the parallel compression on. Which is done by creating an effects channel with a compressor on it, very severally compressed. Then I have the group channel send to that effects channel. So at this point I have parallel compressed correct?

Now, what exactly is the goal with parallel compression, that might help me understand why I'm doing what I'm doing , and thus maybe grasp the concept a little better.

Here is a short clip with the bass and drums. 

Alright I watched the video again, honestly, I'm really confused as to what I'm suppose to be doing. So this is what I did.

I left the compression on the various channels I had, and created another effects channel with compression on it, and then sent it back to the group channel. So this is what it looks like.

The drums have a little compression on it and outputs to a group channel with the bass in it as well, did the same to the bass. Then THAT channel is the one I'm doing the parallel compression on. Which is done by creating an effects channel with a compressor on it, very severally compressed. Then I have the group channel send to that effects channel. So at this point I have parallel compressed correct?


Now, what exactly is the goal with parallel compression, that might help me understand why I'm doing what I'm doing , and thus maybe grasp the concept a little better. 

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/ccs-s ... r-compress


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 4, 2015)

Ive been messing around some with parallel compression (guitars as well as drums/bass) and re did some of the levels and stuff and this is what the song as a whole sounds like now. A lot better, but it still needs some work.

https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/ccs-better-mixed


----------



## José Herring (Jan 4, 2015)

The purpose of parallel compression is that you can blend the relatively clean track with a heavily compressed track and the added pump makes the drums pop.

The problem with your track is that the original drums are too compressed so you kill the dynamics straight out of the gate. So any parallel compression you do is moot because the original track is too squashed to get any benefit.

The other problem is that there seems to be a lack of snare so your drums aren't popping orchestration wise. Just a lot of dull thudding in the kick and too many cymbols.

So no amount of mix tricks is going to fix that. I would just start rebuilding the drums and start from scratch. That's one thing that I do all the time, is if I find myself relying too much on my mixing skills or lack of mixing skills, there's usually something else musically that's the problem like ineffective orchestration.


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 4, 2015)

Haha I was actually fighting with that snare earlier. I may go in and get rid of ALL the effects except eq within the vst itself. I think the actually writing is pretty solid on the drum part (and don't say that because I wrote it, I play drums, and analyzed a fair amount of stuff in this style, the drum part is pretty sterotypical, no reason its shouldn't be working) so maybe if I go in a wipe out all the compression within the program itself (It puts it individually on each things, snares,kick, hi hat, and toms, cymbals have overhead mics and a room mic).

I'll post back here when Ive changed that. Also, just wanted to say thanks for the help, Ive learned more about mixing out of this thread then I think I have in the last 3 months combined just trying to shift through youtube and find stuff.


----------



## José Herring (Jan 4, 2015)

If you feel the writing is secure then it must be that the compression your are using is obscuring the actual part. 

Use just a tad at the track level. Then I send the track to a parallel processor for a bit more compression. Then group it together and apply a heavy bit of compression on the group. I know the guy in the video groups bass and drums together. I generally try not to. But I rarely do music that would have bass and drums in combo in a rock style. I usually use this technique on just drums.


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 4, 2015)

Yea I went in and didn't realize how heavy the compression was on those drum samples. I went in, and it had a pretty freaking heavy compression so I made it just very light compression (less than 2 db thresh hold for most of them). It sounds much better now though I would still like to get a little more pop out of that snare. Also I'm starting to add vocals to it. Over the intro is just some spoken word (a psalm) and I'm hoping to make it sound a LOT better than it does now (may straight up re record it) as I'm trying to go for something in between these 2 sounds. 


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dr9hqzIE8g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saT6uTS779w&t=3m44s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saT6uTS779w&amp;t=3m44s)

I feel like I grasp the concept of parallel compression a little better now. Like I said, I also did it to the guitar tracks to help them pop as well, I think it works pretty well (but you are probably a better judge at that lol). Does it matter what compressor I use, Ive just been using the default compressor that came with cubase 7.5, haven't gotten any others (except one or 2 freeware, and I'm broke, so freewhere is it for me)

The spoken word in this you can either ignore or give advice, I just threw it on there because I'm wanting to get the vocals in, and I knew I wanted spoken word. I'll probably completely re record it as I'm not happy with some of the words, but I digress. I'm also probably going to add a few bass drops to help certain parts have a little more kick (like when everything comes in), though I want it to be subtle and non tacky (if its even possibly to do a bass drop non tacky) 

Here is what I have so far https://soundcloud.com/john-agnew/ccs-f ... with-voice


----------



## newbycomposer (Jan 4, 2015)

This is probably a better example of what I"m wanting the spoken word to sound like 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohXmIcCHT9o


----------



## 100khz (Jan 12, 2015)

josejherring @ Mon Dec 01 said:


> sketching makes a big difference over here. I went from writing in full score, to writing in DAW. Sketching before I get to my Daw has made a big difference. Even if the sketches are only that. At least it gives you time a way from your DAW to get your musical ideas together before you start tweaking patches.



thats a great piece of advice.


----------

