# Achieving greater warmth in the sound of digital mockups?



## jc5 (Feb 3, 2007)

My poor tired ears have started to grow sick of the frequently tinny 'canned' sound of sampled music performances... I do all right in my post pro, but certainly I wouldn't claim to be a specialist mastering engineer by any means.

Are there any tricks/tips that anyone can recommend to reduce that often sterile tinny tinge? EQing rarely gives me the results I seek, though I suspect that is what many would recommend. Are there any plugins that specifically could help in this department?

Sadly, and I know I'm not the first to note this, convolution reverbs seem to add to this particular problem - I know they do for me.. the definition of space they give is wonderful, but there is frequently this sound effect of a 'thinning' and _tinning_ of the sound...

I can only wonder if I've expressed myself adequately... but I look forward to all discussion that may ensue. :smile:


----------



## Frederick Russ (Feb 3, 2007)

Aside from investing in a lot of analog gear, you could check out some of PSP virtual instrument titles. Used sparingly, you could warm up the digital chill using PSP Saturator (emulates the old analog tape saturation) and PSP Pressor (relatively transparent compressor but adds some analog warmth). These are fun to work with and are far less expensive than their analog counterparts but please note - just a little does a lot, and its easy to do too much and ruin the stew.


----------



## Dr.Quest (Feb 3, 2007)

So what libraries are you using? Since I've invested in Gold XP and SAM's as well as several other modern Sample Libraries I don't think I would discribe any as tinny. They can always do with a little warmth and the PSP stuff is great for that. What are you experiencing?
J


----------



## Toddk (Feb 3, 2007)

I second the PSP plugs. I actually couldnt live without them for drum mixes
using them with DKFH Superior/ w Custom and Vintage.
But they work on anything.

Vintage Warmer is another one you would like, in addition to the Mix Pack
mentioned prior.
TK


----------



## david robinson (Feb 3, 2007)

good music is about commitment.

sample libs have only the commitment that was recorded at that time.

so, they'll work on some material because the commitment matches.

more often than not, they don't match.

as far as adding plugins, all you are really doing is warming up left overs that should have been tossed out yonks ago. (warmed up non-commitment)

i use sample libs all the time but i'm not that dumb that i think they replace a really nice orchestra at any time soon.

i've heard 78 rpm shellac's with more "warmth".


----------



## choir (Feb 4, 2007)

Antares Tube might be useful 
But there are many ways to achieve good wamth in the sound, I think it all depands on the project in my opinion.


----------



## KeviD (Feb 4, 2007)

On the issue of convolution reverb, I find that whilst Wizoo's W2 isn't the most realistic sounding, IMO it's the warmest sounding by far.

Kev


----------



## Niah (Feb 4, 2007)

This is an excellent topic jc5.

It has been one of my main concerns since I got involved in making music on the pc, making things more phat warm and closer to a real recording.

Unfortunately sample libs and devs suck the life out of samples with noise reduction and such which only make our lives much harder. (I remember that in the old days even a simple piano patch was fatter and warmer than the now super piano libs although not as complex of course).

Anyway I'm not going to give you any EQ/plugin advice as most of the posters have already give you great input on that, but I am picking up where Doc Quest left off, which is the choice of libs. (This is crucial IMO)

I try to use the most out of my project sam sounds as they are the best sounding and warmer of my template (although they could still sound even warmer if they didn't used noise reduction ). Then I use alot of spectrasonics products which are phat phat phat to double sections or simple as post-production tools. You can use alot of atmosphere, distorted reality or even trilogy underneath the score and still sound orchestral and not modern/hybrid. You can also use alot of RMX to make things more robust in the perc section but sill sounding conventional.
EWQL also is good choice since all their products are very fat and warm IMO, I don't have their orchestral sets but I use alot of colossus pacthes as well as RA. Yes RA, you can use lots of RA underneath the music and still sound orchestral and not ethnic. For instance most of the times I hate the fact that a flute is so thin, so I pickup some woods in RA that give right away not only a warmer sound but also some expressiveness.

Add that to some great plugins and it's all my bag of tricks in terms of production.

But of course nothing beats and already fat natural recorded lib with no noise redux thingy !


----------



## david robinson (Feb 4, 2007)

Dr Quest, your comment is duly noted, sir.

i've done real orch recording for forty years.

samples don't now and never will come close.

samples libs are great for people who cannnot afford the real thing.

that, unfortunately, still doesn't make them the next J Goldsmith.

btw, i like posters to use there real names, it sorta lets me know i'm "talking" to a real person.

this forum, although there are some good souls here, seems to be mainly set up to sell people sample libs.


----------



## Toddk (Feb 4, 2007)

david robinson @ Sun Feb 04 said:


> Dr Quest, your comment is duly noted, sir.
> 
> i've done real orch recording for forty years.


----------



## david robinson (Feb 4, 2007)

it'd would be very benefitial if the forum actually helped people find work.
then you'd really have somrthing here. david robinson.


----------



## Dr.Quest (Feb 4, 2007)

David,
I think you'll find quite a variety of interesting people here, many of which are working composers and sound designers and many that would like to be. It's a great place to share ideas and discuss things that we might want to make better. We all have something to say and we all benefit by listening as well.
Synthetic,
I've used the Logic Match EQ and Firium from Elemental Audio now RND. Both are interesting and used with a delicate hand can be very good for a mix. I've used it to better match other strings to Gold strings.
Cheers,
Jamie





0


----------



## david robinson (Feb 4, 2007)

i'd really like to see something more constructive, that's all, as i think there are some brilliant minds at work here.

my goal has and always will be excellence in art, but i'm very busy creating, so i find listening to others works a pleasure that i cannot afford right now.
(it's a guilty pleasure).

cheers, and keep the music coming.


----------



## bryla (Feb 5, 2007)

depending on the quality of ones sample libraries (mine are not that great (.,.... jam packs)...) I would (always) create a sum buss for all ensembles - eg. strings/brass playing out chords - with a LITTLE bit of chorus or what I prefer Logic's build-in "Ensemble" plugin. Ensemble creates a non-shifting pitch differences as opposed to chorus that shifts in time, and makes it sound like one trumpet player is first lower then higher...

Ensemble-like plug-ins make them sound more human-like


----------



## Hannes_F (Feb 5, 2007)

synthetic @ Mon Feb 05 said:


> I think I can guess Dr. Quest's name by his sig, but I'm pretty smart. Of course we'd rather write for live players. I'm sure that Ferraris are really cool, too, but that doesn't help me make my stuff sound better.
> 
> Someone just told me about Match EQ in Logic. Roger Nichols Digital sells a similar plug-in for other DAWs, can't remember the name. Match EQ lets you play a piece in, say a sweet love cue or an action cue that you think sounds good. Then you save that as a preset and apply it to the master out of your own mix (B). The EQ then does some (really weird!) EQ curves to make B sound more like A. I haven't tried it yet, but this guy said "it gets rid of that synthy buildup you hear with samples." Might be a cool thing to try on a mix, or even to "master" your demo reel or final recordings.



For a cheap alternative match EQ look at www.elevayta.com. I believe the last time I worked ò®Ê   P¬®Ê   P¬®Ê   P¬ ®Ê   P¬!®Ê   P¬"®Ê   P¬#®Ê   P¬$®Ê   P¬%®Ê   P¬&®Ê   P¬'®Ê   P¬(®Ê   P¬)®Ê   P¬*®Ê   P¬+®Ê   P¬,®Ê   P¬-®Ê   P¬.®Ê   P¬/®Ê   P¬0®Ê


----------



## Rob Elliott (Feb 5, 2007)

KeviD @ Sun Feb 04 said:


> On the issue of convolution reverb, I find that whilst Wizoo's W2 isn't the most realistic sounding, IMO it's the warmest sounding by far.
> 
> Kev




I have to agree with Kev on this. I bought W2 just to bridge the gap for me on VSL until MIR is a reality. Using the 'film Soundstage' IR - it really has a warmer sound than most of what I have tried out.

Also Voxengo's 'Warmifier' may do the trick (very good price points). Although to be honest it adds just a little too much 'distortion' for my likes. Of course I probably 'poured the whole bottle of salt' on it - need to go back and season to taste with a little more tast :oops: 


Rob


----------



## atmajian (Mar 3, 2007)

Well, I'll probably get banned when I now say that I'm one of the very few people around who never applied any mixing or mastering to their mockups. I was always too afraid that it would make samples sound even less realistic and take them off the texture I created, and they were just mockups anyway. I read all the posts and I'm just wondering - what are your thoughts on IK's T-RackS in comparison to the above mentioned PSP pack? I read a lot of comments saying that T-RackS makes sounds very warm too and that it's many people's IK favorite.

OT: Is there an ignore option on this forum?


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Mar 3, 2007)

synthetic @ Mon Feb 05 said:


> I think I can guess Dr. Quest's name by his sig, but I'm pretty smart. Of course we'd rather write for live players. I'm sure that Ferraris are really cool, too, but that doesn't help me make my stuff sound better.
> 
> Someone just told me about Match EQ in Logic. Roger Nichols Digital sells a similar plug-in for other DAWs, can't remember the name. Match EQ lets you play a piece in, say a sweet love cue or an action cue that you think sounds good. Then you save that as a preset and apply it to the master out of your own mix (B). The EQ then does some (really weird!) EQ curves to make B sound more like A. I haven't tried it yet, but this guy said "it gets rid of that synthy buildup you hear with samples." Might be a cool thing to try on a mix, or even to "master" your demo reel or final recordings.



Har-Bal is a similar EQ-"matcher". I haven't tested it yet, but last week I did some matching "by hand and eye": looking at spectrums of parts of my mixes that ressemble the orchestration and dynamics of commercial tracks and then adjusting a master EQ contour. It worked very well and improved the overall sound.

BTW: if you do this use uncompressed PCM files from commercial CD's, NEVER use Mp3 files, I found quite some differences even with high quality settings for the Mp3's.

I'm still stuck on whether Linear Phase is better for orchestral or if Minimum Phase is better - I need some more eartraining for this. I have the same with the Waves Q and RenEQ plugins for individual tracks. Is the "vintage" sound of the RenEQ's better at giving a slightly analog hint to individual instrument groups or does orchestral mixing require the more accurate Waves Q plugins?


----------



## david robinson (Mar 3, 2007)

greater "warmth"?

stop using bookshelf monitors, and start listening thru larger speakers that can reproduce the cricital detail in the lower mids and the attendant dynamic range.
listen in a room big enough to accurately reproduce these frequencies without phase problems, and you're off to a good start.
stop living in apartment blocks and move to the countery and get a big house to do this.
i know i'm being pedantic , but, i also know this works.

little monitors sound "little". great as a translation device but serious work........?

David R.


----------



## atmajian (Mar 3, 2007)

Like I said, is there an ignore option here?


----------



## Synesthesia (Mar 3, 2007)

david robinson @ Sat Mar 03 said:


> greater "warmth"?
> 
> stop using bookshelf monitors, and start listening thru larger speakers that can reproduce the cricital detail in the lower mids and the attendant dynamic range.
> listen in a room big enough to accurately reproduce these frequencies without phase problems, and you're off to a good start.
> ...



Sure, thats why all the great mix engineers work mainly on small monitors through 98% of the mix (hello NS10s) and only do final checks on the big 'flattering' studio monitors.

P
:mrgreen:


----------



## david robinson (Mar 4, 2007)

Synesthesia @ Sun Mar 04 said:


> david robinson @ Sat Mar 03 said:
> 
> 
> > greater "warmth"?
> ...



..........and i suppose when i enter a cinema to watch the "latest and greatest" movie extravaganza i'm listening to the sound track thru "NS-10"'s as well?

sorry, in my experience, these speaker types are only useful for "translation".
all sound to image studio's i've worked in at least try to simulate the cinema experience with nowadays 5.1 or better, and the room size is at least 20x30x40 feet!

if you can't afford this type of rig, that's your problem, and i certainly wouldn't accept mixes done on NS-10s, if it were my responsibility to deliver the ST.
mix on the toys at your peril.


----------



## Marsdy (Mar 4, 2007)

david robinson @ Mon 05 Feb said:


> Dr Quest, your comment is duly noted, sir.
> 
> i've done real orch recording for forty years.
> 
> ...



Why don't you f*** off then?


----------



## david robinson (Mar 4, 2007)

[quote:cò¹ƒ   Sjý¹ƒ   Sjþ¹ƒ   Sjÿ¹ƒ   Sk ¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk	¹ƒ   Sk
¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk ¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk¹ƒ   Sk ¹ƒ   Sk!¹ƒ   Sk"¹ƒ   Sk#¹ƒ   Sk$¹ƒ   Sk%¹ƒ   Sk&¹ƒ   Sk'¹ƒ   Sk(¹ƒ   Sk)¹ƒ   Sk*¹ƒ   Sk+¹ƒ   Sk,¹ƒ   Sk-¹ƒ   Sk.¹ƒ   Sk/¹ƒ   Sk0¹ƒ   Sk1¹ƒ   Sk2¹ƒ   Sk3¹ƒ   Sk4¹ƒ   Sk5¹ƒ   Sk6¹ƒ   Sk7¹ƒ   Sk8¹ƒ   Sk9¹ƒ   Sk:¹ƒ   Sk;¹ƒ   Sk<¹ƒ   Sk=¹ƒ   Sk>¹ƒ   Sk?¹ƒ   [email protected]¹ƒ   SkA¹ƒ   SkB¹ƒ   SkC¹ƒ   SkD¹ƒ   SkE¹ƒ   SkF¹ƒ   SkG¹ƒ   SkH¹ƒ   SkI¹ƒ   SkJ¹ƒ   SkK¹ƒ   SkL¹ƒ   SkM¹ƒ   SkN¹ƒ   SkO¹ƒ   SkP¹ƒ   SkQ¹„   SkR¹„   SkS¹„   SkT¹„   SkU¹„   SkV¹„   SkW¹„   SkX¹„   SkY¹„   SkZ¹„   Sk[¹„   Sk\¹„   Sk]¹„   Sk^¹„   Sk_¹„   Sk`¹„   Ska¹„   Skb¹„   Skc¹„   Skd¹„   Ske¹„   Skf¹„   Skg¹„   Skh¹„   Ski¹„   Skj¹„   Skk¹„   Skl              ò¹„   Skn¹„   Sko¹„   Skp¹„   Skq¹„   Skr¹„   Sks¹„   Skt¹„   Sku¹„   Skv¹„   Skw¹„   Skx¹„   Sky¹„   Skz¹„   Sk{¹„   Sk|¹„   Sk}¹„   Sk~¹„   Sk¹„   Sk€¹„   Sk¹…   Sk‚¹…   Skƒ¹…   Sk„¹…   Sk…¹…   Sk†¹…   Sk‡¹…   Skˆ¹…   Sk‰¹…   SkŠ¹…   Sk‹¹…   SkŒ¹…   Sk¹…   SkŽ¹…   Sk¹…   Sk¹…   Sk‘¹…   Sk’¹…   Sk“¹…   Sk”¹…   Sk•¹…   Sk–¹…   Sk—¹…   Sk˜¹…   Sk™¹…   Skš¹…   Sk›¹…   Skœ¹…   Sk¹…   Skž¹…   SkŸ¹…   Sk ¹…   Sk¡¹…   Sk¢¹…   Sk£¹…   Sk¤¹…   Sk¥¹…   Sk¦¹…   Sk§¹…   Sk¨¹…   Sk©¹…   Skª¹…   Sk«¹…   Sk¬¹…   Sk­¹…   Sk®¹…   Sk¯¹…   Sk°¹…   Sk±¹…   Sk²¹…   Sk³¹


----------



## david robinson (Mar 4, 2007)

Marsdy @ Sun Mar 04 said:


> david robinson @ Mon 05 Feb said:
> 
> 
> > Dr Quest, your comment is duly noted, sir.
> ...



So you agree with me then.


----------



## atmajian (Mar 4, 2007)

Someone please tell me if there's an ignore option here.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Mar 4, 2007)

Okay,

Can everyone now try to cool down?

Please?

This "discussion" is going nowhere this way, please refrain from more strong language and don't make the moderators put on a lock on it...


----------



## Aaron Sapp (Mar 4, 2007)

Hey David,

While I greatly respect your forty years of orchestral recording experience, and even though you may be right in these discussions regarding proper mixing techniques, I'd have to agree with Paul. Obviously, most of us cannot afford to buy a house that accomodates the ideal mixing enviroment, so we have to work with what we got. It doesn't help anyone to provide solutions that you know are well beyond impractical for the average composer - working or otherwise. 

I've seen posts like this from you before. It's such a shame that for someone with so much to offer, you contribute little. A little humility goes a long way. 

As the maxim goes, "*when the rice plant grows taller, it bows...*"


----------



## atmajian (Mar 4, 2007)

Peter Roos @ Sun Mar 04 said:


> Okay,
> 
> Can everyone now try to cool down?
> 
> ...



With all due respect, the only posts you should be editing are David Robinson's.

There is one of his kind on every music forum I've ever been to and by common sense these kinds of posts should be considered spam.

If his wants he is free to open a 'www.let's-bash-samples-and-everyone-who-doesn't-hate-them.com* and he will have plenty of members, I'm sure.

In the meantime, since there is obviously no ignore option here, we're all forced to close our eyes when scrolling down.

It says: 

v.i. control forum
Musicians helping Musicians


----------



## Marsdy (Mar 4, 2007)

Well I quite like the idea of VI Pro having it's very own Houston type dickhead.

It will keep me entertained that's for sure.

Did he f*** off or what?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Mar 4, 2007)

Hey David Robinson,

What are you doing here anyways?

tic, toc, tic, toc, tic, toc, tic.............. ~o)


----------



## Alex W (Mar 4, 2007)

I find that the right usage of reverb on orchestal samples goes a long way to giving some warmth - I usually roll off the highs on a nice big warm hall preset to about 2-4khz, and be careful of the lower mids (250hz - 750hz say) in the various sections. In fact, I almost always end up cutting some out of around the 250-450 range - it just seems to clear up the mix so much. It depends on what samples you're using too though, but the basics to warmth are reverb and good EQ I believe.


----------



## Synesthesia (Mar 5, 2007)

Guys,

Just to clarify, I edited myself - I wasn't edited by anyone else! (That doesn't happen here..)

I decided my comment, while it made me feel better, wasn't particularly edifying regarding the topic under discussion. :mrgreen: 

I should remember...

Dont feed the troll.

:twisted: 

Cheers!

Paul


----------



## Synesthesia (Mar 5, 2007)

Actually, regarding the topic.

I use a fair amount of DAD Tape/Valve, and McDSP Ananlog Channel 1 sometimes on the mix bus and sometimes on the channel tracks. 

DAD adds a nice amount of low end saturation and extra harmonic fuzziness (in a nice way) and 'thickness' to the tracks, while McDSP adds detail and can simulate the behaviour of Neve or SSL characteristics compression and drive wise.

I also use the Waves SSL bundle - it adds a certain mojo even if you dont dial in that SSL eq or mixbuss compressor sound.

Failing that, some extra ideas.

Run a few tracks out into your room and record back in to the session through some analog gear - I use a Focusrite Red 3, a Urei blackface 1176 and various other cheaper bits, they can all add nice character and help avoid the 'all disk' harshness.

Getting some nice air into a track is always good. If your recording room is not fantastic in terms of acoustic treatment, use a SE Reflexion filter.

I have 8 realtraps and a reflexion filter and I can record great sounding tracks in non-ideal room.

Its all extra effort, but it all adds up,

cheers,

Paul o-[][]-o


----------



## atmajian (Mar 5, 2007)

Thanks for all your comments, guys. But, has anyone tried IK's T-RackS and can anyone tell me their impressions on how it compares to, for instance, Waves SSL 4000 or PSP?

Thanx.


----------



## Niah (Mar 5, 2007)

Some really good advices here, keep 'em coming guys.


----------



## Synesthesia (Mar 5, 2007)

atmajian @ Mon Mar 05 said:


> Thanks for all your comments, guys. But, has anyone tried IK's T-RackS and can anyone tell me their impressions on how it compares to, for instance, Waves SSL 4000 or PSP?
> 
> Thanx.



I can cp T racks and Waves SSL. They are wholely different beasts.

T Racks is nice for doing some mastering on a final mix, and characteristically sounds quite round and full, never used it for orchestral but it is good for beats oriented stuff - for a certain sound.

Waves SSL is both a channel eq/comp and a master buss comp - and has the fierce SSL sound, you can dial in a giant amount of brutal eq and the compression is like being whacked in the face with a 4x2.

Of course you can use it judicously, but its like the polar opposite of the T Racks sound. 

Personally I love the SSL sound and the Waves set does it really well, but its good to use judicously in orchestral stuff, it can bring out detail and brighten up parts really nicely.

Cheers,
\
Paul


----------



## edafe96 (Mar 6, 2007)

I recently found a very nice PlugIn for creating subtle "analogue" warmth.

It´s called ColorTone Free and yes: it is indeed free! 
You need to have the pluggo-runtime installed, then it runs without problems.

In case you want to check it out, here is the download link:

http://www.tritonedigital.com/index.php?cPath=25

Give it a try, I use it nearly on every production

Greetz

Tino


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Mar 6, 2007)

PSP Neon HR has had a very favorable review in SoundOnSound - I have had an opportunity to have a mix of mine "remastered" with it and it sounds sooo much better than Waves' Linear Phase stuff (which is probably too neutral). It's not really meant for adding "warmth" but I am quite sure it can be done with Neon HR. If not for warmth, you can use it to add so much clarity and openness to your mix that you seriously will want to go back to the tracking phase to fix things you never heard before! This is absolutely number one on my must have list!


----------



## jc5 (Mar 6, 2007)

Sorry for having disappeared from the thread that I started (was seriously swamped the last little while), but I'm glad to see some healthy discussion ensued. :wink: 

Much useful advice here, much of which I'm going to have to try out before returning to comment.

Ps.
The new emoticons are cute, heh o-[][]-o


----------

