| Author
|
THE WRITING RECORDING MIXING PROCESS
|
Atherian
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
13
Posts :
51
Posted : Mar 12, 2008 04:47:13
|
Hey everyone ive been working at refining my production techniques with trance for the past year or so and since september ive been going to school for audio engineering and i can say that i have learnt a considerable amount about the nature of sound and the recording and mixing process and so on.. but as i have been experimenting with electronic music i have been running into a few situations that i was hoping some people here could shed some light on.
WIth most music the writing process is one thing, the recording process is another separate step,then the track is mixed separately. but i find myself with electronic music writing, recording, and mixing my track all at the same time as one single process. lately i have been finding the advantages that come with working with audio so i ahjve been creating allot of my tracks with samplers and only a few synth tracks.. i then bounce everything down to audio and then start mixing... i was just wondering what you guys do at this point
like for example do you mix the track then bounce each section down into loops then work on things from there?
or do you bounce the kick and the bass down together into a loop and mix it back into the track? that way you can get those cool glitch like transitions and intros by looping certain sections within the loop right before a change. its cool to hear those things happen when they arn't affecting other aspects of the track.. and sometimes its cool when the whole track has it happen.
i geuss there are a million ways to do it and theres definatly no wrong way as long as it sounds good.. its tough to commit to certain elements of the track and then find out later you want to change it but can't..
so if any of you guys have any tips or tricks of your own you wanna share that would be awsome
|
|
|
Suloo
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
87
Posts :
2822
Posted : Mar 12, 2008 06:29
|
Hm..i think everybody got its own way..depends on your setup..power of computer etc..personaly i like it to work as long as possible in midi and do audio edit fx at the end..i do mix while arrange..but i usualy make a break before..and listen to other music as well,to refresh my ears..but most things like drums and kick/bass i do immediatly..otherwise would make no sense to start a track with an unmixed kick/bass/drums  ..and yer..alway depends on the sound i want to integrate..like if i know how to make it sound better i just do it..makes more fun to work with a ruff mix..in the end i do a final one..
my advice would to always keep a dry version of your track(no fx,no eq,no compression etc..) saved seperately..like if you got new skills you can start fresh..
good luck!
 -------......-------...-..-..-..-.-.-.-.- |
|
|
|
TuK
TuK
Started Topics :
41
Posts :
228
Posted : Mar 12, 2008 09:26
|
i always have an audio track with a well produced
track so i can compare my mix anytime during the production. after i finish writing a section of the track i always bounce the midi to audio and then move on, i find that it really opens your creativity to work like that. the only tracks that stays midi all the way through is my bassline and drums but i think that will change in the future. about fx i usually bounce the midi with fx that are crutial for the sound to sound ok in the mix like a sound that must have delay or reverb and maybe some eq and then i finish working on it in the audio track.
|
|
|
|
Atherian
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
13
Posts :
51
Posted : Mar 13, 2008 01:49
|
|
cool guys thanks for the tips.. i hope some other people would like to share thier methods |
|
|
|
XuN
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
84
Posts :
499
Posted : Mar 13, 2008 02:13
|
I like to have my whole track in midi, as long as I am working with it. I want the option to change every little detail in my track from start till end of my production.
Usually I start with a kick and bass, and then add the rest of the elements. And I usually have the peak and the mid of the track complete, before I start putting it together to form a track.
That's alot of synths and alot of patterns, and it takes all my cpu (that's why i'm getting a new one  ). But as I said, I like it when I have total control of every aspect all the way.
www.xun.dk / myspace.com/xundk
!!PLUR!! |
|
|
|
bandarlog
Bandarlog
Started Topics :
44
Posts :
809
Posted : Mar 13, 2008 02:30
|
First produce everything untill you reach 100% cpu. Then I start to bounce (and save in previous versions with midi notations and synths so I can get back in time offcourse). I end up with a lot (!) of audiotracks and samples and almost no vsti left for synths. by the time the track is almost finnished all the cpu goes into vst's.
When I consider the track as finished (for the first mixdown) I bounce in seperate tracks. bass and kick (togeteher or seperated, depends on the track), snares, leads, efx, hihats, the rest.
Then I got 5-8 long audiotracks which I work with for the final mix. Just looking at them learns me alot about the track. Some volume/eq changes are made untill I have a balanced mix. At ANY point I can go back to the sound/midi notation that might cause a problem and fix it.
As for time spend:
80% producing while mixing untill I got the 5-8 long tracks
20% listening to them, going back to previous versions, fixing stuff and mixing down.
ps: I usually end up with 15 saved versions of 1 track. Most of the versions have the most considerable change in their name in case I should forget.
pps: another tip I forgot: When you bounce a synthlead, I usually create a ghost track with the midinotation. Doesn't consume cpu and you can use it to make other leads go into dialogue with the notation of your bounced lead. http://www.soundcloud.com/bandarlog
http://www.ektoplazm.com/free-music/bandarlog-memoirs-of-the-moment |
|
|
|
Atherian
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
13
Posts :
51
Posted : Mar 13, 2008 04:03
|
|
awsome dude that definatly helps allot.. hey another question... when your bouncing down your effects and leads and so on.. lets say you have a reverb on the lead is it better to bounce the lead to a audio file, bus the new audio track to the reverb and then boucne that down.. or just bounce the reverb when the input is still the actual synth? |
|
|
|
bandarlog
Bandarlog
Started Topics :
44
Posts :
809
Posted : Mar 13, 2008 14:19
|
It should be the same result in the end. But I tend to produce with reverbs and sometimes I turn off the reverb before bouncing in order to put the or a reverb back on the audiotrack. This has some advantages:
If you're writing let's say a lead in an early stage of your production, a bit more reverb might sound sweet. Later on when more sounds (and even more leads) are added, you might regret the fact that you gave it 'that' much reverb.
Another thing is that when you're procuing and a lot of cpu hogs are playing, you might not want to use the fattest reverb (eating up lots of % of your cpu). If you bounced without reverb, you can end up using the fattest reverbs on everything (that's what I explained earlier: end up with only (fat) vst's, no vsti's left). But it all depends on the song/sound/routing of efx offcourse.
ps: This only applies for reverbs. In my musical style/workflow and method of producing I couldn't imagine bouncing down or using complete dry channels. Lots of sounds go to lots of sendchannels with heaps of efxroutings to create interesting efx. It's always a balance exercise with clearness as a goal. I pay special attention to two things when bouncing: the amount of distortion and the amount of reverb that you might regret later on. These two could add noise esepcially in combination with other sounds. http://www.soundcloud.com/bandarlog
http://www.ektoplazm.com/free-music/bandarlog-memoirs-of-the-moment |
|
|
|
MishaCore
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
60
Posted : Mar 14, 2008 00:32
|
ok so this thread made me think, are there actually physical differences in terms of sound between a midi channel(equed, compressed, fx processed or whatever) and the same channel processed after bouncing it?
what concerns me is the colour of the mix, not cpu usages or creativity factors. |
|
|
|
Suloo
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
87
Posts :
2822
Posted : Mar 14, 2008 01:02
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-03-14 00:32, MishaCore wrote:
ok so this thread made me think, are there actually physical differences in terms of sound between a midi channel(equed, compressed, fx processed or whatever) and the same channel processed after bouncing it?
what concerns me is the colour of the mix, not cpu usages or creativity factors.
|
|
no their should be no difference at all..but if you got a modulated sound it might sound a bit different each time you play the part..so to fix a sound you bounce it out..or even some arpeggios don`t start at the beginning if you trigger it again..so it might sound out of sync..then bouncing is even the way..or if you want definatly always the same attack behavior and no overlapping frequencies in your bass for example..then bouncing the single notes and edit them is even a good way..and sure offline edit in single regions of a track for example is even nice with audio..so there are benefits of both worlds..depends of what your after..
good luck!
-------......-------...-..-..-..-.-.-.-.- |
|
|
|
MishaCore
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
60
Posted : Mar 14, 2008 01:40
|
|
thanx Mtz Mtzz. |
|
|
|
Atherian
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
13
Posts :
51
Posted : Mar 14, 2008 05:09
|
|
one other element that will make a difference between an audio track verse a midi track is volume automation will change the velocity of a midi track when bringing it up or down in a fade while doing volume automation with an actual audio file will only change the level of the signal and not manipulate its texture.. its a subtle difference but i think all volume automations should be done to audio and not midi unless your looking for that effect specifically... generally it will just sound tighter i find with audio |
|
|
|
Elad
Tsabeat/Sattel Battle
Started Topics :
158
Posts :
5306
Posted : Mar 14, 2008 06:55
|
its less quality baisicly since the "pixels" are exporting twice , meens that there is some areas doesnt perfectly match - this will lower quality in theory.
realistic , i dont hear that its so bad , and also wouldnt quit my audio manipulation
www.sattelbattle.com
http://yoavweinberg.weebly.com/ |
|
|
|
