The Song Fight Bulletin Board

This is a bit of self promotion, but hopefully some Songfighters will find the information useful:

http://www.hometracked.com/2006/12/22/1 ... ecordings/

In short, there are (at least) 10 telltale signs that a recording was made by a novice:

• Too much bass
  Poor drum levels
  Clashing instruments
  Uneven vocals
  Overused reverb
  Cheap reverb
  “Fake” drums
  Muddy, indistinct vocals
  Too much "bad" room sound
  Timing problems

Learn how to recognize these, and your own recordings will improve.

deshead wrote: Clashing instruments
Uneven vocals
Overused reverb
Cheap reverb
“Fake” drums
Muddy, indistinct vocals
Too much "bad" room sound
Timing problems

Maybe these are a problem if you're producing Green Day or something. These all sound like perfectly reasonable stylistic choices to me. If I saw a song described with those terms I would listen to it.

Heh.

(Though FTR, I didn't actually say they're a "problem." Just that, in general, songs with these traits tend to sound amateur ... If amateur is what you're going for, great. But if you're specifically after a more professional sound, you'll get better results without mud and timing errors in your recordings.)

jute gyte wrote:

deshead wrote: Clashing instruments
Uneven vocals
Overused reverb
Cheap reverb
“Fake” drums
Muddy, indistinct vocals
Too much "bad" room sound
Timing problems

Maybe these are a problem if you're producing Green Day or something. These all sound like perfectly reasonable stylistic choices to me. If I saw a song described with those terms I would listen to it.

Yeah, but you can tell the difference between intentional and unintentional applications of the above features. I think that what deshead was trying to say was that if your songs are sounding "unprofessional" and you don't know what to do to make them sound more "professional", then try rolling back the bass on all the instruments except the bass guitar, etc etc. I haven't read his article, but his top 10 seems reasonably accurate.

With the exception of "Fake" drums, of course. Even the pros use "Fake" drums sometimes.

jute gyte wrote:Maybe these are a problem if you're producing Green Day or something. These all sound like perfectly reasonable stylistic choices to me. If I saw a song described with those terms I would listen to it.

Deshead's article, paragraph 2:

"Many competent engineers produce lo-fi or distorted mixes on purpose, when it suits the song. Rather, amateur recordings tend to share some key traits, telltale signs that the mixing and recording are the work of a novice."

There's a difference between a "stylistic choice" and the happenstance from inexperience. I think the linked article makes that clear (and gives some pretty useful recording advice in the process), don't you?

Ya, exactly.

stylonpilson wrote:With the exception of "Fake" drums, of course. Even the pros use "Fake" drums sometimes.

More specifically, it's "obviously-programmed drums attempting to pass as live drums." Fake drums by themselves are fine (especially in electronic music.) But the heavily-quantized, mono-sample drum loop that you're trying to pass off a real drums just makes you sound like a newb.

deshead wrote:Ya, exactly.

stylonpilson wrote:With the exception of "Fake" drums, of course. Even the pros use "Fake" drums sometimes.

More specifically, it's "obviously-programmed drums attempting to pass as live drums." Fake drums by themselves are fine (especially in electronic music.) But the heavily-quantized, mono-sample drum loop that you're trying to pass off a real drums just makes you sound like a newb.

Funny you should mention that, because that is one of my current issues.

Circumstances give me a couple of options as far as drums are required - I've got a Yamaha midi kit which is currently dismantled in the garage and a pain to set up whenever I want to use it. My other option is Hydrogen, a software sequencer which allows you to set the velocity of each drum stroke, and tweak a slider to humanise the timings.

I used Hydrogen on my entry for Glutton - what are your thoughts?

Excellent article, Deshead! The comments about reverb made me wonder if (pop) professionals use natural reverb anymore? A mic at the mouth and one at the back of the big, stone room?

I remember my old 4-track days, I knew what kind of sound I could get by recording things in each room of my house. Bathroom was always tempting, but only rarely a good idea. Without pedals and before computer-recording, I rarely tried to dull the ambience out of the sound entirely. The world was my effects rack!

I gotta get that back.

jute gyte wrote:Maybe these are a problem if you're producing Green Day or something. These all sound like perfectly reasonable stylistic choices to me. If I saw a song described with those terms I would listen to it.

The referenced article makes clear arguments and sets the context around each point and offers links to further articles/discussions to make it even more clear. Responding like this seems a little...amateurish.

stylonpilson wrote:I used Hydrogen on my entry for Glutton - what are your thoughts?

It sounds good (though the drums could definitely be louder.)

I'd humanize the velocity of the snare drum a bit more. The snare is the most consistent sound in your mix, and for realism, it should vary a good deal. I find a believable snare track will range over about 20 midi values (typically from 95 to 115,) with the odd rim shot thrown in for accent.

Do you have the ability to use a positional or multi-layered sample? That is, a sample that actually sounds different, rather than just louder or quieter, depending on how hard the drum is "hit".

Mostess wrote:Excellent article, Deshead!

Thanks very much!

Mostess wrote:The comments about reverb made me wonder if (pop) professionals use natural reverb anymore? A mic at the mouth and one at the back of the big, stone room?

For drums, definitely .. But I think you're right about vocals. The trend seems to be for dry "vocal booth" tracks, and a hint of digital reverb.

One exception that springs to mind is Bright Eyes "Wide Awake .." It sounds like you're sitting in the middle of the room with him. I find it's most obvious on the ess's .. Digital reverb is really sensitive to sibilance, where a natural room sound accents the body more.

Of course, it's not really a "pop" album, so there's that.

Each of those describe or have described my music. Especially the heavy reverb in my early songs, bad fake drums, bad drum levels, etc. I think that you might want to add clipping to that list. Every time I hear a song with the levels clipping, I assume it's very amateur, even more so than me.

Des, what's your process for sequenced/programmed/"fake" drums when you use them? They're something I've been grappling with for years and I've just gotten fairly complacent about them and have stopped trying to do them better. Ultimately I would like to be able to actually play drums, but that's not going to happen any time soon. Recently I've started just avoiding them and focusing on genres where full kit drums aren't really necessary, and light hand percussion can carry the beat sufficiently.

Anyway, I use Reason, so I don't have the multiple sample thing happening, which sucks. I'm thinking I should instead use Battery or BFD or something. What drum sampler you use? And what samples do you use?

I play the drums by hand on a keyboard primarily, and I try to think like a drummer, even though I'm not a drummer. I try to make sure the velocities of the hi-hat, cymbals, and snare aren't just 100% all the time, of course. Still, I'm not a drummer. Usually I quantize things since my rhythm just isn't good enough to get away with not doing that. Generally my patience for hand editing the MIDI to make sure that the velocity and timing are "human" enough is limited, especially during a SongFight! How do you create and edit the MIDI for you sequenced drums?

Great article, by the way. It ought to be required reading for all SongFight! participants! Excellent assortment of links to other very informative articles in there, too. Could you add an addendum about direct recorded acoustic guitar, too?

I'd like to make two points:

1 If you're not being paid for it, you're an amateur. If you are, you're not. Calling a response on a message board amateurish doesn't help the discussion any.

2 It's important to distinguish between useful advice and dogma - what's good for one genre is not necessarily good for another, and I don't feel the linked article was particularly good at pointing that out.

I now await a dogpiling like the one I got last time I dared disagree with deshead's mixing advice.

obscurity wrote: 1 If you're not being paid for it, you're an amateur. If you are, you're not. Calling a response on a message board amateurish doesn't help the discussion any.

Strictly speaking, yes. But come on, obs. I think we can all agree that the terms "amateur" and "professional" can be used to describe gradations of quality, can't we?

Look, I'm kind of an innocent bystander here, just lurking. And I haven't read the article yet. But it seems to me that the minute deshead offered some advice (which I gather some people will find useful), people immediately logged on to berate him as if he would ever be so fucking arrogant as to post a link to an article. What an outrage!

frankie big face wrote: But it seems to me that the minute deshead offered some advice (which I gather some people will find useful), people immediately logged on to berate him as if he would ever be so fucking arrogant as to post a link to an article. What an outrage!

Maybe my perception is coloured here, but it looked to me like people were berating jute for disagreeing with deshead's article. I didn't notice anyone berating deshead anywhere. I happened to pretty much agree with what jute said, and felt he was being treated unfairly, so posted to point that out.

But I have a long history of being unable to express myself clearly in threads like this on here, so I think I should just learn to keep my gob shut.

obscurity wrote: it looked to me like people were berating jute for disagreeing with deshead's article.

For the record, I was not berating jute for disagreeing with the article. He and the article actually agree on the point he made. Jute seemed unaware of that. Which is kind of funny, and worth a little berating, donchya think?

And, hey, ease up on the reverb, obs! (joke).

obscurity wrote: But I have a long history of being unable to express myself clearly in threads like this on here, so I think I should just learn to keep my gob shut.

Nah, it's probably just me being overly sensitive.

The internet is both awesome and terrible for communication. On the plus side, I get to have conversations with cool people from Nottingham, UK; on the negative, no matter how hard we try, we're always misunderstood by each other!

I personally can never get enough advice. I love checking out articles like this to see if it's telling me something that I don't already know. Even if I only like or use 1%, I feel I've evolved a little more. Recording comes down to how many tricks or techniques you have in your bag. And by tricks, I don't mean just sitting at the mixing console with effect at hand. There are so many different ways to mic your equipment, etc etc. The uneven vocals part of the above article is something I need to pay a lot more attention to, amongst other things. But as stated, different types of music need different techniques.
I for one love live rock. I like the natural sounds that instruments make before they are all cleaned up in the studio, so I work twice as hard to maintain those sounds when I record and mix. Not everyone will agree with my techniques, but that's ok too. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel or change the world. I'm just making music and recording it in my vision.
This weeks Sunspot entry is a good example. The guy that was teaching me how to use Pro Tools as we were recording my acoustic piece, wanted to keep pulling my finger sliding noise from my strings out. It sounded so sterile I told him to leave it alone and let it be what it is. This made him cringe, but made me happy. I'm sure if it's too over baring I'll hear it in the reviews. But anyway, that's just how I feel about recording, keep it real. And yes, I know my song fight entries all have a drum machine, but you have to admit, I program them with typical mistakes to achieve a live feel.
Damn, I need to cut back on my coffee intake.

I'm always trying to improve my recording abilities. I think I do a decent job with what I got. Our bass player wants to spend out of pocket for real studio time while we have no money and a decent recording set up. Hurts my feelings honestly. I think 'tips' can make all the difference in a good demo and I will try to utilize ANYTHING to make myself sound more 'professional' which does not necessarily equal Green Day's 'American Idiot' record. (which is produced to the 9's I might add)

lunkhead, your drum programming sounds great to my ears.

here's a fine example.


and as an unbiased lurker, i'd say des was being helpful for posting the article and JG was a bit stand-offish (a very small bit) with his response, but des took it in stride and laughed it off. everyone else seems to have taken more offense than the parties originally involved, but remember, this is songfight!

and des, your helpful posts are always welcome dude. totally on point to this thread. and of course it turns into a minor bitch session about opinions.

Nowadays, if you have a decent recording setup, there are only two reasons to outsource any work: Drums and mastering. You should be able to competently engineer, comp, and mix your own stuff, which is where most of the hours come from in a studio.

Drums, really pro live drums, are another story for truly pro sounding results in general. The right room, with the right kit, with the right mics placed just right. It's a nightmare. We're getting a full close mic setup soon, so we'll see how that goes.

For mastering, it really makes a difference to have the crazy $20k HD mastering suite that a pro studio will have. It also makes a difference to have those pro ears, and most importantly, a different set of ears than your own. Having someone who isn't attached or personally invested in the project do the final tweaks can make the difference between good and perfect.

I'll read the article soon, the above was mainly toward Hoblit's bassist. Give him the finger and tell him he can pay for studio time if he wants.

I totally agree, Sober.

Even if you want to sound amateur, nothing beats a pair of pro ears to help you do it right.

jack wrote:and of course it turns into a minor bitch session about opinions.

Like you said, this is Songfight! I guess we're all masochists

Lunkhead wrote:Des, what's your process for sequenced/programmed/"fake" drums when you use them?

I basically use my acoustic kit as an electronic kit, for the kick and snare. I have a little piezo mics on those two drums, and I record a track and run it through KTDrumTrigger to create a midi track. Then I feed that to the sampler (VSampler or BFD.)

Hats, crashes, and rides, I play using your method, on the keyboard. Though often I'll just record 8 bars or so, then cut and paste. Then I quantize them, and humanize them a little, assuming it's needed, with a CAL script in Sonar. (Yeah, it might seem odd to quantize then humanize again, but I get better results that way.)

My Hxaro for j$'s SUASD is a good example of using this approach.

(And here's another shameless self-link with lots of drum replacers: http://www.hometracked.com/2006/04/29/f ... replacers/ A few of them, including KTDrumTrigger, you could even beatbox into, and generate a midi track suitable for BFD or whatever.)

Recently I've started just avoiding them and focusing on genres where full kit drums aren't really necessary, and light hand percussion can carry the beat sufficiently.

Though I haven't tried it myself, I've read nothing but good things about Drumcore. It outputs midi, but the input was played by humans .. So you get a live feel to the track, but you're free to run it through whatever sample library you want.

I'm thinking I should instead use Battery or BFD or something. What drum sampler you use? And what samples do you use?

Well, I have my own drum kit, so that's mostly all I use. But when I want to beef things up, I use BFD. (Though I don't own any others... they ain't cheap.)

For great free samples, you can't beat the Natural Studios free kit.

Lunkhead wrote:Could you add an addendum about direct recorded acoustic guitar, too?

Heh heh.