R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Do you process to tape or not....  (Read 10589 times)

h2o2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #15 on: March 09, 2010, 02:14:25 am »

Greg Dixon wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 16:55

h2o2 wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 08:34

grantis wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 14:18

h2o2 wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 14:10

mcsnare wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 11:55

Adding eq and compression at the recording stage is standard operating procedure and not would I refer to as pre-mixing.

Dave


Alright, Compression is often done at recording to save time.
I believe adding EQ at recording time, apart from EQ controls of guitar cab or lowcut is not that common practice however.
Regardless it is common or not, this pre-processing is detrimental to IMP idea.


Common to EQ to tape over here.  

And I'm struggling with the idea that cutting EQ to tape is detrimental to this exercise.  Please explain.

In case of struggle it is good to ask yourself questions and develop logical thinking.
For example: why it is not allowed to submit early? which reason?

I believe non-destructive editing did bet destructive one?


One reason for not submitting mixes early is so that people aren't copying each others mixes.

Getting the sounds 'right' while recording, is definitely the ideal. Leaving decisions until the mix, is something to be avoided in general. Yes, it has become common practice to not eq and compress until the mix, but that's a recent trend and just makes it harder to get a great mix.

Having the sounds close to the way they'll be in the final mix, makes adding overdubs much easier, as you know right away if the new sound is working in the track.

I'm very grateful that I started recording on 4 and 8 tracks and spent the first 8 years professionally recording to 16 tracks.

I started with a fairly small number of quality mics, great monitors, decent desk, a pair of reverbs and delays and one dual channel compressor. You have to learn to get things right as you go. Lots of decisions to make like, which tracks get the compressors while tracking and which ones in the mix.

Unfortunately mixing is much more complicated matter since there are more then a single mixing strategy and sweet spot in each track. You certainly would like to make that decision during mixing and not in a hurry during recording.
Logged

Seb Riou

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #16 on: March 09, 2010, 06:32:28 am »

I'm not in a hurry while recording. I'm concentrated, focused, fully listening , ready to rec. Are you ?
Logged

NelsonL

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1233
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #17 on: March 09, 2010, 06:58:20 am »

h2o2 wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 23:14

Greg Dixon wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 16:55

h2o2 wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 08:34

grantis wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 14:18

h2o2 wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 14:10

mcsnare wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 11:55

Adding eq and compression at the recording stage is standard operating procedure and not would I refer to as pre-mixing.

Dave


Alright, Compression is often done at recording to save time.
I believe adding EQ at recording time, apart from EQ controls of guitar cab or lowcut is not that common practice however.
Regardless it is common or not, this pre-processing is detrimental to IMP idea.


Common to EQ to tape over here.  

And I'm struggling with the idea that cutting EQ to tape is detrimental to this exercise.  Please explain.

In case of struggle it is good to ask yourself questions and develop logical thinking.
For example: why it is not allowed to submit early? which reason?

I believe non-destructive editing did bet destructive one?


One reason for not submitting mixes early is so that people aren't copying each others mixes.

Getting the sounds 'right' while recording, is definitely the ideal. Leaving decisions until the mix, is something to be avoided in general. Yes, it has become common practice to not eq and compress until the mix, but that's a recent trend and just makes it harder to get a great mix.

Having the sounds close to the way they'll be in the final mix, makes adding overdubs much easier, as you know right away if the new sound is working in the track.

I'm very grateful that I started recording on 4 and 8 tracks and spent the first 8 years professionally recording to 16 tracks.

I started with a fairly small number of quality mics, great monitors, decent desk, a pair of reverbs and delays and one dual channel compressor. You have to learn to get things right as you go. Lots of decisions to make like, which tracks get the compressors while tracking and which ones in the mix.

Unfortunately mixing is much more complicated matter since there are more then a single mixing strategy and sweet spot in each track. You certainly would like to make that decision during mixing and not in a hurry during recording.




Sure, one must be judicious. But you're talking in absolutes, and I know for a fact that there are professionals who do not adhere to your tenets.

EQ, compression, gating, etc. are all fair game during tracking. Experienced engineers know when and how to use these tools without tying their hands at mix time. There are wildly differing philosophies on how much is too much etc, but your philosophy of abstinence is not the professional norm. In a sense, there really is no 'norm' so go ahead and knock yourself out. But I'd be wary of any single, proscribed way of working.
Logged

Daniel Farris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2439
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #18 on: March 09, 2010, 09:29:03 am »

NelsonL wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 03:58

EQ, compression, gating, etc. are all fair game during tracking. Experienced engineers know when and how to use these tools without tying their hands at mix time. There are wildly differing philosophies on how much is too much etc, but your philosophy of abstinence is not the professional norm. In a sense, there really is no 'norm' so go ahead and knock yourself out. But I'd be wary of any single, proscribed way of working.


I agree.

I use compression and EQ (less so with gating) on the way to tape all the time, as does nearly every engineer I know.

I'll also add that, if I know (or suspect) that another engineer may end up mixing the project, sometimes I *want* to tie their hands. Not only will I use EQ and compression during recording, I'll print plug-ins and outboard effects used during overdubbing.

My job is not to provide the mix engineer with a blank canvas upon which to express himself.

(That said, mixing almost never gets away from me, thankfully. It's probably been five years since any of my tracks found their way to an outside mix engineer.)

DF
Logged

h2o2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #19 on: March 09, 2010, 11:23:54 am »

NelsonL wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 05:58

h2o2 wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 23:14

Greg Dixon wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 16:55

h2o2 wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 08:34

grantis wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 14:18

h2o2 wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 14:10

mcsnare wrote on Mon, 08 March 2010 11:55

Adding eq and compression at the recording stage is standard operating procedure and not would I refer to as pre-mixing.

Dave


Alright, Compression is often done at recording to save time.
I believe adding EQ at recording time, apart from EQ controls of guitar cab or lowcut is not that common practice however.
Regardless it is common or not, this pre-processing is detrimental to IMP idea.


Common to EQ to tape over here.  

And I'm struggling with the idea that cutting EQ to tape is detrimental to this exercise.  Please explain.

In case of struggle it is good to ask yourself questions and develop logical thinking.
For example: why it is not allowed to submit early? which reason?

I believe non-destructive editing did bet destructive one?


One reason for not submitting mixes early is so that people aren't copying each others mixes.

Getting the sounds 'right' while recording, is definitely the ideal. Leaving decisions until the mix, is something to be avoided in general. Yes, it has become common practice to not eq and compress until the mix, but that's a recent trend and just makes it harder to get a great mix.

Having the sounds close to the way they'll be in the final mix, makes adding overdubs much easier, as you know right away if the new sound is working in the track.

I'm very grateful that I started recording on 4 and 8 tracks and spent the first 8 years professionally recording to 16 tracks.

I started with a fairly small number of quality mics, great monitors, decent desk, a pair of reverbs and delays and one dual channel compressor. You have to learn to get things right as you go. Lots of decisions to make like, which tracks get the compressors while tracking and which ones in the mix.

Unfortunately mixing is much more complicated matter since there are more then a single mixing strategy and sweet spot in each track. You certainly would like to make that decision during mixing and not in a hurry during recording.




Sure, one must be judicious. But you're talking in absolutes, and I know for a fact that there are professionals who do not adhere to your tenets.

EQ, compression, gating, etc. are all fair game during tracking. Experienced engineers know when and how to use these tools without tying their hands at mix time. There are wildly differing philosophies on how much is too much etc, but your philosophy of abstinence is not the professional norm. In a sense, there really is no 'norm' so go ahead and knock yourself out. But I'd be wary of any single, proscribed way of working.

And you are talking .. you are just talking, since this is not backed by any single argument or even thought. Just to express variety of approaches is costing nothing.
You shouldn't be wary of proscribed ways if they are backed by good reasoning and you understand what you are doing and what you are trying to achieve.

Logged

Daniel Farris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2439
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #20 on: March 09, 2010, 11:35:20 am »

h2o2 wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 08:23

And you are talking .. you are just talking, since this is not backed by any single argument or even thought.


Actually it is.

Committing EQ and compression to tape is pretty much the accepted way of doing things and goes back to engineers trying to maximize levels while minimizing saturation and noise on tape. It isn't an arbitrary decision. It's been done that way for decades for a very good reason.

DF
Logged

mafigi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #21 on: March 09, 2010, 11:50:46 am »

I agree, optimize the sound recording, just enough, without distorting the choices made by the sounds of instruments and microphones, is a normal operation, is certainly not a premix.
Logged

dconstruction

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #22 on: March 09, 2010, 11:51:17 am »

[removed by author]
Logged

h2o2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #23 on: March 09, 2010, 11:54:39 am »

Daniel Farris wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 10:35

h2o2 wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 08:23

And you are talking .. you are just talking, since this is not backed by any single argument or even thought.


Actually it is.

Committing EQ and compression to tape is pretty much the accepted way of doing things and goes back to engineers trying to maximize levels while minimizing saturation and noise on tape. It isn't an arbitrary decision. It's been done that way for decades for a very good reason.

DF

now it is, but before it was not.
Lets have a look at your argument. I think statement about traditions is very true and makes a lot of sense to EQ before going to tape machiene. However not always a statement which is taken out of context preserve its truthiness. Also EQ to compensate tape frequency response is not the same as artistic/tonal EQ we are talking about here.
At the time of tape machines, destructive editing (i mentioned early) was perfectly ok (as were all problems it creates) in modern times shift towards non-destructive editing occured for a good reasons.

I strongly believe that engineer which doesn't take religios decisions produces better results since he totally understands what he is doing.
Logged

Daniel Farris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2439
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #24 on: March 09, 2010, 11:58:51 am »

h2o2 wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 08:54

Also EQ to compensate tape frequency response is not the same as artistic/tonal EQ we are talking about here.


Actually, it is.

Boost highs = boost noise. The tape doesn't care what your artistic intentions are.

DF
Logged

h2o2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #25 on: March 09, 2010, 12:01:09 pm »

mafigi wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 10:50

I agree, optimize the sound recording, just enough, without distorting the choices made by the sounds of instruments and microphones, is a normal operation, is certainly not a premix.

I'm sorry since you enter the discussion, could you please define " optimize the sound recording"?
Logged

j.hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3787
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #26 on: March 09, 2010, 12:32:51 pm »

this is a good discussion, but let's keep it to that......a discussion.

i refrained from comment as this topic was WRECKING my IMP thread, so i split it out.

here goes.

i will speak strictly from my own personal experience here, and and a few details that i simply know to be true.

h2o2.....
first off, i'd certainly like to know (in a non threatening way), how long you have been recording?  are you doing it full time, or as a hobby?

i legitimately want the answer to those questions.  they will add much insight to the conversation.

secondly, i've been doing this for 12 years, 7.5 of which have been full time, day in day out......

speaking from my own personal experience i can assure you that EQ compression, FX, etc... get printed "to tape" on a daily basis.  this would be by myself, and while i'm engineering for producers.  

perhaps experience is a huge difference in your mindset vs. mine.  perhaps not.  but i will say that this practice happens widely, daily, and i'm a willing participant in doing it.

further more, i'm not interested in convincing anyone to change their work habits, especially if, A. what they are doing works for them, and B. if i have nothing personal involved.

i can tell you this, a number of the people discussing this with you are "vets", have significant credits (which only adds legitimacy) and years of experience doing this at a pro level.
Logged

KB_S1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
Re: Do you process to tape or not....
« Reply #27 on: March 09, 2010, 01:09:09 pm »

I can remember this sort of discussion when I was first at college learning about audio engineering.
There was some weight to the argument that if working to digital it was not necessary to eq/compress whilst recording anymore as it was always a workaround of tape limitation.
There was also the counter argument of doing what was necessary at the time to get the best sound when recording.

Now, I don't usually add eq when recording but I will spend time working on mic choice and placement, instrument/room placement and many other things to achieve the tonal balance that I or the client is looking for. This imparts as much of  signature on the sound as any eq'ing would, within reason of course. If need be I haave no problem using a little eq whilst recording.
I do compress as I record when I have access to a good enough piece of hardware.
Particularly on vocals, bass and ambient mic's.


Very rarely do I record reverb or other effects as part of the main recording. Not  against it but being PT based it doesn't feel a normal way to work for me.

Logged
<a href="http://www.parklanerecordingstudios.com/" class="link3">Park Lane Studio</a> Where to find me most of the time<br /><br />

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/kb_s1/" class="link3">Flickr</a>where to see what I have been up to  <br /><br />

h2o2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
Re: IMP 24 BEGINS
« Reply #28 on: March 09, 2010, 01:20:36 pm »

j.hall wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 11:32


h2o2.....
first off, i'd certainly like to know (in a non threatening way), how long you have been recording?  are you doing it full time, or as a hobby?

i legitimately want the answer to those questions.  they will add much insight to the conversation.

secondly, i've been doing this for 12 years, 7.5 of which have been full time, day in day out......

speaking from my own personal experience i can assure you that EQ compression, FX, etc... get printed "to tape" on a daily basis.  this would be by myself, and while i'm engineering for producers.  

perhaps experience is a huge difference in your mindset vs. mine.  perhaps not.  but i will say that this practice happens widely, daily, and i'm a willing participant in doing it.

further more, i'm not interested in convincing anyone to change their work habits, especially if, A. what they are doing works for them, and B. if i have nothing personal involved.

i can tell you this, a number of the people discussing this with you are "vets", have significant credits (which only adds legitimacy) and years of experience doing this at a pro level.

I'm sorry but i don't like to tell you my personal info. This might be because of sexism, racism, agism, or any other "ism" currently popular in US. While years of experience usually impress western world and this is by far most used argument in discussions (and usually the only one), in the eastern world we still adhering to logic and strength/number of arguments in discussions.
I believe IMP results submitted for this imp will give better weight then a number of years of experience which does not correlate usually.

Saying that I do compress vocals before tape and use some lowcut eq etc before tape. But my reasonings don't include "it's common in the industry" my reasoning is primarily saving of time and compressing vocal with 1:4 ratio is de-facto standard and you very rarely want different. But I would be very careful to what i choose to compress during recording because you simply lock yourself and your decisions and producing mixes which are awfully the same and not improving.
Logged

h2o2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
Re: Do you process to tape or not....
« Reply #29 on: March 09, 2010, 01:27:33 pm »

KB_S1 wrote on Tue, 09 March 2010 12:09

I can
Now, I don't usually add eq when recording but I will spend time working on mic choice and placement, instrument/room placement and many other things to achieve the tonal balance that I or the client is looking for.


EXACTLY
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8   Go Up