McAllister wrote on Sun, 13 March 2005 12:17 |
Is this loss of fader-riding-ability also due to the abundance of outboard mic pres? Were faders moving during tracking, or just during mixing? |
Quote: |
Something I suspect lots of younger people are missing is that we USED the faders on the console |
Quote: |
In mixing, no matter what, or how much, if any, automation I'm using, I will always save several things to do manually as the mix goes down. This is usually the lead vocal, plus another thing or two, and of course, certain reverb send changes, etc. Call me crazy, but I like it this way. And sometimes you'll get something unexpected that you really like. |
thermionic wrote on Sun, 13 March 2005 16:25 |
The funny thing is, however "on form" you are when the computer records your fader movements, it never seems to have the same "vibe" when it comes back at you does it? Is this imaginary / mental attitude? |
Quote: |
"Into" the mic on the screams, and "away" from the mic on the whispers |
Quote: |
The funny thing is, however "on form" you are when the computer records your fader movements, it never seems to have the same "vibe" when it comes back at you does it? Is this imaginary / mental attitude? That is a very good question...will have to think about it! |
Level wrote on Mon, 14 March 2005 06:29 | ||
It is neither imaginary nor mental attitude. It is plain ole' fact. Computers do not track fades as smooth. They do it in increments. As tiny as they are, the automation is still in steps, like it or not. Something about that vibrating motor attached to a potentiometer. When we have the tops of our hands laying across multiple faders...we are using our ears and we are doing fades at completely within the human touch. Sometimes "breathing" on a fader is all that is needed. Can we hear 0.5dB increments? I can. Just how precise can fader controlling motors smoothly move? At the very least, we feel we can do better...of course 21 fader moves at a time should be "printed" because performing them live is all but impossible. What really sucks is to rehearse a mixdown and be ready for the 2mix. You simply nail a difficult set of moves...and find our the record enable on the 2 track recorder was not switched in. You do that ONE mix that was simply perfect...to not be repeated again. |
Brian Kehew wrote on Mon, 14 March 2005 02:45 |
is. Aside... Aretha - I just mixed the (soon to be released) Live at the Fillmore box set. It was the biggest mixing challenge of my life. The band was astounding, but sloppy. The random hums and buzzes made it really tough to get a consistent sound. Aretha herself - maybe it's her "live" appraoch, but she had the WORST mic technique I've ever heard. "Into" the mic on the screams, and "away" from the mic on the whispers. This meant the drums rush up in the quiet spots you wanted to raise, and the tone and level just scream when she hits a big one. And she uses those dynamics (I can see that - on the PA - this makes her dynamics wider, but it's hell on the recorders and soundmen.) |