EQ Magazine - September 2008 - (Page 6)

www.eqm SOUNDING BOARD ag.c om EQ WAR M IT UP ! TA PE SI M RO UN DU TM 10 TIP SINGERS S FOR MAKING SOUND BET TER 3 MIKING STRATEGIE S FOR UPRIGHT YOUR BASS MIXING STR INGS IN YOUR DAW P JULY 2008 $5.99 $5.99 07 JULY 7 A MUSIC PLAYER 25274 01017 2 PUBLICA TION CAN YOUR RECORD IN THE DIG GO GOLD STUDIO ITAL AG SECR E? FOUR TE ETS OF LOUIS T, AND DE XIV STROYE , SUNN 0)) R ) AND TH EXTREM E ART OF E GUITA R RECORD ING WILD THINGS “Taming the Wild Upright Bass” was a great title for Paul Grundman’s article [Bass Management—07/08]. Not only is the upright bass hard to capture, it’s hard to get it to behave itself in the mix. For those folks who don’t have a [Neumann] U47 or Schoeps CCM sitting around, try wrapping a [Shure] SM58 in a piece of foam and then tucking it into the tailpiece. For something a little more detailed with a bigger bottom, try a Crown CM-700. Neither of the mics will create as hi-fi of a sound as the Neumann/Schoeps combo, but they are way cheaper. You’ll be amazed at how good they do sound and how easy your bass tracks will be to mix. Steve Chiasson (via email) NOT KNOWING IS HALF THE BATTLE When reading Craig’s Talk Box [“All I Know is There’s a Lot I Don’t Know”— 07/08], I remembered a recording seminar I attended ten years ago led by the one and only Roger Nichols. Nichols told us a story about making some digital copies of a Steely Dan album. [Steely Dan guitarist] Walter Becker asked Roger why the copies he made sounded different than the original. Roger assured Walter that he had used all of the test equipment at his disposal to identify any discrepancies and that all of the copies were identical to the original. Walter swore there were differences in the copies, so Roger conducted some blind listening tests during which he did things like panning the tracks to different speakers in an attempt to confuse Walter. Walter was able to pick out the copies every single time. Moral of the story: There really is a lot we don’t know . . . and technology is nowhere near as reliable as our own ears. David Smith (via email) WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMING TO? As I read Devine Evans’ “Turning Dreary Vocals into Pop Star Performances” [Vocal Cords—7/08] I said to myself, “This is what is wrong with pop music!” Obviously Devine is starting with a singer that lacks the ability to convincingly put the song across. In fact, it sounds like this singer has little or no talent at all. While it may in fact be possible to create something that sounds reasonable by spending hours massaging inadequate performances, it sounds like his “demo singer” actually has the chops. So why waste time polishing crap when he can just use the demo singer’s performance? I understand the realities of the recording biz. Oftentimes we are presented with singers who can’t quite pull off what they want to do. At what point are you doing them a disservice by completely transforming them into someone else? What happens when they get on stage? The extreme modifications Evans suggests would be better replaced by singing lessons, perhaps from that “demo singer,” before heading into the recording studio. It’s very hard to figure out where to draw the line these days, with tools like [Celemony] Melodyne that allow us to mold recordings like wet clay. More and more I find myself drawing that line further away from plastic surgery, letting more of the warts show. That is due in part to my sense of right and wrong in regards to a performance being tweaked, but also because I like a recording that sounds like a human being. Maybe I’m not in the target audience for pop music any more. Great singers performed the pop music I grew up with. Am I supposed to believe that there aren’t any new ones out there? Gary Mankin (via email) BAD, CHEATERS, BAD In Cheat Sheet [“Recording Electric Guitar”—07/08], you state in regards to combining direct and miked sounds: “The sound coming from the mic will be delayed compared to the direct sound . . . nudge the miked sound forward (earlier) in time to compensate.” This would be absolutely incorrect. First off, nudging the miked sound forward would put it later, not earlier, in the track, and thus further out of time with the direct track. The correct method would be to nudge the track backwards to align with the direct. However, if the monitored track was the miked track, the better method would be to nudge the direct track forward to match the miked track, as that track was the player’s reference. Nick Joyce (via email) Craig Anderton responds: You’re confusing “forward in time” (as stated) with “forward with respect to physical position on a track.” I realize it’s counterintuitive that moving a track’s clip to the left on a linear timeline (what you would call moving “backward”) moves it forward (earlier) with respect to time, but that’s the way most DAWs work. That’s why I added “earlier” for further clarification. As to monitoring, your point is welltaken but most engineers keep the mic pretty close to the speaker—a few inches—so we’re talking about only hundreds of microseconds of delay (which is exactly why there are comb filtering issues). If the mic is further away from the speaker and used more as a room mic, then not only does the engineer probably intend to include the ambient/delay sound, but comb filtering will not be as serious an issue because the delay differential is so much greater. But this brings up the opportunity to add one more tidbit beyond the scope of the original Cheat Sheet: Just because you’ve matched the two tracks doesn’t mean you’re done. For example, if the direct track is used for re-amping through a plug-in, there will be additional latencies that will require moving the direct track further forward in time (or if you prefer, “backward” on the physical timeline). DEATH CAB FOR CUTIE Got something to say? Questions, comments, concerns? Head on over to www.eqmag.com and drop us a line in our Letters to the Editor forum, send us an email at eqeditor@musicplayer.com or snail mail c/o EQ Magazine, 1111 Bayhill Dr., Suite 125, San Bruno, CA 94066 for possible inclusion in the Sounding Board. Note: Letters may be edited for length and/or clarity. Direct correspondence by EQ editorial is not guaranteed. All submissions become the property of EQ magazine and can be published in any medium. 6 EQ SEPTEMBER 2008 www.eqmag.com http://www.eqmag.com http://www.eqmag.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of EQ Magazine - September 2008

EQ Magazine - September 2008 Contents Talk Box Sounding Board Punch In Freak Folk Todd Rundgren Guitar Trax Bass Management Key Issues Drum Heads Vocal Cords Mix Bus Cheat Sheet Sony Acid 6 Ableton Live 7 Portable Recorder Showdown Gadgets and Goodies Sounds Room with a Vu

EQ Magazine - September 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.