Archive Page 5

EDM: The Most Democratic of Arts?

If it was Slash who made me first pick up a guitar, it was Noel Gallagher who made me want to join a band. In a recent interview, Noel was heard to say “any f*cker can make dance music”. This quote led to some major activity on Twitter, with the consensus being that he was probably right, but that there is a difference to making dance music, and making good dance music, which is probably fair. Tim Exile put it well when he tweeted that “making dance music is the new gaming”. I have to say, I think it’s great; it means that electronic music is one step closer to becoming the purest, most egalitarian and democratic art form.

You can now have more studio power with a cheap PC and a Computer Music cover disc than The Beatles had. Even if you go back to perhaps one of the last big shifts in accessible recording, the Tascam Portastudio, you were still looking at a sizeable investment, particularly once you added microphones and effects units etc. Now, even with freeware VSTs, you can make some professional quality tracks. I spent significantly more money than I had on my Virus TI, but my freeware Juno and SH-101 still see frequent use.

Everyone has always had the ability to make music, even if that was just banging out a beat on a rock and a bit of old bone. Now though, nearly anyone can not only make music, but also record it and distribute it to the world. You’ve got to admit, that’s a pretty impressive step forward. The issue now though has become, not making your music, but getting people to listen to it.

I’m glad that electronic music production is more accessible. If you’re willing to put the hours in searching Soundcloud, you can find some outstanding tunes, some of the experimental electronica can be fantastic, but, for the dj, you might find that one track that differentiates you from the Beatport top ten-playing crowd…

This post first appeared as a news article for Now Then Records.

Of Monitors and of Monitoring…

So, you’ve been producing on your headphones or some old hi-fi speakers, and you’re ready to go out and get yourself a new pair of studio monitors. This is going to be the addition to your studio that really changes your productions: you’ll be able to hear all those little details you couldn’t hear before; you’ll eq better, compress better and pan better. You’ve got a budget of, lets be mathematical about this and say £x, so you go out and buy a new pair of monitors that cost exactly £x, the best pair of monitors you can afford. Is that the right thing to do? In most situations, probably not.

It might be easier if you think of your budget not as how you have to spend on your monitors, but how much to spend on your monitoring. Being able to hear what is going on in your mixes is perhaps the most important thing to get right when trying to make informed decisions about your productions and making mixes that translate well to other systems. What you hear isn’t just a function of your monitors, but of a whole chain, from the DA conversion in your soundcard, through any monitor controllers, the monitors themselves, how the monitors are placed and what the rest of the room is like. You may well find that you get the best monitoring environment if you apportion a, sometimes not insignificant, part of your budget to some of these other variables, rather than blowing the whole lot on the monitors themselves.

As you might guess, this is a pretty big topic, and so there will probably be a few posts on more specific aspects of the subject. I’ll try and give a bit of an overview here of some of the things that have worked for me, which don’t cost a huge amount of money and, hopefully, don’t require that you rearrange all your furniture to get yourself a decent monitoring environment.

The first thing, that has probably made the biggest difference for me, is to try and get rid of any hiss and hum that might be emanating from your speakers. Ground loops can be a big problem here. If you can, get hold of a power filter/surge protector (the latter is a good idea anyway) with multiple outlets. These don’t have to cost an arm and a leg and can help get rid of some ground loops. Different power outlets can often be at different potentials, leading to current flow when different bits of gear are plugged into different outlets. By plugging computer, soundcard and monitors into the same outlet, you can sometimes get rid of some problems, just make sure and count up how many amps you’re drawing! If you’re using a laptop, sometimes disconnecting the power and running on the battery can make a huge difference. For critical mixing tasks, this can sometimes be a big help.

Try and mount your monitors on proper stands with as much mass as possible, some can be filled with sand for this purpose. If your monitors are just sitting on your desk, you can get problems as the sound from the speakers bounces of the desk and mixes back in with the sound coming at you directly, this can cause comb filtering. Additionally, placing some foam ‘wedgies’ –the type with the pyramid patterns are good for this, and not too expensive- at the acoustic ‘mirror points’ on the side walls to try and break up as many reflections as you can is often a good first step on the road to more thorough acoustic treatment.

Additionally, if you’re using stands, it can sometimes be easier to achieve a good monitor placement. You’ll want to try to get the monitors forming an equilateral –or sometimes isosceles!- triangle with your head, pointing in slightly (if you can’t really see the sides of the monitor cabinets, that’s usually pretty good) with the tweeters at ear level or the monitors tilted slightly so a line coming straight out of the tweeters is aimed at your ear height.

If you can, try not to have your setup with speakers tightly in the corners of rooms or against a wall, although sometimes this is unavoidable. If your speakers have ‘placement correction’ controls –they often high pass filter the bass or allow cut or boost of the low and/or high frequencies- experiment with those to try and find the best settings. To do this, you’ll want some reference material. One easy way to test things is to draw an ascending chromatic scale in your DAW playing back a sine wave in a soft synth. Sit in your monitoring position and hit play, the notes should sound at equal volumes. If you hear louder or quieter notes –due to interference creating room nulls and resonances- you can adjust the settings, or at least be aware of which notes are problematic and make informed mix decisions. The excellent Sound on Sound has a bass staircase mp3 here. Additionally, playing back some tracks you know well can be a big help and never underestimate the power of listening to your mixes on as many systems as possible!

That probably covers it for the quick and easy fixes for now, but chances are good that we’ll revisit a lot of these things in future posts. If anyone has some more easy solutions and suggestions to improving your monitoring, I look forward to hearing them!

The Dilemma of the Digital DJ

I am a music lover, and I like to say I’m one of a diverse range of styles. If I were to close my eyes and pick a few CDs at random I could end up with David Bowie, Portishead, John Mayall, Fiona Apple, Martha Reeves, Flying Lotus, My Bloody Valentine, John Coltrane, Public Enemy, Fred Everything, Pearl Jam… the list goes on; and that’s just the CD albums, then you add in all the nu-jazz, soul and funk that sits on the vinyl shelves, and the deep house and techno that now lives on the hard drive- although I’ll admit that am a fan of an actual physical thing which I can hold: I find it adds to the music listening experience, the building anticipation of the CD tray sliding back home, or the stylus making its way towards the first cut track…

While I love the aesthetic of vinyl, it’s not how I buy my house and techno anymore: I’ve become a convert to the digital download. While some of the purists may not approve, I am quite happy that my record boxes are now folders on a hard drive. I can choose the particular mix I want to buy, so my wallet is happier, and I don’t have to carry the weight of too many 180g pressings around in bags and boxes, so my spine is happier.

I will admit that learning to beatmatch oldskool takes a lot more practice than hitting the sync button in Traktor, but, to be honest, that doesn’t really bother me. You can make two arguments: the first is that technology has freed up djs to be more creative with their mixing allowing them to remix on the fly; the second, and the one to which I subscribe, is that as long as the tunes being played are good, do you really mind? I would rather listen to two great songs simply mixed back to back than three tracks that don’t fit the mood of the crowd perfectly remixed into some new song.

I suppose it depends on your point of view and what you want out of a dj set, do you want to be awed by inspirational mixing techniques and mash-ups, or do you just want to hear unadulterated versions of great songs back to back…?

This post first appeared as an article on the NowThenRecords website.

The Quick and Dirty Home Mastering Guide: Part 2

Okay, back to the home mastering: a rough and ready guide to making your mix that bit louder. If you caught the first part of this post, then you should have your mix ready as a wave file with some commercial releases ready for comparison. I’ll admit, I’m a bit nervous about this blog post, there are too many different opinions, many held by people who aren’t backward in coming forward in telling you that yours is wrong; all I can say is that this type of process has worked for me, hopefully it can get you going in the right direction too…

Step 1: Import your mixdown into two channels in your DAW. One of these is going to be the channel you process, the other is for comparison. Set your channel and master faders to 0 dB.

Step 2: Processing time. Insert a low cut filter first in the chain and set the frequency to about 25 Hz. After the filter, insert a parametric eq. This stage of processing is for any surgical corrections that you might need to make: any resonances or one-note-bass type problems where you might need to make some narrow, high-Q cuts.

Step 3: Insert a compressor. If you have a lot of compressor choices, I would be tempted to lean for something designed to be fairly transparent, rather than a ‘character’ compressor. Set the ratio between 1.1 and 1.2:1 and bring the threshold all the way down. This compressor should be working constantly and giving you a couple of dBs of gain reduction. If the terms for some of these compressor settings are unfamiliar, a quick internet search should tell you all you need to know; they’ll also be the subject of a future post.

Step 4: More aggressive compression. This one starts to become a bit more about your personal taste and will be quite dependent on your source material. You could maybe start with a ratio of about 2:1 and reduce the threshold until you get a couple of dBs of gain reduction. Start with the attack time at about 50 ms and bring it down, listening to what happens to the sound. Listen out for any loss of bass as a marker for when you’ve gone too far. If your compressor has an auto release setting, go for that, if not, then start with quite a long release time and bring down listening for any pumping sounds.

Step 5: The tone control. Here your just about the subtle tone shaping, just like the bass and treble controls on your hi-fi. Set up an eq with high and low shelving bands and start adjusting to taste. If you have a fingerprint eq you can use it here to dial in the general flavour of a commercial track in the genre.

Step 5: Limiting. This is where you add those extra dBs you want. Insert a lookahead brickwall limiter and set the output to -0.3 dB. Start to add gain and you’ll hear the track getting louder. It can be helpful to insert a couple of metering plugins after the limiter. The excellent TT Dynamic Range meter is an excellent plugin for seeing how much dynamic range your song has and for checking RMS values. Solid State Logic’s X-ISM plugin is very useful for checking intersample peaks to ensure you don’t clip any DA converters.

As you start to add gain with the limiter, listen for distortion of the low frequencies, the kick is a useful guide here. You’ll also want to listen for softening of transients; listen to the front end of snares and hats in particular. All the while flicking back and forth between the processed and unprocessed mixes to make sure every adjustment is improving the sound over your original, or at least is a good trade off of quality for the loudness you are after.

So, there we are, a quick and dirty guide that may provide a useful starting point to get your mixes where you might want them to be and that might bail you out when you need a mix sounding louder at short notice! I would still recommend the professional approach, but that might not always be an option.

Given the benefit of additional pairs of ears can have to your mix though, you could consider grouping together with other like-minded producers to master each others’ songs, it keeps things free and you can another opinion.

There are also a few other things that can be used for this type of finalizing process. Effects like tape saturation can sometimes help to glue the parts of a mix together, and you can also play with adding some low level distortion and high frequency compression to simulate that. Effects like exciters and stereo width enhancers can be used, but are best used sparingly, you don’t want to be trying to fix mix decisions at the mastering stage (and be careful about maintaining mono compatibility with stereo enhancement).

Okay, we’ll leave it there for now. Please leave any comments and tips you have for mastering your own tracks and hopefully we can make this a useful little resource.

Happy loudness maximising!

The Quick and Dirty Home Mastering Guide: Part 1

One of the themes I see coming up rather often on a lot of the recording forums is of people complaining that their mixes don’t sound as loud as commercial records. The answer given most often is, of course, mastering.

Before we carry on, a few caveats. First off, getting a good mix comes first. As [one version of] the saying goes: you can’t polish a turd. The next thing is that I highly recommend having a reputable professional mastering engineer do your mastering for you.

There are two main reasons for this. The first is that they are going to have absolutely top class equipment, most importantly their monitoring, their room and their ears, along with the experience to get the most out of them. The second is that you’ll get a second person listening to your mix. If you’ve been immersing yourself in your programming, performing, arranging and mixing, you can start to lose some objectivity. The mastering engineer can step back from the mix with a fresh perspective and hear what the mix might need.

When it comes to picking a mastering service, do your research. It seems like mastering has exploded in the last couple of years. It seems like everyone with a copy of Waves L2 has set up an online mastering service. Look to see who has mastered some of the records in your collection and check them out; they might be more affordable than you think. With even huge studios like Abbey Road offering online mastering services, anyone can now get access to those ears of experience.

All that said of course there are going to be times you might want to do it yourself. You might have a work in progress you want to listen to in the same context as some commercial releases; you might have just finished a song that you want to play out that night; or you might have just spent your last penny on the latest plugin.

So, for those occasions, how can you bring that level up and add a bit of punch? A simple internet search can give you more ‘how to’ guides than I could ever hope to list, so I’ll just run through a quick step-by-step of what works for me, and you can adapt it for your own best results.

In preparation for part two of this post, get yourself a stereo wave file of your final mix ready along with a couple of files of similar style commercial tracks for comparison and stop back in a few days for the step-by-step…

Beauty in Music’s Physical Form

I’m not a neophile, I’ll quite happily admit that; I do not immediately jump on board the latest craze or gadget just because it’s new. However, I wouldn’t say I was especially big on nostalgia either. I don’t automatically think that something is better just because they don’t make it anymore. I just like things to work and I don’t see the point of change for change’s sake. For example, I like TVs with buttons on them so I can use them when I’ve lost the remote, but I like being able to take thousands of pictures on holiday, store them on one tiny card and only print out the ones that aren’t of my thumb.

All of which brings me somewhat inelegantly onto the subject of digital music downloads.

Digital music delivery is huge, I don’t think you can deny that, but is it an improvement over where we were before? It has certainly made music more available, it’s now incredibly straightforward for a new unsigned artist to get tracks out to people, but I think that’s a subject for another post. I’m more interested in the concept of buying something that doesn’t really exist in a physical form. In order to discuss the present case of music downloads though, I think it’s best to start with the past…

With each new format of sound delivery, there has traditionally been an increase in quality, from wax cylinders, to vinyl discs, to the cassette to the CD. Now, I know that vinyl is actually better in terms of certain specifications than the digital constraints of CD, but that’s a whole other post again… Generally though, each successive format has improved our listening experience. Then, in 1999, along came the super-audio CD (SACD). Using a 1-bit high frequency technology, the SACD offered audio specifications approximately equivalent to 24 bit 96 kHz recording, with better frequency response and dynamic range than the original CD. An excellent review on the science behind the quality of SACD can be found in Hugh Robjohns’ interesting Sound on Sound article.

While some hi-fi audiophiles picked up SACD players, it just didn’t catch on the same way CD did; the same for DVD-Audio. It appears that the CD is the plateau of consumer quality, a point above which it wasn’t worthwhile climbing. And it makes sense. What percentage of the world’s music listeners even own a hi-fi separates system these days, let alone have their chair neatly positioned in the stereo sweet spot and some acoustic treatment in their listening room?

So, the next step beyond the CD: a step backwards in quality. Limited bandwidth compressed audio: the all-conquering mp3. Now, this brings me back to the first paragraph, I think the mp3 is a wonderful thing. I can carry thousands of songs in my pocket (I sometimes miss my CD Walkman days though, but that’s also another post…) and I don’t really notice the loss of quality as I’m stood in a bus shelter, next to a main road, when it’s raining and listening through ear buds.

The thing is though: I rarely buy mp3s. There are the occasional tracks, maybe a random tune from an album where I don’t want to buy the full thing, but that’s really it. Virtually all my mp3s are ripped from the CDs I buy. The reason (apart from the whole quality thing): I like the physical interaction you get when you buy a record. Be it CD or vinyl, it’s a wonderful thing to look at the cover art, read the liner notes, it becomes more of a ritual, like grinding the beans for your morning coffee. Taking the record from the sleeve, sitting it on the platter, the thunk, hssssss, as the needle finds its groove… wonderful. And to come back to the visual art of vinyl and CDs, some of it is superb purely on that level, from beautiful to iconic and back again, records can be very pretty things… and I’m not just talking about my 12” Kylie Minogue Slow picture disc.

Back in my teenage years of limited pocket money, as opposed to now with limited disposable income but the benefits of credit, I could perhaps afford a CD every two to three weeks. I would end up knowing that album inside and out, I could draw the cover from memory (not very well, art was never really my thing), tell you who produced and engineered it, where it was recorded and even give you a potted list of the people in the thank you list.

I still get that same buzz today when the post delivers that tell-tale cardboard sleeve containing the latest vinyl purchase. The Hidden Orchestra limited double 12” on the clear/marbled vinyl and my signed Jo Mango 10” (she says I’m a wee star!) remain wondrous things to behold before you even listen to them, along with my complete set of the Journal of Popular Noise 7”s, an original 45 of The Velvelettes Needle in a Haystack and my early Amy Winehouse CD promos, the list goes on, but I love them all dearly. I just don’t get that same feeling with a mouse click and a little download progress bar somehow…

Of Hiss and Noise Floors: the quest for silence

If you are a home studio-ist who is anything like me, you’ll have at least some degree of ‘gear lust’, that list of must purchase items that increases faster than your bank balance and that will be last few things that will turn your sound from amateur to pro. I have lived this life for many years, in some ways I still do. I’m beginning to realize maybe it’s not the gear that’s the limiting factor in my productions, but that doesn’t mean I don’t crave a rack full of esoteric equalizers, compressors and other audio manglers, even if they never even get turned on. That stuff just looks cool man!

Anyway, what I have recently realized, and that I think has made a noticeable difference to my productions, is that everything is too quiet. Now, I should point out here that I don’t want to get into a big analogue versus digital debate, that whole thing has been done to death, but, the sad truth is, with just a laptop, a DAW and a consumer-level interface, you can make higher quality recordings than those classic albums of the sixties and seventies.

I have put together, what I consider to be, a reasonably well thought out studio. The gear is pretty good, all connections balanced and the cables neatly arranged ‘round the back so that the power cords cross the audio cables at ninety degrees. When I first went all balanced and got rid of my studio hiss, I noticed something quite striking, my mixes sounded empty and like a loosely assembled group of sounds. Nothing really gelled the way the sounds did on my favourite records.

This was particularly noticeable with the dance and electronica tracks, where everything is either produced in the box, or run from drum machines and synths into line inputs, nothing is mic’d up.

I recently made a dramatic decision, and decided to downgrade my studio. Out went some of the higher end gear (it really hurt to say goodbye to some of it, I do miss you FATSO), and in came a cheap analogue mixer, just so that I could run mixes or stems out and back, and maybe bring some noise back into the mix.

There’s something about a low level of background noise, that higher noisefloor that used to cause so many engineering issues in the days of tape, particularly when multiple bounces were required. And think about the great days of house and techno, then hip hop and trip hop; songs produced with 8 and 12-bit samplers run through cheap mixers and cheap effects, but the records sounded fantastic.

There are a couple of quick fixes that I’ve taken to using to try and make things glue together that little bit more. Less is often more here, so close your eyes and let your ears make the decisions. The first is to dedicate a track in your DAW to some white noise. In Live, I have a Simpler with a white noise sample in my template set, with a clip of crotchets and the noise set to a slow attack so it adds something rhythmically as well, a bit like the sidechained kick drum pumping sound, Bring up the fader until you can just hear it, then back it off a couple of dB. Try programming a drum loop and listening with and without the added noise. You’re really looking to find a level where it’s almost a psychoacoustic effect, but you should know it’s there.

The other trick is to reduce the bit depth of some of your tracks or groups. Some of the famous samplers that are still prized today, such as the SP1200, were 12-bit. If you use Live, you can add an instance of the Redux effect to cut the bits, but a fantastic 3rd party VST plugin is D16’s Decimort, which even has presets for hardware such as the MPC60. And don’t forget distortion. Fill out those thin-sounding synths with a bit of overdrive or tube saturation. URS Saturation plugin is something that gets used on pretty much every mix I do, but there are plenty of freeware options and native DAW plugins that will get you underway.

So, don’t fear the noise. In the early days of CDs, some producers were adding hiss back to recordings as it was such a big culture shock from people coming from vinyl, and the pristine quality of CD just didn’t sound ‘natural’. These days, if you produce in the box, even at 16 bits, your signal to noise ratio is likely to be considerably better than George Martin, Paul Rothchild and Ken Scott ever enjoyed. Rather than getting hung up on improving the sound quality of your studio, maybe you should think about going the other way. Don’t worry though gear lusters, there are still a lot of expensive pretty things you can buy to go in that direction: Culture Vulture anyone?

The First Post…

There are a lot of music blogs around, why should you be spending your time reading this one? Well, first of all, I’m not a pro. I’m not a professional musician/producer/engineer/music writer etc. I’ve never even taken a music technology course; I’m a scientist. Music and production is a hobby for me; perhaps that gives me a different perspective.

I’ll admit, it’s a hobby I take pretty seriously. I enjoy spending time on it, and I’ve certainly spent enough on it over the years! I’ve seen, used and owned my fair share of hardware and software over the last wee while. I’ve sold a few tracks and CDs in my time as well and, while I’ve never had a formal production course, I’ve picked up quite a lot over the last fifteen years from various sources and I hope that at least some of my thoughts and advice might be helpful, or at least interesting! If I don’t know it, then I think I at least know where to go looking for it!

I’m going to try and keep this blog interesting and fairly diverse: a combination of gear reviews, tutorials, new music reviews and my reviews of the classic albums in my collection that have influenced me, as well as my general thoughts and feelings about music technology, production and the industry world; all from the perspective of this enthusiastic hobbyist! Should you be interested, you can check out my tracks here.

So, with that, I’ll leave it for the first post and just wrap up by giving kudos to Benwaa for setting up the free-to-download group on Soundcloud: hopefully this will develop into a great source for free house, techno and edm tracks.

‘Till next time y’all, fc.