Gain structure

[joel hamilton]

" notice that after really working a great mix you'll notice all the faders somewhat at unity, it's cool. In my mind its a sign that you've done something right with all of your gain stages. If everything looks up/down wacky...well you're compensating for something wrong-


I agree with all the previous posts and I think that is the art of engineering in a nutshell. How each stage of the signal flow effects the chain is what it's really all about. These days I only reach for EQ as a last resort, and hardly ever when tracking. But then again there are no rules"

-Nestle


Well said.

I would like to add that all of this discussion SHOULD assume that we have done the best we can with mic choice/placement. I am constantly amazed that the placement becomes not so critical when your gain structure is well chosen, and the overall "life" of the instrument being captured, along with subtleties of "intent" and actual "performance" start to come down the wires. When I have been very deliberate in my gain choices, I have seen a good singer move around a ton (!) and the performance was there, and tone, life, presence, mood, intent, and energy remained completely intact! Even when subjected to empirical(subjective?) comparison against any other record, the vocal quality was of the highest caliber.
The tone of that vocal is something people have commented on. I was using a soundeluxe U95, into a 1073 (in the 80 series console at mission here in brooklyn), with a little bit of 1176 @ 12:1 to tape (otari 2").

All of the gear used is almost not an issue, as I have achieved similar results with a 4033 into a sytek, and a DBX 160A for what we thought would be a scratch vocal. I wound up making almost the whole record with that chain for this particular male singer even with mics and compressors that cost 50 times that of the ENTIRE CHAIN! It was WHEN the gain was applied in this chain, and WHY it was applied at that point in the chain, regardless of capture format. Aside from S/N, the capture format is almost irrelevant In my experience.

Amazing how little this gets debated/discussed in a world where it is the underlying force that makes a great recording regardless of price tags and hype!

Great thoughts from everyone.

[Devlars]

Aside from S/N, the capture format is almost irrelevant In my experience.

Amazing how little this gets debated/discussed in a world where it is the underlying force that makes a great recording regardless of price tags and hype!

Great thoughts from everyone.

Yes it is very easy to lose sight of the fact that what matters most is the performance that's being captured is solid and enciting a particular reaction. The best engineer with the best gear and the best resources at hand mean nothing if the performance is lack lustre.

I suppose due to the nature of the forum we tend to forget to state that even if it's still there in our minds. Everytime I hear a band cover a Beatles song I am reminded of this (Yes, I am in fact implying that nearly every Beatles cover I've ever heard has been awful).

[I'm Painting Again]

we should start talking practical gain structure tips/insights at this point..

one thing is to use it as a counterpoint or contrast in a song..like having a fuzz bass go through a bunch of crazy amp stages to dial in a magic huge overmodulated tone then do drums dynamic and super clean and hi-fi or whatever..an interesting contrast using gain structure..

who wants to share thier insight ?

[OneZero]

(Yes, I am in fact implying that nearly every Beatles cover I've ever heard has been awful).

I just had to post that all tape opers should take the time to listed to CALDO 71 home recording of Paperback writer.

http://www.dbhstudios.com/blue/Paperbac ... %20Mix.mp3

Not only one of the best sounding home recordings I've ever heard. one of the best Beatles covers I've ever heard.

Hope you don't mind me saying so Adam?

[Devlars]

I only wish I could hear it. I don't have access to a computer except here at work where "MP3" among other things are blocked

[KennyLusk]

Beautiful recording. The Drums!!! The Bass!!

Outstanding! Clean!

Can you see me dancing?!! Round and round in circles; great tune.

OK, my co-workers are looking at me funny now; I'll stop.

I'd like to know what kind of compressor he used on that track.

[JASIII]

Nice recording. great performance! I especially like how the vocals were panned, very effective. Now, how do we tie this to gain structure?

[Devlars]

Can you see me dancing?!! Round and round in circles; great tune.

Is it anything like that fat kid with the light saber swinging about like he's just been clipped by a semi?
(Someone on this forum has that as their avatar can't remember who though)

[greatmagnet]

Someone told me you all were talking about me...

Not only one of the best sounding home recordings I've ever heard. one of the best Beatles covers I've ever heard.

Hope you don't mind me saying so Adam?

Shit no...swell my head 'til it doesn't fit through the door anymore.

We're off-topic, but since you all asked, I did half the vocal compression with the opto built into my ART Pro Channel, and then compressed it again a bit more digitally with DP4's built-in dynamics plugin. I always like that combo...a bit of opto to tape or disk and then a little more digital compression in the box.

I think I used no compression on drums, but they are to tape so there's a little of the "natural" variety there. Oh, and there's an omni mike in my little fiberglass shower stall in the bathroom next to the living room where I recorded this. I slammed the fuck outta that one in DP4 and put just a red c-hair in the mix for taste.

Bass was direct from a Bass POD, probably a little of the built-in comp there. Guitars were a POD pro into a Boogie power amp and a mic'ed 1-12"...probably used a bit of POD compression on the guitar as well but that's while it's still in the guitar preamp.

As for the panning, I think he doubled every single vocal part on the song so when I was done there were around eight thousand vocal tracks. So, I basically just panned 'em all across the stereo spectrum as was appropriate to each part.

Awesome thread BTW. Back on topic....

[Devlars]

I really REALLY wish I could hear this now!

[Everybody's X]

man that sounds GREAT, Im keeping it

thanks for tips guys

[greatmagnet]

You guys are bad for my humility...thanks.

IMHO the first half of the I Am Sam soundtrack has a few sweet renditions as well. Then the plane crashes into the mountain.

[Devlars]

Just to get this thread back on topic, I recently did some tracking and kept gain structure very much at the front of my mind. I had recorded things that would allow the natural dynamics of the sound being captured replace my need for playback fader moves. I was very happy with the results. It did take more time and a bit more thought than simply, "record it hot as you can". It was more attention to the meters and making sure that there was a level consistency amongst the tracks. It was really great to do some rough mixes of the song (although it's not done) and have the faders all straight across the board and, for the most part, not have to touch them during playback. I definitely learned a helpful approach with this last bit of recording.

[nacho459]

Great thread!

I felt really good when I mixed my last recording, I only used one EQ, and that was a little top boost on the hi-hat. I'm the kinda guy that will run my source through twenty pieces of outboard gear while tracking, if need be, and then just throw up the faders on mixdown. I'm all about getting the sound I want on tape.

I'm really thinking of getting that Speck LiLo console that doesn't have any EQs at all. http://www.speck.com/lilo/lilo.shtml I have couple outboard EQs if disaster strikes though.