Martin
434 posts
Aug 01, 2013
3:56 PM
|
For some nefarious reason the harmonica always comes out hopeless when I try to record it.
I don´t know if the link below works but if, this is a very raw first draft of something that I´m preoccupied with. I´m not primarily interested in musical comments here -- but sure, feel free to slash my crappy playing: frankly I cringe when I listen to it myself, amateurish clumsiness, and several crude mistakes, aargh -- but rather why the recording sounds as it does. What am I doing wrong?
(My general intention is to do something about boredom (an existential fundament of life), a sort of prose poem/spoken word, illustrated with pictures of boring places (lots and lots of them here in Sweden) and then this attempt at desert/wasteland blues as a ... desperately boring -- at times aggressively boring -- soundtrack.)
First thing is of course to check the levels, and they are absolutely OK. (I´m using Audacity.)
Then when I record, it sounds perfectly all right in the earphones (the SOUND, not necessarily the music, but as I said, that´s a later issue). It´s loud and clear.
Then when I play it back the effing harmonica comes out differently: it clips and it sounds half-muted and so on.
Compare it with the slide guitar that crops up every now and then (terribly unsystematic), low in the mix: that one is clean and sober -- despite the fact that I´m using a guitar that´s more of a torture instrument and should rightly be handed in to the nearest police station. The guitar is also responsible for the high noise level. And I´m a lousy guitarist. Still ...
Any immediate ideas/suggestions would be warmly appreciated.
http://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=12435921
|
Martin
435 posts
Aug 01, 2013
3:59 PM
|
Of course, that didn´t work! I try this one:
http://soundclick.com/bands/page_music.cfm?bandID=1311618
or this one ...:
embed src="http://www.abc.com/anySoundfile.mp3" width="350" height="40" autostart="false" type="audio/mpeg" loop="false">
http://sclk.co/s7ejm9
Last Edited by Martin on Aug 01, 2013 4:02 PM
|
Martin
436 posts
Aug 01, 2013
4:04 PM
|
Fuck, didn´t work either! I´d say, the instructions for how to do these things are far from clear.
I give up.
|
joe
10 posts
Aug 01, 2013
4:29 PM
|
take it easy dude!
these coding requirements are a bitch i know
the link in your second post works as copy/paste
you must have all the text between embed and /embed
with < at the beginning and > at the end and no line breaks [which will break the code]
your sound file hosting site may have the embed coding line
for your file on the same page as your file
------------------------
UTC+10
Last Edited by joe on Aug 01, 2013 5:00 PM
|
nacoran
6998 posts
Aug 01, 2013
6:11 PM
|
Link to Soundclick
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
|
nacoran
6999 posts
Aug 01, 2013
6:12 PM
|
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
Last Edited by nacoran on Aug 01, 2013 6:16 PM
|
1847
948 posts
Aug 01, 2013
6:26 PM
|
sounds like jeff beck.... i like it.
----------
master po
|
nacoran
7001 posts
Aug 01, 2013
6:48 PM
|
Okay, figured out Soundclick. :)
On the recording, are the other instruments a backing track/prerecorded or did you record them too? Audacity has a nasty habit of sounding very differently when you export a file as an mp3. It's a mastering issue. Sometimes I get lucky and stuff comes out okay, and other times it drives me crazy. The simplest solution is to export things as .wav files, although that's not a permanent solution, since someone else may have problems if they convert it to mp3 later. I haven't exported a .wav and tried to convert it to mp3 with different software so I don't know if it is the Audacity lame converter (it's actual name!) or if it's something else with mastering.
Listening to this recording, it sounds like the harp is sticking out a bit, so turning it down just a bit in the mix might make it blend better. Sometimes using the compression feature helps, but it can also make things flat. Normalize? Pan the other instruments a bit more so the harp is more centered. A little less reverb (not much, just a little). Bring down the highs a little? A lot of mixing for me is trying a lot of different things and seeing which ones sound incrementally a little better. It's not something I've mastered by any means.
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
|
Jehosaphat
513 posts
Aug 01, 2013
8:55 PM
|
To my ears the Harp sounds fine?!
The guitar is too low in the mix in parts i suppose but if you hadn't mentioned it i would of thought that was just the effect you were going for.
Learning how to mixdown your own tracks is a bit of an artform in itself though.
I ended up buying a System called N-track for about 40$ which i find easier than audacity to use.
|
WinslowYerxa
386 posts
Aug 01, 2013
9:14 PM
|
The harp sounds fine to me, as well.
You're getting a compressed amplified sound that rolls off the highs (generally a good thing with harmonica) and also takes away the "air" that you hear around an acoustic instrument - which is fine if that's the sound you're going for.
Underneath that, your tone is good and overall control and shaping of sound is nice. I think you're being too self-critical.
----------
Winslow
Last Edited by WinslowYerxa on Aug 01, 2013 9:27 PM
|
didjcripey
593 posts
Aug 01, 2013
10:31 PM
|
I hear you about how hard it is to record harp, especially amplified.
When I'm in front of the amp playing, the sound is a rich and complex mix bright/sharp/fat/thick tones, but when its recorded (with unprofessional gear) it just sounds one dimensional and pissy.
I've also noticed with something like an iphone or high end video camera at a live gig that it still sounds crap but dominates the mix. At the same time the bass and drums dissapear and the whole thing sounds like a mess (great for band meetings later on when you try to work out how it went).
I'd say that its just a matter of recording gear and ability, lets not forget that sound engineering is an art in itself. I did a little session work and was recorded properly; it sounded fine.
Like your track by the way.
----------
Lucky Lester
|
Kingley
2960 posts
Aug 02, 2013
12:10 AM
|
Try using two mics to record amplified harp. Put one about 3-6 inches from the speaker and another one 2-6 feet away. Then mix the sound down to get the sound you want. I also find with harp unlike many other instruments, that it's often easier to put you effects on the amp and record it then rather than post production effects. Also generally speaking small amps often record better and sound bigger than big amps do. Of course that's not set in stone though. Really at the end of the day it's all about experimenting in the room and finding what work best in that room. Once you find a good sound in a good room, then make a note of what works and next time you're good to go.
Last Edited by Kingley on Aug 02, 2013 12:16 AM
|
nacoran
7003 posts
Aug 02, 2013
12:21 AM
|
One of the problems with Audacity is it's possible to get it to sound like it's mixed properly but when you export it sounds different, even on the same exact speakers. I get the feeling from what you said in your first post that that might have been happening. (Did it sound good played back in the headphones just while you were recording or were you able to play it back the way you wanted up and until you exported it, is I guess what I'm getting at.) As for me saying the harp could come down a bit, that can also be solved by bringing other things up. I didn't play anything else through my headphones to compare the overall volume too- the last thing I had it set for was Skyrim.
I did like what you were doing, but the recording had the same problem I've been struggling with- some of the instruments sound like they are in the computer and some sound like they are in the room. Panning some of the instruments left or right has made the most difference for me. I set the bass about 20 points one way and the guitar about 20 points the other. I leave the harp and the vocal down the middle. Echo and reverb are the most useful harp effects, but they are also the most finicky. Sometimes it will seem fine in the middle of a phrase, but then sounds a little too spacey at the end, especially if no other instruments are playing, especially on the high end. Once or twice I've faded the end of a riff just a little to get it to sound cleaner. (It also works for plosives).
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
|
S-harp
158 posts
Aug 02, 2013
12:31 AM
|
Sounds Good Martin! Sounds like Mark Feltham's recordings with TalkTalk when you work the low notes.
When mixing I prefer using deacent speakers instead of headphones.
I second Kingley on two mics ...
To my taste the harp could have a bit more brilliance/ crisp / highs to shine through when you open up the cupping
When you cut amped harp I find it useful to record with pretty much treble. It's better to roll it off when mixing than wishing you had more highs to work with when mixing.
When recording digital it's better to keep input level just a bit low, when analog recording can handle a bit high input level. Digital input level set to high destroys the recording. Digital levels can then with no problem be turned up when mixing, when analog recording input levels set low risk noice when turned up when mixing.
----------
The tone, the tone ... and the Tone
Last Edited by S-harp on Aug 02, 2013 1:25 AM
|
Martin
438 posts
Aug 02, 2013
5:07 AM
|
OK, thanks guys. There are some points here I´ll look into.
@nacoran: Everything is recorded by me: that is I play the instruments except the drum track which comes from an RP 150.
And yes, you describe exactly what´s up: When I listen to it as I record it, it sounds quite passable; then shite happens after it´s exported. "Some instruments are in the computer and some in the room" -- very much to the point. But I´ll see if it helps turning the harp down even more.
@Kingley: This is recorded right into the machine. I line a small Roland (5 W) via headphones to the computer; so the only microphone that comes into play is the Beyer mic I blow into.
Therefore the sound is annoyingly "electric", but that´s just a fact that I can´t bypass: don´t even own a tube amp anymore; and Richard Hunter´s RP patches won´t do the job. The Roland is far superior in this context. So there really is no "room" to talk about ... And frankly; I don´t own any decent microphones either -- but that can be borrowed, and maybe I´ll look into the possibility of doing it the "acoustic" way, live in the room. Thanks for the suggestion.
@S-harp: You´re much more advanced than I. Mixing in Audacity could be used as a form of advanced punishment and I´m totally lost in space there. I only set the volumes, and use the effect "normalize" after recording.
But I´ll play around with the treble and see if that helps any.
Interesting what you say about digital/analog recording -- maybe there´s a YT tutorial on how to mix in Audacity, the most user unfriendly piece of software in the history of mankind.
I don´t know if the fact that I have reverb to the max on the Roland is a destructive factor -- but the kind of sound I´m ultimately striving for (Jeff Beck, Bill Frisell airiness) is all ABOUT reverb ...
|
Kingley
2962 posts
Aug 02, 2013
5:48 AM
|
"I line a small Roland (5 W) via headphones to the computer"
Martin- Does your computer have a built in mic? If so try recording using that as the room mic. You might be surprised by the results that can be obtained.
|
Martin
441 posts
Aug 02, 2013
6:10 AM
|
Kingley: Nope, none of the computers I own have mics. I´m a low-tech guy. But now that you mention it I recall I do have a Sony mic that I can plug directly into the machine and I´ll give things a try with that one.
Thanks for the tip.
|
Greg Heumann
2296 posts
Aug 02, 2013
5:53 PM
|
The sound we hear when we play is a mixture of what our ears hear through the air, and the darker, highs-removed bone conductance sound you hear if you plug your ears while playing. I suspect we all sound better to ourselves. Recording is a great way to push yourself to work harder on better acoustic and amplified tone.
----------
***************************************************
/Greg
BlowsMeAway Productions
See my Customer Mics album on Facebook
BlueState - my band
Bluestate on iTunes
|
JInx
474 posts
Aug 02, 2013
7:22 PM
|
Multitrack recording and mixing to good results is not easy. Here's a trick the may help you along the way to effective, interesting sound scape design.
Set up all your backing tracks each to play through an individual speaker. Position them around the room, mimicking a "band" rehearsal. Rehearse with your "track band" and your live harmonica, adjusting levels so the room sounds good. Then mic the whole thing with one room mic and hit record.
You are going to lose much of that multitrack sparkle clarity, but you should get a better overall sonic image.
----------
Sun, sun, sun
Burn, burn, burn
Soon, soon, soon
Moon, moon, moon
----------
Sun, sun, sun
Burn, burn, burn
Soon, soon, soon
Moon, moon, moon
Last Edited by JInx on Aug 02, 2013 7:22 PM
|
nacoran
7007 posts
Aug 02, 2013
7:56 PM
|
I'm not sure if it's relevant to this recording in particular, but you can always undo it if you don't like it- try either recording a second track of the guitar doing exactly (or as nearly as you can play it) the same thing. Delay one by a fraction of a second (play around to find the exact amount) and pan fairly hard right and the other fairly hard left (or if you don't want to play it again, just double the track). Depending on the delay and how hard you pan it you will get either a ping pong sort of effect (I don't know if that's the real name of it or not, it's what my bass player called it when he heard me use it) or just a really full sound on guitar. I've also used it to make the uke sound less like it's fighting with the harp in our recordings.
(Some recording software lets you pan individual parts of a track just by adjusting the balance slides while you are playing it. Audacity doesn't. If you adjust a track left or right with the slider the whole length of the track adjusts. You can get around it with a few tricks- cutting tracks into pieces and doing each part separate, but it's a pain. There may be a plugin for it somewhere, I don't know. Still, panning tracks left or right can make a difference.)
Also, try exporting it as a .wav to see if that at least temporarily fixes the problem.
I don't know how it works for whole songs, but this site has an online mixing program that is at least fun to play with. It doesn't have as many options as Audacity, but it's a little more intuitive. As an Audacity user I play with it when Audacity has got me frustrated, just to remind myself what I'm trying to do.
Dead link removed
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
Last Edited by nacoran on Sep 30, 2020 12:12 PM
|
