Orchestra: The Final Frontier

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 2:44 pm

David French wrote:

Surely Jeremy, David, Ben, Joe, Tom, or someone can hear something to complain about, right?

David, I haven't had a chance to listen to it properly on big speakers, yet, but yes, I have some complaints. The spots seem to be too loud, the harp glisses stand out like beacons and really sound unnatural as a result.

Will comment properly when I have had a good listen.

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 3:33 pm

Thanks, David. Looking forward to it.

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 3:40 pm

I'm interested in what the musicians thought of the mix. While I like the mix with less of the spots, I'd like to know how much of the "more me in the mix" syndrome is alive in classical musicians at this level. I would not be surprised if they (and many other listeners) preferred your mix.

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 4:41 pm

Oh dear Lord. I have somehow managed to provide the wrong excerpt. I have no idea how that happened. I'm so sorry for wasting your time, Jeremy.

If I might be so lucky to get a second shot, here is the multitrack from the excerpt I posted. I have fixed the original link as well.

Daphnis Multitrack Excerpt [self-extracting RAR archive - 109 MB]

While that final movement is exciting, I chose not to post it or put it on my demo reel because I am not satisfied with the performance as it relates to the quality of recorded sound, especially with regards to percussion. It has absolutely no grace, and to me, it is not pleasant to listen to.

Jeremy, that mix you did sounds about as good as I can imagine it sounding. That IR must be something special. There's a sheen to the high end that sounds like a slick mastering job or something. I do believe I understand your reasons for what you did for that excerpt; however, I would like to know why you chose not to time align.

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:36 pm

So here is the mix I did with it.
Please keep in mind this is my very first orchestral mix.
I did not add any verb, nor did I time align. I was mainly trying to get the levels and panning right before I start adding any thing extra to it.
http://download.yousendit.com/A2927D007FBBBF5B
Be honest, chances are my ears are totally missing something.

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:03 pm

Time aligning is great in principle, but in reality, it never works out as I'd like it to.

Sure, you can do the math - .88ms per foot if you're at sea level and it's 76 degrees in the hall. However, it rarely ever adds up to that amount.

Also, what happens to the sounds that fall between the two sets of mics to be time aligned? Say you get some viola or 2nd violin on your flute spot mics, they are now delayed along with your spots and they now sound as though they are coming from further back.

Also, I rarely bring spots in enough to create distance perception issues.

Of course, then the other question is, to which mic(s) do you time align? Do you try to time align the outriggers and all spots to the same central source? Do you only time-align spots?

On very rare occassions, I'll time align spots, but I use measurements as a guideline at best and then use my ears the rest of the way.

If I get a chance, I'll try to get to the corrected clip, but it may be a few days.

J.

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:35 pm

Cucco, and chance you could give a quick listen and critique to my mix?
I am just paranoid that my ears are completely missing out on some things.

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:40 pm

Hey, what a nice recording!!
It's a flute solo. I think the conductor should be holding everyone else back... a single instrument from the middle can only play so loud... so the rest need to be softer.... and yes, turn the harp down a little. really nice.

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:09 pm

BobRogers wrote:

I'm interested in what the musicians thought of the mix. While I like the mix with less of the spots, I'd like to know how much of the "more me in the mix" syndrome is alive in classical musicians at this level. I would not be surprised if they (and many other listeners) preferred your mix.

I have not found this to be the case at all - actually quite the contrary.

Usually, when I fly a pair of spots over woodwinds or brass (or even percussion) I get at a minimum some dirty looks and at most a comment to the effect of "you shouldn't do that - we'll be heard just fine."

It's only after I ward off the comments with something to the effect of:
"Don't worry - these are only going to be brought up just a little in the mix - you won't even hear them"

that the guys/gals back down. Fortunately, I have colleagues/friends in most of the orchestras in this area and if I don't, I try to make some real quick so that they can chime in and explain that I know what I'm doing.

In general, most classical musicians listen a lot to classical music and they know real quick when the balance from section-to-section is off.

That being said - I've heard a recording of Gershwin's Cuban Overture on XM Radio lately that's been driving me friggin NUTS!!!

The latin percussion was obviously spot-mic'ed and whoever the engineer was apparently thought that the percussion needed to come to the fore when they began playing. Everytime they kick in, it sounds like they've been thrust to the front of the stage and cover the orchestra with nothing but shakers and claves.

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:48 pm

Fraz, I listened to your mix, and I thought it sounded very similar to my own mix, while Cucco's sounded significantly more natural.

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:17 pm

David -

Let me tell you how I came to that particular mix. Some insight might help to understand why I did some things.

First step -

I listened to just the main pair of mics only for the entire track. This gave me an idea as to what I wanted to acheive from the mix and what may or may not have been present with just the main pair.

Second step -

Started listening again, this time with both the main and flanking pairs at unity. While listening, I adjust the balance of these pairs until I get the tonality and the width and depth of soundstage that I want. If anything is lacking, I go to the spot mics.

Third step -

Spot mics. I wanted a little more in the middle but not so much as to paint a broad wall of sound - more the traditional arc of the orchestra. In this case, I settled with a level that was VERY low in relationship to the main pairs.

Fourth step -

Effects. I only reached for the EQ for a couple reasons here. First, I was hearing a ringing coming from the timpani. This is very common on rooms that aren't quite perfect or when the timpanist puts him/her self in corner. By cutting a little in the presence region, I felt the need to boost a little in the lower region to give more weight.

The HF boost was there because I felt the main pairs would be best suited by a little more reach into the ensemble.

As for the reverb, I'll send you some details off-line in a PM...

Cheers-

Jeremy

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:31 pm

Cucco wrote:

BobRogers wrote:

I'm interested in what the musicians thought of the mix. While I like the mix with less of the spots, I'd like to know how much of the "more me in the mix" syndrome is alive in classical musicians at this level. I would not be surprised if they (and many other listeners) preferred your mix.

I have not found this to be the case at all - actually quite the contrary....

Interesting. Almost all of my contact with classical musicians is with HS students and college students at VT. Even the ones who are much more knowledgeable than I about classical music have a very different perspective. (Though they are not uniform. Some are much more conservative in their musical tastes than I.) They grew up listening to modern recordings both of classical and popular music. I'd still be interested in the reaction of David's group which is mostly students (if I remember correctly).

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:41 pm

I wouldn't doubt that younger students (particularly college age) would be prone to this. It's just my experience that once they get into the "real" classical world, they curb that pretty quickly.

I agree - it would be interesting to get some of his clients' reactions.

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:59 pm

David French wrote:

Fraz, I listened to your mix, and I thought it sounded very similar to my own mix, while Cucco's sounded significantly more natural.

Well i am glad mine turned out decent atleast. I really did not know how to approach the mix. I started with the mains, and then increased the levels of the flanks. Then tried to fill in the holes with the spots.

Next time, I am going to try putting the mains and flanks at unity. It may gives me a whole new perspective on the mix.

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:20 pm

Thank you Jeremy for that explanation. Everything makes perfect sense and although what you say is very simple, I feel I have learned a lot just by reading it.

This topic sponsored by: