How odd?? Why do you think this would enahnce a mix? All the sounds which make up the leakage will be in the mix in all their glory.

If you really want some, just record the foldback mix in the cans with no head in them. :?

Well, reverb/ambience ? EQ? Try that combination.

inLoco wrote: i really think that leakage is very important on the overall sound of the mix... i've recorded some vocals and i think they feel a bit unatural because there's no leakage! anyone know a plug in that simulates leakage or a technique?

:shock:

I love being alive! Just when I begin to think I've heard and seen everything, something like this comes along and makes me realize that there's always something new in the offering.

InLoco,
What makes you think "leakage is very important on the overall sound of the mix"?

Have you head this for yourself or are you assuming this based on things you have read or heard other people say?

If it is the first, then you should be telling us what it is you are hearing and how it was achieved.

If it is the latter of the two, I will point out, the kind of "leakage" most referred to in this context is "room leakage" when all the instruments are played at one time in a very good sounding room like in a Phil Spector or early Beatles recording. There are phase anomalies and off axis microphone response introduced to the recordings all which combine to create the "sound", which is virtually impossible to recreate with "plugs" or re-amping / re-recording techniques.

A lot of records from the 50's / 60's were done using only four or five mics .... and all mixed as the recording was being done. Once the session was over that was it ... no mixing or futzing. Master the puppy to vinyl and put it on the train to be pressed. These people were doing 3 dates a day ... each date running 3 or 4 hours.

Records that were recorded on that date were on the radio in 2 weeks or even less. Of course, in those days everyone thought it was just "Rock 'n Roll" ... and no one took it all too seriously. That may be part of what made it all so special .... Just do it and move on. Sometimes over analyzing something too much can kill it.

My recommendation is to first, stop looking for "plug in solutions". This is so much of what is going wrong with the recording industry. No one practices good recording habits anymore ... they just look to "fix it in the mix" with a plug in or a sample that has been used by a bilzillion other guys looking to do the same thing.

You want spill? Record everything at once in one room with as few mics as possible.

In lieu of doing that, it is not uncommon to have several 'verbs across a mix at one time all which are being used judiciously across a lot of the tracks at once. This is how we get a sense of front to rear placement, by using short 'verbs to place things in front and longer 'verbs to make things appear as if they are further away.

What I do to make isolated multi tracked and overdubbed recordings sound as if they were recorded in one room at the same time is place 2 or 3 short reverbs, all with different room sizes and early reflection / pre delay settings across the whole rhythm track mix. I start with very short / small room settings and dial just enough of that so they can be heard. I place these on the drums (kick included) the bass and all rhythm instruments. Two or three short 'verbs combine to make very complex short room sounds that can be very convincing. You can manipulate the apparent placement of instruments by using the different verbs and panning. Think of it like you are re-creating the spill thing, as if they were all in the same room at the same time. ... Only after I have this all worked out will I start to add in some longer 'verbs on guitars, horns and vocals to get the "soup" that I like.

Kurt Foster wrote:
What I do to make isolated multi tracked and overdubbed recordings sound as if they were recorded in one room at the same time is place 2 or 3 short reverbs, all with different room sizes and early reflection / pre delay settings across the whole rhythm track mix. I start with very short / small room settings and dial just enough of that so they can be heard. I place these on the drums (kick included) the bass and all rhythm instruments. Two or three short 'verbs combine to make very complex short room sounds that can be very convincing. You can manipulate the apparent placement of instruments by using the different verbs and panning. Think of it like you are re-creating the spill thing, as if they were all in the same room at the same time. ... Only after I have this all worked out will I start to add in some longer 'verbs on guitars, horns and vocals to get the "soup" that I like.

that's what i wanted to hear kurt! yes i do feel that live feel is very important on the overall mix! and because not everyone can afford recording live in such a room we try to look at other options! and the low gear is catching up fast with the pro gear... so... it gives hope!
i do feel that sometimes recordings i do now give me a bit of isolated feel! i can feel the vocal was overdubed and recorded on a treated enviroment! it's funny but the first recordings i did i had a behringer 2004a mixer and a soundblaster! i had the soundblaster output to a stereo channel and put it on the alternative 3-4 stereo channel! then i'd use a channel to record guitar for instance! because of the quality of the mixer i could still get a bit of sound from the alternative to the mix channel! the result was a feeling like leakage!
but yes i do love to hear good overall mixes and not good isolated sounds...