Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)
"reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:sZqdneLyp6qmDnjcRVn-1w@adelphia.com...
>>It's not harder to find a space in the mix for that,
>> really... it should be easier. Think about it - a real life, "doubled"
> track
>> vs. a cloned/timeshifted/pseudo-doubled track. It will add depth to the
> mix;
>> hence, generating even more space to work with.
>>
>
> I'm not sure I folow. The posts above were about having to pan hard left
> and
> hard right so one could have some space in the mix.
What I was saying - maybe I didn't elucidate well enough - is that (IMO,
anyway) the doubled parts, if doubled by playing both parts, will interact
with each other in a different way than will cloned doubled parts. The
cloning creates a constant differential in all respects between the cloned &
the original track (unless you break up the waveform & nudge different
segments of it in different increments, apply different or automated
dynamics processing to each of those segments, etc); while doubling by
playing creates something more interesting - the very slight varying time
shifts between each note/chord/whatever, slightly different degrees of
vibrato (if applicable), slightly different degrees of dynamics, slightly
different sustain of each note or chord, etc. Now, we're talking very, very,
very small degrees here - assuming if you've got a good player & he's trying
to double it tight - but nonetheless, there are obviously going to be these
slight differences in all these areas, and to me (again, YMMV) that creates
the perception of more space in the middle than a
cloned/nudged/processed-slightly-differently track does.
Not that there's anything wrong with what you've described, but - and maybe
this is just me since I'm a guitarist, and it could be an idiosycracy of
mine - I tend to like a real doubled part much better; I think all these
very slight variances I mentioned add more real energy to the mix. Kinda
like having an actual violin section in a recording of a symphony instead of
recording one violin & cloning it a dozen times.
Neil Henderson
>
> I never pan much besides reverb to the edges. Hard panned instruments are
> way too 1969 for me. I'll go 4 and 8 oclock all the time, though.
>
> jb
>
>
>
"reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:sZqdneLyp6qmDnjcRVn-1w@adelphia.com...
>>It's not harder to find a space in the mix for that,
>> really... it should be easier. Think about it - a real life, "doubled"
> track
>> vs. a cloned/timeshifted/pseudo-doubled track. It will add depth to the
> mix;
>> hence, generating even more space to work with.
>>
>
> I'm not sure I folow. The posts above were about having to pan hard left
> and
> hard right so one could have some space in the mix.
What I was saying - maybe I didn't elucidate well enough - is that (IMO,
anyway) the doubled parts, if doubled by playing both parts, will interact
with each other in a different way than will cloned doubled parts. The
cloning creates a constant differential in all respects between the cloned &
the original track (unless you break up the waveform & nudge different
segments of it in different increments, apply different or automated
dynamics processing to each of those segments, etc); while doubling by
playing creates something more interesting - the very slight varying time
shifts between each note/chord/whatever, slightly different degrees of
vibrato (if applicable), slightly different degrees of dynamics, slightly
different sustain of each note or chord, etc. Now, we're talking very, very,
very small degrees here - assuming if you've got a good player & he's trying
to double it tight - but nonetheless, there are obviously going to be these
slight differences in all these areas, and to me (again, YMMV) that creates
the perception of more space in the middle than a
cloned/nudged/processed-slightly-differently track does.
Not that there's anything wrong with what you've described, but - and maybe
this is just me since I'm a guitarist, and it could be an idiosycracy of
mine - I tend to like a real doubled part much better; I think all these
very slight variances I mentioned add more real energy to the mix. Kinda
like having an actual violin section in a recording of a symphony instead of
recording one violin & cloning it a dozen times.
Neil Henderson
>
> I never pan much besides reverb to the edges. Hard panned instruments are
> way too 1969 for me. I'll go 4 and 8 oclock all the time, though.
>
> jb
>
>
>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram