expander

[bigd]

That was a great post about posting. Guilty party present... sorry... Hopefully this is worhty of some thought...

If I was to make wider vocals... I know that I can double a track, pitch shift it a bit, and move it up a few ms, pan them and such... But what about using an expander... If all I have are the basic mbox audiosuite plug-ins, is there something else I can do to make it sound wider, or have I hit my limits?

[Chris Cavell]

for ultra wide:

1. record and double
2. duplicate both
3.flip the phase on the duplicates
4. hard pan them opposite directions
5. pan the originals opposite their doubled and phase flipped counterparts
*(6. double the originals again and keep 'em center panned)

note: #6 thins them somewhat, but makes it so the vocals don't dissappear when playing back in mono

[bigd]

Wow, that's gold man... Thanks!

[Chris Cavell]

well, it ain't gold always...

that's really pretty much as wide as it can scientifically go if you leave out #6 (actually just one take duplicated, flipped and hard panned is as wide as it can go)...which hopefully meets your needs

[bigd]

I'll give it a try. I have a very simple system, but I'm going to try to concentrate on the guitar and voice only type recordings for a while, keep it very simple and very clean. I only new, but I'm looking for the John Mayer type of solo work. And becoming profecient with what I have before investing in anything else. With a limited budget I need to make it work with what I have...

Thanks again Chris.

[Chris Cavell]

his solo work, like on his first "demo" album..."inside wants out" i think was the title (the solo acoustic version of 'neon' for instance...the album that solidified his record deal including brick wall as management)...is just straight ahead stuff: mono vox panned center and a stereo set for the acoustic. Nothing fancy at all. Concentrate on good sounds, good levels, and most importantly: good performance.

You're looking at 3 tracks (as in 'neon')...maybe five with a stereo second guitar and reverb...maybe seven with that and a couple of background harmony vox for most of the other tracks on that album. It highlights his songwriting and musical ability, not the production.

Jack Joseph Puig was a huge influence on the second album(but first label release)...check out and listen carefully to some of his work with other artists to try and catch a glimpse of the production methods (counting crows, cheryl crow, et al). There's a certain signature sound in his work that you'll instantly recognize once you start to associate his name with certain albums. You'll hear a tune on the radio...for the first time...and say, "I'll bet anything that was JJP."

[bigd]

Noted, and thank you for giving me a figure to push my energy towards. JJP eh? alright.

"You're looking at 3 tracks (as in 'neon')...maybe five with a stereo second guitar and reverb...maybe seven with that and a couple of background harmony vox for most of the other tracks on that album. It highlights his songwriting and musical ability, not the production."

Bingo. That's my point. To find musicians that have such talent, and capture something they could reproduce right in front of you with a guitar... not a full fledged arsenal of effects and instruments. Capturing the essence of a true performance. Nothing bring me such sadness then listening to a cd, then watching a live concert and the person can carry the tune, or play the tune for that matter. I watched John Mayer on the grammy's one year, and I was blown away. Granted, I've also listen to some stuff that wasn't that great...

and a stereo set for the acoustic.

would you mind elaborating?

OT-

I'm currently working on an CD for my uncle who's a fisherman and a true folk singer. And on the other hand I'm tracking for a guy who has great talent but can't hold a beat to save his life... I'm talking about 4 beats, 4 beats, then 7 beats, then 6 beats, then 4, 4, etc... In your opinion, or anyone elses, should I go ahead and record him as is or force him to follow a click track? I've tried before and you can feel the "claustrophobic-ness" creep up... not good for performance. Am I crazy to think that it's just going to make him unique? I mean with the extra beats he adds, it puts the feel into the song... Just don't try to follow him with a foot beat...

[Chris Cavell]

stereo pair: either spaced (AB-pair), near coincident (ORTF), or coincident (xy, ms, blumlein, etc.)

I listen to songs like "Neon" on that album (Inside Wants Out, not Room for Squares) and think it had to be recorded one of two ways: either with a single stereo setup picking everything up (just two tracks), or a vocal mic and a stereo setup for the guitar (three tracks).

As for the artist with poor timing...don't laugh at this answer...

If you can get away with this...buy him a cheap quartz metronome for the holidays. Give him a practice schedule of one and a half hours a day with it:
15 minutes of playing "normally", trying to find the natural bpm with the metronome to match his playing
15 minutes of trying to stick to that setting without missing or adding beats
15 minutes of playing it 5 bpm faster than "natural" without skipping or adding beats
15 minutes 5 bpm slower than "natural"
15 minutes "natural" again
15 minutes without the metronome as a cool-off (so he doesn't start hating music)

Then track him in February with a click.

If the kid does this religiously for a month...he'll never have bad timing again, and playing to a click in the studio will be a breeze. (for most players it only takes a week of this...if he really stinks give him a month)

[bigd]

Thanks for elaborating... I'll try to get him to use the metronome, but in all honesty, I don't think there's hope... let's just say, you can't help the unwilling... I was hoping that I could just record him as is and see where it got us. I once watched a documentary for the Dave Matthews Band drummer and he said that Dave would add a fifth beat every so often, and at the end of it all it would all add up. I'm thinking that perhaps I can do this with this guy, let him have his few extra beats, but keep it mathematically in line.

Also, I tried your "ultra wide" technique, but when I inverted the phasing, it made it very quiet... I had to move one a few ms to make it better... I also tried this and it made pretty cool.

Track 1 <80 -2ms, Track 2 80> +2ms, Track 3 in the <0> dead on.

interesting sound for sure...

[Chris Cavell]

if they aren't completely 100% hard panned, the opposite phases will cancel where they blend and cause a decrease in volume. In mono, they should cancel completely.