TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- ...That "professional" sound
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

...That "professional" sound

As I listen to killer club tunes I find myself pondering what makes the sound professional? I mean here I am - I got the gear most pros would dream about, my collection puts Filo & Perry's setup to shame, yet their sound is so "crisp", tight, and just down right squeaky clean and full, while my patches sound flat and two dimensional. What's the secret of extracting the "3rd dimension" from your sounds?

eqing and compressing ur tracks well.

compressing isnt really that essential but eqing is by far essential. makes the entire track sound 'high quality' imo

Having your tracks mastered by a professional will almost certainly leave it sounding pro... As long as the basis was good to begin with.

I think the biggest aspect of getting that "pro" sound has to do with the proper use of effects and eq. A good mastering job is great and all, but you can't take a crappy sound and master the shit out of it to make it sound great.

Mastering will not save a track that is dead to begin with. The track should already sound good before mastering, as mastering should be just to inhance what is already there.

CynepMeH, yes your studio is impressive. I can't really give u a pin point answer why your tracks lack the pro shimmer.

Eq and compression is used to seperate the sound and boost parts that are to low in the mix. I doubt this is your problem, because if you have a good patch to begin with most of the time just using the onboard filter is good enough. If the patches that come out of your synths dont sound good them maybe thats the problem. There are a load of killer patches for the jp and virus on the net, some are free others you have to pay for. If you do have great patches from veangence for example and your mixes are still dull then i'm pretty sure its your actual compositions. Although you can't always pick it out, most tracks have alot going on in the mix that give it a full spatial sound when properly panned. Also melodies should be composed in such a way that they are thick , for examples using 3 or 4 octaves for an arped melody, will give it a high end as well as low end presence and help to accentuate the bassline. Percussions need to be good, to help get a fuller sound, using multiple hihat patterns, layering kicks, adding effects to claps, cymbals, etc.. and panning everything. Fx is another thing that can help to fill out a track, like chorus, reverb, delay, can really fatten a sound. Pro tracks may sound simple in themselves but there is alot going on in achieving that sound. You have to use everything at your disposal. Do not be content with something that sounds good because it can always sound better with the right effects and stuff. also having 2 many synths can sometimes be more of a curse than a advantage. Try concentrating on one or 2 synths and experiment with them. I dont know what else to say. good luck

While your gear is important, it will only take you so far. Your technique will play the largest part in achieving a professional sound, I'll put it this way, give a dog a Roland JP80XX and you probably wont be very impressed. While having your track mastered by a professional engineer will clean up most of your track, its not going to make your leads fatter, or make your builds have more emotion. I would have to say the best way to improve your sound is to post tracks you have done on the forums and let the communities comments help guide your hand.

quote:

Mastering will not save a track that is dead to begin with. The track should already sound good before mastering, as mastering should be just to inhance what is already there.

To add on to NRGs GREAT post.. I believe it to be a good idea to leave ALL fx (except for filters) until the end when you're mastering.. this way you concentrate more on how your MIX sounds.. rather then how the SYNTHS sound..

Like what is quoted above, even a world-class mastering engineer can't make gold out of shit

if it sounds bad before mastering, it will sound bad after mastering

I guess that's why they call it "mastering" - What sux0rz big time is that not only you got to be able to come up with an interesting idea, get it properly laid out, mix it, eq it, compress it, enchance, arrange, bring out the main theme, FX it, blah blah blah. don't get me wrong - I have some patches /tunes that just woooooow me. But when I listen to the mix I just don't feel it. I mean some ideas catch your breath but then I knock it down and say "too cliche" or "too unrefined" or "nah... no identity". I am absolutely envious of people who can find their "sound" and carve the niche in this genre. My time in the car is spent listening. Every note, every trick - I hear and I can actually see myself doing it, yet I feel like a blind artist trying to recreate "Mona Lisa".

Sux.. at times it can be sooo discouraging. One other thing is - I am often baffled how some things are achieved in a song, like a crisp timely "sprinkle" that pops up here and there or driving base that can be a song all by itself. That's the shit dreams are made of. I think once I find a way to do it - it'll be an ever increasing process. But learning curve is huuuuge.

Anyway, how much role does EQ/Compression play in the mix? please explain.

quality samples make a difference too . . .

quote:

Originally posted by CynepMeH Anyway, how much role does EQ/Compression play in the mix? please explain.

Each play an EXTREMLY important role in getting a pro sound.. possibly more then any other FX

Compression acts like a guy at the mixer continiously raising and lowering the level of the instrument - only a compresser does it MUCH quicker and more efficiently

It is great for getting your kick to stand out, and for giving bass "punch"

EQ can be used to get rid of "muddy" frequencies, shape a sound, and, most importantly, give each instrument it's own space in the waveform

EX. to great a great bass - cut everything, except for the kick and the bass, below 80hz - that gives the bass room

try EQing your kick like this - raise 40-80hz by about 2-3db, lower 250-1khz by 3db, and lower 5-20khz by 4db... should get you a "pro sounding" kick (along with compression)

u need the determination and creativity that they possess.. u can have a giant studio, with all the sounds you want.. and be overwhelmed and not know where to begin. I bet filo and perry could do an awesome tune on a software only system. its about how much of a determination you have for music, be willing to learn everything involved.. theory, EQ, sounddesign etc.. whatever it takes.the studio is second to the producer.

compression isn't a magic tool to make anything sound better, the odds is bigger that you'll ruin your mix with bad compression

EQing is not a magic tool to make anything sound better, if you use good sounds to begin with you shouldn't need to EQ more then maybe 1 or 2 db here and there

mastering is defenetly NOT a magic tool to make your tunes sound better, first off if your mixdown suck then mastering will suck
mastering is simply the process of increasing the overall volume of a track without clipping it (although sometimes you do minor EQing too in the process if any parts is lacking)

the only magic tool you have to make your tunes sound good is yourself
some people say that it's not about wich tools you use but how you use them, this is 100% true.
If you can't handle the tools you got then they wont sound good in your tunes, it's as easy as that....


so what can you do to make it sound better....train train train!
try to do complete remakes of existing songs just to learn how to handle your sequencer/synths/effects and so on, it's really up to you...not your tools

(now don't take this post wrong, I'm not saying that you suck in any way so don't take it that way )

When I started producing several years ago, I was pondering the same questions over and over. The quality of my tracks was just not satisfactory, let alone comparable to pro tunes. I agree with all the people that replied. Everybody mentioned something important in the music making process, and what it comes down to is the fact that music making is a multifaceted approach, especially electronic music making.
Now days you're faced with not only having to compose but to completely engineer, mix and master your tracks. Therefore you chose a hobby/job that's much more complicated than others. You burden yourself with an unbelievable amount of information that you need to grasp, remember and use in order to sound good. Many people do not understand and do not appreciate the amount of work and being anal about every little detail in your productions. I'm telling you all this because the key for making good music (at least for me) was work, work and more work. Initially there was a thought that some kind of plug-in or an audio sweetening tool will make my music awesome only to realize later that no piece of hardware or software will save me. What counts and what worked was long hours of practice to make sure that everything fits tight and sounds well. And even now, I feel there is much more room for improvement. But the best thing is that if you persist one day you will be able to turn around and proudly say-'I made this'. It's a great and irreplaceable feeling of satisfaction. Now, it looks like I did not give you the facts and specific pointers. Maybe I could, but the point is practice will make you perfect and it's the only thing that works.
PS
I started realizing all this when applying a compressor to every instrument in my songs and didn't even know how to set-up attack and release times properly.

STEREO!

design great post, I think I might get a new view of producing if I think like that

and again, as I said before...it's up to you as a person, not your tools

quote:

Originally posted by Bondor STEREO!

seriously, a lot of people neglect this point sometimes entirely. Panning the drums is good ... but im talking about seriously tweeking the stereo image of the synths, in reason the subtractor is not a stereo device, and once you double it and addust the phase ... BAM-O! it sounds so much fuller. if stereo does one thing it adds that massive full bodied sound to your track. if you have anything that isnt stereo in your track, do something about it. hard pan the reverb, delay, background noise, whatever... mono tracks within a stereo mix stand out as dull. im not saying that this is the secret, its far from it, but it will most likly help out ten fold to achieve that profetional sound. But, like Design said, the true defining qualities of a profesional sounding song are the person + hard work + time.

bondor

person + hard work + hardware* + time


* There are good professional productions done with software only, but hardware makes things easier. It's something you must have heard...1000 words can't show you the pressure andclearness of nord lead bass sound without having applied any eq, fx, whatever...


Trancevision

Re: ...That "professional" sound

quote:

Originally posted by CynepMeH What's the secret of extracting the "3rd dimension" from your sounds?

Time and experience. Or a professional sound engineer, like a lot of the "big names" use.

Re: Re: ...That "professional" sound

quote:

Originally posted by xls Time and experience. Or a professional sound engineer, like a lot of the "big names" use.

but it's still not needed if you just devote yourself to what you doo...

take armin as an example, he produces his stuff totally on his own...
he creates the arrangement, he mixes it and he masters it...

Re: Re: Re: ...That "professional" sound

quote:

Originally posted by Vizay but it's still not needed if you just devote yourself to what you doo... take armin as an example, he produces his stuff totally on his own... he creates the arrangement, he mixes it and he masters it...

That's where the time & experience come in

quote:

take armin as an example, he produces his stuff totally on his own...

Agreed

Re: Re: Re: Re: ...That "professional" sound

quote:

Originally posted by xls That's where the time & experience come in

sry, don't know why but I ignored that part for some reason when I posted that post

well still armin is a very good example of what one can achieve with lots of money and dedication

quote:

Originally posted by Trancevision hardware makes things easier

I think that's a matter of opinion based on how you're used to working. I would never go back to sequencing on hardware. It's not visual enough. Same goes for sampling. Trimming and setting loop points are way easier on your computer than they are on the small display of an external sampler. As for synths, it's gotten to the point that softsynths are so good, that the deciding factor for me basically comes down to interface design. Some hardware synths are so simple there's no reason to want a software version over the hardware version. There's still a few that are so distinct sounding that software just can't replace them all the time. But some softsynths can do things that would be next to impossible in hardware (Reaktor for example). And other softsynths make stuff like modulation matrix assignment dumb-ass simple (check out the LinPlug stuff - no scrolling through pages of menus on a 4-inch long LCD). There's an interesting series in one of the big music publications (can't remember if it was SOS or Future Music) comparing classic Analogue synths to their new software counterparts. The FM7 softsynth destroyed the original Yamaha DX7 because it was so much easier to use, and the sound quality was virtually indistinguishable. Softsynths also solve the problem of recording. Don't have to worry about noise in your system, or faulty cables or anything like that.

Don't get me wrong, I still use my 303 and my Virus all the time, but in the past couple of years, more and more of my synths have been replaced by software!

Uh watch out people, hardware/software discussion here again

I don't have experiences with hardware, don't have the money for it. Would love to let my ideas go on hardware in a studio and see what comes out and if it sounds better than software.

So I use software, and what I learned these months here was:

Compression - but for me it makes little differences

EQ-ing - all sounds waaaAAAAaay clearer and more crisp, big improvement. There are whole tables available on what you should remove from a sound. Listen while you change it and feel for yourself tho.

Panning - i was an idiot, i never used it, but it helps both clarity and dimension

With panning, so making stereo, comes stereo enhancing. I think every pro tune has it on the instruments in the higher spectrum, so hihats, lead synths, fx. The FX should be panned the most IMO. Give the listeners the idea that... an airplane flies over!

Chorus, phasing and flanging help to create dimension too (they use panning). Don't forget reverb, but watch out for muddiness.

My tracks improved a damn whole lot with these points. Hope it helps you too. This is IMO far more important than large synth sounds, cause these days very easy sines and sawes are still used to create pro tracks.

I was already familiar with layering, dynamics (volume and filters), buildup structure, the basic things actually.

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo I believe it to be a good idea to leave ALL fx (except for filters) until the end when you're mastering.. this way you concentrate more on how your MIX sounds.. rather then how the SYNTHS sound..

correctamundo. Things like delays, reverbs, etc can wait to be added later. Use them to write so you know what it is suppossed to sound like, then add them in afterwards. Really helps.

With EQ'ing, rarely do you want to have to add, taking away is almost always better. Adding will more easily distort and/or destroy a sound. Compression is almost an art, and squashing things down too much is very easy to do. you have to be careful and learn how to do it properly. Ideally every instrument will have it's own dedicated compressor, as not all will require as much, if any.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.