TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- i need help seperating string from lead synth

i need help seperating string from lead synth

basically the higher frequencies are clashing with my string and lead synth during the break down..what i want to do is use sidechain compression so that the higher frequencies of the string will duck lower in volume whrn the lead synth play.

im using cubase so how do i duplicate the audio signal in it..its easy in reason because you can use the audio merger and splitter but how in cubase??

what compressor should i use too?i have waves and t racks..

You know that the problem is that the frequencies are clashing, and you want to solve it with sidechained compression!? On a lead!? FFS, use EQ!

When all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail...

i know what your saying but ideally i would like it so that when the both are playing together just the high frequencies on one instrument ducks..then when there on their own they sound back to normal...using eq sidechaining someway..cant figure out how to multiply output signals though

hmmm not that I think it's the best way...as Digi said, you should use EQ, but if you want to do it the way you've mentioned...maybe you could duplicate the signal by sending it to a send...

I do it that way in Ableton...you know when I need a copy of the track I just do a full send somewhere...and work it on the return...

hope it makes sense..

The only way I could thing of to duck a certain frequency range (i.e. "EQ sidechaining") is to use two copies of the single and put a bandpass filter on one to narrow it to the specific range in question, then duck that copy. I guess that's kind of similar to what's sometimes done on vocals except that the copy is reverb, not bandpassed...

You *could* do that with sends, although the routing might get a little tricky. You'd probably have to have 3 group channels - one for the initial send, one for the sidechain, and another to hold the combined output.

You'd have to send to group channels, not FX tracks, because FX tracks can't be routed anywhere but the main out.

Or you could just bounce to audio - it's probably a lot easier that way. That's virtually always what's done in vocal processing.

Still - I'm telling you, you're going to get a much better mix using EQ properly than ducking strings off a lead. I'm not pulling any punches when I say that's a really bad idea almost all the time. Ducking strings off a kick or bass isn't the best idea, but off a lead... ew.

Depends on the lead.. could be exactly what it needs and could give it an original unique sound..

Sidechaining IMO is the way to go for this because:

A) to make them fit with EQ you will have to weaken one of the sounds, probably the pad because im guessing its more dominate than the lead. (if your tracks are like mine).

B) will make the pad not so static, give it some movement.

oh and don't use waves SC make sure you get a stereo one.

i agree with mysticalninja on this one for the simple fact that you could get a unique, possibly good sounding, result. also, using a mixture of the two could be a good way to go as well.(mixture of EQ and SC)

quote:

Originally posted by mysticalninja A) to make them fit with EQ you will have to weaken one of the sounds

Err, no, not really. Technically you might be thinning out the sound but the purpose of the exercise is to make them both clear, whereas if it's muddy then they might as well both be "weak". Proper EQ doesn't make anything perceptibly weaker to the listener, it makes every element of the mix sound much stronger (unless it's done for the express purpose of burying a sound).

Even if what you're saying were true in any meaningful sense, it doesn't mean that ducking is the answer. Mixing is an exercise in compromise, and heavy ducking is essentially a cop-out, a refusal to make the necessary compromises.

I know that a lot of amateur producers got very excited when the Benassi-style duck became the flavour of the month, because it was really easy to do and virtually eliminated the need to actually do any mixing (since all that duck effect is really doing is unmixing the sounds, making it so only one can really play at a time). Regardless, it's high time people realized that that sound is officially pass�, and has been for about a year now.

Side-chained effects certainly have their place, but as supplements to a mix, not substitutes for it.

Sorry Digi, but sidechaining is here to stay. Till the end of EDM.

And using sidechaining here is not a cop-out, it's not a replacment for EQ. It's a totally different effect EQ can't acomplish.

quote:

Proper EQ doesn't make anything perceptibly weaker to the listener.

sure it does, cutting with EQ = frequency spectrum less filled = weaker. If you wanted to automate the EQ in once the lead started, then it might not be perceptivly weaker.

quote:

Originally posted by mysticalninja sure it does, cutting with EQ = frequency spectrum less filled = weaker. If you wanted to automate the EQ in once the lead started, then it might not be perceptivly weaker.

if it does than you're prolly not as good with it...why would all profi mix/master engineers use subtractive EQing anyway? The idea behind subtractive EQing is to lower frequencies that are not too much perceptible...but still they occuppy a range which makes the sound muddy/hissy etc...

Though...using sidechain in a unique way certainly could give an interesting result...I would think the result will be messy...(though, maybe interesting!)

well could you please give a listen to the track and see what ye think..its in the music production promotion section and the thread is a synaesthesia remix...

linkzors or stfu

Having tried this on a bass and kick combination, I agree with Diginut. It's better to just EQ out the conflicts while trying to maintain the fuller sound. As Diginut said, mixing is a compromise, and this abuse of sidechaining is a cop-out.

quote:

Originally posted by mysticalninja it might not be perceptivly weaker.

Correct.

It's all about tailoring the illusion of the sound to the perception of the listener.

Depending on the track and the instrument, you may use EQ and/or sidechaining, or neither.

In this case, it sounds like the guy needs to EQ his pad or his lead, though, to make both fit tightly together, since he basically let us know that his track elements were conflicting.

Erm I didn't mean to make it sound like I don't ever use subtractive EQ because I think it makes sounds weaker, infact it's the number one tool I use in production.

quote:

Having tried this on a bass and kick combination, I agree with Diginut. It's better to just EQ out the conflicts while trying to maintain the fuller sound. As Diginut said, mixing is a compromise, and this abuse of sidechaining is a cop-out.

You tried sidechaining a Kick/Bass once, couldn't get it right, and now you consider sidechaining a cop-out? Cool. Was there even a bass note hitting with the kick? I've seen people try to put a sidechain on an OFFBEAT bass because the kick had a long tail, and then wonder why it doesn't sound right..

EQ isn't used in a vacuum, it's done along with proper levels.

You might cut out certain frequencies and then raise the volume to compensate. Or not. The point is, conflicting sounds will all get buried and appear to be weak, whereas proper EQ will bring them all out and they will all sound stronger, in spite of having smaller bandwidths. Ducking, on the other hand, is simply going to bury one sound in favour of the other, which is why it's a great technique for managing reverb and other wet effects but generally a lousy technique for balancing elements of a mix.

You are right about one thing though MN: ducking is not a replacement for EQ, which is precisely why I'm saying that it shouldn't be used as one.

I guess the saying is true, a broken watch is right twice a day.

Most mixes I've heard that I would consider to be professional do not use the ducked/sidechained sound. Some do, but most not, and the vast majority of ones that do, use it to balance wet effects and not to create a pumping sound.

I mostly listen to house / prog tho.

quote:

Originally posted by mysticalninja You tried sidechaining a Kick/Bass once, couldn't get it right, and now you consider sidechaining a cop-out? Cool. Was there even a bass note hitting with the kick? I've seen people try to put a sidechain on an OFFBEAT bass because the kick had a long tail, and then wonder why it doesn't sound right..

Fuck you, too. This was a rolling bassline. I gated the kick, too. I just couldn't hear the fucking bassline when the two hit together. Thanks for being a dickhead.

Lmfao sory.. Try a lower theshold, with high limiting like ratio. with rolling bass u dont wnat that much ducking try around -20 -30 max.

If one decides that EQing is the way to go, to get the pad and lead to not clash, what steps do you take to figure out how each one should then be EQed? How do you figure out what frequencies should be cut or boosted in each? I know how to give a little boost to an instrument to bring it out more, but EQing 2 instruments to get them to not clash seems trickier. Seems to me you would EQ only one of the instruments, not both, perhaps the pad.

A lot of the time my pads seem to not be as clearly heard as I want them to be, even when they aren't clashing with any of the other instruments. I've run into this lately, and it's a bit frustrating.

quote:

Originally posted by zodiac9 If one decides that EQing is the way to go, to get the pad and lead to not clash, what steps do you take to figure out how each one should then be EQed? How do you figure out what frequencies should be cut or boosted in each? I know how to give a little boost to an instrument to bring it out more, but EQing 2 instruments to get them to not clash seems trickier. Seems to me you would EQ only one of the instruments, not both, perhaps the pad. A lot of the time my pads seem to not be as clearly heard as I want them to be, even when they aren't clashing with any of the other instruments. I've run into this lately, and it's a bit frustrating.

That's often correct - you might only need to EQ one of them. Sometimes you'll cut one, boost the other... sometimes cut both... sometimes cut both in some spots and boost both in other spots. Really it's kind of a trial-and-error process unless you've got years of experience behind you.

As for pads, you have to be careful with those; as producers we all like to hear all the sounds we put into the track, but to a listener pads are just atmosphere, background noise. They really shouldn't stand out that much, and we producers have to be careful not to fall into the trap of trying to bring out the background elements too much.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut As for pads, you have to be careful with those; as producers we all like to hear all the sounds we put into the track, but to a listener pads are just atmosphere, background noise. They really shouldn't stand out that much, and we producers have to be careful not to fall into the trap of trying to bring out the background elements too much.

For this reason, I often don't even give my pads much presence in the treble range. I think pads sound better when lowpassed, anyway.

Dynamically attenuating a specific part of a frequency has been done long time before Benny (he just took it to the extreme, which will probably sound funny in a couple of years). Deessers, that serve this function (although usually used on vocals) have been on the market for a long time and used quite extensively.
But, who says you can't attenuate a frequency of your choice on a lead. If it sounds good, it's good...
Cheers
Effero

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