|
3-d Drum placement... Any thoughts?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| djglacial |
Usually my percussion is just panned around and stereo widened etc on a vertual sound wall in terms of placement in 3d.
I've tried moving them foreward and back using delay, 'verbe and volume and am successful at that, but aside from the almost cliché "distant clap", kicks and heavy booms, I find that instruments such as shakers and hats lose tonnes of oomph.
Any way to make percussion hugely 3d and keep the oomph, or is this a lost cause? All my favorite songs have percussion within 3 feet or so, but I'm talking 15+. |
|
|
| DJ Chrono |
its a good question
I'd like to know how to create a more 3dimentional soundstage aswell, not just for percussion, but for all elements. like how to have a synthline come in from behind, and have effects flying in from distant points across the 3d spectrum.
speaking of this, it would be crazy producing for a surround sound audio-dvd format. I wonder how they do it :conf: |
|
|
| Vizay |
| well as always....if you deconcentrate the kick from the center it will be hard to keep the, as you say it, ooomph in the song... |
|
|
| dj-sean |
| You definitely want to keep that kick centred. Aside from that, the only thing I can really offer is to throw highpass filters on all of your percussions and adjust them to taste. If you listen to a lot of steve porter tracks you'll hear highly filtered percussions that sound awesome. |
|
|
| djglacial |
Decentering the kick is no fun. -_o
I actually have a fundamental dislike for surround sound. Why use four or five channels when you only have two ears? Proper sound processing, rather than the splitting of the channels, is much more favorable in my mind.
There are 4 channel CDs out there somewhere, for those of you interested, but you need the proper equipment to play them.
One thing I like doing is adding 'verbe to a delay and stereo widening the result. This can make the echo sound very much like it was behind you. You must be careful with this, as it can really water down the track. With the reverbe being the only thing coming from the rear, even if it's not very loud at all, your track could sound extremely over-processed.
edit- Adding chorus and the like to your reverbe can yield some interesting results too, but watchout for those crossovers! ; ) |
|
|
| Cuervo79 |
| quote: | Originally posted by djglacial
Decentering the kick is no fun. -_o
I actually have a fundamental dislike for surround sound. Why use four or five channels when you only have two ears? Proper sound processing, rather than the splitting of the channels, is much more favorable in my mind.
There are 4 channel CDs out there somewhere, for those of you interested, but you need the proper equipment to play them.
One thing I like doing is adding 'verbe to a delay and stereo widening the result. This can make the echo sound very much like it was behind you. You must be careful with this, as it can really water down the track. With the reverbe being the only thing coming from the rear, even if it's not very loud at all, your track could sound extremely over-processed.
edit- Adding chorus and the like to your reverbe can yield some interesting results too, but watchout for those crossovers! ; ) |
Well I was thinking that they meant moving it in 3d with only two speakers... besides yes you have only two ears but you can discern in 3d were a sound is coming from.... |
|
|
| djglacial |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cuervo79
you have only two ears but you can discern in 3d were a sound is coming from.... |
Yes.. but you can also portay 3D sound with two speakers as well; the principal goes both ways. And that is why I dislike surround sound: a fundamental difference in principals - it's inconsistant, un economic and is a simplistic solution to a complex problem.
Rather than using 5 speakers, three in front and two in back, you could use two speakers directly beside you and get the same effect - the difference being a surround sound process, rather than channel splitting.
My stereo TV has it, but the speakers are in the TV instead of beside you, giving you only a 180 degree perception. Granted you could still get the full effect using two speakers in front of you, but the wrong ears get too much of the wrong sound.
I find this form of surround is much richer and enveloping than conventional surround, which has definate points of origin in the speaker position. Two speakers beside you also are much less complex to set up, and much harder to screw up. Everyday folks tend not to set up surround systems properly. Perhaps they can't tell the difference, and thus don't care, but I find that irritating as hell.
Also, less thought needed in production == less thought used, generally.
I could go on for hours but I'll stop it here. |
|
|
| Cuervo79 |
| I agree with you.. and I wish i could start producing that way.... but yeah right |
|
|
| djglacial |
There is software out there that can assist you. I had a program once -I think it was a demo- that you could use to make a sample sound as if it was behind you. Then use that as a normal sample.
Either that, or learn exactly why a person can tell a sound is high, low behind or in front and use the tools you have handy.
I'm pretty sure the high pitches are dampened from sounds behind you, while remaining loud. Things below you have more close quarters reverb to them than things above you, unless your ceiling is low, and have less high pitch than things that are above you because of the of the ear muffling the sound.
-Front - clear and loud
-Far - less high pitch and quieter, more 'verbe
-Behind - Muffled and loud
-Above - clear, perhaps close quarters 'verbe (CQ) (like a bathroom... sharp, rapid-fire echoes rather than smooth, long lasting reverbe)
-Below - muffled, CQ 'verbe
-Left - muffled to the right and arrives at the left ear first
-Right - opposite of left!
Don't use too much 'verbe or it won't work right.
The easiest way to figure it out is to snap at different places around your head.
There have to be VST tools somewhere as well. |
|
|
|
|
