What rack gear could you not live without in your mixes?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Any technology can be used, overused, or misused

Over-tuning, in my view, isn’t any different than over-compressing or even over-arranging!

I think some of the digital tools make it too easy for overuse and misuse. Over tuning and cut / copy / paste are worse imo than an overcompressed or distorted performance that still has vibe.
 
I can agree that plugins ... have definitely brought quality to the masses.
Sure enough. Plug-ins allow guys like me, a retired member of the masses, to play with all sorts of different sounds without owning a big pile of analog equipment. And, like photo processing software, digital recording software can easily lead to over-processing abuse. Over and poorly processed audio is analogous to over processed photos, it seems artificial. As with so many things, it boils down to how one uses it - and a little often goes a long way. (Um ... er ... as if I was qualified to speak on this ...) James
 
…or perhaps it’s that those tools haven’t yet been in the popular consciousness long enough for their abuse/misuse to become widely interesting!

I dispute the premise that there is a homogeneous popular consciousness any longer, or more precisely that the current version thereof hasn’t inoculated itself to that very outcome. I don’t imagine that the signature sounds of the overused plugins of today will eventually become so ubiquitous as to be recognizable to the casual listener as was the outcome in the bygone era in which a relatively small quantity of analog gear appeared in every top tier studio. That’s a stretch, unless we’re only talking auto tune.

The order of the day now is variety and pillory, fulfilled by the staggering breadth of plugin options available and the “reaction community” (a term I just heard). The vanguard (influencers?) replicate and reject every processor-technique trend the moment it takes off towards ubiquity.

The same has been true of analog. Plenty of us groused about Chris Lord-Algae’s bumper crop of analog compressors whose knobs he never turns and instead uses as his own personal presets. If we could also, well, surely we would. Unless we preferred to shed the colossal weight of a rack of analog boxes. And in that preferred mode I absolutely agree that plug-in technology has advanced in recent years to the point where a laptop and a pair of headphones is a viable option for some diligent mixers who know how not to abuse and misuse the plugin glut. Still, they do so at their own peril as our tube-named friend says.
 
I dispute the premise that there is a homogeneous popular consciousness any longer, or more precisely that the current version thereof hasn’t inoculated itself to that very outcome. I don’t imagine that the signature sounds of the overused plugins of today will eventually become so ubiquitous as to be recognizable to the casual listener as was the outcome in the bygone era in which a relatively small quantity of analog gear appeared in every top tier studio. That’s a stretch, unless we’re only talking auto tune.

The order of the day now is variety and pillory, fulfilled by the staggering breadth of plugin options available and the “reaction community” (a term I just heard). The vanguard (influencers?) replicate and reject every processor-technique trend the moment it takes off towards ubiquity.

The same has been true of analog. Plenty of us groused about Chris Lord-Algae’s bumper crop of analog compressors whose knobs he never turns and instead uses as his own personal presets. If we could also, well, surely we would. Unless we preferred to shed the colossal weight of a rack of analog boxes. And in that preferred mode I absolutely agree that plug-in technology has advanced in recent years to the point where a laptop and a pair of headphones is a viable option for some diligent mixers who know how not to abuse and misuse the plugin glut. Still, they do so at their own peril as our tube-named friend says.

You don’t think Decapitator has become ubiquitous, overused, and recognizable?

Just for one example…
 
You don’t think Decapitator has become ubiquitous, overused, and recognizable?

Just for one example…

Like hardware units: 1176, SSL Bus comp, L480 Hall preset, SPX90, EMT 140 Plate... for example
All overused over the years and recognizable

I don't see any problem with that, I like all of them in hardware form or the best plugin emulations of those units, as I like Decapitator.
Overusing good things might not be a Bad thing
 
Yeah, I also overused Decapitator and now I’m overusing SIR Standard Clip instead. I think overuse plus tweaky exploration can yield exciting results.

In the history of getting “that sound” from hardware I’m thinking of how many studios abused the few popular models of tape machine by hitting the tape hard. There was still some significant degree of variation in the result due to variables including machine maintenance (or lack thereof) and tape type/age. That was replaced with a generation of engineers abusing the soft limit on popular analog to digital converters. We recognize those sounds.

Plug-ins come and go from favor far more quickly. Maybe that’s good, and brings me back to my hypothesis that the overused now can barely achieve recognizability before being supplanted.

Apologies for all the rambling. I only intended to commiserate with others who struggle with plugin induced laziness. It requires adaption, and now there’s plenty of plugins that are good enough to motivate the effort.
 
A separate discussion that would be very interesting to me is how people are using hardware processing in tracking and why. Surely there’s some inspiring tricks to share.
 
Recording vocals with good writers but ok singing is a struggle of dynamics. I like having my vintage LA3a compressor for managing those ups and downs along with distance from the mic when printing. I like using clip gain to manage sibilants. I have time these days to go through a vocal but not overwork it. A songwriter may have unpolished vocals that add character IMO. The trick is recognizing what to leave alone.
 
A separate discussion that would be very interesting to me is how people are using hardware processing in tracking and why. Surely there’s some inspiring tricks to share.

I use simple stuff while tracking and rely a lot on Mic positioning and Mic choice rather than using EQ while tracking. Very simple concepts like if I want more treble from an instrument, I will change the mic for a brighter one rather than using an EQ, also if I find an instrument too bright I might using a Ribbon mic instead to smooth it up. If I want an in your face sound I might use the mic very close, while if I want a more natural, loose and roomy sound I position the mic further away. Very simple stuff.
But before than that I like to have instruments/sources already with character and not with a generic or uninteresting sound. So I might give advice on a different amp or different instrument to be used in the first place.

I can't live without good mic preamps, and I choose each individual mic preamp for each individual source and mic. So I might choose Neve Preamps for sounds that I want "rounder" with body and less peaky, and API preamps for stuff that I want to have snappy (fast) transients and punch. Then some preamps with a lot of clean gain for Ribbon Mics, as ribbons already have a lot of character on their own, so I just need a lot of clean gain for them.

I might have a Night EQ if I use Ribbon mics for overheads, as I like that combo to brighten up Ribbon mics, in situations were you really want the ribbon character and not a conderser mic, but the ribbon is too dark.

I use compressors always for Snare, Bass, Electric Guitar and Vocals.

Snare gets the 1176 (slower attack, faster release), if there's none available in the studio I will use a plugin later on,
Bass could be an LA2A, LA3A, LA4A, Distressor or DBX160, depending on whats available, but gets a compressor for sure in tracking. I always use at least 5:1 ratio on bass
Electric Guitar I like the LA4A

Vocals: I choose the Mic for that singer and for that song. For vocals I'm a big fan of a Neve 1073 (Mic Pre+EQ), I'm not a fan of API for vocals. The EQ on the 1073 is only used if needed just for some general tone shapping, might be needed at some point or not, but it's good to be there. Then I like to use 2 compressors. A compressor Combo of an LA2A into a Distressor, 2 to 3 dbs of Gain reduction in each (fast realease on the Distressor). When tracking vocals I prefer to use 2 compressors doing less than only one compressor doing a lot, it also adds a bit of the character of the LA2A and a bit of the Distressor.

If I need some distortion, or grit, I might send a Mic Preamp out to another Mic Pre input and distort/saturate to taste. Or smash the sound with a lot of Pumping in an 1176 or an SSL bus comp. I will normally record that into separate tracks.

So this is basically it for me, just the general idea, could change depending on the session and type of music. But somehow I learned how to record without using EQ and depending on changing the mics and the positioning, so I got used to it, even though I'm not a purist at all.

But this perspective changes while mixing, then I might use a lot of EQ and everything else as needed. If I need to have 8 plugins in a track to get the sound I want I will not have any problem with that. I'll use what I think is needed, sometimes it's less other times more.

Sorry if this is boring
 
Last edited:
You don’t think Decapitator has become ubiquitous, overused, and recognizable?

Just for one example…
Saturation is one of the very reasons people love analogue gear, transformers and valves! How can you say saturation is overused. It is the essence of great sounding records. A 1073 to me can sound at its best at the point of saturation. What about the culture vulture? There are many analogue units dedicated to saturation and other gear that does it by design. Now we can get the same sounds from decapitator.

I think the case is badly used saturation effects be it analogue or digital. Which bears no relevance to the plug-in, but is the responsibility of the person tweaking the knobs.
 
Recording vocals with good writers but ok singing is a struggle of dynamics. I like having my vintage LA3a compressor for managing those ups and downs along with distance from the mic when printing. I like using clip gain to manage sibilants. I have time these days to go through a vocal but not overwork it. A songwriter may have unpolished vocals that add character IMO. The trick is recognizing what to leave alone.

I can relate - I mostly record bands that I also play in, which means I mostly record amateur musicians. They are often good writers but somewhat less than polished performers. It takes restraint for me not to attempt to fix every little imperfection.

Back when I recorded to tape the test was simple, I’d ask “Is it noticeable enough to be worth the effort of doing a punch-in to fix it?” In the digital realm there’s an expectation of doing many takes and comping together, which has never yielded as good a result for me.

> I like using clip gain to manage sibilants.

Excellent point worth highlighting. I think clip gain is such an important feature for hybrid mixing setups. Larry Crane taught me that.

It’s amazing how much you can improve an uneven take using only clip gain. It requires zooming way in and listening close for where to cross fade to hide the edits or edit precisely on a zero crossing in the waveform.

Plosives can be handled effectively with clip gain as well, usually in combination with rendering a high pass filter or low shelf EQ to reduce the low frequency energy.
 
Overusing good things might not be a Bad thing

Um ... ahem ... this is an unfortunate syntax. "Overusing" is a pejorative word, i.e., it always has negative connotations and is intended to disparage or belittle whatever object it modifies. Overusing something means to to use that something excessively or too much; and too much is always a bad thing. We should not overlook or ignore the word "too" in the locution ... because, it is a good thing, then it was not used too much.

I do NOT intend to be overly critical or pick nits - I am merely suggesting we should be a bit more precise BECAUSE MR WHOPS RAISES AN IMPORTANT POINT. The discussion turns on just what IS the proper scope for using these tools; just where do we draw the line between use and overuse? Is it a sliding scale subject to change over time? Is it context dependent on what type of music we are producint? While heavily distorted heavy metal guitar was once considered excessive distortion, that sound has infiltrated pop, country, classical, symphonic, big band, and other styles of music. Mr. Whoops may be suggesting today's overuse is tomorrow's frequent or common use? Or ... what?

So, if overuse is always a bad thing ... when, how and why does it become a good thing and qualify for a different label? Somehow I think this is the rub, the crux of the debate over these audio tools. James
 
You don’t think Decapitator has become ubiquitous, overused, and recognizable?

Just for one example…
The issue with the Decapitator is not so much that it is used a lot for distortion in as much as that it doesn’t oversample, so the distortion has quite a bit of digital aliasing. That is a “novel” kind of saturation compared to traditional analog saturation but becomes easily recognized an can feel'overused at some point. On the other hand applying API saturation ( Jack White knows who I’m talking about) can become tiresome, too.
 
I can relate - I mostly record bands that I also play in, which means I mostly record amateur musicians. They are often good writers but somewhat less than polished performers. It takes restraint for me not to attempt to fix every little imperfection.

Back when I recorded to tape the test was simple, I’d ask “Is it noticeable enough to be worth the effort of doing a punch-in to fix it?” In the digital realm there’s an expectation of doing many takes and comping together, which has never yielded as good a result for me.

> I like using clip gain to manage sibilants.

Excellent point worth highlighting. I think clip gain is such an important feature for hybrid mixing setups. Larry Crane taught me that.

It’s amazing how much you can improve an uneven take using only clip gain. It requires zooming way in and listening close for where to cross fade to hide the edits or edit precisely on a zero crossing in the waveform.

Plosives can be handled effectively with clip gain as well, usually in combination with rendering a high pass filter or low shelf EQ to reduce the low frequency energy.
This point is huge and needs to be understood by more people. In my mixes (and I have to credits to my mentors) de-easing, de-plosives and de-clicking is always done by hand, using gain or automation before applying any processors. The same goes for evening out a vocal before compression. I don’t let the compressor “ride” my vocals- that causes all kinds of artifacts. Use the comps for tone and envelope shaping and ride the levels with automation *before* the compressor.

I track vocals with a hand on the fader and compress after the fader, before the recorder. That way I manually ride the singer into the compressor and I can play the compressor for the tone/intensity I want without getting uneven tonal changes and compression artifacts. I do, however, love a Vac Rac limiter on ‘stun’ on a loud rock vocal during mixing!!
 
Mr. Whoops may be suggesting today's overuse is tomorrow's frequent or common use?

Well I couldn't care less of someones opinion of "overusing" for something related to music production, it doesn't matter at all to me, it doesn't mean anything really.
The reason is that it's all subjective is not a fact by any means, someone might consider something "overusing" while for other people it might just be the perfect sound or production.
In the end it's just an opinion of one person, it doesn't represent by any means the opinion of all others or even a general opinion.
No one is God to consider some production is "overusing" and other is not.
So I couldn't care less.

This year I have an high number of students, aged between 19 and 22 years old, that are into Hip-Hop and Trap production, they are really into Autotune vocals, so someone might consider the way they use Autotune in those styles "overusing" while for them is just how they like it. It's part of that production, and millions of people like it also.
The same way my students could think that my use of distortion and hard pumping compression on drums is "overusing" while I just think it's perfect and exciting.

Above all I like diversity, and what I like about music is freedom, creativity and experimentation.
Even if I don't like some music style or production style I respect it, all styles of music have "overusing" of something.

Doesn't mater what others think, whatever you do, do what you think sounds right and what makes you happy. And if there's a sound that you like a lot then "overuse" it all day long.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top