9
Record one long shot.
Split it from the half.
Put one half to the right channel and the other to left channel.
Export a stereo file.
This way you will get a very wide stereo image that is hard to get from a stereo field recording and your sounds in the front will be clearly distinct from ambience.
Do not just transform to stereo. If you do that, you will ...
7
It really depends.
Sometimes you need a global volume boost because the audio is too low anyway to correctly listen to the noise reduction you're applying. Sometimes there's a 50 or 60Hz rumble or any other fixed unwanted frequency that you could remove before denoising...
But generally speaking "the sooner the better". And before any processing other than ...
6
Your real problem is most likely recording technique and possibly the gear you're using. A good sound recorded properly doesn't need any EQ to sound professional.
Where you place your microphone is the most important thing in capturing a sound and works just like EQing when in the right hands.
5
This is called a sibilance, or sibilant articulation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibilant
You can avoid it in the recording process using a pop filter, but in post production there are a handful of de-essers available for taming those sounds. The process involves compressing just the frequency range that contains the sibilant consonants through ...
4
Record 2 mono claps/pulses/shots, however you're generating it.
Move the mic from one side of the room to the other for each, keeping each at the same distance from the source.
Match up the initial claps later, save as stereo.
It won't be perfect, but no-one except you will ever know ;-)
4
Route the output of each track to another empty track. Record arm the destination tracks and then hit record. When the record pass is done all your effects and automation will be "printed" to the new tracks.
4
This is a very big topic, I will start by redirecting you to a very useful site/article: Mastering for Vinyl from Recording magazine.
Also I would like to state that I'm not a mastering engineer, I'm a mixing engineer only working with analog gear, so I'll try to tell you what we keep in mind when going for vinyl. The article is far more detailed and ...
4
If it was recorded with one microphone, there is no good way to rectify this problem.
Vocals and guitars share the same frequencies, so EQ is out of the picture.
Sorry.
4
I don't know if any of the following will work or not, but maybe worth an experiment.
Try a delay of about 1/2 of a millisecond, if you have the capability, between the two channels, of the mono signal. The goal is for the delay to match the amount of time it takes a sound to travel from one ear to the other. I can't remember the exact number--something ...
3
It does depend but most will apply it early in the chain especially if it's an offline process like Izotope Denoiser. It's much easier for the software to work if the noise floor isn't moving around and being compressed, expanded, clip gained, volume automation etc.
3
Your instinct is correct - a reasonable way to deal with this using Audacity would be to copy the section to a second (stereo) track, shifted in position so that an earlier piece aligns with the giggle.
Then use the 'envelope' tool to shape the volume profile of each track. Since the replacement section was earlier in time, lower its volume enough to match ...
3
Speech is anything but "well-rounded". Vowels start at the vocal cords with basically the most overtone-rich signal possible, a pulse train. If you look at the frequency content of such a pulse train, the Fourier transform domain actually also shows a pulse train with (constant-peak) pulses at the multiples of the fundamental frequency. This is the "...
3
(I'm not sure what you want to fix - it sounds sick and genrewise it is spot on!)
Needless to say: always record with a DI so you have the option to reamp later on if something turns out too hot etc. But at this point this advice is not worth much ;-)
I can think of a few things you might try out:
De-clipping: Try to "restore" clipped areas. De-clipping ...
3
In addition to @frcake's excellent answer, I have a few points:
I have been gigging for over 30 years and I still have trouble getting some sounds I want. One solution that most guitarists go for is to have many guitars. All of mine sound slightly different, sustain, wood tone, pickups, bridge, electrics, resonance etc. Some have higher action or greater ...
3
Yes, it is simply a compressor - typically you'd use one with a relatively low threshold and ratio.
And some may store metadata for the whole track once it has been compressed/normalised once. I know my car stereo could do that - would zip through new tracks to identify peaks and normalise against them.
You don't need predictive normalisation though - ...
3
It's 'simply a compressor'... however it's a very specialised type of compressor.
There are probably others in this field, but the go-to name for radio compression is Optimod by Orban
Optimod is, to over-simplify, a multi-band compressor specifically made for radio transmission & includes specific timing & frequency compensation for the way radio ...
3
You can't. There is no mechanism for storing metadata on a bog standard audio CD. The metadata you are seeing is actually stored within iTunes and WMP respectively. Each media player recognises the CD you have burned and invokes the entries within it's own respective database. There are ways of retrieving metadata from online databases such as musicbrainz ...
2
I recommend looking into a free online course from a site like Coursera .
There are also plenty of books available: The Sound Reinforcement Handbook by Gary Davis or Modern Recording Techniques by Huber could be a good resource for learning about the subjects you mentioned.
2
First of all: An EQ can not add something to a sound that is not there!!!!
This is a very important fact, as a lot of beginners feel like they need to put on a magic frequency response in the EQ to make a sound big or stand out.
But there are roughly 3 situations where you want to use an EQ:
On all of those as a rule of thumb: Wide Q boots and small Q ...
2
Loudon Stearns of Berkleemusic.com runs Introduction to Music Production course on Coursera. It's free.
I can't recommend Loudon's courses high enough.
If you hooked up, you may also choose to take his paid Berkleemusic.com course. It will blow you away. I promise.
As for the choice of gear and software, it strongly depends on the kind of music you want to ...
2
The question is a bit vague. There are lots of books about film, and quite a few books about film sound. But most won't mention any differences between Europe/US other than in anecdotal form.
There really is no "magic" difference. The main differences between big "Hollywood blockbuster type" films and typical European films is budget, number of folks ...
2
Pan and EQ each differently. Then mix them all to provide a wash/bed. Then ride the levels so that they take turns "poking" out.
2
Do some tests using all permutations and trust your ears. The more you take this experimental approach to your work the better idea you will have about which techniques suit which circumstances. Learning by experience will build your skills far better than just doing what you're told is 'the' answer.
2
A long-shot, but this might work if you have a similar setup to mine.
It works equally well for DVD [I don't have a BluRay] TV, catchup, YouTube, Netflix, VLC, etc etc
I use my PC's built-in 7.1 analog outs to my 5.1 amp [which saves double decoding & odd phase issues I get over S/PDIF, or HDMI.]
My built-in sound is a Realtek HD device [I know, not ...
2
Full rattling is as Tetsujin said a matter of adding something to the mix, potentially a field recording or synthesis. However, you can get a lot closer to what your looking for by using a combination of amp/cabinet/speaker simulation, short reverb, distortion, etc. There are a variety of plugins for this. An interesting approach would be Ableton's "...
2
There's Way too much to go into here, about leveling audio, and as I haven't heard the audio clip, I will keep it short.
The speech leveller is probably causing the problem and you may not be using the hard limiter properly.
I would suggest scrapping the speech leveller and instead using the single band compresser with 'instant' attack(0ms) ,a short ...
2
The processing really depends on the material / the track you have; since the track is an instrumental, we can assume that instruments take over the most of the frequencies palette (if not true - even better). To mix in the vocal, you need to have some space in those frequencies so your vocal recording wouldn't clash with the music, but rather "sit" into it. ...
2
The main thing you will want to do is to enhance the bass part of the spectrum in order to enhance realism. Obviously increased level will be necessary (relevant to other elements in the mix) but the bass part of the mix will be the most important in order to enhance realism.
2
Yes, you can definitely fix the majority of the pop on that one by effectively removing the DC offset that is in there.
Most DAWs will let you do this - it can be a bit fiddly, but the aim is to zoom in as much as you can to see where the DC offset starts, and remove it. From your graph it looks like it was suddenly applied to both channels and then ramped ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible