"Claustrophobic" mixes

[Guest voclizr]

Hi John;

Thanks for asking. I have made some progress in that area. I don't recall whom (I think it was James), but somebody advised me to hold back on some of the reverb on the tracks and add it to the overall mix. So I've been looking around for a program to help me achieve that end. I have Audacity, but it's reverb does not serve my purpose well. A week or two ago I tried a shareware program called Wave MP3 Editor 2006. The program has alot to offer, but ran much too slow on my system. In the meantime, I finally figured how to do an "Automated Mixdown" on my Zoom 8-track. This is pretty cool because I no longer have to worry about

"ques", and I can change effects quickly, if I want. You do this by marking "scenes" and the unit takes a snapshot of the setup in between the marks.

I also found a forum for Zoom equipment users. Lots of stuff to sample and download from people who have similar equipment. I've been listening to quite a bit of music from people who use Zoom products and the conclusion I've come to is I've achieved about as much as I'm going to achieve with this piece of gear.

I say this because one of the top guys on that forum has an original song posted and he is lauded by his contemporaries as having achieved "excellent" results. He uses the exact model I do (MRS-802). The song is quite good, but listening to the recording, it sounds much like the results I get. The "claustrophobic" thickness I get in my stuff. So if his is the best there, I guess it the "nature of the beast" and until I can invest in a PC setup (which will be quite awhile) I guess I'll just have to settle for what I got. Some of those guys use Toneports to record with. The guy I'm speaking about doesn't use the built in drum machine on his 802, but uses a program called "Beatcraft". But I AM more satisfied. I did an automix with "Nuclear Confusion" and just cut reverb on the lead vox and it seems to yield better results. I'm finding that with reverb on a digital recording, less is better. Thanks again for asking.

John B.

[Donna]

Your journey is inspiring, JB.

You've tracked many miles!!

[Guest voclizr]

Hi, and thanks for the kind words!

BTW-I'm not tryiing to ignore anybody lately. It's just that my phone service has been on the fritz the past several days, resulting in a very slow internet connection, frustratingly slow, so I don't even bother. Verizon has been taking their good ol time in resolving the issue, but promising repair tomorrow (Tuesday). It's a miracle I can post this much. Anyway, hopefully I'll be back to FULL POWER soon! Luv Yas!

John B.

[Prometheus]

I'm finding that with reverb on a digital recording, less is better. smile.gif Thanks again for asking. smile.gif

Over use of reverb is definintely something to watch... I would urge anyone making use of reverb algorithms to avoid preset surfing. The presets are there to catch the ear, not to be slammed onto a track just as they are... I'm not saying you do this John, but it is a common fault, one which I myself was guilty of at one time...

[Guest voclizr]

It's just that with analogue, reverb seems to provide space and dimension, but with digital it seems to just get lost in the tightness. The thing I have a problem with (with my Zoom) is the lack of headroom. The sound that everything is tight up against your head and you want it to sound like it's a few feet back, but still there. I'm sure you know what I mean. The funny thing is, there are samples of all the different models of Zoom gear on the forum, (PS02, PS04, MRS 802, MRS 1608 etc.) The best samples I've heard (and I've sampled several from ALL models) seem to come from the MRS 8, which is a step DOWN from the 802. This is practically a palm recorder, but has drum and bass features like the 802 (Actually, the 802 lacks bass). The 802 samples ALL have that "tightness" and ALL the 8 samples sound more spacious, but the 802 is bigger & more expensive (twice as much)! The main difference between the MRS 8 and the 802 is the storage media. The smaller 8 uses a Smartcard, whereas the 802 uses a hard drive. I'm beginning to think I should have spent half the money and bought an MRS 8 instead! Cheaper, better & smaller!

John B.

[Guest voclizr]

Oh, I forgot to mention, After talking to some of the artists, they tell me that (with the MRS8) most use external gear to enhance the signals. This may be the difference.

JB

[Donna]

Examples, JB?

What kind of gear to enhance signal?

[Guest voclizr]

Things like "Tube" preamps and compressors.

UPDATE: The guy that I mentioned that is one of the top guys on the site (Jedi Zoom Master) who has exactly the same model I have did a remix, and does it sound GREAT! I don't think he has anything extra (external) cos I asked him and he said not. He's an incredable guitarist and most of his posts are cover songs, but he has one or two originals on his page. The first (and the covers) sound like mine) but this remake is so much cleaner. I asked him what effects patches he uses (no answer yet). Maybe I'll get a clue from there. You might want to check him out. He's really good! "Lori's Song" is the original I'm talking about.. He pull the older version. There's some indication he ran it through Krystal. I can't use that on my desktop. (Wish I could)!

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=299442

Check this guy out too. Another Zoom Jedi Master. Uses MRS8. I love this song!

http://leeszwast.com/mymusic/HerDiary.mp3

John B.

[Prometheus]

Yeah, it's widely thought that recordings that are created exclusively in the digital domain can come across as sounding a little lifeless. They often tend to end up bright and harsh sounding compared to analogue ones. For the likes of Donna's four track Tascam machine, the dbx noise reduction adds a certain flavour to the sound as does the fact that a bit of clipping produces nice warm harmonics in analogue tape machines as opposed to an insidious crackle and dropout on a digital recorder. The dynamic limits of the tape itself produces a warm and natural surrounding compression...

The headroom problems you mention John are solved by upgrading to 24 bit dynamic range. I can reach plus six dB's on my analogue desk before I even have to start contemplating whether the 10 10 converters will overload. I can overload my condenser microphone capsules before this happens. I would urge you, when you do switch to the PC as you've mentioned, to upgrade your sound card to 24 bit... In this day and age, it really shouldn't cost you more than twenty or thirty dollars...

Edited August 11, 2006 by Prometheus

[Guest voclizr]

You know what? For a brief time I thought I could achieve 24 bit recording with my Zoom. I was at a music store yesterday that sells Zoom gear and the sales rep told me that my model, which by default is 16 bit could be converted to 24. I asked him to demonstrate. He couldn't remember offhand but told me "it's in the manual". When I got home, that's the first thing I checked. No dice! Yeah well...........

John B.

[john]

Hey John

Unlikely, but it could be possible. Check and see if there is a firmware upgrade for your zoom. you might find info after you upgrade

Cheers

John

[Guest voclizr]

Been watching the sites for that kind of info. Nothing yet.

John B.

[john]

Hey John

What's the model?

Now I've asked, I bet you mentioned somewhere above....

Cheers

John

[Guest voclizr]

MRS-802BCD

John B.