How do I get my recordings to sound closer to professional

rent a day in a pro studio.

track something simple, and dynamic.

observe what equipment is used.....
gain staging....
mic choices.....
especially pay attention to the sound of the room.


ask to sit in on the mix, just to watch and learn.

listen to the playback, and get a copy.

take it home and study it.

compare it to your stuff, to see where the differences are.


your answers are in that process.

I would give Danny Danzi a try at mastering.

Danny provides a vid when he mixes for you. Maybe he will do the same for mastering, remembering that every master project is as unique as a mixing project.

bitflipper


IMO if you're not happy with it now, having it professionally mastered probably won't make a night and day difference. The magic really has to happen in the mix. Why not buy time in a professional studio and have it mixed while you watch? Any for-hire engineer should be willing to teach you for the same hourly rate they'd charge to you to do the mix. Seems like a better investment.

Or, as I said DFanny will mix and provide a vid of what he did and compare it to what you did. For a fee of course.

I don't think there is any easy answer to that but go through the motions with your ears. I dont have the same level as some of the guys above but Ive come a long way, and most of it has to do with practice, knowing what Im hearing and knowing what to use to make that change!

Im at the stage now where Im desperately trying to figure out how to tackle the mids, which are often left (as AP stated) after hi and low pass filtering.

bitflipper is right too, If the mix is shot, a master will do f all for it, the magic must be in the mix.

Id recommend Danny too, he's fairly priced and he really likes his job, meaning that he will explain it really well and give you his time of day.

Best of luck,

Cian

Thanks Ed, Clifford and Cian! Much appreciated.....tour hugs! :)

Mun: I think this is a pretty good mix and you're being a little hard on yourself brother. The one thing I hear which is no fault of yours is the mp3 encoding really took a lot from your song in my opinion.

Great classic rock vibe, loved the song, the vocals were great and there are some really nice things going on here.

A word about trying to make things super pro: To get pro, you have to think pro, know pro and buy pro. Once you do all that stuff, it's how you use it all that makes it even more pro and of course picking up bits of information from those you admire.

If you ever hear a recording someone has done that impresses you, by all means email them and ask a few questions. Worst case scenario, they will not share any info...but most times they will to an extent. Your recording habits, how you capture sounds, what gear you have...and of course your ears and know-how all make it into the scheme of things. I think you have a really good grasp on everything, so the things you may not know...aren't out of your reach in my opinion.

Studio's and booking time: To me, this sort of thing is a lot like going out and buying a book. Though books can be VERY helpful, they can also be incredibly mis-leading and here's why. When you got a pro engineer or producer telling you all these things that he does (which most do NOT show you step by step how to do these things) 8 times out of 10 it doesn't apply to the gear you use.

So if you went to a pro studio, you would definitely pick up a great deal of knowledge, but there's only so much you can do if you don't have the stuff that studio has. This is one of the cool things about the video's I offer. They are created around what you use, using your songs, your plugs, your DAW (if I have it...I prefer to use Sonar) and we get the best out of YOUR sounds.

You can go to a studio and watch a guy mic up a snare. You can use the same mics and procedures and not even get close if you don't have the snare he used. This field is difficult in that area which is why I am very cautious about buying audio books. It doesn't help me if the gear they are teaching on is in the millions with a million dollar room to go with it. It doesn't help me if they are using outboard gear that I don't have....so these are the things to keep in mind and they all stem back to "how pro do you want it?"

I had a guy send me a song to do for him where he wanted me to mix it and turn it into this pro recording. The sounds he used were horrible and my hands would have been tied. I couldn't take the guys money because in certain situations, you just are NOT going to make a bad performance or badly chosen sound sources to sound like a major label. It just ain't gonna happen.

Instead, I offered him an alternative. I ran video and I resampled as much of his project as possible while keeping the originals archived, and showed him what he could have if different sounds were chosen. I then played guitars using both expensive gear so he could hear what it sounded like in case he wanted to purchase it, and then did it on stuff I had which is much cheaper and easier to afford. So he got nearly 3 different ways to do his project. I turned his badly recorded drums into midi using Audio Snap and then ran different drum modules and ran Drumagog on them as well showing hybridding methods.

So there are loads of things you can do to make the best use of what you have without spending a bundle really. It's also nice to have a video of your song showing before and after processing so you can see where you may have went wrong...or where you can make things different. And you have it for life without a one-trip studio visit that may not apply to you since they don't have the gear you have or the DAW and plugs you use.

Not trying to sell you on it, honest...I just figured since the guys mentioned it, I would tell you a little about how it works. As for mastering, I don't do any mastering vids because...well, there are just some things I like to keep to myself. LOL!

Anyway, I think you did a really good job on this. There are a few things I would do differently within your mix and would do different things via mastering, but to be honest, you did a good enough job in my opinion to where it would be pure subjectivity and not worth me mentioning really. I don't hear anything blatantly wrong other than the encoding really sucking the life out of the tune which is another reason it's not fair for me to comment on the mix more. But it sounds like a really strong demo where the engineer had a clue as to what he was doing. That's really as far as most of us can get anyway without spending a chunk of change that becomes another mortgage. LOL!

-Danny

There ain't a whole lot wrong with this mix. The vocal sound is a bit thick, overpowers the accompaniment slightly. One or two times the guitars stick out unnecessarily, but I think overall this is something that sounds pretty good.

.

+1 all.  I've heard a couple of the Op's songs and believe he has already achieved the goal of being excellent and professional.

Honestly, mixing and mastering, recording and singing, performing and inspiring, living life to the fullness, etc. ... requires cascading miracles, IMHO.  

(not trying to sound religious (I'm not pure) ... but miracles and your/my 'utmost emotions' (aka music) oft require a bit of faith and compassion toward humanity and/or God)

One artist may affirm that honesty and persistence guide his masterpieces.  I agree.

While I won't deny that Danny Danzi is the dream ME for us; I would probably swear that everyone of us here ... does have a pro-hit story to sing ... someone will love you/I.

IOWs:  Who knows why?  I dunno.

Somewhat on topic:

An icon-rock-star may be just an illusion ... he/she gets 'replaced' by fickle listeners, etc.

What is pro sounding here might not be so pro sounding there.  

Have any of you tried skating to Led Zep?  Not very pro-sounding for skating despite being icon-rock.

Thank you everyone!  Danny specially you.  Being a stubborn SOB, I remain focused on teaching myself how to get this right.  So I have taken the feedback and created another mix.  I focused on getting a more defined bottom.  It is definitely better than the previous version.  But when I listen to my reference track, there is a sweetness in the highs that I just cannot get.  My snare sounds harsh compared to my reference.  The acoustic guitar as well.  Anyway what do you guys think?  If I am not closer, Danny we need to talk!

http://soundcloud.com/sun...n-the-name-of-paradise

munmun


Thank you everyone!  Danny specially you.  Being a stubborn SOB, I remain focused on teaching myself how to get this right.  So I have taken the feedback and created another mix.  I focused on getting a more defined bottom.  It is definitely better than the previous version.  But when I listen to my reference track, there is a sweetness in the highs that I just cannot get.  My snare sounds harsh compared to my reference.  The acoustic guitar as well.  Anyway what do you guys think?  If I am not closer, Danny we need to talk!

http://soundcloud.com/sun...n-the-name-of-paradise

(Long post ahead Mun....sorry. I tried, but there's no way around it to really explain this the right way.)
 
Not a problem man. Trust me, I know all about that stubborn thing. The problem with me was....I was so stubborn it took me 15 years to finally throw myself at the mercy of an engineer to teach me what to listen for as well as updating my entire monitor/listening experience. LOL!
 
The first thing you probably need to do is create a drop box account so you can post a good 320 kb mp3 in there and give us the link so we can hear it without the artifacts Soundcloud is adding. It's definitely affecting your cymbals and snare...and if it's not, we definitely need to talk. :)
 
Keep in mind, and I mean this sincerely...9 times out of 10 your monitor environment is the culprit. You can't fix the right stuff if you can't hear the right stuff. For example, I'm not hearing any kick drum barely at all on my end. I hear it but I don't feel it when all the music is playing. This tells me 3 things it can possibly be...or all 3 working as a team:
 
1. Your system is putting out lows, so your curbing them.
 
2. Your snare is paper thin and a bit harsh with no resonance. It just sounds like a pop...not really a full bodied snare drum. This could be due to #1. Your system is putting out lows, so you feel curbing the snare is the answer...which it is, but if those lows you are hearing in your system really don't exist, you'll never fix this problem and will remain searching for the right low end punch while carving things up to sound harsh where they shouldn't be.
 
3. Your kick is frequency masking with your bass.
 
My final advice: I still don't think you're far off, but the distance off that you are is going to involve a little work or you'll never fix this stuff.
 
First, you may want to do some room correction if at all possible. I use ARC here and absolutely love it in all my rooms. ARC also tunes my monitors. I get a lot of flack for bringing it up on this forum, but if you listen to the songs of those that have went out of their way to attempt to make me feel like I shouldn't brag about ARC, and then would like me to share some of my current works....you'll see that these certain individuals that stalk me about ARC, can't mix their way out of a wet paper bag to be talking such trash.
 
It's a fantastic tool. Those on this forum that use it seem to always get highly praised for their mixes and there are several. Again I say, it's a wonderful tool that is simple to use and it works for about 95% of the people that try it. Some have had bad luck with it and it failed for them....so there is a chance of failure. But it's never failed me in all the years and rooms I've used it in with every set of monitors other than NS-10's that didn't have a sub on them. As soon as I added a sub and did the correction again, my NS-10's are now as good as any other monitor I use.
 
Monitor tuning is another thing. You could go out and buy the best monitor rig in the world and be no better than you are now unless you correct the monitors to be flat. If a monitor rig puts out too much low end, this forces you to compensate and cut out the lows when in reality, they don't exist.
 
The same with monitors that may be mid range based or top endy and bright. This forces you to curb mids and high end when in fact, these mids and highs aren't really there. I mean they ARE, but once you correct your monitors, it balances them so what you hear is what you're supposed to hear. This stuff alone can be the death of you and all you do is waste time trying to compensate if you stay on the course you're on if this is indeed your problem.
 
There are free tools you can look into on the net that allow you to test your monitors as well as your room to find out where you may be lacking or where you may be putting out too much junk. The problem with it in my opinion is, you have to be selective in the mic you use to take the room snap-shot.
 
The wrong mic can give you the wrong outcome. If you create a post on monitor correction, the guys will come out and tell you what programs to use as well as how to do it. I just felt better with ARC as the mic that comes with it is made for the software as well as how it analyzes your room and monitors. But you could always hire someone to come out and do it with a scope. You'll need to provide an eq for them so they can remove/add the frequencies to flatten your monitors.
 
Don't listen to the masses....buy a sub. Anyone, no matter who they are, that comes on here and tells you "you don't need a sub for small rooms" is out of their tree. I have a sub in every room I mix in. The key is how much of the sub you allow when using it. Most near-fields can't get down low enough to those nice frequencies we need in our music.
 
They claim they can, but you may never hear it. With a sub, there is no mistake and no second guessing. You may need to experiment with how much or how little of the sub you allow, but you should be able to fix that in 3-5 mixes really. If you are mixing bass light, you lower your sub so it forces you to mix more bass in your mixes. If you are mixing bass heavy, you raise your sub so it forces you to mix with less bass.
 
The only problem with just guessing at it is, you may select the wrong sub frequency to boost on your sub if it has a frequency control. Knowing what sub area is right for your room is something you just have to know really. You can experiment and get a feel for what works best in your room though. For example, at my main studio, it's 85 Hz on my sub. At my new studio, 75 Hz was the best choice.
 
Next, and this is last because without the above, you'll never get it right. But the last on the list is knowing what and how to listen for something. Just about always, we need to be taught how to listen for this stuff. Some guys are naturals, others need to be taught things like when, where, how and why to choose a certain low end push for a kick drum or a bass guitar. What makes up the harshness in a guitar tone...when is it too warm, when is it too bright and what frequencies need to be adjusted for the best results? How much to high pass, how much to low pass...when to high pass and low pass as well as when to use shelving.
 
When is there enough vocal brightness in a take to where it's bright but not producing sibilence? When should a bass be boomy and when should it have a little more high end clack so we let the kick drum lead the charge? When should a piano be thinned out, or a orchestra patch and how do you go about it? How to make a vocal choir sit in a mix with other instrumentation....all this stuff is something you can sit around and experiment with, or you can have someone show you the good and the bad. Even when someone shows you, you still will need to hone your skills...but at least you have starting points and that comes from learning how to identify frequencies and almost speak "frequency".
 
What's a good sound that can be used in a recording...what is a bad sound that shouldn't even be kept to where you waste loads of time. Choosing the right sounds will always be the most important at the tracking stage as well as knowing what and how to listen for something. But without the right monitor environment with at the least, having your monitors correctly tuned, you're a fish out of water. Rooms can come into play with messing up the sound of a monitor system, but trust me when I tell you, the room is the least of your worries of the monitors themselves are giving you false representation.
 
Most home studio study rooms, bed rooms and office type rooms do not need room correction unless you are really experiencing problems. A corrected monitor system should be enough and HAS been enough for me when I've worked in those types of rooms. People give rooms a bit too much credit. When you are on top of your monitors with them being corrected monitors, as long as they are not up against a wall a basic office/bed room/small studio room is not going to be a problem.
 
But un-corrected monitors without a sub, will just about always be a thorn in your side. That's just my experience if you value anything I have to say. I don't listen to the people that get all scientific about how they correct their rooms and then show you examples of their audio work that sounds like an amateur. Yes, it can be important...but if you're just a home recordist looking for good, accurate sound, you don't need all that ugly crap degrading the look of your home.
 
So keep some of this in mind and see if you can look into any of it. The day you feel you've had enough to where you're tired of taking CD's out to your car, listening to them while writing stuff down that you will change once you get back in to your studio to where you can't hear what to change once you're back there because you don't hear what you heard in your car, is the day you'll submit and make a difference for the better.
 
Just don't waste 15 years like I did brother. The day I went for help was the day the clouds parted and I actually enjoyed this field without the frustration and actually make a great living at this now. Sometimes we just need help from the right people while doing the right procedures. To me, you can't put a price on that if you love this field and are as frustrated as I was. :)
 
I know I probably come off as a know-it-all or some sort of super engineer. I am NOT. However, I get good results without blatant artifacts. People like my stuff or they don't...but it's rare they would say "too much low end rumble" or "too piercing" or "you have frequency masking going on." I'm a good balanced type of engineer that gets better than demo quality and I've had my rare moments where I've hung with big boy production as well. That's all we can strive for really unless we have million dollar facilities with millions in gear and the technical know-how for it. :) Good luck, hope some of this helps.
 
-Danny

.

Danny, great feedback in the last two posts. The monitoring is everything. Without it you can tweak all day and not get translatable results.

Danny Danzi

Yeah I think you'll like ARC ...
 

Kudos to Mr. Danzi for some of the most helpful, informative postings I've seen here.  Great work, Danny ... may you continue to find success with your music career.
 
Speaking of ARC, I was curious if you decided to go back to the original or if you kept the upgrade to ARC 2.  I think I remember you were having some issues with the new version.
 
Cheers,
Eddie
 

The dog is still on the bone!  This thread has been amazing in terms of pushing me!  Thank you!  Am I closer?  I have worked hard on the low end

https://soundcloud.com/su...n-the-name-of-paradise

Great topic and posts here. I have same problems with my recordings because sometimes even if technically it's all good and sounds good - the recording like e.g. OP's still has that specific homemade smell. How to get rid of that smell it's a million $ question I guess