Uh yes, I forgot another question regarding the dry-wet-ratio (Question 3): I read somewhere on the web, that instruments in the front need less reverb (let's say dry:wet 80:20) than instruments in the back of the orchestra (20:80). Is this really true, because when I listen to orchestral music, strings always seem to a nice, particularly long reverb tail, much more anyway than let's say xylophone which as part of the percussion section in the back would have more reverb according to this rule. Why is this, or is the truth more complicated than that? Thanks in advance!
-
Welcome Quioloy,
you pose some very interesting questions - but honestly, everything else than the most basic answers would fill a book (or two). :-) I'll try to give you some pointers nonetheless.
ad 1. Everything you do with a single track will change the overall impression of your mix, to some extent. Mixing is about relations between all involved elements (... actually, the old term "balancing" describes the process much better than the uninspired word "mixing"). Assuming that there is not one piece of music like the other, there are no absolute rules how to achieve a good mix, and likewise no "one-size-fits-all"-solution for single instruments. - As the guy who created about 80% of all Vienna Suite presets and 100% of all MIR Pro and MIRx settings I think I'm allowed to say that even the most elaborate ones can be just "educated guesses" to support your quest for a good mix. It's more or less impossible to make any final settings without hearing the results in their musical and acoustic context.
ad 2. All the talk about dry/wet ratios of reverberation mean nothing without knowing the original "dry" signal, without knowing the way the reverb engine technically works, and without knowing how these techniques are actually implemented*). Ideally these values you quoted can give you a rough idea what the they are meant to achieve ("more reverb", "less reverb"), but they are meaningless without context.
*) ... just to give you an example: MIR Pro indeed "thinks" in dry/wet ratios, as it is meant to be used on individual signals. OTOH, Vienna Suite Convolution Reverb "thinks" in independent dry and wet levels, as it is meant to be mainly used in an Aux-send scheme rather than as an insert in a single channel. Both approaches make perfectly sense, but you can't compare them by means of "ratios" easily.
ad 3. What you read is a nice example of possible misunderstandings due to (certainly well-meant) information on the web without context. :-) It is most likely that closer instruments will seem to sound "drier" than those further away - but that's not necessarily just a function of reverb level (i.e. "dry/wet ratio"). The shape and sound of the so-called "early reflections" as well as the initial delay between the signal and the appearance of the first reflections are at least as important as the actual reverb level.
What's more, different acoustic environments will interact differently with different sources: The string section you wrote about will create a different acoustic reaction than the xylophone in the same room, simply because the sharp, high-frequency-rich transients of the latter will provoke other reflection patterns than a soft, floating cello-theme. - Oh, and of course the results will be different in another room. :-)
(... one of my pet-topics during a mix is to put those d*mned triangles in the back of the orchestra. Without the use of some dirty tricks a triangle will always seem to sit right in front of your nose. ;-) ...)
Kind regards,
/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library -
Thanks a lot, Dietz, for your basic yet insightful pointers, for that was exactly what I was looking for. Btw: Which 1-2 book(s) on the subject would you recommend?
btw, I'm almost decided about buying Vienna Studio (not pro) in order to have a comfortable tool to learn how different settings change the sound. Hope it's also for beginners. (Right now I'm fiddling with the tiny track EQ in Cubase and that's probably not the way to do it).
-
I love these kind of posts - thank you - they lead forward on one's own tracks of research!
About literature: Following the link some Amazon reviews stated that it doesn't really cover the orchestral side of music/mixing - can you verify this? Skimming through the list, I stumbled over these two books which have formidable reviews by the same author (who has taken his time to explain why he thinks so highly of them). I haven't read them, since I found them right now, but maybe you wanna look into them (review author "sylva").
Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio
Acoustic and MIDI Orchestration for the Contemporary Composer: A Practical Guide to Writing and Sequencing for the Studio Orchestra (take care to read the edit of his review as well).
Kind regards,
Lukas
-
[...] it doesn't really cover the orchestral side of music/mixing - can you verify this? [...]
Well - the physical principles and techncial approaches don't differentiate between the type of music you mix. 😉
/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library -
One more vote for Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio! It contains the same info you would get in 2 - 3 semesters of classes that would easily cost thousands of dollars. Plus the author recommends lots of free plug ins to use, and has tons of audio examples you can download and then use them in your DAW to work through what you learned in each chapter.
If you are looking for a quick and easy way to get great reverb with VSL instruments, (without being an audio engineer) MIRx and MIR are amazing! And, MIRx is very inexpensive, just be aware that it is not a plug in, it can only be used on VSL instruments inside of VIP (not sure if it works in VI or not).
Vienna Suite is great in that there are presets for every VSL instrument. It's a fantastic set of plug ins, but you still need to understand how to use them. You may want to try the Suite out after you read Mixing Secrets.
Michael
