Do you prefer to adjust vocal effect levels on the input (send to the effect engine) or the output (return back to the mix) and why?
Mixology 201: Effects
- Thread starter Jay Barracato
- Start date
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
Both.
On a console with enough VCA/DCA/equivalent, I will include both input side control VCA to things with natural tails (e.g. reverbs) and output side control VCA to things where I want to control the decay (e.g. tap delay).
If I've got room for another "everything but lead vox" vca, then it will also control the output side of all FX via this third VCA.
Both.
On a console with enough VCA/DCA/equivalent, I will include both input side control VCA to things with natural tails (e.g. reverbs) and output side control VCA to things where I want to control the decay (e.g. tap delay).
If I've got room for another "everything but lead vox" vca, then it will also control the output side of all FX via this third VCA.
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
Since using FX is somewhat new to me, I guess I have mostly been using output side control. What would be the advantage of doing input side level control?
Since using FX is somewhat new to me, I guess I have mostly been using output side control. What would be the advantage of doing input side level control?
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
For FX that should tail out with the music, input side control insures that you cut the feed to the FX unit, but the reverb tail still emerges completely as the music dies out.
For things like a tap delay, slapback verb, reverse verb, or other "special" effects, it is often easier to manually ride the FX output side to control the decay tail than to get it set up perfect in regards to decay via the FX unit control parameters.
For something like a tap delay, which might have several different delay times on different songs, and require a different number of taps on each song, manual fader rides are often most expedient.
For FX that should tail out with the music, input side control insures that you cut the feed to the FX unit, but the reverb tail still emerges completely as the music dies out.
For things like a tap delay, slapback verb, reverse verb, or other "special" effects, it is often easier to manually ride the FX output side to control the decay tail than to get it set up perfect in regards to decay via the FX unit control parameters.
For something like a tap delay, which might have several different delay times on different songs, and require a different number of taps on each song, manual fader rides are often most expedient.
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
For "dub style" repeats, turning up the FX send for the specific phrase only can allow many repeats without having to "edit" the off-beat stuff on the return.
With multiple singers taking turns at lead and background, a different balance of reverberation and delay will allow the lead to be more "out front", so the FX sends on the individual singers need to be adjusted to achieve that.
A common scenario in clubland is a too-loud guitar player. Since FX returns may be set for vocals and/or drums, to enhance a lead, the guitar channel can be left out, not assigned or low in the mix, and sent to the FX, giving a "big" lead sound with little additional volume.
The FX sends on the FX return channels can also be used for regeneration controls or to send a bit of delay to reverb. Between muting one or the other, and sending various amounts of effects to each other on sends, one can instantly achieve a near infinite variety of FX without even changing the effect parameters.
Muting FX returns between songs is easier to do on returns than individual sends, but I do most FX mixing on the sends.
For "dub style" repeats, turning up the FX send for the specific phrase only can allow many repeats without having to "edit" the off-beat stuff on the return.
With multiple singers taking turns at lead and background, a different balance of reverberation and delay will allow the lead to be more "out front", so the FX sends on the individual singers need to be adjusted to achieve that.
A common scenario in clubland is a too-loud guitar player. Since FX returns may be set for vocals and/or drums, to enhance a lead, the guitar channel can be left out, not assigned or low in the mix, and sent to the FX, giving a "big" lead sound with little additional volume.
The FX sends on the FX return channels can also be used for regeneration controls or to send a bit of delay to reverb. Between muting one or the other, and sending various amounts of effects to each other on sends, one can instantly achieve a near infinite variety of FX without even changing the effect parameters.
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
So I asked a loaded question, with my own answers in mind, and Phil and Art basically pegged them all. There are good reasons for doing both. The ease with which you can do them depends on the flexibility you have in routing.
Now I wonder if anyone can come up with some additional reasons that haven't been mentioned.
( I do use a special effect with a long delay that is the opposite of what Phil mentioned and the same as Art mentioned, where I bring up the input for a single word or phase or scat and then bring it back down leaving the long repeat underneath the next line of the song as a contrast)
So I asked a loaded question, with my own answers in mind, and Phil and Art basically pegged them all. There are good reasons for doing both. The ease with which you can do them depends on the flexibility you have in routing.
Now I wonder if anyone can come up with some additional reasons that haven't been mentioned.
( I do use a special effect with a long delay that is the opposite of what Phil mentioned and the same as Art mentioned, where I bring up the input for a single word or phase or scat and then bring it back down leaving the long repeat underneath the next line of the song as a contrast)
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
Good discussion.
I had noticed that keeping the signal relatively high going into my M-OneXL gives a ... warmer, nicer sound than having a cooler signal going in and simply boosting the output on the return.
The explanation in this thread makes a great deal of sense.
The down side of this is that you are closer to over-driving the efx unit so boosting the channel volume on the lead vocals can result in getting enough input to clip the efx if you don't leave enough room.
Jay,
Good discussion.
I had noticed that keeping the signal relatively high going into my M-OneXL gives a ... warmer, nicer sound than having a cooler signal going in and simply boosting the output on the return.
The explanation in this thread makes a great deal of sense.
The down side of this is that you are closer to over-driving the efx unit so boosting the channel volume on the lead vocals can result in getting enough input to clip the efx if you don't leave enough room.
Since I am changing relative levels each song I route the inputs prefader so I don't have to worry about something else changing the levels. But I am also rarely making big changes in the vocal levels during a song after I have set the effects.
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
My experience with a Studiolive and its internal effects proved this to me the hard way.
A slight offside to this is FX when using groups - if you're routing via post fader sends and make wholesale adjustments to group levels that don't incorporate the FX the balance gets fun! A fact lost on some people...
-Gareth
My experience with a Studiolive and its internal effects proved this to me the hard way.
A slight offside to this is FX when using groups - if you're routing via post fader sends and make wholesale adjustments to group levels that don't incorporate the FX the balance gets fun! A fact lost on some people...
-Gareth
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
That's because the SL has no dedicated effects return fader. The whole setup is a PITA.
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
Except for adjusting the effect balance between sources on the individual sends, I tend to use the "master" send level to adjust to get the right sound when I'm soloing the effect. Some "analogue" effects change quite a lot when pushed, and obviously the input level is important for stuff like gated reverbs.
I use the return level or a vca to control the blend into the mix.
Except for adjusting the effect balance between sources on the individual sends, I tend to use the "master" send level to adjust to get the right sound when I'm soloing the effect. Some "analogue" effects change quite a lot when pushed, and obviously the input level is important for stuff like gated reverbs.
I use the return level or a vca to control the blend into the mix.
Re: Mixology 201: Effects
I just had to burn a subgroup or two when I was doing shows on an SL. Major bummer.
I just had to burn a subgroup or two when I was doing shows on an SL. Major bummer.