Flatten Sound

caelans

New member
Hi,

I'm using FL Studio.

When designing sounds, I like to use lots of effects to make trippy and interesting sounds. Think Shpongle, or Ott.

However, certain effects that I really like, such as delay, phaser, flanger, filter etc., at certain settings they cause the sound to peak at certain points, and then go quiet at others.

Over the time I've been producing, I've managed to get things to sound a lot better than they once did, but the sounds and the clarity are still lacking.

I use compressors, multiband compressors, limiters, trying different ordering and combinations of the two, and although I can get the waveform a little flatter I can't stop peaking without the limiter, but the limiter will make it sound a bit naff at points when the input sound is clipping and details in the sound get a bit lost due to the limiter. I try EQing after to give the sound more presence at various frequencies in the spectrum. I've also experimented with FL's Maximus considerably, adjusting stereo separation in different frequency bands, as I've found that can help bring certain details out. I also experiment with removing frequencies from the sound that don't make a difference in the context of the other sounds playing around it.

So if I ease up on the limiter so that there's not so much distortion and loss of detail when the waveform gets louder, while the individual sounds don't clip, the sum of all of the sounds cause clipping, but if I turn it down such that it doesn't clip, it just sounds really quiet and lost in the mix. I also route melodies into their own channel and limit the spikes, and do the same with drums, bass, and other classifications of sound, which does help considerably.

But I still can't get certain sounds to stand out, and on anything other than my good headphones, just sound like what could be described as 'blurry', e.g., not clear?

I also add a little distortion to sounds too which often helps.

What are some tips so I can get flatter waveforms with all these effects and stop the clipping and hear more details in the sound?

------------------------------------

Another issue I have is with the filter, I really like how some noises sound after applying a low-pass filter, and sounds really good on decent headphones and details can be heard, but on anything else the sound is lost and you just can't hear detail, it just sounds like a droning noise with no gaps.

Is it simply that due to the low-pass, the high-mids and highs are gone, but are required to give detail to a sound, or is there another trick that can bring out the details?


I listen to the epic noises of Shpongle, and the waveform just sounds flatter, and details poke out, and I can hear he makes extensive use of these effects, so obviously there is a way to flatten these sounds.

Any pointers or tips would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you all in advance.
 
Last edited:
Sound design practice. Also study all the types of synthesis you use and see what's causing the noises to go the directions they go in.
 
Hi,

I'm using FL Studio.

When designing sounds, I like to use lots of effects to make trippy and interesting sounds. Think Shpongle, or Ott.

However, certain effects that I really like, such as delay, phaser, flanger, filter etc., at certain settings they cause the sound to peak at certain points, and then go quiet at others.

Over the time I've been producing, I've managed to get things to sound a lot better than they once did, but the sounds and the clarity are still lacking.

I use compressors, multiband compressors, limiters, trying different ordering and combinations of the two, and although I can get the waveform a little flatter I can't stop peaking without the limiter, but the limiter will make it sound a bit naff at points when the input sound is clipping and details in the sound get a bit lost due to the limiter. I try EQing after to give the sound more presence at various frequencies in the spectrum. I've also experimented with FL's Maximus considerably, adjusting stereo separation in different frequency bands, as I've found that can help bring certain details out. I also experiment with removing frequencies from the sound that don't make a difference in the context of the other sounds playing around it.

So if I ease up on the limiter so that there's not so much distortion and loss of detail when the waveform gets louder, while the individual sounds don't clip, the sum of all of the sounds cause clipping, but if I turn it down such that it doesn't clip, it just sounds really quiet and lost in the mix. I also route melodies into their own channel and limit the spikes, and do the same with drums, bass, and other classifications of sound, which does help considerably.

But I still can't get certain sounds to stand out, and on anything other than my good headphones, just sound like what could be described as 'blurry', e.g., not clear?

I also add a little distortion to sounds too which often helps.

What are some tips so I can get flatter waveforms with all these effects and stop the clipping and hear more details in the sound?

------------------------------------

Another issue I have is with the filter, I really like how some noises sound after applying a low-pass filter, and sounds really good on decent headphones and details can be heard, but on anything else the sound is lost and you just can't hear detail, it just sounds like a droning noise with no gaps.

Is it simply that due to the low-pass, the high-mids and highs are gone, but are required to give detail to a sound, or is there another trick that can bring out the details?


I listen to the epic noises of Shpongle, and the waveform just sounds flatter, and details poke out, and I can hear he makes extensive use of these effects, so obviously there is a way to flatten these sounds.

Any pointers or tips would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you all in advance.

Hi there! It seems like you've put some thought in here, its always interesting to hear other's plans of action .

Some thoughts to perhaps look into:

-really dig into sound design/audio concepts including and related to frequency masking, comb-filtering, phase shift. I'm not entirely sure I follow your issues with FXs for example, but I think its likely you can find a solution after some time with these subjects and concepts (if nothing but a refresher to jar solutions loose etc).

A brief example, perhaps related here: multiple phasers or modulators in a mix can quickly create audio-chaos for listeners if the literal arrangement of tracks/sources in the song are not suiting the "narrative" of the song for listeners (too much action for the brain to practically follow or aesthetically appreciate in one particular moment in time). More into sound design specifically (and I believe you suggested this above): within a dense mix it IS difficult for the ear/brain to follow Fxs which create dynamic oscillation/modulation...im not so sure downward dynamic constriction is the solution (yielding loss of fundamental frequencies and/or harmonics, both which make audibility next to impossible as you've found). Perhaps consider compromise here---in both musical arrangements and mixing/mastering, less is sometimes more at the end of the day. You have mentioned several techniques that are very helpful for your predicament. You could consider your ideas here as both tools and ingredients---considering what is a balanced application of each tool, what is a balanced combination of ingredients: define parameters of excess and deficit per tool or ingredient (or sum of ingredients)

For your additional thought about filters:
-I believe you've given yourself part of your solution here=Using low-pass filters eliminate harmonic frequencies...thus upper details are not heard. Though you are suggesting your reference track artist is achieving both "flatness" and "detail"...I would site "frequency masking" here and suggest some time reading/making these ideas your own to further your exploration here.
A nudge here: look into how individual tracks (and their specific range of frequencies) add up to a collective range of audible frequencies, how individual changes to frequencies per individual track can in-fact shift the perceptibly of other neighboring tracks. With these ideas in mind (and with some tinkering in your own time) there are theoretically infinite combinations of of eq/dyn moves to individual tracks which could trick the ear into perceiving a specific synth track as being both "flat" (im assuming you mean without upper frequency harmonics) and yet full o harmonics (detail). Perception is odd and counter-intuitive sometimes it would appear..Another idea if your mean "flat" in terms of dynamics (not frequencies manipulation via EQ), as mentioned above squashing peaks of tracks is another way of ridding your tracks of resonant frequency peaks (perhaps upper harmonics, but more likely fundamental frequencies as these are deeper frequencies, which limiters LOVE to gobble up first)...BUT similar to your (justified) complaints, dull, lifeless sounds are not desirable in music. Limiting the bloody life outta stuff will give you dull lifelessness as well. Like you mentioned though loudness is needed...so as life goes, limits must be set (perhaps unavoidably so) so its all about what you put into life's limits that matter yes?

-A note on headphones: think of them as small stereo amps/speakers. They project and distort audio relative to the parameters of the speaker design (frequency curve and limits (phase alterations), volume limits (distortion threshold)). The action of applying low-pass filters progressively makes available low frequencies more apparent as upper harmonics disappear yes? ---Use a lowpass eq with automatic gain compensation as a test for this, listen to the LFs rise as you drag the low pass deeper.--- So given the freq/volume parameters of headphones which do not technically possess the abilities to produce/project low freq content as large speakers do, it would make sense that using low pass filters in headphones appears to highlight fundamental frequencies (and most likely second order harmonics as well), but on big speakers it becomes obvious that you were not perceiving the boost in LFs below fundamental freq and 2nd order harms (your noted lack of clarity on big speakers).

I hope some perspective can be found here! either way, I am wishing you and yours the best!

-MadHat
 
Hi there! It seems like you've put some thought in here, its always interesting to hear other's plans of action .

Some thoughts to perhaps look into:

-really dig into sound design/audio concepts including and related to frequency masking, comb-filtering, phase shift. I'm not entirely sure I follow your issues with FXs for example, but I think its likely you can find a solution after some time with these subjects and concepts (if nothing but a refresher to jar solutions loose etc).

A brief example, perhaps related here: multiple phasers or modulators in a mix can quickly create audio-chaos for listeners if the literal arrangement of tracks/sources in the song are not suiting the "narrative" of the song for listeners (too much action for the brain to practically follow or aesthetically appreciate in one particular moment in time). More into sound design specifically (and I believe you suggested this above): within a dense mix it IS difficult for the ear/brain to follow Fxs which create dynamic oscillation/modulation...im not so sure downward dynamic constriction is the solution (yielding loss of fundamental frequencies and/or harmonics, both which make audibility next to impossible as you've found). Perhaps consider compromise here---in both musical arrangements and mixing/mastering, less is sometimes more at the end of the day. You have mentioned several techniques that are very helpful for your predicament. You could consider your ideas here as both tools and ingredients---considering what is a balanced application of each tool, what is a balanced combination of ingredients: define parameters of excess and deficit per tool or ingredient (or sum of ingredients)

For your additional thought about filters:
-I believe you've given yourself part of your solution here=Using low-pass filters eliminate harmonic frequencies...thus upper details are not heard. Though you are suggesting your reference track artist is achieving both "flatness" and "detail"...I would site "frequency masking" here and suggest some time reading/making these ideas your own to further your exploration here.
A nudge here: look into how individual tracks (and their specific range of frequencies) add up to a collective range of audible frequencies, how individual changes to frequencies per individual track can in-fact shift the perceptibly of other neighboring tracks. With these ideas in mind (and with some tinkering in your own time) there are theoretically infinite combinations of of eq/dyn moves to individual tracks which could trick the ear into perceiving a specific synth track as being both "flat" (im assuming you mean without upper frequency harmonics) and yet full o harmonics (detail). Perception is odd and counter-intuitive sometimes it would appear..Another idea if your mean "flat" in terms of dynamics (not frequencies manipulation via EQ), as mentioned above squashing peaks of tracks is another way of ridding your tracks of resonant frequency peaks (perhaps upper harmonics, but more likely fundamental frequencies as these are deeper frequencies, which limiters LOVE to gobble up first)...BUT similar to your (justified) complaints, dull, lifeless sounds are not desirable in music. Limiting the bloody life outta stuff will give you dull lifelessness as well. Like you mentioned though loudness is needed...so as life goes, limits must be set (perhaps unavoidably so) so its all about what you put into life's limits that matter yes?

-A note on headphones: think of them as small stereo amps/speakers. They project and distort audio relative to the parameters of the speaker design (frequency curve and limits (phase alterations), volume limits (distortion threshold)). The action of applying low-pass filters progressively makes available low frequencies more apparent as upper harmonics disappear yes? ---Use a lowpass eq with automatic gain compensation as a test for this, listen to the LFs rise as you drag the low pass deeper.--- So given the freq/volume parameters of headphones which do not technically possess the abilities to produce/project low freq content as large speakers do, it would make sense that using low pass filters in headphones appears to highlight fundamental frequencies (and most likely second order harmonics as well), but on big speakers it becomes obvious that you were not perceiving the boost in LFs below fundamental freq and 2nd order harms (your noted lack of clarity on big speakers).

I hope some perspective can be found here! either way, I am wishing you and yours the best!

-MadHat

Wow, thank you so much for the information!

I have been working recently to perfect the sounds and have used some of the tips you suggest, like considering frequencies in other sounds around, and just trying to get the hang of proper EQ, compressor and limiter use.

I will look into the unfamiliar concepts you have presented to me further.

And yes I meant fluctuations in amplitude. For instance in FL, the 'Effector' effects low pass filter at certain settings will cause the volume to increase considerably compared with the sound without the filter.

Or, a phaser for instance, at certain points in the oscillation cycle will be much louder. I find this is very noticeable in the lows to low mids with FL's phaser.

Also Is it detrimental to produce the song on headphones? I don't have monitors you see.

Also, excuse me for being forward, but - if you have the time - I'd really appreciate it if you could listen to what I've done so far and suggest where I might improve with respect to mixing and mastering?

Thank you again for taking the time!
 
Last edited:
Sounds to me like you're overprocessing... you shouldn't need multi-band compressors or limiters on individual sounds. Unless you really have to fix a specific problem.
It's best to view a multiband compressor more as a fancy eq or tonal balance tool than anything else.

Also.. yes, get monitors. Producing on headphones is detrimental. You hear these stories about people mixing albums on their iPhone earbuds and shit.. but in so far as that's not just boastful bullshit, you're talking about experienced mixers with trained ears. They'll instinctly know to keep the bass mono without hearing it or can pick up a harsh frequency their headphone might gloss over just by looking at the spectrum. If you're experienced, and you work in a style with a kind of preset formula for how it's supposed to sound (trap and hiphop for instance)... totally doable.

If you're in the process of learning to mix, and training your ears.. you're more likely to learn bad technique you're gonna have to unlearn. For instance, judging dynamics is hard when they're hammering your ears directly.
You also get fatigued much more quickly, leading to more mistakes because your ears start to mask things (eg. betray you). If you like working with time and space effects.. because you're in the middle of the sound you get a tendency to take stereo much too far.. leading to sumptious tripping on your headphones, but an unfocused, undefined wash of sound on just about anything else. So get them.. a pair of half-decent ones is about as much as a good headphone these days, so there's no excuse. You don't need amazing 3000 dollar monitors to make good mixes either.. If you combine a budget kit with a decent headphone you'll be set for a good while.

For getting a nice, full, warm, organic, well rounded sound.. you should really be looking at using saturation. Sphongle (I think) uses a lot of analog equipment.. that just has that sound built in, while digital has not and is too clean by default. Well saturated sounds sound fuller and louder, at the same or lower peak levels. They hit compressors just that bit nicer and combine into a nicer mix much easier.
 
Back
Top