Adding a bit of reverb to the final mix down?

R

ritek

Guest
I was making my first house tune the other day (I usually produce hip hop, idm and DnB) and I decided that the sound lacked a bit of presence so I decided to add a bit of reverb on the main mix channel..... I loved the results, the track sounded a lot fuller and it added much presence and character to it.

I was wondering if this is a common practice or if I should stay away from it?

I also added a plugin by Steinber that has a "smooth - enhance" kinda fader thing.... I moved it all the way to enhance and it also helped a lot.

Anything else I should do, comments?
 
If you add just a little bit of reverb, it does add some body to the mix. I think that some people do it, but I'm not sure if its a widely used/accepted thing to do. I have a nice reverb plug-in and I can get some pretty good ambient reverb that isnt too noticible, but definetly adds some. Basically, if it sounds good, do it . :D
 
I tend to concentrate on adding reverb to different 'instruments' in my tracks rather then the whole thing. This enables me to keep the parts that I want to make the most impact (e.g. kick and bass) nice and dry.
Depends on the music you're making though, as to in what kind of environment it will get played. For club music, you will get a lot of natural reverb when it is played out, so if you've already added overall reverb then it's just going to sound muddy and a bit weak. I've been told that dry sounding tracks have much more impact in clubs. The problem is they can sound a bit harsh and sterile on headphones (where there is no natural reverb) or on small hi-fi systems.
I guess it's about striking a balance.
 
Its used alot, alot more then u think it just depends on what your goin for or what u need...There is no rules really dough once u know how reverb works....
 
Like others, I tend to add reverb to individual tracks (sometimes not at all) or to subgroups. On several (rare) occasions I've added just a touch of reverb to a finished mix during the mastering process. Last time, I rolled off the bottom of the signal I sent to the reverb to avoid muddying the sound and that seemed to work fairly well.

One thing I try to avoid is using a riot of different reverbs and echoes in a single mix. While individual instruments in a real world setting will have different levels and even types of reverb, it can be psychoacoustically disconcerting to be confronted with a thoroughly surreal combination of 'verbs. Still, some of my favorite music has been highly "unnatural." Look at the mixes done for Al Green in the 70s. Some instruments were absolutely dry, some were drenched in 'verb or echo... it sounded more like a dub mix than a band in a studio. But, you know what, it really worked, often as not.
 
If you want reverb DO IT IN THE MIX individually to the instruments. Just reverbing an entire track like that is... a sure sign of an amature production. It will sound bad as well. I mean maybe you could get away with like 1% reverb but I wouldn't do even that.

If you want a "FAT" mix learn your EQ and compressor. Don't resort to these cheap tricks because they will only hurt you in the long run.

My technique for achieving a "fat" mix is to restrain myself from using any type of reverb, delay, chorus, layering or doubling--I force myself to use only EQ and compression until I get the fullest sounding mix that I can possibly achieve.

THEN I add the fancy crap like chorus or reverb.

My theory is that if you add layers, chorus, delay, 'verb and so on early into a mix you will think that it is fat and leave it alone--you won't work the eq/mix hard enough. Save that stuff until later--after you have gotten a fat mix with only basic tools. When you put some 'verb or chorus, or start bringing in the 7 other layers of guitar into the mix THEN it will sound SUPER fat.

That's just me... but I advise heavily against the reverb trick. Sounds like amature night and makes you lazy as a producer. Try to avoid those easy fixes (at least until last).
 
I think there's a lot of merit to what JKM says about working up the mix without 'verb first. (I'm wondering where such a purist would ever use chorus in a mix, though. :D Maybe it's just that I hate chorus fx. Gimme a big ol' Leslie speaker anyday... :D )

I strongly suspect that using his methodology that you'll use a lot less 'verb and other FX -- and that makes a fatter, more in your face mix a lot of times.

Of course, these things are subject to fashion. I remember when I first started at the beginning of the 80s all the dreaded studio product sounded like Toto... flat, paper dry, perfectly manicured... lifeless. So the first thing me and some of my like-minded bretheren did was throw on oodles of reverb and echo (and that was before cheap digital 'verb... ) Everything started sounding like Bauhaus after a while...

I remember learning about gating reverb to add depth without sounding drenched or ringy... but within a few years people were using gated verb as an effect -- and a thoroughly obnoxious one, at that.

Today you still hear some small studio projects with cannon snares with these perfectly uniform 'verb tails that just go "oooo-wump"... Welcome to the 80s.

Lately, I've been hearing more verb, though, and not necessarily from people lost in the past. I'm not sure I'm ready for it, myself. I'm still not sure I've got the dry sound down and I'd like to perfect it before I have to move back to the catacombs...
 
You're right--I use effects in very tiny amounts as a consequence of this approach. However you have to get used to tweaking EQ/compression for hours on stuff. You have to find that magic mix of frequencies and levels.

My use of chorus is pretty light--you'd never know I was using it. Except on guitar where I use my Small Clone like a madman. I admit I'm a chorus junky, I have a Boss CE300 and a Small Clone that I use a lot.

However, *digital* chorus can sound pretty nasty so I don't use that unless I have to or I'm in a rush. If I do use it I will be sparing.

I'm a big believer in 5% wet sounds. :)
 
TECHNINE said:


My use of chorus is pretty light--you'd never know I was using it. Except on guitar where I use my Small Clone like a madman. I admit I'm a chorus junky, I have a Boss CE300 and a Small Clone that I use a lot.
Click to expand...

Uh oh... another Andy Summer fan...

:D
 
ritek said:
I was making my first house tune the other day (I usually produce hip hop, idm and DnB) and I decided that the sound lacked a bit of presence so I decided to add a bit of reverb on the main mix channel..... I loved the results, the track sounded a lot fuller and it added much presence and character to it.

I was wondering if this is a common practice or if I should stay away from it?

I also added a plugin by Steinber that has a "smooth - enhance" kinda fader thing.... I moved it all the way to enhance and it also helped a lot.

Anything else I should do, comments?
Click to expand...


I think the reason reverb on the full mix of a house track sounds good to you is because it makes the track sound more like what you hear in the clubs with the natural reverb from the room. Like someone else said here, I would not suggest that you use reverb in this way. I think you should use reverb on the individual tracks (on whichever tracks you may decide to use reverb on) rather than the full mix as a whole. And even then, do not go overboard with it.
 
I say never say never... but the biggest problem adding reverb to a whole mix -- and the reason it was almost never done when many people were limited to spring reverbs (not everyone had a nice plate -- or a chamber -- when I was coming up) is that the bass components can really wack out the 'verb. Of course, you can minimize that by EQing the 'verb send to eliminate much of the bass going to the reverb. But I think it's best to think of this as a fix-it-in-the-mix stopgap and generally try to get your mix right in the mix stage where you can tailor the sound more tightly.
 
I think dvyce is correct about the reverb issue now that I think about it. And what's the matter with Andy Summers? Heheheh.
 
Well, I've often wondered that, myself...


:D

[I'm just teasin' y'all. Attacking the Police is akin to attacking motherhood and puppy dogs, seems like sometimes. I'd never kick a puppy or my mom or anything, but... ;) ]
 
Well, The Police *were* responsible for "Don't Stand So Close to Me 86" so I suppose occaisional bashing is in good measure.
 
Is "Don't Stand So Close to Me 86" different than the original song or something?

As someone who flirted with the idea of becoming an educator (I was more pointed toward college, though) I sort of identified with that one... and I've called it "the best rock song about being a teacher, ever"...

I also thought "Every Breath You Take" was almost as creepy as Aqualung, in its way, so high points there, too.
 
theblue1 said:
Is "Don't Stand So Close to Me 86" different than the original song or something?
Click to expand...


It shouldn't even be considered the same song. If I remember correctly, Sting himself talked in an interview about how crappy that "DSSCTM 86" song was. :)
 
Track it down and listen to it... it is soooo terrible.

My favorite Police stuff was the creepier, darker stuff like Invisible Sun, Synchronicity II, or Spirits in the Material World.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top