Hi guys! Today I was experimenting with these new modern gadgets (ok boomer) that handle the dynamics of 30/60 bands. Now, after years of my career, I think I know the difference between dynamics and tone, but how is it possible that a plugin that changes the dynamics of 30 bands doesn't alter the tonal balance of my track? (Truebalance, span, etc. show the same frequency response).

So am I only reducing when "soft and loud" hit those 30 frequencies but not changing their balance? How is this possible?

 

Which tool did you try? Soothe? DSEQ? Gulfoss? ..

This can be also an issue of measurement. If your frequency analyser is set so that it only shows changes to the frequency spectrum over a long time, but not short term instant reductions, you won't be able to spot a difference visually. Since most of these tools are performing short term reduction in narrow frequency ranges poking out, this will not manifest in drastic overall changes of the spectrum.

 

I tried soniformer by voxengo and smooth operator by baby audio. This also happen with Gullfoss or TEOTE. Or simply with any multiband compressor. I started looking into these because i wanted something that mantain costant the tonal balance of my instruments/master without strange pumping

 

The pumping action is from a compressor, without the correct settings so it doesn't have that result. But why not use an EQ like Fabfilter Pro-Q3? If you hover your mouse pointer, it even shows you the points of interest to you. It can even show overlaps/masking with other channels that also have a Pro-Q3 instance on them.

If you use a narrow Q, you can easily remove resonances and other undesirable things anywhere you want, across the whole spectrum. If you really need to have 30+ nodes, you can always run another EQ instance in series; especially a digital one with no coloration being added. (or even a Pro-MB or Pro-C2 instance, after your EQ). Those narrow types of cuts/attenuation should not change tonal balance, when narrow enough; like a notch filter.

 

Last edited: Jun 22, 2023

It's not, changing the freqs' level is basically what they're doing. The displayed resolution of your measuring tools is not fine enough to show it.

Do you care to rephrase? What exactly is the problem and what do you want to achieve? In music the tonal balance is changing all the time on a more or less small scale in level and time because, well, it's still music, not a fundamental waveform or noise (I hope ).

This.

 

Maybe it's because I started using tools for tonal balance (truebalance by sonible for the majority) and i found that top 50 songs stay practically always in the curve, even when there is the intro, maybe only the bass are down but the mid and high right. My mixes tends to change frequently the curve (it's pop music so my clients usually don't wants a lot of dynamic) so i wanted to stabilize it.. i hope i was clear

 

Ah, ok. I would first start with the arrangement. For instance, no guitars in the intro, room for strings, especially celli cover almost the exact same range.
Mixwise, you can pull up a freq range with a dyn EQ and tame it at the same time (raise statically to fill a gap, tame dynamically so it doesn't overpower). You can achieve a similar effect with an MB compressor. But both have limits in the range where it still sounds musical. Heavy limiting and/or clipping also gives a more static tonal balance (although I'm not a friend of this).

 

You mean heavy limiting the master or the single instruments?

and also, I found that if I limit/compress the melodic part, for example, it doesn't go up and down in volume but still occupy the frequencies of the vocal.. so compression isn't something different from that tonal curve?

 

Only reason I can think of is that the spectral EQ/compressor has automatic makeup gain enabled for all of the bands. That would mean it's only changing the dynamics, not the tonal balance. Otherwise it would definitely change the tonal balance.

Could also be that the changes are so fast that your frequency analyzer don't catch the changes. It depends on how you have the analyzer set.

 

Master. But clipping produces more useful results on track level.

At least less, that's right.

Sorry? Context is missing, is this good or bad in this case?

I'm not sure if I understand this question.

 

tried it yesterday, im sorry but FL Multiband Comp on preset Mastering 2.4 on the Master bus sounds way better than this. May be an upopular Opinion, but i just feel that way

 

Wrong thread? If yes, I can move it.

 

Ok sorry, maybe I'm being paranoid for no reason, I'll try to explain as precisely as possible hoping you can understand:

In my mind it has always been: does a sound have too many volume jumps? Reduce the dynamic range with compression. Does a sound have too many frequencies in the low end? Use an EQ.

Talking about vocals and tonal balance (the curve in true balance)
1. I want my pop vocals to always stay upfront. Reasoning, to simplify let's take a base + vocals example: the vocals are masked by the transients of this base and its frequencies. With trackspacer I cut the frequencies, but if there are parts of the base that are low in volume and others high, my vocals will be masked in the high parts. If I use a compressor on the base, my vocals still won't have enough space to be heard, in terms of frequencies. If the base has +10db (I'm exaggerating) in the 500-10khz range, my vocals will be hidden even if this range never changes in volume (compressed but not equalized).

2. If the tonal balance exceeds the maximum target indicated by the plugin during the song execution, let's say in the 5khz range. However, this is regardless of how low or high it sounds in volume. Equalizing falls within the curve of the plugin, but maybe this range has a very high dynamic range with peaks of +10db (I always exaggerate). How do I keep this curve constant and ensure a "dynamically coherent" song in all its frequencies without having highs that hit hard and lows always crushed or vice versa, for example?

 

With volume automation.
Dynamic compression is not volume automation because dynamic is not volume.
Could also be, that the bass or the vocals lack distortion, or reverb or whatever.
It's not only about compression and eq.
For bass it is normal to have formants. Interpretation and composition has to be taken into account here.

To be honest, compression is the least important thing of all possibilities.


It is btw. still important to care about context with such things as "tonal balance".

 

Last edited: Jun 23, 2023

In the course of the song? Then

I've mixed songs with more automation lines than audio tracks. Half of them being level automations.

= bass, the string instrument?

I've hardly any experience with it, but if you adjust it to the loud parts doesn't it leave the low level parts untouched?

Have you tried a dyn EQ on the bass triggered by the vocals?

I have to admit I don't give a dime of what Sonible thinks how the tonal balance of my mixes or masters should look like. I'm using some phase meters and freq analyzers but I'm not their slave, they're tools to help me, nothing more, nothing less.

You could use a spectral EQ like DSEQ (TEOTE, ...) to brutally force the freqs to stay within certain limits but I wouldn't do this. As I said before these tools have their limits.
You may should take into consideration that you can automate almost everything. Compressor ratio and threshold, EQs, saturation and of course the already mentioned levels.
I once mixed a Rock song where I found the the low end of the kick so good that I removed these freqs in the bass completely, which I hardly ever do. This really worked - apart from the part where the bass played a short solo line. There I kicked in the low end (plus some growl) with an EQ via automation. No one ever recognized it...
Means, don't think you can just set up a plugin and let it run for the whole song. There are many cases where this doesn't work at all.