Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
How to make these 2 tracks sound fuller/clearer/less muddy?
Hello!
I have been working on mixing these two tracks for the last month- at first I was pretty happy with them but now I am realizing they sound quite muddy
Some of these strange depth effects and elements receding into the background are intentional- my goal is to create tracks that sound like all of the instruments + voice are swirling around the listener in a huge grain silo- to accomplish this I have used instances of panststion on each track except for bass and drums, + a reverb where there wet dry mix ratio is being controlled by an LFO, this creates the illusion of the instruments moving around you in stereo but also changing in spatial depth from the listener as the reverb swings back and forth- I have already peeled back the reverb quite a bit but it still sounds muddier than I would like
That said- I am OK with the vocals sounding masked by the other instruments at some points
However after comparing with a professional track these both sound thin (my cheese reference which I know is much less dense, but still sounds much much much more full and clear)
To mix these I did the mix against pink noise, adjusted the levels/eq slightly until each sound was poking through its neighbors to the extent that sounded right, then bounced the mix downs to Landr with plenty of headroom
The track is relatively simple in that it is 3 piano-ish synths, a bass, drums, vocals, and 2 synths doing wooshes/ sweeps
Could anyone please give me some tips on how to achieve a full frontal loud clear booming mix while still creating the whirling spatial sound I described? Any advice would be infinitely appreciated
Comments
To begin with, your tracks sound like ten times as busy as your example video, and they all fight for attention because there's no room left for them to breathe.
Try to reduce to the bare minimum of tracks that you think are the core of the songs and also experiment a bit with track mutes. I still surprise myself at times when a song sounds better after muting a few channels.
Only then I would start tweaking the individual sounds.
@rs2000 thank you very much for this
I’ve tried this approach of muting tracks and dropping out parts but to be honest I feel like I have it paired down to the minimum number of instruments I can imagine carrying the different melodic/rhythmic interplays I would like to preserve in the track
At any given time there are between ‘2-3 piano synths’ playing, a vocal, a bass, and drums
Do you have any other thoughts on how I might go about taming it/ bringing out deeper/clearer dynamics?
Why don’t you post this on the collab thread and look for someone to shed a new perspective on what seems to be fertile material. Or just post a thread looking for someone to remix the tracks. I think you posted a similar question on a fun filled track some months ago. Is that correct?
@LinearLineman - it was me I admit it
This might be something I want to do in the future re: remixes etc but to be honest I’m feeling a bit possessive at the moment and would like to really understand how to master this sound on my own the way I know I want it to sound before I spin off into the world of derivatives and alternate interpretations
It's certainly a matter of taste but my approach would be to make the arrangement much less busy. Both tracks start with the full rate of musical elements right from the beginning, try to add one after another and give it some structure that evolves over time. Full instrumentation needs some preparation for the listener that hears your tracks for the first time. Start simple and keep the busy parts for the "climax" of the song.
In my opinion, you need to look at the frequency profiles of each track and and eq them to reduce the amount of collision. You can’t have a zillion tracks swirling around with a lot of frequency overlap AND have it be clear. If you have multiple reverbs or delays, you might want to re-think that.
I’d also recommend spending some time reading articles/books or watching videos about mixing.
There isn’t a quick fix for these tracks. You will need to patiently go through the tracks and listening to pairs of them and Eq and pan for clarity...and repeat for the various combinations.
https://forum.audiob.us/discussion/39216/mixing-mastering-tips-for-dense-punchy-track/p1
@jolico i was going to say,,, this seems awfully familiar....
I hope this helps because I'd like to know how to fix these types of projects too with mastering skills.
I would recommend slowing down dramatically on the rate of the "swirl" so it's impactful but not so obvious that the world is spinning. At the current rates I start to focus on following the effect and get distracted from the musical information. Some instruments are spinning so fast UI'm not sure what they are. You want your instruments to be clarified and not confusing dervishes, if I read your intent.
Do you use side-chaining of a Compressor/EQ FX unit to carve out "attention" for one or maybe 2 primary instruments? That will open up spectrum for the most important sounds.
It might help to re-build the project one track at a time... which is actually like the muting approach but with a precise starting point. Add them to the mix in their order of importance.
Yes, this sounds very similar to what we've heard before...
Where do YOU think your tracks differ from your reference track?
What do YOU think could help these tracks?
Where do YOU think it went off rails?
I'm not trying to offend you, but you have to learn to use your ears and judgment.
At the moment, this isn't a mastering or even mixing issue... there are far bigger 'problems' with these tracks, especially now that you shown what was the goal... I don't have to understand the concept behind your composition but I struggle to find any similarities between your tracks and your reference material.
I’m no expert and there are way more qualified people around here to comment. I admittedly listened to these tracks on my phone speaker, but I feel like you want to pay more attention to what’s going on in your low end if you want punchy clear and booming. Use EQ to carve out frequencies and give every instrument it’s own space in the mix, and make sure you’re not overlapping a lot of bass frequencies that can end up sounding muddy. Keep weird stereo information out of the bass frequencies. Sometimes you want to drop another EQ after an effect to tame down any unwanted frequencies that the effect may add in. I think the mix sounds busy, but if you don’t want to strip it back, then you need to allow each of the elements room to breathe. Your reference track allows for a lot of that breathing room, and moving the more er... “Wall of Sound” parts of your tracks further back in the mix would probably help a lot.
I legit just had to do this to a track like half an hour ago with the eq carving. It came out way too muddy and I used a spectrograph and an eq cleaned up some of the low end and was really blown away at how much it improved the track and gave each instrument its own space
Hey @annahahn, I’m not going to tell you how to make a different piece of music when clearly this is what you intended to make but I can (I hope) help you mix it. And this is a mixing thing, not a mastering one.
My approach to mixing - which I think would work for these tracks as well - is to start with a central, key component whose level you can use as a benchmark for the whole track. Where there is one, this is usually the kick drum. Get that sitting at 0db and then add things in around that, adjusting EQ to make room or to bring out the bit that matters, but with an aim of getting each thing to the lowest possible level against that kick drum benchmark. Always work things down until they are right, not up. You’ll be surprised how ‘quiet’ you can get some things and still have them perfectly audible in the mix. Many tracks benefit from having the levels change with as the song proceeds. The brain doesn’t enjoy hearing everything at the same level the whole time - songs like to breathe a little so use automation to change levels over time if it suits.
As you add things in you will need to change some of the things you already have - levels or EQ, or add some excitement, perhaps. You may even decide you have to re-EQ the kick after a while which may (to an extent) mean you have to restart the process. Soloing is generally not your friend here - you need to hear context to work out how something should sit.
Most of that swirly stuff only needs its upper frequencies moving to tell you that it’s swirling. Given what you are trying to achieve, you may wish to make sure all the lower frequencies are firmly in the centre to provide a contrast - even possibly the lower end of any reverb. And all this stuff closer to the centre can be suitably EQed to get the body and non-thinness (!) you are seeking without compromising the swirling stuff.
I strongly think that most of what you are grappling with is a frequency-related issue and can be fixed by EQing things to take up just the space in the mix where you want them to be. Muddiness is mostly fixed by using EQ to carve things so they don’t overlap - there’s always parts of a sound your brain doesn’t really hear and which can be removed without making what’s left sound ‘wrong’ (if you use your ears). And I get that you want the swirling stuff to be in your face but you can still achieve that by carefully paring some of it away to let the fullness of the rest of it come through.
Having said I don’t think you have a mastering problem, I recently bought Brainworx Masterdesk in a sale - a mastering tool for people who aren’t mastering engineers (I actually used to be a mastering engineer though and this tool is great!). It has a neat feature and I wonder what it would do for your mix. It uses mid side processing to mono the lower frequencies and widen the stereo field.
Masterdesk can be seen here but it’s not an iOS thing: https://www.plugin-alliance.com/en/products/bx_masterdesk.html
I think what you are trying to achieve is really interesting and I hope any of this helps.
Another thought - after a further listen: to me the bass part of each track sounds like it’s coming through the walls from next door. This is because my brain is telling me that piece of music has had its high frequencies attenuated by walls and doors. But the swirly part (which is amazing, by the way) is full of higher frequencies.
I think it’s because my brain is separating the two and not perceiving them as being part of the same piece of music.
I wonder if doubling the bottom end stuff an octave up might help that. It’s a trick used to make sure you can hear the kick drum even on small speakers (and is there on your reference track) but here it may have the effect of gluing the two halves together.
Keep it as it is and sell it to the military.
They can use it for crowd dispersal, demoralizing the enemy or even torture.
😂
I really hope you’re trolling
Not sure how helpful it is to judge.
Edith Piaf
I understand why people would imagine that this might be trolling, but it isn’t
I’ve spent hundreds of hours over the past 5 months trying to get these mixes balanced so that I can have a mixing formula for tracks in this ‘genre’ if you can call it that
I’m not really interested in debating aesthetic preferences as I imagine chipmunk autistic Ricky Martin isn’t everyone’s thing, but it happens to be my cup of tea that I have sunk many hours into perfecting that my family wishes I had given to them- if anyone has any ideas on how I can improve my forays in this direction would love to hear them
My interest in making this post is not to start a fight on the forum but rather to reiterate that I am infact ‘serious’ and that I am extremely grateful to all those who take the time to provide me with tips on how I can improve this- if anyone else has further advice I would be grateful to hear it
@jolico I just listened to your jonny licorice track and it sounds fantastic the dynamics are so clear and full even though there are many elements overlapping. I would love to be able to get my tracks to have a similarly full bodied/clear sound- if you have any tips on how I can attempt to achieve that I would genuinely love to hear them
@espiegel123 i think you are onto something with this talk of carving frequency profiles but I am a bit confused about where I am going wrong as this is exactly what I have been doing the last few months, I’ve also been watching videos about mixing from various perspectives and toiling over finessing the details but somehow this is the closest I’ve gotten to the full sound I am after even after many months
I think my reference track is obviously a bad example, very different composition, but I am more speaking to the fullness and depth in each sound where mine sounds thin, @jolico ’s track may be a much better reference because of the density of the composition... I don’t know I’ve struggled to find a reference that matches the composition and sonic profile I am working with
@qryss your doubling idea is genius and is helping a huge amount with the kick- any tips on how to do this on the bass synth without it changing the character of the sound too much? When I add an extra layer of notes an octave up it changes the character a lot by adding too much sizzle
I am very happy with the tracks overall, I just want to pull elements closer to the foreground and make everything more full-bodied
That's useful info... if you could find another reference track, one that could be used as reference that would help a lot. I still think you should try to identify your issues so you can avoid them in the future.
Punch comes from definition and has to be supported by composition. In your ref track I can hear every instrument, every note they play. It's catchy because I don't have to focus on anything beside the music and I could play it back after listening. In your tracks it's difficult to identify anything. If this is the sound you're after than you're comparing it to wrong reference.
Turn way down all the effects and try to improve the sound. Then bring up the effects slowly.
swear on my mom I'm not trolling
How many tracks are you using?
Is each element/instrument on its own track so that you can control drums, bass, lead and vocals separately?
Are you using side-chain compression?
Which EQ are you using? (Some EQs allow for extreme boosts)
Try to cut instead of boost.
If boosting is too hardwired into your brain like mine, just lower the EQ’s output after boosting and it will be like cutting all the other frequencies.
@jolico
Thank you for this
super simple song
3 pianos
1 bass synth
1 kick drum
1 hi hat topper looper
2 swoosh tracks for riser sort of stuff
1 vocal
YES- everything is separate so I can adjust the volume/EQ on everything- it's crazy to me that to the ears of someone who hasn't seen the mixing session that it really sounds so cacophonous that these elements sound that smushed- the composition is actually really straight forward
I'm basically trying to build a 5 piece whirling band as a template in cubasis where I can drop any midi into it in a tango style and sing ontop of it- my theory being if I can get the balance perfect once I can more or less get it right every time
I'm using the toneboosters EQ on every track
right now no sidechain compression- what are the best sidechain compressors to use within cubasis that run on iphone? I have woodpressor but sometimes it seems to act weird with multiple instance routing?
Do you have any tips for the best ways for me to setup my sidechain routing in this instance?
I have always been very boost oriented other than shaving off the low freqs- any tips for cutting? the goal is to identify the muddy parts and reduce them?
Wooo, didn‘t expect that
is the basis for
I hope the tips of the others help in working out the individual parts.
For my un-trained ears, its perhaps the reverbs and long release tails of the accompaniment smear the tracks to something noise like. Perhaps if each of the individual tracks would not only be separated in the frequency realm, but also in the time domain so that each note stands outs a bit. The swirling around of the tracks you‘re after can probably also be done with shorter and more discrete notes.
Low-cut/high-pass filter
Why not just one piano?
or are they each playing a different octave?
Try sidechaining the bass to the kick drum
Try to keep this as your loudest track (without going into the red)
Low-cut/high-pass filter
Low-cut/high-pass filter
Low-cut/high-pass filter.
High-cut/low-pass filter on vocals etc. that have been pitch shifted up.
Toneboosters EQ is great for sidechaining, because you can cut only the clashing frequencies.
Put Toneboosters EQ on the bass and put it’s sidechain input on the kick.
Just lower the output volume of the EQ after boosting the “good” frequencies.
@jolico thank you so so much for this!!
Does toneboosters EQ allow Sidechain input when hosted within Cubasis? Usually I have to use plugs like Woodpressor that create separate virtual busses to get around the limitations of DAWs that do not accommodate proper sidechain routing
If not- is there anything that behaves similarly allowing virtual sidechain busses to control specific frequencies?
Yes each piano is playing a different octave and also processed differently to push some to the back/ make them sound more ethereal
I don’t have cubasis. Maybe someone who does can let us know if it supports actual sidechaining.
'it's only when I start changing the instrumentation it becomes a bit cacophonous'
That's one clue. Busy arrangements have to be supported by carefully chosen sounds. Sounds that work together without fighting each other. If you try to push everything up front, nothing stays relevant in your mix. If a given sound works on its own (you like it a lot) that doesn't necessarily mean that it'll work together with another sound.
If you listen to the tracks you've posted... there is always something in the main focus and the rest of the instruments only trying to support that, instead of stealing focus.
Select one track that caries the main content of your song. Add drums (kick & snare) to it and find a good balance you're happy with (without any effect). This will be the body of your song. Right in the centre, up front. Start adding more tracks, one by one according to their role in the song while listening to their content. Make sure adding tracks is not stealing focus from the body of your song. At some point it will, that's your cue. Stop adding tracks and listen carefully where the problem is (if you can't point at the problem but you hear it's there let us listen to it, to help to identify it).
Your main tools to work with
f.e. notice that in the tracks you've posted the glitchy, chaosy effect you're trying to achieve is only present in those songs where there is plenty of room for that. One or only few tracks playing and the focus is on the effect. You can't achieve that same effect/result in a busy environment.
Same goes for the harmony content. Often removing a note here or there from individual tracks will help the song as a whole. It's always a balancing act, you just have to find the right balance.
+1
Afaik Cubasis doesn't support multichannel AUs, also I would advise to stay away from side chaining for a moment. It's definitely a useful tool, but its main goal is to mask an issue. Right now you're trying to identify the issue.