How do you get "silky" highs?

chrispick · Post by **chrispick** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:53 pm

Kubi wrote:
chrispick wrote:Sometimes, it can be worth sacrificing premium sonic fidelity for something that simply sounds better in your mix.
I totally agree - but in this particular case the original poster was specifically asking re. "silky highs", which do suffer when going through mediocre DA-AD.

True enough.

I guess, in truth, it's really down to the right mic, the right pre and high-quality converters.

If a specific example can help at all --

I'd probably go ribbon mic into my Pacifica (which produces very smooth highs), then push up the high shelf with a Pultec (to compensate for the ribbon's darkness -- they're dark, but smooth). And I probably wouldn't mic the source too closely, allowing some air to hit the mic.

I think.

jrdmcdnld · Post by **jrdmcdnld** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:22 pm

I find it interesting, chrispick, that you mention the pultec and some others have mentioned emulator style eqs in this thread. I can't help but agree and speculate that some of what I'm looking for can't be accomplished with the "colder" style digital eqs.

chrispick · Post by **chrispick** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 11:24 pm

jrdmcdnld wrote:I find it interesting, chrispick, that you mention the pultec and some others have mentioned emulator style eqs in this thread. I can't help but agree and speculate that some of what I'm looking for can't be accomplished with the "colder" style digital eqs.

I'd guess not. You're talking about a kind of sonic affectation, after all, not a sterile or clinical change in frequency dB.

The reason I keep citing the Pultec (and my only experience is with the UAD emulation -- I'd imagine the hardware version would prove even more effective) is that the way in which it can simultaneously boost frequency and harmonic content while also attenuating some of that signal. The result can sound kind of silky to me.