Hello, and welcome to another episode of Inside the Recording Studio. I am Jody Whitesides, and with me as always is Mr. Chris Hellstrom. How are you right now, Chris? doing amazingly well Jody how about yourself? I'm not amazing, but I'm well. sounds good you sounded a little bit like a sportscaster going into that a fellow was like hockey night in Canada there for a second Or for the Kings, for that matter. yes yeah yeah yeah absolutely so what is today's topic what are we chatting about?
rid of audio masking and it kind of happened just a little bit over that intro with the yeah way I did that. Yeah. Crafty, crafty, crafty. Different instruments on different tracks Yeah, see how crafty you are? So when you're mentioning masking, what are you technically referring to when it comes to today's topic? [silence] that occupy the exact same frequency range.
That's what I mean by masking in that the two of them together will end up stepping all over each other's feet, their toes, their ankles, all the way up to their shins and maybe their ankle bones and their thighs, I don't know, something of that nature. [BLANK_AUDIO]
Gotcha. So we're talking like keyboards and guitars and any other instruments that are just living in the same frequency range that range that essentially not adding to the whole or making something better but just kind of Less focused, less important to the mix. taking away and not in the way of that we sometimes speak about phasing issues but how we're just like stuff is just sort of... Thank you that's what I was trying to say and this is not necessarily a level issue where it's Right.
just like oh we just need to bring the keys up they're really just kind of stepping on. on. Exactly. So what's the drawback of this happening then? Yeah. This is really a frequency issue problem. Your mix could sound woolly cluttered, unfocused. Things get lost. [BLANK_AUDIO] Wait a minute. I thought I had a base in there. You were wrong.
might be there but you don't hear it or man that vocal was so cool when I sang it in the That's one of the problem solutions that we have to do when we mix, right? booth where did that go well it's there why don't you hear it could be something stepping all over it. We have to make these decisions to what's the primary part and Oh, it is. If you've got Al Schmidt starting you off on your recording, but How do we make that stand out?
And it's not, as we all know, it's not just like putting all the faders at unity and you have a good mix, unless you're... I was gonna say, this is true. Yeah, so there are those people that are able to do that. But for us mere mortals, it's decision time, right? It can, like you said, Yes. [ Silence ] just make your mix a completely cluttered mess.
And we're not necessarily talking in the way that we talked about layering a couple of episodes ago, where we're stacking things to make the whole better. This is where things are just fundamentally living in the same space and we have to fix it, make sure it sounds good. So I suppose we should kind of walk through the frequency range here perhaps, right? Do you agree with that? Can it go in some problem areas? Yes, let's do it. We might garner a little extra attention.
Which way do you want to start top down or bottom up? cool. We always go bottom up. So bottoms up, baby. Let's do it. Yeah. Yes. And fat bottom You want to start bottom up? All right. Spinal tap says big bottom. girls make the rockin' world go round, says Freddie Mercury, right? So let's start at Right. paint. Yep. Right.
the low end. One thing that we talk about a lot that gets probably most of the attention with this is when we're talking kick versus bass or bass synth, any kind of bass instrument, right, where we have a frequency range that we've spoken about. If it's below 100 or whatever, neither one of them has an impact that we want and that's basically because they keep happening My weapon of choice, a high pass filter.
at the same time. So what's your weapon of choice here? How do you get rid of that? Yes. That's the weapon of mass choice destruction. Yeah, so you reach for that EQ. Yeah, no, but sure. Yeah, but I Um, right. mean, but it is as easy as that. This will be a recurring theme here through this episode, but working with EQ, figuring out decision time now, right? We have to figure out what is the
most prominent part? Is it the bass that's going to lead? Or is And if you're thinking more orchestral, you could also be talking about your it the kick or what have you? [BLANK_AUDIO] double bass instruments competing maybe with your really low end timpani's and that kind of thing. So it's not just specific to a kick drum and a bass. Sure. [BLANK_AUDIO] Sure. No, that's just a common application, right? That most of us tend to come across a fair bit, right? Yeah. It is, bro.
So we have to make that decision. We've talked about frequency ranges of kicks and stuff. Where do you tend to go with this? Is it just a matter of fact for you to, let's say in this kick and bass guitar example, I'm assuming you're gonna lead with a kick, that the kick is gonna be most important. So how aggressive might you go with a low cut on the bass track? I know it's program dependent, but. I was like, wait a minute.
Sure. This is so program dependent because sometimes I want the bass to be there to hold a particular drone on the bottom end and sometimes I want the kick to be the punctuating mark Right.
Instead of the bass so to speak So in terms of that I have to determine whether I want the bass to be [ Pause ] doing its thing down there if it's holding longer notes or if it's more staccato or somewhere in between, I need to make that determination is the bass more important to hold that low end so it's consistent in a sense, or do I want the kick drum to be a punctuating mark down there?
Once I've made that decision, then I'm using the high pass filter on either the bass or the kick or the double bass Now, because it's easy to think, because you bring up a good point here, it's easy to think instruments of an orchestra compared to the timpani, that kind of thing. What's upProject? If not for just this one for the mos music act..." that the kick will always win out, but that's not certainly the case.
This is very style dependent, and we talked about how in a lot of metal stuff, for example, especially with detuning and things like that, the bass and even the guitars go down so low * that the kick, although being very prominent in a lot of modern metal and things, Right. I'll go a dubstep on that one with the wobbling it's not necessarily the low end of it that is the focal point, right? Because you might get that
from the attack of higher up on the beater and things like that. But what would be another case where you might think that besides the low droning note of the bass, what do you think would be be another case where the kick is not going to win out. It's not going to be the most prominent thing. Yeah. Yeah. bass that's not necessarily a drone, it's wobbling, it's moving, it's doing its thing
Yeah. Yeah. Decisions have to be made. I was saying this is like, you know, we always, and I would be more inclined especially if it's a low end wobble. I think that might be more fun in the sub to me, but that's just me. But it also again becomes whether or not if the kick drum pattern going on in a particular dubstep situation is more important than the wobbling that's going on with the bass.
repeat ourselves like this is always content-dependent right but you have to make that decision for every track that you're doing and there's certain things Yep. that we've talked about in this range of the spectrum how you know exactly the The sonic juiciness down there can be difficult to make that determination. sonic juiciness how juicy is the Sonics but yeah EQ low-cut filters even obviously in the case of bass and kick we can use sidechaining to kind of get
rid of that as well, you know, we're ducking one of the others. But what if we move up a little bit more in the range where I'm thinking maybe like the low match, we're thinking about 200 to 500 type of a thing. Yeah, sure is. There's a lot of instruments that kind of live here. Kinda live is a relative statement, Yeah. but we've got snares, guitars, keyboards, vocals, even bass, the mid-range, the low mids of the bass Yeah, there's a lot of information that has to be filled in there.
and that sort of thing. cellos, violas, they all live in this area. ( sound For me, the same principle applies here because it's dangerous sort of frequency range. of I'm using the term dangerous loosely here, obviously. a We can't... huge cause for buildup that can happen here because so many instruments live in this range in terms Yeah. Right. of their meat of their sound, so to speak.
And masking being that you're hiding one thing with another, so to speak, or even multiple things hiding each other can be a real problem. Okay. And especially down here where if we're too aggressive as well with cutting something out, we can potentially lose some of the weight of the song. Now that might sound like an oxymoron because we're trying to get rid of clutter, right? But I do think that it is tempting to get away too much from that. [ Pause ]
We're listening to it in isolation and all of a sudden we lose some weight. But again, I'm listening for keyboards here, depending on what they're doing, what they're playing versus guitars or again, bass again here as well, right? Mm-hmm. You we discussed layering a few weeks ago. I'm thinking of keyboard parts that I like to Mm hmm. go with a cut as opposed to high pass filter. So low cutting higher up in the keyboard range might be a suitable option here to get away with stuff.
Assuming again that that's not the most prominent part. Bell type curves here can come in as well right so that we don't get rid of anything. But are there any ( audio cuts out) sort of issues that you would sort of caution against here getting too heavy handed or what ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( are you thinking in this range.
audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( audio cuts out) ( And a lot of time people looks very specifically around the 290 to 300 area between kick and bass [ Pause ] in order to figure out, well, if I want the bass to have more prominence here, I'm going to cut at around 290 to 300 ish area in the kick drum. So I give the bass more space.
The same can be said between guitars and vocals because they tend to live in the same registers and doing so. you want to make sure that your vocals aren't necessarily trampled on by the guitar. Or guitars, depending on the song that you're doing with. [ Pause ] And if they're layering keyboards, all those kind of things, they have to live in different spaces.
So you have to pick wisely between where the part is, frequency speaking, is the vocal on the upper end of this range, is the guitar in the middle end of this range, and is the piano part on the lower end of this range. What is the more important aspect in this particular range at any given time? [Silence] Is it the vocal? Is it the guitar? Is it the keys? Is it the snare? Those are all relatively important questions to ask of yourself as you're dealing with the mix
and what you're going to cut. And I don't do a ton of boosting in this area. I tend One thing... [Silence] to do a lot more cutting in this area. Yeah, I agree. It's more for me to make space for something else, right? And removing something.
*P Russo sounds Jensen is Warren's And one area of caution here that I found myself working with a fair bit, if you have a dense mix and perhaps struggle with the vocal as well to make that sit, in this range for me that's where I hear a lot of the warmth of the vocal, like the low end, so if you're wanting something that where the vocal is truly a part that is sitting above [ Silence ]
everything else and the importance of things in your mix. If you take out too much of this range, let's say about two to three hundred or depending on the vocals, but in this area you can make it sit a little bit better but you might
lose some of the proximity and some of the warmth. So if you're doing something that is perhaps more on the soul side or a pop side, that type of [LAUGHTER] thing be aware that in this range a lot of that low end and warmth of the vocal is sitting while you're trying to make room for the keyboard part of whatever the warmth of the keyboard you might be making that vocalist sound really really
tiny because you're taking so much away from that. That's one of the things that Unless the part is specifically missing it and it's kind of there and you can get it I caution do but I'm with you there I would do a lot more cutting as opposed boosting in this range. So, sure, right. Well, I'm gonna jump up a little bit. I'm back so to speak with boosting a certain thing. What's the next level that we're looking at?
looking at the high mids here. I'm thinking 1k to perhaps 3k. Again, the same Yep. group of instruments are kind of living here. I'm thinking for as far as guitars, Yep. I'm thinking definition here where I might hear the cleanliness of those, the Yep. pick attack and the upper range of chords that type of thing. So that clarity if you're arpeggiating something or if you're playing these larger chords that we hear the whole range of that. So that can be something to be brought out here Right.
if we're finding that the guitars are having a hard time sitting. And the same thing would be for like keyboards obviously you're not getting a pick attack but you can get that definition as we say as well like vocals here and like clarity of the vocals in this range as well so yeah yeah I do a slight cut on my Big definition area. What's a good trick for this area to get vocals to sit well? Right. instrument bus where all the instruments I will take out a couple of dB around
around the 2k area. It's like 2 to 2.2 something like that and just do a little bit of the dip, conversely doing a boost of the same range on the vocal buss or something. I can just bring out a little bit of that clarity and it's not extreme moves. It's kind of shocking how little you have to do to make that it. You're welcome. Now I'm just rubbing myself intently.
sit. I think that was a trick I actually learned from you from years ago but But it's, thank you sir, yeah, don't break your arm, patting yourself on the back there, but as you should. Yes, it does. That's a good trick, but it is again the definition, right? And we have to find there where we can do a bit of a boost to perhaps bring that out. Because again, this is an area of contention.
This whole chunk all the way from the low mids all the way up to the high mids, that's where most stuff tends to live, right? So besides that little vocal thing, [ just describe what are some of the things that you do there? Or do you have any sort of like extra moves Silence ] that you need to fill me in on that year that's gonna make my mixes stand out even better? [laughs] Mm-hmm. I pick different points with tighter cues for things that I want to have their definitions stand out.
For the vocal, I'm looking somewhere between 1.9 to 2.2 ish, depending on the vocal, maybe even a little bit higher on the female vocal end of things. And depending upon that, and if there's guitars in there, Yeah. if I really want a particular sparkle on the definition of the attack, so to speak, of the guitar, I will likely choose an area above that or below that for the vocal. And then I will tighten the cue and just kind of nudge it in there.
But like you were mentioning, I do have that trick [ Pause ] of like, well, if the vocal is starting to get hidden, I'm gonna take a EQ and dip out around the 2K mark, just depends on where the vocal is being lifted just a little bit, and then I'll dip the instruments a little bit in the opposite direction.
I don't know if I go so much as drastic as two down for the instruments in the 2K mark with a fairly wide Q and a two dB up on the vocal with a similar kind of Q going up, 'cause that's almost taking it a little too far. Yeah, no, I was going to say I will do one or the other. Oftentimes I'm just doing it just to the instruments 'cause the vocals already sitting where I want it, so to speak. Right. Yeah, it becomes a big change, yeah. Because now it's like a 4 dB change, really in that range.
So that's pretty drastic. Thank you. One thing I wanted to mention also in when we talk about low mids and things, I wanted Thank you.
You You bring this up is if you're working on a track where you have perhaps orchestral instruments, (silence) to make those sit a little bit better, if you're competing with guitars in keys and everything like that, everything they have to wrestle with, I have found that just playing around with a mid-range where the strings might sound awkward in isolation if you do this, but a relatively Mm-hmm.
>> Sure. drastic dip in that area can actually make it more prominent just because there is so much stuff going on in that range. Now if you're doing an orchestral score you know you're just dealing with an orchestra that's probably less of an issue for you but if you're dealing with all this like Where are you going now?
in a pop track or something and certainly if you have a lot of guitars and things I find that I can get a little bit more aggressive on that because if they're in a track like that you're not necessarily going for a supernatural sound by themselves. You're just having them sit there along and have those elements. So I just wanted to bring that in before we move forward even higher up in the range. I'm going highs. I'm going like 4k up that kind of range. For me, there's less All right.
Sure, but it does happen. of issues up here when it comes to like masking. But it does happen. I tend to just be Uh-huh. relatively judicious with my high cuts here on instruments, why they don't need it. I would say the trickiest thing up here would be to get things like drum overheads versus vocals to kind of play nice together. Things like crashes and things can sometimes be in that range. Right. Mm-hmm. [LAUGHTER] whereas the airiness of a vocal might be there.
But what's that, you know, a little bit higher, but is that deep in sort of like the sound of expensive, right? That's the really only things that I tend to do up there. [BLANK_AUDIO] I don't feel like I come across a lot there that they're clashing. I am pretty aggressive with EQ on my effects returns, >> Right. like reverbs and delays and things like that, [BLANK_AUDIO] where I usually above 4K, I just take that shit out from those sides.
Sure. So I tend to EQ those returns pretty heavily. So that would be the biggest thing I would do there because that will definitely trample all over the vocal and all that kind of stuff. That's me. But what about you? What are you doing up there? I'm looking out for the buildup of a lot of different things and what ends up happening, Yeah. especially around the 4.2K mark is harshness. That's very specific. Yeah. So when you're searching for that, do you do that?
an over buildup of high in that area, it can sound really harsh on the ear. So I'll often determine which instrument, which thing is actually doing this, or if it's a combination of a bunch of them, and then take a really sharp Q and drop the 4.2 area to reduce the the amount of harshness that can come through up there. Well, I don't tend to boost when I do it.
narrow cue and really high boost to kind of sweep and listen for that sort of like whistling effect and then just kind of go down So, you know, you don't feel like I just tend to, it's the area where it tends to happen and I will pull it out instead. And it tends to clean up that high end. At this point, you know that this is where it's at. You don't have to search for it. Any mate Generally speaking, yes. It's generally just in that area. Okay, and how much do you end up sucking out usually?
- Yeah. It really depends. Sure Depends on how bad the buildup is, but not too much. Right there we're talking like 1 DB to I mean, the maximum maybe of around five DB is max, All right but generally it's like a DB, maybe two, if I'm really feeling heavy handed on it. It's not a lot. Yeah. But you find that that helps with that build up anywhere that horseshoes there and do you usually do that on? (guitars playing) Instrument buses or do you tend to do that on like the vocals as well?
Primarily on guitars and other instruments Yeah. that have a lot of energy up there, especially distorted guitars, Yes. Once you get up into that range, you can make things sound dull, but once you go above they have a lot of problem up there. (guitars playing) Yeah. six or seven, there's very little value in like distorted guitars up there, right? It's like That's right. clarity versus just harshness that we have to pay attention to, I guess. [BLANK_AUDIO]
And let's take a word from our sponsors before we move on with some general fixes. And we're back. Now we're gonna go talking about some fixes Well, as we mentioned here already, EQ is the first weapon of choice for me to generally, that are pretty general. And we're gonna talk about some software that can help make this happen a little easier for you. What do you got for us, Chris?
Moon Weapon. Moon Weapon "E when I'm making room for stuff I am doing relatively gentle cuts, sometimes broader than not in my in isolation sound really odd on the instrument but sometimes that helps me duck them out in a little bit more of a natural way. If there are these like you mentioned in or I think I mentioned actually in the MoonAsk higher frequencies how we can sometimes get a sort of like resonance kind of like whistle type of a
thing. When I'm fixing those I tend to go for more of a narrower cue and perhaps a more drastic dip Moon but to have something gentle can often to my ear at least sound more of a natural way to make it sitting in the mix. Now I'm using that word natural in a very generic sense here because if I'm Mm hmm. Right. But the ideas don't listen to it in solo. listening to the instrument isolated with that cut. It might not sound very natural but in the mix it's
exactly. But one thing that we can do though, or at least I do and you can call me an idiot for [inaudible] [inaudible] doing it, but if I'm listening for these build-ups and I'm trying to isolate where it is, I will idiot. frequently listen to just a group of tracks that are occupying that range where I'm hitting an issue. So, there you go. Just kidding. [LAUGHTER] But that would be, you know, things like guitars and keyboards, and if there's a string section, that type of thing.
You know, made the decision that the guitars are going to be the most important part of this track. So I might listen for, well, how much can I get away with taking out the keyboards or whatever string part it is? And then obviously you make final decision when you're listening to the full mix. because just because it sounds good in isolation doesn't mean that it's gonna work in the mix, right? Mm-hmm. [silence]
So you can even you know, you might make the decision that you have to take out less or you have to take out more But just finding those frequencies where they are It helps to me at least to tune my ear a little bit to it to just kind of hear those But I don't do that for extended periods of time This is just kind of like to find the sweet spot or where I'm gonna make those adjustments [BLANK_AUDIO] It also sounds like you're kind of doing this.
changing the arrangement and figuring out whether or not the offending instrument or frequency is absolutely necessary. How's that for a short explanation? That is part of it, but to me, it's less to do with frequency masking. Thank you. Mm-hmm. That's a result of it, right? Mm-hmm. And that's something I do when I, if it's a production I'm not involved with, You [BLANK_AUDIO] I'm getting it tracks to mix.
I do that on first pass and I might notice that, holy crap, there's a lot of stuff going on here. There's eight guitars and there's four keyboards [LAUGH] and it's all the casino production candy going on, right? And is everything really necessary here? [BLANK_AUDIO] And then you have that discussion with the clients like, you go, hey, you know what? I know you quadruple miked all the triple tracked guitars here, but do we really need everything in here?
Right. Right. The general answer is usually that, oh, just make it sound good. 'Cause that's kind of why they want your opinion to do it anyway. I wouldn't say that necessarily just removing tracks is the best solution all the time, but it is on the table. It's not, I'm not taking that off the table. So it's like, yep, the second viola that's on here has to go, right, or whatever. I'm hoping by the time I've been given the tracks to mix, So do you do the same thing?
Or what are your thoughts on that? Wow, aren't you optimistic? the arrangement's already been decided. That's what I'm hoping for. But if I, yes, I'm overly optimistic. The simple answer is if it doesn't feel like it's enhancing the situation, I'm gonna give it the ax. Of course, I'm gonna ask about giving it the ax, but I'm going to give it the ax as best I can. Say that 10 times fast. That's right. There's multiple ways of even going about Yeah. Okay. Mm. giving it the ax as well.
(silence) And that leads us kind of into the next section Mm. of the software that can help you find this audio masking and deal with it, or just deal with it from the get go. Hmm. Thank you. And one of the things that I'm thinking of right up front is in order to find masking, there's a nice plugin from Isotope. If you're having a hard time learning out of here what masking does, you can use Neutron. That's a plugin that you can stick on multiple channels.
and then you can tell one channel to look at another channel, so to speak, in your DAW. And it will tell you in the graphical interface where the overlapping frequencies of masking [Silence] is actually happening, which then gives you the ability to make your decision. Do I want this instrument over that instrument and then EQ appropriately to deal with? What are some other ways that you can deal with it Right. [Silence] in terms of software?
I'm thinking dynamic EQ can sometimes be so if it is a moving melody part let's say Mmm-mmm. Mmm-hmm. that is happening there might be a bass line or it's a melody that goes on and the bass is hitting on every fourth bar, whatever happens to be. It's something that's not a constant, but it's reoccurring enough where it's creating a problem. Then I might go to just dynamic EQ for that part. When you get to this range, it dips an appropriate amount. Right.
Yep. Yeah. And along the lines of the dynamic EQ, the split EQ, the split EQ, the split EQ, the split So that's another way to solve it, where you don't necessarily wanna shape the entirety of the instrument, right? By rolling off up until 200 or whatever it is, right? and it takes away too much other weight. So you just have, oh, just when it hits this D, right? You just aim in at that frequency. So that's another thing that I think can be quite effective when you're doing those kinds of stuff.
So. Yeah. EQ from Eventide is also another really good one in that you can separate the attack from the tone, so to speak. Mm-hmm And if you have a problem with a particular area of the instrument where the tone is a So problem, you can just EQ out the tone in that section. Or if you want to enhance an attack that isn't bringing up the tone, you can enhance the attack of it, so to speak, which is a beautiful thing about the split EQ.
You know say this every so often It's a pretty marvelous instrument in and of itself. Yep. But it is a wonderful time to be alive with all the tools that we have for this stuff, right? Now, the only caution I would say to sort of play devil's advocate here is with all Mixing with your eyeballs, you're saying. of these analyzing tools that do all these things for us, right, or potentially do it for us.
It that's kind of where I'm getting that and also to be too reliant on it that we perhaps >> Yep. don't train our ears in the way that we start recognizing these off the bat and can adjust >> Right. for them. it is very easy to lean on the tools. I'm guilty of this as well, right? If I can make my job easier, cool.
I like the idea of not being too reliant on it because let's say that you're in a situation you might be mixing in somebody else's studio and you don't have the same plugin folder, right? Right. Right. Then you go, oh crap, I can't do this now because I don't have plugin XYZ, you know?
So learning to listen for those is to me at least the ultimate thing, but using spectrum analyzers and all this kind of stuff is definitely a great helping tool to help us identify those areas where we come across these issues. So kudos to them, all great tools, fantastic. But ultimately I think it would be great to be able to just hear and perhaps use EQ to do that. That's the whole point of having those two holes on the side of your head. Or if you're, you know, get the ears of Al Schmidt
Do it right at the recording source. Exactly. and you just do it at the source, right? Right, yeah. But it's EQ, that's the biggest weapon of choice here to kind of deal with that in your ears, identifying it and kind of getting rid of it and put a bow on it, kind of like just think about what's the main part, what's the prominent part and how do we make that stand out? That's right. And with that, we're going to move on to our Friday Fines. Chris, what are you bringing today? day.
Today I am bringing up something that I am very happy Mm-hmm. that is included in my Slate digital subscription. And they have the fantastic synth called Anna 2 [BLANK_AUDIO] from Sonic Academy. The past couple of weeks, we have been treated to some new expansion packs for that, which is free [BLANK_AUDIO] if you're a subscriber, so go grab those. We have one called the Circuit Breaker and another one that's called SD2. [ Silence ] Circuit Breaker is kind of what it sounds like, right?
It's like weird sounds, blips and things. And that can be very, very interesting to use in your tracks. And SD2 is kind of like a sound design type of thing, low-fi type of sound. So those two packs are kind of fun to play with and you get varying mileage obviously out of them, depending on what kind of music you're working on. That's my Friday Find for this week. Those expansion packs for Anna 2.
Rock on. I am looking beyond the concept of using my ears and actually using my eyes to fill my brain with knowledge What do you got? Oh, wow. and it's a book and The book is called inspire the music and it is about the history of Roland There are 50 years of influence on music and music technology at this point Yeah, so it comes with pictures and history and interviews with people that actually help develop and design and create these Very cool.
iconic Rowan products Yeah, so that's my pick for this week That's interesting. Yes, while we've got your attention Very cool. We ask that you go to inside the recording studio calm and sign up for our mailing list doing so we'll get you weekly [ Pause ] reminders about the Tuesday tips when they come out and we'll make sure that [ Pause ] you don't miss any future episodes of the podcast. Send us an email at gold star G-O-L-D-S-T-A-R at inside the recording studio dot com with the word
masking and you'll get something cool back in your inbox. If you have a topic or suggestion for Chris and I to explain in a future episode contact us at the contact page and we'll put it into consideration for a future episode and And with that, I will say, see you next week. Have a good one, Jyoti. Thanks for listening, everybody.