R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


Author Topic: WUMP 22 Comments Thread  (Read 10697 times)

Offline aivoryuk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 480
WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« on: December 14, 2010, 12:50:13 pm »
Hi all

This is the thread to post your comments regarding the other entries, I have split these into 2 groups as there are 19 entries. If you are feeling brave then feel free to comment on them all.

Group 1
DOMC
PMX
Kayo
gertvanhoof
ggidluck
LudwigM
Ed Littman_Mastering
GreggJanman
aivoryuk
MC

Group 2
Fuse
Specialized01
adam_gonsa
Biig Nick
Patrick T
Undertow
AndreasN
Chris Doremus
Philip

For the time being don't post your techniques as this will be covered in a seperate thread

Any questions just ask.

Offline MoreSpaceEcho

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2010, 01:35:40 pm »
i can't believe i have to listen to this damn song at least another 19 times! what was i thinking?

on the other hand, it's quite a privilege to have one's song attended to by 19 ME's, and i can't wait to hear what everyone did.  gonna try and listen tonight, but i have a last minute rush job to do first. (client: "we HAVE to get it to discmakers by 7:00!!!!....oh, and yeah, we'll get you those last two mixes within an hour....") sounds familiar right?

cheers everyone.

Offline Patrik T

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2010, 06:22:11 am »
All entries (because it's x-mas soon) in no particular order:


domc - too much of boxy mids, could be a narrow q higher up

kayo - i get this flipped-polarity feeling here, it just doesn't sound right at all.

gertvanhof - this is really good stuff. i can hear you tried to fix the "resonant mids", still not sure if it was worth the attempt (spin-off: more edge).

ggidluck - something's happening at 2:40 with the stereo, can't eactly say what. the eq work is ok, but while taking care of the somewhat cloudy mids you might have lost some meat. overall i think you did something better to the track. sounds weak though.

gregjannman - i think the hunt for better clarity has resulted in papery/poke-y qualities that makes things a bit harsh/sizzly.

ludwigM - this is the kind of sound which makes me stop listen after 40 seconds. everything is everywhere all the time. nervous.

undertow - in the obvious hunt for clarity; way too much sizzle and sharpness. the word "exciter" comes to mind. sounds too
analytical.

ed littman - very good stuff. no obvious defects. easy to the ear but maybe a bit too controlled (if you get my drift).

aivoryuk - good balance and tone, maybe lacks just a little body.

fuse - nice and open and soft. but slightly sizzly and I miss a little something in the lower mids.

pmx - a little too boxy for me.

adam gonsa - 2:22 and 2:24 something sounds strange and it draws my attention to the dynamics. i think things are too controlled.

andreas n - good and easy on the ear. fluffy like clouds in the sky. i miss a little "cling-klang" and "schmack" though.

biigniick - very good. this has got exactly what i was missing above. a better push.

chris domerus - it sounds small and boxy.

MC - something is just wrong here. sounds like a speaker emulation.

philip - good and easy on the ear. similar to andreas n's entry but more lightweight. the message comes through with no disturbances.

specialized - i find this too harsh.


Best Regards
Patrik

Offline UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 393
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2010, 04:15:09 pm »
Patrik T wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 12:22


undertow - in the obvious hunt for clarity; way too much sizzle and sharpness. the word "exciter" comes to mind. sounds too
analytical.


I hesitated for a very long time before deciding on making the master as bright as I did. (And on a quick listen I seem to have delivered one of the brightest masters). In a real-world (read commercial) situation I would be checking with the client to see if that distorted guitar could be adjusted a touch to tame some of the fizzle and sizzle which I think is biggest issue in this master. If that wasn't possible, I would most probably make the master less bright. And yes I like analytical. Hi-Fi baby. Wink

Thanks for the feedback!

My ears are a bit tired for a listening session now. Hopefully I will get a chance to listen and review the other entries before the week-end.

Alistair

Offline MoreSpaceEcho

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2010, 07:41:26 pm »
UnderTow wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 21:15

that distorted guitar


haha! which one??? there's only about 80 in there.

Offline biigniick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2010, 12:10:35 pm »
here are the comments i've thought of while listening to the mixes that were available on the server when i downloaded them.  if i've missed you, i'll try to find time to check the ftp again and listen to the others also.  here is my list in a quasi-preferential order. . .

ggidlock   i love the openness and punch of the snare of this version.  it might be a little quiet for most clients liking, but turn it up and it rocks!  one shortfall, you didn't address the fadeout at the end Sad

patrik    a little dark.  i could use some more definition in the lows and low-mids.  sounds a little mushy.

fuse    overall good, but you didn't address the fadeout at the end.  did you add reverb?

gertvanhoof   overall good.  i feel im missing a little on the snare reverb trail compared to some others.  

phillip   overall very good.  fadeout at the end might be a little abrupt, though.  no dithering?

Ed_Littman_Mastering   feels a little loose on the low and low-mids.  is that analog tape?

MC   overall, good.  i loose something about the snare attack and some upper midrange clarity/openness.  also, you didn't address the fadeout at the end

ChrisDoremus   overall ok.  not my favorite; not sure why.

GreggJanman   a little bright/strident (2k-3k). it did make that snare stand out nicely, but i think guitars suffered.  also, you didn't address the fadeout at the end

UnderTow    a little bright (8k - 16k).  it sounds good on some parts of the song, but at the guitar part at the end seems very brittle.  also, your fadeout is very abrupt.

DOMC   a little dark.  i feel i'm missing something on the ultra low end and have too much low end in general.  maybe just a little muddy sounding in the 100-200 range.  also, you didn't address the fadeout at the end and have 5 sec of digital black tacked on the end.

LudwigM   LOUD!    i feel this one is lacking some of the movement of th original, especially in the low mids.  also, you didn't address the fadeout at the end

KAyo   wider stereo image. . . lots of MS stuff going on.  there are a lot of changes from the mix, guitars are way louder, snare has changed and the vocal placement is different.  also, you didn't address the fadeout at the end .  overall, i think, a little heavy handed.


Offline domc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2010, 04:26:48 pm »
Ed Littman - nice big wide bottom end - very snappy snare sound.  good level and nice over all tone - love the top end.

Gert van hoof - felt a bit dead in the bottom end and a little too wide.  A bit harsh at times too it made the guitars jump out too much for my liking

ggiduck - felt like it  lacked mid to low feel to it was very harsh.  nice and snappy though.  a little soft in level but guess what...I just turned my volume knob up (WOW)

gregjanman - I liked this it felt smooth and just right..well done (maybe a bit too much tops but still...i liked it)

LudwigM - too loud for my liking and just felt harsh and squashed - sorry Sad

MC - felt a bit distorted and phasey and I felt like I had lost the air from the original track

PMX - nice a little bit loose in the bottom end and a bit too much in the mid 400 sort of range at times but not bad

aivorvuk - too boxy and mid range for my liking and too harsh at the top as well.  too loud as well

Kayo - felt a bit too wide and too much top end for my liking I lost the air and feel of the original track and the vocals almost got lost by the spread guitars.



Domc
 
Mastering Engineer
Dominic McGlinn B.Mus.T. (Hons)
 
Margate, QLD
+61421961641
 
www.domc.com.au
dom@domc.com.au

Offline gertvanhoof

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #7 on: December 16, 2010, 04:59:25 pm »
Here's my list, in alphabetical order. I'm not a native speaker by any means, hence my preventive apologies for any linguistic anomalies…

Adam Gonsa - nice overall, plosives in a capella intro taken care of, maybe some lack of definition towards the end of the track.

AivoryUK - good balance, snare just a tad (too?) dark to my tastes.

AndreasN - nice impact on the snare, yet lively, open and transparent. I like this one.

BiigNiick - I particularly like the way you handled the track's dynamics, nicely moving from section to section. Rich, yet controlled soundfield. Well done!

ChrisDoremus - brightness helps to bring out the vocals, but adds grit to the guitars in the loud sections. On the subject of loudness, this version could have been 2dB louder overall without any adverse effects on the sound quality.

DOMC - some excessive resonance in the midrange. Nice dynamic structure. The stereo image sounds processed somehow.

Ed Littman Mastering - perhaps the most "professional-sounding" (for lack of a better description) of the lot. Attention to detail, loud enough, full-blooded without being overstated. Did I mention I like this one a lot?

Fuse - natural dynamic progress. A little too bright overall, as far as I'm concerned. Did you add subharmonics to the low end?

Gertvanhoof - not really convinced at all about my own entry here. I mastered this track at the end of a long day. On second thought and in the context of the other entries, the result strikes me as an obvious compromise in dynamics processing (too loud overall). The grit in the midrange and the plosives in the a capella intro would easily justify a closer look as well.

Ggidluck - fulfills the brief nicely in terms of overall sound and dynamic range. Open yet authoritative snare sound. The upper midrange nudges to the eerie side from time to time.

GreggJanman - improves drastically on vocal clarity and intelligibility, albeit at the expense of overall weight and impact.

KAyo - all too enthousiastic use of mid/side-processing, resulting in shifting internal balances and a general loss of impact.

LudwigM - I think you've pushed this one a little too far in the dynamics department. The result sounds "loud without a cause". On a sidenote, I've found this track quite hard to position on the loudness scale and I'm not too sure at all about my own take on the matter. Maybe the context of an album would have provided some pointers here.

MC - in the usual tradeoff between raw impact and texture/definition, I think there's literally too much weight on the impact side here. As the brief pointed out, this track could do with a little more life.

Patrik - nice approach, maybe a little too busy and closed-in (to my tastes, that is) in the loudest sections.

Philip - just (even maybe) a hint of cloudiness in the midrange, but nothing really to complain about. Natural dynamics, balanced and inviting sound. What's not to like?

PMX - I like your attention to detail, shame about the fade-out. Maybe the lower midrange is somewhat overrepresented.

Specialized01 - this one's bright on the edge of phasey, probably due to the all too obvious application of dynamics processing.

Undertow - another case of the vocals-vs.-guitars-dilemma. Clarity becomes harshness in the loud sections, exposing what I consider to be the main challenge in this WUMP edition.

Best regards,
Gert

Offline domc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #8 on: December 16, 2010, 05:11:07 pm »
wump's are so cool - its great to see so many different takes on the one thing - we all have different ears and different rooms Very Happy
Domc
 
Mastering Engineer
Dominic McGlinn B.Mus.T. (Hons)
 
Margate, QLD
+61421961641
 
www.domc.com.au
dom@domc.com.au

Offline gertvanhoof

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #9 on: December 16, 2010, 05:16:40 pm »
domc wrote on Thu, 16 December 2010 23:11

wump's are so cool - its great to see so many different takes on the one thing - we all have different ears and different rooms Very Happy

Well, at least we seem to agree on most of the terms, don't we?

Best regards,
Gert

Offline MoreSpaceEcho

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2010, 05:25:44 pm »
it's really interesting reading the replies so far. most of them seem very much in line with mine, which is cool. i'm midway through a second listen, will report back in a bit.

Offline MoreSpaceEcho

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2010, 11:12:21 pm »
Ok, first of all thanks to everyone who participated, I felt honored (and a little intimidated) imagining all of you guys attending to my little song. It was great hearing all the different approaches to the mix, and I thought a lot of the entries were really good. While I have some issue with all of them, most would be an easy revision and we'd be in business.

Since I'm playing the role of Thee Artiste here, I get to be blunt and cranky. Please don't take offense, it's all in good fun.

I started out with the unmastered mix. I still like it. The vocals are what they are, it's a little cloudy in the low mids, needs a little pizazz in the highs, some glue wouldn't hurt...

Then I listened in the order Wavelab arranged them for me:

Specialized  Nice softening of the plosives in the beginning. I can hear the compression starting about 20 sec in. It sounds ok for about the first minute. After that it sounds like an electric razor in a frying pan. It's just too hot and the high end is awfully harsh, especially in the guitar solo. Cymbal crashes are painful.

Kayo  Good god man what have you done to my mix? The L/R channels are reversed for starters. The eq is way too boom and sizzle. It's a bit crackly in places. But all that is immaterial compared to whatever phase/stereo image business you're doing. The mix sounds like it's turning inside out on itself. Seriously eye-crossing crazy. It's really doing my head in!

Phew, we are off to a rough start! Switching between Kayo's master and the original mix made me lose my mind completely, so at this point I ran screaming out of the studio and spent 10 minutes in the living room quietly strumming D and G chords on my telecaster and staring at the ceiling.

Alright, another cup of coffee and back to the front:

Adam Gonza The fade up at the beginning is weird. There's a glitch on the right side at approx 2:16. Something crazy is going on with the kick drum at around 2:25, 2:27, 2:39 and 3:30. It sounds like bad edits or a buffer underrun or something. The eq is kinda low midrangey, it lacks clarity and sounds muffled. The compression is cool but it's too much.

andreasN Good. Best so far. By far. Eq is maybe a little low middy? It feels a little bit soft and sluggish. Like the compressor release is a bit too slow maybe? I think with a couple minor tweaks and a bit less level this would be great.

Biig Niick The vocals sound good at the beginning. Eq is a bit sub heavy, makes the kick too prominent, other than that it's good. I'm missing the snare attack a bit, not a big deal though, the snare in general sounds nice. The level's a tiny bit hot, it sounds good but like it's just on the edge of starting to come apart, I'd be into a little more headroom. Otherwise it's cool.

Chris Doremus  Why's it peaking at -2.1???  Did you turn up the sides? Seems like it. I don't mind it but it's a bit much. Eq seems cool.

DOMC The low boost is kinda crazy, it makes the synth bass drone too pronounced. It seems like the q is really tight? The snare's too smushed, and there's some weird ducking on the heavy guitar part at the end. The guitar on the right. Sounds like a bad crosssfade maybe?

Ed Littman Very nice. The vocals at the start sound great (well, as great as these vocals are going to). I heard a lot of small artifacts on other people's masters that I don't hear on yours, so either they were in the original mix and you skillfully got rid of them, or they're the result of peoples chains distorting. Either way this sounds good! I'd be into a bit less of the low end boost, it makes it all feel just a little too ponderous. Maybe a tiny bit more of a high mid push as well. Otherwise it's great.

Gertvanhoof The vocals at the beginning sound really aggressive. The compression/level is too much, it sounds good but it's killing the drum impact more than I'd like. The eq sounds great though, if you just backed off the compression/level a bit I'd be way into this. This one became my reference for eq sanity check when jumping around between masters.

Ggidluck Peaks at -1.3. The first loud snare hit jumps out in a weird way, as do the hits during the breakdown. Are you expanding? Hey, what the hell did you do to my distorted drum fill? It sounds like a crossfade between plugs or something. I'm not sure what but it's all messed up there. This does sound nice and clear but I think there's too much meat cut out.

Gregg Janman It's too scooped around 400, especially in the first half, the snare sounds weird. It seems better in the second half. I think the high boost is too much. The stereo image sounds nice, snare is loud and proud, nice depth to this as well. The level is cool although the heavy guitars at the end sound a little overdone...could be distortions in the mix coming to light due to the brightness and not your chain but either way its too much. Also I feel like there's a little pumping during the last vocal section.

LudwigM Sweet screaming baby jesus. I had to turn this down 6db just to listen to it. Sounds sooooo aggressive right off the bat. It does hang together remarkably well for being so smashed, but I did say "i'm much more interested in depth and tone than i am in your ability to get it loud without artifacts" so no cookies for you!

MCThe first half sounds kinda muffled. The second half it's not so bad. It's too loud but I gotta admit I am enjoying it. It seems like you didn't boost the high end much, and this keeps the focus more on the midrange, which I like. It sounds tough. However, I heard a few smaller crackles throughout, but it really comes undone at the end where the stupid crunch guitars come in, the crackling is really severe there. Unacceptable! Back it all off a few db and it'd be cool.

Philip The lows seem just a bit too prominent, it still sounds a little cloudy. I think a slightly different eq curve would make it a little more exciting. Otherwise it's great, very respectful of the mix, could even be a bit louder.

UnderTow I'm sorry man, that high boost is just nuts. It sounds really weird and unnatural to me. The s's in the beginning are brutal. The snare doesn't sound right at all. The stereo image seems too wide/phasey. It's all making my ears go crazy!

Fuse That vocal was dry on purpose thank you very much. The sub boost is too much. I can see where you're going with this and it doesn't sound bad but it's not what I mixed.

Patrik It's too loud but it's nicely done. It does sound kinda closed in when compared level matched to quieter entries. If you just backed off the level it'd be cool.

PMX The eq is a little subby. I hear some pumping on the last vocal section. Otherwise I like it.

AivoryUK Again, it's too loud, but it's very well done. The transients do sound smushed when compared to the quieter entries, but eq wise it doesn't sound as closed in as Patrik's. Nice work. If you backed off the level I'd be happy.

As Nick pointed out, a bunch of people didn't attend to the fade at the end. No biggie AFAIC but in real life that stuff's important.

Now that I've critiqued all your work, you're all more than welcome to tell me I can't mix paint. I'd love to hear any critiques/advice you might have.

Really looking forward to the techniques thread, super curious to learn what you all did.

cheers

Offline Ed Littman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 877
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #12 on: December 17, 2010, 12:33:36 am »
I'm listening on Dunlavy sc11a's with a velodyne sub all level matched to the original mix
I thought I'd stab at all of them...
In the original mix I was distracted by pops & crackles by both the vocals & later the drums. I reduced the noise ...some didn't.
Also, I was distracted by a strange keyboard swell on the left side at 2:50 I also reduced that as well.
The challenge of this mix is to get more clarity without getting to harsh & not changing the mix to much(as client has requested) a tough one at best.  I did not see any instruction on when to fade out so I went to the end with a smooth out. Good work Gents



Kayo...In the attempt to achieve more clarity went to far away from the mix in a tail spin

Fuze... Nice & clear holds the low end a bit to harsh in the highs.

Patrik... more detail that the original mix but lost a bit of the punch in comparison

pmx... Nice highs but lost some of the body in the pursuit

adam gonsa...brought out the panned gits more but lost abit of the snap of the snare & kick

andreasN.....Nice notch for the snare(listening to client) but made the surrounding elements a bit boxy. nice highs & lows

BigNick.... good tone.understandably scooping  the mids but a bit to much as the vox are now buried

ChrisDoremus....good tone good snare crack but   a bit harsh in spots

DOMC.... reduced the boxy sound but snare looses (tough choice in this mix)

gertvanhoof... still kept some beef but still to aggressive at points

ggigluck.....nice snare snap. strange, drums duck out at 240 a bit to thin

GregJanman...nice snare crack. to harsh

LudwigM...nice lows clear mids, to sizzly on top

MC... truer to the original. brought out hh but lost a bit snare &  air

philip...smooth close to the original, abit more detail with out harshness

UnderTow.... to bright harsh

Specialized...opened it up for clarity but still changed the mix to much

aivoryuk...closest to the original with a bit more clarity. lost the snap & some air



Offline ggidluck

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #13 on: December 19, 2010, 08:59:54 pm »
Group 1:

aivoryuk: Nice balance overall. Good eq work there. One of the best.

kayo: I hear a lot more hit-hat and snap of the snare. I think it has a bit too much high and low shelf for my liking. I experimented and turning down the lows and highs at an arbitrary point of less than 1db made a big difference.

pmx: I like this one a lot. Nice work on the snare/hi-hat. Not overdone. Good balance with the low end to round out the sound. Levels are good but not pushed too much. Nice controlled levels and a good entry I think.

domc: A bit too much on the low end, and it adds a little fog to the mix compared to the original. It is masking a bit of mids and highs that I want to hear.

ed_littman_mastering: Very nice job. Good balance on the low end, nice snap on the snare and good hi-hat. Still has lots of bounce on the meters. A good example of compromise on this track. Levels are up, bass is not overdone and good general eq treatment to improve listenability.

gertvanhoof: Pretty good sound overall. Similar to the pmx track I think, but slightly too much compression as I think you stated.

greggjanman: Sounds clearer and more listenable. Nice hi-hat and snare coming through but maybe a tad bit too much. Overall quite good.

ludwigm: Levels pushed too much. The snare has lost impact. Good eq treatment though.

mc: you've pushed the level up but and it's brightened up slightly but not much different from the original. Has lost a bit of the punch of the original recording.
Gordon Gidluck
http://live2496.com

Offline aivoryuk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 480
Re: WUMP 22 Comments Thread
« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2010, 03:56:54 pm »
Here are my thoughts.

I think it was a very challenging track for all, very dense but also with some dynamic difference within the the track.

I was particulary interested in how people were going to deal with the point at around 2:40 where the vocal re-enters as the volume seems to really drop.

Undertow- Very Bright kinda ear splitting.

Biig Niick - Nice Overall sound, Dynamics seem slow and a little squashed.

Kayo_ not sure whats going on here a bit too much of everything.

DOMc- Nice Dynamics but there seems to eb some tight notching in the mids that gives it a unnatural sound.

Specialized 01 - not bad dynamics but oveall a very bright entry.

Gregg Janmann - Nice dynamics but lacking body and a bit bright.

PMX - Nice balance & dynamics, guitars seem to have a lost a little clarity.

Phillip - Nice sound although dynamics seem a  bit squashed.

LudwigM - Overdone.

ggidluck- Nice balance but not sure why you peaked so low.

MC - Some grainy highend filter going on here sounds like it has been converted to Mp3?

Fuse - Balance seems a bit off like its been widened too much but overall good.

Patrick T - I think this time round this is my Fav, really good balance and control.

Adam_Gonsa Good apart the gltiches and I think the sides have been widened just a tad too much.

GertVan Hoof- Another good one although snare does seem just slightly squashed.

Ed Littman - Nice Job although the volume drop at 2:40 seems really noticeable so overall I think the dynamics could have been ironed out more.

AndreasN - pretty good stuff no complaints.

Chris Dormeus - Generally good but why peak so low?