Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lagerfeldt]

Matt, remember you're master here is still in my top 3 And some people liked it a lot, and didn't find it too compressed. YMMV.

Personally it sounds too mushy, where all instruments seem to blend together as an indistinguishable pulp. Sometimes multiband does this to the sounds since it keeps all the bands from peaking too much, and thus loses transients and definition.

I'm surprised you don't use multiband, maybe you are using very low thresholds on several compressors? I don't know.

I'm not arguing aginst your levels which are fine.

To me this sound is very similar to what happens to something on the air, due to more compression and multiband (this leading me to the conclusion of over-compression or multiband issues).

Hope that clarified my opinion?

PS. I'm sorry I haven't uploaded my version yet but due to a lot of stuff going on right now in my life I've been a little selective of what tasks to do (guess I'm taking time to write here of course!).

[UnderTow]

lagerfeldt wrote on Mon, 12 June 2006 09:55

Personally it sounds too mushy, where all instruments seem to blend together as an indistinguishable pulp.

Looking at the techniques thread, I'm guessing that part of what I personaly don't like in Matt G's version is introduced by the Waves Bass plugin.

Everytime I've tried using this plugin (or similar) on a whole mix and sometimes even just on bass, I've found that the low-end/low-mid becomes mushy.

This is just a guess as other processing is being applied which might be the culprits.

Alistair

[UnderTow]

cerberus wrote on Mon, 12 June 2006 07:45

(mac user here, no elephants for us; but what is it actually? voxengo's website doesn't clear that up for me.) jeff dinces

It is a brickwall peak limiter. Lol.

I was under the impression that what you see in those graphs is harmonic distortion. Paul Frindle has suggested that it is the release time constants causing this. However, if that is the case, I would have thought it should also be present in the upsampled versions of Elephant. That discussion was a while ago so I'll have to revisit it.

I'm still thinking about your other comments so no response to that yet.

Alistair

[lagerfeldt]

Here's my master from April 2005, I didn't have time to do a re-mastering now after I got my K+H O 300 system.

http://www.onlinemastering.dk/download/wump/wump3_lagerfeldt .zip

[Ged Leitch]

Hey Holger, just had a listen...


to me, overall it sounds really good.

But the uppermids on the synth really pierce at high volume
and maybe the low end could be a tad tighter?

just my opinion dude!

thanks for uploading the track BTW, i totally understand your life may be a bit chaotic right now!


cheers,
Ged.

[NoWo]

I second Ged

[Matt_G]

lagerfeldt wrote on Mon, 12 June 2006 18:55

Matt, remember you're master here is still in my top 3 And some people liked it a lot, and didn't find it too compressed. YMMV. Personally it sounds too mushy, where all instruments seem to blend together as an indistinguishable pulp. Sometimes multiband does this to the sounds since it keeps all the bands from peaking too much, and thus loses transients and definition. I'm surprised you don't use multiband, maybe you are using very low thresholds on several compressors? I don't know. I'm not arguing aginst your levels which are fine. To me this sound is very similar to what happens to something on the air, due to more compression and multiband (this leading me to the conclusion of over-compression or multiband issues). Hope that clarified my opinion? PS. I'm sorry I haven't uploaded my version yet but due to a lot of stuff going on right now in my life I've been a little selective of what tasks to do (guess I'm taking time to write here of course!).

Thanks for the clarification Holger, I guess when you start approaching the upper limits of the digital threshold to gain high RMS levels, some things have to suffer. Perhaps it's a combination of the HEDD & AC2 which compresses & melds things together that sucks the life out of it a bit. I'll try to work around this in other ways in future. It's the age old problem - how do you get the level up without screwing with the dynamics too much? If there is some techniques or ways to achieve this transparently, I'd love to hear about them.

All suggestions & comments welcome.

Thanks for uploading your original master too Holger, I think that it's only fair & by the sounds of things you are too busy to do another version anyway. Congrats on becoming a father is in order here I believe

Now when I find the time I'll go through them all & comment also.

Cheers,

Matt

[cerberus]

holger;

matt's the one that makes me wanna dance the most; not perfect of course.  i think you demonstrate a keen ear in your critiques, though we have different tastes and attitudes; your comments for me were technically correct. i appreciate the information which is helpful to me.

matt;

perhaps holger and some others may have liked yours better if you had run some of the stereo dynamics processing as m/s?   for me it always means less of that "glueing the mix" effect; much more open and truer to the source. i'm almost certain that you wouldn't need to  compensate with duy wide in that case (my opinion)  because the differential eq processing you already do in m/s would be preserved better.

almost every dynamics tool i've tried (including ac-2,) works better for me in m/s: set up in stereo, then move the settings over to m/s and vive la difference.

jeff dinces

[Ged Leitch]

cerberus wrote on Tue, 13 June 2006 02:24

holger; matt's the one that makes me wanna dance the most; not perfect of course.  i think you demonstrate a keen ear in your critiques, though we have different tastes and attitudes; your comments for me were technically correct. i appreciate the information which is helpful to me. matt; perhaps holger and some others may have liked yours better if you had run some of the stereo dynamics processing as m/s?   for me it always means less of that "glueing the mix" effect; much more open and truer to the source. i'm almost certain that you wouldn't need to  compensate with duy wide in that case (my opinion)  because the differential eq processing you already do in m/s would be preserved better. almost every dynamics tool i've tried (including ac-2,) works better for me in m/s: set up in stereo, then move the settings over to m/s and vive la difference. jeff dinces

Hi Jeff,
Could you tell me how you set up your stereo comp into M/S?

Just curious mate!

Cheers,
Ged.

[cerberus]

hi ged;

at the moment with waves s1.  the details are described in the s1 manual, which suggests how to employ the technique (for eq) in protools.  with other platforms it can require bussing.  

i consider perhaps doing it the old fashioned way in the future:  (L+R) and (L-R) = M and S  ;  (M+S) and (M-S) = L and R [same algorithm to encode or decode].  

there's always mathematical loss of half the total signal gain (around 6.02db) which needs to be made up.


jeff dinces

[lagerfeldt]

NoWo wrote on Mon, 12 June 2006 23:03

[snip]...this it is one of the best masterings I have ever heard. I has exact the sound I am after for since 2 years. What was most responsible for this I dare to ask? Waves Multi, Gyraf, SSL or what? I am searching for this slightly hollow upfront sound which gets it loud without ruining anybodys ears or nerves.

Thanks for the comments. I don't think one thing in particular is responsible, it's a cliche but it's a combination of several things.

Ged, I totally agree with your two comments - which is something I would have changed today, especially evident on my new Klein+Hummels.

[NoWo]

lagerfeldt wrote on Tue, 13 June 2006 09:16

Thanks for the comments. I don't think one thing in particular is responsible, it's a cliche but it's a combination of several things.

Hi Holger,

this is certainly true.
But I am aiming at this hollow drum sound coming from everywhere, not just out of the middle.
RME clipping can not do this, AFAIK the same is true for the Waves plugs, so only the Gyraf and the SSL remain. So who of the both is more responsible for this typical sound? I am comparing it to Britney Spears s Toxic and Modern Talking s Sexy Lover in the remastered version.

Norbert

[lagerfeldt]

What you're talking about could be the effect of the tube sound in the Gyraf Gyratec X when it's pushed hard (which I did). It causes some harmonics to increase in both directions, which fattens the sound. Furthermore, due to the Vari-Mu design, the non-linearities in the L/R set of tubes get progressively stronger when pushed hard. This causes an effect similar to stereo spreading but in a very pleasing and natural way which also includes the bass frequencies.

I suspect this is what you like.

The SSL sounds like an SSL (the classic SSL sound), only mine has a 6dB/Octave roll off sidechain from around 80 Hz which makes it pump less than normal versions or the Danfield 726. Great for dance music. My custom built clone has transformer balanced outputs which has a less distorted and softer sound, especially audible on the top frequencies.

[NoWo]

Thanks a lot Holger  

Norbert

[cerberus]

is it over yet?  i learned too much... as in, i hope i don't forget what i learned. this is not revisions of course , perhaps more like the final exam.. the experimental techniques i mentioned can work with any other technique, but requires a multitrack daw, it is an additional process to "regular mastering", like m/s or multiband, it takes extra time to set up properly.
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&uf id=FB2B0931206AD80A

notes:

-  almost all dynamics is m/s lots of lnmb to be clean this time. no "drastic" eq.
-  multi stage limiting, parrellel stage feeding transx multi to final l3 succeeded by dc offset filter which was eventually only partially effective once i got it really slamming..but too late to change...you've got to work through this filter and not touch it again or it changes everything.
- bob katz inspired "madsen effect" bus, not working as much as an elliptic eq as i usually do with this but more pure katz...kind of a work in progress. i was trying to make an elliptic eq effect to move bass to the center without m/s and bob suggested the haas range delays...and there it was.
- experiment was: running every process backwards and forwards, (except what follows an intentional delay of more than one sample)... the final result is a mix of all of these processes. heavily processed, but not as over-processed sounding as my actual wump3 submission.  

jeff dinces