R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Go Down

Author Topic: WUMP VI discussion  (Read 14244 times)

Ged Leitch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1057
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #75 on: July 31, 2006, 12:28:40 PM »

Justo let you guys know I've updated my comments Smile
Logged
http://bitheadmastering.co.uk/

"...But I don't wanna be a pirate!"

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #76 on: July 31, 2006, 12:49:17 PM »

Hi Guys and Girls,

I just got back from Italy. (Yes it was excellent!) Smile
I've downloaded all the tracks. I'll try to listen this evening but I am a bit tired and that might affect my judgement so I'll probably listen and comment tommorow. It was allready very interesting to read the comments on my version. Smile

Alistair
Logged

Ged Leitch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1057
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #77 on: July 31, 2006, 12:53:13 PM »

UnderTow wrote on Mon, 31 July 2006 17:49

Hi Guys and Girls,

I just got back from Italy. (Yes it was excellent!) Smile


Alistair



Bonjourno Alastair!
Logged
http://bitheadmastering.co.uk/

"...But I don't wanna be a pirate!"

mbruce333

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 192
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #78 on: August 01, 2006, 01:03:28 AM »

Well, for better or worse, here are my comments.  I was pretty surprised at the range of sounds on this wump.  Everything from pretty loud to quiet, no highs to no lows.  Pretty cool to hear all the different approches, that's for sure.

In no particular order...


5277:
Nice control of the low end. Maybe a tad dark on the high end, it could use a little more air to bring out the pitch definition of the slightly muddy cello.  Overall, I like this one!

0001:
Nice job smoothing out the low end, but there is this weird thing going on in the high end.  It sounds a little rolled off, except for wayyy up there, and then there is a ton!  Like a little smiley EQ between 2K and 220K.  The crescendos have great build and feel to them!  I think a little careful surgery could have taken out a little boxy sound through the mid.  Dynamic control kicks!

1114
Slightly muffled sounding, but nice overall!  The top end is very nice, but could use a little more punch in the kick.  Very nice dynamic movement in the crescendos.

1138
Pretty cloudy in the lower mid.  The crescendos don’t quite have the same forward energy as some of the others.  I think this one could have been a little more aggressive.  

1234:
We got a hot one!  Pretty nice clarity in the opening and first cello solo.  Bright but not harsh, well done!  Some of the dynamics have been lost (of course) in the crescendos, but I think this is a trade that was worth it considering that this one is very aggressive sounding, which fits perfectly!

1389:
I like the punch of the kick, but I think it’s still pretty cloudy in the lower mid.  Overall, very nice, not much actually wrong, but it just didn’t move me much.

1411:
I like this one!  Nice job cleaning up the first cello solo.  Low end kicks, and the high end is opened up nicely.  Being fairly quiet, there is a ton of room left for the crescendo section to kick butt, too.  One of my favorites.

2323:
Hmmm, not sure what you were going for here.  Too much upper midrange around 2k makes it sound a little boxy for my taste.

2951:
Similar to 2323, too much upper mid makes it harsh and boxy.  Crescendos do move nicely, though!

4391:
Nice job cleaning out the lower mid range mud, but way too much high EQ.  Makes it a little to bright and edgy, even though I like it aggressive.  Pretty good job of keeping some motion in the crescendo section despite the fact that this is a pretty loud presentation!

9070:
Very smooth sounding, nice job!  Kick sounds very nice and punchy. Crescendo sections have a nice momentum to them.  Overall a very nice job.

9170:
Hmm, not sure what the intention was here.  Way too thin and kind harsh with a very low level.

1978:
Sounds kind of muffled with a big boost in the really high end that makes the whole thing a bit crispy.  The low end is nice and powerful, but combined with the high end boost gives it a bit of a smile EQ sound.  Sounds a bit over compressed, but not really that loud.

7288:
Overall very nice…smooth and balanced.  Dynamic control was also good.  Maybe a touch brighter for a little more air???

0603:
Pretty similar to 7288 but a touch more air.  I could use a still little more bite and aggression to match the vibe of the track, though.  Nice punchy kick drum.

0905:
The first thing I noticed was a lack of stereo spread.  While not quite mono, it’s pretty close.  Good job of controlling the lower mid muck in the cellos, but could have used more punch in the kick drum and air in the high end.  But, the tonal balance you have works pretty well even without the “ends” of the spectrum quite as hot as I like it.

1212:
Quite the opposite of 0905, the stereo image is really wide.  One of the Hotter entries, too!  Tonally it has a stuffy sound to it, maybe too much around 350-450?  

1793:
Nice job with the lower mid thing that I keep harping on, but it still has a slight boxy sound, maybe too much around 400 or so???  Crescendo section is nice, especially for how loud this one is!  Over all, very well done.

2941:
I don’t really dig the little pre-echo thing on the drum fill that brings in the tune, plus I think it needs more blank time at the beginning.  I usually leave around 150ms, while this one has only 27 or so ms, not enough IMO.  Overall a stuffy sound with too much lower mid and not enough air.

8085:
Lots of high end, maybe a bit too much though.  The low end sits very nice, though.  Nice control of the dynamics.  A little less high end I would really dig this one!

8606:
Wow, I’m not sure what the goal was here.  Thin and harsh with all the low end gone.  


That's all folks..
Mike Bruce
Logged
Mike Bruce
myspace.com/auricleaudiomastering

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #79 on: August 01, 2006, 02:49:35 PM »

My listening situation: Terratec EWS88MT soundcard, Yamaha MSP10 monitors, rectangular room with bad accoustics.

Here are my notes: (Track nr, monitoring gain, comments)

0001   -6.6   Sounds a bit dull and distant. Not very clear.

0603   -7.4   Good overall balance. Nice crescendo. Kick slightly muddy.

0905   -4.8   Slightly muddy low-mid. Less stereo width than original. Less detail than original.

1114   -5.7   Nice overall sound. Less muddy than original. More detail than original. Sometimes a tiny bit too sharp on the hihats.

1138   -6.5   Very close to original in freq balance. Still a bit dull in the very high-end. (Lack of air).

1212   -9.2   Loud! (Loudest of the bunch). Sounds a bit overcompressed. Slightly grainy sound. A bit too much mid for my taste. A bit tiring to listen to.

1234   -8.7   Another loud one. Doesn't sound as stressed as 1212. A bit too much low-end. A touch nasal sounding. Not bad for the loudness level.

1411   -5.0   Full sounding. Lacking a bit of mid but I like it.

1389   -5.4   Nice balance. More detail than original. Could use a touch more air. Another nice one.

1793   -7.0   Another nice one especially considering the level.

1978   -3.5   Too sharp. Not much level.

2323   -6.5   A touch nasal. Could do with a bit more low-end. Slightly larger stereo than original.

2941   -6.6   Wide sounding. Up-front sound. A tiny bit too smiley curved.

2951   -5.3   Nasal and sharp sounding.

4391   -8.2   Another loud one. A bit sharp sounding. Not bad for the loudness level. Kick a bit lost.

5277   -6.0   Nice balance. More detail than original. Another nice one.

7288   -5.0   Nice balance. I like it.

8085   -7.0   Too sharp. Hurts ears in loud parts. Added reverb? (Or is that just the increased high-end?)

8606   -3.0   Waow. Way too sharp. No bass. Sounds like it was recorded through a telephone.

9070   -4.9   Full sounding. Nice balance. More detail than original. Could maybe have a touch less -low-end. I like it.

9170   -3.0   A bit sharp and too much mid. Lacking low-end.

Alistair
Logged

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #80 on: August 02, 2006, 08:59:47 AM »


We have 18 out of 21 reviews. Can the last 3 participants indicate if they have time to do the reviews? I'm not trying to rush anything but if people are too busy with work or other stuff, which is fully understandable, we might as well move on with the techniques discussions. Of course if any of them indicate that they will be able to review soon, lets wait.

I know some people have allready posted their techniques but they are a bit meaningless without being able to correlate them with actual audio. I would prefer to post my techniques with the file number included so that we don't need to do complicated cross-referencing of posts.

Alistair
Logged

garret

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1012
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #81 on: August 02, 2006, 01:41:18 PM »

Seem to me like 18 out of 21 entries is critical mass.... plenty of good feedback has been provided already.  

Stuff happens, this isn't ever going to be the highest priority in peoples' busy lives, the tracks are big and difficult to download, etc.

Maybe we should pm the remaining three to make sure they know we're waiting for them, and set an end of week deadline.  After that, we go ahead and close this thing.

I'm itchin to find out who's who. Wink
-Garret
Logged
tomorrow is already here - http://www.worksongs.net/

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #82 on: August 02, 2006, 02:24:28 PM »

garretg wrote on Wed, 02 August 2006 12:41

Seem to me like 18 out of 21 entries is critical mass.... plenty of good feedback has been provided already.  

I agree - let's move forward...
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

TotalSonic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3728
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #83 on: August 04, 2006, 04:59:01 PM »

Gentlemen -
I'm listening to all the tracks now and over the next few hours and will post extensive notes later tonight or tomorrow.  

Apologies for taking a bit longer with this than promised but I was wrestling with a multitude of computer problems (had to spend two days swapping parts and rebuilding DAW#2 as it went kaput right towards the end of a session - quick fix was to pull out the hard drive that I recorded to and then put it into DAW#1 - redundancy can be mighty handy - but finally got it working better than it was doing before), a hard drive in my office computer decided to stop spinning up, and for some frickin' reason the firewire ports on my old internet iMac (which I use to sneaker net to an external hard drive for loading of big files to my DAWs) decided to weirdly just stop working.   For some reason things like this always seem to come at once and in threes.  

Anyway - check back here later for full update - and thanks again to everyone who participated.

Best regards.
Steve Berson

Phillip Graham

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 280
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #84 on: August 10, 2006, 10:40:31 AM »

TotalSonic wrote on Fri, 04 August 2006 16:59


Anyway - check back here later for full update - and thanks again to everyone who participated.

Best regards.
Steve Berson


Bump,

Still hoping you are going to be able to provide feedback on the submissions.

Thanks!
Logged
Phillip Graham

TotalSonic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3728
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #85 on: August 10, 2006, 06:12:34 PM »

Phillip Graham wrote on Thu, 10 August 2006 15:40

TotalSonic wrote on Fri, 04 August 2006 16:59


Anyway - check back here later for full update - and thanks again to everyone who participated.

Best regards.
Steve Berson


Bump,

Still hoping you are going to be able to provide feedback on the submissions.

Thanks!


MY APOLOGIES EVERYONE!!!  I was listening through on both monitors and headphones and trying to do extensive notes and got through just five that evening.  Man - doing a good job with evaluations is time consuming!  

Well - after that things got busy - between mastering sessions, trying to tweak up the room, doing some cello gigs with some other folks where I have to learn a bunch of new music, and necessary promo for our group to try and further this upcoming CD along with recording and mixing the final track for it, along with trying to spend time with my girlfriend before she split for the month back to Cali, etc. etc. - well you get the idea.

I'll post the five that I have later tonight and will try and get to more of them asap.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

mbruce333

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 192
Re: WUMP VI discussion
« Reply #86 on: August 10, 2006, 06:26:06 PM »

Don't stress about it too much, Steve. Smile   While I can't wait to read you thoughts, life has a way of putting somethings on the back burner...for a little while.  You'll get to it when you can, I think we all appreciate your wanting to take the time to do it right.

Later...
Mike Bruce
Logged
Mike Bruce
myspace.com/auricleaudiomastering
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Go Up
 

Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 19 queries.