R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   Go Down

Author Topic: IMP6 discussion  (Read 8560 times)

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #45 on: August 30, 2006, 06:05:19 pm »

j.hall wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 22:34



what is "floppy"?  the kick drum, or the whole mix?



Sorry for not being clear: The kick.

Quote:


how come people keep submitting mixes?  next mix submission i see will get deleted.....maybe in school you can turn homework in late and get away with it, in the real world you just get fired and not paid!


Sorry for that.  Embarassed  I didn't know when the dead-line was. I actually thought I had read it was last week. Then I saw some people still posting mixes so I thought I would have a go afterall but then encountered the locked thread when I was finished.  Confused

My apologies.

Alistair
Logged

scott volthause

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #46 on: August 30, 2006, 06:14:47 pm »

Oh, and in case anyone was curious, I found out the reason why one of the vocals tracks was seriously early / out of time.

That track is being processed with a pitch shifter +1 octave, and my DAW doesn't do automatic plug-in compensation, so that track had to be slid forward a good 100+ millis in order for it to sound in time.

And I also remember the ohead tracks being out of phase. One of my Oktava mics is wired opposite of the other. How is that for Russian quality?

Also, given the rather crappy state of that recording space (read that as very thin walls, no sound treatment) it's hard to make a determination for sure which party is offending during tracking, so phase flipping was left for mix time.
Logged

blueboy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 538
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #47 on: August 30, 2006, 06:15:20 pm »

rankus wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 11:30

BlueBoy:

Cool intro reverse cymbal.  You beat yourself up in your post , but dude this is good stuff. The gtrs are a teensy bit harsh, but they started out that way so no biggie.  Overall ballance is great! Good job.



Thanks very much Rick. I appreciate the words of encouragement.
(Charles Dye taught me everything I know... Smile ) <inside joke>

I'm not really qualified to comment on other people's mixes, but I tend to agree with much of Rankus' assessment. (How's that for dodging a bullet!)

I wanted to do this to learn more about other people's approaches to mixing, so I thought I would explain in detail my thought process of how I approached the mix, and coming from a novice perspective I'm interested in whether or not my approach makes any sense to others.

When I first got the tracks I was surprised how disjointed they were, but instead of cleaning things up I was lazy and just routed things to individual groups (ensuring no overlapping lead vox for example). Mono lead vox, stereo bkg vox, stereo gtr, mono bass, stereo drums, lead gtr. My intention once I first ran through the track was to try and build on what was there, instead of making drastic overall tonal changes, as I think it would need to be re-tracked to do any major alterations without killing it.

For the intro I wanted to give the first hit more impact so I thought using a reverse crash would give it a sense of relative volume as it accelerated to the first hit. I used 2 stereo crash samples (one inverted and slightly delayed) to give it some "motion".

On the intro guitar I thought it would be interesting to use automation to emulate the hypercompression that you normally hear on these types of songs. I wanted the guitar to sound huge, so instead of going from a relatively small single guitar to big stereo guitars, I tried to make the energy of the single guitar match the energy of when the band comes in. I thought the contrast of this combined with going from up-front center mono to big wide stereo was cool. I was hoping that by having a big guitar sound in the beginning, I could bring the level down during the rest of the song, and that people would still hear (remember) the guitar as being "big" even though it was much quieter.

For the drums I tried to beef up the kick with a bit of compression and EQ as it was pretty flat. I copied the snare track and did some parallel compression and EQ and a subtle super short stereo delay.

I did hear a problem with the overheads (out of phase) but it wasn't that obvious "one of my ears is plugged" sound. It was more like funky stereo miking in a weird room. I only work with drum sample libraries so it never occurred to me to even check for that type of thing. Anyway I mixed with the sound the way it was, which kind of left the snare a bit weak and distant sounding. After fixing the problem the snare was more full and a bit more prominent in the mix so I think I may want to go back and adjust how it sits in the mix again.


I added choked cymbal crashes and muted the hi-hat count-in to give the intro a little more tension and release. I also automated mutes on a room sound IR and a plate IR on the snare throughout the different sections to give it some contrast.

On the bass I duplicated the track and put a bunch of crap on it and blended it with the original. It sounds almost laughable when in solo, but I really liked the way it sounded in the track so I left it that way.

I left the mono intro guitar untouched, and then cut a bit of 300Hz out of the stereo guitars. Acoustic guitars got a bit of high end boost. I left the acoustics with only slight bus compression as I wanted them to jump out of the mix as a contrast to the naturally compressed distorted guitars. Maybe they are too loud, but I like how the mood changes in that part so I left them that way.

The vocals were very difficult for me. I didn't like the sound of the original tracks so I did some major EQ and added 2 comps with subtle amounts of reduction. I used a short vocal plate IR with a long initial delay and a subtle slap back delay to add ambience. I also did a parallel stereo vox track doing a slightly detuned left and right lead vox double with a slight amount of chorus to give it a more natural feel by slowly modulating it. I tried to make the vox cut through the noise of the mix without sounding too "overprocessed" but I don't know how well I succeeded in that. Vox were also edited to line things up, fix some bkg vox lines, and to add a fake harmony at the end.

The biggest challenge overall for me was trying to stuff all that noise into 2 tracks and maintain clarity without diminshing the power throughout the different sections. When all the bkg vocals come in I found it difficult to not have them take over the mix. I ended up routing the lead vox group and the bkg vox groups through another master vox group in order to automate the relative vox to music relationship.

I ended up with level automation on individual vox tracks, group vox tracks, and master vox tracks in order to tame some loud vox sections and avoid using more compression. A lot of the automation was on individual words or syllables which was a real pain. I tried to fine tune the overall vocal level by listening at a really low level on some small computer speakers and matching up the different sections.

There was a lot of automation used throughout the song to try and give it some sense of progression. Being a guitarist I had to fight the urge to crank up the guitars all the time as I wanted to keep it exciting but not fatiguing. I still feel that they are bit harsh and I should have EQ'd the high end a bit. I hope all the level changes weren't too distracting.

I was surprised at the variation in overall balance of all the submitted mixes, and I'm not sure if it is due to sound preference or to monitoring differences. I tried to check my mix on about 5 different pairs of speakers at various listening levels. I'm using a pair of Tannoy Reveal Actives which I find are a bit cloudy in the mids and highs (got a great deal on them and I'm still learning their sound), but I am most familiar with some floor standing B&W's with a sub for a full range reference. I've tried to tune the room and ensure a balanced sound, but I don't know if what I am hearing is accurate yet.

Anyway, this was a great learning experience and a lot of fun... and I never want to hear this song ever again.  Smile <jk>

Actually I think I'm going to try and re-mix and then master it now...

Sorry for the long rambling post...and thanks for letting me participate!

JL

Logged
"Only he who attempts the absurd can achieve the impossible." ~ Manuel Onamuno

Juergen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #48 on: August 30, 2006, 06:30:29 pm »

Nice turnout! I really enjoyed listening to the (sometimes very) different sonic interpretations. I did look at the whole thing but didn't really get to mixing it, so I'll spare my comments for next time when I do participate.  Smile
Logged
Signature: The fakultative signature, which will appear with the soil of your reports

ATOR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #49 on: August 30, 2006, 06:33:33 pm »

Rankus

ATOR:
Good Mix! (Mastered ?) (MASTERED!!!) Dood this is a "mix" project.... decent mix though.

Nope, not mastered just an UAD prec limiter shaving off peaks. I do some mastering, like more guys over here I know from Brads place, so maybe I'm more focussed on getting a 'mastered' sounding result.

Undertow

ATOR: A bit sharp but nice full spectrum mix. (I like that). Did you replace the kick? It is a bit prominant. You made the mix quite loud (like me). I'm not sure this was the intention. Smile Vocal nice and clear. Nice width. I like it.

The kick is all original. I used a waves gate to get the length I wanted, an UAD 1176 to shape the envelope, an UAD Pultec to beef it up and another eq for cleaning up some flabbyness.

I didn't make my mix loud but I did try to make a balanced clean mix using very little compression, a lot of level automation and cutting out the frequencies that take up unnecessary space. Because most of the transients are still clean (uncompressed) this does leave a lot of  room to get it loud in mastering. Basicly I made a mix that I'd like to get for a mastering job.

Alistair I missed your mix but will listen to it tomorrow.


Hey Scott, thanks for letting us have a go at your recordings.
Logged
Pieter Vincenten - ATORmastering

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #50 on: August 30, 2006, 07:01:23 pm »

ATOR wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 23:33


The kick is all original. I used a waves gate to get the length I wanted, an UAD 1176 to shape the envelope, an UAD Pultec to beef it up and another eq for cleaning up some flabbyness.



Interesting. I like what you did to the sound of the kick (Just a bit loud).

Quote:


I didn't make my mix loud but I did try to make a balanced clean mix using very little compression, a lot of level automation and cutting out the frequencies that take up unnecessary space. Because most of the transients are still clean (uncompressed) this does leave a lot of  room to get it loud in mastering. Basicly I made a mix that I'd like to get for a mastering job.



Good approach it seems. Smile

Quote:


Alistair I missed your mix but will listen to it tomorrow.



Thanks!

Alistair
Logged

cerberus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2651
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #51 on: August 30, 2006, 07:09:01 pm »

UnderTow wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 17:21

I noticed the overheads issue so I turned the phase of one of the channels by 59 degrees.
how did you do that?

jeff dinces

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #52 on: August 30, 2006, 07:29:08 pm »

cerberus wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 00:09

UnderTow wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 17:21

I noticed the overheads issue so I turned the phase of one of the channels by 59 degrees.
how did you do that?

jeff dinces



Sonar comes with a phase plugin. You can turn the phase from -180 to + 180 degrees.

Alistair
Logged

Mark.Fassett

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #53 on: August 30, 2006, 08:59:39 pm »

I'd post comments on everyone's mixes, except that I don't yet feel qualified to comment seeing as how this was my third complete mix (the other two were IMP5).

I totally missed the out of phase OH, so I'm going to go back when I get a bit of time and play with that and see what the difference is.

I noticed the one vocal track that was out of time, and slid that forward. In the bridge, there are the two different lyrics at the same time, and I dumped the one with the least number of tracks because, to my ear, it just sounded like someone got the line wrong.

I thought the bass was sloppy - lots of pops and buzzes. I ran it through two different compressor plugins, and, at least when mixed with everything else, it seemed to even it out and hide most of the ugliness.

I liked the song, for the most part, but I certainly wasn't ready to deal with so many vocal tracks. Took me what seemed forever to figure out what was what.
Logged

cerberus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2651
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #54 on: August 30, 2006, 10:08:10 pm »

in no particular order:

shakes the clown really nice  balanced mix, i like how the guitars rip well above the bass, but are not harsh.  very masculine bass, maybe slightly overbearing in stature.   i don't favor reverb for this song at all, but it doesn't swamp out the vocal as much as it tended to in other's mixes. i find the vocals here sound very natural  save for reverb which seems to become less obvious as the mix gets denser.

chrisj i think you achieved your stated goals here. perhaps remove the snare fx on the second acoustic break? the punchy snare helps drives the groove, but i think there could still be more nuance to it.

tom c nice feeling dynamics. i like how the guitars and the snare "tear" (as in "rip"...) but i find the mix somewhat hollowed and ringy perhaps from "too much" eq.

j. hall each kick sounds like a large caliber gun shot.... vocals a bit drowned at times.... slappy 'verb in acoustic section seems heavy handed. i think that aside from the kick drum, it is a balanced mix that would flourish as soon as the kick is reduced.

louman brings it on for the 2nd chorus... but up to then, perhaps needs to borrow chrisj's conductor's baton to supplement the groove energy?

nizzle reverb on vocals...  ugh.  sounds like vocal was phoned in from a shower stall... otherwise this is great.  the reverb is too nasty, things seem pitched weird. but i still enjoyed it anyway for sounding "together" like a record should.

dikledoux interesting reverbs.. vocal levels seem a bit off in places... nice burble from the guitars.. drums seem like they're pulling my eardrums a bit.

dikledoux [revised] i got the "police bullhorn thing".. very interesting but not loud or distorted enough.  the other (filtered?) vocals are nice.. sound stressy, but real smooth, has that phil collins exciter effect?    i like how the snare sounds low and lets the brass percussion ring clear like hell's  sleighbells.

ator takes off and flies in the bridge (2nd "how long"). but before that it seems to be a bit meek about spreading it's wings.  cool "avant" drum sound which reminds me of radiohead kid-a... really interesting.

blueboy cool subtexture here on the bass... it works less well for me on the acoustic parts, but it's rich like chocolate in most places..... i like how you let the guitars recede in parts, and then they come back up front, moreso as the song progresses.

blueboy [revision] the effects are working better... everything much better. guitar tones have balls now. bass is better wetter, more rounded off.. very powerful... totally fixed the frogginess.  i love these guitar tones now.... nice fx on "misery".. still a bit obtrusive, the wailing vocals between the second acoustic part and the "how long can you wait".. are perfect.. love that minor harmony...a few "why don't" you come quietly's" sound a bit thin and harsh, but then at the end again, very rich harmonies... would like to hear more of that.

cerberus [282] still too much distortion on vocals during the second acoustic part.  guitars are a bit harsh in upper mids.  tinny overheads. drums not punching through enough. weak bass. guitars are too band limited.. need more articulaton.

garretg the snare sounds real heavy, this is cool... you've removed the more "s and m" leaning lyrics... so it has a way of lightening the mood despite the very metal attitude of the guitars taking over...  then there is the somewhat whimsical percussion treatment towards the end...it  has a sort of air of  playfulness where one might expect the devil to be lurking.

undertow how did you do your bass and kick drum? i really like how this hits me hard in the torso... wow.. the impact and clarity go together... how was that done?      beautiful natural top end too... if slighltly overwhelmed by the bottom, but there are no freq holes. snare is a bit compressed sounding...     nice vocal changeup at the climax.   then bringing on some grit...  what a suberb mix, amazing attention to all kinds of detail, it feels like music.

adam miller decent mix.. i think there are more subtleties to bring out here... less bass perhaps might help me feel it more, but it's hard to tell with a bass this dominant.

calvin i am getting into the articulation of the guitars here, like i can actually imagine a real guitarist or two playing riffs, as opposed to a wall of chaoticsound.  the groove is fairly strong, but as it's been pointed out that the overheads have phase problems, perhaps flipping the polarity of one or the other would open it up more.

patrik_t reverb ok. seems like it works well towards the end.. with the layered vocal parts the really big sound is glorious... i really like the  sweet guitar tones without losing the aggression.  this mix fits my general sonic aesthetic more than my own mix does,  very pleasant  sonically...i'd like to hear a more complete mix...

max this is really smooth..and clear.... except for the vocals, which sound uncompleted and disjointed in parts...  i hope others will see what can be done with no bus compression.   i like the so called: "out of time vocals..."  makes it interesting for humans, imo.  strange which vocals are missing here.... similar cuts as garret made.

nick t this one has me groovin'.... i find it a very flawed mix technically, but i cannot stop moving. this mix is like a drug for me: if i turn it up it's way harsh on top, but at low levels i simply feel the music.   the "how long can you wait" part takes me even higher.... the "before it's too late" vocal part is missing.. that is essential to the song, imo. i feel an empty space needs to be filled there. so i wonder why you didn't use it?

vkorehov very strange and chaotic...timing sounds sloppy. good separation on the guitars..  the filtered vocal is a bit distant. that keyboard thing is weird!     compression sounds like it's being played like an overstressed instrument.. like some guitars are ducking other ones.  cool.. but is very messy sounding, very different from what i'm used to hearing,  or would expect.

mfassett  kinda murky bottom, i guess there are reverbs on the drums? and compression, no doubt.. nice sharp acoustics punching through and really good vocal sound.  but imo compressors wreck it a bit...the quiet parts are too loud, the loud parts too quiet.   i wonder what it sounds like without bus fx?

rankus  <ery clear guitars, e.g. i hear the slides (cool).. bass however is too "in the head", not thumping in the chest enough, for this reason, it seems too disconnected from the kick which does hit lower.  vocals are also pleasantly clean and clear, as if you spent a good amount of time comping takes and matching them perfectly.  the obvious weirdness in that one instrumental section is kinda "patchy" for me, too much contrast,  and no lead instrument up front; so i don't find it helps the song,

jeff dinces

chrisj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #55 on: August 30, 2006, 11:01:57 pm »

I got a certain amount of HAAATE and a certain amount of like from various things of my mix, so I thought I'd do what most people are doing and post what I was trying to accomplish. Evilness included. Free stupidity in every package!  Twisted Evil

I wanted to do a 'Slipperman Homage' type mix without having any idea really how to do one, having never done a heavy rock mix before, plus I only had GarageBand. So basically we're talking Deep Hurting already. Unfortunately, I did not give up Wink

I went into every track and tried to find places to put parametric EQ boosts, all at Q of 10. 'wah pedal left half on' stuff. For instance, the vocal clarity is 9.5 db boost at 3.6K and 7.8 db boost at 17.4K... no compression or other effects of any kind.

The boxy snare is because it's got 11.4 db boost at 3.6K, after a peak limiter with slow attack and fast release. Kick was 11 db at 83 hz also after a peak limiter...

The guitars sound the way they do because they're made up out of two boosts at 280 and 2.6K, 11 and 9 db both at Q 10. This is evil and I would be sorry for killing the guitars, except that I enjoyed it. I need more bands though, to do THAT trick properly.

The bass is an 800 hz boost of about 9 db going into a peak limiter, fastest attack and fast release.

Only thing on the 2-buss is 'Cyanide 2' set to very slightly distort the peaks.

Essentially, everything here is the product of doing it in GarageBand and having only two slots for Audio Units and hating all GarageBand's default FX. Soon I will get Logic Express, and there will be much rejoicing- LogicX's audio engine seems to sound better (well, no 16 bit output anyway) and the channel EQ has four bands all of which will do stupid Q tricks the way I enjoy them. I really can't get sounds this way with a maximum of two narrow bands- you have to build them up from more bands or it's just stupid, plus if I wanted to bring in the peak limiter there's one slot gone already, and the GarageBand compression and verb was just useless presets with one knob for each.

So I wanted to do extremely cruel things while completely lacking the ability to do them properly Very Happy sucks to be me! I still had fun. I know I missed a lot, especially in tonality, because I was doing such sick, sick things Smile part of the reason I got such a boxy sound was I'm a complete 70s head... I need to do what I did better, rather than start trying to do completely unrelated things. I refer to some of the bigger, lusher entries for useful examples of what I missed.

The one thing I saw which it seemed to me most people missed was simply groove- that's why I posted the crazy track-slide picture. Listen to the mix and it should not seem like stuff was slid all over the place, because it was being slid to where it belonged- for example, the whole axis of the band that centered on the kick was quite on top of the beat. The center and stereo guitars weren't in the same place time-wise, and though I didn't try to tune the vocals, the vocals were also often quite on top of the beat and had to slide back until they were part of the groove. I could've got even crazier with regions and fixing little details but I wanted to do OVERALL fixes that got everything cohesive.

So, basically, what I did was crazy evil brain-damaged EQing, virtually no dynamics at all except vicious peak limiting on kick, snare and bass (compressed the overheads with the crappy GB compressor) and major global timing adjustments on absolutely everything- which came out so useful that I am now ready to grab a bunch of 8-track masters onto my computer as stereo pairs. Time-stamping? hahahaha! I'll just slide all the shit around anyway, who cares! Or something Smile

Cheers. If people need to be punished I will do an 'evil chris' crit and pick the one most horrible thing from everyone's mix Smile should only take a few seconds per track as it's usually obvious...

maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #56 on: August 30, 2006, 11:53:56 pm »

evil is good

it's nice to have one's ego stroked, but it's, hardly, instructional
Logged

NickT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #57 on: August 31, 2006, 01:05:59 am »

Quote:

nick t this one has me groovin'.... i find it a very flawed mix technically, but i cannot stop moving. this mix is like a drug for me: if i turn it up it's way harsh on top, but at low levels i simply feel the music. the "how long can you wait" part takes me even higher.... the "before it's too late" vocal part is missing.. that is essential to the song, imo. i feel an empty space needs to be filled there. so i wonder why you didn't use it?



Well, I am self taught...so I am sure my mix is flawed technically. As far as that vocal line, I don't have it! Smile I would have used it if it were there. I must have lost it in the import.

I would comment on all the mixes, but I agree with most of the statements. I also agree that my mix is to bright. I saw the thread when I got home from work the day it was due. So my ears were pretty fried by the time I posted.

Jeff - I would love to hear from you in a PM about the technical shortcomings of my mix. I am always trying to learn.

Thanks,

Nick

cerberus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2651
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #58 on: August 31, 2006, 01:54:25 am »

chris; i can't tell how many samples you slid the tracks... a few?  tens?  hundreds?

also pm me if you want to buy a license for logic "pro" real cheap.
-
nick, sure,  i will do it in the next day. and please do the same for me, i'll be revising my own mix further since i think that the best way to learn is to actually get it right.

jeff dinces

Patrik T

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 833
Re: IMP6 discussion
« Reply #59 on: August 31, 2006, 07:22:36 am »

Here are some comments. It amuses me how many that writes these comments actually go out for finding faults without looking at the craft or how the unity in the song feels. AKA the big picture. Or, as I will end this post with - the big picture within a smokey pile of debris.


Lou: This is wiiiiiide. Maybe too wide. I also feel that mono compability is overrated, but this is perhaps on the very edge. The sound is soft, sweet and nice.

Ator: United. Good mix. The huge kick-klick is very attention-drawing. I think 2-buss processing should never include any limiter at the mix stage...

Rankus: The big pic is great here. The acoustic parts are very moody - your mix there makes the hairs stand out on my arms. You've nailed the mood there! Natural tone and rigid classic tone over-all. Smokey flangey Cobainic stuff.

Dik: United. Goody-goody mix. Acoustic passage #1 might still be a bit too high to go with the following chorus-thing. But over-all it is very good. Thank you for not articualting more than it is.

Calvin: Balanced and alive. Cool guitar shift at the "how long"-part at around 3:00. Very effective.

Cerberus: Surgical feeling, very articulated. Some kewl fret-things which are unpresent in other mixes. The tonality is very united, but the big picture is perhaps not very gathered. I really like the weird little noises and things that comes up here and there. Is the vox tuned?

ChrisJ: Snare a'la Eric B & Rakim. This mix is freakingly funny and I love it. I instantly get this feeling: I am in a house's basement watching the band from 10 feet distance. There are two guitar amps put in closets with closed doors which are really mooooaning in there. It is kewl, old-skool and the mix is entertaining cause it's very alive.

Nick T: Loud!?! Controlled. But aren't the vox disattached from the tone on the remaining musical mass? Might be. Good mix.

M Fassett: There is one instant thing i kinda feel here - I can almost see the kick pedal move through the air and go bang into the kick, like as if the mic is attached to the pedal itself and that is beyond kewl! Very swell feeling. Good balance, good unity and good big P. Pleasing tone. 2-buss limiter?

Nizzle: Good united tone thorughout the mix and the mix is good.

Blueboy: Kewl mix with a lot of edge. The bass is...funky.

Adam: Good big picture! That snare is...very controlled. Good mix, the tune is certainly there.

Vkorehov: Smokey pads, Vangelis!  Smile  The mix is good but there is a barrier here - the comp issues draws too much attention to them. Sidechain or whatever it is - that processing is overshadowing the music itself and it is kind of ironic since you earlier mentioned reverbs should be used with care. I think comps should be used with equal care.

Tom C: Good mix. Very articulated. Feels like you could stuff up 40-100 a little more, but the other aspects are just fine (big p, unity and so on...).

Garret: The mix is dancing. It is united. The snare draws my attention from the singer in the verses.

Undertow: Maybe a bit heavy on the bottom, maybe not. The mix is great but how much of that comes from the GR and level-increase on the 2-buss? Isn't this one going too far into mastering-land? Whassup with the 476 kbps by the way?

Jhall: As you indicated earlier, the comp things draws too much attention to themselves. I really like the vocal treatment, cause it brings some kind of Elvis/funkis thing to it. Soft, united and great big picture.


And finally (this will be a small essay):

Max: I have already seen some comments regarding your mix which are brutal. No need to worry about that man, you know what you are doing and you've done something that is beyond great - this is classic music. I was easily drawn to brutal conclusions as well at first, but found that your mix is the one that I come back to, time after time. I'm glad I came back to it, because as it is now - this one rock's my boat extremely much.

The bass is dominant, no wait, at spots it is. Vox goes with bass and acoustic guitar - drums with distorted guitars. Like two different soundscapes in one. Two-headed unity that shifts itself. Like a cobra transforming to a rattlesnake and then to a lizard. Ths mix smokes! It is unpredictability de luxe. The sounds are sweet, good, nice, rich. And especially one thing: At around 3:00 when the "hooow long will..."-part start, you ignite that one with the absoultely most effective guitar sound that kills any other mix at that spot instantly, period. RIght there you've just raced your F1 car across the finish line. It can not be made any better. That guitar sound along with the vox is what makes great music great. That very part along with the totally smoked soundscape is turning everything onto the genious side. This mix is very easy to sidekick as being "bad", "off" or whatever doesn't suit perfection for the day but - I swear to god - if the people who have wrote such comments will revisit this mix, listen to what it has got and find the excellence they might be freaked by how much fresh breezes you blow into evey aspect of music, mix and everything.

Max, I love your mix and your mix is like two open arms that embrace me again and again, every single time I listen to this piece of music. And guess what - the song is there, it really is. It comes up at the 2:nd listen as natural as in any polished and perfect version at the first. The difference thereafter is that your mix invites me back, over and over again. You are in a land of making music classic, dramatic, sensible, alive, crazed out, full of love and not just forgotten within a month and big, big kudos to you for reminding me of this very vital aspect of mixing.


Best Regards
Patrik
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   Go Up