R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down

Author Topic: IMP9 begins.  (Read 10129 times)

j.hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3787
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #60 on: January 08, 2007, 03:47:37 pm »

WOW.  this is great.  we've got an IMP that's stirring the pot before we have even heard a single mix.

BTW.  bad playing is not exclussive to the under ground rock scene.  in today's market, bad playing is running far to rampant around the entire industry at ALL levels.
Logged

garret

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1012
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #61 on: January 08, 2007, 03:53:38 pm »

gatino wrote on Mon, 08 January 2007 06:00


i'd like to know what others did esp. considering the lead track had the noise.



I'll have to take another listen.  I thought I heard a crackle at one point while mixing, but then I couldn't find the prob and thought it was just my system flaking for a bit.

I will say that the vocal was the easiest thing for me to mix in this track... no major editing, pitch problems, etc...   if there is some distortion, and I can hear it in the final mix, I might run the vox through some simulated tape saturation... I find that can soften out harsh clippy edges, and make it sound a bit more musical/intentional.

Logged
tomorrow is already here - http://www.worksongs.net/

j.hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3787
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #62 on: January 08, 2007, 04:07:35 pm »

it is what it is, i just rolled with it.

compressed the crap out of it, EQ'd to taste and de-essed it.....DONE
Logged

scott volthause

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #63 on: January 08, 2007, 04:19:18 pm »

I found the drums fairly lifeless. It took a fair amount of thinking and experimenting to actually get some groove going. NO editing though.

The song definitely had some great attributes though, overall nothing I found offensive.
Logged

garret

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1012
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #64 on: January 08, 2007, 05:05:25 pm »

scott volthause wrote on Mon, 08 January 2007 16:19

I found the drums fairly lifeless. It took a fair amount of thinking and experimenting to actually get some groove going. NO editing though.



Yep, that was my immediate impression from the first faders up listen... "ugh, please tell me the drummer changes up that pattern.  dang, he doesn't.  Okay so what about set 2... same deal.  Dang #2."

The way the drums are recorded is okay, and the timing isn't too bad, but it's the drum arrangement that bugs me...  my fix was/is to build a more inventive arrangement by subtractive editing, and a few tempo-sync'd delays.  I did very little timing correction, but I did take a heavy knife to the drum tracks.

I'm not sure about the distinction some are making between editing and not editing.  When I mix a tune, I very rarely use any track start to finish...

Then again, I don't do any for-pay client work right now, so I'm more willing to disregard the artists intent and create what I think makes the tune work... in a real situation, I might need to talk things through first to avoid hard feelings.

-G
Logged
tomorrow is already here - http://www.worksongs.net/

gatino

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 132
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #65 on: January 08, 2007, 07:21:34 pm »

garretg wrote on Mon, 08 January 2007 14:53


I will say that the vocal was the easiest thing for me to mix in this track... no major editing, pitch problems, etc...  



now that's interesting. i really like this guy's voice and i think the performance is very good.  but, i didn't use "chorus vox 2" due to intonation and had no choice but to edit (melodyne) the other two to make them work.

btw, good song too.
Logged

ScotcH

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 329
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #66 on: January 08, 2007, 11:16:00 pm »

Wow ... I'm really anxious to hear these mixes ... it seems everyone did a helluvalot more than I did to the track.  To me, the simple almost drum machine like back beat worked very well, especially with the bass tracks.  The vocals were also dead easy for me, though I did notice a few crackles that were fixed (just automation though).  I'm not sure I'd be brave enough to totally edit an artist's part (like rearrangine this drums) ... that just seems "wrong" somehow.  If the song needs that much "fixing", perhaps then song is not really done and ready for mixing?
Logged
Arek Wojciechowski - Laundry Room, Basement, Garage, Bedroom, etc.

chrisj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #67 on: January 09, 2007, 12:08:28 am »

I did the same as you Arek- I made the drums into a big crushing sound and left them alone. Didn't even worry about the timing irregularities, just tried to make things ride the wave. Sort of Pixieslike this idea of a 'wave', like the band is flailing about riding this big surge of music and you notice things based on how they balance on front of that.

I did some automation (more like track editing- this time I just stuck fades and things in on the raw tracks) but not ever to fix, just to do things. The grating noise, I had it go ZAPPP! once to start off, and then faded it steadily up under the chorus to around the pain threshold Very Happy

I did a crazy number of plugins but apart from the Logic flanger and Spitfish they were all my modular ones so it's not quite like multi-effects territory. I'm eager to hear if people are digging it, it was my wet dream of what plugins I'd want and how I'd want them to sound.

REALLY looking forward to Tuesday. So we upload by the end of Tuesday?

dconstruction

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #68 on: January 09, 2007, 01:49:54 am »

Well, it's Tuesday, and my mix is up.  I didn't think I'd be able to participate, but I found a few hours tonight and dove in, mangling audio along the way.

In case you missed the previous post in which this song appeared, I recorded this one (and IMP7).

The band is Pleasant Grove, and the song called Luzern.  This was recorded on a Monday evening, I think, for a benefit CD just released here in Dallas.  We had one evening.  Marcus, the singer/songwriter came in still undecided on which song we'd be recording that night.  He ran through a few on acoustic, made some lyric changes, and settled on this one.

First, we recorded a scratch vox and guitar.  This first take is what we kept.  For those wondering whether Marcus was drunk, why yes, he was.  We both were.  And it was also the first take.  But quickly the guitar became a secondary element, and the performance did capture, uh, something.

We then did a first take on vocals.  Again, this is what you hear.  Marcus asked for a really close, lip-smacking tone in his headphones.  I have no outboard compressors, so I put a smashing Blockfish comp across the input and recorded to disc.  The harmonies on the last chorus are there only because Marcus gets bored and sang something different when we were stacking voices.  I tried to keep him in line, but I also wasn't too worried.  Panned L/C/R, the three voices were already sounding good.  Lawson L47FET through an OSA MP1-C.  I didn't hear any digital distortion on the track.  Lots of sibilance.  Maybe that's what's being heard?  Dunno.  The performance is great: I love it when Marcus runs out of breath.  Why would we replace that?

The bassist Tony finally showed up.  He didn't know the song.  So we ran through it a few times.  During the run-throughs, we settled on my suggestion of the high-E pedal tone chorus part.  Tracked it direct through an OSA MP1-L3.  What you got was a quick comp of two takes.  And then the bassist went home.

The drummer never showed up.  Oddly enough, a drummer friend of mine was hanging out.  We threw him on the kit after realizing Marcus was hopeless with all his big tom fills and nonsense.  My friend is a big "jam band" drummer and brought an interesting slant to the tune.  But after about two hours of takes, and a lot of wrestling with the parts, we said goodnight to the drummer friend, thanked him for his time, and then erased the takes.  Marcus was back on kit and I told him to play only kick, hat and snare.  We got the simple beat you have here.  Then we doubled it.  Threw them up hard L/R and Marcus loved it.  Snare = 57s.  Kick beater = MD421, reso = RE20.  OH = Lawson L47.

Then Marcus toddled over to the Wurly and I threw up a 421 in front one of the tiny built-in speakers.  After finding the part, we tracked it.  Next.

Marcus was worried it wasn't vibing enough.  He asked for a synth patch, but wasn't happy with anything we were getting.  He went out to smoke and I hooked up the Rhodes to my Z Vex Fuzz Factory and then into a Peavey Classic 50 mic'd with another 421, I think.  Instant destruction.  I showed him the interaction between the knobs on the pedal and sat him down.  This is another first take.

Then the "Chop" part which is my tele played through a POD in the control room.  We threw a hard, chopping tremolo on it in Cubase and ran.

Then I did a very ugly doubling of the bass, again with the tele through the POD.  Another first take, as it was getting late and we were out of beer.  I was drunk and though I'd heard the song a bajilion times, I realized I didn't really know how to play it.  Whatever.  It was meant as a very small part (though comes through pretty forward in my mix.  Go figure).

So, was this "Indie"?  I don't know.  It was fun, fast and we came out with a product we were very happy with.  In that it was done for zero dollars, I'd say it was pretty Indie.  In that the song is amazingly potent and reaching, I'd say it's pretty Indie, too.

In my mix, I didn't edit anything.  Didn't pitch anything.  No grids.  My delays aren't even tempo-synched.  It's a mess - and I love it.  I just tried to "vibe" this as much as possible, taking heed of J. Hall's original advice.  I like what I've done, and the exercise definitely got me listening more carefully.

Thanks to everyone who participates.  Can't wait to hear the results!

Thanks,

Lindsay Graham
Logged

chrisj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #69 on: January 09, 2007, 03:20:25 am »

OK, I'm up! Very quick downloads too- WOW, there's a lot of different approaches. And I thought mine wuz loud Wink well, file me under 'most crankable' then. And 'obvious bass lover' Smile I did say I wanted things to ride a wave, obviously that's gotta be bass, right?

Great fun, can't wait to hear the rest.

Turn mine UP, folks Wink

judah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 275
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #70 on: January 09, 2007, 03:25:14 am »

Hi all,
I gave it a try last night. Unfortunately I've been out for a few days and discovered IMP9 just yesterday morning. I'm still retouching my control room (soffit mounted the mains a few days ago) and was looking to mix something to hear how it all translate in the outside world.
I'm sorry to say that the song did nothing to me, especially the drums. Don't know why (well, I know...) but of all the 4 kick drum tracks I used just one. I understand the slacker feeling of it but it's really not my cup of tea at all.
Anyway, I rolled the track, put some comp and EQ here and there, a tad of reverb and balanced everything. That's it. Nothing fancy. Heard a couple MP3 of other guys, some interesting ideas throwed around.  Cool
Logged
Ronnie Amighetti
DIESEL
Laboratorio di registrazione sonora

"I'm fucking busy and vice versa."
Dolly Parton

henchman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 549
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #71 on: January 09, 2007, 04:17:58 am »

dconstruction wrote on Mon, 08 January 2007 22:49


Snare = 57s.  Kick beater = MD421, reso = RE20.  OH = Lawson L47.





I figured the snare was a 57.
I really had to crank the top end, as there was no top at all, really.

scottoliphant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 721
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #72 on: January 09, 2007, 07:44:26 am »

you all were up late =) mix is up
checking them out

scottoliphant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 721
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #73 on: January 09, 2007, 07:55:47 am »

nice job Lindsay, regardless of what the other folks might say. It was right up my alley, and i liked the way it was engineered. music is still about having fun eh? you guys sounded like you had fun making this track, kudos. I just used an l47 recently and loved it (kick beater), this cements it for me, gonna have to grab one of those. well done

Vladislavs Korehovs

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 215
Re: IMP9 begins.
« Reply #74 on: January 09, 2007, 08:16:53 am »

I WANT DISCUSSION THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up