R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Down

Author Topic: IMP9 discussion thread.  (Read 15269 times)

Tom C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 377
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #60 on: January 11, 2007, 03:15:41 pm »

dconstruction wrote on Thu, 11 January 2007 18:00


TomC: Those drums are really small.  Like someone left Ringo in the closet.  



Yep, I noticed that when I'm not so happy with the drums
I have the tendency to bury them too much in the mix.
I've to work on that.

dconstruction


Ah, the harmonies.  You know, I like them, but I would have been a little more judicious in their use.  You’ve made some weird choices, to my ears, of when they come in and out.  Also, when doing this trick, you might want to edit out the breath noises from the harmony track – it’s a tell that the harmonies are mechanical when both voices inhale together – and a third apart!  This to me is another narrow mix.



Thanks for pointing this out, I didn't check for the
breathing. Good point.

I've used the harmonies the way how I saw the band performing it:
the singer sings, and from time to time the guitar player
walks close to him and adds some spare harmonies into the same
mic. Of course with the cigarette still in his mouth.
Think Keith Richards here Smile

Thanks a lot for your time, it's mucho appreciated.


Logged
Tom

.signature failure

Vladislavs Korehovs

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 215
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #61 on: January 11, 2007, 03:42:53 pm »

Tom C wrote on Thu, 11 January 2007 14:07


VKorehov:
Reamped guitars? They sound nice, but a bit to much
in the back of the singer, a bit less reverb would
bring them closer.



Yes, exactly.
Applied Marshall JCM2000 Impulse and mixed with original sound.
You have a great listening skill.
I haven't used Reverb, but have used Delay on guit. in general i agree... Just wanted to make it sound more interesting:(
Logged

ATOR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #62 on: January 11, 2007, 04:44:00 pm »

These are my notes. Just the things that came to mind when listening.

A lack of groove makes me wanna turn music off, to me it's worse than scratching fingernails on a chalkboard. The mixes where it’s really annoying are labelled LOG: “Lack Of Groove”


Greg Dixon
Sounds good. LOG. Vocal could be louder. Chorus could use more lift.

iCombs
Nice vox, drums are a little thin. LOG. There's no lift in the chorus.

Garret
Looks like you messed up the samplerate. I like the  arrangement but it could lift off a bit earlier, the overall sound is kinda boxy, drums are weak, the extra git part is nice

Gatino
Why a 48k mp3?  Drums lack power. Guitar a bit too loud. I miss the BG vox in the chorus. Leadvocal has some ugly highs as if it’s been de-essed too much but with a too long attack time.

HephaLuemp
LOG. The kick is big but it drags down the song and makes the lack of rhythm very annoying. The sound of the rest is good. I like what you did with the FX tracks.

Judah
The wurlitzer hook could be louder. Drums are distant. Guitar is too big, it masks the rest. LOG

Mark Fasset
Less kick more bass would be nice. Louder backing vocals would lift the chorus more

ScotcH
LOG. Was the guitar that doubles the bass that much out of time? The snare lacks punch. Nice idea to put the bg vox left.

Scott Oliphant
It's not a coherent mix to me. You took the parts in a  different direction: distorted drums, clean guitars, very ambient vocal. For me they don't fit together.

SingSing
The mix is very dull (lack of high freqs) accept for the vocal sibilance. I like the intimate feeling it has. The sound reminds me of playing in an overly damped rehearsalstudio.

TLester
Nice and direct as if played in a very small room. LOG

VKorehov
Track is swimming in guitar with delay, it attracks all  attention. I think the rest sounds pretty  good.

ChrisJ
Bigger and louder drums would be great. Balance between  instruments is off.

DConstruction
Why a 48k mp3? The different drumsounds left and right tear the mix in two. Tapedelay on the Wurlitzer is nice. The mix sounds good but the splitted drums give me a headache.

Henchman
great punch in snare, a bit thin though. Nice vocal, too distant in chorus. A little less/shorter reverb would  make the track connect more.

Undertow
The drums are amazing, you can get a kick out of everything. The fx Rhodes and the chop guitar could be more present to make the chorus different from the  verse

Macmandude
I don't like the compression/distortion, the different instruments have become a single wash of sound.

Rankus
Sounds good, I'd like a little less reverb here an  there. You made the snare and guitar bigger than the  lead vocal. I'd like to see that the other way around.

Cary
Sounds good. LOG. I like a little less/shorter reverb  to make it more direct. The chorus vocals are too soft.

Maxim
Bass is overpowering and makes the mix very thick and sluggish. I like the extra Wurlitzer parts. Snare sounds little boxy. The chorus could be bigger.

Nizzle
LOG. Very big mix. Vocal a bit sibilant, doubling could be duller and softer so it's less distracting. Reverb on Wurlitzer and Chop git is too big it washes away the whole mix. Chorus could be bigger. I Like the racecar fx, what's that? You left in the Rhodes burp.

LouMan
The vocal reverb distracts from the vocal itself. Guitar is very big compared to drums. I don't like the sibilant harsh chorus vocal sound. Lacks kick.

Nick T
The vocal delays are distracting. I like the presence of the drums, too bad they are mono without any stereo room sound, they don't fit the rest. LOG.  

J Hall
Very big mix. LOG. Instruments are good separated and still make a whole. A little less compression would have left room for the chorus to be bigger than the verse.

Volthause
LOG. Vocal has sibilance and is low in level mostly because the snare is in it's way. Mix sounds distant and blurred especially the last chorus.

Tom C
Nice to hear a mix that isn't soaked in reverb. Mix is dull, Nice harmonies on vox. Much sibilance on vox. Instruments could be bigger in chorus. Drums and bass are very soft.

Spoon
LOG. Instruments balance is off. Long reverb makes mix blurred.

Nick Evans
Nice and Dry. Good drumsound. Rhodes and Chop guitar are earsplitting loud.

pitzter redfro
It all fits into a nice whole. Chop guitar is too loud.

six wax
LOG. Snare is very big and  drums are a bit dull but  it works. The snare is too big for the extra reverb in the last chorus though. I like the vibe. Leadvocal stands out very nice and sounds good.



Ok that's it. Don't take it personal, it's just what I would do differently if they were my mixes.

It's nice to hear so many versions of a story.

Logged
Pieter Vincenten - ATORmastering

dconstruction

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #63 on: January 11, 2007, 05:09:18 pm »

Don't know if this is kosher, but I'm listening to my iTunes here at work and came across two instances of double-tracked drums done well (certainly better executed than on this tune).  Thought I'd share.

I guess I should make some sort of disclaimer that these tracks are presented for demonstration purposes only.  If the holder of the copyrights on these tunes wants them removed, please contact me and I'll immediately remove them.  Thanks.

http://www.dmeterstudios.com/audio/requiem.mp3
http://www.dmeterstudios.com/audio/Old_Soul_Song.mp3

Lindsay

Logged

scottoliphant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 721
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #64 on: January 11, 2007, 05:17:32 pm »

requiem is from the m.ward CD post war I've been digging so much lately. cool CD. TONS of verb, which kind of inspired me to see if i could make it work.

Mike Mogis did both of these records (and i think m.ward toured with bright eyes for a bit?)


maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #65 on: January 11, 2007, 06:24:28 pm »

tom wrote:

"Guitar intro sounds like 're-amped' with NI guitar rig"

that's the wurly


Logged

Tom C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 377
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #66 on: January 11, 2007, 07:18:18 pm »

maxim wrote on Fri, 12 January 2007 00:24

tom wrote:

"Guitar intro sounds like 're-amped' with NI guitar rig"

that's the wurly





Oops, I meant the wurly, sorry.
But Guitar Rig is correct?

Logged
Tom

.signature failure

maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #67 on: January 11, 2007, 09:05:04 pm »

spot on!
Logged

six_wax

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #68 on: January 12, 2007, 03:01:35 am »

I had no idea how difficult it would be to listen to 20 of these in a row and still keep seeing the forest for the trees!

I'll try to do more concise reviews, but it's interesting to see the different spins that mixers put on it... The accumulation of a dozen or more pretty serious artistic decisions turns out to effect the perception of the music greatly! To me, these cumulative differences in OVERALL VIBE are far more important than little technical things like the drums being too compressed, etc. As a mixer, it's like I can see, "Now, if I had gone that direction..."

One thing that impacted the vibe of the tune greatly was weather or not the drum performances were edited. There's a couple mixes where this is plain as day, and the simple groove almost gets robotic. Split the drums wide, and it becomes doubly artificial.

Different treatments of the guitar interested me as well: Some people pushed it up and featured it, or made it edgier & more rockin'. Wasn't how I heard it at all; Changed the color of the tune. It's another choice... That goes on to effect all your choices.

Vocal treatment & level impacted the sense of intimacy and performance greatly as well. Some smashed him down and nestled him in with the band, others pushed him up front, showcasing it. This alone made the song... FEEL different, MEAN different things  to me.

Frankly, I kind of went with my gut, and only evaluated a couple of the bazillion different avenues. I mixed it pretty quickly, and skimmed past a couple perspectives that others delved deeply into. I would've loved to have been able to have a dialog with the artist --as I usually do-- about what they were going for. I'm sure that would have influenced my decision-making greatly.

Thanks to everybody else who participated for showing me what I missed, and "what might have been"!
Logged

Cary Holding

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 55
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #69 on: January 12, 2007, 10:34:06 am »

six_wax wrote on Fri, 12 January 2007 03:01


Thanks to everybody else who participated for showing me what I missed, and "what might have been"!


I'll echo that.  Smile
Logged
Cary

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #70 on: January 12, 2007, 03:46:23 pm »

dconstruction wrote on Thu, 11 January 2007 18:00


UnderTow: Now that’s an interesting take on the Wurly.  You made it sound like two instruments.  Was there a particular reason for breaking up the phrases like that?  



I am not sure what you mean. The Wurly has some distortion, tape emulation and EQ on it but nothing further and no editing. Or did you mean the Rhodes? The Rhodes is heavily effected.

Quote:


Nice, solid single-drum sound.  The bass is really big and potent, too.  Maybe too big?  Whatever, it’s certainly THERE.  And your kick sound is thumping, too.  I’d like to steal some of that girth.



Heh. Thanks. Smile There might be a bit too much low-end/low-mid. I'll be upgrading my acoustics, monitors and DAs soon. I hope to get a better idea of what is going on in the low-end once that is done.

Alistair
Logged

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #71 on: January 12, 2007, 03:51:22 pm »

Tom C wrote on Thu, 11 January 2007 21:07


Pleasant_Groove:
Like this one a lot, maybe the bass could be a bit cleaner,
it's a bit muddy at times. Nice and interesting panning with
the chops.



I think you mean me. Pleasant Groove is the name of the band. Smile
Thanks for the comments. As I said in my previous post, I hope to be able to better judge the low-end in the not so distant future. Smile

Alistair
Logged

UnderTow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #72 on: January 12, 2007, 03:55:38 pm »

ATOR wrote on Thu, 11 January 2007 22:44


Undertow
The drums are amazing, you can get a kick out of everything.



Thanks! Smile

Quote:


The fx Rhodes and the chop guitar could be more present to make the chorus different from the  verse



Good point. It could indeed be more distinctive.

I'll be listening to and posting comments on all the mixes this week-end.

Cheers,

Alistair
Logged

dconstruction

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #73 on: January 12, 2007, 04:14:24 pm »

UnderTow wrote on Fri, 12 January 2007 14:51



I think you mean me. Pleasant Groove is the name of the band. Smile



Not to be too picky, but it's Pleasant Grove.

L
Logged

ScotcH

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 329
Re: IMP9 discussion thread.
« Reply #74 on: January 12, 2007, 05:16:04 pm »

dconstruction wrote on Fri, 12 January 2007 16:14


Not to be too picky, but it's Pleasant Grove.



Dammit ... you're alwasy so picky.



Wink
Logged
Arek Wojciechowski - Laundry Room, Basement, Garage, Bedroom, etc.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Up