I’m not going to make any “300-500hz” comments ‘cause I know I’d be speaking out of my ass. I’ll try to limit my comments to the general approach and feel of each mix. And, as with all Internet bloviating, feel free to ignore me entirely.
ATOR: a “distant” mix, with a lot of ambience, flanging, etc. Nice, big use of the chorus vocals – pretty much as I imagined them when tracking. I think you took a cue from the “retreat” of the vocals in that last chorus and played to a subtler end, with the exception of the big swell of the Chop guitar. Used the tambourine as a hit in the last chorus, which is fine, I suppose.
Cary: Like ATOR, you used the Chop ambience up front. Nice idea. Drums up the middle, and perhaps a bit too “sparkly” for my taste on this song. I think the faux second guitar is a great idea and lends a good depth to the song. Even still, the verse seems a bit narrow to me, and I was hoping for more expansion in the chorus. Didn’t happen.
ChrisJ: One of the several mixes that kept the guitar count-off in the mix. Plus a bit of a noisy start. Why? The bass may be a bit too forward, and seems all one big, furry frequency. The drums seem buried and distant. I do like the size of the chorus vox. Overall, this seems to be a “veiled” mix. The Wurly, Rhodes and Guitar all seem clouded a bit – and whoa! did you mix that one Chop guitar hit loud. Was that on purpose?
Dconstruction: My mix. Actually, about my fifth mix. This was my “reset switch” mix in which I pulled up the tracks fresh, just like all of you, in an attempt to forget I tracked the thing. I had a previous conversation with J.Hall about the strategy in approaching this mix, and I do think you’ll hear a similarity of intent in our two mixes. The vocals are a little spitty – I probably could have de-essed further. And some of the delays on the Wurly bug me. I’m awestruck by the ability of some of you to get such fullness out of a kick drum. I’d like to learn the tricks of doing so. I’m just now figuring the snare out. Kick will be next. To answer Scott, no this wasn’t mastered. I did have the Waves SSL comp across the 2-bus (about 4db reduction, 30ms attack) running into a multi-band comp that was doing very little (<1db reduction on all bands; maybe up to 2db on bass). And to answer Spoon, no: no drum replacement. I tried to get two good, distinct and “normal” drum sounds out of each pair. On the right, I gated and EQ’d only. On the left, I gated and compressed. Then I bounced those down to mono tracks and screwed with them, blowing out the right side and running the left through about three additional compressors to get them very present and snappy. I succeeded only about 70%.
Garret: A real risk taker, here. I worry that you’ve strayed too far, though. It’s a pretty small mix, stereo-wise. The drums have no kick that I can tell and sound over-all fairly band-limited. I miss the “power” of some of the other mixes. And I find the call-and-repeat vocals distracting. They’re very similarly treated, placed at about the same spot in the stereo field and at nearly equal loudness, maybe stepping on each other. This approach doesn’t work for me. Please forgive me, but this sounds like a “toy” mix.
Gatino: Another in the drums-up-the-middle school. The vox is nice and forward. Another “narrow” mix, for me. Though everything sounds OK, nothing is really speaking to me here. The kick seems lost, too. I think a lot was left on the table with this mix.
Greg Dixon: A dark mix, but immediately more enveloping than, say, the previous. Used both kits, left and right. This sounds A LOT like my tracking mix. I think the Rhodes could have been brought more forward. And maybe capitalize on the chorus vox a bit more; there’s not a lot of verse/chorus distinction, which both the Rhodes and multiple vox serve, in my mind. I kinda like the fade, too. The first one to try that (that I’ve heard).
Henchman: Whew: watch that voltage rising speed (I kid; I kid). VERY sparkly drum sound. Yet, the vox is kinda dull, boxy. All I hear is that splash of the snare and tambourine. I like the tambourine, actually; I figure if you’re not going to use the two kits, then the tambourine does a good job of adding to the chorus part. I don’t hear much chorus vox at all. That’s a shame. Were you the one that gave up on them because of intonation? Hmm. Another fadeout. Overall, I don’t know if this mix, if I may be so bold, indicates that the song was really understood. I think it misses the mark, not technically, but spiritually.
HephaLuemp – First off, why keep the bass squeak and guitar count-off? Drums up the middle, but this time, they’re approached more like a drum machine. Did you quantize these? There’s still the little lag in the hats during the break at the top of the song, but the drums seem more mechanical. That kick is super floppy. This is a compliment; I like it. I think you realized that the drums were there for their character more than their part. The chorus vox are a bit spitty (mine are, too), but with the delay, it becomes distracting. Ah, you used the blip on the Chop guitar, too. That wasn’t mean to be in the mix. Is there a reason you (and several others) kept it? All in all, this mix sounds much like my tracking mix, though with much better (and mono) drums.
iCombs: Again, another mix similar to my original tracking mix, but a lot more punchy. I like the subtle presence of the bass-doubling guitar. Boy, that Wurly’s compressed, isn’t it? The attack is hard. This is solid, good-sounding and well-balanced mix that does the song justice. Ah, you kept the ending bleghchttpppt from the Rhodes. I cut that out.
J Hall: You brought out an interesting ring in the leftside snare. I didn’t like it at first, but it’s grown on me. I can feel the kick in this one. What did you do there? I feel my mix’s kick is a bit, uh, unendowed. This represents the song well. I like the big second half of the last chorus. Without it being overtly obvious – with the exception of the introduction of the Chop guitar – it gets bigger, somehow.
Judah: A darker mix. This seems to fit again into the group of mixes that, given a few aesthetic choices, “gets” the song and portrays it well. Nothing’s “wrong” with this mix, to my ears. Maybe a touch soft around the edges, but certainly not “wrong.” Good job.
LouMan: Nice, different vocal treatment. Very forward. Again, a darker mix than many. Drums are kinda buried for my tastes; I can’t really hear the kick in the chorus. It’s getting difficult to comment! Anything else would be just a matter of taste. You were another person to use a fade – but then left that Rhodes burping at the end. Was there a reason for that?
MacManDude: Midrange! I hear a weird, high-pitch, scratchy distortion on the guitar. Almost as if there’s a second track of really screwed up fizzy stuff tucked under the original. Almost sounds ring-modulator like. I’m not sure about that stuff. Nice tight drums, though. I can’t make a decision on the vocal treatment. Do I like it? I don’t know.
Mark Fasset: A narrow mix. Though the chorus vox are panned wide and the guitar’s pretty far off to the right, I still hear this mix as constrained, pinched up the center. It sounds small.
Ugh. Can’t continue right now. Too. Much. Same. Song.
More later.