R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13   Go Down

Author Topic: IMP10 discussion thread  (Read 19118 times)

j.hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3787
IMP10 discussion thread
« on: February 27, 2007, 11:31:41 am »

bingo....
Logged

henchman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 549
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2007, 05:24:51 pm »

This was so much more enjoyable to work on, even though I had no time.
It's nice to be able to not have to re-trigger drums, edit parts in time, or autotune bad vocals.

Red Tape

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 119
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #2 on: February 27, 2007, 05:33:17 pm »

Yeah, good tracks, nice phase on the kit mics.
The room mic sounded cool.
Good choices of sound overall, everything fitted together pretty well with all faders up.
Logged

SingSing

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 157
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #3 on: February 27, 2007, 05:55:44 pm »

I'm really looking forward listening to the results.

Let's hear it guys...


Take care,
Stefan
SingSing
Logged

j.hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3787
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #4 on: February 27, 2007, 05:56:15 pm »

iCombs

i can see where you were going, but honestly, this feels like a rough mix done right after the bass player tracked.  the drums are there, they just are getting pressed down by the bass......as is most everything.

you've got too much bottom on the bass.  overall the vocals sound good, but lack any real connection to the music.  they are just kinda hanging out.

all that is easily fixable.  i think your overall blend is pretty close, just needs a nip and tuck here and there.  here's my bigger problem.  i think your mix is WAY too conservative for the sounds that were printed (mainly guitars) and the overall vibe of the band.

that big dry in your face sound you went for is cool, but there needs to be something that explodes off the speakers in a song like this.  the song itself is boring.  it isn't all that inspired of a performance, and it doesn't really go anywhere.  thatn's why i chose it.

every one was praising the sounds that were printed, and rightly so.  but great tracking can't save a boring song.......but great mixing can at least help.

scott oliphant

i like how you've placed the band ina physical space.  the space you picked is cool, sounds like a practice space or an empty small club.

my question is......what happened to all the bottom end in the tracks?  your mix sounds just rounder then a telephone.

WHERE's THE BEEF?????????? (you might be too young for that line......but it still makes me laugh)

Rankus

your vocal effects are nice.  i like the subtle changes in them through each section.  they are placed into the music and married to it nicely.

kick drum.....where's the beef????????

the one hole in your tracking is the kick.  it didn't have much bottom in it.  the tone was great, just not very round.  i made it happen, if you like what i did, i'll share......i did not use a single sample on this track.

i think all the textural guitar dubs you were to nice too.  that end section witht he stopping drums and repeating vocal loses me.  i got super bored.

ATOR

man, you almost had me with the intro.  i could totally see that as a pre-roll segue on the record.  but we never came out of the spacey lo-fi thing.  the drums are in the other room, and feel soft.  the background vocals are louder then the lead.  everything just feels soft.

now, if you turned up the guitars i could be sold on this mix.  the song is total album filler....and this isn't all that bad of "connector" song.  it just doesn't rock.  

what was your vision for the mix and the song?  i'm curious how you got to this mix.

SingSing

that guitar melody at the top is cool that loud, but when it stops it a very abrupt change.  a touch of trailing off delay would ease the problem.  see my comments on ATOR's drums and apply them to your mix.

aside from the drums, everything feels overly mono.  that's not a bad thing, but perhaps not a good choice for this tune.

i really like what you've done with the guitar melodies and noodling.  i like how loud you mixed them.  it's makes them jump out of the mix and grab my attention again.

the vocal feels like it's in a cathedral.....not sure how i feel about that, just commenting.

Maxim

very dry mix.  for this style and what i think the band is after, i think that's a good choice.  your mix is not nearly compressed enough for the big sludgy rock mix you went for.  to me, this feels like you tried to extract a more beautiful side of the song.  IMO, there isn't one.  

Red Tape

great vocal tone.  it's compressed well and EQ'd well.

where's the beef?????  the drums are dark, distant (not verb, volume) have no bottom and aren't propelling the mix forward.  the drummer in this recording is the only one with any feel.  that in mind, your snare sound is good, just needs a some more high end.  you want your snare drum to be as bright, but not any brighter, then the lead vocal and vice versa (that's a real gem there.........so don't blow me off......)

i'd guess you as a bass player based on this mix.  guitars and drums are fairly back, bass and vocal is up front.  if you have a pair of headphones you trust, i'd be curious how the mix would change if you did it in headphones.

Tom C

i like how you are leaning on the bass amp/distortion more then the DI.  i don't like how dark the drums are.  the vocal effects are an interesting choice, but i think the rest of the music isn't matching it.  you need your elements to meet each other "where they are".  if you want to go with that vocal effect (which i kinda of like) you should find where each element fits into that.  right now, the singer is on saturn, while the band is in route to get there.

the FX on the guitar leads are great, just crank them up.  with the vocal like this, you should make those guitar leads just slightly louder then the vocal.....it would give the listener the illusion of the singer trying to sing over that guitar.  making the mix feel bigger.

overall, i think it's not hitting hard enough.  you should compress the drums quite a bit harder and see if the pumping works with the vocal effects.

thus far, i like your vocal the best, but i don't like your mix.
Logged

SingSing

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 157
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #5 on: February 27, 2007, 06:52:39 pm »

Interesting to read that Jason.

I was just thinking that perhaps it would be of interest for us all if those who want could give some additional info about their mix choices.

Me? I went for a "Mike Johnson"-sound.  Twisted Evil


Stefan
SingSing
Logged

henchman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 549
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #6 on: February 27, 2007, 06:53:52 pm »

I jut tried to not f$#k it up too much.  Very Happy

maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #7 on: February 27, 2007, 07:32:39 pm »

i agree with j

this was a hard song to keep interesting

i tried to play around with reverse boomerang (mix of backwards and forwards in peak) over the bits of the whole mix in the freakout section, and i agree i may have made it altogether too polite

the context of the song is also very important

it doesn't really sound like a single, so the rest of the album, and its position on the record would be relevant


pete wrote:

"...nice phase on the kit mics"

i had to flip half the mics' phase (i had to choose between going with kick coherent or snare coherent (i went with the snare...probably should have gone with kick...))



j wrote:

"...beautiful side of the song. IMO, there isn't one."

funny

i always had a soft spot for satanic pop-rock

when i listened to your mix, i thought i was listening to a different song...

it's what this is great for!


Logged

henchman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 549
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #8 on: February 27, 2007, 08:03:01 pm »

maxim wrote on Tue, 27 February 2007 16:32


i agree with j

this was a hard song to keep interesting


j wrote:

"...beautiful side of the song. IMO, there isn't one."





Interesting, because I found this one so much better than the last IMP. Which I found extermely bad allround from a songwriting and recoridng perspective.

maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #9 on: February 27, 2007, 08:58:25 pm »

i think it's a better recorded song, but there isn't much movement and variety within it
Logged

chrisj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #10 on: February 27, 2007, 09:48:44 pm »

I just glommed onto the vocal immediately, as hard as I could, and did everything around that. The vocal had to come forward, the kick had to come forward, to make them be where I wanted them to be. I still don't know what the guy's singing about, exactly, but everything else took a back seat to him.

I'll do a crit on every track listed on the discussion thread by tomorrow morning- that's when I'm going to go through and DL everything. I think this time it'll be a combination of insta-reaction and nice. That would be an unstudying, 'basic vibe' take on what each track makes me think of/feel about it, but spun in such a way as to describe the things in an unjudgemental way. 'cos why not?

M Carter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 369
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #11 on: February 27, 2007, 10:18:40 pm »

This one certainly reiterates the fine line between capturing the sound of a band vs. taking creative liberties in the mix without the band's input.  So far it seems like most of us went towards the same thing and kept it pretty conservative.  

Did anyone else have a hard time making the chorus open up and get big with the rhythm guitars?  that was the biggest challenge for me, it was hard to give them any weight, and I kept wanting more excitement out of them not matter how hard I rode them.

The one thing I wish I'd paid more attention to is the kick sound...
Logged
Matt Carter
General Manager
Manhattan Sound Recording
www.manhattansoundrecording.com
(212) 564 8248

jdier

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #12 on: February 27, 2007, 11:23:35 pm »

J, Thank for sharing my email with the group.  I mixed IMP9 after the official submissions, but this is my first time submitting with the group.

I guess I am all alone in that I loved the song and the arrangement.  In fact, I loved IMP9 AND IMP10.

I worry that my mix is pretty boring but since I am really just learning how to mix, it was a great exercise for me.

Looking forward to hearing everyone elses mixes.

J, Do you ever share who the bands are and who tracked the songs?  I would probably like to buy each band's full album with the real mixes that these were released on (if available through CD Baby or some thing)

Thanks again for everything.  

I think I am becoming and IMP junkie!

Jim
Logged
jdier - Home recordist

(currently selling one of my dual Great River preamps)

maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #13 on: February 27, 2007, 11:49:17 pm »

chris, did you use your monsterizer plugin?
Logged

Greg Dixon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 791
Re: IMP10 discussion thread
« Reply #14 on: February 28, 2007, 12:14:52 am »

Nice work everyone.

Let me be the first to confess to using Soundreplacer on the kick. For the first time ever, I used the sample only. Normally if I use it, it's to augment the original sound, but in this case it seemed to sound better with just the sample.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13   Go Up