R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion  (Read 11901 times)

uncleozzy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #30 on: April 09, 2008, 08:52:48 am »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 13:33


uncleozzy - snare way too big, overall dark tones


Ha!  You should have heard the snare in my first bounce.  So small it sounded like somebody was knocking on the neighbors' door.  I certainly did over-"correct", though.  Coincidentally, that's also why the snare fill near the end sounds so wonky: I was in a hurry and didn't give a good listen all the way through after that change.  Oops!

Thanks for listening; I appreciate it.
Logged

Adam Miller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #31 on: April 09, 2008, 08:37:51 pm »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 18:33

 I think this mix is really well balanced and also has the smooth upper midrange and top end I look for in a good mix.


Your cheque is in the mail Brad.
Logged

Adam Miller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #32 on: April 09, 2008, 08:39:46 pm »

But seriously, thanks very much- It's an unexpected pleasure to hear my work properly mastered, it definitely makes a big difference.  
Logged

Rob Darling

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 294
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #33 on: April 09, 2008, 11:02:29 pm »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 18:33


robdarling - vox too loud, nice balance overall, maybe a touch splashy

Cheers, hope this helps!



Hey Brad,

I'll agree on the vox- I never quite felt like I got how to pull the guitar and bass in with them- they follow the drums rhythmically, but the guitars and bass shift what they do- and so they are stuck out there or buried.  Tough one.

What does splashy mean?


Logged
____________________
rob darling
rob@robdarling.net
www.robdarling.net

J-Texas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1212
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #34 on: April 09, 2008, 11:52:55 pm »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 12:33

 
jtexas - extremely dark and bottom heavy - tweeters 6dB to bright?


Brad,

I've always been leery of bass. I've always been very reserved. I decided to go aggresive because I wanted it stompy and pounding. As far as the tweeters... well, I've never had a problem in the past being bright and "hi-fi". Everyone seemed to go with real midrange cliche guitars and I didn't think they wanted that in this song. To me, the power came in the bass crunch and the attack of the drums. I still listen to it with the high shelf and everything sits just how I intended. Thank you for the crit!


Logged
Jason Thompson
www.4141studios.com

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #35 on: April 10, 2008, 10:54:11 am »

Billybehdaz wrote on Wed, 09 April 2008 06:58


Hi Brad, thanks for the comments.  This brings some more questions.  What part of the song are you considering the "chorus"?  I'm assuming the part with the downstroke power chords and 8th notes on the crash, please correct me if I'm wrong so I can interpret you comments better.

Sorry, to be clear, the section from 0:23-0:48 and the 'outro' (yah, the j. doesn't exactly stick to standard ABABCBB-type arrangements...)

Quote:

Also, which vox delay do you feel sounds cheap?  The slapback on the lead or the 1/8 note that comes in on the 'chorus'.  

The slap-back on the lead during the 'verses'.

Quote:

I used a lot of automation in the song so it would build from beginning to end with the intention that the outro would really slam.  It sounds like this is a problem for mastering?  I did some of this with master fader rides because I was compressing the buss from the beginning.  I think there was only about a 1.5db shift from front to back, too much?

Yah, too much. basically, the outro part of the song will dictate how loud the track can get, meaning that it will 'set the standard' - either it will be WAY louder than the rest of the record or the front end will be way quieter.

FWIW, it doesn't matter how little or much you automated it - the outro chorus sounds about 3dB louder than the first chorus ( as 'chorus' is defined by me above)...
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #36 on: April 10, 2008, 10:56:37 am »

robdarling@mail.com wrote on Wed, 09 April 2008 22:02

What does splashy mean?

Too much upper midrange (8-10kHz) - the vox are sibilant and the cymbals are overbearing, imo.
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #37 on: April 10, 2008, 10:58:32 am »

J-Texas wrote on Wed, 09 April 2008 22:52

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 12:33

 
jtexas - extremely dark and bottom heavy - tweeters 6dB to bright?


Brad,

I've always been leery of bass. I've always been very reserved. I decided to go aggresive because I wanted it stompy and pounding. As far as the tweeters... well, I've never had a problem in the past being bright and "hi-fi". Everyone seemed to go with real midrange cliche guitars and I didn't think they wanted that in this song. To me, the power came in the bass crunch and the attack of the drums. I still listen to it with the high shelf and everything sits just how I intended. Thank you for the crit!

My thoughts are purely from the mastering perspective - my point is your track would be VERy difficult to master and make it sound 'good' as defined by most people. It would takes tons of EQ to get the bottom end tight and open up the midrange and top...
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

j.hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3787
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #38 on: April 10, 2008, 05:42:22 pm »

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 09:54


Sorry, to be clear, the section from 0:23-0:48 and the 'outro' (yah, the j. doesn't exactly stick to standard ABABCBB-type arrangements...)




HAHAHAHAHA.  standard arrangements are boring!
Logged

J-Texas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1212
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #39 on: April 10, 2008, 05:55:17 pm »

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 09:58

J-Texas wrote on Wed, 09 April 2008 22:52

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 12:33

 
jtexas - extremely dark and bottom heavy - tweeters 6dB to bright?


Brad,

I've always been leery of bass. I've always been very reserved. I decided to go aggresive because I wanted it stompy and pounding. As far as the tweeters... well, I've never had a problem in the past being bright and "hi-fi". Everyone seemed to go with real midrange cliche guitars and I didn't think they wanted that in this song. To me, the power came in the bass crunch and the attack of the drums. I still listen to it with the high shelf and everything sits just how I intended. Thank you for the crit!

My thoughts are purely from the mastering perspective - my point is your track would be VERy difficult to master and make it sound 'good' as defined by most people. It would takes tons of EQ to get the bottom end tight and open up the midrange and top...


I mean this VERY seriously:

When you master, do you go for what most people think is "good"?

I don't know another way to make that NOT sound sarcastic.

Logged
Jason Thompson
www.4141studios.com

j.hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3787
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #40 on: April 10, 2008, 05:59:36 pm »

it's not sarcastic or rude.  
Logged

J-Texas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1212
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #41 on: April 10, 2008, 06:34:00 pm »

With all of the "loudness wars" and trends... I would argue that most people don't know what "good" is.
Logged
Jason Thompson
www.4141studios.com

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #42 on: April 10, 2008, 07:03:06 pm »

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 16:55

I mean this VERY seriously:

When you master, do you go for what most people think is "good"?

I don't know another way to make that NOT sound sarcastic.

Yes and no. Yes, you want to please the most people with the sound of the recording, but no, I wont compromise something simply because I don't think most people will like it.

The fact is everyone hears things differently, but like any other data grouping, you can make a representative bell curve of how people hear things. When mastering, we are trying to get everything we can out of the mix, to make it match the artist's ideal first and foremost, but after that, there is a certain amount of effort trying to fit it in the window where it sounds 'good'. IMO, the ability to do this is one of the things that determines the overall commercial success an engineer enjoys.

My point is this: if you asked 100 people if your mix was too dark and bass heavy, I'll bet 95 (or more) of the them would answer 'yes'.
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #43 on: April 10, 2008, 07:13:41 pm »

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 17:34

With all of the "loudness wars" and trends... I would argue that most people don't know what "good" is.

If you wish to reduce my judgement of your mix by saying this, fine. I suggest you need to listen to your mix again and try to be more objective...
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

imdrecordings

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
Re: IMP17 Beat J.Hall Discussion
« Reply #44 on: April 10, 2008, 08:00:26 pm »

Good is so 1978. Razz

I think I was 1 year old back then.
Logged
-Scott S
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Up