R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Down

Author Topic: IMP18 discussion  (Read 9699 times)

Firefly

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #30 on: June 13, 2008, 11:36:38 am »

M Carter wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 13:27


On a quick listen, it sounds like a lot of people (myself included) had issues dealing with the bass.  While it's not omnipresent in any of them, it's practically non-existent in a few.

Thoughts?

Matt


Haven't had a chance to listen to anything yet, but ended up having to mix mine with headphones at home and didn't get a chance to reference...so in other words i was throwing darts blindfolded and hoping i was at least facing the right direction.


Logged

ATOR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #31 on: June 13, 2008, 02:36:52 pm »

Greg Thompson

Yours sounds like a "remix".  It's great!
I would hazard to say that you might get some wildly differing opinions when you play it for the band.  Half would hate it, half would love it.  The band would break up.  It would be awesome.



dconstruction


While ATOR's mix is (expectedly) a pretty far reach for the band


A remix, a pretty far reach ??

This was my idea of a basic no frills mix  Shocked


I'm glad you like it Greg.
Logged
Pieter Vincenten - ATORmastering

ATOR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #32 on: June 13, 2008, 02:51:34 pm »

dconstruction

I'm more of a producer than an engineer anyway - or at least I expend my energy more in the former direction than the later. This band, on this song, had no parts other than the acoustic and vocal. Everything else is a strong and sometimes explicit (i.e., I played it) suggestion from me. Which is good, because that's what I like doing. So, as an exercise, I undid all my arrangement edits before putting these tracks together for the IMP. I used the outro drums in the beginning, got rid of the horribly played electric guitar in the verses (which, shockingly, some of you have really highlighted; man, I hate that part). I delayed the entrance of the bass, shuffled the bridge guitars around and completely chopped up the beatbox performances (some of his triplets and 'ksshhh!' cymbals were distracting) - all sorts of edits which you guys didn't get. I wanted to see how many of you heard what I heard.


Is there a reason you made so many arrangement changes after the recording when you came up with most of the parts? Wouldn't it be easier and faster to first get the arrangement right and then record it?
Logged
Pieter Vincenten - ATORmastering

dconstruction

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #33 on: June 13, 2008, 03:24:22 pm »

First, Peter: I hope you know, I never said I didn't like your mix (actually, I do; a lot), but a "no frills" mix it is not (Rankus wins that title, clearly) and likely not one that's going to make the album.

But onto this question.  No, I do not think it is easier and faster to get the arrangement done first.  And maybe it's misleading to say I "came up with most of the parts."  I suggested most of the parts.  E.g.: "This section is too spare; let's fill it in with an organ part - get the chords down while I mic it up."  "What does everyone think about beatboxing over the end?  Crazy, right?  Yeah, yeah: go do it.  Here's a mic."  "I think we should add some piano over the bridge, something simple - wait, what did you just play?  Play that again.  Yeah, that's great.  Let me set it up."  "We should really pare down the electric guitars.  Would you stop playing, please?"

This sort of free-associated improvisation in the studio is what is fun for me, and most effective for my method of working, and the bands I record.  Besides, the edits weren't done after the recording (well, technically they were), but during: the inception, recording and editing of the part is one process.  Some stolid, measured, planned and scheduled arrangement might yield better technical results, and maybe even better parts, eventually - but there's no way the band has the patience or ego (or ability or money) to wait on me to come up with charts, hand them to them and ask them to play.  I work fast, loose, and in cooperation with the band (or I make it seem like cooperation).

YMMV, but this is the method that works for me.

L
Logged

fiasco ( P.M.DuMont )

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 437
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #34 on: June 13, 2008, 03:24:53 pm »

Here are my initial impressions of the first 5 I've listened to.

As I am a newcomer and largely inexperienced, please correct any mis observations.

jhall - Felt like there was too much verb? on the drums;
              very good balance on the "break down" part, lifted the tune right up!;
              would have liked to hear the beat box fade out, kinda stuck out with the abrupt ending.
             
Slash - Interesting choice with the no drums;
              bass could have been more consistent without the drums there;
              ehh... I don't know about the use of the harmonies;
              good vocals.

maxim - The arrangement was good, suited the tune nicely;
              good, clear vocals;
              nice tone on the organ;
              seemed like the song got a little disjointed towards the end @ 3:15;
              over all good balance.

Greg Dixon - First, probably my pick so far;
              nice work on the bass;
              wanted to hear a little more top on the gits;
              the harmonies seemed a bit uneven?;
              the piano sounded fantastic;
              felt like the right channel was always a bit heavy.

Daniel Farris - The vocals seemed a bit wet when the drums come in;
              good overall balance;
              I liked the fade out;
              hmm... can't think of anything else to say besides... nice!
             
             
Logged
Philip

fiasco ( P.M.DuMont )

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 437
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #35 on: June 13, 2008, 04:46:50 pm »

Guess I've got the sandbox all to myself. Very Happy

Antman - All in all pretty balanced;
I thought the electric gits were too hot, kinda just jumped out;
harmonies a little loud as well.

Firefly - The drums seemed a bit inconsistent;
delay on "maybe you're ready for change" very cool;
I liked the use of panning on the beat box.

imdrecordings - I thought this a very good/organic mix;
nice separation with the drum tracks;
clave too hot, almost to the point of distraction;
the piano stuck out a bit too much as well;
harmonies flangey?, phasey?

Chris Ilett - The lead in was noisy;
drums were very present, perhaps too much, but I liked;
bass was definitely too quiet;
interesting choice of the sparse arrangement from @ 2:30 on, cool;
everything, with the exception of bass, seemed too... "loud".

rankus - Great arrangement, suited the tune well;
I like how you brought the drums into the song;
nifty ending.
Logged
Philip

ATOR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #36 on: June 13, 2008, 04:57:21 pm »

dconstruction wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 21:24

First, Peter: I hope you know, I never said I didn't like your mix (actually, I do; a lot), but a "no frills" mix it is not (Rankus wins that title, clearly) and likely not one that's going to make the album.

But onto this question.  No, I do not think it is easier and faster to get the arrangement done first.  And maybe it's misleading to say I "came up with most of the parts."  I suggested most of the parts.  E.g.: "This section is too spare; let's fill it in with an organ part - get the chords down while I mic it up."  "What does everyone think about beatboxing over the end?  Crazy, right?  Yeah, yeah: go do it.  Here's a mic."  "I think we should add some piano over the bridge, something simple - wait, what did you just play?  Play that again.  Yeah, that's great.  Let me set it up."  "We should really pare down the electric guitars.  Would you stop playing, please?"

This sort of free-associated improvisation in the studio is what is fun for me, and most effective for my method of working, and the bands I record.  Besides, the edits weren't done after the recording (well, technically they were), but during: the inception, recording and editing of the part is one process.  Some stolid, measured, planned and scheduled arrangement might yield better technical results, and maybe even better parts, eventually - but there's no way the band has the patience or ego (or ability or money) to wait on me to come up with charts, hand them to them and ask them to play.  I work fast, loose, and in cooperation with the band (or I make it seem like cooperation).

YMMV, but this is the method that works for me.

L

So you are producing, writing parts, recording and arranging all at the same time. Some parts already had me wondering:"Was this meant to be right here in the song or is it a recorded part that's just put to tape to maybe fit in elsewhere." Like the last arpeggiated guitar part. It all makes sense now. It's a lot like how I write songs.

Logged
Pieter Vincenten - ATORmastering

imdrecordings

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #37 on: June 13, 2008, 05:28:12 pm »

Quote:

By Fiasco:  imdrecordings - I thought this a very good/organic mix;
nice separation with the drum tracks;
clave too hot, almost to the point of distraction;
the piano stuck out a bit too much as well;
harmonies flangey?, phasey?
You're right about that Clave being a smidgen too high, right around the ending or after the peak of the song.
Flangy harmonies?  That's probably from the Roland Dimension-D.  I bussed them down to a stereo buss and slapped on that plug on it's lightest setting.  Probably could've pulled it off and replaced it with a light/fast stereo delay and a touch of verb.

I liked the Piano a little over powering, I really enjoyed how it built tension, that setup the resolve/end of the song.  just my cup-O tea I guess.


Thanks Phillip!
Logged
-Scott S

fiasco ( P.M.DuMont )

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 437
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #38 on: June 13, 2008, 05:33:27 pm »

imdrecordings wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 17:28

 ... just my cup-O tea.


Thanks Phillip!


And a good cup o' tea it is.
You are welcome.
Logged
Philip

Chris Ilett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 253
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #39 on: June 13, 2008, 07:31:04 pm »

Cheers Fiasco. I listened to a couple, but on the same laptop I mixed on, so will be back on Monday or Tuesday to give everything a proper listen. Including mine.

maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #40 on: June 13, 2008, 08:31:07 pm »

" the horribly played electric guitar in the verses (which, shockingly, some of you have really highlighted; man, I hate that part)."

about the only part i really liked (just goes to show...)

Logged

fiasco ( P.M.DuMont )

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 437
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #41 on: June 13, 2008, 10:17:54 pm »

Part 3 of 4(I think)...

Huds - It has good balance for the most part;
the bass and drums seem quiet;
I noticed a timing issue with the electric and acoustic gits @55 seconds;
the "lead" guitar under the beatbox was cool.

SingSing - I like the organ under the beginning section;
it seems your overall levels are low, for this tune it seems appropriate;
piano @ 55 sec... ehh... good idea just didn't work for me;
good arrangement ideas;
pretty good balance;
clave too loud. Damn clave.

teleric - Drums (all panned left?) seem a little falamy ... is that a word?;
electric guitar sits well;
other than drums nothing to distracting.  

M Carter - Lots o' mouth sounds, perhaps too much vocal compression;
good balance, however, see last point;
repeating harmonies didn't work for me, but hey, that's just me;
good treatment on electric gits;
for this tune, overall, just way too hot.

ATOR - Nice and different, interesting spin on the song;
like the solo EGit part @ 1:15;
Bass drum a bit slappy for tune;
good harmony section;
fun version!

Logged
Philip

ATOR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #42 on: June 14, 2008, 11:04:57 am »

This is what came to mind when listening to the mixes.


Antman
Nice acoustic guitar at intro. Vocals doubling is overdone. Bass is like a ghost. Vocal is buried at times. A very gentle mix. Choir is very loud. The guitars at the end make a mess.

Chriss Ilet
Intimate. Drums are a booming mess absorbing the bassguitar. Balance needs way more work.

Daniel Farris
Good mix, the acoustic that starts is a little dominant, otherwise I like it.

Dconstruction
High end of the reverb could use some taming. The verb makes the vocal stand loose from the rest, ditto for the shaker. Bass is boomy. It's not a whole.

Fiasco
Low end is boomy, uncontrolled and too loud, this drowns the mix. And then at 3:30 it disappears. I listened to this mix without hearing the song, that's not a good sign.

Firefly
Controlled and warm sound. Great balance, levels could use some automation. Love this.

Greg Dixon
Phasey guitar. I like the stereo drums. In a quiet mix like this I'd like the lead vocal sticking out more. Balance is good.

Greg Thompson
Nice and full sounds, it's still beefy even with the low level drums. The first pianopart is a little too far underwater for me. Good mix.

Huds
Balance could use more tweaking/automation. I don't like the shifted acoustic, the idea is ok but if you do it time it right. My attention gets drawn to the wrong parts like eg the beatbox in the bridge and the acoustic guitar. The vocal needs to be in the spotlight.

J Hall
Very defined sounds. Until the drums and bass kick in. The timing of the guitars in the first chorus throws me off, the delay doesn't make this any better. The midlows of the drums/bass eat up the leadvox. Leadvox gets buried at end.

M Carter
Sounds good. The delays make the sloppy timing very obvious. Bass is boomy and too loud. The mix distorts. Nice choir but the last chord sounds off.

Mdifazio
Aah, the old I thought it was 44k mix. It's a regular here  Smile

MGaudio
Tinny guitar. You really cranked the highs on the drums/tambourine, probably why you've got so much noise. All sounds lack body and the low end is missing. Levels could use automation. Piano is very soft, makes the bridge kinda boring.

Osumosan
This mix lacks some power and foundation, as if it would fall over if you pushed it. Arpeggiated guitars are too loud. Balance needs work.

Rankus
A singer-songwriter approach. I like the idea that the acoustic carries the song but in the bridge the playing gets too sloppy to justify a lead role. You could have made more use of other parts. At the end the acoustic overpowers the rest.

Scott Selfridge
Bass is very boomy. Sounds are very dry and basic on the brink of uninspiring. Is this a faders up mix with some verb?

Singsing
Nice padlike organ at intro, piano edits are a nice touch. The lead electric sound is a little icepickish and doesn't gel with the rest. If you make it a lead at the piano part take out the mistake. Yeah, nice use of the choir. Great arrangement, good sounds.

Slash5969
I like the bonedry vocal as if he's 1 feet before me. The holding back feeling creates a great tension. Aaah, you weren't holding  back, this is already it, that's too bad. I like what you did with the choir just not where and how loud you did it.

Southboundloco
Another messed up samplerate, damn this is slow.

Strummer
The Beachboys intro/outtro doesn't connect with the song. The balance needs a lot of work. You need to point the ears to the lead by making it the focal point/loudest/most present and turn down the supporting tracks.

Teleric
Great sounds, good separation and focus. I really like this one. I would drop the repeated choir, the harmony is off.

The Dan
Good sounds. Good balance. I like this one. Vocal level is too low at places, needs automation. In the bridge the lead is the guitar that's been playing the same all throughout the song, there's no added value in highlighting that especially when you have the piano. Ghostshaker.



This has been another great IMP!

Thanks to Tonite Tonite and Dconstruction for providing the track.
Logged
Pieter Vincenten - ATORmastering

Antman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #43 on: June 14, 2008, 11:15:31 am »

ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 23:04

This is what came to mind when listening to the mixes.


Antman
Nice acoustic guitar at intro. Vocals doubling is overdone. Bass is like a ghost. Vocal is buried at times. A very gentle mix. Choir is very loud. The guitars at the end make a mess.



Could you explain what you mean by vocals doubling? What's that? And in what sense is the bass like a ghost? I actually thought the bass was a little overbearing, especially when I listened to everyone elses mix, so a little more elaboration on those two points would be greatly appreciated.
Logged

M Carter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 369
Re: IMP18 discussion
« Reply #44 on: June 14, 2008, 11:50:31 am »

Ator - Thanks for the crit.

It's weird, I heard the mix distorting too, but didn't hear it when I was printing..

However, the mp3 doesn't seem to distort when it's downloaded.

Or am i just crazy?

EDIT: **No, I'm just crazy.  **

Matt
Logged
Matt Carter
General Manager
Manhattan Sound Recording
www.manhattansoundrecording.com
(212) 564 8248
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Up