dikledoux wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 14:54 |
Another thing... Some of the files didn't line up by just a bit even though I brought them all into a project at 0:00:000. This isn't the first time I've seen this - is lining up tracks a standard issue when getting raw track files, or is it just operator error on my part? I heard on a couple of the mixes that people didn't notice the vocals not lining up - sounded like a slap echo, but I figured it was just a timing problem and slid (slud?) parts accordingly. |
dikledoux wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 14:54 |
Another thing... Some of the files didn't line up by just a bit even though I brought them all into a project at 0:00:000. |
chrisj wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 14:38 |
J. Hall- Wow, compressed AND pointed. Intense intense intense. Got a super-aggressive groove factor. Damn, are your walls-o-sound good, too. I like the use of the bass for lows, it seems to sound extra good. Compression compression compression. Sweet. You da man |
scott volthause wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 12:47 |
Okay, I'll come clean. That was my bands song, that we tracked a little less than 2 years ago. If anyone has any specific questions of me, fire away. And if anyone wants to hear the original mix, I can throw that up too. I think everyone did cool things though. |
scott volthause wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 15:47 |
...Sometimes you might get stuff to mix that just doesn't make any sense at all. |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 17:49 |
sc ott had to label the tracks the best he could for a large audience so i'll cut him slack there. |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 17:49 |
i used samples to beef up the drum sounds. for a hard rock track the printed drums were just to sloppy sonically. they were played well, but they just didn't match the precision in the guitars. |
Quote: |
Nick T- Whoa! BIG. Ye GODS. Makes me feel like a tiny little ant person Damn good groove factor too, and holy mother of f*#@, that frequency range, super lows and such highs. I'm not worthy, I'm not worthy! and what did you mix this on?? (actually when I turn mine up about 7 db I don't feel quite so much like a tiny little ant person. Still... *makes heavy metal gestures while headbanging* |
Nizzle wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 18:47 |
Oheads were out of phase with one another |
chrisj wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 15:38 |
Whatcha doing on the lead vocal in the acoustic section? |
Nizzle wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 19:01 |
I definitely flipped phase on one of the oheads as I felt like my equilibrium was out of whack while listening to them alone. -t |
scott volthause wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 22:57 |
Original Mix Fornever |
Tom C wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 07:39 |
cerberus: like your re-amped guitar sound at DG, but it's too different to SG, maybe you should treat SG the same or in a similar way. |
Quote: |
Vocals are good but could be a tad louder compared to the guitars (are you a guitar player?), |
Quote: |
vocals a bit misaligned at V4 + V5. |
Quote: |
thought the guitars were well tracked, the drums were OK, but I really did not like the bass. If there was one element of this tune that I would have liked to re-track, it would be the bass. I'm interested to learn what everyone did to create a usefull bass track. I ended up playing around with a freeware envelope control plugin ("Dominion") to try to control and beef up the bass. Mixed results, I would say. |
Patrik T wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 09:02 |
I made the tune decrease after the biggest spot. If I would work more on this I'd use the fatter guitar bus in the very end. I would also automate a whole bunch of crap throughout the piece as well. Especially in the 2:nd half of the tune. It was just a rapid mix. I strapped a comp over the 2 buss in the end, just taking one dB at some spots. |
cerberus wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 02:52 |
hi scott; i noticed in your mp3 there is a sort of keyboard-pad-like sound playing under the acoustic section, what exactly is that? jeff dinces |
UnderTow wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 07:04 |
Hi Scott, There seems to be some weird squeaking in the MP3 on all the loud transients. It makes it very painfull to listen to. What did you encode the MP3 with? Alistair |
scott volthause wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 15:34 | ||
There are several delays and a nice fat plate 'verb on stuff during that section. During the second verse / acoustic section, one of the acoustic guitars is treated with a tremelo. That's pretty much it. |
scott volthause wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 15:37 | ||
|
cerberus wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 16:17 | ||||
jeff dinces |
scott volthause wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 16:28 |
it's probably just my mixing that's making it painful to listen to. |
scott volthause wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 20:37 |
Exported out of Samplitude to MP3. I'm not hearing the squeaking at all using iTunes. Anyone else getting that? What are you playing it back through? |
UnderTow wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 16:21 |
J.Hall: Another big mix but the compressor is chewing up the kick drum. It sounds floppy. Vocal could use less verb for my taste. The mix would probably sound great without so much compression. |
j.hall wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 14:34 | ||
what is "floppy"? the kick drum, or the whole mix? how come people keep submitting mixes? next mix submission i see will get deleted.....maybe in school you can turn homework in late and get away with it, in the real world you just get fired and not paid! |
cerberus wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 16:17 |
=== scott, i think it's fair for us to be extra critical of your mix because you had exponetially more time and a clearer view from which to consider every aspect. my opinion is that it is very weak on harmony and counterpoint. compare to other mixes that used more vocal and guitar parts (e.g. blueboy's revision). and compare to mixes where the effects change more for the chorus, verse, and break. there is tons of harmony and counterpoint in these recordings, but your mix/arrangement only seems strong on melody. |
j.hall wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 22:34 |
what is "floppy"? the kick drum, or the whole mix? |
Quote: |
how come people keep submitting mixes? next mix submission i see will get deleted.....maybe in school you can turn homework in late and get away with it, in the real world you just get fired and not paid! |
rankus wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 11:30 |
BlueBoy: Cool intro reverse cymbal. You beat yourself up in your post , but dude this is good stuff. The gtrs are a teensy bit harsh, but they started out that way so no biggie. Overall ballance is great! Good job. |
Rankus |
ATOR: Good Mix! (Mastered ?) (MASTERED!!!) Dood this is a "mix" project.... decent mix though. |
Undertow |
ATOR: A bit sharp but nice full spectrum mix. (I like that). Did you replace the kick? It is a bit prominant. You made the mix quite loud (like me). I'm not sure this was the intention. Smile Vocal nice and clear. Nice width. I like it. |
ATOR wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 23:33 |
The kick is all original. I used a waves gate to get the length I wanted, an UAD 1176 to shape the envelope, an UAD Pultec to beef it up and another eq for cleaning up some flabbyness. |
Quote: |
I didn't make my mix loud but I did try to make a balanced clean mix using very little compression, a lot of level automation and cutting out the frequencies that take up unnecessary space. Because most of the transients are still clean (uncompressed) this does leave a lot of room to get it loud in mastering. Basicly I made a mix that I'd like to get for a mastering job. |
Quote: |
Alistair I missed your mix but will listen to it tomorrow. |
UnderTow wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 17:21 |
I noticed the overheads issue so I turned the phase of one of the channels by 59 degrees. |
cerberus wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 00:09 | ||
jeff dinces |
Quote: |
nick t this one has me groovin'.... i find it a very flawed mix technically, but i cannot stop moving. this mix is like a drug for me: if i turn it up it's way harsh on top, but at low levels i simply feel the music. the "how long can you wait" part takes me even higher.... the "before it's too late" vocal part is missing.. that is essential to the song, imo. i feel an empty space needs to be filled there. so i wonder why you didn't use it? |
Patrik T wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 12:22 |
Undertow: Maybe a bit heavy on the bottom, maybe not. The mix is great but how much of that comes from the GR and level-increase on the 2-buss? Isn't this one going too far into mastering-land? |
Quote: |
Whassup with the 476 kbps by the way? |
UnderTow wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 13:15 |
Is that what your player tells you? If so, it is very confused as 476 Kbps MP3s don't exist. The MP3 is 192 Kbps. Alistair |
maxim wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 12:54 |
i also wish i had the mastering engineer sprinkle some gold dust |
Patrik T wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 13:22 |
Leftclicking the file, checking the properties in windows on two different computers (one with xp home and the other with xp pro) says 476 kbps. As did WMA. |
cerberus wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 03:08 |
undertow how did you do your bass and kick drum? i really like how this hits me hard in the torso... wow.. the impact and clarity go together... how was that done? beautiful natural top end too... if slighltly overwhelmed by the bottom, but there are no freq holes. snare is a bit compressed sounding... nice vocal changeup at the climax. then bringing on some grit... what a suberb mix, amazing attention to all kinds of detail, it feels like music. |
ATOR wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 14:30 |
Some guys I left out in my first review: Alistair Nice! Massive and direct, I like that. Bassguitar could use some taming. Leadvocal timing is off in some places, |
Quote: |
there’s a sound as if something hits a mic around 3:30. |
cerberus wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 03:08 |
nizzle reverb on vocals... ugh. sounds like vocal was phoned in from a shower stall... otherwise this is great. the reverb is too nasty, things seem pitched weird. but i still enjoyed it anyway for sounding "together" like a record should. |
Patrik T wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 07:22 |
Is the vox tuned? |
UnderTow wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 09:39 |
think what worked for me was the lack of time. I didn't over think any decisions (something I am prone to). I kept it simple and just went with my first gut instinct every time. I'll give full details on what I did with the kick/bass: |
j.hall wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 14:20 |
rankus......lots of comments on murky low mids......you got a low mid bump in your acoustics? |
cerberus wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 22:08 |
dikledoux interesting reverbs.. vocal levels seem a bit off in places... nice burble from the guitars.. drums seem like they're pulling my eardrums a bit. |
cerberus wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 22:08 |
dikledoux [revised] i got the "police bullhorn thing".. very interesting but not loud or distorted enough. the other (filtered?) vocals are nice.. sound stressy, but real smooth, has that phil collins exciter effect? i like how the snare sounds low and lets the brass percussion ring clear like hell's sleighbells. |
dikledoux wrote on Fri, 01 September 2006 13:29 |
The reverb is just the toms run through the room section of a useful reverb and then compressed all to heck. I figured there weren't any toms, so I'd make room mics where there were none. |
rankus wrote on Thu, 31 August 2006 10:53 | ||
I will take the MP3's to the studio and have a listen there and report back. Thanks for the heads up.... This indeed may be on my end. |
rankus wrote on Sat, 02 September 2006 12:14 |
OK. I listened to all the mixes again at the studio with better acoustics. |
Quote: |
J Hall, your mix is damned good on my system with the sub pumping. The comp still pumps, but you knew that. |
garretg wrote on Thu, 07 September 2006 05:12 |
ator - in many ways this is a fantastic mix.... one of my favorites, with great energy and balance. Question though: did you de-ess the vocals? I hear a pronounced lisp now. Maybe it's something in my monitoring system... hmmm. Whatever it is, it's bad news. |
Adam Miller wrote on Thu, 07 September 2006 12:11 |
Guits- Well recorded, but on the harsh side. Fair whack of Eq using URS Neve graphic, then just a matter of panning and balancing appropriately. In some sections I pitchshifted 2 tracks down an octave, eq'd heavily then blended in the background just to give the sound a little more girth. |
garretg wrote on Wed, 06 September 2006 23:12 |
But I'm unswamped now, and had some time to listen to the mixes tonight... I made it through 2/3 of them before my ears wore out... i'll try to get to the rest tomorrow. |
garretg wrote on Fri, 08 September 2006 06:59 |
Scratch that plan! My wife had a baby this morning at 7 am... so I'm, er, busy... Big un, 9 lbs even, 20 1/2 inches, firstname Henry... almost as big as his older brother (now 3 years old) was.... Not sure if/when I'll be able to get back to this... -G |
Adam Miller wrote on Thu, 07 September 2006 21:27 |
Hi Pieter- thanks for the kind words. Guitars were really just done with EQ- generally as a subgroup, although I did tweak the sound on a track-by-track basis across the different sections of the song though. I'm not sure it's really noticeable unless you were purposefully looking out for it, though. The basic sound is really the URS eq- I gave the guitars a little nudge at 110Hz, pulled a fair bit out at 700 and 1.6kHz and then a little bump up at 7K just to pull the leading edge out. I followed the URS with a waves q, Hipassing at 80Hz-ish and lowpassing around 8kHz. I also did another midrange cut around 1.2k with a fairly tight Q. With distorted guitars, it's really a matter of carving out enough space to be able to push them nice and high in the mix without treading all over everything else. It's very definitely the kind of thing to do whilst listening to the whole track, rather than just the guitars in isolation (something I still do way too much of). The rest is just balancing up the individual tracks- I like it nice and wide, so at least L and R tracks hard panned, and preferably another track down the middle so the whole thing doesn't competely collapse in mono. And really, that's about it, I think. |
garretg wrote on Fri, 08 September 2006 06:59 | ||
Scratch that plan! My wife had a baby this morning at 7 am... so I'm, er, busy... Big un, 9 lbs even, 20 1/2 inches, firstname Henry... almost as big as his older brother (now 3 years old) was.... Not sure if/when I'll be able to get back to this... -G |
garretg wrote on Fri, 08 September 2006 05:59 |
My wife had a baby this morning at 7 am... so I'm, er, busy... -G |
garretg wrote on Wed, 06 September 2006 23:12 |
the mix doesn't sound completely glued together (I hear very discrete tracks of sound, rather than a band!) |
garretg wrote on Mon, 11 September 2006 12:33 |
and his older brother is being an angel, we'll see how long that lasts. |