Post by: j.hall on April 07, 2008, 04:02:28 PM
that doesn't mean you can't chime in with your thoughts and opinions, it just means that the final word in if you beat me or not is with them. that applies to me as well....cause of course i'll be voting for my mix.
Post by: J-Texas on April 07, 2008, 04:59:08 PM
Post by: iCombs on April 07, 2008, 07:19:16 PM
First up - J-Tex. Why not?
This is probably the best set of balances I've heard in your mixes yet. I'm not sure I'm crazy about the lo-fi treatment or the crazy ping-pong delay on the main vocal...your breakdown treatment is almost exactly the same as mine...I guess great minds think alike! The bass is just a touch dominant for the guitars...and there are a couple spots where the bass totally just farts. I could also be all over the bass on this because the top is so reserved...I'd probably be singing a slightly different tune if the top were more "finished."
Cymatics - Dirt much? I like the focus of the bass and guitars...the toms are really ringy...like the mics are in the drums. Damn are those drums slammed to the absolute max...mono drums in the breakdown...nice touch...I can hear the compressor just SUCK the cymbal decay down in the first verse. The vocal sits kinda low in the mix...did you add a bunch of hair to these guitars? They sound pretty big. Overall the spectral balance feels good but the lead vocal seems like it's darker than the rest of the mix...especially with distorted or filtered vox, check the top against the top of your guitars...not that they should necessarily be the exact same, but they should be commensurate or complimentary in some way. No guitar fix in the bridge...I like that, but it'd have been nice to hear some more treatment in that spot...really make it stick out a little more.
Firefly - 48k, huh? Love the depth in drum world. The whole mix seems to have a phasey quality to it. not sure if that's intentional or not. The vocals seem a little dark again compared to the rest of the mix...and the vocal balance is kinda all over the place...man...coming out of the bridge...WTF is going on with that imaging...something's making me queasy. I don't think the guitars are carrying the size that they probably can while retaining that sort of tone. The bass rocks...but I'd like to hear it drier...I swear I can hear it in a verb somewhere. Seriously...that imaging is so weird...
Podgorny - JESUS is that bass awesome. Rippin'. There's this honk thing going on with the brass like in the 4-6k sort of place that's a little distracting...the vocals could use a nudge up in the face of that snare. That snare is pretty much the loudest thing in this mix. I like the guitars. The vocal sounds like it's spectrally in the right spot...it just needs to be as loud as the rest of the mix. Something I got told once that can really help those sorts of things...start your balances with kick, bass, and vocal and then bring in your snare. With those elements you've basically got the center of your mix together...then do your best to mix around that core. That first snare hit makes me really excited...what happened to the snare sound from there out? It seems to lose some of that attitude.
Billybehdaz - Width. Lots of junk on the vocal...interesting choice...it's really alarming compared to the other mixes...I love the "POP" your snare's got going on...I'd like to hear a little more top on the drums as a whole so they can keep up spectrally...cool treatment in the bridge. Your mix is easily as crushed as j.'s, and is about as firm as his in terms of not pumping distractingly. Toms feel like they could use a little more body. Balances feel solid...I'm not fighting to make out the vocals.
j. hall - love the fundamentals. everything has its "feet planted" so to speak...the mix as a whole feels like everything is up front...in a way it makes it feel thin in a textural sort of sense...it's like looking at a picture of a hallway as opposed to actually being in a hallway...there's a certain depth that I'd like to hear that I'm not. Love the vocal placement. I'm curious as to how your compressed it...with all the lip smacking and plosives, I'm wondering how you kept those in check.
iCombs - bright. focused in the middle. Aggressive through the upper mids. Honestly, I know I really got into those guitars with the EQ, but the top was so smooth that I felt like I could really lay into them with EQ and not start getting painful. The bass was tricky for me...getting that first set of harmonics above the fundamental to sit right so I could really make notes out cleanly. The whole mix sounds a little reserved now that I directly compare it to some others. We'll see what the panel thinks. I will say I do like the disorienting stereo nature of my bridge section...but we'll see how that goes over.
ATOR - BIG ROOM AND LOTS OF MIDS! The bass sounds diffuse...room on that? Wow. Those guitars sound like there's some extra filth on them. The sense of space on the snare is awesome, but it sounds like the kick is fairly separate from the toms and snare. WOW BREAKDOWN. That panning shit is crazy...makes me think surf music for the incredibly demented. I wonder if the room needs to be that bloaty through 3-500 hz. LAST CHORUS! Wow! First arrangement change! Liked the reverse swell into the break. The room really gets distracting for me. Balances feel good though...top end is more reserved than I'd probably like to hear, but that's just me.
Adam Miller - Nice spectral balance. The vocal placement is GREAT. This mix is a little more compact than most, but I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing. The guitars could use a little biggenation...the bottom of the guitar where all the notes are is a little thin-ish...but otherwise...this is just a good solid mix...not a lot I can say when its well executed!
======================================================-
That's all for now...I'll catch up on some more when some more come in.
Post by: j.hall on April 07, 2008, 08:02:47 PM
| J-Texas wrote on Mon, 07 April 2008 15:59 |
Yo man. That's bullshit! That sounds like a mastered mix. The one that was in the rar was A LOT darker than that. I think you should put that one up as "J. Hall's Mix". But hey... I only work here. I haven't listened to the links from the other threads but... |
i promise you it's the same mix. the one i posted is my typical reference mp3. the level is bumped up and that's it. i set my limiter to have no gain reduction, so however loud that makes it is what it is.
if you level match the two you'll find them to be the same.
Post by: maxim on April 07, 2008, 08:18:18 PM
Post by: j.hall on April 07, 2008, 10:28:27 PM
| maxim wrote on Mon, 07 April 2008 19:18 |
my 11 yr old thinks your song is "pretty cool" |
i hope your 11 year old does not have nightmares......i apologize in advance.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Post by: uncleozzy on April 07, 2008, 11:55:33 PM
Here's what my absolute-amateur ears tell me. Take it all with a grain of salt, though, as I'm not a mixer by anything other than aspiration, and my ears are a bit fatigued after hearing so many of these tonight. So apologies if I'm less than helpful at times.
In alphabetical order:
Adam Miller: This is virtually the mix that I wanted to make. The drums, in particular, are nice. Bright, crunchy guitars; I like these, too. Drums are tear-your-head-off punchy. As iCombs says, perfect, vocal placement, although I'm not 100% behind the delay. I like this mix.
Antman: Nice and bright, but not too bright. Vocals are nice and present, although I'd roll back the delay a little bit overall, and bring them up during the breakdown. I'd like more, or punchier drums, at least kick and snare. Guitars sound great.
Ator: The first thing that jumps out is the disorienting stereo separation. Wow, those guitars are fuzzy. I'm actually feeling a bit seasick this is so wide. It also feels a bit bass-heavy, although that could just be a trick of the super-wideness. I do dig the sound of the snare, though, and especially like the "sucking in" into the break. The vocal arrangement at the end is nice, too.
Boedoconstrictor: Good balance between the rhythm instruments. I could use a little more of the vocals in the first verse. Digging the snare; drums sound nice overall. I really like this mix, although I'm not crazy about the vocal treatment.
cymatics: Wow, this is loud. Lots of grit on the vocals; I like this. The toms seem a bit flabby, and the overheads are a little loud and bright for my taste; okay, the drums are just crushed, I guess. Guitars are really in-your-face: nice. Overall, it's maybe a bit too bright, gritty, and loud for my taste.
firefly: Interesting vocal treatment; might be a little too loud. I'm not sure how I feel about all the reverb on the bass. Drums are a bit buried. I don't know about this; as iCombs noted, the stereo imaging is crazy. I just switched to headphones to try to figure it out, but it's still just a little weird to me.
Grant Richard: Are my ears just getting tired, or is this pumping like crazy? I like the contrast in the vocals in the beginning. Drums sound great to my ears. The guitars are a bit too big for the drums, the snare in particular.
Greg Thompson: Great balance. I dig the present, dry vocals. Everything sounds really great together. I really like this mix. This is, much like Adam Miller's, the mix I wish I'd done. The snare sounds maybe a little honky in the breakdown, but overall sounds great. Not sure about the guitar (bass?) effect at the end.
iCombs: Whoa, lots of top end grit on those vocals; maybe a bit too top-heavy for me. Bass sounds pretty nice, but gets a little buried near the end. Guitars are way-scooped, or at least seem that way next to the bass; not sure I like that. Background vocals could maybe come down a little in the chorus. Snare is very nice.
JTexas: Bass sounds great. Not crazy about all the delay on the vox. Good balance with the BG vox in the chorus. Guitars are a little dark for me (even though I like em dark in this song), though the bass sounds good. Bit dark overall, though, maybe a bit muddy with all the gits and bass together.
maxim: Maybe too much grit/volume on the bass. Drowns out the drums at the beginning. Great vocal treatment. What happened when the guitars kick in? I expect to get kicked in the teeth, and it's a bit like they're playing in the next room--with the drums. This treatment on the breakdown guitars is ... unique? I really need more guitars in this mix.
podgorny: I like how dry and direct this is; drums, bass, and guitars sound great. Especially the bass. Wacky treatment on the BG vox! Lead vox could come up just a bit in the second verse. I really like these drums. The snare is, as iCombs says, loud, but I like it. I like the vocal edit at the end; sounds like there'll be a few mixes with that edit, and it's a good one. This is a good mix to my ears, and would be better with just a little more of the vox.
RKoehler: The drums really pump, or maybe it's the whole mix. Guitars are are very narrow, in contrast to the fairly wide drums. I like the vocals a lot, really nice sound there.
Rob Darling: Digging this mix, great sounds. Snare is fantastic, love the drums. I could use a little more guitars overall, but the tone is great. The overheads get a little out of control in some places. But I like this mix.
Scott Selfridge: More gritty vox; I like these. Lots of bass; the toms are kicking me in the chest. The first snare edit made me keep rewinding to figure out what was "wrong." Vox are a little quiet in the pre-breakdown (?!) -- basically inaudible on my monitors. My biggest gripe, overall, is the vocals.
Post by: grantis on April 08, 2008, 12:01:23 AM
| Quote: |
Grant Richard: Are my ears just getting tired, or is this pumping like crazy? |
'tis...but not like crazy.
the only thing pumping really hard is the overhead mics.
Post by: imdrecordings on April 08, 2008, 12:16:00 AM
Thanks for the healthy criticism. I love it!
| Quote: |
Scott Selfridge: More gritty vox; I like these. Lots of bass; the toms are kicking me in the chest. The first snare edit made me keep rewinding to figure out what was "wrong." Vox are a little quiet in the pre-breakdown (?!) -- basically inaudible on my monitors. My biggest gripe, overall, is the vocals. |
The Vocals being berried was intentional. To me it's a part of a certain genre and draws you in or makes the singer sound like he's fighting something. Builds tension.
Even High on Fire albums, ISIS/Neurosis albums have that same quality. I certainly wasn't going for the Pop Radio friendly mix.
About the edit in the beginning. I didn't like the lackluster snare hit going into the loud part. I pulled it and if I had more time I would have made it a little more seamless. Either that or try and make the flame punch the listener in the face. I kind of wanted it to drop in on the off beat and catch the listener by surprise,demanding their attention.
Thanks again.
Post by: Podgorny on April 08, 2008, 01:15:02 AM
| uncleozzy wrote on Mon, 07 April 2008 22:55 |
podgorny: I like how dry and direct this is; drums, bass, and guitars sound great. Especially the bass. Wacky treatment on the BG vox! Lead vox could come up just a bit in the second verse. I really like these drums. The snare is, as iCombs says, loud, but I like it. I like the vocal edit at the end; sounds like there'll be a few mixes with that edit, and it's a good one. This is a good mix to my ears, and would be better with just a little more of the vox. |
Haha... I spent three hours mixing this, and then came back to it a couple days later to make tweaks, including raising the snare and lowering the vocal. I did this on purpose because when I put a limiter on the 2 bus, the snare lost its impact, and the vocals came forward! I didn't put the limiter on the mix I submitted because J Hall mentioned that mastering engineers would be critiquing the mixes and I thought they might be put off by a crushed mix. I suppose that's what I get for pandering to the judges...
Glad you like the bass though. Of course, most of it has to do with the fact that the bass sounded good.
Post by: Firefly on April 08, 2008, 04:45:13 AM
| iCombs wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 01:19 |
Firefly - WTF is going on with that imaging...something's making me queasy. |
Ah yes, the joys of mixing up to the deadline, and not knowing if what you're doing actually sounds good. I was trying to get a more double tracked feel with a stereo imager...and went overboard it would seem. *Smack across the head* - lesson learned (which is what we're for right?)
Post by: uncleozzy on April 08, 2008, 08:07:26 AM
| imdrecordings |
The Vocals being berried was intentional. To me it's a part of a certain genre and draws you in or makes the singer sound like he's fighting something. Builds tension. |
Ah, see, a genre with which I'm entirely unfamiliar! (Which is why I relied so heavily on the reference mix; I opened the RAR and said, whoa, I have no idea what to do with this.)
| Podgorny |
Of course, most of it has to do with the fact that the bass sounded good. |
Ha... which is funny, because it does sound great. But when I first opened the session and soloed the bass mic, I thought, WTF?!
| Firefly |
I was trying to get a more double tracked feel with a stereo imager...and went overboard it would seem. *Smack across the head* - lesson learned (which is what we're for right?) |
I really did have to switch to headphones because it made me seasick on my monitors. But this whole thing is definitely a learning experience. My mix has a big oops that I didn't notice til after I uploaded it, too. Oh well!
Post by: J-Texas on April 08, 2008, 11:22:50 AM
| j.hall wrote on Mon, 07 April 2008 19:02 | ||
i promise you it's the same mix. the one i posted is my typical reference mp3. the level is bumped up and that's it. i set my limiter to have no gain reduction, so however loud that makes it is what it is. if you level match the two you'll find them to be the same. |
Hey maybe I'm in the wrong business then. I put the two of them together and they sound completely different. I started out on the "copy J.'s mix" and found that there were some things I liked and things that I would change. Hence, the beat J.'s mix (not DIY). If I would have been copying the mix in the discussion thread, mine would have been brighter.
Anyone else think that or am I nuts?
I'm not accusing you of ANYTHING. It doesn't really matter, except to me personally. I know that setting your limiter a little differently is not going to make those types of changes. If indeed it does, then I need to re-learn and re-train my ears. I just don't see how it's possible.
Post by: J-Texas on April 08, 2008, 11:34:58 AM
| iCombs wrote on Mon, 07 April 2008 18:19 |
First up - J-Tex. Why not? This is probably the best set of balances I've heard in your mixes yet. I'm not sure I'm crazy about the lo-fi treatment or the crazy ping-pong delay on the main vocal...your breakdown treatment is almost exactly the same as mine...I guess great minds think alike! The bass is just a touch dominant for the guitars...and there are a couple spots where the bass totally just farts. I could also be all over the bass on this because the top is so reserved...I'd probably be singing a slightly different tune if the top were more "finished." |
| uncleozzy wrote on Mon, 07 April 2008 22:55 |
JTexas: Bass sounds great. Not crazy about all the delay on the vox. Good balance with the BG vox in the chorus. Guitars are a little dark for me (even though I like em dark in this song), though the bass sounds good. Bit dark overall, though, maybe a bit muddy with all the gits and bass together. |
Sorry to reply to you guys together, but I think it would be redundant to do it separately since you had about the same issues.
I Like the delay!
I think it really filled up some of the sparseness of the track. I wouldn't usually go crazy with delay like that, but it fit for me. Kind of like Ad-Rock or something.I really felt comfortable with the balance in this one. I think after years of recording, I'm finally starting to understand what I'm doing.
This has been REALLY good for me. I appreciate all of the feedback. Especially J. for pushing me to challenge myself and being blunt.As far as the darkness. Well, I was mixing this for mastering guys to hear. I thought that was the point. When I added about a 5db high shelf about 3500, it really sizzled without anything poking out too much. If you like the mix, check it out like that and see what you think.
THANK YOU FOR THE CRITS GUYS.
Post by: imdrecordings on April 08, 2008, 11:43:31 AM
| Quote: |
Hey maybe I'm in the wrong business then. I put the two of them together and they sound completely different. I started out on the "copy J.'s mix" and found that there were some things I liked and things that I would change. Hence, the beat J.'s mix (not DIY). If I would have been copying the mix in the discussion thread, mine would have been brighter. Anyone else think that or am I nuts? I'm not accusing you of ANYTHING. It doesn't really matter, except to me personally. I know that setting your limiter a little differently is not going to make those types of changes. If indeed it does, then I need to re-learn and re-train my ears. I just don't see how it's possible |
If you made the mix you intended to, it shouldn't matter what J did or didn't do. Right?
Post by: J-Texas on April 08, 2008, 11:47:38 AM
Post by: imdrecordings on April 08, 2008, 11:51:26 AM
On the flip side, Jason.
What was your idea for the song? Where did you hear this song coming from or going? What did you hear the song trying to convey to the listener and how did that affect the way you mixed?
I'm curious to know how everyone approached the mix!
Post by: j.hall on April 08, 2008, 12:42:42 PM
| imdrecordings wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 10:51 |
I'm curious to know how everyone approached the mix! |
two and a half minutes of teeth kicking rock.
i wanted my mix to be thick, wide and loud. i also wanted it to be fairly raw. i wanted the listener to feel slightly uncomfortable with the message that's being yelled at them.
the verse drum and bass groove just pounds itself out, and i'm always trying to make my rhythm sections slam.
my overall goal, was to have a mix that didn't get in the way of people hearing a rock band, being a rock band, while making the rock band sound larger then life.......
lyrically the song is about a single person seeking redemption. it's a metaphor based off Edgar Allen Poe's Tell Tale Heart
Post by: iCombs on April 08, 2008, 12:46:43 PM
Post by: J-Texas on April 08, 2008, 01:01:42 PM
Post by: j.hall on April 08, 2008, 01:02:03 PM
| J-Texas wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 10:34 |
As far as the darkness. Well, I was mixing this for mastering guys to hear. I thought that was the point. When I added about a 5db high shelf about 3500, it really sizzled without anything poking out too much. If you like the mix, check it out like that and see what you think. |
first off, if i were trying to beat my mix, the very first thing i would do would be to get the top end opened up and feeling good.
PLEASE don't read this as condescending or rude, but, i do about 40 - 60 projects a year. i hear my work mastered ALL THE TIME. so mixing something specifically for mastering in my case is a fairly solid educated guess of what i'll get on the back side.
i would never, NEVER recommend mixing "for mastering". and to be clear, i actually don't ever mix for mastering. this is my band, and i have complete control (minus what the other 3 guys want done). i mixed this record dark on purpose and for a specific goal.
it's too dark, no question. the mastered finished album is exactly what we wanted as a band, so it worked out.
also, i've never compared the output of my limiter to the source. to my ears, it's really transparent, but maybe it's boosting some highs.....i don't know, sorry about the "bait and switch" wasn't my intention at all.
Post by: imdrecordings on April 08, 2008, 01:06:42 PM
How did you use/mix the Room Mics for the drums?
I couldn't find a use for them.
Post by: J-Texas on April 08, 2008, 01:15:53 PM
As far as the room mics. I really found no use in the room1 mic. The room2 mic was absolutely crucial to getting the drum sound that I wanted.
Post by: bblackwood on April 08, 2008, 01:33:56 PM
Here are the notes I jotted down regarding each mix:
j.hall - nice bottom, gtrs seem smeary, overall dark
rkoehler - choruses smaller than verses and too dark, cymbals really eating up space
firefly - stereo spreader or verb? big smeary mess here
antman - vox too spitty/sibilant, guitars too scooped/neutered. where's the bottom?
billbehadaz - vox buried in chorus, vocal delay sounds cheap, too much dynamic shift from first chorus to last, will make the front of the song sound weak comapred to others around it. last chorus sounds good.
cymatics - strange buss compression, upper mids/top harsh, lower mids neutered
scott selfridge - bottom end nice, top a little edgy
grant richards - dark, nice pumping overall, sorta welrdly pushed in the mids
gregthompson - harsh upper mids, makes it seem overly-thin
jtexas - extremely dark and bottom heavy - tweeters 6dB to bright?
podgorny - nice presence, not over-done,but seems phasey
uncleozzy - snare way too big, overall dark tones
adammiller - nice balance.i like this one
ator - holy midrange batman!
boedconstrictor - vox too sibilant in verses, vocals distracting, overall balance prettty good
maxim - vox way too loud, mix very dark, little presence in choruses
icombs - very wierd spectrum - monitoring must be screwed in this room. no midrange!
robdarling - vox too loud, nice balance overall, maybe a touch splashy
Since this portion of IMP17 was to "beat J.Hall's mix", I'm considering his mix the benchmark. That being said, I only found one track that I would choose over J.hall's mix if I were mastering it and that was Adam Miller's. 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.
For comparison, here's j.hall's mastered mix (the way he wanted when he came down for mastering): *click*.
Here's Adam Miller's version mastered (though Adam's was mastered off the MP3: *click*.
Cheers, hope this helps!
Post by: imdrecordings on April 08, 2008, 04:30:47 PM
| j.hall wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 11:42 | ||
two and a half minutes of teeth kicking rock. i wanted my mix to be thick, wide and loud. i also wanted it to be fairly raw. i wanted the listener to feel slightly uncomfortable with the message that's being yelled at them. the verse drum and bass groove just pounds itself out, and i'm always trying to make my rhythm sections slam. my overall goal, was to have a mix that didn't get in the way of people hearing a rock band, being a rock band, while making the rock band sound larger then life....... lyrically the song is about a single person seeking redemption. it's a metaphor based off Edgar Allen Poe's Tell Tale Heart |
That's pretty much what I heard and was going for, too. It's funny how people's tastes differ. It's so cool how the same idea from 2 different people yields two seperate results. I love mixing...
J.- 414's on the Rooms?
I don't mix any where near the amount of material you do.
That said...
When you mixed your own album, were there any albums/bands you kept in the back of your mind? Or do you approach a mix with the intent of exposing a feeling inside or vision and work at it until it finally becomes/is that? Does that make sense?
| Quote: |
scott selfridge - bottom end nice, top a little edgy |
Brad,
Thank you!
This place is great.
I love the feadback!
Post by: iCombs on April 08, 2008, 07:30:08 PM
| bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 12:33 |
Hey J, if this isn't the right place for this, feel free to move it... Here are the notes I jotted down regarding each mix: icombs - very wierd spectrum - monitoring must be screwed in this room. no midrange! |
That was a bit of an intentional choice...I really wanted the size top to bottom to feel a bit exaggerated. I think I just lost my frame of reference towards the end of it and scooped a little more than I should have. I know my room isn't stellar...but it's not THAT bad.
Post by: Antman on April 08, 2008, 08:06:36 PM
| bblackwood wrote on Wed, 09 April 2008 01:33 |
Hey J, if this isn't the right place for this, feel free to move it... antman - vox too spitty/sibilant, guitars too scooped/neutered. where's the bottom? |
Woah, not enough bottom was the last thing I was expecting to hear. I think I mustn't be spending enough time with my studio monitors and probably too much time listening to my laptop's speakers.
Thanks.
Post by: j.hall on April 08, 2008, 11:32:20 PM
| imdrecordings wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 15:30 |
J.- 414's on the Rooms? |
nope, this record was made totally ghetto.
tracked in a basement to a PT M-powered rig with a random slew of cheap mics.
| Quote: |
When you mixed your own album, were there any albums/bands you kept in the back of your mind? |
nope, i never do
| Quote: |
Or do you approach a mix with the intent of exposing a feeling inside or vision and work at it until it finally becomes/is that? Does that make sense? |
that's a tough question to answer. i think the idealistic side of myself would like to think feelings can be conveyed with the proper mix. i do know, believe and understand that the emotional content is up the band.
i do generally have a clear vision of where i want to take a mix, and i'm typically working toward that very early on. sometimes it changes as the mix develops, but that is kinda rare.
you have to keep in mind that forcing your will onto a song is a really bad approach, IMO.
i think that's something that takes a lot of experience and good instincts to finely tune. and i'm not saying i have either. i'm still learning and have much to learn.....
i do however enjoy the digital domain. i'll fearlessly edit and mix songs knowing if the band hates it, i just change it to what they want.......no harm no foul
Post by: j.hall on April 08, 2008, 11:35:38 PM
basically, those mics are tight to the kit. i compress the crap out of them and blend them back in the tight mics. it makes the kit sound HUGE if done right..........IF DONE RIGHT.
Post by: Billybehdaz on April 09, 2008, 07:58:49 AM
| bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 12:33 |
billbehadaz - vox buried in chorus, vocal delay sounds cheap, too much dynamic shift from first chorus to last, will make the front of the song sound weak comapred to others around it. last chorus sounds good. |
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. 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'.
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?
Thanks!
Post by: uncleozzy 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.
Post by: Adam Miller 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.
Post by: Adam Miller on April 09, 2008, 08:39:46 PM
Post by: Rob Darling 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?
Post by: J-Texas 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!
Post by: bblackwood 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)...
Post by: bblackwood 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.
Post by: bblackwood on April 10, 2008, 10:58:32 AM
| J-Texas wrote on Wed, 09 April 2008 22:52 | ||
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...
Post by: j.hall 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!
Post by: J-Texas on April 10, 2008, 05:55:17 PM
| bblackwood wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 09:58 | ||||
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.
Post by: j.hall on April 10, 2008, 05:59:36 PM
Post by: J-Texas on April 10, 2008, 06:34:00 PM
Post by: bblackwood 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'.
Post by: bblackwood 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...
Post by: imdrecordings on April 10, 2008, 08:00:26 PM
I think I was 1 year old back then.
Post by: maxim on April 10, 2008, 09:26:03 PM
"maxim - ...mix very dark..."
it was half-deliberate
obviously, i want to get it as close to finished as possible, but, if pushed, i'd rather have the mix too dark than too bright for the ME
would you be able to fix it in mastering?
Post by: J-Texas on April 10, 2008, 09:56:07 PM
| bblackwood wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 18:03 |
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'. |
This was funny. Humorous (in a so true it hurts sort of way).
| bblackwood wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 18:13 | ||
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... |
This point had NOTHING to do with my mix bro'.
| imdrecordings wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 19:00 |
Good is so 1978. I think I was 1 year old back then. |
You don't know how old you are?
Post by: bblackwood on April 10, 2008, 10:41:22 PM
Post by: imdrecordings on April 10, 2008, 11:06:13 PM
There is a limit that a mix can be pushed before losing the music, band, song or message. In fact it can be worse when someone misses the point entirely and depends on an effect to ground a song. Some of the mixes I listened too, didn't even begin to identify with what the band was delivering and instead decided that they needed to make a statement with an effect or "avenue" that they(the mixer) decided to go down.
You have to respect that in some way, shape or form that the music is the most important part as well as the people who are performing it. How can you as an artist or engineer deliver that message to even more people than they could, with out diluting the content.
I thought this was the perfect exercise to match J's mix, because it was already at it's peak level of existence.
I guess we all missed the boat entirely or just arrived too late to do what really mattered.
Cheers J. Where can I get me a copy of your album?
Post by: J-Texas on April 10, 2008, 11:39:40 PM
| bblackwood wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 21:41 |
[Edit: Never mind, I'm done.] |
Dude. Did you have a rough day?
That was a legitimate point and a serious question. I think holding back your qualified input takes away from the learning process.
I'll ask you again.
In your opinion, has the need for everything to be loud and not dynamic, as well as following a mixing trend for commercial viability, skewed what most people consider good?
ps. I agreed with you about the 95 out of 100 dentist survey saying, indeed, my mix was dark.
I don't understand your frustration.
Post by: imdrecordings on April 10, 2008, 11:44:44 PM
| bblackwood wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 21:41 |
[Edit: Never mind, I'm done.] |
Brad, you had some brilliant points! Why did you go and erase it???
Post by: bblackwood on April 10, 2008, 11:47:53 PM
| J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 22:39 |
Dude. Did you have a rough day? |
Nope, not at all. Feeling good, actually.
| Quote: |
That was a legitimate point and a serious question. I think holding back your qualified input takes away from the learning process. |
I've held nothing back - how could you even suggest that?
| Quote: |
I'll ask you again. In your opinion, has the need for everything to be loud and not dynamic, as well as following a mixing trend for commercial viability, skewed what most people consider good? |
I'll ask you- when did I ever inject the loudness of this mix into this discussion? I didn't you did. I'm not viewing this as a 'commercially viable' mix discussion, as the music isn't 'commercially viable' from the get-go. If you think your mix is awesome, so be it - ignore my perspective. Makes no diff to me - I was simply trying to make a point (which you obviously either wish to argue or ignore).
| Quote: |
I don't understand your frustration. |
No frustration, just bewilderment that you wouldn't actually listen to your mix and try to be objective about it.
If you think it's great - awesome. More power to you. Either way, I'm done.
If anyone else has questions, feel free to ask.
Post by: bblackwood on April 10, 2008, 11:49:55 PM
| imdrecordings wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 22:44 | ||
Brad, you had some brilliant points! Why did you go and erase it??? |
I appreciate your kind words, but I'm not going to debate him on this - I don't have the spare time. I shared my opinion and he refuses to even consider it might be worth considering, so I'm done with it.
Post by: J-Texas on April 10, 2008, 11:56:37 PM
Are you putting me on here?
I think we're off on the wrong foot or something. I'm not talking about MY mix.
I appreciate your criticism. I have weighed it carefully and listened objectively, gone back and tweaked it, listened objectively again. The learning is never done man.
I really am trying to put out a generalization. This is the indie thread man. If you can help me (or anyone else trying to learn how to tune the craft) find a happy medium between what I consider right and what the masses consider good, then I might learn something. I'm not trying to turn you off man. From an ME perspective I'm trying to find out what makes you tick not ticked off.
Post by: grantis on April 11, 2008, 12:07:12 AM
| bblackwood wrote on Tue, 08 April 2008 12:33 |
grant richards - dark, nice pumping overall, sorta welrdly pushed in the mids |
thanks for the comments Brad. from a your purest ME perspective, is the pumping done well enough to make the master pretty loud?
pushed in the mids...guitars? vocals? drums? everything? elaboration would be appreciated.
what's your take on the bottom?
you rock
Post by: imdrecordings on April 11, 2008, 12:10:30 AM
| bblackwood wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 22:49 | ||||
I appreciate your kind words, but I'm not going to debate him on this - I don't have the spare time. I shared my opinion and he refuses to even consider it might be worth considering, so I'm done with it. |
Kind words?
No thanks necessary. You laid it all out.
Your short little snippet you said of what my mix wa, gave me an affirmation that I already knew. Thank you. That's all I needed. Do you do stuff like "help people with their mix" kind of thing?
If so PM me how much.....
Post by: bblackwood on April 11, 2008, 12:16:24 AM
| grant richard wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 23:07 | ||
thanks for the comments Brad. from a your purest ME perspective, is the pumping done well enough to make the master pretty loud? pushed in the mids...guitars? vocals? drums? everything? elaboration would be appreciated. what's your take on the bottom? |
Hey man, everything seemed a little pushed in the mids. I think overall, a decent master could be cut from this - an excellent master if the band loved the mix.
As for loud - please, PLEASE do nothing in mixing to make things loud - just make it sound good! If you start focusing on loudness without the perspective (not to mention the additional processing which might be involved) of the mastering engineer, you'll likely be missing stuff you need to focus on.
Leave it to us to get it loud (if needed), just make it please the artist!
Post by: bblackwood on April 11, 2008, 12:17:48 AM
| imdrecordings wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 23:10 |
Kind words? No thanks necessary. You laid it all out. Your short little snippet you said of what my mix wa, gave me an affirmation that I already knew. Thank you. That's all I needed. Do you do stuff like "help people with their mix" kind of thing? If so PM me how much..... |
I regularly help clients with this for free, PM me if interested - I don't want this to turn into a commercial thing...
Post by: bblackwood on April 11, 2008, 12:32:47 AM
| J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 22:56 |
Brad, Are you putting me on here? I think we're off on the wrong foot or something. I'm not talking about MY mix. |
Sorry, then I have no idea what mix you're talking about here. I'm just commenting on what was submitted..
Post by: J-Texas on April 11, 2008, 12:52:21 AM
Post by: grantis on April 11, 2008, 01:37:48 AM
| Quote: |
As for loud - please, PLEASE do nothing in mixing to make things loud - just make it sound good! If you start focusing on loudness without the perspective (not to mention the additional processing which might be involved) of the mastering engineer, you'll likely be missing stuff you need to focus on. |
ah ha! duly noted. thanks brad.
the reason i bring it up is this. i've heard of some mastering engineers ***ahem*** commenting on mixes pumping too much, which limits how hard the mix can be "hit" in mastering.
when we say "loudness", if you're speaking of leaving headroom for the ME, no problem there. i've been leaving about 10 db for the ME to play with. the mp3 i submitted for this most likely was bumped up to level with a cheap mastering plug, just to make it a listen-able volume.
my question was more along the lines of how much bus compression i was using, and the resulting pumping action.
sorry to mention again, what did you think of the bottom end?
Post by: bblackwood on April 11, 2008, 08:20:11 AM
| grant richard wrote on Fri, 11 April 2008 00:37 |
the reason i bring it up is this. i've heard of some mastering engineers ***ahem*** commenting on mixes pumping too much, which limits how hard the mix can be "hit" in mastering. |
Well, it's generally true - the more dynamic the mix is, the louder it can generally be made in mastering (within reason). A heavily compressed mix can be very difficult to get loud at times...
| Quote: |
when we say "loudness", if you're speaking of leaving headroom for the ME, no problem there. i've been leaving about 10 db for the ME to play with. the mp3 i submitted for this most likely was bumped up to level with a cheap mastering plug, just to make it a listen-able volume. |
What I mean by loudness is this: don't do ANYTHING trying to prepare the track to be loud. Don't compress/limit/anything else in an attempt to 'help' the mastering engineer - just focus on the mix and make it slay. If loudness is something that needs to be achieved to appease the artist, then leave that to the mastering guy.
| Quote: |
my question was more along the lines of how much bus compression i was using, and the resulting pumping action. |
I just felt that, in your case, the pumping was a bit much. Granted, I cut records all the time with that much compression on the mixes, so this isn't a train-wreck, it's just somewhat common for buss compression issues to become even more apparent post-mastering...
| Quote: |
sorry to mention again, what did you think of the bottom end? |
It was a bit big, a bit too much. Not bad, just a bit - could probably be fixed in mastering.
Post by: garret on April 11, 2008, 11:15:52 AM
Important note: I was judging the mixes on their own merits, not by comparison to J's mix.
If I missed anyone, please let me know..
-G
---------------------
antman – toms in the intro are a little brittle... backup vox are a little dominant in the first chorus... bass guitar needs more bottom. Good mix... nicely balanced, lots of energy..
rkoehler – a dark and murky place. Take another swing at that snare... it's very thin and papery right now. Brightening that up could add a lot of missing presence. Some good treatments here, but all together it's adding up to something very murky... track levels are nicely balanced against each other.. but there's something off in the overall spectral balance... too much eq maybe? I think the original tracks were considerably brighter.
j.hall – vocal are a little overprocessed... kick is too loud. Lots of energy in this mix though.. gets my pulse rate up and my head banging. Good balanced dynamics and sonics... Hey, that's the J delay on TAKE TAKE TAKE... so this is the J Hall mix...
adam miller – bass guitar needs a little bit of low end. Great mix though... everything sounds good and is nicely balanced... tons of energy, and one of the best payoffs at the 2:00 mark...
e_houston – strange bass sound... not sure what the story is, but it's very metallic. I like the toms though... backup vox are mixed too high in the first chorus... great snare (I love reverby snares). Solid mix except for the bass tone. Did you add some chorus or something to the bass? It's really warbly...
boedo – some odd treatments in this one... the lead vox very sibilant.. the kick is dominant, and it's not a great tone... flap flap flap. Not much energy in this mix. Spectral balance is pushing up from 1khz – 5khz. Are your monitors dark in that range?
ATOR – vocal is lispy. Bass guitar is very strange... kick is dominant. Wow, it get phasey at 0:30 ... it's making my ears twitch.. do less processing, more balancing.
Uncleozzy – I'd like to hear some fundamental on the bass guitar... kick sounds delicious, but it's mixed too loud. I love the backwards stuff to fill the cut at 1:00.
cymatics – the vocals are lacking definition... very lispy, and buried in the mix... wow, there's a ton of sub bass rumble in this. Where'd it come from? Sounds like a truck outside my window. Lots of good energy and vibe in this mix... you just need to get the vocals right.
firefly – phasey vocals... ugh my ears are twitching... is there reverb on the bass? It sounds a mile away. Lots to address in this, but the phase stuff is making it hard to focus to give you feedback. There's a huge presence peak from 1-5khz... what are you monitoring on?
j.texas – murky... vocals are buried too far back. The bass is well supported.. nice bottom with the metallic stuff on top... but it's dominating the mix. Lots of balancing problems in this... bass is too high, vocals are too quiet.. guitars are at times either too loud or too quiet...
podgorny – Good sonics in this one... Balances are good too, except the vocals are a little buried. Great guitars... lots of energy... I just want to hear the vocals take more control, especially around 1:30.
greg_thompson – Some balancing issues here... drums and bass are a little high compares to the vocals and guitars... kick is particularly relentless. Good energy though... the 1:30 section could be one of the best if the kick were dropped down a few db...
grant richard – low end dominant... kick and bass are out of control... there's a sine wave tone at 1:11 or so? What the heck is that? Some good energy though.. nice vocal and guitar treatments...
maxim – toms are a little weak in the intro (mine are too). Sonics in the choruses are very scooped.. the bass guitar is all sub bass, and the vocals have a ton of clarity/sparkle (not what I heard as appropriate for a tune like this.) Oddly balanced, like in the section around 1:25... the effects trickery and left to right stuff is oddly matched. It's a call and response.. so each thing needs the focus when it is the focus...
teleric – bass needs more bottom. I like the kick level, but then again I'm allergic to dominant kick drums... vocals are getting lost... this could be a great mix with the bass and vocals up a little more... Good energy and seethe.... makes me anxious, which is a good thing I think.
Billy behdaz -- lispy vocal. Some heavy-handed treatments... overall mix lacks coherence... I'm hearing your mix trickery, not the song...
rob darling – nicely balanced... but I think the bass needs a little more bottom.. you're losing that little bass counter melody I love so well.
icombs – ooh, that's a strange one. Now that's a scooped mix... Vocals are incredibly sibilant.. The whole mix is strangely distant, like I'm listening through a 30 foot plastic pipe. Low end is nonexistent, except a little boost of sub bass.
Post by: j.hall on April 11, 2008, 11:23:27 AM
| imdrecordings wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 22:06 |
There is something that's not being discussed at all. |
indeed.....but that's always the case....
| Quote: |
There is a limit that a mix can be pushed before losing the music, band, song or message. In fact it can be worse when someone misses the point entirely and depends on an effect to ground a song. Some of the mixes I listened too, didn't even begin to identify with what the band was delivering and instead decided that they needed to make a statement with an effect or "avenue" that they(the mixer) decided to go down. |
IMP has always suffered from some degree of this. i've never been able to figure out if it's really how people mix, or if they are attempting to "show" off in front of the class. not sure it really matters, but it does in fact exist on every IMP.
| Quote: |
You have to respect that in some way, shape or form that the music is the most important part as well as the people who are performing it. How can you as an artist or engineer deliver that message to even more people than they could, with out diluting the content. |
many things make a mixers job difficult, but this issue seems to be a big one for many. i'm not sure why honestly. i'd like to believe that KNOWING the music and art are king would just come naturally.
| Quote: |
I thought this was the perfect exercise to match J's mix, because it was already at it's peak level of existence. |
thanks for that. but honestly, my mix achieved what i wanted out of it, don't confuse that with some one else not being able to do a "better" job. i'm sure Andy Wallace would mop the floor with my mix. i'm also sure that there are many "unknown" mixers like myself, that could slay a record like this.
| Quote: |
I guess we all missed the boat entirely or just arrived too late to do what really mattered. Cheers J. Where can I get me a copy of your album? |
well, that's not entirely true. i think Adam Miller's mix was great. i do like my rhythm section better only cause it feels more aggressive to me. but at the end of the day, i agree with Brad's opinion.
the record will be on iTunes pretty soon. the digital booklet is being laid out now.
Post by: Gabriel F on April 11, 2008, 01:57:31 PM
and some mixes did the opposite added too much reverb on vocals and other things. used effects that didnt enhanced the agressive mood the mix asked for.
i think adam was close pretty close, cant say if its better they are both good.
Gabriel Fonts.
Post by: Adam Miller on April 14, 2008, 06:08:57 PM
I'm being harsh tonight because a) Hopefully it's more useful in the long run, and b) I'm tired and grumpy.
Jhall –Low end heavy. Ring on the intro toms muddies up the low end quite a lot. Love all the vocal effects. Good energy, great excitement, but I feel like the compression on the drums distracts slightly from the mix. But definitely the best one overall.
Cymatics- Fucked up! Bit too OTT, scooped, distorted and slammed to really work. Vocal way too far back in the mix. Some nice ideas, but it all needs to be backed down several notches.
Podgorny- Vocal too far back. Drums sound very clean and quite polite- that snare needs a bit of ring on it! Tones are quite good, and balance is also ok- apart from lead vox.
Firefly- I think it’s all been said about the stereo… Low bass out of proportion with rest of mix. Mix lacks impact.
Jtexas- Shite vocal delay. Mix way too dark. Snare drum doesn’t drive in the heavy ‘chorus’ sections like it should really. I think the balance might actually be ok, but it’s hard to hear ‘through’ the tonal imbalance.
Bilybehdaz – I like the idea with the vocal distortion- actually I like the whole idea of the aggression you’ve got in the mix overall- it’s just not as well executed as it needs to be to work without being distracting. Mix is quite hard to listen to as a result.
ICombs- Soooo scooped out. Load of little vocal noises/breaths as a result of the vox distortion you’ve used. Like Jtexas, past the tonal imbalance the actual mix might be halfway decent, but it’s hard to tell.
ATOR- Weird reverbs, weird guitars. You need to stop wrenching what were perfectly decent raw tracks around with gimmicks and just focus on the balance first of all. Nice little backward delay tho….!
Boedoconstrictor – Interesting vox effect. Good basic balance. Drums sound a little emasculated and thin. Low end needs tidying up, but overall I quite like this one.
Uncleozzy – Sounds aren’t quite there; decent intial balance though. Needs a bit more work, top end needs a bit more bite.
Antman- A bit ‘toasty’ for want of a better word! Good balance and excitement, walks a fine line on the verge of overcompression, but gets away with it I think…. Shouty vocal mid section doesn’t work- too distant. Snare drum needs some extra jizz. Whatever that means.
Maxim- Strips out any vestige of excitement from this track. Not sure if this is meant to be an ‘avant-garde’ balance or something, but seriously…. I’m not sure if I can offer anything constructive on this one.
GrantRichard- ‘Slams’- but a bit overcooked I think. It takes a lot of skill to keep truckloads of compression palatable to the ear, and certainly not one that I’ve mastered, but this definitely goes too far.
ScottSelfridge- I like some of the sounds esp in the intro, but the balance is a bit cocked. As are all the gimmicky space delays. Need to watch the guitar vs vocal balance.
Greg Thompson- Nice intial intro. Chorus looses it slightly- too much attacky kick. Kit doesn’t really sit in the space that it really should.
RobDarling- Lack of intro bass means the mix starts off on the back foot. Good balance otherwise, broadly speaking, but thin in the bottom end.
Rkoehler- Small and middy sounding. The whole mix needs to be opened up a lot. Bit heavy on the sub of the bass guitar too.
I'd just like to say it's a hard task trying to match up to J's mix.. I really can't stand to listen to mine now either....
Cheers,
Ad
Post by: J-Texas on April 14, 2008, 10:42:33 PM
| Adam Miller wrote on Mon, 14 April 2008 17:08 |
Jtexas- Shite vocal delay. Mix way too dark. Snare drum doesn’t drive in the heavy ‘chorus’ sections like it should really. I think the balance might actually be ok, but it’s hard to hear ‘through’ the tonal imbalance. |
I like the delay!I get everyone saying the mix is too dark.
Thank you for the crit.
(I just read this again. I mean... I GET that everyone says it's too dark, and I recognize that. Thank you ALL)
Post by: grantis on April 14, 2008, 11:40:04 PM
| Quote: |
GrantRichard- ‘Slams’- but a bit overcooked I think. It takes a lot of skill to keep truckloads of compression palatable to the ear, and certainly not one that I’ve mastered, but this definitely goes too far. |
thanks for the feedback. i would agree that i went overboard on the bus comp. still getting a handle on it.
any other comments other than the bus comp?
Post by: Antman on April 15, 2008, 12:49:29 AM
| Adam Miller wrote on Tue, 15 April 2008 06:08 |
Here are my reviews, better late than never... I'm being harsh tonight because a) Hopefully it's more useful in the long run, and b) I'm tired and grumpy. Antman- A bit ‘toasty’ for want of a better word! Good balance and excitement, walks a fine line on the verge of overcompression, but gets away with it I think…. Shouty vocal mid section doesn’t work- too distant. Snare drum needs some extra jizz. Whatever that means. |
Thanks Adam.
Where do you hear the compression? I've got drums and bass sends grouped together and heavily compressed and mixed in underneath the dry tracks.
I've also got a bit of distortion on a duplicate bass track, which would add to some compression. Otherwise I think that's all I had from what I can remember.
The shouty vocals were meant to sound distant, but yeah I wasn't sure I had them close enough, thanks.
Fair cop on the snare too.
Post by: Firefly on April 15, 2008, 07:19:45 AM
I'd also like to echo the statement about mixing songs according to the nature of the song, and not trying to push your ideas onto it and beating it until it fits. Its curious that Adam's is generally agreed as being the best of the bunch, and yet conversely probably has the least trickery going on.
I know myself that when I opened J's mix, I said righto: "what could I improve" well, other than opening up the highs, not a lot - its a good mix. Especially considering the source material. Those were very RAW tracks, and so, naturally the end result should've sounded raw. Instead of just sticking to that i went way overboard trying to make everything sound expensive and hifi, and made a right royal mess of everything. (i was like a little kid i was, playing with all the toys i'd never been allowed to play with before). I remember reading an article about the great Andy Wallace, and how he uses hardly any outboard other then his compressor, eq, and verb... lesson learned for next time then (I really should've learnt it by now, but anyway)
Post by: j.hall on April 15, 2008, 01:08:46 PM
| Adam Miller wrote on Mon, 14 April 2008 17:08 |
Jhall –Low end heavy. Ring on the intro toms muddies up the low end quite a lot. Love all the vocal effects. Good energy, great excitement, but I feel like the compression on the drums distracts slightly from the mix. But definitely the best one overall. |
i think the bottom can stay that big with better sculpting of the floor tom and bass guitar EQ. just my opinion.
| Quote: |
I'd just like to say it's a hard task trying to match up to J's mix.. I really can't stand to listen to mine now either.... Cheers, Ad |
thanks, if my mix had your smooth top end i might actually agree with you.
Post by: Chris Ilett on April 16, 2008, 05:30:53 PM
I love this track, and I do think that raw is the way forward. Haven't managed to listen to them all, but I THINK it was Adam's that I thought was really good, and in no way less, Gregs was awesome. Really liked how Gregs differed in the way that everything sounded that bit tighter.
Wouldn't be my choice for this song - a bit too metal, but impressive technique for sure! Didn't realise you were on here buddy (Only for 4 years huh?).
J's is kinda my favourite so far though. That's not totally objective because I haven't listened to them all, but you just know it's going to be hard to beat.
Sorry I'm chipping in without taking part, but it's really more to give kudos to you all. Hopefully I'll take part in the next one.
Chris
Post by: Adam Miller on April 16, 2008, 06:33:02 PM
| grant richard wrote on Tue, 15 April 2008 04:40 |
thanks for the feedback. i would agree that i went overboard on the bus comp. still getting a handle on it. any other comments other than the bus comp? |
Just general things- the drums don't sit quite right, and the guitars are too pushed. It sounds quite 'impressive', but stick it through the kind of multiband uber compression they use on radio, or an ipod with sound enhancer and bass boost enabled and it would really suffer, i think. It all needs to be backed down a notch or two.
Post by: Adam Miller on April 16, 2008, 06:35:00 PM
| Antman wrote on Tue, 15 April 2008 05:49 |
Where do you hear the compression? I've got drums and bass sends grouped together and heavily compressed and mixed in underneath the dry tracks. |
That would do it- plus whatever distortion-type effect you've got on the vocal makes it a bit too forward too soon in the track, imo.
Post by: Podgorny on April 20, 2008, 01:40:11 AM
Anywho, on to the mixes.
Greg Thompson
I really generally like the balance of this. The "stomped-on" snare is very cool too, though it seems to have an odd space around it that I don't hear on the other drums.
I don't love the vocal delay in the second verse or the filtered effect on the bass at the end. And there seems to be some weird panning automation in the left channel before the second "Let go - And Live". But that's just me being picky.
I give this mix four inverted polarities out of five.
Post by: Greg Dixon on April 20, 2008, 05:27:28 AM
| Podgorny wrote on Sun, 20 April 2008 15:40 |
Greg Dixon Very Dark. Very Dry, except the lead vocal, which has an out-time-delay. Weird edit during the "let go and live section". Vocals too low. Was this mixed on headphones? |
Ha blame J! This was a match J submission. Delay on vocal changes at different points, trying to follow what J did. There are no edits by me and no it wasn't mixed on headphones.
Post by: Antman on April 20, 2008, 12:19:30 PM
| Podgorny wrote on Sun, 20 April 2008 13:40 | ||||||||||||||
Antman Post by: Antman on April 20, 2008, 12:22:07 PM
I don't remember putting any distortion on his voice! I just brought up some of the very high frequencies that I felt accentuated the "throat being torn apart" sound. Maybe I screwed up some levels somewhere along the line. 
Post by: J-Texas on April 23, 2008, 09:49:44 PM
WHERE'S MY FUCKING ALIEN WRITING DUDE? Thank you for the listen. Contrary to what some might say about the way I take criticism it was all very welcome and I did go back in and kick this thing's ass.
Post by: Boedo Constrictor on April 23, 2008, 11:23:23 PM ` Post by: Greg Thompson on April 28, 2008, 01:37:13 PM I found that folks fell into easy identifiable groups: A) People who have fucked monitoring situations and have some glaring errors going on with their mixes B) People who have a lot going right with their mixes, but just needed 1 or 2 nudges with the mix to have it just right C) People who just discovered delay and reverb (and also sometimes fall into either category A and B) Just because JHall used a few verb throws here and there, doesn't mean that more is better. As it turns out, less is probably better. Mixing in a vacuum without being able to bounce your ideas off of anybody really leads to bad things. Please take all my critiques with a grain of salt. Most folks think I'm rude anyway. -Greg ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------- Bodeoconstrictor: Vocals a few db too loud. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Chorus on the vocal? Daring! A little veiled in the upper mids, but the mix takes high end nicely. Antman: Vocal delay. Umm. Also daring. Most likely to be voted down by the band. Nice sounding drums. what's going on with the guitars after the breakdown? Some phasing or is it just the 2 guitars eq'ed differently? the guitars sound nice and wide, but when summed to mono, the mix sounds like mostly drums and vocals. Still.. in stereo the guitars sound just a few db low of where I'd prefer them. Grant Richard: Seems like you don't hear what's going on below 80 Hz or so in your speakers. I'm yanking 32 Hz down 10 dB on my iTunes EQ to tame it. An easy fix as it seems mostly in your kick drum and not in your bass guitar. When I switch to the small speakers, it's not apparent at all. Guitars/bass vocals sound cool. The mix takes high end pretty well. There's some guitar hum that's left over from one of the guitars that's not playing, but you muted it in the breakdown. Kinda disconcerting. Either lose it completely or leave it on all the time. Greg Thompson (me): Yep. Brad was right, guitars/cymbals too pointy. Makes the mix sounds small. Reminds me of why I have problems listening to my old Quicksand CD's. Too much kick. I usually mix with too little kick. Are the toms too loud at the end? WTF is that effect on the guitars at the end? Was trying to make it sound like somebody playing with a half-cocked wah. I thought the outro could use a little something to spice it up. Jhall: Mix sounds veiled. Don't like the toms ringing (especially in the left channel) at the top. The "let Go" vocals jump out a little bit. The effect on them doesn't sound punk. Not a fan of the mix pumping as the kick drum hits. Maxim: Okay. What happened? Its like you forgot to turn on the drums and guitars. Not liking the use of flanging. So turn on the drum and guitar channels and we'll discuss further. Uncleozzy: I dig your use of efx, even the backwards swoosh. Would like to hear the vocals turned down and de-essed a little as they stand out a little to far against the track. Kick drum has a little too much ultra-low end, but that's a nitpick. I think the guitars just need to come up a few dB. That'll make the kick/snare/bass/vocal sit a little nicer in the stew. Kick and snare are a bit more forward of the rest of the drum kit. Cymatics: Sounds like you took a Vintage Warmer or other 2Buss Masher and jacked the heck out of it and called it a day. Vocals are getting lost under the guitars and drums. Bass gets lost too. Do we go into the part where the drums are pumping like mad or has that been covered already? This mix seems like you had a lot of fun applying some compression techniques learned from others but going overboard with it. Guitars are a little too pointy in the presence region Ator: Mix sounds boxy. Like playing on a cheap boom box. If I kill 250 hz and 2k there's a lot of improvement. Do we blame the speakers/environment you're monitoring in? Drum reverb? I don't like it. Guitar stereoizer effect you have going on? Disappears in mono. Caves head in when I listen in earbuds. Not recommended. Kick/snare sound pretty beefy and nicely EQ'ed (after doing that 250/2k eq to the mix) Choppy effect in breakdown.. discussed already? Unnecessary. This is not Kraftwerk. Long verb on vocals? Not digging. Podgorny: I am enjoying this. Has a lot of energy. I think the bass gtr has a little too much hair on it to sit with the guitars Vocals could be a touch louder in the second verse on.. With the eq'ed vocal at the first chorus, they are plenty loud, but without them later on, vocs are not quite loud enough in the big parts. BillyBehadz: Not digging the vocal fx, but I like the overall sound of drums/guitars/bass. Firefly: vocal effect... some sort of panning thing with different eq's or a delay on each side? Makes me feel like I have a clogged eustachian tube. Also, vocals overall too loud. So you have something that offends my ears and it's the loudest thing in the mix. Bass guitar is owning too much of the bottom end. You could afford to give more low freq real estate to the guitars and kick drum. Overall sounds like there's not enough guitars overall. Sounds like you spent a ton of time getting the balance of the vocal/bass/drums and then added the guitars last and didn't quite get their balance correct. JTexas: Yeah. Vocal effects make it sound like its your first day with a digital delay. The "my mix is dark" has already been discussed. When I bring up the top end and decrease the bottom end to clear it up here's what I hear, kick sounds cardboardy.. needs more click. Bass guitar needs some sculpting so it plays nicely with the others. Currently it is owning the low freqs, leaving no room for the guitars and kick. Same thing as I said for Firefly. Guitars could use a little more hair, vocals could use a little de-essing. When I brighten it up, the spit in the vocals jumps up the most, with the cymbals coming up next. Guitars don't really get much brighter, which I think they could use a little. RKoehler: Guitars are too dark (for me). Bass guitar, owning the low end real estate a little too much. Overall vocals/guitars sound veiled, but drums are bright enough. I hear what sounds like you're leaning into a 2 buss compressor a little too much, but it doesn't bother me too much. Rob Darling: Group vocals jump out a little too far. Crunch guitars (all but the single note parts) could be louder. Kick sounds like there's no eq on it. A little too jazzy sounding for me. I don't love the verb environment for the drums, but it works. I think your tom ringing works pretty well as opposed to how I didn't like it in JHall's mix. Scott Seifritz: What's with the delay effect going on forever and ever? Not punk rock. There's a huge hump in your kick around 100hz. Overall spectral balance seems skewed. Guitars sound too thin in some places, bass and kick too thick, cymbals get loud and overpower vocals in places. ICombs: Vocal compression/eq too far over the top. Sounds like you ran the whole mix through an amp sim. Adam Miller: Agreed by all that this is the most balanced mix. Folks should take a minute to listen to his mix in mono and see that the guitars don't disappear when you do that. Would like to hear the single note guitar part at 1:00 a little louder, but that's nitpicking. Post by: J-Texas on April 28, 2008, 02:56:35 PM
YIKES!Understood about all of the above. I also gave my guitars some hair.  THX GREG. PS J. What do you think about making this even more of a real world scenario. What if on the next IMP... we did the mixes. Had one week to do crits. Then another week to post ONE revised mix in the "RECALL" thread. That way, all of the critiques could be thought of as client input... to see if we can "make it happen". Just an idea. Post by: Greg Thompson on April 28, 2008, 06:21:36 PM I think this is worthy. However, wasn't this addressed earlier in an IMP where there was a round of revisions presented? How about a setup where random "teams" are chosen where mixes are shared between 2 folks of different abilities (weekend warriors and pro's?) are matched up to share pre-deadline mixes and ideas before posting to the forum? Just suggestin'. Somebody kick me if I'm getting uppity. Post by: uncleozzy on April 29, 2008, 09:41:17 AM
Thanks for listening; I appreciate the comments. I'm continually glad to hear that my mix wasn't a complete mess. My monitoring situation is sort of lousy, so I really worry about the low end, which was sort of important (!) in this track. Glad you liked the efx, though; every time I noticed the distorted delay, I thought to myself... too much? I still think it's a bit much in spots. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: IMP is tremendously educational. I'll be the first to admit that I haven't the faintest idea of what I'm doing, and it's really helpful to get feedback and hear what others do with the tracks. Post by: imdrecordings on April 29, 2008, 02:41:45 PM Post by: Greg Thompson on April 30, 2008, 01:37:15 PM When I was mixing these tracks I had a hard time deciding what sounded cool because I could pretty much turn anything up louder than anything else and it sounded cool. I kept chasing my tail turning everything louder than everything else. And then there's the "well, I need to make my mix sound cooler than everybody else's" so where do your reach for that extra special sauce? Would your mix get you the gig over anybody else's? Do you play it safe and try and do a good job or do you go over the top? How far is too far? I'd say you went just a little too far, but nothing that couldn't be taken care (to make me happy if I were the person you were mixing for) of in 1 or 2 revisions. I'm listening down to your mix and enjoying a lot of the sounds you got, but there's things that aren't my cup of tea. Those being: The long vocal delay the level and moisture of the group vocals The level of the guitars vs the vocals just prior to the first "let go" part. (Enjoying the panning of them more tho) the level of the guitars prior to the second "let go" part (too low) The level of the vocals just past that "let go" part (too low) The sudden rise in level of the guitars at the end. (would be cooler to me if it just jumped for the last 3 chords or last repeat than the way it ramps up) I would give more exact times for the spots I'm talking about, but something with your mp3 encoder has the numbers all fuckocked on my player and the mp3 comes in at 20 minutes long. That said, nice drums/bass/guitar/lead vocal sounds. And let's forget what I say... what would the band say? I've had plenty of my share of mix ideas revoked. I like it better when I can offer up those ideas earlier in the mix, before painting myself into a corner with my decisions. It's a bitch when you're just working in a vacuum and you present a mix and things you spent a ton of time or effort on are immediately nixed. Or they say "uh, we want X to sound more like Y" and then the whole balance of things falls apart when you try to accommodate the request. I hate working in a vacuum. Plus the acoustics are really lousy in a vacuum.
I was using a song off of the Refused album "The Shape of Punk to Come" as my frame of reference. I also took JHalls mix and jacked the top end as a reference, which may help explain why my high mids are so out of whack. Post by: imdrecordings on April 30, 2008, 02:33:48 PM Sorry man. I just had to delete my post and you saw it! and quoted it! ah! Don't know why your words kind of got to me. I'm a bit embarrassed. I liked your mix the most out of all the mixes presented. Maybe that's why... or maybe it was the “punk” comment. I grew up in the SF Bay area and have lived and played in the gutters of the punk/metal scene there. Your response reflects typically how I work or the path I would have taken for the next step in perfecting this mix. I usually push things pretty far, some times too far out of shear excitement. then the artist comes in takes a listen and we make final adjustments. I agree with everything you had to say though, those would definitely make the mix more organic or for the better. Thanks for taking the time to break down your thoughts, opinions and ideas. I appreciate that. Thank you, Post by: maxim on April 30, 2008, 10:18:53 PM Post by: Greg Thompson on May 01, 2008, 07:48:00 AM Post by: ScotcH on May 01, 2008, 12:30:56 PM
|