R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => j. hall => Topic started by: j.hall on June 04, 2007, 11:00:49 am

Title: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 04, 2007, 11:00:49 am
*breathes deeply*

AHHHHHHH  fresh air..............

mixes are due wednesday 6/6/2007
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 04, 2007, 01:42:44 pm
Just curious what is the approx BPM of this. I ask because in order for me to import this into the Mackie HDR, I had to create a "new project". I did this in 16/44.1. Then I went back to an earlier post and discovered this project is at 48. which might give me a slower playback. It seems slow, but everything sounds natrual as far as timber goes. I hope I have time to do this. It took some time to learn to get the Rar converted and into the HDR, but now I have it down.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Red Tape on June 04, 2007, 01:50:00 pm
I'd just like to say that I can't believe the trash talk that was going on in the other thread.
J - Please pay these people no attention, and remember that the majority are delighted to take part in, or just observe the IMP process.

Dear fools..
If you don't like it, keep quiet and/or spend your time elsewhere.
Bitching about the song/rules is incredibly, incredibly lame.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: UnderTow on June 04, 2007, 02:16:03 pm
Chance, I've got it at 84 BPM.

Alistair
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 04, 2007, 02:23:47 pm
UnderTow wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 13:16

Chance, I've got it at 84 BPM.

Alistair



indeed.

it's 84bpm, sorry, i meant to post that earlier.

also, the tracks are 24bit i think.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 04, 2007, 03:23:05 pm
Since I imported it @ 16/44, would that make it appear to be slower?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: dconstruction on June 04, 2007, 03:32:17 pm
Yeah, by 8.125%:

44.1 / 48 = 91.875%

So it'd appear to be 77.175bpm.

Also, it'd sound lower by that same percentage.  That's real close to a half-step down:

100% (an octave) / 12 = 8.33%

L
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Iain Graham on June 04, 2007, 03:37:50 pm
Only if it wasn't sample rate converted.

If SRC was applied it'll be fine, if not it'll play back slow and a half step down like dconstruction said.

Can the mackie take external clock?

YOu couldd always clock it to a 48k source and force it back up.

Might be interestung if your board is digital though.....
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: audiosculpture on June 04, 2007, 05:27:02 pm
now that all of that's out of the way, let me say hi.  my name is tony, i am going to submit my first IMP this week.  i've wanted to participate in the past, but never had the time.  for what it's worth, i like the song a lot.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: scottoliphant on June 04, 2007, 06:46:34 pm
hey tony! welcome to the fun
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 04, 2007, 06:50:24 pm
j.hall wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 10:00

*breathes deeply*

AHHHHHHH  fresh air..............




J. is that around 9K?  Smile
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 04, 2007, 08:51:46 pm
J-Texas wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 18:50

j.hall wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 10:00

*breathes deeply*

AHHHHHHH  fresh air..............




J. is that around 9K?  Smile


Higher!

At last the mix is printed, saved to a safe spot and ready for the world to wallow in its crappiness.

I had a wonderful time stripping the female vocal from the awesome conversation that was going on. Too bad all i found out is that Newcastle was the drink of the night among other personal opinions about someones sister.

I keed I keed.



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 04, 2007, 09:53:10 pm
how much compression was applied to hear such conversations?

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 04, 2007, 10:00:23 pm
Fibes wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 19:51

Too bad all i found out is that Newcastle was the drink of the night...


Ahhh. This explains the need for the chaser of Antares!

Really though, the girl had a wonderful voice. I wanted to use her as the lead, but it didn't make sense at all times.

Cool track. I had fun. I can't wait for everyone to bruise it. That's the point of this thing, right? CONSTRUCTIVE criticism?

Shocked
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 04, 2007, 11:10:36 pm
j.hall wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 21:53

how much compression was applied to hear such conversations?




FWIW the only compression I used was on the 2 buss.


This is a compression and reverb free mix.


Oh and not one piece of processing (sans 2 buss) I've ever used before.
....and the tail of the bass track made for a great science experiment track.


Within everything there is opportunity come mix time.






49 hours til the reveal.








Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: chrisj on June 04, 2007, 11:23:39 pm
I had a lot of fun too, though I did absolutely nothing to change the arrangement. I can't imagine trying to turn this into something coherent- with lyrics like 'doctor please save me' it was clearly a fever dream and demanded to be treated as such Smile
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 04, 2007, 11:35:34 pm
chrisj wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 22:23

with lyrics like 'doctor please save me' it was clearly a fever dream and demanded to be treated as such Smile


I guess I read too much into it. I heard something about a Dad's Christmas present and thought maybe he wasn't doing too well. Mine got really dreamy with an angelic liftoff into the unknown at the end. I couldn't really make sense of the right synth. It wasn't in key, so I reversed it and used the parts that were with some delay and panning. A real space oddity to say the least. I was also able to do something with (only in my opinion) some lifeless organ. Add some EQ and space to it and then reversed a few of those parts and layered it very subtly. I was pleased with the arrangement. It really couldn't go anywhere else... it's not that type of song.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: yanik on June 05, 2007, 12:45:51 am
My mix will be available at the URL below. I've already uploaded it because I won't be anywhere near a computer for the next few days, but the link won't work until Wednesday. I hope it's alright. By the way I love the song.

http://stonedogsmusic.com/imp/
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 05, 2007, 03:27:46 am
Quote:

I had a lot of fun too, though I did absolutely nothing to change the arrangement. I can't imagine trying to turn this into something coherent- with lyrics like 'doctor please save me' it was clearly a fever dream and demanded to be treated as such Smile


i would agree, i didn't touch the arrangement.

and to whoever said something about 'conversations' in the tracks.   for whatever reason, i thought that was kind of cool, so i smashed the bass just so i COULD hear the convo.  Smile.......just my taste i guess......i'm stoked to hear what everyone did!!!
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: SingSing on June 05, 2007, 05:28:28 am
Loved the song J. Looking very much forward to hearing the interpretations of this one.

All the best,

Stefan
SingSing
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: maxim on June 05, 2007, 08:00:28 am
quite open to interpretation
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 05, 2007, 08:05:26 am
I blew it. I imported it as 16/44 and it's too slow. The bass drum sounded soo massive LOL. It's too late now to give it a shot. Now that I know the routine, I'll wait for #13
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Iain Graham on June 05, 2007, 08:28:01 am
Go with it. It's almost a perfect half step.

It'll be fine. No one else will have done it.....

Cos I do lots if instrumental trad Scottish stuff, I've been confused by this so many times.

No vocal so it sounds right either way.  Shocked  Confused  Laughing
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: audiosculpture on June 05, 2007, 08:42:38 am
CHANCE wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 08:05

I blew it. I imported it as 16/44 and it's too slow. The bass drum sounded soo massive LOL. It's too late now to give it a shot. Now that I know the routine, I'll wait for #13



i think you should go with the slow/low version too, it could be very cool.  i just realized i did not use the synth tracks (i missed them when i transferred the tracks from work computer to audio computer).
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: bblackwood on June 05, 2007, 09:51:17 am
Wouldn't tempo adjusments fall under arranging? It's not uncommon for people to change the overall feel of a mix by pitching it up or down (sometimes even as late as mastering).

I say post the 44.1 version- if you didn't think that the singer sounded like he just got shot in the neck with a tranquilizer dart then it might be cool...
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Devin Knutson on June 05, 2007, 10:25:24 am
I have absolutely fallen in love with the second... er, verse?  Stanza?  Phrase, I guess.  Smile

"to live ten thousand years..."

For me, that big giant sloppy kick wanted to be a focal point, kind of like an erratic heartbeat winding down (save me, doctor!)...

Do I win even more fabulous prizes by uploading at the stroke of midnight tonight?  I can't wait...
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 05, 2007, 10:47:12 am
i'm glad you guys are digging into the tune.  despite it's surface simplicity, it's a very complicated little ditty.

since i wrote everything including the lyrics, i can give you guys a lof of insight into the song itself.

please upload your slow version, i want to hear it.

chrisj and sidechain, digging into the lyrics for mix direction.......very nice!!!!!!

this song, and all the songs on the secret club record, are fairly tricky to decipher.  the music holds just as much value as the lyrics if you want to "find the point".  the unconventional arrangements are VERY intentional and in a lot of  ways, the lyrics are just used to create a secondary (or another) metaphor to the music.

so yes, the song was a xmas gift to my dad, his health was, and is currently, fine.  i wrote the song in the thick of writing the rest of the record and the rest of the band wanted it to open the record, it seemed to make sense to me, so we went with it.

i'll reveal more and answer any questions you have tomorrow.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 05, 2007, 10:47:23 am
I ended up going with the oddly balanced miking on the drums. Hard left and right with a sampled, low pass, kick up the middle. Then a little verb for space and depth. Pretty cool. Wacky.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: chrisj on June 05, 2007, 11:47:53 am
CHANCE wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 08:05

I blew it. I imported it as 16/44 and it's too slow. The bass drum sounded soo massive LOL. It's too late now to give it a shot. Now that I know the routine, I'll wait for #13


I did that once too, and posted it in the final lineup before realizing it, so you're ahead of the game Smile

Post it anyway! It's only a mistake, and on this song it might even work Smile
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: chrisj on June 05, 2007, 11:52:50 am
J-Texas wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 10:47

I ended up going with the oddly balanced miking on the drums. Hard left and right with a sampled, low pass, kick up the middle. Then a little verb for space and depth. Pretty cool. Wacky.


Likewise, with NO timing fixes, more verb and insane, insane compression all using my varimu clone. I have it squished so ridiculously that it's unrecognizable, and the loud hihat (spread aggressively into L and R by the miking) is my 'WTF' element- well one of them! I was like, can't make this 'nice', make it outrageous, on purpose Smile

Lastminute tweaks and daft ideas, engage...
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 05, 2007, 11:57:41 am
chrisj wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 10:52


can't make this 'nice', make it outrageous, on purpose Smile



now you're speaking my language.

often my favorite mixes are the ones with blatantly "wrong" things.

rich costey and tchad blake are SOOOOOOO  good at that.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: homerecordingodyssey on June 05, 2007, 07:51:37 pm
Okay my Mix is done and as someone with less then 12 months experience I am pretty happy with the end result.

I really didn't do too much to it. I panned the first synth from left to right and the second synth I reversed, added reverb and reversed back again then added stereo delay, seem to make it glue into the mix better. I also took the best kick sample from the left drum track and added it each time the kick was there to a third track to give a more pronounced kick. I also boosted the kick for the last 3 hits to finish with a more edgy crescendo.

I applied Camelphat to the drums but only subtly.

On the master bus I added colortone free with the SSL setting.

Added reverb to the vocals and that is about all apart from mixing and EQ, although I used next to no EQ anywhere.

I have no way of hosting this so how do I post it when the time comes? (It is Wednesday in Australia already does that count Smile

I know I can upload to your server but how do I link it in the tread?

Andrew
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 05, 2007, 08:57:21 pm


Man I am crankin' for some mix.

Can we please upload at midnight?

Signed,

Severely Stoked


Surprised
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 05, 2007, 10:27:23 pm
Just did a mix (slow speed) and the melody and vibe is eeriely haunting. Nothing going on here tonight so I left the console "as is" and will check it in the morning with fresh ears. I hope uploading is as simple as it looks (maybe like posting a jpg photo?)
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Brian Lloyd on June 06, 2007, 12:39:16 am
Sorry for uploading early but they cut off my internet overnight so i wanted to get it up before they give it the axe. Thanks J for an AMAZING track! i fell in love with it.

And thanks to Kim  Razz

Cant wait to hear all the mix's


Brian Lloyd
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: scottoliphant on June 06, 2007, 02:25:47 am
thank you very much j for contributing. i ended up squeezing the snot out of most of the tracks. a little out of the ordinary for me, but, seemed appropriate in this case. kept thinking of the low record fridmann did (destroyer?). Wanted that huge marching drum kick sound without using additional verb. J, your track almost made me spit my beverage all over my keyboard. heh. good times. looking forward to hearing the others.
thanks again!
scott
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: M Carter on June 06, 2007, 02:32:28 am
I'll upload mine first thing in the AM.

Definitely went in a diff direction than i expected at first...

Matt
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: WallyWest on June 06, 2007, 04:27:47 am
I was to late to enter this imp. But id just like to say that the song was quality.
Does anyone happen to know what album the track was off? id be interested in getting a hold of it. Cheers.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: ATOR on June 06, 2007, 05:31:22 am

I had a good time doin this one. I went for a somewhat ethereal sound, the song seemed somewhat like a prayer. And no I'm not talking about the Madonna song  Very Happy

Now let's see what wild stuff everyone comes up with.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: UnderTow on June 06, 2007, 06:51:54 am
Mine is uploaded too. This was fun. Smile

Off to download whats allready been uploaded...

Alistair
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: a.g.p on June 06, 2007, 08:27:37 am
Hi,

Wanted to introduce myself to everyone.  This is my first IMP and I enjoyed it very much. I mixed the song fairly straight forward since I liked the way the tracks worked together as is.

I look forward to hearing the other mixes and receiving some comments!

Anthony
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: BigMetal on June 06, 2007, 09:00:16 am
hello everyone!  i'm a bit of a lurker/newb... thought i'd give it a try.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: UnderTow on June 06, 2007, 10:05:38 am
So which mix is J's and which one is Vlad's?  Very Happy

Alistair
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Careful Collapse on June 06, 2007, 10:08:14 am
UnderTow wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 09:05

So which mix is J's and which one is Vlad's?  Very Happy

Alistair


lol, EXACTLY my first thought
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 06, 2007, 10:09:15 am
WallyWest wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 03:27

I was to late to enter this imp. But id just like to say that the song was quality.
Does anyone happen to know what album the track was off? id be interested in getting a hold of it. Cheers.





the song is on a record by the band "the secret club"  the album is called "the sunday suite"

it's the only record we did, and it's available on iTunes, CDbaby or through our website

http://www.thesecretclubhouse.com/

the mix that's on the record is quite different then the one i did for IMP and the overall feel of the record is pretty dark.  
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: dconstruction on June 06, 2007, 10:42:17 am
Quote:

So which mix is J's and which one is Vlad's?


Man-oh-man!  It's hard not to comment on Vlad's work.

--

Mine will be up after lunch today.  Left the stupid disc at home.

L
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 06, 2007, 02:01:07 pm
Is the process of uploading as simple as it seems? Or am I going to be in for some surprises. I will only have a few minutes to do this during a session (on a break)
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 06, 2007, 02:08:05 pm
CHANCE wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 14:01

Is the process of uploading as simple as it seems? Or am I going to be in for some surprises. I will only have a few minutes to do this during a session (on a break)


Yes, it should be very simple.

Export your mix as a 192kbps mp3, then upload it to the PSW server.

Open up the IMP page...

http://www.prosoundweb.com/imp/

username: psw-imp
password: imp!234

Click the Browse button, and locate your mp3 file on your computer.

Click Upload!

Of course, we are talking bout computers, and they're always ready with more surprises if you want surprises.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 06, 2007, 02:17:54 pm
Hmmm I burned it to a CD. I have it on my MAC desktop as wav. It's also in my Itunes library
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: blueboy on June 06, 2007, 02:39:06 pm
Excellent mix Fibes!
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 06, 2007, 02:46:11 pm
CHANCE wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 14:17

Hmmm I burned it to a CD. I have it on my MAC desktop as wav. It's also in my Itunes library


Do you have an mp3 encoder?  I think LAME encoder is available for the mac, or itunes or quicktime can do it.  

Just googling around, I think this one will work...
http://philippe.laval.free.fr/DropMP3/index_en.php

Mac folks, can someone help Chance through this part?

Cheers,
-G

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: NelsonL on June 06, 2007, 03:13:14 pm
Chance, there are better ways to do this-- (download Audacity and get the LAME codec-- thanks again Chris J.)

But...

You can open iTunes, go into advanced prefs, importing, import as MP3, set to 192 khz (stereo, 96khz dual mono) and then reimport your mix into iTunes from CD as an mp3.

It'll stash the file in your iTunes library which may be slightly harder to find-- but if you ctl click on the song in iTunes I think it will reveal the file location.

If that doesn't work you could always burn an mp3 disk from your current .wav file (iTunes prefs, burning)and then copy it to your desktop to upload. I'm on a PC this afternoon otherwise I'd be able to be more exact about how to find the file location through iTunes. In windows it's in the right click menu, which usually corresponds to ctrl click on a Mac.

Liam
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 06, 2007, 03:18:05 pm
Wow, so much cool stuff and so many files I'm gonna need a Cipher to figure out whozizwhat.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: M Carter on June 06, 2007, 03:25:22 pm
so... how did everyone approach this one going in ?

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 06, 2007, 03:41:21 pm
Quote:

Do you have an mp3 encoder? I think LAME encoder is available for the mac, or itunes or quicktime can do it.

Just googling around, I think this one will work...
http://philippe.laval.free.fr/DropMP3/index_en.php

Mac folks, can someone help Chance through this part?

Cheers,
-G


there is a program called "Switch" for Mac OS X.  just google it, it's all over the place, i think i got it at pure-mac.com



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 06, 2007, 04:01:28 pm
M Carter wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 15:25

so... how did everyone approach this one going in ?




I based the entire mix around the hiss from the last 15 seconds of the bass track.


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: mcsnare on June 06, 2007, 04:11:52 pm
Nice.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: M Carter on June 06, 2007, 04:33:57 pm
Yeah, and if you listen to closely you can here the pre delay off of the pre fader reverb send of the clog solo I mentioned before.  

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 06, 2007, 04:38:22 pm
M Carter wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 14:25

so... how did everyone approach this one going in ?




I didn't want to make any excuses for the living room sound and cover it up. Just jumped in a tried to make the best of what was there. Make it sound as cool as I could. The "heavier" mix was an assload more compression on the bass for sustain and not quite such a harsh split on the drums. Both are decent to me.

Propers:

Vlad, whoever did the tricked out mix. The Cure sounding guitar is what I liked.

AGP - Cool "Peppers" guitar sound

garret - Cool male vox

mcsnare - Cool drums

scottoliphant - Nailed the snare sound

J. - You're too close to it. Sounds great. Especially the guitars and vox. They cut.

Let's get stems of these elements (except the Cure guitar) and make a mega mix!  Very Happy

I've listened twice. Good job everyone. I hope everybody had as much fun as me.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: iCombs on June 06, 2007, 04:46:41 pm
HERE WE GO!!!  ROUND 1:

Brian Lloyd - I'm not sure I like the cutting on the arrangement, especially when the edits aren't quite in time.  It doesn't sound like you found the element that tied everything together and built on it, you just cut stuff up.

Greg Dixon - Tasteful edting...I like the cuts into the arrangement.  The mix is straightforward.  I like the way you worked with the thickness of the recordings.  Everything sounds well-placed.  My only bitch is that this mix feels like it's looking for that one thing to take it up over the top.  Find that and you're golden.

McSnare - Another good edit job on the arrangement.  I like the cleaner intro.  Those delays on the drums sound like someone's spinning a whip in front of a stereo pair of something.  The unbalance of the mix is really cool.  I'm not sure I quite have the nads to leave a mix as asymmetrical as this.  I LOVE the smack on the snare drum...lemme guess...samples?  Not sure I like the super-brittle guitar texture, but otherwise, yet another killer mix.

Bennals - OMG the treatment at the top is lush. The dimension between the big bass and guitar and the kinda smallish vocal is GREAT.  Unfortunately, the drums don't feel like they keep the promise that the intro made. This is also an incredibly hot mix.  You didn't like much in the male vocal, huh?  Rough.  Not bad, but the drums don't feel like they belong to the rest of the track.  The cymbal crashes get a bit distracting, as well.

BigMetal - It kinda sounds like you just threw up the faders and panned stuff and called it a day.  Plus or minus some reverb.  The vocals sit too far back in the mix...and this is coming from a guy who's pretty notorious for burying vocals.  Get 'em up front where I can hear them.  Start there, because I'll tell you that they are the most important thing in this track.

Billybehdaz - another cut into the intro.  Nobody liked that?  huh.  So far, this might be the darkest mix I've listened to.  Again, those vocals are critical to this.  Without them, this is a song of three or four chords and 2 parts.

Careful Collapse - No organ in the intro.  Nice.  Kinda the opposite of what I did.  Wow.  Holy crap is there shit ALL OVER those drums.  Interesting way to feature that.  I think the delay on the female vocals is about twice as fast as it needs to be.  Wow...all that filtering on the guitar is cool, but the way it's used feels a little distracting...maybe because I can only hear bits and pieces of it...if you can find a way to keep it more obvious and still unobtrusive, it'll be a cool effect.  No organ ANYWHERE, huh?  Gutsy...kinda leaves it empty.  That slowdown ending is sweet, though.

DarkHorsePorter - More vocals.  Get 'em up there.  They're laying flat in the back of the track.  Everything feels pretty flat, and the guitars are pretty much dominating the mix.  They aren't what's important or dramatic in this song, at least not to the point where they should be the loudest part of it.

Devin K - Interesting treatment of that organ at the top.  I kinda like the cuts.  Another one where the vocals are too far back.  Bring them forward.  Both in terms of brightness and volume.  Vocal arrangement ideas are good, but they need to be executed more seamlessly.

Jason Thompson - interesting cuts on that bassline at the top.  Beatles, much?  Except Ringo's kit was always on the left.  The organ in the verse sounds weird.  Like a delay that's drunk and stumbling on itself.  I like the use of synths in the ending, but that feels like it needs more drama to me.  

J_Hall - WAIT.  Nevermind.

M Carter - Looks like you win the shortest edit award.  Damn that's a lot of bottom end.  And those vocals are something else.  HISSSSSSSSS.  BREATHE IN...kinda minimal...no female vox, huh?  unusual.  Everyone else seemed to be so fond of them.  I like how you found an idea and ran full-bore with it.  I'm not 100% sure it's my favorite mix of the bunch yet, but I'll definitely applaud you're sticking to a theme!

Scott Oliphant - Big dark drums.  Normal arrangement.  Vox are a touch dark for me.  Other that that, solid mix.  Sorry if the commentary on this feels a bit shortish, but you basically put up a good solid mix that's generally well executed but doesn't do anything unexpected.

TW - Bring the vocals up.  Don't be afraid to turn up the high end on some of it, too.  It needs the help as far as clarity is concerned.

AGP - Vocals are up.  Another asymmetrical mix.  Until the end.  Interesting.  The guitars feel brittle.  Woulda been nice to hear some more girth out of those. The female vox feel a little dark to me.  



ATOR - Like the treatment.  Clear.  You managed all the saturation well.  I like the delay work.  Great work with the ethereal aspects.  So far, you've done the best blending of the synthetic aspects with the acoustic aspects.

---------------------

Oops...looks like I have some real work to get done.  I'll pick this up later, but this should be a good start.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: leester on June 06, 2007, 04:48:20 pm
I took it as "what can I get done in short order without obsessing for a month like I normally do..." which meant pretty much au natural.

Grabbed it Tuesday, spent 2 hours mixing, 3 more hours second-guessing and learnin' to live with the mess I made.  

The drums 'n bass was speakin' to me, so there's prolly way too much now.  Tracks seemed 'thin' (to me) so all the comp'n was done in the low-end.  Not sure who that voice is, but I think I've mixed something with her before? Anyhoo - loved it.  Both of 'em.  Guy voice, nice compliment - left it.  Organ, too loud / distracting, buried it.  Hi-hat from hell?  Loved it, left it.  Juno-60 sounding keys?  Confused the heck outta me, at least as they were.  Figured somebody wanted 'em in there (or they were a clever distraction) so I just put 'em where they made more sense (to me) in a kinda swirling 'round the toilet ending.  Guitars... almost forgot to un-mute 'em, so when I did towards the end, I just made 'em fit with what I had going.  

Lyrically, the only thing I noticed was the 'Save me' and eventually the "please doctor" (male vox was kinda buried) and I re-used that lil clip on the outta-whack ending.  

Had to leave it sit yesterday (boy's graduation) and when I listened back this morning in the car, I figured I'd go ahead and put it up.  

Speed and completion was kinda the issue for me, since it's a weak spot of mine.  Is it done?  Done enough, especially considering there's a load of mixes from everybody else.  Didn't make sense to obsess over it, but rather "do what I do... and fast" then see what y'all think I did right or wrong.  

Had a blast either way, and this'n pulled me outta lurk mode for the REP.  Keep 'em coming.  

loved it
lees
(PS - just fixed the link to my server AND uploaded it to PSW)
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: WallyWest on June 06, 2007, 05:11:02 pm
i checked out the album J and it was stellar. Its a shame you guys only did the one album. The guitar tone is something special.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: M Carter on June 06, 2007, 05:23:03 pm
Ian -  I appreciate the feedback man.  The song just didn't pull me in the radio rock production that it seemed to pull everyone else.   I purposely pulled up all the hiss between the 2 verses... like you noticed,  I figured if I was going to go lofi, go all the way lofi.

On second listen, there may be a tad bit much in the low end huh?

I haven't had a chance to listen to the other mixes yet, will do when I get outta the office.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: homerecordingodyssey on June 06, 2007, 05:24:43 pm
Well that was great fun, never mixed anything like that before. When is the next IMP Smile

Listened to nearly all of them, will listen to the rest when I get home from work.

Andrew
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 06, 2007, 05:39:08 pm
iCombs wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 15:46

HERE WE GO!!!  ROUND 1:

Jason Thompson - interesting cuts on that bassline at the top.  Beatles, much?  Except Ringo's kit was always on the left.  The organ in the verse sounds weird.  Like a delay that's drunk and stumbling on itself.  I like the use of synths in the ending, but that feels like it needs more drama to me.


Like the critique.

I tightened up the panning on the Ringo skins in the "Heavier" mix. The "weird" organ was supposed to sound more like a pad. It sounded really drone and monotonous to me. I wanted it to swim and be dreamy. To me, if the synths had any more EQ than what I cut, they would sound like a synth on top of a mix. Too poked out for me man.

By the way... that's just where I was coming from. I AM DEFINITELY NOT TRYING TO DEFEND MYSELF. I really do like the critique. Much obliged partner.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Brian Lloyd on June 06, 2007, 05:43:23 pm
Ian - Thanks for the input. this was my first imp and my first experience in the world of "indie" rock. personally i couldn't tie it all together but oh well. i stand by it...good or bad. listening to the mixes now and will post findings soon.

Thanks to all that have submitted.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: bennals on June 06, 2007, 06:15:18 pm
iCombs wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 15:46



Bennals -   You didn't like much in the male vocal, huh?  Rough.  




Thanks for the feedback Ian.  I'm pretty inexperienced at this.  It wasn't so much that I didn't like the male vocal, more that I fell in love with the female vocal and the way it was working with the guitars and bass.  I agree, my efforts with the drums were ordinary.  What I settled on was maybe the fourth reworking from the ground up but I still could have spent more time on them for sure.  The cymbal and ride samples were an attempt at glueing it all together I guess.  I'll be listening to everyone else's tonight.  Looking forward to it.

Bill.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: mcsnare on June 06, 2007, 07:28:52 pm
Thanks Ian! I liked a lot of them this time around. I'll try to find time to listen and critique.
Dave
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 06, 2007, 08:28:35 pm
mcsnare wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 19:28

Thanks Ian! I liked a lot of them this time around. I'll try to find time to listen and critique.
Dave


Your mix is great D. Totally pro.

I see we both touched the drums with DDL.

Should I feel left out that Ian didn't comment on mine?


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: mcsnare on June 06, 2007, 09:54:10 pm
Kev, the first thing I noticed about yours (after the tres creepy intro and V1) was that delay on the drums. Great minds......
Dave
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: M Carter on June 06, 2007, 10:20:23 pm
Yeah, i gotta hand it to Fibes, the drum delay was great on that one.  What delay did you use?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 06, 2007, 10:41:21 pm
WallyWest wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 16:11

i checked out the album J and it was stellar. Its a shame you guys only did the one album. The guitar tone is something special.



we will be doing an EP some time this year to document where things left off in the process of writing the next record when the singer and drummer were asked to leave.

we're in another project for fun, and when it's over, the club will rejoin and continue on.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 06, 2007, 10:47:25 pm
iCombs wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 15:46


J_Hall - WAIT.  Nevermind.



ok, either i'm missing something, or vlad registerd yet another user name and was caught yet agian by fletcher, ernie and/or brad.

fill me in please, i was out all day.

by the way, i posted twice, the second post of mine is that mix by "yanik"

BTW, of course i'm too close to this, my mix represents what i wanted the song to convey emotionally.

i'm loving what i'm hearing guys.  i was really nervous doing this with my own song, but i couldn't be happier with everyone's creativity.

maybe i should toss up another secret club tune in a few months.

i need to dig in to these.  this time i want to give some "artist" type feedback.  i want my critiques to be more "emotional content" based then straight technique.

fibes has joined us (after much bugging by me, and his schedule opening up) i'd like him to provide some of the technique based critiques.  his mix really blows me away.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: scottoliphant on June 06, 2007, 11:06:20 pm
2 tracks, one with an underscore. i was slow at first myself. i thought you threw us for a loop =) was cool hearing everyones take, gonna wait for the stragglers and dive into this tomorrow
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: iCombs on June 07, 2007, 12:48:14 am
Quote:

ok, either i'm missing something, or vlad registerd yet another user name and was caught yet agian by fletcher, ernie and/or brad.

fill me in please, i was out all day.



Yeah.  Vlad posted a mix with your name on it.  I'm not going to comment publicly, but if you get a chance to listen, it's still on the PSW server.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: briefcasemanx on June 07, 2007, 01:08:16 am
Hey mcsnare, what did you use for compression and delay on the vox?

What did you use for chorus on the female vox at the beginning?

I like that snare A LOT. What did you do there?

Sorry if there's too many questions.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: maxim on June 07, 2007, 02:01:04 am
thanks for the tune, j

i had a real "cocteau twins" moment with  it

if it was you singing, i apologise for giving jen the lead vocal role and placing you in the back of the room



"it's still on the PSW server."

it's the 12" club remix

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: mcsnare on June 07, 2007, 08:14:51 am
I kinda liked Vlad's, but it's not a mix. It's a REMIX. That is not what IMP is about. It's a shame he is such a prickly pear.

Briefcasemanx, I used a UAD 1176 plugin. J.'s voc got a little MoogerFooger Analog Delay plug for ambience and then Echo Boy added on the choruses. The female voc got Echo Boy, and then on the end part I added dual mono H949 Eventide plugs. In all I think I used 3 Echo Boys and 2 Mooger Fooger delays to get things to swim a bit.
The snare has a tiny bit of a Ludwig Black Beauty sample added in.
The bass drum also has a bit of a sample added.
Dave
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 07, 2007, 08:21:40 am
I went in a different direction on this. First, it was at 44 which slowed it down. The bass drum's decay sounded like verb. I was getting more ideas as I progressed and wanted to add triggered 1/8's off the HH. I just finished a movie sound track and I think I was still in "soundtrack mode" LOL. I would loved to have had some time to spend on this.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: leester on June 07, 2007, 10:17:16 am
I listened to 29 of 'em last night at least once.

There were a few I have some specific questions on "how'd you do that?" and some where the vox (both male & female) were perfect.  

Kept looping them until I heard one I really liked, then 'blindly' put it to the end of the list.  I whittled down the list until there were 5 left, plus mine and j.halls.  

The ones I remember sticking out were Fibes, undertow, and three others that the mixer name escapes me ATM.  (I'll check 'em again when I get back to the house.)  I also enjoyed Vlad's(?), I understand that was the dance remix, but that wasn't the point of the exercise.  

Already learned a lil bout my own mixing preferences by comparison.  Y'all sure like the verb.   Laughing  That, and I'm skeert of them upper-mids and tend to mix around 'em for safety sake.  I blame the 20/20's.   Laughing

There was some really really interesting interpretations.  I was surprised how seemingly few picked the female vox as the lead, but as another poster mentioned, I kinda fell in love with it - and that's obvious in mine.  

ANyhoo - looks like I got a few more to listen to, and I'll get the names & specific questions together later.  

Thanks fer the tune J!  I wouldn't mind doing one of these every other week.  

lees

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 07, 2007, 10:42:34 am
iCombs wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 21:48

Quote:

ok, either i'm missing something, or vlad registerd yet another user name and was caught yet agian by fletcher, ernie and/or brad.

fill me in please, i was out all day.



Yeah.  Vlad posted a mix with your name on it.  I'm not going to comment publicly, but if you get a chance to listen, it's still on the PSW server.



Which is Vlad's?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Careful Collapse on June 07, 2007, 10:59:25 am
Quote:

Which is Vlad's?


It's assumed this one; don't know who else would have done this!  http://www.prosoundweb.com/imp/files/IMP12_JHall.mp3
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 07, 2007, 11:34:52 am
j.hall wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 21:47

BTW, of course i'm too close to this, my mix represents what i wanted the song to convey emotionally.


My friend Wes and I were just talking about this 5 minutes ago. It's really hard to tell where people are coming from in type.

I don't know you man, so I can't tell. You snappy? I was being sarcastic. It's your song dude... of course your mix represents your feelings best. Do you think I would expect that one of these other mixes would make you say something like: "Damn! That's what I meant to do. I was totally wrong. What was I thinking?"  Smile

My buddy said his sarcasm doesn't translate well over the internet, that's why he doesn't write much.

Take what I say with a grain of salt. Everyone will know when I'm not joking. You can hear it in my voice. I mean, see it in my fingers. Well, you'll just sense it by what I write. No, that won't work either. You'll just have to get to know me. Yes. Definitely. That will work.

Sincerely yours,

Vlad... I mean Jason  Very Happy

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 07, 2007, 11:39:17 am
Careful Collapse wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 09:59

Quote:

Which is Vlad's?


It's assumed this one; don't know who else would have done this!  http://www.prosoundweb.com/imp/files/IMP12_JHall.mp3


Man, this sounded like someone hijacked the Starship Enterprise and took it to AcidPlanet!  Rolling Eyes

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 07, 2007, 12:17:23 pm
40 submissions!  Ack.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 07, 2007, 12:41:33 pm

CHANCE! Absolutely wicked dude! That scared the hell out of me. I had to turn around and look over my shoulder once. The "please doctor" thing is great too. I'm glad you turned it in after all!

Kim - Killer punch-boom-depth on the kick... love it.

Nick - I like your use of compression on this. Instead of taming those hats, the snare got pushed up with it. Very cool.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: craig boychuk on June 07, 2007, 01:21:23 pm
Man, this is fun. Just sifting through all these mixes now. Talk about different strokes! ha ha!

This is one of the first mixes I've done with my new monitors, so if anyone ends up listening to my submission I welcome comments on the overall frequency balance...too much lf, not enough, dull, bright, etc etc.... I haven't listened to this mix on any other system, so I'm interested to see how it'll translate.

Thanks for contributing to this IMP, everyone!

-craig

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 07, 2007, 01:52:18 pm
craig wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 12:21

This is one of the first mixes I've done with my new monitors, so if anyone ends up listening to my submission I welcome comments on the overall frequency balance...too much lf, not enough, dull, bright, etc etc.... I haven't listened to this mix on any other system, so I'm interested to see how it'll translate.



Craig,

I think the new monitors are lying to you about the mids and highs. Maybe a freq adjustment or not so much overcompensating if it sounds too brittle to you in the room. The vox are a little burried too. Probably the mid thing. Check it out.

ps. I love the cranked up drama at the end. Very cool indeed.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Careful Collapse on June 07, 2007, 01:55:44 pm
Quote:

welcome comments on the overall frequency balance
 More obvious to me was the stereo balance; it sounds like everything in the center is too low in the mix; drums, bass, and vox
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: BigMetal on June 07, 2007, 02:39:02 pm
iCombs wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 16:46

HERE WE GO!!!  ROUND 1:

BigMetal - It kinda sounds like you just threw up the faders and panned stuff and called it a day.  Plus or minus some reverb.  The vocals sit too far back in the mix...and this is coming from a guy who's pretty notorious for burying vocals.  Get 'em up front where I can hear them.  Start there, because I'll tell you that they are the most important thing in this track.




I wish I had faders!!  badump pshh!  I'm always guilty of mixes being too even.  All the subtleties are too subtle because I think my mind tricks me (I know they're there so I hear them louder).  I guess I didn't get the point of the exercise when I approached the mix.  This isn't a knock on anyone, but many of the mixes seem like the "mix as a performance" is outplaying the actual performances.  When I threw up the faders I heard a vibe that was vulnerable and shaky... leaving the mix more stripped down seemed appropriate.  In hindsight I do agree that the vocals should be the focus.  I need help making things sound bigger.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: iCombs on June 07, 2007, 04:03:43 pm
BigMetal wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 13:39

iCombs wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 16:46

HERE WE GO!!!  ROUND 1:

BigMetal - It kinda sounds like you just threw up the faders and panned stuff and called it a day.  Plus or minus some reverb.  The vocals sit too far back in the mix...and this is coming from a guy who's pretty notorious for burying vocals.  Get 'em up front where I can hear them.  Start there, because I'll tell you that they are the most important thing in this track.




I wish I had faders!!  badump pshh!  I'm always guilty of mixes being too even.  All the subtleties are too subtle because I think my mind tricks me (I know they're there so I hear them louder).  I guess I didn't get the point of the exercise when I approached the mix.  This isn't a knock on anyone, but many of the mixes seem like the "mix as a performance" is outplaying the actual performances.  When I threw up the faders I heard a vibe that was vulnerable and shaky... leaving the mix more stripped down seemed appropriate.  In hindsight I do agree that the vocals should be the focus.  I need help making things sound bigger.


Well, "the mix as a performance" is kinda what we're about here.  It's not a contest to see who gets it the "most right."  It's about flexing your muscles as a mix engineer and doing it the way YOU hear it...not the way you anticipate that the "client" wants to hear it.  This, at least for me has been huge as far as helping me create a sort of identity as a mix engineer, as I'm not looking to satisfy anyone but myself.  I've learned a lot about instinct...and I'm learning both how to trust my instinct and hone it so that when I go by my gut, my head comes with.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: dconstruction on June 07, 2007, 04:30:50 pm
Hmm, I totally see it as a contest as to who gets it "most right."  I mean, for a non-contest.  I can flex my muscles all I want - but I may be exercising the wrong ones.   I think realizing the performance is "vulnerable and shaky" is exactly the "right" thing to do, versus, say, proclaim, "this song, it no work; needs everything wrong made right," and then come up with Vlad's Euro-beat thing.  Or even  UnderTow's - a mixer I have *enormous* respect for sonically.

I guess, in short, I wouldn't hire a "performance" mixer, and I wouldn't ask one to teach me anything other than their gimmicks.

Now, all that said, I'm pretty sure I did not get it "the most right."

L
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Billybehdaz on June 07, 2007, 04:51:54 pm
dconstruction wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 15:30

Hmm, I totally see it as a contest as to who gets it "most right."  I mean, for a non-contest.  I can flex my muscles all I want - but I may be exercising the wrong ones.   I think realizing the performance is "vulnerable and shaky" is exactly the "right" thing to do, versus, say, proclaim, "this song, it no work; needs everything wrong made right," and then come up with Vlad's Euro-beat thing.  Or even  UnderTow's - a mixer I have *enormous* respect for sonically.

I guess, in short, I wouldn't hire a "performance" mixer, and I wouldn't ask one to teach me anything other than their gimmicks.

Now, all that said, I'm pretty sure I did not get it "the most right."

L



As a new guy here, I don't want to get too opinionated, but I would have to agree with this.  I didn't see this as a "make it sound how I want it to" thing, but a "what is the artist going for", and how best can I bring that out.  Isn't that what mixing someone else's song all about?  Not trying to make it your own, but serving the song?

Having said that - I went way stripped down, cutting out a lot of the tracks for a more intimate feel, which I thought served the song best.  I was surprised at other's interpretations, most were much more "produced" then I thought was called for, but what do I know?

BTW, I've listened to about half, and I think I like Tom C's the best, based on what I've stated above.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 07, 2007, 04:58:28 pm
j-texas, you'll learn in time how laid back i am.  i was merely admitting my closeness to the track and why my mix ended up the way it did.

iCombs and deconstruction, you are both right.  the topic is really good, and i'm happy to see it come it.

think of your opinions as two ditches.  to me, they are both on the extreme end of what i consider a "mixer" to be (or at least consider myself to be).  the ground in between those two ditches is where you need to attempt to stay.

IMP is designed to teach you guys the ground inbetween the ditches by showing the ditches themselves.

you only get to see the ditches through other people's mixes.

WOW, i feel all king-fu now.

41 submissions!!!!!!!!!!!!

this is going to kill me.

mcsnare and i spoke on the phone today about a lot of things circling this imp, dave, would you mind sharing your comments about the lead vocal?  i think people could learn a lot from that.  use fibes' mix as your example.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 07, 2007, 05:03:14 pm
Billybehdaz wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 15:51


Isn't that what mixing someone else's song all about?  Not trying to make it your own, but serving the song?




indeed, but don't sell short the fact that YOU are the medium of what exactly serves the song best.........this topic will get you looking down a rather deep rabbit hole

Quote:


Having said that - I went way stripped down, cutting out a lot of the tracks for a more intimate feel, which I thought served the song best.  I was surprised at other's interpretations, most were much more "produced" then I thought was called for, but what do I know?



i haven't listened to yours yet, but as the artist i would say you made a wise choice.

the song itself is trying to project simplicity to convey it's somberness, the outro to this song is SO important.  it's the clincher.  i'll get to that later.


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 07, 2007, 05:45:26 pm
careful collapse, i love he drum treatments.   blowing them out was a cool idea, i like how it enhances the intent of the drums for the song.  they sorta plod along painting a picture all their own.

the thing that gets me as an artist is all the bleeps and bloops you add.  while it was a cool idea to add dimention, you took a song about a young boy seeking attention froma work-aholic father, and turned it into a lonely robot crying itself a river (A.I. style.....blue fairy, make me a real boy blue fairy)

the outro of this song was written to bring resolve.  where the song seems to be over (synth part and even more sparse drumming) and where you might think our story ends in an awkard relationship, we launch into a more triumphant outro.  so where you think the song is depressing and rather one dimensional, the outro serves to add the second chapter to the story, increasing the songs depth, and twisting something sad, into something rather good.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: ATOR on June 07, 2007, 05:50:49 pm
I don't think there is one right way to mix a track. The great thing about music is that recorded performances will evoke different feelings with everyone. It's obvious if you listen to the wildly varying results from this IMP.

Every mix engineer interpreted it his own way, everyone heard different things in it. I didn't hear 'shakey and vulnerable' but more of a 'love and surrender' thing. Some picked the man as lead, some the woman, some felt the lead vox needed distortion and the list goes on and on.

No one but the artist himself knows how he meant it and sometimes they don't even know it. I interpreted IMP10 as trip because I heard the chorus lyrics as "Love's lucid fire". If I had known the lyrics actually were "Love losing fight" I would have made a different mix  Razz

I'm guilty of overproducing this track but for me it is how it feels right. For me it is where the tracks wanted to go, not because I wanted to flex my mixing muscles.

The part where I do flex my mixmuscles, for what it's worth, is trying to get the sound I want as good as I can get it, even if it's lo-fi.

I also don't think overproduced and intimate are opposites. I do think that you're missing the point if the production gets in the way of the vibe of the recorded tracks.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 07, 2007, 05:52:45 pm

DAMN!! I DEMAND A FULL RE-MIX FROM MYSELF IMMEDIATELY!  Laughing

I wish I knew the answers to the test before I started.

iCombs - Now I know where you were coming from with the SFX outro being more pronounced.

So when is IMP-13 again?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Careful Collapse on June 07, 2007, 05:54:32 pm
Quote:

turned it into a lonely robot crying itself a river



lol, I thought it kinda sounded like a song by the Super Furry Animals, so I ran the guitar through a filter.  Oh well
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Billybehdaz on June 07, 2007, 06:14:21 pm
ATOR wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 16:50

I don't think there is one right way to mix a track. The great thing about music is that recorded performances will evoke different feelings with everyone. It's obvious if you listen to the wildly varying results from this IMP.




Yeah, you're absolutely right, I hope my post didn't come off like I was saying that.  I guess I'm just surprised by the variety in the mixes. With my limited mixing experience, I could only see it going one way, which was the way I took it.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: iCombs on June 07, 2007, 06:47:06 pm
J-Texas wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 16:52


DAMN!! I DEMAND A FULL RE-MIX FROM MYSELF IMMEDIATELY!  Laughing

I wish I knew the answers to the test before I started.

iCombs - Now I know where you were coming from with the SFX outro being more pronounced.

So when is IMP-13 again?



Therein lies the point of the whole exercise...next time around, you'll ask youself "what does this need?"  and if you've taken anything away from this, the picture will come a little bit clearer...your instincts will sharpen and you'll marry your intstincts to your brain and muscles and then the song.  

I haven't gotten a chance to get back to listening...but hopefully once I get through the weekend, I can post reviews and stuff...for now, I'll have to be satisfied by waxing philosophic.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: iCombs on June 07, 2007, 06:51:40 pm
j.hall wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 15:58

j-texas, you'll learn in time how laid back i am.  i was merely admitting my closeness to the track and why my mix ended up the way it did.

iCombs and deconstruction, you are both right.  the topic is really good, and i'm happy to see it come it.

think of your opinions as two ditches.  to me, they are both on the extreme end of what i consider a "mixer" to be (or at least consider myself to be).  the ground in between those two ditches is where you need to attempt to stay.

IMP is designed to teach you guys the ground inbetween the ditches by showing the ditches themselves.

you only get to see the ditches through other people's mixes.

WOW, i feel all king-fu now.

41 submissions!!!!!!!!!!!!

this is going to kill me.

mcsnare and i spoke on the phone today about a lot of things circling this imp, dave, would you mind sharing your comments about the lead vocal?  i think people could learn a lot from that.  use fibes' mix as your example.



I absolutely agree with you, J.  I just want to clarify and say that I in no way am an advocate of vladwankery in mixes...however, in the realm of IMP I'm more willing to go absolutely balls-out in the name and spirit of learning.  Here, we don't have clients to alienate.  So we can focus on our craft...and in some cases, if we feel the song calls for it, go absolutely balls-out-bonkers on a mix to find out if our instincts are worth trusting.  That way, when we take out instincts back to the land where the money is, we'll have that off-the-deep-end experience to call upon to perhaps bring that one great element of spice to a mix that makes the client go, "DAMN..I never woulda thought of that but that's amazing...can I pay you double?"
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Kim Watson on June 07, 2007, 08:34:05 pm
Hey

Thanks J-Texas

The kick sound I was trying to go for was inspired by Aereogramme, "your always welcome" (album "my heart has a wish you would not go" <- wicked album btw)

have a listen you'll hear what I was tryng to get at... they added a delay to it aswell but that gave me some hastle so I pulled it.

knew it would fit the track when I heard it.

Kim
x

PS im gonna go through them all at somepoint tomorrow.... these shows im doing just get in the way!
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: maxim on June 07, 2007, 09:26:42 pm
my favourite is chance's

i never thought that downsampling would add such an unsettling flavour to the piece

it is a very "stephen king" mix



j, maybe it would be a good idea to state the background, or a "mission statement" with the tracks, so the mixer is aware of what the song is actually about BEFORE rather than after the mix?

maybe not...
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: chrisj on June 07, 2007, 09:37:16 pm
Oh my god, 41 entries. Kill me now Very Happy Okay, I am Mr. A&R guy with a briefcase of tapes from potential mixers, and I'm going through these like a buzzsaw. As usual not about the technical, more about whether I'm catching a vibe. Also, good mood so this time I'm not going to be like "WTF is this strange filenaming convention? *toss*" ...actually I'm going to be curious how everybody handles the synth digression, so this is going to take forever, plus J says it's all about the outro. Yay, hurt me more...

81328_briefcasemanximp12- wtf is this 81328? Very Happy boy, upfront and solid. Are we trying to pretend this is like a real band? Not into leaning on the keyboards this way, they are boring and sit there. This doesn't work as a straight mix, wonder how many others are straight.

Brian_Lloyd_The_Space_Doctor- Major major arrangement tweaks. It's dragging it out even more and making it even more static. Whoa, lyrics are seriously altered by rearranging lines! I can't approve, the song's lyric-driven and not that way by mistake. It's got few enough images already, you can't simply take them away arbitrarily.

craig_imp12- Very very gentle, but it feels like a mistake or monitoring issues, not a decision. Hey, there's the aggression- the whole outro is a huge contrast! I don't think it's executed well but I completely get what's being attempted. I don't think that has much to do with the song but I'm starting to think this song is way harder than it looked...

Greg_Dixon_IMP12- Something about this isn't interesting, as if it's trying hard to build the mix out of the performances, as if they are supposed to be rock performances in a normal rock context. The way the sounds are built, nothing is striking me as worth attention.

IMP_12_mcsnare- ah, the famous mcsnare! I hear STUFF happening, but I'm also catching a vibe that has the sort of spacey lonely thing I heard in the song. It's still acting too much like it's a normal song, but not completely- liking the synth part going into the outro- like the hints of 'offness' here and there. Fair enough, best yet Smile

IMP-012-TomC- immediate weird shit, yay! I'm liking the vocals here. I'm liking the vibe, for whatever reason the song seems important to the people in it this time. Maybe I'm not supposed to understand them but they sure are trying to communicate something. Minimal, but there's a song there. Dunno how to explain this- maybe further mixes will help fill in the understanding of what I'm hearing here. One thing is, the voices aren't being made weird, they're bare, exposed.

IMP12_bennals- UM LOUD? THIS SEEMS REAL LOUD BUT THEN THE VOICE ISN'T... where'd that femme vocal come from? Must have been the harmony. Lead vocal MIA completely. Song doesn't sound complete, at all. But then it's trying to sound like pop or something, so it sounds like a bizarre pop failure- can't do that with these tracks, no worky. CANNOT get rid of the weird stuff and have anything left. Missing the point *klik*

IMP12-BigMetal- huh, are we doing some kind of acoustic guitar simulation? Sounds different somehow. Another person who didn't like the lead vocal. I have a funny feeling that if you hate the lead vocal you're just fucked... it's defining the song so much that you can't remove it and have anything left. It's pretty amazing how that works. I wouldn't have called this a big star quality lead vocal but it still completely dictates the feel of the song. Well to remember when we're tracking lead vocals Very Happy after all, though this lead vocal isn't that clear, tuned, or anything, it IS honest and emotive in a subdued spacey way and that is apparently more important. Heh. Big lessons and I'm not even 1/4 of the way through...

IMP12_Billybehdaz- Boy, are they in a room! Very Happy Good hard try to present the appearance of a normal rock band. I'm not feeling how that's helpful. Again, something's missing. Everything sounds 'good' and pretty, but it's not bringing any drama. Again with the getting rid of weirdness. That wasn't what this song was about IMNESHO (not even slightly humble opinion! don't worry, I get humbled when everybody HATES my mix Very Happy)

IMP12_CarefulCollapse- BEATLES! Suddenly we're all Ricks and Hofner bass. WEIRD and edgy. WEIRD drum treatment with roaring distorting kick. Obviously not a bashful mix! Now does it bring anything? Hmmm. We're covering up the lead voice a little. I think that's the only real problem here. It's like all of this could be having mental breakdowns behind the lead voice but instead it's dominating. Beatles tip, the crazy weirdness NEVER kills the lead vocal, EVER. whoah! *LOL* weird ending! Most daring award (so far, possibly most daring period)

IMP12_ CHANCE_WRONG_SAMPLE_RATE- Whoah. It's a troop of monks doing basso harmonies! Where did the rattler come from, I don't remember it? Maybe it's just the different pitch. Can't criticise this because working on the wrong sample rate is horribly distracting- it's interesting and the heavy use of harmonizer is a bold stroke, as is the rattle. I don't feel the song at all, though. Oh well- better luck next time, I made the sample-rate mistake once too and it ruined my entry that IMP Smile

IMP12_ChrisJ- Boy, my drum sounds are disgusting Very Happy however, I'm still listening to hear if anyone had the same ideas as I did with those wacky synths. Swoopy one super distant and like a kaboom and rocket liftoff, beepy one super bright and dry like neurons popping. I had fun Smile

IMP12_darkhorseporter- Immediate problem with the lead vocals hiding and being shy. Can't rely on the instruments in this song, doesn't matter if the vocal doesn't seem to be saying anything. It is NOT just another instrument, it is the heart of the song, the place you look for meaning. This was a bitch of a song if you were trying to just get levels- it needed so much more, and the worst of all was to just balance everything cleanly.

IMP12_dconstruction- Why's the fundamental on the voices seem to be coming from the backing vocals? Ooooh, for a second I couldn't tell whether that distortion was drums or guitar in the background. I like the wavering of the guitars to set a mood. The distortion in the background is a little scary though. This is the first mix where I think the guy is DYING rapidly,  perhaps caught in some horrible mangle Very Happy audio snuff mix! The contrast between the vocals and those ripping distortions is more than a little disturbing Smile

IMP12_DevinK- Whoa, suddenly it's a nice tune. Very cool to lean on the bass that heavily, it quickly sets a pleasant mood. Guitars are pretty, chimey. I hear a hint of snare drum on the bridge. I'm liking this, and the reason is it's convincingly nice, but there are still disturbing elements- WHOA yeah, serious disturbing elements sneakily hidden everywhere. This is COOL. I am SERIOUSLY digging where you went with this. Just.. wow. If I'd known you could do this I'd have worked a lot harder at setting the 'pretty' stage in order to undermine it later...

imp12_grantrichard4- I enjoy the background noise on the bass track! The guitar is stepping on it, though, I liked what the intro bass did so much that I want to hear more of it, want it (and the lead vocal) to be the centerpiece. Instead there's a droning quality I'm not liking, coming from the guitars and organ. I am also liking the drums, though. But too much is compressed at once. I don't hear it as good that EVERYTHING is smashed as a stunt. Good- no GREAT on the bass track but some of that stuff ought to lay back...

IMP12_Jason_Thompson_Heavier- Normalish so far, hmmm. This mix doesn't sound vulnerable. It doesn't sound sick. A weird complaint, I know. It's very pretty with the phasey stuff on the organ and all, maybe it's the most convincing 'straight' rendition I've heard yet. So convincing that it's winning me over, yes it is precious Wink I'm also approving of the arrangement reshuffling on stuff like the synths, you got away with it, bigtime. Satisfying. It's down to the artist to let you know whether you're supposed to feel satisfied after this song is heard- or unsettled, adrift Smile Regardless, GOOD work.

IMP12_MCarter-USE- But what if I don't WANT to touch the weenis? Boy is that an extreme vocal effect. Kinda neat how it's blasting away with the guy's breathing and all between verses. Now it needs to stop and change to a regular human, but it pretty much doesn't. I'm surprised Jen doesn't get a look in. No outro ATall, which apparently is a major gaffe with the songwriter, why is that? I'm thinking it's because the vibe set in the outro was a sort of release, important. Without it I can tell you that the song feels constricting, and with the intense vocal treatment it's like hearing from a guy locked in a little box at the bottom of a long steel tube. Yes he needs saving but he's not appealing anymore Smile

Imp12_NickT- Kind of straight. The risk I run trying to crit 41 mixes is that I'll burn right out and not be able to hear anymore (assuming I could in the first place!). I'll need to take some breaks. This mix feels straight enough that I'm not connecting with it very well. I'm hearing the irregularities as mistakes, they're not setting a weird tone for me, because the context seems so normal. I wonder why that's not the case with Devin's. *compare* partly because Devin ran with the rumbley kick drum and isn't also making snare and hat 'big' and poppy. Absence of 'normal' snare and hat is a cue that something's weird.

IMP12_rattleyour- Sort of polished, but I'm getting a sense of vulnerability off this anyway. That holds for a lot of sounds, actually- like the hat is real bright, but still has a character to it. I think some of the stuff sitting in the background is helping. Yeah, I like- it's a trip, definite lysergical quality. Ends too soon. (THAT'S a compliment as well as a crit- you should have kept going, but to do a mix and when it ends the listener was like 'hey, want more'? GOOD)

IMP12_scottoliphant- Um, it's kind of leaning on me. Guitars, keyboards are taking up a lot of space and seem to be poking me in the ear. Largely that organ I think. Straight vocals but they're not taking my attention enough, they're fighting with the organ and guitars. Everything's fighting to be loud a bit. Some bits like the snare are very neat sounds but it's not making me want to be listening to this. *klik*

imp12_singsing- VOCALS. That's some serious spotlighting on the vocals, plus the attitude is pouring off them. if anything it's a bit too much- too emo or something, there's a resigned relaxed quality also in that vocal and here it is obliterated, totally eradicated. That's a risk of pushing the 'tude on the vocal too hard. It's less appealing but more compelling this way. I have an INTENSE sense of a personality behind the vocal, but I don't want to save him Smile

imp12_superloud- interestingly, not super loud! I'm feeling the sparseness and emptiness here, which is good, I think that's part of the vibe. I don't think the female voice should dominate, even though it's prettier- it's a harmony melody, it's not a lead melody. So, major criticism is, why isn't the lead vocal a lot more central? It's not about how pristine the performance is, it's how well you can hang a song on it- it's like you hung the song properly on the vocal but then turned it down some.

imp12_tw- huh? Oh, it's the organ. Which does have its vibe. Unfortunately it's annoying this way... The rest of the song feels good, it's just that organ which hurts. Outro feels VERY empty, interesting. Somehow the outro feels more like a song than the song does, maybe because that empty quality was there in the song and is wildly exaggerated by the outro?

imp12_Yanik- reamping-R-us Wink sounds sort of hair-metal, only without passion. Definite big feel, like it's trying to do a stadium thing, except it's not being backed up by the song, the song's not trying to go there. The thing is, if the mix and the song get into a fight, the mix is always wrong Very Happy sorry- if I get into a crit, I'm not going to worry about whether _I_ am wrong, much less whether my own pathetic twiddlings are as good. I'll just level with whatever my gut reaction is, and in this case we're talking empty stadium soundcheck here. The song's somewhere else.

IMP12----El Duderino- bzzt, gratituous dashes and a space in the name when the rules said not to! NO SOUP FOR YOU! Just kidding, you can have soup. Might wish you hadn't... OK, I never like hearing the annoying parts of the organ more. However, the vocal sounded like a person- good! Crazy indie guitar fragging on the left there... produces funny events. I think you could lose the vocal echoes and other than that, this is pretty solid, largely because it preserves the weird bedroom-recording vulnerability in the song while making it huge. This is the biggest mix that I've actually liked... apart from the organ I don't want to turn it off. There's a mood in there. I think it's coming from the imbalances and wrong elements somehow, definitely from some things being too bassy and the guitar being too distorted and grungey. Contrasts with no one element carrying the song.

imp12-agp- hey, this isn't IMP 9? Boxy voices, highlighted organ- what this does have going for it is the vocals are direct and communicative, and the rest of the track is completely whacked! It screams 'indie indie INDIE INDIE' which I think the song expects, I just don't like all the choices of what is highlighted. Whoa big outro, that's really loud. The word for this mix is NAIVETE. Normally I think you'd have to show more skill... big fan of the tail-off crackly-guitar-pickup organ chord, I really liked that idea, better than what I did. (yeah, I know, 'better than ChrisJ' is passive-aggressive insultry Wink )

IMP12-ATOR- Whee, instant arrangement change, just add BEEOOoooooouuuwwwww Wink This comes off as heavy, but I keep hearing things I like, things I'm not expecting. This might be the _heaviest_ mix I actually like. I can tell right away I like it, and I'm trying to figure out why... again with the direct, communicative vocals, and the experimentalism isn't stepping in front of the lead vocal. BGvox, hell yeah, you're clobbering them sometimes. I'm not hearing weak wastingness in this one, nothing 'so much sick' about it. It's strong with those synths all over it, just weird as anything. I think it could go closer to the mood of the song, but at the same time it really stands on its own.

imp12-maxim- In this mix, we hunt for hooks! Lots of hooks! Paste them all over! Very Happy Seriously, the actual mix has the experimentalism knob cranked to 11, which is a pretty good call here- it seems a little fugitive, but the bits that are poking out have a somewhat unsettling air, which I like. What I don't like is, the lead vocal is bye-bye. That's the track with the point of the song, you can't take it away and then try to do its job with the mix. The mix should be reinforcing it, not replacing it. Granted I'm just a silly freak but EVERY track I've liked has had the lead vocal right there feeling like a person- not hiding behind anything. It makes me nuts when the lead vocal hides. What could be more important?

imp12-spoon- THERE IS N... sorry Very Happy always wanted to say that. Starting to get less rational, so many mixes. How about 'there is no lead vocal'? What's the background vocal doing replacing him? That's not a lead vocal melody, it's just not. Many spankings for hiding the lead vocal. The rest of the mix ain't bad, but ChrisJ is losing it listening to mixes with hiding lead vocals...

IMP12-UnderTow- Yay, weird introness! Synths cut and pasted everywhere! This is certainly establishing the 'so much sick' concept, though funnily enough the singer doesn't seem vulnerable at all. It sounds like he's SMILING, then he's on a telephone. A lot in the mix is supporting a disorienting lead vocal, but the lead vocal itself has been made stronger somehow. I don't remember it being sung strongly and solidly, there's a vulnerability that has gone away. WHOA- you have to tell how you produced a sort of flanged conga track out of what you were given, because I'd swear it was new tracking and if it was, BZZT Wink

imp12-v1-leester- ARGH more hiding lead vocal! Do you guys REALLY think this song, THIS song, has to be fronted by a slick sexay studio babe? Never mind that the melody isn't a lead melody. It's distracting me so bad it's hard to focus on the rest of the track. Which seems nice, not too glossy, sort of warm, the right kinds of unsettling elements in there- but yikes! Prettiness in voice is a COLOR, it's not the whole point. Mute Dylan why dontcha Wink

IMP12._-_iCombsMix- Wha! Yikes! Ahahaha! What the hell are you doing? *ROFL* That is the weirdest intro yet! Kinda GOOFY. Eeek, techno delay-sting! This is making me laugh and smile- just WHOA. I'd like more lead vocal because the guy's being smothered by all this crazy stuff. Of course, that kinda-sorta works... I LOVE the spacey, vague feel. Well played sir Smile

imp12Anonymous- Hmmm- interesting choice with supporting the beginning on organ only. Everybody knows I don't like the harmony vocal taking center stage so I'll shut up until the next time... this feels very tentative, very tentative. I think it would work if the lead voice was plastered way up front and the rest of it stayed tentative. I don't think it helps having Jen be the focus. Heh, interesting outro trick! That's a pretty big arrangement change, though. And it makes him FOLLOW her, again, she's not the lead vocal.

Imp12Fantomas- Getting back to the more 'straight' this time with harmonies added. AGAIN LEAD VOX HIDES ARGH ok I'm better now. I'm not into having the vocals be with the lush reverb and the guitars be dryer- it feels like the vocals are more 'produced' which doesn't work for me here. nifty transition to outro! Liked the jump in loudness. Where are you guys getting the loud background hiss ending the song? ...and why??

IMP12Fibes- yay added elements. Backwards, repurposed harmony vocals etc. The thing is, I'm not feeling that 'aaa-aaaahhh' is BETTER for hearing it every few seconds Wink it starts to be like, oh no, her again. What I AM really liking is the funny filtered drum echo. That feels cool as hell. I could listen to the whole track with ONLY the drum echo trick for extra elements added. AAAH! aaa-aaah! aaaaaaaaaah! I'm going to wake up in the middle of the damn night and go 'aaa-aaaahhh' and scream! My cats will start doing it! Oh no no nooooo... I'm sorry, brain starting to show strain of too many mixes by now...

IMP12garret- Hey, I just noticed I'm hearing lots of organ and not hating it this time! Why is that? The chorusing maybe? I'm LIKING the vocals here. I like their balance and I like being able to focus easily on them, and after the Fibes track (sorry...) I like that they have a natural sense of unedited flow. It seems like not so much was done with this one, but it worked.

imp12JHall- Yup, I knew the vox would be solid. Things seem really solid and upfront. Including the vocals, ironically- not my favorite vocal treatments, simply because they sound too strong. Loses vulnerability and openness by putting on a bit of a gloss, bit of an edge- same thing as with SingSing but not anywhere near as much. In general, solid solid solid, obviously an understanding and sense of the song, it's just that on this song I want the singer to not feel as strong- while still being totally central to the mix. If that makes any sense?

IMP12Liam- Mellowness. This has a placid feel, with nothing much violating it, even the drums are big warm and DISTANT. So mellow. Now it would be interesting if, instead of the muttering echoes, there were hints of the synths or that distort-one-guitar trick. I felt this track loved having unsettling elements subtly sneaking in, this mix is so lacking in unsettling stuff that it's distressing me a little. Too easy to tune out.

IMP12Mix_by_Andrew_Brierley- Cold. I don't know why. That's not a criticism, it's a vibe. I don't like how bright the hat is, but on the other hand, I got real vibe off the vocalist singing 'so much sick'. I'm liking the vocals, a lot. They're a little thin, a little shiny, but they're getting LOTS of that vulnerable, exposed quality I was looking for in this song. Compare to J's, which has more of a 'rock vocal' presence and authority, where Andrew's has more of a 'sonic event' presence, barely enough warmth/depth to carry it, but feels way more vulnerable- and it's the same track.

Kimwatsonimp12- Nice vocal blend! Guitars sound excellent- liking the kick and snare in the context of the song- harmony vocals hotter than they need to be, but in general WOW, this has LOTS of vibe. It's maybe somewhat polite. Aggressiveness isn't really there though it's not lacking in size or power- the thing is, that works for this song, because there's a very limited range of ways the mix can be aggressive without screwing it up anyway. This one felt gooood.

OMGWTFBBQ that was the last one! I finished!!! Very Happy

God help me, I'm gonna get clobbered this time. Oh well, I deserve it for being such a bastard. Blame the workload of having way too many songs to crit- and too many WITHOUT LEAD VOCALS argh! aaa--aaaaahhhh! o/` aaaaaah there's that hook again, it followed me! aaaah!

Wonder if it'll all fit in one post?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 07, 2007, 10:34:12 pm
Chris, you madman.   Thank you for reviewing all the tracks... much appreciated.

re: my track... good catch, I worked a lot on the organ to get it to sit up high without hurting my ears.  I'll check the signal chain later, but I think it's just high shelf eq, stereo chorus, and some tape saturation.  Re: not doing much.. I actually worked quite a bit on this one, maybe 5 hours or so.  For a change, I tried to rein in my creative side and let the tune and arrangment stand as-is.  Yah, I know, what a concept! I've been guilty of overworking stuff in previous IMPs, so this time around, I just wanted to make a mix that worked perfectly with no trickery.  I'm happy with my mix, and have learned something.  Yay IMP.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: yanik on June 07, 2007, 11:28:19 pm
J, thanks for posting mine. I'm glad somebody hates it already.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 07, 2007, 11:57:40 pm
Madman is right! Dude you have had too many quad grande non-fat vanilla four sweet-n-low lattes  or a truckload of 'white witch'.

Whatever the case... I love it.

That's a freakin' critique. (or as the French say: "critique")  Confused

The ONLY person to ever say "weenis" is my wife's 14 year old 2nd cousin. I thought he was bullshitting me.

I can hear the monks now.

Man... just save the guy in the steel tube. He needs you.

El is starving for his soup. Yes, El Duderino (if you're not into that whole brevity thing).

Dishing out spankings and talking about yourself in the 3rd person?

I like your style.



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: maxim on June 08, 2007, 12:02:35 am
chris wote:

"It makes me nuts when the lead vocal hides. What could be more important?"

the song?

in the end, the song could be about a boy and his father, a girl and her lover, a dog and his master etcetera

don't prejudge the mixes because YOU know what was left out

imo, the female vocalist delivered the emotion better than the male, so i put her in the lead

in the "real world", i would have had some communication with the band about this decision, but this is "virtual world', where anything goes...

i too have enjoyed the mixes where the male vocal was upfront

there are a myriad ways of mixing a track...

this is, in part, what this is about
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 08, 2007, 12:17:08 am
maxim wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 23:02

in the end, the song could be about a boy and his father, a girl and her lover, a dog and his master etcetera

don't prejudge the mixes because YOU know what was left out

imo, the female vocalist delivered the emotion better than the male, so i put her in the lead


Max,

I thought his dad was dying then... and is dead now. That's what I got out of it (and the little info we got from J.) You're right. Sparky could have been run over right in front of my eyes... it's still a desperate sounding tune.

I also said in a previous post that I wished I could have used the chick (no offense Kim) in the lead too. She was defintely feeling it dawg (I swear I don't watch 'Idol'). The bottom line is that it wasn't strong enough by itself and didn't make sense as the melody 100% of the time. To me, it was clearly the backup. The male vox had the emotion and character IMO.

But as they say: "Opinions are like assholes... everybody's got one!"



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: M Carter on June 08, 2007, 12:54:30 am
re: Touch the weenis

my friend had just bounced out a demo with his band, and had named it "touch the weenis", my fault for not noticing.

ChrisJ: I appreciate the remarks.  As far as Jen's vocal went, the harmonies didn't serve any purpose to me, so I took them out.  I also didn't "get" the outro.  Admittedly, I may have missed the mark a bit on this one, but I like the direction I took it, although I think the execution could've been more thoughtful.

In retrospect, I kind of wish I would've included the outro.  I think what happened is that the song took too long to get there, and it felt that way.  I probably could've shortened the break, and brought that outro in sooner.    

So far  i think my favorite mixes are J's, mcsnares, grants, and fibes'(which is funny, because none of them sound anything close to mine).  Those are at least the ones that stuck out right away.  I haven't gotten through all of them yet though.

Sure had fun with this one tho, thanks J.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: chrisj on June 08, 2007, 01:29:04 am
J-Texas wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 23:57


Dishing out spankings and talking about yourself in the 3rd person?
I like your style.



Charitable to talk to a doomed man that way! Very Happy I'm gonna get reamed in return, it turned out to be one of my _least_ feel-good nicey-nice crit sessions because I was so rushed.

That's what I do- if I'm in one of these things I try to crit every legitimate entry. It took hours. No unusual amount of coffee.

I stand by all my half-assed opinions, whether or not they are wrong Very Happy no matter how wrong they are, and no matter how bad my track sucks, I honestly did have those reactions listening to each of the mixes. The idea is, you get to know what the reaction was, and then you decide if you want to call it a stupid reaction or a perceptive one. Odds are, when I said 'yay you roxxors!' those people will consider it a perceptive reaction Wink

I'm looking forward to seeing other people's crits.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 02:44:23 am
Quote:

imp12_grantrichard4- I enjoy the background noise on the bass track! The guitar is stepping on it, though, I liked what the intro bass did so much that I want to hear more of it, want it (and the lead vocal) to be the centerpiece. Instead there's a droning quality I'm not liking, coming from the guitars and organ. I am also liking the drums, though. But too much is compressed at once. I don't hear it as good that EVERYTHING is smashed as a stunt. Good- no GREAT on the bass track but some of that stuff ought to lay back...


thanks for those words!  i only made the bass like that because I'd never mixed an upright bass before, and it was a good challenge, so that's where i oozed out most of my vibe.  honestly, i didn't know what to do with the guitar, so i did what i always do......re-amp it with an ac-30 and crush it.  i think if i'd not compressed the guitar, or the organ, and left the drums the way they are, the mix would have 'breathed' better.

as far as my compression goes, i'm still learning proper management of 2bus compression.  anybody got any tips as to what their using on their 2bus?

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: AnonymousUser on June 08, 2007, 03:48:11 am
The female vocals weren't lead?  Wow, I really missed that one. Embarassed
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Kim Watson on June 08, 2007, 07:52:45 am
Hey Chris

Thanks for your kind comments.

>Polite mix....

Most of my mixes wind up being very conservitive. That is something I really need to work on. what do you think is the cause.... eq? or having the vocal to instrument balance.

Kim
x
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 08, 2007, 08:28:08 am
chrisj wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 18:37


IMP12_ CHANCE_WRONG_SAMPLE_RATE- Whoah. It's a troop of monks doing basso harmonies! Where did the rattler come from, I don't remember it? Maybe it's just the different pitch. Can't criticise this because working on the wrong sample rate is horribly distracting- it's interesting and the heavy use of harmonizer is a bold stroke, as is the rattle. I don't feel the song at all, though. Oh well- better luck next time, I made the sample-rate mistake once too and it ruined my entry that IMP Smile



The rattler (vibraslap) and cabassa was triggered off the snare track. The lead vox was processed with the "voice pryzm plus" using harmonies with tension (think Manheim Steam roller) The "whisper" was processed with the "voice one". Because of the slow speed, (sample rate) and spending a month on a film sound track, the drums were unusable at that speed and I felt lead to go in this direction. Not my cup of tea, but it was an interesting project. Truly a first for me.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: UnderTow on June 08, 2007, 08:57:50 am
Wow Chris! You have allready listened to all 41 mixes!  Shocked

chrisj wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 03:37

Oh my god,
IMP12-UnderTow- Yay, weird introness! Synths cut and pasted everywhere!



There are only three short synth sections I used. The one at the beginning, the one just before the start of the drums (it was reversed) and the one in the break.  The other synthy sounds are the organ going through Ohmboyz Emhatohm and/or iZotope Spectron, the backing vocal going through Bufffer Overflow and the female vocal going through iZotope Spectron and/or GRM Freeze. The noise burst comes from the start of the bass track. Oh and all going through delays with filters and two reverbs.

Quote:


This is certainly establishing the 'so much sick' concept, though funnily enough the singer doesn't seem vulnerable at all. It sounds like he's SMILING, then he's on a telephone.



Smiling? Lol.  Laughing  I just dual-band compressed the shit out of the lead vocal, added a bit of presence and saturation. Oh and verb.

Quote:


A lot in the mix is supporting a disorienting lead vocal, but the lead vocal itself has been made stronger somehow. I don't remember it being sung strongly and solidly, there's a vulnerability that has gone away.



I tried different things with the male vocal but ended up going back to a relatively clean (albeit compressed) version. Anything else I tried felt too outlandish and didn't work with the female vocals.

Quote:


WHOA- you have to tell how you produced a sort of flanged conga track out of what you were given, because I'd swear it was new tracking and if it was, BZZT Wink



Heh.  Cool It was actually purely accidental: I was changing things arround and accidentaly routed the drum mix to one of my FX busses and this sound came out more or less. The bus had Antares Filter, CamelSpace and Nitro in series. (You can also more or less hear it at the beginning on the synth). The combined swept filter resonance of these plugins created these conga'ish sounds. I bounced the bus to a track and cut out the hits that were in tune with the rest and then made them sound more percussive with heavy compression, some layering with other more distorted hits and more filter sweeping.

In the last section I took one of the bass notes, lowpassed it so that there was nearly only sine left, layerd it under the attack of one of the conga'ish sounds and then compressed to the max. I also used different hits in the last section to change the beat a bit.

I fed these new beats to delays and more swept filter resonance, flanging maybe a few other things.

The snare hit is one of the snare hits going through cianyde, EQued and filter delayed.

Now off to listening to 40 mixes.  Shocked

Alistair
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 08, 2007, 10:11:09 am
i can hardly keep up with this thread.

BTW, getting a lot of info ahead of mixing will simply not happen.

95% of the time, i simply get files and a deposit check.......that's my world, therefore, imp will be the same.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 08, 2007, 10:31:49 am
I'd like to thank Chris J for taking the time to comment on ALL the mixes.

For those of you who do not agree with his comments don't sweat it. He took the time to make them and the beauty is we are all different and that is what makes this IMP thing special.

At mix time it's all about the song, the artist and what you bring to the table.

So, take this comments, think about them and see if they match the most important critic of all, YOU.


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 08, 2007, 11:44:13 am
FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Always save your work. I was almost finished my my critique and I hit the back button!

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Devin Knutson on June 08, 2007, 12:24:17 pm
J-Texas wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 08:44

FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Always save your work. I was almost finished my my critique and I hit the back button!




Ouch.  That's why my notes are being maintained in a separate file as I listen...  one here, one there...

That's also why it's taking me so long.  I really want to comment on every entry, and I'd like to post them all at once, but I don't necessarily want to listen to them all at once (even if I could).  Plus, I've just been slammed this week - almost 60 hours so far...

Many thanks to both Ian and Chris for their comments, and to everybody else for such wildly diverse and interesting submissions.  I'm having a lot of fun.  At least I think I am...  hard to tell, this week.  Smile


Ian:
Wow, you want the vox louder?  Really?  I was seriously considering backing them off a bit.  They're already kind of on the edge of sticking out to my ears.  They probably could be a bit brighter though, you're right there.  Although if I did that, they would almost certainly have to come down a bit.

Chris
LOL  I wasn't thinking in terms of "undermining the pretty" when I did it, but I like the way you put that.  It just seemed to me that the tension continued to build all the way through the track, and then needed to resolve with some sort of major release - but still with a strange undercurrent.

That's it for now, I'm afraid.  I will have my thoughts up on everybody as soon as I can.

Thanks all!
-Devin
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: iCombs on June 08, 2007, 12:24:23 pm
J-Texas wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 10:44

FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Always save your work. I was almost finished my my critique and I hit the back button!




Kinda makes you want to drink drano, doesn't it?

I actually sometimes type mine in word and copy/paste them.  Then they are saveable.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tomas Danko on June 08, 2007, 12:38:29 pm
iCombs wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 17:24

J-Texas wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 10:44

FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Always save your work. I was almost finished my my critique and I hit the back button!




Kinda makes you want to drink drano, doesn't it?

I actually sometimes type mine in word and copy/paste them.  Then they are saveable.


It's easy to "select all" and "copy" before submitting. Two key combination strokes. If things get lost in Cyberspace you just post again and paste it back.

That is, if you remember to copy in time. Smile
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: leester on June 08, 2007, 12:43:24 pm
Thanks for the crits Chrisj. I know it takes a while to do.  I shoulda typed mine out while I was listening the other night.

philosophical mode = on...

Now - mebby this should go in a new thread, but how / why did a semi-significant amount of us determine the lead vocal was the female vocal?  

For me, it wasn't the 'color' of the voice, though the delivery had something to do with it.  I found the ascending vocal against the descending instruments to add to the sense of turmoil I got from the overall tune, and THAT was what put me in a dark and moody mindset.  The male vocal never once (at all) seemed to me the lead vocal, and it wasn't performance or timbre related, but rather melody related.  

So was it the order that I heard them in?  Perhaps.

Was it the anonymity of "the band" to me, leaving no preconceptions of who was supposed to be the lead singer?  

Was it a mistake?  I mean, let's say ya didn't know CSN&Y, and you had a pile of tracks from them in front of ya.  You start pulling up faders trying to figure out the song, and you pick the 'obvious' melody during a section (or whole) of the song.  

If ya weren't there when it was written, it's possible you've made the wrong selection in the artists eyes.  It's also possible you've made one of them happy mistakes.  

Anyhoo - I find this to be very interesting.  Among the many different choices and interpretations, THIS one seems split between the familiar (with j.hall's band) and non-familiar.  

For me, I thought it was kinda weird when I heard it the first time with that background guy out front.   Very Happy

So I'mma ask... how did you 'know' which was the lead vocal on this track?  (you meaning all of ya) ASSumption?  Familiarity?  Preference?  

Curioser
mees
(for any that don't know me already, I ain't stirrin' up sheet, just thinkin' deep out loud.)
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Devin Knutson on June 08, 2007, 01:10:40 pm
leester wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 09:43


So I'mma ask... how did you 'know' which was the lead vocal on this track?  (you meaning all of ya) ASSumption?  Familiarity?  Preference?  


Well for me, the fem vox was clearly a harmony.  No question at all.  I don't remember which one I added or heard first, but the part itself just plain isn't a melody.  It doesn't interact with the root.  The song itself told me where the melody was.

I don't really know how to explain it better than that.  It's kinda like looking at da Vinci's Last Supper and asking "How do we know which figure is the focal point?"  Sure, there are probably any number of different interpretations of that question, but the artist's intention is pretty plain...

- Devin
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 08, 2007, 01:25:51 pm
sidechain wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 10:10

leester wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 09:43


So I'mma ask... how did you 'know' which was the lead vocal on this track?  (you meaning all of ya) ASSumption?  Familiarity?  Preference?  


Well for me, the fem vox was clearly a harmony.  No question at all.  I don't remember which one I added or heard first, but the part itself just plain isn't a melody.  It doesn't interact with the root.  The song itself told me where the melody was.

I don't really know how to explain it better than that.  It's kinda like looking at da Vinci's Last Supper and asking "How do we know which figure is the focal point?"  Sure, there are probably any number of different interpretations of that question, but the artist's intention is pretty plain...

- Devin



I agree. The male vox was more in cadence with the root/key of the song. The female vox was answering the male vox
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Gabriel F on June 08, 2007, 02:03:42 pm
my first impression was that the female singer was the lead vocal
because it has more movement and expression. And i choose it because of the nice timbre she has. I dont belive it was and obvious choice to use the male vocal as lead. I believe the song could work both ways.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: iCombs on June 08, 2007, 02:07:01 pm
I honestly looked at it as a two-singer situation where both parts were pretty much necessary the whole time.  I thought the vocal arrangements were really great, and that vocal work IS the song...did anyone take a moment and listen to those voices a cappella?  They sound great...almost enough there to make a song out of with just those voices.  When I put the faders up, I went, "Sweet...2 singers!"
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: dconstruction on June 08, 2007, 02:15:57 pm
I don't know how anyone could continue to think the female was the lead when it gets to the chorus of "save me."  It's so clearly a call-and-response.  Right?

Also, the tracks were labeled "Vox," "Vox_dbl," "Jen_1" and "Jen_2."  I know that's not conclusive, but it sure seems to me that the track labeled "Vox" would be the, uh, main vox.

L
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: leester on June 08, 2007, 02:16:59 pm
iCombs wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:07

I honestly looked at it as a two-singer situation where both parts were pretty much necessary the whole time.  I thought the vocal arrangements were really great, and that vocal work IS the song...did anyone take a moment and listen to those voices a cappella?  They sound great...almost enough there to make a song out of with just those voices.  When I put the faders up, I went, "Sweet...2 singers!"


That's kinda what I got, and why I thought CSN&Y.  

Really, the tune is a simple gem IMHO.  Even they way I mixed it.   Laughing

I'm still quittin' my day job.  

lees
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 08, 2007, 02:23:46 pm
I am so pissed that I erased everything I previously wrote. It was in depth and I lost it. So, I guess I'm about to give the short and maybe not so sweet, laser version of what I already F'ing did.

J. - Crispy. Good crispy... it's not dull. I was afraid of keeping the EQ on the really heavily compressed bass. It was breathing too much. i should have kept my like it was, instead I went lowpass for that reason alone. I like the "crazy" out of tune synth thing in the background. It's just too weird for me.

Fibes - Where are the male vox? The delay needed to be behind the beat more. A drag would have been better than a rush on this one.  I was really hoping for more buildup on the segue. It started out sounding like it was going to sneak up and bite me on the nuts, but it didn't.

Greg - Straight mix. A lot of compression. Everything seats nicely though.

Yanik - That guitar thing makes me want to listen to one speaker... the other one. Perfect on the delay (feedback and time). Your synth segue is the absolute best of them all to me.

Audiosculpture - I like what you did with the organ. I wish the vocals were as open and 'lost' as the drums. No synth segue and stripped down outro was anti-climactic for me. It just went to nothing.

Careful Collapse - I love what you did with the guitar. I hate what you did with the girl vox!  Twisted Evil No organ? At least at the end it would have really set off your outro which was big anyway. Loved the ending. Oh and the editing on the guitar part.

Undertow - Tasty use of delay. I think it should have been more behind the beat. See the deal is with this particular track is that the tempo is so washy that the same delay setting won't work everywhere. Take it out in places? Your outro is so cool. Cool shit throughout. The delay worked at the end because it wasn't competing with the real drum sound.

Scottoliphant - I like this mix except for the lead voc. I needed to feel more intimate with it. It's not the highlight. The drums and the girl take precedent.

MCarter - I love the hell out of that vocal. The breathing. The emotion. The lip smacking. I just wish it was right in front of my face instead of the bathroom down the hall. It's too cool to wash out like that. What? You killed it right there? I WANT MORE DAMMIT! I thought it was about to explode man!

Garret - Love the kick drum. I feel really close to the vocal. It's personal. No bass? Dude it sounds like somebody didn't show up for the gig and the show had to go on. Like the segue. Nothing happening in the outro. It's so bare that it could have been left off of this mix.

mcsnare - I don't really dig the Prince and the Revolution chorus on the guitar. Great drums and vox. Delay is way too fast. Everything is nestled in nicely though. It sounds good. I love the segue. The most impact in any mix yet when it hits. I still can't get over the drums. Love 'em.

AGP - Very nice guitars. The vox are muddy though. Getting killed by the guitars. A few dB down in the 100Hz and down, they might have seated better. I like the effected vox on the chorus a lot! The organ is sort of getting on my nerves though. Sorry mcsnare, I just heard a better thump you in the galooms outro. Way to go. I like the ending too.

Big Metal - The girl is absolutely not the star of this track. I think she's awesome, but it is NOT the lead part. It's really weak that way. It's distracting to hear, what is clearly, the lead in the background too. Nice mix on the instruments though. I like synth. The segue seemed to hold out too long or something. I'll have to listen again.

Sidechain - love the bass. A few dB up on the vox man!! This is cool to me. I like the flange guitar. The girl voc on the chorus sounds like she singing a round though. That was the tastiest use of that crazy synth. For some reason is more like canvas rather than sandpaper rubbing my eardrum raw.

bennals - Is that a sample rate problem? What's with the frying bacon all the way through the track? COOL Vocal! SHE IS NOT THE LEAD! ahhhhh. What sets this apart from the others is that you didn't try to mix it with the male vox. THAT IS THE SAVING GRACE. As well as the really cool vocal sound. I really like the ending. Great idea.

Ator - Is that editing or a gate on the vocal? Distracting either way. Great vocal sound! Again, the delay would sound better dragging. Love the use of the synth. The reverb and delay trails are wicked. I love the segue and outro. HITS HARD. The delay always works better on the outro. With everyone that has done it.

Mac - I would have liked a bit crispier vox and drums. The guitar, organ and bass sound GREAT. That long, EQ delay is freaking me out. Cool. I wanted to say: "whoever is talking please shut up, I'm trying to listen."

icombs - Sounds cool. I don't really like the Catherine Hepburn thing going on, it freaks out my ears (not in a good way). The drum replacement sounds good, but i don't agree with the pickup notes in some of those places. Sound weird. I'm still on the fence about all the guitar distortion too.

Darkhorse - Vocal too far back. This would have been a great straightforward mix otherwise. The drums could come up too. There's just not that many textures in there to make it interesting enough. It's levels with no depth and character. I need some space, something highlighted or unique you know?

Brian LLoyd - Didn't like the vocal cuts. It was like: "When are you going to say something?" There was an imaging problem on the drums too. It sounds like a Sly and the family stone record. Like it would be better in mono.

Billy - Too much vocal pookie. Instruments are good. Organ is up on this one and it doesn't bother me.

TomC - Like the drums. Cool intro idea. Vocal nice and up front. The overdubbed male voc on the chorus is mixed too hot IMO.

Leester - Girl is dull as the lead. Especially dry and evenly mixed on the doubling. Nice drums. Maybe if you were going to do the vox like that you could have kept the guy out of it until the chorus. But he can't be obviously taking the lead on the chorus and be that far mixed down. The ending is a trip. Cool idea.

Kim - Good mix. I love the boom on the kick, it sounds great teamed up with the bass. I love the spacious sound of the chorus. I think my biggest complaint would be the dull sound overall. If it were brighter it would have really tickled my fancy. Maybe a little more synth on the segue. I like the impact at the outro though.

Superloud - Too centered. No separation to it at all. The guy is way too low. It hurts to strain that hard to hear it. I love what you did with the synth segue. Anticipation. Very cool for impact.

SingSing - Now that's up front! That's what this track needed. Intimacy. The drums are pretty whimpy compared to everything else though. I love the spacey effect. I guess it's the organ? Very cool. The girl is very interesting, just not on her own. Where is she in this mix? I think you lost a big part of the track by doing that. Otherwise, very cool!

dconstruction - Vocals are too skinny. Is that a distorted organ? I don't know man. VERY cool segue. I like the distortion on the outro though. Maybe roll off the highs a bit and crank it up? Cool.

Rattleyour - I love the big ass bottom on this. That effect is very cool, just not all of the time. In and out would be cool. Loud and soft? Like the synth treatment. Drums sound great.

Craig - I love the kick drum. Where's the beef? I need some decibels!!! Male voc is burried too. The organ is hot. I LOVE the outro!!

Maxim - I like the intro. Interesting ideas. Crazy bass sound. This is fun to listen to. Except for the burried male vox in the chorus. Very cool effects. You definitely went all the way with it. Commit. I like it.

El Duederino - If you're not into the whole brevity thing. HAWOWEEE! Yikes! That was a kick in the balls. I likey, I likey. Sounds like the doctor needs to save this guy from the looney bin! WAY OVER THE TOP!! I like it.

Jason Thompson - Sounds good, but pretty simple and boring. Better luck next time chump! F-U self! I like the sustain on the bass. Vox are up front, good balance. Interesting backwards organ . Good, but plain. Synth needs to be highlighted more at end. More buildup in segue.

Briefcase - Nice and up front. I'd like to order extra crispy on the vocals with a side of balls on the kick. Good mix!

Grant Richard - I see where you were going with the panning, but it's really left heavy with that balls out guitar sound. Maybe some jizum on the organ to even it out? I love the vocal delay. Interesting to listen to. Great drums!

Nick T - Immediately pleasing to the ear. Nice mix. Maybe a bit too much on the lead vox. Maybe not. I like the sizzle on the drums. Cool not to hide them. Started fading to quick for me.

Anonymous - You need volume to hear. I'm a fan of the pan. Many records were made like that out of necessity. It works. The girl is not the lead vocal though. So it makes it less than interesting. The girl split left and right with the male up the middle would have been nice to me. Drums sound good.

fantomas - Great separation and then the drums are flat as a pancake turned sideways! What happened? BURRIED VOCALS - GIRL NOT THE LEAD. Interesting harmonies! Is this the monk thing? It sounds like a Gregorian chant to me. Brownie points for interesting though. Great buildup on the synth thing.

Spoon - Fat bottom. I'm always a fan of round. I don't like you anymore, you put the girl up front!  Razz Nice in your face drums! Good impact on the outro.

Andrew - I see you took the "nice" approach like me. It sounds good man. Then your drums came in! Nice. With the drums up front like that the vox could be out there too! Another tasty use of the crazy synth.

Chance - I've already commented on this. Making lemonade out of lemons. What a trip. I HATE the rattle though man!  Very Happy  This is just creepy man! I love it. The please doctor thing freaks me out still!!!! Somebody save that guy, he's scaring the shit out me!! Kick go Boooooooom!

And last but not least...

Chris J. - Bone dry vox. It suits this thing. Intimate. The drums are just over the top for me personally. I thought I was being abducted... for real when the synth came in. Whew... close encounter!

SORRY ABOUT THE FIRST COUPLE... I WAS STILL PISSED ABOUT ERASING EVERYTHING.






Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 08, 2007, 02:30:15 pm
For me the vocal choice was a multi-facted wank.

1. I knew who the lead singer was going in.
2. I knew a little of the politics about the vox tracking.
3. I knew what it was like to be J. tracking/producing/mixing his own band for eons.
4. I knew I was the client here, had it been J. and his band i may have been forced to look at it differently, but this mix was two hours of making me happy.
5. I knew, like every other mix I've done that i had to walk into it with an OPEN MIND.


That said, I chose the female vocal because it felt more in vibe with the sentiment and performance.

It had a direct connection to the lyrics even though the connection may have been vastly different from the songwriter.

The male vocal never quite felt right to me and it is all about the delivery. I'll let J. discuss the details if he'd like but much of the reason I chose to downplay the male vocal J. understands.

So, those are my reasons, not all of them but enough to tilt the scales.



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: leester on June 08, 2007, 02:41:54 pm
dconstruction wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:15

I don't know how anyone could continue to think the female was the lead when it gets to the chorus of "save me."  It's so clearly a call-and-response.  Right?


It would sound kinda silly without both of them there, but does the lead HAVE to "call" and the BGV do the response in a two-singer situation?  (not pickin' at you specifically, still thinking out loud... in a "learn all the rules then forget about 'em" kinda way)

Quote:


Also, the tracks were labeled "Vox," "Vox_dbl," "Jen_1" and "Jen_2."  I know that's not conclusive, but it sure seems to me that the track labeled "Vox" would be the, uh, main vox.

L


That's the interesting part in my case.  Once they were loaded, the labels didn't matter.  Had they been labeled "Julie_1", "Julie_2", "George_1", "George_2" - or as I see a bunch "track01..." then that could be ruled out, leaving the mixer to rely ONLY on their instincts or gut feelings about their own interpretation.  

So if one was in doubt, the labels would help clarify. If (like me) ya never thought twice about it, and the 'other' voice happened to (pre)support the call / response section in a very artistic way that I thought was intentional - is it wrong?  

Ultimately, I'd have to say the answer is yes, since it's a mis-interpretation of the artist's original intent.  But hows come it feels so good to be wrong?    

This is one of them where I'd slap my forehead and "fix" it for the client, but keep a copy of both for meself.   Cool

lees
PS - hopefully I don't come off sounding "heated" as I'm actually more "intrigued"



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 08, 2007, 02:42:15 pm
Bennals, to me, was the only person that put the girl up front that made it make sense! The girl sounded beautiful, but not for this track. Her legato parts and simple movement told me that it was a backup. It did not have the sand by itself. The story was coming out of the male vox. That's where the emotion was. That's where the pain was coming from. If all of that wasn't enough... the male obviously took over lead with the 'question and answer' chorus! If the guy part was left out of the verse altogether, and the female vocal was processed in an interesting way, then yes, it could be the lead. That is what Bennals did for me. Having a hint of the lead in the background and using it as a harmony part was so frustrating to listen to for me.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 08, 2007, 02:43:09 pm
Alright, my feedback.. If I missed anyone, please let me know.

My favorites…

spoon  Great vocal treatment (though I’d like em a touch higher in the mix)... powerful drums that don't take over (okay maybe the hat is a little bit much).  The organ is nicely tamed...   I like the transition, angels nicely featured.

ATOR  good solid mix.... i'd like to hear the vox with a bit more clarity, but otherwise this is a good one.  the bass is nicely tamed too... doesn't wig out my subwoofer.  Good transition... but I'd like to hear the synth get out of the way of the angels when they come in.

garret  Hey, this one is mine.   I know those drums, and vocals.  Way up front, yay.  Yepper, there's my synth treatment.  Pow, there come the angels.  Only thing I wish I did is to keep a bit more of the upright... there are some good bits I lost, that I've rediscovered listening to other mixes.  But I think this is my first IMP mix that I’m really happy with.  Yay progress.

grant very solid mix... good work. the kick is a bit much... otherwise, nicely done.  Good transition, pulled off with the synth in full glory... tricky tricky.

rattleyour - a lot to like, but vox a touch too quiet and bass is overpowering.

big metal - very nice.  good vocals, and somehow the bass doesn't bug me (see my mix for the only answer I found for its boominess).    the synth transition doesn't quite work for me... I think the bang should be when the angelic vocals come back in, so the synth just before can't be too dominating.

nick t - Mix is open and balanced, but somehow a little brittle.  Vox up front... yay.

jhall - very solid mix....  good up front vocals... the transition works, and you set the scene for the angels nicely...

sing sing - very nice... a unique treatment in many ways, but not over the top... good balanced mix.. works for me.

greg dixon - good balanced mix.  I'd like to hear the vocal pop more (probably just eq for more presence and maybe watch the compression level.)

briefcase  very good mix.  Organ is up high where I like it, but harsh on the ears... excellent vocals... transition is good.

fibes - interesting mix....vibey!  maybe a touch overworked, but keeps its balance and never loses the mood. Lovely angels.

imp12liam - very good mix.   the bass is overpowering, but a bit of tone adjustment on my monitors, I'm liking the balance of this mix.    good transition in this one... okay maybe the angels could pop a bit more.

-----------------------
Mixes I like, but not as much as the top set…

leester  Good mix... needs more guitars... seems very narrow.  I think you pulled off the vocal reversal (male is the bvox) much better than I thought possible.     Good transition into angels. Too much production trickery at the end.

icombs --   tonal balance seems off somehow, but I can't tell you what's wrong exactly.    Seems to be lacking in dynamics and intimacy... but hurray!  I can hear the vocals and they sounds great. good job treating those…  The reamped guitars here are good... they sound natural, not overdone.  Timing is off some places… not sure what’s going on… the downbeat at 0:33 has about three different starting points.  Is there delay on the kick or something?  

jason thompson -  interesting panning.. not sure I like it, but it's interesting. Smile  Nice vox!  up front where they should be.  the organ is hurting my ears, and fighting with the vox.

agp - Vocals get a bit nasally in the upper mids at times.     Organ is hurting me and overpowering the angels in the bridge.

kim watson    not too shabby, but the low end is a touch out of control.. good transition into the angels... okay maybe I'd like the synth that leads in to not drop out so much, because it makes the song sound like it's stopping.

darkhorse -  a good mix in many ways, but the vocals are buried too much.  Not sure if it’s heavy reverb, or a levels problem…

scott oliphant -  vox are too low, and/or lacking in clarity.  good drum treatment... otherwise a good mix

mcsnare the vox treatment is very good, but the organ is a touch painful and the synth is distracting.      I think the kick is too explosive for a little tune like this...  

billybehdaz- vocals are very far away, so much reverb on them, they're losing focus and intellegibility.  bass is boomy, making my sub go wonky.


-----------------------

Mixes that are okay, but have at least one clear problem I can’t get past..

devin k - vox too low.  maybe a touch overdone (delays and such).  

el duderino - All the distortion seems completely unnecessary.   You're gonna drive off the angels if you keep that up racket, son.  Smile

TW   – not too bad, but the vocals get harsh at times (2 min).  I'm also having trouble hearing the guitars throughout...


fantomas -  sounds like I'm hearing only the wet vocal mix, not the dry.     The “video gamed” synth in the bridge isn't doing it for me... I don’t think it matches the feel of the angelic vocals.. hard to put in words, but it’s too “playful.”

dconstruction – something fuzzy in the vocals... clipping or something, and I can hear the compressor clamping down too hard on the peaks.   some good production ideas in there, but it's missing the balance to make it really work as a mix.

Collapse -  not too bad, really, but often unfocused.  Like, what's the synth doing twiddling away when I'm trying to listen to the singer..  I dig the ending shot... that was swell.  

undertow -  Very well done, but you're trying too hard... too much production trickery... it's overpowering the simple tune.   Nice balance though, and the vox are nicely treated.  No complaints there...

maxim -   another lost the male vox mix.   balance is off at times (the bass in the 2nd verse seems like it's gonna clobber her).    Overdone and not balanced enough to make it work.  but vibey!  You definitely nailed the vibe.

super loud -  vocals way quiet, and the bass is boomin.    guitars are hard to hear, somehow.

BENNALS -   a touch overworked... where'd the male vocal go?  I think the female vocal tracks aren't lead material, because they weren't sung as such... they're too reserved/clinical to be up front, unless you're doing electronica and want that robot voice thing.  bass booms often...

--------------------
Mixes that just didn’t work for me…

andrew brierley – both mixes.  at times, they fall way out of balance (all I hear is drums and bass).  watch the de-essing or gating... you're losing the S of a few lyrical lines (1:10 – ten thousand day... cider how).  where'd the guitars go in the angelic bridge?

anonymous oh I dunno about reversing the vocal priority...  if you were able to pull it off, you'd need the male bvox to be higher in the mix than this.  But I'm not sure you could or should try... the tracks are the tracks.  Panning is a bit heavy-handed... trying too hard to be wide.

chance –strange, buddy... more than a little strange. Smile  spooky too!  I definitely hear a soundtrack thing going on here.  Probably for one of those scary movies I don’t go to.

craig  – organ is up high where I like it, but the high end drawbars are too painful... they're overwhelming the vocals, which are mixed way too low...

chrisj  – soo much drums, sooo little guitars/organ/everything really. I don't think this songs needs a booming kick like that... the drums are weird panned hard L-R like that... the only thing that doesn't get overwhelmed by the drums is the vox, which thankfully is up front and in the middle.  Out of balance and a little strange.  

mcarter – weird distant band limited vocal treatment... I could see it as a special thing for the intro or one verse, but with it going throughout the song, it just sounds wrong..  Dude, where's my angels!  For me, they're the whole reason the tune exists...

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 03:21:19 pm
Quote:

So far i think my favorite mixes are J's, mcsnares, grants, and fibes'(which is funny, because none of them sound anything close to mine). Those are at least the ones that stuck out right away. I haven't gotten through all of them yet though.


thanks!  what did you like about it?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 03:30:12 pm
Kim Watson wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 06:52

Hey Chris

Thanks for your kind comments.

>Polite mix....

Most of my mixes wind up being very conservitive. That is something I really need to work on. what do you think is the cause.... eq? or having the vocal to instrument balance.

Kim
x


compress both of the drum mics more and turn the overhead mic up.  make those drums absolutely slamming.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 08, 2007, 03:34:42 pm
grant richard wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:30

compress both of the drum mics more and turn the overhead mic up.  make those drums absolutely slamming.



Should she do do before or after thinking about dynamics?  Very Happy
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: M Carter on June 08, 2007, 03:40:28 pm
eh, dynamics only exist on Count Basie records and classical recordings any way.... Very Happy
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 03:44:00 pm
dconstruction wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 13:15

I don't know how anyone could continue to think the female was the lead when it gets to the chorus of "save me."  It's so clearly a call-and-response.  Right?


yup, that was my thought exactly.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 03:46:42 pm
J-Texas wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:34

grant richard wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:30

compress both of the drum mics more and turn the overhead mic up.  make those drums absolutely slamming.



Should she do do before or after thinking about dynamics?  Very Happy


haha Smile

i firmly believe that compression holds the key to massive vibe, and if you harness it properly, dynamics still exist even when heavily compressed.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 03:52:16 pm
J-Texas wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 13:23



Grant Richard - I see where you were going with the panning, but it's really left heavy with that balls out guitar sound. Maybe some jizum on the organ to even it out? I love the vocal delay. Interesting to listen to. Great drums!



thanks for the words J-Texas.

my reasoning for the thin organ was to make space for the guitar.  simple as that.  i probably could have placed the guitar better though.  if you listen carefully, a guitar delay going to the right side kicks in when the drums kick in.  that was meant to help the balance.  thoughts?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 08, 2007, 03:54:08 pm
grant richard wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 15:46


i firmly believe that compression holds the key to massive vibe, and if you harness it properly, dynamics still exist even when heavily compressed.


Not to be cheeky, but why does a track like this need to be massive? Smile  You're right, compression yields massiveness, and a track is still dynamic in one sense... but I find the heavy kick stuff distracting most of the time.

It's weird, I hear far more kick-heavy mixes here than anywhere else... and I probably have a thousand records and don't live in a vacuum.  Of course, the kick should be there, in the foundation, but it should never take focus away from the lead instruments (usually vocals).  *Except when it should, like a special bridge or something where the kick jumps up and becomes a lead instrument for a bit.   Flaming Lips pull that off very well...

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 03:58:36 pm
garret wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 13:43


grant very solid mix... good work. the kick is a bit much... otherwise, nicely done.  Good transition, pulled off with the synth in full glory... tricky tricky.



i did struggle a bit with the kick.  i really wanted thunderous authority, but i battled with the amount of bottom to push up.  thanks for commenting!
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 04:02:45 pm
garret wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:54

grant richard wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 15:46


i firmly believe that compression holds the key to massive vibe, and if you harness it properly, dynamics still exist even when heavily compressed.


Not to be cheeky, but why does a track like this need to be massive? Smile  You're right, compression yields massiveness, and a track is still dynamic in one sense... but I find the heavy kick stuff distracting most of the time.

It's weird, I hear far more kick-heavy mixes here than anywhere else... and I probably have a thousand records and don't live in a vacuum.  Of course, the kick should be there, in the foundation, but it should never take focus away from the lead instruments (usually vocals).  *Except when it should, like a special bridge or something where the kick jumps up and becomes a lead instrument for a bit.   Flaming Lips pull that off very well...




i wasn't implying that the mix should be massive...let me clarify....

when i said 'massive' i was referring to the amount of 'vibe', not the sound of the mix.  IMO, 'vibe' is what makes me want to keep listening to a mix, instead of moving on to the next one.  all i was saying is that if something is well compressed....it can reveal massive amounts of vibe.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: BigMetal on June 08, 2007, 04:03:21 pm
dconstruction wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:15

I don't know how anyone could continue to think the female was the lead when it gets to the chorus of "save me."  It's so clearly a call-and-response.  Right?

Also, the tracks were labeled "Vox," "Vox_dbl," "Jen_1" and "Jen_2."  I know that's not conclusive, but it sure seems to me that the track labeled "Vox" would be the, uh, main vox.

L


i really thought the vocals were on equal footing... cut it down to a single female track at the intro because i like the sparseness.  

J-Texas wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:23

Big Metal - The girl is absolutely not the star of this track. I think she's awesome, but it is NOT the lead part. It's really weak that way. It's distracting to hear, what is clearly, the lead in the background too. Nice mix on the instruments though. I like synth. The segue seemed to hold out too long or something. I'll have to listen again.




i sat and questioned the synth break in the middle for a long time... i knew it wasn't "right," but i had to let it go.  the original arrangement of the raw tracks told me that it was okay to leave it a bit awkward sounding...

garret wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 14:43


big metal - very nice.  good vocals, and somehow the bass doesn't bug me (see my mix for the only answer I found for its boominess).    the synth transition doesn't quite work for me... I think the bang should be when the angelic vocals come back in, so the synth just before can't be too dominating.




with acoustic bass, it's really the performer's job to handle the dynamics.  everything i tried made it sound bad, so i found a spot where i thought it fit volume-wise and sent just a bit of it to the verb bus that the drums were on to back it off a bit. no eq, no compression...
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: el duderino on June 08, 2007, 04:05:09 pm
garret wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 15:54


the kick should be there, in the foundation, but it should never take focus away from the lead instruments (usually vocals).  *Except when it should, like a special bridge or something where the kick jumps up and becomes a lead instrument for a bit.   Flaming Lips pull that off very well...




to me, the kick seemed like a lead instrument. i felt it should suck you into a trance almost. but thats me.

thanks for the critique's guys, i appreciate it. as for the distortion (forget who said it, just read the last 3 or 4 pages of this thread) i felt it was completely necessary. I thought it needed to be trashed up.

I think Fibes said it best before when he said HE was the client and the mix was suppose to make HIM happy. thats pretty much the way i looked at it, its fun and should be enjoyable for me. and it certainly was. but i can completely understand how some (many perhaps?) don't like it. if it were a paying client id have more of an idea as to what they want, no matter how vague.

thanks for putting up one of your songs J.

I hope to listen and critique to the mixes somepoint this weekend. 41, damn. Thanks for listening everybody who did or will, that takes some time.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 08, 2007, 04:08:54 pm
grant richard wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:02


i wasn't implying that the mix should be massive...let me clarify....

when i said 'massive' i was referring to the amount of 'vibe', not the sound of the mix.  IMO, 'vibe' is what makes me want to keep listening to a mix, instead of moving on to the next one.  all i was saying is that if something is well compressed....it can reveal massive amounts of vibe.


Ah, got it... I misread what you wrote.   I will agree that compression can lead to vibe, but I don't firmly believe it (not sure I firmly believe anything.)

Compression can also kill a vibe, if the compression is obnoxious...  to me, heavy compression is artificial vibe.  That's not the song... that's not why I'm listening... that's just audio candy.  The energy might be appealing for a few listens, but then it quickly becomes tiring...

Maybe I'm just anti compression... Smile
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 08, 2007, 04:09:25 pm
[quote title=garret wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 15:54  *Except when it should, like a special bridge or something where the kick jumps up and becomes a lead instrument for a bit.   Flaming Lips pull that off very well...

[/quote]



This was a Flaming Lips moment, most of us went the route where the drums were there for maximum impact.


You didn't take that route and I'm curios why...

Here are my comments on your mix:

The vocal sits so far out front that when the drums come in (quiet) the first instrumental pick up actually drops dynamically and the following verse actually moves up uncomfortably.

To me the sounds are sonically all there but the dynamics and lift fall short.

Seed From the Sewer:

With minimal instrumentation it is imperitive that everything speaks. The best part is, as opposed to cluttered high track count tunes you can make a wide path for everyone to walk down and be noticed.

Impact and lift.



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 08, 2007, 04:14:03 pm
BigMetal wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:03


with acoustic bass, it's really the performer's job to handle the dynamics.  everything i tried made it sound bad, so i found a spot where i thought it fit volume-wise and sent just a bit of it to the verb bus that the drums were on to back it off a bit. no eq, no compression...


I can definitely agree with that.   This bass track just didn't work for me... I like the musical ideas, but it was so tentatively played and toneless (all fundamental --- just round round round and boomy).  I was happier hearing just the low end from the organ.  If this were a real mix, the upright bass is the one element I'd want to re-track or replace with samples...  I actually did keep the bass in my mix, but it's mixed way low so it almost disappears.

Or am I hearing this wrong... experienced folks who've mixed real acoustic bass... is this bass track really keeper material?

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 08, 2007, 04:16:34 pm
Fibes wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:09

garret wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 15:54

  *Except when it should, like a special bridge or something where the kick jumps up and becomes a lead instrument for a bit.   Flaming Lips pull that off very well...





This was a Flaming Lips moment, most of us went the route where the drums were there for maximum impact.

You didn't take that route and I'm curios why...



Interesting feedback, Fibes... lemme give this some thought and let you know.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 08, 2007, 04:23:40 pm
The bass:

It wasn't my favorite upright sound and I think I just abandoned it at some point. One thing i did notice is that the bass track at the end was considerably different (read better) than at the top of the tune. Maybe it was the bass, the player or spacemen.







Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 08, 2007, 04:40:49 pm
garret wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 15:14

BigMetal wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:03


with acoustic bass, it's really the performer's job to handle the dynamics.  everything i tried made it sound bad, so i found a spot where i thought it fit volume-wise and sent just a bit of it to the verb bus that the drums were on to back it off a bit. no eq, no compression...


I can definitely agree with that.   This bass track just didn't work for me... I like the musical ideas, but it was so tentatively played and toneless (all fundamental --- just round round round and boomy).  I was happier hearing just the low end from the organ.  If this were a real mix, the upright bass is the one element I'd want to re-track or replace with samples...  I actually did keep the bass in my mix, but it's mixed way low so it almost disappears.

Or am I hearing this wrong... experienced folks who've mixed real acoustic bass... is this bass track really keeper material?




this was my first mix with upright bass.  i thought it was extremely bottom heavy.

i know i say this a lot but.......

a wise man once said "the only way to make a bad track work, is to vibe the rest of the song around it".  

bad bass??? make it the focal center.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: yanik on June 08, 2007, 04:42:05 pm
el duderino wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 16:05

I think Fibes said it best before when he said HE was the client and the mix was suppose to make HIM happy. thats pretty much the way i looked at it, its fun and should be enjoyable for me.



Well it was enjoyable for at least one other person. I've only gone through seventeen of them but this one's my favorite so far. I love that second guitar and the way it kicks in. And the way the repeat on the lead vocal blends with the Jen vocal in the chorus is pretty cool too.

This is my first IMP but I listened to a lot of the IMP 11 mixes and I thought it was pretty easy to tell which ones worked best because it was such a straight pop song. This one is much more open to interpretation. And it's interesting too that having been given such different songs to mix everyone who has done both has pretty much remained who they are.

And thanks for the comments so far, good and bad. I'm sure I remember a good one in there.
Title: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on June 08, 2007, 05:39:09 pm
Hey, all.

I have to say, this was a _very_ fun IMP...I really liked this one.
Not that the others were not fun, they were.  This was just more fun.

I did not read any of J's commentary so I did not go in to it knowing it was his band's stuff.  That would have given me a bit more insight into who was the lead vocal.

So I went into it _really_ open.  The male vox leaned towards the lead, but I think the fembot was just soooo nice.  She reminded me a bit of Azure Ray ( love them two ) and the track had just the tinyest bit of the somber movement akin to Kim Deal's "Oh!" from POD.

So I went with those vocal treatments (Fem front and center with the dude in the lush background verbing it up).

I dont think there is a clear right way with this one.  I think on this IMP, almost everyone's mix came out great.  Really.  Some were bass heavy but that was just a bit.  

Some have commented on the male vox being obvious, but then I hear my mix (and some others) and I think that presentation is the obvious one.   Just goes to show, it is really about the artist's perspective.  And not knowing J's position, I assumed the artist's role and went the fembot way.

Thanks to ChrisJ, J-TEJAS and Garret for the comments.  I appreciated that.

(Garret, I did struggle with the hats.  Abit more time that I could not spend.)

I have not listed to them all, that is this weekend, but I would like to point out....Dave McSnare...dude it is almost unfair for you to turn in an IMP, but at the same time, it is almost required.

Your experience really shows.  It is so appearant on your vocals (especially with this track)...they are, imo, perfect.  Thanks.

So I will comment after the weekend on others.

Again, great IMP and song.

Regards,
David
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 08, 2007, 11:34:05 pm

Hope I don't miss much. I'm going away for awhile.

No. Not like that... to Florida!

Keep rockin', or groovin', or vibin', or whatever it is that you do.

JT Smile
Title: Re: McSnare
Post by: briefcasemanx on June 08, 2007, 11:55:57 pm
Can I ask your approximate settings on the 1176 for the male vocal?
Title: Re: McSnare
Post by: mcsnare on June 09, 2007, 12:58:56 am
Here is a screen shot of the lead vocal chain.
The order is:
EQ
Compressor
Phoenix
D'esserindex.php/fa/5340/0/
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 09, 2007, 01:11:37 am
garret wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 15:08


Maybe I'm just anti compression... Smile



haha i hear ya....that's where you and i differ.  compression is my best friend Smile
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tom C on June 09, 2007, 07:14:03 am
For what it's worth, I did a blind-test (all this 5 zillion mixes randomly moved around in the
DAW of my choice) to be able to judge more objectively, so if I wrote something bad it's not
personal http://www.tom-crowning.com/pub/icons/whistling1.gif

Sorry that I can't write this with such beautiful words like ChrisJ did that this time.
Kudos to Chris for that, VERY nicely written.

(Names taken from the filenames):

iCombs: The heavily processed organ in the intro annoys me a bit and takes my focus
completely away from the song. I'm fine with the rest.

bennals: VERY LOUD and low-fi. Too much drowned in reverb for my taste. Poor (male-) singer
hadn't much to do. Bass a bit boomy sometimes. I like the general direction, but I think it doesn't
support the general mood of the song here.

BigMetal: I wouldn't have thought that such an extreme panning approach would work, but
you've managed to make it work. Great.
The (for me) most important part isn't loud enough, I'd like to hear the vocals better especially
the male vocals. Super long maxi version...

garret: Save mix, not much experiments. I'd personally prefer to hear more dynamics
(especially drums wise), but your more hold-back approach works for the song.
BTW, you forgot to comment on my mix.

CarefulCollapse: a bit bass heavy, crazy drums, but on a second listen they work just fine.
Too much reverb on the vocals. Good integration of the synthesizer parts.
Funny end.

ATOR: Good balance, love the guitar sound (some nice placed reverb tails). Not much to complain.
Good idea to end it with that synthesizer fade!

darkhorseporter: I like the overall sound, supports the mood of the song nicely. Vocals (as they
are IMO the most important part) could be more upfront.

grantrichard: I bit low-fi (dunno if I like that or not), female vocals left side only doesn't work
as good. Dig the drum sound.

Kimwatson: Female vocals sound a bit phasy, rest of drums not loud enough compared to the kick
(which is too loud anyway). Overall too much low end and missing some sheen in the higher frequencies.

Jason_Thompson: Nice vocals, I'd like to have less bass in the intro section.
Nice drum sound with extreme panning. Good!

DevinK: Nothing to complain here, nice mix, albeit a bit lifeless, maybe bringing up the vocals
would do the job. Not sure about re-amping the guitar in the last half of the song.

MCarter: Very low-fi, but I don't dig the vocal processing. In general too much reverb.
I'd like to hear the guitars more.

NickT: Not much to complain here, I like this one. I prefer the female vocals hard panned to open
the stereo field more.

scottoliphant: Drums and bass section too loud for my taste (but sounding good). Same for the
synthesizer parts.

briefcasemanx: I like this one a lot. I'd prefer the organ to be less dominant, though.

superloud: I like the intro idea a lot. Oddly panned drums, I'd prefer center or hard
left/right (for the snare at least). I'd bring the vocals up more. Bass too loud sometimes.

tw: Nice psychedelic intro, I'd prefer less bass there (and in the outro, too). Drums are drowned
in reverb, I don't like that. Sounds a bit unbalanced panning wise.

(The mixer formerly known as) Vlad:  http://www.tom-crowning.com/pub/icons/new-thefinger.gif

agp: Not much to complain here, extremely (but in a good way) panned. Would like to have less reverb
on the male vocals and maybe the organ slightly less loud.
Second, hmh, chorus(?) too loud, that completely shakes you out of that mood you were put in before.

Anonymous: Very similar mood (but less aggressive) to agp, sans bass works nicely. I'd like to hear
the male singer better.

Brian_Lloyd: Nice wide vocals, good idea the pan the male vocals. Don't like the snare panned half
left, it makes the drums unbalanced. Like your synthesizer panning for obvious reasons.

El Duderino: That's the crazy mix for sure. Don't like the male vocals, and the re-amped guitar is
too dominant and aggressive for my taste. I see what you're going for (and your doing it quite good), but
I don't think it suits the song very good.

Fantomas: Save mix, but I don't dig that boxy drum sound. Nice psychedelic vocal approach, but IMO
a bit overdone sometimes.

Greg_Dixon: I like this one,nicely balanced, nothing to complain.

Fibes: Very psychedelic, from the more experimental ones I like this one most. Supports the mood of
the song very good. Nicely used reverb and delay effects.

Billybehdaz: The vocals are too much 'behind' the rest reverb-wise. Put the vocals more to the front
and automate the bass (it's too loud in some parts) and it'll be perfect.

JHall: More upfront approach, nicely executed and well balanced. Nothing to complain. Okay, maybe the
synthesizers are a bit loud for my taste, but I could blame myself for doing the same...

Liam: I'd like to hear less reverb on the vocals and more dynamic and shiny drums. Besides that the
overall impression is good.

maxim: A more experimental version. I like the organ sound, but would like to hear more of the male
singer. Can't decide if I like this or not.

Andrew_Brierley: Bass a bit too loud and muddy. Besides that the rest is quite good. Maybe a tad more
guitar.

spoon: I like the way you've made the female vocals the center of the song. Good mix, good drums.
Male vocals a bit buried sometimes.

UnderTow: Cool (re-amped?) bass sound in the intro, lots of little effects that work good. These don't
perfectly support the song each time, but this mix is different in a good way. The additional percussion in the
second half is a bit overdone IMO.

leester: Nicely balanced, but I think you could use the stereo field better, it sounds almost mono.
Could have a bit more sheen. I'd put the vocals at the end into the intro.

Yanic: The guitar players mix. I like the overall sound of the single tracks, but I'd make the vocals
louder and the guitars less loud. Nice idea for the synthesizer 'solo'.

TomC: http://www.tom-crowning.com/pub/icons/headphones.gif

mcsnare: Another psychedelic approach, but I think this one's drowned in reverb too much. Besides that
the overall balance and the single sounds are good. Less reverb and it'd be one of my favorites

CHANCE:
Sorry, but I think that you've overdone a couple of things (and that isn't because of the wrong sample rate).
But whatever you smoked I want some of it http://www.tom-crowning.com/pub/icons/smokin.gif

ChrisJ: Wow, that bass is deeeeeep. I like that, but don't know how it'll translate on average consumer
systems. This extreme synthesizer sounds cool, but I don't think it supports the song very good, it's too huge.
Don't like the drums at all, sorry.
I'd like the female vocals matched better to the male ones, they are not in the same room right now.
The vocal sound itself is good.

Phew, I'm glad I'll have some other mixes to do this weekend, I have to get that damn song
out of my mind.

Tom

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: ATOR on June 09, 2007, 09:04:54 am
Some thought on the recordings:

I like the song and the arrangement. Didn't feel the need to change anything about it. I did miss an instrumental hook in the intro and the instrumental part after the first verse. I filled that void with the use of synth fx.

The drums were great and had a lot of character in them. I only made bigger what was already there.

The bass sounded good too, I just put some compression on it to enhance the sustain.

The guitars were kinda muffled. I slightly distorted and reamped one to get some more life in to it. I also made some duplicates of the guitartracks with various treatments like heavy flanger, big springreverb and delays and put those barely hearable underneath the clean guitars.

I don't like the organ, it's an obnoxious monotonous sound. I added some modulation and tucked it way in the back just to thicken the sound of the guitars during the chorus.

The vocals didn't need much work. I kept the lead vocal fairly dry to keep it intimate and made the girl sound like a church choir.

The synth bleeps sounded like 'just turn on record and I'll throw in some bleeps we could use later', not like they were meant to be there in the arrangement. They were also out of key. So I cut some usable ones out and placed them where I thought was suitable. The ringmod sweep was great and was thankfully used throughout the song.

------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------------------------------

AGP
Guitars and vocals sound good. The vocal reverb return could use some hpf or maybe it’s the vocal itself that has too much lows in it. I don’t like the sound and panning of the drums.

Andrew Brierly phase rev
Distant guitars. Vocals could use more presence. Drums are too loud esp the hihat but sound good.

Anonymous
So you actually liked the organ. Shocked  Somehow this mix feels as if the parts don’t connect into a whole.

Bennals
The crackles at the begin sound as if this came from an old vinyl record. Drums have completely lost their power. I miss the leadvocal which gave the song a direct connection. Vocals could use more body and de-essing.

BigMetal
I’m spurised by how much entries had drums panned. Just because you have two drumtracks doesn’t automatically mean you pan one left and the other right. There has to be a good reason to do it and I haven’t heard that in any of the panned mixes. The sounds are pretty good, the vocals are buried. And of course the organ is too loud but that goes without saying Smile

Billydehdaz
It’s as if I hear the leadvocal only through roommics, I like them up close. The sounds need more work to get my juices flowing. And then there’s that organ thing

Brian Loyd
So you thought cutting out lyrics would make the song better??? The timing of some of the remaining lyrics is off. Drums sound worse than the recording. This mix doesn’t work for me.

Briefcasemanx
Oh man, a loud organ. I’ll try to listen as if it’s not there. The rest sounds good. I don’t like the artificial cut-out stereo on the drums.

Careful Collapse
A thunderdome distorted kick. Why did you have it just at the begin and at the end? I like the combo of the close lead with the big wet backing. The weird sample&hold bleeps on the right don’t fit the song. Yeah, great fx on the end. Also good choice to keep it empty when you choose for a lot of reverb.

Chance wrong sr
Hahaha, I’m glad you posted this one. I would have loved to see your face when you first played back the recordings and thought: ”Interesting.” The original song is completely lost but you did manage to get great vibraslap out of it.

ChrisJ
Guitars are somewhere dark in the corner. Whoa, sounds like you've invented a compressor that goes to 11 and put it on the drums. Big loud synthsweep in the break. If you go this extreme with the drumsound the rest of the sounds should fit that approach but they are rather plain.

Craig
This one doesn’t reach me, it all very distant, vague and dull. There’s nothing going on that captures my attention.

Darkhorsereporter
This one is all about the guitars, the rest is somewhere in the back. Guitars sound ok but the other sounds need work to match them in level and sound. Why did you make a fade-out?

Dconstruction
I like the tremolo on the right guitar, the speed could be a little slower. Guitarsound is good. Vocals are very low in level. I see you've added some gentle distortion to the guitars in the chorus, it comes out of nowhere and doesn't fit the other sounds. I like the sound of the filtered delay on the drums but I think the song would groove more if you didn't use a quarter note delay but something like a dotted 8th. I'd also like a little more bass.

DevinK
How did you get the stringsound at the beginning? I like the way the lead and backing vocals go together. Nice percussion snarelike sound. The heavily distorted guitar adds to the big ending.

El Duderino
I see you added some subtle distortion to the guitar, what was it in the recording that made you think:” Oh yeah this really need a crazy amount of distortion and I’ll turn it up really loud.”  The rest sounds pretty good.

Fantomas
I’d like some more separation between the sounds. Now they all have the same taste, nothing jumps out and grabs me.

Fibes
Good drumsound, I love the filtered delays. Immediately sets the mood. Great use of the Ahahaa. The girls vocals are dreamy, I miss the direct contact of the guyvocal. This has made it more of an atmosphere track than a song. I really dig the sound and captivating mood of this track.

Garret
Guitars still sound muffled, drums are very small. Sounds like a faders up mix.

GrantRichard
The bass is so much compressed that it has lost his balls. That goes for more instruments. If the attack and release are too short the sounds lose their natural level envelope: Bam starts to sound like baM. This track would get a lot more life in it if you made the attack settings longer.

Greg Dixon
Good sounds. The drums panning is distracting me, it sounds weird and unnatural. Fix that and this is a great mix.

JHall
Did you cut the kickdrum loose from the rest to get it that long? Good sounds. I like how you almost fused the lead with backing vocals.

iCombs
The intro-organ makes it sound as if I’m in a factory with buzzing machines. Machinegunsnare Smile The organ is very loud. Drums are very distant and small. The sounds are not supporting the song.

Jason Thompson
Why did you go for panned drums? I like the mix, good vocal treatment. Organ is too loud: boring dronesounds should be way in the back.

Kimwatson
Nice intimate space. Drums are disappointing, turn them up. Vocals could use some de-essing.

Leester
You’ve almost killed the lead vox! Sounds like a train passing at 1:53. Drums are good. The ending doesn’t work for me.

Liam
Guitars are dull. Leadvocal could be a little louder. Drums sound as if they’re a mile away. It all sounds a little veiled.

Maxim
This is a lullaby version of the song. Everything is tampered and easy on the ears. I don’t think this is where the recordings wanted to go.

MCarter (use)
You made a bold choice with your vocal treatment but you haven’t made the rest of the sounds to match it. This mix doesn’t work for me.

McSnare
I’d like more dry signal in the chorused guitars. I like the filtered delays but their timing seems a little to fast. Kick sounds good, the snare could have more of the explosion in it like you did the last few IMPs. (Yes you spoiled me Very Happy ) Good vocal sounds.

NickT
Sounds good. Drums could be a little rounder. I wouldn’t have made a fade-out.

Rattleyour
I like the idea of tremolo on the organ (guitar?) but it would be better if it was in time. Kick and bass fight. Leadvocal could use more presence and high end. Guitars are nice and warm.

Scottoliphant
Good sounds. Organ is way too loud for me. Leadvocal could be more in your face. Very big drums. Maybe you could cut out more room for the bass in the kick.

Singsing
Yeah a big leadvocal, that's good. Drums are a bit disappointing. The rest of the sounds are great. There's a resonant reverblike sound on the left (1:55, 2:08 and more) that could use some eqing and a hpf. Fix the drums and you have a great track.

Spoon
Good sounds. You put the lady in the drivers seat. She's a bit sibilant. The guy could have been a little louder: 'save me' could be backing but when he says 'please doctor' I'd like to hear what he's saying. Overall balance and sound is great. Nice space. I don't like the organ sound.

Superloud
I miss the leadvocal. It gets easy listening without it especially if the sounds are all mellow like this.

TomC
Nice intro. The basssound lacks foundation. Organ is too loud for me. Vocals sound good.

Tw
Aaah, an organ intro Mad  Lead and BG vox are harsh. Bass is too loud in last part. You’ve made the last part superflous, nothing happens in there.

UnderTow
Great use of filtered delay. How exactly did you get the percussion sounds? This is the only mix that has a double bass that sounds like a double bass, great job! I like the fx sounds throughout the song and the little details like change the voice for a few words. Great arrangement, great sounds, great mix.

Yanik
Vocals are buried. I miss energy. The guitars are too big. Haha, nice mayhem break.



This was a great wump. The first one where I still like my own mix after hearing the other ones.

It's great to hear where everybody took the recordings, also the ones I didn't like. It helps me a lot to get beyond my 'this is how it should sound' and  see more potential and possibilities while mixing.


Thanks everybody for joining and J for providing a great track!
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 09, 2007, 10:22:03 am
Tom C wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 07:14


garret: Save mix, not much experiments. I'd personally prefer to hear more dynamics
(especially drums wise), but your more hold-back approach works for the song.
BTW, you forgot to comment on my mix.



Thanks for the review, Tom... I've got your track downloaded now, and I'll write you some feedback later when I can stand listening to the song again. Smile
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: craig boychuk on June 09, 2007, 01:23:07 pm
Thanks for all the comments! I'll try to hand out some feedback soon, but in the meantime...:

J-texas

I think the new monitors are lying to you about the mids and highs. Maybe a freq adjustment or not so much overcompensating if it sounds too brittle to you in the room. The vox are a little burried too. Probably the mid thing. Check it out.

ps. I love the cranked up drama at the end. Very cool indeed.


more from J-texas...


Craig - I love the kick drum. Where's the beef? I need some decibels!!! Male voc is burried too. The organ is hot. I LOVE the outro!!



Yeah, I'm getting the feeling that I need to cut back the top & mids on these here speakers...seems like most folks feel that my mix is on the dull side - which I agree with, having listened to some of the other ones.

More decibels? Somehow my mix is quieter than most others, but you could just turn it up... I didn't use any 2mix processing to get the level up or anything. I generally keep my peak level between -3 and -6 or thereabouts...y'know, leave some room & whatnot.

Maybe I messed up when I made the mp3...I was rushing to get it done and head out the door.


Careful Collapse

 More obvious to me was the stereo balance; it sounds like everything in the center is too low in the mix; drums, bass, and vox


Hmm...interesting...I actually turned up the guitars at the last minute, second-guessing my original decision. Maybe I should've left it as it was.

chrisj

craig_imp12- Very very gentle, but it feels like a mistake or monitoring issues, not a decision. Hey, there's the aggression- the whole outro is a huge contrast! I don't think it's executed well but I completely get what's being attempted. I don't think that has much to do with the song but I'm starting to think this song is way harder than it looked...


Well, I wanted it to kinda hit you in the face at the end. Maybe it would've come off better if I had the mid & high thing sussed out. I wasn't really going for gentle, so I'm gonna go with "monitoring issue" on this one.


garret


craig – organ is up high where I like it, but the high end drawbars are too painful... they're overwhelming the vocals, which are mixed way too low...


ATOR

Craig
This one doesn’t reach me, it all very distant, vague and dull. There’s nothing going on that captures my attention.



Sounds like the HF & mid response of these monitors are fucking me over... I'm gonna roll everything off and see what happens.

Thank you all for your feedback, it has been very helpful! I will try to return the favour as soon as I can.

-craig






Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Devin Knutson on June 09, 2007, 02:06:07 pm
ATOR wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 06:04


DevinK
How did you get the stringsound at the beginning? I like the way the lead and backing vocals go together. Nice percussion snarelike sound. The heavily distorted guitar adds to the big ending.



Thanks very much for the comments!  The stringy sound on the right is the organ track bussed out through the Waves Vocoder in sustain mode.  I wanted the organ on the left, but I needed something to balance it on the right.

I actually did spend quite a bit of time on the vocals in the first two verses.  Tried to get the pitch on the male to better match the female without losing its character, slipped the timing of consonants and releases, etc.

The percussion thing on the backbeat through the second verse is the accidental chair kick or whatever that was from one of the female vocal tracks.  Pretty much unmodified.  Just a little verb.

---------------------------

My comments are still in progress.  I will post them, I promise.

Thanks again!
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 09, 2007, 04:39:54 pm
Fibes wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 15:23

The bass:

It wasn't my favorite upright sound and I think I just abandoned it at some point. One thing i did notice is that the bass track at the end was considerably different (read better) than at the top of the tune. Maybe it was the bass, the player or spacemen.




i didn't like it either.  and i recorded it!!!!!!!!

i re-amped mine.  no idea about the outro, it was the same setup tracked in about k30 minutes or less.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 09, 2007, 04:53:39 pm
ATOR wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 08:04



JHall
Did you cut the kickdrum loose from the rest to get it that long? Good sounds. I like how you almost fused the lead with backing vocals.



i EQ'd the two drum mics, then i copied those tracks and compressed each one differently (very hard) and EQ'd them differently, and blended them back in.

they are all panned differently as well.

so i basically had 4 drum tracks.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 09, 2007, 04:57:13 pm
this thread is moving fast.

i'm going to try and get all the mixes reviewed soon.

if any of you have specific questions for me about my mix, or the song in general, post them here, and please PM.  i'm scanning a lot of posts just to keep up with the thread.

seems like a few pages are generated in a day.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: chrisj on June 09, 2007, 06:14:40 pm
ATOR wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 09:04


Guitars are somewhere dark in the corner. Whoa, sounds like you've invented a compressor that goes to 11 and put it on the drums. Big loud synthsweep in the break. If you go this extreme with the drumsound the rest of the sounds should fit that approach but they are rather plain.


Actually I did! That's my 'Pressure' vari-mu plugin, twice. Once to make the sound, and once to bring up the solidity of the 'point' on the drum hits a bit. The synth sweep is meant to be TOO loud since it's a contrast- ginormous reverb against the other beepy synth being very dry (dryer than dry even, I processed it to lean it out)

I thought the song was about being sick or feverish or something. If I'd been thinking 'loneliness' I might have made some different choices, but I'm not sure what. I do know that I tried to adjust things the next day and it was worse than the original mix session outcome so I kept the first try...
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: superloud on June 10, 2007, 04:44:20 pm
thanks to everyone who's contributed their time to critiquing the submissions.  i've gained some valuable insight from reading the posts, and especially listening to the mixes. this thread has highlighted fundamental mixing philosophies, something that i find much more  interesting than plain old gear discussions  Smile

i think ultimately the mix that we deliver is a reflection on how we hear music.  i can recognise  certain traits that my mixes share, and i guess this is a result of what i like to hear (sonically, and emotion wise).

when i put up the faders for the first time on the imp12 track, my perception was that this was not  going to be a 'technical' mix. the challenge with this track was to deliver a compelling version of  the song, doing whatever was necessary to get the message across.

how successful the mixes are depends on a) the actual idea and plan for the mix, and b) how successful  the mixer was in realising that vision.

with 40 submissions, that’s a lot of different interpretations!  i think it would impossible for any  of the participants not to learn from this exercise, so thanks to everyone for making this happen.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 10, 2007, 09:51:16 pm
Tom C wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 07:14

For what it's worth, I did a blind-test (all this 5 zillion mixes randomly moved around in the
DAW of my choice) to be able to judge more objectively, so if I wrote something bad it's not
personal http://www.tom-crowning.com/pub/icons/whistling1.gif





Same here...  i've found I can listen much more carefully when I don't know anything about what I'm listening to.  And it's a lot easier to write honest criticism when you don't have to worry about whether you know the mixer or not, or if they're a working pro and your not, etc...

Listening blind: highly recommended.   Thumbs Up

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: chrisj on June 10, 2007, 11:31:12 pm
Once you realize you yourself have grown most the times you've had your ass handed to you in julienne slices, it really immunizes you from the fear of being critical to anyone else, pro or amateur...

I don't ever want to make personal judgements on the PEOPLE who do these mixes. However, for the purposes of critting, whether I'm in a cheerful or pissy mood, I'm not going to spend a single moment wondering whether I'm really right or justified. There's a whole world out there to disagree with me- I owe you my straightest shot.

Let's see some more crits, no personal attacks, but no shyness about your reactions please Very Happy
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tom C on June 11, 2007, 04:42:24 am
chrisj wrote on Mon, 11 June 2007 05:31

Once you realize you yourself have grown most the times you've had your ass handed to you in julienne slices, it really immunizes you from the fear of being critical to anyone else, pro or amateur...

I don't ever want to make personal judgements on the PEOPLE who do these mixes. However, for the purposes of critting, whether I'm in a cheerful or pissy mood, I'm not going to spend a single moment wondering whether I'm really right or justified. There's a whole world out there to disagree with me- I owe you my straightest shot.

Let's see some more crits, no personal attacks, but no shyness about your reactions please Very Happy


It's not about honesty, about right or wrong, about good or bad mood.
As soon as you know WHO did a mix your complete mindset is
different and your judgement WILL be different.

If you don't believe me (or if you one of the persons who believe
that's true, but not for themselves) just go to the psychologist
of you're choice and let him give you some (scientific) reading
material about that.

Tom
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 11, 2007, 01:57:34 pm
the going is slow.  i've got about half done.  with so many submissions, i hope i'm being helpful and not just blowing through them.

do to the arrangement of the song, i have to listen to the entire track.  it's taking a while.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 11, 2007, 02:45:03 pm
j.hall wrote on Mon, 11 June 2007 13:57

the going is slow.  i've got about half done.  with so many submissions, i hope i'm being helpful and not just blowing through them.

do to the arrangement of the song, i have to listen to the entire track.  it's taking a while.


Ditto.

That and a complete deathmarch of southern sugar pop.

"No, it really isn't awesome that you keep the high hat 1/2 open whilst bashing it for the whole song."---It's a ballad...




Title: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on June 11, 2007, 04:25:16 pm
Aha!

Overall, great track, fun to mix.  Everyone's submission was good with minor issues on a few.
Focus on tonal differences and comment on mix choices.  ID only bad problem errors (bass heavy, etc).


agp - Nice even mix, warm & intimate mvox.  Good work on the 'Save Me' sections.  Like the panning choices (organ & drums). Outro has good energy.

andrew brierly - Very nice male vox.  Abit bass heavy.

anonymous - Very interesting mix.  Nice levels and nice space...love the kick drum.  Did the left pan drum thing. Plus Fem First (I like that). Added male at outro and filtered/pitched the girls...Very creative.

ator - Aggressive sound with a shortened arrangement.  Nice vocal treatments, especially the extension on the outro.

bennals - No mvox.  Interesting that you thought it was not necessary in the light of some others feeling it was the obvious lead.  Drums, snare track specifically is in that middle ground of not being loud enough, nor background enough if going for that ambient effect.  I like the outro to verse arrangement.  Did you add vinyl static?

BigMetal - Soft, smooth intro.  Left panned drums.  Interesting that this spoke to quite a few posters.  I like the outro (I caught the 'Please Doctor too')...smooth in, smooth out.

Billy_Behdaz - Very ambient vox.  This is making me ask for a bit more volume from them.  Conventional mix and arrangement.  Nice.

Brian_Lloyd - Like the intro arrangement, very creative.  I think it works.  The vocal treatments sound good.  The lo end seemed to fall off when the drums first come in.

briefcasemanx - Nice full sounding mix.  Good vocal work.  Nice job.

careful_collapse - Thinned out the guitar on the intro.  Good mvox and very ambient fembots.  Those drums are killer fun...love the filters.

Chance - I like the drug version.  I feel that some comments may be moot considering there is an unintentional sample rate conversion...like the 'Please Doctor' sounds very silibant in this version...who knows.

ChrisJ - Nice warm vibe.  Good vocal treatment, very intimate.  You got the drums really pumping...J would be proud. Great synth before the outro....that was larger than life.

Craig - To me the vocals were abit low.  I see you didnt like the original kick...it was a bit evasive.  I think that sample makes the snare abit small.  The upright too, but it still manages to provide the lows.  Hey I like the guitar treatment you applied on the outro.  Way cool.  Nice ending too.

darkhorseporter - Nice full mix.  To me the vocals are abit low.  Yeah...cause I think they sound good, and I keep yearning for more vocal volume.  I like the clarity of the outro guitars.  The fade-out sounds good.  Nice mix.

dconstruction - Love the 'electric' guitar and drum FX.  Nice and big. VERY NICE bridge to the outro.  I just with the vocals were louder.  Again the distorted guitar is a nice touch.  Really changes the vibe of this song.

devink - Very big and warm with a killer kick.  The kick makes the snare small.  The vocals could be louder for my taste.  Nice guitar effects.

El_duderino - Mean guitar, and nice vocal treatment.  That guitar overpowers the vocals though.  Good drum sound.  

fantomas - Ah, vocal harmonies.  The main vox sounds buried though.  Nice drums.  You took the drums up a notch at the outro, but nothing else seemed to join them.  Makes the drums seem overpowering in that section.

fibes - Fembots front and center.  Nice filters on the drums.  Nice vocal treatments.  Nice 'angel' touches thru-out the song with the outro fembot snippets.  Nice ending.

garret - Forward and aggressive vocals are sort of let down by slightly limp drums.  I do like the vocal treatments and I think the track works without the bass but I feel that would require bigger drums.  Still a damn fine mix.

Greg_Dixon - Very aggressive mix, vocals and vocal FX in the right channel.  Nice drums too.  Ah, extended the upright...compression I imagine.  Fun how the vibe changes from that.

iCombs - Filter swept intro.  Nice vocals.  Replaced the kick.  It was definitely a challenging kit to mix.

Jason_Thompson - Abit bass heavy, but otherwise a nice mix.  The vocals sound good, but occasionally get dwarfed by the bass.  Creative bridge to the outro.  Very nice ending.  Ended on a nice vibe, I did that.

JHall - I guess this would be the benchmark really, as this is obviously how the artist intended the song to be.  Drums sound good.

Kim_Watson - Nice kick.  Maybe it makes the snare a bit small when combined with the upright bass.  I could use a bit more vox.

Leester - No dudes allowed, huh...well until later.  I had a similar idea.  Big drums sound good.  Maybe a tab bass heavy.

Liam - Big, warm and full mix.  I like it...vocals very nice and upfront.  The drums are a bit back....but I think that sounds fine.

Maxim - Fembot to the front...nice.  So you gave it an edge by screaching the organ a bit, but kept the other parts smooth.  Nice effect.  Nice use of the fembots vox in the intro.  Nice outro.

Mcarter - Bass heavy, but nice aggressive vocal intro.  BIG DRUMS rock.  You left the fembots off.  Interesting.

Mcarter - Bass heavy, but nice aggressive vocal intro.  BIG DRUMS rock.  You left the fembots off.  Interesting. Crazy ending...I like it.  I still long for the fembot outro though.

Dave_McSnare - I remember you postulating on how songs should get to the point and grab the listener...you waste no time and bring the perfectly prepared vocals in right away.  Nice drum treatments to boot regardless of how one feels about the ping-pong delays...the root of the drums rock.  Like I mentioned previously, it is good to have someone with your mixing experience participating in these things too.

NickT - Very nice and full.  Great vocals.  Very nice drums, full while still retaining space.  I personally would like to hear abit more fembot.  Smooth outro fade.

Rattleyour - Warmer vibe.  Nice vocals.  BFD!  I like these drums.  And the background 'rattle/tremelo' during the 'chorus' takes up space perfectly.  I could stand a bit more vocal, but who couldnt.  Cool ending.

Scott_Oliphant - Very nice drums here too.  The vocals are good, nice and upfront. Good mix.

singsing - Clear upfront vocals (sans fembot).  Nice stereo-ized drums.  There is something ringing in the background during the chorus and outro that I did...nice filtered effect.  I could use more fembot when you finally bring them to the party.

spoon - Just a great mix (hehe).  Maybe spend more time with that hihat.

superloud - Love the intro (I did acapellas).  Drums sound good (and untreated).Bass may be abit loud as it dwarfs the vox at times.  I like the femforward vocals too.

TomC - Another refreshingly creative intro.  Nice balances. The drums sound good (and largely untouched too).  Very nice vocals. Very good mix.

TW - Too much bass.  Lovely drums, depth, girth and ambiance.  I like the grit on the fembot, matches the aggressiveness of the drums.  Way cool outro...way cool, but that bass is really too much here.

Undertow - Catchy intro.  Very crisp, nice vocals.  I like the drums and the add synth parts.  Filtered mvox is a nice touch.  The delays distract me abit, but I am old like that.  Great bridge, simple but effective.  Another kickass outro (and ending to boot).


The fact that these mixes were all damn good (no where near the train wreck that imp10 was) say a few things.  Regardless if it is room treatment, monitors or just experience, the IMP group as a whole is making progress.

That the many different arrangements work (IMO) is testament to the versatility of the track; it had a good vibe and was recorded with the vibe first.


Cheers,
David
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: darkhorseporter on June 11, 2007, 06:00:06 pm
Hey, everybody,

Thanks for the critiques - I'll be posting mine this week when things die down a bit.  From what I've heard so far, people have done some nice work.

-Adam
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Greg Dixon on June 11, 2007, 08:12:12 pm
Thanks to everyone who gave their opinions on the mixes. I always find the comments to be as fascinating as the mixes themselves. They show time and time again, that while some mixes are definitely better than others, personal taste and how we hear things is a huge part of our perceptions and therefore comments.

I was hoping to find time to comment this time, but we had a massive storm and were without power for three days. It makes you realize how much we rely on electricity.

iCombs wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 06:46



Greg Dixon - Tasteful edting...I like the cuts into the arrangement.  The mix is straightforward.  I like the way you worked with the thickness of the recordings.  Everything sounds well-placed.  My only bitch is that this mix feels like it's looking for that one thing to take it up over the top.  Find that and you're golden.




Thanks

chrisj wrote on Fri, 08 June 2007 11:37



Greg_Dixon_IMP12- Something about this isn't interesting, as if it's trying hard to build the mix out of the performances, as if they are supposed to be rock performances in a normal rock context. The way the sounds are built, nothing is striking me as worth attention.



Fair enough.

ATOR wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 23:04


Greg Dixon
Good sounds. The drums panning is distracting me, it sounds weird and unnatural. Fix that and this is a great mix.




I played around with the drum panning a lot and was never completely happy with it.

J-Texas wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 04:23



Greg - Straight mix. A lot of compression. Everything seats nicely though.




I actually used very little compression on this mix. There is a small amount overall and a parallel drum compressor that's pumping fairly hard, but that's about it..

garret wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 04:43



greg dixon - good balanced mix.  I'd like to hear the vocal pop more (probably just eq for more presence and maybe watch the compression level.)




Thanks. There's actually no compressing on the lead vocal, I'm just riding it. I think I used a bit on Jen's vocals.

Tom C wrote on Sat, 09 June 2007 21:14



Greg_Dixon: I like this one,nicely balanced, nothing to complain.





spoon wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 06:25



Greg_Dixon - Very aggressive mix, vocals and vocal FX in the right channel.  Nice drums too.  Ah, extended the upright...compression I imagine.  Fun how the vibe changes from that.




I'm not sure you're listening to my mix here. Lead vocal is centered

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on June 12, 2007, 12:26:36 am
Greg Dixon wrote on Mon, 11 June 2007 19:12



spoon wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 06:25



Greg_Dixon - Very aggressive mix, vocals and vocal FX in the right channel.  Nice drums too.  Ah, extended the upright...compression I imagine.  Fun how the vibe changes from that.




I'm not sure you're listening to my mix here. Lead vocal is centered




Bad punctuation.  The mix is aggressive along with the vocals.  Additionally, the vocal FX on the right adds to that quality.

Did you elongate the bass?  I gives the track a totally different feel.  Very clever.

Regards,
David
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Greg Dixon on June 12, 2007, 06:07:26 am
spoon wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 14:26



Bad punctuation.  The mix is aggressive along with the vocals.  Additionally, the vocal FX on the right adds to that quality.

Did you elongate the bass?  I gives the track a totally different feel.  Very clever.

Regards,
David



Well I like the clever bit! Thanks. Very Happy

The vocal FX weren't centered on the right, but it might have appeared that way due to the drums. I think I had the main drum track centred, with the bass drum to one side and an aux input panned the other way with both drum tracks heavily compressed. It made the drums move, which a few people didn't like.

I don't think I compressed the bass, as it just exaggerated the hiss, but I did ride the fader, so I probably brought it up to make it sound longer in places. That's something I do a bit with bass, when I want the sustain to be longer.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on June 12, 2007, 07:44:57 am
Greg Dixon wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 05:07



Well I like the clever bit! Thanks. Very Happy

The vocal FX weren't centered on the right, but it might have appeared that way due to the drums. I think I had the main drum track centred, with the bass drum to one side and an aux input panned the other way with both drum tracks heavily compressed. It made the drums move, which a few people didn't like.

I don't think I compressed the bass, as it just exaggerated the hiss, but I did ride the fader, so I probably brought it up to make it sound longer in places. That's something I do a bit with bass, when I want the sustain to be longer.



Ah, stereo trickery.

About the bass riding...that's old school.  I do that to vocals all the time (not on this one though) instead of compressing.  Usually it sounds better (to me).


Cheers,
David


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Greg Dixon on June 12, 2007, 07:57:17 am
spoon wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 21:44


About the bass riding...that's old school.  I do that to vocals all the time (not on this one though) instead of compressing.  Usually it sounds better (to me).


Cheers,
David




I agree completely. Much more transparent than compression. Of course sometimes you like to hear the compression..... Old school for me though, was completely manual, whereas now I don't have to remember the moves for each pass. I can focus more on the overall mix and less on worrying about remembering which fader to move and by how much.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 12, 2007, 10:47:35 pm
i feel like time is slipping away.  i'll post the reviews i have done to at least prove that i'm doing them.  i'll get the others up shortly.  i'm starting to consider hiring an assistant.......i'm just burried.

Fibes

I absolutely love this mix.  As an artist I?d say turning the male vocal down would have to change.  It?s very difficult for the subject matter of this tune to be properly ?told? by my sister (Jen).  The edit at the end removes the clincher which is a deal breaker for me.

I love the vibe.  You did a great job harnessing the ?enchanting? feeling I wanted this song to have

Greg Dixon

simplicity.  The song was written this way for a reason, and you did a great job finding that, and serving it.  I like your guitar EQ, they were tracked a bit dark, but you did a good job bringing them back, but not going too bright.  The edit in the outro kills my buzz.  Solid mix that serves the song.  You used simple sounds, and built a mix that has me listening to the song and not your mix??that?s a really great thing!

Yanik

the guitar distortion doesn?t bother me.  It creates a lot of tension that isn?t a bad thing for this song.  the vocals are too dark, which doesn?t draw my ear to them, I keep listening to the guitars.  You cut the ?please doctor? line??that?s a cold knife in my heart.  A mixer?s job is to sculpt a song, but to also pay attention to where the point is.  That single line is crucial, as my dad is a doctor??.it connects the metaphor back to the relationship being referenced.

Your transition to the outro is simply stunning.  The first mix yet that made the outro the biggest part of the song??well played!

audiosculpture

the effect on the bass is making a man sick to his stomach.  It feels like a weird effect for the sake of a weird effect.  Vocals are too dark, and the vocal distortion on my sister in the chorus adds too much tension for my liking.  The outro bores me, and makes me wonder why it?s there at all.  The guitars are down played in your mix, which I don?t like.

Sonically the mix is good, a few things to keep an eye on, but nothing you probably don?t already know.

Careful Collapse

I like the sparseness of what you are doing.  My comments on the synth effect have already been made.  The lead vocal is placed and EQ?d nicely.  The drum treatments are really great.  You did a masterful job with that.  The varispeed at the end sorta ruins the ride for me.

Under Tow

the intro seems a bit unnecessary, but I like the textures once the song comes in.  it borders some bleepy bloopy stuff in careful collapse?s mix, but stays on the more ?human? side of the line.  The chorus ?percussion? part is to distracting to me, and the outro is worse.  I could see how stumbling onto that effect would be fun to work with, but it just doesn?t grab the direction of the song, IMO.  Another drum edit at the end, I?m only a few submissions in and I fear that I?ll hear a lot more of this.  I like the automated delay on my sister?s very last vocal.  Sonically the mix is in good shape.

scottoliphant

Vocals are too dark.  Blend of instruments is nice.  I like the simple approach.  This is easily your best sounding entry into the IMP world.  The vocal needs to be brighter and louder, but all things considered, this is good.  I like the drums.  I would have faded that organ through the ?bridge? part, but that?s a subtle thing.  You kept the drums at the end, thank you!

M Carter

another ?by the book? intro.  I like hearing the bass featured, it?s a nice change of perspective, but nothing drastic.  The vocal effects are making my ear push it to the back almost ignoring it.  I can hear my hi-hat keeping time in the second verse, did you mean to do that?  No female vocal at all?  Interesting choice, care to explain?  NO OUTRO?????  Oof, that hurt.

Garret

no bass in the first verse, I kinda like it, but I?d like to hear it enter the first chorus, it would have given it a nice lift.  The kick drum feels a bit out of place, but that?s cause I know what it originally was.  I like your balance of vocals, I think it?s very appropriate.  This mix is extremely close to the original mix that?s on the record.  Did you cheat?  Again, I?d like to hear the bass in the outro as it holds some good movement.

mcsnare

guitars seems phasey and watery.  I really like holding my sister back till the last line in the first verse.  The drum samples add a cleaner image, which I like.  I also like how you build the mix as it developes.  Even though the track count is low, you work with the elements well.  I can feel how you are trying to highlight the simplicity of the tune.  OH, drums fade in the bridge??very nice!  I also like how you work the groove.  I haven?t heard any entries yet that did any editing for groove and feel.  The song isn?t different, it just flows better to the ear.

a.g.p.

a touch of distortion on the guitars is a cool idea.  The vocals are nice and loud and balanced well, just too dark.  I like the panning in the chorus.  I?d like to hear the drums thicker, but it?s nice to hear the mix get ?blown out?.  Nice entrance of the bass in verse 2.  Chorus 2 has a nice lift as well.  Drum fade in the bridge again, though I think you did this a touch too soon.  GOOD GRIEF the outro has a HUGE lift.  I love it!!  Kept the organ punch at the end??.almost perfect outro.  Man that was cool.

Big Metal

started nicely, but using my sister as the lead doesn?t do it for me.  I think I?ll hear more of this coming up.  I know she feels better, but the point of the song just can?t be delivered from her, plus her note selection sucks as the lead.  If you flipped the male back to lead in the chorus it might have worked better.  OH, the drum edit made me think you ditch the outro, nice turn around.  Now that?s an interesting take on the outro.

sidechain

cool synth effect on the organ.  Drums sound really cool, I want to hear the snare decay like the kick, more compression, or a touch of verb, it?s tricky with the tracks.  I don?t like the long delay on my sister?s chorus vocal, but I love how you pushed the ?please doctor? line.  That?s a really nice touch.  WOW, that?s some guitar re-amping.  I think the idea is good, but it?s too much fuzz to support that clean vocal treatment.

bennals

the vinyl record feel is cool.  Female as lead?..you know how I feel about that if you read the other reviews I wrote.  Something feels out of sync.  Especially the vocals, they feel late.  The crash cymbal samples feel too fake to me.  Chorus feels empty without the male vocal, though you kept the ?please doctor? line.  Explain your thoughts on re-visting the first verse?

ATOR

2001 space odyssey.  The balances are good, a bit spacey for my taste.  However, the vocals are nicely balanced and they really sound great.  Listen to mcsnare?s mix for two things.  1.  His edits for groove, and his lead vocal tuning.  I think you could benefit from that.  Your direction on this mix, while not my taste, is very well put together.  I think you could tighten it up in those two areas and have a great mix here.

mac

what is that vocal effect?  The guitars sound really good, bass is placed really well and the organ is right where I intended.  The drums seem too far back for the intimate picture you painted.  That moaning, dying cat vocal effect is getting on my nerves.  So, the drums need to come into your intimate picture.  It feels really rich except the drums and now synth work.

iCombs

my tracks bumped through a big muff.  Oh, except the vocals.  A touch heavy on my sister in the vocal balance.  OH NICE.  The chorus drops in a cool way.  I?m liking how you develop the track.  That makes the track a lot easier to listen to.  the snare delay thing adds too much techno feel for my taste.  The chorus vocal balance is pretty good, still a touch heavy on my sister, but I can live with it.  I don?t mind your kick sample, it fits your mix well, snare as well.  I wish the outro lifted more.

darkhorseporter

vocals are too quiet, but sound good.  Just turn em up.  Right now I?m listening more to the guitar then the vocal.  Mix is well balanced.  Could use a touch more bottom end, but I?m just reaching for that.  Thus far, I really like this mix.  It?s simple and to the point.  I personally feel the song supports itself, and your mix is allowing that to happen.  Get the vocals up and I?d be sold.  The outro could lift a bit, but it?s cool this way too.  The fade is ok, I prefer the hard ending.  Brings more conclusion then a fade.

Brian Lloyd

total vocal re-arranging.  Shame shame??To me, the focus of the song should have been obvious.  As an artist, moving the vocal phrasing AND changing the lyrics is all but maddening.  I?d love to hear your reasoning for this.  The drums feel really thin compared to your other elements.  I can?t get past the vocal edits.  Give me some insight.

Billybehdaz

vocals in the bathroom, turned up to 11 (the bathroom that is).  it sets up the chorus nicely, though the overall tone of the first verse is not something I dig.  If you rely on the guitar and vocal only, you should try to match their vibe better.  Chopped he last drum hit.

Tom C

interesting intro.  Other then the intro, that seems a bit out of place to me, I like the mix.  It?s wide but still up front.  Nice Tom.

leester

the mix feels a bit dark.  Female as lead.  Thus far the whole thing is evenly dark, so that can be fixed in mastering.  A touch of male vocals in the 2nd verse.  Other then the vocal balance, the mix is to the point and focused.  Both good things.  The outro is interesting.  I?d have to listen more to see if I could live with it.  The idea is there, and I don?t mind it, if I were listening as the artist and you were the only mixer, I?d run it down 10 more times to see what I thought.

Kim Watson

I really dig the effect on the guitar.  It?s nicely placed.  Chorus is nice too.  Drums are a bit thick in the low mids.  Bass is too.  Might be a monitoring thing.  I like the stripped down verses.  The mixes that have done this have all have great impact into the chorus, yours does too.  I was into the outro till the drums faded.  

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: mcsnare on June 12, 2007, 10:58:49 pm
J. thanks for the reviews and especially the comments on mine. I almost went with the gtrs unaffected, I just thought they might be better juiced up because there are so few elements, I'd try to make the most of everything. If I went back I'd probably not flange them or use a lot less of it. The delays on the drums were my way of trying to add some pseudo percussion to help the groove because of the slow tempo. I like it, but I can see how some would find it too distracting or otherwise inappropriate.
My apologies to the other IMPers for not reviewing the entries, I've been totally slammed at work and at home.
Dave
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 12, 2007, 11:05:39 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 22:47



Garret

no bass in the first verse, I kinda like it, but I?d like to hear it enter the first chorus, it would have given it a nice lift.  The kick drum feels a bit out of place, but that?s cause I know what it originally was.  I like your balance of vocals, I think it?s very appropriate.  This mix is extremely close to the original mix that?s on the record.  Did you cheat?  Again, I?d like to hear the bass in the outro as it holds some good movement.




Yah, in retrospect, I should have worked with the bass... it was too easy to drop, and I do like my mix as is... but there is some good bass stuff in the outtra I'm missing.

Glad to hear you liked the vox balance.  I mixed this tune (mostly) on a set of avantone mix cubes, and it was incredibly easy to dial in the vox.  Very happy with the avantones for this...  I got 'em on a whim to tie me over until I could swing cash for a set of quality near fields... but now I dunno.  I'm loving the avantones.  Kick on a sub to fill in the low end, and dang... good stuff.

Interesting that my mix sounds close to the record... I didn't cheat, but maybe your mix was influencing me since I had heard it a half dozen times (a while back though).

Glad to hear you're busy... just make sure the kids remember who pops is.

-G
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: a.g.p on June 12, 2007, 11:46:35 pm
Thanks to all who listened to my mix, and those who took the time to critique.

Quote:

J-Texas : Cool "Peppers" guitar sound. Very nice guitars. The vox are muddy though. Getting killed by the guitars. A few dB down in the 100Hz and down, they might have seated better. I like the effected vox on the chorus a lot! The organ is sort of getting on my nerves though. Sorry mcsnare, I just heard a better thump you in the galooms outro. Way to go. I like the ending too.

Glad you liked the guitars. They weren't quite what I was after but they grew on me after a while.  You picked up on what seems to be a common theme here - muddy vox & annoying organ. I can pick that out now of course.

Quote:

iCombs : Vocals are up. Another asymmetrical mix. Until the end. Interesting. The guitars feel brittle. Woulda been nice to hear some more girth out of those. The female vox feel a little dark to me.

I think my vocal level issues are coming from the lack of highs? ...had to turn them up, maybe.

Quote:

chrisj : hey, this isn't IMP 9? Boxy voices, highlighted organ- what this does have going for it is the vocals are direct and communicative, and the rest of the track is completely whacked! It screams 'indie indie INDIE INDIE' which I think the song expects, I just don't like all the choices of what is highlighted. Whoa big outro, that's really loud. The word for this mix is NAIVETE. Normally I think you'd have to show more skill... big fan of the tail-off crackly-guitar-pickup organ chord, I really liked that idea, better than what I did. (yeah, I know, 'better than ChrisJ' is passive-aggressive insultry Wink )

The mix is pretty whack, but when it was more typical, eg: drums/bass central, I wasn't feeling it. At first listen, I felt the end was very uplifting and brighter then the rest of the track.  I tried to pass that along with some volume / panning changes - possibly too much.

Quote:

garret : Vocals get a bit nasally in the upper mids at times. Organ is hurting me and overpowering the angels in the bridge.

Again....that damn organ!

Quote:

Tom C : Not much to complain here, extremely (but in a good way) panned. Would like to have less reverb on the male vocals and maybe the organ slightly less loud. Second, hmh, chorus(?) too loud, that completely shakes you out of that mood you were put in before.

Happy you like extreme panning! I saw the track in 2 parts, so I was trying to separate the ending...

Quote:

ATOR : Guitars and vocals sound good. The vocal reverb return could use some hpf or maybe it’s the vocal itself that has too much lows in it. I don’t like the sound and panning of the drums.

There wasn't too much reverb so I suspect you're hearing muddy vocals again.

Quote:

spoon : Nice even mix, warm & intimate mvox. Good work on the 'Save Me' sections. Like the panning choices (organ & drums). Outro has good energy.

Thanks!

Quote:

j.hall : a touch of distortion on the guitars is a cool idea. The vocals are nice and loud and balanced well, just too dark. I like the panning in the chorus. I?d like to hear the drums thicker, but it?s nice to hear the mix get ?blown out?. Nice entrance of the bass in verse 2. Chorus 2 has a nice lift as well. Drum fade in the bridge again, though I think you did this a touch too soon. GOOD GRIEF the outro has a HUGE lift. I love it!! Kept the organ punch at the end??.almost perfect outro. Man that was cool.

Thank you for the comments. The breakdown middle was something I played with for a while, and liked the fade and position changes, which move to their ending pans. The lift at the end is what I was shooting for.  Sort of a response to earlier in the song in a  (to me) happier key.

Again, thanks for the time. I'll dig into this mix again and make some changes and I'm looking forward to #13.  Maybe I'll try some critique's of my own.

Cheers
Anthony
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: yanik on June 12, 2007, 11:50:51 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 22:47


the guitar distortion doesn?t bother me.  It creates a lot of tension that isn?t a bad thing for this song.

I just played with the volume on the Bandmaster until it sounded right to me. I thought there was some space there that needed to be filled.
Quote:

the vocals are too dark, which doesn?t draw my ear to them, I keep listening to the guitars.

Absolutely right.
Quote:

You cut the ?please doctor? line??that?s a cold knife in my heart.  A mixer?s job is to sculpt a song, but to also pay attention to where the point is.  That single line is crucial, as my dad is a doctor??.it connects the metaphor back to the relationship being referenced.

I felt bad about that afterwards. I just wasn't crazy about how it sounded but I could and should have made it work.
Quote:

Your transition to the outro is simply stunning.  The first mix yet that made the outro the biggest part of the song??well played!

Well played right back at you, since these are pretty much the dynamics of the song as it was recorded. Thanks again for taking the time to do this.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 13, 2007, 12:11:04 am
j.hall wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 22:47

i feel like time is slipping away.  i'll post the reviews i have done to at least prove that i'm doing them.  i'll get the others up shortly.  i'm starting to consider hiring an assistant.......i'm just burried.

Fibes

I absolutely love this mix.  As an artist I?d say turning the male vocal down would have to change.  It?s very difficult for the subject matter of this tune to be properly ?told? by my sister (Jen).  The edit at the end removes the clincher which is a deal breaker for me.

I love the vibe.  You did a great job harnessing the ?enchanting? feeling I wanted this song to have



Heh, I'm glad you liked it, as per the male vocal I (as you) know that it shoulda been hotter in the chorus. The vocal in the verses wasn't selling me, it was just too ahh, not there for me to showcase it. The chorus vocal and the end were both things i second guessed myself on (don't do that) and if i had more than 2 hours they would have been revisited but life was on its way and that's how it shook down. The drums at the end just didn't play nice with the delay and it was a distraction.


As per my reviews, it's 12am and I'm just getting done. Hopefully I'l have some time tomorrow in between sessions to eat and listen/review.

It's been a slow month up until this week which was great to give a window to participate yet not enough to give all the songs a solid listen.

No matter what it's been a blast and all the mixes have something special.


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: scottoliphant on June 13, 2007, 12:53:08 am
Quote:

scottoliphant

Vocals are too dark. Blend of instruments is nice. I like the simple approach. This is easily your best sounding entry into the IMP world. The vocal needs to be brighter and louder, but all things considered, this is good. I like the drums. I would have faded that organ through the ?bridge? part, but that?s a subtle thing. You kept the drums at the end, thank you!


thanks j, this track was right up my alley, i still track to my 16 track =) I think a big part to the non hyped vox came from being a "Low" fan. i think that kind of oozed into this mix. cool track, thanks for sharing.  I'm hoping to get my reviews up tomorrow, thank you to all of you who have taken the time to review! I wonder how many folks immediately reached to notch out the tape hiss?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: M Carter on June 13, 2007, 01:39:08 am
j.hall wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 21:47



M Carter

another ?by the book? intro.  I like hearing the bass featured, it?s a nice change of perspective, but nothing drastic.  The vocal effects are making my ear push it to the back almost ignoring it.  I can hear my hi-hat keeping time in the second verse, did you mean to do that?  No female vocal at all?  Interesting choice, care to explain?  NO OUTRO?????  Oof, that hurt.






Thanks for the comments J.  I felt that the song didn't really need the female vocal, so i just kind of... took it out.  The harmonies didn't really take the song anywhere for me.  The way I heard the song was as an outro to a hard hitting rock record, thats why I kind of lo fi'd it out.  In retrospect, i think I might've gone a little too far off the deep end with it, but live and learn.

truth be told, I had a nice clean mix set to go with this one, but then i was bouncing out a reverb stem and thought "hey, that sounds cool... what if the mix was just... that?".  I put it back in and mixed it with the dry tracks, which is something i almost wished i hadn't done.

Overall it felt a bit long to me, that's why I cut out the outro.   To me, it made the song feel a bit overdone.  If it was going to go somewhere, I wanted it to go somewhere different, and when it didn't take me there, I decided to nix it.  (I also liked the idea of just takingthat space noise waaaaay up at the end)



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Kim Watson on June 13, 2007, 07:51:55 am
Kim Watson

I really dig the effect on the guitar. It?s nicely placed. Chorus is nice too. Drums are a bit thick in the low mids. Bass is too. Might be a monitoring thing. I like the stripped down verses. The mixes that have done this have all have great impact into the chorus, yours does too. I was into the outro till the drums faded.


Thanks J.

I agree with the Monitoring problem. I reaised after I mixied the track why I stopped using the laptops internal card for my headphones..HPF.. LOL stupid mistake but I was Lazy. When I get my edirol out it really helps with the bottom end. Did that before I submitted and tidyed the bottom up. Im using Sony HDR7509s headphones and Mackie HR824 working on getting my monitoring sorted here!

Thanks for the input!

Loved the track.... and im still finding myself humming it from time to time! Very Happy

Have a wicked day!

Kim
x
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: scottoliphant on June 13, 2007, 09:17:45 am
i noticed several folks posted files not 44.1 16bit...it'd make it easier if we stuck to that for the mixdown? especially when there are 40 some odd files. just a suggestion
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on June 13, 2007, 11:03:11 am
I thought the files had to be 192k MP3s, no?



scottoliphant wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 08:17

i noticed several folks posted files not 44.1 16bit...it'd make it easier if we stuck to that for the mixdown? especially when there are 40 some odd files. just a suggestion

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on June 13, 2007, 11:04:43 am
j.hall wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 21:47



Fibes
I absolutely love this mix.  As an artist I?d say turning the male vocal down would have to change.  It?s very difficult for the subject matter of this tune to be properly ?told? by my sister (Jen).  The edit at the end removes the clincher which is a deal breaker for me.




Dude, your sister RAWKS!  What a great job she did.



Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: scottoliphant on June 13, 2007, 11:24:36 am
Quote:

I thought the files had to be 192k MP3s, no?
i guess i meant that a few of the mp3's are still 48. it's not a huge deal, it just means i have to convert quite a few of the files if i want to dump them all on the same timeline for the sake of reviewing.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 13, 2007, 04:28:47 pm
spoon wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 10:04



Dude, your sister RAWKS!  What a great job she did.






i'll let her know you think so.  she is fully opera trained, can sing in 5 languages, and multiple styles (jazz, country, opera.....blah blah blah)

all that, and she thinks she sucks.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 13, 2007, 04:31:21 pm
BTW, i really like seeing you guys respond to my reviews.  it's nice to get some insight into your decisions.  plus, i think a lot of you really took a lot away from this one from the stand point of mixing "for the song"

since i can lend much more perspective on the song itself, i think you guys are drawing some solid lines on how you approach that.

this is one of my goals this time.  to start blending the technical side of mixing, into the artistic representation side.

pay close attention to mixes submitted that you end up listening to the song and not the mix.  that's the point right?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Brian Lloyd on June 13, 2007, 04:50:20 pm
J-

like i said before i took a chance on re-arranging the vocals...guess it failed. oh well. being a non-indie engineer, the song didnt grab me at first. thus the reason for the shifting of the vocals. guess i arranged them so they sounded best to me. had a gut feeling it wasnt a good idea but oh well. cant win if you play conservative right? i did however learn a tremendous amount of things from mixing this track. over time it quickly grew on my and cant wait to mix number 13! drums didnt really have that much beef to them..should have pumped them up a little bit.

im about 1/2 done reviewing all the tracks, just crazy busy at work now since camp is days away from opening and the crew has just arrived.

Now a side note....this is my first track really done inside the box. can someone shed some light on exactly what you guys mean by 2 buss compression? and what are its advantages? i know this seems like a total noob question but its something i'd like to get straight. thanks!

brian
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: garret on June 13, 2007, 05:01:48 pm
Brian Lloyd wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 16:50


Now a side note....this is my first track really done inside the box. can someone shed some light on exactly what you guys mean by 2 buss compression? and what are its advantages? i know this seems like a total noob question but its something i'd like to get straight. thanks!

brian


2 bus compression is when you put a compressor on the master bus.  2-bus = stereo, left and right.

If done right, 2bus compression can make a track "pump and breath"...

Personally, I didn't consider using 2bus compression on this track because it didn't seem like the track was the pumpin type.  It ain't rock music, there's no backbeat, etc.   I did use a limiter on the 2bus to knock off a couple of peaks, but that's it.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Brian Lloyd on June 13, 2007, 06:35:21 pm
Thanks garret...thats what i had suspected. i would also rather use a limiter...thus reducing the chance of a track sounding "compressed". thanks for the quick response.

brian
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 13, 2007, 09:32:20 pm
Brian Lloyd wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 15:50

cant win if you play conservative right?



Indeed.

had you been mixing the track for me privately, i simply would have ask you to put them back to the original order.  
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 14, 2007, 12:14:20 am
The following is a long drawn out worthless two cents.

<Blind listening>

Briefcasemanx
Dry, static in some respects. A safari without an adventure. I like how the bass sits just don't know if it ever grabs me.

Brian Lloyd
The vocal edits distract from the flow and the drums don't lift but the vocals sit right in your lap. The breakdown section does a great job of setting up the coda.

Craig
Where are the transients on the drums? Ok maybe they showed up in the guitars. I like the fact the guitars are treated at the end but i wish the drums were spanking with them.

Greg Dixon
Thanks for making the organ stereo, it really likes to move. The drums are doing some interesting moving too.

Mcsnare
From the top I'm hearing slick flange. Oh, this one isn't blind anymore I'm hearing the delay on the drums. And that lovely hiss in the quiet sections! Excellent groove rehab, you obviously spent the time to tame J.'s wandering groove. Kudos. Pulling the drums back before the coda is an idea worth keeping.

Tom C
I dig the intro, it's natural. I wish the drums weren't L/R but hey the vocals are telling the story. Maybe a little low pass on the vocal widener to creep some of the slickness out but it's prolly tubby time if that were to happen. Is this one peaking?

Fibes
You really screwed the pooch missing that "please doctor" line in the chorus and what is it with the phased tape hiss being louder than the bass? A notch on the drum DDL woulda kept it from overhonking and if yer gonna split the damn vocals L/R please time align them SSs. Oh and you managed to keep the crackle in the left guitar at the intro.

Bennals
There's some Trent Rez noiseplay here and some creative editing. I wish the drums were more in line with the egglike lo-fi high approach. But hey you got that crazy low end on the bass; i just wish it locked with the drums as one big gooey pulse.

BigMetal I like the female intro it really draws you in and eliminates the weakest of the male parts. The guitar and drums do the L/R balnce well, it's asuccessfil use of the sides. I miss the big down beat at the top of the coda but the transition works on its own and the left guitar helps lift the coda. The fade is cool too.

IMP 12 (2:36.65secs)
Dunno who did this one. Lots of verb on the vocals and a stop unlike any other before the second verse. Cool intimacy but the verb is distracting and a bit strident.

Careful Collapse
Do I hear CamelPhat? And that glorious hiss. I'm wishing for a smoother delay on the vox or maybe MORE movement in the frequency spectrum. Definately a chance taker. The high passed guitars lose impact that i wish the drums picked up.

Chance
Dude. That's freaky. The Residents would be proud. I gotta go listen to George and James To get back on track. Just goes to show proximity effect can get to be greater at a different sample rate. Did J.'s sister grow balls? Vibraslap? Cabasa straight from the HR-16. 200 gold stars for actually living this.

ChrisJ
Nice grippy vocal. Drum transients coulda been multed in? The wet fish is nice and all but i had sushi for breakfast. I do like the movement on the drums like an indian blanket on a cold Montana night. Ok, maybe Vermont. Nice air on the Ahhs.

Darkhorseporter
Sounds close to what J intended. Coulda used 2-3 db more drums but the sit good now... The transition into the egglike part works smooth like buttah and the coda guitars have a nice definition but fades give me hives. heh.

dConstruction
Kinda sounds like yer name. Reminds me of a greasy granny. It's all about the breakdown, not sure that's where I'd go but then again shuffleboard is my game of choice. cool tangent.

DevinK
Very Brit mix. The use of space and envelopes is intrigueing. Wish the organ went there too.

Grant Richard Gritty. Showcases the conversation. Somehow I only got 22 seconds worth.

Jason Thompson
I can close my eyes and visualise a band but the organ player is running sound. Nice edit in the breakdown.


Touch the weenis
Weenis has lots of bass, and a vocal fetish. Distorted lip noise isn't my favorite but neither is that vocal take. Some of the elements are striking but on the whole the mix is a bit incongruous. Very Sopranos ending.

NickT
The male vocal sounds, uh, pushed. It was already pushed and something is acting as a pusher.  Maybe it's the doubling, maybe it's some sort of squeeze but it pulls too much away from the rest. Drums are rocking tho. And the naked female vocal at the end is haunting.

Scottoliphant
I imagine if J. was sitting there loomingover someone this is what the mix would sound like. It's the most successful of non-tweakers. Jon Brion would sample that kick and sell it on the strip for suit coat money. Nice nose on the bass.

OK that's half way.

I gotta sleep before y'all kill me.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Brian Lloyd on June 14, 2007, 12:37:37 am
j.hall wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 21:32

Brian Lloyd wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 15:50

cant win if you play conservative right?



Indeed.

had you been mixing the track for me privately, i simply would have ask you to put them back to the original order.  



of course! but since this was a new experience for me i figured id see where it lead...and now i know Laughing

if this was a TRUE session it would have been alot quicker and based more upon what the artist thought it should sound like....vs....giving me free reign.

thanks again J for such a great learning experience !

brian
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tom C on June 14, 2007, 04:00:55 am
Thank you all for your feedback and your time, it's MUCHO  appreciated.
Thumbs up to everyone who listened to that song for another 40 times to write a comment!

I'll reply to the questions in the comments only (and to J. because he asked for feedback
about his comments), but feel free to ask additional questions.


Fibes wrote on Thu, 14 June 2007 06:14


Tom C
I dig the intro, it's natural. I wish the drums weren't L/R but hey the vocals are telling the story. Maybe a little low pass on the vocal widener to creep some of the slickness out but it's prolly tubby time if that were to happen. Is this one peaking?



I tried the drums fully centered, but in my mix the male vocals were much more intense with that tom out of the way.
It's not fully L/R but more like 11 a.m./3 p.m.
Do you mean clipping with 'peaking'? I had a limiter on the 2-bus to remove a couple of peaks, maybe 2db or so.

j.hall wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 04:47

Tom C
interesting intro.  Other then the intro, that seems a bit out of place to me, I like the mix.  It?s wide but still up front.  Nice Tom.



I added that intro because IMO the song starts to abrupt with the guitars/organ, it should start softer to lead the listener into the song more smoothly. The softer Peter Gabriel stuff comes to my mind here.

I first tried a normal fade-in with the guitars, but that didn't work at all so I added the synthesizer fade and the female vocals.
On a second thought the vocals weren't probably the best choice, but the synthesizer is essential IMO.
Thanks again for hosting this IMP, I've (again) learned a lot.


And, to the mixers who didn't yet comment: DO IT NOW!

I know it's hard to listen to 40+ mixes of the same song, but I learn most when I listen to all these mixes and try to understand the intention behind the mix.

Tom
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 14, 2007, 12:55:09 pm
Brian Lloyd wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 23:37



if this was a TRUE session it would have been alot quicker and based more upon what the artist thought it should sound like....vs....giving me free reign.




interesting.  i'd say 75% of my projects give me free reign.  the artists want me to not have my hands tied.

typically they say, "do whatever you need to make it rock."
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 14, 2007, 02:32:08 pm
Same here J.

But i also track quite a bit of what i mix nowadays or at least have a hand in it.

When i mix alone it happens very quickly.

When mixes are attended they either go superfast (meaning it's a battle I can't win) or take way too much time and thought.

"If ya gotta attend, steer clear until the mix is 80% done or you'll be toast by the time we get to the details." ---That's my advice.


This mix took two hours including the time it took to figure out how to get the RAR file to open. If this was for release, there would have been more time locking up the drums, reamping the bass, lining up the female vocal and tweaking the male vox in the mix.

And J. woulda had me do a recall and get his majestic high hat ticks back into the end of the tune.


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 14, 2007, 03:39:57 pm
Fibes wrote on Thu, 14 June 2007 13:32



And J. woulda had me do a recall and get his majestic high hat ticks back into the end of the tune.





indeed.

a recall taking you all of 30 seconds.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: bennals on June 14, 2007, 04:05:20 pm
This really is an invaluable experience J.  Thanks.  Below are a few thoughts on the first ten on the list.  I'll try and do the rest over the weekend.  Take them with a grain of salt.  It's 4 in the morning and I'm listening on cans (7506s)...not an ideal scenario I know.  Unfortunately I did my mix under the same conditions.

In response to your question about revisiting the first verse J., I guess it was mostly gut instinct.  No doubt you had your reasons, but it felt like it needed something more than that abrupt end and the reprise kind of closed the circle if you like.  A gentle landing?  On the out of sync thing, once I'd decided to strip out the male vox the phrasing seemed out of whack to me, so I shifted it around a bit.  Not surprised it sounds out to the person who wrote it.  I agree about the crashes too...crap job there and on the drums in general.  And what was I thinking on the 2-bus limiting...maybe I was drunk.  Anyway, I re-did the mix the next day and addressed those problems and was much happier with it.  Looking forward to the next one.

Cheers.

Bill.


Billybehdaz - nice simple guitar sound though not sure about the wide treatment on the vocals and the way they sit in the song.  I like the sparse verses but in the choruses the organ sits at lead instrument level where it might have been better as background.  

Fantomas - Nice intro balance with the exception of the loud organ.  Dry and grainy drums seem out of context when they kick in though.  The pronounced harmonising in the second verse, which I can now hear in the first verse as well, seems a bit over the top.

Brian_Lloyd_The_Space_Doctor - well, I admire your gumption but I guess it seems like the mix got away from you amidst all the editing and restructuring.  Some odd moments when it sounds like your hand slipped on the low boost knob as well.  Repetition of the male chorus line at the death seems particularly out of place.

NickT - good straightforward mix.  I thought the guitars sounded so nice they didn't need any chorus etc. but it's not obtrusive.  Pitch correction (?) on the male vox sounds pretty artifacty at times (is that a word?).

Jason_Thompson - Heavy - Big bottom end Jason.  Nice vox.  Reversed organ is nice but the organ in general seemed to sit too high in the mix.  One of the best treatments of the synths.  I thought they were best left out but they work ok here.  Excellent finish.

Jason_Thompson - I liked the heavy version much more than this one.  Heavily panned snare and hat don't sit comfortably and the organ is even more on top here.

agp - intro was encouraging but the transition to the chorus with the right panned (loud) organ and left panned drums seemed to disembowel the mix.  I thought the male vox in the verses was good but the overdriven parts in the second chorus, with the exception of 'please doctor',  a bit unnecessary.

ATOR - The psychedelic approach didn't really work for me here.  I thought it required something warmer and more intimate, but to your credit you executed it really well.  Everything is well balanced.  If that was what the client was after they would be stoked, I'm sure.

garret - no bass was a bold move.  It does leave it sounding a bit insipid though.  Kind of unglued I guess, and also allows the organ to dominate.  Heavy compression on the male vox maybe exacerbates the effect.

Andrew_Brierley - I can barely make the guitars out underneath the chorus effect, bass and organ.  Everything is really subtle to begin with then the drums sound quite aggressive in comparison.  I find that a bit out of whack, particularly in the outro when their distortion is really noticeable.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: BigMetal on June 14, 2007, 06:16:24 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 12 June 2007 22:47



Big Metal

started nicely, but using my sister as the lead doesn?t do it for me.  I think I?ll hear more of this coming up.  I know she feels better, but the point of the song just can?t be delivered from her, plus her note selection sucks as the lead.  If you flipped the male back to lead in the chorus it might have worked better.  OH, the drum edit made me think you ditch the outro, nice turn around.  Now that?s an interesting take on the outro.



I must be losing my hearing or just not paying attention... I didn't understand the words to well.  I thought the male voice was saying "please don't talk" instead of "please doctor" and that the vocals were a dialog between the female and male.  That gave me the impression that the vocals were pretty equal.  I don't have autotune so I backed off the male vox as they were less in key than the female vox.  Plus it gave the "she's crying for help and he's in the distance trying to ignore her" vibe...
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Greg Dixon on June 14, 2007, 06:18:31 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 13 June 2007 12:47



Greg Dixon

simplicity.  The song was written this way for a reason, and you did a great job finding that, and serving it.  I like your guitar EQ, they were tracked a bit dark, but you did a good job bringing them back, but not going too bright.  The edit in the outro kills my buzz.  Solid mix that serves the song.  You used simple sounds, and built a mix that has me listening to the song and not your mix??that?s a really great thing!




Thanks for the praise j. I usually aim to be 'the invisible mixer'.
Is 'The edit in the outro kills my buzz.' a good or bad thing?


Fibes wrote on Thu, 14 June 2007 14:14



Greg Dixon
Thanks for making the organ stereo, it really likes to move. The drums are doing some interesting moving too.




No problem, it felt a bit bland originally, so I used the Bomb Factory Voce Leslie emulation plug on that.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: scottoliphant on June 14, 2007, 08:47:01 pm
anyone accidentally unmute all and almost piss yourself? heh
Good job everyone, thanks to those that got a chance to make it through these. Do you all use this many effects when you normally mix? Just a different style i suppose from what I'm used to. I felt like in some cases, the effects became more important than the song. like when someone new to photoshop starts making your band flyers, and they end up with 15 different filters and plugs on top. Also, did a lot of folks immediately reach for the high pass to kill the hiss? On a few mixes i felt like in by trying to eliminate the noise, you lost some important stuff going on in the upper registers.

and we're off:

brian lloyd
you've got this huge lush vocal treatment, and the rest of the tracks just seem kind of limp in comparison. it's obvious you spent a lot of time on the vox, sound good. not sure about the rearranging of the song, thought it was fine as is. would love more oomph in the kick.

craig
straightforward, which i like, not a lot of bells and whistles. i lose a bit of the snare in relation to the kick. cool ending! the bass seems a little one dimensional.

greg dixon
the drums feel a little woozy to me. are they bussed and compressed together? the snare hits center, and then drifts over to the right. may be intentional with the chorus on the organ. other than that, good mix

el duderino
sounds really limited to me, which is a little distracting, but, interesting take. different than anything i've heard thus far. with everything being so loud and distorted, not much contrast when we get to the end, doesn't feel different.

agp
nice full snare, kick feels impotent next to it. a few spots where it seems the bass could have been sustained more. it drops out in the chorus and it feels like a giant hole opens up in the middle due to the panning. ending is nice, organ a bit loud for me.

ator
effects! on the opposite end of the spectrum from my mix, i feel the vox are a little overhyped for my taste. a little too limited for me, the end break doesn't seem that different than the rest of the tune and felt like it needed to be, but overall good mix.

maxim
no male vox? the femal vox alone sounds autotuned or something to me. there is a strange timbre, possibly just hearing it alone. interesting effects on the organ. drums fall a little flat for me, almost feel like they are coming through the singers headphones during vocal tracking rather than part of song. but as a drummer i'll admit i notice the drum treatments first. bass sounds a little woody, or boxy. there seems to be an audible click or something when the end break comes in.

spoon
pretty good straightforward mix. doesn't do a whole lot for me, maybe feels a little dry, but could be due to the effects overload of a bunch of other mixes. i lose the bass, maybe more sustain? no synths on break? i missed them.

undertow
whoa. lots of effects. cool bass tone at the beginning. thought it was going to be some sort of remix thing. if i was the artist and had submitted this track, it'd be too out there for me, but you did a nice job of keeping things fairly balanced. i miss the real drums at the end. seems to fall flat with the loss of the persistent highs from the snare and hat.

leester
male vox? mix overall sounds flat to me, narrow. was hoping it'd freak out at the end break, but stayed fairly narrow and dry. not sure about the vox at the end.

icombs
the drum samples sound fake / weird to me, maybe it's the clicky kick, out of place in the song? but that's just my own aversion to them possibly. nice vocal work.

bennals
where's the kick? verb to tweaky high end for me on the drums, makes the drums sound like midi drums and a click track rather than an instrument, male vox?

big metal
not too bad for one of the more straightforward mixes. the verb on drums has the super high end sheen to it that i'm not a huge fan of (peessss peeessss). the big break didn't feel big enough for me.

billybehdaz
feels a little flat, one dimensional.somethign weird happens left during some of the choruses, like the guitar jaunts out there quickly, then retreats back to center. 1:22 for example. pause feels awkward before big break, that doesnt' feel very big. bass overpowers end section. end hat cut off? feels a little awkward since you let us get right up to it, and there isn't a fade out or anything on the last kick note. just cuts off. maybe the render got messed up.

careful collapse
feels very limited. interesting drum effect. almost works for me. i lose the snare from time to time, like the compressor hasn't yet recovered. maybe it's the filter thing. the mix overall feels very robotic and computerized. like this is what indie rock sounds like in space, on one of those giant spinning wheels that induces gravity, while you are out for your morning space exercise.

chance
whoa!!!! crazy stuff. is it wrong if i laughed at the noise maker left side during the first chorus? this mix overall just kind of freaks me out. interesting experiment, but not for me.i do like the female vox treatment at the end, i wish i could sample it and make a vocal pad out of it. very startekky or something.

chris j
in the effort to kill the tape hiss, i feel like you lost the high end on the guitars and other tracks.the drums distract me from the rest of the tracks, chorus feels like vox and drums solo'd. hi brushy reverb feels weird. i guess since i've said this is several reviews, i don't like that super sparkly high end reverb sound. doesn't feel like it's adding depth, just some sizzly sustain. cool big synth sweep. bass?

darkhorseporter
feels like the rough tracking / headphone mix. the snare attack feels kind of missing. the big end feels anticlimactic. just kind of does more of the same. the bass seems compressed weird, notes die off very fast.

dconstruction
kind of cool once song gets going. only negative in the verses or the vox seem to be triggering the compressor or something pulling down the other instruments a bit as they try to come back up. i like the big distorto thing that was trying to come blow in for the big break, but was disappointed when she quietly turned back around and went home. thought we were goign to have a big my bloody valentine-ish ending

devink
not bad, levels seem to be decent on everything, just doesn't feel finished. vox a little low. sounds very digital to me, like it was tracked on a digital multitrack. the middle of the stereo field seems a little anemic, can't put my finger on it.

jason thompson
pretty good mix, i wish there was more sustain on the kick with it being all the way over there by itself. i lose the guitars a bit.interesting rework of the bass leading up to the break.

mcarter
it sounds like the whole thing was run through an amp simulator. with the compression, i lose the guitars a bit. miss the femal vox and the end, but cool little build thing there at end.

nickt
good clean mix. wanted something big to happen at end though.

rattleyour
bass feels kind of big, boxy and boomy, seems to overtake some of the nice qualities of your mix. nice job overall. end break felt a little flat to me, maybe because the rest of song was very up and about the face.

superloud
was expecting a superloud mix hah! kick is lost. feels a little unfinished, like you just turned up the faders. the drum cut out in middle felt awkward. feels a little narrow.

tw27
the drums feel all outta phase for me. it's distracting me, making it hard to listen critically to the rest. i want to hit that phase flip button and make it all better! i thought maybe at end, everythign woudl come back into phase as a little twist, but nope. End is empty. i do like the super washed vocals at very end leading us away.

fantomas
where'd that other harmony come from? drums feel like they were run through an amp. feels a little flat. like all the high end was cut to kill the hiss. the end didn't do much for me, was hoping it got bigger.

fibes
nice pro mix, well done. for all the hating on effects i've done and do, you've done it pretty tastefully, doesn't take away from the song, but works with it, pains a nice picture. All the elements work together like they are part of the same song. On some of the other mixes, i didn't get this, lack of cohesion. nice job. i do with the bass sustained a little more though.

garrett
started well for me, when drums start in, i felt it went flat. feels very frequency flat to me, like the whole thing was notched or something. bass? is it there at all?

jhall
there you go. this guy does this for a living. feels finished. complete idea. is the guitar reamped? i like the guitars out wide more than the guy up the middle in verse. i wish there were more dynamics, we all know how you do like the compression. nice job

liam
feels phasey up the middle, but can't put my finger on it. something with the drum effect. i like the spooky extra vocal thing right. wish end was bigger.

andrew briarley
i long for more bass sustain. feels heavily eq'd, digital sounding. the drums feel way tweaked for that much hi hi end without hiss. the guitars feel like a bit of an after thought. again, wish the end got bigger.

mcsnare
radio here we come. the samples distract me a bit, again, probably just my aversion to them. didn't think this song needed that big kick click. sounds a little out of place / not believable, but that's probably not the point. good job, just feels too worked on for my tastes, but some would love it.

kim watson
pretty good! the gated verb on the kick sounds a little weird to me. i want things to live more together. i lose the snare a bit. could have done with a bigger synth sweep middle for the big payoff.


wew, all done!
these are just MY opinions, so please don't take anything i've said personally. we all bring our own tastes to this!
take care
scott
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 14, 2007, 10:49:36 pm
are people deliberately not reviewing my mix??? that's the third or fourth person to skip it Sad
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Greg Dixon on June 14, 2007, 10:57:27 pm
scottoliphant wrote on Fri, 15 June 2007 10:47



greg dixon
the drums feel a little woozy to me. are they bussed and compressed together? the snare hits center, and then drifts over to the right. may be intentional with the chorus on the organ. other than that, good mix




Thanks Scott. Yes the drum movement was intentional. Main track centred, bass drum one side and then an aux return with both those heavily compressed on the other side. Just trying to make the drums feel less static. I didn't want it to be distracting, but give it a bit of movement and the slight unsteadiness seemed to fit with the song.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: scottoliphant on June 14, 2007, 11:25:32 pm
was it uploaded to the imp server? I just grabbed everything up there, wasn't intentional, I'll go back and check!
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: grantis on June 15, 2007, 01:11:15 am
no it's on my personal server.  i posted a link in the submissions thread
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 15, 2007, 01:12:42 am
greg, killing my buzz is a bad thing

scott, my guitars were re-amped with the sans amp PSA-1 plugin.  i use that thing ALL THE TIME.

yes i like compression, and oddly enough, my IMP mixes typically lack dynamics, but my "work for hire" stuff usually has a lot more.

however, i'm automating the dynamics in most the time.  it's very common for me to get a chorus rocking, then turn the drums dow 3 - 4 dB for a verse and rebuild the mix around that.  so the chorus lifts harder
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tom C on June 15, 2007, 04:28:15 am
grant richard wrote on Fri, 15 June 2007 04:49

are people deliberately not reviewing my mix??? that's the third or fourth person to skip it Sad


Maybe you (like me) use your own server?
Seems some people don't go through the official submission thread
and just look on the upload server.
They won't even notice when someone uploads after the deadline.

Tom
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: audiosculpture on June 15, 2007, 08:53:13 am
I just wanted to say thanks to the folks who have reviewed mixes. Unfortunately, between the day job & studio work, I still have not had a chance to listen & review, but I plan to sometime soon.  I have another marathon mixing session this weekend (& low / wilco tonight), so hopefully early next week (before I leave town for a wedding).

Thanks!
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 15, 2007, 09:53:23 am
I have roughly 10 mixes that have the name IMP12.


Shame on y'all.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: homerecordingodyssey on June 17, 2007, 07:34:49 pm
Quote:

andrew briarley
i long for more bass sustain. feels heavily eq'd, digital sounding. the drums feel way tweaked for that much hi hi end without hiss. the guitars feel like a bit of an after thought. again, wish the end got bigger.



Thanks for the feedback, I am still learning and I am going to use that excuse for the next couple of mixes at least Smile

I only had a couple of hours to mix as I had only just discovered the site a day or two before the deadline.

Really enjoying listening to so many variations and the feedback.

I don't feel knowledgeable enough to offer opinions on the other mixes myself yet so I will leave that until I have a bit more credibility.

Andrew
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tom C on June 18, 2007, 11:21:15 am
homerecordingodyssey wrote on Mon, 18 June 2007 01:34


I don't feel knowledgeable enough to offer opinions on the other mixes myself yet so I will leave that until I have a bit more credibility.

Andrew



My guitar playing sucks big time, but I can still offer my opinion about a world class guitar player.
So can you with the mixes here.

It won't be a technical feedback, but you can express your feelings about a mix, e.g. that it grooves for you, that you doesn't like something about it, that you like it but don't know why...

Have a look at ChrisJ's feedback some pages ago, it's about the feelings and emotions he had, not much about the technical stuff.
Writing about a mix forces you to listen carefully to find out why and what you like (or don't like) about it, and that's IMO an important thing to learn.

Tom
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 18, 2007, 04:04:15 pm
Back from vacation! Did everyone get busy all of the sudden? J. Hall's Ghost Town Forum.  Very Happy


garret

jason thompson - interesting panning.. not sure I like it, but it's interesting. Nice vox! up front where they should be. the organ is hurting my ears, and fighting with the vox.


tom c

Jason_Thompson: Nice vocals, I'd like to have less bass in the intro section.
Nice drum sound with extreme panning. Good!


ATOR

Jason Thompson -Why did you go for panned drums? I like the mix, good vocal treatment. Organ is too loud: boring dronesounds should be way in the back.


spoon

Jason_Thompson - Abit bass heavy, but otherwise a nice mix. The vocals sound good, but occasionally get dwarfed by the bass. Creative bridge to the outro. Very nice ending. Ended on a nice vibe, I did that.


Fibes

Jason Thompson - I can close my eyes and visualise a band but the organ player is running sound. Nice edit in the breakdown.


bennals

Jason_Thompson - Big bottom end Jason. Nice vox. Reversed organ is nice but the organ in general seemed to sit too high in the mix. One of the best treatments of the synths. I thought they were best left out but they work ok here. Excellent finish.


scottoliphant

jason thompson - pretty good mix, i wish there was more sustain on the kick with it being all the way over there by itself. i lose the guitars a bit.interesting rework of the bass leading up to the break.


I must have some hearing loss in the freakishly monotonous organ frequency!  Laughing   I figured if you can't beat 'em join 'em! That's why I tried to make it more like a pad or something wide open. Didn't work! Next!

We're about 50/50 on the panning idea. I liked it. That's the way the mics sounded and I went with it. I didn't want it right up the middle and I didn't want fake stereo going on. (yes, I've read the thread about the stereo v. mono thing and I don't want to go there!)  Smile

The bass is a product of 3 things: I like bass. NS-10s. My room makes me feel a little low at times.



THANK Y'ALL SO MUCH... for checking out everyone's work This is very cool that people actually care enough to take the time out and give marks.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 18, 2007, 04:13:11 pm
homerecordingodyssey wrote on Sun, 17 June 2007 18:34

I don't feel knowledgeable enough to offer opinions on the other mixes myself yet so I will leave that until I have a bit more credibility.

Andrew



NO WAY DUDE!

Unacceptable!  Surprised

You know how you feel when you hear something don't you? Don't think about it man. Blurt it out! OUCH! Too much organ! That guitar sounds like it's in a Campbell's soup can. I've heard better bass in a Pinto. Things like that!

You don't have to be mean. But, you can't change the way you interpret someone's mix. If it doesn't blow your skirt up, it just doesn't. Not that you wear skirts... do you?  Rolling Eyes

You're homework for tonight will be to critique everyone's mix from your heart not your head! (If you have time of course)

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 19, 2007, 10:55:30 am
Fibes wrote on Fri, 15 June 2007 08:53

I have roughly 10 mixes that have the name IMP12.


Shame on y'all.



INDEED!!!!!!!!

i'm back from a 4 day trip and will resume reviewing mixes.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tom C on June 19, 2007, 12:11:18 pm
Fibes wrote on Fri, 15 June 2007 15:53

I have roughly 10 mixes that have the name IMP12.


Shame on y'all.


You mean with exactly the same name?

I downloaded about 40 (I skipped the ones uploaded AFTER the deadline)
and they all have unique names.

Tom
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 19, 2007, 12:14:44 pm
I'M FINISHED!!!!!!!!!!!!


superloud

leaning on the female vox again.  With the bass this round, I want to the kick drum match it.  I like the panning you have going on.  The male vox in the chorus is too underplayed.  Drums cut in the bridge, not necessarily a bad thing.  But there wasn?t much movement through there.  The song sorta died for that span.  The outro comes in big but only due to the lack of drums in the bridge.  I think your instinct was leading you to some cool things, you just didn?t fully follow through, at least IMO.  I do like the cymbals fading to the tape hiss.  That?s a nice touch, though I think a few fillings rattled out in the process.

Take note of deconstructions bridge.

SingSing

your intro, to me at least, is a throw away.  Love the re-amped guitars.  They are dark and almost nasty yet some how stay pretty.  Bringing my sister in on the second verse is really nice touch.  There are some effects on the drums (I think the drums) that I dig.  It?s very subtle but it adds a lot of dimension.  The drums being panned mostly right is cool.   OH NICE.  Cut the drums a beat before the outro.  That was well played!!!  You should take note of mcsnare?s touching up of the groove.  Small edits here and there to smooth out the groove.  Your mix is great, had the groove had been sculpted like mcsnare?s your mix would be unbeatable thus far.

deconstruction

tremelo on the guitars, I have to get used to it, only bothers me because I?m not used to it.  Holly vocal compression batman.  You really wanted to hear that tape hiss eh?  I like the ?lo-fi? drum delay.  A nice touch to the actually delay.  The crust in the chorus is a cool thought, just a touch loud.  It?s distract me from the vocal.  Speaking of, I think the noise factor of the whole mix is a touch high.  It creates a good ?ground zero?, but it?s too much in context.  The bridge is near flawless.  I love that idea.  I would have worked that last few beats a bit more.  As it drops, I think it could drop harder, to make the outro POUND when it comes in on the one.  The ever so slight hint of the female outro vocal is great.  Nice touch.  By the end of the mix the tremelo guitars didn?t bother me.

rattleyour

the thing that you always impress me with is your reverbs.  You always pick, great verbs that perfectly blend into the song.  the drums are cool.  Kinda muddy, but not really.  I?d say they are a touch loud, but the low end is awesome.  You really have my attention focused on the vocals and the drums.  Which is perfect.  The bridge could have better movement.  The outro is amazing other then the edit.  Although, this is one of the few edits I think works.  Some of you fades aren?t working (ending in ticks or pops) but that?s easy to fix.  Well done, I think this is your best IMP entry yet, IMO.

Craig

another mix resembling the original album version,  you cheat?  The vocals feel quiet.  Actually, the guitars are dominating everything by a few dB.  I haven?t liked the female heavy mixes, but for some reason I?m liking this vocal balance.  OH, you threw the ?please doctor? line off to the left, nice touch.  I was going to comment on the bridge, but the bridge just hit.  I like the thought, you just need to match the drums and bass to it.  Not necessarily the distortion and verb, but they just get lost behind the guitars.

Maxim

Is this the space odyssey re-mix?  Aside from the female being the lead vocal, I don?t mind a lot of it.  The intro you built isn?t my bag, but I like how you cleaned it up when the vocal came in.  that?s smart mixing.  The second verse is better, the bass feels too loud to me.  The drum delay being as bright as it is, is distracting, but not that much.  Man you went crazy with the synth stuff.  Not a bad thing, it?s just all over the place.  The bridge feels half-assed, and the outro coming in makes the bridge section feel even more half-assed.  Thoughts on that?

el duderino

did you re-amp the guitars? Oh you did for sure in the chorus.  That?s to much, especially following it into the 2nd verse.  The vocal balances are nice, but the left guitar is killing your really pretty mix.  Did you not want it to be so pretty?  The vocal delays are OK, you could have worked those a bit better.  Honestly, the mix was great till the left guitar grew a mullet, bought a 5150, turned it to 11 and came to the wrong band practice.  Curious what your thought was on that.

J-Texas

built yourself a little bass fill.  Based on your guitar and bass sounds, the drums aren?t nearly hyped enough.  The mix feels safe.  You are either newer to mixing, or you just didn?t feel the track very much.  The backwards organ is really cool, that?s a great touch.  And you used it subtly.  The bass in the bridge just feels off to me.  The synth work is good.  Interesting ending.  I didn?t like it at first, but the last female vocal almost sold me on it.  

briefcasemanx

leaning on the organ more then most people did.  Adds a drone to the song that I like (hence having the part tracked in the first place).  I wish the drums felt bigger, though the drums and bass blend is really good.  Good vocal sounds.  The hard cut of the organ in the bridge sounds like a mistake, should have faded it.  Especially since you are leaning on it so heavily.

Grant Richard

used the bass players warm up for an intro.  The guitar re-amping in the verse is has too much grit, but it balances well in the chorus.  Perhaps a trade off, or perhaps you could have done two different settings.  The kick drum is way beyond on the bass.  Drums and bass (in 95% of songs) NEED to be balanced.  Lose that balance and your rhythm section just doesn?t feel right.  I like the kick drum shaking the mix, just bring the bass to the party.  The organ is great.  Despite it being a real organ, it still lacked any vibe.  Solid mix.  OOPS, you left the organ punch in the end.  Should have been obvious that that was a mistake.

NickT

there is something watery going on with the guitars.  I like the EQ you have on them, the effect I?m not crazy about.  Maybe it?s not an effect on the guitars?..organ maybe.  Another rhythm section balance issue.  Drums are awesome, bass is not matching the drums, this balance is crucial.  I like the sonics of the mix.  It?s present, but not harsh, or even ?bright?.  It?s very smooth, which is not easy to do.  You played it to safe in the bridge with the synth parts.  Everything was moving nicely, but the rising synth never took it anywhere.  Refer to my mix as our bridges are very similar.  The outro vocal isn?t as pretty as you made her in the bulk of the song, I miss that angelic quality.  The fade is OK, but the tension of that last few drum hits are better, IMO.

AnonymousUser

organ intro, to organ and vocal verse.  You could have made that work if things wouldn?t have been ?by the book?.  The sounds are too safe for a move like that.  You?re paying attention to your instinct, you just aren?t following it with any vibe.  Some times having something sound wrong is the right move.  Reference Rich Costey, killer mixer, and brilliant at working ?right? sounds out of intentionally wrong ones.  the vocal effects in the outro are great, again, just too safe.  Why not make that effect louder then the lead the few times it?s there.  You are making solid arrangement decisions, and working the song well.  The sonic vibe isn?t following you.

fantomas

another organ heavy mix, interesting.  WOW the drums are loud.  And very dark.  What is that vocal effect?  I don?t love it, or hate it.  I?d turn it down myself, it dominates too much.  The loud  drums and the fact that they are dark are distracting me.  They are washing out a lot of the other instruments, along with the vocal effects.  The synth lift in the bridge is great!!!!!  That?s what it was supposed to do.

spoon

I?m done commenting on the female vocal being featured, and I?m sure you?re sick of hearing it.  The vocal verb is a too long, or too loud.  It sounds good, but it moves the vocal past the dry music.  Always look for a realistic picture of the whole band.  Granted, this isn?t always the right approach, I just think it is for this particular song.  your mix does a good job rolling by.  Aside from the image of the verb, the song just happens, which is great.  Rhythm section is balanced well too.  Why did you want the outro to go that long?

homerecordingodyssey

mix version 2 reviewed:

the mix is a bit dark, but the drums are really bright and really loud.  Though the bass is balanced with the kick well.  The sonic differences can?t be fixed in mastering, FYI.  When the drums are in, they just dominate.  Overall, I think the mix is boring.  You have some good ideas, but the music needs to come up to blend with the  rhythm section.

Chance

I thought I was going to hate the wrong sample rate, but it?s creepy in a cool way.  Those vocal effects are freaking me out.  The alt perc. is interesting, but out of place.  Good grief, this mix is scary.  I?m going to have nightmares.  Do you work on horror films?  The samples are A LOT brighter and louder then the music.  For having the sample rate wrong, I think you did your best to make it work.  That kick drum is HUGE!!!!!!

Chris J

I really like the organ.  Wow, the vocals are a lot louder then the music.  Intentional?  I dig the snare, the kick is too light in the low end.  The huge compression only bothers me at the level the drums are mixed.  You could sell it by turning them down and blending in some of the original sounds.  There is something in the mids of the vocals that feels honky (male vocal).  Nice bridge.  That?s massive!!!!!  You just need the drums to come around.  That huge wide synth takes up a lot of space in a good way, but when it leaves, now the mix feels empty.  This is my favorite organ sound.  You made it sound like a pipe organ in an old church.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 19, 2007, 12:32:25 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 11:14


J-Texas

built yourself a little bass fill.  Based on your guitar and bass sounds, the drums aren?t nearly hyped enough.  The mix feels safe.  You are either newer to mixing, or you just didn?t feel the track very much.  The backwards organ is really cool, that?s a great touch.  And you used it subtly.  The bass in the bridge just feels off to me.  The synth work is good.  Interesting ending.  I didn?t like it at first, but the last female vocal almost sold me on it.


I'm glad somebody got the organ thing. There wasn't much to the bass so it had to be pumped for sustain. The guitar I liked. Besides a little EQ, I didn't want to mess with it much. I thought that the highlight of the track was the vox. That's what I focused on. And the spacey feel of the tune. I went back in after listening to the thing about a thousand times (it really grew on me like that black stuff in the X-Files movie) and squashed the drums a bit and it sounded better... bigger. I pumped the gain makeup and it put a cool sustain on that bass drum. Should-a. Could-a. Would-a. Better luck next time. If it sounds like I just started mixing then I've wasted a lot of time and should find a new profession.  Surprised  My junior high band director once suggested 'Underwater Basket Weaving'... maybe I'll look into that. Thanks for the feedback. I really did like the tune though. I checked out the rest of the album on iTunes. Pretty cool. Can't wait to try number 13.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 19, 2007, 12:57:28 pm
i just think you played it safe.  which to me, is from lack of motivation, or lack of experience.

didn't mean to offend, just wanted to spaker your mind thinking about how others precieve your work.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on June 19, 2007, 01:04:39 pm

Come on dude... you didn't offend! I'm secure bro! I can't argue that I played it safe, I guess. That's just the way I heard it, that's all.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on June 19, 2007, 01:54:24 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 11:14

I'M FINISHED!!!!!!!!!!!!

spoon

I?m done commenting on the female vocal being featured, and I?m sure you?re sick of hearing it.  The vocal verb is a too long, or too loud.  It sounds good, but it moves the vocal past the dry music.  Always look for a realistic picture of the whole band.  Granted, this isn?t always the right approach, I just think it is for this particular song.  your mix does a good job rolling by.  Aside from the image of the verb, the song just happens, which is great.  Rhythm section is balanced well too.  Why did you want the outro to go that long?



I dont mind the fembot comments.  I am still glad with that play (though now I know the artist intended a male lead, and would have changed that in an instant had I known then).  I am assuming you mean the verb on the male vox (yours).  Yeah it is a bit much, but I wrote previously, this was intentional to the femvox focus; I wanted the mvox to be distant and very ambient.

Outro:  As I wrote in another post ( I sure you missed it as you were out and there is 6 pages to this thread), I REALLY like this song and (as you do know) I think your sister's voice is great.

When the bridge dropped and the outro hit with full rays-from-heaven vocals, I just loved the shock.  So, like a junkie, I wanted more...and gave myself more.  (Just one more hit!)  
If I had MY way, I would have repeated it a bunch more while slowly decaying the volume and sending the entire mix into reverb'ed obscurity.  Twisted Evil  (Which I did for my own collection.)

Thanks for the song J!

David
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Fibes on June 19, 2007, 02:24:39 pm
To gahena with the male vocals.

The only thing they were selling is the song short.

My dime and a half.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: chrisj on June 19, 2007, 02:32:01 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 12:14


Chris J
I really like the organ.  Wow, the vocals are a lot louder then the music.  Intentional?  I dig the snare, the kick is too light in the low end.  The huge compression only bothers me at the level the drums are mixed.  You could sell it by turning them down and blending in some of the original sounds.  There is something in the mids of the vocals that feels honky (male vocal).  Nice bridge.  That?s massive!!!!!  You just need the drums to come around.  That huge wide synth takes up a lot of space in a good way, but when it leaves, now the mix feels empty.  This is my favorite organ sound.  You made it sound like a pipe organ in an old church.



Worth the wait! Thank you so much! The vocals being really up is intentional- I'm usually working to make them register as a person and to dominate the rest of the song, and here especially I thought it was all about the words- even more so since I didn't entirely understand what they were about. It's like OK, let's confuse _everybody_ and make it so you can't ignore the puzzling singer or avoid dealing with how he feels! Turned out to be a winning strategy because how he feels is the whole thing...

Thanks for the tips on incorporating such extreme drum sounds- would have helped if I'd done that. Thrilled that you liked all the aggressive stuff I did- it figures, because to some extent it's your advice to not be shy or stick to habits, expressing itself in radical mix decisions.

I do like my organs (hee). That's actually all done with two plugs I make one of which is free. I use 'Ensemble' on organs all the time because it kills the directness and makes them sound more background- it's like a 20-voice chorus effect- and the whole verb, including the synth bridge, is 'FreeverbCJ' on my Kagi site in the downloads section. It bears no resemblance to Freeverb anymore but Freeverb is its daddy so it will stay free forever. Those two things are, I think, the only things I did to the organ sound... it's all about having a good verb, for a sound like that.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: CHANCE on June 19, 2007, 07:03:31 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 09:14

I'M FINISHED!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chance

I thought I was going to hate the wrong sample rate, but it?s creepy in a cool way.  Those vocal effects are freaking me out.  The alt perc. is interesting, but out of place.  Good grief, this mix is scary.  I?m going to have nightmares.  Do you work on horror films?  The samples are A LOT brighter and louder then the music.  For having the sample rate wrong, I think you did your best to make it work.  That kick drum is HUGE!!!!!!


LOL,,,Damn near fell on the floor

Do I work on horror films? Close. 50% of my work is commercials and jingles


I might add that I enjoyed listening to all these variations on a theme and to give a shout of thanks to J Hall for all the time invested in imp
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: maxim on June 19, 2007, 08:09:32 pm
j wrote:

"Is this the space odyssey re-mix?"

it's the cocteau twins re-mix



"Aside from the female being the lead vocal, I don?t mind a lot of it."


my rationale for spotlighting the female was that i preferred the vocal

if i had been able to discuss the mix with the artiste, i would have undoubtedly tried to work harder with the male vocal

as it is, i see this exercise, partly, as an opportunity to go a bit crazy with the mix

sometimes it works out, sometimes, it doesn't

in imp11, i dropped out the entire drum track, this time, i thought the lead vocal could go

live and learn...




"The bridge feels half-assed, and the outro coming in makes the bridge section feel even more half-assed. Thoughts on that?"


i wasn't 100% happy with it, the execution seemed to lack the impact i was imagining it would have

the intention was for the listener to go enter a nightmarish space

i should have just cut and pasted chance's bridge...

thanks for the comments, j

(perhaps, in the future, the tracks could have a "mission statement" from the artiste?)

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: southboundloco on June 21, 2007, 08:48:50 am
is it still possible to DL the multitracks of IMP12?...i missed out Sad  
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 21, 2007, 01:15:34 pm
nope, go DL em.  just don't post a mix.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: southboundloco on June 21, 2007, 02:40:09 pm
oh ok...hmmm...where's the (link of the)DL site for the multi tracks of this song cant seem to find it. Rolling Eyes
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 21, 2007, 03:33:08 pm
there isn't one.

check the rules thread to get to the server.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: southboundloco on June 21, 2007, 10:42:14 pm
ok thanks! Very Happy   hehe lookin forward to the next IMP
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: el duderino on June 25, 2007, 01:29:43 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 12:14


el duderino

did you re-amp the guitars? Oh you did for sure in the chorus.  That?s to much, especially following it into the 2nd verse.  The vocal balances are nice, but the left guitar is killing your really pretty mix.  Did you not want it to be so pretty?  The vocal delays are OK, you could have worked those a bit better.  Honestly, the mix was great till the left guitar grew a mullet, bought a 5150, turned it to 11 and came to the wrong band practice.  Curious what your thought was on that.




didnt reamp, just slapped an emulator on it  Shocked

yeah after listening again i agree there is a bit much distortion but i wanted to add a nasty element. wasnt really going for pretty. The vocals delays are one thing i wish i had more time for, i had plenty of ideas, but unfortunately no dice. I dont know why, but when listening to the 2 guitars as they were I felt something was missing but at the same time kind of distracted me from the song as a whole. if that makes any sense. I wanted to add that dirty element and i was trying to make the dist guitar a bit more pad-like. didnt quite work as i had planned but it was in the ball park.  

I appreciate your review, comments, and accurate description of the left guitar. Very Happy thanks again for doin this.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: homerecordingodyssey on June 25, 2007, 09:10:21 pm
Quote:

homerecordingodyssey

mix version 2 reviewed:

the mix is a bit dark, but the drums are really bright and really loud. Though the bass is balanced with the kick well. The sonic differences can?t be fixed in mastering, FYI. When the drums are in, they just dominate. Overall, I think the mix is boring. You have some good ideas, but the music needs to come up to blend with the rhythm section.



My inexperience shows through, which is why I am here Smile In my defense I only had a day to mix it, but the main problem is the low end response of the 5" monitors I am using, I just cant here it properly and always seem to end up putting in too much or too little drums and bass. Although you would think by now that I was used to them.

Hopefully will do a better job with the next one.

Thanks for the comments. I am going to remix it again from scratch until I feel it is up there with some of the other mixes submitted for my own learning experience.

Andrew
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: rankus on June 25, 2007, 09:35:55 pm
homerecordingodyssey wrote on Mon, 25 June 2007 18:10




Thanks for the comments. I am going to remix it again from scratch until I feel it is up there with some of the other mixes submitted for my own learning experience.

Andrew



Thats what it's all about


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 25, 2007, 09:36:19 pm
some times a "negative" review is much more educational then a "pat you on the back one"

if you are hear to learn, let the learning begin.  i treat every one the same during IMP, so never feel singled out.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: SingSing on June 26, 2007, 11:00:55 am
Let's get this thread going again.
Heard thru sennheiser hd-600
My view and therefore the truth...to me  Smile

Briefcaseman
Nice bass and guitars, organ very present...perhaps a bit too much for my taste. Nice treatment of vocals. Drums panned a bit weird with the kick to the left and the rest to the right, not sure if that's good. Generally a bit on the safe side with nothing really standing out (except for the loud organ =o)  Overall tasteful but too much on the safe side.

Brian Lloyd
When messing with the vocal I feel a bit of the 'tone' is lost. Perhaps a bit too creative with the original creation. Good vocal tone but a bit too much verb when used that loud. Instruments generally very low. Drums hollow yet loud. Different approach but not up my alley...

Craig
Safe intro. Hohoho, here comes the vocals...but they are too low. They'd fit as bg vox but here they are lost. You found a new kick! As safe as the first two until after the bridge. Now that's some strange guitars. A bold move...and I kind of like it! The vocals didn't work for me and they are the most important here...if you fix those and mess a bit with the scissor we might have something here.

Greg Dixon
Nice treatment directly from the start. Organ pans nicely. Nice lead vox that fits nicely in the production. Drums nice and big. This mix feels right throughout and there's nothing to complain about here. Good work!

McSnare
Very pro sounding (though the smiley frequency curve is a bit too present) but I'm not sure the guitars fit the song 2007. Very nice vocals...great sounding organ. The bg vox supports J perfectly. Smashing drums with a cool delay. Everything lined up...not sure if it's the best for this song. I kinda like the rough feel of the original. Anything but safe...yet sounding 'safe'. Quite an achievement, nice work!

Tom C
Instrumentation is sounding a bit boxy verbwise yet they seem a bit midrange heavy. Lead vox fits nice though. I need to hear this one through my monitors. Nice mix yet a bit on the safe side!

iCombs
Finally you got to use all those weird FX in your DAW!  =)  After listening to the song so many times I'm kind of used to 'safety mode ON' and your mix is anything but safe. Needless to say, interesting approach. Very nice bass & guitars, cool drums & big organ. Vox fit perfectly. And that fill before the 2nd verse is unexpected. Not sure it's needed before the chorus though. Good work!

Bennals
This I like. Nice use of noise. Organ fits perfectly! Ahhh...here comes the female vox...as lead. Very nice vox treatment. Where's J?  Wink  Drums are not supporting the otherwise really good sounding instrumentation. I need less verb on the hat and more punch!  =)  Very nice mix and it would be interesting to hear it with some pounding drums.

BigMetal
Safe sounding with the female vox as lead. What's all that about? Hehe.... I like the vox treatment. Overall this mix feels a bit unfinished. Nothing to really complain about but still doesn't capture the feeling of the song.

Billybehdaz
That room is too present. Nice and safe mix but the vox needs to be treated differently. The tracks sound lined up but not worked with.

CarefulCollapse
Nice guitar & bass. Interesting use of a dubdelay on the bg vox! How did you do that weird noise on the kick? Tasteful weirdness though the transition from chorus to verse might be a bit abrupt. I like your use of the noises. Good creative mix and this far first price for automation.

Chance
Glad to see you didn't try to resample it...I did that last IMP and the outcome was less than stellar. This is spooky. J's vox scares me.... =)  Nice automation and though it's the wrong samplerate I like it this way. I'm not sure about the percussion though. Nice work!

I'll be back in a minute...
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: homerecordingodyssey on June 28, 2007, 04:51:41 pm
I would really like to play the best mix as judged by you J. on my Podcast. The only trouble is of course that you may have even more to judge next IMP Smile

Let me know if I can have permission to do this and of course which mix you want me to play.

I don't know if you have ever listened to my show but it is basically home recording for beginners. (by beginners)

Regards

Andrew

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: j.hall on June 29, 2007, 11:14:36 am
i can't do it for the simple reason that it turns IMP into a contest and IMP has nothing to do with winning, and every thing to do with personal taste, and the development of personal instincts and skills.

you can play my if you want, or your own.  any others will have to have the blessing of the person who mixed it.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: briefcasemanx on July 05, 2007, 03:56:10 am
The Organ cutting out is how the file was when I downloaded it. Also, I am not very creative.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Careful Collapse on July 05, 2007, 04:37:26 pm
I kinda want to see the next one be anonymous.  I'd have a much easier time being honest and writing up my critiques if I didn't have to second guess myself, thinking something like "I dislike this mix but he dislikes mine, I don't want to seem sour..."

KnowwhutImean?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: ATOR on July 05, 2007, 04:55:08 pm
Careful Collapse wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 22:37

I kinda want to see the next one be anonymous.  I'd have a much easier time being honest and writing up my critiques if I didn't have to second guess myself, thinking something like "I dislike this mix but he dislikes mine, I don't want to seem sour..."

KnowwhutImean?


Just set up a way you can listen to the mixes blind. Drop them in your DAW and write your review per tracknr. Then when you're finished look up the name behind the tracknr.

Making IMP anonymous would make things unnecessary complicated.

Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on July 05, 2007, 05:00:24 pm
Careful Collapse wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 15:37

I kinda want to see the next one be anonymous.  I'd have a much easier time being honest and writing up my critiques if I didn't have to second guess myself, thinking something like "I dislike this mix but he dislikes mine, I don't want to seem sour..."

KnowwhutImean?


To me, that's getting one step further from personal in this internet medium. I like the cyberspace cafe here, where we can talk 'face to face'. I mean, the comfort zone and solitude wherever your butt is planted right now, the pseudo names... let's at least man up and get real. I doubt J. will fly wherever you are and want to kick your ass for clowning his mix. You know what they say about opinions, right? EVERYBODY has one. Art is subjective. Tell the truth. But let's not pass notes in the hallway between classes man.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on July 05, 2007, 05:04:36 pm
ATOR wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 15:55


Drop them in your DAW and write your review per tracknr. Then when you're finished look up the name behind the tracknr.




Hey, that's cool. When the discussion page comes out, the names and numbers could be listed then. Good idea! At least it's not biased that way. Oops, maybe that's what you were saying Careful Collapse.

I stick z foot in z mouth quite often, no?
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Careful Collapse on July 05, 2007, 07:49:46 pm
Oh yeah, I mean posting the reviews or critiques or whatever here like normal but not revealing who mixed what until some specified point.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tom C on July 06, 2007, 04:16:01 am
J-Texas wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 23:04

ATOR wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 15:55


Drop them in your DAW and write your review per tracknr. Then when you're finished look up the name behind the tracknr.




Hey, that's cool. When the discussion page comes out, the names and numbers could be listed then. Good idea! At least it's not biased that way. Oops, maybe that's what you were saying Careful Collapse.



That's exactly what I did last IMP: put all the tracks in the DAW,
hide the track names, shuffle them around a bit and assign the
comments to the track numbers.
Un-hide track names, put the names to the comments and post it here.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on July 06, 2007, 10:41:42 am
Hey Tom, how did you shuffle them without seeing the track names...what DAW did you use?

I like this technique.

Regards,
David

Tom C wrote on Fri, 06 July 2007 03:16

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 23:04

ATOR wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 15:55


Drop them in your DAW and write your review per tracknr. Then when you're finished look up the name behind the tracknr.




Hey, that's cool. When the discussion page comes out, the names and numbers could be listed then. Good idea! At least it's not biased that way. Oops, maybe that's what you were saying Careful Collapse.



That's exactly what I did last IMP: put all the tracks in the DAW,
hide the track names, shuffle them around a bit and assign the
comments to the track numbers.
Un-hide track names, put the names to the comments and post it here.


Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: J-Texas on July 06, 2007, 11:19:19 am
spoon wrote on Fri, 06 July 2007 09:41

Hey Tom, how did you shuffle them without seeing the track names...what DAW did you use?

I like this technique.

Regards,
David

Tom C wrote on Fri, 06 July 2007 03:16

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 23:04

ATOR wrote on Thu, 05 July 2007 15:55


Drop them in your DAW and write your review per tracknr. Then when you're finished look up the name behind the tracknr.




Hey, that's cool. When the discussion page comes out, the names and numbers could be listed then. Good idea! At least it's not biased that way. Oops, maybe that's what you were saying Careful Collapse.



That's exactly what I did last IMP: put all the tracks in the DAW,
hide the track names, shuffle them around a bit and assign the
comments to the track numbers.
Un-hide track names, put the names to the comments and post it here.





I just thought it would look cool to have one more box of quotes.

Tom, I remember (now) that you said you did that.
Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: Tom C on July 06, 2007, 11:30:03 am
Hi David,
I use Cubase.

I drag'n'drop all the mixes into Cubase, switch off file
properties for the tracks (so I can't see the original file
names) and move them around by hand/mouse because they
are kind of alphabetical sorted in the files explorer I
dragged them from.

That's from memory, if you need more detailed information
drop me a note and I'll have a look when I'm sitting at
the DAW later today.

spoon wrote on Fri, 06 July 2007 16:41

Hey Tom, how did you shuffle them without seeing the track names...what DAW did you use?

I like this technique.

Regards,
David




Title: Re: IMP12 discussion thread
Post by: spoon on July 06, 2007, 04:18:32 pm
Ok, that covers it.  I thought there was a feature that randomized tracks in the DAW you were using.

Thanks.


J-Tejas, that additional box did look good.  Nice job.



Tom C wrote on Fri, 06 July 2007 10:30

Hi David,
I use Cubase.

I drag'n'drop all the mixes into Cubase, switch off file
properties for the tracks (so I can't see the original file
names) and move them around by hand/mouse because they
are kind of alphabetical sorted in the files explorer I
dragged them from.

That's from memory, if you need more detailed information
drop me a note and I'll have a look when I'm sitting at
the DAW later today.

spoon wrote on Fri, 06 July 2007 16:41

Hey Tom, how did you shuffle them without seeing the track names...what DAW did you use?

I like this technique.

Regards,
David