R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => j. hall => Topic started by: j.hall on June 12, 2008, 10:18:27 am

Title: IMP18 discussion
Post by: j.hall on June 12, 2008, 10:18:27 am
chat it up.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: slash5969 on June 12, 2008, 11:20:24 am
Perhaps it's due to my abilities (or lack thereof), but I had a terrible time with the drums on this IMP. I ended up mixing the song without drums - it just sounded better to me that way.

The lead vocal track I found quirky and a little noisy when I got the volume up.

I thought the harmony part was really good, and so I used it more than once. Ha! I usually have to get my one "out-of-left-field" edit in there somewhere.

I used basically compression and volume, with very little EQ - just a touch on the lead vocal to rein in low-mids.

I also used Cardinal Points. Nothing is panned anywhere except hard left or hard right.

Overall, this was a fun tune to mix!
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Antman on June 12, 2008, 11:48:51 am
There were a few more things I would have liked to done if I had the time, automating the bass, bringing the shakere down a dB or two, and brought down those guitars right at the end of the song. I noticed many of you took those off, but I thought they sounded like they were meant to be there, even if they did disrupt a nice ending, so I tried to make them work, perhaps I was missing the musicians point.

Will be interesting to hear how everyone handled the rhythm section in this IMP.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Huds on June 12, 2008, 12:05:38 pm
In my head, I hear the song fade out... Although I usually leave that for the mastering stage, I may fade the mix I've done
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: j.hall on June 12, 2008, 12:23:22 pm
since there is no mastering, you should mix the song as you want it heard.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Eric H. on June 12, 2008, 01:03:05 pm
i went in for a deep mood. hope it translates.
great arrangement on this song. Great overall tracking too which made it easy to mix. liked those pretty sounds.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: ATOR on June 12, 2008, 01:11:21 pm
The song has great vibe and character and I just let it take me to where it wanted to be.

I dropped the stereo drums, re-amped some guitars, the bass and the drums. The drums needed that to get some focus.

My mix is kinda noisy but that doesn't bother me.


Half the time I spend on this was on editing. This is a classic we'll fix it in the mix recording  Twisted Evil

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Daniel Farris on June 12, 2008, 01:36:33 pm
So I really wanted to mix this track, but I was sure I wouldn't have time. Then, last night my session called and said they'd be two hours late.

This is by no means a finished mix from me. It's what I could do in two hours.

I'd give anything for another hour and a half to finish it.

This was my first IMP. It was fun.

DF
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on June 12, 2008, 01:39:34 pm
The song was tracked pretty well in my opinion. Having said that, I didn't get enough time (or with any 'proper' gear) to prove that in my mix.  My drums aren't great, although only a few tweaks away I think.

I was gutted when I found out I'd somehow messed up the harmony vocals, somehow they've just disappeared. Might be able to do a quick mix at 3am when I get home to solve this, as it should still be Thursday in US time. Not massively worried about it though.


My intention was to have the shaker sound more like a record after the tracks have finished, the needle still down, that kind of scratchy old noise. Edit the guitars out, just leave the vocal in.

Would have liked to have automated more of a build as well, but I'll more than likely be making do with something I think is just 'ok'. For a job, I'd use this mix as a starting point I think.#

All that said, I definitely welcome criticism with none of the above in mind  Cool
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Daniel Farris on June 12, 2008, 01:43:46 pm
So... what's with the *really* obvious editing out of the silence between vocal lines?

I've heard that on several mixes.

It's bothering me.

DF
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: rankus on June 12, 2008, 02:03:01 pm


I started out with the intention of using no effects, no eq, no compression ... keeping it "faders and pan only" mix.  But in the end I had to use a touch of low shelving eq to clean some mud... but other than that mine is "faders only" mix  

The mix leans left a tad and I did not adhere to the "Cardinal Points" panning... this was a rare case for me where things sounded better with unusual panning.

You may also note I did not use about 60% of the tracks... they were simply getting in the way of a great song IMO.

Great song!

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Firefly on June 12, 2008, 02:05:07 pm
To save somebody the trouble of explaining the MS thing:

http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_front_center/


found the stuff about how it could be used in mastering to control the stereo field really interesting!
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: martthie_08 on June 12, 2008, 03:40:30 pm
put up my first IMP submission, again, really nice tune! It isn't easy to mix a project where you don't get some clues from the band or producer, or at least know what they are after. This mix could have been done in many, many ways, some of which I am sure I will listen through when I find the time the next couple of days. Looking forward to that Smile
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Greg Thompson on June 12, 2008, 03:53:33 pm
Just listened to everybody else's submissions plus mine up to this point.  I think mine wins for the "wettest" mix.

Overall after listening to everybody elses, and then hearing mine I think "damn, I got the vocals and main AGT too loud"
And I turned the lead vocal down before printing!

Greg
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Greg Thompson on June 12, 2008, 04:00:00 pm
Yours sounds like a "remix".  It's great!
I would hazard to say that you might get some wildly differing opinions when you play it for the band.  Half would hate it, half would love it.  The band would break up.  It would be awesome.


ATOR wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 18:11

The song has great vibe and character and I just let it take me to where it wanted to be.

I dropped the stereo drums, re-amped some guitars, the bass and the drums. The drums needed that to get some focus.

My mix is kinda noisy but that doesn't bother me.


Half the time I spend on this was on editing. This is a classic we'll fix it in the mix recording  Twisted Evil



Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: dconstruction on June 12, 2008, 05:07:21 pm
So, a few answers to a few questions from this and the IMP18 Begins thread:

"Out of interest: what was the acoustic guitar played and how did you mic it? I'm curious..."

The guitar played is a small, cracked, plywood, beater Mexican nylon string I got for free.  I decided to do mid-side because I decided to mid-side.  That's really it.  I like it in this context, as it lends a subtle spaciousness.  I often mic this guitar with an RE-20, too.  Just not this time.

"I thought they could of had a more appropriate/same drum sound if they had used just 1 mic."

Probably so.  The drums were done very quickly (*everything* was done quickly).  There was no part written and the drummer had never played the song.  We flipped the kick up to resemble a big floor tom, put a tambourine on the real floor tom and I mic'd the underneath (reso head) of the kick with an RE-20, on top about two feet away with a Lawson L47FET, and then put an AEA R84 a few feet back, pointed perpendicular to the kit.  I went back to the control room, listened for a little while, decided it was fine and kept moving.

I did not intend the drums to be in mid-side, though the labeling might have led you to believe that.

"with the exception of hiding a noisy edit or two (comp'ed tracks?)"

My response ("I have no idea what you mean") to this was tongue in cheek.  But now that it's mentioned specifically that it was the bridge acoustic at the end, I'll explain: those parts are looped (obviously).  I thought I'd give you guys the option of getting one of the loops un-crossfaded for use in editing.  Purely a courtesy - that I see many people took as a literal part of the song.

"Noise"

There's noise on the tracks.  Number one reason?  My power supply was feeding about 96v to the phantom.  Luckily all the mics survived, and I've had the supply serviced, but it sure did get noisy sometimes.  Also, as you can imagine, the vocal was sung pretty softly (L47FET again, into an OSA MP1-L3).

"Half the time I spend on this was on editing. "

While ATOR's mix is (expectedly) a pretty far reach for the band, he's not wrong in that this mix is an exercise in editing.

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

In a few moments, I'll post my mix, which is exactly where we left it after that day of tracking.  I probably should have tried to revisit it for a "real" mix, but, eh, I didn't.  Mine is a VERY wet mix.  This is done on purpose, as a contrast to many of the other songs on the album, which you guys obviously have no context for.  Perhaps I'm too used to the 'verb, but some of the really dry and close mixes make me uncomfortable.

Wow.  I type a lot.

L
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Huds on June 12, 2008, 05:54:19 pm
Definitely an interesting project... in listening to most of the submissions, quite a few went down the same road.  Personally, I mixed the drums as more of a background as opposed to "driving" the tune.  Don't know what made me run the beatbox stuff thru an amp sim, but it sounds like dcon went the same route (or is it re-amped?).

Huds
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 12, 2008, 06:51:28 pm
Thanks for the IMP. Great idea.

I've uploaded a mix. First time I've done so... please be gentle with me.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: osumosan on June 12, 2008, 09:09:43 pm
The edits I did were on the main acoustic guitar and shaker to get it not to drag or seems like jerky triplets. In fact a did a premix of the acoustics and normalized it so I could see the peaks. I would have liked to have had time to edit the first Beatbox to the point of usability and the claves. I started editing before I noticed the click track, so I did not use any grid. I thought that it should retain a bit of sloppiness although I'll bet a spot on performance would have sounded great.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Strummer on June 12, 2008, 09:24:30 pm
I had to slide the electric guitar around a bit, other than that I could live with the timing issues.

I almost played with the timing of the shaker but thought better of it.

In the first 10 minutes I committed to the harmony edits, something I'll never live down or someone will love it as much as I.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on June 12, 2008, 10:02:59 pm
I'm going to give these a listen tomorrow (Friday). I doubt you can have the acoustic and vocal 'too loud' Greg, it's all down to interpretation of what should lead the song with this one imo.

For me, I thought "If I get the drums right, I'll get the mix right" because everything else seemed pretty obvious and easy (standing up to be knocked down with that statement).

Shame about a conversation with a friend of mine earlier, where I concluded that I didn't get the drums right.

Look forward to hearing some of these. Gave J's a quick skip through - like the sampled guitar line.

(You cut that and copied it to infinity, right? I didn't just miss it...?).

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: rankus on June 12, 2008, 10:21:46 pm
dconstruction wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 14:07

 some of the really dry and close mixes make me uncomfortable.



Then your really gonna hate my mix lol


Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: j.hall on June 13, 2008, 12:15:25 am
Chris Ilett wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 21:02



Look forward to hearing some of these. Gave J's a quick skip through - like the sampled guitar line.

(You cut that and copied it to infinity, right? I didn't just miss it...?).




i didn't make a single edit, nor use a single sample.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: SingSing on June 13, 2008, 05:50:02 am
FYI

ATOR just informed me (thank you very much) that my submission link isn't working and I quickly found that I missed /files in the URL. My submission is listed in the IMP directory, so you can get it from there (imp18_singsing.mp3).

Cheers,

Stefan
SingSing
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: M Carter on June 13, 2008, 07:27:03 am
I'm gonna try and get through these this weekend.

I did some edits on mine, far more than usual.  Tightened up the two drum sets so there were less clams bet ween them.  Took a bunch of what felt unnecessary out of the 'piano bridge', and tripled up on the background vox to make the bridge a little more dynamic.

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

Thoughts?

Matt
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on June 13, 2008, 10:04:01 am
M Carter wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 06:27

I'm gonna try and get through these this weekend.

I did some edits on mine, far more than usual.  Tightened up the two drum sets so there were less clams bet ween them.  Took a bunch of what felt unnecessary out of the 'piano bridge', and tripled up on the background vox to make the bridge a little more dynamic.

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

Thoughts?

Matt


YUP!

Gregs sounds pretty good here though.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: j.hall on June 13, 2008, 10:36:58 am
SingSing wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 04:50

FYI

ATOR just informed me (thank you very much) that my submission link isn't working and I quickly found that I missed /files in the URL. My submission is listed in the IMP directory, so you can get it from there (imp18_singsing.mp3).

Cheers,

Stefan
SingSing


fixed!  your link works now.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 13, 2008, 11:01:06 am
Chris Ilett wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 10:04

M Carter wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 06:27

I'm gonna try and get through these this weekend.

I did some edits on mine, far more than usual.  Tightened up the two drum sets so there were less clams bet ween them.  Took a bunch of what felt unnecessary out of the 'piano bridge', and tripled up on the background vox to make the bridge a little more dynamic.

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

Thoughts?

Matt


YUP!

Gregs sounds pretty good here though.


That was my initial thought too.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 13, 2008, 11:03:51 am
Of the fist five I've listened to, it seems that I have left my mix relatively quiet in comparison.

Hmmm...
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: osumosan on June 13, 2008, 11:31:35 am
The bass had a lot of resonant frequencies. For me, I didn't think fishing for all of them with EQ would be a good idea. I would have liked to have had time to ride all the booms -- but I smoothed it out with chorus (and light compression of course). My first mix I thought I had the right amount of bass until I brought it to my second set of speakers and it just overpowered everything, so maybe people had the same difficulty I had between enough and too much bass.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Firefly on June 13, 2008, 11:36:38 am
M Carter wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 13:27


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

Thoughts?

Matt


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


Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: ATOR on June 13, 2008, 02:36:52 pm
Greg Thompson

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



dconstruction


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


A remix, a pretty far reach ??

This was my idea of a basic no frills mix  Shocked


I'm glad you like it Greg.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: ATOR on June 13, 2008, 02:51:34 pm
dconstruction

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


Is there a reason you made so many arrangement changes after the recording when you came up with most of the parts? Wouldn't it be easier and faster to first get the arrangement right and then record it?
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: dconstruction on June 13, 2008, 03:24:22 pm
First, Peter: I hope you know, I never said I didn't like your mix (actually, I do; a lot), but a "no frills" mix it is not (Rankus wins that title, clearly) and likely not one that's going to make the album.

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

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

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

L
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 13, 2008, 03:24:53 pm
Here are my initial impressions of the first 5 I've listened to.

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

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

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

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

Daniel Farris - The vocals seemed a bit wet when the drums come in;
              good overall balance;
              I liked the fade out;
              hmm... can't think of anything else to say besides... nice!
             
             
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 13, 2008, 04:46:50 pm
Guess I've got the sandbox all to myself. Very Happy

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

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

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

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

rankus - Great arrangement, suited the tune well;
I like how you brought the drums into the song;
nifty ending.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: ATOR on June 13, 2008, 04:57:21 pm
dconstruction wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 21:24

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

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

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

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

L

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

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: imdrecordings on June 13, 2008, 05:28:12 pm
Quote:

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

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


Thanks Phillip!
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 13, 2008, 05:33:27 pm
imdrecordings wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 17:28

 ... just my cup-O tea.


Thanks Phillip!


And a good cup o' tea it is.
You are welcome.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on June 13, 2008, 07:31:04 pm
Cheers Fiasco. I listened to a couple, but on the same laptop I mixed on, so will be back on Monday or Tuesday to give everything a proper listen. Including mine.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: maxim on June 13, 2008, 08:31:07 pm
" the horribly played electric guitar in the verses (which, shockingly, some of you have really highlighted; man, I hate that part)."

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

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 13, 2008, 10:17:54 pm
Part 3 of 4(I think)...

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

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

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

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

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

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: ATOR on June 14, 2008, 11:04:57 am
This is what came to mind when listening to the mixes.


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Southboundloco
Another messed up samplerate, damn this is slow.

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

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

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



This has been another great IMP!

Thanks to Tonite Tonite and Dconstruction for providing the track.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Antman on June 14, 2008, 11:15:31 am
ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 23:04

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


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



Could you explain what you mean by vocals doubling? What's that? And in what sense is the bass like a ghost? I actually thought the bass was a little overbearing, especially when I listened to everyone elses mix, so a little more elaboration on those two points would be greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: M Carter on June 14, 2008, 11:50:31 am
Ator - Thanks for the crit.

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

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

Or am i just crazy?

EDIT: **No, I'm just crazy.  **

Matt
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: ATOR on June 14, 2008, 12:11:04 pm
Antman wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 17:15

ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 23:04

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


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



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



The bass is cloudy, without presence. Adding more mids and or harmonics makes it easier to hear the bass as an instrument instead of just a bunch of low frequencies.

Doubling is using a short delay or different take to duplicate the lead vocal without having it sound like two vocalists. Your lead vocal sometimes sounds like two singers panned at either side and for this song I'd like a single centered guy better.


These are points I would change but it's mostly a matter of taste. I liked this song to be intimate so I went for a centered vocal and a focussed bass. I did double the leadvocal in the chorus with vocals from the other chorusses but just a little to thicken it up.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Antman on June 14, 2008, 02:16:18 pm
Hmm interesting. Nothing I did I did with the intention of doubling the vocals, so it must be the result of accidentally misusing a technique... In fact I wanted to keep a centre focus with the vocals too...

I hear what you mean about the bass now, thanks.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Greg Thompson on June 14, 2008, 02:25:50 pm
Few random thoughts here to share:

Chris Illet:  When I listened to your mp3 it was dead mono and pretty low resolution sounding.  Perhaps you can take a look at your mp3 encoder settings and see if that didn't screw with your mix more than you think.
But hey, now you know how other engineers feel when somebody monos up their mix and squashes it with an mp3 encoder!

Regarding arrangements and edits:  I did a few edits here and there, mostly as what I would call triage(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triage).
I found a bar of the shaker/cabasa thing that didn't offend and then looped it for the song, then dropped back in the spots where it did its little fills.  Did some beat detection/time alignment with the bass/drums/clave at the end, where they all ritard slightly but not together.  
I didn't think the song needed too much editing, and its my opinion that for a first time mix, one shouldn't really be asked to rearrange the parts to create a workable arrangement.  If you're submitting tracks to me to be mixed, you're submitting stuff in the arrangement that you like, and you want them mixed like that.  However as an arrangement decision I did mute the repeating acoustic guitar part when the electrics came back in to prevent the song from getting too busy at that point.

regarding the guitar "solo":  I thought about fixing some of the clams in there, but that smacked of effort and would have taken time away from fixing other things.  Also, I figured if somebody had left that there as a final track, then somebody in the band must have loved that part and would have been upset if I took it out.  
Also, that single line part basically defined the approach I took to the mix.  I heard it and said, "well the only way this is going to work is if I drench it in a springy reverb" and that led to other FX used elsewhere.

the bass track:  This is a candidate for explaining why you should always record a Bass DI track even if it's not in vogue these days.  I probably spent the most time in the mix trying to make that bass track work.  

Great sounding vocal.  What was the mic again?

The MS guitar?  Great idea.. I immediately turned off the side tracks cause it sounded too "headcavey" for me to use.  I prefer a single acoustic guitar to be a mono instrument.  If I want stereo, then I double it or do something else.

The drums...  What was the intention here?  2 separate takes and picking and choosing the best parts?  I just went with kit #2 and did a stereo panning thing.  I was kinda disappointed that there wasn't any spot mics on the bass drum and floor tom/cymbal thing.  I guess limitations can be good, but my first impression of hearing those tracks was not one of joy.
Also, did you move the mics around between take 1 and 2 of the drums?


anyway, thanks for posting this, I had a lot of fun mixing it.

Greg
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 14, 2008, 02:41:34 pm
ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 11:04

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

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




Odd... I check the mix on several systems and didn't notice the low end being problematic.
Definitely not as focused as I would like, but didn't seem boomy.

Quote:

I listened to this mix without hearing the song, that's not a good sign.


Not sure what that means. Could you elaborate?

Thanks for the critique.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: M Carter on June 14, 2008, 02:45:57 pm
Here's where I'm at so far...

J. Hall -  The guitar sounds great.  This is one of the few mixes that wasn't scared of the bass guitar, which I like about it. Drums feel really left heavy, which kind of takes me out of the song.  The drums SOUND great, i just wish both sides had that balls. Nice work keeping the energy up post bridge, that was tough to do.

Greg dixon - great mix.  The guitar 'solo' on the right is a little loud with nothing else going on on left side though. Occasionally the vocal jumps out at me, but generally this mix sounds dictated by the song, which is great. Piano could come down a notch though.

Antman - Vocals sound great.  You kind of wimped out on the drums for my tastes.  Guitars sound great though.  Vox in bridge are a little loud.  Piano has a nice quality to it. Nice backgrounds too.  All I want are more drums!  

Slash - The lack of drums doesn't work for me.  It makes it have kind of a 'demo' quality.  the elements you DID use, sound really great though.  I'm glad to see that someone else used the backgrounds more than once, although harmonically the placement is a little weird sometimes.


ATOR -  Not enough enough low end in the mix over all for me.  Bold move on the distorted guitar, I like the idea, but the vocal ambience doesn't seem on the same page.  Nice subtle use of the beat boxing (which I basically chucked out the window).  Nice edits.  My one really big gripe is that the kick drum sounds like it came off of an Alesis SR16.  Piano comes in nice.  In short, I love the direction of it, but it could be refined a bit.

Teleric - The left-heavy drums throw me.  The vocal is a bit too loud in relation to the music, it makes me afraid to turn the volume up.  Good mix, I just want more vibe out of it.

Daniel Farris - This one has something I really like  - it's not all "in your face".  I think it could benefit from a little 'clean up' in mastering.  So far I think this wins as my favorite.  You weren't afraid of the bass, I like it.

Sing Sing - I like the idea of the piano in the chorus, but I can't really grasp it in the context of the music.  This one 'had me at hello' and then lost me at the guitar solo.  The rhythm section sounds great, and I like where the vocal sits.  Over all, some good stuff going on in this one.  

Osumosan - You killed parts of this mix.  My only issue with this mix is that the whole mix feels very mono until the bridge.   I like a lot of the sounds, I just wish it felt BIGGEr.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Antman on June 14, 2008, 02:56:49 pm
M Carter wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 02:45


Antman - Vocals sound great.  You kind of wimped out on the drums for my tastes.  Guitars sound great though.  Vox in bridge are a little loud.  Piano has a nice quality to it. Nice backgrounds too.  All I want are more drums!  



Thanks,

Haha, as a drummer, i was particularly allergic to the drums on this track, and nearly muted them altogether, but found I liked them when used to add rhythm in a more covert manner, especially that kick drum just there throughout the song beating out the pulse, with most of it's energy focused into a wide low end sort of sound and not a lot of attack.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Huds on June 14, 2008, 10:41:43 pm
Not sure what you mean by "shifted acoustic"... I used the center AG and brought the sides up just a hair to give it space. I didn't move/shift anything.... on purpose that is - I have been know to fat-finger edits in the past Smile



ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 11:04

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

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



Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: southboundloco on June 15, 2008, 07:25:38 am
arrrrrgggghhh!!!!!....bloody elastic audio fucked up the songs tempo on my mix...oh well at least we know its good at what it does hehe Laughing   Laughing
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: mdifazio on June 15, 2008, 10:28:12 pm
ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 10:04


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



Hey, I would much appreciate someone spot double checking this.  First thing I did was check the readme and my Logic project shows 48k.  Also it sounds like same tempo as others and beatmap shows 89 +/-.

Thanks,

Matt
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Greg Dixon on June 15, 2008, 10:36:14 pm
mdifazio wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 12:28

ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 10:04


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



Hey, I would much appreciate someone spot double checking this.  First thing I did was check the readme and my Logic project shows 48k.  Also it sounds like same tempo as others and beatmap shows 89 +/-.

Thanks,

Matt


No problem here Matt. Sounds fine.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Strummer on June 15, 2008, 10:43:53 pm
Greg Dixon wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 22:36

mdifazio wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 12:28

ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 10:04


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



Hey, I would much appreciate someone spot double checking this.  First thing I did was check the readme and my Logic project shows 48k.  Also it sounds like same tempo as others and beatmap shows 89 +/-.

Thanks,

Matt


No problem here Matt. Sounds fine.


Here too.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: mdifazio on June 15, 2008, 10:51:43 pm
Thanks guys,

It was an interesting position to be in... out of town... wedding reception... check the old iPhone... (?) ...  stuck on the plane all day...

You know it is just a frivolous thing, but you sort of fall in love with these songs as you mix them...  Wink

Title: IMP Impressions
Post by: osumosan on June 16, 2008, 10:23:38 am
JHall - Satisfying lowend as usual. Electric guitar delay is distracting at the noodle section. Re: the bit crushing on the beatbox: I can't say if it adds a nice texture or just sounds like insects eating. I agree with the intimate and dry vocal treatment and the best thing is how the acoustics all come together at the onset of the bridge.

Greg Dixon - Lots of motion and wideness. The onset of the bridge after chorus seems to stall. Is that due to an edit?

Antman - Subtle chorusing on vox - cool, drops the bottom a bit though. ElecGuitars are sounding a bit direct. In general I'd be against added disto. I like the crisp acoustic guitar treatment. The end has a good velocity to it. The performances couldn't hold it up though and it starts to get chaotic.

Slash 5969 - Acoustic is a bit over de-noised and sounds constricted. Where's the line buzz coming from? The mix is very gentle, so the really close intimate vox seems out of place, although conceptually, that would be hard to predict. All of a sudden I find myself wishing that somebody had added pseudo vinyl noise to this. Probably because this treatment seems very 70s to me.

Chris Ilett - I can't reconcile these vox with reverb. To have intimacy and spaciousness distracts me. I'd love to hear them where the electrics are just to see what happens. Drums are a bit ponderous. Did you leave out the bridge guitars on purpose, too? The electrics at the end are lost. I think your beatbox treatment works best so far.

ATOR - Nice ideas, but now we need the drummer to come back and kick in at certain points. Are you a child of the 80s by any chance? If so, your services are in demand at the moment. I think all your choices are really cool if not a little self-conscious. The drums actually have a very Beck-ish feel to them.

Teleric -  Good balance for intimacy. Forceful yet restrained (or is that the description for the wine I'm driking right now?) The rhythm section really holds the hypnotic bottom here and gets tucked away nicely into the subconscious after a while.

Daniel Farris -  Whoa! Cave singing? Something that drastic should be a little bit more out-of-the-ordinary. Instrumentation gets a little cottony. Hooray on the fade-out that I wish I had done.

SingSing - Very very cool effect at the front and that space you create does go well with and holds up to the intimacy. Very good editing and I like the stripping away to end the song. I might search around a wee bit for alternative disto guitar fills.

Greg Thompson - The Blue Velvet mix. I'd automate the verb to ramp up. It seems extreme at the beginning. The mix asks for a more dramatic drum onset.

Martthie - Acoustic is too big. Sounds angry. And then the bass kind of squeaks in. It's a cool sound but isn't holding up and shirks it's low end duties.

Rankus - Would like to hear more drums here. Or vox is just a bit too dominant. The only part where the total strip down lags is when the beatbox comes in. That section becomes too long.

Huds - Drums are practically invisible. From the bridge on the mix holds very well. I like the beatbox treatment and would like to hear more of it if not just brought down as it goes on.

MGAudio - Lofi! Who's cooking bacon in the background, though? The vox is disembodied. Why not give it the same treatment since now it's carrying the low end? The tambourine a bit shrewish on the high end.

dconstruction - You DO like wet vocals. The mix sounds like it's at a soundcheck though and a couple sibilances could be tamed. Then it seems blown out when the piano comes in, but has a great build with a lovely cacophony at the end.

Strummer - Good idea with the Beatles/Queen intro, but the whole mix pales against it and I'm not sure repeating at the end really makes sense, although it's not unexpected. Just turn down the BGvox. Your vox track should be on MGAudio's mix. This is on the lofi side, too, but it seems constrained. It needs to open up, especially the low end.

Fiasco - This seems like the perfect amount of wet for the vox. The mix has a nice space and fills up the sonic spectrum in a very satisfying way. Strange choices at the end.

TheDan - The only mix I turned down before the guitar even started. The hiss scared me! The treatment of the electric ditty is a bit distracting from the vox. There are some peaks in the high end that could be tamed there. The mix has good clarity but maybe overmastered.

imrecordings - Nice short space on the vox. There's something cool about the drums on the left, but I can't put my finger on it. Another short room? The piano arpeggios and claves stick out a tad. This is a successful merging of reverbs and intimacy. Nothing seems out of place which I think was the shorcoming of a lot of mixes.

Firefly - Nice bottom on the vox. All around, too. one of the best controlled basses of this bunch.

Southboundloco- Artifacts all over the place! This is definitely loco. I don't think slowing it down did it any good. Generally one might do this if you wanted to accentuate spaces and give it some cool air, but it's just slow.

Maxim - Fearless use of reverb on the bass! Generally a nice cutup that enhances the multifaceted arrangement. The use of the electric guitar is a bit random throughout and is calling attention to itself at the expense of the vox. The timing is actually off at the end.

MCarter - Bass a bit over the edge. But consistent. Very nice build. The BG vox repetition ads a cool harmonic. This mix compression highlights the air around everything. It made my monitors seem bigger than they are. The stoner mix for sure.

mdifazio - The intro is like a Cocteau twins mix. The trasition between wet and dry is a bit shocking, though and the vox is a bit overpowering. I would have loved to hear the spacious mix throughout.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: dconstruction on June 16, 2008, 10:31:22 am
Greg Thompson wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 13:25


the bass track:  This is a candidate for explaining why you should always record a Bass DI track even if it's not in vogue these days.  I probably spent the most time in the mix trying to make that bass track work.


I'd probably agree.  We'll be revisiting the bass on this track.

Greg Thompson wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 13:25

Great sounding vocal.  What was the mic again?


Lawson L47FET http://www.lawsonmicrophones.com/l47fet.html

Greg Thompson wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 13:25

The drums...  What was the intention here?


I was hearing two kits, left and right.  If, when mixing, the flamming got too bad, I'd either fix or punt.  And no, I did not move the mics around (though the drummer might have!); I think the second take is just more authoritative and secure.

Greg Thompson wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 13:25

anyway, thanks for posting this, I had a lot of fun mixing it.

Greg


You are welcome!  I had a lot of fun having you mix it!

L
Title: Re: IMP Impressions
Post by: dconstruction on June 16, 2008, 10:37:19 am
osumosan wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 09:23


dconstruction - You DO like wet vocals. The mix sounds like it's at a soundcheck though and a couple sibilances could be tamed. Then it seems blown out when the piano comes in, but has a great build with a lovely cacophony at the end.


Thanks for the critique.  I guess I do like wet vocals (on this song).  Though, I'll admit, hearing them so dry over and over has got me thinking.  Sibilance is indeed a problem.  Just not one I got to at the end of the day when tracking.

Cacophony.  Yeah.  I do that.

L
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Antman on June 16, 2008, 10:38:11 am
Okay this is weird, people keep commenting on things I didn't do in my mix...
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: ATOR on June 16, 2008, 11:47:52 am
@Antman
Somehow one side of your vocal got delayed. Hence the doubling/chorusing.

@Fiasco
I now notice I have a lot of 'boomy bass' in my comments and my mix is commented to have too little bass so go figure. Always take comments with a grain of salt  Smile
Basstraps are on top of my shopping list, I finished designing them last week.

@Huds
I hadn't noticed while mixing that the acoustics straight 8ths timing shifted to a heavy swing feel in the chorus. It was only in your mix that I heard it so I thought you had shifted it, my bad.

@Mdifazio
Weird, now it plays normal over here too. It's a crazy world. Sorry mate.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 16, 2008, 04:36:40 pm
ATOR wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 11:47



@Fiasco
I now notice I have a lot of 'boomy bass' in my comments and my mix is commented to have too little bass so go figure. Always take comments with a grain of salt  Smile
Basstraps are on top of my shopping list, I finished designing them last week.



No salt needed brother, I took no offense. Smile
Title: Re: IMP Impressions
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 16, 2008, 04:41:58 pm
osumosan wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 10:23



Fiasco - This seems like the perfect amount of wet for the vox. The mix has a nice space and fills up the sonic spectrum in a very satisfying way. Strange choices at the end.




Thanks osumosan.
Strange good or strange bad?
I felt the song should return to more of an intimate feel, like the beginning.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: j.hall on June 16, 2008, 05:02:27 pm
Antman wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 09:38

Okay this is weird, people keep commenting on things I didn't do in my mix...


didn't do?  or can't hear?  big difference.

i'll have a listen soon.  working a ton and traveling to work.  leaves little computer time.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 16, 2008, 07:08:07 pm
O.K. I think I've listened to them all!

Strummer - Interesting choice of the harmonies;
vocals seemed a touch too low;
drums could have been tightened up;
good balance between the guitars;
shaker a bit distracting;
2nd harmony section too strong.

martthie 08 - Good clarity on the bass, however needed low end;
good balance overall;
I thought the mix could use a little less "volume".

mdifazio - Delay on the acoustic... mmm... I don't know;
the drums and bass were sitting kind of quiet;
liked the tremelo(?) on the electric git;
could use more dynamics where the song wants to get louder.

southboundloco - Well, I guess you figured out this one. Very Happy

Greg Thompson - I thought the drums could be up a touch;
the vocals slightly overpowered the rest of the tune;
from the beatbox section on, the arrangement seemed to lose power;
the whole thing, to me, was over effected.

MGAudio - On the whole this mix was kind of thin;
some noticeable hiss;
uneven harmony section;
I still thought it was a pretty balanced mix.

osumosan - I think a little LF roll off on the vocals would have been nice;
the bass drum a bit hot;
some of the extra instrumentation, E.G., 2nd A.G. seemed a bit spikey;
very good build up from beginning to end.

TheDan - Very hissy before the intro;
the instruments were overpowering the vocals at times;
I liked the treatment of the elec git "solo";
the drums sounded a little loose and falamy.

dconstruction - Vox effects detract from what I thought a great performance;
good sparse arrangement through beginning, nice build up towards end;
nice harmony section;
I liked the beatbox where it is (supposed to be?).

Thanks for letting me work on the song.

P.S. If I missed anyone, let me know.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Strummer on June 16, 2008, 09:53:30 pm
I'm really enjoying reading and listening. I'm not going to attempt to comment on all the mixes, but when I get back home in a week or so I'll post about the ones I think I understand.

I got carried away with the BGvox, maybe it's because "Smile" is in my truck CD changer. I was taken with those lovely harmonies, and they are way too loud in the middle.

Thanks to the band, dconstruction, j, and all of you for making this IMP possible.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Greg Dixon on June 17, 2008, 05:25:46 am
OK here are my reviews. I dropped the folder of mixes into iTunes and set it up so I could only see the track numbers, not names. I then added the names afterwards.

Had to do a bit of detective work to find the names on quite a few of them, including some regulars, which was very annoying.

dconstruction. Alternative. Interesting idea, dry band, with vocal at the end of a tunnel. Reverb is a bit metallic. Not sure it works for so long. Drums and bass sound alright, although a bit indistinct. Most of the other instruments sound a bit thin.

Antman. A bit bass and drums light for me. Main acoustic might be a touch bright. Electric parts don't quite sit with the rest of it. Lack of ambience in general is making the parts feel a bit separate. Harmonies are nice. Good sounds, but disjointed.

Firefly. Nice warm acoustic and vocal start. Very inviting. Understated drums and bass. Think I'd like more of them at some point. Like the beatbox panning. Drum pulse at end is good.

Scott Selfridge. Wow the vocal seems to be in a vacuum, like it's actually had ambience removed.  Band very subdued. Like the nasal guitar in the bridge. Main problem with this is it doesn't quite hold my interest. Too much flange on harmonies for me. Instrument panning creates movement, but all a bit light.

ATOR Loud mix. Interesting drums. Wasn't expecting anyone to get a scooped mid kick out of this. Electric guitar sounds are interesting, but a bit thin and scratchy for me. I like that the drums keep pumping through the track to give it a center otherwise it would be a bit of a mess. Extra harmony section is cool.

Maxim. Guitar and voice are fine. Drums sound good. Another understated mix. Extra harmonies seem to work first time. Not sure about before the bridge. Edited lead at end doesn't work. Otherwise pretty good.

Osumosan Vocal seems a bit dull. He sounds a bit bored.  Almost no bass, which I miss. This one is almost a vocal/percussion version. OK the bridge guitar just came in to give it a lift. Beatbox solo! Interesting arrangement. Kill the guitars at the end. It needs a bit of ambience in the first half.

Slash5969 Interesting start with very dry vocal, guitar and a touch of bass. Not sure I like the electric sounds. Too dry, thin and back. To work that far back, I'd make them less bright and add some ambience. I miss the pulse of the drums. extra harmonies don't fit for me.

Strummer Harmonies at start would have worked better if they hadn't faded out. They're also way too loud for when the rest of the track starts. Sounds like a mistake.  Vocal could be louder. The drums lack bottom, but seem to work. Shaker is out of proportion with the rest of the track. End harmonies too loud too. Very end harmonies ok volume. Overall the blend doesn't quite work.

Chris Ilett Bottom end is a bit overwhelming and indistinct.  Is the mix completely mono? I keep waiting for it to open up. A bit of stereo electrics.  Voice is fine.

Daniel Farris Nice start. Not sure about the long reverb on the vocal when the band enters. I'd leave the reverb until the chorus and back it off quite a bit. Electric is too dry and bright for the rest of the track. Vocal could be louder. It's become a bit of a textural wash, with everything else. Overall I like the sounds, just doesn't really hold my attention.

J.Hall Vocal and acoustic sound good, but disappear a bit when the drums and bass enter. Interesting idea with the drums, having them spread left to right as if echoing in a large room. Not sure it totally works. Drums have meat and definition. Bass level is good. If the vocal was louder, I think this one would work much better.

Greg Thompson Reverb on acoustic is too long and cluttered. Whisper quiet drums.  The vocal needs to come down or have something else up with it, so it's not there by itself.

Greg Dixon Nice spread on the nylon string.  Understated vocal delay works well. Almost dry with a hint of ambience. Drums and bass sound good and work well together. Transition to bridge more subtle than most. Vocal could come up a tad in the bridge. Piano sounds fine. Beatbox works well.

Huds Very upfront acoustic hiding everything else. I think if the vocal was louder and the acoustic down, this mix would work ok. Beatbox doesn't sit with the rest of the instruments. As it is, it just needs to be better balanced.

mdifazio Interesting delay on the acoustic. Works for most of it. Not sure about the dry electric lead part? Whole thing is very dreamy. The vocal sounds good, which keeps the mix from getting lost like some of the other atmospheric mixes, although it's too loud.  Interesting use of piano at end.

MGA Acoustic a bit thin at the start, with dry vocal. Pity about the hiss coming in during the verse. Not much low end. Kick is a bit bright and thin. This mix has some good ideas, they just don't work that well together.

MGT Very midrangy drums and bass. Voice sounds good at the start, but could come up in volume a bit as the mix gets fuller. Another mix where it's mainly acoustic guitar and voice. Overall a mix is washy and indistinct.

Sing Sing Late night mood mix. Another atmospheric treatment, with the vocalist up close. I like the organ being there in the first verse. Don't like the piano coming in earlier though. Just doesn't fit musically. I think it needs some bass drum with the bass.

southboundloco Time stretched or wrong sample rate? Don't like it. Real dirge. I assume this is a mistake.

Teleric Nice sounds. Lacks a bit of bottom and could use a bit more ambience to help the parts sit together. Works ok as is, but could be better with some more dynamic movement. A bit static.

Fiasco Where are the mids? Wispy top and fat, round, slightly lumpy bottom. Some good ideas, they just don't quite fit together.

theDan Acoustic sounds good, but the voice seems a bit boxy. I like the drums, but would like more bass to go with them.  Pity about the hiss in the bridge. Beatboxing seems separate from the rest of the instruments. Is that hiss at the end from reverb on the shaker?

M. Carter Overall this seems bottom heavy, which masks the rest of it. Sounds are ok, just not balanced well. Vocal appears to be over compressed. Extra harmonies don't work harmonically.

Rankus Interesting having the drums and bass creep in. Dry, which works, but I think a bit of reverb or delay might help the depth.  The up front dry acoustic and vocal gets to be a bit much by halfway through. Good ideas, I just wanted a bit of relief somewhere.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Antman on June 17, 2008, 12:33:56 pm
Greg Dixon wrote on Tue, 17 June 2008 17:25


Antman. A bit bass and drums light for me. Main acoustic might be a touch bright. Electric parts don't quite sit with the rest of it. Lack of ambience in general is making the parts feel a bit separate. Harmonies are nice. Good sounds, but disjointed.



Thanks heaps.

I've gotten loads of very interesting and useful feedback thus far, thanks everyone, I'll try and make the time tomorrow to get through everyone's mixes, but I'm starting to think I really need to hurry up and treat my new room. (Not to make excuses, but just a warning to take my feedback with that in mind)
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on June 17, 2008, 12:43:39 pm
Greg

Thanks for your comments (and to all who commented). Mix certainly isn't meant to be mono, so I'll just say that something seriously fucked up along the way.

Apart from the drums needing some serious low-end attention - I missed some of the tracks from my final mix. There was definitely - at some point - a stereo mix. I've not had the chance to backtrack to see what happened yet, or even open up the session.

Still need to get back here and pay into the feedback of everyone elses mixes, so I look forward to that.

Cheers all.
Title: Re: IMP Impressions
Post by: osumosan on June 17, 2008, 09:19:44 pm
Fiasco wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 16:41

Strange good or strange bad?
I felt the song should return to more of an intimate feel, like the beginning.



I didn't understand the choices. The reamped electric guitar doesn't really do the intimacy thing for me and the flanging on the vox seems to come out of nowhere. I totally hate the overused word "pristine," but that's the quality of the vox that gives us intimacy. The effect just takes us away from that -- (in my opinion, obviously).

Thanks for your comments, too. I really enjoyed the lowend on the vocals myself and wanted a sparkly accompaniment. Maybe I overshot it, but it sounds okay on my monitoring.
Title: Re: IMP Impressions
Post by: J-Texas on June 18, 2008, 11:10:26 am
Back from the beach! It was great.

I did a mix before I left and put it on the iphone. Should have sent it to J. or put it on my site or something!  Embarassed  I dind't get it pulled over. If anyone wants to hear it, PM me and I'll send you a link.

I had plenty of time on my hands, so I checked out all of the mixes.

Here you go:


J.Hall – Drums L and R… hard! Seems like a lot going on in the low end. Muddy. I like the delay on the electric guitar. Were the acoustics that far behind the beat? Love that btb treatment. Piano very natural… I like a lot. Love the ending that way. We took a similar approach.

Greg Dixon – Acoustic is weird leaning on the left side like that. Love hearing the bass strings against the click of the kick. Organ panning is freaking me out. I like spreading things out on this one, but I chose different panning. I think it was more of a necessity than personal opinion though. Nice piano, but too loud for me. That btb is so off beat that it is really distracting spread out. Very cool ending with the organ.

Antman – Lot of compression on acoustic. Weird vocal spread. I miss the drums as driving force. Sounds like people jamming and someone’s drunk friend won’t get off the drums. Oh… another drunk friend trying to btb! Take that junk off the vocal and treat the kick like it belongs and you’ve got something. Acoustic stuff sounds good.

Slash – Like this so far. IMO a longer verb would have been more suited. Sounds like a big bathroom. Nice mids/strings going on in the bass, but it’s not enough to carry the thing without the drums. I like all of the other panning, but why so mono on the main acoustic? Your btb would have sounded great if it were edited. The only beat we get in here and it’s all f$#@ed up? Love the re-use of the BGV.

Chris Ilett – I like that you didn’t EQ out  the bass in the vox and acoustic. I would like more spread, less elephant bass, longer verb. Mono is cool… but not today. I like making one kick more dominant. Cool sparseness on the pre-btb part, but it would have been nice to have all of the textures there when the btb came in. No BGV? The coolest sounding thing in the song for me. Dirty ending man.

ATOR – Man, I always know I’ll get something extra from you! I like the verb on the vox. I like the things that you’ve done to the song, but wished that you would have gone balls-out on the sounds. Hammered electric, set the sensitivity on the trigger so the kicks were all max. samples, kind of NIN Pretty Hate Machine sounding I guess is the what I want to say. Love the filter before the piano part. Cool piano sound. I like.

Teleric – The best to my ears so far. Nice panning choices. I like it pretty dry. Spoke too soon on the panning. Would love the lead acoustic spread out. Don’t like the piano and organ humping each other. Nice vox all around. Love the re-use of the BGV. Needs more meat in the bottom I think. 50-80hz?

Daniel Farris – Very nice and even EQ on the acoustic. WOWwee… reverb! If that was only done to the organ it would have been nice for me. Like the vocal delay. Like the panning. Low pass on organ? Hair more btb? To my ears, this track didn’t need the kind of space that some people put to it. I like this.

Osumosan – Incredible amount of 2 buss compression. Very slow release… it’s freking me out. I can’t concentrate on what going on. It’s like the ocean that I’m looking at. Back and forth, coming and going. I’m pretty certain that you have nice things going on with good panning. Turn that thing all the way off man. I’m not with the ending either.

Greg Thompson – OH. You’ve got me wet! YOWWY. Where’s the beef? Nice organ. Electric guitar is bothering me. Everything is too washed out for me. Cool piano, yet loud. Not sure about the weird flangey BGVs. Love the ending. Intimate.

Martthie 08 – Boomy. Crazy verb. Nice vox. Even different vocal verb? I like the mids in the bass and kick… but where’s the meat? To me, there’s no reason why an organ should sound bigger than a bass guitar or kick. Acoustic is getting annoying. Cool piano sound. Nice vox to BGV balance. This is getting out of hand to me.

Rankus – Well, at least the vocal filled up the hole in my right ear! LOL. I like the beat sort of sneaking up, but thought the bass might have done the same. Where’s my bass? I love the rhythm thing into the lead. Cool idea. I didn’t miss the other guitar there. Another re-hash of the BGV. Cool. Interesting ending.

Huds – If you don’t compress the lead vocal… how about some automation? If you want to hear the bass go down the street and take a right. Cheesy reverse on the lead guitar (for my taste). No beat. Nice spread and balance on the acoustics in the “bridge”. Like the btb. Something that noticeable, to me, needs to be more on beat. Where’d it go? Fade? Delay last beat? Did it just give up?

Dconstruction – What the hell? I don’t like that vocal treatment. Like the driving force of the kick. Organ seems kind of lifeless. Best use of the m/s on the acoustic. Great piano sound… perfect for this. Lots of low-mids on the BGV. Strange. Perfect ending.

Strummer – Refreshing. I wanted more. Lead vox too low compared to what just happened. All of that one thing in the left side? Why? There’s shaker and there’s an acoustic. Let’s get the band to join one another in the same space. The whole thing is very distant to me.

Fiasco – A lot of extra high freqs on the vox. Lots of extra compression on the rhythm stuff. Rock stadium verb on the electric? Another no-lead acoustic… I like that. Balance is all crazy IMO. A few people really tried to change up these sounds. I think they were good to start with. Darth Vader vox at the end! Smooth ending.

The Dan – I wanted to love this. Balance is a bit off for me. Too big on the lead. Like a guy with a spotlight playing in the moonlight. Strange. Did you use the BGV like a pad (or have I heard this too many times)? I like it whatever it is. The lead guy in the moonlight just put down his guitar and picked up a shaker! Great ending. I like this.

IMDrecording – I’m a huge fan of pan. A guy that sounds like he’s singing and playing a guitar doesn’t need center vox and hard left guitar… IMO. My first instinct was to also put that organ in the center, but I thought it stepped all over the vocal. Nice piano, a little loud. I think this panning in the “bridge” just exploited that the rhythm was all f’ed up.Flange BGV? Great ending!

Firefly – I like! Damn! Where’s the rhythm? Ok here it comes. Tasty use of the delay in the lead electric to cover up the sparseness and sloppiness. Another rhythm as lead… I like. Cool filtered delay on vox in the btb section. Like the panning. More effective on beat. Very cool. Acoustic rhythm is really too loud throughout compared to everything else. Good ending.

Maxim – Nice start! By far my favorite. Nice panning. WOW! BGVs so early? COOL. Hate that squirrely lead sound though. I like the mids in the bass and kick. The delay on the vox… not my favorite. In this mix, either more or not at all (probably not at all). Don’t kill me with the BGV! That was one place that it wasn’t necessary to me. Whoa!! Who called the mothership? Could have held on to that vocal delay till right there at the end. Cool ending.

MCarter – Why don’t I mind this crazy verb? Quick delay on the guitar? Almost like a rockabilly guitar. I like it… it fits. This sounds really finished to me. The ”best with what you got” mix. I wanted more btb! Everything is right in front of my face. I likey. WHOA dude… very dissonant chord with the BGV there. Don’t know if I hate it. Unexpected for sure. Fits great with that crazy organ chord at the end though, makes it sound intentional. Love the AM radio ending. I have 2 favorites for different reasons.


Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on June 18, 2008, 03:16:53 pm
Thanks a lot for that J. Hope you had fun!
Title: Re: IMP Impressions
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 18, 2008, 04:09:08 pm
J-Texas wrote on Wed, 18 June 2008 11:10

Back from the beach! It was great.


Fiasco – A lot of extra high freqs on the vox. Lots of extra compression on the rhythm stuff. Rock stadium verb on the electric? Another no-lead acoustic… I like that. Balance is all crazy IMO. A few people really tried to change up these sounds. I think they were good to start with. Darth Vader vox at the end! Smooth ending.




Thanks for the critique!
You are correct about the vocals... damn it. Tried to give it a little sparkle, and spilled the whole bottle.
I will have to double check but I don't think I used compression at all on the drums or perc.
I will come back and correct myself if wrong.
I used the same verb on the elec as the vocal, I guess it does stand out more.
Thanks again.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on June 18, 2008, 04:13:33 pm
Greg Dixon wrote on Tue, 17 June 2008 05:25


Fiasco Where are the mids?


I guess I wiped them up when I spilled that bottle of highs on the vocals. Smile

I appreciate the critique.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on June 18, 2008, 06:14:56 pm
Don't worry about it, I spilled a bottle of fuckup all over mine, and didn't even wipe it up.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: maxim on June 18, 2008, 08:25:59 pm
"...someone’s drunk friend won’t get off the drums. Oh… another drunk friend trying to btb!"

quoted 'coz it's funny...

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Greg Dixon on June 18, 2008, 09:10:54 pm
Thanks to everyone who's reviewed these so far.

Fiasco wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 05:24



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


Thanks for the kind words. I spent a lot of time getting the bass to sit comfortably. I did roll a bit of tops off the acoustics, so they wouldn't be too piercing and quite a bit off the electrics. Right channel probably was a hit heavy with the piano and lead guitar. Don't know what I was thinking there.... probably about the bass!


ATOR wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 01:04



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




I agree about the vocal, especially in the bridge. Which guitars are you hearing as phasey?


M Carter wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 04:45



Greg dixon - great mix.  The guitar 'solo' on the right is a little loud with nothing else going on on left side though. Occasionally the vocal jumps out at me, but generally this mix sounds dictated by the song, which is great. Piano could come down a notch though.




Thanks. Yes the lead guitar and piano are up a tad too much. I tried not to use much compression on the vocal and automate it, but I know I missed a few bits.


J-Texas wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 01:10

 

Greg Dixon – Acoustic is weird leaning on the left side like that. Love hearing the bass strings against the click of the kick. Organ panning is freaking me out. I like spreading things out on this one, but I chose different panning. I think it was more of a necessity than personal opinion though. Nice piano, but too loud for me. That btb is so off beat that it is really distracting spread out. Very cool ending with the organ.




Mmm interesting. The acoustic wasn't panned at all. I just used the m/s straight up the middle. I worked hard on the bass and drums in an attempt to make them almost one. I thought the beatbox was ok (obviously), but it was hard finding a place where they felt ok. Agree the piano is up a bit too much. I used the Voce Spin (Leslie) plug-in over the organ, as it just seemed to back a bit of movement.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: slash5969 on June 18, 2008, 09:41:54 pm
Random-order blind listens. Overall, a lot of fun. And I learned, which is the point. My goals with this mix were 1) getting good vocal sounds and 2) trying to find balance. I appreciate the feedback from everyone. These are my uneducated observations, and as always, your mileage may vary.

1. J Hall
   Great beginning. Good acoustic tone. Vocal a bit low-key for me - give me more. Drums are a bit heavy - I didn't hear this as a rock song. I like the shimmer in the electric guitar lines. This is balanced and full, if a bit bottom-heavy. I dig the Coldplay bridge piano thing. Luscious harmonies. More vocal, less thump. Close, though. I like.

2. Greg Dixon
   Nice balanced feel. "Rock song" bottom again, but well done. The drums in particular seem to plod, just in context to the rest of the song, not because of anything the mix engineer did. Piano is front and center on the bridge portion. Drives the tail end of the song nicely. I wanted less drums through the end.

3. Antman
   Nice acoustic tone.  Drums don't overpower, but the tamborine isn't there either. Electric guitar a bit loud. More piano, please. Messy ending.

4. slash5969
   This one is quieter than most have been so far. It fits - it's that delicate thing again. Vocals are up-front but not overpowering or drenched in effect. No drums...this is mine. I like it. I'll be quiet now.

5. Chris Ilett
   Another mix that starts out very nice and then gets the "rock song" treatment when the bass and drums come in. Crisp vocal  and not buried, very out-front - I like that. I really missed the AG counter part @ 2:20. Beatbox is overpowering, and the mix becomes ponderous at that point. Missed the "lushness" of all those harmony parts.

6. ATOR    
   Bright start here. Rock song feel when drums come in. Oh my! - electric guitar IS out of a rock song! Different take, but interesting after hearing this tune a few hundred times over the last week. There's a lot to like in this mix, but it's a little off-putting by virtue of how different it is. The delay on the EG line is perfect! Piano front and center at bridge - very nice - has a certain Coldplay vibe to it here. Someone else used the harmonies more than once - cool idea! A+ for originality - I would NEVER have come up with this mix for this song.

7. Teleric    
   Another well-balanced beginning with rock-song bottom-end. Vocal out front and crisp. Organ a bit powerful through the verses. Piano strong in the bridge, and I like that. Clave a bit hot, as is bass drum. This mix works, although again I miss the "gentleness" that I heard in the song.

8. Daniel Farris
   Beautiful intro. Bass is a bit hot. Drums aren't, which is nice for a change. Good vocal tone. This mix actually became one of my favorites once I turned the bass down a few notches. Nice balanced feel through the verses. I missed the piano through the bridge, and I felt just a tad cheated by the fade.

9. SingSing
   Here we go. Delicate intro. Bass doesn't overpower and drums are a support instrument, as they should be in this song. The overamped electric seems a bit out of place. Nice "eerieness" from the organ through the verses. Crisp vocals. I would have liked the piano through the bridge instead of the electric guitar. I like the harmony repeated. Rather abrupt end. This one was really close, I think.

10. Osumosan
   Nice beginning - mellow, as it should be. Is this mine? No - there are the drums, and they're a bit heavy. Did everyone really hear this tune as a rock song, or are we just pre-disposed to mix drums that "thump"? Otherwise, these are nice sounds here. I like the vocal. Beatbox portion seems a bit too loud. I would have cut the last 5 or 6 seconds off of the end of the tune.

11. Greg Thompson
   Can you say "reverb"? It sort of works, after I adjust to it. Acoustic is a bit loud. Nice balanced bottom without overpowering the mix. This mix sounds louder than most of the others I've heard so far. creative use of the organ track. Piano is out-front through the bridge - I dig that Coldplay feel every time someone gets it right. I wanted a mellower ending - perhaps fade out the bottom sooner?

12. martthie 08
   This mix is HOT. Thick in midrange, but somehow thin feeling overall. Acoustic is predominant. Everything seems to be fighting for space here, and the end result is sort of claustrophobic.

13. Rankus
  I like this intro. I'd think it was mine if mine hadn't already played. Mellow and delicate. Drums are unobtrusive. Sparse instrumentation here, on purpose I assume. I like the concept, since I heard this as a 180-degree off-center tune myself. It's not a rock song, and no one would mistake this mix for a rock song. It's a bit barren and ragged through the bridge portion, however. I would have loved to hear that piano shine through. The acoustic becomes almost annoying towards the end - it really needed some relief. The kick drum at the end felt out of place. Great concept for the song, but you lost me somewhere around the bridge.

14. Huds
   Another one that sounds like mine at first - mellow and gentle-feeling. I like how the drums sort of "ease" in. Acoustic is a bit loud, but I like the overall feel. Bass is anemic, but it works in this song. Turn that acoustic down a bit, and we've got a first-half winner. The predominant kick drum at the bridge would work better if it didn't lag behind the beat so much. Clave is MIA - on purpose, I suppose? I sort of miss it, after hearing it there a few hundred times. Acoustic still too loud, even through the Coldplay piano section. The distorted beatbox didn't work for me, and neither does the fade. Another one that's close, I think.

15. MGAudio
   Bright and shiny. Vocal feels loud, as does kick drum. If Bob Dylan covered a Cars tune, I imagine it would sound something like this. Bottom is light even though kick is loud. This one just feels out of sorts to me.

16. dconstruction
   Vocals very wet - from the bottom of a well.  More rocksong bottom - bass is ponderous. Almost a salsa feel to the bridge. Coldplay piano - you know I like it. Clave is distracting, like a cricket in the house at night. I just didn't hear this tune this heavy.

17. Strummer
   Harmony start - cool effect, but a bit out of place when everything falls away to that stark beginning. I want more lead vocal and less plodding drums. Anemic bass. Too much kick. I like the panning at the bridge, and the bass shows up, too. Piano a bit muted for the full-on Coldplay effect. Where's the organ? The harmony again at the very end is sort of tedious - I was ready for the end before it ever came.

18. Fiasco
   Nice, delicate start. I lose the clarity on the vocal once the drums and bass come in. Nice electric tone - I wish I had worked a bit more on it in my mix. I like the organ there in the verses. Not enough piano - missed the Coldplay shiver. Harmony a bit subdued - give me more, please. Interesting return of the electric. Unusual end, but it held my attention.

19. The Dan
   Very nice acoustic sound. Vocal a bit bland by comparison. Too much dirge drums for me. Good electric tone - why didn't I do that? Guitars sound really good in this mix, but the bottom end doesn't groove me. Too much acoustic through the Coldplay portion of the bridge. Lush harmonies - I like. Vocals get lost after the bridge. More vocal, less acoustic and drums, throw in a little 'verb, and we're there.

20. imdrecordings
   Great start. Good vocal tone. Bass resonates a bit - more compression, please. I like the organ through the verses. Coldplay is in da house! I dig that etheral vibe! Harmonies a tad soft, but I like the piano line out. I like the way it sort of petered-out at the end - would have been even better if the bass/kick drum disappeared sooner.

21. firefly
   Oh yeah! Nice beginning here. AG tone is spot-on. Vocals are crisp and up front. Bass fills out the bottom on entrance without overpowering. Nice drum presence without beating me over the head with them. Balanced and full. Too much acoustic and not enough piano at the Coldplay point. Where's the shaker? Overall, one of my favorites so far.

22. southboundloco
   My quaalude kicked in. Or your head fell in your soup. Or both. Ouch.

23. maxim
   Different start. The electric makes an early appearance. Ponderous bottom. Rocksong-itis. Premature harmonies, but they work for me. This is ponderous but it doesn't plod like many of them have. Full-out Coldplay, with elephant phartz to boot! See me grinnin' over here? I'm not so certain that this mix really works, but it's certainly refreshingly different after hearing this song the conventional way a few hundred times.

24. M Carter
   Another balanced beginning. Good AG tone. Vocal crisp and a bit wet. Hello bass! Too much, and it's a pity, because everything else here is spot-on. I like the organ in the verse. Nice tone to the electric. More piano, please. Less bass. Harmonies are lush and full, and you know I like the repeat. Perfect ending, with the organ getting that last sustaining note.

25. mdifazio
   Doubled guitar almost works, but it's more of a distraction than an addition in the end. If something draws your attention away from the center of the song, then it shouldn't be there. The organ is a bit heavy. Bass is MIA. Nice tone in the guitars. More piano, please - we missed the Coldplay shiver. Where's the lushness in the harmony? Nice ending.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: slash5969 on June 18, 2008, 10:15:47 pm
Fiasco wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 14:24

               
Slash - Interesting choice with the no drums;
              bass could have been more consistent without the drums there;
              ehh... I don't know about the use of the harmonies;
              good vocals.              
             


Thanks. My main goal with this IMP was to improve my
previously-somewhat-less-than-stellar vocal treatments.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: slash5969 on June 18, 2008, 10:18:17 pm
ATOR wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 10:04


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




What did you think I was holding back? Tension is good - it's the lack of release that causes trouble.

M Carter wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 13:45


Slash - The lack of drums doesn't work for me.  It makes it have kind of a 'demo' quality.  the elements you DID use, sound really great though.  I'm glad to see that someone else used the backgrounds more than once, although harmonically the placement is a little weird sometimes.



Thanks! I probably would have used the drums had I been a more competent mix engineer. I simply couldn't make them sound better IN the song than they did OUT. Ha!


Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: slash5969 on June 18, 2008, 10:20:00 pm
osumosan wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 09:23


Slash 5969 - Acoustic is a bit over de-noised and sounds constricted. Where's the line buzz coming from? The mix is very gentle, so the really close intimate vox seems out of place, although conceptually, that would be hard to predict. All of a sudden I find myself wishing that somebody had added pseudo vinyl noise to this. Probably because this treatment seems very 70s to me.




Thank you for the comments. I heard the song as very gentle, so I'm pleased to learn that I managed to translate that to some degree. I'm not sure what you mean by being "conceptually hard to predict" - perhaps because my 70's are pretty much a blur at this point. *grin*

Greg Dixon wrote on Tue, 17 June 2008 04:25


Slash5969 Interesting start with very dry vocal, guitar and a touch of bass. Not sure I like the electric sounds. Too dry, thin and back. To work that far back, I'd make them less bright and add some ambience. I miss the pulse of the drums. extra harmonies don't fit for me.



I wish I'd worked more on the tone of the electric guitar. It's the one thing I heard in other mixes that I really wished I'd done a better job of myself.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: slash5969 on June 18, 2008, 10:25:48 pm
J-Texas wrote on Wed, 18 June 2008 10:10


Slash – Like this so far. IMO a longer verb would have been more suited. Sounds like a big bathroom. Nice mids/strings going on in the bass, but it’s not enough to carry the thing without the drums. I like all of the other panning, but why so mono on the main acoustic? Your btb would have sounded great if it were edited. The only beat we get in here and it’s all f$#@ed up? Love the re-use of the BGV.




Thanks, Jason. I pretty much concur with these comments. I tried several reverbs, and the one I went with was very much a "lesser of all the evils" solution - I never found the right one.

As far as the acoustic, I used all the tracks. I'm sure I had them panned hard right and hard left as well as right down the middle. If it strikes you as mono, then it would have to been a volume issue on the panned tracks. My monitoring situation isn't ideal, and lots of times I just monkey around with stuff until it doesn't sound real bad anymore and then I quit and call it good.

Prolly what happened here, too. Smile
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: mdifazio on June 18, 2008, 11:48:08 pm
Here are my notes. Please take these with a grain of salt as my experience level is quite low and monitor situation is suboptimal.

JHall  Great job denoising and the vocal treatment in general.  Drums in the left channel are hot on my monitors compared with the vocal.  I have no problem with the asymmetry, just the level.  Bass also a little hot.  Maybe just bring vocal up.  Guitar delay at 1:15 for my taste could have been more of an even meter feel.    Would have buried the beatbox.   At 2:20, looped acoustic too forward, would have liked more piano.   I thought the organ was a feature, think you disagreed.

GDixon  Nice balance up front.  Vocal delay a shade too noticeable in isolation.  Bass too loud on my system.  Organ autopan/rotor making me a little seasick.  Piano arps a little forward. Nice background vox.  Overall a strong mix.

Antman  Nice spread on the vocal.  Bass sits well.  Cabasa/clave could come down a smidge.  Lose the loops at the end.  Very nice job.  

Slash  Vocal a little loud, edits noticable.  Would have liked some kind of space on the vocal.  Like the bass attack.  Don’t mind lack of drums.  I think beatbox would have benefitted from looping the bits that worked as a general comment for all.  Clever edit on the background vox, would have dropped the last set.  Nice finish.

CIlett  Mono.  Like the vocals except could have dealt with noise.  Drums good, just a little loud.  Guitar lead lacking.  Beatbox sybillance killing me.

ATOR  Vocal too wet.  Nice rhythm edits.  Disagree with guitar distortion.  Guitar lead too much delay.  Good use of beatbox.  Nice build to 2:50.  Clave too loud.  

Teleric  Vocal draws me in.   Like the bass/drum levels.  Clave a little hot.  I really like this one.

DFarris  Bass too hot on my end.  Vocal needs compromise between 1st/2nd verse re extemes of space.  That organ just kills!  Nice background.  I wasn’t hearing a fade on this one.

Singsing  Cool pad up front.  Bass too loud here.  Piano drops weren’t working.  Guitar lead treatment needed but overdone.  Good use of beatbox.  Clave too loud/dry.  Background a little much.  Abrupt ending.

Osumosan  Nice acoustic guitars.  Feels like vocals pulled back at 0:35.  Drums a little forward.  Nice organ.  Lose the acoustic loops.  Good job.

GThompson  Noise.  Like the space on the acoustic, vocal too wet.  Good bass level.  Piano drowning in verb.  Good levels just dry the whole thing out.  

MGT  Nice opening.  Really like the drum/bass balance.  Like the trem on the solo (obviously), the panning distracts a little.  Piano too wet.  Agree with the beatbox and background levels.  Nice finish.  Good job on that one.

Rankus  Totally different concept from what I imagined but very well mixed.  Would fade the drums at the end.  I’m wondering if a little “mastering verb” would glue this.  Really liked it.

Hudsv  I’d like the organ to be dryer and cut thru more.  Beatbox a little prominent.  Wasn’t hearing a fade.  Good overall.

MGA  Noise.  Drums a little uneven.  I like where you have the vocal.  Lose the acoustic loops at end.

dconstruction  Vocal too wet.  Sybillance and mouth noises.  Drums a little loud.  Distortion on beatbox too much.  Clave too loud.  Funny how you disliked the guitar lead, which I liked/interpreted as sensitive playing.  Last 0:30 just too much happening.  

Strummer  Disagree with the opening.  Drums too loud, vocal too soft.  Bass good.   Cabasa too loud.  Good beatbox level.  Good piano level.  Lose the acoustic loops and bkg vox at end.

Fiascov  Nice attention to the vocal.  Bass a little loud on my monitors.  Like the guitar FX.  Like the organ.  

TheDan  Great til the guitar lead which is a little heavy handed.  Would have liked organ a little higher.  Overall I think my favorite straight ahead mix.

SSelfridge  Like the acoustics panned.  Bass a little heavy on my system.  Really like how the drums are sitting.  Clave and piano a little hot.  

Firefly  Like the bass level, the delayed drum entry.  Nice vocal treatment, maybe a little too much verb.  Guitar lead come forward.  Nice attention to the beatbox.   Very nice overall.

Soutboundloco  First I thought 44/48 issue, so I tried to upconvert, then realized it was repitched at a slower tempo.  Ear fatigue prevents me from giving useful feedback here.  On a side note, the vocals sounded kinda cool pitched up 10%.  Vocals might have sounded cool with shifted formants but not transposed/slowed.  

Maxim  Would have saved the guitar lead for midsong.  Don’t agree with the background arrangement.  Good balance of vocal/drums/bass.  Cool trem on the organ.    Nice filter sweeps!  Nice edits eguitar at end.  

MCarter  Vocal “T”s could be tamed.  Bass a bit heavy on my system.  Good overall balance otherwise.  Don’t agree with the background repeats.

MDifazio  This is mine.  I pitched this to myself as Norah Jones meets Philip Glass although someone mentioned Cocteau Twins and I could see that influence with the vocal intelligibility and ethereal arrangement.  [Can we get a lyric sheet?]  Agree the vocal is too forward.  Too afraid of the bass, which maybe speaks to my monitors.  I only used the looped guitars every other measure, interspersed with the beat box which was heavily deessed and lowpassed.  For the end, I faded the drums and brought back the swirling piano/organ.  Had to loop the noise tail on the organ track til fadeout.  As for the delays, I wanted to emphasize the repetitive arped feel throughout.  Maybe overdid it.  

Thanks dconstruction for the tracks and everyone else for the time/feedback.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: J-Texas on June 19, 2008, 12:04:54 am
slash5969 wrote on Wed, 18 June 2008 21:25

J-Texas wrote on Wed, 18 June 2008 10:10


Slash – Like this so far. IMO a longer verb would have been more suited. Sounds like a big bathroom. Nice mids/strings going on in the bass, but it’s not enough to carry the thing without the drums. I like all of the other panning, but why so mono on the main acoustic? Your btb would have sounded great if it were edited. The only beat we get in here and it’s all f$#@ed up? Love the re-use of the BGV.




Thanks, Jason. I pretty much concur with these comments. I tried several reverbs, and the one I went with was very much a "lesser of all the evils" solution - I never found the right one.

As far as the acoustic, I used all the tracks. I'm sure I had them panned hard right and hard left as well as right down the middle. If it strikes you as mono, then it would have to been a volume issue on the panned tracks. My monitoring situation isn't ideal, and lots of times I just monkey around with stuff until it doesn't sound real bad anymore and then I quit and call it good.

Prolly what happened here, too. Smile



I'd be willing to bet that you just mixed a little too much of the mid in the mid/side. You can really control the space by how much of that mic you use. Go back in and bring it down for giggles.
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: J-Texas on June 19, 2008, 12:37:41 am
Greg Dixon wrote on Wed, 18 June 2008 20:10


J-Texas wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 01:10

 

Greg Dixon – Acoustic is weird leaning on the left side like that. Love hearing the bass strings against the click of the kick. Organ panning is freaking me out. I like spreading things out on this one, but I chose different panning. I think it was more of a necessity than personal opinion though. Nice piano, but too loud for me. That btb is so off beat that it is really distracting spread out. Very cool ending with the organ.




Mmm interesting. The acoustic wasn't panned at all. I just used the m/s straight up the middle. I worked hard on the bass and drums in an attempt to make them almost one. I thought the beatbox was ok (obviously), but it was hard finding a place where they felt ok. Agree the piano is up a bit too much. I used the Voce Spin (Leslie) plug-in over the organ, as it just seemed to back a bit of movement.


I listened again. MOST of the mixes have the acoustic leaning to one side. It's the way it was recorded. Check it out. Tell me your take on it.


Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: J-Texas on June 19, 2008, 12:48:44 am
I don't know how some of you escaped my coils!

Moowhaha ha ha ha.  Twisted Evil



Sing Sing - Dreamy. I like the added use of the organ and piano. After the electric lead thing (which I didn't like the distortion on  Rolling Eyes ) the levels on the organ gets loud. Then piano loud and soft. It's very noticeable. The pops in the btb section are bugging me. I don't think they're edits, it sounds more like a crazy untamed frequency spike. All-in-all... the coolest arrangement. It's interesting all the way through.

MGAudio - Missing some lows in the acoustic. It sounds about 1 inch thick. I'm VERY good with having highs in the kick/drums... but not at the expense of it not gelling with the bass guitar or sounding like the locusts are coming before a drum is hit. Pretty sparse sounding without both drum parts too. There's more bass in a couple of the btb parts than in the kick or bass guitar. Once it sounded like a fart. LOL! Were you wanting the mastering engineer to fade for you?  Smile

Southboundloco - What? I'm stumped. Someone just turned on a box fan in the studio too. This is time stretched to the max. I like all of the panning and the eq sounds cool. I have to stop it now... very unnatural.

MDifazio - Seemed like over the top (unnecessary  Rolling Eyes
) use of delay and verb on this. I like the interesting electric though. Missing the meat in this one. Nice piano. Nice vocal treatment. The readability really comes through. I don't struggle to understand the lyrics. BTB is lost (in or out... you pick one! LOL). Nice ending!


ANYONE ELSE? Sorry guys. It must have been the sun or this hideous pineapple wine I had.

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Strummer on June 27, 2008, 04:15:00 pm
Thanks to everyone who took the time to comment on the mixes, especially mine.

I listened to this yesterday while driving and I do hear things a lot of you have commented on. If I could find a way to remove myself and my ears while I'm working on something I'd be better at picking up mistakes.

The most heartening thing to me is that no one really killed me on the bass and drum sound. I think there was one negative comment, that's okay, they're not perfect, I know.

I worked the most on those in this mix and there's things I'd do differently now, but that's part of the learning curve, eh? Probably why I mixed them too loud, lol!

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: rankus on June 27, 2008, 06:24:31 pm


I want to thank everyone who commented on my mix as well.  Unfortunately I will not be able to return the favor this round.  The studio is keeping me busy and my mom is pretty ill, so it's family first.

I will comment on my mix for interst sake.

I kept this song very dry and the vocals up in your face because I felt this is an intimate song, such as the singer whispering in his girls ear. Lots of reverb just pushes the listener away from the band.  

Also being a very WELL WRITTEN song I did not feel that it needed all the extra embellishments... Hence the dry sparse mix.

Someone did comment that it would be nice if something (instrumentation) came in about 2/3 or 3/4 of the way through as things got boring in my mix by then.  I agree completely and if it were within the rules I would have overdubbed a tambo and an organ track (the organ in the files was not what I would want being introduced at that point).

Also, I felt the song was too long... another reason it became boring at that point.  I would have used my mix as a pre-production staring point and presented it to the artist as such, and hopefully we would have agreed to chop almost a minute and work on instrumental arrangements.

This is not to comment on the original recordists interpetation by any stretch.  I understand what can be done within a certain budget and time constraint and I am all for seeing where the moment takes us...

I hope these comments are found useful and that this artist comes back into your studio to re-cut this track... It is pretty damned good.  While I was mixing it I had at least three people ask if they could have a copy because they dug the tune... (I never release this IMP material BTW)

Thanks J and everyone for another fun mix-off!

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: loudsongsinc on June 29, 2008, 12:22:24 pm
I'm very late to the party, so pardon me please. . .


I have just stumbled onto your cool little corner of the internet, here, and it's just what I've been looking for.

I've uploaded my version of IMP18 and I would love some feedback if you have 5 minutes to waste.

I did my mix before I listened to any others so I wouldn't be influenced.  After listening to everyone else's it seems I have gone for a little different vibe than most.

Thanks a million for this project!!
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: SingSing on June 29, 2008, 05:16:35 pm
Late submissions are seldom (if ever) listened to...  There are a few clear cut rules that J has decided on to keep things manageable and tidy.  Smile

But...I just saw IMP 19 is coming up in the next few days, so before that one starts you can find some valuable information in the Rules thread at the top of the page.

Cheers,

Stefan
SingSing
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: loudsongsinc on June 29, 2008, 05:26:26 pm
Sorry 'bout that.  I didn't see any specific rules about late submissions. Embarassed

In the interest of keeping things tidy, I'd happily accept critiques via PM.

And I am IN on 19!


Thanks!!
Scott
Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on June 30, 2008, 08:36:16 am
Hi Scott

Rules are here http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/14857/18003/

I still seem to break forum rules a fair bit too so don't worry too much. Looking forward to imp 19!

Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: j.hall on June 30, 2008, 09:49:04 am
imp19 will start in a few days.  keep your eyes peeled.


Title: Re: IMP18 discussion
Post by: rankus on July 01, 2008, 02:52:38 am


Where can one get an "eye peeler" these days anyway?  So many eyes to peel and no proper tools...  Very Happy