R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => j. hall => Topic started by: j.hall on May 06, 2009, 09:57:24 am

Title: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 06, 2009, 09:57:24 am
the song rocks, the tracking rocks.  i squeezed off two hours to play with it.  if i have time i'll do a touch more automation, i'm doubting i'll have time.  at least i'll submit a mix this time.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Eric H. on May 06, 2009, 06:49:08 pm
Abuse of Autotune on the lead voc?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 06, 2009, 08:56:42 pm
Man...it's there...but that's not even CLOSE to the most abusive AT I've heard.  I was actually remarking to myself that the guy who tuned it did a pretty good job keeping the artifacting to a minimum.

And J wasn't kidding about the tracking kicking ass.  Really bang-up work.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 06, 2009, 10:36:28 pm
this AT job is solid.  i have no complaints about the tracking, editing, or track management, this is a pro session through and through.

wish the guitar tracks were brighter, but it wasn't an issue in my quicky mix.

have fun with all the BGVs.  i used them all, and enjoyed them all.

not sure why this band isn't touring with fall out boy.........then again, maybe they are, i don't even know who they are.


Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 07, 2009, 01:16:02 am
Actually...the only thing that bugged me at all was the compression of the OH on tracking felt like it choked the snare a little more than I would have liked...that and the stereo balance with regard to the snare tilted a little to the left for my tastes, but I'm really anal about snare centering in the OH...ESPECIALLY when the OH is this good and can be such a great foundation to the drumkit.

That and the kick in mic was obviously a Beta 52.  It works fine in the mix...but there's something about it that I just don't really like...the top has a sort of grit and grind to it that I'm just not a fan of, personally.  Doesn't stop me from using it and being happy with the mix, though.

Actually...this is probably the second kit I've mixed in the last 6 months or better that I didn't feel compelled to use sample replacements on.

I guess what I'm saying is that personally, there are choices I'd have made differently, but I'm in no way saying that this is anything short of a really great set of tracks to work on.

It'd be great if the tracking guy would please stand up!  I'd love to hear more about this session...perhaps once the mixes are all in!
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 07, 2009, 09:56:43 am
as usual, it's completely up the user who volunteered these tracks to "out" himself.  i stay out of all that.

bottom line here is that the band is tight, the tracks are pro, there is little wiggle room for a crappy mix.  you can't ask for an easier mix gig.  you can only ask for different choices which yield different sonic tracks.  that's all opinion based.


Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 07, 2009, 02:14:34 pm


Reminds me of Paramore a lot!

I'm busy as snot, and just downloaded out of curiosity, but now I MUST make time to do this one.  Good stuff!

Good tracking but there are a few spots where the timing could be tighter. (a couple of Drum fills and vox mainly)  But all in all pretty good stuff!

PS:  Anybody figure out the BPM on this?

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 07, 2009, 05:22:05 pm
index.php/fa/12149/0/



Huh?
Did you miss Grant THAT much?




Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 07, 2009, 05:34:49 pm
nope.  you'll see a lot more of me from June forward.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 07, 2009, 06:04:45 pm
rankus wrote on Thu, 07 May 2009 13:14



Reminds me of Paramore a lot!

I'm busy as snot, and just downloaded out of curiosity, but now I MUST make time to do this one.  Good stuff!

Good tracking but there are a few spots where the timing could be tighter. (a couple of Drum fills and vox mainly)  But all in all pretty good stuff!

PS:  Anybody figure out the BPM on this?




I got it right around 110.  Might be 109...but 110's probably close enough.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 07, 2009, 06:29:11 pm
Podgorny wrote on Thu, 07 May 2009 16:22

index.php/fa/12149/0/



Huh?
Did you miss Grant THAT much?








Laughing

I kidnapped him....he's typing from my closet
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Gav on May 08, 2009, 06:34:09 am
iCombs wrote on Thu, 07 May 2009 15:16



Reminds me of Paramore a lot!




Thats what I was thinking as well... Maybe it is Smile

rankus wrote on Fri, 08 May 2009 04:14


That and the kick in mic was obviously a Beta 52. It works fine in the mix...but there's something about it that I just don't really like...the top has a sort of grit and grind to it that I'm just not a fan of, personally. Doesn't stop me from using it and being happy with the mix, though.




Agreed.  It was punchy but it just didn't quite sound right, maybe a bit flappy almost.

-Gav
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Boedo Constrictor on May 08, 2009, 08:59:53 am
   
I'm not in front of the session right now, but I seem to remember that the tempo was 116, someone else?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Hubert Labbe on May 08, 2009, 01:02:16 pm
Seem to be around 110 using nuendo tempo calculator.

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 08, 2009, 02:15:30 pm

Thanks on the tempo guys...  I'll have a check later.

On the kick drum.  I'm wondering why we have a clipped waveform.. snare too.. It appears to have been brick walled on the way in? Clipped converters? Perhaps limited after the fact?  Anyway, quite possibly the reason for the grit me thinks... I'm using it and it sits nicely in the track so I'm not complaining just fodder for conversation.

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: mdifazio on May 08, 2009, 04:31:31 pm
I get a tempo of around 110 also.  Then there's that tricky 7/8 section...
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 08, 2009, 05:15:08 pm
Eric H. wrote on Wed, 06 May 2009 17:49

Abuse of Autotune on the lead voc?


Not an ounce of Autotune.
There is Melodyne, and I promise it was executed with a great deal of competence.

With regards to the overheads, these are more "cymbal" mics than full-kit overheads.  The kit sound during tracking was built around the close room mics and spot mics.  The OHs were compressed with a pair of 1176s - which I thought worked well for this song.

The Kick is another story.  The kick and toms were an early sixties ludwig kit- chosen for another song that needed a more vintage sound.  Efforts were made to make the Ludwigs more aggressive for this song, with varying degrees of success (I think the kick sounds better than the toms).  And no, it wasn't a Beta52, smartypants. Smile

There is no set tempo, as the band recorded without a click.  They were good enough to, so why not?  Anywhere between 110bpm and 116bpm should get you close enough for setting delays.

The snare and kick waveforms ARE clipped.  They were compressed with an LT Sound CLX-2.  If you ever work in Nashville, you'll see them all over the place.  They do that to drums.  I don't know why.  I've noticed it, but don't really care because that thing just rules.

Anyway, I'm glad you're all enjoying this.  It was a fun project.  Unfortunately, the band is not on tour with anyone.  They broke up about a month after finishing this.

And J, it will be nice to have you in town.


A picture...



index.php/fa/12158/0/
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 08, 2009, 07:32:22 pm
Color me corrected about the kick mic!

Sounded like the weirdness that I get from B52's...musta been the processing that's creating it.

Too bad about the band breaking up...good tune.

Anything else you care to share about these sessions or you plan on keeping it under wraps til mixes are in?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 08, 2009, 07:46:06 pm
No wraps. What do you want to know?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 08, 2009, 08:20:54 pm
Actually...wondering what the setups for vocals were...doesn't sound like there was a lot of compression going in and controlling vocal dynamics is something I'm struggling with a little on these...Everything else is just SCREAMING (at least IMO) for certain treatments...mostly because the sounds are really well established already...the vocals sound a little more raw both spectrally and dynamically.

This is a hell of a job, dude.  I'm really impressed all the way around.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 08, 2009, 11:11:45 pm
The vocals are by far the most difficult aspect of this mix.  One, there are a lot of vocals.  And two, the singer's voice has a tendency to become a little harsh if not treated carefully.

The chain was SM7 > API 512 > umm... I don't remember. It was over a year ago.  Maybe a DBX 160?

Unlike the rest of the tracks, I prefer to cut vocals without a ton of processing. That way it's easier to match up sounds later on, as I'm much more likely to have to punch in a line or two after the fact than I am with, say, bass.  I sometimes will listen with some more compression on the tape return, as it can help the singer to feel more comfortable.



Some more pics:


http://www.kylemann.com/imp21/drums.jpg

http://www.kylemann.com/imp21/amps.jpg

http://www.kylemann.com/imp21/cabinets.jpg

http://www.kylemann.com/imp21/marshall_settings.jpg

http://www.kylemann.com/imp21/patchbay.jpg
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Jonah A. Kort on May 09, 2009, 08:02:20 am
How was the bass recorded, please?

I know it really doesn't matter, but it might spark a new idea in

my head for tracking!
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Patrik T on May 09, 2009, 03:40:56 pm
Is the mp3 expected to be 44.1 or 48 kHz?

/patrik
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Eric H. on May 09, 2009, 04:38:43 pm
Is this a Bruce Swedien style Kick drum blanket that i see on the pictures?
Did you make it for yourself?

This track is really great and seems almost premixed (editing and levels as well as the right tones and eq/comp). Very good job indeed.
I am still a little bothered by the pitch correction, probably because i never have to use it.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 09, 2009, 06:34:01 pm
That's actually just a packing blanket...which is the same sort of technique that Bruce Swedien (and a lot of other engineers) use to minimize bleed into the mic outside the kick drum.

I've done it, too, and it's really, really handy when you want to lean on that out mic for your kick sound (something I'm doing more and more...especially in this mix).  I've always wondered, though, if there was any side effect on the sound of the kick drum itself as far as damping the shell is concerned...I've actually gone as far as sandbagging the blanket on top of the kick (which also adds more acoustic damping for the bleed that comes to the inside kick mic), but I gotta wonder if or how much it plays with the shell resonance of the drum and what that does not only to the close mics, but the aggregate of the kick drum sound.

I'm almost positive that the differences are so negligible that it's probably a purely theoretical discussion, but at that, I still just GOTTA WONDER.  Anyone have any experience that leads them to any sort of conclusion on this?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 10, 2009, 01:06:03 am
Hey Jonah,

I'm sorry, I don't recall all the details about bass. I'll list what I remember.

It was definitely a Jazz Bass into my Hiwatt and an Ampeg 8x10. I think we used my SIB Varidrive for a little bit of grit too.

Mic was probably an SM7.  But it could've been a D112 or a Gefell M71.  I don't recall. Preamp was API 512 (I used APIs for every track on the project), into GML 8200 and LA-2A (or CL1B?).

DI was probably a Sescom w/ Jensen TF.  I don't think I used any of the DI in my mix.



About the kick/packing blanket.  YES, it can change the tone of the drum; DRASTICALLY.  I mean, imagine wrapping your Toms in blankets.  It kills shell resonance.  Sometimes this sound is part of the reason for using a blanket, but usually, since rock kick sounds are already very short in duration, it's strictly about bleed.  If you notice on the side-picture, there is a tunnel in front of the kick as well.  It's a 26" bass drum shell, that I keep for that purpose.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 10, 2009, 03:16:34 pm
I've done the extra shell thing as far as tunneling the kick off...but I've found that I hear the inside of that second shell in a weird way...perhaps if I blanket the INSIDE of that shell...even just a little at the bottom...I'll have to try this.

As far as damping goes...I totally see that...but when, like you say, the drum is already muffled and is primarily filling the role of a quick thump...does the blanket really make a functional difference in the way things sound?  I know it does on an absolute level, but what are the practical implications in this situation?  Anything worth worrying about?

Also...I totally forgot to ask...if it isn't a Beta 52 in there...then what the hell is it?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 10, 2009, 03:49:23 pm
Kyle,
What was the mic used on the far room mics?  Is that an SF-12 I see out in the distance?

Great, great, great tracks
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 10, 2009, 06:58:01 pm
D112.


Edit:
Grant, the close room mics are Royer 121s, and the far mics are UM92s.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 11, 2009, 12:53:52 am
Huh.  Veeird.  Not used to hearing D112's sound like that...they're also not on my first call list of kick mics, though the last one I used on something turned out surprisingly good.

Like I said, though...any difference of opinion I have with these tracks is 100% subjective.  Everything works!  I even think I solved at least a bunch of the vocal issues I was having!

Can't wait to hear these mixes!
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 11, 2009, 12:38:37 pm
Patrik T wrote on Sat, 09 May 2009 14:40

Is the mp3 expected to be 44.1 or 48 kHz?

/patrik


256kb/s

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 11, 2009, 12:45:14 pm
i didn't use the bass DI on my mix either.

i wouldn't call these tracks, "pre-mixed" by a long shot.  in fact, that's pretty rare to ever get.

these are solid tracks that only help make the mix better.  they still need "mixing"


Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 11, 2009, 03:54:32 pm


So, deadline is Wed night at midnight?  

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 11, 2009, 05:41:06 pm
j.hall wrote on Mon, 11 May 2009 11:45

i wouldn't call these tracks, "pre-mixed" by a long shot.  in fact, that's pretty rare to ever get.




EXACTLY.

Listen to the multitracks from Queen's "Killer Queen".  THOSE are amazing.  In the case of these tracks, I did my best to make things sound good on their way in.  But it still needs a good bit of massaging if you're going to achieve any kind of bigness.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 11, 2009, 05:42:46 pm
rankus wrote on Mon, 11 May 2009 14:54



So, deadline is Wed night at midnight?  




yessem!
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 11, 2009, 08:39:12 pm
j.hall wrote on Mon, 11 May 2009 14:42

rankus wrote on Mon, 11 May 2009 14:54



So, deadline is Wed night at midnight?  




yessem!


Phew  Smile !

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: drumsound85 on May 11, 2009, 09:56:16 pm
which microphone was used in the  bottom snare?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: imdrecordings on May 12, 2009, 03:26:56 am
wOOPS!
Just downloaded the tracks, I had no idea this was up.
Song sounds great!
Looking forward to participating. Smile
Just celebrated my birthday on Friday and this is a fun little present!
Good times..
 Thanks Kyle and J.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Eric H. on May 12, 2009, 03:27:02 am
Wow, once again, those tracks are really good.
After some hours of good fun 'massaging', i think i was able to get my mix to somewhere i've never been yet.
Usually, i spent all my ressources on trying to make up for very raw or bad tracking.
Those tracks are already flawless so it all went to making the mix right.

Thanks for this one!
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: DCombs on May 13, 2009, 03:57:32 am
it's been a long time since i've been on. my bro turned me on to this song, and i love pretty much everything about it.

can i ask about OH chain?

and also, was it recorded at 48? (reasoning?)
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 13, 2009, 04:11:36 pm
rankus and DCombs, did you miss the extra two guitar tracks that fill in those drum breaks? and the second verse?

curious if you guys missed them, or if you both just chose cut them out.



FYI, if i had more time i would have replaced the kick and blended a snare sample.

the snare needed a sample to give it that extra bit of crack to open it up over the guitars.

the kick is ok, but a solid sample with no dynamics would have really rounded out the drums.

so my mix has no samples (imagine that) and no edits.  i just mixed the tracks that were there..........quickly.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 13, 2009, 06:14:03 pm


Ya, I did notice the guitar tracks you mention, there's one of them buried in a few spots. But yes, chose to not use them.  They were a bit too dirty for my tastes.  I would have liked to have more time to work on that breakdown and come up with an interesting effect etc. but had no time.

Don't even have time to listen to mixes until tomorrow (hopefully).

In fact I did not even have time do anything to the BG vocals except ride the faders... Really just quick and dirty eq and comps.. a stack of comps, eq's, and de-essers on the lead vox and out the door.

Oops. And a snare sample blended. Other than that no samples used.



Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Boedo Constrictor on May 13, 2009, 07:09:23 pm
Wrong thread, sorry.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on May 13, 2009, 07:48:23 pm
Here's some for now.

J Hall. Clarity is awesome, and good balance. Little bright, but makes mine sound a bit dull, so lesson learned. Like the vocal in the breakdown. Also think your snare is nice and snappy. Toms are ace.


Podgorny - great feeling of space in this, and backing vocals are sounding really good to me, if not a bit Mutt Lange. Again - balance and clarity are great.

Rankus - I was really keen on the guitars you missed out, but I don't think it ruins the song. Not sure it sounds at full without though. A good mix though, a bit more gritty and AC/DC because of that. The kick in after the breakdown is pretty effective. Nice toms. The very end felt a little messy for me.

Thats my lot for now.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 14, 2009, 01:10:27 am
RANKUS
Mix is pretty good.  I can pick out most everything, except for the guitars you chose to omit.
I know you're mixing this for you, but usually, if you get tracks to mix, the arrangement has already been finalized.  In this case, there wasn't really much wiggle room.  Maybe losing the backwards stuff?

I could've gone for a little more snap on the drums, and maybe a little less non-linear reverb or whatever that is.


DCOMBS
Low end is generally a little cloudy.
Same note about the omission of guitar parts.
Vocal sounds small.  This vocal was BEGGING for limiting.
Vocal treatment in bridge section is interesting.


GRANT
Kick sample much?  Haha - like my mix isn't pretty much all sample.
This sounds pretty good.  Drums have lots of attack.  I'm glad you separated the two guitar parts.  Low end isn't very large, but it is clear.  What is to me, the climax of the song (end of bridge) kind of misses the mark.  But overall it's pretty aggressive. I like it.


YLAB
What's with the intro?
And the stereo widening?  Sounds like the toms were on opposite sides of the room.
Overall, it's not bad... But then, it sounds you spent more time playing with flanges and the stereo-field than nailing compression.


ERICH
Guitars are very midrangey.  Bottom octave is a little anemic.  The big vocal reverbs kind of hide things here.  Go for more in your face.  There's not much room for depth of field here.  It's all about punch.
And that high female BGV in the bridge...  NOT a big fan.  I liked the part, but never thought it sounded great.  It's more of a texture thing.
And I'm sorry for the bazillion vocals at the end.  Sounds like you just gave up.  When faced with such a situation, try using distortion or filtering to create different harmonic textures for each of the parts to help separate them. Then, ride parts up and down, so that while each part is still playing, only one part catches the ear at a time.  It fools the listener into thinking all of them are being heard clearly.  


NIZZLE
Snare reverb seems narrower than the cymbals.  Gives kind of a weird perspective - Like the room is smaller than the drum kit.  Backwards guitars are awfully loud.  Think texture, not "part".
Balance of low to high is pretty solid.
Beginning of bridge needs to be MUCH smaller if there's going to be any impact when the bass and kick come in.
Overall not bad.


BEODOCONSTRICTOR
Very dark.  I'm assuming your monitors (headphones?) are pretty bright.  Wouldn't hurt to reference some big-name mixes in a similar genre as you go along (Paramore, The Starting Line, Fallout Boy, etc.)  Sounds like there's some L-R wackiness on the drums.  Like you panned spot mics audience perspective, but didn't swap the room mics. I could be wrong though.


FIASCO
Vocal kind of sits on top of the track.  Doesn't sound like you did a whole lot of "massaging".
I like what you did with the drum breakdown before the bridge.  BGVs at the end kind of fall apart.
Killer fade out.


CILETT
There's always one.
The session was tracked at 24/48.  Check that stuff before you import files.
And then, get rid of the countoff.  This isn't garagerock.


H20
Countoff.  Guys, the first thing I do once I get my files into a project is go through and clean up noises, talking, etc.  I guess because the rest of the tracks were already cleaned you assumed that the countoff was supposed to stay?  I dunno.
Drums sound like they're in some sort of can.  All the width is gone.  Don't be afraid to pan stuff wide.  It's rare for me to pan major tracks anywhere but hard left/right or center.
What's with the bass?  Why does it sound about 20cents flat the whole way through?


GIO
Not bad.  Spend more time making stuff sound good and less time editing out snare hits.


ICOMBS
Toms sound good. HAHAHA- Flangerdrums.
Vocal is a bit loud.  If it were tucked down a little more it might work better.
I like the delay on the Chorus BGVs.  2nd Verse BGV "moment" is a little loud.
Mix lacks some open-ness, but the low end is pretty good.
You had fun with the flanger, didn't you?


GRAHAM
Vocal seems to bounce between loud and really loud.
Guitars are kind of buried,  Actually everything is kind of buried.  I guess you liked the drum rooms?


JHALL
As usual, your stuff sounds good.  I agree with you about the kick sample.  Toms seem kind of odd- in their own little world.  Not sure why.  Guitars sound great - love when they come in on the bridge.  Overall, I could still go for some more aggression.  BGVs need some clarity.


PODGORNY
Well, I didn't mix this.  An engineer far better than me did.
I could've gone for a little less kick and more bass, but overall, IMHO, this is what the song needed.
Kick and snare samples.  Lots of limiting on the vocals.  Various kinds of distortion.



Final thoughts:
It seems to me that a bunch of you spent more time playing with effects, than improving your mix.
DON'T BE AFRAID TO CALL A SPADE A SPADE.  These tracks were decent - but they're by no means perfect.  Identify what sucks and deal with it.  If you're just going to push up the faders and add some reverb, you may as well not bother.  The object here is to BEAT the tracking engineer's rough mixes, not match them. Ya know?




Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 14, 2009, 01:22:47 am
And because people have asked...

Kick In > D112 > API 512 > API 550B > LT Sound CLX-2
Kick Out > Lawson FET47 > API 512 > DBX 160
Snare Top > Yamaha MZ-205 > API 312 > API 550B > LT Sound CLX-2
Snare Bottom > Shure KSM-137 > API 312 > GML 8200 > DBX 160
OHs > Neumann M269c > API 312 > API 560B > Urei 1176
Hi Hat > Shure SM-81 > API 312
Ride > Shure KSM-137 > API 312
Toms > AKG C414 > API 312 > API 550B
Close Rooms > Royer R-121 > API 312 > Manley Massive Passive > Neve 33609
Far Rooms > Gefell UM92 > API 312

Guitars were mostly a Gibson Les Paul, and some high-end Epiphone semi-hollow with burstbuckers.  Amps were A Marshall JCM2000 TSL, a Mesa Boogie DC-5 and an Epiphone Valve Junior.

Vocals were all SM7.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: imdrecordings on May 14, 2009, 02:55:09 am
I'm no pro, so please take my critiques with a grain of salt.
It appears that I missed the deadline for the submission thread, but was able to get a some what completed mix uploaded.
I didn't have much time to play around.
In fact I did this mix in a panic with 12pm closing in and my vocal suffered! I second guessed something like a dumb ass...
AH!!!!  

My one wish for my mix is 2db more of the vocal! Confused
Any who, thanks J and Kyle.

     ************************************************************

IMP21_Gio.mp3:
Vocal seems high in the mix.
I like the relationship you got with th vocals.
Kind of reminds me of a mix I might find in an 80's tenn movie or TV show.
Plate Verb on drums?

JonahAKort_IMP21.mp3:
Toms sound great.
I'd like to hear the room more.  I really like the vocal tone, but I miss the dirty grindy bass and roomy drums that are great for this genre.
Kick is a tad high, sounds seprate from the rest of the mix and a bit too basketbally for me.

IMP21_graham.mp3:
Oooh.  I like the roomy sound of everything.
Vocals seem to high in the mix, if these got pulled back this mix would sound sup uber cool.
Quite the unique break down.

IMP21Nizzle.mp3:
I can hear a Gate opening.
Vocals could be pulled back more.
Backup woo's sound great.
There seems to be a weird resonance that pops out every so often.
I Like the distorted break down and the outro male back up vocals.

IMP21_Stretch97317.mp3:
Wow! Weird Mix.  Kick on the left snare on the right, toms in the center and a
super loud vocal.  I don't know what to say about this one.

IMP_21_Fiasco.mp3:

Cool tight toms.
I kind of like the raw edge this has.
Kick needs some restraint.
I hear some weird resonance in the guitars, mainly the one on the left.
Break down is cool.

IMP21_Podgorny.mp3:
Great mix.
In your face and clear!
If I had to be picky...
I think the vocal needs riding.
It seems too high for my taste, in some parts.
Kick sample sounds kind of floppy in some places.
I kinda of don't like the samples chosen.

imp21_h2o.mp3:
Some phasing in the cymbals, maybe.
Snare has distortion?  Maybe gating before distortion would clean up the dirty phasy thing in the drums.
Vocals sound good.  A bit Kick heavy.  
I'm not a fan of obvious chorus on guitars.
But all in all a interesting sounding mix.

IMP21-grantis.mp3:
Good work.
I like the tone of the Vocal, but it's a little hi for my taste.
It almost sounds like a bus compressor is chomping down on the music, because the vocal is slamming into it.

IMP21_Ylab.mp3:
Good sounding mix and balance.
I could use some more roomy sound on the drum/snare.
I miss the tapping guitars in the middle of the song, could be louder.
a tad kick heavy or it could use some EQing.
But a good sounding mix.

IMP21JHall.mp3:
Great sounding mix.
This is the vocal sound I would like to be able to achieve. (nice and tight, with little no sibilance)
A bit of Sub processing being added?  Sounds like it.
I always love J's cymbals sound.
It needs fader riding and and fine tuning.

IMP21-EricH.mp3:
Could use some low end from the bass maybe.
I really like the the mid range of the music.
Vocals seem too up front and need pulling back and quite possibly some Verb or Delay.
Guitars sound great.
Snare sounds great.  Good work.

IMP21_IMDRecordings.mp3:((Time for MINE!))

I had a problem with the sibilance of the vocal.
Consequently, it's a bit too low in the mix IMO.
I like the tonality of my mix, but I needed more time with the vocal. Just 2db more and I'd be there. not!
The Low end might be a tiny bit rumbly and the guitars a tad to edgy maybe...... hmmmmm

IMP21BOEDOCONSTRICTOR.mp3:

I like the effect thing in the beginning.
I'm hearing guitar parts I haven't heard before.  Were thos always there? Wow!
ha!  I had a feeling this breakdown would be interesting!  
Good sounding vocal and a over all mix.
Could be more in your face and driving, for this genre.


IMP 21_-_iCombs.mp3:

good sounding mix and fun....
great to finally here someone take some big/weird chance
However you made the band sound goofy.
If that's there thing.. than I guess that's a good thing.

IMP21_Rankus.mp3:
Loud mix! Wow Rick!
Interesting sounding.
Kick could use EQing maybe, for me.
I like the Strong Vocal.
Snares removed on the break down?
Good sounding mix.


IMP 21 DREW (master).mp3

Nice and clear.
an over all great job.
Mix could use some samples on kick and snare.
But I'm just being picky.
Great Job.






 









Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on May 14, 2009, 10:37:57 am
Sorry guys. As I said, new software, but I actually thought I'd accounted for this. Haven't had a problem with anything else, but I messed that up.

However...


Podgorny wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 00:10


CILETT
There's always one.





This is meant to be a learning process. It appears I offended you.

I've learnt two things now...  Rolling Eyes


FWIW I think it rocks a bit slower.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Jonah A. Kort on May 14, 2009, 10:49:37 am
Dude my kick is ruining my mix....Damn... Confused
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 14, 2009, 12:30:23 pm
Chris Ilett wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 09:37


This is meant to be a learning process. It appears I offended you.





Dude.  I'm not offended AT ALL.
You're right.  This IS a learning process.  And we've all had to learn some things by trial and error.  Not a problem.

And no, it's not better  at 44.1.
Haha.



Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Gio on May 14, 2009, 12:52:33 pm
Podgorny wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 01:10

GIO
Not bad.  Spend more time making stuff sound good and less time editing out snare hits.



So had I not wasted the 1/2 sec. it took to remove a single snare hit, the mix would have turned out better?  Twisted Evil

Just foolin'! Care to elaborate?  Cool

I'll give all the others a listen tonight.

Thanks,
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: graham on May 14, 2009, 02:53:16 pm
Here are my notes.  This has been a good learning experience--good job everyone.  Interesting how we hear so differently.



GIO
Nice and big.  Good job on the vocals.  Gets a little fatiguing in the low mids.  A little hard and forward.

GRAHAM
Ha, I guess I did get the vocal too forward.  It was a good bit of work getting rid of the crazy 10k sibilance.  Normally a harsh vocal like this would make me push it back in the mix too much, and I overcompensated.  What can I say, I like big deep drum ambience.  On this listening I would trim some low mids back, and make things more aggressive.  I'm not a fan of bright.

H20
Oddly mid forward, hollow and constricted across the board.  I like the filter/distortion on the vocal as a way to treat it, but too honky for me.  Bit slammed.  The backing vocals are fairly lost.

IMDRECORDINGS
Big and full.  A bit slammed, but not harsh.  Tom attack sounds odd.  Vocal seems a bit buried.  Guitar low mids are covering them up?  I like the breakdown.  Pretty good but I would like more dynamics in the rest of the song.


PODGORNY
Good.  BD sample is interesting, it sometimes overtakes the snare, and is a bit disconnected.  The mix fatigues me, which just shows how I hear things.  I'm curious what monitors were used.  Not enough bass for my tastes.  Everything is nicely placed, but too slammed to have much depth other than snare and BGV.  YMMV.

RANKUS
Pretty good size.  Snare and toms are a little tubby.  Interesting/curious loss of the guitars.  Some huffiness to the vocals.

YLAB
Intro -- kind of cool -- yet also reminds me of an FX buffer that didn't clear before bouncing.  BD is out front.  I like the bass/guitar fullness, though it gets to be a bit much later in the song.  Good job on the vocals, though still sibilant.


BOEDOCONSTRICTOR
Choked snare.  Something is funny with the cymbals.  Cool aggressiveness to the guitars.  Vocals are pretty good.  We had similar ideas on the breakdown... nice impact on the return.

CILETT
Well, a bold choice.  Smile  Low mids need cleaning up to me.


ERICH
Nice aggressiveness.  Bright.  I miss the bass relative to the brightness.  Argh, the sibilance.  Bit slammed and makes my ears retreat after a while.


GRANTIS
Good impact, but drum attack almost too plastic.  Too much mids in spots.  Sounds like a lot of compression.


JHALL
I dig the way the guitars pump.  Not sure I like the snare comp -- hard and up front (sounds better in the intro).  That's a lot of cymbals.  Good impact but the drums seem a little small in places.  Vocal could use a little riding.  Overall the compression seems to push and pull in good ways and bad to me.  Nice breakdown.  The big tom is cool, but maybe a bit much.


NIZZLE
I like the drum depth, though the snare ring is a bit too much for me later on.  Aggressive guitars. Left guitar a bit resonant.  Balances a little funny on some of the guitar extras.  Good breakdown, though it could pull back for more impact?  


DREW
Big, deep BD.  I like the guitar texture, though I miss the one that's taken out.  Cymbals are a little too much for me.  Good impact on the breakdown, though hearing the drum verb that clearly is a bit odd.


ICOMBS
Depth is cool on the drums, but I think the snare needs more crack.  I wouldn't have thought about those FX.  Vocals too far forward.  Low mids need help.  Cymbal highs are too much for me.


FIASCO
Bright and large.  Good aggression.  I want more bass.  Too much sibilance for me.  I'd like to hear more weight to the snare.  Some guitars are too forward in spots.


Thanks,

Graham
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on May 14, 2009, 04:43:52 pm
Thanks Graham.

Low mids are a real bone of contention for me with my monitoring situation, meaning I really do go and sit in the car for my 'real' mixes - a couple of times over.

I've moved about a fair bit the last couple of years, and currently - referencing material I know well, I figured the low mids need to be a bit over-baring for a good mix for me.

I'm particularly interested in this from everyone elses point of view too.

Some of the others sounded really good on my speakers - no problem, so I obviously need to look into that. I really like IMP, it's of real value to me.

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 14, 2009, 04:50:58 pm
Quote:

Good impact, but drum attack almost too plastic. Too much mids in spots. Sounds like a lot of compression.


Thanks for the feedback!

Can you describe more in depth what you mean by "plastic"?  Also...too much low mid, or high mid? or both?

Is that a lot of GOOD compression or a lot of BAD compression?


Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: imdrecordings on May 14, 2009, 05:26:28 pm
Would anyone care to point out their vocal chain and how they dealt with the sibilance?  Anyone else notice the weird lisp, the vocalist had.  Almost as if she used a "blurps" sound instead of an "eSss", on the outtro of the song.

I struggled with the sibilance.
In fact, I had the vocals just right.
But at the last minute I second guessed myself and thought I could swap the vocal compressor from a UAD LA2A to something much faster, in order to cut down on the 10-12k sibilance.  Mind you I had 2 Dessers going too.    So after swapping out the compressor and tweaking, I looked at the clock and it was 11:57pm! AH!!!!   Hence the reason why my lead vocal sounds like garbage. Dooh!Dumbass!  Lesson learned...
I should have quit while I was ahead and just uploaded what I had. O'well

Any way...

J and Rick, what was your vocal chain and how did you deal with the sibilance?  I thought both of your vocals were superb in wonderfully different ways.


Thanks!
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: graham on May 14, 2009, 05:34:44 pm
Chris Ilett wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 15:43


Low mids are a real bone of contention for me with my monitoring situation



Cool, no problem.  Low mids are tough to get right.  I struggle with them every mix.  Power vs. clarity.  Or something like that!  For me the important thing is not giving up. IMP rocks...

Graham  
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Chris Ilett on May 14, 2009, 05:53:39 pm
I think there's a thread not too far down about this. Apparently I didn't read it  Very Happy

I get a boom around 130 - 200hz, which is a real pain in the ass.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: graham on May 14, 2009, 06:06:06 pm
grantis wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 15:50


Can you describe more in depth what you mean by "plastic"?  Also...too much low mid, or high mid? or both?

Is that a lot of GOOD compression or a lot of BAD compression?



Sure!  Bass drum and snare attack just came across a little clicky in spots to me... not a problem, just a taste thing.  I'm not doing a lot of work in this genre, so take my comments with many grains of salt.  Smile

The vocal has some low mid resonance in how it's processed, and that leads to some harshness here.  I hear a lot of compression/limiting that's holding it in place, but that also brings out the edge (high mid and sibilance).  So some good (control), and some bad (flat and edgy).  But it just depends on what you like to hear.  I'm certainly not an authority on the subject.

Hope that helps!

Graham
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 14, 2009, 06:42:24 pm
imdrecordings wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 14:26


J and Rick, what was your vocal chain and how did you deal with the sibilance?  I thought both of your vocals were superb in wonderfully different ways.

Thanks!


Wow thanks!

I'm going from memory here (at home with no net at the studio)

First in the insert chain was Waves De-esser, then into TWO 1176's back to back both set at 20:1 with the knobs at 6 and 6... both running about -10db on the meter followed by 1073 EQ and then a Pultec EQ followed up by another Waves De-esser... Then all that fed out to the board (toft) where it was EQ'd even more...

On the effects side (sends):  A tad of short Plate 140 verb, a bit of long Plate 140, a tad of short echo, a pinch of long echo, some chorus, some doubling using Waves Doubler (23 ms left and 60 ms right),... then out to the board where there was a tad of Space Echo...

Pretty much mangled it into submission with really heavy handed manipulation.

All Universal Audio stuff mentioned were plugs.

Thanks for the interest. Dying to hear what J did!

I hope to be able to have a listen to all the mixes this weekend... just coming off two EP's in a week and a half with crazy deadlines... I'm bushed!



Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: DCombs on May 15, 2009, 01:40:07 am
all righty,

Jhall
I really like the bus compression on the drums, like the way it sucks down on cymbals. i would like to hear a bigger kick. nice lead vocal treatment! guitars sound great, maybe a touch loud; i like hearing loud drums though. (snare was good, just more kickz)

Podgorny
i LOVE the balance for everything! guitars are a bit honky and loud. bg vox are KILLER! the drums feel a little small it would be nice to hear a little more depth. whole mix feels a little "2D". just a little bit more low end would be nice! Great balance for what is here though!

Rankus
lol we're mix brothers with those guitars missing! the snare is a little goofy in the mix; a little too loud. Love the guitars! well placed drums sound good. bass feels great. great mix.

DCombs
oooh a little scooped there buddy! cymbals are a bit bright! vox feel a bit naked. i like the impact from drums, maybe guitars up a hair. low mids feel a little empty.

Grantis
i really dig this! my only beef is that the bass isn't filling up enough of the mix in the mid range. master bus is a bit squishy! the volume automation in the chorus is really noticeable. bigger kick drum would be cool! vocals are a bit honky.

Ylab
i like the drums! the guitar on the left side is a little dull. like the bass treatment. the esses on the vox are kinda harsh. background vocals feel weird to me. overall i like this mix drums might be a hair loud, but then again, i like em loud.

EricH
I initially really like it! the high end a is a bit out of control. it gets a bit harsh. like the guitars a lot! i like the aggression from this mix, although it feels like it's missing a lot in the low end. vocals are a bit loud for me. but it sounds big!

Nizzle
not diggin' the snare very much, but i like the cymbals. great bg vox treatment (the low male vocal at the end is a bit loud). lead line in the verse is a little loud; it covers up the vocals. well placed lead vocals though! i'm digging the distorted vox before the bridge! bass sits well. well done.

Boedoconstrictor
awesome drums, just up the OH a bit! bass is sonically good, which it didn't take up so much space in the mix. left guitar is a little too dull. well done my friend!

Fiasco
snare sounds great, but it is loud! vocals should come up, and get de-essed (easier said than done on these vox). toms, guitars, and bass low mid range up a bit. well done mix, sounds awesome!

Cilett
like everyone else, i think this would sound much better at 44.1. this mix is a little dull, i like the low end, it's very consistent. low mids get a little cloudy.

h2o1
low mids are a bit much. guitars sound good. bass is a little loud. i would like to hear this a little brighter! good mix though, i like the balance.

Gio
mix feels a little hollow. vocals are a bit loud, and uncontrolled. oh's are a little dull in comparison to the vocalist's esses. i would like to hear brighter guitars. also, where did the kick drum go? it got a little buried. i like the omission of the background vocals, helps clear up your mix a bunch.

ICombs
hey bro, bass sounds a bit loud, but that's what you get when a bass player mixes. your drums sound good, although maybe the cymbals are a bit too thin. i like your your kick and snare placement. i like all the effecty drums, although the bus compression gets to be a bit much for me. guitars are nice and bright! vocals sound better than mine, although they are a bit too far in front. other than the the low end being just slightly bloated, this is my favorite mix as of yet.

Graham
i like the way you took the drums. guitars are a bit mushy. and bass has a nice home in your mix. vocals need a little help. i'm not sold. i like the bridge idea, but not executed as cleanly as i would like.



From what i can hear everyone had problems with vocals whether it was balance or eq, this girl is very tricky. this song is kinda falls into place otherwise! well done everyone.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: sstillwell on May 15, 2009, 06:04:26 pm
Doh!

Here I've been thinking, "Man, when are they going to do another IMP???"

You snooze, you lose.

Guess I'll mix it for my own tor...err, enjoyment.

Scott
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 16, 2009, 02:53:54 pm
I only had time for 1 listen-through for each mix.  These notes are at times incoherent since I was typing as I was listening...take them as you will and in accordance to what my mix sounds like of course.


IMP 21 DREW (master)
Nice bass.....big and round.  Odd placement of the hi-hat mic...it sticks out quite a bit.  Snare lacks impact, it’s kind of weak.  Chorus has no lift.  Not diggin it.  Bridge interrupts the song, it doesn’t keep the song going.  BGV’s are a bit nasal, and there was nothing done to help it.  They’re floating out there in their own world.  Mix doesn’t feel very wide.

IMP 21_-_iCombs
Mix is scooped.  Lots of lows and highs, lacks a LOT of mids.  Vocals are too loud, they don’t sit in the mix with everything else. Interesting bridge treatment.  I like it.  FX on the snare are kind of random, the don’t add to the song, just distract.

IMP_21_Fiasco.mp3
The whole mix feels a bit cold.  Not much substance to speak of.  Is your sub up pretty loud?  BGV’s feel really good in the chorus though.  I think I hear a slap delay on the snare?  Hmmmmm.....it kind of depletes the impact of it.  Bridge is weak.  Drums are pretty weak in general.  

IMP21_Gio
Waaaaaay too mono.  Pan those guitars out all the way L-R.  OH’s too.  Everything is a clouded mess in the middle.  Drums lack impact.  I can barely hear the kick drum....  Whooooah tambourine.  

IMP21_graham
Guitars are pretty dark.  Low end is muddy, flabby, etc.  Vocal is mid-rangy without much bite.  The whole mix isn’t very aggressive.  What’s with the bridge?  Was that a reverb loop on the drums?  Whatever steam this train had...the bridge killed it.  

IMP21_h2o
Did you sum the room mics or something?  The high end on the cymbals is very tinny, phasey, nasty.  Good bottom end though.  Guitars are too quiet and dark.  Vocal is contained nicely, but as a result, lacks bite.  Mix as a whole is moderately aggressive, but needs more aggression.  I like the bridge.  Keepin’ it simple, always a good choice.

IMP21_IMDRecordings
Woooooo compression.  My kind of guy.  This is a little out of control though.  The bottom end is out of control.  Guitars could be brighter.  The vocal is getting buried by the massiveness of everything else.  It’s a trick to balance it all, and this is a good effort.   Overall, turn that vocal up, manage the bottom end, and brighten up those guitars and we have a winner.  Back off the 2buss comp too......

IMP21_Podgorny
Very aggressive and balanced....i really dig this.  You were right about our drums being all samples.....haha.  I could handle a touch more vocal throughout.  I love the bridge.  Is the bass filtered in the bridge?  Very cool.  Nice work.

IMP21_Rankus
Very aggressive.  Nice.  Vocal is treated very well.  Did you compress the guitars?  They have a certain....a....i....i can’t put my finger on it.   Whatever you did, they’re cool.  They could be a bit brighter.  Kick drums lacks bottom end, but so does the bass.  Good news is they match.  Overall nice work, good mix.  One of my faves.

IMP21_Stretch97317
I’m not sure this was intentional, but the kick-left snare-right thing is just bad...or maybe genius for AM radio.  I can’t describe anything on this mix....just bad.  Nothing fits.  

IMP21_Ylab
I see your snare and raise you a vocal.  Swap those levels and we’re good to go.  Vocal is buried and hollow and the snare is a touch too loud. Overall I dig the aggression in this mix.  Guitars are kind of dark.  I like the bridge, the filtered guitar is cool.  Overall pretty good, turn that vocal up.

IMP21-EricH
Tickle me eaaars.  I like how bright everything is.  It’s relatively in control and balanced.  Bottom end is weak but not by much.  Vocal could have a bit more bite.  Female BGV in the bridge is too loud, or needs compression...or both.

IMP21BOEDOCONSTRICTOR
Low end is muddy and too loud.  The whole mix is being swallowed by the bottom end, most severely, the vocal.  Drums are pretty aggressive, but it’s hard to tell over that bottom end.  In it’s own weird way though, everything is pretty tight.  Guitars are too quiet.  Overall not bad.

IMP21JHall
Drums are lacking overall, they just samples to match the aggression of the guitars/bass/vocal.  Guitars are nice and bright as well as the OH’s.  Bottom end is nice as always.  Nice pumping action overall, it adds superb bite.  Nicely done.

IMP21Nizzle
Sounds like the snare has a splash cymbal on it.  Kind of weird.  Guitars are nice and bright, so are the drums.  Vocal is treated pretty well...it could come up a little bit.  Drums are very aggressive overall, I really dig ‘em.  Bridge is kind of cool...i dig the lo-fi thing.  BGV’s are swallowing the lead vocal in the bridge.  Reverb is kind of honky.  Overall pretty good.

IMP21_JonahAKort
You’re such a drummer.....hahahahah.  Turn the kick down a couple DB.  Guitars are too dark, vocal is buried and not aggressive enough.  Bass is hollow.  Drums need more aggression in general...blend in a snare sample for sure.  Bridge is pumping wayyyyyy too hard.  Tweak those 2buss comp settings.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 16, 2009, 03:20:34 pm


Quote:

   IMP21_Rankus
Very aggressive. Nice. Vocal is treated very well. Did you compress the guitars? They have a certain....a....i....i can’t put my finger on it. Whatever you did, they’re cool. They could be a bit brighter. Kick drums lacks bottom end, but so does the bass. Good news is they match. Overall nice work, good mix. One of my faves.


Thanks Grant. All I really did was pan the gtrs out hard L&R (a Dark one and bright one on each side) then just a bit of comp on the gtr bus with Waves Ren Comp, my favorite gtr comp pluggin. -3db reduction at 4:1 ...  IRRC just a tiny bump of EQ at 5k (about 1/2 to 1 db) (Maybe a small mid scoop too.. likely less than 2db)

In fact I did very little to any of the tracks except the vocal. A few have mentioned my tom treatment. I did nothing at all to the toms except a tiny bump of eq at the fundamentals (prolly 1.5 db)

Less is more.  Balance is everything.  
(Thanks to TM for this philosophy.. it has changed everything)



Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: imdrecordings on May 17, 2009, 10:53:56 am
Quote:

IMP21_IMDRecordings
Woooooo compression. My kind of guy. This is a little out of control though. The bottom end is out of control. Guitars could be brighter. The vocal is getting buried by the massiveness of everything else. It’s a trick to balance it all, and this is a good effort. Overall, turn that vocal up, manage the bottom end, and brighten up those guitars and we have a winner. Back off the 2buss comp too......


Thanks Grant! Smile

I think I just like my guitars to sound dark. Twisted Evil

About the Vocals:
I changed the compressor last minute (and I do mean last minute ) and that decision consequently buried my vocal. I'm guessing the vocal level probably leads anyone to believe the problem stems from out of control compression or the size of the other components.
I have an earlier mix where the music sounds the same, but the vocal rides perfectly on top and some of the things you mention are fixed/unnoticeable by the vocal being more apparent.
I should have just uploaded the original.... o'well.  say la vee

About the low end being out of control.
Could you go into a little more detail, please?
I struggle with "low-end realty", between bass, bas drum, low toms and guitars.  I have a tendancy to emphasize the 80-180hz range a little too much, because I like to "feel" the mix.   Embarassed  

If anyone cares, here's some of the stuff I did:
I used a bit of side chaining on this mix and a few buss compressors.  

Guitars were bussed through a UAD LA2A (big fan of this)
Drums where bussed through a UAD 4k Compressor
Master Bus used a UAD 4k compressor
Dumped the compressors on the busses prior to starting the mix.

I sent the Overheads and room mics to there own submix/bus and I used side chain compression on the overheads/room mics submix, triggered from the kick drum. (I've been a big fan of doing this lately and some times I'll use the snare too)
I also used side chain compression for the guitar bus on the tom hits, this helped the BIG sounding toms poke through a tiny bit better.
Bass guitar compression was side chained off the kick.
All side chaining was sent post fader.

I used Drum-a-Gog to replace the Kick and toms 100%, while adding two extra snare samples along with the original snare.
On snare rolls, I'd ride the original snare up in the mix.  The samples were a dead give away on snare rolls.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 17, 2009, 06:54:04 pm
FINALLY!!! CRITS!!!

j. hall

Band has size...guitars have good depth, but are really dominating the mix, too.  If I had an m/s processor, I'd turn the M up a bit.  Snare's up in the mix but the kick doesn't feel like it follows suit.  Basically what I'm saying is that I dig a lot of the processing work, but I'm not necessarily digging the balances.

Podgorny

This couldn't feel too much different from j.'s mix.  Feels like it's got more front-to-back stacking.  The sizzle that the snare drum is distracting me.  Drums are really aggressive...in the fun way.  I'd like to hear the lead vocal carry a little more weight in the mix, personally, but that's probably a subjective thing.  End of the song gets REALLY busy...I'd rather go find the backing vocals than have them slap me in the face, but again...that's just me.

Rankus

First thing that strikes me is the fundimental solidity.  The kick and bass feel well rooted.  The lead vocal is a little masked by the guitars...they feel like they're fighting over 2k.  There's also a bit of a lack of real top air and sparkle...would be nice to hear more of the sparkly stuff...there's plenty of it in the tracks!  No harmonies in the choruses...interesting choice...can't say I'd have gone there...but I love dense vocal arrangements in songs like this.  Backing vocals in the end section sit really nicely.  Some weirdness in that snare drum...like the bottom got sent to the rooms really hot.  Love the overall punch of the snare, though.

DCombs

WOW SPARKLE!!  Granted, I just listened to Rankus's mix, but sparkle is back and it's in style!  I like the treatment of the guitars...they aren't stepping on the lead vocal.  High hat is a bit much.  OH feels like it's really dominated by the left side...would be nice to hear the brass balance out more.  Lead vocal feels a little choked in the choruses...would be nice to hear a little less compression (or different compression) and to pull that vocal a little more out front just in terms of level.  Like what's happening in the harmonies at the end.

Grantis

Good depth in the kit.  Where's the bass?  I can hear it a little behind the snap of the kick and the guitars, but I can't feel it.  Of course, with bass, I err on the side of "feel" rather than "hear."  Man is that vocal crunchy.  It's almost fatiguingly so.  Like the editing in the 7/8 section.  Interesting choice on what leads the "I'm just a lyric" backing vox in terms of volume.

Ylab

Nice balances on the intro!  Big and clear.  Love the clankier bass.  Vocal feels a little thin to be the lead.  I know it's pretty high, but girls have fundamentals too!  The guitars on the left side are starting to really dominate the mix.  The size is great, but this song is really a song where the vocals are the big deal...they really need to be treated as such.  I do like a lot of the little effecty stuff I'm hearing in terms of flangers and stuff.  I think, much like j.'s mix, that the sounds are good but the balances are rougher and could use another look over.  Nice work with the tambourine!  First one I've heard yet!

All I've got time for at the moment...will keep running them down later this evening!

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 18, 2009, 12:53:09 pm
imdrecordings wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 14:26


J and Rick, what was your vocal chain and how did you deal with the sibilance?  I thought both of your vocals were superb in wonderfully different ways.

Thanks!


my vocal chain is the same EVERY TIME.  well, with a few rare exceptions.

EQ3 7 band
EMI Abbey Road Limiter
Dyn 3 De-esser (not as transparent as i'd like, but it was free)
UAD 1176 LN

the exceptions are.  i sometimes add a Crane Song Phoenix behind the De-Esser and before the 1176.  

and i sometimes add a UAD Pultec behind the 1176 at the very end of the chain.  just depends on what i need.  but these are rare exceptions.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 18, 2009, 12:55:48 pm
i mixed my guitars hot on purpose.  i wanted the mix to feel "weighted" down by the thick wall of guitar.  kick should be a sample which would help it cut a lot better.

snare is loud cause it's the first thing to drop in volume through mastering.  i've learned this lesson over and over and i'm finally now starting to compensate for it.

a good ME could M/S my mix and make it slam, IMO.  granted, there are many other problems with my mix that should be tweaked before mastering.

not getting defensive at all, just explaining my thought process
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 18, 2009, 02:35:07 pm
j.hall wrote on Mon, 18 May 2009 09:55


snare is loud cause it's the first thing to drop in volume through mastering.  i've learned this lesson over and over and i'm finally now starting to compensate for it.



Yes yes!  This is also why my snare sticks out a bit.  The transient stuff gets knocked down and the heavily compressed tracks, especially distorted gtrs, tend to come forwards... All the nuances (quiet BG's etc.)(and stuff you thought you'd hidden) will become more apparent too...

Ian mentioned lack of sparkle in mine as well. This is another area that mastering will naturally boost.  I have noticed that without even tweaking EQ's, a heavy limiter will bring out the high end... Since I have started to mix with less top end the final masters are a lot less "crunchy" in the highs, and cymbals sound more natural in the final product.


Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 18, 2009, 03:46:02 pm
j.hall wrote on Mon, 18 May 2009 11:55

i mixed my guitars hot on purpose.  i wanted the mix to feel "weighted" down by the thick wall of guitar.  kick should be a sample which would help it cut a lot better.

snare is loud cause it's the first thing to drop in volume through mastering.  i've learned this lesson over and over and i'm finally now starting to compensate for it.

a good ME could M/S my mix and make it slam, IMO.  granted, there are many other problems with my mix that should be tweaked before mastering.

not getting defensive at all, just explaining my thought process


Absolutely.  These are the conversations that this series SHOULD inspire.

I will say that the one thing that bugged me in the kick was the brickwalled kick in.  I ended up not leaning heavily on the kick in in the mix, so instead of the dynamics tracking the same between the kick in and out, it felt like the brightness of the kick was kinda coming and going...so much so that I actually automated the gain on my top EQ band on the kick track.  I thought that the played dynamics were actually really good...nothing that a little fader riding couldn't take care of.

I really kinda shudder at the thought of samples with drums that are tracked like these.  I mean, this was obviously a drummer who knew WTF.  He can play...his kit sounds good...and it's being recorded very well.  From an engineering point of view, I really want to hear all that.  Screwing with those dynamics (IMO) would kinda plasticize an otherwise ass-kickin' performance.  I know you're general motto is "whatever I gotta do to make it rock," but this is one where I think the tracking is really honestly good enough to stand on its own merits.

I should be getting to more crits tonight, hopefully.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 18, 2009, 06:46:45 pm
iCombs wrote on Mon, 18 May 2009 14:46



...... it felt like the brightness of the kick was kinda coming and going...so much so that I actually automated the gain on my top EQ band on the kick track.  I thought that the played dynamics were actually really good...nothing that a little fader riding couldn't take care of.



exactly the reason you use a sample.  

Quote:


I really kinda shudder at the thought of samples with drums that are tracked like these.


see above.

you're chasing your tail.  being "against" samples cause the guy can play defeats the purpose of being a "mixer" IMO.  you aren't changing the fact that he can play, you're controlling the fact that he isn't consistent and there is a HUGE wall of guitar that simply won't back down.

the amount of work you went through to automate the EQ could have been spent elsewhere.

i get a lot of projects that includes samples off the live drums.  if the kick is good, i'll use the sample of the exact kick on the project.  it's all about control.  these huge dense rock mixes just don't have any wiggle room for drum hits (especially the kick) to be changing tone on you.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: cgc on May 18, 2009, 10:18:28 pm
It is interesting to hear how people are defensively mixing against the crushing onslaught of modern mastering.  
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 19, 2009, 01:31:45 am
j.hall wrote on Mon, 18 May 2009 17:46

iCombs wrote on Mon, 18 May 2009 14:46



...... it felt like the brightness of the kick was kinda coming and going...so much so that I actually automated the gain on my top EQ band on the kick track.  I thought that the played dynamics were actually really good...nothing that a little fader riding couldn't take care of.



exactly the reason you use a sample.  

Quote:


I really kinda shudder at the thought of samples with drums that are tracked like these.


see above.

you're chasing your tail.  being "against" samples cause the guy can play defeats the purpose of being a "mixer" IMO.  you aren't changing the fact that he can play, you're controlling the fact that he isn't consistent and there is a HUGE wall of guitar that simply won't back down.

the amount of work you went through to automate the EQ could have been spent elsewhere.

i get a lot of projects that includes samples off the live drums.  if the kick is good, i'll use the sample of the exact kick on the project.  it's all about control.  these huge dense rock mixes just don't have any wiggle room for drum hits (especially the kick) to be changing tone on you.



See...I guess I don't necessarily buy the consistency for consistency's sake argument...I don't want to hear static levels and I don't mind the drum changing tone so long as it does so the way it should...in this particular case, the brickwalling of the kick in mic made the kick drum do weird things dynamically ESPECIALLY against the kick out mic.  THAT was my biggest issue, and IMO I think it worked out just fine in my mix without the sample.  Not saying what I did is perfect by any means, but that aspect of my mix seemed to be more a success than a failure.

And really...automating the EQ took me all of 10 minutes tops.  It probably took me 10-15 passes of the mix once I got everything in place to decide that it was a big enough issue for me to find a way to "fix" it.  Because I'm silly and anal retentive about my sample replacement triggering, I hand cut samples so that I don't have to dick with phase anomalies and flamming and false triggers...which generally takes me an hour or so per drum to be replaced.  I know in some ways I'm going to start contradicting myself...but there seems to be a distinction in my head between this scenario and one where I though the track sounded like ass and there was just no way that I was going to make the drum sound like anything acceptable without samples.  I knew I could use this drum and make it work without.  So I chose an automation tack.  Really, had I wanted to get stupid with EQ, I probably could have made it work with the kick out mic alone.


I guess what I'm saying is that for me, for this track, sample replacement didn't even spring to mind because I felt like I could work with what I was given, and I'd rather deal with that particular issue the way I did vx. sample replacement.

And as far as being "against samples because the guy can play" is concerned, perhaps it wasn't my best description of the scenario, but at a gut level I still think it's true.  There's something that effects me emotionally when I hear sample replaced drums...probably because I know enough about what real drums sound like and what really good players sound like that when I hear the samples I have trouble hearing past them.  And again, the played dynamics weren't "consistent."  They were "right." Let us not necessarily confuse those two conditions.  His playing was excellent but the processing to tape altered the interaction between the mics...and...well...yadda yadda yadda...you know what I'm talking about.

With this mix, I wanted to do everything I could to reveal the players and the instruments inside the song rather than create new realities.

As a sort of aside to this tack, I didn't think it was a backbreaker because, really, who gives 2 shits about the kick drum when this song is obviously a vocal oriented track?  I mean...I don't want it to sound BAD, but it really doesn't matter WHAT it sounds like so long as it supports the vocal (or creates the structure for the stuff that supports the vocal).

I'd be really interested to dig into this tack a little further.  I mean...if you listen to the mix I did, you know damn well what I thought of the vocal!  It's WAY too damn loud!  I put it too far out front, but in listening back to it, that doesn't ruin the song for me.  But there were a lot of mixes that really had the guitars way up front to the point where the vocal was kinda in the second row behind the guitars and fighting with the snare drum and I'm just curious as to how everyone kinda views the functional parts of this mix and how they stack up in terms of a hierarchy for lack of a better word.

Lemme try to make a little sense of this: If you had to rank the basic elements of this mix (the basic elements being drumx, bass, guitars, lead vocal, harmony vocal, backing vocals) in order of importance, how would that list shake down?  

I think the answers could be really telling.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: rankus on May 19, 2009, 02:52:10 am


Interesting question Ian.  I'm going to answer off the top of my head and prolly regret it later. (as is my usual MO lol)

My thinking with this type of genre is that the vocal is equal to the band in importance 50/50.

The genre being that of a rock band, the band must be big and important/impressive, but the vocal is still very important as you rightfully point out.

In this case the vocal could imo be just a teensy bit tucked in for sake of the band being big and powerful... but as well, the nature of a thin female voice means that she will cut through the mix easily anyway... allowing you to have your cake and eat it too... big punchy band and intelligible vocals.

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 19, 2009, 03:44:26 pm
iCombs wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 00:31



Lemme try to make a little sense of this: If you had to rank the basic elements of this mix (the basic elements being drumx, bass, guitars, lead vocal, harmony vocal, backing vocals) in order of importance, how would that list shake down?  
.


1.  lead vocal
2.  lead vocal
3.  lead vocal



Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: DCombs on May 19, 2009, 04:56:20 pm
for what it's worth, i think vocals and the biggest single part of this mix. also, i didn't think the kick drum sounded bad, so i used it! (i mean, hell, if you are going to put up more than one mic in the kick drum, you should make sure that it's good enough to use) i find it bizarre that kick drum is the main problem for this discussion. for the most part, it seems like people didn't nail the vocals, which i found to be the weakest part of what was tracked. when i listen to a song, purely from a fans perspective, it doesn't matter what the kick drum sounds like as long as it sounds like a kick drum, and both j and icombs are right.

now as far as triggering them, ian is right, it takes a lot to keep the phase right, and the only way to do it properly is to cut use the first sample of every kick hit, so you're samples don't bounce around phase wise.

j, you are right about the wall of guitars versus the kick drums. this is the exact reason why i like hearing loud drums. instead of removing a pretty damn good drum performance by adding samples, you could easily just balance levels, eq, and compression better.

Smile
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 19, 2009, 05:49:48 pm
As far as the kick drum is concerned...I rarely have the patience to deal with tone/level changes in a live tracked kick drum, even in songs like this where the drums sound good.  I manually replace every hit and it takes 10 min.  No phase issues, no flams, no mis-triggers.  I gave up on sound replacer looong ago because it was taking 4x longer to fix its mistakes than just doing it manually.

That said...I did the same on this mix and was unhappy with just the kick sample, so I blended it with the original kick-in mic which added a bit of dynamics back into the drum while maintaining a consistent pounding *thud* that could break through the wall of guitars.

Snare drum=the same

I agree the most important aspect of any mix...save for instrumental music...is the lead vocal.  I battled and battled with this vocal and appreciate all the feedback thus far.  

I still have trouble properly implementing a de-esser and always think I've de-essed too much so I inevitably back off until I'm *happy*.  Then....come to find out....it didn't work.  Rick's vocal treatment was awesome and I applaud him for sharing his treatment technique.  WELL DONE RICK!

I do have to ask this though....did anybody use the bass DI?  I used it in my mix with a PSA-1 blended with the amp mic and my bass tone fell short....




Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 19, 2009, 05:54:49 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 14:44

iCombs wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 00:31



Lemme try to make a little sense of this: If you had to rank the basic elements of this mix (the basic elements being drumx, bass, guitars, lead vocal, harmony vocal, backing vocals) in order of importance, how would that list shake down?  
.


1.  lead vocal
2.  lead vocal
3.  lead vocal






Couldn't agree more with this.

So at that point...nothing in the mix really "matters" past that, right?  I mean...like Drew was saying...what does the rest of it matter so long as you can hear it and it's not distracting you from the most important aspect of the mix (and it doesn't sound BAD in an absolute sense (unless that's necessary))?

I guess my tendency with a mix built around vocals is to really leave it to rhythm section to carry the song as that's easier (for me) to keep out of the way of the vocals without having to crucify them sonically.

I remember once being told to start mix balances with the center elements first...starting with kick, bass, and vocals.  Those things really do define the basic rhythm, chord structure, and melody of the song.  From there, start rolling in the "other stuff."  I generally start with anything else that will be in the center (like snare)...balance out the rest of the drumkit and start bringing in guitars and the rest of the band.  Then...if things start fighting the vocal and you're happy with the way the vocal sits against the middle, you know where to start attacking to mitigate any clashes.

I will get to more critiques, I promise...I've been up to my ass in my TV mixing gig but I should be finishing that in the next day or so so I can get back into it.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 19, 2009, 06:03:46 pm
grantis wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 16:49

As far as the kick drum is concerned...I rarely have the patience to deal with tone/level changes in a live tracked kick drum, even in songs like this where the drums sound good.  I manually replace every hit and it takes 10 min.  No phase issues, no flams, no mis-triggers.  I gave up on sound replacer looong ago because it was taking 4x longer to fix its mistakes than just doing it manually.

That said...I did the same on this mix and was unhappy with just the kick sample, so I blended it with the original kick-in mic which added a bit of dynamics back into the drum while maintaining a consistent pounding *thud* that could break through the wall of guitars.

Snare drum=the same

I agree the most important aspect of any mix...save for instrumental music...is the lead vocal.  I battled and battled with this vocal and appreciate all the feedback thus far.  

I still have trouble properly implementing a de-esser and always think I've de-essed too much so I inevitably back off until I'm *happy*.  Then....come to find out....it didn't work.  Rick's vocal treatment was awesome and I applaud him for sharing his treatment technique.  WELL DONE RICK!

I do have to ask this though....did anybody use the bass DI?  I used it in my mix with a PSA-1 blended with the amp mic and my bass tone fell short....







I did.  Though I used a phase rotator plugin to really get the amp and DI to match up well.  Thought it was a little sizzly, but nothing that an LPF didn't take care of.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 19, 2009, 11:01:19 pm
What plugin did you use for phase rotation?


Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Gio on May 19, 2009, 11:57:04 pm
Hey All,

I feel like I'm late to the party, as I meant to do this much sooner. There's been a good bit of discussion going on already.... hope to jump in soon.

FWIW, here are my comments. I'm not too keen on criticizing the work of others, so my comments will be based on listening in the same environment I mixed in. Hopefully referencing these various mixes and comments will help me resolve some room issues I am trying to solve in this home space I set up. Skill issues....... that's another story!  Razz

Here goes.....

Podgorny
I liked the BV placement, and gtrs, though I'm thrown by the kick/sn samples. A bit obvious. More bass?

J.Hall
I see J. has already given his reasons for what he did, so nuff said. I did think the toms were panned a bit wide and a tad loud(?), and kick/sn a bit detached. Vox seem tucked in.

Rankus
I like the energy, and can hear everything nicely. Snare could use some snap, I thought. Nice. ( I missed the gtr parts)

DCombs
I thought the kick was a bit clicky, and a touch loud. The cymbals are distracting me, and the toms again a bit wide. GTRs could come up. Overall sounds a bit clamped or tight or something. I like where you were going, tho.

Grantis
I felt the kick to be a little loud and separate, and the snare "boingy"? Vox needed some love, and the BV's could have come up. A bit more clarity in general.

Ylab
A bit thick overall, I thought.  The kit doesn't gel for me. The vox could come up, but are a bit sibilant.

Eric H.
GTRs seem uneven at times. Snare could use some life. Nice , clear vox.

Nizzle
Vox seem dry and detached. Snare sticks out in a way. GTRs seem clear and cloudy at the same time, sort of.

BoedoConstrictor
Heavy on the kick, and lo end in general.Snare sounds choked. Other than that, pretty even. BVs pretty nice.

Fiasco
The vocal treatment could use help. Thin and sibilant. It all sounds tight, but doesn't gel somehow. Snare needs to blend more?

CIlett
Sucks when that happens!! It's hard to comment given the circumstances.....

h2o
Seems a bit murky in general. Kick is loud, and snare sticks out. I miss some gtr parts and BVs. Vox seem dry and squished. GTRs could be louder.

iCombs
More GTR please! Kick sticks out. Snare could use some life. Vox are on top too much, IMO.

graham
Drums are a bit far away, ( room mics!) Vox FX need some finessing. I think leaning on the drum room takes away some energy overall.

IMDRecording  
Pretty grungy, but as you said, "Where are the VOX?" Also, some low cut on the toms would help. The verb on the vox is a bit much, to me.

Gio

Mine....

Mono? Nah. OHs are hard L-R. Room too. I do have main GTRs 1-2 up the middle. Those could come down a hair(?),and the doubles hard L-R could come up. GTRs could growl some more..... I feel I missed some cool GTR parts in this mix, with this choice of panning ..... I've just always hated GTRs hard L-R, and nothin up the middle. Yep, kick can be louder, or at least have some more lo end energy. Toms up too?. Bass could be more defined. LV does seem louder than most other mixes, but I like being able to hear them. Wrangle them in more. I was a bit shy w/the BVs, too, in spots. Could be rounder overall.

Did I miss anyone?

Thanks again to J. and Kyle, for making this possible. IMP does indeed ROCK!
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 20, 2009, 12:32:39 am
grantis wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 22:01

What plugin did you use for phase rotation?


The stock "phase" plugin that comes with Reaper.  Also used it to line up kick in/out, snare top/bottom, and the aggregate kick and snare against the overheads.  It's a little surprising what that does to a kit.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 20, 2009, 02:09:07 pm
iCombs wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 16:54



So at that point...nothing in the mix really "matters" past that, right?  



well, it does matter.  but when dealing with the "common public" the lead vocal has to be there.  past that it's all subjective.  but it does matter.  if it didn't, guys like CLA wouldn't exist in this profession.

and for the record, i can get a sample, phase accurate, placed in about 10 minutes.

not a competition, just saying, it doesn't take that long, or shouldn't at least.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 20, 2009, 03:14:22 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 13:09

iCombs wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 16:54



So at that point...nothing in the mix really "matters" past that, right?  



well, it does matter.  but when dealing with the "common public" the lead vocal has to be there.  past that it's all subjective.  but it does matter.  if it didn't, guys like CLA wouldn't exist in this profession.

and for the record, i can get a sample, phase accurate, placed in about 10 minutes.

not a competition, just saying, it doesn't take that long, or shouldn't at least.


I'm super interested...part of it might be my current software's audtomatic transient detection not being super hot...part of it might be some of drumagog's quirks...but since I do it all manually hit by hit, it takes a damn eternity.

Mind thumbnailing your process?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 20, 2009, 06:22:10 pm
Ian,
Are you working in Pro Tools?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 20, 2009, 08:06:23 pm
Reaper.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 20, 2009, 08:55:31 pm
My apologies...i missed that....
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 20, 2009, 10:38:15 pm
iCombs wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 14:14

j.hall wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 13:09

iCombs wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 16:54



So at that point...nothing in the mix really "matters" past that, right?  



well, it does matter.  but when dealing with the "common public" the lead vocal has to be there.  past that it's all subjective.  but it does matter.  if it didn't, guys like CLA wouldn't exist in this profession.

and for the record, i can get a sample, phase accurate, placed in about 10 minutes.

not a competition, just saying, it doesn't take that long, or shouldn't at least.


I'm super interested...part of it might be my current software's audtomatic transient detection not being super hot...part of it might be some of drumagog's quirks...but since I do it all manually hit by hit, it takes a damn eternity.

Mind thumbnailing your process?


i use apptriga.  very similar to drumaggog.  i buss it to another track.  record it in (goes real time, but whatever)

from there, i zoom way in and tab to transient moving the hits that misfired.  i do it as one big move each time so when i'm done with the song i know everything is right.  if you separate each hit you might miss one, or drag something into about region.

kick phase doesn't isn't nearly as crucial as the snare.  this is of course considering the fact that i never keep the original kick if i place a sample.  if you keep it, then phase is crucial there too.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Podgorny on May 20, 2009, 10:49:03 pm
I like aptrigga.  When I'm in a hurry, or feeling lazy, I'll use it.
But if I care, I'd rather hand place the samples.  One at a time.

Honestly, it's not that Aptrigga does a bad job.  With the filtering and the dynamics controls, it probably does an even better job of replacement than doing it manually.

But since I'm usually blending samples, I'd rather make sure they are PERFECTLY in phase.  Even the kick.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: marcel on May 20, 2009, 11:32:12 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 19:38

...the fact that i never keep the original kick if i place a sample.

Curious as to why this is, j?  Since you said 'never'...
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: iCombs on May 21, 2009, 01:23:43 am
j.hall wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 21:38

iCombs wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 14:14

j.hall wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 13:09

iCombs wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 16:54



So at that point...nothing in the mix really "matters" past that, right?  



well, it does matter.  but when dealing with the "common public" the lead vocal has to be there.  past that it's all subjective.  but it does matter.  if it didn't, guys like CLA wouldn't exist in this profession.

and for the record, i can get a sample, phase accurate, placed in about 10 minutes.

not a competition, just saying, it doesn't take that long, or shouldn't at least.


I'm super interested...part of it might be my current software's audtomatic transient detection not being super hot...part of it might be some of drumagog's quirks...but since I do it all manually hit by hit, it takes a damn eternity.

Mind thumbnailing your process?


i use apptriga.  very similar to drumaggog.  i buss it to another track.  record it in (goes real time, but whatever)

from there, i zoom way in and tab to transient moving the hits that misfired.  i do it as one big move each time so when i'm done with the song i know everything is right.  if you separate each hit you might miss one, or drag something into about region.

kick phase doesn't isn't nearly as crucial as the snare.  this is of course considering the fact that i never keep the original kick if i place a sample.  if you keep it, then phase is crucial there too.



Do you do any strip silence on the kick track that you send to aptrigga?  I see how you're doing it, but I find that if I cut up a trigger track, then drumagog does its job way better as far as phase is concerned and once I print the trigger track it's right once I get the first transient lined up.  

Granted...the last couple projects I did heavy sample replacement on were both projects with LOTS of double bass work, so I was a busy boy cutting up those 16th notes at 190+.  NOT FUN WORK.

Which...come to think of it...is a big deal that perhaps we haven't made a big enough deal about...I had FUN doing all the goony automation on this track...the drum subgroup buss had like 6 or 7 automation envelopes just for the goony shit...for example...on the snare only fills, I wanted the snare to really get smashed, so I automated the drum buss threshold and makeup so it went from hitting the subgroup at no more than 3-4 dB to cranking it for up to 12.  Did fun things to the room sound, too.  I also automated the drum verb return volume so the drums could kinda change in size with the sections of the song.  And while I was doing it, I was laughing to myself and smiling and having a grand old time...and isn't that why we do what we do?  Isn't that sort of fun the impetus for really breakthrough work?  When you have a vision and achieving it doesn't feel like a whole lot of work and you just start doing it by gut feel and when you come back the next day it doesn't suck...haven't you just achieved perhaps a small bit of transcendence?  Isn't that one of the things we all strive for?

[/rant]

Anyways...I'll have to play with my triggering workflow...it's clunky as hell the way it sits now and I know there's a better way.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on May 22, 2009, 10:56:40 am
no strip silence here.  apptriga has filters built in on the input side.  i just filter the source accordingly.

once it's set right (which i have presets saved now) it rarely misses.

placing by hand only takes you longer, and yields you the same result.  i can move the samples to phase accurate rather quickly.

problem with phase accurate is that softer snare hits have a different attack and sustain then harder ones.  with apptriga i get the dynamic tracking, but ultimately, you have to choose how close to make it phase-wise.

i replace the kick because keeping the original doesn't do me much good.  if i didn't like the kick enough to replace it, i don't want any of it in the mix.  snare is different as there is a lot of expression and feel in what's played.  if you hate the snare, you kinda have to keep it anyway.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Adam Miller on May 22, 2009, 02:11:46 pm
Can I just give a big up to TL Drum Rehab here? After the first few of times using it, I stopped bothering to check the phase of each sample because it was always bang in. The user interface is a bit crap, but the results are great and a huge timesaver. The detection algorithm is also excellent and has managed to extract tom hits from all manner of horrible cymbal wash and spill on more than one occasion for me...
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 25, 2009, 12:51:26 pm
Quote:

and the snare "boingy"


Hahaha....can you define boingy for me?  Too dark? too bright?
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Gio on May 25, 2009, 10:04:01 pm
grantis wrote on Mon, 25 May 2009 12:51

Quote:

and the snare "boingy"


Hahaha....can you define boingy for me?  Too dark? too bright?


No,no...... more like ringing, like the basketball thing.  Cool
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on May 25, 2009, 11:13:11 pm
Ohhh, ok thanks.  Yeah, I wanted it to smack through the mix but couldn't seem to do it without a bit of ring.  If I did away with the ring, would that fix it IYO?

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Gio on June 01, 2009, 11:40:40 am
grantis wrote on Mon, 25 May 2009 23:13

Ohhh, ok thanks.  Yeah, I wanted it to smack through the mix but couldn't seem to do it without a bit of ring.  If I did away with the ring, would that fix it IYO?




It would help it, for sure. I'm trying to figure out where it came from. I didn't notice it much when i mixed the tune. Curious what you used on the snare that brought it out?
( I know it's been a while now.........)
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: grantis on June 02, 2009, 05:35:52 pm
I comp'd a snare sample pretty hard and blended it with an uncomp'd sample.  It definitely wasn't there in the original tracks...you didn't miss anything Wink.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: NelsonL on June 10, 2009, 03:09:49 am
j.hall wrote on Fri, 22 May 2009 07:56

no strip silence here.  apptriga has filters built in on the input side.  i just filter the source accordingly.

once it's set right (which i have presets saved now) it rarely misses.

placing by hand only takes you longer, and yields you the same result.  i can move the samples to phase accurate rather quickly.

problem with phase accurate is that softer snare hits have a different attack and sustain then harder ones.  with apptriga i get the dynamic tracking, but ultimately, you have to choose how close to make it phase-wise.

i replace the kick because keeping the original doesn't do me much good.  if i didn't like the kick enough to replace it, i don't want any of it in the mix.  snare is different as there is a lot of expression and feel in what's played.  if you hate the snare, you kinda have to keep it anyway.


OT from IMP, but I'm starting to get interested in Massey DTM as an alternative to apptriga, which I already like:

http://blog.kalmusky.com/?p=90

Would be cool to trigger the Reason Drums Refill, which I've already been printing kicks and snares from, somewhat laboriously.
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Music_Junky on August 05, 2009, 05:48:42 pm
Hi all. My name is D
Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: j.hall on August 06, 2009, 12:03:38 pm
welcome!!

i love the music that comes from your country.  mainly Bjork, Sigur Ros and Mum.  i have had much time to explore much more.

anyway.  with my current work load it's difficult for me to predict when another IMP will take place.

i hope soon.

just keep an eye on the forum.  generally i post a topic something like "looking for another IMP song".  once i find one i like, we start it up.

Title: Re: IMP21 discussion
Post by: Music_Junky on August 06, 2009, 04:59:44 pm
Thank you for your reply. I look forward for the next IMP. I am having fun mixing nr 21 now.

Good to know you are busy at work!