Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
My turn to try Dune Rider
#1
Cool song with lots of opportunity for creative processing. The main challenge for me was limiting the amount of high-hat, especially in the parts where it's played open, since it spilled all over the snare. I tried a gate, but when it opened for the snare, an obvious "SWISH" of high-hat spilled out with it. I finally ended up with an expander on the snare track with about a 6db cut when closed, and I muted the hat's close mic through the loud sections. I also phase reversed it for a sort of ducking effect after I made sure it wasn't affecting the snare too.

The track to me called out for a full on fuzz box treatment on the bass line, ala Acid King/Electric Wizard/Sleep but I restrained myself to just some limited overdrive.

A couple massive hall 'verbs here and there (especially the outro), a phaser in parts, some overdrive on the main Hammond track ... and those backing vocal parts? Oh my. Thank you ReaTune.



.mp3    Dune Rider master 2.mp3 --  (Download: 9.34 MB)


Reply
#2
(24-02-2016, 03:55 AM)ulynch Wrote: Cool song with lots of opportunity for creative processing. The main challenge for me was limiting the amount of high-hat, especially in the parts where it's played open, since it spilled all over the snare. I tried a gate, but when it opened for the snare, an obvious "SWISH" of high-hat spilled out with it. I finally ended up with an expander on the snare track with about a 6db cut when closed, and I muted the hat's close mic through the loud sections. I also phase reversed it for a sort of ducking effect after I made sure it wasn't affecting the snare too.

The track to me called out for a full on fuzz box treatment on the bass line, ala Acid King/Electric Wizard/Sleep but I restrained myself to just some limited overdrive.

A couple massive hall 'verbs here and there (especially the outro), a phaser in parts, some overdrive on the main Hammond track ... and those backing vocal parts? Oh my. Thank you ReaTune.

Nice version with smooth steep spectrum, only thing is there seems to be too much information around 400 Hz (gives entire mix some honky quality, could be just 1 dB less).
Another thing is bass seems to be high-passed to much with peak on 93 Hz (sometimes sounds like trapped in a small room or cubicle).
Overall seems quite balanced sound with crunchy guitar despite lack of Hammond presence at times but it's okay anyway.
Thank you.

Reply
#3
Thanks for the listen sysrq. Big Grin

(28-02-2016, 02:21 PM)sysrq Wrote: ... there seems to be too much information around 400 Hz (gives entire mix some honky quality, could be just 1 dB less).

That's most likely the plate reverb on the guitar that I used to thicken up its presence in the mix. It is a bit honky, but my goal was toward a less-muddy variation on an early Sabbath sort of guitar sound. It's mostly there, but hey, no one's perfect Undecided

(28-02-2016, 02:21 PM)sysrq Wrote: Another thing is bass seems to be high-passed to much with peak on 93 Hz (sometimes sounds like trapped in a small room or cubicle).

High pass on the bass was fairly steep @ 60hz. I only used the DI, re-amped ITB with an Ampeg 810 IR, which tends be heavy in the low mids and virtually eliminated everything below 40 anyway. There's only close mics on the IR, with no room presence to speak of, no reverb on the track, and full mono. I like my low end tightly centered, especially here where there's so much sub-60hz from the Hammond in the stereo field, and the bass guitar carries so much of the tune. Again, back to the early Sabbath reference (with a dash of Jon Lord). Plus, I'm not a fan of useless sub frequencies, which to me only serve to reduce the intelligibility of the bass line (and blow your car stereo speakers).

(28-02-2016, 02:21 PM)sysrq Wrote: ... lack of Hammond presence at times

Ha! I was afraid the Hammond was too up front here! Good to hear I didn't overcook it :-) It's a great instrument in this song, and I wanted to highlight it (hence the overdrive in all but the breakdown). The Hammond's volume is down a db or so in the verses to let the guitar take over, and up in the chorus sections.

Listening again with fresh ears, the thing that stands out for me now is the high pitched squeak of the guitar's pick attack in some sections. I need to figure out how to deal with that more effectively.
Reply
#4
(28-02-2016, 05:17 PM)ulynch Wrote: High pass on the bass was fairly steep @ 60hz. I only used the DI, re-amped ITB with an Ampeg 810 IR, which tends be heavy in the low mids and virtually eliminated everything below 40 anyway. There's only close mics on the IR, with no room presence to speak of, no reverb on the track, and full mono. I like my low end tightly centered, especially here where there's so much sub-60hz from the Hammond in the stereo field, and the bass guitar carries so much of the tune. Again, back to the early Sabbath reference (with a dash of Jon Lord). Plus, I'm not a fan of useless sub frequencies, which to me only serve to reduce the intelligibility of the bass line (and blow your car stereo speakers).

It realy depends on the speed of given track and if it fits the music from artistic point of view, another thing is to watch out for useless frequencies which are hard to hear due to wave shape or they harmonically doesn't contribute to anything.
Car is not the best place to listen to music anyway. The aim is to make your track listenable on all systems, if you don't like the sub frequencies then make them appear at one or more points during the song then they will seem more effective and people with sub-woofers or stereo speakers with extended frequency response will be kept ''happy''.

(28-02-2016, 05:17 PM)ulynch Wrote: Listening again with fresh ears, the thing that stands out for me now is the high pitched squeak of the guitar's pick attack in some sections. I need to figure out how to deal with that more effectively.

For me squeaks and pops seem to be more interesting if they sound ''aesthetically'' good, especially if it's a psychedelic piece of music.

Reply