Thread Rating:
  • 5 Vote(s) - 3.4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
THANK YOU! - Official Release Mix: Opinions, Q&A, critics, additional information!
#11
Where are the drum samples from? From Logic too? Just interested because I'm looking for a good drum sample library for rock / punk / metal stuff.
Reply
#12
Till, do you suffer from hearing impairment? i'm being serious. i have no idea how anyone can listen to this mix without suffering major fatigue; the amount of compression applied here is absolutely ridiculous. most musicians have impaired hearing, indeed, many kids these days are also showing significant signs of damage due to changes in listening habits; ear buds and prolonged exposures above safe thresholds are partly to blame - it's becoming a global governmental concern. these might be your target audience, perhaps; without their DAC's and speakers distorting to hell they can't embrace the music because they probably can't hear it unless it's doing so.

if your mix was loudness-matched against a dynamic mix that complied with iTunes dynamic specifications (i.e. their playback leveller which penalises loud songs) and global loudness legislation for example, it would, and does........suck. it's totally lifeless and lacks any energy whatsoever. clearly you are yet to be convinced the loudness war is over because you are waving a middle finger to dynamics with much gusto? however they do say that "Loud is perceived better", only it's been proven that it isn't. but it does impress the noobs and i can't help wondering if you are exploiting that [intentionally, or otherwise]?

anyway, i recommend you get your hearing checked. because if it is failing from poor attention to health and safety, you need to act fast to stop it declining any further. hearing aids aren't cool, eh?



on another matter, Mike states in the MDL's page introduction, that:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"All these files are presented......without any effects or processing."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that's clearly NOT the case with your multi-track. it's been tampered with subsequent to the recordings...you've EQ'd, compressed and automated. the vocal has also been pitch corrected.

if i'm going to mix something, i want to apply my own parameters without having them, and their artifacts(!) forced upon me, and i'd suggest that people here in the forum, would also benefit from not having to negotiate material that's been tampered with. for example, automation is going to mess up someone's Insert chain, and thereafter through to the stereo buss, pretty substantially. if they don't yet understand what they are being confronted with in the supplied materials, they will never stand a hope in learning anything. they believe they are mixing "The Recordings", without processing - Mike has told them so.

if the kid can't pitch and you don't want the world to know, i could understand processing it before releasing it in the Public Domain (but poor pitching skills will show up at gigs anyway). personally, i think it would provide excellent opportunity in the forum for people to have a go at doing "transparent" pitch correction, for example. and if low cuts and high cuts or shelving filters need to be applied, that they learn by having a go at doing this themselves. the same goes for compression...and automation.

i don't wish to sound confrontational, but i have concerns. your fundamental concern appears to be marketing and promotion for the band (hence the loudness - to impress perhaps)? my concern is for my on-going personal development and helping the development of others as best i can, in a sharing community. i believe that what you are doing is hindering the development process, not only in this mix, but in your multi-track. when i read comments like "nice mix", or "this is a very good, solid, pleasant, and effective mix", then i think my concerns are well founded. noobs are going to read those comments and think that what they are hearing IS good and will no doubt try and replicate it. that's not a healthy learning environment, in any language.

i challenge you to put this song out WITH dynamics intact. aim for -14LUFS, a True Peak of -1 and an approximate +5 LRA (simply turning it down is not enough, though for those who do turn this mix down to loudness match it against =14 LUFS, say, they will immediately discover where my claims of dullness came from). i bet my pension that you can't rise to the challenge. indeed, i challenge EVERYONE to have a go at this. in attempting to, you should soon discover the issues present in the multi which nobody has discussed yet.

anyway, please at least think about the issues i raise, that's all i ask. without thought, there cannot be a potential for progress......

Cheers,,
Dave
Beware...........Cognitive Dissonance!
Reply
#13
Hey Dave,

wow, that was... honest.
Thanks for your feedback.

I think that I may have to clarify some things...
First of all, I never wanted to put my mix as best mix out there ever. I am NOT happy with it. It just came out as the band wanted it to be.
Apart from the drum tracks, which were recorded through hardware processing as stated in my first post of this thread, only vocals were processed. No compression or EQing apart from that, neither on vocals, nor the raw bass track (the distorted one was just reamped through a sansamp, no further processing) or guitars, no automation, nothing.
And yes, the vocals were pitch corrected. With Logic Pro X's pitch shifter. Nothing fancy because I'm a student and can't afford anything fancy from the credit I took to be able to study.
I never studied sound engineering, so I'm not a professional. I've been doing it as a hobby for about three years now, but always learned via trial and error.
I don't like listening to loud music and I try to preserve my hearing abilities, so I'm always rehearsing with in-ear-monitoring and additional hearing protection to dampen the whole thing down when playing drums with my band, I'm using hearing protection on live concerts and I prefer listening to music on a medium volume using isolating headphones rather than damaging my hearing with cheap earbuds on full volume, and I had a hearing test recently stating "above average" hearing abilities for my age so no, I don't suffer from hearing impairment.

The leveling was made in the mastering (which was done in Tiny Pond Studios as well) and he's a professional, though the master was a bit overcompressed in my opinion too.
There have been two masters: A "hard master" to stay in the game if the EP was compared to another disc and a "soft master" for services with automatic volume adjustment like iTunes, Spotify, etc.
I uploaded the hard master, but if you want to, I can upload the unmastered mix and the soft master as well if you'd like to take a listen.

You know what, Dave? Loudness sucks. I totally agree on that. But that's my opinion and the band needs to be able to sell their EP and they can't if they want a really dynamic mix and music industry doesn't change anything.
The guy who mastered this knew this and did the right thing even if it sounds wrong to professionals. But you wouldn't notice small plot errors in a movie unless you're a script writer, right? I know that argument sucks, but I can't change it. That's how it works and a local band is not in a good position for a big change in the music industry.
I didn't do the mix for you guys, I did it for the band, and I invested more time in this project than in anything else just to learn something and get some small money for it. Do you really think that I'm screwing the mix only to "wave my middle finger" to everyone?

I don't know what you refer to as a "kid", I'm 22 years old, if that's a kid in your point of view, that's fine, but if you treat every kid like this you shouldn't be a dad. Ever.
I like critics because they help me improve my skills but it's all a matter of tone, you know? You basically just put me in the position of a total douche for my mix, stating that I was either making fun of people who are yet learning how to mix or I'm a total loser on that.

...aaaand I don't know for sure what you mean with -14LUFS, a True Peak of -1 and an approximate +5 LRA. I guess that's some standard of dynamic range, but I wouldn't know how to do that.




...on the other hand it's a true statement saying that a mix sucks if you didn't even upload one yourself. To say that with your words:
I don't wish to sound confrontational, but that's kinda poor in my opinion.

Did you notice how arrogant that sounds?

Cheers,
Till


(25-10-2015, 02:58 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: Till, do you suffer from hearing impairment? i'm being serious. i have no idea how anyone can listen to this mix without suffering major fatigue; the amount of compression applied here is absolutely ridiculous. most musicians have impaired hearing, indeed, many kids these days are also showing significant signs of damage due to changes in listening habits; ear buds and prolonged exposures above safe thresholds are partly to blame - it's becoming a global governmental concern. these might be your target audience, perhaps; without their DAC's and speakers distorting to hell they can't embrace the music because they probably can't hear it unless it's doing so.

if your mix was loudness-matched against a dynamic mix that complied with iTunes dynamic specifications (i.e. their playback leveller which penalises loud songs) and global loudness legislation for example, it would, and does........suck. it's totally lifeless and lacks any energy whatsoever. clearly you are yet to be convinced the loudness war is over because you are waving a middle finger to dynamics with much gusto? however they do say that "Loud is perceived better", only it's been proven that it isn't. but it does impress the noobs and i can't help wondering if you are exploiting that [intentionally, or otherwise]?

anyway, i recommend you get your hearing checked. because if it is failing from poor attention to health and safety, you need to act fast to stop it declining any further. hearing aids aren't cool, eh?



on another matter, Mike states in the MDL's page introduction, that:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"All these files are presented......without any effects or processing."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that's clearly NOT the case with your multi-track. it's been tampered with subsequent to the recordings...you've EQ'd, compressed and automated. the vocal has also been pitch corrected.

if i'm going to mix something, i want to apply my own parameters without having them, and their artifacts(!) forced upon me, and i'd suggest that people here in the forum, would also benefit from not having to negotiate material that's been tampered with. for example, automation is going to mess up someone's Insert chain, and thereafter through to the stereo buss, pretty substantially. if they don't yet understand what they are being confronted with in the supplied materials, they will never stand a hope in learning anything. they believe they are mixing "The Recordings", without processing - Mike has told them so.

if the kid can't pitch and you don't want the world to know, i could understand processing it before releasing it in the Public Domain (but poor pitching skills will show up at gigs anyway). personally, i think it would provide excellent opportunity in the forum for people to have a go at doing "transparent" pitch correction, for example. and if low cuts and high cuts or shelving filters need to be applied, that they learn by having a go at doing this themselves. the same goes for compression...and automation.

i don't wish to sound confrontational, but i have concerns. your fundamental concern appears to be marketing and promotion for the band (hence the loudness - to impress perhaps)? my concern is for my on-going personal development and helping the development of others as best i can, in a sharing community. i believe that what you are doing is hindering the development process, not only in this mix, but in your multi-track. when i read comments like "nice mix", or "this is a very good, solid, pleasant, and effective mix", then i think my concerns are well founded. noobs are going to read those comments and think that what they are hearing IS good and will no doubt try and replicate it. that's not a healthy learning environment, in any language.

i challenge you to put this song out WITH dynamics intact. aim for -14LUFS, a True Peak of -1 and an approximate +5 LRA (simply turning it down is not enough, though for those who do turn this mix down to loudness match it against =14 LUFS, say, they will immediately discover where my claims of dullness came from). i bet my pension that you can't rise to the challenge. indeed, i challenge EVERYONE to have a go at this. in attempting to, you should soon discover the issues present in the multi which nobody has discussed yet.

anyway, please at least think about the issues i raise, that's all i ask. without thought, there cannot be a potential for progress......

Cheers,,
Dave

Reply
#14
(24-10-2015, 12:41 PM)kapu Wrote: Where are the drum samples from? From Logic too? Just interested because I'm looking for a good drum sample library for rock / punk / metal stuff.

Hi Kapu,
the guy from Tiny Pond Studios who mastered the song gave them to me. I'm not sure where he got them, I think it's his private collection.

Good luck!
Reply
#15
I don't know that I can even remotely agree with Dave's loudness issues on this. I can't stand overcompressed mixes/masters, and jump all over them when it is annoying, and I don't see anything bothersome about it in your mix Till.

Sure, it is loud, but loudness isn't in and of itself a negative. Squashed dynamics can be an ugly thing, but this song doesn't actually have a huge dynamic range anyway.

I agree that going for loud gusto isn't smart, but in the case of your mix/master here, I do not hear anything annoying in the loudness. I am certainly not a noob (been an audio engineer since the 1980s), and think that Dave's opinion on this matter is perhaps a bit "stronger" than it need be.
Joe Walter
a.k.a. "grizwalter"
Mile-High Audio Productions
www.mountainmix.net
[email protected]

Reply
#16
Here's the soft mastering to compare it with the hard master I already provided.
I'm sorry for having caused such an amount of disgust in you with my mix, Dave... Can't help it, I did my best.

Honestly, I don't notice a huge difference between this one and the hard master... opinions?


.mp3    04 Sleep by the Fire, bloom in Water.mp3 --  (Download: 7.85 MB)


Reply
#17
Hmm... I don't think the problem here is loudness. I think there are a lot of good or even great sounding records or songs that are pushing -6 LUFS. Although in my opinion the frequency balance is a bit harsh and ear drilling in the "original" mix, soft and loud master.

LRA is a good way of measuring the dynamics of the overall program material, or the musical arrangement. Radio talk show might have a LRA of 0-1 dBs although it's produced at -23 LUFS. There are different ways to measure the micro dynamics of audio, but in my opionion a good rule of thumb is that when the crest factor average goes over 10 dBs the record starts to sound just weak and not dynamic when considering modern rock.

Almost all consumer products are designed and tested for -10 dBV. This in itself doesn't tell much, but almost every -10 consumer level DAC product is tested and calibrated for 10 - 12 dBs of headroom, 16-bit or 24-bit. This is usually reported in the tech specs, where the nominal operating level is at -10 dBV and the max output level for peaks is "always" 0 or +2 dBV. Basically this just means that when the digital signal level is averaging at around -10 dBFS (usually in some RMS time window) the DAC is working at it's nominal level, and peak levels can go as high 10 dB over (closer to 0 dBFS) the average level, also known as headroom. Professional production gear can have as much as 24 dBs of headroom above the nominal level, which in pro gear is usually +4 dBu, also meaning the pro gear signal operates at higher voltage level in analog domain.

When producing material for listening on consumer level gear the average level unfortunately still has to be fairly high, and of course avoid intersampled peaks. From purely technical point of view. It's actually kind of funny how loud masters are criticized for being just loud, when indeed the main purpose of (pre)-mastering is to prepare the original material for the delivery medium and playback gear, and this "always" means increasing the average level of relatively low level 24-bit mixdown closer to -10 dBFS and dithering to 16-bits. Of course there are some records which are loud for just being loud.
Reply
#18
Thanks for tracks, great for practice. In your mix I think it is a little bit lack of low end. Also bit to bright for my taste. I've choosed different way, you can check in the mean time.

I found some troubles with bass, sometimes is quiter in the middle of the phrase. It was played like that or some troubles with an instrument? Or maybe problem with me? Smile Drums were not recorded in big room, right?



Reply
#19
Hi konop_tnt,

thanks for your feedback! I guess the mastering did some work on the mix. If you'd have heard the unmastered mix you wouldn't be happy with it at all.. mastering it really saved it. Yes, it's a bit harsh and lacking a bit of bottom, but it sounds okay and the band likes it Smile

Yeah, the bass guitar. What the hell. It was a fender precision and it caused a lot of problems. For some reason I couldn't get it to sound good, that's why I let someone reamp it through a sansamp which is common but effective. But I didn't notice any problem with the dynamics. I'd have to look over the tracks again..
The drums were recorded in a pretty small room, but treated acousticly for professional recording. I had minor trouble with the overheads and room mics, but nothing I couldn't deal with.
Honestly, I think these were the easiest drums I had to deal with ever, except for the snare. Damn you, snare. Hi there, sample. What's up?
Reply
#20
(25-10-2015, 09:55 PM)wurstdrummer Wrote: Here's the soft mastering to compare it with the hard master I already provided.
I'm sorry for having caused such an amount of disgust in you with my mix, Dave... Can't help it, I did my best.

Honestly, I don't notice a huge difference between this one and the hard master... opinions?

Hi Till,

First thanks again for providing these multitracks.
I don't know Dave but just out of humble curiosity I would really like to compare discogrophies.
Of cousre mine peters out after about 2005, health problems forced this old man into semi-retirement. But I used to be a container, err contender when it came to engineering. I'm just trying to be professional, something I think Dave has yet to learn. Otherwise I would ask some completely different questions and compare a lot more than how many majors either he or I worked on.

Ok Sorry but his rant was just so uncalled for as is my reply here. But someone has to tell some people to behave.

As to your mixes, I like the soft master better. The original upload is a little too pumped for my taste. See, I've been doing this for a very long time and what I'm hearing is a well balnenced mix with good sounds that may have been over-mastered. I can tell the difference between a mix and it's master. I don't mean to put the mastering facility down but I think if they had put in just alittle more time and maybe gotten some input from you, the mixer, it would sound very different.

The soft master gives the wall of guitars a little more space and lets the lead vocal ride out in front of the mix. The hard master made the lead sink a bit down into the mix and pasted the guitars at an overly corrected space and Eq.

I really liked the work that you've done. And stop calling yourself a beginner. You can obviously mix an industry standard recording that any Indie label looking to put out this Indie band would have no problem releasing.

Sooner or later we all get to that point of industry standards. What sets us apart is nothing more than how unique the final sound of the mix is. In other words to be different is better than to be safe.

As an old-timer and professional I deeply apologize for the terrible statments made by Dave.
I think he may be mad at something else, no mix no matter how good or bad could elicit that kind of emotion based upon the mix alone. Something else was surely on his mind.

I don't knwo if this is the correct place to put this, but, this is my straight pass, no automation, no effects except on the lead vocal. Just a bone dry attempt at the track first as a starting point. Get insulted and then take the usefull comments to heart and make it better.

Sorry for my rant. And agin I thank you for putting these tracks up so that those of us who enjoy the wonder of mixing can do some great work.

Tom Chianti
AlanaTomiC Productions and Publishing (ASCAP)


.mp3    By The Fire Mix.mp3 --  (Download: 5.18 MB)


Reply