Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
First mix posted in quite some time.
#1
I'm back with a fresh attitude and hopefully some new skills to share with you guys.

New year's resolution is to focus more on what makes the song musical and use much more automation than previously.

On this mix you'll hear a good deal of automation in the effects, which hopefully are pretty subtle. Lots and lots of distortion going on, too.

All criticism is welcome. Let's get to work.


.mp3    Juliet\'s Rescue.mp3 --  (Download: 10.25 MB)


I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!
Reply
#2
yeah, where did you go?

(31-12-2015, 10:54 AM)pauli Wrote: I'm back with a fresh attitude and hopefully some new skills to share with you guys.

let me be the first to welcome you back....just noticed your post in the Zone...i guess the dog's gone walkies? Wink

Quote:New year's resolution is to focus more on what makes the song musical and use much more automation than previously.

awesome NYR!

Quote:On this mix you'll hear a good deal of automation in the effects, which hopefully are pretty subtle. Lots and lots of distortion going on, too.

only had a quick listen....really loved the vocal and the sound-stage. i'll pop back laters with some constructive ideas and stuff when the alcohol has worn off and me thinking head is back on!

Quote:All criticism is welcome. Let's get to work.

happy new year to you and the family (and the dog!).

laters,,
Beware...........Cognitive Dissonance!
Reply
#3
Thanks for the welcome back, dude.

I was in a bit of a rut that got really, really frustratingly deep, so I went away for a while and focused on recording. Turns out, I learned a lot about mixing (and my personal taste) in doing so.

Happy new year, Dave. I'm really looking forward to working with you and the gang again Big Grin
I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!
Reply
#4
I like how you made the choruses big to contrast with the verses, a lot of the mixes I've listen to here neglected to lift the chorus at all, leaving them sounding flat or even dipping in energy when it arrives. Though it is hard to blend the electronic/rock sections of this song together convincingly.

The electronic kick during the verses you've mixed very low, while it's all open to personal interpretation a "four on the floor" generally kick wants one thing, to be loud and proud, propelling the song along. It feels to me you're using the hats for the energy, whenever the kick would supply this and the hats would sit nicely underneath supply the groove.

Or perhaps you had a reason for mixing it this way?
Reply
#5
Hey Sano! Thanks for listening and your on point observations. I automated a subtle stereo enhancer on the master buss for that lift... I'm glad you noticedSmile

As for the quietly mixed kick, I felt like a loud, four on the floor electro kick was giving the verse too much energy and not leaving enough room for the chorus. My vision was to sacrifice some of that low end energy in the verses so the chorus could expand vertically and have more impact. You're right, though, it could come up a bit.
I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!
Reply
#6
(03-01-2016, 06:50 PM)pauli Wrote: I felt like a loud, four on the floor electro kick was giving the verse too much energy and not leaving enough room for the chorus.

by energy, do you mean volts and the subsequent loss of headroom relative to the needs of the chorus?


Quote:My vision was to sacrifice some of that low end energy in the verses so the chorus could expand vertically and have more impact. You're right, though, it could come up a bit.

expand vertically? you mean treble-wise (re. the 3-dimensions)? i think the kick could come up a lot more generally, but what i'm missing here and in everyone else's mix, is the bass guitar, or rather it's bassss. so, i pulled the multi and took a quick look, and it seems the bass is often higher up the register, making the low-end somewhat thin and weak'ish and a touch devoid of rhythm and pulse - the emphasis seems placed on the guitars as a consequence? as a side note, the heavy guitars are calling for some distortion on the bass so it can hang in there with the gang. i especially liked the character you'd mixed into the e-guitars.

also took a listen to the preview....which had the blazes sidechained out of it, rather interestingly. blimey, that gave the song some rhythm!! lol.

on the vertical dimension, the ramp up at ~2:16 sounded generous in treble? i'm wondering if less is more in this instance, it would benefit the vocal too, which sounds like she's struggling to keep her head up here. did you automate her upwards at this point? also on the vocal, i'd give her some width in the mix (but not a reverb) - note she's very present in mono...which suggests there's some scope. but the snare disappears here, so too the kick. still in this area, the RH cymbal appears somewhat overly present in the ear and it's fatiguing in my cans (i'm on the Ovations). i'm thinking that if the kit is somewhat in the depth field, so the cymbals can go pretty much mono perhaps with trebles rolled off a little, which would also work in your favour by reducing the spectral skew? i'm not sure i'd want the kit so far back as it appears in the illusion you've created though, but i guess also from the other elements, that you wanted some space in your vision? me thinks the song would benefit from less depth [overall], which would help the gear cut through the mix too. you mentioned about taking the mix vertically, which is a neat idea, and working the trebles accordingly...which also makes a song subjectively louder (and perceptively louder with increasing SPL, of course) and brings with it it's own form of energy, drive and emotion - treble is exciting. it's a good way to get some contrast....and to do so without having to push the levels up so much.....and guard that all important headroom while so doing. you could probably find the first two choruses could come down in amplitude without losing the vibe (the last paragraph briefly touches upon this subject).

occasionally the sibilance has moments where it's a little on the uncomfortable side, though when the song is banging and the cymbals are flying, it doesn't stick out because of the masking, but then i find the trebles difficult. what technique did you employ to de-ess, out of interest?

this is a mega dynamic mix...more akin to classical, i'd say. personally, i'd consider having a louder intro to get the listener's interest, then backing it off a little while relaxing into the first verse, then meddle with the levels on the way to the climax. the choruses, for example, all sound at the same level - while there aren't rules, it's generally the norm to have the final section/conclusion the loudest for emotional impact and we build on the way, with the verses structured to suit. so, this has me wondering where you start mixing first - i'd personally start at the loudest spot because this sets the headroom limit, then i know how much room i have left to wiggle the faders. note the song around 2:45 disappears in loudness relative to the song overall....then the chorus comes in with striking contrast a brief moment later (but not as wild as i went with Howlin, thankfully, LOL!). i'd recommend reducing the song's dynamics; while i didn't put the meter on it, judging by the output level on my gear in the back room, you're well above -14 LUFS. this is probably THE most dynamic mix i've ever come across in the forum. incredible. Mastering engineers dream of getting such clients!
Beware...........Cognitive Dissonance!
Reply
#7
Hey Dave, thanks for the critical listen and thoughtful comments. You always manage to suggest something (or 3 or 4 things lol) that I hadn't considered.

(05-01-2016, 02:51 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: by energy, do you mean volts and the subsequent loss of headroom relative to the needs of the chorus?

In this case by energy I didn't mean anything literal or technical, I was mainly referring to feel/excitement for various reasons, but that certainly applies. I wanted to give the choruses plenty of room to hit hard, because this arrangement has a tendency to shrink in the choruses if you're not careful.

(05-01-2016, 02:51 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: expand vertically? you mean treble-wise (re. the 3-dimensions)? i think the kick could come up a lot more generally, but what i'm missing here and in everyone else's mix, is the bass guitar, or rather it's bassss. so, i pulled the multi and took a quick look, and it seems the bass is often higher up the register, making the low-end somewhat thin and weak'ish and a touch devoid of rhythm and pulse - the emphasis seems placed on the guitars as a consequence? as a side note, the heavy guitars are calling for some distortion on the bass so it can hang in there with the gang.

I meant both treble and bass. The kick is mixed in a good deal louder in the choruses, and the stereo enhancer brightens things up as they often tend to do. That's a very on-point observation on the bass guitar vs. guitars. The bass guitar's contribution could benefit from multing and processing the verses and choruses entirely different, in hindsight. If I revise this, I'll probably let the electro kick fill out the bottem in the dance-inspired verses and use the bass guitar for low end in the rock inspired choruses.

(05-01-2016, 02:51 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: i especially liked the character you'd mixed into the e-guitars.

Thank you!

(05-01-2016, 02:51 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: on the vertical dimension, the ramp up at ~2:16 sounded generous in treble? i'm wondering if less is more in this instance, it would benefit the vocal too, which sounds like she's struggling to keep her head up here. did you automate her upwards at this point? also on the vocal, i'd give her some width in the mix (but not a reverb) - note she's very present in mono...which suggests there's some scope. but the snare disappears here, so too the kick. still in this area, the RH cymbal appears somewhat overly present in the ear and it's fatiguing in my cans (i'm on the Ovations). i'm thinking that if the kit is somewhat in the depth field, so the cymbals can go pretty much mono perhaps with trebles rolled off a little, which would also work in your favour by reducing the spectral skew?

Yeah, I agree on all points. It's not just the treble enhancement that's boosting the cymbals overmuch, either... that's an issue with the supplied overheads and the issues highly definitely warrant a different mixing strategy with the drums.. probably focusing more on the spot mics.

(05-01-2016, 02:51 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: i'm not sure i'd want the kit so far back as it appears in the illusion you've created though, but i guess also from the other elements, that you wanted some space in your vision?

lol yeah. I layered a master reverb under everything, a lexicon impulse of some kind, hoping mostly just the glue things together and fill out any holes in the stereo field, but it's adding too much depth to the drums in particular, given the emphasis placed on the overhead/room mics while mixing the kit.

(05-01-2016, 02:51 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: occasionally the sibilance has moments where it's a little on the uncomfortable side, though when the song is banging and the cymbals are flying, it doesn't stick out because of the masking, but then i find the trebles difficult. what technique did you employ to de-ess, out of interest?

No de-essing Tongue I think you're right about the cymbals, because they mask the sibilance and in so doing fatigue the ears. The esses didn't seem like a problem when I posted but I can hear them now.

(05-01-2016, 02:51 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: this is probably THE most dynamic mix i've ever come across in the forum. incredible. Mastering engineers dream of getting such clients!

Lol thanks! Took a bit of work considering a compressed/distorted the living hell out of a few elements for color/character. I metered it, and if memory serves it was around 16 LUFs over the course of the song, but the verses were significantly more dynamic.

Thanks again for the thoughtful review, this will be a lot of help going forward.
I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!
Reply
#8
Hey pauli, just spent two days mixing this so objectivity is a little difficult. But...this mix has a lot going for it, nice dynamics and blends, and didn't notice the sibilance, I figure vocs like this need to be bright, everything is good but I feel like the drums are letting it down. I agree with Sano re the kick and I see what you were aiming for in your comment, but I think that it and the snare both need some presence in the verses, just sounds a little weak to me, and not sure the snare needs that much room on it, then in the choruses I think the whole kit could come up with the exception of the cymbals, which are too harsh and could def sit behind the gtrs and synths rather than in front while the rest of the kit is getting lost. So maybe increasing the presence and defintion of all the drums would help, while keeping the dynamics? Tricky stuff for sure blending the two kits. Of course there are no rules but I can't help thinking that this genre needs dry, upfront drums. Also there's some clipping/distortion on the snare[?] track, at .42 and 1.32 for example, happens elsewhere too, think some volume automation fixes that. And yeah, multing the bass track is a good idea, the original tracks don't supply what the choruses need. Sorry to be negative, I hate criticising people's mixes, mainly cos I don't know what I'm talking about! I guess I'm just confirming what The Metallurgist already suggested though.
Reply
#9
Thanks for your comments, manuke. I'm not sure why it sounds like the snare clips, because it doesn't. I did apply some valve distortion though, so maybe it hits the plugin a little too hot in places.

Could be I just need to mute the room mics all together.
I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!
Reply