Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
23-01-2016, 09:06 PM (This post was last modified: 23-01-2016 09:06 PM by Mixinthecloud.)
Post: #1
Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
I really enjoyed all of the facets of this great song. I felt it was well recorded and well performed with not much needed to bring out more character in keeping with the musicality of it. The only thing I might say about the performance is that the tempo seems to drift a bit in places. If I was better with my DAW, I'd probably be able to fix that and tighten it up even more. anyway, I hope you enjoy my take. Your responses are encouraged.


.mp3   Andrew Cole.mp3 --  (Download: 3.61 MB)



PreSonus Studio One DAW
on RDS Server with Dante Via (ask for details)
[email protected]


Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2016, 06:20 PM
Post: #2
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
Hey man, I like your levels and overall mix of the instruments, however, I feel there may just be way to much verb on some things that need to be more upfront, like the vocals and the drums. Especially the male vox, its trying to be in the middle and very present, but the verb just keeps it just away from being where it should. As for the female vox, it may be just too much decay on the verb and maybe lower the mix of wet/dry a tad too. However, at the very end of the song, that little "howl" part, the verb sounds great.

I think its kinds funny, cause what you did to the vocals, I think you should have don't to the Electric. Its kind of dry and panned right a tad, where I would have made it wetter. Just a few thoughts.
Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2016, 06:24 PM
Post: #3
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
One more thing about the tempo variances, I think that they performed live off the floor with no click. And I think that to try and warp or stretch it to a click would kill the performance. I noticed the tempo variances as well, and went with something like 104bpm for my delays so they could be close to on, even though its not 104, the very few repeats of the delay are close.
Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2016, 06:54 PM
Post: #4
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
(26-01-2016 06:20 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  Hey man, I like your levels and overall mix of the instruments, however, I feel there may just be way to much verb on some things that need to be more upfront, like the vocals and the drums. Especially the male vox, its trying to be in the middle and very present, but the verb just keeps it just away from being where it should. As for the female vox, it may be just too much decay on the verb and maybe lower the mix of wet/dry a tad too. However, at the very end of the song, that little "howl" part, the verb sounds great.

I think its kinds funny, cause what you did to the vocals, I think you should have don't to the Electric. Its kind of dry and panned right a tad, where I would have made it wetter. Just a few thoughts.

David,
Thanks for your input. I have a few questions, if you don't mind.
The vocal reverb on the male and female are identical (these are inserts on their individual channels). That being said, can you expand on your feel of those envelopes? I think the differences in the decays being heard are based on the frequency content of the voices which may be a bit sibilant. I agree the female vox might be too up front in relation to the male lead but I really liked her voice and the presence of each even with their reverb. I wanted them to stand out against the background of the instruments and drums. Do you think the female vox is too loud during the duets or just when she sings alone? The reverb tail at the end of the song is just an automated ramp up of the dry/wet mix to make it disappear into the distance. You are spot on with the electrics. They are bone dry, and that was a conscious decision based upon how I wanted them to lay against the drums, bass and vox.

All good input.

As for the playing and timing, there were some notes about this I read somewhere about some beats being off a bit, which you can notice, but my Melodyne skills are lacking when it comes to quantizing and aligning performances. I think it would be interesting to tackle some of those to see if it can tighten the song in places.

PreSonus Studio One DAW
on RDS Server with Dante Via (ask for details)
[email protected]


Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2016, 08:13 PM
Post: #5
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
I think your verb could be darkened a bit. Bring some of the highs out of it. That will help the two voices blend with the verb a little better. Also, maybe deessing his voice before the reverb could help as well. At least, I think that will help sort out your verb.

Nice mix man!

Draper
Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2016, 10:38 PM (This post was last modified: 26-01-2016 10:38 PM by Mixinthecloud.)
Post: #6
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
In deference to the good ears and good advice of commenters, I have made some adjustments. Let me know if they have improved the quality of this presentation.


.mp3   Andrew Cole - Dead Roses.mp3 --  (Download: 3.59 MB)



PreSonus Studio One DAW
on RDS Server with Dante Via (ask for details)
[email protected]


Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2016, 09:03 PM
Post: #7
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
(26-01-2016 06:54 PM)Mixinthecloud Wrote:  
(26-01-2016 06:20 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  Hey man, I like your levels and overall mix of the instruments, however, I feel there may just be way to much verb on some things that need to be more upfront, like the vocals and the drums. Especially the male vox, its trying to be in the middle and very present, but the verb just keeps it just away from being where it should. As for the female vox, it may be just too much decay on the verb and maybe lower the mix of wet/dry a tad too. However, at the very end of the song, that little "howl" part, the verb sounds great.

I think its kinds funny, cause what you did to the vocals, I think you should have don't to the Electric. Its kind of dry and panned right a tad, where I would have made it wetter. Just a few thoughts.

David,
Thanks for your input. I have a few questions, if you don't mind.
The vocal reverb on the male and female are identical (these are inserts on their individual channels). That being said, can you expand on your feel of those envelopes? I think the differences in the decays being heard are based on the frequency content of the voices which may be a bit sibilant. I agree the female vox might be too up front in relation to the male lead but I really liked her voice and the presence of each even with their reverb. I wanted them to stand out against the background of the instruments and drums. Do you think the female vox is too loud during the duets or just when she sings alone? The reverb tail at the end of the song is just an automated ramp up of the dry/wet mix to make it disappear into the distance. You are spot on with the electrics. They are bone dry, and that was a conscious decision based upon how I wanted them to lay against the drums, bass and vox.

All good input.

As for the playing and timing, there were some notes about this I read somewhere about some beats being off a bit, which you can notice, but my Melodyne skills are lacking when it comes to quantizing and aligning performances. I think it would be interesting to tackle some of those to see if it can tighten the song in places.

When Im referring to the verb, I guess I'm referring to how the trails are very obvious, which isn't natural, especially against a dry band. Not saying its a bad thing, just not natural, and it stands out to me. My goal in my mix of this song, was to make this sound like a band in a room playing. More live off the floor.

After taking another listen to your mix (not the new one, the one I originally listened to), I feel like the spacial balance (forward backward balance) is opposite, where the band is dryer they feel closer to me, more up front, although their volume balance, tells me they should be further back, like behind the vocals. But, the vocals feel back, because they are so wet with verb, but their volume balance is up front. So, the whole mix is almost battling itself to place the parts in the mix. Does that make sense?

With all that said, the low end sounds great to me, something I know I need work on.
Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2016, 04:07 PM
Post: #8
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
(30-01-2016 09:03 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  
(26-01-2016 06:54 PM)Mixinthecloud Wrote:  
(26-01-2016 06:20 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  Hey man, I like your levels and overall mix of the instruments, however, I feel there may just be way to much verb on some things that need to be more upfront, like the vocals and the drums. Especially the male vox, its trying to be in the middle and very present, but the verb just keeps it just away from being where it should. As for the female vox, it may be just too much decay on the verb and maybe lower the mix of wet/dry a tad too. However, at the very end of the song, that little "howl" part, the verb sounds great.

I think its kinds funny, cause what you did to the vocals, I think you should have don't to the Electric. Its kind of dry and panned right a tad, where I would have made it wetter. Just a few thoughts.

David,
Thanks for your input. I have a few questions, if you don't mind.
The vocal reverb on the male and female are identical (these are inserts on their individual channels). That being said, can you expand on your feel of those envelopes? I think the differences in the decays being heard are based on the frequency content of the voices which may be a bit sibilant. I agree the female vox might be too up front in relation to the male lead but I really liked her voice and the presence of each even with their reverb. I wanted them to stand out against the background of the instruments and drums. Do you think the female vox is too loud during the duets or just when she sings alone? The reverb tail at the end of the song is just an automated ramp up of the dry/wet mix to make it disappear into the distance. You are spot on with the electrics. They are bone dry, and that was a conscious decision based upon how I wanted them to lay against the drums, bass and vox.

All good input.

As for the playing and timing, there were some notes about this I read somewhere about some beats being off a bit, which you can notice, but my Melodyne skills are lacking when it comes to quantizing and aligning performances. I think it would be interesting to tackle some of those to see if it can tighten the song in places.

When Im referring to the verb, I guess I'm referring to how the trails are very obvious, which isn't natural, especially against a dry band. Not saying its a bad thing, just not natural, and it stands out to me. My goal in my mix of this song, was to make this sound like a band in a room playing. More live off the floor.

After taking another listen to your mix (not the new one, the one I originally listened to), I feel like the spacial balance (forward backward balance) is opposite, where the band is dryer they feel closer to me, more up front, although their volume balance, tells me they should be further back, like behind the vocals. But, the vocals feel back, because they are so wet with verb, but their volume balance is up front. So, the whole mix is almost battling itself to place the parts in the mix. Does that make sense?

With all that said, the low end sounds great to me, something I know I need work on.

David,
In my interpretation of this piece, I classified this as 'Country' song. Listening to a lot of those mixes, especially ballads, adhering to the 'band on stage' approach is hardly a rule. As a live sound enineer, I certainly understand this concept and when appropriate adhere to it. With that in mind I mixed this song to try and capture the individual qualities of each element and to exemplify the vocals which carry the emotional content of the song and use my environmentals in a tempo-based application of them. The vocals called out to be treated in a distinct way to give this song a particular character. Reference the history of vocals in ballads which I pulled from include folks like Linda Ronstadt and Aaron Neville really don't keep to a 'band on stage' mix and I took that approach here.
That being said, I think we can agree there is no right or wrong here, only a matter of personal taste and approach. There are a ton a really good mixes of this song here.

PreSonus Studio One DAW
on RDS Server with Dante Via (ask for details)
[email protected]


Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2016, 04:53 PM
Post: #9
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
(31-01-2016 04:07 PM)Mixinthecloud Wrote:  
(30-01-2016 09:03 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  
(26-01-2016 06:54 PM)Mixinthecloud Wrote:  
(26-01-2016 06:20 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  Hey man, I like your levels and overall mix of the instruments, however, I feel there may just be way to much verb on some things that need to be more upfront, like the vocals and the drums. Especially the male vox, its trying to be in the middle and very present, but the verb just keeps it just away from being where it should. As for the female vox, it may be just too much decay on the verb and maybe lower the mix of wet/dry a tad too. However, at the very end of the song, that little "howl" part, the verb sounds great.

I think its kinds funny, cause what you did to the vocals, I think you should have don't to the Electric. Its kind of dry and panned right a tad, where I would have made it wetter. Just a few thoughts.

David,
Thanks for your input. I have a few questions, if you don't mind.
The vocal reverb on the male and female are identical (these are inserts on their individual channels). That being said, can you expand on your feel of those envelopes? I think the differences in the decays being heard are based on the frequency content of the voices which may be a bit sibilant. I agree the female vox might be too up front in relation to the male lead but I really liked her voice and the presence of each even with their reverb. I wanted them to stand out against the background of the instruments and drums. Do you think the female vox is too loud during the duets or just when she sings alone? The reverb tail at the end of the song is just an automated ramp up of the dry/wet mix to make it disappear into the distance. You are spot on with the electrics. They are bone dry, and that was a conscious decision based upon how I wanted them to lay against the drums, bass and vox.

All good input.

As for the playing and timing, there were some notes about this I read somewhere about some beats being off a bit, which you can notice, but my Melodyne skills are lacking when it comes to quantizing and aligning performances. I think it would be interesting to tackle some of those to see if it can tighten the song in places.

When Im referring to the verb, I guess I'm referring to how the trails are very obvious, which isn't natural, especially against a dry band. Not saying its a bad thing, just not natural, and it stands out to me. My goal in my mix of this song, was to make this sound like a band in a room playing. More live off the floor.

After taking another listen to your mix (not the new one, the one I originally listened to), I feel like the spacial balance (forward backward balance) is opposite, where the band is dryer they feel closer to me, more up front, although their volume balance, tells me they should be further back, like behind the vocals. But, the vocals feel back, because they are so wet with verb, but their volume balance is up front. So, the whole mix is almost battling itself to place the parts in the mix. Does that make sense?

With all that said, the low end sounds great to me, something I know I need work on.

David,
In my interpretation of this piece, I classified this as 'Country' song. Listening to a lot of those mixes, especially ballads, adhering to the 'band on stage' approach is hardly a rule. As a live sound enineer, I certainly understand this concept and when appropriate adhere to it. With that in mind I mixed this song to try and capture the individual qualities of each element and to exemplify the vocals which carry the emotional content of the song and use my environmentals in a tempo-based application of them. The vocals called out to be treated in a distinct way to give this song a particular character. Reference the history of vocals in ballads which I pulled from include folks like Linda Ronstadt and Aaron Neville really don't keep to a 'band on stage' mix and I took that approach here.
That being said, I think we can agree there is no right or wrong here, only a matter of personal taste and approach. There are a ton a really good mixes of this song here.

I certainly never meant to imply that the "band on stage" approach was a rule, rather that it was the approach that I took coming at this mix to create the dichotomy of where I went with the song as compared to my experience with your mix. Im not trying to say that your mix is wrong by any stretch, just give my thoughts on it and compare it to my approach to it. Which is exactly what I would want others to do to my mixes, hopefully others who are established in the industry, as their mixes are what get put on the radio, albums, ect.

Another difference I spot here is that you consider this a vocal ballad, which it is, but rather my first listen caused me to lean in the direction of more of a folk, indie "The Civil Wars" meets "Norah Jones" and wanted to capture the warmth and fullness of the instruments with the intimacy of the vocals on top. Now, when I listen to those mixes, Im encompassed by the band. The mixer who mixed those artists carefully constructed a soundscape for me to feel surrounded by the band. Not exactly "band on stage" but you get the idea.

My comments aren't so much of a critique rather I find it fascinating how two totally different people can hear a song and go two totally different directions with it, almost making it a different song in a way. I find that very cool.
Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2016, 05:25 PM
Post: #10
RE: Andrew Cole - Dead Roses
(01-02-2016 04:53 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  
(31-01-2016 04:07 PM)Mixinthecloud Wrote:  
(30-01-2016 09:03 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  
(26-01-2016 06:54 PM)Mixinthecloud Wrote:  
(26-01-2016 06:20 PM)davidwmontgomery Wrote:  Hey man, I like your levels and overall mix of the instruments, however, I feel there may just be way to much verb on some things that need to be more upfront, like the vocals and the drums. Especially the male vox, its trying to be in the middle and very present, but the verb just keeps it just away from being where it should. As for the female vox, it may be just too much decay on the verb and maybe lower the mix of wet/dry a tad too. However, at the very end of the song, that little "howl" part, the verb sounds great.

I think its kinds funny, cause what you did to the vocals, I think you should have don't to the Electric. Its kind of dry and panned right a tad, where I would have made it wetter. Just a few thoughts.

David,
Thanks for your input. I have a few questions, if you don't mind.
The vocal reverb on the male and female are identical (these are inserts on their individual channels). That being said, can you expand on your feel of those envelopes? I think the differences in the decays being heard are based on the frequency content of the voices which may be a bit sibilant. I agree the female vox might be too up front in relation to the male lead but I really liked her voice and the presence of each even with their reverb. I wanted them to stand out against the background of the instruments and drums. Do you think the female vox is too loud during the duets or just when she sings alone? The reverb tail at the end of the song is just an automated ramp up of the dry/wet mix to make it disappear into the distance. You are spot on with the electrics. They are bone dry, and that was a conscious decision based upon how I wanted them to lay against the drums, bass and vox.

All good input.

As for the playing and timing, there were some notes about this I read somewhere about some beats being off a bit, which you can notice, but my Melodyne skills are lacking when it comes to quantizing and aligning performances. I think it would be interesting to tackle some of those to see if it can tighten the song in places.

When Im referring to the verb, I guess I'm referring to how the trails are very obvious, which isn't natural, especially against a dry band. Not saying its a bad thing, just not natural, and it stands out to me. My goal in my mix of this song, was to make this sound like a band in a room playing. More live off the floor.

After taking another listen to your mix (not the new one, the one I originally listened to), I feel like the spacial balance (forward backward balance) is opposite, where the band is dryer they feel closer to me, more up front, although their volume balance, tells me they should be further back, like behind the vocals. But, the vocals feel back, because they are so wet with verb, but their volume balance is up front. So, the whole mix is almost battling itself to place the parts in the mix. Does that make sense?

With all that said, the low end sounds great to me, something I know I need work on.

David,
In my interpretation of this piece, I classified this as 'Country' song. Listening to a lot of those mixes, especially ballads, adhering to the 'band on stage' approach is hardly a rule. As a live sound enineer, I certainly understand this concept and when appropriate adhere to it. With that in mind I mixed this song to try and capture the individual qualities of each element and to exemplify the vocals which carry the emotional content of the song and use my environmentals in a tempo-based application of them. The vocals called out to be treated in a distinct way to give this song a particular character. Reference the history of vocals in ballads which I pulled from include folks like Linda Ronstadt and Aaron Neville really don't keep to a 'band on stage' mix and I took that approach here.
That being said, I think we can agree there is no right or wrong here, only a matter of personal taste and approach. There are a ton a really good mixes of this song here.

I certainly never meant to imply that the "band on stage" approach was a rule, rather that it was the approach that I took coming at this mix to create the dichotomy of where I went with the song as compared to my experience with your mix. Im not trying to say that your mix is wrong by any stretch, just give my thoughts on it and compare it to my approach to it. Which is exactly what I would want others to do to my mixes, hopefully others who are established in the industry, as their mixes are what get put on the radio, albums, ect.

Another difference I spot here is that you consider this a vocal ballad, which it is, but rather my first listen caused me to lean in the direction of more of a folk, indie "The Civil Wars" meets "Norah Jones" and wanted to capture the warmth and fullness of the instruments with the intimacy of the vocals on top. Now, when I listen to those mixes, Im encompassed by the band. The mixer who mixed those artists carefully constructed a soundscape for me to feel surrounded by the band. Not exactly "band on stage" but you get the idea.

My comments aren't so much of a critique rather I find it fascinating how two totally different people can hear a song and go two totally different directions with it, almost making it a different song in a way. I find that very cool.

David,
After your comments I went and listened to your mix of it and to tell you the truth I think our mixes are very similar except for the treatment of the vocals. I think we are pretty much on the same wavelength on this song except for that.

PreSonus Studio One DAW
on RDS Server with Dante Via (ask for details)
[email protected]


Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Support my video work!
Advertisement: