Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Went for the big sound this time
#1
The other track has more of a Basie vibe so I tried to make it as dynamic as I could, whereas this one is more of a punch in the face the whole time so it felt more logical to leave things pushed for most of it.

Soundcloud version with bass panned to the center, I started the mix trying to be creative, not sure it was really worth so I posted also a more standard version for comparison.

I honestly like it with the bass panned, the cab is low passed and left and the DI is high passed and center, it let me sneak more low end into the guitar in the right channel.

Because everything is so hot I rolled off some of the super high-end in mastering. Decided to add individual reverbs to the guitar and piano this time as well.

After leaving it for a few hours and coming back I feel like vocal down a dB or a half dB might be more right. The way the bones bleed into the room mics left the overall dynamics of the song a little non-negotiable, maybe that isn't the case though. I feel like doing it bass down the middle with the rhythm section eq slotted this way is, is almost like making the rhythm section into an acoustic version of a metal band, (not trying to make anything small, even re-sampling the snare in a few places, and automating the kick drum volume up when it hits unison figures with the band,) except all the close mics are like the LV of a country song, and there's 6 of them.

The low bass in both channels does something to the limiter that makes everything sound louder but I don't know if the balance is better. It makes the vocal sound too loud as well. I suppose if you build a whole mix around 120 Hz in the left channel and then at the end you put the same amount in the right channel without changing anything else its sort of asking for trouble, It gives it a "wall of sound" vibe, whereas with the bass in the left channel a few things are more separated and the maximizer isn't doing as much because its getting half as much low frequency signal. So easing off the maximizer is probably a solution, or perhaps just turning the bass down while its in both channels. Its a hard call because the fact that the one version is just "louder" makes me like it but I don't know if it's actually better or if it's just louder. However, the center bass version with just the vocal down a touch and the opening sax phrase down a touch might be better too, (saxes should not be blasting until after the trombones come in I feel.)


.mp3    Corine, Corine, Soundcloud version_02.mp3 --  (Download: 6.31 MB)


.mp3    Corine, Corine, High Pass Vocal_01.mp3 --  (Download: 6.29 MB)


Reply
#2
Hi Dan ,
Both versions sound great to me Listening on headphones version 01 sounds more open version 2 the centre bass sounds tighter.
Listening on Ns10 with the mono sub I like version 01 .
The vocals have a nice vintage vibe maybe a touch nasal sounding around 700-1k area probably my monitors and personal taste.

Cheers Big Grin



Please Help Mike Keep This Awesome Educational Site Alive And Become A patron !
https://www.patreon.com/CambridgeMT/posts

Reply
#3
(22-05-2018, 10:41 AM)thedon Wrote: Hi Dan ,
Both versions sound great to me Listening on headphones version 01 sounds more open version 2 the centre bass sounds tighter.
Listening on Ns10 with the mono sub I like version 01 .
The vocals have a nice vintage vibe maybe a touch nasal sounding around 700-1k area probably my monitors and personal taste.

Cheers Big Grin

So I bumped the guitar up 1.0 for the vocal part and gave it some more wet, and then I automated the volume a little for some louder words and some sibilance, and then I tossed the vocal into the room mics stereo bus, (which I put reverb on directly, in Song of India I was manipulating the dry /wet on that reverb with automation in this song I just left it wet the entire time, cut a second off the beginning of each room mic track and moved them into perfect phase with the trombones, then re-verbed them digitally,) and then I was like..... huh.

If I'm done mixing an LV in less than an hour something isn't right, like there's no way I edit drums for 8 hours just to make a song sound normal and I don't at least try to do something to this.

So I got a little experimental, and I have an EQ that boosts like 550 Hz in the voice when he sings higher notes in his register, and it boosts either 1200 or 1700 when he hits lower notes. Decently wide Q.

Other than that since I cut 2.4-3K from so many horn mics I just gave him that straight away, kind of felt like "there's no way this will be wrong," and then went from there.


I'm addicted at this point in need more bigband tracks. Haven't even started experimenting with like, parallel compression on room mics, cutting some frequencies or boosting them in rooms, squashing that and feeding both back in. If you squashed a low pass room and left a high pass room dry you could maybe mix around the rooms in a different way, I don't know. You could try so many things with this kind of stuff just to change the tonal flavor of it all, its endlessly exciting. Now that I popped my big band cherry I probably won't care quite as much about any other kind of music tbh. Tongue
Reply
#4
I liked it very much! Great scene, great sound. Brilliant!
Alexander
Reply
#5
Interesting vibe! It has a certain midrangey, pushy feel that is not what I personally prefer, but we are talking about taste here. To my ears, the mix is too loud and squashed, and there are some nasty midrange frequencies that get a little too pinchy. I've noticed this with all of the Telefunken tracks I've mixed until now: the mics seem to impart midrange resonances that are not always complementary to the source. But as always, YMMV.
Reply