10-07-2019, 03:42 PM (This post was last modified: 10-07-2019, 05:36 PM by Mixinthecloud.)
This piece had its challenges; and rewards. The three channels of mono drums presents a ton of imaging options. I do not think the drums were recorded using the Glyn Johns method but I would be interested to know how the mics were placed. Anyway, moving the overhead around really changed the focus of the drums. That was cool. I ended up offsetting the overhead slightly to the left.
My first impression of the other instruments was that they called for widening and articulation without panning. Panning is an easy way to get definition from a field of instruments which may be fighting for tonal space in a mix. But with only four instruments, that seemed an unnecessary approach so I loaded up some heavy compression and delays and choruses and went to work. As the Rhodes was a mono source, a chorus seemed to be a good solution for widening and the guitar needed taming and separation by space so a limiting amp and several delays and a reverb were used.
I re-amped the bass buss with a clean American channel and a 4 x 12 classic British enclosure using EQ, delay and reverb stomp boxes with some articulation added by a Neutrino at the end of the chain. The chain was headed by a Klanghelm compressor to drive it.
The sources in this allow for any number of treatments so I chose my path and sallied forth and infiltrated this place of perception and produced this.
I hope it is found worthy of comment.
thelvnguage - Raspberry Jam - Mix 3
Slightly re-imaged drums with an attendant remastering.
(10-07-2019, 03:42 PM)Mixinthecloud Wrote: Panning is an easy way to get definition from a field of instruments which may be fighting for tonal space in a mix.
A pan knob merely varies the gain of an element between speakers. The louder an element, the more it will mask, and vice versa.
For those who pan to so-say enhance clarity or separation (which is exaggerated and unreliable in headphones due to L and R channel isolation, and with nearfield monitoring to a large extent), in mono that apparent convenience vanishes and congestion and colossal masking can often be observed.
A room acts like a mono speaker, allbeit a highly resonant one!
However, what I’m feeling here is, to coin a phrase, “Big Mono”, which isn’t engaging. It’s a sense that everyone’s up the middle pushing the phantom centre. I'm expecting a performance by a quartet in a stereo sound stage, as I would expect as an audience participant, or a music consumer with a pair of fully functional ears with binaural acuity and a kickass stereo system.
The keys for example, have a direct sound which is excessively wide and not of this world with an equally odd proximity. They feel detached from the performance space as a whole, compared say to the guitar or drums which give different cues my brain is trying to interpret and make sense of; there's ambiguity, contradiction and hence distraction.
Sticking to sound stage, it would also benefit from the bass guitar having the perception of being in the room. Otherwise it sounds dry as a bone, and in need of ambiance and a phase relationship with the other elements. Better integration generally in other words, and depth. I would also look at it’s attack. Here it sounds muffled and mumbling somewhat, and would benefit from better instrumental definition (an issue in mono). I’ve not explored the multi, so not sure what you are up against.
Oh, I'd turn the vocal up too
"Nearly half of all teenagers and young adults (12-35 years old) in middle- and high-income countries are exposed to unsafe levels of sound from the use of personal audio devices": https://tinyurl.com/6xeeahc5 Read my bio.
(10-07-2019, 03:42 PM)Mixinthecloud Wrote: Panning is an easy way to get definition from a field of instruments which may be fighting for tonal space in a mix.
A pan knob merely varies the gain of an element between speakers. The louder an element, the more it will mask, and vice versa. Gee. Thanks for the lesson. Who would have known that?
For those who pan to so-say enhance clarity or separation (which is exaggerated and unreliable in headphones due to L and R channel isolation, (disagree completely) and with nearfield monitoring to a large extent), in mono that apparent convenience vanishes and congestion and colossal masking can often be observed. That's why you always check a mix in mono.
A room acts like a mono speaker, allbeit a highly resonant one! I guess that's why they add asymetry controls in room emulators. Where are you getting this stuff?
However, what I’m feeling here is, to coin a phrase, “Big Mono”, which isn’t engaging. It’s a sense that everyone’s up the middle pushing the phantom centre. I'm expecting a performance by a quartet in a stereo sound stage, as I would expect as an audience participant, or a music consumer with a pair of fully functional ears with binaural acuity and a kickass stereo system. That's the trouble with expectations. Assume nothing. You'll b a happier person.
The keys for example, have a direct sound which is excessively wide and not of this world with an equally odd proximity. They feel detached from the performance space as a whole, compared say to the guitar or drums which give different cues my brain is trying to interpret and make sense of; there's ambiguity, contradiction and hence distraction. Have you ever considered checking the polarity of your speakers. What you call distraction others call movement. With such a limited and mono selection of sources, movement is easy and an attractive solution (if you know what you are doing). It hurts that you feel I don't know what I'm doing.
Sticking to sound stage, it would also benefit from the bass guitar having the perception of being in the room. Otherwise it sounds dry as a bone, and in need of ambiance and a phase relationship with the other elements. Better integration generally in other words, and depth. I would also look at it’s attack. Here it sounds muffled and mumbling somewhat, and would benefit from better instrumental definition (an issue in mono). I’ve not explored the multi, so not sure what you are up against. Are you sure you are commenting on my mix. Maybe you missed the bass guitar chain in the notes.
Oh, I'd turn the vocal up too In the next mix I promise they will make your ears bleed
Hey MTC,
Nice mix overall, well balanced, nice tones. It might be matter of taste, but i would pull off revebr a bit from rhodes, also feel like Kick could have a bit more low end. Well done. Cheers.
I like it...definitely its own "direction", but I like it. I went the other way entirely - I'll post my mix up shortly, but I went the ultra-saturation route on this one (and probably enjoyed the low end just a bit too much.
I checked out mix 3. Sounds good. I kinda wish the kick and snare were a little more forward. I like how the keys and guitar almost feel like an extension of each other. The guitar is a little aggressive when they dig in but I might just be overly sensitive to it. Other than that there's nothing much to complain about.
(13-08-2019, 02:06 AM)RoyMatthews Wrote: I checked out mix 3. Sounds good. I kinda wish the kick and snare were a little more forward. I like how the keys and guitar almost feel like an extension of each other. The guitar is a little aggressive when they dig in but I might just be overly sensitive to it. Other than that there's nothing much to complain about.
All good points Roy. There was just so much you could do with this short and sweet arrangement that it was tough to make it sound bad. A lot of good treatments on this one.
