Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Whisper to a scream (short version)
#1
Hi guys!

here is my version of the mix.
I took the short version.
It's not mastered yet! Fresh out from mix!
please tell me what you think about...i could work on that song days and days more Big Grin


-Andre


.mp3    WhisperToScream.mp3 --  (Download: 1.23 MB)


Reply
#2
Hi there.
Sounds good, few suggestions to make it sound better:
Guitars are in mono, the obvious choice is widen them, either all the way L R or somewhere between that and mono.
As is only drums use the stereo field.
Voice is very loud, its possible to make guitars way louder and sink voice more into the music and make it still audible.
But great eq, especially bass, good job !
Old ears, old gear, little boy inside love music and sounds and my wife, not necessarily in that order
Reply
#3
Hi! thanks for the answer!

The guitars were 2 stereo tracks (not so much wide,but stereo), mixing 90% in mono, i forgot to wide 'em up! By the way...great suggestion!

About the voice i'm still trying to do something Big Grin because i want the main voice out from the other instruments, kind of loud, but in the right way (yes you're right, now are soo loud)...do you know what i mean? I'll figure it out! ;-)
Isn't the bass too much loud to you?


thank you again!!

-Andrea
Reply
#4
(07-01-2014, 04:45 PM)rebu90 Wrote: here is my version of the mix.
I took the short version.
It's not mastered yet! Fresh out from mix!
please tell me what you think about...i could work on that song days and days more Big Grin

Don't think you need to work on it for days and days more; you've got it sounding excellent already! Smile

My only issues are a little too harsh in sound overall; try pulling back a bit on any tracks with EQ boost in the 5-6 kHz region (a common problem with mixes of this song). Also, vocals are a LITTLE high. Once you pull back on the 5-6 kHz they may be fine or maybe pull them back just a decibel or two.

I look forward to hearing the completed product. Wink
John A. Ardelli
Pedaling Prince Pictures
http://www.youtube.com/user/PedalingPrince
Reply
#5
Thank you!
I'm on it, i will post a new version in the next days (work business).
Maybe a mastered one as well!

Thank you all, i really like get useful suggestions and tips!

Andrea
Reply
#6
(08-01-2014, 07:44 PM)rebu90 Wrote: Thank you!
I'm on it, i will post a new version in the next days (work business).
Maybe a mastered one as well!

What do you mean by "mastered?" Huh

Dictionary.com offers a myriad of definitions of the word "mastering," but for the purposes of this discussion I'm concerned mostly about definitions 2 and 20.

Definition 20, which is the "recording" definition, defines "mastering" as "a tape or disk from which duplicates may be made." That is ALL the term "mastering" means: the creation of the final "master" of a recording from which your copies will be made. Mind you, today that "master" is more likely to be a computer file than a tape or disk, but the principle is still the same: the creation of a "master" from which all the CDs, AACs, MP3s etc. will be created.

However, it seems to me that a lot of people now think of "mastering" more like Definition 2, "an owner of a slave, animal, etc.," as if "mastering" is some mysterious process more akin to breaking in a horse, as if the final mixdown is inherently "wild" in some way and must be "tamed" to sound its best. This belief has led to many unfortunate messes where otherwise fine recordings were totally destroyed in the attempt to "master" them. Rolleyes Case in point:

http://discussion.cambridge-mt.com/showt...9#pid13979

The shape of the sound of a recording is shaped not by "mastering" but by MIXING. All the decisions you make about the playback of each track in a mix, level, EQ, compression, panning, automation etc., THOSE are the decisions that create the sound of the final product. The ONLY thing that "mastering" actually does is take all those tracks and, based on the decisions you made about each track's sound, mixes them all together into the two tracks that ordinary stereos can play; that is, in fact, why the process is CALLED "mixing." Wink

So basically all "mastering" is is the final mixdown you do once you're completely satisfied with your work; that mixdown, in turn, becomes the "master" from which all copies of your recording will then be made.

There was a time when SOME adjustments to that final mixdown would have to be made during the creation of a master in order to compensate for the limitations of home stereo media of the time. Masters intended for duplication into records, for example, had to be carefully peak limited in order to prevent creating grooves with peaks high enough to throw the needle out of the groove. Masters intended for cassette or 8-track had to be lightly compressed and EQed to fit within the limited dynamic range and frequency response of those media.

However, with digital sound there are NO PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS to cope with; the full fidelity of the studio mixdown can be preserved in the "master." In other words, once you get your mix sounding the way you want it, all you have to do to "master" it is complete a mixdown. Voila: there's your "master." Wink

So if by "mastered" you mean you want to create a "final" version that you're 100% satisfied with that you feel you don't need any further advice on but just want to share, please do. If you mean something else? Well, IMHO anything else is not "mastering" at all. Tongue
John A. Ardelli
Pedaling Prince Pictures
http://www.youtube.com/user/PedalingPrince
Reply
#7
Hi,
I'm sorry about that, english is not my first language so sometimes i say bullshits Big Grin
i meant,
I'll work on the things you suggested and i will post a mixdown, and i will finalize the project (i meant this by mastered) to post even a Final version

Thanks!
Reply
#8
(12-01-2014, 12:54 AM)rebu90 Wrote: I'm sorry about that, english is not my first language so sometimes i say bullshits Big Grin

No, not your fault at all. Seriously, a lot of people today really do seem to think of "mastering" as something other than it is. It's my mission as an aspiring engineer to address some of these misconceptions.

Sounds to me, though, like you know what you're doing. The only problem I heard with your first mix was a bit too much overall brightness; your work clearly does not sound overprocessed, aside from the issue of too much EQ boost in the 5-6 kHz range as I said, and that's fairly easily fixed. Now that you've said this, I'm looking forward to hearing your "mastered" version. Wink
John A. Ardelli
Pedaling Prince Pictures
http://www.youtube.com/user/PedalingPrince
Reply