Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tears In The Rain
#11
Oddly enough, I AM a young man and had my hearing tested recently because I take a medication that causes reversible (upon discontinuation) tinnitus in some people... And I heard frequencies up to 17.something kH, which is far better than average even for my age.

I'm well aware of the high frequency content of the mix, but the fact that it's not making me uncomfortable has nothing to do with hearing loss, I assure you... And my monitoring is significantly toppier than yours, I imagine.
There is some compression that's fatiguing for me, personally, but I generally choose not to mention that unless it's extreme because to a point that's a matter of taste, and I prefer less compression than most modern listeners.
However, as I've noted many times on various mixes of this song, there is some very severe comb filtering on the rhythm guitars that's quite obvious to me, so I'm sure you can hear it, too, and I'm willing to bet that's fatiguing you more than anything else. Bandpass the low mids and then the upper mids and you'll see what I mean. Not one mix I've heard (including yours) has introduced a 100 percent satisfactory solution to the problem... But that's because there isn't one. It's a duff recording, and nobody's going to be able to get those acoustics to an appropriate level without fatigue resulting from the near constant, super distracting tonal modulations that are occurring exactly where our ears are the most sensitive.

So we do what we can with what we're given... And fix what we can and have the courage to accept there are some things we can't, and printed-on comb filtering is by and large one of those things.

No beef, but it's a point worth making. If you could be a little more specific as to what you think is fatiguing you, your observations would be a lot more valuable.
I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!
Reply
#12
(05-07-2014, 11:47 AM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: hi Bob,

last October i got my hearing checked by a qualified audiologist for two reasons: the first, primarily is because to be professionally engaged in mixing and mastering one is totally dependent on having good hearing. the ears of a studio mixing and mastering engineer are the critical tools needed to perform the role, like a pair of healthy hands are crucial for a pianist etc. i wasn't happy merely to assume my hearing was adequate for the job. secondly, i was also suffering a lot of discomfort when listening to people's mixes, not only here in this forum, but all over the web....and occasionally with so-say professionally produced and mastered audio CD's. as someone who started a career in heavy industry, and with a father who was an audiophile, i was well versed in the issues surrounding the hazards of exposure to loud sources and have taken the necessary precautions all my life. indeed, i'll even wear ear plugs in the car on a long drive, or during a flight, for example. last year i attended a major Blues Festival and noted only one other person with ear plugs, despite the fact that the festival was going on over the course of 2 days; duration of exposure is a critical factor to hearing loss, which many are unaware of. while one event without hearing protection won't make one deaf, it will most certainly have contributed to the risks of long-term hearing loss....the damage stacks up and we are totally unaware of it until it's too late - normally discovered during mid-life though there's a trend occurring where even kids/youths and young adults are also showing evidence of hearing loss because of their modern-day listening habits.

the audiologist's report had him surprised....as he'd never seen a client of my age with such good hearing. indeed, to quote him; "You have the hearing of a young man".

so, now when listening to records and i suffer discomfort, i know the problem isn't me.

i found your mix, while having some nice attributes, nevertheless caused me fatigue. what concerns me is that i appear to be the only one here to have experienced the problem. it's not my gear....i'm running a Lake People 103 headphone amp over a pair of Sennheiser Ovation II's, namely the HD560's which got rave reviews back in their day and still impress those who are fortunate to discover them on the second hand market. and it's clearly not my ears.
I don't know what to say. When I listen to your mix, it sounds "harder" frequency wise than mine to me?
To mix or not to mix ... mix!
Reply
#13
enjoyed this from beginning to end...agree with pauli...great sounding drums
Reply
#14
(05-07-2014, 03:01 PM)pauli Wrote: If you could be a little more specific as to what you think is fatiguing you, your observations would be a lot more valuable.

the problem in this mix is pretty much the same as it is in most mixes in the forum.

in DAW's, unlike mixing consoles and tape of the analogue era, high frequency retention is 100 percent. there's too much high frequency extension in too many of the instruments here. so, there's a prominent build up of high frequency content....and i'm understandably feeling it. the compression and limiting strategy employed on the stereo buss is contributing to the problem but to be clear, it's by no means the sole cause.

i fully understand the issues within the tracking. personally speaking, i think it's par for the course in many recordings, especially where "affordable" low quality China condenser mics are employed, and specifically mics that have a "lift" in the presence area. naturally some are worse than others and of course we do our best in the circumstances. but i don't agree this is a reason to sit and listen to mixes that are fatiguing and uncomfortable. so, we should do our best to make them listenable and as enjoyable as possible and think about the audience's needs. if we are mixing solely for the musician, it's quite possible their hearing is impaired? if so, they will have a bias in their subjective assessment on the spectral balance of a mix...."This mix ain't bright enough!". unfortunately, some of them will be your customer! and if it's an engineer with hearing impairment as well, it's probably best to avoid buying the CD. unfortunately, the masses are conditioned to distortion and spectral issues...the loudness war being one outcome. as far as i am concerned, an imbalanced frequency response especially in the HF zone, IS THE SAME as the loudness war and should be fixed. rant over.

if we look instead of listening, thereby removing the issues experienced by those with impaired hearing, poor monitoring, etc etc, in the direction of spectrum analysis, we will observe some significant peaks well beyond the call of duty which are aggravating the issues caused by a lack of "digital" attention towards EQ and low-pass filtering too. there's a monster concrete buster at about 13,000Hz for example, which is, quite frankly, nothing short of a health hazard to my ears. there's also a couple of others of extensive magnitude at 8,000Hz and 9,000Hz. you all have the opportunity to find this out for yourselves and as budding mixing engineers should be enthusiastic about doing so. but these peaks are only part of the problem......

..........i know of no valid reason why a shaker must have content extending to 20kHz, or a steel acoustic guitar, for that matter....unless one is trying to make the dog happy.

but this kind of "oversight" in appropriately addressing the high frequency spectrum is quite the norm in the forum. but why??????????

Pauli, if your hearing is not impaired, i'd suggest you have a duty to flag up your observations? if you don't, you are helping to contribute to the problem instead of being part of the solution? "feeling" the effects of compression isn't a taste thing and neither is it fashionable....it's the consequences and outcome of a quality problem, no more, no less. if mixes like this one for example, are seen by novices and perceived to be "good" because it's been mixed by someone with apparent experience (supported by complementary feedback from likewise individuals), there is a risk they will benchmark against it....

....make no mistake, this thread has some significant learning opportunities for the community. please don't delete it Bob, not least because of the time, effort and passion i've put into my posts here!

i could have taken the easy way out and just said "Hey, great mix"....or just ignored it. so, don't shoot the messenger, eh chaps? so, if you can't hear the issues for yourselves, then you need to question the components engaged in your audio process - especially your ears! hearing impairment is a condition in the community, and age holds no barrier to it. but there are tools out there to help us make valid informed judgements of our mixing, and spectrum analysis can be of significant value here but only if our mix is benchmarked against credible quality music (it's out there....you just have to look hard! check out Bob Katz's site digido.com if you'd like a speedier, highly qualified list!). use Skrillex material if you don't.

my vision for the mix was aided by the title of the song. this gave me the chance to present the mix in a warm way, dropping the steel guitars back in the mix thereby enabling me to roll off a significant spectral problem in their frequency response. brittle guitars were contrary to the emotion i was seeking. additionally, it enabled me to present the nylon guitar with a smoother delivery, to help present the emotion of the song...and it's subject. the shaker was likewise given the depth treatment so i could roll it's highly brittle top end off in a generous way. yes, there are issues in my mix, but that goes with the territory which has already been well discussed. i need to fix the one steel, it's low-mid isn't balanced correctly, unfortunately Olli didn't let me get away with it!

critically and crucially, tone has everything to do with emotion. brightness is normally associated with happiness, vibe and energy! tears? debatable.

i sincerely hope this has helped a lot of people...or at least made them think......

later's guys
Dave
.
.
.
.
.
.

Beware...........Cognitive Dissonance!
Reply
#15
Interesting and difficult topic. Here's my unstructured and unstable opinions. I may have a different opinion tomorrow. I'm sorry for not having any clear answers.

About bmullen's mix: I agree there is some fatique causing harshness in this mix's top end, mainly caused by hi-hat, but overall sound is still very smooth and balanced. To me the hi-hat problem is quite small. So, I think it's pretty good mix. Well, at least to my damaged ears.

About brightness and fatique in general: I've been thinking this problem every now and then. To me this brightness issue is somewhat similar than the question of loudness. Personally I prefer softer and dynamic sound, but if one wants to be competitive, there's a certain demand for brightness and loudness. So, normally I try to do smooth and dynamic mix, but I don't like the way it sounds for example in a car. It just don't cut through in noisy environments unless I turn up the volume quite a bit to the level where it disturbs conversation.

My guess is that 99% of music is listened in noisy environments: cars, markets, kitchens etc. Even I agree that in those cases loud and bright music seems to "work" better. But in my mixing room I would never say that. There I just don't like loud and bright music. So is the taste of 99% of music consumers bad if their listening environment is almost always noisy?

In a sense as mixers we have to each time make a decision is the mix targeted for a larger public, or for a closed elitist circle. Most of the time I tend to lean more towards elitist sound. Then I pick up my references for example from Bob Katz's list (I love it). But sometimes I try to rehears more competitive sounds. Then I pick my references from latest grammy winning mixes (which I quite often don't like at all). Luckily I don't have to make my living out of music.

Reply
#16
I can hear the brightness too, but I don't think it ruins the mix, the shaker maybe doesn't need to extend quite as high but it sounds fine.

I'm 21 and playing sine sweeps I can hear mostly flat to about 17K then it drops off sharply to 19K and is gone above that.

How loud are you listening? I find over compressed mixes far far more fatiguing than slightly bright mixes.

Chris
Reply
#17
Dave, I think my tone was quite a bit unnecessarily abrasive in my previous post. I must have been having a bad day or something because I'm usually not nasty like that Sad so I apologize sincerely for that. Wasn't really fair of me to hijack the thread like that either, so sincere apologies to Bob, too. My main gripe is that it's not really fair to jump to the "hearing loss" conclusion not knowing one's listening environment/history, but I definitely overreacted. You're right to suggest I provide some of my perspective on this.

Having gotten some distance from this one and checking the mix on a few different listening systems, I have a little more perspective on where this gets potentially fatiguing. For me personally, as a biased guitarist, string noise, pick noise, and finger noise are an important part of the intimacy of a performance. However, there is a good deal of compression going on here, which is exacerbating the problem with the high frequency energy, bring the relative level of those details quite a bit higher, which can be a bit harsh (especially the fingers sliding on the coiled lower strings). You also mentioned on my post that it'd be tempting for me to listen to the part with the way it would sound to me when I was playing it... also a very good observation.

Now Chris93 has a good point here as well... listening level is important. A mistake we make all too often on discussion zone mixes is mixing at a low level (as one should) but then failing to check it at higher levels where issues like treble fatigue may be much more severe. BTW Chris, the sharp dropoff from 17K is very likely a result of conversion to mp3, which reduces file size primarily by cutting off mostly inaudible frequencies. Very, very few people older than a newborn baby can hear much above 17 and it's debatable even then that anyone (even babies) can really actively hear up to 19, where sound is more subliminally sensed than really heard, so I'd be careful what you believe you're hearing, and check the bandwidth on the sine wave you're sweeping. MP3 conversion has audible effects, but that's for another discussion.

In many ways I still enjoy this mix, though. The energy from the drums is a strength, and a reduction in compression overall would make much of the harshness disappear. When mixing at low levels for long periods of time, it's tempting to over compress and leave things too bright because atmospheric sounds (A/C, electrical hum, weather outside) tend to make the things we like to hear at those levels.. well.. harder to hear.

At any rate, this is good discussion, and I'm sorry again that I let my brain cooties get the better of me on the board.
I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!
Reply
#18
I've just tried it using the tone generator in audacity listening on Yamaha HS50s. Not exactly scientific, but assuming the frequency is what it says it is I can hear to 18.5K, but not much above that, 18.7 was a bit painful though. 18K easy, that would be a very annoying noise to have in the background for me.

It's possible there's some aliasing happening in audacity, but I don't think it sounds like that.

Chris
Reply
#19
Yeah, it's very hard to be sure unless you're using calibrated headphones and a calibrated signal. Anything overmuch going on above 18 k is likely to distress and fatigue someone with very good hearing, but I doubt he'd be aware why. Even 17k is really really high, and most natural sounds gently roll off start around 10 k... Keyword being gently, so it's a good quality for a mix to have.
I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!
Reply
#20
Dave, thanks for taking the time to explain further. I really appreciate your input with the background you have. I am aware of how the digital domain is capable of emphasizing the upper frequencies much more than analog ... what I am probably not aware of is how much I am accustomed to hearing my mixes with this emphasis. I have attempted to tone down the upper frequencies in the mix below. Let me know what you think.
Thanks again for everyone's input here ... very interesting.


.mp3    Tears In The Rain Anolog.mp3 --  (Download: 8.44 MB)


To mix or not to mix ... mix!
Reply