29-12-2014, 03:24 PM
i've not worked this, so i'm shooting from the hip....
the danger with adding distortion is that too much of it will cloud the mix because of all the additional spectral material. it works in small doses, but i think you've over done it, as evidenced by the masking issues and the lack of clarity during some moments especially. but in a way this can form part of the vision (intended lack of clarity or simply an alternative sonic statement or a way of distracting the audience from poor quality tracking)? however, with too little definition, you risk fatiguing some of your listeners which in a commercial world might be a dangerous and somewhat costly burden on the revenue stream. there is a lot of merit where a track is less than good (who defines what "good" is or should be in the World of Art anyway????), to disguise it's inherited recorded virtues by distorting even more, but it's very much open to question where and by how much one could get away with this strategy; each situation needs to be evaluated on it's own merit and such an assessment falls into the realms of personal taste as well as being able to assess the Market's opinions accordingly (as would a decent Producer and even then it's.....subjective!). the bottom line at the end of the day, is that we can't fix it in the mix....and in trying to do so we can only "succeed in failing" by losing some elements of the emotional delivery as a consequence. another issue is regarding the genre and especially the concept of the song and whether it can sustain such an approach (let's ignore the band's intended audience and market for the sake of discussion). subjectively i think adding distortion to specific instruments at specific times in the song can help drive the emotional intentions. however, by adding too much of it i.e. keeping the distortion engaged for the entirety of a song, we can lose the impact and it simply becomes a norm which we adjust to, potentially raising the risk of losing the listener's focus and attention. change is good, but too much of the same stuff isn't, kinda thing.
there's a problem somewhere in the final octave which you've overlooked in the mix specifically, and mastering as a Final Inspection quality routine especially. i'm not using tweeters on this audition, just a stereo pair with 7cm woofers, nevertheless it's uncomfortable and burns on occasions. if you can't hear it or feel it, then perhaps you might need to question your monitoring, the condition of your ears....or whether you're taking enough breaks (or all 3 - yikes!)....and if other's giving feedback are missing it?
the sub element of your mix is muddying up the low end somewhat. there's not sufficient clarity between the kick's sub here and the bass line. something that does stick out is the extended decay on the kick's sub which won't help things. perhaps a gate might help tame the wash, but the EQ strategy in the 40Hz to 160Hz two octaves needs re-evaluating; the outcome might give you more headroom too. it's easy to get carried away by the kick's abundant harmonics higher up the spectrum and lose sight of the mischief down in the fundamental zone.....i often beat myself with a big stick to try and keep focus on it - that's not a recommendation by the way! by clearing this up, it would offer some scope for exploting the improved spectral space by offering it to other instruments which would otherwise risk muddying the mix; just a thought. drop a low pass filter with 36dB/octave gradient or more, and sweep it around the 200Hz zone and lower, especially if one's ear doesn't tune into this range easily without being force-fed. referencing decent CD's while doing likewise can help the ear focus on the appropriate detail and offer a benchmark. which reminds me.....i should/must practice what i preach with far greater regularity than i do. lol
a pedantic observation regarding your transition into the chrous; it hits loud and jumps out even at a low monitoring level. this suggests that cranked up you might have over-done it, depending on the spectral elements contributing to the loudness and the ear's non-linear sensitivities of course. some like their toast on the brown side though. subjectively i very much like and applaud the essence behind the attack.
one star? this forum has many juveniles. personally, i think the Thread Rating is renedered meaningless as a consequence. i personally hold NO VALUE to it whatsoever simply because of the complex nature of mixing (and of the extent of ignorance that manifests within it) and i dare say those of us in the more mature camp, including the younger elements with emotional intelligence, will think likewise. there is an assumption that the Rating applies to the Quailty of the Mix herein (who defines what Quaity should be, in what is afterall a highly subjective subject??), but that misses a fundamental point, namely that a thread can have some really decent, objective, balanced opinions by some respected forum participants which could offer other's valuable insights. thus, a one star rating would be nothing less than idiotic and irrelevant anyway and i tend to interpret them in this way! Mike would be doing the forum better justice by removing the column - as it stands, it only cheapens the site and degrades it, in my opinion. i'd give you a 5 simply in saluting your ability to take a different perspective in your vision! it suggests the person who awarded you one star might be envious of your skill-set which comes as a gift at birth; it can't be pirated unlike the joker-with-a-grudge's abundant VST collection, i dare say. if such a "feedback" bothers you, Mike will be able to check the board's admin records because it is stored in the logs. if the thread rating scheme was transparent, this bullsh1t wouldn't prevail. the problem fundamentally, is that the Thread Rating is a feature-set built into forum software and doesn't take into account the varied nature of environments served by such software on the web. furthermore, because there's no stipulated criteria or meaning behind such a system in this forum, it further exposes opportunity for ritual and repeated abuse.....and where there's opportunity, there's an outcome and a consequence.
anyway, keep up the 5 star mixing attitude and especially keep challenging the status quo!
catch you in 2015...i wish you and fellow thread followers herin, a good "transition".
peace
Dave
the danger with adding distortion is that too much of it will cloud the mix because of all the additional spectral material. it works in small doses, but i think you've over done it, as evidenced by the masking issues and the lack of clarity during some moments especially. but in a way this can form part of the vision (intended lack of clarity or simply an alternative sonic statement or a way of distracting the audience from poor quality tracking)? however, with too little definition, you risk fatiguing some of your listeners which in a commercial world might be a dangerous and somewhat costly burden on the revenue stream. there is a lot of merit where a track is less than good (who defines what "good" is or should be in the World of Art anyway????), to disguise it's inherited recorded virtues by distorting even more, but it's very much open to question where and by how much one could get away with this strategy; each situation needs to be evaluated on it's own merit and such an assessment falls into the realms of personal taste as well as being able to assess the Market's opinions accordingly (as would a decent Producer and even then it's.....subjective!). the bottom line at the end of the day, is that we can't fix it in the mix....and in trying to do so we can only "succeed in failing" by losing some elements of the emotional delivery as a consequence. another issue is regarding the genre and especially the concept of the song and whether it can sustain such an approach (let's ignore the band's intended audience and market for the sake of discussion). subjectively i think adding distortion to specific instruments at specific times in the song can help drive the emotional intentions. however, by adding too much of it i.e. keeping the distortion engaged for the entirety of a song, we can lose the impact and it simply becomes a norm which we adjust to, potentially raising the risk of losing the listener's focus and attention. change is good, but too much of the same stuff isn't, kinda thing.
there's a problem somewhere in the final octave which you've overlooked in the mix specifically, and mastering as a Final Inspection quality routine especially. i'm not using tweeters on this audition, just a stereo pair with 7cm woofers, nevertheless it's uncomfortable and burns on occasions. if you can't hear it or feel it, then perhaps you might need to question your monitoring, the condition of your ears....or whether you're taking enough breaks (or all 3 - yikes!)....and if other's giving feedback are missing it?
the sub element of your mix is muddying up the low end somewhat. there's not sufficient clarity between the kick's sub here and the bass line. something that does stick out is the extended decay on the kick's sub which won't help things. perhaps a gate might help tame the wash, but the EQ strategy in the 40Hz to 160Hz two octaves needs re-evaluating; the outcome might give you more headroom too. it's easy to get carried away by the kick's abundant harmonics higher up the spectrum and lose sight of the mischief down in the fundamental zone.....i often beat myself with a big stick to try and keep focus on it - that's not a recommendation by the way! by clearing this up, it would offer some scope for exploting the improved spectral space by offering it to other instruments which would otherwise risk muddying the mix; just a thought. drop a low pass filter with 36dB/octave gradient or more, and sweep it around the 200Hz zone and lower, especially if one's ear doesn't tune into this range easily without being force-fed. referencing decent CD's while doing likewise can help the ear focus on the appropriate detail and offer a benchmark. which reminds me.....i should/must practice what i preach with far greater regularity than i do. lol
a pedantic observation regarding your transition into the chrous; it hits loud and jumps out even at a low monitoring level. this suggests that cranked up you might have over-done it, depending on the spectral elements contributing to the loudness and the ear's non-linear sensitivities of course. some like their toast on the brown side though. subjectively i very much like and applaud the essence behind the attack.
one star? this forum has many juveniles. personally, i think the Thread Rating is renedered meaningless as a consequence. i personally hold NO VALUE to it whatsoever simply because of the complex nature of mixing (and of the extent of ignorance that manifests within it) and i dare say those of us in the more mature camp, including the younger elements with emotional intelligence, will think likewise. there is an assumption that the Rating applies to the Quailty of the Mix herein (who defines what Quaity should be, in what is afterall a highly subjective subject??), but that misses a fundamental point, namely that a thread can have some really decent, objective, balanced opinions by some respected forum participants which could offer other's valuable insights. thus, a one star rating would be nothing less than idiotic and irrelevant anyway and i tend to interpret them in this way! Mike would be doing the forum better justice by removing the column - as it stands, it only cheapens the site and degrades it, in my opinion. i'd give you a 5 simply in saluting your ability to take a different perspective in your vision! it suggests the person who awarded you one star might be envious of your skill-set which comes as a gift at birth; it can't be pirated unlike the joker-with-a-grudge's abundant VST collection, i dare say. if such a "feedback" bothers you, Mike will be able to check the board's admin records because it is stored in the logs. if the thread rating scheme was transparent, this bullsh1t wouldn't prevail. the problem fundamentally, is that the Thread Rating is a feature-set built into forum software and doesn't take into account the varied nature of environments served by such software on the web. furthermore, because there's no stipulated criteria or meaning behind such a system in this forum, it further exposes opportunity for ritual and repeated abuse.....and where there's opportunity, there's an outcome and a consequence.
anyway, keep up the 5 star mixing attitude and especially keep challenging the status quo!
catch you in 2015...i wish you and fellow thread followers herin, a good "transition".
peace
Dave
Beware...........Cognitive Dissonance!