The Metallurgist does µ's -Too Bright

[The_Metallurgist]

Another very creative mix Dave! I'm really amazed at the things you do in a mix to push its boundaries.
This one gives indeed a different dimension to this song.

i also like to push my own boundaries too, including those of some forum participants who lean towards tradition

Subjectively, I'm unconvinced by the amount of edge you've pushed during the chorus. .....It stands out for sure, but to me it does so in a way which is not very palatable, and would make me stop the playing if I were to listen to this on a radio...

a couple of observations on that one, Patrick, if i may. the genre you are engaging in within the forum (Electronica, Dance.....and specifically Experimental) is THE LEAST supported by way of multi's in the library and indeed in the mixing pages. it's not too difficult to find people mixing in this category who say in their defence, "This isn't my genre, but i'm having a go anyway!". so, on the whole, i'd suggest that unless someone's tastes and general listening habits verge towards or within the edge-type scene, they're going to struggle getting into edge-type material and engaging with it. that's life, which i'm sure you'd totally agree with.

however, to ignore the audience out there who like their music with an edge would be to deny them a right to edgy material. we mix according to an audience's needs (and within the scope of the musician's). there are radio stations that broadcast this stuff and know there is a community that wants it. edgy is is not classed as "Peak Listening Time" material, but is easily found flicking through the stations after 22:00hrs....and into the late night. i'm not going to second guess what this specific artist's intended audience is as only an idiot would try and do so, but in the freedom of the forum where the only constraints are within an individual's self-determined mixing vision, anything goes. unless, that is, the mixer is stifled by their own tastes, listening habits and level of talent which forms their Terms of Reference. there's more than enough of those already.

Art is art. whether visual or aural, it's sheer nature makes it, by definition, subjective and open to taste. however that shouldn't prevent us from appreciating the work and skill (talent also?) that's gone into it, even if it falls outside of our taste-zone. i think even a subjective analysis needs to incorporate such consideration, and i'm sure you have done so, but chose not to express it perhaps. I've got quite a bit of material stacked on my CD shelves which doesn't suit my taste but that doesn't stop me from engaging with the Art that's gone into it, and appreciating the artist's, and their Team's endeavours. indeed, much of it has influenced me deeply, and i'm profoundly grateful for that.

I find the end a little bit too abrupt as well, I get that you didn't want to repeat again that 'much too bright' part (I was bored with it in all the other's mixes), but I wonder if there is no way to make sound less like a cut?

i can only conclude from this, that you haven't listened to the lyrics and you've missed the concept. i think the cut is perfect. i suspect you're listening to the music and instrumentation and analysing it rather than engaging with the story and it's message then seeing how the music is supporting it's emotional delivery. this is why the chorus was mixed edgy, by the way I wonder also, that because you know the song was shortened, that you've got some subconscious bias coming into play perhaps.

but to answer your question, there's a million ways to end a song, but which one is right will ultimately depend on the needs of the Artist and how they feel it supports their intended concept and that's how it should be, and what we think is irrelevant (unless we're also assuming the impartial role of Producer as well as mixer....but it's still the Artist's ultimate decision).

this was my mix, my interpretation and of course, my vision. if someone gave me this without any brief, this is what i'd do to it, but every mix will form it's own creative vision and i could easily shape a vision that suits the artist's goals, and do so. however, as already stated, it's ultimately the artist's decision of what gets printed.

If you were given the materials, just like other's, you're vision would be individual too; your choice of compression, panning, EQ, spectral balance, level balance etc would be individual. HOWEVER, the difference in my approach, is that i've gone well beyond the scope of basic macro and micro mixing in order to exercise and express MY creativity. of course, the macro and micro objectives still apply (which you've not embraced in your feedback). i must say that i find adding creative elements as i have done here for example, places a huge amount of demand on the mixing objectives that go far beyond a normal vanilla mix which forms the majority of approaches by people in the forum. in my experience, it's exponential in it's additional work-load and complexity. thankfully, i've been able to set up my work flow so i can quickly implement ideas and expand them without getting my knickers in a twist - the less i have to think about the needs of the DAW, the less distracted i am when it comes to the creative tasks; ideas can come quickly...too quickly on occasion! so, if i need to go back in and make adjustments, it's relatively easy...sometimes!!

try it

thanks again for dropping in....and especially for raising some good points for discussion.

PS: IOU a PM....Blue has been undergoing advanced developments taking the vision further, but i needed a break from it.