Posts: 1,684
Threads: 117
Joined: May 2015
(15-06-2016, 02:23 AM)loweche6 Wrote: Hey Dave, in version 2 nothing sounds bad. . . . (leaving this as it is, however I moved my rig to a different, temporary space and I had wired my speakers backwards, so my comment about it not sounding bad vs me saying it sounding good was founded on stupid psychoachoustic flim-flammery. It's amazing how switching the stereo image can make a mix feel wrong, even if technically you can't find anything wrong) The verses feels really left channel heavy. The static guitar that you have panned, left, I automated so that it panned across the entire spectrum. Having it in on position made the mix feel too off kilter. If you don't feel like automating it, maybe pan it center, or create a fake double just like you would a vocal, and hard pan the two. Other than that, I like it!
Nice work Dave!
Draper
Hi Draper.
Thanks for the comments. I have since listened to the mix on headphones and I'm hearing what you're talking about. I like having the guitar panned off the centre, but it might be too left of stage. I thought it would work by giving the right side some "ear candy" when the other guitar parts come in. I need to bring the panning back in towards the centre.
It's interesting reading about your reversed stereo listening experience. I've made up a simple passive monitor controller which allows me to switch between stereo, mono, reverse and difference with the turn of a knob. Very useful for checking a mix and at waking up the ears to any psycho-acoustic flim-flammery as you have discovered.
Dave
Posts: 10
Threads: 4
Joined: Jun 2016
Really like it..
very well balanced .. and the mood set by the mix suit the genre perfectly .
The second version is more improved to my newbie ear.
Posts: 1,684
Threads: 117
Joined: May 2015
(16-06-2016, 09:31 PM)waswise Wrote: Really like it..
very well balanced .. and the mood set by the mix suit the genre perfectly .
The second version is more improved to my newbie ear.
Thanks waswise.
Yeah, there's nothing wrong with your hearing, the second version is much better.
Dave
Posts: 165
Threads: 41
Joined: Oct 2012
(10-06-2016, 01:37 PM)Dangerous Wrote: Update 18/06/16. Some slight drum bus automation adjustments to #3.
Your version #3 is in my opinion the best I heard so far. I vote for it.
If I have to suggest anything, I would add a very little (even) more of snare snap, to make it perfect.
cheers
"... I'm listening. Yes."
from Switzerland
Posts: 229
Threads: 7
Joined: Aug 2014
One of my favorite mixes here. Really good job!
Could you tell me how you processed the bass guitar? Almost sounds like a fretless
Posts: 1,684
Threads: 117
Joined: May 2015
(28-06-2016, 11:32 PM)Lammy Wrote: (10-06-2016, 01:37 PM)Dangerous Wrote: Update 18/06/16. Some slight drum bus automation adjustments to #3.
Your version #3 is in my opinion the best I heard so far. I vote for it.
If I have to suggest anything, I would add a very little (even) more of snare snap, to make it perfect.
cheers
Thanks Lammy, You've made my day.
I totally agree with the snare. My two known weaknesses with mixing, snares and pianos, I guess I've just got to keep working at it.
Thanks again
Dave
Posts: 1,684
Threads: 117
Joined: May 2015
(29-06-2016, 11:39 AM)wurstdrummer Wrote: One of my favorite mixes here. Really good job!
Could you tell me how you processed the bass guitar? Almost sounds like a fretless
Thanks Till, It's always great getting feedback from the artist, especially when it's positive. Glad you approve.
I used a very minimal approach to the bass. I sent the three unprocessed bass tracks to a bus, Bass DI and Bass Pedal both -4dB and Bass amp at unity. I then eq-ed the bus with ReaEQ. High Pass @45hz, a tight -6dB cut @ 105hz and a broad -6dB cut at 3250hz. I then used a standard comp 4:1 ratio, 4dB gain reduction just for some tightening. The raw bass signals sounded pretty good to me so I keeped the processing light.
Thanks for giving us the opportunity to work with these tracks.
Dave.
