25-02-2014, 02:17 PM
hi there,
i think you did a good job. for me your mix is one of the better ones here e.g. your side channel wasn't blowing my ears off, unlike takka360's by way of example which i thought was a health hazard
...but yours was still on the heavy side spectrally, ok? you need to keep bass down the middle. there's loads of articles out there discussing this very aspect, so i'd recommend researching it.
this was a challenging project/mult/mix because of it's inherent low-end bottleneck issues with it's propensity to create mud at the slightest opportunity. i personally felt the only way round the problem was either to delete the offending track (arpeggiated synth - marked "Bass"), low cut the mud out of it and thereby lose the mud-inducing bass element(!) or make my own up! i cut ruthlessly. however, i'm in the throws of making a new bass line, one i hope will work better... if only from a mixing perspective.
now then...given what i felt strongly was a track "Unfit for Purpose" (the synth bass), you did well to craft your structure around it. in the circumstances, one cannot criticise your low-end structure (and therefore offer some direction towards a solution) simply because you/we were up against what to my mind was an impossible task anyway. so, yes, the low end is congested...and it's unfortunately fatiguing as a consequence - if the brain has to struggle to identify the elements, this causes fatigue, yes? low-end congestion is often accompanied by high end brightness, that is, an attempt at creating clarity from the low-end components as well as to help change the textural/tonal balance of the mix. the consequence so often results in high-end fatigue due to excess content (because of the spectral imbalance inherent) and i found it difficult to enjoy for this reason too - sore ears. that's also NOT a criticism, because i believe it's inevitable given the low-end raw material problem. to fix the fatigue from the high-end elements would leave you in a bigger mess...any attempt at fixing the high-end fatigue here will cause the instruments to lose their clarity/definition and for the tonal balance to swing even more towards the lower end bringing your mix right down to it's knees. but you could always try and post up the results
in a normal situation, we'd clear the low-end elements which is causing the congestion and lack of clarity (you could also try this too, of course), and this would automatically make the top-end brighter, but the raw material/arrangement doesn't allow for this? you've probably discovered over time, that working the low-end first and removing clutter, automatically makes the top end stand out much more, despite not having touched it?
for me, the piano was a critical element of the emotion and thereby needed to be given the spectral space to present itself. one example of congestion is the fact that your piano suffered. but like i said, i think this was an impossible mission and there's some fantastic learning elements to be gained from exploring this mix further.
if you want to dig really deep, check out monitor construction and the problems woofers have in moving fast enough and with sufficient extension to actually make a 100Hz or even 50Hz bass wave while still having to deliver a 1000Hz wave at the same time, as is the case of many nearfield 2-way rigs...and importantly, what happens when the material they are fed is beyond their mechanical ability to produce. then imagine how a domestic, low-budget music system will cope, OR even a high-end one!!!
my most demanding monitor is actually the Avantone Cube set up in mono (that is, one box with stereo down-mixed to mono). NOTHING will force you to work your mix more than one of these things.
much fun
Dave
i think you did a good job. for me your mix is one of the better ones here e.g. your side channel wasn't blowing my ears off, unlike takka360's by way of example which i thought was a health hazard
...but yours was still on the heavy side spectrally, ok? you need to keep bass down the middle. there's loads of articles out there discussing this very aspect, so i'd recommend researching it. this was a challenging project/mult/mix because of it's inherent low-end bottleneck issues with it's propensity to create mud at the slightest opportunity. i personally felt the only way round the problem was either to delete the offending track (arpeggiated synth - marked "Bass"), low cut the mud out of it and thereby lose the mud-inducing bass element(!) or make my own up! i cut ruthlessly. however, i'm in the throws of making a new bass line, one i hope will work better... if only from a mixing perspective.
now then...given what i felt strongly was a track "Unfit for Purpose" (the synth bass), you did well to craft your structure around it. in the circumstances, one cannot criticise your low-end structure (and therefore offer some direction towards a solution) simply because you/we were up against what to my mind was an impossible task anyway. so, yes, the low end is congested...and it's unfortunately fatiguing as a consequence - if the brain has to struggle to identify the elements, this causes fatigue, yes? low-end congestion is often accompanied by high end brightness, that is, an attempt at creating clarity from the low-end components as well as to help change the textural/tonal balance of the mix. the consequence so often results in high-end fatigue due to excess content (because of the spectral imbalance inherent) and i found it difficult to enjoy for this reason too - sore ears. that's also NOT a criticism, because i believe it's inevitable given the low-end raw material problem. to fix the fatigue from the high-end elements would leave you in a bigger mess...any attempt at fixing the high-end fatigue here will cause the instruments to lose their clarity/definition and for the tonal balance to swing even more towards the lower end bringing your mix right down to it's knees. but you could always try and post up the results
in a normal situation, we'd clear the low-end elements which is causing the congestion and lack of clarity (you could also try this too, of course), and this would automatically make the top-end brighter, but the raw material/arrangement doesn't allow for this? you've probably discovered over time, that working the low-end first and removing clutter, automatically makes the top end stand out much more, despite not having touched it?
for me, the piano was a critical element of the emotion and thereby needed to be given the spectral space to present itself. one example of congestion is the fact that your piano suffered. but like i said, i think this was an impossible mission and there's some fantastic learning elements to be gained from exploring this mix further.
if you want to dig really deep, check out monitor construction and the problems woofers have in moving fast enough and with sufficient extension to actually make a 100Hz or even 50Hz bass wave while still having to deliver a 1000Hz wave at the same time, as is the case of many nearfield 2-way rigs...and importantly, what happens when the material they are fed is beyond their mechanical ability to produce. then imagine how a domestic, low-budget music system will cope, OR even a high-end one!!!
my most demanding monitor is actually the Avantone Cube set up in mono (that is, one box with stereo down-mixed to mono). NOTHING will force you to work your mix more than one of these things.
much fun
Dave
Beware...........Cognitive Dissonance!