20-08-2019, 07:57 AM (This post was last modified: 22-08-2019, 08:01 AM by Quathamer.)
A nice little mix for the afternoon.
Went for a cleaner mix here (not too clean though). I've been experimenting with deep subs (80hz and lower) because that's the way modern mixing and mastering is going at the moment. And to be honest I'm loving it. Love making my subs work hard.
Comment!
** Edit
Made a couple of quick tweaks to the kick to bring the "smack" and the "subs" together, and also made it a little less effect heavy. Thanks to stevens304 and Mixinthecloud for the suggestions. Also a couple of minor balancing tweaks.
I'm still a fan of M1.1 due to its fuller body and warmth - it would be interesting to hear what other people's opinions are and which mix is prefered.
That's some neat work there. I'm diggin' it a lot. Every element is nicely audible. Nice room sounds.
The guitars are great. Maybe spread a little too wide. It kinda drags the balance a bit in the beginning.
I'm listening on headphones right now. So I can't really judge the low-end so far. I'm going to have another run when I'm back at the studio.
Just wanted to give my first impression. I like it
You could have a listen to my version in the meantime, if you like. It's up there in another thread. I could use some different opinion as well. From what I heard from your's, I like your sax and guitars much better...
Yes, that's some intense low-end! Still pretty controlled. Very nice. Stays pretty tight on my sub. That's a good sign!
Everything I liked before pretty much stayed the same
The only thing I might criticize is this: The kick seems a little decoupled in itself. The low-end and the smack from the beater don't really connect. Correct me, but you might have taken out a lot of the midrange?
Regarding the kick, I didn't take a lot of the midrange out because there wasn't much there. I actually cut a bit of 4-5K and also cut a large chunk out of the 150hz range. I could have taken too much out of the 150hz area if I'm honest. I'm guessing the disconnect in the sub/smack of the kick is due to the fact that the sub frequencies in the kick are resonate and the smack comes from the attack, so they will always be a bit disconnected. The way I would solve this is to bring back a bit of the 150hz low-frequency presence until the 2 marry up again.
I feel the character of this song is in the many nuances of the figures of all players. With your mix kind of swimming in reverb a lot of those intimate details get washed away, I'm afraid. Just a little sloppy in places. You've got good energy going but the wash of the reverb gets in the way for me. A lot of lingering artifacts in the reverb.
(21-08-2019, 05:00 AM)Mixinthecloud Wrote: I feel the character of this song is in the many nuances of the figures of all players. With your mix kind of swimming in reverb a lot of those intimate details get washed away, I'm afraid. Just a little sloppy in places. You've got good energy going but the wash of the reverb gets in the way for me. A lot of lingering artifacts in the reverb.
Hmmm interesting. I don't know what you mean, I can easily hear all the subtle nuances of the recording session. I'll agree, there is a considerable amount of reverb and effects, especially on the sax, my mixes are typically fx reliant but I can still very clearly distinguish all the parts and the intimate details. The drums are clear but controlled, the bass is round, clear, but not ear fatiguing. Guitars are present and balanced, the vocals are up front and articulate, and the horn, my goodness the horn, is just addictive to listen to especially with the effects.
All of this doesn't really matter though. In my mind, because I'm a live engineer turned studio engineer, clarity and nuances mean very little in the broader goal of things. Neither does volume. What does matter is energy and vibe. Look at Adele's track Hello - lots of effects and lots of energy, and lots of so-called mistakes such as low-passing the whole drum kit during the verses at around 300 hz. Where are the subtle nuances there? Good riddance I say, because it makes the track that much more energetic. Energy and vibe is king when it comes to mixing.
Now actually I'm surprised by your comments because your mix is just as sloppy and effect swimming if not more so. There's a crazy slap on your horn that kills the presence of it, there's so much verb on your drums they sound like they were recorded 10 meters away from the mic and not only are the nuances in your mix almost non-existent, the mix itself has very little vibe, presence or energy. This may come across as harsh, but a big lesson I had to learn early on is to come to grips with what the purpose of mixing is - listener entertainment - not audio purity. I know that might sound contradictory, but its all about mixing something that the listener will enjoy, not something that perfectly represents a recording session, or the sound of the room they were recorded in, and certainly not the LUFS.
(21-08-2019, 05:00 AM)Mixinthecloud Wrote: I feel the character of this song is in the many nuances of the figures of all players. With your mix kind of swimming in reverb a lot of those intimate details get washed away, I'm afraid. Just a little sloppy in places. You've got good energy going but the wash of the reverb gets in the way for me. A lot of lingering artifacts in the reverb.
Hmmm interesting. I don't know what you mean, I can easily hear all the subtle nuances of the recording session. I'll agree, there is a considerable amount of reverb and effects, especially on the sax, my mixes are typically fx reliant but I can still very clearly distinguish all the parts and the intimate details. The drums are clear but controlled, the bass is round, clear, but not ear fatiguing. Guitars are present and balanced, the vocals are up front and articulate, and the horn, my goodness the horn, is just addictive to listen to especially with the effects.
All of this doesn't really matter though. In my mind, because I'm a live engineer turned studio engineer, clarity and nuances mean very little in the broader goal of things. Neither does volume. What does matter is energy and vibe. Look at Adele's track Hello - lots of effects and lots of energy, and lots of so-called mistakes such as low-passing the whole drum kit during the verses at around 300 hz. Where are the subtle nuances there? Good riddance I say, because it makes the track that much more energetic. Energy and vibe is king when it comes to mixing.
Now actually I'm surprised by your comments because your mix is just as sloppy and effect swimming if not more so. There's a crazy slap on your horn that kills the presence of it, there's so much verb on your drums they sound like they were recorded 10 meters away from the mic and not only are the nuances in your mix almost non-existent, the mix itself has very little vibe, presence or energy. This may come across as harsh, but a big lesson I had to learn early on is to come to grips with what the purpose of mixing is - listener entertainment - not audio purity. I know that might sound contradictory, but its all about mixing something that the listener will enjoy, not something that perfectly represents a recording session, or the sound of the room they were recorded in, and certainly not the LUFS.
I think you make some good points about the energy of the mix. Yet when I listen to the tracks, the tones and the intensity of the playing just doesn't scream high volumes and big driving energy. You can use that approach on any song I imagine, but does it match the arrangement? I started off in that direction and found it just wasn't as complimentary to the playing as a less pushed approach. Does it match the energy of your mix. Absolutely not, but I guess that's why there are millions of colors on a sound palette. You can opt for an in-your-face style mix or a more laid back one. I try to let the music and playing define that.
That's fair, but I would still argue that you still have a lot of control over the style and feel of the track. Whether the band is good or not, nobody will listen to them if it's boring or sounds like crap. I think it's the engineer's job to make it interesting for the listener as much as it's the band's job to make it interesting. That's why the best engineers are the best engineers, because they know how to make people listen to their music.
