All Souls Moon - stoman's mix

[stoman]

What a great song (like all of James' songs) - I could not resist.

I spent some time getting rid of the clicks on the vocal track and then did a 30-minute mix. I may regret my choice of reverb when I listen again after some time has passed, but right now it seems ok to me - at least for a quick mix.

Happy New Year,
Steffen

[Olli H]

Sounds good to me.

Only the compression on the lead vocal bothers me a little bit.

I think the solo should be a duetto between bass and background vocals. Now in this mix it's the solo of background vocals.

But very good if you did it in only 30 minutes. How about sharing us the best version you can do with this? I'm all ears.

[stoman]

Thanks, Olli!

I actually have no intention to proceed with my mix as it already works well enough for me. I'm not even sure if I would change the vocal compression at all (but I'll listen to it again in a couple of days and see if I stil like it, which may or may not be the case). The vocals in the bridge section are mixed like I think they should, and like I said on your thread. IMO they take the role of the lead vocal during that section. To me it would sound strange otherwise.

BTW, I have the same apporach as you, i.e. I always do a very quick fader mix (just 5 - 10 minutes) first, then I do the panning, adjust the faders again and apply some basic EQ if and where necessary. Then I switch to mono and start the actual mix.

Oh, and I always edit the dynamics of the tracks first, i.e. I automate them and print the automation. That's extremely quick and easy in Cubase or REAPER, where the pre-fader volume automation is reflected visually in the waveform. Studio One does not have that feature (yet, as of 2.6), unfortunately, and I'm not sure about other DAWs.

Regards,
Steffen

[stoman]

BTW, James said his new MP3 album will probably be released in January. So there actually is no reason to get the mix as perfect as it can get, as I will buy his album anyway.

Regards,
Steffen

[Olli H]

Oh, and I always edit the dynamics of the tracks first, i.e. I automate them and print the automation. That's extremely quick and easy in Cubase or REAPER, where the pre-fader volume automation is reflected visually in the waveform. Studio One does not have that feature (yet, as of 2.6), unfortunately, and I'm not sure about other DAWs.

We seem to have very similar approach to mixing process. Except that I don't print it as long as CPU power won't be complaining

Pro Tools has quite nice Clip Gain feature. And of course it's also before any plugins.

[stoman]

Yeah, but clip gain isn't the same. Every DAW on the planet has clip gain .

Well, ProTools has not had it for a long time, but they finally implemented it in version 10 or 11, I think. The first DAW that came up with this feature was Samplitude, if I recall correctly, followed by Cubase. Today I don't know any DAW that does not have it.

However, it isn't as precise as pre-fader volume curve automation.

So you use Pro-Tools?

Regards,
Steffen

[Olli H]

Pro Tools is the only DAW I know. I know nothing about other DAWs. What's the main difference? In Pro Tools "pre-fader volume automation is reflected visually in the waveform".

[stoman]

That's good - then riding the pre-fader volume should be as easy as in Cubase or REAPER.

I always print the automization because the resulting tracks are the ones I actually want to use in my mix. The volume automization does not have anything to do with the actual song, so it would simply distract me from the actual work.

What's the main difference between ProTools and other DAWs? That's mostly a matter of taste or individual workflow. I couldn't work with a DAW that has no folders, so ProTools isn't for me. But I guess you can do all the everyday tasks with it with no problems.

Cubase, of course, is the most advanced DAW in terms of features. Some people think it has too many features. Studio One is the opposite, it has a very limited set of features, but for many people that's exactly the reason why they prefer it. ProTools is slow, Studio One is fast. Cubase is somewhere in between. Cubase is perfect for MIDI production (that's were it comes from) AND audio processing.

Then there is Harrison Mixbus, which is actualy Ardour with a proprietary mixer console added. Mixbus is VERY limited, but it runs on Linux, Mac and Windows (it does not support VST in the Windows version though), and the console has a great sound. It does not (yet) support MIDI, and it you cannot use multi-channel plugins with it.

Samplitude is a full-blown DAW like Cubase, but you have to get used to its GUI. I think Samplitude is the only DAW on the market that supports object oriented editing, i.e. you can have complete control over clips with individual plugins and mixer settings. Studio One has a similar, but somewhat more restricted feature.

REAPER is the most customizable DAW I know, and you can do almost everything with it. The only drawbacks are: No VST3 support (not planned either), no decent vocal tuning feature. Studio One has ARA support which allows for seamless integration of Melodyne, and that's a GREAT workflow enhancement. The latest version of Sonar supports ARA too and comes with Melodyne Essential (like Studio One Pro) and also has VVocal, a built-in vocal tuner. Cubase has VariAudio.

... and so on ...

Regards,
Steffen

[Voelund]

Yeah, but clip gain isn't the same. Every DAW on the planet has clip gain .

To the best o my knowledge Logic doesnt have clip gain. One can automate the gain of a gain plugin, inserted in first slot, but thats the only way I can think of doin it in Logic.

[stoman]

Really? I don't know Logic as I'm a Windows user, but that surprises me because Logic has been around for quite a while.

Olli, how was it done in ProTools before Avid implemented that feature?

Regards,
Steffen