In a backroom in Tulsa, dirty deeds get done.....

[The_Metallurgist]

I read the article Pauli send me, as I understand it the subconscious awareness of unexpected noises like machinesounds and such were there for thickening the less thick actual instrumentation.
Ive used similar techniques in some mixes, I remember puttin a very low lvl sitar loop in one of the first songs I wrote to my wife and it created a tension in chorus, but werent really audible. Listen to Mark Knopflers Privateering song, theres a lot o use o that technique. The hicut lo vlv voices, the drum thing in chorus in uneven measures even. Very clever and exciting if you ask me

ok, we're talking layering here. the Knopfler example is an especially good illustration....smart stuff indeed...thanks for that! i think i must add this album to my list, i wasn't aware of it before. i really should get out more

[Voelund]

Buy, borrow or at least hear it. Its brillant songwriting musicianship and sonics.

[pauli]

here's the article for dave and anyone else who might be tuning in. I experimented with it a little bit... seems like it creates a good depth and space where there aren't 50 tracks to fill it out, but I'd like to refine the technique before I try any of it out for you guys.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul10/ar...e_0710.htm

[The_Metallurgist]

gang, this link works (it looks the same, but the browser retains the original URL here, in Pauli's post it didn't for some reason).

thanks for the heads-up here Pauli, top.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul10/ar...e_0710.htm

[ALX]

Let me start by saying I like the bones of this mix. Nice vibe and sonic impression. Listening in mono the guitar in the beginning of the song is hard to hear. It is also much thinner than the rest of the mix which is very thick from 80 to 120Hz. A really good tape emulation may help this. I think a tube emu. may add to the harshness. The lowend lacks detail. May be from the build up from 80Hz to 120Hz. The texture of the mix is very good. I really like the dense analog sound. Just went a little to far with it. Listening at 79, 83, and 85 ref levels, I would recommend 83 for this style of music, the vocal sounds too loud and forward on the soft domes, metal domes and paper mono speaker. It takes away from the perception of size. Makes the mix sound (SMALL). Not very wide or deep. This song has the potential to extend outside the left and right speakers and deeper behind. There is about a 10db dip in the in averaged response curve starting around 150Hz to 400Hz center around 250Hz. There is also a 10 to 15db narrow spike just above around 420Hz. The guitar on the right starts to digitally distort from the middle to the end of the song. Sound like the brickwall limiter was pushed a little to hard. The meters are reacting like there may be a soft clipper in there also. All that said. This mix is very close to being awesome. One of the best I have heard so far.

[The_Metallurgist]

Hi ALX, many thanks for dropping by. all views and opinions are appreciated..and especially your time.

Let me start by saying I like the bones of this mix. Nice vibe and sonic impression.

that's always a good start

Listening in mono the guitar in the beginning of the song is hard to hear. It is also much thinner than the rest of the mix which is very thick from 80 to 120Hz.

there's a lot going on in this mix, the kick is a flipping nightmare of a boomer. no damping whatsoever during tracking, by the sounds of it - budget constraints, i guess. on top of this sonic stuff on the drum kit, the piano with all it's inherent slow decays and a willingness to trample on anything else that moves, and already we can see potential here for unwanted congestion. now add the upright bass.....The most emotive instrument, arguably. it was a focal point for me. my challenge with this thing, was setting it back in the mix somewhat without spilling mud everywhere, especially in the reverb. all good fun.

i don't know if you've looked at this one yet, but it has some interesting challenges.

The lowend lacks detail.

all low-end by default lacks detail, which is why we use the harmonics from the fundamentals to get the clarity. if you've never put a steep low-pass filter over the stereo buss at 500Hz on any project, then have a go. now show me clarity!

Listening at 79, 83, and 85 ref levels, I would recommend 83 for this style of music, the vocal sounds too loud and forward on the soft domes, metal domes and paper mono speaker.

yessssssss! this isn't a song...it's a story. my vision wasn't for the vocalist to be immersed with the band....but forward with some degree of detachment. i wanted intimacy here beyond a normal singing perspective. there's no power in his vocal to worry about, for example.

It takes away from the perception of size. Makes the mix sound (SMALL). Not very wide or deep.

but i didn't want it wide as in "wide". making it deeper would lose the top end by default (and increase the low-end content, which you've suggested was an issue to you). but i did want it a little wider. however, the stereo balance started to go out of control all too readily. now, if i EQ'd this to try and control the power, i'd have lost the textures. i was considering some other strategies to overcome this, but didn't pursue it further. with more time, and a decent cost/benefit analysis, i would have there were more engaging things to focus my time on, basically.

like they say, if you only have 6 hours to fell a tree, it's good to spend 4 hours sharpening the axe

This song has the potential to extend outside the left and right speakers and deeper behind.

fully agree, but this would turn the delivery into a song....and that wasn't my vision. i could make this thing wider than a barn door, but you wouldn't like to hear it over headphones. 50 percent listen with buds or whatere's in or on their ears, so it should be a critical obligation to think of these peeps and not have stuff banging out of kilter. but wide wasn't the goal.

any idiot can pan an instrument hard left or hard right, or both even! but not all idiots can create the illusion of an "appropriate" space or sound-stage.

i gave the original mix by the artist, and my mix to my partner. she didn't know which was mine in advance - this was effectively a blind-fold test and was monitoring over headphones. she ended up preferring mine to listen to, saying the original caused her discomfort. i'm not saying this makes my mix better, whatever better is.....but it does highlight that balance and sound-stage requires diligence.

There is about a 10db dip in the in averaged response curve starting around 150Hz to 400Hz center around 250Hz. There is also a 10 to 15db narrow spike just above around 420Hz.

numbers....i can feel a yawn coming on

The guitar on the right starts to digitally distort from the middle to the end of the song.

yay! it was meant to but i did overdo it's amplitude a bit. i wanted this thing to bite, and bite hard in order to announce to the audience that something especially dark and lurid was approaching. i'm wondering by your feedback, if you are engrossed in the technicals, and missing the story and it's delivery? are your expectations focused on traditional approaches to mixing a song? this isn't traditional....well, that was my vision.

All that said. This mix is very close to being awesome. One of the best I have heard so far.

oh thanks man, that's cool. i will take on board your observations meanwhile [on the low end], however, given the especially challenging low-end issues and my vision here, i did make some uncomfortable compromises. such is life, eh?

again, thanks for popping by and sharing your unbiased perspectives.

catch you later!
cheers
Dave

[ALX]

with more time, and a decent cost/benefit analysis, i would have

there were more engaging things to focus my time on, basically.

like they say, if you only have 6 hours to fell a tree, it's good to spend 4 hours sharpening the axe

I totally understand. Once you reached your mixing goals, the mix was over for you. Practice mixes don't have to be up to industry standards. It's practice.

[Pedaling Prince]

Wesley's graphic story telling....too good to push back in the mix?

You continue to surprise me; this is pretty decent, too.

I feel the reverb is a little much for the intimate sound you later said you were going for; it doesn't fit the song IMHO. I also feel the piano is a little thin and too far down in the mix; I feel it's an important part of the feel of the song and needs to be more prominent. Also, the vocals are getting a little buried starting with the "seven years of bad luck" part. All that being said, I have to admit I didn't think your mix was too bright as even you have claimed (and I can't believe I'm saying that considering that was my primary complaint about your work until now); I actually think the frequency balance on this was just fine (I particularly liked the nice thick sound you got out of the bass ). And I also appreciate that you didn't make any wholesale changes to the arrangement here, either, so I take it you actually liked this song.

Honestly, when I began this project of reviewing all your work I was fresh off of your godawful mockery of Skelpolu's "Human Mistakes" and your excessively bright mix of Street Noise's "Revelations;" I was not expecting to like the first two mixes I critiqued. I've been pleasantly surprised, actually. I'm still not convinced your advice is valid since it still doesn't take into account the artistic merit of alternate approaches, and your tendency to mock artist's work is definitely not cool, but at least there's some hint here that you might have something of value to contribute.

I'm packing it in for the night; I'll check out more of your work tomorrow.

[WesleyMorgan]

If I look at the mix aesthetically i miss the roomtracks a lot and the drums "caboomph" at 0.28 is a free exciter if turned up in lvl. This is the kind of mix where drawin attention to whatever instrument plays an exciting or textreflectin noise can create an allmost magical atmosphere and fader ridin is so much fun. In my opinon that is :-)
In my mix i made a virtue out of listenin through the difrent tracks and findin whatever phrases i liked or thought reflected the lyrics and turn them up, only so they didnt conflict with either voice or guitar solo.

This is the kind of suggestion to either ignore if youre satisfied with your mix or try out, if you want to try it with another approach.

I second this. When we were mixing these tracks, I was noting where the cool parts were hitting and made sure to turn up the fader. I did more of this on the other tune "Flesh&Bone", particularly with the accordion.

On this tune, that drum hit at 0:28 and 0:45 is a good example. If I was mixing this again I'd bump up the piano at 1:02 leading up to the drum hits. THe lead guitar in between the vocals on the second verse. The high bass line fills. It'd be great to hear some of the moments when the pedal steel moves a bit. It is mostly there as a pad, but it can have it's moments too.

Any time the vocal isn't hitting, what is the most exciting thing going on elsewhere. Bump that up a bit.