18-05-2023, 10:34 PM
(This post was last modified: 30-05-2023, 05:51 PM by Mixinthecloud.)
Nice tracks, mostly well performed.
I think a lot of mixes tried hard to get close to the level of the posted mix. I opted for something more streaming positive, ending at -11.6 LUFS with -0.1 peaks. Please feel free to turn it up if you want LOUD. I typically mix at very modest levels then bring the mix up on my mains to hear what it sounds like loud. I also tested this on various headphones, a cell phone and a mono Bluetooth speaker. It translated very well for me on all platforms, so I figured it was ready to be published.
I tried not to do too much with these tracks besides a touch of de-honking where needed. Some of the tones were very midrangy but within the mix context, worked well for the most part. I really liked the background vocals and their arrangement. This is where the bulk of my automation resides. Getting the lead vocal to sit where I thought it best was the biggest challenge for me. Once I put some ambience on it, it began to find a good home. There are two discreet delays on the lead vocal and those delays feed two discreet reverbs. There is no direct reverb on the lead vocal tracks.
For me, the groove of the song comes from the interplay between the snare and the hi-hat, with support from the acoustic guitars. I did not feel the acoustics demanded to be anything more than support, so they stayed well behind the top of the mix and did not intrude on the excellent electrics which filled the sound field and provided great embellishments and turn-arounds throughout the song. I used the keyboards as a bed below the mix as well. I did very little compression of my instrument busses beyond two of the guitar subs, lead and background busses and only a limiter on the two-buss to contain any wayward peaks. The mix before mastering was at -14.3 LUFS and -1.0 peak. Mastering included some widening adding to the overall level, some top end brightening, and some gain added to bring it to the final level of -11.6. I wanted to keep as much of the dynamics as possible as I felt that really supported the groove and feel of the song.
I hope you find this an enjoyable listen and worth a comment or two.
Joe's Bars G2 - Evolved
This is a highly evolved version of the first mix. It is not hugely different, but greater attention to detail in respect to environment, placement, tonal balance, level, dynamics and automation have been refined. The original mix buss config consisted of only a stock StudioOne limiter (which is not bad). The mix buss on this version had a Waves API 2500 in Limit mode (yum) preceded by a stock StudioOne 4-band parametric (sweet). I used the 4-band the same way I was using a stock ProEQ in my mastering, but opted for that flavoring on the mix buss, instead. The API in limit mode brought in the the legendary crunch and richness my ears love about API. It was a good match for this song, I felt. Mixing into the API help me bring out finer details of the arrangement.
Mastering: G2 refers to the style of compression used in mastering (The Glue).
Mastering had its own iterations which are the same as the mix iterations in this version. Each contributed to the evolution of the final mix and master. As mastering evolved, it revealed more detail in the previous iteration requiring more and more subtle mix alterations. Iterations were monitored on everything from cell phone to AKG and Sennheiser headphones to a mono bluetooth speaker and to Klitpsch 7 Series cabinets. Anything those playback platforms revealed was acknowledged and/or addressed as needed.
The original mastering chain consisted of a stock ProEQ on the track. The Master section has Wave's Abbey Road TG Stereo Mastering chain followed by a stock StudioOne limiter. In the original mix the AR TG used tape emulation (IEC 7.5 ips) in mid-side, the presence section which a touch in the upper mids and the Spreader in the master module for a tiny bit of width. The ProEQ on the track was used for tone shaping and correction. The current evolved version with the added 4-band EQ on the mix buss, negated the need for the ProEQ on the track and it was disabled. Two copies of the track were inserted in the project to allow for discreet variations of compression on the tracks. I found that there was too much space in the mix and I needed to control the depth. My choice was The Glue. As Mark Daniel Nelson says, it gives the mix a lift. the setting for each Glue were identical except for attack and release times. The G1 version (not posted here) uses a faster attack and release. G2 uses the slowest attack and faster release. Both and undermixed at 82% for the fill i wanted. Some adjustments of the detector hi-pass filter were made between versions. Version G2 gives a fatter punchier bottom end while G1 is a bit more transient. Both punch hard at high volume.
Typically, I allow myself seven iterations of a mix/master until I am satisfied. Often, more attempts than that means I have missed the song! Nice try, Pal: now that you've squeezed the very essence of life out of it, and it is dead and flopping on the ground, it's time to move on...so to speak. This one took 8 tries. I am grateful I like this song. It made it easier to get through all the evolutionary changes my perfectionist bent demands! I do like the results. I hope you like them too.
I would love to hear how your mixes evolve from an initial to final. What steps do you take? What traps do you fall in?
Mix Well and Mix Often,
mITc
I think a lot of mixes tried hard to get close to the level of the posted mix. I opted for something more streaming positive, ending at -11.6 LUFS with -0.1 peaks. Please feel free to turn it up if you want LOUD. I typically mix at very modest levels then bring the mix up on my mains to hear what it sounds like loud. I also tested this on various headphones, a cell phone and a mono Bluetooth speaker. It translated very well for me on all platforms, so I figured it was ready to be published.
I tried not to do too much with these tracks besides a touch of de-honking where needed. Some of the tones were very midrangy but within the mix context, worked well for the most part. I really liked the background vocals and their arrangement. This is where the bulk of my automation resides. Getting the lead vocal to sit where I thought it best was the biggest challenge for me. Once I put some ambience on it, it began to find a good home. There are two discreet delays on the lead vocal and those delays feed two discreet reverbs. There is no direct reverb on the lead vocal tracks.
For me, the groove of the song comes from the interplay between the snare and the hi-hat, with support from the acoustic guitars. I did not feel the acoustics demanded to be anything more than support, so they stayed well behind the top of the mix and did not intrude on the excellent electrics which filled the sound field and provided great embellishments and turn-arounds throughout the song. I used the keyboards as a bed below the mix as well. I did very little compression of my instrument busses beyond two of the guitar subs, lead and background busses and only a limiter on the two-buss to contain any wayward peaks. The mix before mastering was at -14.3 LUFS and -1.0 peak. Mastering included some widening adding to the overall level, some top end brightening, and some gain added to bring it to the final level of -11.6. I wanted to keep as much of the dynamics as possible as I felt that really supported the groove and feel of the song.
I hope you find this an enjoyable listen and worth a comment or two.
Joe's Bars G2 - Evolved
This is a highly evolved version of the first mix. It is not hugely different, but greater attention to detail in respect to environment, placement, tonal balance, level, dynamics and automation have been refined. The original mix buss config consisted of only a stock StudioOne limiter (which is not bad). The mix buss on this version had a Waves API 2500 in Limit mode (yum) preceded by a stock StudioOne 4-band parametric (sweet). I used the 4-band the same way I was using a stock ProEQ in my mastering, but opted for that flavoring on the mix buss, instead. The API in limit mode brought in the the legendary crunch and richness my ears love about API. It was a good match for this song, I felt. Mixing into the API help me bring out finer details of the arrangement.
Mastering: G2 refers to the style of compression used in mastering (The Glue).
Mastering had its own iterations which are the same as the mix iterations in this version. Each contributed to the evolution of the final mix and master. As mastering evolved, it revealed more detail in the previous iteration requiring more and more subtle mix alterations. Iterations were monitored on everything from cell phone to AKG and Sennheiser headphones to a mono bluetooth speaker and to Klitpsch 7 Series cabinets. Anything those playback platforms revealed was acknowledged and/or addressed as needed.
The original mastering chain consisted of a stock ProEQ on the track. The Master section has Wave's Abbey Road TG Stereo Mastering chain followed by a stock StudioOne limiter. In the original mix the AR TG used tape emulation (IEC 7.5 ips) in mid-side, the presence section which a touch in the upper mids and the Spreader in the master module for a tiny bit of width. The ProEQ on the track was used for tone shaping and correction. The current evolved version with the added 4-band EQ on the mix buss, negated the need for the ProEQ on the track and it was disabled. Two copies of the track were inserted in the project to allow for discreet variations of compression on the tracks. I found that there was too much space in the mix and I needed to control the depth. My choice was The Glue. As Mark Daniel Nelson says, it gives the mix a lift. the setting for each Glue were identical except for attack and release times. The G1 version (not posted here) uses a faster attack and release. G2 uses the slowest attack and faster release. Both and undermixed at 82% for the fill i wanted. Some adjustments of the detector hi-pass filter were made between versions. Version G2 gives a fatter punchier bottom end while G1 is a bit more transient. Both punch hard at high volume.
Typically, I allow myself seven iterations of a mix/master until I am satisfied. Often, more attempts than that means I have missed the song! Nice try, Pal: now that you've squeezed the very essence of life out of it, and it is dead and flopping on the ground, it's time to move on...so to speak. This one took 8 tries. I am grateful I like this song. It made it easier to get through all the evolutionary changes my perfectionist bent demands! I do like the results. I hope you like them too.
I would love to hear how your mixes evolve from an initial to final. What steps do you take? What traps do you fall in?
Mix Well and Mix Often,
mITc
PreSonus Studio One DAW
[email protected]
[email protected]
