We'll talk about it all tonight (Sano mix)

[sano]

Great song to mix !

[HbGuitar]

really nice tight rhythm section going here ... instruments all sit well together......love the bright glockenspiel in chorus1...makes me want to go and change mine

The only thing that struck me is that the ldvox in verse 1 & 2 seem a little low..They're great in choruses, drop chorus and outro.

Nice job

[sano]

Thanks for your comments!

I think your right about the vocal levels during the verses. I actually struggled to get the vocals to cut during the choruses so I set up a fairly heavily compressed parallel chain, and manually rode it during the track but mostly drop it out during the verse.

The glockenspiel I really wanted to shine, so again I sent it to an aux track and pitched it up an octave and brought it up in level to sit just under the original pitched version. I was pretty pleased with the results.

[pauli]

Hey Sano, you did a really good job separating the instruments here, and other than a little excessive brightness (for my taste anyway) in the harmonica and glock. there are some really good choices in which frequencies to expose on each backing instrument, but the piano sounds a little unnatural to me.

in my humble opinion, the bottom end feels pretty congested, and the mix overall feels really hot... low frequency build up might be confusing your mix compression. i'm not hearing any really offensive compression artifacts though... maybe you compressed the mix in parallel? if so I bet a high pass filter on the parallel channel would clean it up quite a bit.

Is there maybe a bit too much compression on the vocal?

Overall though, good work.. I just think it needs to breathe a little more

[sano]

Hey pauli. I certainly wouldn't disagree about it being a bit on the bright side, often I reach the end of my mixes and on reflection the tone can be overly bright/dark etc, but the task of rebalancing the entire mix makes me usually settle for what I've got. But it something I defiantly become more aware of lately.

The bottom end is quite full, I wanted a fuller sounding mix so I carved out less of the lower mids, so I can see why this is your opinion, but a valid comment.

As for the compression, now you,ve mentioned it. I don't think I've ever parallel compressed the entire mix and I usually HPF the master buss compressor with the internal side chain.

Over compressed vocal? I always over compress the vocal. lol

Thanks for your comments pauli your listening skills are really coming along.

[HbGuitar]

Thanks for your comments!

I think your right about the vocal levels during the verses. I actually struggled to get the vocals to cut during the choruses so I set up a fairly heavily compressed parallel chain, and manually rode it during the track but mostly drop it out during the verse.

I figured there was a reason for it...and i suspected it was part of your long term dynamics..its only a db or so off...and the idea of parallel comp. on choruses only is a good one...and gives you that change-up between verse and chorus

The glockenspiel I really wanted to shine, so again I sent it to an aux track and pitched it up an octave and brought it up in level to sit just under the original pitched version. I was pretty pleased with the results.

such a clever idea... i may just have to borrow that one day

[pauli]

Hey pauli. I certainly wouldn't disagree about it being a bit on the bright side, often I reach the end of my mixes and on reflection the tone can be overly bright/dark etc, but the task of rebalancing the entire mix makes me usually settle for what I've got. But it something I defiantly become more aware of lately.

Happens to me all the time. Sometimes I post before I listen with fresh ears and I'm rightly spanked for it

As for the compression, now you,ve mentioned it. I don't think I've ever parallel compressed the entire mix and I usually HPF the master buss compressor with the internal side chain.

Most mastering compressors have a wet/dry option... you should try it, it's really good for bringing up low level details, making them easier to automate in the endgame. But sometimes I'll route everything to a submix buss instead of the master and run a truly parallel compression setup through to the master so I can control which frequency ranges get how much of the compressed underlayment with a dynamic EQ instead of a side chain HP... call it "obsessive compulsive parallel multiband compression" and you'll realize what a kook I am especially since that buss never gets turned up enough to make any more than a subtle difference...

Thanks for your comments pauli your listening skills are really coming along.

you're welcome, and thanks to you.. that means a lot.

[The_Metallurgist]

...I certainly wouldn't disagree about it being a bit on the bright side, often I reach the end of my mixes and on reflection the tone can be overly bright/dark etc, but the task of rebalancing the entire mix makes me usually settle for what I've got. But it something I defiantly become more aware of lately.

hi there,
Pauli's observations fall short of the mark regarding brightness, with respect. if you can't hear it (and feel it too, like i can), i strongly recommend doing some referencing against "qualified quality" CD material, and get your eyes to help your ears by using some spectral graphics. the gloc is the worst offender here; personally, i'd have fed it a touch of distortion to suit and cut some space for it, as pitching it up has turned it into a laser. the point i think you've missed, is that it's character comes from lower down in the spectrum. by pitching it, you take this opportunity away and it turns into fatigue - major fatigue....perhaps the quality of the tracking hasn't helped you here, can't say.

....but the HMF and HF's are stressful throughout the mix.

if you are a long-time musician or someone who's been involved in music, but hasn't used hearing protection when exposed to loudness (what's loud? and what about duration of exposure?), i'd recommend you get your hearing professionally checked as a matter of routine. please don't rely on home tests as the results are meaningless - the field of acoustics is complicated, eh? once we lose our hearing, we lose our mixing. this is a head's up for everyone, because listening to many mixes in the forum, fatiguing mixes are overly common (including Mike's!). for some, it will be the constraints of cheap monitoring and poor room acoustics, but for others the reality can be more serious. long term hearing issues are actually becoming a political concern (at least in the UK because of the deafness epidemic and future projected statistics which are really gloomy as more of us use headphones and ear buds). those of us who come from an industrial background, will have been educated in the risks - third party Factory Inspectors do spot checks to make sure the staff are taking care of themselves and of each other - it's a Legal duty. but not in the world of music which is unregulated in this regard. i watched some Glastonbury footage the other day (UK open air concert), and it was obvious the audience had all been supplied with ear plugs! for the younger ones there's hope, for the older ones it may already be too late.

he's right about the congestion, in my view. it's often the case in low-mid congested mixes that people look for the mid range and highs to get the tonal balance back and find some clarity? i suspect this is what's happened here. i once put a LPF on the stereo buss (36dB/oct at least), and took it slowly down through the mix and was frankly amazed at how much bass resides in the 500Hz region alone! going lower into the low-mid range will change your perspective forever and should cause you to re-think fundamental frequencies and what to do with them.

i'm not a lover of 20 foot wide pianos unless the genre is off the beaten track. one might argue that it's a subjective opinion, but i'd disagree of course if something doesn't sound natural (or within context), it's a distraction. but one's mother-in-law wouldn't notice, or would she? anyway, have a go perhaps at feeding a mono piano into a high quality stereo reverb; i think the outcome would be quite pleasant and...natural. there is a "but", however. if the piano wasn't tracked properly in stereo (few ever are), there will likely be some serious phase issues which will change the character of the piano for the worse. but anyone listening to your mix over AM radio or in the shopping center, will hear the issues anyway when the stereo is mixed down to mono. quality starts with the recordings.

while tone/spectral balance can be tweaked at the mastering stage to some extent, i'd encourage you to fix tonal issues in the mix. but it goes without saying that if we can't do it in the mix, then we won't have the skills during mastering. if you struggle with tone during mixing, try loading a reference track into the project and keep refreshing your ears with it now and again, because our hearing can go off on a serious tangent VERY quickly; 10 seconds can do it! it will help keep you rooted - i should listen to my own advice more often!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 8-) DON'T USE A LOSSY-BASED sample for reasons which should be obvious.

i've not mixed this myself, but listening to other posts suggests it's got some interesting challenges. anyway, hope i've offered something which might help your mixing in future, and other forum participants too, for that matter

coffee time over, catch you laters
Dave

[pauli]

I think a lot of the overly bright mixes on the forum are the result of the same situation... limited mixing time, leading to fewer breaks and lost perspective. most of us are learned enough to keep the level low and not to push it for too long (I have an SPL meter myself), but one loses perspective long before hearing damage is really a concern. Only takes me about 30 minutes before I have to "clean" my ears... which is why lately I post a rough draft followed by several revisions, which is usually how the pros do it, too. Alan made a good point in that we only hear their best mixes.

this beast of a multi, though, has so many low end issues that everyone's been pushing the brightness trying make up for it... my latest take has a harmonica that'll melt your earwax (lol)

[The_Metallurgist]

I think a lot of the overly bright mixes on the forum are the result of the same situation... limited mixing time, leading to fewer breaks and lost perspective.

yes, we've all been there, and i'm as guilty as much as the next chap. however, i've come across far too many situations where feedback has been brimming with superlatives, but my ears were smoking from the burn, and some of those giving feedback were "senior members" who are most likely to have suffered from long-term hearing damage - drummers, live mixing engineers, electric guitarists, singers, night club bar staff(!), table-top dancers(!!) etc. this has nothing to do with limited mixing time, fewer breaks nor a lost perspective because it's the reviewer we're talking about in such examples, not the person who submitted the mix. Pauli, there's an epidemic going on out there which is correlated to a change in leisure habits. the problem, and the danger, is that people aren't sufficiently informed.

i mentored a teenager for a few years. he was a slow learner, but let me tell you this, he was mighty quick at learning that hearing impairment could mess his career up! his mates thought he was an idiot, and that plugs were uncool. however, during their next band practice, they were all wearing protection. it's hearing aids that aren't cool.

SPL meters are great for the studio, essential even. however, we can't put an SPL meter in headphones, nor ear buds from iPhones and i've never seen any musician sporting a meter during a gig. most importantly of all, SPL meters don't measure exposure time and it's this combination of loudness levels and duration of exposure that people are unaware of.

let me ask you this:
"if you are the lead guitarist in a band, and the sound level where you are standing is 120dBA, how long will it take before you begin to experience irreparable hearing damage?"

Mike makes a brief mention about watching out for monitoring levels, but in my view, it was totally inadequate. people who mix are generally musicians...and musicians are exposed to problems outside the studio but it impacts what they do inside it!

most of us are learned enough to keep the level low and not to push it for too long (I have an SPL meter myself), but one loses perspective long before hearing damage is really a concern.

many mixers here are musicians. musicians are exposed to levels of loudness that can impair hearing over time. it's a slow process, slow enough for people not to notice until it's too late. sure, mixing is a risk too, but to many the real risks of exposure occur outside the studio.

Only takes me about 30 minutes before I have to "clean" my ears... which is why lately I post a rough draft followed by several revisions, which is usually how the pros do it, too. Alan made a good point in that we only hear their best mixes.

for me, the quickest loss of perspective occurs when trying to fix the EQ on bright material. i find acoustic guitars to be a total nightmare, for example - i can suffer serious discomfort from these things. also, just sweeping a frequency can be enough, then when you put the notch in it doesn't sound right? i now tend to sweep with a cut, not a boost, then i don't suffer but it's a bit tricky if you're not used to working this way.

this beast of a multi, though, has so many low end issues that everyone's been pushing the brightness trying make up for it... my latest take has a harmonica that'll melt your earwax (lol)

i'm already looking for the emergency exit

take care guys, inform yourselves. even with a loss of perspective after a long mixing session, there's still things that can be done to run quality checks before printing which takes the ears out of the equation.

this was a random link which some might find informative:
http://www.medic8.com/ear-disorders/hear...music.html

let's make this a fatigue-free zone and help others to mix with this goal in mind?