Discussion in 'Fix This MIX!' started by packrobottom, Feb 15, 2015.
I'm not pushing play unless you explain why you are putting it here and confirm that you have recorded the music yourself with the use of at least one mic.
It's a nice song. Well performed, well recorded.
I'm not crazy about the EQ, compression and effect on the lead vocal, but, I understand that there are those who are into more "trendy" mixing styles who might like it, or at least not be bothered by it.
From now on, when you post, please give a description of what you are posting, along with why you are posting - Are you looking for music critique? Recording/Mixing/Mastering Engineering or Production comments/advice?
Or are you looking for comments on video editing/production?
We'd rather that you didn't post music to simply "up" your YouTube listen/view count; the purpose for this forum is for critique, suggestion, advice on recording or mixing, etc., and not for self-promotion of your music.
Along with being a requirement stated in our TOS, the advantage to you is that you are far more likely to get more interest and feedback if you provide some narrative/explanations related to the music you are posting.
I've been posting here since 2005 and many people know me. I have posted entire albums here many of those songs have been critiqued by you Donny. This one time I overlooked posting the mic i used sorry My bad. I certainly didn't post it here to "up my youtube count" lol. I mean to be fair it's not like this site gets some crazy traffic. That being said.
I used an apogee duet and one AT4047 for this entire track. I wrote, played everything and sing. It was recorded in Logic Pro. I used a martin for the Acoustic and a Rickenbacker 12 string for the electric parts. Obviously it's a done deal. Normally I post mixes here in earlier stages but this one I was happy with. Thanks for the listen.
My sincere apologies Packrobottom. It the first time I see your name and a video without introduction and reason to being posted is kind of looking like count fishing.
So what is the reason for posting, just general comments? are you struggling with something that you'd like opinions on ?
When I get back to the studio I'll take time to listen to it.
Cool stuff, is that teahupoo? That's a scarily amazing wave there. I used to surf a bit. While I really like your mix, and would call it a finished one. I can't help but picture even more , way, more verb and delay. I'll never forget when I saw the growlers a second time, the Singer goes "please put a rediculous amount of reverb on my vocals" to the sound guy.
I'm just saying, if I mixed your tune, i undoubtably would have tried to rip off their sound whether it ended up that way, who knows, but I would have given it a fair try. You might like them. I gotta say, their are defi at,y better live, but, imagine this x 10 and it's what they are live.
Excellent work man, yours holds its own. Keep it up!!!!!
Here's a growlers vid. Also not for my YouTube benefit, I'm not in the band
My apologies. I saw your post without any narrative attached, and because we mods deal with so many posts where a lack of description usually indicates a post meant to shill songs or videos to up view/listen counts, I mistakenly thought it was another one of these. I am sorry I painted you with this same brush.
I think we can both come to a reasonable compromise here - in the future, if you could include a narrative description of some kind with your song/video posts, it would be helpful, and I will promise to be more attentive as to what and how I am moderating; I won't jump the gun as fast, nor will I be as quick to assume that a post even needs any moderation.
PS - I'm still not crazy about the effect on your lead vocal, LOL - but that's just one guy's opinion, and I still think that it's a very good song, well arranged, recorded and mixed.
The sound is nice, but like others have mentioned, the sound sounds a bit over done. I think it would sound better if it had less processing.
The initial guitar sounds too close, to overproduced. In fact the whole song sounds to overproduced, too loud, too "in your face" - this style of production does not suit the light, open, folky/pop feel of the song. The song itself is very good, well written, catchy, well performed and arranged. The breathy vocal is well sung, well suited to the track, with some nice harmonies.
This whole piece is lovely, full of good musicianship and poetical feeling. The only fault for me is the heavy handed production, which appears to be over everything, all the instruments and the vocals. This song needs an open, natural sound to suit it's character, with a minimum of effects. The vocal does not need to be effected, it's a good voice. Too much effect on the electric guitar too.
Is the over-pushy sound due to too much compression at mastering, or something else?
It's a shame, because there's a great piece in here.
Or if the effects/production is not printed to tape, then this piece could be saved by a re-mix. I suggest that this is worth the time and effort for this fresh, breezy, romantic song.
I'm not sure I agree with the term "saved"... which kinda implies that it's broken. Everyone has their own individual tastes and styles as to what they like - both in what they hear and in what they do.
I don't care for the processing on the vocals, but that doesn't mean that the song is "broken" just because of his choice of production.
If the song fits the songwriter/artist's vision, then that's the only thing that really matters. As listeners, we might proclaim our own preferences, and as engineers, we might all come out of a control room with an entirely different mix of the song. That doesn't mean that anyone is necessarily right, nor does it mean that anyone was wrong, either.
I'm sure there are people out there who considered producers like Alan Parsons to have "over produced" the work he's done over the years as well - along with other producers like Rundgren, Mutt, Clearmountain, the Alge Brothers, etc.
But that doesn't mean they were wrong. It just might not be our cup of tea, personally. Plenty of A&R people turned down the Beatles, too.
While I think that it's fair to critique engineering facets, I think it's nearly impossible to critique creativity or artistic vision, because it's all too subjective, all too contextual, all too reliant on what a listener personally likes - or doesn't.
It's far easier for me to critique engineering than it is for me critique someone's production styles. It's kinda like telling someone their baby is ugly just because you don't like babies. LOL
In short, just because a song may be produced in a style other than what we might personally prefer, doesn't mean that it needs "saving".
IMHO of course.
Oh dear, hope I haven't offended anyone or been too overcritical. I was just expressing my own opinion of course. And I'm certainly not criticizing the overall creativity of this piece, which as I said was lovely. I just thought that it could sound better with a different engineering approach. But what do I know?
As much as any of us does, I would think.
I wasn't slamming you, I just thought that there could be a better description than that of "save the mix".
We all know that different ears hear things differently, that we all have our own personal tastes in music, that we all do certain things in individual ways when it comes to production. What makes one of us say "wow, I love the effect on the voice", makes another think, "man, I'm really not digging that effect on the voice."
Neither one is right, neither one is wrong.
I finally had time to listen and watch it. It's a good song and I think that the instruments are well performed and recorded. The only thing that is a bit weak in my opinion is the vocal. The effects on it place the vocal appart from the music and seem like they have been added as lack of confidence or to hide something that in fact could have been exposed without hesitation. What I'm saying is that many signers don't like their voice and they tend to put a lot of effects when mixing themself. This might not be the case at all, it is just an impression I had... Anyway, the song is not missing much from the Pro records, so good work there. (1000 engineer will do 1000 different mixes)
For the video, good job again appart for minor things. I guess I found that some overlays were not very convincing and many shots of the performer were dark. The better shots were all distant shots again like a sens of shyness. I would have like a couple of close and personnal shots of the signer and guitar and less overlays. For me the bubble part was a bit unsettling.
Again they are just personnal impressions and only derived on taste
thx for all the discussion and thoughts guys. I really appreciate the feedback and listens as that takes time. I'm surprised about a couple of the comments regarding too much processing on the vocal. There really isn't much going on there. Some eq,verb,delay and a bit of compression. The intro guitar is just an acoustic gtr and a rickenbaker elect 12 string. doubled with very slight processing. They are panned wide but that is personal preference and definitely not unprecedented. I am glad everyone seems to like the songwriting for the most part as that's the important thing.
I don't feel the choices of effects are wrong, just that they could be less present in the mix. This often happens if you put the effects on the track instead of on a bus. A thing that can be helpfull is using paralelle processing. You send the clean signal to the masterbus (after EQ an Compression if you want) then you can send the same signal to 2 independent Aux bus for the reverb and the delay. Then you blend them. What it does is that you don't get the delay into the the reverb and/or don't get the reverb into the delay and since the direct signal is still in the mix you can achieve a natural sound but surrounded with effects.
I hope this makes sens. Maybe you already use that technic in which case I appologies
i think the whole thing is just fine as far as effects, tones mix. nothing wrong with the song either. i would take previous comments / critiques with a grain of salt. all that sh*t is so subjective. btw the snare sounds great! (re; how many engineers does it take to mix a record?)
depending on what the recording is for, (demo / finished CD / downloads) i would think out the intro. 50 seconds until the vocals come in is a bit artistically indulgent for an artist that is trying to break. the freeways in LA are littered with CDs and cassettes AR guys have tossed out the window after listening to the first 10 seconds. that's about all the time you have to catch someones ear.
That's what I said earlier :
A good part comes from tastes at this point.
As Kurt said, it's all subjective. What may seem like "a lot" of effect to one listener, might seem just perfect to another, and maybe even not enough to yet another. Personally, I base "wet vs dry" ratios on whether the effect is as obvious as the direct signal, or whether it's added as a more subtle texture, meant to support the performance.
I have a friend who insists on always drowning his vocal tracks in reverb - at least that's the way I hear and describe it. The ratio of his verb is at least 50%, and to me, to my own perception, my own tastes, that's pretty wet. It's too much.
If I can hear the effect in a wet ratio of any more than around 30% , it's likely too wet for my tastes, regardless of what type of effect it is. Yes, there are "those" exceptions, those moments when you want that effect to do exactly as its name implies - you want it to jump out and "effect" something.
But, if you have just as much effect audible as you do the direct signal for the whole performance, then the effect starts to become less effective. You are also risking the effect as being the only thing that a listener will hear, and, you can also risk wiping out clarity and definition on the original performance as well.
The other thing, is that many of us have become accustomed to hearing tracks with heavy effects on them as a way for the singer to "camouflage" their true voice, to cover up certain nuances that they maybe aren't comfortable hearing. I'm not saying that this is what you did... I'm saying that some of us have become conditioned to think this, because we've heard it so many times before.
In the end, none of what I say really matters one bit. You need to stick to your vision, you need to do what pleases you. My opinion is obviously my own, and was presented solely as such, merely as another position for you to look at it from... that's all.
Marco said, "ask 1000 engineers and you'll probably get 1000 different opinions". I agree. It's up to you to decide how much of what is suggested to you - if anything - you choose to consider.
Agreed with above, and may add, that there are technical things and creative things. Obvious sss s for instance probably every engineer will agree is bad in general.
Good call Kurt, indeed, all this is subjective.
being said, its a bit harsh around 7k/10k ( where I'm told, converters that are chocking for some reason are most noticeable. Same with your mic? Is this your conversion or your mic or what.... but there is something here that you can improved "there".
The mix itself is cool and I loved the intro. I think if there's anything I would suggest, you are excellent and if finances allow, invest in a better vox chain.
Separate names with a comma.