Well stay with soundcloud if its working. Is cool too, just not as high def.

In Mac, all you do is mouse over the files in your Public folder , press Control and click the mouse. The menu will pop up. ( to test this) I'm using an older mac and it works prefect.

Davedog;

That was the BIGGEST sounding mix I've ever heard. That sounded like a European castle singing a song! Fantastic!

I wish I could have gotten mine that big*. And this is early on for you? Look out, world!!!

*stop snickering!

audiokid, post: 387578 wrote: We need to figure this out. Its so obvious and simple. I'm guessing your browser must not be acting well and why you are not seeing something. What version / browser are you using?

I use firefox and sometimes safari with google.

How can I be getting a standing wave in the electrics? They are DI.

And yes, let's have the notes! LOL!

Hey John,

I don't hear standing waves or any acoustic issues with the electrics. Your problem is absolutely proximity on the VOX, and it could be the levelling plug-in you used caused a latency, phasy thing on these VOX tracks too. I can also hear room sound in your vocals and one of the acoustic guitars tracks.

Hey Dave,

Glad to hear your mix and I'm sure it will improve. Your mix sounds like serious mud combined with excessive reverb. Not sure if that is what you call the Glue? Love to hear what you mean there. So far I don't hear any glue lol. And you know I'm having fun with you.

This song is a sonic challenge that can get better. The question is how and who can do it! Track tuning is inevitable.
I'm still cleaning it up so I haven't given up yet. I hope Remy digs in soon.

audiokid, post: 387614 wrote: Hey John,

I don't hear standing waves or any acoustic issues with the electrics. Your problem is absolutely proximity on the VOX, and it could be the levelling plug-in you used caused a latency, phasy thing on these VOX tracks too. I can also hear room sound in your vocals and one of the acoustic guitars tracks.

Hey Dave,

Glad to hear your mix and I'm sure it will improve. Your mix sounds like serious mud combined with excessive reverb. Not sure if that is what you call the Glue? Love to hear what you mean there. So far I don't hear any glue lol. And you know I'm having fun with you.

This song is a sonic challenge that can get better. The question is how and who can do it! Track tuning is inevitable.
I'm still cleaning it up so I haven't given up yet. I hope Remy digs in soon.

I wasnt very clear but the build up was mostly in the acoustics and the electrics had a lot of the same information present though not through a "standing wave" ....I meant more like a very present frequency. Kinda where humbucked guitars live.....

Theres very little reverb on my mix. And where there is a verb it is just a small amount and is frequency limited in most cases. Heres a list.

Lead Guitar- Waves Trueverb. Heavily damped above 7100hz and below 4000hz, so the actual verb is only in that area and there are no early reflections.

Snare- individual track has McDSP Revolver @ -16 db wet and a range of 190hz to 6.4Khz. Mostly dry but this one is a convoluted verb and I'm using it to give the snare sound some size. The length is the quarter-note in time.

Drum Mix- Has only a very small amount of Waves Trueverb again for size. I dont know if the drum sounds had anything on them originally. It didnt sound like it.

Lead vocals- UA Realverb Pro. A rectangle plate glass on one side and wood on the other. In the mix @ 2.3%. Length is minimal and the decay is fast with no morphing on the tails.

Backing vocals- Only on the stereo sub-master for the basic voices only. UA EMT140 at 92% dry. LF filter @180hz. EQ on the verb @300hz -12db and 4k flat. Time is less than 1. No predelay.

There is nothing else. The mastering is minimal with only the McDSP Mastering Limiter being used.

I dont think that the glue is going to come from anything I can do. I heard it in the arrangement and selection of the instrumentation that John recorded and only tried to keep those things that sounded like they belonged together rather than do a bunch of surgery to repair stuff that didnt need it. I used some compression on certain things and this seemed to tie things together. Heres the list.

Intro/Outro Git:UAD CS eq w/a very very fast double>UAD 1176SE fast attack fast release 4:1
AC Git: L Waves Renaissance Axx comp
AC Git: R McDSP Filterbank EQ
Lead AC Git: Waves V-Comp factory default setting (it was just right)>Waves Trueverb
Bass: McDSP Tube Comp> UAD Fairchild
E Git: L McDSP Analog channel Otari>Sans-Amp
E Git: R McDSP Analog channel Otari> Sans-Amp
Chime E Git 1: nothing
Chime E Git 2: Sans-Amp>Digi DB33 Leslie Cabinet wide mic spead lots of drive
Kik ind: Bomb Factory 76 fast attack med slow release 8:1> McDSP P4 Filter everything cut below 120hz
Hat ind: Waves Renaissance EQ w/ peaks at 112hz,2750,11K all narrow Q
Snare ind: McDSP P4 EQ wide peak @ 210hz> Waves MV2>McDSP Revolver Verb
Drum Mix: UAD Neve 88rs w/ touches of EQ and compression>small amount of global Waves Trueverb
Lt.Perc: as is
Pad Keys: as is
EM4 Pad: Waves C4 comp cut below 100hz
Lead Vox:UAD LA2A gain 60- peak red. 60>UAD Realverb Pro
Back Vox: UAD Neve 88rs>UAD EMT140>Waves L1+
Back Vox2: Digi Comp/Limiter

The rest is all levels and panning. The keys are automated as are the backing vocals. everything else comes and goes as it seemed to be written.

But of course since its all serious mud combined with excessive reverb, its a moot point.

Everyone hears things differently. I will probably do another mix with an entirely new set of tools soon. I still want to get those two different vocal sections to play well together.

I actually spent more time trying to upload it than mix it.

Sometimes, you dont need to fix stuff. You just let it be what it is and try to coax it onto being bigger than you got it. I never approach something I havent tracked thinking I've got to FIX it in order for it to be good. The song can stand on its own merits. So I didnt try and make it clearer, or make it behave like a Steely Dan record. It has a warmth to it without a lot of help and a lot of it is the emotional content that John wrote into the lyric and the melody. When I approach a mix that I didnt track, I get rid of everything except the most basic instrument and the vocal that will carry the song as a solo artist performance. everything else around it is gravy and cupcakes for dessert. when the song can sustain itself through the entire playing with only a single instrument and voice, then thats where to start building the rest up to this.

This is the "glue" I'm talking about. It doesnt need me finding some yet unfound element to make this happen, it either has it already or it doesnt. If it doesnt then is the time to start inventing some way to get it. John's song already had the "glue". I dont really see how "track tuning" is going to make it a better song. Of course the sounds can be clearer, the instruments larger than life, the vocalist sounding like hes on a par with anyone.... It can be autotuned, edited, beat detected, enhanced, driven to Starbucks for a Latte....but it wont make it a better song.

This is one of the main reasons I dont debate the merits of gear nor do I participate in lively discussions about ITB vs. OTB or any other discussions about that kind of thing. Gear works for many many people in many many ways and in many many many different setups. I have friends who have a computer and one preamp and one mic with a keyboard. Nothing spectacular or high-end trendy, but they make gorgeous recordings .....mostly because of the strength of the songs. Could they be better? How? Why? Why not? Its amazing what a clever arrangement will do for a basic song. And I'm not talking about adding bunch of instrumental doodlings, I'm talking about chordal structuring, and transitions into little lifts and unexpected delightful changes.

Thats where its at for me.

So I'll probably put up another mix but I'm not sure it'll be any better than the muddy overly reverbed one ya got now. I have found over the years that fast first impressions are usually the ones that get used because the analytical mind hasnt had a chance to take over the emotional feeling side of things yet.......

Davedog, post: 387632 wrote: I have found over the years that fast first impressions are usually the ones that get used because the analytical mind hasnt had a chance to take over the emotional feeling side of things yet.......

I couldn't agree more on this statement. thumb

lets try this.

(Expired Link Removed)

It still wouldnt let me copy and paste from dropbox but at least it gave me an address to enter.

For a break between mixing Johns song, (because I'm still excited on improving this ( love the song) for my own experience.

Lets spend some time discussing a mix contest, followed by what we learn here, to engage our members that showed interest in the larger thread I started last year after our ADL 600 contest ended.

Based on what we've learned so far,

Official contest rules and idea's:

How much freedom should a mixer be allowed?
What type of song should we be looking for?
Who would judge the mix?
Do we allow MIDI or the use of replacing VSTi?
Time limit?

What else?

Regarding judging, this is what I thought might work. Whomever provides that tracks, they would get a nice prize. One would be a great mix and the other would hopefully be some piece of equipment.

The mix winner would get a nice prize too, of course!

I was thinking that the track provider would be the judge.

Davedog...
neither of the two last links you posted work! Error (403)

djmukilteo, post: 387643 wrote: Davedog...
neither of the two last links you posted work! Error (403)

I was afraid of that. They work for me here but I wouldnt have any idea how to fix it for someone else.

I cleared my browser cache and signed out of my provider and back in and they still work for me. But then none of the other links in this thread are working for me until yesterday.

You upload to your public folder via the web site. I can't get the dropbox folder on my pc and the one on the website to sync. Once you have it in your public folder, open your public folder, right click on the file and select dropbox/copy public link. A pop up will open up asking if you want to copy to clip board. Copy to clipboard and you are good to go. It's covoluted, yes but there's a lot of storage for free.

Yeah I was just going to say...it has to be in your public folder!
Also not in a subfolder just by itself.
Then like huesph said right click copy the link then paste it here.

Okay. Is it working now?

Nope

Got it!...

Okay go now........Dont ya love newbies??!! I'm gonna have to hire a grandkid to learn me this stuff....

Interesting to note since I have them side by side, the MAJOR differences in sound between the MP3 and the 24/48 wav files of Johns song. Rest assured these are exactly the same mix and the MP3 is a bounce from the wav master tracks. I definately hear the low-mid build up since the MP3 is obviously cutting the heads off all the shiny parts throughout. Interesting. The soundcloud mix is even muddier sounding. Also no change in mix .....simply a format change.

Presents a whole ballpark of things to talk about.

The other song has some serious squish to it and that is intentional.

I really like the swirly leslie on the guitar chucks on the left!
I bet that effect would work on those secondary extra BGV with the different lyrics!
That's kind of the sound John had on those...
I think that sound has a lot of Lennon/Spector flavor in it..thumb

Davedog, post: 387658 wrote: Okay go now........Dont ya love newbies??!! I'm gonna have to hire a grandkid to learn me this stuff....

It took audiokid and I at least five times to figure it out....so your par for the DropBox course!
It is pretty cool though...2Gb free and if you turn someone else onto it you can get 500Mb more up to 8Gb free!
I've got 2.75Gb so far....to the cloud Batman...to the cloud and beyond!?!

Something else interesting that I have discovered when A/Bing the different bounces is the MP3 bounce sounds like it has more reverb than the wav file. How could this be? They are identical mixes, simply one rendered one way and the other another. I scratch my head with that one! Anyone else experience this? I wondered at first, if it had something to do with the elastic timing properties and so I checked and I'm not using that feature in PT. Big mystery. I was wondering latency but its a two-track stereo master with only a Mastering Limiter across the bus at the end.

So, perhaps, this is what Chris was hearing.

I also knew that soundcloud's sound was going to be a lot muddier and darker than the original, and it is. Takes a lot of server space for what they do, so its to be expected.

Wwoooowwwww!!! The difference is so huge that it's even hard to believe that they come from the same source... (not saying you're lying of course, i'm just saying i would never have guessed that these were the same mix...)
What did you use to encode the mp3??
Was the limiter already there on the wave file??

That is really weird......!!!

Anyway, that sounds much better than the soundcloud file...

If i may, I like it, except for the electric guitars that i find a little bit to "fake". You hear from the first note that the amps are beeing simulated...

Good work though...

N.

It is even "awesomer" than the last one, man!

smokeHey....dont blame me for the simulated guitars! John recorded them direct!! I could have reamped to my VHT PittBull or the fender Blues Jr. but they're really okay to everybody whos NOT a guitar player.
Thank goodness we dont make this stuff for ONLY other musicians........:cool:

niclaus, post: 387677 wrote: Wwoooowwwww!!! The difference is so huge that it's even hard to believe that they come from the same source... (not saying you're lying of course, i'm just saying i would never have guessed that these were the same mix...)
What did you use to encode the mp3??
Was the limiter already there on the wave file??

That is really weird......!!!

Anyway, that sounds much better than the soundcloud file...

If i may, I like it, except for the electric guitars that i find a little bit to "fake". You hear from the first note that the amps are beeing simulated...

Good work though...

N.

Yeah. The difference was quite a shock to me. The encoding was what ProTools 9.05 does with a Mac using the 'Best' setting. The mix is as it was coming off the two track master with everything in place. One was the wav bounce and the other was the MP3 bounce from the same source no changes whatsoever.

Amazing huh....Even the difference in just the dropbox A/B is significant. I knew going in that soundcloud was going to do just that to the sound......cloud it up. But its still not a definitive mix. I hear lots of stuff I want to focus a bit more. Every mix takes a couple of days or even sometimes weeks to really mature in your head before you can really get it better.

The limiter is a McDSP ML4000 plug. I quite like it. It displays the least amount of artifacts from anything I currently have. I know theres much better stuff and if I had the money I'd have a bit of analog delight to toss on when I'm getting the volume up to CD level. Specifically a mastering hardware limiter and a mastering hardware EQ.....GML? I like em...

But this is an exercise in ITB/OTB mixing. This is all ITB which is one reason I didnt reamp the gits. Plus John already has his mix for release done. This is just something for the folks here to participate in perhaps leading to more participation throughout the group.

At least thats what I see it as.

Davedog, post: 387693 wrote: smokeHey....dont blame me for the simulated guitars! John recorded them direct!! I could have reamped to my VHT PittBull or the fender Blues Jr. but they're really okay to everybody whos NOT a guitar player.
Thank goodness we dont make this stuff for ONLY other musicians........:cool:

Aww now...I got better results in my mix using Amplitube. But it's early in the process. Are you going to re-amp them with classy gear? I'd love to hear that!

Davedog, post: 387635 wrote: lets try this.

(Expired Link Removed)

It still wouldnt let me copy and paste from dropbox but at least it gave me an address to enter.

No disrespect, this is much better than the soundcloud clip, but its smashed beyond repair now. I cannot believe you all can't here the distortion and overloading of lower freq here. :confused:

audiokid, post: 387704 wrote: No disrespect, this is much better than the soundcloud clip, but its smashed beyond repair now. I cannot believe you all can't here the distortion and overloading of lower freq here. :confused:

I hear it. I hear it in mine too.

audiokid, post: 387704 wrote: No disrespect, this is much better than the soundcloud clip, but its smashed beyond repair now. I cannot believe you all can't here the distortion and overloading of lower freq here. :confused:

Then I'll just get rid of it since its hopelessly bad.

Not sure what the agenda is here, so dont invite me to play anymore.

Apparently you arent reading all the posts. I pretty much explained it all from beginning to end and I dont disagree with your assement. It was a quick early start with some good ideas and some just getting it done in order to play along. But since I obviously dont understand the parameters of this thread I'm out.

I don't think there's any agenda or parameters involved...
I think were just getting critical listening from everyone who's "playing the game"

The mixes Huesph and I submitted weren't well received either. There seems to be too much low end reported.
I thought mine sounded good to me in the low end and I thought yours (Davedog) sounded good too.

I could hear some real fat "punch" on the last wav file, which I liked. And not distorted at all. The main vocal was certainly loud and clear enough and the rest of the mix was really just personal taste...they aren't ever going to be exactly what John likes. I think his mix is just as good if not better than really anything submitted, but then it's his song and his interpretation to begin with.
I think that is a critical item to take into account in this whole thing...none of us are going to improve on what he's done....perhaps what would be better is how close we can get our mix to sound like his...
I could say audiokid's altered drums....were nice but completely different and changed the feel of John's song. But that was just his interpretation.

I think were discovering this has a lot more to do with each of our own monitoring and hearing.
Were each hearing different things.
I know my monitoring is not accurate for sure, so I racked that all up to my crappy system....sorry but I didn't feel like "playing" anymore either because I don't think doing more and more mixes would help me. Listening to everyone's mix only concluded to me we hear different things.
I don't know what audiokid, John, Huesph, niclaus or you are using for listening...I think that would be something interesting to compare. There is something to learn here, but I don't think it's picking apart each of our mixes.
The OTB side only has 1 entry and the ITB side has 4 entries.
Bottom line is we need some more OTB entries..
For me audiokid's system isn't something I can compete with and it may end up no ITB mix will either?

Yikes! :frown:

Dave, we are mixing this song as best we can, discussing the process, trying again, discussing the process and helping each other in the processes. We are also preparing for a mixing contest so I think you would appreciate a few things mentioned rather than be offended. You seemed pretty confident that "its what you do" ?
Did you read the READTHIS file in the download? It was pretty clear and if you've read this thread, its also pretty clear what we are doing.
Never the less,
Being able to be honest as we move along here and learn from each other is a noble attribute and the focus here. Sorry you find this openness challenging and are slamming the door on a fun thing. I'm sure its frustrating and most likely not what you expected from me but WTF are you doing here if we or I can't even mention that the file is smashed and wondered about it. You posted it. FYI, quite a few of my sounded like ass. But I didn't flip out.
We are going to blaze along with or without you ... Suit yourself.

---------------------------------

So far from this thread I am finding we aren't hearing the bass freq very well. I did mention about 6 months back that I thought Soundcloud degraded the sound and I wondered if we should be adding addition freq to compensate during bouncing. I seem to get better results when I burn to CD, keep the file and then export it at 44.1 for online distribution as we are doing with Dropbox.
I've been experimenting a bit more on it and I've arrived at this .

(Expired Link Removed)

EDIT: Files removed , onto another mix fest.

Very nice BT....very wide on those BGV....clear and crispy!
I miss the elec guitar parts in there though.
Also that vocal skip in the beginning and the other flaw later on becomes noticable.
Not that that matters, it is what it is, but it really sounds high end!

djmukilteo, post: 387710 wrote: I don't think there's any agenda or parameters involved...
I think were just getting critical listening from everyone who's "playing the game"

The mixes Huesph and I submitted weren't well received either. There seems to be too much low end reported.
I thought mine sounded good to me in the low end and I thought yours (Davedog) sounded good too.

I could hear some real fat "punch" on the last wav file, which I liked. And not distorted at all. The main vocal was certainly loud and clear enough and the rest of the mix was really just personal taste...they aren't ever going to be exactly what John likes. I think his mix is just as good if not better than really anything submitted, but then it's his song and his interpretation to begin with.
I think that is a critical item to take into account in this whole thing...none of us are going to improve on what he's done....perhaps what would be better is how close we can get our mix to sound like his...
I could say audiokid's altered drums....were nice but completely different and changed the feel of John's song. But that was just his interpretation.

I think were discovering this has a lot more to do with each of our own monitoring and hearing.
Were each hearing different things.
I know my monitoring is not accurate for sure, so I racked that all up to my crappy system....sorry but I didn't feel like "playing" anymore either because I don't think doing more and more mixes would help me. Listening to everyone's mix only concluded to me we hear different things.
I don't know what audiokid, John, Huesph, niclaus or you are using for listening...I think that would be something interesting to compare. There is something to learn here, but I don't think it's picking apart each of our mixes.
The OTB side only has 1 entry and the ITB side has 4 entries.
Bottom line is we need some more OTB entries..
For me audiokid's system isn't something I can compete with and it may end up no ITB mix will either?

This is actually another point I was going to bring up Don and you beat me to it! You are a good spirit following along with an open heart and ears. We must leave the ego's at the door.

We all talk about how important Monitoring and room acoustics are. We all know this but when put to the test, as we are doing here right now, the truth reveals itself. I'm well prepared to be schooled. How much better can it get that that! No BS. Lay it on the line.

No engineer would mix a song with that much bass and distortion knowingly.To be offended by another engineer, well the truth hurts I guess. Or, school me back FFS. Kick my ass right now. Teach me something because I WANT TO LEARN, or take it with a grain of salt.
We're listening to ALL our mixes and being critical for good reason. I'm just being honest and helpful as others are.

I can definitely tell that all of your monitoring systems are suffering.

Until I got a clean monitoring system, I didn't know what I was missing. So, what good are all the mic pre's and mics without a good monitoring system. You can't hear what you are doing, truthfully. Knowing what I know now, for anyone starting out, invest your money in acoustics and a clean monitoring system and then start adding piece by piece, otherwise how can you judge anything with accuracy.

My room is extremely well treated. I have 13 bass traps ( RealTraps), foam and a great monitor system. if anyone is interested I use a Dangerous Monitor ST, Neumann KH 120, Dynaudio Bm9 subs and Dynaudio Bm6 nearfields but they wouldn't sound right if I didn't have my room treated. I can hear freq very low and there are next to nill for standing waves in my studio.
Until I got my shit together in that area, I was mixing in a cloud. My mix's sounded different from one player to the next. Never consistent and always different from my studio.

Now I just need to learn how to mix better lol! I have all this gear and I admit, I'm learning and welcome help all the time. Its why I'm here.

I'm not prepared to give up on Johns song yet. I'm discovering more and more angles on how to mix a song that needed a lot of work to start with. And that is what this thread is all about. I'm not going to let anyone effect the fun and positive direction this forum is going. If you can't take some criticism, don't engage in any kind of mix contest.

djmukilteo, post: 387712 wrote: Very nice BT....very wide on those BGV....clear and crispy!
I miss the elec guitar parts in there though.
Also that vocal skip in the beginning and the other flaw later on becomes noticable.
Not that that matters, it is what it is, but it really sounds high end!

Thanks!

That skip is driving me nuts. I actually fixed that and then lost half the VOX tracks and don't dare revisit it again lol!

Last night I had the NAIL pumping with the beat of the electric and it sounded AMAZING! It lifted the sound to a good groove. I know John would love it. I'll try and get that in on the next mix. Its not easy keeping it all clear with it. Struggling but refuse to stop until I am satisfied I have done my best.

Two things on the electrics and those "extra" BGV...
They need some sauce, like Dave's leslie or Johns Amplitude effect.
I did like the acoustic guitar sound but with the electrics it changes the sound of the song greatly.
Same thing with those extra BGV parts..
Some sort of warbly reverb effect like John's version that puts those "out there". And again that changes the whole feel.
That's one of the things that's so good about John's version which I think we've all sort of missed.
And Dave's was there on the electrics but I wanted to hear more of them...they were further back than I would like to hear.
Of course again it's all relative...LOL...all of this is just my opinion...I'm nobody and not meaning to be offending anyone, so I hope everybody takes things with a grain of salt as they say!
God help us all if Remy comes in here...!!!

One thing I know is I would love to able to sit around in a studio like yours for hours on end and argue/debate over every nuance, every skip, every level, every pan on every mix.
I wish I could do more, but I'm just kidding myself with what I have and it's good for me to realize my limitations but still try new things and have some fun.

I put some British amp in for fun but I'm just experimenting here.
(Expired Link Removed)

EDIT: Files removed , onto another mix fest.

I'll hit the harmonies with some sweet verb soon.
I do hear what you are suggestion Don, thanks. I need to add more variety of verb in to help glue and space out the forward sound.

audiokid, post: 387711 wrote: Yikes! :frown:

Dave, we are mixing this song as best we can, discussing the process, trying again, discussing the process and helping each other in the processes. We are also preparing for a mixing contest so I think you would appreciate a few things mentioned rather than be offended. You seemed pretty confident that "its what you do" ?
Did you read the READTHIS file in the download? It was pretty clear and if you've read this thread, its also pretty clear what we are doing.
Never the less,
Being able to be honest as we move along here and learn from each other is a noble attribute and the focus here. Sorry you find this openness challenging and are slamming the door on a fun thing. I'm sure its frustrating and most likely not what you expected from me but WTF are you doing here if we or I can't even mention that the file is smashed and wondered about it. You posted it. FYI, quite a few of my sounded like ass. But I didn't flip out.
We are going to blaze along with or without you ... Suit yourself.

---------------------------------

So far from this thread I am finding we aren't hearing the bass freq very well. I did mention about 6 months back that I thought Soundcloud degraded the sound and I wondered if we should be adding addition freq to compensate during bouncing. I seem to get better results when I burn to CD, keep the file and then export it at 44.1 for online distribution as we are doing with Dropbox.
I've been experimenting a bit more on it and I've arrived at this .

EDIT: Files removed , onto another mix fest.

I'm not offended. I simply dont have the time. I've explained my methodology completely and what I hear that sounds fine here isnt coming out there with any sort of clarity and is becoming "completely unrepairable". So why bother. I'm not getting paid and this isnt a client sort of relationship for me. I agree that tweeking what I had would make it 'better' in fidelity and yes, I can hear exactly what it sounds like. I have no issues in my listening environment.
My point was one of making a 'wooly' driven sound reminiscent of tape saturation and for that end I did that. I thought it served the song. Fixing all the little bobbles and skips and all the things John felt he could leave in his original mix added to the charm of the song for me so I made no attempt to repair anything. Seems obvious.

But having others "like" the wooly mix seems to have created a negativity towards it on Chris' part to the point where it became , not a discussion of whats wrong, but a condemnation of 'its beyond repair'. I cant tell you why something that is clear and NOT SMASHED leaves my desk and winds up something it isnt on yours. I was hoping to open the discussion about the difference in MP3 bounces vs. wav and the degredation of the sound on various sites such as soundcloud and the whys of that but cant seem to get past Chris' distaste for my track. Ah well....cest la vie.

My opinion is not changed. Chris' mixes are superior in every way sonically. Its great that a set of tracks can be 'fixed' to sound as if they were recorded at a high-end level. But does it make the song 'better'?? Not from here. So "honestly"....theres a disconnect between the newer redone drum part and the original playing. I'm sure that John played his instruments to a click or a simple drum groove when he recorded and thats one reason I did not attempt to "fix" the drums. While the new drum tracks are sonically 'better' they arent in a groove with the other instruments. There is a groove perse, just not the one that the song was constructed upon.

I love the clarity thats happening. I dont want to spend a multitude of hours trying to match that. Again, I dont think the song actually benefits from it but thats my opinion. A little here and there but clarity with loss of depth and character isnt something I would personally strive for. But then I always look for the emotional content of a song over fidelity unless that fidelity makes the emotions larger and more easily accessible.

As for "smashing" ....I will post once more with nothing on the output of the master and see if that is what is being heard and abhorred. But as far as that I dont see many people getting with the program here and participating. Theres only been four? so far.

I'm not offended but I cant compete with superior gear nor was I interested in that. This is becoming an exercise for Chris to try out his new room and gear and thats fine. I wanted to hear everyone elses mixes but as I said earlier, all I get are the error messages with the dropbox links for the rest except Chris' so I havent been able to.

Since my technology is keeping me from really being able to participate I choose to stop worrying about it. You can interpret that any way you like.

BTW...John's mix is still the best one. He has a handle on what he's trying to do and say in his music and does so without a lot of high-end stuff. Its the way it should be.

Dave, what a bunch of BS. It appears you are very offended. And who cares whether me, you or anyone here makes the song better if it caused you to start tossing mud and lashing out at me for pointing out your track was smashed beyond repair. I'm not here to compete, patronize or to baby you either. I'm here to learn and discuss how to make things "professionally" better ( CD quality) and ask questions openly and honestly with everyone like we would do and EXPECT in class full of engineers seeking to learn, even if it isn't what you want to hear in front of your peers or groupies.
Its clear you can't even have a mature engineering discussion on processing with me, what wooly is ( look it up), HPF etc without being offended by audiokid and his so called clean system that lacks glue. The system doesn't lack anything to do with glue. What a rediculous statement coming from a professional engineer that knows what this is. If it lacks anything, it would be great engineering skill which I am very open and well prepared to be educated 24/7/365. But you are quick to point out and state, "this is what you do" and how you glue sound all together on a first round.
So I question how you did that, when I could clearly hear mass distortion and smashing of the song loaded with mass amounts of bass that any good mastering engineer would turn down.

If a newbie on the collaboration forum presented a track like that, yopu would have made mention of that I'm sure.
But when I do this, you instead blame soundcloud for this and change the song rather than being a stand up guy with all of us and say, oops, I guess I smashed it. The you attack me and say you have no time for this " I'm out of here" but now all of a sudden you are going to try it again just because .... :rolleyes:.

I don't buy any of what you just said. Total BS gone sideways on you.

We're here talking about processing, how to improve a song, if it can be done etc and learn from our techniques. If you or anyone can't discuss things without slamming the door whenever someone points out something that need to be explained, definitely don't play or we will have a big problem.

And no, I'm not offended over your response towards me, I expect it and expect it from all people that are here for other reason than true learning. I am however, now very disappointed in your way of handling an error and me in a fun project. I could see you were and are very frustrated over this entire process and song as soon as you heard it. The song is a challenge even for the best engineers who think they have their shit together. I knew this the moment I heard the track. I saw it as the real deal to discover something long overdue around here.
Whomever steps up to the game here, should be thrilled and open and able to roll with the questions and shots, all in good fun.
You sadly, chose the opposite path and I am used me as the perfect target to try and siderail an escape.

No worries Dave, I'm doing this all for a good reason, we move ... with or without you smoke. There is a contest coming, good engineers lurking so we need to cut through all the BS and ego's and act professional.

Please Dave, just go away if you can't smile here. I will remove any and all BS from this point on.

+++++++++++++++++++

My track

EDIT: Tracks removed for the next Mix fest

is distorting, something happened during my bounce which I'm going to fix..

I'm not screwing around here. Lets test the sonic differences with soundcloud. I'll fix it and do an A/B next.

Cheers!

Here is an A/B of the exact file between Soundcloud and DropBox: They sound pretty close ( at least in regards to what Dave mentioned about reverb being added) so we have that one nipped in the bud.

EDIT: Tracks removed for the next Mix fest

PS
I missed the ending fadeout on the acoustic. The background noise is not my system.

The Soundcloud is to light and dry sounding compared to the wav file....which is no surprise.
The wav file is much clearer and defined. But I don't think there's anything to glean from that.
We know the quality of MP3 (which I assume is Soundcloud's method) is not very faithful to the original.
Bandcamp I believe allows you to upload wav or FLAC files which may be a better test of online listening systems.

Do you think if this was mastered to CD or vinyl either of those would be more faithful?

I was just reading the article about Neil Young and his interest in developing a higher quality format for this very problem, and to me this is where were at. Neil like many people in the industry realize this is a problem with going backwards in terms of audio quality.

The public doesn't seem to care or mind listening to MP3's because they're small, fit in their phones and ipods quickly and easily and they probably don't really know the difference.
When I was young it was records, then cassettes, then CD's.
Cassettes were pretty good, but I never bought produced cassettes, they sounded terrible! I always had the album on my turntable with my nice stereo system if I wanted to listen critically. But the cassette let me record and play those records on my car stereo (Blaupunkt....oooh). When I got my first JVC CD player which I paid $600 for, I bought Supertramp on CD and it blew me away on my nice stereo! At that time you had to go to a music store to even find CD's. There were very few out yet.

So maybe MP3's will go the way of cassettes and "wav players" will take over.
Or maybe some completely new type of media will surface.
At this point in my life I have three records, 20 commercial reel to reel tapes, (I know weird huh) a box of 100 homemade cassettes, 100's of commercial CD's in a rack collecting dust and 1000's of MP3's on my computer.
If I don't think about it too much the MP3's sound pretty darn good and I don't have to do anything but click my mouse.

I'm with you on CD's and Cassettes. I lost interest buying them because they no longer seemed like an investment. Albums had a timeless memory and they sounded warm. Tape stretched and wore out. CD are the next best thing but they do have a sound.

Something that I've noticed. Electronic music sounds way better compressed than acoustic music. Have you noticed this. And the level you can get with electronic music is huge compared.

I also wonder about songs recorded ten years ago sounding pretty close to the volume of modern pop radio today. Have you noticed this? I'm starting to wonder if we should be less interested in brick walling as much. The radio stations must use expanders for the older songs. I think I remember Remy mentioning something about this?