Ya, much better Clark. Now you are getting it! thumb
The snare is much better too, best mix indeed.

Now to pick it apart, the bottom end is still a bit weak as in not punching enough for me. This could be the result of a few things and one important one which is personal taste. In you studio ( the way you hear it) , is the kick just there, tucked in the mix so you need to listen for it or is it quite full sounding?
And that being said, I think you need to just sit back and enjoy some praise for doing such a great job!

audiokid, post: 398764 wrote: The snare is much better too, best mix indeed.

I think you're listing to the wrong song. Entertwined doesn't have a snare drum. :/

But thanks for the kind words! :P

Sorry, I was listening to I Am Yours Mix1 and comparing it to Your Majesty. hehe, Okay, I'll listen to Entertwined right now. :)

Ya! That's really good! That's exactly the sound I'm looking for! Best ever. And what a beautiful voice and song. Tell her we said so!
Now you are sounding 2013 and this is choice to send out to a label.

The vocal is just a touch close in proximity. Just a touch! You can fix this easily by pulling a dB or two around 300 to 400 where its jumping out occasionally. This is a common area where the Female Vox is dominant. But it so subtle I wouldn't want you to screw it up. You can find it by using a notch curve and sweeping while boosting excessively to see where the honk is most dominant, then stop there and open the bell curve a bit and pull it out a few db. Does this make sense?

Beautiful song and mix!

If you don't quite understand me ( which isn't the first time someone went huh, lol) Fab has it here but it cost $22. Its a great tutorial though. [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.puremix…"]How To Eq Vocals - pureMix Online Tutorials: Mixing, Recording, Producing Audio and Music[/]="http://www.puremix…"]How To Eq Vocals - pureMix Online Tutorials: Mixing, Recording, Producing Audio and Music[/]

Someone may chime in here and explain more. I'm sure a lot of us are going to like this mix! I'll listen a few more times this week. This was my first opinion and that is the one that counts most.

audiokid, post: 398770 wrote: The vocal is just a touch close in proximity. Just a touch! You can fix this easily by pulling a dB or two around 300 to 400 where its jumping out occasionally. This is a common area where the Female Vox is dominant. But it so subtle I wouldn't want you to screw it up. You can find it by using a notch curve and sweeping while boosting excessively to see where the honk is most dominant, then stop there and open the bell curve a bit and pull it out a few db. Does this make sense?

Yep that makes perfect sense. I use that technique all the time. I'll try it out on those low mids.

audiokid, post: 398770 wrote: And what a beautiful voice and song. Tell her we said so!

I will! She is so great. She tracked these vocals in probably under an hour and it was our first time working together. So amazing.

Oooh , she is a winner for this sound. How old is she? Did she write that song?

She is 17 years old. She didn't write this one, no. All of these songs I have been posting were written by my client, Ken, but once we tracked the music he liked them so much that he didn't want to sing on them! lol. He found singers that had better and more suitable voices for each song.

How old would you have guessed that she is? lol

2.37 string squeak. The only reason I noticed it is because the rest of the guitar part is played so cleanly. Do you want to remove it? Adobe Audition does that stuff easily.

Question about the vocal, which is very airy. Do you want it that airy? Are you aiming at that? I think it fits the song because it's devotional and airy is sort of... angelic. If it was me, I'd be trying to get it as clear as it is now, but with more body. But that's me. Just a thought.

Good stuff, a good listen.

Hey Youse! Glad you liked it. :) I don't really pay much attention to string squeaks. But maybe I should. Do you know of any plugins that I could use within my DAW that can do that kind of work?

youse, post: 398901 wrote: Question about the vocal, which is very airy. Do you want it that airy? Are you aiming at that? I think it fits the song because it's devotional and airy is sort of... angelic. If it was me, I'd be trying to get it as clear as it is now, but with more body. But that's me. Just a thought.

Angelic was actually the same word I was thinking of to describe the vocals I was aiming for. More body might be good though. What do you mean by that, and how would I get more body?

-Clark

Personally, I'd leave the string squeaks because I am (no, the world is) starving for real. But it wouldn't hurt removing those either. The older I get, the less I edit things like that.

I ran this through my rig, to look to see if the low mids were in fact what I would tweak. I remixed it pulling out 220 to 280 by 1.5db I would even pull more out after listening again. Its a bit too heavy in that area.
I thought the little tweak I made, made a difference to the voice but it didn't help the music though. I would rather not pull that out on the rest but it was already mastered so it is what it is. I would remix it again and do what I suggest. She sounds great and you did a wonderful job here IMHO. :) Wow.

My critique: The vocals were recorded just a bit too close which is what we're hearing. Proximity which added extra low mids.
I also added a Bricasti on the mix to space it out as it was a bit too dry for me. I can send the file to you? Once you hear them, I will remove it off soundcloud.

here is the example: What do you think?
[MEDIA=soundcloud]audiokid/entertwined-remix

EDIT: And a bit more removed after I posted this so my bottom comment are not as valid now. ( I like this better!) Mastering this was a breeze. So it may be ready the way you have it too. Tweak the 1/4 bar vocal and she may be so close to done!
[MEDIA=soundcloud]audiokid/entertwined2

Removing the low mid lost some volume on the vocal, I would be sure to increase this a bit now. I also notices a phasy thing with the guitar. Could be comb filtering. Reflecting from the room.
I love the violin. Its sound real. Is it? I would like to hear a bit more of the instruments on the left side?

Again, I'm just being picky on that, its only taste from this point on. The song is a clear winner. I'd send this out for publishing and get her signed.

PS, right at the start ( I bow before) her voice is low, if you could lift that, perfect.

Thoughts?

You're mastered version sounds really nice. More clarity and definition for sure. I'll try some of those changes. I'll definitely bring those first few words out a little. I already pulled out about 3dB of the low mids in her voice before you posted this, but the mix I have up on my website is still the old one. I think you might be right that the vox were tracked a tad too close.

As far as editing the string squeak, that's not an area that I am going to get in to at this point. To me, it makes it sound more human and authentic. Not necessarily a bad thing in my eyes. I would like to try removing things like that just for the fun of it someday, but I'm not prepared to pay $300 or whatever Adobe Audition costs to do it. Maybe the next version of Cubase will have a tool like that built in.

audiokid, post: 398924 wrote: I also notices a phasy thing with the guitar. Could be comb filtering. Reflecting from the room. I love the violin. Its sound real. Is it?

I'm not sure what you're talking about with the phase problem. I'm probably not quite there yet knowledge-wise. The violin and cello are real. It was pretty funny. My client brought them in on a Saturday afternoon with hardly any notice. They had never heard any of the songs before, and I had never recorded strings before. But they were amazing and tracked four songs in only a few hours. It was a great afternoon, except for when my next door neighbour decided to trim his hedges right outside my windown with a gas-motored hedge saw. :/ We were forced to take a long, unplanned break lol.

I have a new mix with all those changes uploading right now. Check back to the same website ten minutes from this post and I would love to hear what you guys think on "Intertwined Mix3!"

Pax Caritas et lol,
-Clark

the mix sounds quite good, it's refreshing to work w/ talented people eh? my listening area isn't accurate enough for me to make anything but broad statements, my studio doesn't have internet. but i'll take audiokid's word on the low cut, i think subtlety is the key.

not trying to mess with a really good song, but i would try some harmonies towards the later part chorus's. it's definatley a commercial pop move, and i dunno if it would work, but i would try it. her voice stacked could be awsome. there's a nice intimate feel to the song, so i dunno if i'd really want to mess w/ that by incorporating harmonies, but i would spend the time to at least try it.

fingersqueaks are part of the performance. maybe it's cuz editing is 'work' to me, but keep em. little off-putting things spark interest. i edit out mistakes only.

To echo and add more on what kmetal suggested,

I hear a Cindy Loper Time after Time kind of thing here for some background drums. Maybe half way through, and soft kick, side stick and cabasa/shaker coming in.

But I love it just like it is too. Find a worship label and send them a mix.

ClarkJaman, post: 398917 wrote: Hey Youse! Glad you liked it. :) I don't really pay much attention to string squeaks. But maybe I should. Do you know of any plugins that I could use within my DAW that can do that kind of work?

I use Audition - it's got a tool called the spot healing brush which is fairly magical - it's very good at removing unwanted noise and filling the gap with whatever comes before and after it. There are programs that are better at this than Audition, but nothing cheaper which is as good as Audition, I believe. Having said that, although I pointed out the string squeak (because it sort of jumped out at me due to the cleanness of the rest of the guitar playing), I actually tend to side with audiokid when he says 'the older I get, the less I edit things like that'. I just wanted to point it out in case you'd heard the mix so many times you'd stopped hearing the squeak.

ClarkJaman, post: 398917 wrote: Angelic was actually the same word I was thinking of to describe the vocals I was aiming for. More body might be good though. What do you mean by that, and how would I get more body?

Well, I don't know how you EQ'ed it, but I'd be looking at reducing the highs a touch if you put a high shelf on it, and I'd be looking at setting the highpass at a slightly lower frequency. Which is kind of ironic, because audiokid's recommending *cutting* more low mids. I'd tend to try his suggestions before mine. :cool:

I thought you did a very nice job of recording and mixing the song. I personally was not really pleased with her vocal sound the way you mixed it. It's not airy, it's harsh and it's supposed to be devotional. So it needs to have a little smoother sound to it. You could use more compression and a slower release time. I don't care about what year it is, I care about how I perceive the sound and how it moves me. And the harsh high airy sounding vocal just makes me want to stop listening to this song. She doesn't even sit right in the mix due to a lack of dynamics processor or not doing it properly with too fast an attack time and look ahead engaged. She is lacking all peak dynamics. They are over controlled just as religion does to most people. And I don't find anything inspirational about that vocal sound. This could be so much better.

Those little guitar string squeaks are natural sounding. It's something that all guitars do. So why eliminate an element of something real? It's organic. It happens. It's part of the sound that instrument makes. You're trying to control God. And I'm not up with that as much. Even though I'm not a believer.

I'm not as much concerned about the airiness as I am about the warmth. That's the sound gets deep down inside your spirit not those high frequencies. That does not denote faithfulness. The substance denotes the faithfulness. That's all the meat and all the fat and that which is real.

Just my observations and how I perceived it. Which has nothing to do with Lucky 13.
Mx. Remy Ann David

RemyRAD, post: 398966 wrote: I thought you did a very nice job of recording and mixing the song. I personally was not really pleased with her vocal sound the way you mixed it. It's not airy, it's harsh and it's supposed to be devotional. So it needs to have a little smoother sound to it. You could use more compression and a slower release time. I don't care about what year it is, I care about how I perceive the sound and how it moves me. And the harsh high airy sounding vocal just makes me want to stop listening to this song. She doesn't even sit right in the mix due to a lack of dynamics processor or not doing it properly with too fast an attack time and look ahead engaged. She is lacking all peak dynamics. They are over controlled just as religion does to most people. And I don't find anything inspirational about that vocal sound. This could be so much better.

Those little guitar string squeaks are natural sounding. It's something that all guitars do. So why eliminate an element of something real? It's organic. It happens. It's part of the sound that instrument makes. You're trying to control God. And I'm not up with that as much. Even though I'm not a believer.

I'm not as much concerned about the airiness as I am about the warmth. That's the sound gets deep down inside your spirit not those high frequencies. That does not denote faithfulness. The substance denotes the faithfulness. That's all the meat and all the fat and that which is real.

Just my observations and how I perceived it. Which has nothing to do with Lucky 13.
Mx. Remy Ann David

The whole time I was reading this I was waiting for you to mention that you are an atheist, but it never came! You're slipping Remy, you're not staying true to your atheism! Haha :P

I say I'm an atheist but really I'm just a conscientious objector I think? If I can't see or hear a difference, I simply remain a skeptic. And even when I do, it just makes me want to record more music. So maybe I too have the rapture?

I like recording gospel music and things like the Verdi Requiem. A large part of my recording career has been recording inspirational and liturgical music. Which of course is the most universal of all languages. Certainly easy to understand what everybody is singing about. So there must be something to it? And I enjoyed working for the Foundry United Methodist Church, for a couple of years. Lincoln went there. So did Truman and the Clintons. And I really liked the senior pastors sermons. Like his even better than many of the guests pastors and they were importing. I like folks that believe. As long as they don't distorted for their own needs rife with hatred and discrimination. Screw that. LOL. I mean I really don't care for extremists. So what am I doing here? Don't we all want extremely good audio? Sure we do. We're all extremists. We're the best kind.

I'm extremely confused as usual.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Hey guys. I liked the way this song turned out so much that I decided to film a simple music video for it. Thanks for your all of your help in putting the finishing touches on the mix:
[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.youtube…"]Intertwined- Janaya Trudel with Ken Yasinski and Clark Jaman - YouTube[/]="http://www.youtube…"]Intertwined- Janaya Trudel with Ken Yasinski and Clark Jaman - YouTube[/]