As always, I love your style and musicianship. (y) Very nice.

I can't really get my head in the bass because the song is full of phase shifting and pumping. Its way to premature to even be concerned with the bass freq right now. Get the balances and mix up front, drop all the compression and start over. That's my advice.

The pumping starts immediately after the 33sec mark. Before that, its not as aggressive, the beginning sounds more natural in comparison to the rest of the song.

Its sounds like there is a lot of sidechain or multi compression in all instruments?
I'm wondering why this is happening because I've heard this effect in a few other tracks of yours, but you eventually sort that out. I can't help but feel for you because it can't be fun at the final mixing.

To avoid me from going crazy, this is how I try and avoid what I am hearing in this mix.
(What works for one guy, doesn't always work for the next so... )

(Shop talk edited a few times):
Generally speaking, I avoid processing all mic tracks until its mixing time". I am big on waiting to mix or process all vocals and instruments "I plan on keeping" until its mixing time. Otherwise, start over and redo everything you can, start to finish and then mix it.

I believe processing microphone tracks while still recording and building a song (especially if it includes VSTi) creates a pieced together sound full of sonic problems that are often not even a problem when it comes to mixing.
When we are adjusting vocals to a mix that is being created and processed over a example week, what we hear in our head is far from accurate to the translating mix. You will likely shrink and screw up the freq's to tracks that don't even need an EQ or at least eqing where we are eqing and compressing.

As far as bass, the bass is a bit shy, but there. Nothing is jumping out. It all sounds pretty smooth so I think I wouldn't worry about that right now. I would sort out whats creating the phase and pumping.

I think your overall balance and mix perspective is at a good starting point. When you get the pumping effect sorting, I think you'll have an excellent song, Donny.

As always, I love your style and musicianship. (y) Very nice.

Shop Talk :) With much kindness and respect.

I can't really get my head in the bass because the song is full of phase shifting and pumping. Its way to premature to be concerned with the bass freq right now. Get the balances and mix up front, drop all the compression and processing and start over. That's my advice.

The pumping starts immediately after the 33sec mark. Before that, its not as aggressive, the beginning sounds more natural in comparison to the rest of the song.

Its sounds like there is a lot of sidechain or multi compression in all instruments?
I'm wondering why this is happening because I've heard this effect in a few other tracks of yours, but you eventually sort that out. I can't help but feel for you because it can't be fun at the final mixing.

To avoid me from going crazy, this is how I try and avoid what I am hearing in this mix.
(What works for one guy, doesn't always work for the next so... )

Generally speaking, I avoid processing all mic tracks until its mixing time". I am big on waiting to mix or process all vocals and instruments "I plan on keeping" until its mixing time. Otherwise, start over and redo everything you can, start to finish and then mix it.

I believe processing microphone tracks while still recording and building a song (especially if it includes VSTi) creates a pieced together sound full of sonic problems that are often not even a problem when it comes to mixing.
When we are adjusting vocals to a mix that is being created and processed over a example week, what we hear in our head is far from accurate to the translating mix. You will likely shrink and screw up the freq's to tracks that don't even need an EQ or at least eqing where we are eqing and compressing.

As far as bass, the bass is a bit shy, but there. Nothing in regards to standing waves or bass humps are jumping out. Your freq balance sounds pretty smooth so I think I wouldn't worry about the bass right now. I would sort out whats creating the phase, pumping and whatever is keeping you from hearing the extreme drops in volumes. Hopefully my critique helps.

When you get the pumping effect sorting, I think you'll have an excellent song, Donny.

Hm, I'm hearing the low end of the bass stepping on the mix. The bass has a big bump centered on 60Hz and it has no definition. Maybe compression/limiting on the master bus is conflicting with that LF and causing the mentioned pumping.

audiokid, post: 447622, member: 1 wrote: As far as bass, the bass is a bit shy, but there. Nothing in regards to standing waves or bass humps are jumping out.

I'm not hearing the phase issues on this that you are, Chris... I'm not saying they're not there, this is exactly why I wanted other people to critique it, and you were one of the biggies because I know you have a very well-balanced space and monitor system.. what I'm saying is that I'm not hearing what you are, neither through speakers or phones... which is either a reflection on my ability to hear and mix, or, the room I'm in is so badly skewed that I'd be better off using pro grade headphones.

FWIW, there is a phase effect on some of the backing vocals, this was intentional... is this maybe part of what you are picking up on? Or you're saying the mix is out of phase? I checked the mix with a phase correlation meter, and it's wider than usual because of the M-S acoustic guitar, but it's still within acceptable range. Summing to mono isn't making anything totally disappear...

bouldersound, post: 447626, member: 38959 wrote: Hm, I'm hearing the low end of the bass stepping on the mix. The bass has a big bump centered on 60Hz and it has no definition. Maybe compression/limiting on the master bus is conflicting with that LF and causing the mentioned pumping.

So you are hearing the pumping, too? I have to admit, I'm not... is it a compression-type pumping?

The increased low end... you are hearing it, Chris is not. I think my problem is the room I'm in - the bass sounds balanced and defined through my system. Of course, that means absolutely zip if it's not translating well to other pro systems. LOL

I'd thought of running a mix with cans - man, I hate to mix that way, but would be willing to try - but I'm not sure I'd be any better off, maybe even worse, as the headphones I have are only cue-grade AKG's ( 241's), and IMO, sufficient only for tracking.

I think I'm gonna have to find another space to work in, or, invest in a pair of mega-uber-sell-a-kidney-to-afford-headphones. :-(

Bass and Drums only, mixed through HP's:
IGTS SAMP DRUMS BASS RO FEB 19 2017.mp3

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files IGTS SAMP DRUMS BASS RO FEB 19 2017.mp3 (2.2 MB) 

I've listened to it in my studio a few times now and I have to agree with the sentiment. I think that the bottom end is overpowering your mix, Donny. It's also sucking out the clarity on the other instruments and voices. I would tame the bass and you should hear the other tracks come alive. I'm not sure if it's a frequency thing or it's just too loud.

Very nice song BTW.

Cheers,

Peter.

Okay...
So I did a headphone mix ( AKG K240 M's, Austria), and I tamed the bass back in both frequency and in volume. I shelved the low end that Boulder (bouldersound ) mentioned there being a big 60Hz hump in the first mix I posted, so I tamed that back, and also brought down the volume by -2db.
(BTW, the mix sounds completely different in the cans than it does in the room).
I used a commercial mix ( In The House Of Stone And Light, Martin Paige) as a mix reference on this for low end and kick and bass relationship, in both volume and tone, because that's the type of mix I am shooting for.

Here's the most current mix:

I'LL GO TO SLEEP NEW BASS EQ FEB 20 2017.mp3

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files I'LL GO TO SLEEP NEW BASS EQ FEB 20 2017.mp3 (7.7 MB) 

wow... just listened through my nearfields... the vocal sounds way hot, especially at the end... I'm gonna have to do some volume envelope work on that - I hate to hit it with the amount of compression it would need to tame it...

Man, I SUCK at this. Holy Crap... when did I become a hack?
I wonder if Walmart needs greeters...

DonnyThompson, post: 447635, member: 46114 wrote: wow... just listened through my nearfields... the vocal sounds way hot...

That's normal. The lack of cross bleed tends to de-emphasize centered tracks so one tends to mix them hot relative to panned tracks. If I have to mix on headphones I like to do it with the mono button on.

At this time in the mix... I would prefer to hear this with just you and the guitar (decluttered). Get that right and it will not only improve all things that matter but it will also evolve this discussion into what I think will be a very inspiring and informative discussion that could quite possibly launch us towards something very positive.

In fact, I think we should start suggesting more acoustic work (or just the bed tracks) and make that a trend for RO.
Again, get the basics right and everything improves.

There are collaboration opportunities that could go way beyond this as well.

audiokid, post: 447638, member: 1 wrote: There are collaboration opportunities that could go way beyond this as well.

This thread got me thinking about that. How about a mix sharing sub forum? I propose using Reaper as a common DAW so mix projects could be shared in their entirety, right down to the tiniest detail. Instead of all this talk about "what I do is..." you could see exactly what was done and hear the results.

audiokid, post: 447638, member: 1 wrote: At this time in the mix... I would prefer to hear this with just you and the guitar (decluttered). Get that right and it will not only improve all things that matter but it will also evolve this discussion into what I think will be a very inspiring and informative discussion that could quite possibly launch us towards something very positive.

In fact, I think we should start suggesting more acoustic work (or just the bed tracks) and make that a trend for RO.
Again, get the basics right and everything improves.

There are collaboration opportunities that could go way beyond this as well.

I have no problems doing that... and if you think it might help the forum, then I'm even more for it....
But I'm gonna need to get a better LV track first before you guys really dig in. This vocal take is pitchy - which is one of those things that just happens to drive me crazy, especially when it comes to my own performances, and, I've heard a bit of clipping on one word, I must have hit it harder than the others. It's not a post-gain thing, it was apparently tracked that way.

But, at least for now...

well, I was gonna upload a guitar and vocal mix, but I got an error message saying "security error occurred, please refresh and try again", which I did, but still no dice, it's not letting me upload...

bouldersound, post: 447639, member: 38959 wrote: This thread got me thinking about that. How about a mix sharing sub forum? I propose using Reaper as a common DAW so mix projects could be shared in their entirety, right down to the tiniest detail. Instead of all this talk about "what I do is..." you could see exactly what was done and hear the results.

Good suggestions for Reaper.
I'm also suggesting this so we start hearing whats important in a mix, which I think, simply hearing a vocal and instrument in "as best we can do (for what we have) capture" would put a lot of guessing to rest.
How many times have we been told, if you want to get signed, keep it simple, do it well and that will go a lot farther than something that has all the production added after. As a producer, I don't always want to hear it all done as well.
Simple, truthful recordings will make us all stronger and the better recordists, mixers and masters.

Personally, I would like to hear recordings that are truthful composition consisting of a room mic, vocal mic and instrument. We should be able to make solid recommendations from excellent MP3 examples that could inspire all of us..

foreshadow

I am looking into sponsors so there could be some intensives if we actually get this rolling.
We would all benefit from this.

I also see this heading towards a global collaboration which at that point, would be open game to use whatever we like. But for starters, we need to get the bed tracks sonically solid and the core of RO on the same page . There is way too much distraction with production.
I think Donny's track would be the perfect start because he is confident, professional and very capable.

audiokid, post: 447664, member: 1 wrote: can you try the upload again

I'LL GO TO SLEEP LV & AG ONLY FEB 21 2017.mp3

I also reduced the BR from 320 to 256; I had done that before I saw your post above.
I can try and upload a 320 again, but this 256 obviously worked.

-d.

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files I'LL GO TO SLEEP LV & AG ONLY FEB 21 2017.mp3 (6.1 MB) 

DonnyThompson, post: 447635, member: 46114 wrote: wow... just listened through my nearfields... the vocal sounds way hot, especially at the end... I'm gonna have to do some volume envelope work on that - I hate to hit it with the amount of compression it would need to tame it...

Man, I SUCK at this. Holy Crap... when did I become a hack?
I wonder if Walmart needs greeters...

Actually, the vocal seems okay on my system. I like the basic tones and arrangement.

The one thing that stood out was that 60Hz peak. I've compared your mix to various sources on the same system: CD (Best of Steely Dan), FM, some stuff I'm working on. I think you've got a null in your mix position right on that frequency. I put a 12dB 2/3 octave notch there and it helped a lot. It's primarily in the bass, but also in the kick and perhaps toms.

A bit more examination shows me that there are two peaks, one at 60Hz and one at 100Hz. Cutting each by 7dB seemed to improve on my above eq setting. I suspect they're both room issues. Do you ever get up and walk the room while your mix is playing? I learn all sorts of stuff that way.

bouldersound, post: 447688, member: 38959 wrote: I suspect they're both room issues. Do you ever get up and walk the room while your mix is playing? I learn all sorts of stuff that way.

bouldersound :

First of all, I really appreciate you taking the time to do a frequency analysis on this.

There's no doubt that the room I'm in is a huge factor - I've noticed both hot spots and weak spots in various low end freq's. If I had to guesstimate I'd say you're right on the money with the two frequencies you mentioned.
I have no idea if bass trapping would even help with this or not (@Brien Holcombe ); to the degree where the room would eventually become ideal. Even if trapping made it a little better, that's still not enough - for me - I need an accurate environment. I can't be "guessing" or "getting it close enough".

As far as walking the room, yes, I have. I can move towards the door, which is behind me ( and the mix position) by about 13', and hear all kinds of low end - I'm guessing it's the door acting as a "trap" ( I don't know the Sabine value of an open door) ...but as I move closer to the position of the nearfields, the low end attenuates. It doesn't disappear, but it does attenuate - a lot. I have not yet taken an actual measurement on the amount of attenuation/boost.
At present, I've yet to find any actual full nulls.

Thanks again for taking the time. I really do appreciate it. ;)

-d.

I've done a ton of mixing in challenging rooms. It's a pain but you can mix through it if you learn the room, find out what different positions in the room do. For example, in one control room I use there's a spot that reveals everything below 200Hz. That knowledge combined with standard listening levels lets me calibrate the lows better than just mixing from the chair. Then I check my mixes at home where the bass response is completely different (more accurate, actually) and references are just a click of the remote away. I would suggest putting on some commercially released recordings you like and walk the room. Find out what each different position of the room tells you about those mixes and apply it to yours.

I do think bass trapping will help tremendously. We just put a couple up in another control room I use, and it made a substantial difference. There was less of a difference between the sound there and the sound at home. I had to retrain myself to compensate less for the bass issues.

DonnyThompson I don't know how I can help you. My strong suit is based on rooms that I know a lot about....and I don't here.

Open windows and or doors can help...obviously it comes with exterior intrusion but you have to weight that.

Mid and low frequency treatment seldom hurt. Mix position as you guys have discussed is important...and elevation in the structure can not be over stated...meaning the farther you get from the earth the more flanking can penetrate your environment....like a second story room.

But even a first story floor can present lf energy just not at the level of a floor 10 feet higher.

Let's pursue this...I want to help you.

Great song Donny !
Im listening to 20 feb mix on my ear buds and the bass is still masking the detail in other tracks .
Vocals sound perfect to me ,( good character ) not pitchy , they are well within allowances in my hearing.
Once you put your ambience on the vocals it ll sound sweet ( assuming your gonna do that ).
One more off topic , have you got a tamborine there, i think you need to play the real thing there :)
look forward to hearing newer mixes of this (n)

Have you tried EarPods ?, they must be cheap as chips over there .
Push them right in your ear and the bass is great ( Im trying to learn to mix with them )...lol

DonnyThompson, post: 447666, member: 46114 wrote: I'LL GO TO SLEEP LV & AG ONLY FEB 21 2017.mp3

I also reduced the BR from 320 to 256; I had done that before I saw your post above.
I can try and upload a 320 again, but this 256 obviously worked.

-d.

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

This version sounds much better.

Brien Holcombe, post: 447736, member: 48996 wrote: and elevation in the structure can not be over stated...meaning the farther you get from the earth the more flanking can penetrate your environment....like a second story room.

I didn't know this Brien... again I've learned something totally new here on RO.
The room is indeed on the second floor. Isolation doesn't really matter to me much, as I'm not doing a whole lot of recording, short of vocals and acoustic guitar, which I can do in the very early morning hours. It's the mixing part that's important.
This is the room I PMd you about a few months ago, with the canted ceiling. I'm mixing on the low side of that pitch, with the ceiling ramping up behind me.
There are low end hot spots and weak spots in the room. I haven't yet found a complete null.
There is a closet behind me - on the wall with the high side of the ceiling, that isn't really being used... I could fill that with roxul, and I could add a cloud (OC 703) above my mix position as well.
Thanks for being willing to help. I really do appreciate it... but I've also prepared myself for the possibility that this is one of "those" rooms that perhaps simply won't ever sound right.
-d

audiokid dvdhawk pcrecord Boswell Kurt Foster @Brien Holcombe kmetal , ( et al)

Update:

Okay, so here's the first mix I've done with the new treatment in place; mixed to MP3/250kbps through the Presonus E8's.

It sounds better to me...here...with what I feel is a nicely defined bass and overall low end.... but that's not what counts. What counts is how it sounds to you.

All comments welcome, of course.

I'LL GO TO SLEEP PRESONUS ERIS MIX MP3 MARCH 3 2017.mp3

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files I'LL GO TO SLEEP PRESONUS ERIS MIX MP3 MARCH 3 2017.mp3 (6.1 MB) 

That's a big improvement in my opinion. I think the low-end seems a lot tighter and more focused. To me, the 'bass guitar' is about perfect once the drums kick in, but maybe a pinch too loud before the drums join in.

I'm not critical listening, but while driving I listened to this and it does sound 100% better now, Donny. You are getting it now!
The bass guitar still sounds a bit heavy to me. Going on instinct, (not seeing it on a spectral graph) (bass guitar) sounds a bit thick and loud in the 250hz range. I would pull a bell down there rather than dropping the volume.

Marco and I (please correct me if I am wrong, Marco) we both have mentioned using a sub to add volume that will force us to reduce more in a mix. Meaning, even though I don't recommend using a sub in small rooms (or at all for that matter), you can use them to help do the opposite.

Much like I will use a monitor that has exaggerated top end so I don't add it in a mix.

What are you doing different beside the bass treating? It sounds like you are mixing better, not so processed now? I like what you are doing now.

I like the hook, "sooner the better" ;)

audiokid, post: 448210, member: 1 wrote: What are you doing different beside the bass treating? It sounds like you are mixing better, not so processed now? I like what you are doing now.

I like the hook, "sooner the better" ;)

I really believe it's the treatment, Chris.

It's letting me hear things that I wasn't able to hear before, so I suppose in that regard it is helping me to mix better and make better decisions.
I didn't really remove (or add) anything, other than through EQ - I just did the EQ all over again on the tracks, and adjusted some volumes along the way.
I think the big problem was pretty much the "classic" problem that all home studios tend to face - if the low end in the room is uneven, it's not just the bass in the mix that suffers, it's everything else too, because those lower frequency peaks and nulls will definitely mess with other things too - vocals, guitars, etc...

:)

audiokid, post: 448209, member: 1 wrote: The bass guitar still sounds a bit heavy to me. Going on instinct, (not seeing it on a spectral graph) (bass guitar) sounds a bit thick and loud in the 250hz range. I would pull a bell down there rather than dropping the volume.

By how much do you think? And with a very tight Q, or wider range? I know you were going by your car speakers... I'm just looking for a guesstimate so I can at least try it and post it. :)

dvdhawk, post: 448207, member: 36047 wrote: To me, the 'bass guitar' is about perfect once the drums kick in, but maybe a pinch too loud before the drums join in.

Should I pull the actual volume back at this section... or do you think Chris's suggestion of pulling 250hz down across the mix would fix it?

Thanks guys. :)

I went ahead and made a few alterations:

dvdhawk : pulled bass down by -2db in intro

audiokid pulled 250hz on bass across the mix by -3db, Q=8.5

I'LL GO TO SLEEP PRESONUS ERIS MIX MP3 MARCH 4 2017.mp3

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files I'LL GO TO SLEEP PRESONUS ERIS MIX MP3 MARCH 4 2017.mp3 (7.6 MB) 

I've been reduced to an iPhone since my hiatus last year so I can't tell anything under like 250-300hz.

That said I'm familiar w the phones sound in general for overall impressions.

I'm hearing the top one sound fuller overall, in a good way, with the most recent mix w the low cuts sounding a bit too thin.

Maybe split the difference and only cut 1 and 1.5 db?

Or maybe a different freq so the song retains a bit of warmth on tiny speakers. ??

I'm getting a bit of a Paul Simon vibe to the mix. Fun stuff.

excellent. The bass and drums are much improved.

I think you would be wise (in future projects to where you are recording voice) to now find a dead way to record your vocals as I hear comb filtering. I'd personally track vocals as dry as I could and use your DAW reverb. Its starting to sound very pro.

Just for conversation.

(Edited)
When I have a mix close like this, its where a Pultec MEQ -5 or Bax shines on the center of a (M/S) matrix. This is where I switch off DAW 1 master buss and pass the stems over the DAW2 and begin fitting in the lower mids of the overall mix, possibly including the mono bass from 250 down and reducing subs on the side (M/S).
I do a shuffling here and there of freq on the DAW 1 stems while mixing those stems into the DAW2 master until its as good as you can get it. I suppose one could do the same without DAW2 using the same approach.
Meaning, using Samplitude's M/S master section with a Pultec type curve on the middle of the (M/S).
At the very end of the master chain I will add a smidgen of compression and even a master reverb to complete the acoustic space.

When I get it to where its right, thats when the ME comes in to finish it off. (I'm not saying you need to do this) I'm simply sharing a bit of what I do.

audiokid, post: 448269, member: 1 wrote: I think you would be wise (in future projects to where you are recording voice) to now find a dead way to record your vocals as I hear comb filtering. I'd personally track vocals as dry as I could and use your DAW reverb. Its starting to sound very pro.

Thanks Chris. I'm hoping that the new treatment will also improve recorded tracks in that room -like with vocals especially. The vocals on this version were recorded before the treatment was put into place.
I'm also converting a laptop into a 2nd DAW for capture. I'm hopeful that this will also improve my overall sound.

what do expect to gain from the second DAW for capture ? . Trying to understand this concept benefit.

Well, Chris or Bos could explain it far better than I can, but basically, ( in very basic terms) it's supposed to alleviate the "bottleneck" of normal rendering ITB, which, according to those who have used the 2-DAW capture method, sounds much better, as there is no internal rendering where potential issues can occur, like phase problems, potential glitches due to cpu overtaxing, etc.

This is not a clock-coupled system, so there won't be any need for sync-ing two digital devices; rather, I would simply come out of my current i-o, and into another ( 2channel) i-o assigned to the "capture" computer, which can be a desktop, laptop, etc., and that will be loaded with something like SoundForge, Wavelab, etc., cued to record.

All that being said... I have no idea how much it will help my own particular situation, ( my go to SR is 44.1, BR is 32 Float - quantized down to 24 for 2 track .wav files) but since I already have a decent laptop ( besides my main desktop workstation), I can't see where it would hurt, either. ;)

I'm really not the guy to go into the finite tech details of this... I'm still trying to wrap my head around a lot of it myself...

Chris ( audiokid ) or Bos ( Boswell ) would be able to answer your questions far better than I could.
It's been discussed endlessly around here over the last few years... you could probably pull up more than a few threads about it. ;)

d.

You get increased advantage from a two-box process if you are either or both of (a) putting an analog process such as stem mixing or inserting compression/limiting in the stereo link between Box1 and Box2, or (b) converting sampling rates between source and 2-track mix target, e.g. mixing down from 96KHz tracks to 44.1KHz CD standard. If neither of these applies, then you still get an advantage coming from your way of thinking about the mix-capture process.

This is an extract from what I wrote in October last year:

Usually the point of the uncoupled two-box method is that you capture the mix as accurately as possible at the destination sampling rate. .....Keep in your mind the model of a stereo microphone being recorded by box 2. Everthing up to that point is concentrated on generating the virtual stereo microphone output.

Believe me, the stereo microphone model in my head helped my mixes by allowing me to separate out and concentrate only on the things that were important at each stage.

I will look up an older thread on this. I think there was one a couple of years back where Chris was talking about the 2 DAW 2 computer technique.(y)

The second mix bass sits better in my headphones , although I agree with Kyle about maybe split the difference ,

When the drums etc come in , there is a slight disconnect for me ( 1 the intro guitar is nice and flowing and the introduction of the drums wants it to be more straight vs the the lovely swing it has )
( 2 the intro guitar needs to have more weight , maybe reverbs that help the transition )
After listening again I think the swing vs straight culprit is the hi hat in the first verse , Does the 16 hat need to be there in the first verse?. And also does the hi hat need to be played 16s when the ride
is also being played ? Im a bit knit pickey there but thats my 2 cents
Love everything else and the bass is stand out for me ,:)

dvdhawk audiokid pcrecord kmetal Kurt Foster Smashh @Brien Holcombe Boswell - or anyone else who wants to take a listen and comment.

UPDATE
I've done two mixes of the same song, in the newly-treated room, using the new ARC 2 system.
I've chosen a song that I've previously finished, and that has already commercially been released; so it's not as if I am remixing this for another... this is just a test. This appeared on the Love album I engineered back in 2015; Terry Fairfax's cover of England Dan and John Ford Coley's Nights Are Forever.
This was done at the suggestion of Dave Hawk, who mentioned that it might be a greater test to mix something that I'd previously completed, and that I was already familiar with in regard to the outcome of the song/mix.
Part of why I chose this one in particular is that this track on the album has always bothered me a bit; in that I felt the low end was a bit too much, and slightly undefined ( which was my fault, not the M.E., Thomas Bethel).
This track was the last one I put into the can for that album, and by that time, I was totally fried.

I've got this sounding pretty even and smooth listening to it through several different playback systems on my end; boombox, car, computer speakers, ear buds, headphones ( AKG K240's)... and while I don't think it's the best mix I've ever done, I do think it translates very well to a variety of audio systems other than just my studio nearfields in my room. Consistency is what I'm looking for at this point, and so far, I think I've managed to achieve that to a certain degree.

Two mixes below, with subtle EQ and level differences between them.
As always, all thoughts, suggestions, comments are welcome.

Thanks guys :)

NAF ARC MIX 1 MAR 17 2017 224K.mp3

NAF ARC MIX 2 MAR 17 2017 224K.mp3

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files NAF ARC MIX 1 MAR 17 2017 224K.mp3 (5.9 MB)  NAF ARC MIX 2 MAR 17 2017 224K.mp3 (5.8 MB) 

Both tracks are really good, Donny. If I had to choose, I would marginally prefer Mix 2, but it's close. The only thing that troubles me on both mixes is the very top end, but I suspect that's an MP3 deficiency and the .wav versions would sound OK.

Hearing it on my phone, id use 1 if the mix was going to be mastered because it sounded a little smoother / less hyped, particularly in the top end. If going straight to press then #2, becuase of the increase in highs, although still perhaps a bit much? Could be the MP3 like bos said. Either way they both cool.

D? Have you upgraded to the new Samplitude? I only ask because it has codec preview so you can hear how your mix sounds converted and make adjustments within the session. I've used ozones' but haven't made it that deep into Sam yet, tho i am on X3. Also sonnox has one too. I got the basic codec pluggin for like $10 at GC last summer. Haven't tried it yet, but maybe they have a demo.

I'm also wondering if the top end thing is maybe due to a cut in low mids/lows as opposed to the top end? It's difficult to tell on my phone which cuts off around 300hz, but then mix is certainly not muddy or bassy by any means relative to everything else on the phone.