The overall mix sounds very workable and well performed, Donny. The imaging of mix sounds crammed together which will be fun trying to "un-cram".

audiokid, post: 448387, member: 1 wrote: Its very workable. Nicely performed, Donny. The track sounds crammed together which will be fun trying to "un-cram".

Which I look forward to - but my main concern right now isn't so much the production as it is frequency balance.
So, regarding that, is there anything that is noticeably out of balance frequency wise?
Lows too heavy, muddy? Top end too glassy? Mids too harsh? Undefined?

I'll check it at the studio tonight ;)

I haven't ruled out the possibility that the Presonus E8's that Dave Hawk lent me might be too much gun in the low end for the space I'm in. I need to do an arc measurement with the Alesis M1's, they only have 6" woofs. I dunno. I'm just thinking out loud.

DonnyThompson, post: 448388, member: 46114 wrote: Which I look forward to - but my main concern right now isn't so much the production as it is frequency balance.
So, regarding that, is there anything that is noticeably out of balance frequency wise?
Lows too heavy, muddy? Top end too glassy? Mids too harsh? Undefined?

I understand. :)

The mix sounds well balanced but sonically crammed which could be the result of EQing to fit the room rather than to fit the mix.

That being said, again, you do an excellent job at everything.

But to my ears, the upper mids are lost which makes it hard for me to do any sort of accurate analysis to the mix because I hear cause and effects that happens when you do something that is really the result of another problem that starts early on in a mix. Thus ... there is never enough time or never a satisfied moment where you say, ya... its finished. So when I say crammed together, I am also saying, I think something is with your monitoring.

I imported this into Sequoia and did a broad stroke with an eq. (in red) my ear analysis told me this.

Your upper freq's are buried. I suspect it is because your system, and room is likely harsh or something is too forward in the upper mids. Or your ears are wanting to compensate for a variety of possible reasons.
The track sounds like you are cutting out upper mids in the mix which may be an indication that upper freqs are loud, not smooth (gear, wrong speakers, room, hearing, habit etc).
What can also happen because of that, we then go to the bass and start reducing until eventually we get the crammed together sound I was referring to.

Just a guess, I think you need to look at the upper mids more closely.

DonnyThompson, post: 448390, member: 46114 wrote: I haven't ruled out the possibility that the Presonus E8's that Dave Hawk lent me might be too much gun in the low end for the space I'm in. I need to do an arc measurement with the Alesis M1's, they only have 6" woofs. I dunno. I'm just thinking out loud.

I would suspect that as well. Small quality speakers are where I would be looking no matter what room I was mixing in.

I'm curious to hear what others say, which is why these sort of discussions are always so interesting and helpful to me. Hope that helps. Looking forward to the rest of the groups thoughts.

How does the Arc 2 fit into this....did it correct the mix based on things the software Co sidereal to be flaws in your environment?

Sounds good overall D. The meat and bones are there sounds well balanced level and eq wise to me on the phone. I think taking this to the next level would make a good finished product. Fader rides ect. It's a sign of your skill set to be able to pull a perfectly acceptable first mix out of a new room and new speakers to boot. You da man D.

I'd love to hear a pair of quick mixes even stems where you have the Arc engaged and disengaged. Maybe like mix it once for an hour or two, then mix it again a week later or something so there's no burnout. Anyway just rambling.

Brien Holcombe, post: 448393, member: 48996 wrote: How does the Arc 2 fit into this....did it correct the mix based on things the software Co sidereal to be flaws in your environment?

The ARC is supposed to help his monitors sound flatter in his environement. (At least, where the measurements were done.)
Thing is, it doesn't correct our ears and once in a better environement, we need to get used to it ;)

DonnyThompson : I guess you just need to listen to your favorite CDs for a while and get used to the place. I didn't listen to the mix yet but, just the fact that you are unsecure about it tells me that it's gonna take a bit of time !

The power has been going off and on all day here... we're experiencing really heavy winds off the Lake. The power finally went off completely an hour ago, even all the traffic lights are darkn talked with Ohio Edison and they are saying it's the entire west side of Cleveland, and it might take until tomorrow morning for power to be restored, sooooo...
I can't upload tracks as I was planning on doing. Sorry guys. I'm at da mercy of Mother Nature here. ;)

pcrecord, post: 448395, member: 46460 wrote: The ARC is supposed to help his monitors sound flatter in his environement. (At least, where the measurements were done.)
Thing is, it doesn't correct our ears and once in a better environement, we need to get used to it ;)

So the best place to do measurements is wherever the listeners head is....correct?

pcrecord, post: 448395, member: 46460 wrote: DonnyThompson : I guess you just need to listen to your favorite CDs for a while and get used to the place. I didn't listen to the mix yet but, just the fact that you are unsecure about it tells me that it's gonna take a bit of time !

Good advise.

Brien Holcombe, post: 448399, member: 48996 wrote: So the best place to do measurements is wherever the listeners head is....correct?

precisely (y)

I listen to your mix Donny, it's quite nice. Althought it could use a tinny bit more HF
Here's what my curve would look like if I was to master it (the white line) :

DonnyThompson, post: 448390, member: 46114 wrote: I haven't ruled out the possibility that the Presonus E8's that Dave Hawk lent me might be too much gun in the low end for the space I'm in.

That's certainly a possibility. Out of curiosity, have you made any adjustments on the back of the Eris to address any broader balance issues?

I'll be curious to hear how the Alesis monitors do with the benefit of some treatments in the next test.

I don't hear anything exaggerated in this mix that would indicate your monitors and/or room are wildly out of balance.

Brien Holcombe, post: 448399, member: 48996 wrote: So the best place to do measurements is wherever the listeners head is....correct?

http://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/arc/

This is pretty cool DonnyThompson what do you think of it?

Isn't that the system that Donny is trying out?

Hi guys...
@Brien Holcombe - Brien, the ARC is a speaker calibration tool. It measures (up to 16 different positions) within the area of the listening/mixing position. I had it set precisely at ear height when I'm sitting. It measures an oscillating "pulsing sweep" type of tone -from very low frequencies 20hz - to very high ones-30k, and then takes the various positional measurements and creates a calculation for each, and then creates what I assume is an algorithm of sorts. It turns this "corrected EQ" into a VST plug that is inserted into the last position of the master step bus's inserts. The plug is used to monitor with, but is not left enabled for rendering the final mix.
This speaker correction is most effective when used with a room that has already been treated to a certain degree. It is not meant as a blanket fix-it miracle tool for untreated rooms.
audiokid :
I don't know how I feel about it yet Chris. I've only done the one mix with it that I uploaded here yesterday. I think I'm going to need to get acclimated to this room, after the treatment I've installed, and now the ARC correction. To my ears, things now sound very flat...which on one hand is what we all want, but on the other, it can take some time to get used to monitoring this way. Lol. It's not as easy as it sounds. ;)
I think it's just gonna take me a little time to get used to it... after all, I've only implemented it two days ago, and have only done the one mix with it.
pcrecord : I think the attenuated highs might have been me over compensating mon ami. I'm still not convinced that I might not still need a bit more treatment on the hi's, not necessarily to absorb them, but as Kurt mentioned a few days ago (Kurt Foster ) I might need diffusion instead.
All in all I think the ARC system will be a useful tool to round out the EQ curve of the room and add compensation.
But I wouldn't rely on it alone.

Edit: Dave Hawk (dvdhawk ) suggested that I might try mixing (remixing) something where I'm Alfred familiar with the outcome I want... like taking a Song from the Love album, because I'm so familiar with that album, and remixing it with the ARC system. At first I thought I'd rather stick my head in an oven, but after further consideration it is probably a good idea. Plus, there are several people here on RI who are also familiar with those original mixes.

FWIW
-d

audiokid, post: 448417, member: 1 wrote: http://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/arc/

Ok.... I understand the procedure. I read reviews yesterday on the effectiveness of this plugin....kinda up in the air on the "value" or overall usefullness, as I could tell.

Brien Holcombe, post: 448422, member: 48996 wrote: Ok.... I understand the procedure. I read reviews yesterday on the effectiveness of this plugin....kinda up in the air on the "value" or overall usefullness, as I could tell.

And I think that's probably a testament to the expectations of the user - and the space they are in (it's not meant to replace treatment), or making cheap monitors sound good.
I truly can't say yet myself, Brien. I'm gonna need a little time to work with it and the treatment I've added to the space.

DonnyThompson, post: 448423, member: 46114 wrote: And I think that's probably a testament to the expectations of the user - and the space they are in (it's not meant to replace treatment), or making cheap monitors sound good.
I truly can't say yet myself, Brien. I'm gonna need a little time to work with it and the treatment I've added to the space.

I stayed with reviews of persons that understood the quality that treatments provide. As I understand it this is similar to using eq after treatment so my focus was on those that were of a higher value for input on this procedure than the typical bedroom user.

I am considering it after I reconfigure my room since I am going to focus on tracking and capture as the goal and mixing not as an afterthought but most likely something that can be done with reversible wall mounted soffit and such. Still in the design phase....

UPDATE:

@Brien Holcombe , audiokid , pcrecord , dvdhawk , kmetal Kurt Foster, (Et Al...)

I've just found a new issue with the room. I have no idea how I missed this, because it's so bloody obvious...
I'm hearing a multi harmonic "pinging" when I clap my hands. My best guess is that it's around 2-3k, with a higher overtone around 5-6k.
This might explain why Kyle, Marco and Chris all heard attenuated high frequencies in the mix I posted, which would explain why I was compensating those frequencies by attenuating them in this mix ...except its not nearly as obvious in the listening/mixing triangle "sweet spot", so I might just be spouting conjecture (crap) here.
It's most noticeable when I stand in the center of the room and clap my hands. I can't trace the focus on where it's emanating from, though.

So now, to be honest, I'm not sure what the next step is. I don't want to over treat the room, either.
Any suggestions are welcome.

If you stand in the center of the room....looking left to right then front to rear....and then ceiling to floor...how many hard surfaces do you see?

Brien is onto something. what you describe is normaly due to reflections between paralelle surfaces.
It'd be easier with pictures of the place or a plan of what you have now.

You are not in the worst situation. Many amateurs will kill the HF without adressing the low end.
Getting rid of this last defect, might be done with some thinner absorbtion material. But diffusion ?? Can't say.

Brien Holcombe, post: 448438, member: 48996 wrote: If you stan in the center of the room....looking left to right then front to rear....and then ceiling to floor...how many hard surfaces do you see?

LOL... all of them? Sorry, just injecting a little humour.

Lots, Brien. Walls, ceilings, ( floor is carpeted with what I think is a half inch of padding and a half inch of tight weave polyester carpet), even the desk space in front of me.
With the exception of the cloud directly above me, there is no treatment at all on the canted ceiling.
Now, while there are plenty of hard boundaries, there is no two surfaces that are parallel to each other.

I was walking around the room a few minutes ago, and I think I might have found the culprit. It's a concave area directly above the door, and on the wall, near the ceiling, is a heating vent... metal, of course.
This section is giving off a very noticeable 1k - 2k "ring". ( I checked this by setting up a frequency generator, and matching the pitch with my ears through headphones).

I'm gonna see if I can figure out a way to take a pic of this area and post it here...

An alcove with parellell boundaries so close together will keep high frequencies alive....you may not think they are parellell. ...but they are...

Brien Holcombe, post: 448445, member: 48996 wrote: An alcove with parellell boundaries so close together will keep high frequencies alive....you may not think they are parellell. ...but they are...

Yes they are indeed. The ceiling cants up there but The two vertical faces are indeed parallel. So is my best bet absorption or diffusion up there? Or both?

One a side note (pause for station identification) , while you are working out the upper mid freq.... there are a few companies like ARC that might be of interest to our readers.
I owned the Coneq system but couldn't use it because it didn't play well with active monitoring and my particular hybrid monitoring workflow but it was exceptional. As I became more acclimatized to my surroundings, I invested in Event Opals and used their calculation software which has been working excellent as well.
Basically what I have to do: At final mix, I hardly move my head out of the calculated proximity sweet spot. To my ears, that sweet spot is very accurate. I also have traps, ceiling cloud and absorption. It works great for me.
As an example in my last mixing room, moving my ears 5 inches off the calculated point is enough to make a difference. When I am critical mixing, my head is locked in place.

Here is another link about Coneq.
http://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/real-sound-lab-coneq

http://coneqpro.com/ also makes software like Arc which I still have but haven't needed to use it. After following this thread, I may try it again.

Back to regular programming... treating your room now.

DonnyThompson, post: 448446, member: 46114 wrote: Yes they are indeed. The ceiling cants up there but The two vertical faces are indeed parallel. So is my best bet absorption or diffusion up there? Or both?

Diffusion is very specific in what it will help with so has to be built with specific frequency areas in mind....and is not recommended in areas so close together anyway.

I think I would hang a thick blanket over the whole opening, left to right, and get rid of the alcove completely.

You may have to run Arc 2 analysis again in what it should perceive as a new environment...but that is your call.

Minimum....cover the wall that you can see from your mix position with a thick blanket...that should help...but taking that reflection chamber out of the room should also be considered as well...

the trihedral corner left of that vent is problematic. in fact one thing that should always be addressed is trihedral corners, especially in smaller rooms with low ceilings. trying to address issues in small rooms is kind of like squeezing an audio sausage. if you squeeze one part of it, it will swell up on another part. fix one problem, another one shows it ugly little face.

Kurt Foster, post: 448450, member: 7836 wrote: the trihedral corner left of that vent is problematic. in fact one thing that should always be addressed is trihedral corners, especially in smaller rooms with low ceilings. trying to address issues in small rooms is kind of like squeezing an audio sausage. if you squeeze one part of it, it will swell up on another part. fix one problem, another one shows it ugly little face.

I agree.....but it is a problem inside of a problem

@Brien Holcombe Kurt Foster

Would the best solution be to soffit that trihedron in, with a frame, filled with roxul and then faced with drywall?
I'd have to figure out how to extend the heating vent out...

see the absorber panel you put up next to the vent? put one just like that on the ceiling in both corners. even better would be to do all 3 surfaces.

DonnyThompson ....what I submit is a test....try it and see if it corrects the issue and then we can move forward with more permanent treatments later.

Brien Holcombe, post: 448467, member: 48996 wrote: DonnyThompson ....what I submit is a test....try it and see if it corrects the issue and then we can move forward with more permanent treatments later.

Thanks Brien and Kurt.
I'll try the easiest thing first, and then of that doesn't correct it we can revisit it.
Please understand I KNOW that this space will never be a perfect acoustic space. But I'd like to get it as good as I possibly can- without knocking out walls. Lol.
Thanks for your advice. :)

Kurt Foster, post: 448450, member: 7836 wrote: squeezing an audio sausage

gawd I love that term! :ROFLMAO:

DonnyThompson, post: 448469, member: 46114 wrote: Thanks Brien and Kurt.
I'll try the easiest thing first, and then of that doesn't correct it we can revisit it.
Please understand I KNOW that this space will never be a perfect acoustic space. But I'd like to get it as good as I possibly can- without knocking out walls. Lol.
Thanks for your advice. :)

I'd stick a memory foam pillow or something thick and dense in there and hang a cloud above you for starters.

Close that echo hall off...you will thank me later...

I've got a 3" cloud (2x2) directly above my mixing position now.
Per Kurt's suggestion (Kurt Foster ) I'm gonna start by treating that trihedron area with 2" auralex on all the surfaces and see if that improves it.
If not, I could soffit it in and fill it with Roxul, then drywall a new face on it. Id have to extend the hearing vent out, tho. I'm gonna try the easiest thing first.
Donny + Tools (especially powered ones) = emergency room visits, more often than what is considered acceptable.
I missed the "construction chromosome" most guys are born with. I make up for it with good looks, cunning, and guile. And I can sing purty good too.

a couple of small foam corner bass traps mounted (heh heh, he said mounted) horizontally would do the trick seeing as you are only treating a mid high issue.