Skip to main content

Hello gents (and ladies)...

I'm submitting an album to a label right now (to remain nameless until I land or don't land it). It's a choral album which was recorded over two days in a church nearby where I live.

The chorus is a small chamber chorus made up of roughly 30 musicians and this particular disc features a piano on some of the tracks and one track each with solo cello and clarinet.

Here is a snippet (approx 1 minute). It's my "rough edit" version. Meaning - I want the splices to be a TAD cleaner and the mixing isn't 100% yet, but it's close. In all, there are 5 splices in this 1 minute section.

Let me know what you think.

J.

(Dead Link Removed)

Topic Tags

Comments

Cucco Sun, 06/04/2006 - 19:52

Makes perfect sense. Thanks.

I'll listen again.

My goal with this, given that it's almost entirely secular (bordering on Pops style) was to go with a slightly closer, more intimate sound. However, I used a LOT of channels including discrete ambience channels which can be pulled up a bit more if necessary.

The tracks were recorded at 176.4 kHz in case they wanted to use DVD-A or SACD later in life.

J.

ghellquist Mon, 06/05/2006 - 00:49

Hi Cucco,
real nice recording. The only thing I definitely would change is balance, here in my place it sort of leans to the right a few dB.

Had I done it myself I might have tried a few other things, but I am in no way sure I would keep the changes. I feel that in some places the sibilant sounds are a bit exaggerated, this might be an effect of mp3 though (around 2 and 3 seconds the male singers does this twice in a row).

Gunnar

Cucco Mon, 06/05/2006 - 06:09

Thanks Gunnar -

I'll check the balance, but I suspect it does lean a little. The piano was on the right side of the chorus (not possible to move without totally destroying the session). I recorded it with MS with a few spots, I might be able to use that to "center" it a bit more, but if it sounds odd to do that, I might just have to live with it on the right.

As for the sibilance, I'm not one to usually chalk things up to MP3 artifacts and considering the fact that I used a 320 kbps MP3, the artifacts should be minimal. So, I'll check out some sibilance issues too. That should be a rather easy fix.

Thanks!

J.

anonymous Wed, 06/07/2006 - 10:12

Hi Jeremy,
It's sound more or less alright to me, but
I can't really say more from a few snaps
of MP3. Aracu's comment make sense to
me too. However, I think, it'd help if you
can find out what kind of production your
label currently likes - wet ? dry ? natural
siblance ? ecc... Ultimatelly, you want them
to like your recording, not us.
Cheers,

anonymous Wed, 06/07/2006 - 12:33

All's fine. I'm finishing my next record, called
"Black Sun". I did the pre-production in my
home-studio, next week I'll move to Rob Ulsh's
place (ex-owner of MarterSound Studios in
VA Beach). Some additional recording, then
mixing and mastering.

They have a very wide variety...wet, dry,
in the middle. -- Cucco

Well, then, make a few mixes, and choose with
fresh ears the best. Add to it very carefull
mastering, and go in that nearby church to
pray :shock: . Good luck !

Cucco Fri, 03/16/2007 - 05:40

Yeah..I saw that Kevin was gone. It seems like Crystalphonic is kind of a 'run-of-the-mill' studio nowadays. (They seem to make a lot of money turning gear on E-bay!)

As for this project...it never got off the ground. Rough cuts are still sitting with the group and no decision has been made. I'll still eventually put the disc out, but far more likely on my own label than try to submit it. I've got MUCH bigger fish to fry right now...

Cheers!

J.