News:

Please begin sharing multitrack files as FLAC files. Read more here!

 

Author Topic: Mixoff Contest with Barry Wood - Win Barry's New Book!  (Read 40826 times)

  • No avatar
  • **
July 10, 2011, 08:34:33 PM
I think these tracks are pretty decent for a band that recorded themselves. There are a few timing issues here and there, but all in all its not that bad. Here is my shot at it: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12979410/071011%20-%202.wav

Note: I did use slight master bus compression, and did very minimal editing. Any criticism is welcome. Thank You
« Last Edit: July 10, 2011, 08:41:11 PM by rfahey86 »

  • No avatar
  • **
July 10, 2011, 08:47:16 PM
Had a chance to listen to some other posts. I'm using headphones right now so take my criticisms with a grain of salt.

Spede - I really like the sound of your entire mix. Especially the snare, but the vocals are a bit loud and upfront IMO.
vvv - I like the sound of the vocals and toms in your mix, but the rest of the mix sound very bass heavy IMO.

  • No avatar
  • **
July 10, 2011, 09:43:54 PM
Hi everyone. Im new here and this is my first post. Some really nice projects going on here.

As far as my mix I must admit I struggled to rein this song in. I experimented quite a bit to balance out the spectrum to my ears. I referenced plenty of Hard Rock and Metal because I love that stuff. So I did some A/B ' ing to help me along. At the end I used a limiter on the bus to make it louder but not to knock down the peaks crush it.

Here's my mix    http://www.box.net/shared/ysq2m8k7ap6s9rkjctd2

To JohnSuitcase I really like the clarity of your quick mix it makes my speakers sound deep and wide..


To Spede your guitar tones kickass and I love the drum tones as well I like plump sounding drums, very clear and punchy..perfect..A nice balanced mix.




  • **
July 10, 2011, 10:32:29 PM
Thanks. I added some of my own amp sims to the bass, since I couldn't get the original amp signal to work with the DI (No matter what I did, they
always seemed to eat each others lowest octave away).

I did notice that when I brought up the tracks. There are a couple of ways to make those two bass tracks work together; I can explain those techniques now or after the contest completes. I suppose since people can resubmit mixes it wouldn't be giving anyone an unfair advantage. There's no guarantee that using both tracks together is the right approach anyway :)

If anyone is interested, let me know.

  • ****
July 10, 2011, 10:49:50 PM
Re the bass, I thought about a li'l time-shifting, but then thought, if I was in this band I'd want my tone (bassist, here). 

My approach, my mixing philosophy (as it were), is to assume that the tracks I am presented, especially when recorded by the band, captures their basic sound as they want it.

I look to maximize the presentation, without altering that sound too much, e.g., I'll use compression and EQ on vocals because singers wanna be understood, I'l use delay, etc. to make it interesting.  But I won't use pitch-shifting unless there's a clear clam, and never as an effect unless requested.

So on that bass, I did a little pass filtering and compression/limiting, and I used the DI about 3dB under the mic'd track for the oomph, and I did add a cuppla dB at 900hz (1.3Q) for clarity.

Then I rode the levels to keep it audible, which of course brought the kick up to keep it audible ...

But lemme say I agree with everyone else here - helluva voice on that guy! I like this band.  8)


  • *****
July 10, 2011, 11:03:54 PM
Got an email back from the band, here's a little info:

"Song is in the key of D
Tempo is 80 bpm, then up to 90 for the bridge, down to 84 for the final chorus, then back to 90 for the outro.  Though like someone posted I don't know how strictly we stuck to the click.  All the instruments may not have played with the click.

Also I posted a copy of the lyrics here: http://db.tt/u0blfLZ

Let me know if there are any more questions.
I'm going to try and get on the forum this week and post...been a busy weekend here."

Hope that helps to clarify any questions about the timing, etc. Building a tempo map around one of the instruments is probably the best option, if you really want to get in and edit things.

To Barry, feel free to explain anything that you feel might benefit mixers, I know I'm always open to tips, and I think everyone else is of the same mind!

  • ****
July 10, 2011, 11:05:57 PM
Thanks. I added some of my own amp sims to the bass, since I couldn't get the original amp signal to work with the DI (No matter what I did, they
always seemed to eat each others lowest octave away).

I did notice that when I brought up the tracks. There are a couple of ways to make those two bass tracks work together; I can explain those techniques now or after the contest completes. I suppose since people can resubmit mixes it wouldn't be giving anyone an unfair advantage. There's no guarantee that using both tracks together is the right approach anyway :)

If anyone is interested, let me know.

That would be nice Mr. Wood. Most of the time I get away with those with just zooming in into the waveforms and determining how much delay needs to be
applied (usually) to the DI signal. But it seems that the low-end structure in these tracks were so different from each other, that no matter how I lined
them I couldn't get the results I needed.     


Re the bass, I thought about a li'l time-shifting, but then thought, if I was in this band I'd want my tone (bassist, here). 


I really don't mean to rude here, but would that mean that you wouldn't flip the phase of the top snare to line it better with the overheads? "Hey, that's the way
the tracks were presented to me, so I guess they just wanted a snare with no low end" :)

We all look to maximize the presentation and IMO one the easiest (but yes, maybe a little boring) ways to do it for the bass is to get it's low end consistent.
"You don't go to a record school to go to courses, you go to record school to record there!"
http://soundcloud.com/spede-1

  • **
July 10, 2011, 11:41:14 PM
Thanks. I added some of my own amp sims to the bass, since I couldn't get the original amp signal to work with the DI (No matter what I did, they
always seemed to eat each others lowest octave away).

I did notice that when I brought up the tracks. There are a couple of ways to make those two bass tracks work together; I can explain those techniques now or after the contest completes. I suppose since people can resubmit mixes it wouldn't be giving anyone an unfair advantage. There's no guarantee that using both tracks together is the right approach anyway :)

If anyone is interested, let me know.

That would be nice Mr. Wood. Most of the time I get away with those with just zooming in into the waveforms and determining how much delay needs to be
applied (usually) to the DI signal. But it seems that the low-end structure in these tracks were so different from each other, that no matter how I lined
them I couldn't get the results I needed.     

There is often a discrepancy in the timing between the DI and the mic signal. Typically it's the mic that's a little later than the DI but in this case it was the other way around. Also, the delay was not the only issue, it sounded like the polarity of one of the tracks was reversed; that was the major culprit in causing the bass to disappear when the two tracks were played together.

I found that delaying the Bass mic track by 20 samples and inverting the polarity got them to work well together. This is where something like the Little Labs IBP comes in very handy.



There's a little bit of delay added and the phase invert button is engaged.

  • **
July 10, 2011, 11:57:09 PM

Re the bass, I thought about a li'l time-shifting, but then thought, if I was in this band I'd want my tone (bassist, here). 


I really don't mean to rude here, but would that mean that you wouldn't flip the phase of the top snare to line it better with the overheads? "Hey, that's the way the tracks were presented to me, so I guess they just wanted a snare with no low end" :)

We all look to maximize the presentation and IMO one the easiest (but yes, maybe a little boring) ways to do it for the bass is to get it's low end consistent.


I agree with Spede here. I wouldn't hesitate to fix something like this, in fact, when I loaded up the tracks that was the first thing I did aside from flipping the polarity on the bottom snare mic after hearing that it had not been done during tracking.

  • **
July 11, 2011, 12:15:22 AM
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26696007/Ambitions_Bounce_V1.mp3


Sorry for the lag in my critiques, I've been pretty busy around here.

So far there have been four mixes submitted and I'm numbering them in order of submission as I download them so I can keep everything straight.

#1 Spede

Right off the bat, this is an excellent mix. I like the edits you did, they aren't obvious and they move the song along nicely. Of course, the band may have something to say about them but that's another issue. The subtle string thing adds a nice texture too.

The drums very focussed, it sounds like you probably triggered the kick, snare and toms.

As has been noted, the original guitar tracks are kind of fizzy. It's difficult to pull back that kind of high end without really killing the tone. The only EQ that I've had success in doing something like that is the Manley Massive Passive (hardware or UAD version). The way it attenuates is very nice. I would like to hear a little more body and a little less fizz on the guitars.

The only thing I would be looking for would be more "excitement" in the vocal track. It kind of pales compared to the guitars. That "excitement" could be anything from more effects, less effects, creating compression, EQ, harmonic distortion, or anything else that might make them, well, more exciting. Backing off on the "fizz" of the guitars may be all it takes. When you're making small changes to a mix that's already sounding good it generally doesn't take much.