My best mix so far (I think)
Moderator: cgarges
-
- audio school graduate
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 12:49 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL
- Contact:
- manganeech
- alignin' 24-trk
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 2:16 pm
- Location: Bisbee, Arizona
- Contact:
comparing mix 1 and 2
Great song! I like that you are not affraid to put the vox out front. I listened to both mixes and must say that I like the first one better. I think your instincts on the vocal treatment in mix 1 (scooping out some lows/boosting mids?) fit the song's pop style and singers voice better than the warmer treatment in mix 2. The various musical voices in Mix 1 blend into a more distinctive whole. Mix 2 doesn't hold my attention or get my head nodding as much.
That said, I agree with many of the earlier comments about needing to clean up the track in areas. I think the vocal may be the victim of over compression. Not that the amount of compression doesn't sound good on the track, just that it brings forward too much unwanted information (breaths, lipsmacks, etc.). I've found that pulling that low volume information up in the mix by hitting the compresser hard can work for emphasizing intimacy in a vocal, but it seems to detract a bit from this style of song. One thing you might do is to carefully edit the waveform to remove the breaths and unintentional clutter so you can still hit the compressor hard to get the sound you like. Another thing I have found helpful when dealing with a vocal that has to sit in the mix differently in different parts (your intro/breakdown vs. verse/chorus)is to duplicate the vox track. I then remove the verse/chorus from the intro/breakdown track (and vice-versa). It is then much easier to compress/eq the intro vox to work well in that stand alone "under the microscope" situation, while using differnt settings on the verse/chorus track to achieve the right balance with the music bed. I bring this up because you seem to have acheived an excellent vocal/intrument balance through most of the song, but the intro and breakdown vocals seem a little bit too forward.
The other spot that jumps out at me as needing a little work is end of the song. This may be a production note rather than strictly a mix thing, but the "ahhh ahhh"s in the fade out don't really work for me. They seem like the should be handled by your (excellent) back-up vocals in call-and-response style to the lead's "Jennifer sunrise". You obviously did some work in Mix 2 to fade them out more gracefully, but I think you could go farther. Even if you were to seperate the lead singers existing "ahhh ahhhs" and put them on another track that you set farther back in the mix, it might help.
You have a really good song here. Thank you for sharing.
That said, I agree with many of the earlier comments about needing to clean up the track in areas. I think the vocal may be the victim of over compression. Not that the amount of compression doesn't sound good on the track, just that it brings forward too much unwanted information (breaths, lipsmacks, etc.). I've found that pulling that low volume information up in the mix by hitting the compresser hard can work for emphasizing intimacy in a vocal, but it seems to detract a bit from this style of song. One thing you might do is to carefully edit the waveform to remove the breaths and unintentional clutter so you can still hit the compressor hard to get the sound you like. Another thing I have found helpful when dealing with a vocal that has to sit in the mix differently in different parts (your intro/breakdown vs. verse/chorus)is to duplicate the vox track. I then remove the verse/chorus from the intro/breakdown track (and vice-versa). It is then much easier to compress/eq the intro vox to work well in that stand alone "under the microscope" situation, while using differnt settings on the verse/chorus track to achieve the right balance with the music bed. I bring this up because you seem to have acheived an excellent vocal/intrument balance through most of the song, but the intro and breakdown vocals seem a little bit too forward.
The other spot that jumps out at me as needing a little work is end of the song. This may be a production note rather than strictly a mix thing, but the "ahhh ahhh"s in the fade out don't really work for me. They seem like the should be handled by your (excellent) back-up vocals in call-and-response style to the lead's "Jennifer sunrise". You obviously did some work in Mix 2 to fade them out more gracefully, but I think you could go farther. Even if you were to seperate the lead singers existing "ahhh ahhhs" and put them on another track that you set farther back in the mix, it might help.
You have a really good song here. Thank you for sharing.
Manganeech@cableone.net
El-Change-O!
El-Change-O!
- ub5studio
- audio school graduate
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 7:48 am
- Location: Eden, North Carolina
- Contact:
The Song really reminds me of Job Brion . . . . Solo Stuff that is. The song is great and everything is really well elaborated and let be what they are. I think it sounds amazing. I like that each instrument has its on character. I think a lot of people today tend to make everything sound like one unit and obviously it can as in this song but without losing the integrity of the instrument its self.
Thanks
Justin
Thanks
Justin
"Life's a Garden,Get Buried!!"
I love Jon Brion! Not when he gets all organ-grinder, but when he does his powerpop stuff (remember the Grays?), I get very happy.
Powerpop and such: http://www.myspace.com/gotpop
- ub5studio
- audio school graduate
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 7:48 am
- Location: Eden, North Carolina
- Contact:
Yeah Jon Brion is A genius but I don't like the organ grinder as much either. Meaningless was amazing. But I don't want to displace this thread in a complete other direction I will PM you about it.stevenlebeau wrote:I love Jon Brion! Not when he gets all organ-grinder, but when he does his powerpop stuff (remember the Grays?), I get very happy.
Thanks
Justin
"Life's a Garden,Get Buried!!"
-
- pushin' record
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 10:09 pm
- Location: cincinnati, ohio
- Contact:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests