Helpful Reply****FINAL MIX*** Then and Now: Final mix based on everyones suggestions. Thanks!

Page: 12345 > Showing page 1 of 5
Author
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
2013/11/26 12:46:51 (permalink)

****FINAL MIX*** Then and Now: Final mix based on everyones suggestions. Thanks!

Alright... turned down the bass guitar a little and a couple other light tweaks. I tried a bunch of different stuff with the pultec EQ in the master but seemed to always end up right at the same settings I had for my previous version (even though I was not LOOKING at the original settings... at least my ears are working... well consistent anyway. lol) so I just stuck with the exact same settings I had before. I think it's a lot less boomy now but still bassy. In my good headphones this is pretty much exactly how I intend it to sound. On my crummy headphones it's still a little unpolished for my tastes but much better. At this point I have reached the limit of what my skillset and experience level will allow so I consider this done. Quite the adventure. Thanks again everyone for bearing with me through all this and all the great advice. I'll leave the other versions up on my soundcloud page for a maybe a week just so people can check out the progress on this but after that I'll clean out all the crud.
 
Here she be...
 
https://soundcloud.com/us...s-creep-remix-bass-fix
 
Cheers.
 
 
Everything below this line vvvvvvvvv is the original posts and links.
=================================================================
 
Okay, guys. Spent the afternoon tweaking a bunch of stuff in the mix based on all the fine advice I got here. Still a couple things I could have done but this'll be the final update. Thanks for all the AWESOME advice from EVERYONE and or course a special thank you to Danny for taking so much time to impart his wisdom here for all to learn from. Absolutely great thread.
 
https://soundcloud.com/us...ps-creep-remix-revisit
 
See this post for a run down of what I changed...
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/2946561
 
Cheers!
 
 
 
Everything below this line vvvvvvvvvv are the original posts, versions and updates.
================================================================
 
UPDATE: Okay... I did totally screw up the master. I don't care what anyone says it was incredibly stupid on my part. Here is the premaster version which still has some of the same issues that have been discussed but is not nearly as horrendous as what I posted originally IMO...
 
https://soundcloud.com/us...-creep-remix-premaster
 
 
Title edited so people know this actually goes to a song. Sorry... little spaced out lately. Well... more than usual. ;-)
 
Hello, everyone. Hope you have all been well. Sorry I have not been around but life has been particularly annoying and hectic so every extra second I've had has been put into working on remixing this tune.
 
So first off I know this should probably go into the songs forum and if the admins wanna flush it that's cool but I figured my buddies up here might want to see the results of my non stop nagging and queries. This is a song I recorded and "produced" (if you can even call it producing... lol) shortly after installing X2 and merely a few months after actually purchasing X1 in May 2012. I did not change ANYTHING on this track except for some very minor timing corrections on the drums. I wanted to keep it purely a mixing project to test out everything I've learned about various effects and use Sonar itself to bring the best out of a mediocre recording. I wanted to go through everything from setting up a project for mixing right through to creating a final mastered version... and that's what I did.
 
It ain't great. I made a lot of mistakes and there are other things I could have done in retrospect but it wasn't really about perfection. I just wanted to test a bunch of techniques out and get some mixing hours under my belt. Still I think it is a much better and clearer mix. I'll let you guys be the judge (and no need to be nice... I want to hear criticism, even if it's brutal). I'll provide more details throughout the thread.
 
Warning this is a loud metal song so you may want to turn your speakers down...
 
This is the freshly finished remix...
 
https://soundcloud.com/user432042324/beepster-creep-remix
 
And this is the original mix from a little over a year ago...
 
https://soundcloud.com/user432042324/the-beepster-creep
 
There is some other crap on my soundcloud page that hopefully doesn't autoplay. Does anyone know how to turn that autoplay crap off? Drives me nuts.
post edited by Beepster - 2013/12/09 16:30:29
#1
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/26 12:51:54 (permalink)
I'm going to just update this post with extra info unless replying to other posts instead of bumping the thread.
 
Okay... little more detail (very little). I don't know what was going on with the ride sample at the start. That is just how it sounded and it became really apparent when isolated like that for some reason so yeah... I did what I could there but it seems to slide in to the mix after things get going. Next time I'll be using a different ride sample.
 
The things I thing I did accomplish though that I've had problems with in the past is getting the drums and the bass to sit better in the mix. At least I think so. Some thoughts on that would be nice.
 
Cheers.
 
==========================================================
 
I also think that I need to learn a hell of a lot more about mastering. I kind of got to the end of this then rushed through some basic mastering tuts/principles and hacked my way through it. I was getting anxious to move on to new material and really I think my next major study project is going to be mastering. I did get to use some of the fancier tools though that I totally did not understand before so even if it was a hack job I got the levels up, checked the overall freqs with the analyst, played with post production compression, etc, etc so it was kind of cool even if it could be a million times better.
 
Baby steps. ;-)
 
=======================================================
 
Just a note on the performance and recording.
 
The drums were performed "live" on my Korg padKontrol with the kick drum being played on a crummy on/off expression pedal (generic brand... not the Korg one). I had never played drums this way so it's all a little simplistic and awkward and although I played acoustic drums in a band for a few years I wasn't exactly a pro. I did it in takes one part a time and had to switch to performing the double kick with my fingers (only one expression pedal) but every part was indeed performed live without any input quantize. On the original I hadn't done ANY MIDI editing (because I didn't know how to back then) and on the remix I merely tightened things up a bit to the bass/guitars. There was some drift throughout because I wasn't accustomed to playing the controller (or anything) to a click track so that's why things may sound a little wonked as far as timing at certain points. I'm a lot better at following a click now and intend to put in a lot of hours practicing my pad drumming. I may however  have to resign myself to just programming in my beats though if I want to have any impressive drum parts.
 
The guitars and bass were both recorded line in straight through my interface but I actually have a Line 6 head with stereo XLR outs that I'll be using in the future and may even hook that up to my old Mackie mixer before inputting to the interface to get a better input signal.
 
Just in case anyone was curious. Cheers.
 
======================================================
 
Oh... and in other news I had a bit of an unforeseen windfall so I've upgraded to X3 Pro. I haven't had much chance to play with it yet but I'm psyched to start recording some NEW material with it. Sorry... I actually meant to mention that in my OP. After I sort out some other real life mayhem I will be ripping the program apart and hopefully get back to providing whatever basic help/insights I can. It does indeed look rather nice. Cheers.
 
==========================================================
 
After some thought... I think I'm gonna do some more studying and spend a LITTLE more time mastering this again. It's slick on many of the sources I've tested it through but I think it can be better and I need experience getting my own masters together. I sure as heck can't afford to pay anyone to do it right now. Right now though I have some real world problems that need tackling. Maybe next week with some fresh ears.
 
I know I'm mostly talking to myself but thanks for listening.
post edited by Beepster - 2013/11/26 14:15:46
#2
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/26 17:28:26 (permalink)
Any thoughts here guys?
 
Anyway... I think I need to really revisit the master here and completely do the compression differently. I set the LP-64 quite low so it was just barely working but the more I listen to it through my crummier speakers and headphones I'm really hearing hearing some pumping (ESPECIALLY on that ride part at the beginning. Maybe I should just go against everything I've been reading, dump the fancy multiband and run it through the PC-2A. I also notice a loss of clarity so maybe I should try and give it a bit more lift. I used a modern Slayer recording as my reference material and double checking things through various sources this, to my ears, sounds as clear and defined compared to that stuff BUT then I compare it to something like Necrophagist and it sounds a little dead in comparison. Mind you that stuff is ultra clean so I may be being unrealistic considering my limited resources.
 
Whatever... sorry for the AWing bump. Just thought I might get at least a couple posts. Seriously rip into this. I can take it. ;-)
#3
mmorgan
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 676
  • Joined: 2013/02/19 23:39:05
  • Location: Bellingham, WA
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/26 22:17:43 (permalink)
Hey Beeps. Nicely done on both mixes. I thought the guitars and basses were well balanced and placed. Cymbals were right nice too. To my ears I was expecting the drums to be a little more present as I kept trying to hear them. That could be my environment though...
 
Keep at man you be making progress.
 
Regards,


Mike

Win8(64), Sonar X3e(64) w/ RME Fireface UFX.
#4
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 13933
  • Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
  • Location: NYC
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/26 22:26:56 (permalink)
Wow that's quite a change! The sound has definitely opened up a lot, way more clarity than the original mix. If I had a criticism it would be that the cymbals are a little too prominent and fizzy sounding, at least on my headphones. It kind of contrasts with the warmth of the rest of the mix a little too much. Actually what I'm most impressed with is the bass, all too often it gets lost in a dense metal mix like this, but I can hear that bass line very clearly through my cans. You've got that sitting just right IMO. Great sounding guitars. 

James
Windows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
#5
cclarry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 20964
  • Joined: 2012/02/07 09:42:07
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/26 22:36:01 (permalink)
LOVE IT BEEPS!

I agree the drums could be a little more prominent...at the 
break points in a song like this a like to hear the thump thump nice and loud
of the drums...but overall this is my kinda music!  Well done!


#6
John
Forum Host
  • Total Posts : 30467
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/26 23:09:58 (permalink)
The difference to me is night and day. A nice cliche' but not really a true indication of how profound the difference really is. Not because it was remixed but because of the clear accumulation of knowledge that the one shows over the other. Beep I am not a metal fan but I do know how good something sounds.  Here you have presented growth that should be inspirational to anyone confronted with the task of understanding digital audio.  Talent is also apparent.   

Best
John
#7
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5321
  • Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
  • Location: Maryland, USA
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/26 23:29:47 (permalink)
+1, very nicely (re)done!!!
 
I will crawl back into my cave now... catch you all again in 11 months

ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
#8
Danny Danzi
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 5810
  • Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
  • Location: DanziLand, NJ
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/27 00:36:19 (permalink)
Hi Beeps,
 
I actually have a totally different take on this that is different from all the positive feedback you've received from everyone else. You know me, the last thing I'd ever want to do is deter your progress or upset you, but you've put too much time into this just to have me sugar coat things on your behalf. If you'd like me to send it to you in private, I will.
 
If you'd like me to post here (in the event what I have to say may be helpful to others) that's fine too. It very well may be helpful to a few people seeing how their opinions are drastically different than mine. Opinions of course are just that, but to me there are some important things that I'm a bit astonished others did not mention.
 
What I have to say is of course long, in depth and doesn't pull any punches. If you'd be interested in something like that at all, let me know. I wrote it up earlier today when no one had posted any replies yet and decided to ask you how or if you wanted my take. Let me know. :)
 
-Danny

My Site
Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
#9
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/27 07:28:25 (permalink)
Heh, thanks guys. I had just gone to bed when all your nice comments got posted (sorry). I can't reply in detail right now as I have a bunch of appointments today and am just getting my butt in gear. Maybe tonight but definitely tomorrow.
 
And, Danny... let 'er rip, man. I was hoping you would show up and you know I more than respect your opinion... I cling to every word of it (and a lot of your insights here on the forum actually went into this wherever they applied... even if they may not have been expertly executed). Considering I've gotten so much help here from all the users it's only fair they get the benefit of your critique as well. Don't worry about laying it all out. I want/need that because as I said I'm hearing a some things that I'm not really digging and I think it may be due to my "mastering" job which was rushed and kind of bumbling. Just for a reference point so you know what I was going for check out some of the more recent Slayer recordings like from Divine Intervention and beyond. To my ears those are pretty clean recordings BUT with a lot of grit baked into the mix (if that makes any sense). I know you go for a bit more of a polished tone which I need to learn too and may indeed be better for this (Check out the Necrophagist stuff I mentioned earlier... Stabwound is a good track from them that is a cleaner sound than the Slayer stuff even though the lead and bass tones are more robotic than I like). Still though there is something just not quite right about it now that I listen to it after export. It's a lot less muddy but not quite where I wanted it... like there is a blanket of noise in the hi mid range. IDK... that's why I'm here. ;-)
 
As far as the drums/cymbals... I'm glad that was brought up. I thought the cymbals were a little too present but I felt if I turned them down or took away the hi end they would get buried too much so I will keep that in mind. The toms were another issue... I used the Rock Legends kit for BFD and although I really like that kit due to it's warmth I think the toms are a little too warm/dead for this type of work so I'll probably try other tom samples in the future. I also think I should have tried out a couple doubled samples on the kick and snare but thought they were cutting rather well so I left it. I did double and eq the kick track to get a low "woomph" sound which helped (I think) but it was just a clone, not a different sample.
 
Anyway... just some details as I'm icing my back before getting ready for the day. Thanks for stopping in guys and looking forward to your thoughts, Danny. Cheers!
#10
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/27 07:35:44 (permalink)
Oh and, sharke... I'm glad to hear you say that about the bass. Bass has ALWAYS been a real PITA for me to get right and this was no different (like a spent an ENORMOUS amount of time screwing around with it) but even though I think I could have gotten it a little more to my liking at least it is audible for a change without muddying up the mix (I think). It was a completely line in signal so I'm hoping I can get an easier to work with input signal when I start running through my line 6 and/or my mixer. That remains to be seen though. What I really need is some kind of little line in device or mini amp specifically for bass... preferably with a tube but there ain't no money for that type of thing on the horizon and I think the MarkII Bass sim might be a better investment for now.
 
Cheers and thanks.
 
 
Edit: Looks like the storm screwed up my morning appointment. I'll be around for another couple hours... perhaps longer if the roads don't clear up.
post edited by Beepster - 2013/11/27 08:49:07
#11
ston
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 965
  • Joined: 2008/03/04 12:28:40
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/27 12:01:36 (permalink)
My thoughts...
 
The good:
The guitars / bass sound really good and are well mixed I thought.
 
The bad:
Cymbals & hi-hats completely dominate the mix, snare feels absent.
 
The ugly:
My relationship with EA.  Don't get me started..!
#12
Guitarpima
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 4125
  • Joined: 2005/11/19 23:53:59
  • Location: Terra 3
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/11/30 23:20:06 (permalink)
I prefer the sound of the first one better. The drums are more present in the remix but even in the remix, they are still buried.
 
The remix sounds like it was recorded in a cave.  The blend is better though. Bring up the drums.
 
Interesting tune. Well done.

Notation, the original DAW. Everything else is just rote. We are who we are and no more than another. Humans, you people are crazy.
 
 Win 7 x64  X2  Intel DX58SO, Intel i7 920 2.66ghz 12gb DDR3  ASUS ATI EAH5750  650w PSU 4x WD HDs 320gb  DVD, DVD RW Eleven Rack, KRK Rokit 8s and 10s sub
#13
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/01 07:47:42 (permalink)
Hi, guys. Sorry for not popping back in but I've been pretty wrecked after dealing with a bunch of doctor stuff (nothing bad happening... just tired is all).
 
First off thanks all for taking a listen to this and posting your thoughts. It is VERY much appreciated and I am definitely hearing what you guys are mentioning. I am formulating a plan to fix it up a bit better based on your suggestions (keep 'em coming if you guys hear anything else that needs attention) and realizing where I may have gone wrong in some areas.
 
First and foremost I'm starting to think that perhaps I used the wrong reference material. My "studio" is not exactly ideal for monitoring so I've been doing much of my mixing in the headphones (Sennheiser HD280 Pros) then bringing it up in the monitors (Mackie MKII) to make sure nothing is whack. Then I'd generally check it against my reference track. I did this for each element making sure it sound at least as good or better (to my ears) than the ref track.
 
Soooo... my question is do you guys think that what I created sounds similar to this Slayer album (Divine Intervention).
 
WARNING: loud, probably not safe for work and perhaps offensive to some
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tzLoG3m4QA
 
If it's somewhat comparable then at least I know my ears aren't just totally shot (many MANY years of loud live gigging without ear protection... stupid kid stuff that is).
 
Also considering my mixes do seem to be consistently hi freq heavy I'm thinking I may have a bit of hi freq hearing loss which I guess I'll have to take into account while I'm mixing. Gotta get an ear test to make sure though. I've always thought I had pretty good ears but as I said I abused them pretty hard when I was younger so I just may not notice.
 
Either way that doesn't matter because there isn't anything I can do about it. Just wanted to see if my mix matches up somewhat to my reference track. If not then yeah... there is a problem and I'll have to keep it in mind while working. I wasn't trying to duplicate the sound/tones exactly, just get the levels and clarity about the same. Particularly with the bass and drums.
 
Then there are the hats/cymbals. Yes, I can definitely hear how they are too present in retrospect. Not sure why I keep doing that but it seemed like they were getting buried if I turned them down too much. I think it may have been a bit of ear fatigue coupled with my hack mastering job. I'll bring them down and get the rest of the kit up in the mix. Again I was finding that kind of overwhelmed the guitars but as Ed said in the thread in the songs forum it was definitely mixed by a guitarist (which has been my failing in the past because... well I'm guitarist. Gotta break that habit... which I thought I had but not quite enough I guess).
 
The other issue, and again this is a mastering problem (I think), is the fact I tried to use the -3db/oct curve with the Frequency Analyst. When I looked at the readings of the initial mix I wasn't getting that nice straight diagonal line and there were spikes at certain parts (particularly the toms) so I tried to even it all out with EQing and I think I sucked out a lot of the good stuff by doing that. I should have trusted my ears but I got it into my head that I HAD to get that line perfectly straight. To add to the stupidity after I had done that I thought it sounded a little dead so I gave it some hi lift which probably let too much of the cymbals through. I don't know why I was rushing myself like that but I guess I wanted to get it posted before my appointments and frankly I was getting quite bored of this tune.
I'll be taking another look at this and will use the Freq Analyst but I would let it dictate the sound this time. Just to give me a rough idea of whether my actual mix is close instead of trying to bend my master to conform to it. Sorry guys... it truly was a dumb mistake and I realize that now.
 
Mastering Compressor and Limiter. I mentioned the compressor earlier. I just don't like what the multiband did to this and really everything was so compressed already I don't think it was even necessary. It was just another one of those things I've read about over and over again that you "just do". Even though I set it really low I find it made it a little brittle and cause a touch of pumping. I also think that the limiter (Boost11) can be a little less agressive too. Again I set the limiter to be just barely functioning but I think I want to get it so it isn't doing ANYTHING at all aside from boosting the signal. I find that limiter really does dastardly things to the sound when it starts limiting. Not sure if this is normal but I find it rather unpleasant. Perhaps this is why everyone likes the Concrete Limiter so much. Might be less wonky.
 
Reverb. I'm glad you brought up the "cave" sound, guitarpima. I'm not sure if what you are hearing is due to the brittleness of the mix or because of my reverb bus. I've never really done full mix reverb via sends to a bus before but again it seems like something that consistently is said "must" be done. Thing is it's hard for me to set up a reverb for this purpose because it is so hard to tell how far to push individual tracks and still have it all sound good when the whole mix is brought in. I personally think that the reverb DID help this track a LOT but I may have overdone it or used the wrong settings/routing. I was using Breverb set to "room" (IIRC) and kept it reasonably dry. I just wanted to give it some space. I used sends on each individual drum kit piece and routed them to one verb bus, set it all up and adjusted the sends until it sounded like a nice room recorded kit. Now here's where I wasn't sure what to do. I didn't know if I should have the rest of the instruments using the same instance but I also wanted it all to sound like it had been recorded in the same room. So I cloned the effect and inserted it onto a new bus. Then I wasn't sure if I should have the sends on the individual guitar tracks and bass tracks (there are four cloned bass tracks), many of which were meant to be blended to sound like one track, or try to take the final blended sound and apply reverb to that. I chose the latter and inserted the sends on all the individual busses I had for my guitars (Rhythm, Low Leads, Hi Leads, Bass). This seemed to work out and the drums/instruments sounded like they were recorded in the same space (but not at the same time which is what I wanted... I guess). Soooo... yeah, my noobishness is showing through here. If this is completely wrong or if there are better ways to do this I'm all ears. To me though it really did bring out the mix BUT I was a little concerned at first that it was TOO much verb and that it was muddying things up on a very subtle level. I just don't know because this type of reverb confuses the heck out of me.
 
Anyway... sorry for the ultra long winded post but this is all the stuff I've been thinking about after mulling over everyone's comments over the past few days. Thank you all again and I'll take another crack at this maybe in the next week or so.
 
Cheers!
#14
bobguitkillerleft
Max Output Level: -72 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 944
  • Joined: 2011/05/17 17:28:58
  • Location: Adelaide Australia
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/01 09:24:54 (permalink)
Hey,just listened to both versions,newest one first,and definitely prefer it,really clear,and great playing man!
Good Job.
Bob
 

https://soundcloud.com/rks26https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hitmen Lenovo W540 Factoryrefurb SONAR PLATINUM,Ozone 7 N.I. KA6 Komplete 9 SSD4 Platinum Epi L/H LP Custom Headstock broken twice and fixed.Gibson L/H Les Paul 2010 Wine Red Studio stupid Right Hand Vol.Tone for Left Hand?LH84Ibanez RS135 gen.FloydRose JB Marshall 100w 2203 4x25w Celestion Green backs
"You are what you is"-Frank Zappa "But I'm gonna wave my freak flag high"-Jimi Hendrix    
#15
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/01 09:34:03 (permalink)
Thanks, Bob. Glad it's at least sounding clearer. That's something that I really wanted to be able to accomplish. I listen to some of the stuff on the songs forum and some of it is crystal clear. It was making frustrated with my dull mudfests. Now I just gotta make sure things are a little more balanced I guess and not so ultra hi end (which might be a challenge if I want to keep the clarity... lol). I hope you you've been well, buddy. Cheers.
#16
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 13933
  • Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
  • Location: NYC
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/01 10:40:57 (permalink)
I don't always send everything to a stereo reverb bus. Like you I read and heard time and time again that it's the "done thing" because it saves on CPU and makes everything sound like it's in the "same space." But is that really what you want? Are you striving for "realism" or a live feel? I can see where it could be a goal for a jazz or folk track, but I think with more modern and/or hard edged styles then you have a lot more license when it comes to "realism."

Personally I feel that when you send everything to a stereo reverb bus, you lose some focus and clarity as panned mono instruments get smooshed around the stereo image. It could also contribute to frequency masking. However it can also help create "blend" between instruments and stop them sounding too unconnected. Lately I've been leaning toward sending TINY amounts to a "blend" bus (stereo reverb, maybe an "ambience" type preset, almost like you don't hear it's there till you turn it off) and then giving each mono instrument it's own mono reverb bus with the reverb panned to the same location as the instrument, give or take 5%. So they each have their own reverb for tone/sustain/depth, while also benefiting a tiny bit from the stereo reverb bus. To me this sounds much better than just using the one stereo reverb for everything. Might be worth a try.

James
Windows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
#17
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/01 10:49:29 (permalink)
That's a good idea, sharke. I have seen a lot of vids where the guys slapped reverb right on all the tracks and then glued it altogether via a bus as well. It was a little more work than I was interested in doing with this tester project but I'll mess around with it on any new stuff. Cheers.
#18
Kev999
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3922
  • Joined: 2007/05/01 14:22:54
  • Location: Victoria, Australia
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/02 18:19:24 (permalink)

Cymbals & hi-hats completely dominate the mix...



The hi-hat in particular sounds disconnected from the rest of the kit.  Has it been accidentally routed straight to the master bus rather than through a drums bus?

SonarPlatinum(22.11.0.111)|Mixbus32C(4.3.19)|DigitalPerformer(9.5.1)|Reaper(5.77)
FractalDesign:DefineR5|i7-6850k@4.1GHz|16GB@2666MHz-DDR4|MSI:GamingProCarbonX99a|Matrox:M9148(x2)|UAD2solo(6.5.2)|W7Ult-x64-SP1
Audient:iD22+ASP800|KRK:VXT6|+various-outboard-gear|+guitars&basses, etc.
Having fun at work lately
#19
Danny Danzi
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 5810
  • Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
  • Location: DanziLand, NJ
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/02 18:46:59 (permalink)
Hi Beeps,

Cool, thanks for allowing me to post this. I wrote it up the other day, read it a few times and tightened it up a bit. It's long as usual, but hopefully you can really get something out of this. Was going to pm it to you, but felt a few others may get something from it as well. Before I go on, I didn't mean to sound like I was discrediting anyone that has posted before me with my opinions or what I feel to be factual. I just sort of found it odd that no one had mentioned the things *I* personally thought were important here as well as things that were blatantly obvious to me. Then again....we all know about the subjective part of this field. Anyway, I hope this is useful. :)

A little tough love here, but you'll love me back for this when you've read everything. You know I'd never say anything to hurt you and am always here for you. But let's nail this once and for all. Forget mastering right now brother and either focus on trying to get monitors that better represent what you're recording/hearing or take a step back to a year ago.

The old mix (in my opinion) obliterates the new one. The reason being? The new one is loaded with harsh highs. You totally stripped out the mids, so it lacks body and thickness. You totally stripped out the lows, so you have no bass punch on my end. This tells me your ears or listening environment has changed or your monitors or whatever you're listening on needs to be tuned or replaced. I sincerely believe you are lacking in 2 important areas.

1. I know you've been reading a lot and checking out videos. You may need to be a bit more selective in what you consider "helpful". Try not to always read into the hype people on forums attempt to feed you. Not just this forum, ANY forum...even if it's presented by a supposedly credible engineer. When they do post something, make sure you listen to their mixes and like what you hear before you take any advice they share. For example, don't use a multi-band or any other effect "just because" or because "so and so said you should". Every effect we use in every situation has a cause, an effect and most importantly, a reason. If you are not using the multi-band correctly or are putting it on because someone said you should, or are using a preset or just experimenting, you can easily blow it coming out of the gate. Not every piece needs the same effects in a chain at all times and trust me when I tell you, not everything needs a MBL nor do we need reverb on the master or in the mastering stage.

2. I don't think mastering is your problem unless your final mix of this song is drastically different from your master. The mix needs to be right before you worry about mastering. This is the biggest problem I see with people in this field. They think if they know how to master better that they will suddenly push the black clouds away. One of the big problems I see is the majority of home recordists do NOT understand that their mix needs so much work, it shouldn't even be considered as a mastering candidate yet. This is where people need the most help. Mastering will not help a soul if the mix is jacked. It's like, we can teach people how to master till we're blue in the face. That still won't fix their broken mix. The more stuff people put out via video that others can just take and learn from, the more corrupt and misled some people get. Like, there needs to be a rule that states a person can't download a mastering video until they can post a mix that sounds good enough to allow them to learn how to master. LOL!!!

It's like...these companies sell all these mastering suites, limiters and things that supposedly help mixes/masters. They don't help at all unless you really know what you're doing and the mix has to be right. Slapping a limiter or MBL or some rack full of mastering plugs isn't going to improve a thing if the mix is in bad shape. We do nothing to educate the masses by simply exploiting the art of mastering when the mixes of today sound like muddy compressed @ss before they've even been mastered! Seriously, as a teacher myself, we need to teach people to crawl before they run. Again, that is not said to knock anyone that decides to make a video that will help thousands of people. My point is, there are people that shouldn't be experimenting in certain areas YET and this is why we hear so many bad productions. It's a catch 22...you may teach 500 people that ARE ready for mastering while you may corrupt another 500 that shouldn't be at this step yet, understand? We don't fix the masses if we don't...well, fix the masses CORRECTLY, which is my whole point.

Just to further ram the point home for a second. I know guitarist Greg Howe and his singer Meghan Krauss. I sent them a test mp3 of a part of their song Evergreen off their new album with me singing/playing all the instruments just to make them laugh. Meghan is insane...best female rock singer I've heard in years! But anyway, I sent them this little clip. It's not mastered. For not being mastered, it doesn't sound too bad considering I did this on a stock Dell using cheapo gear and nothing remotely close to what I use in my studio. How much mastering would I do to this? Not much....if anything, the mix needs more work before it would be considered a mastering candidate in MY eyes...errr ears...but the thing took me 30 minutes, so I didn't expect much. It's just for fun, but didn't turn out too bad. If I DID master it as is, I'd add a little low end so that the kick drum and bass guitar would reach down a little deeper into the 50-55 Hz range and I may only implement a sub harm of that using a tight Q. OR, I may decide to push the 130 range and change my game plan so that it's less subby and more rounded. I could do all that in the mix stage really and then have less to do at the mastering stage. But the cool thing about this little clip in my opinion is, it's fairly neutral and leaves you room to sculpt it any way you want. Being "neutral" is what we want before we master something imho.

https://dl.dropboxusercon...9348/EvergreenTest.mp3

(The real song with Meghan and Greg is here...whew, what a great tune http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2HmV2lR9KM )

More stuff for your head.....I decline work on a weekly basis due to people sending me mixes that are not ready for the mastering stage. Yours *might* have been one of those I passed on if you would have sent it to me to be mastered. Not because you suck, (you're light years ahead of suck) but because the mix itself would benefit more from fixing it AT the mix stage than having it mastered and me taking your money. I'd rather you have the best mix possible before we master it...especially if I couldn't make a huge difference. So I'd decline to master you and would tell you to fix the mix or tell you HOW to fix the mix and send me another when you're ready. But as it stands right now, you need to find out why this mix today is so much different/lacking (at least to me it is) than the one a year ago. It's either the monitors, lack of tuning them or your ears and you needing to be taught what to listen for. This is another thing I need to stress that people just don't get...

When you mix and listen to a song 3000 times...when you hit that export button, you are done. If you weren't done, you wouldn't have pressed the export button. Now, you have the stereo 2-track mix and you are about to master it. Where do you start? Do you even know what to listen for on the same set of monitors, on the same song that you have heard 3000 times? See where I'm going with this? At this point, most people don't know how much mastering they need or don't need. And, most of the issues you THINK can be remedied during mastering...are the furthest from the truth. All your issues I hear in both of your mixes would be better off fixed in the mix stage with the mastering being a little polish.

In your mix of a year ago, you have some body in the instrumentation with the only blatant issues being the highs on the cymbals being way to abrasive, your drum levels needing work and your snare needing more punch and less high end. Some good compression on the kit would work nice as well. The guitars are a bit sharp/high endy, but they cut through the mix in a good way. I can take this tone and accept it even though it's a bit high endy...but it's not to the point of it hurting my ears. A light low-pass would take the fizz right out of it. Control the cymbal sssssssss and make the drums more clear and level adjusted and this mix from a year ago improves ten-fold just as it is with 0 mastering at all.

The new mix is totally jacked in the high end area on everything to where I can barely listen to it without putting my fingers in my ears. Maybe high passed too much? The high end is just way out of control on this. That said, the drum levels seem to be a bit more precise/consistent but the high end, lack of lows and excessive abrasiveness are just too much to even try to figure out what is going on here. Yeah I too hear the pumping. Proof you need a reason to use a multi and need to know how to use it.

What really makes this strange is...you played like a lunatic (meant in a good way) yet because of this last mix, it's very hard to enjoy it. So though the playing and performance is quite good (in my opinion) you have proven to those who always chime in here talking about "your performance is everything in a mix" that they are out of their tree's like I have been saying for 10 freaking years. This is a good performance in my opinion...and the mix ruined the performance to where it messes with the enjoyment factor of the listener. Any other good musicians with a good performance will sound the exact same way if they came up with this mix and eq curve.

So what do we do? We have to go back in time and see why you pressed the export button on the first mix a year ago and why we have what we have today. Some questions for you.

What do you hear today when you listen to the 1 year mix verses what you hear on the new one? Meaning, why do you think the new one sounds better if that is indeed how you feel?

Can you now hear what I hear since I've pointed it out to you and does it change your opinion of the new mix?

Can you understand why the new mix is not to my liking? The old one needs work too, but in my opinion it is further along than the new one by leaps and bounds.

Sometimes less is more. Honest when I tell you that. The more processing we do, the more we sometimes miss our mark. I'm not trying to deter you (or anyone else) from mastering. What I AM trying to say is, you have to know when a mix can be the issue so that you don't blame or waste the time on mastering. Especially when mastering may not be the culprit. Now, there is a good chance re-mastering your final mix of this new version may turn out better. But there are things that *I* personally would do in the mix before this would even materialize into a mastering candidate.

First, your drums need to have an identity. Listen to the music you like. When that drum kit hits, every instrument in the kit is heard at all times. A snare or kick doesn't disappear in the mix at random. The reason being....they remove frequencies that aren't needed and they compress the kick and snare so that it is always audible and remains in the mix. If you are not splitting your drum tracks up to individuals where you can process them, this is a necessity and something you need to always do in my opinion. If you ARE doing this, you need to learn how drums should be processed as well as how compression can be used as an effect for transients, as well as it keeping things in check sort of like a prison guard enforcing the "do not step over this line" law. Sometimes you need both, other times just one form.

That said, sample drum processing differs from REAL drum kit processing. So if you are reading about the processing that goes on with real drums, it can be slightly misleading. Though the way you'd process a real kit as opposed to a sampled kit would be similar, the human feel factor and execution determines how the drums will be processed. On a sampled kit we may want to use a compressor so that it simulates a transient plug so the snare really lashes out. On a real snare with a dude that knows how to play it, he's going to crack that thing where it sounds like a shot-gun blast...so for him, you would use the compressor differently...to compress and condition, not to bring out transients....understand? The same with kick drums. Sampled hits (though incredible technology wise) just need to be processed differently or you literally make them stale, lifeless, over-compressed and downright fake and synthetic.

If I played my V-Drums kit verses something someone programmed using the same kit, you'd process the kits differently because one is programmed, the other has a human element even though it's still the same sampled kit. Stuff like this really can make a difference. Real bass as opposed to a sampled bass...again, huge factor here in how your outcome will be as well as how you would process the bass. When I use the SI Bass in Sonar, even though I get a killer tone out of it and think it's one of the best kept secrets in Sonar that should be more popular than it is lol....my real bass is processed way different because of my human element and my execution on the instrument. So learning how to deal with these in different situations can really make an incredible difference. Remember....sampled kits and instruments come out of the box fairly processed other than BFD 2 or 3. The more you process some of these things, the worse they sound. So be careful and remember less is more because someone did the work for you. Eq, lightly comp and go unless you are shooting for a specific, processed sound.

Your guitars are decent. I can't comment on another man's tone because that is just too subjective. I personally like a bit more mids in high gain tones with a bit of rasp so they cut through the mix. Yours seem to have very little low end in them (which is GOOD practice but you took out a bit too much imho) so to me they lack body and definition. However, the ones in the mix a year ago are more along the lines of what I prefer. This new one is just killing me with high end to where I can't tell if the mix went bad or the master went bad.

The key here in my opinion is your listening environment. I know most people don't have thousands to shell out for monitors etc. However, you have to either get lucky with some set of Logitech's or cheapo gear that just magically has the right sound that is accurate, or you have to get some good stuff that makes a valuable difference.

These songs are so drastically different in tonality, I'm a bit surprised at how different they are. I say this because they are so different, it almost sounds as though you may have lost sight of what good tones and frequencies are. Some of it due to your monitoring, the rest due to reading/experimenting too much without really having the right knowledge perhaps? Something made you suck the life out of these tracks and replace it with harsh high end. We need to find out what it was and why that sounds good to your ears now.

The key (besides a good monitor environment) is to know how and what to listen for. Once you can do that, all those black clouds that make this so frustratingly challenging, go away. Trust me when I tell you. I'd be willing to bet you are actually a good engineer. But because you may not know what to listen for or have a good monitor representation to listen on, it's totally messing up your experience in this field. I sure can't use those Sennheiser's bro. Too much low end for me, so I would do the same as you...strip it out.

So in closing, if I were you, I'd forget about mastering right now and concentrate on mixing, your listening environment, identifying what justifies a good sound/bad sound and knowing how and when to process with certain tools. Having this knowledge alone will blow away any mastering you could learn in your particular situation. Mastering should just about NEVER sound completely different from the mix you exported out of Sonar that you considered a mastering candidate.

The only times mastered versions sound drastically different from a mix:

1. The client messed up the mix so bad, the ME performed surgery.

2. The client messed up the mix and did not have the work files to remix, so the ME is stuck with it and must work with it as is.

3. A mix engineer through the advice of a producer, left the mix neutral so that it could be molded further at the mastering stage by the producer and the ME.

4. You're experimenting and just want to see how much you can compress for loudness/change/improve/ruin/your mix.

Other than the above, a mastered song should not need surgery to where it no longer sounds like that mix that made you press the export button. I'd be a raging lunatic if I sent a mix to be mastered and it came back sounding completely different than what I sent. That's not how it's supposed to work.

So try to concentrate on the following and see if it makes a difference for you. I should have put these in a specific order, but they are all equally important and some just may not be feasible right now. But work on this list:

A. Tracking: Don't track it if you don't love/believe in the sound from the beginning. The more you do this stuff, the more you learn when a sound will work and when it will be something you mess with for hours that never works that wastes your time.

B. Identify, identify, identify! Tones/frequencies and when/what/how to listen for things. If you cannot do any of these things correctly because of your monitor situation, you will NEVER be able to unless you fix your listening environment. I can't stress how important this is.

C. Room tuning, ARC, new monitors, sub, whatever you need...try your best not to procrastinate getting these things. With each one you implement, another black cloud leaves, I promise you.

D. Judge the advice you get from others by the material you have heard from them at all times. I don't give a rats @ss who tells you this that this that or this....if their material sounds terrible, they are not someone you want to model off of. If by chance you or anyone else feels that way about me, please disregard everything you've read. Seriously, that's not said sarcastically...if you do not like how I mix, do not listen to me. Listen to the person that has posted material that you admire sonically before you just listen to someone that can share text that talks a good ballgame. Would you take LEAD guitar lessons from Neil Young? Me neither. ;)

E. When you read about something, if it doesn't give you examples on how it is used, you have learned nothing. Any teacher that cannot give you examples in actual audio or video that literally sound good....is not a teacher you need to listen to. Live and learn by example or search until you find the examples with the correct teaching.

So anyway, I really hope you find some of this helpful Beeps. I think the world of you or I wouldn't have put the time into this. You put the time in too, it's only fair you get a serious and in depth critique from me. Not to mention, you've helped me quite a bit in the past so I owed ya one. :) If If you have any questions, feel free to ask man. :)

-Danny

My Site
Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
#20
ston
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 965
  • Joined: 2008/03/04 12:28:40
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 08:43:35 (permalink)
Danny Danzi
When you mix and listen to a song 3000 times...when you hit that export button, you are done. If you weren't done, you wouldn't have pressed the export button.

 
I sometimes like to take an export of a mix downstairs to play on my hifi, or to work to play on my cheapish headphones, just to get an idea of how it's 'travelling'.  Admittedly I don't do that until I feel that the mix is close to being finished, but I find it useful, like getting a second (or third) opinion.
 

C. Room tuning, ARC, new monitors, sub, whatever you need...try your best not to procrastinate getting these things. With each one you implement, another black cloud leaves, I promise you.

 
This times 1,000.  You can buy monitors that cost a million pounds, but put them in a poor listening environment and they're worth less that a set of £100 monitors in a good environment.
 
Room treatment is not a practicable option for me, so I created for myself a stack of parametric EQs which corrected the room as best as I could manage to give a flat response.  The immediate difference in my mixes was night and day.  They sounded good in my home studio, on my hifi, at work etc. 
 
I couldn't get it quite right due to the way the filters started interacting with each other, so I've just decided to take improving my listening environment to the next level and have ordered the ARC 2 system; I think it is bound to do a better job at correcting for my room than I can with my ears and a bunch of EQs.
 
#21
markyzno
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1216
  • Joined: 2011/02/08 06:40:20
  • Location: UK
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 09:34:42 (permalink)
Beepy, I'm a rock guy (less Slayer and more Noise but the same rules still apply)
 
Your second mix is just far far too harsh and nothing can really breathe, Danny has hit many points on the head in his above post.
 
You need some good monitors (which I hope you'll use quietly) which will help you avoid some very harsh highs and lack of lows which are very apparent in your second mix....With these nasty frequencies bounding around, your composition suffers from being over produced.

Why even go there with mastering? Again as Danny says, if you have a nice flat mix leave it at that and send over to a friend who understands mastering a bit better?
 
Having said that, Like Danny I would never say anything to upset you and the above is merely my humble opinion.

Theres a good song in there if you can clean up your dynamics.
 
Big Love mate!!




Sonar Platinum 64 bit > Pro tools 10.3.2 >Intel i7 3770K > 16Gb Ram > Gigabyte Z77-D3H Motherboard> NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 2 GB > ATi RADEON HD5700 > 240GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD> Win 10 home 64 bit> Delta 1010 > MOTU Audio Express > MA-15D's > NI Ultimate 9 > NI Kontrol S61 1.1 > NI MAschine Studio 2.3 / KORG MS-20 Mini - Arturia MicroBrute > KORG SQ1 - KORG Kaoss Pad KP3 > iPad and IO Dock 2 running various bits > Bunch of guitars >

Sound Design on IMDB --
 
#22
Grem
Max Output Level: -19.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5562
  • Joined: 2005/06/28 09:26:32
  • Location: Baton Rouge Area
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 10:42:14 (permalink)
Beep, I didn't read the other posts. Didn't want them to influence me. Here's my take. I listened on decent speakers. Not great, but not BS either.
 
The first one, which is the newer one I believe, sounded good until I heard the next one. Then I realized that the new one sounded too compressed to me. Just squashed together. The older one (the second link) had more detail available to my ears. More dynamics than the new one (first link).
 
The song is good! I like it. My type of music. But your lead playing was buried man. And it sounded good. But I had to strain to hear it. Get that **** out front!! You can play! Let 'er rip!!
 
I don't know enough to give mixing advise. But if this was my trk, I'd go back and try to work on eq everything again. What jumps to my mind is frequency masking. Things just on top of each other. And not as clear as they can be.
 
Oh I don't know if your using a "Loudness Maximizer" of some sort, but it sounds like it to me. Try and use that as least as possible to get rid of that squashed sound.
 
[edit]
I just read the other posts. And what I want to thank you Beep for is posting this. I never sat here intending to have a lesson, but that's exactly what has happened! When I saw Danny's post, and I saw that I had heard the same things he did, I realized that I am learning too!! I am progressing.
 
I 'thought' I could mix. All I needed to learn was to master. That would make my songs sound better. Then I read, studied a book on mixing (www.amazon.com/Mixing-Audio-Concepts-Practices-Tools) and that's when I realized how much I didn't know about mixing.
 
One thing I can say that's encouraged by Danny, is that we have tools. We need to know what that tool will do in this or that situation, before we apply that tool.
 
Danny says a lot of good things. I read every word. I wanted to read every word. Because I am willing and wanting to learn. And the only right way to do this, is to listen to someone you like, and follow their example, to teach yourself how to listen and use the tools!
 
[/edit]
post edited by Grem - 2013/12/03 11:23:58

Grem

Michael
 
Music PC
i7 2600K; 64gb Ram; 3 256gb SSD, System, Samples, Audio; 1TB & 2TB Project Storage; 2TB system BkUp; RME FireFace 400; Win 10 Pro 64; CWbBL 64, 
Home PC
AMD FX 6300; 8gb Ram; 256 SSD sys; 2TB audio/samples; Realtek WASAPI; Win 10 Home 64; CWbBL 64 
Surface Pro 3
Win 10  i7 8gb RAM; CWbBL 64
#23
markyzno
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1216
  • Joined: 2011/02/08 06:40:20
  • Location: UK
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 13:06:32 (permalink)
Personally I think its really cool when we open up like this on a thread (and with respect).
 
Beep you have balls doing this and I wish you well!
 
Really cant stress how important Monitors are tho and well positioned ones at that, although...dont expect miracles at first...give it time, let your ears get experienced with the room/space and kit...play your tunes on other systems and then with experience you can compare and *find your sound*
 
It took me over a decade to find "my sound" and i'm still not happy (that doesnt help with loads of new kit being released all the time)

Best of luck and keep rocking!

Sonar Platinum 64 bit > Pro tools 10.3.2 >Intel i7 3770K > 16Gb Ram > Gigabyte Z77-D3H Motherboard> NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 2 GB > ATi RADEON HD5700 > 240GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD> Win 10 home 64 bit> Delta 1010 > MOTU Audio Express > MA-15D's > NI Ultimate 9 > NI Kontrol S61 1.1 > NI MAschine Studio 2.3 / KORG MS-20 Mini - Arturia MicroBrute > KORG SQ1 - KORG Kaoss Pad KP3 > iPad and IO Dock 2 running various bits > Bunch of guitars >

Sound Design on IMDB --
 
#24
Danny Danzi
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 5810
  • Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
  • Location: DanziLand, NJ
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 13:32:30 (permalink)
markyzno
Why even go there with mastering? Again as Danny says, if you have a nice flat mix leave it at that and send over to a friend who understands mastering a bit better?



I think the problem Mark, is none of us wants to give up and send something to a friend. LOL! If I would have done that I may not be in the position I am now. BUT, I definitely had to learn when a mix should be considered a mastering candidate. With this economy and everyone just trying to enjoy their music when they can, we're always going to be trying to sort this out on our own...and rightfully so. However, like I said before, we need to know when a mix needs work before it hits the mastering stage.
 
In a nutshell, it's SUPER important for everyone to remember that a mix should be able to stand on its own to where you don't EVER need to rely on a master. That was the purpose of me sharing my little clip in the other post. Not to compete or compare against beeps, but to say "hey, this ain't the best mix...but it sounds pretty decent and stands on its own without any mastering."
 
Speaking of mastering, one of the disadvantages most of us have is we compare our MIXES to already mastered material. This in turn makes people master within their mixes. I wish there was a way to show people what a pro mix is supposed to sound like BEFORE it gets mastered. I'm talking major label stuff that is usually neutral so the producer and ME have the power to literally create the sound of the album. I've worked with quite a bit of that stuff, but no one ever wants to share their songs all naked like that. If you've ever heard that Bohemian Rhapsody multi-track that's been circulating, that's not mastered and is taken right off the tape machine. Nothing on that instrument wise is fantastic once you get past the whole "omg this is Queen!" syndrome. Proof of how important the mix really is as opposed to the master.
 
If people are mixing to mastered material (which has gone on since way before the beginning of recording in the bedroom) it really is an instant disadvantage in my opinion. The reason being, the engineering tactics of today sort of degrade music more than/differently than 20 years ago. In some ways, I love the sound of today. In other ways, it makes me cringe because it just sounds too sonic and non-musical. When you tried to mix to a mastered song in the mid 70's to late 80's (which I always felt were great times for production especially for rock) you weren't fighting insane volume, limiting and loads of sub lows. Though I wasn't really into mastering at that time, it would be my guess that the majority of the music put out during those times didn't end up drastically different once it was mastered. The reason being....it STILL sounded relatively neutral to me when it was complete and in my stereo.
 
These days, I got clients yelling at me to try and cop mastering curves from Nickelback who to me, have only put out a handful of songs that actually sound good on studio monitors or car speakers. They definitely excel on earbuds in my opinion. But again...anyone trying to get the sound they get is going to struggle unless they have a good grasp on how to control those sub lows they get on the bass guitar....and we all know how bass can be the death of us without the right listening situation.
 
Anyway, I just felt the need to elaborate a little more on this in case it may help anyone further as you raised an interesting point about sharing with a friend....and then, well you know, I start thinking about other things and another novel pops up. LOL! Sorry about that. :)
 
-Danny

My Site
Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
#25
Grem
Max Output Level: -19.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5562
  • Joined: 2005/06/28 09:26:32
  • Location: Baton Rouge Area
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 13:36:36 (permalink)
markyzno
Personally I think its really cool when we open up like this on a thread (and with respect). [Grem edit: Bold]
 
Beep you have balls doing this and I wish you well!
 
Really cant stress how important Monitors are tho and well positioned ones at that, although...dont expect miracles at first...give it time, let your ears get experienced with the room/space and kit...play your tunes on other systems and then with experience you can compare and *find your sound*
 
It took me over a decade to find "my sound" and i'm still not happy (that doesnt help with loads of new kit being released all the time)

Best of luck and keep rocking!




I agree. Bought some decent monitors (KRK) and it took me about 3-4 yrs to get to where I knew how they translated out. I still am working on it. IOW, I ain't happy yet!!
 
Also, I would like to suggest, learn about standing waves and how they affect "your" listening environment.

Grem

Michael
 
Music PC
i7 2600K; 64gb Ram; 3 256gb SSD, System, Samples, Audio; 1TB & 2TB Project Storage; 2TB system BkUp; RME FireFace 400; Win 10 Pro 64; CWbBL 64, 
Home PC
AMD FX 6300; 8gb Ram; 256 SSD sys; 2TB audio/samples; Realtek WASAPI; Win 10 Home 64; CWbBL 64 
Surface Pro 3
Win 10  i7 8gb RAM; CWbBL 64
#26
wizard71
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 836
  • Joined: 2012/02/12 05:45:05
  • Location: UK
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 13:49:31 (permalink)
I think Danny's quote that we try and mix to make it sound like mastered material is very poignant. In fact I would say its rife because what do we have to compare our mixes to? The references mixes we all try and adhere to are in fact mastered versions. The question is then, how to learn the art of mixing if examples are so hard to come by?
Bibs

http://www.youtube.com/SpaceTimeAces
https://soundcloud.com/space-time-aces
Sonar Platinum - Win 8.1 x64 - Haswell 4770k - ASrock Z87 pro3 - 32gb ram - Fractal design R4 case - 3x HDD 1 USB 2.0 external 1x cr M4 ssd for samples - Octa-capture - Sontronics Aria - Sontronics STC-1s - BX8 monitors - ARC 2 system - Kawai CA63 piano - Kawai MP6 Stage piano - Fender custom Telecaster FMT - Yamaha LL6 - Fender P bass


#27
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 14:02:41 (permalink)
This is going to be an epically looooong post filled with blathering, meandering rants and other beepsterisms. It's all more or less responses to stuff that's been posted, descriptions of my own thoughts, opinions and aspirations and more intricate detail as to what I think about this mix and what my next steps will be. Hopefully it isn't offensive (I just kind of went stream of consciousness here) as it is most certainly not intended to be.
 
That said, ALL of this can be completely ignored. All the relevant info on my new plan is at the bottom of this rant. I will divide the rant from the meat with a double line like this...
 
=======================================================
 
This is the rant...
 
Hi, kev, Mark, ston, Grem and of course Danny. Thanks again for taking a listen and giving me some things to look at. This post will get too muddled and long if I try to squeeze in replies to specific parts of specific posts so I'll just post some of where I think I should personally head based on your suggestions. Also I'll maybe try to explain a bit why I took the direction I did but obviously took too far. Not making excuses but more to give you guys an idea of how I like to hear things and why. Some of the weirdness might make a little more sense then.
 
So I've already PMd Danny to thank him and just give a quick reply about some stuff. Basically it was along the lines of that I do think I destroyed this in the mastering phase BUT there are indeed some mix issues I can now look at from different perspectives thanks to all the input I've gotten here. Also that when I get a chance I'll try to post the premastered version. Unfortunately the levels are REALLY low on that but in my attempt to give myself plenty of headroom I again probably over did it. I was also having a weird issue where even if I wanted to bring up the levels within the mix I was quite literally running out of room on my faders for some of the instrument. The drums particularly. I think this may have to do with the insane amount of layering I did on the guitars and bass. The drums just couldn't keep up. That is only speculation though.
 
Now with the limiter I know I screwed that up a bit. As I mentioned earlier I used the Boost11 plug (it's the only one I have AFAIK) and after a bit of experimenting I set it to only just touch the really loud peaks. This was a mistake I think. What I believe I should have done was turn it up to just before those peaks were hitting or getting rid of them in the mix phase with automation. That said... because it is all so low I'll still have to crank it. I kind of figured that with something like that you wouldn't hear the limiter unless it was actually limiting.
 
Sooooo... does the Boost11 limiter actually color the sound even if it is not limiting anything? If so then I have a bigger problem than I thought and would have to do far more work to get this up to a normal level. I should also mention that because of all this there parts that were overloading the PC Modules so again I had to go through and turn certain things down to avoid that. Not sure what the deal was there but again it probably had to do with the not layered tracks not being able to keep up with the layered ones. 
 
Next up is my reference track. As I said I was using a track from Slayer's Divine Intervention. I have always considered that to be excellent production value but now I'm rethinking that. I spent the morning comparing that track to tracks off their other albums (older and newer) and then against my little creation here. I was avoiding using something older like a South of Heaven track because although that's a great album it seemed far inferior production wise compared to Divine Intervention however I noticed something today and I really should have noticed it earlier. Although the bass and guitars on DI are much better sounding and the overall sound is cleaner the DRUMS are pathetic compared to South of Heaven. Like they are really thin and kind of low in the mix... kind of like my remix here. On SoH they are warm, thick and really in your face. This is a direct result of my ears constantly being draw to the guitar parts in a song. Because the guitars sounded better on my reference track I totally overlooked the weak drums. Don't get me wrong... DI is a monstrous album but it's nowhere near as good for drums as SoH. THEN I was listening to a more contemporary album by them God Hates Us All and frankly I don't really care for that album and to me the guitars are  kind of... IDK... I just don't like them BUT the drums are out of freaking sight. I don't think there is any way I could come close to that without a monstrous drum room, a monstrous kit, a monstrous player and a LOT more experience/better gear. It is something to strive for though as I move forward and it has been noted. I was also listening to a lot of other random thrash metal stuff some old some new and seeing what's what paying particular attention to the drums and how the mix was working together. Again many times the drums are just much more present than my reference track.
 
So long story short... I messed up by using the track I did. I also realized something... well rather it solidified something I kind of knew even when I was first recording this over a year ago was that I put down TOO many guitar tracks to fill it all in. This was because the guits just weren't sounding thick enough for me at the time BUT I could have corrected it in the mix phase. I just did not know enough back then to do that so I did what I know how to do... write extra parts. Now those parts are kind of part of the song and I don't want to drop them but I will be definitely keeping this in mind while arranging new material.
 
It should be noted though that this indeed was written to be ear candy for guitar players as well as a quick starter project for me to learn on. I mention this because I think some stuff that has been said relates to this. It wasn't meant to showcase the bass (or I would not have just doubled the rhythm guit) and certainly not the drums (because... well although it was played "live" it was on a completely foreign instrument to me... the padKontrol. If I had been playing it on a real kit THEN I would have tried to show off my drumming abilities a bit more). Not an excuse by any means but perhaps that will give a bit more context to where I was going with this. Kind of like you wouldn't listen to a Vai or Malmsteen track to check out the backing parts (but obviously for those examples... at least for Vai, you're still getting a lot more for your money than you got here with the Beeps Creep... lol). I do actually write and perform other styles... many other styles actually but guitar metal was where I started and what has always kept me pounding stages and getting clubs filled so it only made sense to start there in my mixing studies. It's just a lot easier for me to write and dial in guit parts than anything else so it took a lot of extra weirdness out of the equation as I learned the tools and concepts. Again not an excuse at all just giving a little more insight to how this ended up where it did.
 
The next thing is I may have actually ruined myself because of my choices of music I listened to for pleasure over the years. I love grit and noise and general chaos in my music. I'd rather listen to a garage demo or crummy live board recording than an immaculately produced radio piece. Most of the stuff I'm into is intentionally obnoxious. Lots of underground punk, metal, industrial, whatever. The nice stuff I listen to is usually ancient like old folk, country, early rock, blues, motown, jazz, etc so the production values are usually quite low by today's standards. In one way it's a problem because I know I need to be able to slick things up to be taken seriously as an engineer but in another way I want to say "F*ck it!" and crank up the saturation and load it all up with hiss and noise. A perfect example is the fact one of my favorite releases of all time is Dead Kennedy's In God We Trust/Plastic Surgery Disasters. The production values are HORRENDOUS but god damn do I love that stuff. Once the DKs started getting into higher production values like on Frankenchrist I just... I find it unlistenable. It's that crappy spring reverb or whatever it is they used back then and the cold sterile tone like they are performing in an empty gymnasium. A lot of potentially great music from that period was ruined IMO because of that crap. It's why I've always shied away from reverb in general and now am kind screwed because now I DO see the benefit of well executed reverb to help even a "dry" sound. I just don't know how to use it properly but will learn (there is reverb on this track BTW).
 
So again that's no excuse but when it comes down to it even if and when I develop the skills to produce stuff EXACTLY how I want (which this is a long way away from being) I think a lot of pros probably won't really dig it. It ain't proper but it's what I like. I would however NOT use my arsehole ears and tastes on other people's material unless they specifically asked but that is all moot because I'm years away from having total control over a mix (I'll get there though I SWEAR IT!)
 
Anyway, that's just rambling for those who may have been interested in where I was, where I'm at and where I'd like to eventually be and how the Beeps Creep has gotten to this point. Seriously though the master killed a lot of my work and it was stupid that I rushed that.
 
I don't really see what the appeal is with that first version though. No offense meant but man... I keep listening to it to see if I can hear what you guys like about it but I'm drawing a blank. The ONLY thing I think it has going for it is it sounds a little more natural and live which the premaster of the remix has as well (IMO but I'll let you guys be the judge). To me the original is totally washed out, there's no clarity, I can't hear the kick drum at ALL at most points, instruments fade in and out as everything fights for room... IDK... it's just a mess to me. I quite literally hate it and think it's an embarrassment. I mean the new one is messed up too but I just don't see the appeal of the original. It does certainly have more low end which I will correct in the new version but to me it is really muddy... like the bad kind of low end. I am however surprised at the bass sound in it. I don't remember the bass cutting that much originally but it is much more dull than I like so I guess if I had my druthers I'd find a middle ground between the clearer/crisper sound of the bass on the remix and more full/fat sound of the original. Bass to me though is a very strange animal and I just WISH I could afford the MarkII plug. There are no sims employed on these tracks because both TH2 and GR5 were not really helping. It is simply the line in signal and everything else was done with layering, EQ, compression and saturation.
 
The only other thing I guess I like about the original version is the cymbals and hats sound more natural but again that's because of me foolishly using the multiband comp in the master when it wasn't necessary and cranking the high end too much (in the mix and the master). However in the original even though they sound more "natural" it's kind of in a bad way. Like crappy stamped cymbals with chunks broken off of them giving that trash can lid sound. In the newer one they sound more like nice cymbals with good decay. They still sound like arse because I cranked them too much but not like cymbals I pulled out the garbage somewhere.
 
I guess... and I can hear it, is that the lows and low mids aren't stripped giving the overall sound more body and less harshness. I think when I get back into the new mix and execute my current plan I can fix that. Maybe disengage the steep slope hi pass on some or all of the bass tracks (yes I used a hi pass to try and get rid of any potential mud but maybe I want a bit of mud) and do some other stuff to bring out more body/bottom end.
 
Again I think I stripped much of that out in mastering though. Seriously I'm almost embarrassed to admit what I did with the EQ when I was trying to conform to the -3db per octave "rule"... but here goes. I used TWO multibands to make the freq analyst conform. One to get the curve close then a SECOND one to touch up. I knew I was being an idiot when I did that. I just KNEW IT but I couldn't help myself. I was so wrapped up in what was "proper" that I just... IDK... I lost all common sense. Same happened with the multiband comp. It wasn't helping but I left it in anyway. Now it's a mess. It was probably still whack before I did that but not nearly as much. I just had other stuff on my mind and tried to push it out the door.
 
Danny is completely right when he said I just was not ready for a mastering attempt and quite frankly I think the premaster did NOT need any major mastering at all. Just some slight tweaks and a volume boost. Anything else should have been done in the mix but it was one of those Bill O'Reilly "F*ck it! We'll do it live!!" moments.
 
Live and learn, eh?
 
Anyway... I hope that noone is offended by my own input on this track because I know I may have countered some people's opinions but even though I am still learning and all of this has been immensely helpful in the end there are certain things where my own preferences as far as sound have to take priority. 95% of what has been said has been spot on but there are a couple things that for my personal tastes and needs just don't really work so I thought I'd just clarify what I like and what I don't. I don't think that 5% is "wrong" it's just not really where I want to go or what my own little fanbase would want to hear. It's also why I like dealing with Danny because although his stuff is perfect it isn't actually how I would do things for certain stuff like this. He is immaculate perfection whereas I am gritty chaos. Ideally where I want to be is where HE is at with the super clean and clear stuff then bend it into the disgusting mess I like. Unfortunately where I am at now is starting out with an unintentionally disgusting mess... which for my audience would probably work but I'd rather be able to control the noise. Not have it control me... know what I mean?
 
=========================================================
 
This is the meat! ;-p
 
 
So... here's the tl;dr...
 
Based on everyones input and my mulling over of this issue since I originally posted this here is what I am going to do... to start with anyway.
 
1) Master: Dump that mastering job. It was stupid and never should have happened. I will fix things in the mix, get rid of that stupid multiband compressor (in favor of a much lighter general compressor or no compressor at all), get rid of the double EQ I did (in favor of a single very LIGHT linear phase EQing just to draw out/cut any good/bad stuff which should be minimal after the re remix), NOT allow the limiter to touch the signal at ALL and try to get my signals up in the mix instead. Basically not be an idiot and use my ears instead of a plug and bookworm crap to dictate what is happening.
 
2) In the mix bring down those obnoxious hats and cymbals and maybe lay off the compression a bit to get some of the more natural quality of the cymbals back.
 
3) Take a look at the bass track EQs and try to bring back a little more of the bottom end from the original version without losing the grit/clarity of the new version.
 
4) Take a hard look at the drums. Particularly getting the kick and snare to be more dominant in the mix even if it means cloning the parts, extracting some MIDI and using extra samples (these are bounced to audio MIDI tracks... I wanted to work with raw waves). I may not mess with the toms because frankly I don't give a crap about the flourishes. I just want to get the general mix together. This won't be released publicly unless I totally rerecord it and frankly I think the tom samples were crummy anyway or at least could have been doubled but they'll do for now. Don't want to spend forever on this. Obviously again the hats and cymbals need to be reigned in and freed up a bit.
 
5) Maybe take another look at the reverb sends to make sure that isn't contributing to the excessive hi end. I think I may have been a little heavy handed with it and didn't really spend as much time as I should have in that area.
 
To me... well I know the guitars COULD be tweaked a bit more (as a guit player they can always be tweaked a bit more) but I don't think they are bad as far as tone. I'm moving on to bigger and better things as far as my guitar tones anyway so they can remain as is. Maybe I'll draw out a little more bottom end but only if it doesn't conflict with other stuff.
 
Those are the major things I'll be looking at... there are a few other minor ideas I have but they aren't really worth mentioning as I'm not sure I'll even go there and this post is already wicked long.
 
Thank you again guys for all the advice and for listening. Everyone has been MORE than helpful here and really any time you guys see me post stuff for perusal I never want sh*t candy coated. If my feelings get hurt that's my own damned problem. I'm not here to have my ego placated... I'm here to learn.
 
You guys rock!
#28
Danny Danzi
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 5810
  • Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
  • Location: DanziLand, NJ
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 14:04:58 (permalink)
markyzno
Personally I think its really cool when we open up like this on a thread (and with respect).
 
Beep you have balls doing this and I wish you well!
 
Really cant stress how important Monitors are tho and well positioned ones at that, although...dont expect miracles at first...give it time, let your ears get experienced with the room/space and kit...play your tunes on other systems and then with experience you can compare and *find your sound*
 
It took me over a decade to find "my sound" and i'm still not happy (that doesnt help with loads of new kit being released all the time)

Best of luck and keep rocking!




I gotta stop reading your posts....you keep inspiring me to write more! Hahahahahahaha! Well said up there....opening up is great and it's even better when you have no fear. That's one of the things I tell my recording students. They get all insecure like they think I'm judging them like a shrink. Ok, I am...but don't tell them that..lol....BUT...it's not in a "you suck hahahahaha" way. If I don't find out what's wrong, nothing changes. So the cool thing is no one should ever be ashamed to post a song on a forum. I whole-heartedly disagree with anyone that says "you need to have thick skin" when it comes to asking for help on a forum. No one gains a thing by someone else annihilating them into submission or to the point of deterring them from progress. I see no need for anyone to sugar coat, but there's no need to bash brains in either. A person in need will learn a heck of a lot more if you tell them the problem and how to fix it without acting like a god.
 
Monitors: you share my pain Mark. It took me 15 years to suss it out man! All the while, I knew in my mind I was a decent engineer with a good set of ears. But you're like trying to run a race without any food or water in you. You're just not ever going to win like that. That's how I always felt. It wasn't that I had bad gear. I had good gear, I was just missing important elements that made such a difference, it changed my world. Between my sub, ARC, knowing what to listen for as well as being taught what to listen for from a mentor.....it all walked hand in hand. One without the other and I was toast. Or it would have taken longer for me to "get it" so to speak.
 
A good test for anyone questioning their monitor environment is....call a pro studio and see if you can work out a deal with them to where they charge you a a small fee to just listen to material you have recorded on THEIR monitors. They may just say "come in during my lunch break and bring your tunes". Listen to pro stuff you like on their monitors first to see how it translates, and then listen to 3-5 of your songs. As you listen to your material, write down all the things you hear wrong with your stuff. When you get back home, listen on your monitors and see if you hear the same things you listed as wrong. If you do not, or are struggling to hear them, the problem is in your monitoring.
 
That's what the guy that taught me did to me. I'd go to his studio with my latest mix in hand. He'd listen to 10 seconds of it, tell me it's crap, throw a pen and pad at me, sit me in his chair and say "now write down what's wrong with this". When I was done he'd say..."you wrote all this down and heard it here, why can't you hear it at home?" Simple...I was missing a sub, my room needed work and I had 0 monitor correction. How do you win? Right, you don't. PERIOD. He had room tuning, monitor tuning, a sub, no wonder I could hear. People just don't understand how important this is. I know it's sometimes expensive...but me knowing what I know now, as God is my witness I'd stop doing this before I'd go through all the guesswork of trying to hear things or compensating for things that don't exist. I was literally ready to sell all my gear. That's how frustrated it made me. The last thing anyone wants to do is come home after working their day job, put in 5 hours doing something you love, you bring the disc to work with you on your way in the next day, and throw it out the window after listening for a minute. Anyone have that happen? Whew, I have all too often. You'll get fair results with headphones....but you'll never make the right calls until you get good monitors that are set up for making the right calls.
 
At the end of the day we have two choices, get the right stuff when we can afford it or we try not to take it so seriously while accepting this is where we are now....it's not necessarily where we'll always be....so there's no need to get frustrated. We can't run a marathon and expect to win if we don't eat....we can't expect to mix with good results if we can't hear. :)
 
-Danny

My Site
Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
#29
sven450
Max Output Level: -72 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 945
  • Joined: 2004/03/16 08:11:49
  • Status: offline
Re: Then and Now: The result of a year and half of studying X2 and digital audio 2013/12/03 14:14:35 (permalink)
"The last thing anyone wants to do is come home after working their day job, put in 5 hours doing something you love, you bring the disc to work with you on your way in the next day, and throw it out the window after listening for a minute. Anyone have that happen?" 
 
This was me for far too long!  Decent pair of monitors, wee bit of treatment and ARC, and I have done away with that particular brand of pain.
 
Also, thanks everyone for a great thread.  Inspirational and helpful.

Sonar Platinum/Bandlab Sonar
Roland Octa-Capture            
Win 10 
i7 6700  16 Gig Ram
Some songs
Covers:  https://soundcloud.com/cygnuss/sets/covers
Originals:
 https://soundcloud.com/cygnuss/sets/originals
#30
Page: 12345 > Showing page 1 of 5
Jump to:
© 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1