Old 4-track tape sessions remastered in SONAR

Haven't been here in a while!
 
My first recordings were done back in the days of 4-track cassette recorders (Fostex X-15) and some cheap-o synths (Yamaha FB-01, a Casio something-or-other I can't remember, and a Yamaha PSR-500). I cringe when I hear those tracks now, but I learned a lot in the process. A couple songs I thought were salvageable, though, so I isolated the vocals from each song, imported them into SONAR, and then did a complete overhaul with sparkling new arrangements (with much better synths etc. at my disposal now, and more arranging experience behind me).
 
I think they turned out pretty good overall, although my weakest link is still my mastering skills. If anyone cares to listen, I'd be glad to get feedback. I'm curious as to whether they sound more modern now. I believe one was originally produced in '93, the other in '96.
 
Thanks!
 
https://soundcloud.com/pjfarrauto/sets/redux-1
Other stuff: http://www.soundclick.com...ault.cfm?bandID=588199

Thanks bapu
 
Yeah, lol, I'm always accused of either mixing vox too loud or too soft. I really need to learn how to use a compressor properly. Also, the vocal tracks were recorded a long time ago using a less than stellar mic (some cheap Radio Shack thing) and an old 4-track cassette recorder so they were thin to start with.

I listened to "Celebrate". Your new music tracks are nice and solid. The vocals are well sung but sound very distant and wet. If you can get them up front and they are not too thin and "reverby", you can probably keep them. It's a hard job trying to update old tape tracks. If you've already retracked the rest of the tune, you're 90% there, and new voices on new equipment would really shine. Good luck..............Ron.

savageopera
I listened to "Celebrate". Your new music tracks are nice and solid. The vocals are well sung but sound very distant and wet. If you can get them up front and they are not too thin and "reverby", you can probably keep them. It's a hard job trying to update old tape tracks. If you've already retracked the rest of the tune, you're 90% there, and new voices on new equipment would really shine. Good luck..............Ron.

I know what you mean by "reverby". Back when the vocals were recorded my setup was very cheap and limited. I had to record the reverb with the vocals, unfortunately, so I can't bring the level down. And it was a cheap reverb unit to boot. I did go through the track and eliminate as much of the reverb tail as possible between phrases. It helped a little.

I'VE always found,
without fail,
that you end up with far better results,
simply re-recording everything with a current rig.
 

interpolated—
 
Hey, thanks! I didn't know there was such a thing as a "deverb". Good to know!

evadianepug
Really a pretty good song.  OK, now I'm gonna ask the unaskable question; Are you a guy or a gal?  I ask because I really like your vocal, what I can hear.  If a guy, a stellar top end vocal.  If a gal, a stellar vocal.  I too would like to hear the whole thing re recorded on modern equip.  I really like the beat.  i give it a 9 to dance to.  

Thanks evadianepug!
 
If you're talking about the first song, the vocal was done by a friend, Chrissy, who also wrote the lyrics. The background "choir" is new and is actually just a single voice track run through a harmonizer. We wrote and recorded several songs back then, but only a few I think are worth salvaging. The vocals are the only track I used from the old master tape. The arrangement and instruments are all new, built around the imported vocals in SONAR. 

I think you did a fine job with this.  The version I just listened to was pretty well balanced in regard to the vocals, and I think they are up front enough for my taste.  The only thing that caught my attention was that the overall mix seemed overly bright.  I guess you don't care for using EQ, but if you rolled off the upper mids (2k - 3.5k) it would still cut through but sound warmer overall.  This song is worth a little extra time, and regardless of the original equipment used, the feeling comes through.

pjfarr
Thanks for chiming in Lynn.
 
It's not that I don't care for using EQ, but rather I'm not able to get consistent results and I end up frustrated. By consistent, I mean I'll have it sounding great on my studio speakers, but then burn it on a CD  (or plug in my mp3 player) to play it in the car and it's suddenly too much high end/too little bass or too much bass/too little high end. So I just keep the default EQ (0's right across or actually not patch it in at all, same diff) and leave it up to the listener to adjust it to their preference.
 
How do you get consistent results between different speaker/amp systems?
 
 

If you're really serious about mixing, check out the ARC 2 system that calibrates your speakers to fit your mixing environment.  IOW, it takes the room out of the mix.  Plus, it has virtual monitors that emulate different speaker systems such as car stereos, boomboxes, laptops, IPOD docks, cheap speakers, and very expensive speakers, as well.  Prices vary, so shop around on the internet for the best deal, but it's an investment well worth the price to get your mixes consistent from system to system.

Lynne—
 
Damn, there really is an app for everything, lol.
 
I had no idea something like this existed, though I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I own a lot of IKM stuff, so I don't know how I missed it. I did a quick read up on it, and it sounds like the included microphone appraises the current room acoustics in order to adjust the apps settings. I love that—thanks for bringing it to my attention!! The price is kinda steep, I guess it's because it comes with an actual microphone. So I have to decide how serious I am, like you said. If my demos are deemed good enough as is to get the song idea across and move the listener without annoying them then I'll be a happy camper.