I've been writing again.

Yep, hard to believe, but I've been working on a new tune with Pat....  

This song is NOT FINISHED, but it is getting there. I plan to record the vocal and the guitar solo again as well as make level adjustments. Nits in the vocals and the solo tone is not what I'm really hearing.... I cranked it in there as a filler for now.

If you were mixing it, what would YOU do differently than I have done to this point? 

I am considering recording a male vocal in the pre-chorus and in the chorus in harmony below the female.  The parts are rough recorded but they did not make it to this WIP version..... it will likely be a week or more before I can get the singer back to the studio. 

Did I mention ....it's country?   Yeah, I know...again, hard to believe...... 

Here's the link>>>>>   http://www.soundclick.com...hi&songID=11124487


 Thoughts on the song, the recording, production, are all appreciated. 

Herb.............  For a song thats not finished, it sounds good.
But I always like listening to your recordings .

To me it sounds good mix wise, everything sounds in its on place, But the vocal.
Its sounds like it was recorded in a different place.   Not glued with the rest.

You said you was going to redo the vocal ???    Try a different mic. 
One of the best female recordings I have done, I used a SM 58 <~~~~really.
Sometimes a mic change is better than any EQ you can do.  It does it for you.

Love the tune............ :)

Tim

That was amazing! I have no idea why, but I heard this in a movie somewhere - I'm saying it could be in one someday.

Somehow I went back to I Hope You Dance.

Again, great song and it'll be better once you iron out the kinks.

(I'm completely jealous! You actually got vocals on your track and here I am stuck with such loops that don't come close to fitting my pieces! Bah!)

I wouldn't be surprise if "May I have this dance," is asked alot. (I mean this in the nicest way possible!)

Love your signature too!

Scoobie...

At this point it's  just some small course corrections for most of it. I guess if you consider scrapping the vocals and recording entirely new tracks nit picking....

good insight there on the vocals. I happen to have a SM-58 here as well. The main vox mic has been my Rode NT-2A, but on the next vocal session, I will use the 58 and the 2A. A side by side comparison might just prove to be interesting. 

Thanks 

Nothing I could add, will keep an ear for the more finished version

Vechung... That's not Pat singing. Pat is a co-writer with me and a mighty fine lyricist.  That's Cassie singing.  She's 16 and a friend of my daughter. 

Wookie.... I will let you know when the finished version is out.

Montezuma... you're kidding.... right? 

Thanks James.  She has a powerful voice and it did overload the mic on a previous tune.... so I will use the  EQ cut when we redo the vocals. 

Passion/confidence..... we have discussed this and I think she gets it.   I'll have a look at continuity as well. 

I'm glad you like the song. 

I can't comment on the mix or recording because I'm confined to listen on laptop speakers :-( I would definitely layer some more vox on this, but I am given to over production... I may opt for a cleaner tone on the guitar solo. 

Monte.... it's compressed but not like a brick... or even excessively.  I play it on my MP3 player right in line with the other tunes and the volume is about equal on all the tunes I have on it.

Robbie & Tim...... not everything!

Yeah... the solo is just a place holder. We're planning to re-do the vocals and I will be deciding at that point the levels of the other instrument tracks.

There is also some lyric re-writing going on behind the scenes. 

The next edition of this, after the re-writes are done and  the vocals are recorded better, should be a nice improvement.

Thanks GP... dynamics.... got it.  
Glad you like it.

This is good!
Like some others have mentioned, the low end could be boosted.  That would be my only suggestion, other than to have it playing over the end credits of a romantic film*.
 
 
* meant as a compliment 

Guitarhacker


Danny... I had to smile and even chuckle a bit as I read that. Mostly at the humor in it. 
I will definitely pull the levels back, and seek to impart more dynamic range in the music when I remix this song. 

Great review and thanks for taking the time to look at this tune in several editors. 

You're quite welcome Herb. I always enjoy your work and totally respect what you do on all levels. You never disappoint with your material whether it be something you're messing with that isn't quite done, or something full blown, finished. So that's a good thing...you've won me over. :)
 
I'm really not so sure it's the mix as far as the dynamic range goes. I'm just curious...when you listen to the pre-master version, do things seem to breathe a little more to you? Like...that consistent line I drew is no longer the case in the pre-master...and can you hear what I mean by "too consistent"? I'm just wondering if the mix without mastering has that same element.
 
LOL @ your book about loud masters. That's actually not a bad idea...however, if you did something with insane distortion like the more modern stuff, you'd see how much harder it is to get that due to all the sonic crap in the background. LOL! Your stuff is so clean, clear and recorded properly, it's a bit easier (and no, I'm not taking away from your great "loud abilities" lol) to get these types of results with super clean instruments like you have here. Insert a few layered, molten metal madness guitars, and it messes up the mix in a different light. LOL!!
 
For stuff like that, we have to super comp within the mix so that when you master it, the guitar distortion doesn't whoomf all over the place and trip the limiter...which in turn, caps off how loud the mix can go before it starts to pump out. But with the clean stuff like what you deliver, man...the sky is the "limit" (pun intended lol) because of how well you capture these prints. Not only that, but what really impresses me about your recordings (and you have this consistency with all your stuff that you should be proud of) is the size of your sounds. In your case, size does matter when you deliver it like that. Hahahaha! But seriously...when you can make things big like this sound wise without over-use of widening etc. that really makes a mix shine.
 
You know CJ from these forums, right? He has a tune in his teaching profile that has this same element. The size of the instrumentation is just off the hook. When someone captures that type of sound, to me it's extremely impressive because that's what the pro's do on major label releases...and you have that quality in all your stuff brother. So keep doing whatever it is you're doing...and if you're happy with things being loud and consistent, it really doesn't matter because your music, performance and your recording quality speaks for itself no matter what you do man....from the heart. :)
 
-Danny

Danny & Whack... 

I think the problem with this mix might be my completely unrestrained use of Boost11.... I just upgraded to X1 and it came bundled. So I "had" to use it..... right?  IIRC I'm using it in a few of the tracks and probably the master too.  Heck I might even have 2 in a row in there somewhere.....  

I think, after I record the vocal again, I will pull all of the plugs and compression out, and start mixing from scratch. Back to square one. I probably went overboard with B11 but it was sounding so good..... but yeah... a little restraint is in order... 

I'm liking this song so going back to square one is not a problem. Like the Army used to say in their commercials.... I want it to "Be all that it can be". And that includes having dynamic range in the mix. 

Love the song, dislike the mix (on my Adams):

Specific pros: The sweet female vox and the guitar section at 3:00.  A wonderful and magical song worthy of extoling.

Specific cons (to my ears): hypercompression, vox-shrills, and weak bottom end.


Hypercompression forced me to slam the volume down twice: at 3 seconds and 10 seconds thereabouts ... with no inclination to return the volume upward after that ... despite trying.

TBH: There's almost no bottom end (at all).  I can detect no bass transients and minimal kick transients.  It may be that the hypercompressed vox 'unbalanced' the bass-line ... (like my own voxformer hypercompression issues?). 

My insane 2-cent sol'ns:

Like Bob Oister: I'd centralize the vox (and delays), kick, and bass ... and hyper-pan everything else (even the snare) 100% Left and right (per Oister's outlandish L-C-R mixing paradigms).  I've heard the L-C-R paradigm with much country music, and my ears incline!

Later, per Danzi, I'd Danzify the panorama back to your conservative headphone-panorama standards.  Or not!  JMO/IMHO.

Boost11 (also my fav maximizer) I'd keep on the kick and bass only, while allowing their 'attack-transients' 'a bit' more headroom.

After you do this, you'll easily discern those hypercompressed 3.5kHz vox shrills and tame them via your dials.

( Song is lovable.  I crave much more bass & kick stuff ... and reduced vocal shrill at 3.5-4 kHz ... hope that helps)