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

batsbrew —
 
The instruments and arrangement are all new. I imported only the isolated vocals from the old master tape and then built up the new orchestrations around it. I produced the new music tracks first in SONAR, then imported the vocals into a track over the new music beds. Since there was no timecode on the original tape I had to chop the vocal up line by line into short clips and drag each clip around until it sync'ed up with the music. It took several days.

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. 

Good job Farr - bringing the snare up would make the world of difference to the overall punch of the mix 

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.

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?
 
 

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.

pjfarr
batsbrew —
 
The instruments and arrangement are all new. I imported only the isolated vocals from the old master tape and then built up the new orchestrations around it. I produced the new music tracks first in SONAR, then imported the vocals into a track over the new music beds. Since there was no timecode on the original tape I had to chop the vocal up line by line into short clips and drag each clip around until it sync'ed up with the music. It took several days.

ok, that makes more sense!
 
as far as mixing,
you can only get as good at mixing,
as you have a good room, and good monitors you trust.
 
or
 
at the very least, have spent so much time with,
that you know how they translate.
 
if you are getting translation problems on other systems,
your monitoring setup is wrong.
 
 
how to fix it,
is another conversation for sure.
 
could be the room,
could be the monitors,
or could be your approach, especially if you are trying to master your stuff and don't really have the skills yet.

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.

batsbrew —
 
I get what you're saying. I have to say, though, sometimes I wonder if it's really worth it to put so much time into the post-production phase. I want my music to sound crisp and sparkly for sure, but listening to the squashed, over-compressed sound of commercially produced music these days and the fact that most people get (and enjoy) their music via quality-compromised mp3's makes me question how important sound quality is to overall commercial success...?