teegothanks for listening!
the vox, starting out, yes, i tend to do that on the very beginning, i'm trying to update and improve on that approach....
i like the listener to really have to dig into the entire mix, i mix it for the vox to blend and work as an instrument, NOT to stand out on top like a standard top 40 mix, where the vocal is really the only thing going on....
comes from listening to a lot of classic rock mixes, the AOR stuff, not the hits......!
rimshotappreciate the comments, and yes, this one if a bit heavier, and more microphone and room use with the acoustics and electrics, whereas a lot of my other stuff is more direct electrics and tighter mic positions.
i do that with the idea that the sonics.... i want the sonics of an album's worth of songs to change from song to song,
i always write my songs with a group of songs in mind... and how it sounds from song to song.
i like a lot of changes.
so this was a denser, fatter mix.
seems like i'm getting a fairly consistent comment about sibilence or just high end, in the headphones, that did not translate into the speakers.
interesting.
that's what i'm looking for, some commonalities, that i can focus on mix wise....
on stereo widening:there is no trickery (plugins) on the mix approach, just a lot of LCR, and some reverbs and delays that are opposite panned, to give that width.
that technique is pretty straightfoward, and typical, but it's very telling that it does not translate as well in the headphones.
some techniques just don't work for both.
i guess the human brain is just too smart for that.
it can figure it out (placement and depth perception).
i think it's fascinating.