reworking: need ruthless ears

Page: < 12 Showing page 2 of 2
Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
MArwood
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1816
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 20:04:42
  • Status: offline
RE: reworking: need ruthless ears 2008/06/18 00:36:23 (permalink)
The guitar buzz is fine, don't worry about it. I hear some hiss also, but it's not the main thing either. Did you get that DEsser figured out yet?
The next thing after you get it done, I could help you with some timing issues.

Max Arwood

"Edited spelling"
New Tag line so I won't have to keep typing this. I may or may not have edited this yet, but I probably need to.

< Message edited by MArwood -- 3/02/2525 3:45:05 AM >
#31
No How
Max Output Level: -23.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5180
  • Joined: 2006/05/02 11:56:01
  • Location: the boogie-woogie Isles
  • Status: offline
RE: reworking: need ruthless ears 2008/06/18 08:43:41 (permalink)
Max, I did the de-esser thingy on the vox and put in volume envelopes all over the guitar to eliminate as much buzz as possible. How about the timing? I already spent about 30 hours splitting and nudging audio tracks to line up (not a fun task).

How can I make timing better?

s o n g s

  – Beauty lodged in a bad hotel has no value.  Raymond Lull
#32
thepogue
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2458
  • Joined: 2007/11/08 20:34:09
  • Status: offline
RE: reworking: need ruthless ears 2008/06/18 10:46:37 (permalink)
great song!! nuff said all the wya round but I really really enjoyed the trip! love the double vox @ 140ish

#33
spacey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 8769
  • Joined: 2004/05/03 18:53:44
  • Status: offline
RE: reworking: need ruthless ears 2008/06/18 11:27:00 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: No How

Not sure which guitar part our mic take has the line noise but I'd find that. It was intermittent. starts at 00:25, 00:34/35 so you know what I'm referring to.
I'd seperate the guitar parts and hard pan L/R and then work the middle and then pan them "in" if needed. Maybe two work together better on a side away from the third -idea.
Get reverb of the acoustic track. (start) Not using stereo on the guitar parts that don't need it sure cleans things up.
Reverb and L/R panning seems to me the biggest changes I'd make.

Sure like the tune.
Michael

Michael, I did as instructed. dumped one acoustic, lessoned the reverb, split the elec and acoustic to wide apart (did nudge a clone elec for ping pong). i think it cleaned it up a bit. Thank you for your kind help on this.

Rick,
I'd like to set a few things right. When I stated what I would do I wasn't instructing you. And I didn't suggest getting rid of any parts.
I mentioned line noise I heard- so you would know it could be heard.
I tried to mention I'd back off the reverb on the acoustic in the intro- felt there was to much but see I didn't type that right at all.
The mono setting on the track is a good thing to cycle. Makes a considerable difference to make a judgement call on what you prefer.
The panning hard - that is a good thing for me to do. I like hearing the middle without them, finding which guitar parts set well together and see if eq needed to keep them their own spot or space-meaning if they muddy each other and a little eq can correct that as well as panning. Then slowly pan towards center to find where they fit.
These things I mentioned, I would do. Everything on the take I listened to was right in the middle and washed with reverbs.
When I do these things I've mentioned, most always there are no effects. I'm checking placement for the instrument. L/R and eq.
When I think they all have a place and aren't working against each other I start adding effects. I kinda look at effects like make-up. Some women are very beautiful with very little...you get my drift. Naturally there are times when there is a lot of makeup-such as a rodeo clown (which is cool - just analogies).
I mentioned these things only because if I were to mix your tune it is what I would do. I sure don't know enough to even be mistaken having instructor qualifications.
Best regards and I still think the tune is a very good one.

Michael
edited for spelling
post edited by spacey - 2008/06/18 12:22:56
#34
MArwood
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1816
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 20:04:42
  • Status: offline
RE: reworking: need ruthless ears 2008/06/19 04:42:13 (permalink)
You do not have the settings right on the DEsser. The "S''s are still SSSSSssss. Instead of "S". The doubled vocals imphasizes the "S"s even more. After you drop the spitfish plugin on the track you have to adjust the knobs till the "S" is not so harsh.

Here is the end of the word "Paradise" The "S" in this photo should look like yours.

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/2365/50580639te7.jpg


Here is a volume envelope to lower the volume of the "S" Look closely at the blue evvelope on the end of the photo.

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/826/s2tr4.jpg

These "S"s were so loud a DeEsser would not get it quiet enough, so I had to do them one at a time.
It would be much easier to use a DeEsser, or even 2 if you needed to.

Max Arwood

"Edited spelling"
New Tag line so I won't have to keep typing this. I may or may not have edited this yet, but I probably need to.

< Message edited by MArwood -- 3/02/2525 3:45:05 AM >
#35
Page: < 12 Showing page 2 of 2
Jump to:
© 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1