Release

Okay, I'll lift it up. There's only about the width of the 57 until I'm miking the wood of the cab... My problems with the amp have always been with "too bright". Can't seem to get my 57 to pick up the "balls" of the thing. Also considering buying some kind of diode overdrive, like a TS, and see if I can get it to break up a bit more...

Maybe, since most of my experience is with sims, I could get the Amplitube Vox bit and play with dynamic mike placement until I figure out what works (while it plays a loop), and then emulate that in meat world. I know that sounds backwards, but playing parts in a room, at volume, over and over, you lose your ear before you get where you're going. I don't have the most sophisticated studio in the world, but I know it's fairly tonal neutral and very dead. I should be able to get this to sound better. Would moving the mike away from the speaker make more or less bright? I'm just pretty novice at miking up a real amp.

Anyway, this is the first song where I haven't got ANY sims running, so it's a step forward. I got some pretty decent tones, and when layered they ended up sounding pretty good. :)

You're already near the edge of the speaker then? I didn't realize that. Well you don't want to mic the wood! But hey, the tones you have here aren't bad, and they're working in the song which is what counts.

I'm skeptical that playing with the settings on your amp sim is going to help you much in learning to mic your tube amp. At the end of the day, you're still going to be experimenting with a particular mic and placement, speaker, amp, room, guitar, pickups, playing style, and song context. I doubt there is any way to avoid the trial and error of dialing all that in.

What's your monitoring situation? If you're trying to make adjustments by listening to the room tone of a cranked tube amp, it's going to lead you astray. Not to mention ear fatigue. If you can find that thread you started back in late April or early May when you bought this amp, there's some discussion of monitoring. Personally, I'm an advocate of getting that speaker out of the room altogether.


Okay, okay ido. I get that you weren't happy with my comments on your latest mix. ;)
 
Just listened to your unmastered version and you're mastered version with the automated limiter. For the unmastered version, I still think the drums are still too low in the mix for such an energetic song but the vocals don't seem as buried. For the mastered version, I don't know if its the fact that you said you were gonna automate the limiter or not, but I feel like there's just a bit too much of a difference between the average volume of the electric section and the acoustic section. Just narrowing that difference by a hair would help I think.
 
Just listened to your unmastered version and you're mastered version with the automated limiter. For the unmastered version, I still think the drums are still too low in the mix for such an energetic song but the vocals don't seem as buried. For the mastered version, I don't know if its the fact that you said you were gonna automate the limiter or not, but I feel like there's just a bit too much of a difference between the average volume of the electric section and the acoustic section. Just narrowing that difference by a hair would help I think.

I'm trying a new experiment because bypassing the limiter and turning it back on makes clipping. SO...I'm automating the amount of gain so it doesn't. Going from 6 to 1.75 sounds about right to me. I'll get the new version up as soon as I can. :) Thanks for sparking my outside the box experience (well, you and Ray). :)
 
The thing that's hurting you the most is those vocals. They are the slightest bit flat almost consistently throughout the tune. They give the impression that everything is just bellowed with very little variation or dynamics. When you hold those long syllables, it's like this homogenous block of sound, warbling in and out of tune. I'd completely retrack them and relax a little when you're doing your takes. Don't be afraid to hold back a little in places for variety. And the vox are too loud for what they are.. they shouldn't be riding out front in the condition they're in. Hope that helps.
 
Oh, and for what it's worth the mix sounds just fine to me. Limited, not limited, get the performances and conviction there and it'll sound great either way. Good luck. :)
 
Robus: I have a mix that is in REALLY good shape. Had to be for this to work. Then when I mastered it, I had to hack it up. The softer parts had to be mastered differently from the hard parts and still gel as a whole, but it's over limited at this point because of the way it needs to fit back together...If I posted the mix, you'd be all over it because the acoustic parts are barely audible...doesn't work with the limiting any other way. I considered making this thing 4 pieces and running different limiting...hey, with automation, that could work.

The limiting ruined your mix. To be succinct, it's abrasive.
So your goal of creating serene parts is being undermined by your limiter. The mix doesn't sound "in your face" (or in my face I guess it would be), but just harsh and abrasive and loud. Without the quite parts, the loud parts lack context. You need dynamics.

You should post the mix. And you should just use automation.
I don't know if any of that was covered because I haven't read the rest of the thread, so I apologize if all that's been said.
 
I listened to the 5M mix.

It is very loud and sections sound like they're almost pumping.

The acoustic guitar sounds real good very natural and nice sounding. The electric crunch guitar is decent. I thought the bass sound was good. Strong low end, but not out of control.

The lead vocal is nice and clear. Is there some delay or odd timing effect on it? There was something about the treatment that I didn't care for.

The drums need some work. The samples are not good. The kick/snare are weak sounding. The cymbals are thin, hissy, and grainy.
 
Nola: Yes, yes it was...but thanks. Yeah, I'm trying to get to a volume level to match the two songs that will surround it on the project. I'm looking for more subtle ways to do that, because, quite frankly my limiter ruined my mix. But the mix and the second attempt were already posted. Working on louder drums, more balance and less drop between the parts, retracking vocals, etc.

Trip: Thanks bud. Like the compliments. Like the honesty.
The loud is what I'm trying to fix. I really need the song to be louder to match the songs before and after on the next project...may have to just send mixes to someone else to master...can't really afford it, but this song is giving me fits. (Guess I said that in the OP) :laughings:
The vocal is my standard. Uses a dual pitch shifter about 3 an 7 ms and just a couple cents up and down. I think the problem (as Fleet said) is that it's just pretty flat everywhere. Working on that, but not where I want it yet. I want the pitch correction off, but I still need it here and there. I'M A SONGWRITER, not a singer/songwriter...:)
Bass is also standard for this project. I ground upped my bass and drums for this year's stuff and I'm using them as a base for stability in the project. Some bass lines have a sub mirror, some have a piano mirror, and some are just the bass. The poor sounding drums has to be how they got mangled in the mix. They sound outstanding on all the other tracks...user error!
Acoustic is my standard. Still can't believe I lucked out and got that guitar and a Michael Kelly Dragonfly 5 string for $400...Sometimes pawn diving pays off.
Crunch is 4 iterations of the Vox (two with the new LP and two with last year's Mockingbird). My poor Hamer is collecting dust.

Spent my afternoon playing with my LP to get some tones for the tone thread, even though Greg's gone, I'd still like ears on how I'm coming along there, too! At least my last attempt didn't sound like a strat on steroids...
 
Back
Top