NEWBIES - THE ART OF MASTERING YOUR SONGS (an introduction)

manning1

Banned
NEWBIES - SOME STEREO MASTERING AND MP3 audio engineering tips.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I know in my last article i said it was my last, and then realised
last night i had not covered mastering your opus or mp3's etc.
so heres a few engineering tips.
1. What seperates the mastering men from the boys ?
The really superb masters of the audio mastering craft can be seperated
from the rest of us by one simple sentence. Their ability to
make a stereo master sound very good on any playback medium.
from dollar store earbuds to small and large home hi fi
and professional speakers and most other formats as well.
So when should you master yourself versus using a pro mastering engineer ?
To my mind the dividing line is if you are a name artist with a label deal.
Until then, in my opinion if like me you are a songwriter/engineer/producer
with your own small studio the expense probably is not worth it.
also to my mind you should learn mastering ANYWAY if you own a revenue
producing studio as it is another tool in your arsenal.
If you finally do manage to get signed by a large label,
as a result of sending out your demoes to labels , probably they will want to redo your songs THEIR WAY with
their own mastering engineers anyway.
so what do you do in the interim ?, or say you are producing small cd runs to sell
at markets and/or fairs or from your own internet site ? until you get
THAT NICE DEAL ? This is what i'm going to cover now.
2. Tools. There are various tools you can use to learn mastering.
firstly you well need a variety of playback mediums as i mentioned
in one of my previous articles. dollar ear buds, one or two old junk car speakers,
maybe a mono speaker from an old tv set or transistor radio, a pair of pretty decent
(upper range) AKG headphones. (eg; i use AKG 240's but there are many other good ones),
maybe a pair of junk computer speakers that came with your computer
(for folks listening to your songs over the internet), and a pair of
normal home hi-fi speakers that you would find in most homes.
supplemented by your own higher end monitors like yorkvilles etc.
The primary purpose being to have your mix sound good on all the foregoing.
you will need some sort of switch box to switch between the various speakers.
radio shack sells one.
the earbuds you can plug into a cassette deck connected to the output of your sound card (use the headphone jack on the
deck with a mini jack to qtr inch adaptor).
Secondly you will need MASTERING SOFTWARE. in your analysis of which software to
buy you should consider the need for the following features as well
as the normal audio editing features. noise reduction, parametric eq,
filtering eq, multiband compression is nice to have but not mandatory
imho particularly if you mixed correctly in the first place.
also if you can get down to sample level editing/redrawing waveforms,
its nice to have. although i find rarely the need to do it with good mixing.
If you have multitrack software already its likely a number of these features
are already incorporated, so you might not need to buy a seperate
piece of mastering software if you know what you are doing.
In my case i use magix audio studio and powertracks for multitracking,
and together they provide me with enough tools/enhancers for my
mastering needs. If you have no money some of the freeware/small shareware payment packages
have some nice features like audacity, and the original inexpensive
cool edit 96 or say goldwave. and there are many others. for more money
you might want to look at sound forge or say dart audio restoration tools,
and there are many many others. I still - my bias i guess - like some of the
original tools in cool edit 96. particular a tool called quick filter.
and the paraeq. because i can compare quickly the effect of some
quick eq filtering ideas on the master to improve it.
3. Preparation for mastering. BEFORE you do your final mixdown
that you will master its IMPERATIVE as i mentioned in one of
my other articles to CLEAN YOUR TRACKS up to obtain a low noise master.
for example silencing the sections where instruments arent playing,
unless your using creative leakage on tracks, and noise reducing say a noisy
guitar amplifier track, and creating clean vocal tracks that have been tailed (subtle fade outs)
appropriately. In summary you want the cleanest, lowest noise master you can get.
3. The mastering process.
3.1. Balancing. bring the master into your mastering software and play it back.
ask yourself if its balanced. ie: there are no major dips/boosts/weirdness in volume.
well you should have spotted this in the mixdown phase of course.
this is different from DYNAMICS. your looking here critically that the song on playback
is balanced. for example - you decide that instead of careening to a stop suddenly
at the end of the song, it might be nice to FADE OUT the song as you
have a nice repeating hook at the end of the song. so try a fade out,
and see if this sounds natural or say the song you feel needs a fade in,
instead of careening in or maybe one part of the song is down a bit in level
more than you would like , so you highlight that part and check off zero crossing detect ,
and do a subtle (NOT TOO MUCH !) volume boost of 3 per cent.
or - say you realise you like this one phrase at the end of the song, lets say a vocal chorus,
but its only sung once, and you would like it to repeat 5 times to fade out lets say;
well you would highlight it, paste it in 4 more times, then hilite the
whole shebang and do a fade out to zero volume. Of course you should have caught
this problem prior to mixdown, but for some new to recording you might
not have thought about it. actually you should have caught the problem in pre-production.
In summary balancing is as the name implies doing subtle corrections
to the mix to balance everything out. A point of note. if your stereo master
is way down in volume when you play it back according to the waveform display and
level meters. rather than normalising it might be a good idea to
redo your mixdown hotter. One more thing one does in balancing is play the song through noting
the highest peaks. The highest peak i aim for is about -3db.
NOT RIGHT ON ZERO db. let me tell you why. If you or your label decides to remaster your mix
this will allow the mastering engineer some room to work in.
Also let me cover off this term ZERO CROSSING. what does it mean ?
if you look at a waveform in detail you will see it crossing zero level many many thousands of times.
if you dont check this option, you could get a POP when editing.
zero crossing ensures you dont hear pops. if your software does not have this option(some do it automatically),
when hiliting a part to edit ensure the hilite starts and ends as
near to zero level(ie; the line across) as you can to ensure no pops.
3.2 filtering. in this phase of mastering you are trying different filtering/eq tricks.
for example firstly (actually i do this on individual tracks prior to mixdown),
look at the very low end below 100 hz. lot of junk down there.
does your mix sound better by doing selective filtering of the low end ?
do many tests with different cut off points. now repeat for low mids, mids, upper mids,
highs, and upper highs. As i said before in another article try CUTS
before BOOSTS. you dont want MUSH. your aim as far as possible is CLARITY on the various playback mediums.
for example you find the mix sizzles badly on earbuds. a likely occurrence, so you
rethink your hi end strategy. maybe at one point in the mix you hear a dominant
frequency that stands out that you dont like. But you dont know where that
frequency is. well one aspect i like about cool edit 96 is it will display the
frequencies of a hilited audio selection for you. i'm sure other
packages do the same. what you do is look at the frequency graph,
and lets say you see a highly dominant peak at eg; 2.8khz. really zoom in
on that bit of the waveform (very fine detailed editing here !)
and use a para eq with a very narrow Q factor with a frequency of 2.8 khz and try cutting 1 or
2 db or more without affecting the rest of the mix. I should say this is very very
detailed editing work, and if you are not experienced it will take more than a little trial
and error. you must of course use the zero crossing technique again duscussed earlier.
This is but an intro to filtering. some packages like goldwave for example have very advanced
filtering algorithms you can custom build for yourself.
audacity has some prebuilt eq algorithms you can try, and there are a thousand and one other options.
If you notice this is far more detailed work than just slapping a plug in over a mix.
but this is the sort of work mastering engineers used to do using
custom outboard hardware years ago on mixes prior to computers with a lot less control
than we have today. A LOT of it is EXPERIMENTATION.
One final tip, compare frequency analysis of your own mixes to commercial major releases
of CD's in a lot of different genres. from old orchestral recordings right through to present day.
you can learn quite a bit this way. But if you think rigidly copying
eq curves will work , its unlikely because every piece of music is different.
and probably you might do more harm to your mix than good in some cases.
3.3 Compression. This is a whole book in itself. i dont use a lot frankly.
at most i use very mild compression. One of my songs at soundclick.com/bmanning called
"Key lime pie" used quite heavy compression because i felt the song
sounded better pumping away because it was that type of song.
and on this one song it seemed to work. but its the exception rather than the rule.
for ME anyway. some people imho go too hog wild on compression of the whole mix.
I come from the old school of everything in moderation. i would suggest
if you MUST use compression to start of with very mild settings, and back off
when it just does not sound good on your various playback mediums.
BE CAREFULL. heavy compression might sound great on one pair of speakers but not on
another. On slower and particularly orchestral type songs i would try the mildest compression settings.
on faster songs and say heavy rock you can try and see if heavier and tighter compression works.
BUT ONE THING NOT TO DO is compresss so the natural dynamics of the
song are affected. Now lets talk multiband . if you have one, certainly try it.
for those who dont know. its all about affecting certain frequencies while leaving others alone.
frankly every time i tried it , it didnt do too much for me. i prefer selective filtering
as discussed earlier. but if it floats your boat - give it a try and see if your mix is better
on ALL playback mediums. you will find - like in magix that i use,
included with the compressor limitor is a noise cut off control often.
many other packages have this feature as well. if you have done your
track cleaning/noise reduction work prior to mixing, eg: if you have a noisy sound card,
you shouldnt really need this. so you can set it very low like say below -40 db.
a word of CAUTION. dont set it so high that you hear music cutting out.
if you MUST USE IT, do several tests until you reach where the nusic cuts out then back off down by say
10 db.
Once again this is but a basic introduction. One last tip, and its a trick to try,
sometimes it works sometimes it doesnt - try a bit of mild compression sometimes on the fade out or fade in to a song.
soometimes i find this can be a tad PLEASING.
3.4. Other tricks/enhancing the master. There are many other tricks you can try on your mix.
Maybe you have a very dry mix BUT you want it to sound more spacious.
in essence you realise your mixdown is not all it could be or lets say a client brought
into your studio a mix to improve. There are many tools once again at
your disposal. You could try adding dimension to your mix. for example the free sound engine editor
you will find on the internet has a 3D type effect you might want to try.
BUT DONT OVERDO IT. various packages like cool edit, and sound forge and many others have hall, cathedral,
and all sorts of "space designer/room designer" type simulation/enhancer effects.
when i'm in a mad crazy experimental mood one trick i do is open up a new project in my
multitrack software, import my stereo mix as track one, then import
as track 2 my effected mix (eg: a hall lets say) then carefully play with
the volume on the effected mix - track 2 - putting it at various levels
under track 1 and seeing how pleasing it sounds. or say i want the effect on the
whole mix for just one part of the song, say on a distance fade out using volume
automation on track 2 and even pan automation if say i want the mix to
pan off to one side in the distance at the end of the song.
you can hear this effect on my song "squirrels" , but in this case the mix fades pretty down centre of the stereo image.
"woohoo" also fades the same way with a fading guitar lead effect.
Sometimes though it just doesnt work ! but sometimes it does. on my song "missile" - the little missile fades off into the distance
at the end of the song. all these are little tricks you might want to think about in your own productions.
I find they are most effective when not used on the whole mix, but maybe a small part of the mix to paint a different sound
picture for the listener. Once again a LOT is trial and error.
4. creating the mp3/cd production.
I'm just going to cover the basics due to time/space cobstraints.
Firstly try various mp3 conversion software to see what sounds good to
you. you basically want a wave format to mp3 convertor software.
There are many available. if your stuck for money try the free lame encoder.
and there are many others available. basically an mp3 encoder software
realises a smaller amount of space. different ones might use different algorithms -
so its best to try a few. after encoding its a good idea to play
your mp3 back both in windows media player and other mp3 player software.
to see if the mix STILL sounds good.
if you upload your mp3 song to an internet music site for musicians its also a good idea to play
it back in hifi and in lofi from the site to see how well it sounds coming off the site.
you might find that a new round of mastering is in order !
Ideally your mp3 should be free of artifacts, but this is sometimes impossible at lofi playback.
You might also be carefull of the bitrate you select for encoding.
some sites only like certain bitrates. you might also consider how you store
your mp3's. some store them off to CD. two hard drives is usefull because
then you can put a folder on each to store all your original mp3 songs,
so if one hard drive goes bad you have the second hard drive as back up.
another way to back up is to store say at a relations
house your CD's of your songs in wave and mp3 format. I call this offsite backup.
A trick from the computer industry. You might also consider if you have a minidisc
recorder playing out your mastered mixes to the minidisc. or say in worse case,
if you dont have any money to a cassette recording. best to do two cassettes in case one goes bad !
another storage/backup possibility is a vhs hifi recorder, or if you have an old tascam half inch 8 track recorder
you dont use much maybe backing up to a reel of tape or even a normal stereo reel to reel recorder.
If you are producing your own CD's. at home say. I might suggest
one tip. remember we talked earlier about the -3db mastering level ?
If you have done your mastering correctly its nice if there is some consistency on levels
between the various songs on your CD , so the listener does not have to keep changing the volume of
his/her receiver when dfferent songs of yours are playing. ie: you dont want one song ultra loud, and the next ultra soft.
something to think about. Once again playback your CD through your
different speakers and even earbuds to search for deficiences.
If you are serious about selling on CD an album of your songs,
also think about the sequence of songs you want on the CD,
and try to ensure a logical flow if there are themes or stories to the
songs that interweave. maybe you want a fast paced song followed by a slower song as an example.
5. Some TIPS if you are using on board sound or a cheap consumer sound card to record songs.
As you are aware - some on board sound chips and cheap consumer sound cards can be quite hissy and noisy.
i often get asked by newbies how to cope with this when they just
see no way to shell out for a pro sound card. they simply must use what they have for multitrack recording/mastering.
If you are in this situation, and ive done it to show friends,
you CAN actually get pretty decent (NOT PERFECT !) but pretty decent results if you follow these tips.
firstly watch your line in levels. some cards seem to work better at stronger line input levels,
other with weaker. so do some tests. NEVER USE MIC input. ONLY LINE INPUT.
next after each track is recorded. do this RIGOROUSLY. NOISE REDUCE each track.
using noise prints. Many editors have noise reduction features.
like cool edit, sound forge,goldwave as examples. audacity has one but
ive not had a chance to try it. after getting the noise print from the beginning or end of the track,
where there is no playing or singing, try MILD noise reduction , around 10 per cent, NOT EXTREME
levels of reduction, BUT try multiple passes.
this is one of the tricks i used to help our fellow bbs member
magichord out awhile back. luckily i could get a noise print off the master where there was no music playing.
I dont know if its still up , but go to nowhereradio.com/attaboy/singles to hear the before and after.
a sweet acoustic guitar piece that i liked a LOT.
so you see you CAN get a pretty decent result with cheap sound cards
PROVIDED you carefully clean up each track afterwards.
once again with cheap sound cards watch the high end from 2k to 7k.
some can be quite shrill. just do subtle cuts of this frequency range on your tracks and/or master if needed.
some mics can be quite shrill in this range as well.

Well thats about it. I'm sure when i go to bed tonight i'll realise ive missed some vitally important point,
and kick myself appropriately for being a dummy.
but i hope ive covered most of the bases to help newbies.
ONE FINAL TIP. through all this make sure you check your masters to see how well they playback in MONO.
I'm guilty of sometimes forgetting this myself !
Please note, i dont consider myself an ace mastering engineer,
but i HAVE picked up a lot of tricks along the way over many years.

best regards to all, and i hope this all helps newbies just a tad.
bmanning.
PS - to GIDGE. i just dont have time to edit this. so feel free.
your a good editor !!
 
Thanks again manning1!

On this topic - what are people's experiences with T-Racks? I've seen and heard it used but I'm not experienced enough to rate it...
 
Some good information Manning1, but let me present my opinion on why DIY-mastering really doesn't work.

The most critical part of the mastering process is to be able to really listen to a mix and objectively analyze what, if anything, needs to be adjusted.

There are some fundamental requirements for this analysis to be successful.

1) You have to have an ear for audio detail -- if you can't tell the difference between an overcompressed signal and an uncompressed, you might as well forget mastering.

2) You have to have objectivity -- if you've tracked and mixed a song (or album), do you really think you're in a position to be objectively critical of your own tracking and mixing? The fact is your ears have grown too accustomed to the project and you're unlikely able to distiinguish subtle audio anomalies in your work.

Of course, the opposite it also true - you could also be so overcritical of your own work that your overanalzye and attempt to correct problems that aren't even an issue.

3) While it's often true that gear doesn't matter, in the mastering process - gear DOES matter, at least as far as requiring an environment that lets you hear what you need to hear to critically judge the sound quality of an audio work. If your signal chain, monitoring system or room is deficient, you will not be able to differentiate between a mix that needs adjustment, or a mix that is fine but is simply being colored by the signal or monitoring chain.


So while there's nothing stopping you from going the DIY route (hey - knock yourself out!), there are also concrete reasons why you shouldn't expect to acheive results that come close to mastering done by a professional.
 
blue bear. your points are well made.
particularly about the objectivity a seperate mastering engineer
can bring to the table. the article is meant for the person that
simply has no other route money wise.
but i think youll agree if your a basement band starting out, maybe spending 10k on mastering by an ace is questionable.
ive seen many aspiring artists spend a lot of money only for their tapes to STILL not be listened to by A and R at major labels.
thus my comments.
 
akpcep said:
Thanks again manning1!

On this topic - what are people's experiences with T-Racks? I've seen and heard it used but I'm not experienced enough to rate it...

I can usualy tell a mile off if someone has used T-Racks. It's very easy to over use it. I think most newbies see mastering as another "effect" they can plug in to polish their turds with.
I'd rather get the best recording to tape and get the best mix from that than waste time on a job for the true profesionals.

Like BlueBear said, it's very difficult to be subjective with your own mix.

Instead of mastering I say people starting out should finish a mix and leave it. Then return to it a few weeks later and see what it really lacks or has too much of.

P.S. How about a new forum on the board. The MANNING1 Forum. Over the past week or so I've seen a lot of newbies (myself included) post questions in here and seen them been burried without a single reply because of all his postspushing them off the front page. Give it a rest already man. If people have problems they ask, that's the whole idea of this BB.

As my old grannie used to say "Nobody likes a smart c~~t!"

Alec.
 
Kramer said:
You guys can check out mannings music here and "hear" his final product.


LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is that really your work Manning1? did you use your "mastering tecnique" on those songs? I could have sworn I read in one of your posts about being in the business 20+ years. I listened to the first three tunes and the mix in all of them was...let's just say substandard. I've only been at this game the past 3 years. If you wanna have a listen to a selection of the stuff I've recorded maybe you could share some of your vast knowledge and let me know where I'm going wrong. There's a small selection up ....HERE

Alec.
 
Thanks Tex. That's a behri V-Amp 2 for all the guitar work. The bass was DI'd, drums done in fruity loops and imported into cubase. Vocals goin through a Studio Projects B1. All out through the Delta 1010 (in groups) back to the board...A&H Saber
 
I think you're being a little unfair, lemontree. Speaking as a newbie, I can say reading manning1's articles answers many of the questions I would otherwise have asked.

Why don't you share some of your experiences on how you got your mixes so much "better" than his?
 
Well, knowing the theories and putting it into practice is not the same thing.

But yeah, I'd rather listen to advice from somebody who can do it in practice too. :)

bmannings music seems mostly to suffer from the fact that:

1. He only has a kick drum, an electric guitar and a vocal mic. A full drum set and a bass guitar would make wonders.

2. He can't sing.

These things really can't be fixed in the mix, so don't blame bmannings mix skills on that. :)
 
lemontree.
well i must tell you. that is about the FIRST agressive negative comments ive had about my songs, and particularly my singing technique. ive lost count of the number of positive comments.
amd emails ive had. i'm particularly surprised about your comment on vocals. Its interesting to note that for all my TERRIBLE
singing ive been offered 3 label dealsin the past year.
and beforethat several other deals.
but you are entitled to your opinion.
 
in the interests of objectivity lemon tree

lemontree.
given your negative comments, etc and as i'm always ultra hard on myself.
and given ive had positive comments from other members of this bbs on some of my songs they have heard of mine plus label folks and from lots of other folks from around the world.
and also many artists ive recorded in the past and mastered,
ie: NOT family who might be biased, you can appreciate i'm rather confused.
after reading your post in fact i was downright depressed at myself.
But as i'm OBJECTIVE I thought - OK - maybe i'm loosing it. Maybe lemontree is spot on, and i'm over the hill.
as it were. I got into my car to take my wife to the train,
frankly totally fed up with myself and did a LOT of thinking. My wife is probably my harshest critic.
which is good , because it keeps me sharp. Today i will be calling back people who i know can be relied on for harsh criticism,
in the interests of objectivity. I AM getting older, and just maybe I AM NO GOOD ANYMORE.
I will listen to your songs. And if they are superb i will be the first
to admit it and post back that you are a far better songwriter/engineer than i am by a country mile.
If you get a chance try and listen to my song "Kind and gentle man", which even the harshest critic ive found likes. Be as critical as you want.
I am always willing to learn from someone better than I.
I wish you only success in your own endevours.
By the way with regard to minimal instrumentation on some of my songs. this is purposefull on some more recent songs in case the label wants to add further instrumentation.
I'm now off to listen to your own material and will post back.
all the best.
 
manning1

In my musical career I've been described as a "genius" and been implored to "write some decent songs". Obviously both can't be true so I take each with a pinch of salt. Don't forget - opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.

It's also worth bearing in mind that it's very easy to be harshly critical (especially on the internet) whereas someone writing an email out of the blue telling you how much they enjoyed your stuff (which happens to me occasionally) takes some thought and motivation. It's often more effort to praise than to pan.

I've listened to a lot of your stuff - I like it well enough but it's not my kind of music so I wouldn't say I'd go out and buy it. However I can still appreciate the work and skill that went into it.

Also, I'm not that great a singer that I'd feel comfortable passing a judgment on your voice. Maybe I'm just more humble than most but I grew out of the need to be "better" than other people in my teens, now I just do things to the best of my ability. After all, there will always (ALWAYS) be someone better than you out there at everything!

So yes, IMO lemontree and anyone else are valid in expressing their opinions of your work (and you invite it), but all I'm saying is try not to lose sight of the bigger picture. Write a song about it!
 
MUCH KUDOS TO LEMONTREE

LEMONTREE.
Let me say up front you have loads of talent.
both in your songwriting and engineering.
I URGE YOU, and i mean this sincerely, to keep on
writing and engineering.
Here are my comments.
1. NEW YORK.
I liked the raw energy of this song. Very well done.
Just a suggestion. And please take this in the spirit suggested, the intro rhythm riff i might suggest be repeated
a couple of times as its quite hooky and grabs the listener. it really grabbed me ! ie: before the intro lead. i REALLY liked it.
a lot of the guitar sounds were VERY GOOD.
If it were me i might have brought out the vocals more upfront
in the mixing.
Great song with lots of great raw energy.
much kudos to you. The only thing i might suggest is doubling the lead vocals,
and see where that leads you. but maybe i'm wrong !
2. HIGH FIVE.
great vocal on this song lemontree. whats not to like !
oh yes !! I LOVED, ABSOLUTELY LOVED THE RHYTHM PICTURE TEXTURE after the first verse , and the choruses.
WONDERFULL, TRULY WONDERFULL EFFORT. YOU NAILED IT PERFECTLY. I CANT SAY ENOUGH WONDERFULL THINGS ABOUT THIS SONG !!
i REALLY REALLY LOVED THIS SONG, and all the little background touches.
as well the bass break with organ. classic hook writing imho.
and i loved the background vocals.
i MEAN THIS. not just ten out of ten on this song but 100 out of ten.
also great ending.

for some reason my browser wouldnt let me play wardour street.
i'll try again later after ive sorted out why my browser is giving me a problem.
In summary lemontree you have tremendous talent.
High five i'm sure was a tremendous amount of work given
all the little beautifull engineering touches.
wonderfull stuff.
all the best.
bmanning
 
Manning1,

I had been curious to hear what your music would sound like given the nature of your posts.

I don't know you from adam, but I was glad to see someone else posting some good info on this site.

Now, people here know that when I critique a clip, I rarely comment on the song as a song, but rather, I concentrate on the overall sound quality and sonic characteristics of the mix.

I don't mean to be rude, but I must say I was disappointed to hear the level of sound quality of your mixes. I even checked the MP3 bitrate to make sure I wasn't being mislead by a lo-fi version of the clip.

The sound quality of your mixes, and the overall balance of the tracks doesn't seem to be congruous with your posts. While the songs themselves might be quite good, they sound pretty much like garage-band demos.

The tracks are muddy and indistinct, with no depth or sense of space/air around any of the instruments. Also, there's an odd "distance" around every track, as if you mic'd everything in a tunnel about 20 feet away.

The sound quality simply doesn't measure up to the level of knowledge that your posts seem to indicate.

I don't think it's a question of being over the hill, maybe simply not having done enough comparisons between your mixes and commercial releases.

As a matter of fact, I suggest you take a look a one of my articles listed on the ARTICLES page of my studio site -- in particular, the Mixing Primer. It will give you some practical tips on getting your mixes up to a higher level of quality.

You can hear some clips of work done at my studio for comparison purposes if it helps you understand where I'm coming from.
 
manning1 said:
Its interesting to note that for all my TERRIBLE
singing ive been offered 3 label dealsin the past year.
and beforethat several other deals.

Man, you made me splurt coffee on my keyboard. Don't do that again, please.
 
bluebear

blue bear.
I think i know what the problem could be.
Over the past few years, and after my mother losing my father,
i had to sell off a lot of very high grade studio equipment
so as to be there for my mother. no alternative really.
one has to step in in times of needed supprt.
I thought i could get by with cutting back to a minimalist set up, but i think in all fairness its started to really impact me severely as i sold off so much equipment.
by the end of this year it looks like hopefully my mother will be in a better position, so possibly this will allow me to rebuild my now very minimal set up.
basically i was trying to "get by" after several family crises i wont bore you with.
as you can see i DO have a lot of experience, but the past few years have really impacted me.
By the way. you have a nice site and equpment list.
lots of great information. kudos to you. I wish i had your equipment.
but i'm beginning to think i might just be getting too old now.
 
manning1 said:
lemontree.
well i must tell you. that is about the FIRST agressive negative comments ive had about my songs, and particularly my singing technique. ive lost count of the number of positive comments.
amd emails ive had. i'm particularly surprised about your comment on vocals. Its interesting to note that for all my TERRIBLE
singing ive been offered 3 label dealsin the past year.
and beforethat several other deals.
but you are entitled to your opinion.

If you look back at my posts you'll see I never once mentioned your singing, however good or bad it was. I was pointing out, maybe not to clearly, that for all the information you seem to be saturating this board with you haven't put any of it into your own work.

I don't think you're over the hill and washed up. I just doubt you ever had it in the first place.

Alec.
 
manning1 said:
lemontree.
well i must tell you. that is about the FIRST agressive negative comments ive had about my songs, and particularly my singing technique. ive lost count of the number of positive comments.
amd emails ive had. i'm particularly surprised about your comment on vocals. Its interesting to note that for all my TERRIBLE
singing ive been offered 3 label dealsin the past year.
and beforethat several other deals.
but you are entitled to your opinion.

If you look back at my posts you'll see I never once mentioned your singing, however good or bad it was. I was pointing out, maybe not to clearly, that for all the information you seem to be saturating this board with you haven't put any of it into your own work.

I don't think you're over the hill and washed up. I just doubt you ever had it in the first place.

Alec.
 
Back
Top