president in the car, dead hooker in the trunk

S

shadowfax

New member
yes its a wierd title. it actually makes sense in a strange way though. it certainly wont sound anything like what you might expect from that title. anyhow, this is the second thing i've put up here, so go easy. =P i know there are a couple mistakes, esp with the drums and the piano at the end (which will probably get re-recorded,) but what can i say.. im a shitty drummer. anyhow all constructive criticism will be appreciated.

http://www.nowhereradio.com/artists/album.php?aid=2467&alid=-1
 
..vocals up!!!...man i can tell im going to LOVE that voice...when i can hear it:D...


engaging song so far...some of those busy parts seem to cover up the vocal..but the vocal is pretty covered on its own...ok .second verse the vocal is a little bit louder..or the guitar is less in the middle of it...i like the guitar break...very cool...the drums are nto quite there (sloppy)..bu also they seem to be real quiet...maybe thats intended .so ..:)

i dug it !..

jamal
 
yeah i know the drums suck. they were kind of rushed so i didnt have time to listen to them and see certain problems (that really stupid fill during the guitar break, for instance... if you notice the drums go down right at that point, you're entirely correct. they come back up though.)

i know what you mean about the busy parts covering the vocals.. what can i do, if anything, besides bringing up the vox (which i will probably do as well) to get the guitar off of them? eq suggestions? panning, perhaps? im only 18 and have only been at this for a couple months, thus i = newbie.

thanks, btw :)
 
The thread title alone is worth responding to...lol.

Okay, if that's you singing, we gotta' get you heard, b/c you have an amazing voice.

This song is VERY much like something I'd listen to in the real world...The mix is absolutely screwed up right now, but your production ideas are killer...like the distorted break in the middle...man, that KILLS... I really like the very stark contrast of that beautiful voice with the heavy/abrasive stuff.

Okay, notice how it clears up a lot at 1:45 when that guitar gets quiet...that's because that electric at the beginning has almost no midrange frequencies in it...it's really bunched up in the "mud" frequencies, with the worst of them being about 250Hz. You need to screw around with that track with an equalizer and CUT a lot of it in that area...when you do that, you should be able to hear your voice a lot better. I'm suggesting you EQ each track until the whole mix sounds clearer instead of just EQ'ing the final mix...it's much more difficult, but I think it's required here.

I could type for hours on this b/c I really like the song, but get some more opinions first, and ask me if I'm not making sense...Oh, and listen to something I've done to see if I'm full of shit first, LOL. Always a good idea.
 
Hey fax thanks for your listen to my song.

Very chill song. Sensual sounds.

That riffing guitar needs some work. It peaks out in several locations, so you proabbly need to bring the volume down on it. I touch it up with some reverb and eq or even some amp simulation/overdrive.

Cool solo thing. Add reverb. That sounds great.

The drums are much better than you think. They need a little work, but sound fine.

I'd eq the voice too. Maybe take out some of the lows. I love the voice singing though. Great talent there.

I liked this.
 
This song is GREAT. Very very nice work.

The production could be a LOT better in tons of ways...but others have already pointed out a lot of the issues.

I just wanted to drop in and say that you're really on to something here! Don't leave this mix/recording as it is...it could be made a lot nicer...it's not been done justice yet, not by a long shot!

Slackmaster 2000
 
There's a lotta really cool stuff in this song. I love your opening guitar sound, and the singers voice is to die for!I agree with catfish, the drum sound is ok for now.

My personal advice (FWIW) would be to back up two steps and before we talk about your mix, get a little better recording. This song is worth redoing from scratch. Get that bass and guitar in tune with each other. Get a "keeper" take on the drums. The guitar solo in the middle got a little monotonous for my taste after a couple of listens, but that is subjective. Try to get things the way you want them to sound during the tracking process, then come back for mix suggestions.

But don't stop now, this is a really cool piece!


Twist
 
I can't decide whether or not I like the song until I understand the words. The title is neat, but I can't understand much else. The music wasn't a style I like, but if the lyrics are as interesting as the title, I might like it.

I'd follow some of the adive you've received above about clearing things up (no midrange anywhere) and see what it turns out like.
 
I can't disagree with what has been said above. What are you recording on/into? I like the song, and the singer is indeed great.

1) I agree with rerecording most of it.

2) Guitars/bass and vox are mostly front and center...need to use some panning. Don't be afraid to move things too. Just because somehting is in the left side at the beginning, it can be moved to the right if something else comes in that is also on the left and competes for space.

3) reduce noise: part of this is recording: practise good gain-staging

4) reduce noise by cutting all empty space out (ie in between vocal phrases, in between guitar licks), every track has noise in it, and if there is no signal there, take away the noise. Doing this to the drums could make a world of difference too, depending on how many tracks there are.

5) subtle EQing on all instruments (incl vox) can really help separate them in the mix.
 
i to liked the song alot, your voice is absolutely great, i wish i could hear it a little better but man from what i can hear you realy gott somthing with your voice and i wish i could say that about myself lol. if i were you i would take the time and set down and retrack this whole song it is defenately worth it because it would not be that hard to get it sounding much better for you, youll surprise yourself if you do. ive retracked and retracked my songs and these guys are always great about helping out. thanks for sharing with us and im looking forward to hearing you voice when you retrack this. god bless tim pate.
 
Sublime vox ,dude!Get a drummer or a sequencer or something cuz this tune has great potential.Reminds me of TimeBaby III in spots.What has been said already covers my mix comments .Totally dig the part after the solo.Well written tune.Good changes and melody.Please do not ruin your song and talents with autotune...
 
woah thanks everyone. that was really helpful and positive. especially about the voice :). i've never put anything out there like that, so its good to get positive feedback.

i took a number of your suggestions and remixed it. it sounds somewhat better but im beginning to agree that what's really needed is indeed some retracking. that will have to wait, though, because there are some (at least one) other songs i want to record first. This time I'll spend a lot of time on the drums and get something much more solid.

i eqed the guitar to cut muddy freqs and boosted mids and highs a bit, which got it off the vox some. i also added a little reverb and panned it slightly to the left (it pans more to the left when the second guitar comes in around the solo-esque part.)

i cut some of the lows on the vocals as per your suggestions.

i really need to improve my ear for these things... it sounds like these errors were glaringly obvious to all of you but, though i knew it didnt sound right, i was completely oblivious there was no midrange. i suppose i'll have to learn to make use of those analytic tools and develop a sense for these things.

concerning the title:

the song's lyrics are about sex with motion as a motif. ("our bodies moving, swaying, turning, come," etc.) the song's structure is supposed to accentuate this.. it revolves around a couple basic chords but there's never a repeated section and it gets louder, and so on.. i think you understand what i mean.

the 'president' part is a little more vague of a connection which i wont get into.

thus, the title, which started as a joke, stuck because the 'president' is 'in the car' denoting transportation / motion and there's a 'dead hooker' - conjuring sexual themes - 'in the trunk' which plays on the president and so on.. its complicated. ill write the lyrics out sometime if you're interested.


anyhow thanks a lot.. any other criticisms / suggestions concerning where to go from here (short of retracking, which will have to wait) would again be appreciated.

i dont use autotune =P

cstockdale, what do you mean, exactly, about gain staging?

I'll keep all of this advice in mind with my next recording and hopefully it'll turn out better from the start.
 
oh yeah and cstockdale, i'm recording through a mackie CR1604 & a M-audio DMP3 into my comp via a delta 1010LT soundcard and using cooledit. as far as mics go, for the drumset i've got two mxl 603s as overheads, a D112 for the kick, SM57 for the snare and four AKG c418s for the toms. For guitar and vocals I used a sennheiser MD441 w/ the low cut on... i have an sm58 for vox too but i think it turned out better with the sennheiser. I'd like to try an LDC for vox sometime, too... and i need a better mixer... ugh i'll have to get a job again :P
 
You may well be already doing this, but gain staging works like so (I'll use vocals as an example):


Mic into the Mackie: check the channel that it is going into. Set the fader to "unity", then bring up the "trim" as high as you can so that it doesn't clip.

You have now "gain staged" the channel.

I assume you record out of one of the "aux sends"...

now you need to be sure you are sending a hot signal from your Mackie board,

not sure if the Delta 1010 has any internal mixer levels to play with, but if it does, set this to "unity", and now you raise the "aux send" level on the Mackie to give the PC the hottest signal it can get without clipping.

If the 1010 doesn't have any internal mixer (I use the Audiophile 2496, and it doesn't have anything to worry about), in cool-edit, the track you are recording into needs to have its level coming to as close to clipping as you can get: this is controlled by the "aux send" on the mackie.

The principal is that at every stage in the audio chain, you want to maximize Signal:Noise ratio. If at the early stages you haven't done this, all you do is amplify any "hiss" along the chain.

It seemed to me that some of the tracks were "hissy", and that is why i suggested gainstaging.

This applies to vocals as well, or anything plugged direct into the board. First, crank the channel with the "Trim" to the highest point without clipping with the fader at Unity , next, make sure the Aux send level is as high as it can get without clipping inside your PC.

You should also do this with the Master Fader on the Mackie at Unity...levels for recording should be adjusted with the "aux sends". Turn down your control room speakers with teh control room levels, or headphone levels if it is too loud, not with the channel faders or master faders.

Also, do you cut out any "silence" in your tracks? Each track, even when gainstaging has been done will carry some noise even in the "silence", add 10 tracks of "digital silence" together and you will discover that there is significant hum/hiss sitting in your mix.
 
Mix issues have been well covered. You've got plenty of homework to keep you busy. But please do post your progress. I'll be interested to see how it comes along. What a soothing voice eh?
 
shadowfax said:
the song's lyrics are about sex with motion as a motif. ("our bodies moving, swaying, turning, come," etc.)
Click to expand...
Okay, now I like it even better. :D
BTW - You actually have better recording equipment than I do. Enjoy this recording thing...it just takes time and practice.
 
Thanks cstockdale. I try to get the highest signal i can most of the time but it occurs to me now that i might not have done that on a couple tracks, most notably the lead on the second half and the piano. I silence tracks when I dont want them on... but is an empty waveform still making small amounts of noise? As in, should I cut the volume to 0 when not using the track even if its an empty waveform at that point? I suppose it couldn't hurt but is it necessary?

In an effort to reduce board noise, i take the signal from the channel inserts. i believe they're pre-eq (which i dont use) and other parts of the board's circutry, so doing so, in theory, reduces noise as the shortest path = the best path. I take the bass out of an aux, though... I forget why, but there must have been a logical reason.

The 1010 has a confusing internal mixer. There are presets for inputs and outputs: +4, -10, and 'consumer.' I havent really played around with this much since I started but right now the inputs are at +4. When I press 'faders,' though, to see where each channel is, the levels are not marked and +4 puts them near the bottom. This is what i find confusing... as memory serves, i get a louder signal with +4. why, then, is +4 at the bottom and -10 at the top? 'consumer' puts them half-way. Also, only two of my channels are balanced (and +4db), yet everything seems to need to be set to +4 to get a proper signal. I guess I'll have to experiment with this to see what setting on my soundcard will correspond closest with the level on the mackie.. its late now so i cant make any noise. Still, this is probably the one part of my recording equipment I havent been able to completely figure out. The manual is no help.

What tracks did you find hissy? (if you can pick it out...) The overheads might have been low. More dynamic instruments are hard to stage like that (eg voices, drums, bass sometimes.) Is there anything I should know about setting levels for those? (apart from 'get a compressor')
 
I'll have to listen to it again to say precisely where I noticed the "hissiness". As for empty waveforms, they can still contribute noise, depending on the source ... if it is from a non-digital instrument, most definitely (ie a guitar part, bass line, especially vocals). Even some digital sources will generate noise...buzz in the lines, modelling amps. If you zoom in on the waveforms, you may notice that some of them generate noise around -50dB. Not much noise, but 6 or 7 tracks all generating -50dB adds up to audible noise.

Also, another good reason to do it, is to save space on your harddrive. An empty waveform is still just as much a digital signal as a big waveform in terms of 0's and 1's in binary code, so if you trim these out, it cuts your song "size" way down. I just did this to a song I have that was 1.4 GB in size, after cutting out empty waves, it came down to 800MB. Especially true on backing vocal lines, accent guitar lines, and anything that only comes in once in a while. Depending on the mood of the song, I also sometimes will cut any "inhales" out of vocals to give it a much cleaner sound, but sometimes you want the inhalations to be there.
But, it is important to note that you want to cut the empty waves BEFORE you apply effects, as reverbs etc. all generate "tails" that you likely want to keep.The tails also stand out better if they are superimposed on silence than over low level noise.

It is a fantastic song, though. JUst trying to contribute the limited number of things I have learned about recording/producing to make it better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top