HR member cover: Emeric's Holiday (for real this time)

P

pglewis

New member
I meant to post this back in April but net-access went bye-bye for a while. It's close to done, just putting together a final to-do list for polishing it up. First thing I've posted with vocs, so there's a lot of 'em to compensate. Lemme know what I gotta fix.

Original:


Cover:
 
Good Lord man.The vocals on this are EXCELLENT.There might be a few volume issues with the vocals(at 1:40 when the distorted guitars kick in) not being loud enough at certain passages but man,I am blown away by the vocal work you did.You did a superb job of getting all those vocal tracks mixed just right without losing them in a blur.

This whole mix sounds good to me.Im sure there will be some nitpickers but this sounds as good or better than a lot of platinum selling albums.I've been listening to a LOT of older albums lately and the mixes would get criticized left and right in the clinic but who gives a rats ass.They sound GREAT just like they are and who's to say whats right and wrong with someones interpretation of a song and the way they choose to mix it?Anyway......killer effort on this tune and thumbs up to emeric for writing such a good song.
 
Been A/B ing the original and your update for a while now.
On the monitors.

Hey - you cheated a bit: his was 128 and your file is some kind of other encoding scheme. It reads out in WMP as 492Kbps!!! (BS)
The filesize was close so you get off on this one!

Very creative breaks all the way through. Very well executed.

Your ability to capture Emeric's vocal style is amazing.

Are you some kind of Canadian Infiltrator? :D The ending vocal chorus was very Beach Boys so you get off there!

That acoustic guit recording is really nice!

My complaint was the drums. Compared to the original it sounded like a click track that came and went.
 
Kramer: Yeah, the vocs in that section have been a bitch to mix. It was a lot worse, actually. It's on the list, I may just re-cut 'em and see if that does the trick. Thanks for the listen and the kind words!

Doc: Mine is a VBR file, probably oscillates between 160 and 256 kbps. I'd ditch that bloated WMP piece of shit in favor of Winamp 2 for MP3s anyway, if I were you. As for the drums, there really aren't any. That was part of the challenge to myself, to do this without making the excuse that I didn't have a drum kit here. I decided to try to work around that with incidental percussion and vocal doo-dads. There's some drum samples in the bridge, most of which I lifted from other tunes I've done. Other percussion is stick click stuff that comes and goes in the mix (I mic'ed a concrete block in spots and a metal chair arm in the bridge). Thank ya for checking it out, bro.

Toki: Thanks!
 
Wow, this may be the most spacial thing I have heard here!

Well balanced, lots of movement inside the cans Ive got on, vocals are Fantastic. love that end,Great all around!

If you still didnt get it.

I really liked this:D


peace
Bill
 
*bump*

Im dissapointed in you guys.:(

A 3 year member like "pglewis" post a tune and he only gets 4 replies?Have some respect for your homerecording.com elders will ya!:mad:








Really though,give the song a listen people!:)
 
I would expect nothing less from you, Mr. Lewis!

Your hard work and attention to detail really show's through in this mix! Smooth as hell, it's just so warm and inviting!

Fuckin' perfectionist! :D I really enjoyed this PG!


4 word's come to mind...................WOW!, ERR, WAIT:confused: :D


Thank's, man!

Peace

Rick
 
wfaraoni: Thanks for checking it out. The acoustic guits were double tracked; most of the other guits and backing vocs were done with 5 tracks each: hard left, 30-50% L, dead center, 30-50% R, and hard right. I would submix to a stereo pair so I didn't have to deal with a bazillion tracks while mixing. So, for a 2-part harmony I'd cut 10 tracks... sounds harder to do than it turned out to be in reality. As a side-effect, variances in the individual takes gave it some movement on its own without any extra work. I don't normally track like that, but as an experiment it seems to have worked out pretty well for stereo spread.

Kramer: "homerecording.com elders"?! lmao Thanks for the bump.

fender: Thanks, man... and I'm not a perfectionist! I'm just, like, picky and stuff. Yeah, that's it.
 
Really enjoyed what you did with this tune!.....the arrangement & instrumentation....THE VOCALS....good stuff!!!
 
Interesting take on the original.

Very nice recording. Everything gels quite well. Good use of space, and quite clean considering the amount of stuff going on in there.

The vocal sounds are quite good. Care to enlighten us as to what mics/pres were used in tracking?

Extra points for creative improvisation on percussion sources.:D
 
You mean you tracked each part 5 times and then did your panning trick, or were you using duplicated tracks? Either way the effect was awesome! Excellent job on a great tune. I hope Emeric hears this one.


Twist
 
Friggin' brilliant vocals! :D

Love the use of effects and fades...reminds me of Yes (and Queen, I hope I don't insult you by saying this!)

Very good!
 
Thanks, mac... this one was a lot of fun to do, glad you enjoyed it.

M. Brane: All vocs were: C-1000 -> mackie (1604-VLZ) -> sound card. I tapped the insert sends on the mackie to bypass everything except the preamp. I think keeping everything at 24-bits helped maintain the definition, with all the tracks in there. For more creative percussion: the "shaker" on 2 & 4 in the last verse is a cigarette lighter. :)

twist: Yeah I tracked each part five times, panned 'em all out, balanced it as much as I could L/R, and then submixed to stereo to keep the track count down. Just duplicating tracks doesn't really buy you much, unless you shift some tracks in time by dragging them or something. It's the variances among different takes that really opens things up, IMO. Thanks for the listen, Emeric has heard this... I expect to hear from his lawyers any day now.

Pedullist: Thank you! Really, vocs are something I've taken a long time to get comfortable with. I'm still not totally there. This tune was an anomaly where my vocs didn't make me cringe as much. No insult taken!

Steve: Thank ya, sir. You are too kind. No really, you need to develop a mean streak :D.
 
have some respect for your homerecording.com elders will ya!
Click to expand...
Yes sir!:D , four yrs and counting here, and belive me when i say i've heard some great mixes in here..and above all, a large amount of great tunes. This is outstanding work, one of the best i've heard hands down. I know emeric is very proud of how you captured this. Big Talent here folks..:cool:
 
Thought I'd better post once in this thread before it drifts into the archives.

Excellent job PG!

The vocals are excellent! The space you created and the dynamic use of reverbs is very cool. The dynamics of the tune are right on as well. Only thing I'd like is a little less verb on the main vocal lead, I think the saturated backup vox got that covered, and it would make your lead a little smoother sounding.

This blows my version away and I mean that. Thanks! :D

Oh yeah, dig the bagpipes!
 
Whoa! this sounds great.. but im confused who is who and who did the original.

1:18 and 2:28 when the back vox kick in sound very heavenly, excellent job.


Is it YES or is it CS&N i am thinking of at the harmonies at the end??
 
He's bigger than Jesus. Yep.

Well...

-----> :p (tongue in cheek)

Luscious. Harm o Knees. TripleM will worship you... (wait... has he read this thread yet?) Clean.

Jeez... goin thru the magic popup-book of metaphors here and cant find one that expresses what your music-thing does to me, here. Haven't heard Emeric's orig-- must do that.... later... for now, one more time....

....ah.... guitars.... backward cymbals... jaw hits floor... razor hits nuts.... brainbag is shaved :D


Seriously.... very n'eyes

-C
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top