She-Wolf - Greg_L original

[Greg_L]

Everything else discussed aside (that horse can be buried)...

I'm curious why you think/feel this way. I've applied heavy stereo effects to bass tracks with good results.

I know it's standard to treat the bass as something reserved (relegated) to the middle of the mix, but that middle space is defined by more than just where the bass sits. Middle can mean anything relative to wherever the remaining instruments are mixed. Hell, most pedestrian reverb effects are still stereo.

I agree, but I like to keep my stuff basic and simple. I don't feel that there's room or a need in my mixes to have crazy bass stuff going on. I like symmetry, balance, and order in my mixes. I'm not trying to be avant-garde or different just for different's sake. I'm perfectly okay with following some basic rock mix guidelines. I move the bass very slightly to the right or left because I want it to seem centered while not occupying all of the same space as the kick and snare which is dead center. I don't feel the bass is less important than anything else, but I don't think it needs any special treatment either....for my stuff. In some regards, it is just a simple bass track. You only need one. I use the rhythms to fill in the sides.

 

[Pinky]

I agree, but I like to keep my stuff basic and simple. I don't feel that there's room or a need in my mixes to have crazy bass stuff going on. I like symmetry, balance, and order in my mixes. I'm not trying to be avant-garde or different just for different's sake. I'm perfectly okay with following some basic rock mix guidelines. I move the bass very slightly to the right or left because I want it to seem centered while not occupying all of the same space as the kick and snare which is dead center. I don't feel the bass is less important than anything else, but I don't think it needs any special treatment either....for my stuff. In some regards, it is just a simple bass track. You only need one. I use the rhythms to fill in the sides.

I agree completely that punk/indie rock doesn't require fancy bass effects. It's also true that the only time I've ever heavily effected a bass part is when there was intention musically to have the bass sound that way in the whacky direction of the song. You were speaking in absolutes so I wasn't sure that you felt that way all the time, or if you knew something I didn't.

I'll leave you alone now, been a fun discussion. It's been a while since I've engaged in anything on hr.com

 

[rayc]

Will it be tom tom foolery?
Really good song Greg. Punches much harder than most.
Lyrically it's fun - I'm glad it's not Brain Salad Surgery.
I quite like the bass - but I'm biased.
I didn't get to hear the 1st mix but am as happy as could be with the current one.

 

[noisewreck]

Fun little number
I like the energy, the mix, the tune. It has come together rather well. The only thing I have an issue with is that I'd prefer the main vocals to be somewhat drier.

I like the lyrics too!

 

[RAMI]

I don't feel the bass is less important than anything else, but I don't think it needs any special treatment either....for my stuff.

Or 99% of music. I can't think of anyone that splits their bass into a faux-stereo instrument, unless it's for some one in a million situation where you want a goofy sounding bass part.

Greg, I think a correction has to be made here. Earlier in this thread, you said that you do the doubling thing with your guitar and have done it on vocals (I think you were trying to be polite because I've noticed you showed a lot of patience in this thread ). But, I don't think you copy, paste and nudge when you do that. I'm pretty sure you do it the proper way and actually play the part twice, which is the best way to do it. Copying and nudging is a cheap pseudo-stereo effect and never sounds as good as actually playing the part twice. But I know you know that already.

 

[joeym]

The king of texan punk strikes again!
Love that rythm in the verses and the lyrics are anything but nonesense, they fit the music perfectly. Rockin' with your cock out is the way punk has to sound and fuck the rest! I love your original stuff Greg, don't you ever change.Great fun tune....again!

Joey

 

[Greg_L]

I agree completely that punk/indie rock doesn't require fancy bass effects. It's also true that the only time I've ever heavily effected a bass part is when there was intention musically to have the bass sound that way in the whacky direction of the song. You were speaking in absolutes so I wasn't sure that you felt that way all the time, or if you knew something I didn't.

I'll leave you alone now, been a fun discussion. It's been a while since I've engaged in anything on hr.com

No problem. You weren't hassling me or anything. I'm pretty opinionated and set in my ways when it comes to my music. I don't mind explaining myself.

Will it be tom tom foolery?
Really good song Greg. Punches much harder than most.
Lyrically it's fun - I'm glad it's not Brain Salad Surgery.
I quite like the bass - but I'm biased.
I didn't get to hear the 1st mix but am as happy as could be with the current one.

Cool, thanks Ray!

Fun little number
I like the energy, the mix, the tune. It has come together rather well. The only thing I have an issue with is that I'd prefer the main vocals to be somewhat drier.

I like the lyrics too!

Thanks man. I tried drier vocals at first, but they didn't seem to sit in the mix as well to my ears.

 

[Greg_L]

Or 99% of music. I can't think of anyone that splits their bass into a faux-stereo instrument, unless it's for some one in a million situation where you want a goofy sounding bass part.

Greg, I think a correction has to be made here. Earlier in this thread, you said that you do the doubling thing with your guitar and have done it on vocals (I think you were trying to be polite because I've noticed you showed a lot of patience in this thread ). But, I don't think you copy, paste and nudge when you do that. I'm pretty sure you do it the proper way and actually play the part twice, which is the best way to do it. Copying and nudging is a cheap pseudo-stereo effect and never sounds as good as actually playing the part twice. But I know you know that already.

Right, I double-track stuff the real way all the time. This song here has 4 unique rhythm gtr tracks. They're all basically doing the same thing, but it's 4 different tracks. The main vocals are doubled in the choruses and there's 10 backup voc tracks. It's just better that way. I've used that copy-and-nudge method maybe 3 times in my life and it's been a long while since. I don't know if you remember a few years ago I did "Lola" by The Kinks. I wanted a phasey room sound on the lead guitar line in that song, and I wanted it to seem kind of wide. I used the copy and nudge. It worked and I thought it was good at the time, but I'd do it differently now. I used it to a very small degree on the vocals when I did The Stooges' "Search and Destroy" as well. Again, it's probably not something I'd do again.

The king of texan punk strikes again!
Love that rythm in the verses and the lyrics are anything but nonesense, they fit the music perfectly. Rockin' with your cock out is the way punk has to sound and fuck the rest! I love your original stuff Greg, don't you ever change.Great fun tune....again!

Joey

Thanks Joey. Texan Punk - I like that.

 

[Pinky]

FWIW, I rarely use this trick any more because I have good chorus effects while tracking and usually double [track] guitars that really require a fattened sound. But for previously recorded single tracks this is still the best method I know to fatten it. Most plugins that accomplish this do exactly what I describe with the track, you just don't obviously see them doing it, and you have to work within their interface to get a result versus just using the pan and gain controls on the mixing console as I'm suggesting.

But, I don't think you copy, paste and nudge when you do that. I'm pretty sure you do it the proper way and actually play the part twice, which is the best way to do it. Copying and nudging is a cheap pseudo-stereo effect and never sounds as good as actually playing the part twice. But I know you know that already.

RAMI, you seem hell bent on tearing what I have posted apart and it's obvious you aren't reading what I'm posting with an open mind. Emphasis added above. Have I pissed you off years ago or something?

I realize this is a musician forum and not the writer's institute, but all we have are words (and some lame smilies). If you're not going to read the words posted... well, I'm at a loss.

 

[Dogman]

I can't tell much difference from the original...still sounds pretty damned good....fuck you Gerg and the bun length wieners you ride.....

I personally love the bass in this,,,it fits really well, and the tone matches what I'd expect for this tune. And drums are thuper.....

 

[RAMI]

RAMI, you seem hell bent on tearing what I have posted apart and it's obvious you aren't reading what I'm posting with an open mind. Emphasis added above. Have I pissed you off years ago or something?

I realize this is a musician forum and not the writer's institute, but all we have are words (and some lame smilies). If you're not going to read the words posted... well, I'm at a loss.

Whoah! easy man. A little paranoid, are you??? I was talking to Greg about something that has been discussed and dissected a millions times here.

You certainly didn't piss me off years ago because I don't even know who you are??/ Have we ever spoken before???

I was simply giving MY OPINION on a certain way of doing something. But I did read your posts correctly, and even with the highlighted emphasis that you put in your last quote, I still feel that "copy and nudge" is NOT the best way to do it. Recording another track is....yes, even with existing pre-recorded tracks.

I don't know why you're taking my opinion of a particular "technique" so personally. Did you invent it????

 

[chrisharris]

Hi....I listened to the first mix, and I just listened to this one, and it's obviously a good recording. I always try really hard to listen for something that maybe could be better, and that's hard to do with your recordings. But I'll try, lol.

The gits actually sound a tad too fuzzy on this one. Like too distorted, which translates here to less heavy.

Well, and not nearly enough stereo bass, lol.

 

[Pinky]

Whoah! easy man. A little paranoid, are you??? I was talking to Greg about something that has been discussed and dissected a millions times here.

You certainly didn't piss me off years ago because I don't even know who you are??/ Have we ever spoken before???

I was simply giving MY OPINION on a certain way of doing something. But I did read your posts correctly, and even with the highlighted emphasis that you put in your last quote, I still feel that "copy and nudge" is NOT the best way to do it. Recording another track is....yes, even with existing pre-recorded tracks.

I don't know why you're taking my opinion of a particular "technique" so personally. Did you invent it????

Your only two replies up to that point contradicted my posts, and seemingly in the face of what had already been posted as if it wasn't even there. I'd hardly call it paranoid to perceive it as anything more or less than it is or was. Perhaps a little more tact would be in order on both our parts. Or perhaps you don't really care. Probably not worth it either way, what use do we serve the other?

Chris, how about stereo panned cowbell?

 

[Greg_L]

I can't tell much difference from the original...still sounds pretty damned good....fuck you Gerg and the bun length wieners you ride.....

I personally love the bass in this,,,it fits really well, and the tone matches what I'd expect for this tune. And drums are thuper.....

Thanks buddy.

 

[Greg_L]

Hi....I listened to the first mix, and I just listened to this one, and it's obviously a good recording. I always try really hard to listen for something that maybe could be better, and that's hard to do with your recordings. But I'll try, lol.

The gits actually sound a tad too fuzzy on this one. Like too distorted, which translates here to less heavy.

Well, and not nearly enough stereo bass, lol.

Thanks Chris. Maybe there's just too many of them. 4 rhythm tracks. Maybe I went overboard. I'm not trying to sound "heavy" though. More like a wall of noise.

 

[Dogman]

Chris, how about stereo panned cowbell?

We tried that at West Feast....Z32 kicks it on the cowbell....

 

[Pinky]

Thanks Chris. Maybe there's just too many of them. 4 rhythm tracks. Maybe I went overboard. I'm not trying to sound "heavy" though. More like a wall of noise.

I liked the distortion and layering. That was probably the best part of the production.

 

[queepy]

Rock with attitude...its not rocket science, just rock you can feel
'nuff said
rocks!

 

[nave]

I have questions Gerg.

You mentioned that the average Gerg Production takes about a day from start to finish but this one took a month. First, what is it about this track or its production that makes it different from the others, so as to require ~30x the amount of time to complete? Was it just unanticipated problems that required extra effort to work around to get it on par with the rest of the stuff? Is it because you were deliberately shooting for a better result? In any case, what were the problems that took a month to solve and how did you solve them? IOW, what were you doing for a month.

Secondly - You mentioned that you seldom second guess the direction a song is headed in. A month is a long time to spend on a single and relatively simple composition and performance(I mean, you must admit, it's not flight of the bumble bees, or rocket science, as someone else said). The temptation over that time to add stuff, change stuff and generally deviate from the initial idea - just as a matter of trying to keep yourself interested in the project so it could be completed- has got to be immense. How do you at once stick to the script and keep yourself interested - not get bored - over the course of a whole month working on one song without ever changing this or that?

 

[Greg_L]

Rock with attitude...its not rocket science, just rock you can feel
'nuff said
rocks!

Thanks queepy.

I have questions Gerg.

You mentioned that the average Gerg Production takes about a day from start to finish but this one took a month. First, what is it about this track or its production that makes it different from the others, so as to require ~30x the amount of time to complete? Was it just unanticipated problems that required extra effort to work around to get it on par with the rest of the stuff? Is it because you were deliberately shooting for a better result? In any case, what were the problems that took a month to solve and how did you solve them? IOW, what were you doing for a month.

I don't work on one project at a time. I usually have like 3 or 4 songs going at once. I did 2 collabs between starting this one and finishing it. I don't put myself on any timetable. If I can finish a song in one day, I will. If it takes a month, that's okay too. You misread/misunderstood what I said anyway. I never said it only takes a day to do one of my songs. I said that the time spent on this song might amount to one day. From conception, to tracking, to mixing, to finish might be around 24 hours total. I usually have a song completely finished musically before I have one word of lyric written. That was the case with this one. It was sitting waiting on lyrics for a few weeks.

Secondly - You mentioned that you seldom second guess the direction a song is headed in. A month is a long time to spend on a single and relatively simple composition and performance(I mean, you must admit, it's not flight of the bumble bees, or rocket science, as someone else said). The temptation over that time to add stuff, change stuff and generally deviate from the initial idea - just as a matter of trying to keep yourself interested in the project so it could be completed- has got to be immense. How do you at once stick to the script and keep yourself interested - not get bored - over the course of a whole month working on one song without ever changing this or that?

Because I have vision, confidence, and integrity. I know that sounds douchey, but it's true. I don't try to be anything I'm not, so it's really easy to stay true to myself. If I want to write a song about horrible subject matter, I will, and I don't give a fuck about what anyone thinks. You might as well be a noob in here. I've written far more offensive stuff than this.

Anyway, to answer your question, like I said, I have vision and know what I want to hear from my songs. I can focus on on the song in my head and duplicate it. It's almost like doing a cover song. I hear it in my head, and just play it. It's not tempting to change anything because I know what the end product should sound like before it's even close to being finished. I write and play music that I like. That's just me though. Again, I didn't spend a literal month on this song. It just took that long to finish because I fucked around with other stuff. My scope is narrow and I have a one-track mind, so I know what will work and what won't work with my own music. I spend considerably more time experimenting with cover songs. My next song has already taken longer than this one and I haven't even tracked the drums yet.