All Time Best Song Ever...

  • Thread starter Thread starter WhiteStrat
  • Start date Start date
WhiteStrat

WhiteStrat

Don't stare at the eye.
Okay..that's what I called it on my system when I first posted it years ago. I've recently rewired my studio and added new monitors. I thought it would be cool to re-mix an old favorite, and as much as this song is my favorite, I found that I didn't save the original project. So instead of re-mixing the original tune, all I could do was tweak the master.

I'm mostly interested in how each version translated to other systems. Do you notice any difference? And if so, is the original better? Or is the new version better?

Prelude in Dm Old:



Prelude in Dm New:

 
I like the old version better. The new version has some boominess in the low end and it seems to lack midrange. Some people might like that fattened bottom, but I prefer the overall balance and clarity in the original.
 
Greg_L said:
I like the old version better. The new version has some boominess in the low end and it seems to lack midrange. Some people might like that fattened bottom, but I prefer the overall balance and clarity in the original.
Click to expand...

Cool. Thanks for the input. I've got to keep listening to the old and the new and learn to hear the difference.
 
I'm getting a little of the boominess on the new mix that Greg's talking about.

But I'll say the new mix sounds much bigger and fuller than the old one (assuming that's not just because it's louder). Maybe if you could tame the boom just a bit, you'd hit a sweet spot in the middle.

I didn't like the kick sound on either one. A little too clicky or maybe slappy.
 
Listening on earbuds... The new version sounds wider, more compressed, and a bit bottom-heavy. I listened to the old one till about half-way through. I then listened to the new one, and immediately thought, "Wow, this sounds really compressed and boomy". I continued listening until about the half-point. I then started the old one, and it immediately sounded thin, hollow, and weak. It may be volume, but I don't think so. The new one seems to have a lot more power than the old. After listening to both, although I didn't think so at first, I know I'd prefer the new one, but if you can tame that bass a bit, it'd be even better.
 
Thanks for input guys--I just listened to this again, and you're all right. I definitely added some mud in the bottom end. When I said I didn't save the original, that wasn't completely accurate. I didn't save the final version (or if I did, I named it something weird and need to keep looking for it), but I do have a version that's very close to this--just missing the "spooky" intro, which I did last. In any case, I'm gonna go back to an old version and remix (as opposed to remaster) based on your comments.

Thanks again!
 
TripleM said:
I'm getting a little of the boominess on the new mix that Greg's talking about.

But I'll say the new mix sounds much bigger and fuller than the old one (assuming that's not just because it's louder). Maybe if you could tame the boom just a bit, you'd hit a sweet spot in the middle.

I didn't like the kick sound on either one. A little too clicky or maybe slappy.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the listen and comments! This was written and recorded a long time ago--before I had drums in my studio, or even a virtual kit I could customize. These are canned drum loops, and as such, are definitely the weak link in the chain.
 
PoeticIntensity said:
Listening on earbuds... The new version sounds wider, more compressed, and a bit bottom-heavy. I listened to the old one till about half-way through. I then listened to the new one, and immediately thought, "Wow, this sounds really compressed and boomy". I continued listening until about the half-point. I then started the old one, and it immediately sounded thin, hollow, and weak. It may be volume, but I don't think so. The new one seems to have a lot more power than the old. After listening to both, although I didn't think so at first, I know I'd prefer the new one, but if you can tame that bass a bit, it'd be even better.
Click to expand...

Yep, I added some stereo widening in this remaster--and some limiting. So your ears are spot on. I'll work on taming the bass. Thanks!
 
Okay...in comparison, I think this one is smashed to hell (note to self: stop doing this shit at 3 in the morning when you're brain is fried!). But is the bottom end any better? Still trying to get a handle on the new monitors...

 
The most recent version (iv) certainly looks pretty smashed from the waveform.

I think my favorite so far is still iii. Yeah, there's a lot of muddy boom on the big hits, but I think that's a good contrast with the quiet, thin piano parts.
 
Just a question. To what extent do edit these kinds of song? They are so complicated in terms of rhythm breaks and all that and I was wondering if you can play this live? Either way, the song is really, really good and the production too. Not really my kind of music but you sure know what you're doing.
 
dainbramage said:
Just a question. To what extent do edit these kinds of song? They are so complicated in terms of rhythm breaks and all that and I was wondering if you can play this live? Either way, the song is really, really good and the production too. Not really my kind of music but you sure know what you're doing.
Click to expand...

Thanks. There's a ton of editing. And no, I couldn't play it live--except for the guitar & bass parts.
 
Last edited:
i like the new one better. maybe bit less pumping and low end though
 
This is a great piece, Bob!
The parts that sound really smashed are when the heavy guitars kick in, guess that is where the mix is most crowded. If you could get those parts to breathe a bit more, this would be complete. The musicianship is just amazing ;)
 
joeym said:
This is a great piece, Bob!
The parts that sound really smashed are when the heavy guitars kick in, guess that is where the mix is most crowded. If you could get those parts to breathe a bit more, this would be complete. The musicianship is just amazing ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks Joe! I really appreciate it. For what it's worth, this is an old tune--I was just playing with the master as a means to dial in my new monitors.

I like the EQ (almost!) and like the stereo separation better--but you're right, it's too squashed. I always make the mistake of doing this stuff too late at night, when I can't really crank it up. Some day next week I'll spend some time with it nice and loud. I'll start from scratch with the limiter on the master buss, and focus on the dynamics.
 
Okay...

I stepped back from the wall--the wall of limited squashed sound, that is. I took some time and brought this up step by step. Here's what I THINK I accomplished--you tell me if you hear something different. I THINK I kept the mids more forward. I THINK the bottom end is tighter, and sufficiently less boomy. I THINK the stereo separation is a tad wider and more interesting (hopefully without sounding swishy and artificial). Last but not least, I THINK (or hope!) that I did all this AND increased the perceived loudness with way less pumping than with the second and thirds attempts.

To save you from going through all the posts and the various versions, here they all are (with notes). And if you want to listen to all four, feel free. But to save 12 minutes of your lives, I'll tell you that the real comparison at this point is between 1 and 4.

Version 1: The original. From about 4 years ago, in my old studio:



Version 2: My first attempt at remastering the original with my new monitors. Most comments indicated that the low end was boomy and it lost some articulation:



Version 3: I tried to tame the bottom end, but apparently went nuts with the limiter--too much pumping, not enough room to breathe:



Version 4: (the current attempt). (See the above intro for details about this last version.) Still bigger and wider than the original, but with a tamed bottom end and less limiter pumping, with more breathing room. At least that's what I hope I've done. If not, let me know. I'm about ready to quit this and go back to sewing ladies underwear.



I listened to all 4 of these versions a couple/few times each before making this post--and I still feel like the 4th version (what I hoped would be the last!) is lacking a touch of bass--like it's 90% of the way there, but not all the way. Help me figure out my monitors and tell me what you think. And seriously--thanks for your time and input! I really appreciate it. This is my "opus" piece--everyone who helps me get the mix right gets a credit on my CD. Or maybe my tombstone. Whichever comes first.

WS
 
The tune's classicly raw, I like it. And not to be a total Neotronian in regards to the mix, but it seems like something right in the middle of the two posted would be perfect - however, in general, I like the new a bit more. I can feel it more, which I like.
 
Prefer the old version. The increase in the bass kind of kills the nice clarity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top