Back on a Role! Brand New Beat, Straight from the SoL.. No annoying synth either!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr. SoL
  • Start date Start date
M

Mr. SoL

New member
SoLETERNiTY - Life

I love it. Hate to cliche again, but I think its my best so far, lol. Unlike my last. Let me know how ya feel.

There's a lot of nice mixing and EQ'ing on this one, although the mp3 version doesn't show it off as nicely as a wav would. Thanks for checking it out. Peace.

Oh and of course, no samples used.

Let me know how the mixing and mastering is guys, and drop any suggestions. pz.
 
Sol,

The track is a good track. There's noting wrong with the mixing or any major EQ problems that I can hear. I think what you're looking for from your other post is to give the tracks some more "punch" to make it sound like a track on the radio.

Just remember that radio stations process the CDs that they play. At radio stations there is major compression and EQ on the mixes, so "radio" is not an appropriate marking point to emulate. The mix is pretty much CD ready. If I were putting the track on a CD, I would just use a bit more compression to decrease the dynamic range a bit. You can do this in the "finishing/mastering" stage, but I would try to remix it so that you can apply it to certain instruments, rather than the whole mix.

Try some compression on the kick at moderate ratio. You also could use some on the snare. Once that is done, you may have to apply some minor EQ to take out some of the "mud" that the compressor brought out. Once that's done, even out your mix with a limiter (10:1 or above with a very "high" threshhold (e.g. "-1 or -2") this will decrease your dynamic range a bit and make the mix a bit more punchy. But to tell the truth, all of this stress on compressors and limiters is a sign of the times that we live in. Your mix sounds fine as is.

E
 
Just what I was looking for, thanks for the advice. Making things Radio-Ready is one thing, but I'm just trying to get the most crystal clear, smooth, 3-D, absorbing mix within my capabilities. So you think I should compress the kicks & snares huh? I was informed, which I'm sure you allready know, that to rid the mud, I should down the freq. range 250-750, and it's proven to work well so far. So I'll mess around with that. Right now i'm going to experiment with the limiting you mentioned. Thanks for listening. Not bad for a 15 year old, eh?
 
Great job for a 15 year-old! Most of the "mud" will be removed by narrow bands of EQ at the selected frequency. Every track will differ, but I have gotten a lot of mileage out of a very narrow band (Q = 7 - 10) at about 300 - 350. If you EQ a wide band you're going to take out too much of the "meat" of the mix. Mids in moderate amounts is still desireable. You don't want to take them all away, just clean the mix up a bit.

3-D Processing
Some of this comes from good mixing. Some of this comes from good processing. There are some 3-D processors or 3-D plugins. Wavelab has a plug-in to widen the stereo field. Waves has the best one that I've used so far. Check them out if you can.
 
I'll try and get my hands on wavelabs if I can. I know cool edit has a plug in called something like widen, I'm pretty sure its the same thing. Thanks for the help. The sound forge 4.5 EQ has 250, and 500, but nothing specific enough to go 300-350. can wavelabs do that? let me know. peace.
 
Sol,

Which EQ are you using in Sound Forge? Sound Forge has a few types of EQ (paragraphic, parametric, graphic). It sounds like you're using the "Graphic EQ". Take that one out and use the "Parametric EQ". Parametrics are variable to frequency and will allow you to vary the width of the EQ (i.e. "the Q of the EQ"). With experience, you will find that Parametric EQs are your most useful EQ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top