Brazilian Cançao

[Inverness]

All I have to say is, I wish it were longer, so I wouldn't have to press play so many times

Out of all of them, I'd say Ver 3 is the best. It brings Ver1 and 2 to a happy compromise.

 

[Supercreep]

LPC picks door number 3

 

[madmush]

What a brutal piece this is! Fantastic.... depressing and haunting.



...

 

[Dogman]

HHMMMM......

 

[true-eurt]

Okay, I will have to listen to #2 and #3 now that everyone has commented on them.

 

[NL5]

T
Ver. 3: Panning 36% (approx 10 and 2 o'clock). Otherwise same as ver. 2. I think this version has just the right separation between the gtrs.

Perfect! Sounds much more natural.

 

[RAMI]

WOW! Well, wherever the guits are panned, this piece is beautiful and much too short.
I listened to Versions 1 and 3. I must have missed 2, couldn't find it. I don't think there's too much delay on anything when listening at the same volume I listen to everything. I might be in the minority but I enjoyed the hard panning more than version 3. It seems that in version 3, the Left guitar just came to about 10 or 11 o'clock, while the right guitar stayed at about 3 o'clock. It sounded great, but I think I would have preffered them further apart but attached by some reverb or room sound. After all, my speakers are only about 4 feet apart and it wouldn't be unusual for 2 guitar players to sit 4 feet apart from each other. Either way, the detail, feeling and precision make this beautiful no matter how it's "produced".

 

[Llarion]

Version 3 is on the money. Perfect balance of wet/dry and field placement. You pegged it right in your analysis of each. What a haunting, lovely piece, and I hate you for playing so tastefully. Wish it were longer.

 

[David Katauskas]

Very nice melodic song...I'll have to add that one to my bag.
No, the delay is not noticable. Nice work!
btw - I liked version 1 the best. It meshed together the best.

 

[Dogman]

I'm partial to 2 for a tune that sounds very full and centered. I like 3 in the fact that it sounds a bit more like 2 people playing live in a room.....I like all versions of this, and feel that they just have different sounds, nothing bad, just different.
Ed

 

[RAMI]

The bottom line is: Make it LOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNGGGGGGGEEEEEER. It's too short, Tim.

 

[VSpaceBoy]

Well I think it sounds great either way. They both add their own thing IMO.

Great Job!

 

[NL5]

Well, I think this just proves "the performance is more important than the recording"! All three have got nearly identical amounts of "votes".

Once again, nice job Tim!

G-

 

[hueseph]

I personally liked thoe original. I thought that maybe just a bit of the right reverb would have filled the center space without cluttering the mix. I took the liberty of trying it out on my own with a small church reverb and it sounded nice to my ears. Of course I'm biased but I like the hard panning.

 

[ch2os7]

#3

im·pec·ca·ble ( ¹m-pµk“…-b…l) adj. 1. Having no flaws; perfect. See note at perfect .

Love listening to your work Tim.

 

[XLR]

SnakeDog, thanks for taking the time to listen to so many versions!

True-eurt and Madmush, - I like your descriptions of the nature of the tune. The left gtr has that sad, sighing descending chromatic figure in ¾ time while the R gtr has a such a hopeful soaring melody superimposed metrically in 6/8. If I heard the two parts separately I’d never think they went together, so a flowing smooth/duel, or brutal/haunting are descriptions I can relate to.

Inverness, thanks. In hindsight, if I ever do another multi version 1 minute tune it’d be smarter to put them together as one longer file.

Supercreep, well LPC’s judgment is highly valued. LPC may very well be HR’s two-brained George Martin.

Dogman, NL5, Llarion, David, Space and ch2os7 thank you for listening and the supportive comments.

Hueseph and Rami, the idea of wide panning w/a connecting reverb is a good one. I just realized that the rev I had on it was separated in a way that was increasing the L/R difference rather than helping to join the parts. I’m going to try the “connective” reverb idea to check it out. Guess I’ll need to print a rev track to control it the way I’d want to.

Thanks for the good ideas. Very helpful.

Tim