Help remixing this song really quick

  • Thread starter Thread starter iBetOnBaseball
  • Start date Start date
The op's would be easier to work with, and sound better. The Lead Belly track has artifacts because I separated everything. The op's track would have vocals and drums untouched because they're on a separate track. Piano, bass, and strings are some of the easiest to separate.
So you think seperating three things is easier than two?:confused:

From what I'm hearing it's more of a novelty than a serious recording tool.You would have a hard sell using the tracks you posted and I'd venture to say the same feat could be accomplished with much less expensive hardware.

Your eggs are less scrambled,but scrambled none the less.
 
So you think seperating three things is easier than two?:confused:

From what I'm hearing it's more of a novelty than a serious recording tool.You would have a hard sell using the tracks you posted and I'd venture to say the same feat could be accomplished with much less expensive hardware.

Your eggs are less scrambled,but scrambled none the less.
I'm not saying it's easier to separate 3 then 2, vocals and guitar occupy much more frequency and overlap much more then bass, piano, and strings.

I'm starting to think that you guys think I'm some idiot who just came in here LOLZORZ I CAN SEPRAIT INSTROMENTES WITH MY TOOLZ!!!!!!1!!1!!11111!

No, I understand completely what I'm trying to say. I'm not here to magically separate instruments perfectly, I'm here to help the guy remix his song.

You can listen to any of the separations the Abbey Road engineers did for The Beatles: Rock Band, they don't sound much better then mine.

It's not made for listening isolated, It's for remixing!!!! The audio blends: You can pan, eq without artifacts.
 
I'm not saying it's easier to separate 3 then 2, vocals and guitar occupy much more frequency and overlap much more then bass, piano, and strings.

I'm starting to think that you guys think I'm some idiot who just came in here LOLZORZ I CAN SEPRAIT INSTROMENTES WITH MY TOOLZ!!!!!!1!!1!!11111!

No, I understand completely what I'm trying to say. I'm not here to magically separate instruments perfectly, I'm here to help the guy remix his song.

You can listen to any of the separations the Abbey Road engineers did for The Beatles: Rock Band, they don't sound much better then mine.

It's not made for listening isolated, It's for remixing!!!! The audio blends: You can pan, eq without artifacts.

It's cool.
It's just that in general trying to fix things on the back end doesn't have the greatest results.

In the end if the guy doesn't want to re-record you've given him the next best thing.
 
I CAN SEPRAIT INSTROMENTES WITH MY TOOLZ!!!!!!1!!1!!11111!
Yikes, anger-generated typos there. Relax, bobbybobbob. You haven't separated anything. That leadbelly example is awful-sounding as is, because of the awful guitar artifacting smeared all over the vocals. BTW, there's nothing I hear there that couldn't be also accomplished to the same level of quality using the Audition editor.

Look, there is some potential use for what you're doing, sure. But don't go around strutting like a cock on the walk making inflated claims that you're using "forensic software" to "separate instruments" and that mixes can be unscrambled because "all the data is there" and all that, because it's all over-hype. And the last thig the Internet Thing needs is yet more over-hype.
You can listen to any of the separations the Abbey Road engineers did for The Beatles: Rock Band, they don't sound much better then mine.
While they do sound quite better than your example, and are passible for a toy, they still sound pretty awful and are certainly nothing to hold up as examples of recommended audio engineering unless you're making something for a toy.
It's not made for listening isolated, It's for remixing!!!! The audio blends: You can pan, eq without artifacts.
Without artifacts? That Leadbelly example is nothing BUT artifacts. And you don't have to listen to the tracks separately for that to be quite audibly obvious. And the problem is that any processing you do to the vocals once they are PARTIALLY isolated like that, you're going to be doing to those guitar artifacts also.

That's not to say that such processing cannot be helpful. I could probably do something to that Leadbelly vocal to make it sound somehow different without completely ruining the guitar, but that's mostly because in that aged recording everything sounds like crap to begin with.

But spectral editing is no different than multi-band or multi-dynamic processing in one important way; the better the quality of the original tracks, the less you should try to "fix" them because of a mistake in engineering choices, and the more you should just go back and re-engineer them. And the reason for than is because, regardless of your claims, it remains impossible to unscramble an egg to the point where you can affect the yolk without also affecting the white.

Again, what you're doing has it's uses, just like any other kind of artificial splitting of a signal to processes slices of it (all of which could also be applied to this situation with some limited success, BTW.) And perhaps you can potentially help somewhat in this situation - But my god, please don't over-sell it as something it most definitely is not.

G.
 
I'm not here to magically separate instruments perfectly, I'm here to help the guy remix his song.

You can listen to any of the separations the Abbey Road engineers did for The Beatles: Rock Band, they don't sound much better then mine.


I'm just curious...what's the point if it doesn't really sound all that great....?
(That's meant for the people who want this done as much as it is for you who offers to do it for them.)

I mean...I can understand why a prodcut like Rock Band would need to do it/use it...
...and I could understand it being used in a true forensics application where it's not really about the quality of the mix that is important...
... but what I don't get is why would anyone want to take a crappy original mix and just remix it into a different but still kinda crappy sounding mix? :confused:

IOW...all the talk about the "spirit" of the original recording kinda goes out the window the minute you CHANGE it....doesn't it? :)

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....might as well just re-record it fresh. ;)

Oh...and just to add as an aside...
I HATE remixes, unless it's something actually done by the original artists.
Yeah...there are some kinda OK "dance remixes" where they just cut/splice and extend songs for 10 minutes....but when things get complete changed/added by someone who just "can" because he has the tools....that's total BS.
If you think you can do it better...record/mix it from scratch....don't take someone else’s work and butcher it up.

I don't even like where some "name" engineers/producers who might have worked on the original projects are now doing remixes of those albums, even though the original artists are dead are not involved.
IOW...it's ALL just profit driven...nothing else.
But hey...what's new about that. It's no different than hearing your favorite tunes selling butter or cleaning products on TV. :(
 
Without artifacts? That Leadbelly example is nothing BUT artifacts. And you don't have to listen to the tracks separately for that to be quite audibly obvious. And the problem is that any processing you do to the vocals once they are PARTIALLY isolated like that, you're going to be doing to those guitar artifacts also.
Can you please point out what said artifacts are? Maybe I'm not hearing it, but it sounds perfect to me.

You sure it's just not the 65 year old recording quality your hearing?
 
Back
Top