Impressionist Mix: "Consumption" Track 1

[K-dub]

Whereas sometimes I aim for extreme clarity in mixing, other times I go for what I call an Impressionist Mix.

I really don't want everything to be pristine and clear, I want it all mashed up together in in a blender and delivered in a boiling mish mosh of sound.

Rather than defined edges, I want blurry edges to the sound.

I want things to leave an impression of what they should be versus being able to pick parts out clearly in space on a sound stage ... like a loud band playing in a reverberant hall where you can't tell exactly where any sound source originates, but it's rockin' ...

This doesn't mean EVERYTHING has to be undefined ... just like there might be bold color strokes through an impressionist painting ... or some definition given to an area to draw the eye ... certain elements can be more defined than others.

I sort of got the idea listening to mixes by Oasis ... and realized that they weren't trying to be highly detailed ... quite the opposite. They were trying to sound like a loud band playing in a big hall ... and the effect is powerful ... the energy it conveys.

So that's what I was aiming for here in my opening track ... a kind of smashed up, colorful, blurry mix that leaves a strong impression of balls out energy.

The end kind of kicks things up a bit.

Consumption

It's about America's love affair with consuming ... and certain resultant consequences ...

Oh, and sometimes a cowbell placed just so is exactly what the arrangement calls for.

Thanks for any/all comments!

Best,

Kev-

 

[ido1957]

The intro guitars sound a wee bit out of tune....

Interesting mix - it's definitely not defined. Kinda mushy really at the start. When the vocals come in clearer, about 1:00 the mix improves. The vocals before that and at 2:00 for example are too undefined for me. Overall great performance as always, and this is something new to think about mix wise... It would be cool if you could give us some tips on how you did this - it sounds like reverb/compress.

 

[K-dub]

The intro guitars sound a wee bit out of tune....

Interesting mix - it's definitely not defined. Kinda mushy really at the start. When the vocals come in clearer, about 1:00 the mix improves. The vocals before that and at 2:00 for example are too undefined for me. Overall great performance as always, and this is something new to think about mix wise... It would be cool if you could give us some tips on how you did this - it sounds like reverb/compress.

It is exactly effects w/ compress bud ... although I must confess that I went WAY overboard w/ the latter and had to jump back in to get levels under control. I really bricked the original wav.

New link is above for the new mix.


But yes, reverb, delays, chorus and flange are all important when blurring the edges ... the trick being to try and keep the sounds boinging around all over the place w/o screwing up the freq balances ... so each effect has to be addressed w/ eq so as to keep the interferences to a minimum.

For instance ... if you're going to have an effects cloud operating, and you've got some reverb on the drums ... you have to REALLY steeply roll off the low end of the effect because there's nothing that will put a hurt on the upper frequency effects being heard than low end drum reverb.

Consequently, the secret to clean blur, if you'll pardon the expression, is layering the frequencies and sculpting the effects themselves so that don't wind up stomping all over each other.

Kev-

 

[WhiteStrat]

Reading your description before listening, I think I had an idea of what you were going for. For the most part, I think you achieved it--but I think maybe in the pursuit of the goal, you sacrificed too much on the vocal. That's where the message is--and something in me just wants to hear that message better.

The song is really cool. Very well developed and very well played. Great stuff...

 

[K-dub]

Yeah ... the verse vocal has been the sticky wicket of this mix. If I bring it too forward it sounds too processed, for I've got the pitch plug doing the harmony on the third ...

... and with the dense mix, it's a tough pocket to carve a hole for.

I always go back to listen though ... and I'll probably be playing w/ the sound until I get that balance just right.

Thanks for the thoughts!

Kev-

 

[Bulls Hit]

I can't offer anything super critical Kev. It strikes me that the verse vocal is fighting hard with the guitar/keys backing and having a tough time of it, maybe some carving might be in order. On these cheapo speakers, my overall impression is wild and woolly

 

[rayc]

I like to get all archaeological when listening so I'm happy with the blur and the slight internment of the vox - in fact I think sometime the vox are too clear.
Really good song - like the solo & the doubling etc.
Consumption scars the soul as well as the lungs & then you get consumption in the 19th century sense.

 

[K-dub]

I like to get all archaeological when listening so I'm happy with the blur and the slight internment of the vox - in fact I think sometime the vox are too clear.
Really good song - like the solo & the doubling etc.
Consumption scars the soul as well as the lungs & then you get consumption in the 19th century sense.

I totally agree Ray ... but the lyric on this has a meaning ... so it's that balance: "Sound against Intelligible" ... right now I lean towards the sound, but several people have thought I should bump the lead just a hair more forward so that the lyrics could be better understood.

I dunno ... like you, I like the sound currently. We'll see how I feel after resting a little and going back to it w/ fresh ears.

I was actually thinking of naming the new collection something like:

"Suffering from Consumption" or ...

"Consumption Blues" ... but then people might be think it was a blues album and be disappointed that it wasn't.

But I'm playing w/ the idea anyways ...

Kev-

 

[K-dub]

I can't offer anything super critical Kev. It strikes me that the verse vocal is fighting hard with the guitar/keys backing and having a tough time of it, maybe some carving might be in order. On these cheapo speakers, my overall impression is wild and woolly

It was worse, K.

At one point I'd bumped sonic points at 2k and 5k ... because that's where the bite of the sound occurs in the verse guitar ... but talk about a frequency fight ... so I rolled the upper regions back a bit to allow the vocal to cut through ...

Mostly, though ... the verse vocal is fighting w/ itself -- I've got a lot of delay and effect on it ...

Maybe the answer is carving a better pocket for it though ... I'll play with it.

I know I'm in the right neighborhood, I just need to find the right driveway.



Kev-

 

[K-dub]

I often kid myself about how many times I'll remix a tune ... but you know what happens?

I'll listen to a mix a million times, but it's that million and oneth time that I actually hear things right ... and sometimes it takes up until that moment for my ears to finally talk to my brain ... and the brain says, "OH ... THAT'S what we should do."

... and because I'm a home recordist and have the time to take the time to get it exactly the way I want it right ... well, then I wait until my ears start talking to my brain.

There was stuff in the early mixes of this ... like the fact that the guitar hook stomped all over the rhythm guitar as they transitioned to the verses ... and the fact that the vocals and rhythm guitar in the verses were just beating the piss out of each other frequency-wise ... and finally figuring out how to solve that (hint: add chorus on the guitar, blend the chorus more than the direct sound and roll off the high end) and cymbal compression (a.k.a. - "Splat" ... perfect term ... anyways -- route the Overheads around the compression stages) ...

... and suddenly the cymbals open up, the right balance of clarity and blur locks, the vocal finds it's pocket ... and ...

... I may JUST ...

... just ...

Be done.



Kev-


Consumption

 

[chrisharris]

haha...man, I was getting ready to type 2 pages of shit, then I realized that I had inadvertently hit a "stage" effect in my monitoring chain prior to listening to the tune. If it had been anybody else, I would have typed 2 pages of totally misleading and incorrect information, but I couldn't believe you'd be posting something that sounded as bad as what I was hearing, and I couldn't believe that others weren't ripping it.

Summary - sounds good.

 

[K-dub]

Wait ... so what you're saying is on "stage", this sounded like shit?



K-

 

[jmorris]

I think its a great tune, well recorded. Now the mix. I hear what your are saying about not wanting anything too defined but I feel you should work on getting everything to sit a bit better together. Like the begining, the gtrs are a bit too loud but I do understand what you are going for, just tweak it a bit so everything is a bit more "even", so not one eliment stands out

 

[K-dub]

I'm not certain what you're trying to get at ... so I'm inquiring further.

Personally, I believe elements should stand out appropriately. For instance, the lead vocal should have a place. The lead guitar should have a place ... and all the important elements should have certain varying amount of spotlight ... if you will ... on them.

The definition of nothing standing out ... where everything is "the same" is: bland.

Equal everything = no spices to a mix. Sameness is too levelly dull.

But I believe something struck you about the mix that bothered you ... so in precise terms ... did you find that there were problems with the levels (particularly in the "hook" guitars?) that jumped out at you? Did you notice something in particular?

Thanks for the help! I totally appreciate comment ... for even the best mixers here are reticent to comment critically in detail on anothers' mix ... for it's not the polite thing to do ... (to a degree, that includes me).

But I think something caught your ear as "off" ... and I would love to hear further comment from you. This is a tough mix ... and I'm always open to opinions.

Thanks!

Best,

Kev-