Jesus He Knows Me (Genesis cover)

[easlern]

Hi all, got a piano cover this time, Sarah doing vocals. Not a whole lot to mix but maybe that's a challenge of its own, keeping my fingers off the ten million doodads I usually throw on a mix.

Apologies for the length (~6 minutes), it ended up kind of long. I like the pacing at this tempo though so I'm just gonna stick with it.

Let me know your thoughts, thanks!


Mix 1: View attachment jesusHeKnowsMe.mp3
Mix 2: View attachment jesusHeKnowsMe2.mp3
Mix 3: View attachment jesusHeKnowsMe3.mp3

 

[andrushkiwt]

I have no idea about mixing a piano, but immediately thought it could be brighter a little. The vocals are really on top of the piano, I thought. Siblilance is still noticeable - it must be that mic Nick. Did you try the pencil?

Good to my ears otherwise! Who's playing the keys?

 

[easlern]

Thanks Taras! This was recorded a new (to recording) room, so I'm still experimenting w/ the vocal sound. That's kind of the only piece of my recordings nowadays that ever actually hits the air, odd to think that. . . Maybe a little eq on the reverb will tame the sibilants. Although I gotta admit I kind of like prominent S sounds, I should try taming it a bit since you mentioned it.

I played the piano, it's a Yamaha digital, first time I got to use it in a recording for logistical reasons. I'll try brightening it up a bit.

 

[andrushkiwt]

Nah, see what the others say first. Might just be me and the music I was listening to before that.

 

[TripleM]

I agree with the piano comment. It's missing a lot of high end.

The singer has a nice voice. It's a bit sibalant, which is being amplified by the type of reverb you're using. The vocal is a bit hot in the mid 2Khz range. The piano is much dryer than the vocal. I'd choose a completely different reverb for the vocal. Make it an intimate song, instead of a Carnegie Hall thing.

I'm hearing a lot of clicks and pops. I think they may be vocal artifacts.

 

[BroKen_H]

Great performance.
Vocals sound stereo...were they widened?
Is that a real piano? If not, it's a pretty good simulation of a miked piano so separate the L and R channels. If so (or afterward), just push the right mike with some 6-8k.

 

[easlern]

Thanks guys! Gonna definitely try some eq on the piano, first time I recorded it so I gotta learn its quirks.

Funny how the vocal sounds like it has more reverb. There's actually one reverb that piano and voice both use and the piano has extra delay too! Probably down to eq on the reverb, I'm guessing after I boost the piano highs they'll sound more similar.

 

[Nola]

The singer is nasal. Maybe it's hard for people to hear b/c it's a female singer. I'd lower her in the mix and cut the nasal frequencies, and also in the future I'd consider tilting the mic off axis and aiming it downward at her chest to reduce that. I'd like more emotional and loose singing, too. It's a bit...robotic.

The piano does sound dark like people said. It sounds like a piano simulator to me because I never heard a real piano sound that way. I'd like to hear tempo changes. There's times where the song should pickup, but it doesn't, and in a 6 minute song that's a necessity (think Bridge Over Troubled Water with tons of dynamics and tempo changes). I don't know the original version of this songs, though, so maybe this is how it goes.

Sometimes I hate writing feedback because it sounds so negative on paper, but the truth is I didn't enjoy it for those reasons, and hopefully you get something out of the feedback Easlern.

 

[TripleM]

first time I recorded it so I gotta learn its quirks.

I'm guessing after I boost the piano highs they'll sound more similar.

I'd be concerned that the lack of high end of the piano is due to mic placement when it was recorded. Boosting the highs might just make it harsh. Try it and see, but pay attention to that. But I'm thinking you'll probably be better off if you play with the mic placement and retrack.

 

[Robus]

Sarah sounds great. Good playing. I agree the piano is a bit dark. There's some sibilance here and there, nothing too bad.

 

[easlern]

Thanks all! Here's a new mix with some de-essing and a boost on the piano highs.

Mix 2: View attachment 97034

I'll keep these notes on recording. Not planning on going back to the recording phase for this one but we will be using the same room/mic for the foreseeable future so it's good to know these things.

The piano is digital TripleM, I'll send your compliments to Yamaha. I boosted it quite a bit, it didn't seem to get too crisp so I'll let you guys have a listen and I'll do a fresh listen in the morning.

 

[Nola]

Cool, glad you're not upset with my comments, and thanks for your feedback in my thread as well, Easlern.

 

[Robus]

Not hearing a lot of difference, but it sounds good.

 

[BroKen_H]

Love my Yamaha. The piano in that IS really good, but also very dark. The model for their sound is an 8' Yamaha G grand in a studio in Tokyo. The actual piano has been played by some amazing people and has a great tone, but it is a bit dark. Many classical pianists prefer a crisp attack with a darker tone. Depending on your model, there is a "bright grand" which should help a bit. Same piano, recorded differently. Hope this helps.

 

[BroKen_H]

Yup. Second mix sounds a lot like my YDP. Unfortunately that includes that digital ringout I hear at the end. Other than that, nice playing and beautiful voice. The piano is just a touch brighter, but not real noticeable. It is just the way that piano was miked. It's nice for live classical, but not so much for pop or jazz styles.

 

[easlern]

Oh wow Ken you might have solved the mystery for me of why there are two grand piano settings to choose from! I'll have to see if the other one is the brighter one. I've had this piano in a few rooms over the years and never really thought about it, though I always preferred one over the other depending on the room. I see what you mean by your mic comments then, I didn't use one but of course the manufacturer would use samples they recorded of actual pianos.

 

[easlern]

No worries Nola, your comment on tempo is right on I think, Sarah and I preferred working without a click track. But when we lined things up and tried to do comping/editing it just became a nightmare because the takes were all slightly different. So we went with the click track, pragmatism trumped artistry in the end. . .

 

[rob aylestone]

Well - I like the vocal. What I don't like is the piano. Not so much it's timbre, but the quite aggressive playing - which emphasises the mid range and this sometimes fights with the vocal. It also sounds quite narrow in dynamics. I thought the quieter playing was still very loud, and as the pianist started to play with the heavier feel, the tone changed, but the volume didn't really go up (not that I think it needed to). Personally, I'd have preferred the piano lower in the mix.

Arrangement wise - some moments were very exposed, and I expected something else. The original has much more harmony content and movement, this is more arpegiated chords with the harmonies weakened. I like the voice, I like the style, but the solo piano doesn't quite work for me.

 

[ibleedburgundy]

Sounds real nice dude. Unlike some others, I like the piano sound.

The reverb on the vocals is nice and smooth. I am wondering if it could be dialed back 2% but that's a nitpick.

 

[easlern]

Thanks for your notes guys! Trying a different tack here, getting the piano out of the way of the vocal. There are things I like about 2 and 3, I'll have to listen again later and check your comments to see which one we might go with.

Mix 3: View attachment 97055