Mix and reward 150$

  • Thread starter Thread starter appleyardrules
  • Start date Start date
appleyardrules said:
wow i madea huge mistake
ive been on vacation
and i put july 20th i meant the 30th -_____- reallll sorry guys
Click to expand...
Does this mean we have up to the 30th to fix our mixes?
 
Great, so I'll take the opportunity and post my definite mix... :D
Man, it's Mix #5 now... :eek:
 
to be honest, with this there were some major problems with the tracking... one thing that struck me about alot of the mixes, is that alot of them buried the cymbals, where to me, they were probably the best sounding part of the kit...
 
Alright - I just saw this thread 5 hours ago so I hope you can give me a fair shake in getting in on this contest. It's still before the deadline so..

Please have a listen to my mix, I spent a few good hours on it.

Edit: Final version..


Should be interesting to see how mine stacks up to some of the others, I didn't listen to any of them before I began, just so as not to skew the direction I went with it. But I'll check some of them out now, and maybe comment back. Ok, may the best home guru win :P
 
Last edited:
Ok - my feedback for the others..

Other than mine I only really like geet's mix. Following him would be sine707.
Geet is the only one I felt had any grasp of the punk genre. Punk mixing is all about guitars. Some mixes had way too much low end on the kick.. some cranked the synth way up.. some were all treble.. Most were just too thin.

I feel I did a few things above and beyond simply mixing it, one of them was my own method of making the rhythms thicker which I might get into more once the results are in. Also, I have some punk music so I refamiliarized myself with the sound I was going for. 3rd, there were some vocal irregularities, tuning and timing issues, which I did my best to fix.

Well, best of luck everyone.
 
Last edited:
Mistral said:
Ok - my feedback for the others..

Other than mine I only really like geet's mix. Following him would be sine707.
Geet is the only one I felt had any grasp of the punk genre. Punk mixing is all about guitars. Some mixes had way too much low end on the kick.. some cranked the synth way up.. some were all treble.. Most were just too thin.

I feel I did a few things above and beyond simply mixing it, one of them was my own method of making the rhythms thicker which I might get into more once the results are in. Also, I have some punk music so I refamiliarized myself with the sound I was going for. 3rd, there were some vocal irregularities, tuning and timing issues, which I did my best to fix.

Well, best of luck everyone.
Click to expand...

Punk Mixing? punk recording is about capturing a moment, it's about taking what you have and making the most of it... punk is about breaking rules, but not about production... it's not about guitars. From my viewpoint, anyone that does any heavy processing on distorted guitars (aside from eq, and especially compression) is confused about how distortion works. punk recordings should sound natural and real, and punk is not about replacing the drums with samples, so they sound better. (no offense, geet... i liked your mix.) I don't know what punk means to this band, but i'm willing to take the leap that they believe in some sort of punk ethics.

in the end, i feel guilty about making a punk band sound any different then they would in a decent sounding room. (any band really). this is why tracking is so much more important than mixing or mastering.

also,
who know's how important the synth is to this band? maybe they want that to drive their record... mixing may involve making some artistic decisions, but unless i was told otherwise, by those intimately involved in creating the music, with only bass, 2 guitars, drums, vocals, and a synth, everything can be pretty present.

and, i can only make the assumption, that with stereo overheads, and a room mic, that they want to hear the cymbals, and the room sound/somewhat natural blend of the kit, or else, why bother?


...not that i spent any real time on my mix... 20 minutes.. i don't even really like my mix. the snare's too bright. among other things.
 
lyriex said:
to be honest, with this there were some major problems with the tracking... one thing that struck me about alot of the mixes, is that alot of them buried the cymbals, where to me, they were probably the best sounding part of the kit...
Click to expand...
I agree with you and also on your punk perspective. What did you think of my mix?
 
Lyriex -

Heh we can sit here and be deep about how punk=anarchy, or a DYI spirit, but like it or not, as the music goes it has a long-established presence and a discerning audience.. since it has been subdivided into different sounds over the years.. old school, new school.. punk isn't just punk, everyone kind of expects something different. I was making an educated guess based on their style what kind of mixing they might be going for.

Certainly there's a chance I'm off-base and they'll go for one of the mixes I wasn't a fan of. And I'm never one to dismiss being experimental, and different. But from my perspective, very few of the mixes suited their music. That's all. And I can't even say for certain that I heard yours, but I downloaded several of them. So try not to take it personally or anything.

I recognize my mix has some flaws, particularily since I mixed it late at night and had to use my sennheiser headphones. So I may give it a once-over today while I can crank the monitors and post a new version.

Anyway, somehow I doubt they want synth to drive their record.. particularily since, and this is not meant to offend anyone, it was probably the sloppiest instrument recorded. My personal take is this.. when a band plays live, they sound like they sound.. they don't have the the benefit of mixing levels perfectly. On a record, they're supposed to sound good, and no doubt they want to sound good. It's not about sounding better than they are, for instance with drum sample replacement (which I did not do myself) all that does is add some gloss, it doesn't change the playing. I tried to make every instrument audible, but in my opinion the lead guitar was superior both in terms of playing and giving catchiness to the song, so I made it more prominent.

Let's not bite each other's heads off over opinions, it is not as if $150 for 12 songs is some huge figure. If I don't win I won't be hurt.
 
NYMorningstar said:
I agree with you and also on your punk perspective. What did you think of my mix?
Click to expand...
cool, i like your mix, but i prefer drums louder, and while the lowend sounds alright on my monitors, i would worry a little bit about how it would translate to home stereo speakers.. actually i kind of like the boomy kick, but i would tone it done a little bit... sometimes it's hard to tell until you burn a cd and listen to it on a few different systems.
 
Alright, I did a quick remix with my room monitors. I edited my original post to include the final version.
 
Mistral said:
Lyriex -

Heh we can sit here and be deep about how punk=anarchy, or a DYI spirit, but like it or not, as the music goes it has a long-established presence and a discerning audience.. since it has been subdivided into different sounds over the years.. old school, new school.. punk isn't just punk, everyone kind of expects something different. I was making an educated guess based on their style what kind of mixing they might be going for.

Certainly there's a chance I'm off-base and they'll go for one of the mixes I wasn't a fan of. And I'm never one to dismiss being experimental, and different. But from my perspective, very few of the mixes suited their music. That's all. And I can't even say for certain that I heard yours, but I downloaded several of them. So try not to take it personally or anything.

I recognize my mix has some flaws, particularily since I mixed it late at night and had to use my sennheiser headphones. So I may give it a once-over today while I can crank the monitors and post a new version.

Anyway, somehow I doubt they want synth to drive their record.. particularily since, and this is not meant to offend anyone, it was probably the sloppiest instrument recorded. My personal take is this.. when a band plays live, they sound like they sound.. they don't have the the benefit of mixing levels perfectly. On a record, they're supposed to sound good, and no doubt they want to sound good. It's not about sounding better than they are, for instance with drum sample replacement (which I did not do myself) all that does is add some gloss, it doesn't change the playing. I tried to make every instrument audible, but in my opinion the lead guitar was superior both in terms of playing and giving catchiness to the song, so I made it more prominent.

Let's not bite each other's heads off over opinions, it is not as if $150 for 12 songs is some huge figure. If I don't win I won't be hurt.
Click to expand...

Well, punk and anarchy have little to do with eachother, i've met punk republicans before (but they are usually super-strange). The DIY Spirit, on the other hand is very much a part of what punk is. I agree that alot of people that play this style really don't know or care about what "Punk" is nor do a lot of them champion any of the philosophical implications of "Punk". To me punk no long implies a certain sound as much as it implies the above mentioned DIY Spirit, and a spirit of indipendence. To say that punk is either old school or new school is a generalization that is meaningless, and if it's believed, it is a misunderstanding of punk.... it would be very much the same as saying that there are two types of metal, old school and new school, and that people expect things out of each. or 2 types of jazz, traditional and fusion... these are all mis-statements. music should be mixed on a case by case, song by song basis. Trying to appease a hypothetical audience that has "expectations" doesn't serve the music at all.

I'm not trying to bite anyone's head off. i'm not interested in $150 dollars to mix someone's record (unless they are a friend, and i'm doing them a favor)... i generally feel that the person that recorded the music should do the mixing..

I was mainly trying to make a statement that saying punk = guitars, or that listening to "punk cd's" and trying to match that sound is off base. Any punk band that replaces acoustic drums with samples, as anything other then a special effect, is very confused about what they are doing, and I love drum machines, alot..

agreed on the sloppy synth playing... if it had been me, i would have re-recorded it. but they posted it as one of their tracks, so i assume they want it in there. And sometimes sloppy is a valid artistic decision.
 
I think posting long quotes is unnecessary.. just address me by name and people will know who you're talking to and what post.. anyhoo, I agree on some points and disagree on others. Even if old and new school are meaningless generalizations, it doesn't change the fact that some people like what is considered "new school" and everything that comes with it, including its production values. Personally I am a firm believer in doing whatever you think sounds good in your own music.. but it's not my own music. If I were an engineer doing mixes for bands in all different genres, it would not be professional of me to mix them all to my tastes.. but the band's, cause that's what I'm getting paid for. In such cases you must have knowledge of said genres, and even though I shudder to think of it, current trends. Then you can decide more accurately how much leeway you can give yourself.

I don't really see what you're saying about drum replacement either. If it is compensating for bad equipment or bad technique, but the playing remains intact, then I see zero problem with it. I don't care what kind of band it is, it is always a valid course of action as long as it is executed right. In Geet's case I am not sure but it sounded like he might have actually changed the pattern.. I doubt I would go to that extent, unless I were paid a tidy sum. In my case I kept the original sounds, just did some compression and gating, EQ'ing and such.
 
Drum replacement... i recognize that in metal, it is commonplace to trigger drum sounds.. in fact i think that triggering double bass can be effective live, for impact, but i'm not a fan of it in a recording environment.. i don't think that drum replacement or heavy edits sound good in punk music, and moreover, they are dishonest. There are lots of slick production techniques that are often used for no reason, and alot of times, these techniques are really just used to boost egos (usually the engineers). Acoustic drums sound good to me, even a cheap drum kit can potentially sound good with the right tunings... i've heard a lot of recordings ruined by drum replacement, the drums never have the same dynamics, and sound flat. even if you use multisamples, the results still generally sound false to me. I like to hear some flaws, i like overtones, these things add character, and they can usually be controlled with eq and compression. Drum replacement is replacing something natural with something artificial that is meant to sound natural. If a drummer wants this, he should play an electronic kit and those sounds can become part of how he expresses himself musically.

I've heard bad drum recordings, but to me, this means it's time to re-record, not to start trying to fix stuff in the mix, although i do understand that recording is essentially fixing problems. On this particular recording, even though the tracks may have been lacking is some regard, they were not bad enough to warrant what i would consider extreme measures.
 
If there was less bleed from the other drums it would have been very easy to compensate for the dynamics on the kick being all over the board.. But it became difficult to get it to where I wanted it, since it would also affect the snare sound, for instance. Some gates would probably have helped, as well as more careful mic'ing.

Another way that triggers can be used is to blend with the existing hits, to make up for lost qualities.. rather than completely replacing them and thus losing the "naturalness".
 
Punk and pop punk are almost completely opposite of each other. I would not call this band "punk". Pop punk is currently all about over production. Punk is and always has been about minimalism. There are certainly exceptions, but that's the general idea.

While you may not agree with sample replacement, take a listen to every modern record. They're all sample replaced. I am just following the trend. I'm not out to make a unique name for myself, I just want to put out solid recordings and be able to do exactly what the client wants.

I spent a half hour on my mix. I did not edit anything besides very basic stuff. I almost always mix the original tracks in with the samples to give it some realism. I didn't do that on this mix. The only way to get a record sounding like everything sounds today is to use samples.

Is it bullshit? Sometimes. I am not opposed to it, though. I like the overly agressive recordings that are coming out now. Everyone has differing opinions, I'm sure.
 
although this is a fine argument...

my main concern is what appleyardrules has decided and why.. he would be the client afterall...
i would just like to know for curiousity sake..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top