news

  • Thread starter Thread starter dobro
  • Start date Start date
dobro said:
It's not distortion on the vocal, it's breath. I dunno if I can fix it. I'll try.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know it's breath rather than tracking too hot, but both still produce a form of distortion that colours the sound. I'd retrack it further from the mic or something if it was me. I dunno, it's your call - I'm just posting what I hear.
 
I haven't listened with headphones yet-- and while I've often been amazed at how much (increased clarity of) sound I've discovered that I hadn't previously noticed when I listened to something with headphones, I sort of feel that listening to something with headphones shouldn't be a requirement. So my only real beef is that I couldn't hear/understand the lyrics, especially in the first part-- it got a little easier later on.

I liked the instrumentation as is, but thought the vocals could benefit from some kind of boost to improve their clarity, either in volume or maybe just bringing out certain frequencies. I really liked the sound as a whole, it's just that I couldn't distinguish what the lyrics were for much of the song, so I kept wondering why it was called "News," and wishing I could hear the vocals more clearly. If I'd had the lyrics printed inside of an album cover to read while listening, so I wouldn't have to wonder about the connection between the title and the song, then I wouldn't have minded the singing as is, because the sound as a whole is very nice to listen to-- mellow, easy-going, pleasant. And I liked the lyrics that I did understand.

Donovan? I didn't think so, and that's not a bad thing. I like Donovan, but I think it's better for someone to have their own sound. I haven't listened to anything else you've recorded (yet), so I don't have any preconceptions about your style or background, but it sounded more Appalachian than British to me-- and by "Appalachian" I don't mean anything in terms of a musical genre (bluegrass or whatever), rather that it makes me feel like I'm relaxing on a mountain top in the Eastern US and listening to someone playing and singing while I watch the clouds rolling through the valley below (if that makes any sense).

(Professor Parentheses)

"So I asked myself, 'Am I crazy, or what?'-- which in my case is a trick question, because both are true!"
 
The "breath/distortion" is a distraction.
The only remedy would be re tracking with a screen and sock.
The bass is much better is V2.
Cool stuff.
 
SeaGtGruff said:
I liked the instrumentation as is, but thought the vocals could benefit from some kind of boost to improve their clarity, either in volume or maybe just bringing out certain frequencies.
Click to expand...

You're right. As soon as I posted the second mix here and listened to it, I went back and boosted the vocal 1.5. It's a strangeness, but sometimes I don't hear stuff until I've posted it for other people to hear.

SeaGtGruff said:
I haven't listened to anything else you've recorded (yet), so I don't have any preconceptions about your style or background, but it sounded more Appalachian than British to me-- and by "Appalachian" I don't mean anything in terms of a musical genre (bluegrass or whatever), rather that it makes me feel like I'm relaxing on a mountain top in the Eastern US and listening to someone playing and singing while I watch the clouds rolling through the valley below (if that makes any sense).
Click to expand...

The Appalachian thing makes sense to me. Of all the different musics on the planet, that Appalachian stuff moves me the most. In the pines, in the pines, where the sun never shines.
 
rayc said:
The "breath/distortion" is a distraction.
The only remedy would be re tracking with a screen and sock.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Racy. Okay, the jury's in - the breath's bad. I used a screen on this one, believe it or don't. I should have used the SM7B - that thing deals with everything.
 
The breath thing doesn't wreck it...it would just bug me....probably to the point of wanting to re-track. There won't be another way to fix it. :)
 
Yeah, well okay. A producer's someone you trust enough to take a nudge.

 
..and....there it is.

That's got all of it...and it's very more better now. :)
 
Now....I hate to say it at this point...because some mixes NEED to have a dynamic like this. This is a good song and a good mix but when you look at the waveform on this mix...and see utterly occupied the space is visually...then you know what you're going to get when you listen to it. Producers didn't have this visual reference decades ago.

If you produce something thinking ONLY about what the mix's waveform is going to visually look like...you'll automatically end up whatever dynamic you envisioned.

I just thought of this. It would be interesting to sketch out a waveform on paper...and then try to write and produce a song trying to replicate it. At the very least you'd challenge your producing ability with that exercise. Of course, I'm always dreaming of way to challenge myself...and then forgetting about it. :)
 
You can't believe the soundcloud widget representation of the waveform - they always look like candidates for the loudness wars - the waveforms on the Soundcloud site aren't much better. Having said that, I limited this one 1 dB more than I usually do. The dynamic range is still about 15 dB though, which is okay for a tune like this.
 
I listened to the first/original mix. First I tend not to think of music in pass or fail terms. It all passes, no one can possibly be that snobbish lol. This is a trip of a song tho'. My ears definitely wanna hear more saturation bass and reverb to make the whole thing even weirder, but that's just opinion. i think the creativity here is definitely apparent :thumbs up:

I heard the latest version and it sounds about the same??
 
'Pass or fail' was just a colorful use of language. To my ears, the latest version sounds significantly different from the first one. I not only made major mix changes, but I even retracked the vocal!
 
I liked the second mix best. To my ears, everything sounded slightly less dry. I hate dry. :D

Nice, quirky song. :)
 
Yeah, it's a tough choice between mix #2 and mix #3 for me. I think the vocals sound more comfortable and sit better in #2, but I can understand them better in #3. I like the song too much to quibble over minutiae, either mix would be a keeper to me.
 
Bubba po said:
I liked the second mix best. To my ears, everything sounded slightly less dry. I hate dry. :D

Nice, quirky song. :)
Click to expand...

My stuff is so much more than quirky. I take your comment about dry, though. I'm drawn to wet like a moth to flame. I just need to let go of caution.
 
I liked both the 2nd and 3rd mixes...not sure which one over the other?

You sound so freakin' happy on this...what gives? :) You even let out a little high pitched, "yeah" in there where you just sound positively joyous. That is one weird ass solo there, but it sounds good. Maybe a little loud on mix 3?

I think either one of the last two mixes would be fine as a keeper.
 
Well, it's a happy song. Thanks for the feedback. When both you and Tadpui say either one's a keeper, then I'm done on this one, I think. I had about 8 producers on this one. How could I miss? :thumbs up:
 
Maybe all 8 were wrong?

No, I'm sure that's not it....:p
 
I posted this one on two sites. On the other site, I got comments that were appreciative of the music, but contained little about the mix. Here, I got mix comments that got me dialing it in right away. Awesome.

I've started to listen to stuff I like here more than just the once, partly for the practice, but partly to be useful. I'm thinking that it makes little sense to listen to my own mixes twenty times each but mixes here get only one listen. Sure, sometimes that single snapshot perception picks out something useful, but it's a couple repeated listens in a relatively short timeframe that really start talking to me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top