Relax Demo

Snowman999 said:
Yeah, at least the first glitch is from soundcloud. It's called compression. I don't hear the pop or the other glitch, maybe it's his speakers. If it was on my mp3 I'd have no problem saying so. I heard Armistice's mix which was not on soundcloud. It sounds great. the song itself sucks. But, hey that's just my opinion. I guess you heard my song, so you can say with authority it sucks. From your post, I don't give a shit what you think. But, I wouldn't expect anything more from someone named Bubba.
Click to expand...
Firstly, Armistice's song doesn't suck. Secondly, I'm pretty familiar with compression. I don't think that glitch is due to compression artefacts. Thirdly, it seems you only welcome criticism from people who don't dig too deep. Fourthly, Bubba is my nickname. My internet handle. I am unlikely to rape you in prison, but it's entirely probable that I am going to give you an honest criticism of your mix. You might try to explain it away or make excuses for it as you have done already, but that isn't going to make you a better recordist or mixer.
 
Double tracking vocals doesn't create an echo - it creates a variation on "chorusing" which does add to the "thickness' of the combined tracks.
Hi Hats - round metallic things that are mechanically banged together when not being struck by a stick or hammer = cymbals. It is a symbol of naivety or something more sinister to suggest that they're aren't know as such. Hey, a bass guitar is referred to as a bass and a piano forte is generally called a piano but you wouldn't want to just have the quiet to play on would you?
The song is cute and might be terrific if the time is spent re-tracking the vocals and a few other things then getting a good mix. Listen to tracks by your commentators and then you'll be able to weigh up the value of their advice. After which you should apply the suggestions made by those who've demonstrated an ear or skill that can help. Some or even most suggestions may not work but try 'em and find out.
 
Bubba po said:
Firstly, Armistice's song doesn't suck. Secondly, I'm pretty familiar with compression. I don't think that glitch is due to compression artefacts. Thirdly, it seems you only welcome criticism from people who don't dig too deep. Fourthly, Bubba is my nickname. My internet handle. I am unlikely to rape you in prison, but it's entirely probable that I am going to give you an honest criticism of your mix. You might try to explain it away or make excuses for it as you have done already, but that isn't going to make you a better recordist or mixer.
Click to expand...

That's your opinion that his song doesn't suck. It's not mine. It lacks anything resembling heart or soul. It's Boston or Toto rock, only not well written. But, if you like Boston or Toto, then you probably would like it. It's a preference. I listened to Forgetting and chose not comment on, because I have no useful comment. But, since he and you have been so polite, I thought I'd reciprocate with my opinion.

You didn't give any criticism except my sound sucks.

Since compression (or whatever soundcloud does to a recording once it's uploaded) doesn't cause glitches, what did? If it's on soundcloud and not on my mp3 version, where did it come from? EXPLAIN it. You're obviously the expert.

I welcome all honest criticism. On some criticism I explain my reasoning, which you'd call excuses. Sometimes if I don't agree, I'll flat out say it. It doesn't mean I'm not listening. If I thought my mixes and songs were perfect I'd say it when I post. Then I'd still want opinions.

One last thing: Opinions are just that, opinions. It doesn't make them fact.
 
andrushkiwt said:
The tune was good, to me. Just work on your mix. But yeah, a hi hat is a cymbal.
Click to expand...

I want to ask you a question. You're recording a song on your DAW. It's drums, guitar, piano, keyboard, bass guitar, and 4 vocals. You know you can't mix it till you get back from your tour of Europe. So, of course being the professional you are, you name the tracks.

1) Kick Drum
2) Snare
3) Cymbal
4) Cymbal
5) Cymbal

Is that how you do it? I mean that seriously? You know you don't. It would (should) be

1) Kick
2) Snare
3) Hats
4) Ride
5) Crash

This way there is no thought about which cymbal.

Yeah, technically hats are cymbals, but no one except the people here call them that. I don't even think the majority do or would. It's now just a technical issue of "we have to prove a point". They're hats or high hats. We're not talking technically when we speak of a song. Technically you can call a kick drum bass. But, then the person you're speaking too would probably think you're talking about the bass guitar and not the kick drum.

Calling high hats cymbals when you're speaking of a track in a song is disgustingly PC. I know it, and you know it.
 
I'll ask you a different way: You have a song that contains hats, ride and crash... The hats are a little too loud for your taste (your opinion). Do you say "hey the cymbal is too loud"? Do you really? If you say no, then you prove my point. Call an instrument what everyone knows it as. Is that really too much to ask? Is it really?

BTW why did you start with Hi Hats - round... why not say CYMBALS? Oh that's right, MUSICIANS call hi hats - hi hats.

Double tracking vocals doesn't create an echo - it creates a variation on "chorusing" which does add to the "thickness' of the combined tracks.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification. Granted I explained it wrong. Was I incorrect in how you use it or why?

The song is cute and might be terrific
Click to expand...

Thank you.

It also sucks and has terrible glitches.
 
What a weird discussion.

A bear is also type of animal.
A parka is also a type of coat.
A high hat is also a type of cymbal.

Simple taxonomy. If there's a need to be highly specific then you get more specific.
 
Things have nouns attached to them to give them a goup of sounds that can be uttered, a name, a concept and a context. Usually a thing is part of a group of similar things and they are labelled as such. Cymbals: Ride Cymbal, China Cymbal, Crash Cymbal, Hi Hat Cymbals. Jargon often replaces the noun within a specific group of users, (professional association, workplace etc.) but not in general use. A sequence of adjectives has a specific order that makes sense of the phrase used. Sometimes the adjective joins with the noun to create a new noun. Language is in flux and change occurs daily but only sticks when it successfully communicates. If one's younger brother is taller than oneself then he can successfully be referred to as the big, older brother. To refer to him as the little, big brother would communicate the wrong idea. Using nouns properly and with clarity is important.
 
dude ..... don't post mixes asking for mix comments and then get all defensive over anything that doesn't praise you.
The song's kinda cool .... the mix is muddy .... you, of course, have the right to disagree and you have the right to get all defensive also, if you wish.
But don't pretend to want mix advice .... you don't.
 
rayc said:
Things have nouns attached to them to give them a goup of sounds that can be uttered, a name, a concept and a context. Usually a thing is part of a group of similar things and they are labelled as such. Cymbals: Ride Cymbal, China Cymbal, Crash Cymbal, Hi Hat Cymbals. Jargon often replaces the noun within a specific group of users, (professional association, workplace etc.) but not in general use. A sequence of adjectives has a specific order that makes sense of the phrase used. Sometimes the adjective joins with the noun to create a new noun. Language is in flux and change occurs daily but only sticks when it successfully communicates. If one's younger brother is taller than oneself then he can successfully be referred to as the big, older brother. To refer to him as the little, big brother would communicate the wrong idea. Using nouns properly and with clarity is important.
Click to expand...

Yet you couldn't answer my question.

---------- Update ----------

Nola said:
What a weird discussion.

A bear is also type of animal.
A parka is also a type of coat.
A high hat is also a type of cymbal.

Simple taxonomy. If there's a need to be highly specific then you get more specific.
Click to expand...

I will merely you the same question, do you write in a track list Hats or cymbal? It's a truly a simple question.

Lt. Bob said:
dude ..... don't post mixes asking for mix comments and then get all defensive over anything that doesn't praise you.
Click to expand...

I didn't. But, thanks.
 
Snowman999 said:
I will merely you the same question, do you write in a track list Hats or cymbal? It's a truly a simple question.
Click to expand...

I don't write anything on the track list. I open a midi file and start programming and looking around for sounds I like. In the list, I do reach for pre-labeled "hats". It makes it easier to find the sound I want, sure. It's just a weird thing to get so upset about. Is it some street cred thing if you call it a hat vs a cymbal? I don't get the anger about it. I own a parka, yet sometimes I call it a coat. If I'm talking directly to a drummer and need to specify which cymbal I want him to hit, I might say "hit the hat". Yeah. So if you need to be specific with someone you'd say that. But if I'm talking with a drummer, and I say "bring all your cymbals to the gig", he knows to bring his ride, hat, etc. A hat is a cymbal. So, I don't understand the conversation. Sucks people are ganging up on you about it and sucks you're so mad about it. Ruins the good vibe that was going here.
 
Why ever use the name "Hats"? If they're just cymbals right.

Do you even know how this got started? The first reviewer said the cymbal was too loud. Another reviewer said he agreed the cymbal was too loud. When someone says cymbal I think RIDE or CRASH. So, I thought I didn't use cymbals in this song. I had to check my own song, and of course I didn't. So, I merely asked if they meant HATS. (because as we all know my mixes are so muddied and unprofessional that they could have meant guitar. Cause you can't tell the difference) To which I was ganged up on that hats are cymbals. Technically they are. But, if you're talking about someone's work or if there's a drummer present and they're riding the hats, you don't say stop riding the cymbal. It makes you sound like you have no idea of what you're talking about. Yet ALL OF YOU defend calling hats cymbals in this type situation. Instead of just saying "Yeah it would have been clearer to call hats hats". I don't blame the two people who called the hats cymbal. The first was probably just mistaken, and the second copied from the first. I blame the idiots who decided to condone calling hats cymbal. Then they want to be taken seriously. They can't even name hats hats.

You should write the drum machine manufacturer and ask why they don't combine the hats and cymbal sounds. I mean they are the same right?

Why get angry? I don't know. Why defend stupidity?
 
Snowman999 said:
So, I thought I didn't use cymbals in this song. I had to check my own song, and of course I didn't.
Click to expand...

Now, here's where it's pretty obvious you should've just dropped it, to me. If, in fact, you know there are NO crashes, rides, splashes, etc.., then why did you need clarification? In this case, it's clear (and appropriate) to call the hats cymbals. Why? Because they are the ONLY instruments of the type in the song.

Sure, a hi hat is a type of cymbal, and sure, we usually distinguish between the cymbals when critiquing - but, if you know the only type of cymbal in the tune is a hi hat, then it's clear which type of cymbal we're talking about. There isn't any need to be more specific. There is only one it can possibly be. See?

So, you can go on and on about calling this that and that this, but at the end of the day, by your own admission, this here tune has only one type of cymbal in it - a hi hat. When he said the cymbals were too loud, you could've clarified, "hi-hats?"..."hi-hats are cymbals"...."understood, got it, thanks"...and that's it.

If this song had 2 crashes, a hat, a ride, a china, and a splash, and someone said "the cymbals are too loud", then I can see wanting clarification about which he's talking about. And by the way of this conversation, you'd think that was the case. But...no. No it's not.

edit: I'll add that it's always unfair and a dick-ish move to say someone's music sucks. They shouldn't have done that to you and you shouldn't have done that to him. We all pour a shitload of work into this, whether its for fun or pay, and it's still a community of people on all sides of the talent spectrum. No one wins when they say someones music sucks publicly. They all look like dicks. As I said a couple times now, the tune was good. Just work on the mix and stop worrying about hats and cymbals.
 
Snowman999 said:
Why ever use the name "Hats"? If they're just cymbals right.

Do you even know how this got started? The first reviewer said the cymbal was too loud. Another reviewer said he agreed the cymbal was too loud. When someone says cymbal I think RIDE or CRASH. So, I thought I didn't use cymbals in this song. I had to check my own song, and of course I didn't. So, I merely asked if they meant HATS. (because as we all know my mixes are so muddied and unprofessional that they could have meant guitar. Cause you can't tell the difference) To which I was ganged up on that hats are cymbals. Technically they are. But, if you're talking about someone's work or if there's a drummer present and they're riding the hats, you don't say stop riding the cymbal. It makes you sound like you have no idea of what you're talking about. Yet ALL OF YOU defend calling hats cymbals in this type situation. Instead of just saying "Yeah it would have been clearer to call hats hats". I don't blame the two people who called the hats cymbal. The first was probably just mistaken, and the second copied from the first. I blame the idiots who decided to condone calling hats cymbal. Then they want to be taken seriously. They can't even name hats hats.

You should write the drum machine manufacturer and ask why they don't combine the hats and cymbal sounds. I mean they are the same right?

Why get angry? I don't know. Why defend stupidity?
Click to expand...
IF you read my last post you'd know why they are referred to by different names in different circumstances yet remain CYMBALS because that's what they are. I fear you are being obdurate because you don't know how to concede. It strikes me that you're of the ilk who would place their opinion above an actual expert in the field you espouse your opinion or experience in. This is why so many people are Flat Earthers. I wonder how those folk explain milk based on their experience and opinion.
In short you are being, colloquially, a dick.
 
If you want to use a different name than cymbals ( and I think you may have a point actually ) they're called Hi-Hats .... not just hats.

lol .... after over 50 years of playing and recording professionally full time and playing with thousands of musicians live and in the studio, I've never heard a single musician or drummer call them HATS ..... it's always hi-hats.

You will , of course, refuse to acknowledge anyone else could know anything so I'm sure it'll fall on deaf ears but if you want to sound like you know what you're doing, it's hi-hats.
 
Good God! Some of the interchange is awfully harsh over something that started out as a terminology misunderstanding.
Does everyone have PMS?
:D
 
RFR said:
Good God! Some of the interchange is awfully harsh over something that started out as a terminology misunderstanding.
Does everyone have PMS?
:D
Click to expand...

actually it started out as people having suggestions and/or comments and the OP getting defensive and insulting about all of them
 
Oh wow - this escalated.:laughings:

Dude! Serious overreaction.

So...

(1) You caused the misunderstanding over cymbals/hi-hats by, somehow intentionally misunderstanding the comment about them being too loud. We can all tell the difference between a handclap sample and hi-hat. You knew what was being talked about. Or maybe you didn't? Either way, it's not a good look. I'm sure your therapist can help you unpack that.

(2) I didn't offer an opinion on your song at all. I offered mix advice - detailed mix advice - after listening to it about 6 times. All those impressions you're getting on Soundcloud? That's me. My comment later about "little folky musings" is more a comment on the style and the wistful nature of it - you can choose to see it as a insult if you're that thin skinned. I didn't think it was rude. On hindsight perhaps I'd find another word than "little". I don't mind the song TBH - but I just wanted to give you mix feedback, not song feedback, as that's what the clinic is supposed to be for. But then you decided to attack my music. That's sort of the thing that's not done here - it's regarded as poor form. As for my song sounding like Toto or Boston, get a grip. And as for it not having "heart and soul" that is such a dumb thing to say. Completely meaningless. Completely subjective. Don't be a dick. The only thing, my friend, that's sucking here is your defensive attitude to honest mix critique.

(3)What I heard as glitches isn't Soundcloud compression. I know what Soundcloud compression is and does. That's not it. There's still a pop at 0.03 - I doubt that's Soundcloud. In any event, listen to it on Soundcloud before posting, just so you know what people are listening to.

(4)The question at the end is for real. Why are you here? If you want comments on your mix, then here's the place. On the song itself, well that's just personal taste, isn't it? I was attempting to determine whether you're posting your tune because you want to become a better mixer - and it would appear not - or because you wanted people to stroke your ego and say "Cool song bro" and shit like that. Harden up.

I'm glad you've been around musicians since before most people on this board were alive, but I've been on this board for 17 years, and the only thing I know, the only thing I take into every venture into the MP3 Clinic is that I know very little, and that I should take on board whatever people say, irrespective of whether I tend to like them or not generally, or agree with them at first blush, and think about what they say - because they're hearing something and so if I can work out what that is, perhaps I can improve the mix, which is all I care about. That's why the Clinic is here. Not for feedback about whether your song is good or not. You should know that already.

So now that you've outed yourself as incredibly thin skinned, we don't need to bother each other listening to each other's mixes any more, I guess.

Any time you want to man up and apologise for your comments about my tune, you can find me in my trailer.:thumbs up:
 
Lt. Bob said:
actually it started out as people having suggestions and/or comments and the OP getting defensive and insulting about all of them
Click to expand...

I agree on where the source is, im just amazed how out of hand it got.

The sad thing is, it's actually a pretty cool tune, and some of the suggestions could have taken it to a better place.

Well, it seems as there will be one less mp3 poster now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top