What I Want

  • Thread starter Thread starter TripleM
  • Start date Start date
nice pop song........nice vocals and good lyrics......

the mp3 encoder should help with the muddyness......it's a good mix though........the harmonies are nice and work well...
 
Smokepole - gotta say I smile every time I see your moniker

I don't know if you had checked out my tunes at all but if you like that moniker, what do think of the band name I made up for myself?

"ITCHY KRAK"

I did it to remind me that music needs to be fun!

Joe
 
"Donald Duck is a registered trademark of the Disney corporation"

lyrical genious there! :D loved that..

great lyrics man.. immediate smile for me..

the muddyness seems like it's been mentioned, so I will mention it again..

"there is some muddyness"


I see Chad has hooked you up with a new encoder.. I was thinking there was some crappy encoding going on too.. Somehow the vocals need to be understood better.. maybe not just a volume thing, but as you know, my lyrics are pretty unintelligible, but these should be easy to figure out because they are a stronger point of this tune.. nice vocal delivery.. Not sure if it was mentioned, but I hear some bass runs that don't work too well.. an example of this is @46.. It sounds like there is a sour note in there..

other than what's mentioned, this is a good feel good song.. I don't often smile while listening to music, but I did here..

I downloaded this yesterday, but I'll check to see if there is a remix..
 
TripleM said:
I suppose I could take out the stereo imaging and do nothig else and you'd notice more clarity in the midrange. As I said, I noticed it when I applied the effect, but decided the effect was the better choice
...
The stereo imager is a cool effect, but it makes it sound like you're singing through an oak door.
...
ditch the stereo stuff if it's muffled
Click to expand...

The "muffled" effect you're experiencing with the stereo imager is probably due to a phase problem. You're essentially sending tracks to a stereo-plugin, and the returns probably end up right on top of the channels you sent. This will cause comb filtering, most noticeable in the higher frequencies... it will sound like there's a blanket over your speakers.

If this imager is a good plug-in, there should be a way to reverse the polarity on each channel. I know in the Waves S1, there's a set of buttons that look like this:

+ <---> +

To reverse polarity on each channel, you click the plus signs and they turn to minus signs. Opens things right up. Hopefully your plugin supports polarity reversal.

Another thing you can do to get rid of the "phasing" is to put a delay plug-in as an insert, right before your stereo imager. Experiment w/the delay settings... anywhere from 10-30ms might help... this could also give a meatier sound to things like electric guitar.


Chad
 
Toki987 said:
good time music. I like this one MMM good. The vocals could be louder for me, I couldnt understand all of the words. It's got that bouncy feel of yours, really up stuff. :)
Click to expand...


pure tripindicularnessish!!!!!! Damn, you can write!!!!!!! WOW!

bed time!!!!!!

thank's man!

peace

Rick
 
"I want a girl with long legs and a short memory" hehe me too(red hair would be nice as well)-I like the way you stucture songs-good progressions and melodies-your vocal performance is very good( mr doubled lead vocal himself hah). Very good pop song. Excellent lyrics alot of clever lines...

As far as performance and mix-I'll say it again You need a drummer damnit ( a young keith Moon would fit the bill nicely)-the drums didnt sound too great for being samples. I heard a few drum "clams"-even though they were in time-the little lick at 2:02 sounded kinda weak to me and again at 2:24--like I said not out of time just not what I think a real drummer would play. The snare could come up a bit-and the cymbals arent coming through very clearly on my phones. The guitar parts are nice-I really like the descending riff starting at 2:03-very cool-but i think the sound is kinda mid-rangey-conflicting with the vocals-I'd like to hear a clean guitar drive the tune with the distorted filling it out more in the backround-but you know what you like-I'm just running at the mouth(fingers)-the vocals could use a little more volume/clarity as well IMO. Hope i'm not over stepping my bounds-and I don't mean to sound like mr critic-This song is right up my alley-I loved it really-I just think with the right production EVERYBODY will like this song hah. Enough.

As far as ozone I use it too (sometimes)-the compulsion is always there to use every plug it has-but I found if I just use eq-multiband compression and loudness maximizing(though im still kinda iffy on that -usually use the waves L1) im better off-it does add a signature kinda sound-and i hear it on this song. Just remember you supposedly like your mix before you start with it-its way too easy to get carried away with it. But again-I'm not an authority on anything-so continue to take anything i say with a grain of salt...(what does that mean anyway). Over and out.
 
powder-duder - thanks for the listen and feedback.

Smokepole - I like the moniker better :). I agree that music first and formost should be fun.

Sam - thanks for the writing comments. I compressed the hell out of the low end and then gave it a decent sized boost. I can quite easily take that down. I already planned to do that after reading theron's comments. I can already tell the encoder is better than what I used, but I'm going to try to work some other things before I put up a remix. I'm sure you'll help me with that one too. I also heard the bass line. It's on rhythm, but there's something with the flow of the runs that makes them kind of land with a thud. But since they were on time and not too terrible I didn't fix them. If I decide it's worth the time I may retrack the bass. I also agree that I may not need to boost the vocal levels, just clear them up. I'll decide when I get there. Thanks again.

participant - if there is a "polarity reverser" it's well hidden. I'll check and read the manuals, but I don't think it's there. There is a fader to boost widening and a delay. The delay simply delays the stereo signal on one side or the other. It's when I apply a delay that the muffledness kicks in. It's a banded effect, and yes it's more noticable in the higher bands. I tried to reduce the delay, but it didn't work. Am I going in the wrong direction and would increasing the delay help? I don't know, I'll toy around with it.

fenderlickinrickenbacher - I appreciate the nice words. Thank you for listening.

Strat - hey that's my favorite line too. That was actually the original idea for the song. It was originally, "long legs and a short attention span," but I couldn't work the cadence in. It's just so superficial I can't help but love it. We'll see what the drums sound like after tinkering. On Ozone - I always figure, "I paid for it, so I should use all of it." Well, maybe not. I think the compressor and EQ are really good. Thanks for the listen.
 
TripleM said:
participant - if there is a "polarity reverser" it's well hidden. I'll check and read the manuals, but I don't think it's there. There is a fader to boost widening and a delay. The delay simply delays the stereo signal on one side or the other. It's when I apply a delay that the muffledness kicks in.
Click to expand...

Do you have a plain "delay" plugin of any type? I'd try putting one of those in the insert path before the stereo widener.

Yes, when you delay a soundwave, chances are good that frequencies will get "comb filtered", because you're adding two soundwaves on top of each other: if one wave's peaks happen where the other wave's "valleys" are, the two will cancel out.

Polarity reversal flips the soundwave "upside down" (oversimplified, maybe)... so if you're getting phase cancellations (valleys & peaks hitting at the same time), this way peaks go with peaks, and valleys go with "valleys".

The most effective way I've found to use the S1 Stereo Widener is to send stereo tracks THAT ARE NOT HARD PANNED; that way, the "widened" output doesn't sit directly on top of the source... it makes electric guitars thicker, for instance.

Trust me-- it's not voodoo -- it works. On a remix of one of my songs, everything opened up once I remembered to reverse the polarity on the S1. I'm speaking from experience.


Chad
 
participant said:
The most effective way I've found to use the S1 Stereo Widener is to send stereo tracks THAT ARE NOT HARD PANNED; that way, the "widened" output doesn't sit directly on top of the source... it makes electric guitars thicker, for instance.
Click to expand...



this confuses me.. I have the S1 but haven't really used it yet..I don't understand why the spreader would work best on things not fully panned.. maybe if I read your response a few more times it will sink in..

probably not though..

I will probably have some Waves questions for you in the very near future..
 
Hey Trip,
nice tune man, real catchy. Would like to hear the vox better, but you got a really nice voice and that was a great performance man.
 
David - thank you. I tinkered around with the mix some this morning. I got a bit of clarity back into the mix. I had to wear headphones (family was asleep) so I couldn't tell exactly how much I got back. I still intend to post a remix. I think I also have a better MP3 encoder - the one I used on this version really whacked some of it.

Sam - participant can certainly answer your question better than I. But I'll try. Stereo wideining works by analyzing what portion of the audio signal is the same on both channels and what portion is different between the two sides. It then essentially turns down the volume on that portion that is the same and turns up the volume on the portions that are different. If you're panned pretty wide to begin with, there's comparatively little signal that is the same on both sides, and quite a lot that is different. So stereo widening will cause you to lose almost the entire middle and make it "hollow" sounding. Confusing enough?
 
B.SABBATH said:
this confuses me.. I have the S1 but haven't really used it yet..I don't understand why the spreader would work best on things not fully panned.. maybe if I read your response a few more times it will sink in..
Click to expand...

That's cool... it's because you're not sending 100% of the track to the S1 effect (hopefully).

This way, if your original, dry "stereo" track is panned 75% L and 75% right, and you send part (maybe half) of each channel to the S1, which is hardpanned, everything will sound thicker as well as wider. This is because you still get some of the original tracks, as well as the effect.

If the original trax are already hardpanned, the effect isn't as noticeable.

Also... you'll notice if you listen to your mix in MONO, with the S1 on it, the widened tracks often disappear. If the original tracks aren't hard panned, you'll still get some of the sound in mono.

BTW--are you just putting the S1 on the master 2-buss? Try using it on certain individual stereo tracks, and leaving it off others. (That would mean you'd have to mix in sonar, tho)


Chad
 
I was waiting for the line..."What I want is a triple nipple" but it never came. :D


A great song.....really. very cool chord progression and a very cool vocal lead line. The performance is nice too. I will say that it's muddy but I think you've gotten all the help you need so no point in going further with that.

Please don't put this song away. It's worthy of some more work.
 
hehe...that was a fun listen. I like the song, but would like to hear the vox a little better. There are some good lies in there being a little obscured.

Nice work
 
participant said:
BTW--are you just putting the S1 on the master 2-buss? Try using it on certain individual stereo tracks, and leaving it off others. (That would mean you'd have to mix in sonar, tho)
Click to expand...

yeah.. that's exactly how I've been testing it.. I just slapped it on the master bus of a finished mix.. It would be cool to mix in sonar, but it would take a long time to be able to figure out how to use it as intuitively as my tascam.. I understand what your saying now though.. Since I have been doing some drums on the computer, I will try out some of your suggestions for the drums at least.. Your a great resource!


Triple - good answer too!
 
There is some genius going on here in the songwriting...a la Townsend. Really fun lyrics (what I can decipher) and a catchy melody.

My problems are all with the recording rather than the performance. No bass, no highs. All mids and it sounds like a 6th generation dub--like you are listening to a band in the room next door. Why? I don't get it.

You played and sang this song really well, from what I can tell. Its just an overall lack of fidelity that is detracting and I have no idea why it comes out this way.

The song and performance are very cool, however--and those lyrics (I want Evil Knevil's autograph) are really good! You also have a pop voice that fits this style to a T. I have enjoyed some of your other tracks too. We gotta get the clarity back, thats all. I'm willing to help if I can. You have a unique thing going on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top