"You Take It All" - 1st mix using ARC2 software

  • Thread starter Thread starter GONZO-X
  • Start date Start date
GONZO-X

GONZO-X

Well-known member
"You Take It All"
https://soundcloud.com/bats-brew/you-take-it-all-1


link to full wav file download:
https://www.hightail.com/dl?phi_act...UNVbDhUQw&s=19102&cid=tx-02002207340200000000


1st mix attempt using IK Media's ARC2 room correction software, this is a working mix, not a finished song yet.

spectrum analyis of my mix:
35uc.jpg




so, here's the thing:
my previous mixes, and (2) album releases, have a very similar end result, as compared to this song mix; i know what i want to get in the end, and i always find a way to get it.

but

whereas in the past, to get a song mix right, i've had to rely on multiple mix sessions, analysis between sessions, multiple system playback, walking the room during mix sessions, and all this other PALAVA......
on THIS session, it was simple: one hour of sitting in one spot, the mix was 'easy', and when i was done, and ran the spectrum analysis, the curve of my mix, almost matched the final 'mastered' versions of my previous album releases.

big wow from me.

i'm not saying this mix is done, or that i'm totally happy yet....
only that, the software did exactly what it said it would do. it fixed some very stange (and typical) anomalies in my room.

and i can make mix decisions faster, easier, and apparently can trust what i'm hearing more than what i had before.



would love some feedback on how it is translating.
i'm continuing to experiment to dial my room in, with treatments, placement and this new room correction software,
so this is definitely a work in progress.
 
ok, a 151 views, and no replies, i'll pull this one and work on a new one
 
I tried but the link went to an error message 5 times.
Remember: bots read 90% of the time.
 
GONZO-X said:
ok, a 151 views, and no replies, i'll pull this one and work on a new one
Click to expand...

sorry guys....


WELL, i had it hanging out there for a while and no one replied, so as i said earlier, i took it down to work on it again.
i usually wont leave them up for very long, especially if there is no interest.....
 
GONZO-X said:
sorry guys....


WELL, i had it hanging out there for a while and no one replied, so as i said earlier, i took it down to work on it again.
i usually wont leave them up for very long, especially if there is no interest.....
Click to expand...

Yea, I linked to it to, I'm just slow (plus, I have to be ready to listen). They don't go stale if you leave them for awhile ;) In case of classic rock, I don't think it went stale, just served to many times.

Throw it back up there, let us give it a spin (so to speak).
 
For your reference so you don't have to look: JBL towers, Sub, Yamaha Receiver


Very Yes sounding in many places.

Could be just a personal thing, but I would like the vocals a bit more upfront (nudging) and a little bit more bottom in general. Between 200-750 area. Could just be me. Really good tune, glad you re-posted.
 
Really dig it. I like the Doobies meet Janes Addiction thing.

I find the droning bass guitar part (F ?) a little annoying and is really the only weak part of the song. Not sure if there's anything you can do with it in the mix, aside from either playing that note an octave lower, scooping it a lot, or doing something more interesting so you're not beating that poor note like it owes you money. :p

But seriously, the last two songs you posted have been really good and sound good.
 
The mix sounds very good, has a bit of a Styx vibe to my ears.
I'm curious how it would have come out without the ARC2 software?

I've been wondering just how good that software is, since I've seen other people complain that it messed up their misses, and that you have to do a lot of measurements around your room and tweaking of the software before it gets you something decent....which isn't much different from learning your monitors/room.

I can see when first starting out it might cut down on the learning of the monitors/room thing...but you already got past phase, according to your first post.....and you said the ARC2 basically gave you the same mix flavor that you use to get without it.
I guess I'm wondering why you would use ARC2 if you've already done the hard part of learning your monitors/room through analysis and experimentation and you were getting the mix resutls you wanted...?
 
It sounds great GONZO!

I'm a bit of a sucker for the light/power rock sound (whatever that means - but it makes sense to me). On that score I would like the guitars to blur more into the bass for more beef.

My concern is that you focus on master frequency response curves too much... they are to be respected but not obeyed... each song needs to emphasise its own strengths, not a generic frequency curve.

Having said that, this sounds great Gonzo! And the vocal suits the style, which is always the main thing :-)

(And I understand the pissy feeling you get when you don't get a response)

P.S. Edit the first post with the working link or you will continue to miss out on responses.
 
dm60
thanks for the reference, that's good.
and i've hear the YES thing before, it's always curious to me, i can't find any yes tunes that sound anything like this, but it must be a voice range/pitch thing, with a little of the prog mixed in.

vocals up, check!
bottom, i'm gonna remix the bass, even thinking of re-tracking it with a newer tone i've discovered, and that will probably change/solve/help the low end power.


pinky
doobies and janes, wow, that's a mix!
LOL, i hadn't thought of that, but you are right.

the droning bass, well, i like that part, but i am intrigued about changing it, and re-tracking a new tone with some new parts anyway.....
and by the way, that note DOES OWE ME MONEY!
the sunofabeech :D
 
miroslav
thanks for listening! i could hear a styx thing, maybe, kinda like the opening to crystal ball, or something like that?

on ARC: honestly, i think people that say it messes up their mixes, simply do not know how to use it or set it up.
it's not complicated, but it's not very intuitive either, until after you've gotten into it.

i think, for CERTAIN ROOMS....... emphasis on certain..... it's a great program.
and it works for me, that's all i can say for sure.

the reason to use it: cuts down mixing time by a quarter, at least, and, i'm not guessing.

when i hear the mix in my room now, i don't do tweaks based on what i remember it translating on another system....
i make the tweaks based on what i'm hearing right there, right now, in real time.

in other words, when i tweak it all, and it all comes together, i now know it is going to translate.

it helps me trust my monitors more, because what i'm hearing thru them, is exactly what i want.

see next post to TOBE to continue this idea.............
 
tobe
thanks man, i appreciate the comments

guitar blur, with bass, i think i know that aesthetic you are suggesting...

actually, i know a way to make that happen, i'm not sure if that's the sound i'm looking for on this one.

i'm afraid it may make it too........ homogenous.
i kinda like it pokey, and a bit gnarly, not smooth.



the focus on mastering curves, is not really focus, it's just paying attention.

the curves i look at, are of professional mixes i love the sound of...
using them as a 'guide' only, to know i'm in the ballpark.

as i mix with arc longer, i am finding that my starting curves (finished mixes, and the balance of harmonics and frequencies) is almost starting to line up dead on.

in other words, i'm trusting my mixes more, and my mixes are coming together very quickly.

i'm a student here, of engineering sound, so i'm keen to learn.
\
i know enough now, to recognize why certain curves are different from others, and can usually tell you why a certain curve has a boost or dip in an area based on nothing but style of music, or the particular tones of the instruments.


all of my curves look different, but there is a range of high end and low end, that you want to keep balanced, for songs to work together in an album of songs, which is what i'm working towards.

thanks again for the good ideas!



ps, i'm going to remix this, so it's time for it to come down anyway....
 
GONZO-X said:
when i hear the mix in my room now, i don't do tweaks based on what i remember it translating on another system....
i make the tweaks based on what i'm hearing right there, right now, in real time.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm looking it from a different perspective. I don't take my mixed to 5 other systems to see how they translate and then try to incorporate that into my mixing SOP.
I'm saying....if you just use your monitors in your room, and once you learn that with them in that environment, you mixes will sound like______________, why would the ARC2 be of any use then?

IOW, you KNOW how your room/monitors sound, and what you've done in the past to the mix based on that sound, to make it come out the way you want.....so why would you always need to revisit that?
AFA going to other systems every time you do a mix just to check it, and then trying to remember all that....yeah, that's a PITA, and I stopped doing that. It took awhile to dial things in, but know I'm pretty confident with things, and I know what I need to hear on my monitors in my room for it translate across other systems.

I'm just wondering how much of a benefit the ARC2 is in that situation?
AFA someone not knowing how a mix should sound on their monitors and in their room for it to translate well....that would be different.
I'm thinking….you already did the leg work to learn your monitors and room....so why would the ARC2 make a difference?

That said.....I can see how people will figure that buying $300 worth of software is cheaper/easier than buying/making traps, and certainly much less expensive than buying a bunch of ready-made traps. :D

I think I will post an ARC2 thread in the studio building forum just to see what people say. ;)
 
miro

for me, the additions of the ARC2 software to the equation, was a HUGE benefit.
i hear the mix better.



i've done room treatments, and still could not get there.
the arc took care of all of the rest of that for me.

if you look at my arc curve you can clearly see what it is i've been battling.


the low end is so much easier to read now.

the process i went thru to get to finished mixes i could trust, still involved multiple sessions to fix low end issues (mostly.....)



so, again i whole heartedly endorse the ARC2 software, based on my own experience,
and leave it to everyone else to figure out what works for them.


i'm sure there are folks everywhere, that have 'translation issues' even tho they trust their monitors and their rooms.

i'll keep submitting my working mixes, and folks can decide for themselves, over time, that my mixes translate or not..... and if not, i'll keep fine tuning stuff.


this is, of course, in leiu of spending a ridiculous amount of money for the ultimate studio setup, which frankly, i'll never be able to afford.
for me, wise money spent.

and it was only $149.
 
by the way, i took the link down...
am working on a new mix anyway, and will probably re-track most of it..

so , this was my FIRST attempt with the ARC2, to be fair, i'm still in the learning curve.

the "MOONSHINE" mix thread is my 2nd attempt, and a bit more dialed in.
 
GONZO-X said:
miro



this is, of course, in leiu of spending a ridiculous amount of money for the ultimate studio setup, which frankly, i'll never be able to afford.
for me, wise money spent.

and it was only $149.
Click to expand...

I posted a thread in the Studio Building Forum....:)....and that's part of the question, does it remove the whole "you need more room treatment" argument, since it's so inexpensive compared to involved room treatment.

Oh...I thought it was $300...?...at least that's how much I've seen it advertised.

IK Multimedia ARC System 2 Advanced Room Correction System | Sweetwater.com
 
All good GONZO, I still do a fair bit of referencing myself, especially with new equipment. And checking the master curve is good practice :) I will have a look at ARC but my instinct isn't convinced.

I guess giving the guitars a bit more balls would be a better description than "blur with bass", but you seem to know what you want and it's sounding good.

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top