YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 I thought I was done. I was feelin' it. Thought sure I was DONE with mixing this CD. And then my brother tells me the guitars are entirely too trebly in this one song. As if, "you know you have to fix those guitars, right?". Huh? Damn it! I thought I nailed the mix. In that one song I had a hell of time getting the guitars to come out. "What my bro was talking about?", I thought. So tonight I was driving around and I heard it for myself. My mix isn't even close! I think the guitars on all 11 songs need to be significantly tweaked. And Super8 thought the guitars on the songs I sent him were thin, too. Grrrrr! I was pretty bummed for a minute or two after realizing that I had to go back and fix all that. My intention is to send this off to be mastered this Monday. 2 or 3 songs in particular are practically unlisten-to-able simply because the guitars are too screechy. I feel better now because it's totally doable. It shouldn't take very long to get the high end out once I figure out how to do it. Does anyone have any general advice about adding some "gut" to the electric guitar sounds. It's mainly the clean to semi-distorted guitars that suffer from this. EQ-wise, my tendency on the guitars was to cut the lowest frequencies entirely and then I subtracted 4-8 db with a thin Q for the mids that I found offensive. I didn't do much boosting. Before this awakening I was really confident about the guitar sounds. So much so that my approach was to get the bass and drums thumping and then to get everything out of the way of the vocal. Damn it damn it damn! Just venting a little. It's fun, really. :thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alcohol_ Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 I think frequent breaks when mixing is necessary. After a while you ears get fatigued and you don't hear the upper frequencies so well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylen Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 Hey LancoMo - you think you got problems ! I got axial modes in here the size of Hippopototomasses - Ha Ha. You want a Hippo playing a guitar - try EQin that ! :D Hang in there with the guitars though - what I heard was cool ! It's fun 'cause you can hear it in your head and it's only a few tenths of a dB and some Q (TBD) away ! :) kylen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 10, 2003 Author Share Posted December 10, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by alcohol_: [b]I think frequent breaks when mixing is necessary. After a while you ears get fatigued and you don't hear the upper frequencies so well.[/b][/quote]Yeah I agree. But more importantly: Nietzsche! The Disappointed One Speaks: "I listened for an echo but heard only praise." - Nietzsche (Beyond Good and Evil I think) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 Well, since you don't have a pair of ADAM's ;) the best advice I can offer you is to do a lot of comparison a/b listening WHILE mixing. Throw up your mix and listen to it carefully. Then throw up a commercial CD of a similar genre that you know well and think is a great example of guitar tones. Listen carefully to how those guitars sound. THAT'S how your guitars should sound. Now go back to your mix and use that as a reference point. Don't be afraid to flip back and forth frequently. As far as balls in a guitar part, giving you specific frequencies is next to useless - Mixing is totally interactive and interdependent. By that I mean if you adjust one thing in the mix, such as a bass guitar's level or tone, it's going to have an effect (to greater or lesser degrees) on everything else within the mix. So the type of bass you used, the way it's EQ'ed, even the level you set it at is going to have an effect on what the guitars sound like and how they should be EQ'ed. Cutting some bottom from the guitars can give you more room within the mix for the bass, but going too far with it (which it sounds like you may have done) will leave a "hole" in the frequency spectrum, leaving the guitars sounding too thin or screechy. Another thought to keep in mind: If you solo something and make it sound great by itself, chances are it's going to clash with or walk on something else within the mix. Going back to guitars, if you make a crunch electric gtr sound great by itself, chances are there will be too much low end and it's going to conflict with the bass and kick fundementals. So I normally suggest that people solo less and do more of the EQ'ing within the context of the mix. You might want to start by lowering the amount of "mid cut" you were doing. 8 dB might be too much - or not. And it depends on what you consider "mids" to be and where you have that EQ center frequency set at. Remember the bass is supporting the bottom, and so what you perceive as "bottom" or "guts" on the guitar may actually be lower mids. And of course, the way the amp / amp sim was set, the type of guitar, amp, mic etc. used can all have an influence on the tones we're dealing with here, so giving you specific frequencies is pretty much impossible... but I'd suggest playing with the 250 - 800 Hz range a bit and see if that helps. Sorry I couldn't be more specific. Hopefully this gives you some food for thought and some places to start from. Best of luck with your mixing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxTick Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by LanceMo: [b] EQ-wise, my tendency on the guitars was to cut the lowest frequencies entirely and then I subtracted 4-8 db with a thin Q for the mids that I found offensive. I didn't do much boosting. [/b][/quote]Without having heard the tracks... Try no EQ...it is that low end that's going to give your guitar tracks some bawls. the less EQ you have to add or subtract, the better. 4-8 dB is an awful lot of cutting (especially at a narrow Q)... you shouldn't have to cut that much. If you [b]have[/b] to EQ, use a wider Q (like 0.7 or 1.5 at the most) with a max cut of maybe 4 dB. Also, try a little compression/limiting.. that should also add some grunt. I hope this helps...good luck EDIT: Phil posted his reply as I was writing mine. As always, Phil posted some good advice. Pardon me if there is redundant info in my post. 0096 2251 2110 8105 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 10, 2003 Author Share Posted December 10, 2003 Thanks Phil! That's exactly the kind of advice I'm looking for. Certainly there's no way to know what frequencies to mess with without hearing the tune. The thing I'm afraid of is that when I change the guitars it's gonna mess with the rest of my balances. It's taken me weeks of tweaking things 1.3 db here and .7 db there to get what I have right. But that's just part of it. Gotta suck it up! I'm gonna take a look at a song or two right now and see if I can find a pattern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylen Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 In fact - I even import a great reference mix into Sonar3 and have it ready at a moments notice (just a mute button away !). It's always just a mute button away - that way I can have it at exactly the same loudness as what I'm mixing so it doesn't get any more confusing. That way you can hear how the dynamics and eq are working in the reference. It might take a little of both like was mentioned earlier. Actually from what I remember your dynamics sound fine but like Phil says 'when you change things - things change !' kylen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 Actually, I think you just said it better with one line than I did with several. :thu: "When you change things - things change". :thu: I like that! :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 Think about fixing your room and environment. Go to the accoustic treatment thread for some ideas of how to treat your room. I'll bet your mixes will sound 10 times better once you fix your room. Shitty room = shitty mix. Good room = good mix Great room = great mix This assumes you have a great song, a great performance, great ears, and some talent behind the controls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtrmac Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 It seems suspicious that you said "I thought I nailed the mix" and then someone else's suggestion made you think that it had major flaws. To me this demonstrates how subjective the art of mixing really is. If it were me I'd just say my brother don't know sh*t and master it. Right after I tweaked the EQ on the guitars a little! :D Mac Bowne G-Clef Acoustics Ltd. Osaka, Japan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 10, 2003 Author Share Posted December 10, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by kylen: [b]In fact - I even import a great reference mix into Sonar3 and have it ready at a moments notice (just a mute button away !). It's always just a mute button away - that way I can have it at exactly the same loudness as what I'm mixing so it doesn't get any more confusing. That way you can hear how the dynamics and eq are working in the reference. It might take a little of both like was mentioned earlier. Actually from what I remember your dynamics sound fine but like Phil says 'when you change things - things change !' kylen[/b][/quote]Great idea about importing the file Kylen. Makes it easy. You're smart! The 2 songs I sent you are probably the ones where the EQ is best. One thing is that I switched the treble setting on the 824s in the middle of the project (around when I mixed those 2 songs) and then I switched it back not long after. I just switched it again so we'll see what happens. By the way Kylen I sent you another tune yesterday. Did you get it? I just took a lot at the song my brother thought the guitars sounded crappy on. He's totally right. My EQs were preposterous. I was finding the right spots to cut but I was cutting them -9db a lot of the time. It was pretty arbitrary too. I hated that frequency so I annihalated it. I'd have -9 here and -6 there in like 4 spots on the guitar in addition to the low cut. No damn wonder the highs were screaming. The guitars were recorded pretty trebly anyhow. So tomorrow my goal is to get this one song right. I really like the song. The recording of it is somewhat iffy in spots but I think the potential is there to turn what I have recorded into something pretty dang nice. gtrmac, I don't have time for your antics and shenanigans! :D By the way, that's not subjective. It's objective: my mind and the object connect just as my brother's mind and the object connect. Law of Identity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylen Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 Hi LanceMo - yes I see it now. I'll give it a listen tonight now that I've got my monitors sounding real good in my room (it's undergoing a 'tuning' and a stern talking to!). Anyway it was mixed up in all the 'extend the length of your pen**' adds - Ha Ha someone must've told Santa ! :D Thanks, kylen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strat0124 Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 I'm not a fan of "fixin it in the mix", so my suggestion is to rerecord the guitars, hopefully with a setup with some ass. :) Down like a dollar comin up against a yen, doin pretty good for the shape I'm in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
where02190 Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 While this is of no help to your current situation, I too do not rely on fix in the mix. My tracking goal is simple, yet extremely effective when it comes time for mixing. I needs to sound goo jsut tossing the faders up, no dynamics, no eq no effects, just volume and pan. I accomplish this by spending time getting the soudn I and the artist are going for...tweaking mics, changing mic/preamp combos, tuning, room acoustics...whatever it takes to get what I hear acoustically from the control room monitors. Speaking of which, perhaps the problem is your conrol room, monitors or combination of. Have you properly tuned the room? what are you suing for monitors (plural, as in a couple diferent refereces)? If you ren't hearing accurately, your mixes won't translate well. Good luck. I subcrive to the elss is more theory of eq as well, but in this case you may have to get more drastic, since I think retracking the guitars is out of the question. Hope this is helpful. NP Recording Studios Analog approach to digital recording. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenElevenShadows Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 I'd first go back to the original guitars and try and work with them there. Maybe you rolled off a little too much bottom or cut too many low freqencies. Maybe the guitars sound okay without EQ. Go back, and then retweak if appropriate. Don't worry about it just yet. Don't re-record them just yet. If tracked properly, you should be able to throw up the faders and have the song sound pretty darn good already. This takes experience (and of course, a good arrangement). When tracking, always be thinking about the mix. Make sense? As I mentioned before, with guitars, I roll off some bottom end to reduce conflict with the kick drum and bass. I listen, listen, listen, and slowly roll off. If the guitar's tone starts changing, I feel I've rolled off too much. This differs from song to song, of course, but if I can get rid of some of the bottom end without sacrificing sound and tone, then I've done a good thing. It opens up the bottom end a lot if done properly without wrecking the guitar tone. Sometimes, I do the same with the top end of the guitars. I start high, and gradually start rolling off. If I hear the tone begin to change, I stop and start going back up. This gets rid of some stuff like hiss, noise, etc. WITHOUT sacrificing guitar tone. Obviously, the absolute most important thing is to get the guitar tone beautiful sounding to begin with, but that's almost so obvious that it doesn't bear mentioning. Ken Lee Photography - photos and books Eleven Shadows ambient music The Mercury Seven-cool spacey music Linktree to various sites Instagram Nightaxians Video Podcast Eleven Shadows website Ken Lee Photography Pinterest Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 10, 2003 Author Share Posted December 10, 2003 I worked this song for 4 hours this afternoon and I'm pretty dang happy with the results. Lots of EQ changes. The guitar melody line in the opening "verse" could use something like a delay maybe, I'm not sure. But the screechy-ness has been taken care of I do believe. Anyone wanna hear it? It'd be interesting as hell to hear what you guys say. It's called The Supermodel. I'm gonna send an MP3 to my bro in a couple hours so lemme know. Ken, The tracking of the song was iffy relative to the others. I wrote the song sort of as we went along and it was a matter of building the song up from the drum track. It was a weird song to put together. For the guitars I used a Hughes & Kettner Tubeman, and their Replex (love the Replex) and I may have used a TC Electronic chorus too. I can't remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenElevenShadows Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Can you post it on a web site and give us the URL? I also emailed you with my other email address. Don't send it to my Yahoo email that I have listed with this forum because it can't handle attachments that size (unless it's below 1.5 MG, but I doubt it, right?). Ken Lee Photography - photos and books Eleven Shadows ambient music The Mercury Seven-cool spacey music Linktree to various sites Instagram Nightaxians Video Podcast Eleven Shadows website Ken Lee Photography Pinterest Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 11, 2003 Author Share Posted December 11, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Ken/Eleven Shadows: [b]Can you post it on a web site and give us the URL? I also emailed you with my other email address. Don't send it to my Yahoo email that I have listed with this forum because it can't handle attachments that size (unless it's below 1.5 MG, but I doubt it, right?).[/b][/quote]I don't have any website action yet. I'll get the email out to you by 11 PM Eastern time. Thanks for havin' a listen. Anybody else? Going once, going twice! By the way, Kylen. If they're having any specials on those "enlargements" you mentioned, lemme know would ya? :thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 pokeefe777@ssrstudio.com - I'll give it a listen on my ADAM's if you'd like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 11, 2003 Author Share Posted December 11, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Philip O'Keefe: [b]pokeefe777@ssrstudio.com - I'll give it a listen on my ADAM's if you'd like.[/b][/quote]Awesome Phil. And thanks! Revision: I'm running a little late so the MP3 will be delivered by 12 AM EST. I'm on a dial up and it's a 6 minute tune. Gonna take the rat a few spins on the wheel to get it through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 11, 2003 Author Share Posted December 11, 2003 The Supermodel is making her way to your email boxes. The file is almost 6 MB. If that's too large I can convert it too a smaller MP3 file. It's still uploading...13% done...14...ugh...think I'm gonna look into cable hook ups for 2004. It's gonna take a little while to upload but it's a-comin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Yeah, definitely get a cable modem. You will be kicking yourself for waiting so long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 11, 2003 Author Share Posted December 11, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Philip O'Keefe: [b]Yeah, definitely get a cable modem. You will be kicking yourself for waiting so long.[/b][/quote]Yeah my brother has comcast and it's instantanious. He had some trouble with it but the last time he mentioned it he was pretty happy with it. It's essential for downloading/uploading files. This dial up stuff is for the birds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G. Ratte Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Well, I guess you're all done and had a happy ending. But I just wanted to pitch in my .02 and say that my best mixes haven't come through when I agonize over tiny EQ tweaks here and there and I disappear into my navel forever. Things have generally turned out best when I just throw up all the tracks about 0db, no EQ and just listen to the song a couple times while adjusting volumes. if something's being obnoxious, i cut some EQ. And then I'm done and it's almost always spiffy. Yay for having enough channels/tracks to not have to put completely different parts on the same tracks 'cuz that screws with the plan. G. Ratte' http://www.cultdeadcow.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YourMotherShouldKnow Posted December 11, 2003 Author Share Posted December 11, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by G. Ratte': [b]Well, I guess you're all done and had a happy ending. But I just wanted to pitch in my .02 and say that my best mixes haven't come through when I agonize over tiny EQ tweaks here and there and I disappear into my navel forever. Things have generally turned out best when I just throw up all the tracks about 0db, no EQ and just listen to the song a couple times while adjusting volumes. if something's being obnoxious, i cut some EQ. And then I'm done and it's almost always spiffy. Yay for having enough channels/tracks to not have to put completely different parts on the same tracks 'cuz that screws with the plan.[/b][/quote]Ratte, I agree if it's a fairly straight forward tune. The most pleasant song to listen to on this CD for me is a solo acoustic fingerpicking piece. But this particular song is complicated. Tweaking is absolutely necessary because there are so many different parts to stitch together. It depends on what you're trying to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Darling Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Lance , Like loads of us told you when you first started this adventure - don't hang your self and restrict yourself with time... As a beginner it is best to have as much time as possible to mix a project - don't have to spend a lot of time actually mixing the song, but you do need some time to live with a mixed track , get your objectivety back and then see if you nailed it or not.. When I just started mixing (and my room then was bad) it took me 4 to 5 attempt before I was please with the mixing. Now I can nail it in one - even though I usually do more simply because after few days I realised I like the string a little louder or something like that. :D Good luck. Danny Rotshtein Danny - Studio Engineer Jingles show-reel Visit DarlingNikkie.com To discover the sounds of "Darling Nikkie"(aka Jade 4U). . . . New exciting project Goddess of Destruction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Well, I got your email, and there's a file attached, but I've tried to download it several times now and I get an error each time. Anyone else having any problems with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rog951 Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Philip O'Keefe: [b]Well, I got your email, and there's a file attached, but I've tried to download it several times now and I get an error each time. Anyone else having any problems with it?[/b][/quote]Mine downloaded fine. But it's almost 6 megs in size so that doesn't help people with limits on email attachements! Lance-O: we've gotta get you hooked-up with a site where you can post this stuff. You'll get way more feedback once you do that... This mix is MUCH better. I didn't have to put my hands over my ears and squeal like a little girl once! It might be apples/oranges since this is an mp3 and I'm used to listening to the wav files. Personally, I wouldn't change much. I can hear the bass and drums now (the bass guitar sounds really cool...that's why I was pissed before when I got the super-trebly no-bass mix). And some of those little cymbal rolls aren't masked by the guitars anymore. The only issues I have left are: 1) The vocals being so dry and present. In a few places it really freaks me out. Still, that might be what you're going for. Being family, I'm not exactly an impartial observer; hearing your voice naked like that is like hearing my own. 2) This cymbals on this mp3 suffer from that same hi-freq anomaly that some of the other tunes have. Whether it's "pumping and breathing" from compression or what, I dunno. The way I can best explain it is that the sizzle from the hi-hat and crash sound like "shhhhh" instead of "sssssss." I'm just hoping it wasn't introduced with compression during tracking cuz I doubt re-recording the drums is an option! Overall, I'm pretty damn impressed that the song sounds so good now compared to the previous mix. :thu: None more black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylen Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Hi Lance - unfortunately I have to drop out for a few days at least. While correcting for modes and reflections diffractions in my listening area I just found some real problems - 8dB notches at 500Hz, 1.5KHz and 12KHz all about 1/4 octave wide. I just corrected one at 18KHz caused by a bad connector so I'm going thru everything with a fine-toothed 'hair-accessory' ! :D I'll catch up later, kylen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.