Nothing to see here, folks. Move along...

[Kendrix]

oops. I guess I was "out of order" making detailed comments on Lee's & Soundscapes mixes. It probably is better to wait till we back off , get some perspective and hear the higher quality renderings versus the MP3 files. Time to work on the song I put down when I went to work on this. BTW - my wife said the song brought to mind Jacob Dylan. I did not see it - but she did. Cheers

[Salyphus]

Concurrence on the perspective thing. I listened to some of the mixes last night, and heard some very cool things, but there were a few places where I was so used to hearing it the way I had done things that the difference was jarring. I can't really say that I would have had the same reaction if I hadn't listened to mine over and over again, and I wouldn't want to offer criticism based on such a distorted perspective. I will say that I'm glad that I like the song enough to hear it this many times, so props to GT3 for a job wll done. There is always a limit to how much you can take though ;) BTW, GT3, you said early on that you had recorded a new version of this song, it would be really interesting to hear that at some point, in addition to your mix of this one. :thu:

[Lee Flier]

Yeah, I figured that out pretty quickly. When I first listened to Henchman's and d gauss' mixes, I hadn't done my own yet, and I liked a lot of things about them. But since doing mine almost everyone else's sounds "wrong" (including those two which I had previously really liked) because I got so used to hearing mine. So I'm going to 1) refrain from any comments until I get the CD and I've had a chance to step away from my own mix, and 2) I will not listen to two mixes back to back, because I don't want to get into comparing them. I want to listen to each one on its own merit, not compared to other people's. So I'm going to rest my ears for at least a half hour, preferably more, between listening to different mixes. This seems to help a lot even in the short time I've been putting this into practice with the MP3's. Listening to a bunch of them all at once really screws up perspective. I'm glad we're all getting on the same page about that. :) And GT3, yeah I'll say I'm very curious now to hear the way YOU mixed it! And whose mix in this event came closest to yours.

[Rim]

Good point Sal and Lee. I've listened to everybody's mix once but a break would be good. Gotta say it, though, listen to spacebass' mix before your break if you haven't yet. Wow!

[Anon-a-Monster]

[quote] And GT3, yeah I'll say I'm very curious now to hear the way YOU mixed it! And whose mix in this event came closest to yours. [/quote]That would be mine... heheh

[Henchman]

[quote]Originally posted by GT3: [b] [url=http://www3.telus.net/Home/GT3/]Henchman\'s mix - Click here.[/url] That one was definitely a REMIX. Craig sent me a mix, but I'm not sure if he wants it posted yet! I think it's probably ok, but I'd like to see if he has any caveats...[/b][/quote]To me, a remix means adding stuff to existing tracks. Which i didn't do. So I must insist calling mine a mix only. :D

[Henchman]

I mixed using the Fairlight for editing and playback. Used the D8B for compression. The TC System6000 for verbs and delays. As well as the delay on the D8B.

[Gtoledo3]

[quote]Originally posted by Henchman: [b] [quote]Originally posted by GT3: [b] [url=http://www3.telus.net/Home/GT3/]Henchman\'s mix - Click here.[/url] That one was definitely a REMIX. Craig sent me a mix, but I'm not sure if he wants it posted yet! I think it's probably ok, but I'd like to see if he has any caveats...[/b][/quote]To me, a remix means adding stuff to existing tracks. Which i didn't do. So I must insist calling mine a mix only. :D [/b][/quote]Don't take that the wrong way! I really love your mix. But, if there are structural changes, it's a remix in my book. Hmmmm, something to ponder :wave:

[Henchman]

Don't worry. I didn't take it the wrong way.

[Kendrix]

[quote]Originally posted by Henchman: [b]I mixed using the Fairlight for editing and playback. Used the D8B for compression. The TC System6000 for verbs and delays. As well as the delay on the D8B.[/b][/quote]TC 6000 Ooh Im green with envy. It occurs to me that there is probably a good mix of pro and project participants in this. An equipment list would probably make this apparent. It will be interesting to see if the quality is vastly different or not. ( Of course the tracking is common -save for the additional sounds). This will be interesting to observe.

[Franknputer]

OK - here's mine: [url=http://franknputer.complexero.com/music/GT3andCCK_mix2.mp3]GT3andCCK_mix2.mp3[/url] I'll post more details in a bit - but I used Eskil's drums, and the guitars are me. :D

[big K]

well sorry everyone... I was just about to go in to cubase. and bounce down to 2track ( mixed it over x-mas) ... and what happens.. no project file... poof gone... I think I might have put it some ware I shouldn't have, then erased the folder. wither way , I guess I am out, cause I am already late and I can't burn a CD any way ( stay away from panasonic laptops by the way!) I will still listen to others though . cheers. Kevin Nemrava -token canadian

[Paul Berolzheimer]

FWIW, I did mine almost entirely in my Protools 24 Mix, running in an old 9600/300 with a scsi & firewire cards. The only thing I went outside for was the subharmonic synth on the rap vocals, that was a DBX 120x-ds. Mostly I used the Waves Linear EQ & Linear Multiband dynamics tool for timbre & dynamics, & just the Digidesign delay plugz for ambience & phasey stuff.

[halljams]

[quote]Originally posted by big K: [b]well sorry everyone... I was just about to go in to cubase. and bounce down to 2track ( mixed it over x-mas) ... and what happens.. no project file... poof gone... I think I might have put it some ware I shouldn't have, then erased the folder. wither way , I guess I am out, cause I am already late and I can't burn a CD any way ( stay away from panasonic laptops by the way!) I will still listen to others though . cheers. Kevin Nemrava -token canadian[/b][/quote]hay fellow Canadian :wave: . I actually erased my first try too. i was having some drop outs in sonar and found a thing that said i should erase the ini file bla bla bla, anyway i misdirected the tune to the audio files i had which i had all cut up into clips and one thing led to the next and 5 hours later i was back where i sorta was! Jeez that stuff sucks.

[Paul Berolzheimer]

Hmmmm.....it's the Canadian missing file conspiracy......

[Mr Darling]

I second few of the above : I also want to hear GT3 origenal mix. !! As for other mixes , I listen to few - to ne honest, I am not interested to hear remixes, just want to hear the same song again and again mixed by different people. And for that I will also need a CD, listening to the mp3 file through the Imac speakers you cant say much over a mix. And please - lets make sure we seperate the remixes from the mixes.

[Anon-a-Monster]

[quote]Originally posted by Mr Darling: [b]As for other mixes , I listen to few - to ne honest, I am not interested to hear remixes, just want to hear the same song again and again mixed by different people. And for that I will also need a CD, listening to the mp3 file through the Imac speakers you cant say much over a mix. And please - lets make sure we seperate the remixes from the mixes.[/b][/quote]Where is the line between mix and remix? I realize my mixes are the extreme in remixing (ground up re tracking), but almost everyones 'mix' has added, edited or replaced parts, drums, bass, egt, solos, keys, even harmonies on the vocals, so what is the standard? It is a slippery slope. The standard to me is to serve the song and present it so it is evocative and interesting. Also, I wanted to illustrate in the ground up remixes that the same vocal performance can take on a completely different attitude and virility with a different style of music supporting it. Personally, I think the rock remix serves the song and vocal much better that the original. If you had someone who had no pre information about this listen to an original parts only mix and then the remix, the remix would win every time. Why? Because the remix tracks are in direct response to the vocal feel, all the parts support the vocal in groove and feel, while the original tracks feel like demo or scratch parts to me. Too many parts just lay there and do not groove and actually fight the vocal groove (and some parts of the vocal are suspect as well). It is a prime example of producing solo music without realtime objective feedback during the part creation and performance process. It is obvious that GT3 is talented but it is difficult (at best) to perform and make evaluations of those performances at the same time, resulting in partial performances. Thats just my opinion. I hope GT3 doesn't take offense.

[Gtoledo3]

Anon, I don't take offense, but it's interesting how people percieve things differently; I definitely feel that some of the rythms you chose fought the vocal timing. I enjoy the tracks though. And the chord changes you chose conflicted with vocal notes every so often, which was kind of weird. I would have thought some of that would have stood out as sounding off.

[Franknputer]

It seems to me that the difference between a mix & a remix is semantical, and somewhat besdie the point. I think we can each judge what is what on our own, and comment on the accordingly without segregating the mixes into different categories. Otherwise, a "pure" mix-off should require that we use what we are given as tracks, and we already agreed not to set that limitation. Why not allow one of the criteria for judging be how far a mix strays from the original vision IF that is important to you? I haven't yet heard Anon's mixes, but if they are so radically different then judge them on their own merit as well as alongside the original (again, IF that matters to the individual).

[Franknputer]

As for my personal molestation of George's (sorry about the name mix-up, there - I have a hole in my brain where the names go - cck) creation, :D I did it on my hopped-up G3 Mac (now with a G4-500) with Digital Performer 2.72, using either the MOTU effects or a few of the freebies I have picked up, mainly the PSP Pianoverb plugin on the B3 and the rhythm guitar, to give them a shared acoustical space. Eskil's drums weren't heavily effected - but I did use the kick to trigger a lo-freq sine pulse to fatten it up, and I also cut the ring frequency from the snare drum to tighten up the tone a bit. The only other bit was to run the room mic through a stereo delay (10 ms L and 20 ms R, iirc) to give it some dimension. No reverb added. The guitar sounds are various sounds from my J-Station. I played my gold PRS with Duncan P'ups through that. The early vocals were effected with the MOTU Spectral Processing, just because I tried it & it sounded nicely weird... :freak: Individual track edits were done with Peak DV, with a minor effect added on one or two (mainly for continuity of the track, if a little 'verb smoothed a travsition) - primarily that was for cut 'n' paste & fades. This was my first time really digging into DP. I had a lot of fun with it!

[Mr Darling]

Anon , I didn't mean anything bad about the remixes. God know, I've done few remixes in the past, and our songs got remixed as well. However, I can not learn more then listening to a remix of GT3 song then I would of buying any single with loads of remixes. However, if I can listen to few mixes, that basicly have the same tracks in them - I could see how other people delt with the same issues I delt while trying to retain space and clarity in the Mix. I've suggested before, and I would like to suggest again : A different catgories 1. Only origenal track (a sub catagory could be origenal+Lee's drums) 2. Mainly Origenal + few added extras 3. A total remix. This inteand just to make our learning expireance easier.I think we all mature enough to catagoriesed our own mixes.Or at least comment next to our list. For example my mix will be : Most origenal tracks + Lee's drum. A slight structure modifacation. And I still very much want to hear the origenal mix. Not the new one GT3 - the origenal!! :D Danny I

[halljams]

Where i came from on my mix, was more to do with what i thought was best for the song. Not to make a statement with a remix. I think many others felt the same with the arrangment changes they made. It seems to me that given the tools and accessability to theses tools that the mixer has these days, he/she should be granted the freedom to make some choices.If the changes are not liked by someone, fine change them back, it's not that hard. Collaboration is a wonderful thing if you allow it to happen. Why shouldn't the mixer be given a chance to have his say, good or bad? Personally i liked the song alot but thought the message could come across stronger. I like the impact of having the "at home" lyrics first. They are more powerful and compelling than that first bit. The intro is beauitiful musically though, i just thought the words got in the way of that. Plus i thought it got way too noisy and stayed that way after around the middle section of the tune and it needed some restaining or people are gonna stop paying attention or turn it off. So I resolved it a couple times. To me it is a simple matter of what i hear as balance through out the tune. As a mixer, that is what i offer to this tune, my take on how to balance the energy, along with setting some levels and picking and choosing what does and doesn't work together in terms of tracks. i loved the fact that there were so many tracks to choose from because i was able to fulfill what i heard the tune needing in terms of balance and direction. I'm a lead guitar player myself but i still chose not to use any guitar solo, i don't think it took the the song to a strong place. I just wanted to throw a bit of insight into my approach because i feel that i did the minimum to make that song palletable in relation to the style it resides in. To leave it as is and just set levels is fine, but IMO, just doing that leaves the tune sub par in it's category of popular music. And the point of mixing is to make it sound attractive and make people want to listen again. Plus to take it up a step from where it was while still maintaining the integrity of the message and feeling. Well i think so anyway. :)

[Uh Clem]

As I said cool stuff. Some of my general impressions: Only a few of the mixes translate well in my room - on the Meyers or Genelecs as compared to commercial CDs and I try to listen to at least 20 artists a day in my room from Rock to Jazz to Classical to Rap so that I'll know how my speakers are supposed to sound. Many of the mixes sound bass heavy or thick in the middle - one that does not as I recall is D Gauss's - that one seems pretty close to how similar styled commercial CDs sound on my system Same goes for Anon's stuff - a few other worked OK. Only one a few seem to have managed to bring the drum tracks to life, while many sound boxy and dull. The difference in fidelity even encoded at the same rate. It varies from really clear (Soundscape) to almost lo-fi. Maybe this was done intentionally on some mixes. I don' think it is MP3 artifacts that I'm hearing either. I actually think you can tell a pretty good bit from MP3 at 128K or higher. For those who are listening to these on computer speakers, I have to wonder why? Did you record and mix it that way also? Or do you just have no way to get the MP3 back into your studio? It would be really cool to hear these all Mastered (by the same Mastering Eng.) to see how they could sound at their maximum potential. Maybe Brad Blackwood has a few spare cycles :D I would also love to hear a dead clean mix of just the material as recorded with no processing whatsoever - especially no plug-ins. Pans and Faders are OK. This would make it a lot easier to appreciate where these mixes are coming from. Can anyone whip one out easily and post? Overall though, this is a tremendously interesting bunch of work. OK, so who does the track remind me of - kind of a Bob Dylan vocal with sort of a J. Geils Band on the backline (on the straight mixes). Now, how do I get that damn song out of my head?

[Henchman]

[quote]Originally posted by Mr Darling: [b] However, I can not learn more then listening to a remix of GT3 song then I would of buying any single with loads of remixes. However, if I can listen to few mixes, that basicly have the same tracks in them - I could see how other people delt with the same issues I delt while trying to retain space and clarity in the Mix. I've suggested before, and I would like to suggest again : A different catgories 1. Only origenal track (a sub catagory could be origenal+Lee's drums) 2. Mainly Origenal + few added extras 3. A total remix. :D Danny I[/b][/quote]This is why I mentioned that the mix I did is a mix, not a remix. I only used the elements provided, nothing was added, just moved around.

[Soundscape Studios.]

[quote]Originally posted by = stevepow =: [b]The difference in fidelity even encoded at the same rate. It varies from really clear (Soundscape) to almost lo-fi. Maybe this was done intentionally on some mixes. I don' think it is MP3 artifacts that I'm hearing either. I actually think you can tell a pretty good bit from MP3 at 128K or higher. [/b][/quote]Well I think it's obvious why my mix was clear - I basically didn't use any of the gritty elements of the song. I used the sequenced arpeggio with the rhythm tracks, and the vocals. That was about it. The tracks I added were also intentionally done to sit as a pop mix, and not where the song originally came from.

[Uh Clem]

[quote]Originally posted by Soundscape Studios: [b] [quote]Originally posted by = stevepow =: [b]The difference in fidelity even encoded at the same rate. It varies from really clear (Soundscape) to almost lo-fi. Maybe this was done intentionally on some mixes. I don' think it is MP3 artifacts that I'm hearing either. I actually think you can tell a pretty good bit from MP3 at 128K or higher. [/b][/quote]Well I think it's obvious why my mix was clear - I basically didn't use any of the gritty elements of the song. I used the sequenced arpeggio with the rhythm tracks, and the vocals. That was about it. The tracks I added were also intentionally done to sit as a pop mix, and not where the song originally came from.[/b][/quote]Nope - I can hear a difference in the synth pad right off the bat.

[Paul Berolzheimer]

"Only one a few seem to have managed to bring the drum tracks to life, while many sound boxy and dull." I think that part of what we're seeing here is that a lot of folks are used to using sampled drums which are already processed with EQ & dynamics to make them punchy & hyped, & have little experience treating raw acoustic drum tracks. Hey Anon, I was going to wait to say anything but since GT3 brought it up...I loved the humor in your treatments but I also wondered about the obvious harmonic & rythmic conflicts with the vocal, with the essence of the song. They're awfully loopy, too, they sound to me like they were done with some sort of auto-music creation program, like a high-tech version of the old hold-one-key-down-to-play-a-song home organs from the '60s & '70s. That said, I was also quite impressed with the speed with which you cranked them out. Do you mind saying what you used?

[Soundscape Studios.]

Steve - that synth pad is mine! I replaced GT's with a stereo Triton pad....

[Master Zap]

Whoah, I completely forgot about this. So what did people think of my crap? Slapped together in SONAR, and then I was gonna "fix it later". Later didn't really appear I see ;) [quote]Very minimalist. Was a cool way to start. When you start to bring in new elements they need to be louder. especially the guitar solo[/quote]Uh... you think? I dunno. Maybe if I had EQ'ed the guitar solo rounder. Now it's EQ'ed kinda "edgy" and would murder the vocals if put louder... and you HEAR 'em, dontcha? I'm not a huge fan of guitar solos anyway. They should be there, but they should know their place in relation to whats important (drums n bazz). Funny is, I started with a real drum'n'bass remix of this, using ONLY original elements, but cut into SMITHEREENS. I never got beyond 3 bars though and Other Things in Life intervened. What I wonder is - with all due respect to GT3 -why would [i]anyone in their right mind[/i] keep that arpeggio? It's [b]atrocious[/b]!? :D /Z

[Uh Clem]

[quote]Originally posted by Soundscape Studios: [b]Steve - that synth pad is mine! I replaced GT's with a stereo Triton pad....[/b][/quote]that would explain it - you bum :D BTW, that panned, double vox is pretty cool. So the bass was yours, the ac gtr, the pad, the synth lead - what else? you did this in 2 hrs at lunch? got any stuff you spent some time on to listen to?