Mixing Challenge - THE RESULTS!

[triviul]

[b][size=5]Mix 2:[/size][/b]

Interesting use of panning for the verse synth sounds, and I like the sucking modulated dynamic effects you're using -- whatever they are! Really emphasises what I like about that part, and makes the SFX parts more dramatic. Overall the atmosphere really works for me. The bass part's rasping sustain also makes a nice impression in the intro to the first verse.

I like the impact that the organ makes when it comes in, and the BVs really make their presence felt, which is always going to win points with me! However, I do feel that the bass and drums take a bit of hit there, and the track therefore begins to lose subjective power at that point as a result. I wonder where it's just that the vocals lift the whole level of the track, and then the buss compression/limiting you're using responds by fading down the backing too much. You can really hear it on "just reasons modernise" for example, and "a new thrill, a new change". Could the lead vocal have a bit more of a tail on it for the choruses, too? Again, I think it might just help sit it back into the mix better, so that it doesn't push the rhythm parts as far into the background.

One small thing too: the moment the snare first properly comes in just after "generation" feels like a missed opportunity at the moment. I think it should be a bit more a statement. You've chosen quite a lightweight sound for it too, in general, which feels unnecessary, given that there's a lot of space for its low end in this particular (and rather non-standard!) arrangement.

On the whole, though, I like a lot of what you've done here, and you clearly have good balancing instincts -- hearing your mix of the verses in particular actually reminds me of a lot of background details that I'd forgotten were there, which can't be a bad thing!

[triviul]

[b][size=5]Mix 3:[/size][/b]

Wow! Reminds me of Depeche Mode somehow, in a good way! I always love hearing a bold creative vision, and this certainly is that. What's particularly interesting to me is that you've turned many of my own instincts on their heads -- the telephoney vocal, the heavy effects, the reduced contrast between verses and choruses... but it still functions very cohesively, so it stands on its own two feet. This is why I always enjoy comparing people's mixes of the same multitracks -- it always expands my own horizons! As a result the song feels more cohesive, and once I've got used to it (I've lived with this track for 10 years, after all!) I can begin to feel the logic in it. You lose some of the inter-section dynamics, clearly, but you also gain a greater cohesion across the whole song, which I never achieved in my version. Definitely food for thought on my part.

On a technical level, I'd try to de-ess the lead vocal a bit more, though, because the telephone EQ is making the 's' sounds rather harsh and distracting. I'd maybe also be tempted to smooth the backing vocals a little and give them a bit more verb, because they're sounding like they're in front of the lead, and I'm not sure that really works emotionally. I probably wouldn't hard-pan them, either, because that also tends to dislocate them a little from the simulated space -- the reverb doesn't surround them any more if they're all the way on one side. I wonder whether the hard panning is also leaving a bit too much of a gap in the panorama between the centre and the edges, which means the lead vocal feels a bit stranded, rather than part of the 'gang'!

I like hearing the verse synth part clearly, but I'd probably fade up the tails a bit more, because that's where the freakier elements of the sound design really make themselves heard. The start of each note is quite traditional, really -- it's the third or fourth repeat in each case that goes a bit off the rails. (Just to give some background: those delays aren't a send effect -- each repeat is actually a separate programmed MIDI part, which is why the later repeats can have the portamento on them when the earlier ones don't. It's also why they can match the harmonies -- a normal delay would clash with the harmony changes.) The organ sound feels a bit of a let-down, though, when it arrives. Maybe just fade it up a little, especially in the first few bars of each chorus?

Anyway, I like the ideas you've brought to the table here, and a few technical niggles don't take away from the fact that you've blown my tiny mind with this new direction -- something I'm always grateful for! Thanks for posting!

[triviul]

[size=5][b]Mix 4: [/b][/size]

This is a very confident and assured mix on a technical level -- the balancing and the naturalness of the sounds are both commendable. It also takes the highly advisable route with any third-party mix of taking the sounds at face value and trying to enhance those, rather than reinventing sounds and risking alienating the artist who chose them. I hasten to add, though, that I'm the last person who'd get annoyed by people taking liberties with my sounds, so no worries for anyone there, but it's just that this mix demonstrates great tact on that count. Fundamentally, this is a mix that doesn't spring any surprises, and relies on the quality of the balancing to speak for itself.

The only specific balancing query I'd have is that the organ entries doesn't really make the impact they need to for me. It's not that the organ sound doesn't work when everything kicks off with the BVs, it's just that it's not cutting or powerful enough right at the outset -- especially in Chorus 2, where the chord is a lower register anyway, because of the way the key's different there. In other words, it's a question of automation mostly, I think.

However, there is one thing that's missing in this mix, for me: drama. It all sounds great, but it seems very static and a bit too safe somehow. The lyric is about a nihilist walking into a diner and shooting everyone hoping for some kind of enlightenment which ultimately fails to materialise -- but it sounds a bit too much like the St Matthew Passion! (Not that I'm implying the music is a patch on that, but hopefully you get what I mean... ) It somehow doesn't feel right to me without a touch of Tarantino or John Woo about it, to put it another way. A bit more compression, a bit more fighting going on between the lead vox and BVs, a bit more fader riding to bring out the details, maybe even a bit of extra grunge here and there... that would make a world of difference for me.

Still, this is an excellent presentation of the material, and you deserve serious props for that, because it's not an easy thiing to do, and implies to me that you treat the material you're working on with respect -- which is a great instinct to have in general.

[triviul]

Again, thanks everyone for taking part -- it's been great hearing the new versions, and I hope some of the comments have been useful.

[Dad3353]

[quote name='triviul' timestamp='1392151955' post='2365449']
Again, thanks everyone for taking part -- it's been great hearing the new versions, and I hope some of the comments have been useful.
[/quote]

Wow..! I certainly didn't expect this..! Horses mouth, and all that..? Welcome to our humble mixing challenge, and thanks again (here I'm sure I speak for all...) for the mass of work on the CMT site, and especially for allowing use of that work here.
This, for the moment, is still supposed to be an anonymous challenge for voting; it is sorely tempting for me to reply or expand on your kind comments, but it would be skewing the rules a bit. Voting ends at month's end, I'll give my version of events then, for those interested.
What a turn-up for the book, though..! Pleased..? Yes, sirree; as Punch. Who'd have thought it, eh..? Well I never. OK, I'll stop, for now. There'll be others in here, commenting, I'm pretty certain.

(...[i]Wonders off, shaking aged head and muttering... "The Man himself..! Well I'll be..! Summit to tell the grand-children, there, then... Well, blow me down..!"[/i]...)

Edited February 11, 2014 by Dad3353

[lurksalot]

WOW

Superb analysis , thank you very much , I read the the notes on my mix , and to be honest I think I did better now than I thought I had before

There is one obvious thing I picked up on as soon as I heard the others , and that has been duly observed , but I am quite pleased overall ,

Cheers Mike .



Just to add, Paul is it time to name and shame do you think


ED to add , I just saw the rules , Friday evening for the last votes

Edited February 11, 2014 by lurksalot

[Skol303]

[quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1392155465' post='2365512']Paul is it time to name and shame do you think.... ED to add , I just saw the rules , Friday evening for the last votes
[/quote]

Aye, voting ends Friday! Not long to go... I'm still undecided

Big thanks to Mike for his superbly useful comments!! Very cool indeed. And a great job on the track itself. It really grabbed my attention when I first heard it, so good to know it's made for an interesting challenge for everyone, mix-wise.

Paul

[xilddx]

[quote name='triviul' timestamp='1392151955' post='2365449']
Again, thanks everyone for taking part -- it's been great hearing the new versions, and I hope some of the comments have been useful.
[/quote]
Fabulous mix notes! It's very kind of you to share all that, and take the time to do so.

[Skol303]

Well done everyone! Sterling work all round.

I'll be revealing the winner later today once I get on my 'puter (currently wrapped in a blanket and nursing a cold... yes, that faint sound you hear is the world's smallest violin playing a lament just for me).

We'll then start making plans for the next one...

Edited February 15, 2014 by Skol303

[Skol303]

[size=5][color=#b22222]Voting has now finished. See first post for the results...[/color][/size]

We’ll kick-start another mix challenge this week. If anyone would like to suggest a track or maybe a style of music they’d like to mix then please do.

Cheers!




Edited February 15, 2014 by Skol303

[lurksalot]

Cheers Paul , a duck for me them

Not to worry , I'm still learning , and I do reckon I was quite close on this one . The disappearance of the bottom end when it got busy really fluffed it I reckon .
Well done Ironside top job , my vote was in your total ! Also well done to Dad and Vasdim .

[Dad3353]

... and the winner is... Ironside1966..! Waves of applause roll around the hall, chock full of notables and guests of note. Sobs from the unconsolable runners-up, deprived of victory by mere quality. Good show, that man, and commiserations for the others.
I'll be back a bit later to [s]refute[/s] comment upon the analysis made earlier by triviul. To be continued...

Yes indeed, another..! Something a bit adventurous..? The complete score from 'Star Wars'..? Some Wagner..? No..? Oh well, we'll see...

[Dad3353]

[quote name='triviul' timestamp='1392151401' post='2365437']...As promised, here's some 'artist feedback' on each of the mixes, for what it's worth. I'll put each one in a separate post to make it easier to separate any reply history.

[size=5][b]Mix 1:[/b][/size]...[/quote]

Good evening, triviul, and thanks for such an enthusiastic review. There's no pulling the wool over [i]your [/i]eyes (or ears, in this case..!); you've picked up on just about everything I had going in this mix. My main concern was (in my tiny head, at least...) to do justice to the fine lyrics, and keep the lead voice's head above water. I can see, in retrospect, that the bv should, indeed, 'win through' a bit more, to complement the lead. Too late, eh..?
Here's a 'blow by blow' account, just for the record... I'm not used to music of this strength, and had quite some apprehension in even tackling the task..! Never mind, we'll start with the drums (I'm a drummer...). These are pre-mixed on one track, and I was fairly happy with the overall sound and balance, but wanted more 'authority' from the snare. A gate and a bit of manual volume ducking seperated it out, enabling a thickening and an echo, bringing out the cross-sticking at the start. Once the snare takes over, this treatment is taken away in stages, until we're back to the original drum sound. A particular 'one-shot' is triggered at the appropriate moment at the height of the tension, then back to 'normal'.
I found the bass a bit lacking in depth, fighting through the organ when it comes in, and added an octaver. It was supposed to be disabled at the beginning and after the first climax, but I accidently left it on right from the start in the final render..! Dummy..! The second part is treated as I had wished, but the excess from the outset is my fault. Sorry.
As I mentioned, I'm not a keen 'glitcher', and I pruned out a fair bit of what I considered to 'extranious distraction' from the beginning, preferring to allow the playing field to establish itself before adding too much detail. Similarly for the kalimba; I wanted it to be more 'sparce' than the original, and only be present when there was a real added value (once again, my judgements, not a reflection on the composition...).
This is when I brought in the lead vocal, which starts off fairly neutral, but receives a dose of Reaper's delay, 'vocal fattener' preset. The dosage increases slowly until climax 1, then cuts away, only to slowly return as the second part 'heats up'. Only when I was satisfied with this overall balance did I bring in the bv, which I tried to spread around the lead, so as to surround him. I seem to have kept them too tame for you (sorry, again..!), but I really did want the lead to maintain domination. It's a fine juggling act, isn't it..?
Now the disclaimer, not as excuses; rather some way towards explanation. My 'home studio' is my armchair, my monitoring is a medium/cheap headset. My ears have had many decades in which to decline , if ever they were any good, the left more 'shot' than the right. Even in my prime, I was never one for 'finesse', and more by necessity and circumstances treat in broad strokes. If I was a painter, I'd be more Impressionist, I think. To top it all, I am renowned for my distinct lack of 'good taste' by those closer to me. All in all, I'm well pleased to receive your comments and will strive to improve the more negative aspects in future works.
I'll end by saying loud and clear how pleased (and yes, even a tad proud...) to have received the votes I did; I hope those that chose my version are not too disappointed by the above.
That's enough for this evening; thanks for reading this.

Edited February 16, 2014 by Dad3353

[lurksalot]

As Douglas has done I will try to explain what I did with regard to Mikes Mix notes .

[b]MIX 2[/b]

I tried to do a lot of seperation using EQ and panning , with so much detail in the vocals , synths and keys I thought narrowing the spectrum of each and pulling them apart sonically would give each a bit more space to be heard , but then I reckon I was probably spending to much time trying to extract all this detail and lost the drive of the song . The bottom end just got lost when it got busy and really was noticeable when I listened to Ironsides mix .
It is funny , but the idea of referencing others and even the original , somehow seems 'cheating' ,I have got to get past that and use that as a tool rather seeing it as not cricket , IYSWIM .

The panning was mostly done by hand , though as Mike noticed I did use M autopan (Melda productions) on a few parts including some Bvs, using different modes it seemed to help show up some detail.
I guess most of mixes are 'non-standard' but then, just as I think I am learning one trick , I let some of the fundamentals slip by

Thanks again guys .

[Dad3353]

[quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1392542098' post='2369755']...It is funny , but the idea of referencing others and even the original , somehow seems 'cheating' ,I have got to get past that and use that as a tool rather seeing it as not cricket , IYSWIM...[/quote]

Yes, this point is understood, and we'd all have our own 'stance' on the matter; for my part, I don't consider the 'cheating' aspect at all. I don't listen to the 'target' mix, nor any others, but more in order to keep clear my own 'vision' of the final result. Once I've finished, I like to compare; hopefully I'll prefer my own 'take', or at least be able to understand why I choose any particular notion. If it came to pass that there was a glaring error on my part, or a definite objective that I'd missed out on, I'd go back and re-think my work, correcting as best I could. It would be, however, perfectly 'legitimate' to listen to any other versions, or sources of similar material even, if it helps to guide the final result. None of us are likely to make identical mixes in any case, even if we deliberately tried to 'copy' another, simply by the software and hardware available to us, I suspect. I don't think that plagiarism, in this context, counts as cheating; it would be more like 'inspiration', or even 'homage'. Others may think differently, of course.

[lurksalot]

I have a few friends that reckon I wrote the book on cheating , however, most think I plagiarised it

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1392561098' post='2370017']
I have a few friends that reckon I wrote the book on cheating , however, most think I plagiarised it
[/quote]

I think I've heard that one before somewhere...

Well done Ironside! I found it hard to choose this time. Either they were all roughly of the same quality, or my ears aren't as good as I thought they were. I did think they all sounded pretty good, though, so well done everyone

I look forward to (being thoroughly beaten by you all) next month

[Skol303]

[size=5][b]UPDATE![/b][/size]

I've had an offer of some mix stems for the next Mixing Challenge. Whilst we're waiting for those, I've also posted a thread in General Discussion touting for others. Link here:

[url="http://basschat.co.uk/topic/233208-want-to-get-your-track-mixed-for-free/"]http://basschat.co.u...mixed-for-free/[/url]

I'll let you all know once we have a fresh track to work on.

If all else fails, we can make use of Mike Senior's ever-useful online library of mix stems, no problem.

Cheers,

Paul

Edited March 27, 2014 by Skol303

[lurksalot]

Excellent news buddy

[Skol303]

WE HAVE A TRACK FOR THE NEXT CHALLENGE!

And it's a really good one

All will be revealed shortly...