51m0n

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXa-QDvxacw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JWTaaS7LdU

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1352819639' post='1867819'] At the risk of repeating myself , the o.p clearly means is bass guitar disappearing from pop music rather than synth bass or sine wave , in which case I would ask what he means by pop music . I've just listened to some snatches of the current top 40 singles and there isn't a whole lot of bass guitar in there , and what's there is is not featured very prominently, on the whole . If you went back to the top 40 of this week twenty, thirty and fourty years ago you would find far more bass guitar content on those records ( I could even try doing that , if you like . I have got that much time on my hands .) However , popular music is such a nebulous term nowadays that it is far harder to say if the bass guitar has a diminished role in the wider context . There are plenty of records with lots of bass guitar on them , there are plenty that have none. Stylistically there has definitely been a shift towards simplicity , and as a broad generalisation , there is not so much emphasis on being able to play well in mainstream rock and pop music . I watch Jools Holland every week and about 75 % of the bass players look like Polytechnic students with Precision Basses , and that is for the most part what they sound like . [/quote] Really 20 years ago, 1992, that would be the year of such bass guitar heavy extravaganzas in the top 40 as Ebaneezer Goode by The Shamen, Erasure's Abba-esqu E.P (5 weeks at #1 no less), Whitney Housten's I WIll Always Love YOouuuuuuuuuuuouuouououououououu (dont remember the bass on that at all!) - maybe you are referring to Deeply Dippy by Right Said Fred, no, can't be I dont think there was any real bass on that, or Rhythm Is A Dancer by Snap!? You see I can go on and on (and usually do) but outside of certain subgenres of pop (BritPop style indie) the bass guitar hasnt been the weapon of choice for well over 20 years, more like 30. And even in Britpop it wasnt ever ever used as a featured instrumetn, it was there in a purely supporting role (as some would say a bass should be) and was rarely ever a featured instrument even so far as having an interesting fill or two, it could just as well have been replaced with a different bass instrument, but that wouldnt work with the band image would it.... And complex basslines very very rarely are a feature in pop, oh I grant you they do exist, but they are very very few and far between IME. And the songs aren't always better for them even then.... So no, I still dont think bass guitar is disappearing from pop music, I think its there about as much as it has been in the last twenty years with the odd exception when genres outside of classic pop that show a heavy reliance on that instrument for stylistic or image reasons become unusually popular for a little while. I cant resist (sorry):- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFJdUJg4wOk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-d4J3YUQmU

Cripes!

Personally I' more into the idea of mixing what is there rather than re-producing the files into a different song, a so called re-mix. Since I think people will mainly get more from hearing what their stuff can be mixed to sound like. If that makes any sense. I'm hoping that this exercise will speed up my average mix time significantly - since I will use it to build a large number of track/group templates for different set ups that people throw at the competition.

[quote name='butlerk02' timestamp='1352814853' post='1867725'] I got the idea from this: [url="http://www.shakingthrough.com/stems"]http://www.shakingthrough.com/stems[/url] which has loads of episodes and stems to choose from. We can also contribute are own stuff also. Looking forward to this. [/quote] Well it was your idea

[quote name='redstriper' timestamp='1352814614' post='1867718'] I've got loads of multi tracks that need mixing and I'd be very happy for anyone to have a go if they really want to. Original reggae, funk, soul and jazz style - bass, drums, keys, guitar and vocals all on separate tracks. [/quote] Ha ha, nice Good call RS, I think that one rule should be that if anyone submits stems to be mixed then if they use any of the mixes the mixer should get a credit for mixing on any use of the track later? Does that seem fair? And anyone can ask for detailed info on how any particular part of a mix was achieved. If that means posting exact procedures/project files/settings/thought processes then I dont see why it shouldnt be done for anyone to learn from. If a mix is of non-BC material then maybe people can keep their hand a little closer to their chest(?), but if this is to be useful it should really be a learning tool for anyone just reading along, and that means full disclosure (I find keeping grannies tied up in the corners as bass traps is my main seceret - right now that is disclosed the rest is just playing with sliders) Final point, it would be cool if we could try and match the output level of any submitted mixes so that people are judging on quality of sound, rather than level. If no one agrees I'll happily unstrap the mega-crusher limiter pack and fire up the frequency analyser - never like to play fair when I can play dirty after all

Cheers chaps! Love that E.P, [b]huge[/b] effort to make the very most of every aspect of the performances (which were great), and to try and bring out the songs to their absolute best. Kit is excellent (great writer, great pianist, really great performer and a great vocalist, and a complete perfectionist), and really knows what she wants, she has a difficult voice though (she is the first to say this), and we spent forever getting the result exactly just 'so'. Once the voice was cracked on each mix the rest started to come together, and there was time for some extensive work to really maximise what was tracked. For instance on You Look So Good Tonight the little percussive vocal parts at the beginning were all in mono, so I sliced them up and spread them all over the place. Makes it all nice and bouncy, in mono it just cluttered up the lead, but it was far too cool to bin. The strings were made to sound more like a large orchestra section rather than a couple of players overdubbed once etc etc. The drums on Little Toy Soldiers were a huge part of the sound of that track, that dead and over compressed snare (snare wires off on the recording too) at the beginning with the big reverb after it, that was what Kit wanted to hear there (but really wasnt what was tracked). If you listen carefully the entire drum sound changes completely three times through the track, there is the humungous dotted stereo heavily filtered delay on it through a quiet section, the reverse reverb on the snare etc etc then later it gets far less compressed and affected to drop the dynamic down super low. Then for the build up at the end it changes again becoming hugely bombastic but not so overly effecty. Lots and lots of automation through the track of all sorts of the parameters on the drums to get those changes to happen really seamlessly, took just for ever, one song with essentially three or four drum mixes, and the automation to and from each one. Bonkers Then there was the bv's, there were only three or four tiny bvs in the original set of files sent over for all the songs, and I convinced Kit that she really should have ago at tracking some more and low and behold hundreds of lovely BVs turned up, which turned the whole EP from lovely band in the studio to a huge produciton sound. But there was a lot fo work 'fitting them in' to the mixes. Especially on Russian Dolls, there are something like 50 tracks of backiong vocals on that song, and you can hear every single one (kinda ) I cant stress how important eq and reverbs (there are three verbs on the lead vocal of each track alone, each for a different part of the ambience, all very very carefully tweaked to do exactly what I needed) are to making that lead vocal on the EP sound so big and smooth. And copious use of delays as well, and compression, so many different ways to use compression on there it almost scares me It took 6 months of elapsed time from start to finish, and has been one of the most enjoyable and demanding mix jobs I've ever undertaken, I'm really proud of the result and the fact that people have only said good things about it! There are so many more little mix gems in there, yet I only ever hear how great the songs are, which means its a great mix to me...

Yeah, if any BC'ers had stems that would be cool, and like you say more could come of that if they want the rest of their release or further releases done later.

There is nothing wrong with a mix hitting -12dBfs on the master fader at mix down at all. Especially if you are runing 24bit. In fact peaking at 0dB on the mix is a very bad idea if you agoing to get something mastered by a pro. You dont mix for final level, but you do mix to allow the final level to be made as loud as possible (oh boy - huge topic now....). Mastering, thats a different process. Just a small part of which is getting level. Can you post the mix so we can hear it at this low level? May be able to provide some more info on hearing it....

Nice effort. Hang them away from the wall by a few inches (2 to 4) and they will work a lot beter. My personal fave looking (and performing) panels are these:- http://www.irishacoustics.com/index.php/acoustics/diy-acoustic-traps/ More info here:- http://www.gearslutz.com/board/bass-traps-acoustic-panels-foam-etc/753545-best-diy-trap-ever.html

Right you are then chaps. Next chance I get I'll put together something on eq.

CDs sound apalling purely because of mastering for immediate volume rather than emotional impact over the long term. Its nothing to do with specialising the master for CD versus some other medium IMO. People still do masters for radio broadcast if yo ask them to (and you should really if you can afford it), since the broadcast limiting will play havoc with the mastering for CD.

Nah, sorry, people use Auratones to mix on to hear what the mix sounds like on really poop speakers. (Actually Auratones are like the ultimate lazer on the mid range too, they arent bad, just frequency limited). People mix and master whilst taking into account Fletcher-Munsen curves to increase the apparent loudness of a track to our fragile and easily beguiled human sound interface (our hearing, which is our ears and our totally not flat perception of that mechanism). We are at the mercy of that particular interface, in that louder always, alwasy, always sounds better [i]in the short term[/i], and so much emphasis has been put on louder at all costs by many people who dont know better. If someone were to mix/master purely for a phone speaker that mix would not translate at all to anything else, why? Because the phone speaker is so massively flawed. It would have huge boosts in upper mid, and no bass or lower mid whatsoever,m since those speakers do nothing at all below 250Hz. And what are they listening to on their phone speakers? Crappy generic pop dance music. And where is that intended to beplayed? Clubs. And what do clubs have? Massive massive sub bins, and floor to ceiling PA rigs. It is far more likely that people are mixing/mastering for clubland, with a healthy dose of nasty limiting and a big kick in the upper mids for Fletcher Munsen all to achieve mythical quantities of supreme loudness. The EQ curves on the mix will also include a drop in sub as often as not so that the mahoosive boost in sub in most clubs doesnt fart out the rig. Which can sound on a normal stereo like they are mixing for ickle tiny speakers (there isnt much sub on this and its kinda hard in the lower treble/upper mid range) when in fact they are mastering for huge club rigs and maximum loudness. Just my opinion.....

Okeedokee, a mix off private love in then to get some ground rules. Starting in the New Year sounds good to me. Crimbo is as busy as a busy thing with a lot of busyness on top for me.... I must confess this was [font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif][size=4][url="http://basschat.co.uk/user/969-butlerk02/"]butlerk02[/url][/size][/font]'s idea in the first place (clever chap!)

Agree with all the above, and add this which is a fabulous resource, its like Radio 4 for sound engineers (but American):- [url="http://www.pensadosplace.tv/"]http://www.pensadosplace.tv/[/url] Some real gems in there once you get past the inevitable love ins with the guests.... Also there is this:- [url="http://www.cambridge-mt.com/MixingSecrets.htm"]Mixing Secrets For The Small Studio[/url] Which reminds me, there is a monthly photo comp, a monthly compositional comp, what do you guys think about a monthly mix comp? WOuld anyone have the time or inclination? Winner chooses the track on that page to mix next....

Completely agree Doddy! Bass isnt an instrument its a frequency range and an arrangement tool. What sounds right to the composer, is right. Anyone think they can come up with a better pop song than this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkDLR4a6KPI&feature=related

Cee Lo Green's Forget You, great bass line, lovely couple of runs in it that really lifet the song. First thing that came into my head when you said pop bass lines. Mixing and mastering has nothing to do with catering for phone speakers, neither does having bass or not, if you add it they wont reproduce it anyway, so why not have some bass if you prefer your arrangement like that (as the composer). Thats a nonsense argumetn if ever I heard one....

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1352764298' post='1867287'] There is no DC from a not broken amp. Doesn't work like that. Even if it did, dc doesn't break speakers, you can put a 9v battery across a speaker and it is fine. [/quote] +1 Yup, used to do that to check 15" cones were all wired in right on old PA kit, they'd all push to the front a bit and sit there, if on ewas wrong it would pop to the back. Probably not hugely good for them, but having said that I never, ever blew a speaker in my life..... (note to self, could try harder??)

Staggered by your attitude, new to the band, clearly pretty green as a bassist all around, and yet still calling people dorks before you know the why's and wherefore's of what you are being asked to do. You need to have a bit of a think about things I think...

Love her playing to bits.......

Oh yeah, they can really fill a big space. Plus they are 8ohm, so if you have a NAD amp you can theoretically run two pairs in parallel....

Brilliant, just back from a rehearsal, top funkiness all round, tracks coming along really well, everyone having put in some work since last time. Well happy

I had serious trouble resisting the 6 string Roscoe fretless for sale on here earlier (sister to my 5 string fretted), but I dont need a 5 string fretless really, let alone a 6! Was hard to ignore though....

Maybe I should do a blog post on eq next? You aren't by any means the first person to say on here that they aren't sure about how to go about using the tools at their disposal when mixing, particularly eq, it sort of comes second after compression as a bit of a mystery (hey at least you can hear it working!). To be honest mixing requires you know how to use only a very limited set of tools very well, they are:- Compression EQ Reverb/delay Pan Faders Automation That is all you absolutely need to be able to do a decent mix. There is a huge amount more you can do, and on the Kit Richardson stuff I got to go all out on a couple of those tracks with some serious warp factor 9 techniques to get things sounding like they did (cheers Nigel by the way, the cheques in the post ) at Kits behest, adn with her in control I hasten to add, she was well up for the mix trying to make as much of her songs as possible, which I hope it did. I was going to do a coupl eof blogs on mics and stereo micing techniques next, but eq may be more useful - what do you think??

Sure. For live you are really looking for set it and forget it type of level control more than anything else. Things may be very different on a recording... Vocals normally have no appreciable transient so you can get as fast as the comp will go although listen for distortion, since some comps can produce artifacts if you set them too fast. As little as 3ms isnt a problem IME. This also negates the need for a limiter after the compressor in almost all cases. Release can be set fairly gently too since we are looking to damp down the fire a bit on everything and there is no big need to let a transient poke through). 100 to 150ms should be fine. Get the threshold set exactly like you did on the bass (max ratio, quiet singing, turn the threshold down until you see some GR occur on the meter) but watch out for feedback (esp with an automatic makeup gain), then slacken off the ratio until you get a good 3dB to 6dB of GR (assuming the monitors get a clear unaffected version, or your singer might kill there voice trying to push the monitor louder) when singing normally. Set the makeup gain to equal to the volume of loud singing. Again watch for feedback - if you get some knock the ratio down a tad then try setting the makeup gain again. Soft knee if you have the option too... Job done....