|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 7, 2016 10:08:36 GMT -6
Do you think this is a revision of A or B? I'm not really sure. Are you changing panning in these various mixes? The width differences seem way more drastic than just ITB vs OTB summing. Obviously the BGV vocal I mentioned is panned different in the wildcard, but it feels like the instruments are panned quite differently each time. The wildcard seems panned the widest. Makes it hard to narrow down what we're listening to, other than just different panning. Yeah, wildcard got panned out totally wide, since most of the criticisms had to do with the width. I guess this is showing that 20k of hardware doesn't have much impact though...
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Oct 7, 2016 10:29:05 GMT -6
I'm not really sure. Are you changing panning in these various mixes? The width differences seem way more drastic than just ITB vs OTB summing. Obviously the BGV vocal I mentioned is panned different in the wildcard, but it feels like the instruments are panned quite differently each time. The wildcard seems panned the widest. Makes it hard to narrow down what we're listening to, other than just different panning. Yeah, wildcard got panned out totally wide, since most of the criticisms had to do with the width. I guess this is showing that 20k of hardware doesn't have much impact though... Heheh. Well I certainly wouldn't go that far it's just impossible to isolate what's what when there are a bunch of changes each mix. If you want to do a straight ITB vs OTB comparison, in my view you've got to keep everything as consistent as you can do the ear can grab onto what's different. With drastic mix changes, at least for me, I can't tell what's responsible for what.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 7, 2016 10:39:26 GMT -6
I like wildcard 3, because with the panning wider, the drum sounds clearer and a little bigger, and the vocal has more room, so the middle's not as crushed or crowded.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Oct 7, 2016 13:03:22 GMT -6
Oh yes the last mix is my favorite one too low ends sits nice. To my taste the brass and LV sometimes sticks out to much I used a little EQ between 2-4 khz to soften it.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 7, 2016 13:46:27 GMT -6
Let me ask, which mix was easier, faster and more fun to do?
ITB or OTB?
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 7, 2016 14:15:05 GMT -6
Let me ask, which mix was easier, faster and more fun to do? ITB or OTB? cheers Wiz More fun is with hardware, no question. Easier/faster is a tossup. Being able to come and go and/or work remotely is a real advantage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2016 14:21:09 GMT -6
Hey Jesse,
More importantly, I'd say clean the noise up in the intro and it sounds like the drummer isn't burying the beater properly, replace the kick with a sample where he isn't doing that. Snare is fucking great, think maybe the vocal could be brighter and less verb on her. Amazing work though. Can't really tell/don't care which is which.
Edit: I think it could also be the sample on the kick slightly out of phase with the original, it only occurred to me now that it's probably live in which case it sounds smashing. I'd still try go through the regions and clean up as much as you can. No shame in replacing the kick entirely in this case as it probably has some weird bleed in it. Sounds like it's just snare buzz in the intro. I like how everyone here is more concerned with what format it was mixed on but not the snare buzzing in the intro. I think this sounds ace. Great work
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 7, 2016 14:47:41 GMT -6
Let me ask, which mix was easier, faster and more fun to do? ITB or OTB? cheers Wiz More fun is with hardware, no question. Easier/faster is a tossup. Being able to come and go and/or work remotely is a real advantage. I know its probably stupidly self evident to say.... but, it shows you can do great things, either way... and what ever suits your budget or work preference is best. Recalability and portability are big factors for some, not for others.... thanks for posting this cheers Wiz
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2016 14:52:28 GMT -6
Hey Jesse, More importantly, I'd say clean the noise up in the intro and it sounds like the drummer isn't burying the beater properly, replace the kick with a sample where he isn't doing that. Snare is fucking great, think maybe the vocal could be brighter and less verb on her. Amazing work though. Can't really tell/don't care which is which. Edit: I think it could also be the sample on the kick slightly out of phase with the original, it only occurred to me now that it's probably live in which case it sounds smashing. I'd still try go through the regions and clean up as much as you can. No shame in replacing the kick entirely in this case as it probably has some weird bleed in it. Sounds like it's just snare buzz in the intro. I like how everyone here is more concerned with what format it was mixed on but not the snare buzzing in the intro. I think this sounds ace. Great work The only time we didn't have snare buzz playing live was when the drummer collapsed and knocked the snare across the stage .... timing of the band improved for some reason ........
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 7, 2016 14:58:07 GMT -6
At this point, I think everyone has listened. Here's the story.
A - ITB lunchtime mix 1. B - OTB mix 1 Wildcard - Wide OTB mix based on mix feedback Wide ITB2 - Just added. Ran another ITB mix at lunch today. Basically, I set the IK British Channel as a plug on every track (as a substitute eq to my MIdas board), and used similar plugin compressors to my hardware on the tracks. Tried to set the panning the same as my OTB mix. I'm sure the eq points aren't the same because I wasn't looking at my console, but this is a closer representation of OTB vs. ITB.
I'm gigging this weekend, so probably won't get into the studio until Monday, but plan to do a couple more tweaks to the OTB mix, then swap in my Stam SA4000 for the RJR and see how different they sound. I'm guessing, probably not very. We'll see...
Thanks for playing everyone!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2016 15:17:39 GMT -6
Is it ok to download and keep the song? I listened to the other 2 tracks - wildcard does it for me. Great recording! Great vibe! Heard the new Bruno Mars song today - this retro vibe is definitely coming back ......
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 7, 2016 15:27:17 GMT -6
Wow! I love being completely wrong about this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 7, 2016 15:32:51 GMT -6
Is it ok to download and keep the song? I listened to the other 2 tracks - wildcard does it for me. Great recording! Great vibe! Heard the new Bruno Mars song today - this retro vibe is definitely coming back ...... Sure thing. Thanks for listening. You can actually download the tracks from Telefunken if you're interested in the raw.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 7, 2016 17:42:21 GMT -6
Re: 20k not making much of a difference....it apparently produced a better mix. If you're hoping for consensus on what a better mix is throughout tastes and experience levels, you'll never get it. ever. Under any circumstance. you have to assign value to opinions based on what you think of someone's work/abilities. Don't worry, I'm not easily offended. that said, the fact that it was a software mix done "over lunch break" on (can I assume) headphones? Has more to do with this than anything else. There are a number of factors at play....if you want a better softwaremix: a) use the studio monitors for all mixing. Duh. You can't use Apple Earbuds to make a great mix for headphones....you have to use flat...it's a matter of translation. b) use less "analog modeled" plug ins...I know this seems contrary to the goal, but it's not...those modeled plugs typically err on the side of saturatey dark and things people with less experience think of as "analog sound". Meanwhile, nothing in a $20k "OTB" mixing set up is going to be particularly euphonically saturated. c)see my post (in Cowboy's "analog vs digital" thread) about maintaining unity gain for software mixes--your software here was WAY processed compared to the hardware. Just the main Egtr--mix B, it sounds like a guitar amp...on A it sounds like a drastically EQ'd/compressed/saturated "recording of a guitar amp". If you maintain unity, you will likely do even LESS DSP than you're doing here "OTB". d) work with summing on the desk....mono kick group, bass group, lead vocal group....then stereo for the "rest of the kit"....stereo "band"....in this case stereo horns....stereo FX returns...and also start configuring some analog inserts--find out what FOR YOU the analog is most bringing to the table. Or just keep doing the "OTB" thing. If it's fun, and that's the goal, cool....but, it's really not a matter of one being better/worse. People who paint with that binary are usually selling gear--to you or to themselves.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Oct 7, 2016 18:09:33 GMT -6
At this point, I think everyone has listened. Here's the story. A - ITB lunchtime mix 1. B - OTB mix 1 Wildcard - Wide OTB mix based on mix feedback Wide ITB2 - Just added. Ran another ITB mix at lunch today. Basically, I set the IK British Channel as a plug on every track (as a substitute eq to my MIdas board), and used similar plugin compressors to my hardware on the tracks. Tried to set the panning the same as my OTB mix. I'm sure the eq points aren't the same because I wasn't looking at my console, but this is a closer representation of OTB vs. ITB. I'm gigging this weekend, so probably won't get into the studio until Monday, but plan to do a couple more tweaks to the OTB mix, then swap in my Stam SA4000 for the RJR and see how different they sound. I'm guessing, probably not very. We'll see... Thanks for playing everyone! May I ask two questions? What the heck is the meaning of the term Wildcard? And second question is how the files have been tracked? Was it on a console with outboard involved etc..... I am asking because my impression is that mixing ITB is something different when the raw files have seen some real gear in tacking. In other words - it makes sense to ad some real gear in the front or backend.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 7, 2016 18:11:02 GMT -6
Re: 20k not making much of a difference....it apparently produced a better mix. If you're hoping for consensus on what a better mix is throughout tastes and experience levels, you'll never get it. ever. Under any circumstance. you have to assign value to opinions based on what you think of someone's work/abilities. Don't worry, I'm not easily offended. that said, the fact that it was a software mix done "over lunch break" on (can I assume) headphones? Has more to do with this than anything else. There are a number of factors at play....if you want a better softwaremix: a) use the studio monitors for all mixing. Duh. You can't use Apple Earbuds to make a great mix for headphones....you have to use flat...it's a matter of translation. b) use less "analog modeled" plug ins...I know this seems contrary to the goal, but it's not...those modeled plugs typically err on the side of saturatey dark and things people with less experience think of as "analog sound". Meanwhile, nothing in a $20k "OTB" mixing set up is going to be particularly euphonically saturated. c)see my post (in Cowboy's "analog vs digital" thread) about maintaining unity gain for software mixes--your software here was WAY processed compared to the hardware. Just the main Egtr--mix B, it sounds like a guitar amp...on A it sounds like a drastically EQ'd/compressed/saturated "recording of a guitar amp". If you maintain unity, you will likely do even LESS DSP than you're doing here "OTB". d) work with summing on the desk....mono kick group, bass group, lead vocal group....then stereo for the "rest of the kit"....stereo "band"....in this case stereo horns....stereo FX returns...and also start configuring some analog inserts--find out what FOR YOU the analog is most bringing to the table. Or just keep doing the "OTB" thing. If it's fun, and that's the goal, cool....but, it's really not a matter of one being better/worse. People who paint with that binary are usually selling gear--to you or to themselves. I think my outboard mixes were significantly better too, but the majority here seemed to prefer the ITB. For the lunchtime mix, I used a pair of Adam S1A's, MunroSonic Egg150's, and AKG Q701's all coming off my Tascam UH-7000 DAC, in a large room, away from walls. Actually, a pretty nice setup. I started the ITB mix to play around with the new Nimbus reverb, just to check it out. I thought the tune was cool, so I stuck with it. Since I have a few new hardware pieces, I figured I'd run down an OTB mix too, to check those pieces out. It wasn't supposed to be an ITB vs. OTB thing when I started, but I figured that I ran down a couple quick versions of the tunes that it would be fun to compare. I didn't have any real expectations of what people would think going in. I significantly preferred mix B and expected others would too. You seem to be the only other one that felt that way. Anyway, after I listened in the morning, I heard some issues (slapback, thin vocal, width), but can't just open the project and run another off, so left as is for the time being. I still hear some issues with my revised OTB mix, but won't have a chance to adjust for a few days. The allure of mixing ITB is always there, but I feel more comfortable mixing with hardware.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 7, 2016 18:14:02 GMT -6
At this point, I think everyone has listened. Here's the story. A - ITB lunchtime mix 1. B - OTB mix 1 Wildcard - Wide OTB mix based on mix feedback Wide ITB2 - Just added. Ran another ITB mix at lunch today. Basically, I set the IK British Channel as a plug on every track (as a substitute eq to my MIdas board), and used similar plugin compressors to my hardware on the tracks. Tried to set the panning the same as my OTB mix. I'm sure the eq points aren't the same because I wasn't looking at my console, but this is a closer representation of OTB vs. ITB. I'm gigging this weekend, so probably won't get into the studio until Monday, but plan to do a couple more tweaks to the OTB mix, then swap in my Stam SA4000 for the RJR and see how different they sound. I'm guessing, probably not very. We'll see... Thanks for playing everyone! May I ask two questions? What the heck is the meaning of the term Wildcard? And second question is how the files have been tracked? Was it on a console with outboard involved etc..... I am asking because my impression is that mixing ITB is something different when the raw files have seen some real gear in tacking. In other words - it makes sense to ad some real gear in the front or backend. Wildcard was just what I called the revision because I didn't want to draw attention to which mix I revised. Re. Tracking, www.telefunken-elektroakustik.com/download/turkuaz/
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Oct 8, 2016 0:40:35 GMT -6
What DAW are you using Jesse?
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Oct 8, 2016 2:41:30 GMT -6
I went to listen to the new mixes and they were labeled I was wrong B originally was the outboard mix and honestly idk it seems the ITB vs OTB premise may be a waste of time for you. Instead of working on a versus you could have worked hybrid with your console and spent the time perfecting a better mix. I understand it was a work lunch break thing for the ITB, I assume an hour or so, which mix a vs b did you spend more time on? Funny to me how I thought the opposite on ITB vs OTB " Samsonite..... I was way offf "
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2016 4:10:05 GMT -6
I honestly thought that was a recording you'd done at the Blues Club hence I was blown away:) Reading the above posts then, would it be fair to say the real quality of a mix comes from the source of the recordings? This surely must be where all the high end gear / expertise will really come in to it's own. Really interesting thread thanks Jesse. p.s. the pennies also dropped for me re paying a bit more for good quality secondhand gear instead of saving a few quid on inferior new stuff...first order in today
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 8, 2016 6:05:47 GMT -6
I honestly thought that was a recording you'd done at the Blues Club hence I was blown away:) Reading the above posts then, would it be fair to say the real quality of a mix comes from the source of the recordings? This surely must be where all the high end gear / expertise will really come in to it's own. Really interesting thread thanks Jesse. p.s. the pennies also dropped for me re paying a bit more for good quality secondhand gear instead of saving a few quid on inferior new stuff...first order in today Honestly, I'm not too satisfied with the Telefunken recording. The snare sounds totally weak with no wire sound, the vocals sound like total garbage too. Grab the raw and give them a listen. Secondhand gear is almost exclusively the field I play in. Also, I generally wait until a smoking deal comes up, then pounce on it. I hate taking a loss when selling things.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 8, 2016 6:06:25 GMT -6
What DAW are you using Jesse? Radar ....nahh, PT.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Oct 8, 2016 6:23:42 GMT -6
I honestly thought that was a recording you'd done at the Blues Club hence I was blown away:) Reading the above posts then, would it be fair to say the real quality of a mix comes from the source of the recordings? This surely must be where all the high end gear / expertise will really come in to it's own. Really interesting thread thanks Jesse. p.s. the pennies also dropped for me re paying a bit more for good quality secondhand gear instead of saving a few quid on inferior new stuff...first order in today Honestly, I'm not too satisfied with the Telefunken recording. The snare sounds totally weak with no wire sound, the vocals sound like total garbage too. Grab the raw and give them a listen. Secondhand gear is almost exclusively the field I play in. Also, I generally wait until a smoking deal comes up, then pounce on it. I hate taking a loss when selling things. From my experience it makes a difference in mixing if all tracks have seen my 1073. Or if I get tracks form a 5316 for mixing. I am not a professional AE but my feeling is.... it makes mixing ITB easier if there is an imprint of real gear harmonics. If you did one mix on earbuds and the other one one monitors that makes the biggest difference. This is not valid AB test. I did like the last mix the most and I don't care if you mixed it OTB or ITB.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 8, 2016 6:37:05 GMT -6
Honestly, I'm not too satisfied with the Telefunken recording. The snare sounds totally weak with no wire sound, the vocals sound like total garbage too. Grab the raw and give them a listen. Secondhand gear is almost exclusively the field I play in. Also, I generally wait until a smoking deal comes up, then pounce on it. I hate taking a loss when selling things. From my experience it makes a difference in mixing if all tracks have seen my 1073. Or if I get tracks form a 5316 for mixing. I am not a professional AE but my feeling is.... it makes mixing ITB easier if there is an imprint of real gear harmonics. If you did one mix on earbuds and the other one one monitors that makes the biggest difference. This is not valid AB test. I did like the last mix the most and I don't care if you mixed it OTB or ITB. "The entire performance was recorded live via the studio's API 1608 console and a selection of Neve & LaChapell pre amps. Every single channel was tracked using a TELEFUNKEN microphone into Pro Tools HD, in one take, with no overdubs." They used high end mics and preamps. Nothing shitty in the chain here. Also, both mixes were done with real monitors, but different ones, which definitely played a role. At the studio, I was using a set of Event 2030's mostly, which are still fairly new to me and heavier in the lows and less forward than I'm used to. For the wildcard mix, I also did some checking on my PMC's which gave me a better reference point. As I said before though, the point of the whole thing was mainly for testing out some new gear.
|
|
|
Post by levon on Oct 9, 2016 23:37:00 GMT -6
Great song. Pity that Google gives away the clue which is which. But I like the wide-panned version more because it's, well, more wide. The wildcard OTB sounds more clear and full, the ITB smaller and more muddy. At least on cheaper AKG headphones.
|
|