References didn't match listing criteria?
Moderators: admin, mdc, TAXIstaff
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 8:41 pm
- Contact:
Re: References didn't match listing criteria?
This is a great piece. Not sure I agree with the feedback but hang onto it and submit it to a music library. I think it's definitely good enough for a placement.
-
- Getting Busy
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:09 pm
- Gender: Male
- Contact:
Re: References didn't match listing criteria?
I think you did a pretty good job. I like your song better than the reference track, although the production on the reference is a little fuller. I think you could still improve the production and mix a little bit, but you could find a home for this one.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2020 9:53 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Contact:
Re: References didn't match listing criteria?
Thanks for the feedback! Do you have any suggestions as to improving the production? I'm still new to all this, have been using Ozone for mastering. I have Neutron for mixing, but haven't been using that much, just stock stuff in Logic. If you have any helpful hints, please let me know!
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2020 9:53 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Contact:
Re: References didn't match listing criteria?
Thank you! I did go ahead and make an alternate version of this one and submitted both, along with a new one, to a similar listing last weekend. Maybe it was a waste of money on my part but I'm just really curious to see if one them hit the mark.
-
- Getting Busy
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:09 pm
- Gender: Male
- Contact:
Re: References didn't match listing criteria?
Like I said, I think you did a pretty solid job, but improvements are always possible. I think your composition is really good and catchy. I assume you're using in the box sounds exclusively, and if so, the good news is you don't have to worry about engineering (which is an art that can take decades to master), but you have to be careful to not sound too "midi generated" or "quantized", by tweaking velocity for notes and/or by automating volume rides, or by not having doubled lines lined up exactly with each other, offsetting the timing of one a fuzz so it sounds less robotic.jbasscase wrote: ↑Mon Mar 29, 2021 5:24 amThanks for the feedback! Do you have any suggestions as to improving the production? I'm still new to all this, have been using Ozone for mastering. I have Neutron for mixing, but haven't been using that much, just stock stuff in Logic. If you have any helpful hints, please let me know!
There are a ton of different techniques you can learn that can help develop the "arc", of course knowing which, when and how to use them is harder than learning the actual techniques. Automation is a big one. You just have to mix a lot...compare to A-list references and try to figure out what separates your mix from theirs, and do it over and over again. And just keep developing your ear and your bag of production/mix ideas and absorb as much as you can from the greats through the internet/youtube etc. The devil's in the details. A lot of details. Read Mixerman's book "Zen and the Art of Mixing" or check out "Mix with the Masters" or Pensado's Place on youtube.
I use Ozone for mastering too, and Neutron is a great eq for mixing. I'd recommend using their Tonal Balance plugin too to help you stay within the industry standard mix parameters. You can get by with Logic plugins. It might not hurt to get Valhalla Vintage Verb...a lot of pros are using that these days. Anyways, just keep at it.
- Stubee
- Getting Busy
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2021 5:00 pm
- Gender: Male
- Contact:
Re: References didn't match listing criteria?
On One of the Taxi TV episodes they mentioned to keep the instruments out of the 85-180 hz range for male voices and 165-255 hz range for female voices. So if keep the melody instruments above 300hz you shouldn't interfere with talking on scenes.
- Telefunkin
- Serious Musician
- Posts: 2503
- Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 12:37 pm
- Gender: Male
- Contact:
Re: References didn't match listing criteria?
Hi,
I agree that its tough to know whether to follow the ref tracks or the listing text. Of course its both, but in general I'd say that the ref tracks are usually your best guide. Listen to them all and take an aggregate of what they tell you rather than any one in particular.
When I listen to the one ref you've linked to I hear the hi-mids as subdued, with fairly gentle transients, and in a reverb space that takes them back in the mix so they're not in your face (or potentially interfering). Then when I listen to your track, although I like it a lot its a little stark, dry and upfront by comparison, which could partly explain the comments about interfering with dialogue. The wind part is also the most prominent and sounds like its right in sweet spot for vocals.
If there was a way to drag the ref audio into your DAW alongside your track so you could flip between them I'm sure you'd notice these things too. The art of referencing should not to be underestimated, and getting good at it will help tremendously.
I'd suggest trying to get your track's tonal qualities, dynamics and also sense of space closer to those of all the ref tracks. That's not to say they should be identical or EQ matched, but if you can flip between yours and the refs and they sound as if they're from the same playlist you're doing OK. If you can't get close with the instrumentation you have then the recommendation to thin-out your melody line would be the next step. Also, compare your wind part with that of the ref track you linked to and identify what's different. Can you EQ yours to get closer, or change instruments? Again, the idea is not to copy or re-create the same thing, but to end up with an overall sound that will sit better under dialogue.
I agree that its tough to know whether to follow the ref tracks or the listing text. Of course its both, but in general I'd say that the ref tracks are usually your best guide. Listen to them all and take an aggregate of what they tell you rather than any one in particular.
When I listen to the one ref you've linked to I hear the hi-mids as subdued, with fairly gentle transients, and in a reverb space that takes them back in the mix so they're not in your face (or potentially interfering). Then when I listen to your track, although I like it a lot its a little stark, dry and upfront by comparison, which could partly explain the comments about interfering with dialogue. The wind part is also the most prominent and sounds like its right in sweet spot for vocals.
If there was a way to drag the ref audio into your DAW alongside your track so you could flip between them I'm sure you'd notice these things too. The art of referencing should not to be underestimated, and getting good at it will help tremendously.
I'd suggest trying to get your track's tonal qualities, dynamics and also sense of space closer to those of all the ref tracks. That's not to say they should be identical or EQ matched, but if you can flip between yours and the refs and they sound as if they're from the same playlist you're doing OK. If you can't get close with the instrumentation you have then the recommendation to thin-out your melody line would be the next step. Also, compare your wind part with that of the ref track you linked to and identify what's different. Can you EQ yours to get closer, or change instruments? Again, the idea is not to copy or re-create the same thing, but to end up with an overall sound that will sit better under dialogue.
Graham (UK). Still composing a little faster than decomposing, and 100% HI.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests