looking for some feedback - production

[bluezcruizer]

Hi all.I've reworked one of my songs called "A Lilly Weeps" using the new system. I've gotten it as polished as I can, but I know that I'm limited in my production skills. I had posted it in the TAXI forums a while back (I hope I'm in the right forum), then got busy with life (surgery & recovery involving the ears and sinuses) which set this back on the backburner for a while. I recently have been able to get back in on it and hammer at it. I'm looking for some help -- whoever is willing, please take a listen to it and let me know if I could do anything better and/or different. It's at www.taxi.com/dustyknappThe song is "A Lilly Weeps (new)". I used an older system a year ago to do "A Lilly Weeps" (old). If you wish, feel free to listen to them both to hear the difference; but I'm looking for help on the "new" file.I think I may want to apply compression to the doublebass strings, or perhaps lower the low-end some on the eq for that track. I'm not sure that's what I need though; and/or/if further "tricks" need to be applied to get it broadcast quality.Any/all feedback is GREATLY appreciated. In advance, thank you all for listening and responding. Sincerely,Bluezcruizer

[squidlips]

I'm listening to it for the second time right now. Beautiful song, Blue. I see what you mean though......I'm wondering if it isn't the "spacing" of the piano vs the double string bass? I hear the piano strictly left side with the double bass on the right that bleeds a little into the middle, which makes the piano seem off center and sometimes lost in the mix. Perhaps panning them both a little more equally into each side might help?Otherwise, yep, you're right. The low end is definitely leaning on the too-beefy side. I think you could eq that out a bit. I don't think you need to compress or add any delay or reverb, the instruments sound fine in that regard.It's a beautiful piece. Can I keep it on my iTunes?

[rnrmachine]

It is a lovely piece Blue, but I find it odd the violin seems the focal point and the piano far left. There is not too much in this recording that you have to seperate them in that manner. I would def go with the piano centered at least for when it starts. Have the Violin come in from the one side (45-50 pan left would be fine while a declining verb brings it in from behind) then step into the lead position while having the piano take a secondary at the same time. Maybe not pan the piano but add a minor amount of verb so it takes a step back in the mix to allow the violin to get in front. These changes in focal point I would make a subtle but an obvious handover in focal point to the listener.I hope this helps and remember, this is just an opinion and should be taken as such.Rob

[jh]

Hi,I agree, it´s very beautiful. Remember when you´re mixing that harmony-rich tracks sound better if biassed a little to the left and rhythm-heavy tracks sound better if biassed a little to the right. When there´s both it´s a good idea to keep them in the middle. Maybe it would help if you would ride the levels. I think the low end is good but maybe the middle frequencies would need a db or two. Try to cut @ 250 first and see/listen if that opens up the middle and the highs a little because tweaking the middles can ruin the naturalness very easily. Then I would use a bigger reverb, not like "drowning" the tracks but just that the space would be a little bigger.Btw. check out http://bamaudioschool.com/crsindex.html there´s so much information on mixing and Bruce Miller really knows his stuff. http://www.bruceamiller.us/ - JH

[mazz]

Quote:Hi, Remember when you´re mixing that harmony-rich tracks sound better if biassed a little to the left and rhythm-heavy tracks sound better if biassed a little to the right. When there´s both it´s a good idea to keep them in the middle. - JHI don't agree with this statement at all. It really depends on the type of music and your vision for the mix. There's no hard and fast rule as to how to do panning of any type of tracks.This is a beautiful piece of music. In my opinion, you need to make it sound like there's a little bit more distance from the listener to the instruments. Your piece is a bit more classical in nature and the aesthetic of that style is more distant mic'ing of the instruments. The rock/pop aesthetic is mostly close mic'd instruments for seperation in the mix while in classical style music, the mixing is more often than not achieved in the room by the players themselves. A close mic'd cello is an unnatural phenomenon to the ear. Listen to some Yo Yo Ma recordings to hear how the engineers blend the closer and the more distant (room) mics to get the sound.I think the panning would be OK if you were to close your eyes and imagine the players were on a stage and you were sitting 20 feet back in a very nice concert hall. At that point, it would be obvious that the piano was to your left and the cello to your right but the sound would be more blended by the time it reached your ears. If you can get closer to that sound when you mix the piece, I think it will have more impact than it already has.Good work!!!Mazz

[bluezcruizer]

Thank you so much everyone! I'm seeing a common thread of need for more 'depth'. A question if I may; would you guys recommend adding reverb as a master effect, or to each individual track? I've currently got reverb on the cello, piano, and violins, but at a very minimal amount...I'm going to tweak the eq down to try and round out the heavy bottom a bit.I'm also going to try and get some Yo Yo Ma stuff and see how the cello sits in those. Thanks for that direction Mazz! I really love writing this type of stuff, and really want to do a better job with it in production so that it doesn't lose anything. I think the panning would be OK if you were to close your eyes and imagine the players were on a stage and you were sitting 20 feet back in a very nice concert hall. At that point, it would be obvious that the piano was to your left and the cello to your right but the sound would be more blended by the time it reached your ears. If you can get closer to that sound when you mix the piece, I think it will have more impact than it already has.Mazz, I'd love to PM you in regards to this; can I do so? Thanks everyone! Great feedback; I'm excited to implement and see the results!bluezcruizer

[squidlips]

I hesitate to answer the reverb question. To me, for a more intimate setting, you have plenty. But if you're wanting a big hall sound, you could do a general reverb wash. You'd have to re-eq everything again, though. You know you've got a very heavy low-end so even after you adjusted that, reverb might exacerbate it again, causing that awful hollow, boomy sound I really don't like much.I bet mazz has a better idea about this. His advice was totally solid.

[mazz]

A PM would be fine. This is a big subject and in the end it's up to taste and what the vision for the final product is.Let's talk,Mazz

[rnrmachine]

Quote:A question if I may; would you guys recommend adding reverb as a master effect, or to each individual track? I've currently got reverb on the cello, piano, and violins, but at a very minimal amount...I'm going to tweak the eq down to try and round out the heavy bottom a bit.I'm also going to try and get some Yo Yo Ma stuff and see how the cello sits in those. Thanks for that direction Mazz! I really love writing this type of stuff, and really want to do a better job with it in production so that it doesn't lose anything. I think the panning would be OK if you were to close your eyes and imagine the players were on a stage and you were sitting 20 feet back in a very nice concert hall. At that point, it would be obvious that the piano was to your left and the cello to your right but the sound would be more blended by the time it reached your ears. If you can get closer to that sound when you mix the piece, I think it will have more impact than it already has.Thanks everyone! Great feedback; I'm excited to implement and see the results!bluezcruizerI am excited to hear the results as well. You are def getting good help here from the others posts. My advice on the reverb question I will generalize to all recordings to try and help you get a better grasp of adding verb in general. I can't possibly tell you what exactly to do without being there and tweeking the knobs myself. This is also assuming that the instruments have not been recorded in a room/hall where you want the "room/hall ambiance/acoustics" coming through. In that case you do not add the master verb because you have it already. Once you choose the "venue" of the musical piece then you can set a minimum level on each instrument to get it enough reverb to make all the instruments sound like they are actually at the venue you choose. This first level setting is very hard to get. Too much and you sound like an amateur, not enough and it does not sound like you are really at that venue. As I am sure you already know, If you have a recording without any verb then everything will sit "up front" in the mix. So it is definitely smart to think of reverb as the 3rd dimension in a stereo recording. More verb on a particular instrument and it takes a step back in the mix (farther away) so, less verb and it sits upfront. Also when you apply more verb to something it may stand out more in the mix because you altered it's state in the mix. This is more common when the verb is on a "buss" which a master verb always is. Adding reverb will increase it's overall volume/db in the mix. IF the instrument is standing out too much in the mix now, it is because the extra db it has gained because the send is a + to the original channel/track. So now the channel/track needs to be lowered to negate the db increase from the send increase to the verb buss. These are usually small changes +/- 2db increments from the "norm".You also need to play with high and low pass filters to create different sounds and affect the verb in ways that suit your arrangement. A professional soundman/engineer could take the exact same verb and affect it through dampening, EQ/low & highpass filters and make it work with a number of different genres and musical performances. That is where knowing verb and what it does and knowing "live" environments comes in real handy. When you are out and about, really listen to the world. Listen to the sounds of people, close to you, far away from you. The way sound is reflecting at you and away from you. When in a big building or a small room. Listen, observe and take mental notes. All these things will "teach" you all you ever need to know about reverb and using it in a realistic manner. Of course the obvious would be, go see some shows in theaters, halls and such. Show up late and listen outside too. The sound you are hearing outside is more often then not a lot like the sound of a master verb in "solo" mode. The next part of listening to "real world" reverb is learning to create it in the studio through manipulating all the tools at your disposal.You can achieve an "intimate" good sound even with a fair amount of reverb... or screw up a sound with just a little reverb, usually a "factory preset". heheI hope this helps you get a better grasp of a master reverb and how to use it. You can also add secondary verbs aside from the master, but be careful here because you want the whole recording to sound like they are recorded in the same room, hall etc... or then you lose the real world effect. Unconsciencly people know when something is "not right" even if they have no idea what it really is.There is a lot more I could say about verb, and later I'll probably think to myself... CRAP!! I should have said that. But this is my generalized & simplified understanding passed onto you. I hope it helps you think more about it and better understand it as the major FX tool. Especially for us "home studio" folk stuck in cruddy acoustic sounding rooms so we pack it full of dampening material.I am sorry if I got too basic for you or my sentence run-ons make it more confusing then it need be. I tried and am tired so going to bed. Good luck in all you do. Really Love the piece, nice job!!Rob

[jh]

Quote:Quote:Remember when you´re mixing that harmony-rich tracks sound better if biassed a little to the left and rhythm-heavy tracks sound better if biassed a little to the right. When there´s both it´s a good idea to keep them in the middle. - JHI don't agree with this statement at all. It really depends on the type of music and your vision for the mix. There's no hard and fast rule as to how to do panning of any type of tracks.MazzHi Mazz,I agree that you can pan the tracks to your liking. However my statement is based on a brain lateralization. I don´t want to argue about it but highly skilled recording engineers take into account brain lateralization in producing a stereo mix. That´s not something I´ve made up I´m not saying I´m highly skilled, but I read stuff So it´s not a hard and fast rule, but it helps.- JH