TAXI.com

I don't have the greatest speakers here, but at full volume it sounds good.... arrangement wise I think an accoustic guitar picked on doule stops coming in after the tune gets going would ad some depth... JMHOArkJack

Nice tune. What I'd change (after one listen):- Add some cymbal crashes to emphasize section breaks.- Add more movement; a panning delay or move one or two of the instruments around a bit, especially during different sections.- There's lots of brightness in all your instruments; don't be afraid to pull back some highs on one or two parts for contrast. I'd start with the piano, which could use a more mellow tone anyway. And listen to your mix in mono...you'll hear that there's some frequency fighting going on that you may not hear in the stereo mix.- I'd like to hear a bit more low-end thump out of the kick, probably a couple dB's ~70-80Hz.- Even though your voxes are rough, I'll mention that I hear that occasional harshness and high-frequency buzzing in your lead vox that I heard in another song of yours (though it's not as bad here). You might try a multi-band compressor and target the 3-4k range, and also the 10-12k range...or play around with exaggerating freq's until you hear the offensive ones and knock them out. Also, you might try some other mic's; I don't think the one you're using "compliments" [shoutout to Nick B.] your voice very well.- The lead vox in general could be more even dynamics-wise; it sounds more like a live performance than a studio recording (which you may be going for).HTH,Andre

Very nice tune. Good production overall. First impressions:I agree with Andre that there are frequencies in your instruments that are fighting the frequencies in your voice that make it pop over the mix. A couple of times I hear an acoustic guitar note that interfered with the vocal in such a way as to make me think the vocal was distorted. Figure out the frequencies that make the vocal ping in the mix and cut those frequencies on all the other instruments (I'd be willng to bet in the 4 to 6K range). Not much cutting is needed but the cumulative effect will be to make the vocal clearer without needing to turn it up or EQ it.The overall arrangement is monochromatic. The chorus should, in my opinion, come in with ROARING guitars. Then when it drops back to the verse, there will be contrast. The arpeggiated guitar part is very nice but it could go away after the intro for a half verse. Basically I'm saying, build your verse up to the chorus. Less is more, until there's more, then less is even more after that more goes away (makes sense to me at 1AM )I could hear, as Andre mentioned, having some parts that move around the stereo field or at the very least, have some interesting ambience around them like, for instance, echoes in time with the tempo. Your best contrast is near the end when the backing vox do a counter melody. I'd like to hear that earlier in the piece and then come back with one more HUGE chorus.Also, I'd like to hear what it sounds like to put the snare on 4 and the floor tom on 2 every once in awhile.You have a very good song here and with some more thought into the arrangement and production I could hear this on a TV show or even the radio.As always, these are just my opinons, for what they're worth. Keep up the good work.Mazz

Quote:Here is the updated version. I left the original version above for comparisons.Number Four (V2) (soundclick player)" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Number Four (V2) (mp3)Well Songwriter you have been given some apparently excellent advice by some very knowledgeable people who's work I hold in the highest regard and the end result is...........I prefer the first version!!!!!It had a magic which it's now lost.Now it's dull and lifeless.SORRY.

Quote:Johnny, that may not reflect on their advice but on how I implemented it I think I still like the first version because I seem to like the air that comes through when the vocals are boosted up there. I can hear that it makes some irritating sounds that I don't have the skill to remove without removing too much air. I think I also took a bit of the upper range of the guitars which I didn't mean to do.I don't actually hear a big difference between the two but I'm interested in what others think since it is hard to have fresh ears after singing/playing/mixing the song. You are right about interpretation of advice.But there is a big difference between the two.One lives and one doesn't.Give it a rest for a while.It's too good to get wrong.

Songwriter-I think the second mix is much more vibrant and balanced tonally; I prefer it to the first without question.It could still use some work:- The piano seems a bit low in volume now.- The panning main guitar has lost some focus since it moves around so much. Maybe you could leave the dry part panned slightly right and then move the delayed signal around in the left side. The possibilities are endless, so try everything you can think of. - The lead vox is better, but there are still some high-frequency problems. I really think you need a de-esser or multi-band compressor to fix the problem; EQ'ing it will probably suck out too much of the definition that comes around 12k (air is usually ~16k). If you want to send me the vocal track I'll see if I can isolate what I'm hearing as a problem.This song is really sticking in my head...I agree with JD; it's worth getting it right.Andre

Quote:andre, you have better trained ears than me I think. What kind of speakers do you use for monitoring? I wonder if you're picking up details in the tone that I'm not hearing and JD isn't hearing.Well, mixing is as much art as science - these are just my opinions...and obviously they're not shared by everyone, so who's to say what's right or wrong?I have a fair amount of acoustic treatment in my room, which I think has more to do with how much I hear than what kind of monitors I use; for example, if you have a build-up of lower frequencies (a common problem in smaller studios/bedrooms), they'll mask the higher frequencies and you'll end up over-compensating for their [perceived] shyness in the mix....yielding an overly-bright mix.However, it's nearly impossible to hear everything from one set of speakers so it's common to reference several monitors, including headphones, when mixing. I personally bounce between Dynaudio BM6p's [6-inch drivers] with a KRK V12 sub, JBL 6328p's [8-inch drivers], a single KRK V4 [4-inch driver] for a mono check, and a pair of Sony 7506 headphones (which are great at exposing the 12kHz problem you're experiencing).Quote:I applied some dynamic EQ which is a little more gentle than EQ. I never thought of applying a de-esser way up at 12 khz.Not sure what dynamic EQ is, but it sounds like some form of multi-band compression...which is what I would probably use to attack your vocal if I couldn't notch out the buzziness with a surgical parametric EQ.A de-esser is different from a multi-band compressor in that it lowers the volume of the whole signal, rather than just the trigger band(s), when the threshold is crossed. One exception to this is the Waves Renaissance de-esser, which has an option to only affect the triggered band.As for using a de-esser on higher frequencies...hey, whatever works! I try to use mixing tools in strange new ways just to see what happens. It may not always yield great results, but then I have a better idea of what might work in another situation down the road.Quote:You've got email on the vocals. Alright, I'll check it out and respond when I can.Andre

Quote:JD, giving songs a rest is a good idea. My problem is once I shelve them I don't tend to come back to them. I have well over a hundred songs like this one. I always seem to move forward to the next one (see my other post for this afternoon's work).andre, you have better trained ears than me I think. What kind of speakers do you use for monitoring? I wonder if you're picking up details in the tone that I'm not hearing and JD isn't hearing. I applied some dynamic EQ which is a little more gentle than EQ. I never thought of applying a de-esser way up at 12 khz.You've got email on the vocals. I know just what you mean about shelving songs but this is a technical problem not a creative one.I think you could come back to this with "fresh ears" and resolve any problems there might be with it.I have periods when I want to create (write)periods when I want to Mix (do technical stuff etc) and periods when I don't want to do anything!!!(that's when I'm here!!!! ) it's just taken me a while to realize what mode,mood I'm in.Back to work.

I think this is a really good song and I'm inclined to agree that maybe taking the time to allow it to speak to you about what it needs as far as mix and arrangement go might be a good strategy.As far as what you did to incorporate some of the suggestions:I agree with Andre, the panning on the guitar was too much and ended up diffusing the effect of the guitar, taking away some of the immediacy of the sound. A dry sound on one side and an echoed version on the other side (very short echo) may be a way to go.The extra vocals helped to add the weight to the chorus and the last chorus seemed to have more passion in it.I think you have enough feedback at this point and in my opinion you just need to let the song tell you what it needs.Good luck,Mazz

Michael-I listened to the soloed vocal tracks you sent me via email, and there are definitely some problem frequencies in them (especially in the upper-mids and highs). You mention you're using a cheap condenser, which is probably contributing to the problem...but I think your room acoustics and your vocal characteristics are also adding to the equation, resulting in a pinched, nasal, harsh sound. Don't feel bad...I have to EQ the heck out of my voice to get it sounding decent, so all is not lost. I was able to get your track sounding pretty good on my end.It may be challenging for you to get things sounding more open and less strident in your current mixing/recording environment without investing in some acoustic treatment (which doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg), but here are some suggestions you may already be aware of:a) Bring a commercially-mixed reference track in a similar genre into your session and reference it OFTEN during you mixing process. Try to listen to how individual tracks are balanced tonally and volume-wise.b) Try to achieve the desired sound by cutting unwanted frequencies instead of boosting the desired ones; ideally with this approach you'll end up with just the "good" frequencies and you won't need to do much boosting at all. I noticed in your processed tracks that the problem frequencies were made worse by the boosts you made, so this approach will help a lot I think (though you'll likely have a growing period before the method starts to sink in sound-wise).To find yucky frequencies, use a parametric EQ with a fairly small bandwidth, boost the frequency gain several dB's (10 or 12), and sweep the frequency knob until you hear the most offensive frequency(s). Then cut those back to whatever degree makes sense based on their severity. After awhile of using this approach (like a few years), you'll be able to hear "bad" frequencies much easier and more quickly.Let us know if you decide to do some acoustic treatment...we can give you some good advice on that front too.HTH,Andre