--- Florin Andrei <florin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 2004-12-04 at 06:59 -0500, Dave Phillips > wrote: > > tim hall wrote: There are some very astute listeners amongst us and I really appreciate all the feedback. It's something that can't be purchased and I am obssesed with producing perfect product. Recieving feedback can be difficult for all of us because we invest so much into our work. I really want all of us to share our music and learn. > > >This mix lacks space and transparency slightly > maybe, but the music just > > >shines through :-) > > > > > Interesting how we all hear things differently. I > liked the mix, it's > > "close" like a club... which tells me that I've > spent 'way too much of > > my life in night-clubs... > > <nod> > > Yes, it's bass-heavy and "cottony" :-) and obviously > has no reverb, etc. > Just like a live recording, dry, punchy and > in-your-face. I think it's > appropriate for this kind of music. Cool anyway! In-your-face isn't what I imagine as the typical jazz mix. The mix you heard is what I played for my client. He said, "This is great. I do not want the old school mix...I want you to mix the shit out of this." I was real happy to hear that. Something to note about this client is that he's one of the people that played the jazz and blues music that we study. The recording is all close mics on everything. What you heard is a "tight" mix. What I mean by that is through equalization, levels, panning and compression, I have isolated every instrument so that it stands out clearly and can be worked with. A tight mix is basically my first objective. With the potential of each track realized, I basically start building the room. That's the point this mix is at. It's ready! > Quite notable, on the Sennheiser cans it actually > has quite a bit of > breathing room while on the Alesis monitors it's > much more closed. This > is one of the mixes that sound very different on my > two main listening > tools. I was gonna suggest that the difference might be minimized after mastering and then realized I did a quick master. The Sennheiser cans can't represent bottom end to the degree that the Alesis monitors will. That might not explain the full story though because you indicate that other mixes are more comparable. Are the comparable mixes not as bass oriented? Any thoughts on this? Perhaps not of much interest is that I seldomly use headphones and probably never listened to this mix on phones. I might be guilty of being lazy. > I would suspect that adding just a droplet of reverb > (turn the reverb > down until you can't hear the tails, then turn it a > bit more) would open > it up on pretty much any speaker, but that's just a > wild guess. I should post the dry and current snare. What you describe is basically what's on the snare and sax. It's a little more obvious on the snare than the sax. So, there is a room there but I'm not using it. Yet! I wasn't gonna finish mixing this for awhile but maybe I'll do that while it's fresh. The feedback is very valuable and will be even more important to the next version. Someone else commented on the stereo width of the organ. The organ is recorded with two mics and a direct line. The direct line is equalized to remove the top end and is panned dead center. The mics have the bottom removed and are panned hard Left and Right. We'll see in the final mix but I've got an idea for examining this observation. What an awesome mailing list. Thanks for all the feedback. ron > Or just leave it as is. :-) Being an electronica > fan, i tend to be a > reverb freak. > > Florin Andrei > > http://florin.myip.org/ > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
