If you capture what you're after - why does dig. vs analog matter?...

[manthe]

There are so many arguments on this board about dig. vs analog....OTB vs ITB, etc, etc. The range from civil to retarded. I always fall on the side of...'it doesn't ultimately matter'.

Anyhow, this is a work in progress. Not fully mixed...obviously not mastered. I am only posting this because I am proud of the way it sounds, as captured. To me, I feel like I got what I was going for and the medium just was not a factor at all. Nothing would have been different were I using tape or mixing 100% OTB, in a figurative sense.

This song was recorded 100% live, straight to DAW via 16 tracks. It isn't finished yet. The gtr solo is completely scratch. It will be done over and cut in half. We're going to add a dueling Hammond organ/elec gtr solo thingie. The mix, so far is 99% ITB...just the vox reverb is analog outboard. The rest is SSL Duende and a light sprinkling of UAD-1

Not a masterpiece, just proud of how it sounds, overall so far...still needs work. Comment and suggestions VERY welcome. Not sure I'm 100% happy with the bass gtr in the mix yet.

http://www.moonfacerecords.com/posts...ng%20Years.mp3

[Mr. Liszt]

So, I realize this is all live and I think you did a neat job but I'll give my thoughts if you have any intention of re-tracking some things here and there.

Tasteful guitar touch. But the first big dirty electric lick (around 1:30-2:00?) I think is premature. I don't care for the distortion there. What's wrong with keeping the earlier less dirty tone and just of course being more dramatic with the solo. The guitar solo gets 24 bars as well. I feel like that would work live but if you are going to do that on a recording then you have to take it higher in the second 12 bars. One thing you could do here is keep the more clean tone for the first 12 bars and kick in the dirty tone for the second 12 bars.

On the line:

"And that lovely broad had the nerve..."

The first time he does it, on the word "that" the singer is attempting a high C and he makes it but it doesn't sound so good. Sounds like he lost his balls on the note, which is quite understandable given the energy required to pull that off in the baritone range but, I'd retrack that line if you can. If the singer has trouble with the C then he could try a really smooth falsetto tone just on the C. If he does it right it would be a really nice touch. Or, he could just go for it a couple of takes and do it all the way. Here is a great example from Buddy Guy to base the phrasing off of:

http:http://www.jeromeperry.com/07%20My%2...er%20While.mp3

Listen to the line:

"I said it's your time now, baby."

The key is two semi-tones lower in pitch than your recording but the contour is similar. Maybe the singer could study that line and try imitating it at first.

Either way, you've got to have a really killer high C (tonic) note somewhere in there.

I also feel like everything is too centered in the mix. Check out the stereo separation in the Buddy Guy example. It's pretty extreme but it might be worth a try.

I feel like the snare is to up front and dry personally.

The last line:

"That lousy broad had the nerve"

He repeats it several times almost exactly the same way. This would be a perfect opportunity for him to unleash a stunning high C.

[dafe]

Drums.
If you send me an .mp3 pn with vox and "box" muted I'll give myself a go and provide you some, if you like the idea. Quota don't appear as a matter.

Greets,
David

[manthe]

Love this...this is gold. Gonna pour over it a few more times and get back to this!

One note - In my post I mentioned that the gtr solo was, indeed scratch and would be recut with a Hammond/gtr dueling solo thing...

We are trying REALLY hard to tame this vocalist. He has the chops and talent...he just lacks studio experience. He approached every song as if he were in a noisy bar in New Orleans...just riffing everywhere! The vox on most of the songs we have cut are scratch (they are all cut live...1 take crap).

So, you're post is gold to me and I want to study it more!

Thanks so much!

Originally Posted by Mr. Liszt

So, I realize this is all live and I think you did a neat job but I'll give my thoughts if you have any intention of re-tracking some things here and there.

Tasteful guitar touch. But the first big dirty electric lick (around 1:30-2:00?) I think is premature. I don't care for the distortion there. What's wrong with keeping the earlier less dirty tone and just of course being more dramatic with the solo. The guitar solo gets 24 bars as well. I feel like that would work live but if you are going to do that on a recording then you have to take it higher in the second 12 bars. One thing you could do here is keep the more clean tone for the first 12 bars and kick in the dirty tone for the second 12 bars.

On the line:

"And that lovely broad had the nerve..."

The first time he does it, on the word "that" the singer is attempting a high C and he makes it but it doesn't sound so good. Sounds like he lost his balls on the note, which is quite understandable given the energy required to pull that off in the baritone range but, I'd retrack that line if you can. If the singer has trouble with the C then he could try a really smooth falsetto tone just on the C. If he does it right it would be a really nice touch. Or, he could just go for it a couple of takes and do it all the way. Here is a great example from Buddy Guy to base the phrasing off of:

http:http://www.jeromeperry.com/07%20My%2...er%20While.mp3

Listen to the line:

"I said it's your time now, baby."

The key is two semi-tones lower in pitch than your recording but the contour is similar. Maybe the singer could study that line and try imitating it at first.

Either way, you've got to have a really killer high C (tonic) note somewhere in there.

I also feel like everything is too centered in the mix. Check out the stereo separation in the Buddy Guy example. It's pretty extreme but it might be worth a try.

I feel like the snare is to up front and dry personally.

The last line:

"That lousy broad had the nerve"

He repeats it several times almost exactly the same way. This would be a perfect opportunity for him to unleash a stunning high C.

[greatgreatriver]

I love it!

[greatgreatriver]

oh man this is great I'm feeling so good now! i want beer when i hear this.

[ilovemusic]

Well, it's alright.. there's the blues... the music is not that great.... it's sloppy played, especially the drums.. always too late.

It sounds very boring... everybody can fire out instrumental cliches like those ridiculous guitar licks / vocals melody lines

What do I know... maybe it was fun coming together and playing..

The analogue/digital question is certainly a minor issue here:

What's the point in recording / mixing this Jam in the first place??

[manthe]

Originally Posted by ilovemusic

Well, it's alright.. there's the blues... the music is not that great.... it's sloppy played, especially the drums.. always too late.

It sounds very boring... everybody can fire out instrumental cliches like those ridiculous guitar licks / vocals melody lines

What do I know... maybe it was fun coming together and playing..

The analogue/digital question is certainly a minor issue here:

What's the point in recording / mixing this Jam in the first place??

Lets hear what you have??

[Hazer]

To my admittedly untrained ear, that sounds really good. I love the guitar tone, the snare is a little lower than I normally like, but it suits the blues. I think the first distorted guitar run is perfect, it steps up the energy when the singer is getting into the song, then the song calms down for a little bit, really cool.

Sounds great, obviously it could use a little mixing, but it's very listenable and well balanced just the way it is.

[tf_dk]

Originally Posted by ilovemusic

Well, it's alright.. there's the blues... the music is not that great.... it's sloppy played, especially the drums.. always too late.

It sounds very boring... everybody can fire out instrumental cliches like those ridiculous guitar licks / vocals melody lines

What do I know... maybe it was fun coming together and playing..

The analogue/digital question is certainly a minor issue here:

What's the point in recording / mixing this Jam in the first place??

Hoi? I have the opposite in mind. I'm a house producer (mh a bit weird mixes, not just normal house. A bit in the trancy direction but then not again. Anyway)

I wouldn't say i have untrained ears. I'm not a veteran in this stuff like many of you obviously are but i have listened to a lot of music, and spent a lot of studio time.

Enough of the introduction, just wanted to say i'm not a complete beginner, but not a pro either. And this is the first review of this genre i do, but i feel like practicing a bit today so why not throw a view on this track. I'll try to split it up a bit between the elements.

Here we go.. Great track! I don't think the drums are too late, i think it gives a bit of swing to place them there. They're not perfect on, but in no way i would prefer quantized drums for this kind of tracks. It has to have a little "lazy" feel on them, just like you managed to snap here.

The bass explains itself, its bomming on there in the background nicely, flowing a bit around along with the drums. I like how much its actually "in the picture" in the medium-distorted guitar solo, and runs up and down. Good match again.

The guitar nicely placed, a very classic "blues" style. I don't know what classic blues style is but you hit what i call blues hence i believe its somewhat classic, at least in my content. Nevertheless very nice.

Vocals? I like the singer a lot. Very much. He got that "rough" sound when he goes up and sings a bit faster, higher and louder. Hm i'm not much into vocal production but sounds like there is also a little bit of distortion added by the preamp or in that areas, again it fits well.

All in all i like the way the guitar and vocals go from subtle to distorted when they're expressing things. Thats a lovely "feature" of this genre.


NOW comes the problem. The mix and master. Its balanced decently yes, but you need equalizing for sure. Its a bit dull/flat. You could use some gentle compression on those drums too, to get a tiny bit of pumping when that kick hits. So you can feel it. Not so much you ruin the dynamics, but just to get them in and ARGH i miss that in this track. Gotta get a bit top on in the frequenzy ranges too.

Again its not bad at all, its just a bit too flat for my likening. But you can very well be proud of this, especially as you say its not well mixed or mastered. You just need that bit more sparkling mix and a touch of mastering (read: equalizing and compression on the master bus) and you got it :)

But you probably knew everything i said already :P

back to the house and trance :D

edit:
about digital vs analog? doesn't make much difference here. You got a good capture. Mixing in the box or out of is not a big deal.
Just get on tuning your equalizers! I see you got UAD. Thats one of the best bids for mixing tools you can get. Just get on using them!!

Best regards,
Daniel

[BluegrassDan]

I really like the feeling in the music and vocals! Can't do ANYTHING without that!

You should be very proud of this recording. The fact that you have access to great musicians that play and sing from the heart says a lot!

Now, in terms of the mix - I sense certain things fighting for space, both in terms of stereo placement and eq.

Of course, I've been on both sides of the fence - growing up and having to do with what I had, and learning to get the most out of it. Later on I was able to use the gear that everyone here lusts over, and it CERTAINLY makes a difference.

I think the difference is that by using outboard pres and high quality converters you'll find that your sound is automatically larger and present, and will require less "tweaking" and adjusting later.

The first biggest differences I noticed (VERY generally speaking) when I began working with expensive gear was in the clarity of the high frequencies and the tightness of the low frequencies. Another person here commented that it seemed like your recording could use more highs. I suspect converters or pres to be the culprit.

ITB or OTB, analog vs digital - it often boils down to quality of gear and technique. I would recommend looking into ways of stereo miking some of the instruments you record. It can help create a more-3D sound.

[tf_dk]

Originally Posted by BluegrassDan

The first biggest differences I noticed (VERY generally speaking) when I began working with expensive gear was in the clarity of the high frequencies and the tightness of the low frequencies. Another person here commented that it seemed like your recording could use more highs. I suspect converters or pres to be the culprit.

Yes that was also what i was going to write yesterday but chose not to though. But i'll give it a +1, better gear simply catches the spectrum better. It sounds less "muffled" and more clear.

I thought his analog vs digital "rave" was about the mixing, thats why i restrained myself to say that on the recording stage, there is no such thing as analog vs digital other than in the mixing stage for this, because anything before that is analog already. On THAT side its important to have good gear but it isn't an analog VS digital thing because there is simply no digital gear on that side.

So i thought to myself that it was a weird thing talking about analog vs digital when it should really be less expensive analog gear vs more expensive analog gear.

The mixing itself though, i believe he can get great results with the digital equipment.

But again yeah, the track has a feeling over it. But the mix needs a bit more work. More presence.

I just gave the track a quick push with a little equalizing, compression and pushing slightly in a limiter, and just with a few minutes of setting up it was easy to get more clarity and punch in the sound.
Still you can get much better results yourself, you sit with the mix! Just get working :D

I would recommend looking into ways of stereo miking some of the instruments you record. It can help create a more-3D sound.

True. as for now, if you recorded the drums with individual microphones for example, try a little panning.

As for the guitar, I don't know how a SLIGHT stereo reverb (something a bit bouncy) or stereo delay (eg a liiiitle more delay in one side than the other) would work. Pan the guitar a little bit to the left for example and let a very short delay panned to the right play in. Very short, just feelable.

The guitar and drums is something i wouldn't mind if you played a bit with as i said above. Let the vocals, kick drum, snare and bass sit around the middle though. Slight panning might be cool but be careful as always.


Again i don't know much about producing anything with these kind of instruments and genre's but i'm just using my intuition and ears a bit and telling what might work. But just be extremely gentle with the delay and panning. Too much will ruin the feeling.

As for the master, i believe the uad fairchild might help you with some stereo seperation on the track. Again be gentle, you don't want very much but just to give it a little feelin'.

cheers!
-Daniel

edit:
ok listened again and the guitar does have a little stereo seperation going on. Perhaps a little more could be usefull. And get going with the drums still :)
(and try a slight touch of the fairchild on your master)