The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Avril: ITB vs OTB DAW Software
Old 25th August 2007
  #61
Gear Nut
 

All I can think about honestly when I listen to this is that both Serban and CLA are fantastic mixers, one a little more new school than the other, but this record sucks ass. Top level dudes getting paid alot of money for what they do best; making **** music sound normal. Some do it in the box, some do it out of the box. The truly depressing part is that CLA still shines **** for a living and he is arguably the ultimate guru of our field. Sorry for my rant. My point is, the topic of this thread is the LEAST significant element involved in all of this. And the marketing department makes it happen.......
Old 25th August 2007
  #62
Gear Maniac
 
Firefox's Avatar
 

i agree with what rcm says about the sound of the itb mix they sound bad
Old 25th August 2007
  #63
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by andymixer View Post
The truly depressing part is that CLA still shines **** for a living ...
We all do. If turds came out golden, we'd all be out of work.
Old 25th August 2007
  #64
Lives for gear
 
shangoe's Avatar
 

the first SONG is the much better one, more energy and agression, the second song is kind of boring - that makes it dificult to say which mix is better. yes the otb mix has more depth and the first one has the typical "itb processed textures" i dont like on the long run...


...both mixes, or i would say ARANGEMENTS do not exite me very much...nothing what a mixer can do better.

the first song played live in a good room plus the fancy mix by CLA would be killer...
Old 25th August 2007
  #65
Lives for gear
 
noiseflaw's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
Actually... no. I think the ITB mix sounds buzzy, flat, harsh and nasty, in my opinion.

Lol


I guess Avril and her management and production team though the same too eh?

Or maybe not.

....But what do they know?

A choon of that quality should nevva have made it to print right - how the hell did they not hear it's obvious flaws?


Yes I'm being sarcastic btw.
Old 25th August 2007
  #66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post

Maybe it was HOW it was mixed. Maybe it was WHAT was given to mix. And ALL the hardware and software between the two.


If it was CLA, same song, same mix, different media, THEN we'd have a discussion... anything less is G.S. B.S. self-serving wankfestheh

-a
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiomichael View Post
I think that the Serban mix serves the song better even though it has sort of a 'Colorforms' 2 dimensional thing to it...it sounds like pop music.

The CLA mix sounds great, but somehow doesn't fit the song's vibe quite right to me. It's sooo signature CLA that it keep waiting for Chris Daughtry's vocals to come in!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad McGowan View Post
to my ears both mixes sound flat and lack depth. I think that has more to do with the production and tracking than with mixing though.


Brad

Totally agree..I think would be very interesting to do the same thing as Ronan did with some songs from the new Pink CD...is also mixed by Serban G and CLA - TLA (please somebody can confirm?).
Paste that new comparison to the same example that Ronan did would be cool..2 artist again ITB/OTB mixers

So we possibly would get a better conclusion and try to undesrtand better where are the bigger differences....o maybe get more confused?


***ACTUALLY SOMEBODY CAN CONFIRM IF WAS CLA O TLA ONE OF THE MIXERS HERE BESIDES SERBAN G?
Old 25th August 2007
  #67
Lives for gear
 

I prefer the ITB, the future is now. Neither of the mixes do much for me, a ton of compression and over processed. Still, I see no end in sight for this particular type of soul sucking slickness. Not that Avril has much soul to begin with. She sounds like a 12 year old reciting her secret diary to a grunge rock preset in Band-in-a-Box.
Old 25th August 2007
  #68
Lives for gear
 
Tony Shepperd's Avatar
This is mainly for the OTB mixers to think about.
Do you really think that the record label listened to SG's mixes and CLA's mixes and thought one was horribly different from the other?

For Mixerguy and the others that thought the ITB mix "sounds buzzy, flat, harsh and nasty".
Do you think the artist, her label, her management all listened to the mix and said those things and then said, "ehh, let's put it out anyway"?

Clearly guys, they don't feel that way. And now someone says these same two mixers are on the Pink record.
Why would they put it out if it had all those bad characteristics? Does that makes sense to any of you?
It doesn't make sense... unless the mixes don't have those characteristics your talking about and they really are just good mixes from both engineers.
Old 25th August 2007
  #69
Lives for gear
 

^^

i suppose....except that the standard of what "sounds good" is not what i once was.

i seriously doubt that avril is a serious "golden ears audiophile" and probably is not the MOST critical chooser of mixes in the history of music.

the same could probably be said of the rest of the "approval team" you describe. as long as it sounds professionally slick, edited to pieces, not blatantly distorted, and of course nice and LOUD.....they are probably fine with it.

the mixes DO sound different. there is no doubt about it. how MUCH of the difference can be put down to ITB or OTB....well we are making educated guesses. to me, putting the aesthetic aside....the OTB sounds much more pleasing to the ear.
Old 25th August 2007
  #70
Lives for gear
 

If it mattered maybe an ITB mix wouldnt have been the first single released off the record and wouldnt be all over radio and mtv.

If someone really thought there was a difference they would have had CLA do all the singles.

Personally I prefer the ITB mix since it sounds a little more original.. the CLA mix sounds JUST like a CLA mix. Sure it might have a little more depth, but the whole thing sounds uninteresting.

None of this matters when the majority of the people listening to Avril listen to it off an IPOD with earbuds or plugged into their car with the bass and treble all the way up.. all coming from an MP3.
Old 25th August 2007
  #71
.

it's a REALLY good point, planet red.


this music was NOT DESIGNED for an audiophile market,

so to have it picked apart like it WAS, is a bit ridiculous....


as you say,

as long as you can blast the 128k mp3's, with all possible knobs

cranked to maximum volume on ipods and car stereos,

the mixes are serving their purpose.


obviously, if we went and listened to the original mixes in the original mix rooms,

they'd sound a good deal better than they do here.


again, imnsvhfo, analyzing radio music in 2007 with audiophile expectations,

is looking for the needle in the haystack, unfortunately....


.





...
Old 25th August 2007
  #72
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
This is mainly for the OTB mixers to think about.
Do you really think that the record label listened to SG's mixes and CLA's mixes and thought one was horribly different from the other?

For Mixerguy and the others that thought the ITB mix "sounds buzzy, flat, harsh and nasty".
Do you think the artist, her label, her management all listened to the mix and said those things and then said, "ehh, let's put it out anyway"?

Clearly guys, they don't feel that way. And now someone says these same two mixers are on the Pink record.
Why would they put it out if it had all those bad characteristics? Does that makes sense to any of you?
It doesn't make sense... unless the mixes don't have those characteristics your talking about and they really are just good mixes from both engineers.
Tony - are you telling me I can't hear properly? How would you know how good my hearing is?

Tony - are you telling me that you know what the artist, her label, her management feel? How would you know what these people feel?

Old 25th August 2007
  #73
Lives for gear
 

I'm with Sheppard on this one. This isn't the style of music to be cork sniffing over. And I doubt that was the intent of the artist, producer, or engineer.

No one is sitting back in their big oxblood leather chair (with deep oak trim) sipping Remi Martin while quietly enjoying this record.

The thing I find most interesting are the similarities and not the differences. It's remarkable how we are identifying these small differences when it fact it's showing what little individuality is left between engineers.

It's almost to a point where we have universally accepted standards of what the right sound is for each particular instrument for each genre with perhaps a 10% space of wiggle room - and those who push the extremes of that 10% "have their own sound"heh

AFAIC - there is nothing unique between the two mixes, and though there is one that I do "prefer" it's only bull**** because it makes no damn difference within the confines of "accepted standard approaches".
Old 25th August 2007
  #74
Lives for gear
 
Tony Shepperd's Avatar
I am not telling you that you can't hear properly.
I am merely quoting what you said "sounds buzzy, flat, harsh and nasty" and asking a simple question.
If you think all the people who work with her felt that way?
And if it was not the best thing for the client, then why would they do it?
On top of that, (if it's true), Pink's record has the same mixers.

If it truly "sounds buzzy, flat, harsh and nasty", why would people keep going back to the same sonic well, if it sounds that bad?

I propose to you that it doesn't sound as bad you might think it sounds and that actually some people either:
A. Can't tell the difference because the mixes are not polar opposites
B. A lot of people like the way the mixes sound like ITB.

BTW, your hearing is probably fine. It's just a bias you have for OTB mixing.
Old 25th August 2007
  #75
Lives for gear
 
mtstudios@charter's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gainreduction View Post
The biggest difference to me is in the low end (Serban's mix has more/deeper low end) and that CLA's mix is a little more "together" while Serban's is a little more "separated".
This is exactly what I noticed on Digidesigns listening test ITB OTB.

Blue Thumb Productions-Audio Production Facilities
Old 25th August 2007
  #76
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
......
If it truly "sounds buzzy, flat, harsh and nasty", why would people keep going back to the same sonic well, if it sounds that bad?........

......BTW, your hearing is probably fine. It's just a bias you have for OTB mixing.
I thought that the ITB mix in question sounded buzzy, harsh, flat and nasty on my first listen to the CD (and second, and third listen, I might add) BEFORE I LOOKED AT THE CREDITS AND KNEW WHO MIXED WHAT ... HOW.

no preconceived notions. only my ears.



Old 25th August 2007
  #77
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by eligit View Post
^^

i suppose....except that the standard of what "sounds good" is not what i once was.

i seriously doubt that avril is a serious "golden ears audiophile" and probably is not the MOST critical chooser of mixes in the history of music.

the same could probably be said of the rest of the "approval team" you describe. as long as it sounds professionally slick, edited to pieces, not blatantly distorted, and of course nice and LOUD.....they are probably fine with it.

the mixes DO sound different. there is no doubt about it. how MUCH of the difference can be put down to ITB or OTB....well we are making educated guesses. to me, putting the aesthetic aside....the OTB sounds much more pleasing to the ear.
+1

Old 25th August 2007
  #78
Lives for gear
 
Empire Prod's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
your hearing is probably fine. It's just a bias you have for OTB mixing.


This is something that has been difficult for me to overcome. Being open minded to the possibility that digital has vastly improved sonically, and ridding myself of the bias against it.These are not easy things to do. Change is not easy.
Old 25th August 2007
  #79
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrox247 View Post
Change is not easy.

that's what stalin said.....


..
Old 25th August 2007
  #80
Lives for gear
 
Empire Prod's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sqye View Post
that's what stalin said.....


..
Did you really just make that comparison? I mean really?
Old 25th August 2007
  #81
.

dude, i was TOTALLY joking....every leader says the same thing....

just a lot of words....


anyway, back to a.l. and off track betting


...
Old 25th August 2007
  #82
Lives for gear
 
Tibbon's Avatar
I think one of the biggest differences here, is that the CLA one seems more open. I think this is mainly due to the fact that the guitar is playing a lot higher in that clip.

If anything, the fact that not a single single 'fan' has noticed, or complained about ITB/OTB mixes being on the same album means that in the end... there's practically no difference (assuming both being skilled mixers and all)
Old 25th August 2007
  #83
Lives for gear
 
Tibbon's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kats View Post

No one is sitting back in their big oxblood leather chair (with deep oak trim) sipping Remi Martin while quietly enjoying this record.
I like my Aeron chair instead, with as much espresso as i can get.
Old 25th August 2007
  #84
Lives for gear
 
mtstudios@charter's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcm View Post
One thing that this thread proves is that its different strokes for different folks. I found mix two to be sonically superior in every way, but based on the answers so far I might be in the "out dated" minority.
Out dated only by budgets, not by quality. Technology may have a little to do with it also.
It is vague on how hybrid the ITB is. How much OTB does one need to get cream?

Bottom line, mixing engineers are getting better and better results in an ITB world. I still prefer a Hybrid of the two, leaning more toward OTB.

In the end it is all about cost vs. profit.

Blue Thumb Productions-Audio Production Facilities
Old 25th August 2007
  #85
Quote:
Originally Posted by kats View Post
No one is sitting back in their big oxblood leather chair (with deep oak trim) sipping Remi Martin while quietly enjoying this record.
".
except maybe the publishers....


.spot on post, kats....

.
Old 25th August 2007
  #86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefox View Post
i agree with what rcm says about the sound of the itb mix they sound bad
Yo Firefox, this is not what I said. I said the OTB was superior in this example. I do not think the ITB mix sounds bad, but that the differences between the two are things that my experience has made me associate with ITB vs. OTB mixing. Even my overall perspective is not that ITB sounds bad, its that OTB sounds better, and I have yet to hear anything that would change my mind (but I keep searching)

Even though I disagree with them and I am surprised by their responses, I find the guys that really prefer the ITB mix really interesting but have no problem with it. Its sort of like talking about who is more beautiful, Paris Hilton or Catherine Zeta Jones. To me there is no contest (CZJ by the way), and I could not really get my head around some one having a differing opinion, but its not an argument any one could ever win because it has no "right" answer. You like what you like. I guess I am just drawn to that out dated kind of beauty.

The responses that bum me out are the ones that say, things along the lines of "ones a little better than the other, but so what". I find it a little nuts that a forum full of people that will have arguments over the minutia of an original 1073 vs a high quality re-issue would not really care about small difference in the final product (I found the difference significant but that is another issue)

Also the idea the pop music does not matter bums me out. This new Avril record does not do much for me, but her tune "I'm with you" from her first album is one of my favorite radio singles I have heard in the last decade. I am not putting Avril in the same league, but 40 years ago, a lot of people dismissed the Beatles as silly pop that did not matter.
Old 25th August 2007
  #87
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
God,I hate the music and hate the majority of the overcompressed autotuned **** they play on commercial radio
..but if I hate to choose it would be B for all the reasons RCM mentioned.no need to repeat it again.
and it just reinforces my experiences with ITB/OTB
but in the big picture,who really gives a sh*t ... she sells records to the kids and makes the label money
.
Old 25th August 2007
  #88
Lives for gear
 
noiseflaw's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcm View Post
The responses that bum me out are the ones that say, things along the lines of "ones a little better than the other, but so what". I find it a little nuts that a forum full of people that will have arguments over the minutia of an original 1073 vs a high quality re-issue would not really care about small difference in the final product (I found the difference significant but that is another issue)
It's all about the context.

For a start the songs were both different. Different arrangements and Different Mixers, different sonics.

The context is: Modern pop music - in this case, bubble gum teen stuff, adolescent radio friendly squash, here today gone from the charts tommorrow.

In this context it seems absurd to approach the differences like some wine connosieur.

In the context of 'over compressed' 'over limited' 'reduced dynamic' rock n roll, the sonic qualities and characteristic differences of the mixes is ABSOLUTELY NEGLIGABLE and not worthy of a forensic analysis - it is a misplaced comparison.

Add to these the usual biased GROANING and PREDICTABLE responses from certain forum members and we have the usual Gearslutz bun fight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcm View Post
Also the idea the pop music does not matter bums me out. This new Avril record does not do much for me, but her tune "I'm with you" from her first album is one of my favorite radio singles I have heard in the last decade. I am not putting Avril in the same league, but 40 years ago, a lot of people dismissed the Beatles as silly pop that did not matter.
Again it is a about context:

I listened to the mixes and it did not matter to me to me because the differences were negligable regarding the context (disposable, radio friendly, teen pop, bubble gum squash).

If I want to get like a wine bore about music and equipment then let the music have some real dynamic and sonic quality - in this example it's like arguing over the subtleties of 2 brands of popular highly starched steel milled white bread.


Oh yesh.. I really am looking forward to that Avril's tribute cover of the Beatles Sergent Pepper album.
Old 25th August 2007
  #89
For some reason, a hit single with tons of radio and MTV airplay always sounds better!
Also, the arrangements, the snare selection, are different, the first one have an open Hihat, the second have a closed Hihat, plus one is a big hit, the other isn't. (YET).

I remember somebody said that the best remedy for a bad mix is a hit song!!

I'm a big CLA, TLA, SG, BC fan, and as a lot of us may know, it's not that easy to achieve that kind of mixing, I think what they do it's an art and they deserve a lot of respect. Maybe we don't like the artist or that kind of music, but those guys are amazing engineers.

Best regards,

delcosmos.
Old 25th August 2007
  #90
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Also the idea the pop music does not matter bums me out. This new Avril record does not do much for me, but her tune "I'm with you" from her first album is one of my favorite radio singles I have heard in the last decade. I am not putting Avril in the same league, but 40 years ago, a lot of people dismissed the Beatles as silly pop that did not matter.
But I don't think it's an issue of "pop doesn't matter". The context of this thread is from an engineering/mixing sonic POV. It's just that the production fashion is so "in your face", as another member put it, like watching a movie from the front row - it seems odd to talk about depth and "sense of space" and make comparisons. It's like arguing who's faster, a turtle or a 1 legged rabbit - who cares, they're both fricken slow!
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Axle_australia / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
6
Mark1353 / The Good News Channel
15
Jay Lee / Low End Theory
2
tvanveen / So much gear, so little time
88
everybody's x / So much gear, so little time
52

Forum Jump
Forum Jump