Post: #201

Ok, this is getting out of hand.

I spent seven hours mixing a track between shitposting yesterday.

It sounded fantastic. Everything (and it's a busy mix) can clearly be heard. The percussion is at a subtle level. Huh, maybe I'll be able to get all these tracks into shape myself.

Try it in the car. Ear rape by tambourine and shaker that was subtle in the mix.

Try in on the other computer. Ear rape by tambourine and shaker.

I even tried it through the analogue tube amp I use for my record player. Ear rape by tambourine and shaker.

Look, I've been mixing demos for years. Yes, bass and treble levels might differ between speakers, but the relative levels of those ingredients shouldn't differ to that kind of ridiculous degree. It should stay within the ballpark of expectations, you know?

There's just all this high end appearing that isn't there on the monitoring speakers, and there's no widening plugins running or eq mastering etc that should vary the sound this much.

Come to think of it - the harpischord (treble) is more present too.

I doubt it could possibly be the room, because if sound is influenced THAT much by your surroundings, how was I such a reliable mixer before?

So, I see two possibilities.

ONE

I've watched Zep's suggested videos, and others it linked to, and I was trying to think about what could have possibly-changed in my room.

I was looking for some of the last demos I did about two years back, and stumbled across a couple of goofy pics I took for Quintus when 'Pantheon' came out, and I remember thinking "Oh yeah, that was a couple of days after I hung the map in the music room. Man, time goes fast."

I hung the map in there.

Apologies for the picture, but the map was only the background, not the focus of the original shot, and my current (non-smart) phone has a useless camera. You should still get the idea.



Look over my shoulder. It's map of Victorian London glued to wood, mounted on a heavy wooden frame. Probably a 120x80 cm. Look at the image on the right: see the shadow it is casting against the wall? That gives you an idea how thick it is. It hangs a good 8 cm out from the wall. Previously, the wall (which is opposite the mixing speakers) was bare.

Could it possibly be the map? I mean, I don't see how, because I find it hard to believe something that simple could influence the acoustics that much, but, I'm not an expert in the area, and given how anal the guy in Zep's videos was being about bookshelves and vodka bottles, well, who knows?

I'd try taking it down, but I'm not currently at home, and won't be until late tomorrow night, which brings me to...

TWO

Or, more likely, I think the top end response in the monitoring speakers has gone.

I've on a flying trip to the city to say a final goodbye to my Step-Grandfather in the morning. I might be able to find an hour to hit a big music store tomorrow before I head back around 4.

So, do I take the risk and buy new speakers while I have the chance? Otherwise, it's going to take a couple of weeks to get any delivered to where I am. Or do I go home, try taking the map down, and end up kicking myself in the arse?

If anyone can recommend a solid brand of monitoring speakers before tomorrow morning, jump in. Obviously, I'd prefer reliability when transferring a file regardless of environment, so if a brand is known for that, fill me in.

Post: #202

That's odd Bosch, are you suuuure your monitors are wired correctly?

http://www.richardfarrar.com/are-your-sp...correctly/

If so, I'd then grab the speakers from your other room and try a quick mix on them, instead of your monitors, in your music room, before investing in new monitors.

I too cannot believe the wall painting would make THAT much difference. But, whatever, try taking it down. I'd be shocked if it was that.

Post: #203

(07-09-2017 06:20 PM)Zep Wrote:  That's odd Bosch, are you suuuure your monitors are wired correctly?

http://www.richardfarrar.com/are-your-sp...correctly/

If so, I'd then grab the speakers from your other room and try a quick mix on them, instead of your monitors, in your music room, before investing in new monitors.

There's no 'wiring' as such. I'm running from the balanced outputs of the soundcard (1/4 inch TRS) to the balanced input of the active monitor speakers (the big microphone plugs) and am definitely using balanced cables. Left to left. Right to right.

The problem stayed the same between using the old USB device and the new USB device, so I doubt it's the device, and I've had an IT mate look over the computer, so I doubt it's that either.

I guess it's theoretically-possible the balanced cables have some kind of issue, but, well, what are the odds of both of them being dodgy at once? (Shaker Rape is concentrated in the left ear, Tambourine Rape is concentrated in the right).

I've just realised what I could try is to hook up my stand-alone 24 Track Tascam recorder to the speakers, dumping the individual tracks onto it and doing a quick mix completely on that device, and try it between other speakers. Then I'd know for sure if it's the speakers or not, because I'd be taking the computer and the USB devices completely out of the mix.

Guess I'd better wait and try that. Shame. I've seen some tempting JBL's in a catalogue.

Post: #204

You could analyze the room+loudspeakers/monitors' acoustics with this:

http://www.roomeqwizard.com

It requires a calibrated mic, though.

Post: #205

Some things that come to mind. . .

1. Possibly another instrument that is occupying the same eq range as the percussion, that is masking the percussions true loudness in your monitoring setup

2. May need to add a high end cutoff on the percussion

3. How bad does it sound simply turning the volume of the percussion down? Is there anything that you can sidechain to keep the sound crisp?

Post: #206

I'll experiment more. Thanks, guys.

Anyone used the JBL LSR308's?

Post: #207

Here's a good comparison with the JBLs alongside similarly priced monitors. I'm sold on the Yamaha's personally, especially after reading the comment by Joe E.

Post: #208

^ I put a lot of research into the JBL's and ended up going with them. I've always found them a good brand. I've had a pair of their tall stereo speakers since the mid-80's paired with a NAD tube amps, and the sound quality is still so good that I've never need to upgrade. If anything, music quality degraded far more with the loudness war and mp3's than 30+ years of usage did to the speakers. Remember though, computers always make everything better.

Back to the mixing issue: the JBL's are great, and the problem was definitely my old speakers after all. I could instantly hear the issues with the mix, have a better idea of things being too loud or too soft in the mix. I've always been frustrated with the wimpiness of my tom drum sounds, particularly when I get any kind of tribal rhythm going, as I sometimes like to avoid a snare backbeat until its introduction provides more emotional power. Turns out the gut-rumbling roundness and reverb of the toms was there all along, I've just been mixing wrong since I couldn't hear it. I've got a head cold at the moment, and the toms were rattling my brain last night, so after about 2 minutes of listening, I had to go and throw up in the toilet. Total thumbs up from me: my old speakers weren't capable of THAT.

So, problem solved guys! Thanks for everyone's help. The frequency scanning of the room was solid advice. These new speakers have multiple trim options to counteract any deficiencies in the room, so it's all golden.

I'd better start chipping away at mixing the mass of material that's backlogged. Thanks again.

Post: #209

The instruments/frequencies you have cutting through too much in your bounced mixes - do they change at all when you make adjustments then re-render them? You say they are super loud listening to them on other speakers, but when you lower the levels then try again, are they just as loud as before or less loud?

Post: #210

(07-18-2017 11:31 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  The instruments/frequencies you have cutting through too much in your bounced mixes - do they change at all when you make adjustments then re-render them? You say they are super loud listening to them on other speakers, but when you lower the levels then try again, are they just as loud as before or less loud?

I've turned them down by up to 9 decibels, (I think ever 3db change doubles the volume doesn't it?), and they still sounded just as loud each time. Does that mean something to you? Would appreciate the help for future reference, even if the new speakers do fix the problem.

I was attempting a remix last night on the new speakers until I got interrupted by friends, but I noticed a clearer picture of the stereo field. The cello and viola are panned across the left speaker, the 2nd and 1st violins across the right, as per your standard orchestral panning. The strings were strong on the old monitors, then would vanish when I took them anywhere else, so I'd keep boosting the violins, where the percussion would suddenly pop out, so I'd keep turning them down.

Result: no apparent change in levels in the car, or on other speakers.

Last night, I boosted the lower strings by 4 dbs and the violins by 2 on the new speakers. The rhythm track is made up of ten separate components, and I had to jump in and relevel those first, and could hear i needed to turn the tambourine and shaker way down to sit better. Hopefully the problem was speaker-related.

It sounded much fuller and more natural now. I'll do some transfer tests today when I have time alone with it.

Post: #211

From what you are describing, it sounds like an issue within your DAW not the monitoring. Whatever changes you are making in your mix are not happening at the master channel, or rather, are not happening in whatever mix is being rendered to your FLAC/WAV file. Could be a routing issue or something like that - what you are hearing coming out of your monitors while working on the track in your DAW is not what is actually being rendered otherwise these leveling changes you are making should be translating to your rendered files.

What DAW are you using?

When you are rendering your FLAC/WAV file, what is the source?(Master, some other output, etc...)

Are their any effects or any sort of locks on your source or any of your tracks that would prevent the changes you are making from translating to your rendered files?(level automation, etc...)

The solution is something silly and simple I am sure.

Post: #212

(07-18-2017 06:19 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  What DAW are you using?

Ableton Live 9.

Quote:When you are rendering your FLAC/WAV file, what is the source?(Master, some other output, etc...)

Master. There's no effects busing. I do that on sub projects and print each track with effects down to a wave file, and do my final mix on those 'flat' tracks, only introducing effects where necessary. Saves a tonne of CPU processing.

I'd then master the track separately in Izotope 7. The issue was happening with both the mastered and unmastered track, so that wasn't the problem either.

Quote:Are their any effects or any sort of locks on your source or any of your tracks that would prevent the changes you are making from translating to your rendered files?(level automation, etc...)

I had already checked for volume level or any other automations - they're easy to spot in Live as it drops a red highlight over the channel. I've never tweaked volume levels for percussion instruments in the past: I find a good groove level and sit it in the mix.

Quote:The solution is something silly and simple I am sure.

Thanks for the very solid suggestions, but I was damn methodical with trying to figure this out, which is why I was getting frustrated. I think the simple solution was new speakers. I was researching my old ones which I bought from a music store 10 years back, figuring maybe there's some reviews that would highlight their particular frequency issues, but the company's website has no mention of them, and I could not find ONE instance of ANY mention of that model online.

A mate had been arguing furiously that I didn't need new speakers until he heard them this morning: "These sound fucking amazing. Didn't I tell you you needed new speakers?"

I'll try a mix this afternoon and hopefully the problem will sort itself out. I just wanted to try something first before I get my head into the mixing space. I used a virtual Roland 808 in the mix, but they haven't captured the cheapness of the era at all in the samples: music was all gaffa tape, feedback hum, misaligned heads and cigarettes back in the day. So, I dug out my real 808, and, if it still works, I'll drop the kick and snare down onto 4 track cassette to get the sad, pathetic, saturated thump and thwack I need, then resample it and lay it into the mix.

Ever played 'The Last Of Us'? I want the drum to sound how the art for that looks. Like Civilisation has marched itself off a cliff.

Post: #213

I figured you knew what you were doing, I'm just thinking the monitors aren't the issue mainly because you said you tried a 9DB decrease and the tracks you modified still sounded the same when rendered. I don't care how fucked your studio monitors are, taking 9DB off of anything should definitely make a difference unless there is some kind of compression or other effect being added to it afterward in the mix that brings it right back up.

Post: #214

^ I spent last night experimenting, and it was the old speakers swallowing most of the treble and seemingly-giving a very poor stereo image response. Something must have died inside them over the last 12 months. Anyway, I've now got much greater control over side processing and could get the panned instruments (such as the shaker, the tambourine and the violins) exactly where I want them, and they don't change much.

There was a basic piano rhythm track I was leaving out of the mix, thinking it added nothing, and now, with the increased clarity, I could sit it back neatly in the mix, hearing that it gives the beat and basic harmonics more body.

I was always a bit annoyed by the lack of cello response for such a rhythmic song. With the increased sound clarity, I noticed - oops - the cello tracks were 1/64th of a bar out of time. It mostly likely happened transferring files in preparation for the recording of the live strings. One downside to Ableton Live is that there's obviously a key macro that 'nudges' the timing of a track left or right that's very easy to accidentally-hit without realising it.

Back in their proper place, now the cellos pump the speakers with power. It's funny - I'm used to kicks and bass guitar thumping away, but I never realised how much air comes out of the speakers when a cello is really sawing hard. I used to have to compress them to get them to register. Now, I've learnt that you don't compress or EQ a real Cello at all if you want a rich, dominant sound.

Thanks again.

Post: #215

I sat down, did a rough mix and ended up spending four hours re-tweaking the strings from scratch. A tip for anyone working with Violins that get up into the 'Bittersweet Symphony' range. If you can't quite notch out the instrument's natural harshness in the airy 1000-3000 area - you'll know it when you hear it - a DeEsser, of all things, can dial down the irritation.

Deep gratitude to all the members helped me solve this issue: even the rough unmastered mix sounds bloody-incredible on multiple speakers. Despite my long history of recorded music, this is the closest I've ever gotten a song to what I was hearing in my head, and it amuses me that I've gotten better results recording in an office and shoving a bunch of classical string players into an old garden shed than years of studios and 'real' producers. We really live in amazing times.

Post: #216

Sounds to me like you might have had blown/ damaged tweeters on your monitors. Or just worn out from years of high volume monitoring.

One tip that always works for me to compensate for deficiencies in the room or speakers is to listen to well recorded commercial music in that style through your speakers.

Post: #217

(07-19-2017 05:04 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ^ I spent last night experimenting, and it was the old speakers swallowing most of the treble and seemingly-giving a very poor stereo image response. Something must have died inside them over the last 12 months. Anyway, I've now got much greater control over side processing and could get the panned instruments (such as the shaker, the tambourine and the violins) exactly where I want them, and they don't change much.

There was a basic piano rhythm track I was leaving out of the mix, thinking it added nothing, and now, with the increased clarity, I could sit it back neatly in the mix, hearing that it gives the beat and basic harmonics more body.

I was always a bit annoyed by the lack of cello response for such a rhythmic song. With the increased sound clarity, I noticed - oops - the cello tracks were 1/64th of a bar out of time. It mostly likely happened transferring files in preparation for the recording of the live strings. One downside to Ableton Live is that there's obviously a key macro that 'nudges' the timing of a track left or right that's very easy to accidentally-hit without realising it.

Back in their proper place, now the cellos pump the speakers with power. It's funny - I'm used to kicks and bass guitar thumping away, but I never realised how much air comes out of the speakers when a cello is really sawing hard. I used to have to compress them to get them to register. Now, I've learnt that you don't compress or EQ a real Cello at all if you want a rich, dominant sound.

Thanks again.

Glad you got it solved but still doesn't make any sense to me how you removed 9DB of gain from a couple instruments tracks and they still were just as loud as they were before blown speakers or not - DB's don't lie.

Post: #218

Slight rant / "oh woe" post.

Do you guys ever struggle with motivation and passion for your music?

Next month will be exactly 3 years since I started to play acoustic guitar and problem is that notion of losing motivation in playing comes and goes for me. Currently, I am playing according to website called "Justin Guitar" going again through the lessons which I first completed about two years ago. I am using a schedule as a daily playing routine modeled after tips on that website.

As much as I love music and guitars, I don't see a lot of reason for me to play anymore but I simply cannot sell the guitar. I hate the idea of wasted investment and would always remember how I backed off of playing.
I am playing for myself (like pleasure of some sort) as I never learned sufficiently to play for others, I am not playing in the streets for money either. Has somebody advice what to do in this situation?

What do you guitar players do as a daily practice routine? Maybe a coherent and not boring schedule will make me find new sense in the playing. How to get through tedious repeated exercises without getting bored?

P.S.
AB, what is the shirt you are wearing? I really like the design.

Post: #219

^ I've been playing guitar for about 4 years now but I don't have a practice routine, which is likely why after 4 years I'm still not very good. When I'm ready to play I pick up the guitar and maybe play a few quick little tunes I already know to get my fingers warmed up then just mess around and then get to work on what I want to do. That said, I play what I like to play for the most part and learn guitar purely utilitarianly; so that I could put together my own compositions instead of just having ideas and asking someone else to play/translate them.

If you want to be really good at guitar then you haver to have a real passion for it. Dudes I know who are really good play every day, often times for hours. If over the course of 3 years you feel your passion is not very consistent then maybe it's not for you. Perhaps the idea of being able to pick up a guitar and play whatever is in your head or in the background sounds cool, but the work to get to that level is long and arduous (for most).

Post: #220

I understand what you mean. This Idea what you said really sounds cool and I am aware there is long work till that but I cannot say for sure if playing is for me or not. So I cannot decide. Sounds ridiculous I know.

Btw, I am playing almost every day for almost an hour and am still not good. Sure I can play chords, change fast between them but my aural skills are zero. You know the guys who hear the song and can replicate it immediately on guitar? Jesus, I cannot even deduce chords from the songs while listening as they sound different to me when playing on my guitar.
You know, I am lucky I got for a first guitar a relatively good one, as I heard that lot of people quickly lose motivation with bad guitars.

Post: #221

(07-20-2017 03:08 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  That said, I play what I like to play for the most part and learn guitar purely utilitarianly; so that I could put together my own compositions instead of just having ideas and asking someone else to play/translate them.

That's also why I started playing guitar, though I'm out of practice at the moment. I only got better by forcing myself to use it as a writing instrument, which meant at least 30 minutes a day was spent messing around with the thing, trying to find a song.

I know no-one is ever going to mistake me for an incredible guitarist, but I have developed my own lead style, and err on the side of doing something interesting rather than something clever, although I push myself outside my comfort zone at every opportunity, and have slowly improved.

Back to Sterling's point: it takes years of work, but you might be spending so long thinking you're getting nowhere that you mightn't realise you're further along the road than you think.

Sterling_Archer Wrote:Btw, I am playing almost every day for almost an hour and am still not good. Sure I can play chords, change fast between them but my aural skills are zero. You know the guys who hear the song and can replicate it immediately on guitar? Jesus, I cannot even deduce chords from the songs while listening as they sound different to me when playing on my guitar.

A musician friend of mine has a very, very successful career, whom, after 20+ years at this, still can't change chords quickly. He often brags about this inability in interviews. Whilst there's some exaggeration for 'cool' points - he's indie / punk all the way - I've played keyboards for him, and there's always that sense of grinding truck gears between changes that the musicians who play with him on a regularly basis have learnt to take into account. To me, it always feels like listening to music on cassette where the wheel peg isn't turning consistently.

So, there you go Sterling, you're far ahead of him, and I've heard his music in mainstream romantic comedies.

As for detecting chords by ear, don't be too hard on yourself. The difference your hearing is most likely guitarists using different fingering to play the same chord, or there's some subtle harmonic changes taking place (an Dm11 instead of a Dm).

What I'd suggest is start trying to write your own pieces, based upon the type of artists you like. Pull their songs apart and explore what they're doing that appeals to you. It's how I started out as a child. You'll get a grounding in how songs are constructed, and the similarities in construction between multiple artists. At, say, 12, I'd play covers all the time, wanting to understand how things ticked. At 17, I'd say my music was very derivative of my influences, and, if you looked at my demo tapes from that period, a good 50% of it was cover versions or songs that are thinly-disguised versions of others. This period of Juvenilia is common for most artists, musicians and writers.

Then, suddenly, the covers stop completely. From 18 onwards, I can't find the obvious influence for a song - usually it's multiple influences recombined in new and interesting ways. Even now, I don't see the point in playing covers - to me it's like raising someone else's kids - though if you end up on any kind of major label they're going to suggest them.

On the rare occassion I do decide to learn a cover version, it's because I hear something very fascinating in the song construction, and I want to not play it live, but pull it apart to add the tricks to my own knowledge. I'd also guarantee the song would be a damn obscure one.

I suspect you need to go through that similar process to keep yourself interested in the instrument. What can you create with it, even if it does start off as derivative?

Good luck, mate.

Post: #222

(07-10-2017 12:44 AM)Zep Wrote:  Here's a good comparison with the JBLs alongside similarly priced monitors. I'm sold on the Yamaha's personally, especially after reading the comment by Joe E.

I used to have krk 8s and yamaha ns10 that was my best monitor combo ever. Best mixes I ever did. Now I have some M audio ones I borrowed from a friend.

Post: #223

(07-20-2017 05:46 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  As for detecting chords by ear, don't be too hard on yourself. The difference your hearing is most likely guitarists using different fingering to play the same chord, or there's some subtle harmonic changes taking place (an Dm11 instead of a Dm).

I am aware of that, but still a lot of my guitar playing friends have no problems deducing chords or rhythm (strumming pattern) from hearing music. What is funny though is that they cannot explain anything to me, as they started to play guitar without any routine or goals. They just looked online for chords, how is fingering for them and they started to copy the songs.
I never started to play like that as I am all in for the "routine, sit down, learn lesson by lesson" approach and I always thought that this approach is superior, as its advocated like such on many websites but apparently its lacking something.

Quote:What I'd suggest is start trying to write your own pieces, based upon the type of artists you like. Pull their songs apart and explore what they're doing that appeals to you. It's how I started out as a child. You'll get a grounding in how songs are constructed, and the similarities in construction between multiple artists. At, say, 12, I'd play covers all the time, wanting to understand how things ticked. At 17, I'd say my music was very derivative of my influences, and, if you looked at my demo tapes from that period, a good 50% of it was cover versions or songs that are thinly-disguised versions of others. This period of Juvenilia is common for most artists, musicians and writers.

Then, suddenly, the covers stop completely. From 18 onwards, I can't find the obvious influence for a song - usually it's multiple influences recombined in new and interesting ways. Even now, I don't see the point in playing covers - to me it's like raising someone else's kids - though if you end up on any kind of major label they're going to suggest them.

That is a good idea. I will put that into my routine. What software would you recommend for writing chords/notes/rhythm. I am not really a pen and paper guy for that.

Quote:I suspect you need to go through that similar process to keep yourself interested in the instrument. What can you create with it, even if it does start off as derivative?

Good luck, mate.

Thank you for advice.

Post: #224

I've been DJing for about 6-7 months now getting really into it and plan to buy a proper set up with Mixer and CDJs and delve more into drum and bass, deep house, prog house & hip hop into one set, I think it would be quite interesting and change the dynamic and a different type of melodious sound.

Eventually I will be buying a proper laptop to start production and use Ableton and make some tracks. Thinking of buying one of those keyboard/synthesizers, anyone have any recommendations for someone who has never played the keyboard or in this space?

Post: #225

(07-21-2017 03:05 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  That is a good idea. I will put that into my routine. What software would you recommend for writing chords/notes/rhythm. I am not really a pen and paper guy for that.

Hmm, not sure. Some other guys might have better ideas. I gave up any form of notation about 10 years ago. I heard multiple big artists say "If you can't remember it, no-one else will." I think they're right - my songwriting made a big leap in people's response to it after that.

Oh, the shirt is just a 'Live To Ride Ride To Live' long sleeved biker tee my girlfriend at the time bought me for riding. It's too loose for me. Still, if you've got big bis / tris / delts, designs that high up the outer sleeve will show off your definition well. Do a search online for shirts with the phrase and you'll get the idea.