A quick update on Mix Round 2:@Gaz has been very busy and things took longer than planned. Hence the "early post". The "individual feedback" will arrive within the next 48 hours. Of course I will update the thread and participants accordingly.
Apologies for the waiting time and thank you for your patience.
This is a recurring topic with each Mix(ing) Challenge. And this is why I specifically ask for music references where people can get inspired by, and then "build upon" that while mixing.rvalle wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 05:09 CESTWell, this was a challenge in which I invested time and dedication to create a mix that would please. The song is very good and I had a lot of fun working on it. I really liked the result I got. Every time I heard my finished mix, I thought I had achieved a very good result. I still do. But it was clear now that the band was looking for a result that was very close to the references that were mentioned. Even though it was said in the contest presentation that a modern approach might be welcome.
Yes, Gaz quite literally wrote "It would be interesting to hear a much more modern approach to this song.", however in defense of this statement, "much more modern" can also mean "modern tech", or "additional modern twist" (as in: push the amp dial just one step further than the band originally did), while the general tone is still the same (albeit with your unique approach and balance). It could also mean "hey, my set of ears hears something that shouldn't be in this frequency range - maybe I can clean that up". See the early comments on the opened upright piano, which has a ton of character on it's own.
This is clearly an early 1970s-type production. Also think "Queen - A Night at the Opera" or most notably "Bohemian Rhapsody" (1975). You can still mix "era accurate", but use modern technology (e.g. use a current day SSL 9000 Console than a 1960s RCA or 1970s Neve -- or even use your own custom setup!), including utilizing modern "movements and transitions" (panning/automation/reverb/delay/reverse-reverb). That is the concept here.
Instead, some entries actually really went the "super modern" approach - everything clean-cut, over-processed in places. Other entries went a bit too "minimalist"/vintage cassette tape inspired (drums barely in the mix, bass not noticeable, everything sounding "nasal"). As mentioned, this has been a recurring topic with recent games. And sometimes, it feels people sadly ignore the song and the general mood.
It is true though, that we do have the rare chance to "super-elevate" an otherwise "bland" production with the Mix(ing) Challenges. We will also get the chance to go a bit more "experimental" again in the future. In all these cases, I do ask for possible references. And if the Song Provider can't give any (because they just worked "in the moment"), I often look up stuff that I think might work and then triple check with the client if that is "okay".
However, paying attention to detail, and having an eye (and ears) on the "bigger picture" is important.
To give you some more feedback for your mix:rvalle wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 05:09 CESTThat's where I went wrong, since I only took into account my taste and the things I usually listen to. I even worked more creatively than I usually do when it came to effects and ambience. I was particularly happy with the result of the radio effect, which I thought was very similar to the voice coming from such a device. I also really liked the result of the backing vocals, which were controlled and fitted in well with the lead vox. And, as one of the points here is learning, at this challenge I discovered that the simplest can be the best option in some cases. There are many excellent mixes and I hope the best one wins. Thanks to @Gaz and the band for the opportunity. Good luck to everyone.
It definitely has something "unique". It is just unfortunate that this didn't work for the client.
What I instantly notice (especially on small speakers, which is my "first impression" device)... your mix is very, very clear and bright. The drums are also modern and "clicky". This is a personal choice, and it needs to serve the song. Yet overall, it felt very harsh and over-processed (especially the snare, where the focus is on the "snare bottom"). With the reverb on the drum set, it also sets a certain stage/base-tone as if the band is in a "brick-wall studio".
Speaking of reverb... the intimacy of the story is missing. In your case, Gaz's lead voice is instantly placed inside of a "room" that feels like a "cell" rather than an "inside head" voice that moves more and more "outside", turning into quite literal screams on the battle-field this character is currently on (pre-chorus sections). At least, this is how I would interpret this song.
Sound effect wise, the radio call/response section could still be "pushed" a bit further (slight distortion), you also blended it with the dry signal (which is a matter of choice, but wouldn't work in this case). The general battlefield feels a bit too "sci-fi", not visceral. The driving part here is "chaos", "distortion (of reality)", not to mention sheer panic and madness being depicted. In fact, a lot of the Top 15 tracks also have this section a bit "too clean", or the balance is somewhat off. Else, placing the "effects" in the stereo field, volume layer and frequency range is always a matter of taste. There is no clear rule here. Either it works and tells a good story, or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, the "client" will tell you.
Good approach, but maybe pushed a bit "too far".
Again, I highly recommend to listen to some of the provided references. Queen's "Bohemian Rhapsody" is a good reference for "dynamic shifts" (yes, Freddie Mercury's voice feels heavy FX laden, also due to the layering - but listen to the changes per section). Gentle Giant's "The Power and the Glory" is a good reference for "raw tone". And both King Crimson and Yes can work as reference for "controlled chaos".
Maybe we'll even throw some Rush with "2112" in there for good measure (although here the drum low end feels "thin", and Jeff Jones really rides that reverb on that album! And despite being a Canadian band, the album felt like "Americana" from the 1970s). Dare I even add Genesis' 1973 Album "Selling England by the Pound" arrangment wise (this can't be any further from the "modern Genesis" content - Peter Gabriel's voice does throw you off on occasion though) or early 1970s Uriah Heep (aggression). (sorry for this one, Gaz!
)A deep dive to "(British) Progressive Rock" on Wikipedia, and/or a trip to both the "Map of Metal" and the "Music Map" ("Classic Rock"/ Golden Age section) is definitely worth to brush up on knowledge. You will notice clear details in narration style, and general tone out of the "US" compared to "UK".
Either way - we'll keep you folks updated on Mix Round 2.
It’s on page 13. My explanation of my autotune mistake is on page 14 if you wanna read how I goofed up…but I basically forgot to take it off at the end of the mix, it was on as a reminder to possibly go in and manually tune if needed…and it’s pulling a few notes wildly out of tune unfortunately…doh! I felt terrible as the band does not even need any tuning.