If I remember correctly there was mention made in the notes about the noise floor potentially being an issue. Did anyone have an issue with this? Personally, I found the bass at the end had a little issue with noisy bits at the end, but I just put an instance of Klevgrand’s Brusfri on it and all that noise went away nicely. Was this the only spot where it could have presented a problem?
there was something spuriously in a few tracks. the bass required some treatment for electric noises and string buzz. (the typical fretless thing when we boost the higher frequencies a bit).
lead vocal had a few digital clicks and some headphone bleed.
in general, I added a couple of declickers, noise gates (Ampeg plugins have some) and the DeEdger on some tracks.
I would beg the jury to point out when they have found noises in a mix that should be cured.
Mostly denoisers like RX,clarity or something else change the sound too much for my ears. I only use them when the noise is too loud. Mostly I edited and canceled the parts of the tracks with only noise and let rest be part of the track. So I did it here …but perhaps declicker could help a little bit.
This is a surgical kind of work. You have to check out precisely what is happening. There's a number of toxic products, or settings that are too hard.
There are so many types of tools. We have to learn exactly, what they do and what it is worth.
Make the decision soon. Additionally, I used the DeEdger a couple of times, and I knew the benefit, and mixed the song in a way that I am actually starting from what these tools have left over, and this is seen very critically by myself.
Thanks to all of you for taking the time to mix our track. We listened over a couple of weeks, on our B&O speakers in our main studio space and also from the kitchen next door. We had such a lot of listening to do and it was VERY hard to choose a top 15 from almost 100 entries.
Thank you also for all the lovely comments about the songwriting and recording. It was interesting to see how people used the tracks in their mix and encouraging to hear how the track itself had sparked a bit of discussion about “robot babies”, technology and the world in general!
Apologies for being slightly over deadline with our feedback for Round 1. Any questions and comments on our feedback are very welcome. Thank you all again.
Rebecca & Dave
A few notes from Dave before our top 15...
General feedback from Dave to all participants:
A big thank you to everyone who took the time to put themselves through this task. I personally don't understand some of the rules; eg. wild cards and penalties for wrong bit rates, although I suppose bit rates might be an issue if you were trying to get a job in a studio. However, the main things I want to say are on a practical level.
First of all, listen to the track and try to assess what the artist is trying to achieve. The submissions were at varying levels of skilfulness and not many actually "got it". Secondly this is a very difficult task as it is a mixing challenge and not a production challenge; huge difference! Normally we would be in the control room with you telling you what we want, so you need to know that we are aware of this.
Secondly, do not rely upon headphones for mixes. Always use speakers as a primary source of monitoring.
The main problems were separation of instruments and their respective clarity, the over use of de-essers (I am hissing and holding my fingers in the shape of a cross at the very mention of de-essers), over use of compression, lack of "wise" use of EQ and stereo placement.
More specifically:
Drums: This is a standard kit recorded one drum at a time by someone in the USA and downloaded by us for use with a midi program within Reaper. Reaper is a damn good recording and mixing platform but the drum writing programming sucks, so the one or two areas that sounded a bit machine like was my fault. If only I'd had access to the same kit on Cakewalk 9. We read comments like "what am I supposed to do with that stick sound? Well, what you're supposed to do is to make sure you are familiar with all sorts of musical styles. The side stick is common in Latin American music, Bosa Nova, Rumba, Samba, that kind of thing. It is treated as the basic snare sound and the real snare is used for the fills. I like to record them as if they are being listened to from the drummer's perspective.
My first course on multi-track recording was done in 1978 using some Ampeg or Ampex 24 track machine with a Matrix 8 routing system and a Tac Matchless desk under the tutelage of a guy called Tony Patrick who was, at that time, the engineer for Whitesnake. He pointed out that a basic kit set-up is kick, snare and hats all up the middle. Crash cymbals either hard left and right or some degree of left and right and toms hard or discreetly left to right and all mixed so the listener is sitting at the kit. Most of you got this to some extent or another but there was a lot of unevenness in terms of volume and stereo placement. The drums on this track are meant to be present but not dominating the track.
Bass: Very few actually "got it" with the bass. Several people actually mentioned how good they thought my bass playing was and still missed it. One even said they had treated it so as to reduce the fretless sound that they thought was too "fretlessy". We're back to "listening" here again. The point is that IT IS A FRETLESS BASS so treat it like a fretless bass and don't fight the sound or the bass player! It was recorded using the back pickup so was quite toppy and all it needed was good use of compression and to be evened out with some bottom end which was missing on the basic track.
It has some top end riffs which, since I bothered to play them, need to be there but have disappeared in some mixes.
Guitar: For me this is the biggest challenge. We included the track that was put through a COSM modelling on our Boss machine and the exact same file without treatment, so everyone had a choice to use one or both tracks. Despite making it clear that these were the same track, one or two people said they had "nudged" them into time (this is nonsense). It was mentioned by only one person that the guitar had a tuning problem and they were right (G string was slightly sharp). I noticed it after the track was recorded and decided that it was so small that I could live with it, so well done that person.
There were some good guitar sounds among the entrants but most of them, despite sounding good in the quiet sections, disappeared from the louder parts. Again, listening is paramount as the guitar is playing against a piano that is being played around the middle with all the same notes and needs separation but definite presence because we are a duo who go out with a guitar and piano.
Piano: As the song writer, piano player and lead vocalist, Rebecca needs to be heard playing as well as singing. The piano is the principal instrument in this song with everything else lending it's support (in fact it's like that with all our music). Some got this and some didn't. The biggest issue is usually stopping the clash of piano and guitar as already mentioned. EQ is the way to go with this but I am under no illusion that very subtle additions and subtractions are needed to get that "sweet spot". The piano was, and always is, recorded in stereo and so there is never any need to pan it.
Vocals: If we do anything well it is vocals (go to arnwyn.com and listen to Rebecca's album In My Defence and my album The Bigger Picture Part One) and if we have left a take in that is slightly pitchy or with a slight timing issue it has usually been noticed and left for it's "human" quality. We were astonished to find that some people used pitch correct on some of the voices. One was so pitch "corrected" that the whole track is out of tune. I suggested to Rebecca that this might be because the instruments are tuned to 432hz instead of the usual 440hz. If a standard tuning device was applied to this track it would appear to be out of tune. If, on the other hand, you check all the instruments you'll see that it is all in tune with itself. This was not a deliberate trick and I'm sorry if the tuning was an issue for you. On this track we supplied two lead vocals because I wanted to have a little bit of beefing up if I needed it. Usually Rebecca's voice is alone as the lead vocal, although it was said by someone that you had listened to our material and that it was our habit to double track everything. This is not true. If I sing a lead vocal, I double it because my voice, although accurate, is not like Kelly Jones or Rod Stuart and I need that doubling. Rebecca, on the other hand, has a voice that needs very little treatment. In terms of backing vocals, again from the early recording course that I did with Tony Patrick, all backing vocals should be doubled and in some cases even tripled. If you're going to support a lead vocal with backing vocals they need to be thick, clear but not competing with the lead voice. I'm sorry that I maybe didn't make it clear that it would have been acceptable to us for the participants to duplicate the end backing vocals so they could be treated in a robotic way alongside of the normal vocals, although that can usually be done by adding a bit of "dry" from whatever effect you're using (if it has that function).
De-Essers: I started playing in 1958, have been using recording devices since 1960 and have been multi-tracking since 1974. I went semi-digital in 1996 and totally digital in about 2000. I have never used a De-Esser. There is nothing that a De-Esser can do that you can't do by learning how to use EQ. Every De-Esser used on this track gives, to greater or lesser degree, an amount of lisping. What is the point of getting a well compressed kit sitting just right in the stereo field, holding down the rhythm section with a punchy but soft fretless bass sliding around all over the place, supporting a nicely treated guitar and piano combination, if the vocals on top of all that have a speech impediment? PLEASE DON'T USE THEM! Use EQ. Find the offending frequency causing the sibilance, push it up to make sure you have it, narrow the Q and reduce the gain. It's not that hard. Also, it might be an idea to listen to some other recordings of both music and speech to understand that there are amounts of sibilance that are acceptable. Don't just use effects because they are there.
Having said all that, please understand that I know how difficult it is to get a good sound on some recordings and you all have my respect, even those that thought we needed pitch correcting.
Good luck in all your recording endeavours.
Dave
Top 15. Robot Baby, in no particular order:
@MilkMonster
Lispy vocals- de-esser? Vocals need to sound clear. The backing vocals could benefit from re-balancing as either the male voice sounds slightly too prominent or the female backing vocals are too quiet in relation to the rest.
Good drum sound overall. Toms could benefit from adjusting EQ and reverb as they sound similar to each other and quite dry. Cymbals sound a little harsh but overall the kit sounds good. Nice bass guitar sound but the lower bass notes seem to be merging with the low end of the piano. Lacking effects- could possibly add some delay or subtle robotic effect to voices in places, but the mix does sound good without this and it's not completely essential. Balance is great for the quieter sections but sounds like the acoustic guitar is being lost when the volume picks up. Could do with more separation and clarity for the guitar. Overall, lovely clear mix.
@Ronson79
Punchy sound overall. Drums pretty basssy and side stick very prominent. Nice cymbal sound. 1:59 hums vocals are forward and well balanced. Nice guitar sound but it's out of balance with the piano and piano is dominating the mix. Bass guitar could do with more definition as it's getting lost and sounds wooly.
Good vocals effect- robot baby vocals at the end sound good. Lispy vocals! Remove de-esser? Male backing vocal is too forward.
@PauPeu
GREAT bass sound. Drums do sound OK but could do with a little adjustment of levels and panning. Good cymbal sound but they are too far back. Stick is too forward. Quite middley and dark tone overall- could benefit from slightly more top to add a little “sparkle”. Can't easily hear the acoustic guitar in this mix- needs more guitar. Vocals at the end are too quiet.
@UHLS
Bassy feel overall. Kit (particularly bass drum and stick) is swamping everything else. Backing vocals have a good balance but vocals are really toppy. What noise was coming from the piano?
Very guitar and bass guitar heavy- can't easily hear the piano until the lullaby section. We're a piano/guitar duo so it's important to hear both instruments.
@JanLefr
Vocal sound is pretty good and clear but there is a slight lispy-ness and harshness to the “s” sounds. Backing vocals could be more prominent throughout.
We think the mix is a bit woolly- needs more definition and separation of instruments. Guitar lost. Piano is coming through OK and has a nice tone. Bass guitar sounds a bit nasaly/quacky at the top end and too bassy on bottom end. The kit is toppy and it sounds a bit dry- could you review stereo image and reverb for kit? There's no definition and it's difficult to visualise the drum kit in this mix. The dynamics are interesting but too severe- needs to be more subtle use of dynamics. For example, it sounds like everything suddenly comes back in at 2:14 after the lullaby section.
@bluesation
Would like to hear more definition & separation of the instruments. Can hear both piano and guitar. Bass guitar riffs are getting lost. Bass could do with being slightly “thinner” and brought forward. Vocal balance sounds pretty good but backing vocals could be more forward in the mix. Cymbals have a good sound. Drum kit is lacking stereo definition and sounds like it's mostly up the middle. Could this be looked at? Nice feel overall to this mix, not harsh and not “in your face”.
@MFTWC
Vocals clear, no lisping. We liked the delay on the end vocals. Bass could be further forward as some riffs are dropping out. Acoustic guitar is difficult to hear- sounds thin and not coming through. Good stereo image on the kit but sounds too toppy to us. Cymbals sound like a short and crunchy “chh” sound, almost sound like they are breaking up. Kit is far forward and swamping everything else. Didn't like the delay on the side stick in the lullaby section as it made the song sound wobbly! The delays in the lullaby section didn't work so well on the voices.
@filipandrei
Nice low end on bass. Bass needs more definition so riffs can come through. Would like to hear more guitar in this mix. Good drum sounds and kit could take a bit more reverb as it sounds dry.
Lead vocal poking through too much, particularly at the end robot babies where it is very loud in comparison to everything else. Harsh edge to the vocal “s” sounds- de-esser causing this? Good overall sound. The piano seems to have an odd, middly harmonic poking through – around the Bb and Ab- it sounds like these notes are sticking out.
@O'MIX
Great mix. Good balance, good separation of instruments, nice reverbs. Drum fills need to be more present. Kick sounds bassy and a bit washy. The robot voice at “permission to birth” is slightly too much- it sounds like the vocals disappear and re-appear.
Effect at the end is too harsh and whistling- the harmonies are lost under the effect. Vocals generally could come forward slightly. Not sure about the delay on the “lullaby” section. Bass needs bit more definition at the top end.
@BenjiRage
Bass guitar is losing some top end riffs but there is good definition on the bottom end. It sounds like the bass guitar is a bit boomy and washing over the track. Nice vocal reverb at the end- would like to hear similar on the humming vocals as they sounded quite dry. Good vocal balance. Like the slight fade of vocals at the end.
Guitar and piano are blending together slightly too much so would be good to have more separation. We'd like to hear more of the kit as it sounds far back in the mix. Stick sounds like it is sitting nicely with the rest of the kit. Nice cymbal sound.
There is quite a “jangly”, toppy frequency going on here, especially at the beginning, but we can't quite hear what's causing it- is it possibly reverb on the guitar or piano? Could it be reduced or perhaps take some of the density out to thin the reverb? Good mix overall.
@Christoph_K
Guitar is being lost in some parts of the song. Nice spacey reverbs and the end of this mix. The final robot babies have a really good sound. Side stick too far forward and distracting but the kit has a good sound overall. Could do with a bit more separation of the instruments. Interesting use of dynamics with drop in level at the beginning of vocal lines. Piano coming through nicely. De-esser too obvious, giving a lispy vocal sound. Vocals are too toppy.
@WrightAudio
Great feel to this mix. Good balance between instruments, liked the piano and guitar sound. Like the placement of the guitar and you “got it” with the bass. Vocals slightly harsh- perhaps soften. More could be done with reverbs and/or delays. Lead vocal is slightly too far forward. The bass drum is sounding a bit separate from the rest of the kit. Good mix overall.
@Michael_K
Great mix. Good separation, plenty of space in the mix and EQ is perfect to give separation and definition to instruments. Slightly too much de-esser, which is noticeable in some places (eg. “the mother-less life”). Side stick is poking through too much- it's very prominent but we're not sure if it's the level or the EQ making it poke through so much. Backing vocals need to sound fuller, thicker and warmer. Good mix and has a good feel to it.
@unclesnuggles
Vocals sound a bit hard and male harmony is slightly too forward. Tom fills couldn't be easily heard. The drums all sound like they have the same top end EQ applied, so we're missing the actual tone of each drum and only hearing the “impact” sound. Good piano sound. Need to hear more acoustic guitar. Bass riffs being lost. Vocal sounds weirdly out of time at 1:10- “this is the life”- was that shifted? Could have possibly sung that line out of time but it doesn't sound like the correct timing to me. Overall, this is a good mix.
@asiohead
Sounds like quite a dry mix overall- more could be done with reverbs and/or delays. Too much de-esser on vocals. Lead vocal too far forward, especially at the end on the final “robot baby” lines. It needs to sit just slightly over the other voices. Kit sounds a bit unbalanced- cymbals are too quiet in comparison to the rest of the kit. The kit generally is a tiny bit too far forward. Nice balance of vocals in the humming section. This mix does feel like it has “space” to breathe.
Ladies and gentlemen, let us kick off Mix Round 2, which will end on Tuesday, 23-JUL-2024 23:59 UTC+2/CEST
As of this moment, that is 5 days (plus the hours since @Arnwyn's update). All Mix Round 2 participants will be sent a reminder via mail shortly.
There is a GLOBAL COUNTDOWN available to check for deadlines.
Just follow this link: Global Countdown (on homepage)
The following 15 participants go into Round 2 (alphabetical order), with "Wild Cards" being pointed out (if present this month).
(all Mix Round 2 participants should have been pinged, all participants will also get a reminder via the new newsletter engine)
All Wild Card users are not only asked to apply the requested changes, but also to fix what they had at fault with Mix Round 1.
Please use the following filename template:
MC098__Arnwyn__Robot_Baby__ForumUsername_R2.wav
The feedback to the productions can be found here: Please see post #224 for individual feedback.
If you are unsure what to do exactly with your mix, reach out to the song provider and engage in a conversation here on the forum.
And please keep the Rules and Guidelines (post #6) in mind regarding submitting your entry. Please do pay attention to detail. (yes, please also check the song length of your entry!)
For those who didn't make it into the second round, I'm happy to do a "I'll Review Yours If You Review Mine". I was thinking of something like picking out three positive aspects of the mix, and three areas that could be improved.
PM me if you're interested.
Cheers!
Last edited by cpsmusic on Fri Jul 19, 2024 07:27 CEST, edited 1 time in total.
Congratulations to everyone who qualifies for the 2nd round. It will be a pleasure for me if someone takes the time to hear and write a few words about my mix too.
@Arnwyn Thank you Rebecca and Dave for your very detailed feedback and explanation of things from your point of view. It was a pleasure to have the opportunity to explore your track in such depth and because of what you have written i fully understand your decisions in regards to the final 15.
Good luck to all of the final 15 participants. I look forward to hearing the results.
A little message to let you know we did take notes as we were listening to all of the mixes and we do have feedback for everybody. We'll get round to posting it next week. We just need to get the other side of Saturday as we have a busy one, then we can focus again on the mix challenge. We will respond asap to any urgent questions/comments relating to Round 2 and feedback for the remaining mixes will follow over the next week. Hope this helps! This is a really supportive forum you have here and it's a great project to be involved with. Thanks so much!
First, @Arnwyn Thank you for the opportunity to mix these tracks and for the huge effort that is done to listen to all the mixes.
Congratulations to all that make it into the next round.
@Arnwyn Interesting to read you comments in the post you were announcing the 15. It was one statement I disagree on though, "The piano was, and always is, recorded in stereo and so there is never any need to pan it.". To me, the use of the word "never" can be terrible wrong, "often" would be a better word. If you eg. have a guitar and a piano that have some sort of dialogue, I would move them opposite of each other if that suits the song. Since the piano is a stereo track, depending on how it's recorded, ordennary panning can reduce the quality of the sound of the instrument. I therefore use the term "move" and a technique to place it left or right so I preserve the quality and balance of the stereo sound.
So, I'm looking forward to your comments on all mixes. Very nice of you to do that. To me these competitions are about practising and learning and making each other better. The "winners" mostly have some experience and get a lot of feedback and critique during the competition. Giving feedback to those who didn't make it into the top 15 is all about giving those who maybe need it most a lift. After listening to most of the 15 going to the next round, I must also say that some are good ones, but there's also some that I do not understand why was chosen. Therefore it will be interesting to see how this evolve and reading the upcoming comments.
@cpsmusic and @kombainera I'll try to listen to your songs over the weekend to see if I have anything to comment on.
@BenjiRage Congratulations, now you got your opertunity to do it over again. Looking forward to listening. Keep up the good work.
Personally, I found the bass at the end had a little issue with noisy bits at the end, but I just put an instance of Klevgrand’s Brusfri on it and all that noise went away nicely. Was this the only spot where it could have presented a problem?
