Vote On It....

Robin Ball

I recorded a track late last year. It was mixed by a guy in Miami. I have had a crack at it myself!

I'd love if some lads from boards cast an ear over it and had a vote on which they liked better!

Head on over to http://www.fundamentalstudios.ie/mix.html to vote.

Any comments very welcome.... no need to be kind!

MilanPan!c

Robin Ball wrote: »

I recorded a track late last year. It was mixed by a guy in Miami. I have had a crack at it myself!

I'd love if some lads from boards cast an ear over it and had a vote on which they liked better!

Head on over to http://www.fundamentalstudios.ie/mix.html to vote.

Any comments very welcome.... no need to be kind!

I did this, you should too... It's fun and interesting.

trackmixstudio

You and Kopek should get a room:D
Great guys. Recorded them many times.

For me Mix B is far better.
Rounder bottom end and more solid low mids and smoother highs.

In Mix A you can hear the bus compression swallowing the vocals and the vocals are also over compressed giving them a "lispy" character. The cymbals sound harsher and the guitars are a bit raspy at (probably) 4-5K.

You can hear the bass getting slightly sidechain compressed by the kick in Mix B which is giving the kick real punch.

Both are very good but it's B for me without question.

Six bucks and my left nut says Mix B is TLA

i57dwun4yb1pt8

i like em both , b to me appears like it would work on many systems , B sounds a bit thicker, and might come across a touch boomy .

id like the toms of A to be in b

B is clearer , more space between stuff,

A sounds a bit bloated.

vocals are clearer ( higher level ) in b and instrument presence is clearer in b
also the drums and bass kick along a touch punchier in B

i prefer the opening vibe of a than b tho

jiltloop

I'm no expert but I prefer B, I didn't even notice the organ in A until I heard it in B and listened back to A. I think the elements are clearer in B.
On a side note, Danny Jordan is seriously talented. I remember going to the early Kopek gigs in Eamonn Dorans with the rest of the Ashbourne crew, they were always good nights and Danny's voice and frontmanship always blew me away even though I was only interested in electronic music back then.

dav nagle

DaDumTish wrote: »

i like em both , b to me appears like it would work on many systems , B sounds a bit thicker, and might come across a touch boomy .

id like the toms of A to be in b

B is clearer , more space between stuff,

A sounds a bit bloated.

vocals are clearer ( higher level ) in b and instrument presence is clearer in b
also the drums and bass kick along a touch punchier in B

i prefer the opening vibe of a than b tho

I agree with the above, spot on.

Rockshamrover

It's another B from me.

It just sounds better/clearer.

Robin Ball

Hey lads,

thanks for the votes, B seems to be the clear winner, which I expected.

For me B has more punch on the chorus and the spacing is a step above my mix. Also Tom Lord Alge's mix has much better placement of reverb and delay.

It has been a good exercise for me anyway and I appreciate all of your time and comments!

Thanks a mill....!

PaulBrewer

I prefer A ....

Robin Ball

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I prefer A ....

This man is a genius!! :-)

jtsuited

I much much much much prefer B. I've mixed some stuff in a similar vein before and find it's a bit tricky to make the mix really coherent to the song. That's where I think mix A falls down. It seems a bit messy and defined in the wrong places.

In a pure sonic sense, they're both fine, but in a musical/feel sense, mix B really stands out to my ears.

Like them lads a lot...saw them years ago in dorans and they were pure ballsy rawk.
Good work.

jtsuited

i've come up with the perfect description for that track actually. It's the bastard son of Muse and At the Drive In.
Really impressed I must say......and this from someone who lost interest in this type of music a good while ago. thanks for posting!

JonathanAnon

Thought the vocals on A were a bit far back in the mix.. hard to make out the lyrics..

judas101

It's B for me. (at least on my system)

Side note: Prefer the old versions of these songs. Especially 'Cocaine Chest Pains'. The new choruses dont fit as well.

I listened to the album and alot of them are different from the versions I know from the live shows.

EDIT: Just saw the price difference.

A: Euro 475
B: US 10,600

:eek:

Dravokivich

A doesn't seem to be streaming for me... Listened to B for a bit...

Admit i'm quite the amatuer on this.. but don't really like the way the bass just jumps out from nowhere on the chorus...

PaulBrewer

Am I right in saying that B is mastered ? If so it's not a fair comparison really.

Robin Ball

B is mastered, you're right.... In that respect it may not be that fair but I think it's still a worthwhile exercise, and I enjoyed myself!! :-) Still appreciating all the comments.

Rockshamrover

Robin Ball wrote: »

B is mastered, you're right.... In that respect it may not be that fair but I think it's still a worthwhile exercise, and I enjoyed myself!! :-) Still appreciating all the comments.

In fairness the difference in price is massive but the difference in sound quality isn't.

Is the difference worth paying that much for?

If the record company is paying, yes.

If you are paying, no.

MilanPan!c

Rockshamrover wrote: »

In fairness the difference in price is massive but the difference in sound quality isn't.

Is the difference worth paying that much for?

If the record company is paying, yes.

If you are paying, no.

This is almost exactly my opinion.

Rockshamrover

MilanPan!c wrote: »

This is almost exactly my opinion.

Yeash, just think of all the lovely equipment you could buy with that ten thousand:D

Maybe that's being short sighted?

krd

I'm going to listen to it again. But I've only listened to it on my laptop so far.


Robin, what's the philosophy on mastering for various different speaker formats these days; laptop speakers, car stereos, radio, I-pod headphones, decent home speakers?

Robin Ball

krd wrote: »

I'm going to listen to it again. But I've only listened to it on my laptop so far.


Robin, what's the philosophy on mastering for various different speaker formats these days; laptop speakers, car stereos, radio, I-pod headphones, decent home speakers?

Well, when mastering the engineer is looking to get a good balance on all mediums but they do have very different characteristics. [I have heard that some mix engineers specifically mix for people in cars!]

Laptop speakers are pretty awful, they are usually quite heavy in the midrange due to their physical size.

Car stereos are pretty good, decent range.

Radio is squashed to hell to get the best transmission signal. Engineers have radio very much in mind when mastering.

iPod is a highly compressed signal, if you use anything other than earbuds you really hear the mp3 degradation.[M.Engineers are not bothered about this]

Home stereo is where the music comes through and that's what the mastering engineer is aiming for, it to sound great there and good on radio.

At the end of the day the artist/record company has the final say....

krd

Robin Ball wrote: »

Well, when mastering the engineer is looking to get a good balance on all mediums but they do have very different characteristics. [I have heard that some mix engineers specifically mix for people in cars!]

I really don't like that crunchy car stereo sound - it gets oppressive very quickly and only certain things sound good through it. (If you like listening saccharine R'n'B). I think the idea is when the car is being test driven the big "fresh" crunchy sound helps sell the car.

Laptop speakers are pretty awful, they are usually quite heavy in the midrange due to their physical size.

My laptop speakers have virtually nothing in the low range. An 808 kick vanishes. If I'm listening to a dance track, a whole bass lines can disappear. I've discovered with some of the music I've made - it might sound good through speakers, try it on a laptop it sounds like nothing.

Car stereos are pretty good, decent range.

Radio is squashed to hell to get the best transmission signal. Engineers have radio very much in mind when mastering.

I can't believe how much 2fm hammer the signal now days.

iPod is a highly compressed signal, if you use anything other than earbuds you really hear the mp3 degradation.[M.Engineers are not bothered about this]

They're the worst headphones. But the I-pod is really the listening instrument of the day. It's really absolutely the worst possible way to listen to music.

Home stereo is where the music comes through and that's what the mastering engineer is aiming for, it to sound great there and good on radio.

At the end of the day the artist/record company has the final say....

It's funny how things have come in a circle - from tinny AM stations - through better cheaper home speakers - to 21st century high technology tinny I-Pod head phones.

I think listening mediums have always influenced recorded music maybe even more than artistic choices - or artistic choices are limited by the listening medium. Phil Spectors/Tina Turner's River Deep supposedly bombed because the textures in the song turned into fizzy mush when played back through car stereos of the day. It sounds massive when played through decent speakers.