Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

chris wollard wrote:

Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal,

OK. I was dumb and listened with the volume setting unchanged from last
time I listened to something on this computer. Fortunately the master
switch for the power amps was nearby. It was operated in about 0.6
seconds.

It is obnoxious, loud crap.

What gets to so slamming a critique from me is that it could actually
have been very well sounding if you had mixed it as it told you to mix
it rather than force it into a meter banging shape that might have
worked with VU meters with a 15 dB lead to tape saturation.

I need to know. Thanks.

Whether dynamic range needs to be adapted to the listening situation is
a different issue, but you have relied on limiting to make your mix work
in a semiautomatic way that still drowns vox out and that does not
constitute mixing, it constitutes squashing. Based on the average level
and based on the look of the curveform you have used at least 10 dB of
limiting that you probably did not even need to use.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

Back to the drawing board, the recording appears to be OK, the music
appears to be kinda OK - not my preferred genre, but kinda OK anyway,
you just need to mix it instead of squashing it. See also
alt.music.4-track, someone recently provided a very well sounding
example of how to diy your own mix. Some points could be made, and Arny
made them, but you could learn a lot from listening to it if it still is
available.


Kind regards

Peter Larsen


--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

"chris wollard" wrote in message


Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

I presume the goal is ear damage, ASAP. Communication of artistic values
seems to be nowhere on the horizon.

The intro is twice too long.

Loud followed by more loud, followed by more loud... I'm sure you're proud
of your compressor farm.

The vocal is almost totally buried for the first third. Yoo bad, the voice
isn't all that bad. No emotion in the singing, except maybe a
general-purpose whine.

No bass. Totally unnatural, electronic sound.

Cymbals sound like they are being played with brushes made of glass.

I'm obviously the wrong guy to ask!

I'm gonna give you some positive feedback also.


The guitar tone was OK, but they feel unnatural, especially the one panned
right.
The singer's voice was OK, but the vocal track was buried in the mix even
though you kept it in the center; there seems to be a hole in the middle of
the mix and the guitars dominate too much.

The bass was weak.
Bass drum felt a little flabby, and the bass guitar sounded like it was
recorded DI(?) but not mixed properly.

Drums were quite bad generally.

But I see where you're getting at. The main problem was that you're trying
to get this skater-punkrock -thing going, and you try to achieve it by
compressing and limiting, and with them it can be achieved, but remember
that by overlimiting you can't just bypass the whole mixing process.
It was trying to be loud but it ended up sounding a little weak and that's a
bad thing..
Listen some records mixed by Andy Wallace or Randy Staub and you know what
I'm talking about.

Good luck, keep on improving your skills!

I'm gunna agree with this post....especially on these points:

No bass (meaning, more bass EQ, not levels)
Loud, loud loud....kill some of the compression or just the dB's. Also, take
some of that twang off the guitar....this whole song has kind of an
obnoxious tone, it needs to be leveled out.

Cymbals ound fine to me for this type of music.

I think by it's very nature this music is pretty loud and obnoxious,
in-yer-face so that might be some of the problem...but i would really
recommend redoing the EQ, add some dynamic range instead of loud chorus,
loud verse, loud bridge + loud chorus, verse, bridge, etc.... and trying to
smooth out some of that twang

I'm not the best audio engineer myself but I know a good mix when I hear it.

Good luck!


--

Jonny Durango

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/7/ratcitymusic.htm

"The man said with a grin, that's not how you lose and I win!" - George
Clinton (The Parliamentary Funkadelic)


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"chris wollard" wrote in message


Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

I presume the goal is ear damage, ASAP. Communication of artistic values
seems to be nowhere on the horizon.

The intro is twice too long.

Loud followed by more loud, followed by more loud... I'm sure you're proud
of your compressor farm.

The vocal is almost totally buried for the first third. Yoo bad, the voice
isn't all that bad. No emotion in the singing, except maybe a
general-purpose whine.

No bass. Totally unnatural, electronic sound.

Cymbals sound like they are being played with brushes made of glass.

I'm obviously the wrong guy to ask!

"chris wollard" wrote in message
...
Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3


I just listened to about a minute and on low volume (due to the OP's
warnings and it's late here) on my PC speakers. The vocals are really
buried. Plus I think I'm hearing autotune artifacts. If not, he's got some
weird stuff going on in his voice. Intro a little too long. If this had been
a "commercial" song I wouldn't have hung around for the lyrics. A little to
flat (squashed) for me but I guess that's what the kids today like.
Otherwise (the tracks themselves) were fine. What style or market is this
for? The music sounds prog-rock (Rush specifically) but the vocal seems a
little out of place.

Chris I think your going for the mars volta / at the drive in thing..


If so I think you did a pretty good job.. I do think it needs a little more
dynamics. I can really hear it pumping.. The guitars are pretty cool for
that syle of music maybe a little more body in the chours. The bass was a
little farty.. I think it could be a bit deeper.. the drums could be more
in your face ala "at the drive in" Over all i think you did a good job.. I
think the people that where real harsh on you maybe are not so familar with
the side of the industry your trying to represent.. Oh yea the vox where
burried but not all the time only in certin parts.

I think your in the right direction maybe a little more tweeking will get
you thier..

Regards

Leon



"chris wollard" wrote in message
...
Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

The guitar tone was OK, but they feel unnatural, especially the one panned
right.
The singer's voice was OK, but the vocal track was buried in the mix even
though you kept it in the center; there seems to be a hole in the middle
of
the mix and the guitars dominate too much.
The bass was weak.
Bass drum felt a little flabby, and the bass guitar sounded like it was
recorded DI(?) but not mixed properly.
Drums were quite bad generally.
But I see where you're getting at. The main problem was that you're trying
to get this skater-punkrock -thing going, and you try to achieve it by
compressing and limiting, and with them it can be achieved, but remember
that by overlimiting you can't just bypass the whole mixing process.
It was trying to be loud but it ended up sounding a little weak and that's
a
bad thing..
Listen some records mixed by Andy Wallace or Randy Staub and you know what
I'm talking about.
Good luck, keep on improving your skills!
--------------

I'd totally agree with this above review. Guitar is probably the strongest
thing, sonically and performance-wise. Chords sounds cool... but the
single-note parts could use a little more wetness.... just sound too dry.
Drums are sloppy, very "herky-jerky". Bass is low, but the bass playing
sounds pretty good. Hard to tell with the shaky drums. Vocal sounds
generally weak and too dry. I like the Rush influence, but if you're gonna
try to do that, the whole thing needs to be tighter... step one, the drums
need to be more solid. The guy is playing "off the grid", so to speak.
Lots of pulling and pushing. Perhaps the drummer should practice the tune
slowly to a metronome concentrating on trying to keep things "on the grid".
Work toward a more even steady solid feel. Then work up to speed little by
little, day by day. After a few weeks of serious practicing like this,
maybe the drummer will be ready to record the tune again. The drummer has
some cool ideas... just needs to work on the groove, needs to be more steady
and solid.

chris wollard wrote:
Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

I like the song and the style of music, so that makes it easier. I'm sure
you guys have been listening to Thirdeyeblind a lot, and I wouldn't mention
it if this mix didn't sound exactly like some of their songs (guitar
placement and sound, drumming style). Others have pointed out the main
flaws in the mix and I agree with most of it: keep the main vocal in focus,
it gets lost in many places (fighting with too much guitar), and in general
I think it sounds a bit thin, lacking lower mids. Also the song could do
with a better defined bass sound and maybe a bit less squashing on the
whole. That's also a matter of taste, this music can do with it IMO, and
afore mentioned group's album is even more squashed, so it's your call. I
don't care much for the solo bass thing around 2:30 much and after that the
vocal is way too soft too. All in all, I'd say pretty good, but can be great.

Luck, Arjan

--
----Real email: news then at then soundbyte then dot then nl----

What should I be using instead of limiting to get the level up?
Unfortunately, at this point I am confined to mixing and "mastering"
in the same room, on the same system, using the same plug-ins,
speakers, etc. I just want the overall level to be somewhat comparable
to commercial CD's, although I see now I might be going about that the
wrong way.

What gets to so slamming a critique from me is that it could actually
have been very well sounding if you had mixed it as it told you to mix
it rather than force it into a meter banging shape that might have
worked with VU meters with a 15 dB lead to tape saturation.

I need to know. Thanks.

Whether dynamic range needs to be adapted to the listening situation is
a different issue, but you have relied on limiting to make your mix work
in a semiautomatic way that still drowns vox out and that does not
constitute mixing, it constitutes squashing. Based on the average level
and based on the look of the curveform you have used at least 10 dB of
limiting that you probably did not even need to use.

"chris wollard" wrote in message
...
What should I be using instead of limiting to get the level up?
Unfortunately, at this point I am confined to mixing and "mastering"
in the same room, on the same system, using the same plug-ins,
speakers, etc. I just want the overall level to be somewhat comparable
to commercial CD's, although I see now I might be going about that the
wrong way.

I'll tell you. First, quit worry about the tracks and worry about the
music. Like Peter said, the song should be somewhat shouting at you what it
needs, but I assume that you've got the mix up too loud and can't hear what
it's saying.

Second, think and listen, not watch and listen. Quit watching the screen to
see all the peaks are at the same place and listen to what each instrument
is telling you where it feels like it should be. Don't bring the volume up
loud. Mix quietly, even with this genre of music. Have some space that
each instrument takes up rather than them all competing for the same space
at the same time. Instruments can move into and out of spaces that other
instruments are using, but not all at one time. With this method you can
bring up the drums and still hear everything well enough. George Massenberg
once said you can have one track down by 60 dB and still hear it in a mix,
so why should everything be at the top?

Third, keep your paws off the darned normalize function for each track, or
lay off the limiter because heavy limiting can bring it's own problems.
Bring your tracks up normally and see where they fit. Work with fitting in
one piece with another, then adding one more in and if it doesn't work,
start over with something else. There's a song in there somewhere but you
just haven't found it yet. What a lot of newer guys do is use things like
normalize as a METHOD, when, in fact, it's at some level just a fix for a
problem. So don't use it on everything. It's like compression in that one
would use compression (other than as an effect) for such things as getting a
bass player's playing to be more consistent in volume and therefore allowing
you to get a little tone out of the bass. Or a vocalist that moves all over
the place would become a little more centered. Again, these are for
problems within tracks. If the tracks are good in the first place, you
probably won't be needing a lot of fixes. Find out whether things need to
be fixed BEFORE you fix them.

Once you get a reasonable mix with space for each instrument, then start
looking at how to get it to a reasonable volume but not pegged at -.1 dB for
the entire song. You can have more than adequate volume even for this type
of recording with a average RMS level of maybe -15 to -10 dB and peaks being
limited to the -.1 dB, but you should see a swing in dynamics and still the
volume should be plenty. Again, do not normalize the damned thing as that
just kills all the other work you've done. Music is a living entity and it
shouldn't be screaming at you that you're killing it. And believe me, you
were killing it. If you didn't have it up so loud you'd have heard it! g

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio


What gets to so slamming a critique from me is that it could actually
have been very well sounding if you had mixed it as it told you to mix
it rather than force it into a meter banging shape that might have
worked with VU meters with a 15 dB lead to tape saturation.

I need to know. Thanks.

Whether dynamic range needs to be adapted to the listening situation is
a different issue, but you have relied on limiting to make your mix work
in a semiautomatic way that still drowns vox out and that does not
constitute mixing, it constitutes squashing. Based on the average level
and based on the look of the curveform you have used at least 10 dB of
limiting that you probably did not even need to use.

I usually have a different opinion than everyone else.
I think this song and this style of music should be as loud as possible. The
people who buy this type of music have the attitude "louder is better" So i
dont think you squashed it too much though your compressor types and settings
may not have been ideal.
The mix is fine for the music. Anyone who tells you to remix it is missing
the bigger picture. The bigger picture being the band didn't play well
together. The timing on the drums relative to the other instruments is a
weekness than no amount of mixing can cure.

Holy ba-jesus! I had to pickup my grado's from the other side of the
room. I like the song. But like everyone else was saying there's like
no dynamics at all. Even the bass solo was loud. It's ok to be quiet
sometimes. It's makes people listen a little more. I know rare these
days huh. Yes the vox were pretty burried in the mix. I know a lot of
people that do this when they start out. They try to get it fit in and
it ends up to quiet. You'll get it eventually. The bass sounds very
DI'ed would probably benefit from some dirt off an Ampeg bass amp.
Just a little dirt in there, mix to taste. I think the drum cymbols
sounded alright. You totally have the LA sound going on. First thing I
thought of was At the drive in and the Atari's, Blink 182, etc...
Traditionally they limit everything too. I say shake things up a
bit... You may need to sit down for what I'm about to say.... Try it
with out compression or limiting first. See what you get. Just use EQ
and mix the crap out of it. Use compression and limiting as last
resort. I think you have something. I would recommend one thing tho.
I'd try mixing out of the box as much as possible. The cute like
diagrams are just that. Cute. Listen with your ears not your eyes.
Maybe invest in a good mixer with great EQ. I find just turning knobs
instead of a mouse helps out dramatically. YMMV.

garrett


chris wollard wrote in message . ..
Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

"chris wollard" wrote in message
...
Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

OK, here we go. Don't kisten to the guys about the overcompression. This
style of music is not meant to have dynamics. It is a good punk-pop tune and
not Rush, like some people have suggested (they should get a radio and take
it off the classic rock station!) Vocal could be stonger, drums are sloppy.
Kick and snare could use some definition. The guitars need a little bit,
too. Double them, but when you record the tracks, each guitar part should
have a really distorted track and a little bit cleaner track (not totally
clean!, just less distortion) doubling it. You can move these tracks around
for definition. It's the only way to hear articulation from these tracks at
these tempos and this loudness. Don't mix the doubled tracks 50/50 with each
other, only use the cleaner track fot articulation. Make sure that these
tracks are dead on note for note with each other and tight timing-wise. When
you are going to squash the hell out of it, the mix is real critical.
Otherwise, you will hear complaints about it being over-compressed. Get it
right and they will ask you where it was mastered. Some guys just don't get
it...

"CalMusic" wrote in message
...

The mix is fine for the music. Anyone who tells you to remix it is
missing
the bigger picture. The bigger picture being the band didn't play well
together. The timing on the drums relative to the other instruments is a
weekness than no amount of mixing can cure.

True, however, as I'm a person who really likes Andy Wallace's mixes(who
mixes just about every rock record nowadays!)
, I can honestly say that there was more flaws in it than just the drum
timing..

It is a good punk-pop tune and not Rush, like some people have suggested
(they should get a radio and take it off the classic rock station!)
--------------------

Ok, fine, but who do you think all these newer bands on modern radio are
trying to emulatate anyway (at least in some cases)? Rush has had a
profound influence on modern music even though many do not realize it. This
MP3 tune in question no doubt has a lot of direct Rush influence. If other
popular modern rock tunes also have these same elements, then they are just
borrowing from Rush as well. Hey, I think it's great... if you are going to
borrow elements and/or a style, might as well borrow from a great band.

"chris wollard" wrote in message
...
Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

Commenting on the other comments - I think it's true that this kind of music
is supposed to be in your face, and I can understand the extreme
compression, which is still not as extreme as what we hear on the radio
everyday. Overall I like it. Despite the complaints you can hear that was a
lot of attention was given to the details of producing it to this point. I
think there's also a de-facto standard that if you've got a good start
you're going to be held to higher standard in the end. I think I'm the
person that Peter was referring to with the mixes up on alt.music.4-track
(http://www.SouthernMusician.com/KnockOffs), and while I'm grateful for the
kind words
and good advice given I also think I got a little bit of a pass - given the
obvious flaws that I was working with in the original tracks.

All that said, let me comment on what I've learned as someone who is very
new to producing tunes on the home PC. I think the big thing that's missing
is a sense of coherency in the "mood" or "feeling" of the tune. You have to
think about it from the listener's viewpoint, you want the music to make a
focused impressions on the listener, and all of the obviously good or bad
technical details will distract the listener. You want them to be absorbed
with listening to the song, not listening to the recording. It's like
watching a movie, if you find yourself thinking about the special effects or
the photography then the director has failed to keep you in the story. Every
track has to work together to create the effect, even if the treatment of
individual tracks goes against the grain of what you may have heard or think
you know.

And speaking of mood, no offense to your drummer but he's not helping.
Speaking as a drummer for 30 years I think he's playing some nice stuff, but
he's missing the mood and the groove of the song. The half-beat rests before
the off-beat kicks do help to define the kick, but at the cost of the
movement of the song. It's not that his timing is that bad, I've heard a lot
worse, but it sounds like he's thinking very hard about his part instead of
thinking about the flow of the song. Nothing, absolutely nothing, can make a
song flow or groove if the drum track doesn't provide the foundation for it.
I can tell you from personal experience that even the best band will sound
like crap if the drummer can't lay it down. I'll admit that my own drum
parts are far from stellar performances, but they work because they fit.

Just for yucks take a listen to this:
http://www.southernmusician.com/Knoc...0is%20Gone.mp3

This was just a room mic set up at the first practice for our band, and
obviously a very different style of music, but you can hear how the bass
player and I have our heads deep into the groove.

Sorry for rambling, and please take it for what it's worth.

Sean

I just want to thank everyone who listened and gave me advice. I've
already gone back and taken the edge off the limiting and did some
things to get the bass a little tighter and stronger. Again, thanks.
It's great to have such a wealth of experienced people here that are
willing to listen advise.

Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3

"WideGlide" wrote in message
t...
It is a good punk-pop tune and not Rush, like some people have
suggested
(they should get a radio and take it off the classic rock station!)
--------------------

Ok, fine, but who do you think all these newer bands on modern radio are
trying to emulatate anyway (at least in some cases)?

Not Rush in most cases.

Rush has had a
profound influence on modern music even though many do not realize it.
This
MP3 tune in question no doubt has a lot of direct Rush influence. If
other
popular modern rock tunes also have these same elements, then they are
just
borrowing from Rush as well. Hey, I think it's great... if you are going
to
borrow elements and/or a style, might as well borrow from a great band.

I like Rush, but punk-pop (or whatever you're gonna call it), don't have
anything to do with it.

Arjan P wrote:

I like the song and the style of music, so that makes it easier.

I can dig what he is aiming at, I have heard punk way back when punk was
punk and had just soo much energy and I have heard it live.

vocal is way too soft too. All in all, I'd say pretty good,
but can be great.

The components are as you say "pretty good" and it has good drive.

Luck, Arjan

--
----Real email: news then at then soundbyte then dot then nl----

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

Chris wollard wrote:

[omg, fixing top-post first ... ]

What gets to so slamming a critique from me is that it
could actually have been very well sounding if you had
mixed it as it told you to mix it rather than force it
into a meter banging shape that might have worked with
VU meters with a 15 dB lead to tape saturation.

What should I be using instead of limiting to get the level up?

There was a wording you didn't notice ... "mix it as it tells you to mix
it", first listen to it anew, on its own terms, as it is. Don't try
adding a lot of effects, whatever they may be. First get a static mix
using fader and panpot and nothing more. Just as if it was pa-mix back
when punk was young.

Your aim of having it comparable with "other releases" may or may not be
a relevant business necessity. Remember however that you can always
reduce dynamic range. What you should not be doing is that you should
not mix against a limiter as you appear to have done. The original
dynamics in this are not extreme, so first try to mix it without any
compression or limiting, and next try listening.

Of all ways of reducing dynamic range then "dumb limiting" is about the
most useless, somewhat depending on how many percent of the duration of
the limiter is active. Multiband limiting may not be less useless. You
should not, in my opinion, try to do what FM crapiostaztions will want
to do in advance, because they will still do it.

Unfortunately, at this point I am confined to mixing
and "mastering" in the same room, on the same system,
using the same plug-ins, speakers, etc.

This is very similar to a thread we had over in 4-track or home-studio
recently. Initial mix and initial stated aim was similar, comments too,
and after some debate it became obvious that the room the mix was mixed
in could be improved. Once bass traps was added and various other
adjustments undertaken, then agreement on a sonic balance for the
project in question was obtainable.

Your room possible does not have bass enough reproduced in the location
you listen in, I am confident that if you had been more sure of what you
were doing, then the bass in the mix had been better and louder.

I just want
the overall level to be somewhat comparable
to commercial CD's, although I see now I might be
going about that the wrong way.

You can always reduce dynamic range, but first get a mix that just
works. This is the music that you are mixing now, not something else,
not all the other CD's. I can't promise that it will work, but what I
would do with this would be to first aim for a purist mix, in case it
does it, and if it doesn't "do it", then define what problems it has and
solve them.

By the definition that there is a vocalist present this music
constitutes A song. Logically putting the vox "up there, center front"
with a 120 Hz highpass and a hint of space around it and then building
the mix around it could make sense. Be careful with your monitor level,
if it is too loud, then you will make all kinds of errors of judgement
because stuff that actually is to weak will be too audible.

YMMV, please note that it is too late local time for a second listen
.....



I need to know. Thanks.

Whether dynamic range needs to be adapted to the listening situation is
a different issue, but you have relied on limiting to make your mix work
in a semiautomatic way that still drowns vox out and that does not
constitute mixing, it constitutes squashing. Based on the average level
and based on the look of the curveform you have used at least 10 dB of
limiting that you probably did not even need to use.


--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

Tommi wrote:

True, however, as I'm a person who really likes Andy Wallace's mixes(who
mixes just about every rock record nowadays!)
, I can honestly say that there was more flaws in it than just the drum
timing..

Punk is supposed to be flawed.

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

"Peter Larsen" wrote in message
...
Tommi wrote:

True, however, as I'm a person who really likes Andy Wallace's mixes(who
mixes just about every rock record nowadays!)
, I can honestly say that there was more flaws in it than just the drum
timing..

Punk is supposed to be flawed.

Oh, maybe he should've recorded it with a single microphone in the middle of
a room then..

"Tommi" wrote in message
...

"Peter Larsen" wrote in message
...
Tommi wrote:

True, however, as I'm a person who really likes Andy Wallace's
mixes(who
mixes just about every rock record nowadays!)
, I can honestly say that there was more flaws in it than just the
drum
timing..

Punk is supposed to be flawed.

Oh, maybe he should've recorded it with a single microphone in the middle
of
a room then..

If it's a good room... :-)

chris wollard wrote in message . ..
Anyone who has the time, can you listen to this mix and tell me what
needs to be done? Seriously, be brutal, I need to know. Thanks.

http://www2.outerscape.net/~justin/e...ewillcome3.mp3


Chris,

OK, some thoughts.

First off, the fill guitar panned hard right is WAY to busy to be
there. It totally distracts from the lead vocal (which you can't hear
anyway). The rhythm guitar is relegated to the left. So right out of
the gate, you have this little fill guitar on one side, and a big
rhythm guitar on the left. That rhythm guitar should be spread out,
and the little fill guy put somewhere else....anywhere but hard right.

The vocals are too far back.

The drums sound like the only thing you are using is a room mike.

The actual performance is iffy.....here and there the vocals and track
are not locked up and in this kind of stuff they have to be.

I know this is an mp3 but everything sounds, overall, dull, and the
guitars sound direct.

Forget the criticism about compression, I don't find it overly
compressed (for this stuff) at all.
It's not compression that is the problem here.

You have a number of things going on. There's no air in this at all.
Try some delays somewhere...anywhere....subtle, not in your face....

And definitely work on them there drums. The combination of the all
out room mic sound on them, coupled with the vocals being to soft, and
the irritatingly WAY too busy lead guitar on the right is sinking this
tune before it has a chance.

JMHO.

Romeo Rondeau wrote:

Punk is supposed to be flawed.

Oh, maybe he should've recorded it with a single
microphone in the middle of a room then..

If it's a good room... :-)

Recording also a stereo "total room ambience" track is not a bad idea,
no matter what the qualities of the room may be.

The danish group Gasolin has occasionally used very very crap rooms -
such as a large car garage as I know this, and I may be wrong, but that
is how it sounds - for drums "very ambiently" recorded.


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************