Well, here is some of my work, as requested...
This first cut was a choir recording of a local church. I tracked the
drums, bass, piano, vocals, and 80-member choir. The other instruments
were tracked in Nashville. I mixed the project, and Hank from
Masterfonics mastered it:
http://www.quarternotestudio.com/audio/KFPHC_4.mp3
Here is that song without any vocals:
http://www.quarternotestudio.com/audio/KFPHC_4trk.mp3

On these next 2 cuts (my wife's group), the instruments were tracked
in Nashville. I recorded the vocals and mixed and mastered the cut:
http://www.quarternotestudio.com/audio/HSM_4.mp3
http://www.quarternotestudio.com/audio/HSM_9.mp3

This cut is a trio that was recorded with a soundtrack. I recorded the
vocals, mixed and mastered the cut:
http://www.quarternotestudio.com/audio/Terry_5.mp3

These recordings are "missing" something, to me-- except maybe the
last one (I was pretty pleased with it). They just don't have a
professional sound. PLEASE give me all the [constructive] criticism
you can!

[You can email responses to ]

Thanks,
PT

(n4vbh) wrote in message

[You can email responses to ]

I think you would get better opinions if everyone responded publicly.
That way you can have counter discussion that would encourage more
attention to detail. I think these recordings do require alot of
attention as they are quite good. IMHO...

I only listened to the first recording and was quite impressed.
Though you may be in a hypercritical listening mode you should give
your self some credit as I really enjoyed the quality of the recording
and mix. If I was to guess what is missing I would say it sounds like
the singers in the first example (especially the lead vox) were not
pushing from the diaphram to project. Now that is an assinine thing
to say as the the vocal performance was very nice. I'm just making a
stretch to say there wasn't much tension in the vocal delivery. You
have talented singers and it is a shame they couldn't be pushed to do
a little more. I'm used to hearing ALOT of vocal improv from the lead
vocal in a gospel recording.

I'm really not the go to guy here for opinions but I decided to post
in hopes others will listen to these recordings. The portion I
listened to was very inspiring. I loved how the sax was recorded.
Sounds very nice.

Thank you for keeping the sample sizes small so I could download it
quick (even with my rural Iowa connection).

Overall many compliments.

I'm very curious at what you used to acheive this recording. You can
email me if your shy about the public internet at: .

I'd download more but fortunately I have alot of projects needing
attention.

Back to work...

IR

n4vbh wrote:

These recordings are "missing" something ...

Most real life recordings are not perfect, doing something may be
relevant.

professional sound. PLEASE give me all the [constructive]
criticism you can!

[You can email responses to ]

If you want my comments via email, then it is USD 20 pr. hour for my
time. I think it is a real bargain.

If comments in the newsgroup are acceptable then I will probably listen
and perhaps comment and I have occasionally made a fixed mp3 available
to illustrate points made.

What do you want?

PT


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

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

"n4vbh" wrote in message
om...

These recordings are "missing" something, to me-- except maybe the
last one (I was pretty pleased with it). They just don't have a
professional sound. PLEASE give me all the [constructive] criticism
you can!

Finally got around to listening and I find nothing wrong with your efforts
at all.

About the only criticism I could offer is that perhaps you're trying to
force something onto the songs, but a song will go where it wants to pretty
much no matter how hard you try. They have punch, they have
intelligibility, balance and a nice stereo image. I hear no smearing, no
loss or overcompensation for any EQ problems. I doubt seriously if I could
have mixed it any differently, and to be honest, perhaps I wouldn't have
mixed it as well.

And I'm listening on the same system I mix on, so other than the fact that
it's an MP3, at least it's at 256kbps so it somewhat represents the song
well. 320 might be a tad better, but who cares.

How long have you been living with the mixes?

Oh, btw, normally one doesn't come to a public forum and then ask for hard
evaluations via email. Let us all pile on! g

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

Sorry... I didn't mean to offend anyone by posting my email. I
thought some responders may not want their comments posted for all to
see. I agree that we can all learn from all posting to this group.

BTW, Thanks for all the compliments!!!

PT

"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message...
"n4vbh" wrote in message
om...

These recordings are "missing" something, to me-- except maybe the
last one (I was pretty pleased with it). They just don't have a
professional sound. PLEASE give me all the [constructive] criticism
you can!

Finally got around to listening and I find nothing wrong with your efforts
at all.

About the only criticism I could offer is that perhaps you're trying to
force something onto the songs, but a song will go where it wants to pretty
much no matter how hard you try. They have punch, they have
intelligibility, balance and a nice stereo image. I hear no smearing, no
loss or overcompensation for any EQ problems. I doubt seriously if I could
have mixed it any differently, and to be honest, perhaps I wouldn't have
mixed it as well.

And I'm listening on the same system I mix on, so other than the fact that
it's an MP3, at least it's at 256kbps so it somewhat represents the song
well. 320 might be a tad better, but who cares.

How long have you been living with the mixes?

Oh, btw, normally one doesn't come to a public forum and then ask for hard
evaluations via email. Let us all pile on! g