Entourage Paul Tucci
EntourageForum Replies Created
-
Jeremy,
Probably best to refrain from sending this mix to mastering until after you check the MONO button!!
PT
-
No cacti (?) were harmed in taking of this photograph. It’s a found prop in the parking lot of the hotel.
PT
-
-
Dana,
That’s fucking brilliant. You managed to distill decades of music production down to an easily digestible nugget of high density inspiration. If your allegory doesn’t make a trade mag article or at the very least, the monthly highlights of MP, the world would be missing out. It’s that good.
The muse visiting me lately said … “Less is more,” … paused for a good long while ..
then continued with “and more is better.” I took that to more or less to mean don’t let grubby hands get at your (my) guitars and allow the sonic space that opens up as the crunchy fades to reveal the calm quiet behind the the aerial barrage delivered by ACE, your imaginary bombardier friend.
The quiet before the next explosive chord is either proof of the #1 rule in show biz, “Leave them wanting more.” or an effective terrorist psy-op leaving the listener aching for more incoming rounds. I believe the guitars got in your head. Fortunately, I know where my heart is.
Thanks
PT
-
-
Jesse, Jeremy, and Dana,
Thank you for listening and commenting. I probably should not have posted that work yet. It was nowhere near ready for public consumption as mentioned in my “raw as a cowboy in the saddle ” preface. Perhaps that disclaimer wasn’t strong enough. I’m good with words, but prefer the subtle approach.
As you could imagine, I found it difficult to dive back into this project without feeling some discomfort. (You see, subtle)
So Jesse, I’m so glad you metaphorically, saw the window and then took the invitation into my interpretation of the song. That’s a success.
Jeremy, yea man, wide 🤘crunchy guitars!🤘
Dana, your suggestion to break the song down to its core and support that with the rest of the instruments flipped a synapse for me and I’m now aiming for the intensity with less bombast. Those flanged-distorto guitars are still there, and they seem even more country-death-metal dirgey because they no longer compete with the lead guitar lines. There’s a path in contrast to be mined in this song. The crunchy guitars against the mandolins, the heavy dirge feel without drums, though I have the idea to have my drummer play brushes on this but play like a half drunk Keith Richards speaks. You can’t understand a fucking word but he makes the point nonetheless. If the drummer stumbles around but bumps into the acoustic guitars occasionally, that may loosen the rigidity of the acoustics that really are the driver of time.
There’s an accapella intro now. It worked for Jay-Z.
And finally … not yet Jesse. I leave next week for my motorcycle trip in the southwest. That squished bug picture is from a previous trip to the Salton Sea.
PT
-
Jesse,
Finally, a category here at MIX PROTE-GEOPARDY that I can run the table on!
Let me get right to the point before I veer off on a tangent… What you’re hearing, if you have but one monitor, is by definition, mono. The musical sources mixed into your monitor mix buss is separate from what drives the two channel (or more) house speaker system. The panned stereo channel inputs feeding the house system can retain their stereo image but the channel inputs feeding your singular monitor speaker combine to one output signal. Even a stereo source, ie, your backing tracks, become mono when individually dialed into the monitor output buss. Chances are your mixer person du jour is putting equal level of both channels into the monitor buss thinking he or she is doing the right thing.
I’ve been taught a better way and have employed this technique successfully. Instinctively we know this every time we check a mix in mono. When all that luscious stereo spread sound field collapses down to mono, whatever is in the middle of the mix gets a bit louder. We have twice as much of that info in the newly created mono monitor mix now. Both the left signal and the right signal contain audio information about the middle that get added together. Science would say a +6dB change would occur to that middle signal compared to the signals that are hard panned. Those hard panned signals would not combine to a greater than original level because they exist in only one half of the sources to be combined. What I learned to do was combine the two signals, Left and Right, together BUT drop one of them by approximately 6dB. Yes, there’s a level loss to one sides’ content, but the resultant mono signal is far less different compared to an equal level addition that over emphasizes the typical middle panned content of kick, bass, and vocal. It works!
I wholeheartedly agree with Dana’s baller rider suggestion of having two wedges provided in a stereo configuration for you. I also agree with Three 6 Mafia when they said “It’s hard out here for a pimp!”
“I’ll take Rap Lyrics for $600 please Alex.”
-
Jeremy,
That offering was certainly just-for-fun but your “too pristine” comment struck a chord for me regarding reverb. Having fought the battle of mixing in reverberant, hostile, acoustic environments for so long trying to achieve the acoustic equivalent of photo realism that when I have the bone dry, highly intelligible possibility available, I lean into it.
Perhaps I should make friends with impressionism.
I was off grid for a solid month and see you have a new song up. I’ll give a listen as i catch up on things and especially my lawn.
PT
-
Jesse,
Yes, you have could go harder on the de squeak and still retain all the delicacy of your guitar playing. I would however, avoid de-squeaking the birds. I love the resonant low end that you captured. It adds a second deeper level to the calming and meditative intent of the piece.
Definitely yes to your feathered friends exiting stage right into the reverb.
Well executed!
PT
-
Yea man, attached is the URL to the tool I used though this free version is not frequency sensitive as is the paid version. First one is always free….
PT
https://www.izotope.com/en/products/ozone-imager.html
-
Jesse,
You’re quite welcome. I had a further thought this morning regarding the middle content build up. I would guess that a Mid-Side process would do the trick more elegantly. Process the stereo signal and drop the overall level of the Middle by 6 dB and leave the Side untouched. Voila.
I have a question for you also. Does my gig tomorrow qualify as baller level? MP3 playback for some aspiring dancers who years ago were pooping in their pants. I didn’t think so either. 🙂
PT
-
-
-
Patrick.
Below are the audio file and a screenshot of the EQ applied to the track. As you listen to the before and after, note the overall tone of the piano. Losing the low mid muck and adding some clarity changes everything. Drastically. The clarity and a sense of openess add happy.
And you thought it was just an EQ tool!
Narrowing the stereo spread to a realistic width as presented here would allow you to place it in a discrete spot within an ensemble setting if that is the vision, or at the very least, prevent the piano from slovenly occupying the entire sonic width.
You a Star Wars fan? Remember that scene when Princess Leia was held captive by Jabba the Hut? Yea, you got the picture?
Use the force for good.
PT
