reaMIXed: The Reaper Mixing Contest - February 2021 - Gettin' Jiggy with It

[garanimals]

Originally Posted by Trogdor

I think maybe some of you here are taking this far more than what it is.

This is a mixing contest for the tonality of mixes. If there is a HR16 drum machine (I have no clue if that it is or not), then that is what is in the song. Same for the bag pipes. It is obvious that is what the artist intended of the music.

This is just a forum for each of us to judge our mixes among others to see where you are at when it comes to mixing. Hearing things like EQ, compression, reverb, use of delay, etc. decisions as well as using automation effectively to create a mix that has space, dynamics and can give an emotional feeling of the music to the listener.

This is not a contest for being a producer or to completely remove instruments from mixes for the entire duration of the song.

One take (#17) had totally changed the arrangement of the song by cutting and gluing. This is not what this contest is for. I listened to the complete track and though the arrangement was quite interesting, it completely took the song in a different direction. Almost sound like proggy folk. But I can only give score on the mix. The arrangement change is really not fare for this.

I'm not in this to learn from others arrangements.

I don't really agree with you...
I think if someone felt strong enough to re-arrange, it is within their purview as long as it doesn't violate the "rules"

If you didn't like the arrangement change, you can downvote just as the the producer/song writer would.

just my opinion, obviously.

[Funicello3]

Hi Glen, it's a great song, thanks for making the tracks available to us!

[StrumminSteve]

Thanks Glen for sharing...a very enjoyable song and nice of you to say hello and share the background. I hope you're future singing endeavors continue to shine... very enjoyable.

Steve
Md Eastern Shore
USA

[Trogdor]

Originally Posted by garanimals

I don't really agree with you...
I think if someone felt strong enough to re-arrange, it is within their purview as long as it doesn't violate the "rules"

If you didn't like the arrangement change, you can downvote just as the the producer/song writer would.

just my opinion, obviously.

Exactly, the song was re-arranged. Parts were moved around like the singing and such. The complete arrangement was changed. That does violate the rules.

The 3rd rule on the web site is:
No destructive editing to the files. No samples or glueing.

Again, doing so limits the ability to share and learn from each other's projects.

When you re-arrange the song, this means cutting the wave files and gluing them differently in different order. I see no point in that in this contest. This is not what we are learning here. If you want to join a re-mix contest where you can re-arrange the song, add samples, add your own talent to the mix, as well as use your own 3rd party plugins, then join the 'Produce Like A Pro' contests where that is allowed and encouraged.

[Djmajik]

Originally Posted by Trogdor

Exactly, the song was re-arranged. Parts were moved around like the singing and such. The complete arrangement was changed. That does violate the rules.

The 3rd rule on the web site is:
No destructive editing to the files. No samples or glueing.

Again, doing so limits the ability to share and learn from each other's projects.

When you re-arrange the song, this means cutting the wave files and gluing them differently in different order. I see no point in that in this contest. This is not what we are learning here. If you want to join a re-mix contest where you can re-arrange the song, add samples, add your own talent to the mix, as well as use your own 3rd party plugins, then join the 'Produce Like A Pro' contests where that is allowed and encouraged.

I agree with you on almost everything you are saying, however my views differ on what defines “destructive editing”. To me, a destructive edit is anything that would create a new audio file or alter the existing one. I moved a couple background vocal parts around here and there, but by cut, copying and pasting, and not gluing or rendering, it doesn’t alter the original file at all. You can still share the project with the same exact audio files on either end. I haven’t seen the project, but I’m imagining number 17 did something similar, but to the extreme. While the rearrangement wasn’t personally my cup of tea, I don’t think, without seeing the project file, any rules would be broken.

[Djmajik]

Check out the response from the contest creator when I asked about rearranging. I chose to heed the advice, and not rearrange very much. However, it specifically stated that rearranging is not forbidden.

Originally Posted by darjama

Stretch markers (Is that what you mean by warp points?) are fine, reaTune is fine. Just don't rerender files.

jsfx included in reaper don't need to be resent, only send jsfx that have been created elsewhere. And any impulse files used with reaVerb.

I would discourage too much rearrangement since what we are comparing in the end are the mixes. But it's not forbidden.

[garanimals]

Originally Posted by Trogdor

Exactly, the song was re-arranged. Parts were moved around like the singing and such. The complete arrangement was changed. That does violate the rules.

The 3rd rule on the web site is:
No destructive editing to the files. No samples or glueing.

Again, doing so limits the ability to share and learn from each other's projects.

When you re-arrange the song, this means cutting the wave files and gluing them differently in different order. I see no point in that in this contest. This is not what we are learning here. If you want to join a re-mix contest where you can re-arrange the song, add samples, add your own talent to the mix, as well as use your own 3rd party plugins, then join the 'Produce Like A Pro' contests where that is allowed and encouraged.

Actually... unless you glue the parts and create new sources, you can make arrangement changes without violating the rules.

What you want out of this contest and what I want may not be exactly the same.

[Djmajik]

Originally Posted by garanimals

Actually... unless you glue the parts and create new sources, you can make arrangement changes without violating the rules.

What you want out of this contest and what I want may not be exactly the same.

Indeed! This was something I learned from this contest. No matter how the voting comes out, that information is invaluable for the future of sharing projects! Really enjoying this process and growing as a reaper user.

[karbomusic]

This is not a contest for being a producer or to completely remove instruments from mixes for the entire duration of the song.

No dog in this fight but an opinion. I understand why someone would want to produce and mix but I've always seen these mixing contests as mixing contests, not production contests unless noted as such

IOW, it's usually harder and more of a learning experience to be able to excel with what you have been handed, including bad tracks and bad arrangements - until you are asked to produce. That's kind of what the real world is like. YMMV.

[eq1]

[I'm writing this stuff as your new replies get tacked-on to the thread, so my ^ reference below doesn't quite fit, and other things. I started this after Trogdor's last post.]


^ Right, you can move stuff around without destructive editing - you just cut and paste. That doesn't violate the rules.

Having said that, I did glue a couple things. I didn't have to, it just made it easier, faster, I was in a hurry. I figured that though it violated the rules, it didn't violate the spirit of them - one could open the project and hear most of the mix as rendered, it would be easy enough to see what I did for most of the mix, to learn from it, etc. - though I doubted and doubt anyone would care enough to do that. A few glued pieces wouldn't make much difference to that end. I didn't use any samples or external plug-ins/sounds, etc...

I'm not really sure why what I've done is such a big deal, at least to Trogdor, lesser so to Tiny T and PVinKC. I was hoping my effort would be... valued, but instead? It's like you guys don't want people to spend much time on this, to really give it their all. It's like you guys want to minimize the role of a 'mixing engineer'... Etal. I kind of get it, but kind of don't... It does seem like this probably isn't the right place for me, though.


Anyway, I came back here to add a couple thoughts about 'the issues', mixing, my mix, what I wrote yesterday, etc. I figured just in case anyone, at some point, cared, I should write my amended conclusion/s...

I think the main thing I've been concluding, that's different from what I said yesterday, is that I probably care much less about what 'the artist' wants or believes than I've led on. I gave a lot of lip-service to that idea yesterday, but I think I was probably goaded into that, in some subconscious, subtle way, by the tone of peoples' responses and their ideas, etc.

I care more about what I think is good and right than what 'the artist' thinks is good and right. If I honestly believe something, and I've given it a lot of consideration, and feel like I'm qualified to judge - I can be pretty stubborn about it. I can subordinate my beliefs/wishes/ideas to someone else's if I have to, but if I don't have to I won't.

I really do believe there are in some manner objective criteria on which to judge the quality of, basically, art. It's not all relative, it's not 'all good'. Take pitch, for example, or harmony, or timing: you can objectively evaluate when any of these are off. That's not to say every pitch, every harmony, every beat has to be 'perfect', rather, the artist/performer sets the standard early-on in the piece, from which everything thereafter unfolds and can be 'evaluated' against. Does the piece 'unfold' appropriately? Does it make 'sense' - sense in a rather vague, impressionistic, sensory way? All this applies to 'the mix' as well. The mix is barely separable from the music itself. Sure, it is in the working world, but in the real world you can hardly untangle the two. To do so would be missing the entire point of mixing...

I spent a lot of time and effort with this kind of stuff earlier in my life. I was really focused. And I never really stopped thinking about it, even through different, non-music related careers. I have a fairly well-developed aesthetic, 'aesthetic sensibility', particularly when it comes to music and mixes, but just for 'things' in general, too. Basically, I think I know what's good, and to some but a lesser degree, why. It's a whole 'nuther thing to actually be able to produce something that's 'good', though. Recognizing good and knowing why are good first steps.

I think that's why I probably harp on this or that 'garbage' or poor quality or whatever. You (we) inexperienced mixers need to develop your (our) aesthetic sense, and a good first step is recognizing when stuff's no good, stuff that doesn't carry its weight in the music... It doesn't mean you always have to nix a bunch of stuff or re-arrange, but in order to make a good mix you have to understand how each instrument, each part, contributes to the whole, what's its role? -- then you can mix accordingly, accentuating what matters most at what time, downplaying something else, etc. That's what mixing is all about. You can't do a good mix unless you have a rather penetrating, deep understanding of the song itself; strengths and weaknesses of the song/performance/the source material, etc. Without that you're just moving deck chairs, twiddling knobs...

I find it interesting that, in Glen's description of the process, he says he played guitar (and sang and wrote the song, of course), while the rest was more or less doled-out to others apparently around the world. It took me a while, but after some days working with the material I recognized that the one acoustic guitar had most of the 'mojo' (something I've been writing in some comments). I thought the song sounded like it started with voice and that acoustic guitar. It sounds like that's the case. I thought it should play a fairly prominent role - you need to hear that acoustic guitar most of the time if you want the song to sound right, if you want the song to be paced, and to unfold, right. In some of the mixes, you can barely hear that guitar. As a result the song feels weak, anemic, lacks movement/progression...

The song is heavily lyrical - it's a story, and you need to hear and understand the words rather clearly to understand the story. Having the words fairly front and center, and clear, is generally standard fare for music with words; it's even more important for this kind of song. A lot of the mixes don't present the vox in the bold, clear way that it needs to be to be intelligible. You definitely shouldn't have to strain to understand them, let alone to merely hear them...

Etc etc. The same kind of thing/questions could be said/asked of each instrument: what role does it play, when? How does it function in the song? What's the purpose of this or that note - is it a continuation of the vox melody, a harmony with another instrument, foreground or background, or, what? When you know these things you then know how to properly mix the piece, or rather, how it should be mixed - you then have to figure out how to get there...

For me, after I get some understanding of the song, then it's all about how to convey it. All of that is subjective, subject to interpretation, taste, habits, proclivities, cultural baggage, choices/decisions, skills and abilities, etc. An analysis/assessment of the song and source material seems pretty cut and dried, to a large extent not very subjective, in comparison... This is what can or should be critiqued. 'The song is [this]; your mix, however, treats it like [that]'. 'The acoustic guitar is the main instrument - but you've put it in the background most of the time.' 'The song is a story, with chronology - but you haven't made the words intelligible'. etc etc.


I should add some point to all this, the bottom line: The bottom line is, all this stuff I'm talking about seems superfluous to, say, Trogdor's conception of what mixing and this 'mix' contest are all about. But to me, it is the whole point. It's very Trump-esque, this polar opposite.

[eq1]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

...That's kind of what the real world is like. YMMV.

Kind of a funny little observation, but this phrase - "the real world" - I think is at the heart of all that's 'Trump-esque' in the current beef, the source of much of our apparent disagreement. What Karbo (and others earlier) call the "real world," I think I'm calling the "working world." What I'd call the "real world" is... not that working world. I'm approaching all this from an idealistic-like - what I'd call more real and true - framework, frame of mind, whatever. The way I see it, you strive for the ideal, for the way it should be, rather than settle for 'the real' - because 'the real' is a totally compromised, half-assed state of affairs. I have no patience for the quote "real world."

Actually, to put it another way, the ideal is more real than the real, as the real is totally compromised, basically looney. In order to get to what's real, which is actually the ideal, you need to transcend the real... In less cryptic terms, the working world has nothing to do with art, and science, but it intrudes on the manner by which we conduct our 'art' (and science), and ends up messing with our heads, basically. We end up thinking 'this is the way it is', merely because that's what pays the bills.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by eq1

Kind of a funny little observation, but this phrase - "the real world" - I think is at the heart of all that's 'Trump-esque' in the current beef, the source of much of our apparent disagreement. What Karbo (and others earlier) call the "real world," I think I'm calling the "working world." What I'd call the "real world" is... not that working world. I'm approaching all this from an idealistic-like - what I'd call more real and true - framework, frame of mind, whatever. The way I see it, you strive for the ideal, for the way it should be, rather than settle for 'the real' - because 'the real' is a totally compromised, half-assed state of affairs. I have no patience for the quote "real world."

Please refrain from statements that reference political figures and/or stretching simple phrases into something they are not.

All I'm saying is if you or anyone starts arranging/chopping/dicing a mix in the real working getting paid for pro work world... and you haven't been hired to produce and you haven't asked the bands permission or anything... you are in the wrong no matter how great your ideas are. That is the real world, like reality from personal real-world experience.

This doesn't need to be clouded by some huge philosophical meanderings by everyone, it's literally a matter of whether it's your job or not.

That may or may not have to do with the rules of this contest but a mixing contest should have some bounds that reflect that same reality IMHO.

[eq1]

^ I don't see that I stretched your use of "the real world" beyond anything you intended, in the original message or your follow-up. Everything you say in your follow-up supports exactly what I was saying.

[karbomusic]

Point taken, I may have misread the main idea.

I think the phrase thing I was complaining about was the 'Trump-esque' piece. I pretty much never want that phrase connected to me in any way whatsoever- and my explanations of basically "you can only do what you get paid to do" has nothing to so with that person-esque in any way that bears any mention in relation to mixing music in any way whatsoever.

That said, I understand your ideological point, it's the reason I got out of my quest to run a commercial studio years ago, I was well on my way but just don't have the patience to not have the control and 90% of my job being turd polishing and so on. Which also gives me great respect for those who can deal with that. But to be fair, this contest is likely preparing people for just that, hence my entry into the thread to begin with.

[eq1]

^ My apologies, Karbo. The only thing I've meant using "Txxxx-esque" is how polar opposites became ubiquitous under Txxxx's reign, basically how two social-political 'realities' must exist, "alternative facts," all that. In the current beef, I seem to see it one way, others seem to see it exactly the opposite way, and I'm suggesting that it probably has mostly to do with me having an alternate reality... In my head, they're 'corrupt', in theirs' I'm probably half-insane or something like that (if not totally), and they're the logical, realist ones.

Overall, though, I think this has gotten blown way out of proportion, in no small part due to my own...verbal voluminosity. I'm pissing all over someone elses' turf, so to speak. Underneath it all, I don't think anyone really cares what I do with a mix.

[karbomusic]

It's all good. My main opinion was it would be helpful for those learning here to have similar restrictions as they might have with a real mix job where the mixer isn't the producer - part of being a good mixer is working with having less than one wants and making that work but it is what it is so...

Take care!

[garanimals]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

No dog in this fight but an opinion. I understand why someone would want to produce and mix but I've always seen these mixing contests as mixing contests, not production contests unless noted as such

IOW, it's usually harder and more of a learning experience to be able to excel with what you have been handed, including bad tracks and bad arrangements - until you are asked to produce. That's kind of what the real world is like. YMMV.

I take your point here...although...

There is a point were artistic license becomes something else.
Its always hard to define that point, though.

I think this contest is self policing, if the group doesn't like the changes made to the song, they'll vote that way.

[Trogdor]

Originally Posted by garanimals

Actually... unless you glue the parts and create new sources, you can make arrangement changes without violating the rules.

What you want out of this contest and what I want may not be exactly the same.

Well someone did glue parts, so the rule is broken right there. Cut and dry.

[Trogdor]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

No dog in this fight but an opinion. I understand why someone would want to produce and mix but I've always seen these mixing contests as mixing contests, not production contests unless noted as such

IOW, it's usually harder and more of a learning experience to be able to excel with what you have been handed, including bad tracks and bad arrangements - until you are asked to produce. That's kind of what the real world is like. YMMV.

I totally agree karbomusic.

I don't know why this is so complicated to some here. It's not.

I really don't care if someone wants to change the arrangement and so forth to try to make the song better. I don't say that in a condescending way. The spirit of this contest is to mix the song. Not re-arrange and change things dramatically. We are not getting paid, there are no prizes!

Look EQ1, I totally understand your point and agree with much of it and all but it sounds like this contest may not be for you then I guess. I don't know it is up to you.

Really if I were to make this track better, I would be doing far more than what you have done. Sorry. It would have to include re-recording a number of tracks. The drums would need to be re-recorded, some of the backing vocals would need to be re-recorded. The lead vocal needs to be re-recorded. If you really want to get down to it. Also I would not be using all Reaper plugins as I would be using many 3rd party plugins that I purchased on my own as well as other software/hardware.

BUT, we can't do that in this contest and I totally get why and that is why I joined this a few months ago for this reason. If you really want to spend the time and push the limits of the contest for your own enjoyment, I'm not stopping you . In fact have fun at it!

Just letting you know that myself and probably some others are not judging you on your re-arranging/producing skills. I really don't care. If the mix sounds like @ss(issues with low end, too much compression, poor eq, balance issues, etc.), then I grade you as such.

I just don't want you to spend a lot of your time with the creative producer aspect of it when it could be spent mixing the track to sound as best it can be.

Like I said earlier, if you are into changing the arrangement/mixing/re-recording/use what ever DAW and plugins you want/etc., then join the Produce Like A Pro contests. They are very good and you will be competing against probably a thousand or so others that range from never mixed to professionals instead of 20 of us Reaper only users. I submitted mine in the last contest earlier this month. It was fun

[garanimals]

Originally Posted by Trogdor

Well someone did glue parts, so the rule is broken right there. Cut and dry.

Oh. I wasn't aware of that.

[StrumminSteve]

Whew....man...its gittin
.its gittin..its gitten kinda hectic..up in here... lol
Sorry.. couldn't resist. Artistic license all around... is always gonna make somebody frown. But i digress...I think y'all have found some common ground here.
We're all here to listen, learn and harvest what hopefully helps each on our journey to mixing enlightenment. Obviously if it's too much to take.. ya just ignore n change the channel. I always appreciate the diversity of the mixes.. but i always look out for similar moves taken by others near what I consider is correct and pleasant sounding to my ear
...to gain reference to get where i want and strive for sonically as efficiently as possible. Keep up the good stuff all... we're a very special n talented group of folks with cool, familiar passions..😉😎 Stay frosty friends

[LCM!]

To sum up my stance:
- this is Daryl's contest and we are free to join it. Or not.
- I take for granted that nobody glued. Because I did (another novice mistake) and our host gently asked me to fix it.
- I will rate what I take as "mixing techniques", regardless arrangements (assuming what somebody with my lacks could understand as "mixing techniques"). Although I honestly prefer that the song had not been changed so drastically.

And thanks to Glen. So special to know that the artist listened to our mixes. I would like to know which mixes fit the most with his conception of the song.

[Tiny Tortoise]

Very cool to have Glen pop in and say hello. It was a lot of fun working with your music. Certainly wouldn't mind hearing more in the future!

Now, when I brought up that pesky term "real-world", I did take care to place it in context - "real-world interaction with a client". I don't think any of us are minimising the role of the mixing engineer either. It necessarily covers a narrower scope than that of a producer, but I see its limited breadth as a trade for greater depth within that scope.

[nsmusic]

Hi all!

Just finished my voting round. I heard a lot of different mixes, different skill levels and approaches. I found it a bit hard to have a clear standard to evaluate all the mixes in the same way so I went with what I think is the best way to represent the artists goal with the song, which is to try to have a clear mix with all the elements present and balance them according to taste to reach the best musical result possible. A kind of "real world" approach as I heard speak here, which makes all the sense in a MIXING contest context.

I left some personal notes on all mixes, some suggestions, and I'm looking forward to discuss them with anyone interested so we can improve our mixing skills together!

[StrumminSteve]

Originally Posted by nsmusic

Hi all!

Just finished my voting round. I heard a lot of different mixes, different skill levels and approaches. I found it a bit hard to have a clear standard to evaluate all the mixes in the same way so I went with what I think is the best way to represent the artists goal with the song, which is to try to have a clear mix with all the elements present and balance them according to taste to reach the best musical result possible. A kind of "real world" approach as I heard speak here, which makes all the sense in a MIXING contest context.

I left some personal notes on all mixes, some suggestions, and I'm looking forward to discuss them with anyone interested so we can improve our mixing skills together!

Summed up very nicely...😎....i look forward to feedback. Hope ya fared well.

[eq1]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate the feedback...

Originally Posted by Trogdor

I just don't want you to spend a lot of your time with the creative producer aspect of it when it could be spent mixing the track to sound as best it can be.

Point taken, same goes for other points you made. I really didn't intend to change things as much as I did, but it just snow-balled... The main thing I didn't like, that started 'it all', was probably the quick verse chorus verse chorus - it just didn't build-up to the rockus bridge like it should, the second verse at least needed to be longer. I thought I could just double that, with easy part edits, such as by repeating the first verse, but one thing led to another...

I think I really am more into this stuff from what you all are calling the "producer" side. I've always done everything, from writing the songs to tracking to mixing, and probably very little of the actual 'mixing'; mixing was something that happened along the way, while writing the songs, for instance. I started as an electronic artist, so it just kind of goes naturally with that genre. I thought, or figured, I could use the contest to improve upon whatever skills I needed to improve - and that means pretty much every possible aspect of using Reaper.

[RiverSessions]

Originally Posted by LCM!

To sum up my stance:
- this is Daryl's contest and we are free to join it. Or not.
- I take for granted that nobody glued. Because I did (another novice mistake) and our host gently asked me to fix it.
- I will rate what I take as "mixing techniques", regardless arrangements (assuming what somebody with my lacks could understand as "mixing techniques"). Although I honestly prefer that the song had not been changed so drastically.

And thanks to Glen. So special to know that the artist listened to our mixes. I would like to know which mixes fit the most with his conception of the song.

I actually really enjoyed all the mixes for different reasons. I'm also learning as well so to me this is just cool all round. I love that folks have analyzed the lyrics and the story and how the music either fits or doesn't fit within that perspective. There have been many great points you have all mentioned which have crossed our mind throughout the writing and recording process as well. When we wrote the song it was just me with an acoustic guitar and our goal was to have a well lyrically written song with a chord progression and melody that fit the theme. Somewhere throughout the process it was decided to speed it up and add a few more instruments to gain a bit of energy. I can appreciate that could be a recipe for disaster. What you risk there is to lose the point of what you were trying to make in telling a story about a young sailor on his maiden voyage who unfortunately doesn't make it back home. That story is not meant to have energy. With that said this is the beauty about learning through the process. Some of the mixes that have caught my ear were the ones who created a bit of a darker mix to try and capture more of the story and less of the energy. A few of you were able to really capture that and still use all the tracks so well done for that. With that said I can appreciate why some of you decided to remove tracks and/or change the arrangement as we struggled with that throughout the process as well. Overall I'm hoping that no one gets disqualified. I feel everyone here had the right intensions on getting the best out of the song. Best of luck and again I appreciate you all for taking the time. This has just been an awesome experience. Cheers!

[StrumminSteve]

Originally Posted by RiverSessions

I actually really enjoyed all the mixes for different reasons. I'm also learning as well so to me this is just cool all round. I love that folks have analyzed the lyrics and the story and how the music either fits or doesn't fit within that perspective. Best of luck and again I appreciate you all for taking the time. This has just been an awesome experience. Cheers!

Again...thanks for chiming in...really cool to hear from the author of a song here. Personally..right off the bat..I thought the song was something that maybe was an old standard that you would hear at a St paddy's day bar...and I mixed it as I would want to hear it live at an event...all tracks included. I don't worry so much about the little details of the quality of the tracks...i focus on balance and levels first..and what will be pleasing to my ear...live in this case. Anyway...your feedback and chat with us is really cool....much appreciated and thanks.

[eq1]

Originally Posted by StrumminSteve

...right off the bat I thought the song was something that maybe was an old standard that you would hear at a St paddy's day bar.

I had a similar impression - I thought the project was a 'modern' arrangement of an old folk tune.

[eq1]

Originally Posted by RiverSessions

...What you risk there is to lose the point of what you were trying to make in telling a story about a young sailor on his maiden voyage who unfortunately doesn't make it back home. That story is not meant to have energy.

I thought about that. In a way, though, it could have energy. The rockessness, the energetic parts, could be seen as a celebration of life, it could be appropriate. It's just difficult to do, the juxtaposition of 'stuff' in the song as-is doesn't quite work, where the rockus bridge seems more offensive and sacrilegious (or something like that) than it does 'a celebration of life', in honor of 'the sailor'...

I kind of glimpsed that angle, the celebration angle, in the song as-is. But it was woefully... just not clear at all. Frankly, the song could take either direction, mournful and solemn, or rockus and celebratory. It just depends on how things are arranged. Like I could see the song played in a bar and become that celebration of life - just depends on the arrangement.

[javiramallo]

Originally Posted by RiverSessions

I actually really enjoyed .............. Cheers!

Glen, again thanks for take the time to share your thoughts with us.

Much appreciated!

Javi.

[Trogdor]

Originally Posted by RiverSessions

I actually really enjoyed all the mixes for different reasons. I'm also learning as well so to me this is just cool all round. I love that folks have analyzed the lyrics and the story and how the music either fits or doesn't fit within that perspective. There have been many great points you have all mentioned which have crossed our mind throughout the writing and recording process as well. When we wrote the song it was just me with an acoustic guitar and our goal was to have a well lyrically written song with a chord progression and melody that fit the theme. Somewhere throughout the process it was decided to speed it up and add a few more instruments to gain a bit of energy. I can appreciate that could be a recipe for disaster. What you risk there is to lose the point of what you were trying to make in telling a story about a young sailor on his maiden voyage who unfortunately doesn't make it back home. That story is not meant to have energy. With that said this is the beauty about learning through the process. Some of the mixes that have caught my ear were the ones who created a bit of a darker mix to try and capture more of the story and less of the energy. A few of you were able to really capture that and still use all the tracks so well done for that. With that said I can appreciate why some of you decided to remove tracks and/or change the arrangement as we struggled with that throughout the process as well. Overall I'm hoping that no one gets disqualified. I feel everyone here had the right intensions on getting the best out of the song. Best of luck and again I appreciate you all for taking the time. This has just been an awesome experience. Cheers!

Thank you for taking the time to check out the mixes. I enjoyed the song just as it was constructed. It reminds me of some of the Canadian artists from out east that create music very much in this style. Maybe you have heard of some of them? Alan Doyle comes to mind to me when I hear your song. He was in the band Great Big Sea who were quite popular.

I hope my mix did your song well!

Cheers and thanks again!

[RiverSessions]

Originally Posted by Trogdor

Thank you for taking the time to check out the mixes. I enjoyed the song just as it was constructed. It reminds me of some of the Canadian artists from out east that create music very much in this style. Maybe you have heard of some of them? Alan Doyle comes to mind to me when I hear your song. He was in the band Great Big Sea who were quite popular.

I hope my mix did your song well!

Cheers and thanks again!

What a great compliment, I am actually from Canada and I was born in Nova Scotia, grew up listening to Great Big Sea so definitely influenced in that regard. Cheers to that!

[garanimals]

I really enjoyed the song! Thanks for letting us mix it!

[Djmajik]

Just submitted my votes and feedback (I think so at least, am I supposed to get a confirmation?)

Can’t wait to see the project files of some of my favorite mixes!

[darjama]

3.5 more hours left to vote, get yours in while there's still time!

[Dex]

Voted.

Thank you Glen for sharing your wonderful song with us and letting us know how the song came together. I think it's a great song (I mean, I picked it, after all...), and I really like the arrangement you gave us with the bagpipes and whistle and everything. It's hard to believe it was written separately by people all over the world because it sounds so cohesive to me. I don't think the contrast between the energy of the song and the subject matter is a problem, but then again I listen to a lot of rock/metal/punk music. I hope to hear more of your music soon. Do you have a Bandcamp or a Spotify or anything?

[PVinKC]

@eq1 nobody wants to run you (or anyone else) off man! As business owners (for those of us who run a studio business that is) it is in our best interest to be a Full Stack Producer...meaning simply that if we want to truly grow our businesses and create a portfolio we can be proud of, we need to be able to talk the artists into changing things from time to time.

If they sing out of tune, we need to try to capture good takes, and ultimately may need to tune the vocal(s). If we hear a problem with things being out of time, we need to retrack or fix things. If we have an idea that would help out a song (be it arrangement or otherwise) we need to figure out a way to convince the artist to try that.

Time aligning things, fixing phasing issues, capturing the best tracks possible from the start...all of that plays into what we must do to be successful.

This contest however is a "mixing contest". I feel very strongly about that. But it doesn't make me right, just makes me convicted.

I judged the tracks submitted based on how I thought they represented the song and the tracks presented. They definitely needed to be doctored a bit. But in doing so we learn right? We aren't always going to be involved in the recording of tracks. Sometimes we may find ourselves asked to mix a project we didn't record. When that happens we can always risk the project if need be by approaching the artist with our concerns and recommending retracking things.

In the end, whatever leaves your studio bears your name and reputation. So I commend you for standing your ground and speaking your truth! Please don't change yourself to suit what you think WE want cause who the heck are we anyway!?

My main intent on posting my rebuttle may have been misunderstood. I was simply trying to give a heads up that I scored the tracks down that changed things as I didn't feel that was in the true spirit of the contest. I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time and certainly won't be the last!

[RiverSessions]

Originally Posted by Dex

Voted.

Thank you Glen for sharing your wonderful song with us and letting us know how the song came together. I think it's a great song (I mean, I picked it, after all...), and I really like the arrangement you gave us with the bagpipes and whistle and everything. It's hard to believe it was written separately by people all over the world because it sounds so cohesive to me. I don't think the contrast between the energy of the song and the subject matter is a problem, but then again I listen to a lot of rock/metal/punk music. I hope to hear more of your music soon. Do you have a Bandcamp or a Spotify or anything?

Hey Dex, thanks again for picking the song. I've been part of a few have fun projects over the years that have been posted online. Here are the links if you're interested in checking out the other tunes. Cheers & thanks again.

The River Sessions (singer songwriter stuff)
https://open.spotify.com/artist/5jjZ...RSGUhVkkKXXtuQ

Mr. Crowes Garden (previous band)
https://open.spotify.com/artist/1yLG...S-6AX0bgYubZaw

[javiramallo]

Hey. Thanks to Daryl for the continuous effort and a big congratulation to "Tiny Tortoise" and "Grundton". Their mixes were amazing.
Lot to learns there.

Again, thanks to everybody for share its knowlenge and perspective which it enriching to the rest. This is the magic of this contest.

I'll hope the goddes of providence bring us a good ROCK track to mix next month.

Hug from Spains to everybody.