Hi Servando,

     unfortunately, like you, mixing is still something I struggle with and try my best to avoid at all costs (along with mastering). I also bought the Bob Katz book some time ago along with a plethora of other books in an effort to improve my mixing and engineering skills. I spent several years producing mixes that were OK but not really what I had wanted. I also find that the longer I spent on the mixing and post-production work, the more I lose interest in the musical aspects of anything I am doing - it feels too much like work for me (if that makes sense?).

For this reason, MIR for me is such a fantastic product in that it allows the realisation of a first mix without much of the complexity normally associated with this process. I fully accept that there is still much that needs to be done from this starting point however just getting to this first stage is a huge leap forward which then allows the fine tuning to be done (or not! depending upon the goals of the individual and the purpose of the mix).

I'm probably not qualified to do anything else other than enthuse about what MIR brings to this whole creative process at this point in time but I would say that you aren't very far off with what you are doing so far. I'd be interested in how William acheives some of the fantastic depth, warmth and expressiveness in his mixes as this was one of the things that blew me away. Not only the music but also the finished product was superb which I know isn't something that is easy to acheive.

Tom

Servando

Weren't you just the other day trying to spread the stereo field and trying to find anything that sound good, that was far off in your computer, getting advices etc..? How surprising in just a few days, you achieve this mastery in mixing? Sorry, just had to validify the discussion in using the MIR. I just purchased it also, to my surprise. It hit the spot for composing. You get the initial starting point on where to begin. And by the way, I'm floored also by your production. And will mention again that VSL has stepped into new boundaries. Perfectly temperedly tuned music heard for the first time. Getting back to MIR. ( Not trying to be conflicting between redundant styles or poise anyone in a tyranical conflict of interest or repression ). But I just found out that the Mozart style comes from his concert hall, to my surprise, the MIR defaults on his hall, and if you play his style with the appassionata strings, first of all, they sounds like any ordinary live strings. But with a magestic grandios flavor. Which is one way to use them. An exception; ( software replacement advantages, as apposed to lushness ). It sounds so realistic, that it exemplifies the sound from which is part of this sound and tradition. The hall is rounded which somehow gives a clear sound of the violins with clearity of the basso also. Complete Clearity of the traditional classical style. This is a surprise to me. I tried switching to shubert's hall, but it did not achieve the traditional mozart sound. So now we know the secret to the sound. This software is the state of the art, hands down... And for your pieces here, again not to take away from your hard work, in which you so eloquently described also. But stunning music. As great art is, exceeding beyond reality. Better than the real thing. Congratulations in this achievement. Now I'm signing off to try to get to this plane myself. Alot of work ahead, and not sure if the age will accomodate or justifies the means. But its worth a shot ! As you so eloquently exemplified here. Will look into Dietz presets also. Thank you.   

Thanks for the friendly feedback, 874!

@874 said:

[...] But I just found out that the Mozart style comes from his concert hall, to my surprise, the MIR defaults on his hall, [...]

Stating the obvious (just to avoid confusion): The Vienna Konzerthaus was built more than a century after Mozart died in Vienna in the year 1791. Mozartsaal got named like that to honor one of the most remarkable geniuses of western music, but of course he never played there. 😊

BTW - MIR's default Venue is a small excerpt from the Great Hall of Vienna Konzerthaus, not Mozartsaal.

Kind regards,

@Another User said:

How surprising in just a few days, you achieve this mastery in mixing?

  Believe me, I have no mastery over mixing at all. Forget about mastery, I have no experience with mixing at all. You can listen to everything I've done with samples in my soundcloud (except for a couple of really bad tracks I did before the style copy, which is the first one I finished). I just follow what my ears ask for, and I'm desperately trying to guess what knob, what fader, what mic, what position, what reverb time, what, what, what... I should move or use. The big help of MIR is that I can do this much more intuitively, and that is compensating my lack of experience. I'm glad you like this mix, I also like it. I love how MIR makes my music sound... but to say I've achieved mastery over mixing... that's too much (^_^)

  In any case, thanks a lot for your kind words. I agree with you in that every room has a "liking" for certain styles. I found that Mozart Saal is great for medium ensembles (I even did a version of Herrmann's Psycho in this hall, and sounded great). I haven't used the apps in it yet, though. I subconsciously associated the apps and Rozsa's music with the Grosser Saal, so I did not even try other venues. But after reading your post, I will definitely give it a try.

  So, thanks again for listening and your comments, and I wish you much fun and success with your MIR projects.

  Best regards.

Ahh, Yes Vienna Konzerthaus.. Thats the big sound....

BTW dietz, your Austrian team of builders came here to my home town and built the same configuration type concert hall for us. Sound quality is supposed to be the same configuration...   Thanks for the correction.. 

this is very, very impressive...congratulations. there is still some room for improvement in strings and woodwinds in particular (I suppose there always is ;-), but this is excellent work already. my personal favourite for the champion in terms of sound as well as musical quality is the (a2, layered?) "solo" violin at the very beginning, especially in Mix A...holy cr*** that sounds good...

   Thanks a lot, Goran. I'll leave this sequence rest for a while, and then I'll get back to it to see if I can improve it with your suggestions. What you and William said about the woodwinds in general, and the solo oboe in particular, is also quite clear to me, and I also suspected the basses could also have a little more presence in the mix as Tom suggested, but it would be really helpful if you could be a little more specific about the possible improvements in the strings, as this is actually what I'm focusing on first, and is far more important for me right now. So far, I'm quite glad with how the string section sounds (including the initial solo), and maybe except for the phrasing in the codetta, which is maybe a little monotonous, I wouldn't really know what else to change. So, I'd be very grateful if you could point those passages I may be totally overlooking.

  Thanks again for listening, and for your encouraging words.

  PS: btw. the solo violin in the introduction is actually not layered, but I think it could be the ubiquitous use of VelXF which may be giving you the impression of layering... especially in the progressive vibrato patch?? It's impressive how your "sample-trained ears" can associate what you hear with a specific technique... Wish I can sharpen my ears that way someday (^_^)

@servandus said:

   Thanks a lot, Goran. I'll leave this sequence rest for a while, and then I'll get back to it to see if I can improve it with your suggestions. What you and William said about the woodwinds in general, and the solo oboe in particular, is also quite clear to me, and I also suspected the basses could also have a little more presence in the mix as Tom suggested, but it would be really helpful if you could be a little more specific about the possible improvements in the strings, as this is actually what I'm focusing on first, and is far more important for me right now. So far, I'm quite glad with how the string section sounds (including the initial solo), and maybe except for the phrasing in the codetta, which is maybe a little monotonous, I wouldn't really know what else to change. So, I'd be very grateful if you could point those passages I may be totally overlooking.

  Thanks again for listening, and for your encouraging words.

  PS: btw. the solo violin in the introduction is actually not layered, but I think it could be the ubiquitous use of VelXF which may be giving you the impression of layering... especially in the progressive vibrato patch?? It's impressive how your "sample-trained ears" can associate what you hear with a specific technique... Wish I can sharpen my ears that way someday (^_^)

What I would change in the strings (as the very first change) is the relation of the room reflections component width to the dry component width - the dry component is too wide, making the sum sound too edgy (at least I hear it that way). Then eventually take same additional "edge" away with an eq, but I would be very careful with that - it is in my experience very easy to project the "edginess" stemming from the above mentionend problem into the frequency area, but this is more often then not a delusion - the problem initially percieved as a frequency problem could either dissapear completely or be drastically reduced as soon as the width relations of signal components are properly set.

That would be my first suggestions, for what they're worth 😉

The solo violin -  in that case I believe it is the slight VelXF "overdose" which occasionally breakes through - but it is a nice effect, it actually doesn't bother me as "unnatural" in any way. It reminds me of a similarly sounding effect Bruckner employs in the slow movement of the Eight Symphony (the 3 solo violins in unisono-passage)...

"Sample-trained" ears are a double-edged sword (although I won't complain too much) - the subject always reminds me of the audio engineer whose name I forgot but who said he would sometimes hear bad edits in concerts :-))

P.S. Compliments on Vayatelas, these are very impressive piano compositions...

  Thank you very much for your hepful explanation, Goran. Much appreciated!! I will definitely take it into account in my eventual revision of this "Love Theme". In fact, I'm paying close attention to this in a little piece by John Williams I'm working on right now. I guess the trick is finding the right spot between that "edginess" you talk about and eventual "muddiness". I'll try to find it. 

@goran_tsch said:

"Sample-trained" ears are a double-edged sword (although I won't complain too much) - the subject always reminds me of the audio engineer whose name I forgot but who said he would sometimes hear bad edits in concerts :-))

  [:D] [:D] [:D] I think I'll take it easy... [:D] [:D] [:D]  

  So, thanks a lot again for your time, Goran. It's this kind of useful advices I'm getting from you all which allow me to discover new things on which I can concentrate and, if I'm able to apply them to my sequences, share better performances with you all.  

   Happy to be in this forum. Thanks everybody!

  PS: Glad you enjoyed the Vayatelas!

I have to say I disagree with those criticisms of Goran about the strings.  They are too technical and show what happens when someone is not listening to the overall sound, but focusing on irrelevant details.  I had absolutely no impression like what he is talking about upon first hearing this, and it sounded like totally real espressivo strings.   I don't think that anything should be done except use French Oboe,  as this particular piece is one of the best string demos I've heard.  It is better than many of the original VSL demos as a matter of fact.   I think this is a function of MIR, Servando's performance, and Rosza's string writing, which is extremely rich and full and shows his great skill in creating themes which use the instruments very characteristically.  When I did the Vaughn Williams 2nd Symphony demo here, I noticed how much mileage you can get with truly great string writing by a composer who uses the instruments' sonorities and characteristics with intimate knowledge of the orchestra, which is what Rosza always did in his scores. 

 The other thing that disturbed me with the Goran criticism is he is advising somebody to tamper with MIR.  Splitting up dry and wet, subjecting them to different EQs, it makes no sense when the sound is this good.  There is actually an inner integrity to the sound you get from MIR that needs to be kept intact.  And it is quite close to what happens with a real concert hall recording.   So I disagree with the concept of screwing around with components of the MIR sound as if it is just another reverb.   

@ William

Well, I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on this one ;-) I've listend to the production again and stand by my original remarks.

To change the relations of dry& wet component widths in MIR you don't have to "split up" anything (not that one shouldn't do it, if one knows what one is doing and achieves a good sounding result with it) - you are doing exactly that every time you widen or shorten an instrument icon ;-)

Goran, I'm not trying to be obnoxious, I think you do absolutely great work, but I do strongly disagree and think you are allowing your intellectual approach to distort your hearing.  If I look at your first post, it is obvious you were excited and amazed.  THEN, you start thinking.  You start talking about adjusting this and that, tweaking things, picking apart things that did not strike you negatively at first.  I am so leery of that kind of over-analysis these days.  If one has a positive reaction to something artistic, then LEAVE IT ALONE!  Don't start trying to "improve" it.  You will soon have turned an almost miraculous first-time creation into a mess.  Anyway, that is my honest reaction.  Don't get mad at me though.  I am an admirer of your work! 

@ William & Goran

  Please excuse me for being absent in this conversation, but I'm really short of time now and couldn't post before.

  First of all, I think it goes without saying that I have the greatest respect and admiration for your experience and expertise, both as musicians and as VSL masters, as this is evident for anyone listening to your work. Rest assured, I value your opinions accordingly. In fact, it's the quality of productions like yours which "pushed" me to buy VSL products, and, consequently, they are the "standards" I'm now trying to follow.

  So, as someone who is "short of time almost by default" (^_^), I really appreciate your taking time to comment on my exercises, and thank you very much again for it. I couldn't emphasize enough how helpful this is for me, so please be sure your time is not wasted. 

  I just wanted to say I'm not really interested in seeing who is "right" or "wrong" here, but just in knowing your points of view, no matter how radically different they might be. You know, as a pianist I'm used to this: I give a concert, a critic says it was a passionate, lyrical performance, other says it was a cool, analytic rendering. My playing was a fact each one heard according to his own perspective, maximizing certain aspects, and minimizing or just overlooking others. With the time (and all the perplexing paradoxes I could witness), I was inclined to think a critic reveals more about himself than about the fact being critizised. Now I'd say is fifty-fifty... (^_^), and what's wonderful is that each 50% is interesting for me, so asking for suggestions is always a win-win situation for me (as long as the critics are well intentioned, of course) and that's why I appreciate comments and take them always into account. Obviously, my own point of view is bound to be partial and closer to some opinions, so when I finally have to make decissions it may seem that I'm ignoring some suggestions when in fact I'm not. 

  In any case, I'm sure your differences here aren't stopping anybody to see the inherent value in your distinct, personal approaches to music production.

  For my part, I couldn't but thank you for your participation in this Rozsa thread. Really interesting to follow.

@William said:

... Rosza's string writing, which is extremely rich and full and shows his great skill in creating themes which use the instruments very characteristically. 

   As a matter of fact, I could recommend these 8 pages to anyone interested in learning how to write for strings. It's truly a masterclass. It seems almost "obvious" when you see it casually in the score, but it's incredibly brilliant if you look at it with the eyes of an arranger. Some amazing decisions in there...

I don't have anything smart to say, but I thought this production was outstanding.

@ Servando

Thank you, I don't believe I have to say there was anything that was ment to be derogatory in my comments ;-)

@ William

I'm not getting mad at anybody [B]. You'll notice that my first post already stated I thought there was some room for improvement in the strings -that is, I didn't start "intellectualizing" anything post factum. The sound of the orchestral strings simply stroke me as if it could use some "polish on the edges", both sound and performance-wise (it wouldn't really take much, as it is a very, very good production already). 

It could be that at this level this is just a matter of personal taste. But to me it seems that the room for some sonic improvement is still located in the "objective area" in this case - that is, is at least partially independent of purely subjective preferences.

  Hi, Brian. As you can imagine, encouraging comments are also more than welcome! (^_^). Looking forward for more "imported goods"... from Italy or elsewhere (^_-)

  Um Gottes Willen... NOT AT ALL, Goran!! (^_^) I couldn't but repeat what I wrote above. I'm learning enormously from your comments and beautiful demos, as I'm learning from William's words and wonderful productions. It's obvious that you have different views here, but as I said, I'm used to this kind of "differences", even (especially??) in very close and friendly atmospheres where everybody feels free to express his opinions. It's an opportunity for me to consider things, rather than a "problem". You know, I am a composer, I love polarities (^_-). Couldn't live without them!! (^_^).

  You know, I've given myself one year to get acquainted with this "new instrument" of mine before I attempt further projects (^_^). During this time I'll be posting more and more exercises. It will always be a pleasure and a privilege for me if you both find some time in the future to listen and comment on my tracks. Especially if you honestly and openly don't agree! (^_-)

@ Servando

...dann haben wir uns richtig verstanden... ;-)