|
E-Spectro ft Trox - You Call It Magic (EZ's Alice in Wonderland Mix) (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| tehlord |
I'd call this another grown up mix. As in somebody that knows what they're doing :p
Very moody.
Everything is well balanced, but i've noteiced the last couple of things you've posted sound like very good headphone mixes. There's some detail missing to the top end? :conf: |
|
|
| Raphie |
Don't get me wrong, i like the mix, only the placement of the vocals are way of the grid, sound like they are not timestretched, they run slower and just loose sync over 8 measures.
also on some pieces i hear them pushed forward a bit, and "sort of" feel the intended groove, but because off the grid again, it doesn't work for me. It's not "loose" timing, it's "no" timing ;) |
|
|
| Richard Butler |
Eddie you are a class one wanksplash.
Just as I thought I might be starting to sound half pro, along comes this masterpiece to fuk me in the ass.
Seriously cool, and I mean cool work with an extra side helping of cool.
Tell you what really impreses me - the originality and style.
It's just stylish.
Your best work by a country mile you wanka.
No crits at all and in fact I love the loose organic nature of the vocals. Actualy one tiny stupid crit - the main hat loop FOR me was slighty repetitios (sp)
Nice:) |
|
|
| Owsey2008 |
I agree with Richard in regards to this being up there with your best. I particularly enjoy the vocal treatment you've cooked up here, especially the low passed vocals and cuts/chops. But I also agree with him in that the hat loop becomes a bit tedious, for my ears at least.
What strikes me even more than the vocal manipulation is the subtle melodies that surround the track. I'm in love with them.
You're well and truly on a roll lately Mr Zilker. I think you should consider contacting one of Dave's ladies and propose commencing a collaboration project |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Raphie in his thread
ThnX Eddy, BTW, can you explain me your vocals in your magic wonderland remix? I can not get my head around it why they are placed as they are, i understand the delayed verbs and the chorus /bridge later in the song, but what acts as verses, i can't relate them to any groove? and they really sound like they are in a different tempo there. running in and out of sync.
For me that's really the one thing that craving to be corrected, for the rest the mix is impressive. But i seem to be the only one not getting it? |
Well, three things come to mind and while I'm trying to explain them, please keep in mind I'm not trying to convince you that you're wrong. I actually understand what you're saying and how it's relevant to my mix.
One is that you manipulated the vocals, when appropriate, in your remix (and even though I didn't comment on it, it was impressive) to fit on the beat and with the music (and I'm assuming you used the original MIDI/Instrumental Stems provided). If you didn't manipulate them, than they fit within the original content of the song that I completely dispensed with. After hearing it repetitiously, that's how you're used to hearing them and, as you'll see with further explanation, when you're hearing my mix I think there may be a little subliminal train-wrecking going on. Not to say that your perception is flawed, in any way, but I think that you're picking up on a trait of my remix and super-imposing what you think (perhaps correctly), should be.
Thing 2: I took the vocals and arranged them with effects before I did anything else. I tried to adhere to some "formal" structure, but really wanted to give it a "what would I have done differently" sort of treatment. To give you an idea of the rules I used, particularly at the end when I feel the female vocal gets severely wonky, timing wise, was that I started complete phrases as close to the beat they sounded natural on.
Notice that the catch-breath (where the vocalist breaths before singing a phrase) falls before the measure but the phrase itself (beginning with the most amplified wave) begins on the first beat. In the original, the phrase falls on the half-note with the catch-breath falling on or close to the down beat.
In another instance, for example, where you took the male vocalist's lyric and placed his first verse on the down-beat, I left the verses unchanged, letting his vocal fall where it naturally occurred in the vox track. It came, on the half-beat, initially, but then, when chorused, fell on the down-beat and I centered that clip on the down-beat of his second (chorused) verse.
Anyway, the fact is that I manipulated the vocals, but only in their placement (no stretching) and, as it became something of a challenge to put music around their new arrangement, I thoroughly enjoyed doing it.
Finally, as with most remixes, if you really, absolutely, positively have to get the timing right, the vocalists have to re-sing them to the new music. While I pride myself on getting some decent results, having remixed some of cryophonik's, Alicia Angel's and Avonlea Montague's work, the liberties I took with my remix of this song would be absolutely unthinkable, not to mention unnecessary, with their work.
There are significant irregularities that occurred with the vocalist's work on "You Call It Magic", which preclude (at least with my ability) obtaining a "perfect" synchronization. Omission of the ''re' part of the lyric, "and You're Happy" (is actually pronounced, and you happy) being a prime example among them. It's not necessarily "wrong" that they did them and vocalists make trade-offs in diction, all the time; for the sake of expediency in the studio or simply because proper diction can actually sound horrible when you put it through reverb and delay.
The bottom line is that the vocals were sung to a different mix and fit that mix, according to its producer. I took them out of their original context and, behold, the oddity confusing your sense of timing. Personally, I don't take it personally that you don't "get it" and I'm not sure that you're necessarily wrong for "not getting it", either. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by tehlord
I'd call this another grown up mix. As in somebody that knows what they're doing :p
Very moody. |
Seriously, thank you.
| quote: | Originally posted by tehlord
Everything is well balanced, but i've noteiced the last couple of things you've posted sound like very good headphone mixes. There's some detail missing to the top end? :conf: |
1. I don't think my most recent visit with my land-lord (while I was just starting work on "Tapestry", to be precise) did my mixing any favors. Let's just say the topic was acceptable noise levels and that I was quite unhappy that mine were found to be unacceptable at 5:30 PM by a workman, next door. I'm mostly on headphones, now, and while I play out on my speakers, the duration I do and the bass I play out with is limited only enough to detect its presence.
2. I've been having this experience lately, where I'm listening to other people's work and feeling overwhelmed with the high-end presence, to the point where I have to EQ it out if I'm listening to it for extended periods.
Nevertheless, I trust your ears and your HS80s. I'll keep it in mind (tossing around like a 5.56mm bouncing through my cranium, keeping me up at night, you damn killjoy! ;) ).
| quote: | Originally posted by Richard Butler
Eddie you are a class one wanksplash.
Just as I thought I might be starting to sound half pro, along comes this masterpiece to fuk me in the ass.
Seriously cool, and I mean cool work with an extra side helping of cool.
Tell you what really impreses me - the originality and style.
It's just stylish.
Your best work by a country mile you wanka.
No crits at all and in fact I love the loose organic nature of the vocals. Actualy one tiny stupid crit - the main hat loop FOR me was slighty repetitios (sp)
Nice:) |
| quote: | Originally posted by Owsey2008
I agree with Richard in regards to this being up there with your best. I particularly enjoy the vocal treatment you've cooked up here, especially the low passed vocals and cuts/chops. But I also agree with him in that the hat loop becomes a bit tedious, for my ears at least.
What strikes me even more than the vocal manipulation is the subtle melodies that surround the track. I'm in love with them.
You're well and truly on a roll lately Mr Zilker. I think you should consider contacting one of Dave's ladies and propose commencing a collaboration project |
Thank you, sirs. Very much appreciated.
Due diligence on a collab with one of Dave's vocalist has been under-taken. I still haven't decided on which song I'd like to cover, yet, and ultimately, it will be up to them and their rather impressive schedules. I appreciate the vote of confidence, none-the-less.
I'll spare you the detailed explanation of my flawed thinking behind the hats. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
Eddie, I've listened to a few of your productions now, including Cop Rocked (incidentally, a dubstep producer already used that sample) and about half of your last concept album. I've refrained from commenting until now, but having heard this mix I'm going to be open with you.
I'm no producer so I'm not going to talk technical. I think you know your sound isn't up to professional scratch, and I'm in no position to tell you how to fix that. I'm talking just as a listener. And man, you just do not seem to understand basslines or rhythms at all. This is supposed to be a house record, right? You've even got the DJ friendly intro and outro, adding and subtracting layers. If this isn't supposed to be a dancefloor record it's an extremely unimaginative structure, because if this isn't made to be mixed, it's made to be heard in full, and long sections of it are pointless. I hope you haven't just structured this track like that because you've listened to too many dance records to envisage a musical reality that doesn't build and fall in such a painfully linear fashion.
But if we accept that this is a dance track, how the is anyone supposed to dance to it? There's no groove, no drive, no snap and no crackle at all. Where's the bassline? I haven't heard a remotely interesting bassline on any of your tracks so far. The beat is completely insipid. It sounds like a parody "techno remix" you'd download from P2P in 2001.
I see a lot of people calling it "moody" and I can buy into the idea there is a decent vibe lurking somewhere in here. But I cannot accept any defence that this is supposed to appropriate dancefloor conventions for a home listening context. That's a cop out. If you're going to put such prominent percussion in there, it has to be interesting. This beat isn't interesting to listen to and it'd never be interesting to dance to. Furthermore, don't appropriate DJ-friendly structures. Some producers have adapted the add-and-subtract dynamics of club records into sweeping, successful home listening albums. You haven't.
This is probably excessively harsh and for that I apologise, but I'd rather put it plainly. I don't think your problem is technical. I listen to your music and I hear a lot of elements that seem to be there purely for the sake of it, without any real consideration as to why they're necessary or what effect they're creating. That's a creative problem. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Eddie, I've listened to a few of your productions now, including Cop Rocked (incidentally, a dubstep producer already used that sample) and about half of your last concept album. I've refrained from commenting until now, but having heard this mix I'm going to be open with you.
I'm no producer so I'm not going to talk technical. I think you know your sound isn't up to professional scratch, and I'm in no position to tell you how to fix that. I'm talking just as a listener. And man, you just do not seem to understand basslines or rhythms at all. This is supposed to be a house record, right? You've even got the DJ friendly intro and outro, adding and subtracting layers. If this isn't supposed to be a dancefloor record it's an extremely unimaginative structure, because if this isn't made to be mixed, it's made to be heard in full, and long sections of it are pointless. I hope you haven't just structured this track like that because you've listened to too many dance records to envisage a musical reality that doesn't build and fall in such a painfully linear fashion.
But if we accept that this is a dance track, how the is anyone supposed to dance to it? There's no groove, no drive, no snap and no crackle at all. Where's the bassline? I haven't heard a remotely interesting bassline on any of your tracks so far. The beat is completely insipid. It sounds like a parody "techno remix" you'd download from P2P in 2001.
I see a lot of people calling it "moody" and I can buy into the idea there is a decent vibe lurking somewhere in here. But I cannot accept any defence that this is supposed to appropriate dancefloor conventions for a home listening context. That's a cop out. If you're going to put such prominent percussion in there, it has to be interesting. This beat isn't interesting to listen to and it'd never be interesting to dance to. Furthermore, don't appropriate DJ-friendly structures. Some producers have adapted the add-and-subtract dynamics of club records into sweeping, successful home listening albums. You haven't.
This is probably excessively harsh and for that I apologise, but I'd rather put it plainly. I don't think your problem is technical. I listen to your music and I hear a lot of elements that seem to be there purely for the sake of it, without any real consideration as to why they're necessary or what effect they're creating. That's a creative problem. |
Thanks for the honesty, Jack, and I'll take what you say into consideration. I'm certainly not going to attempt to justify anything other than to say I'm in a bit of a creative metamorphosis, right now, and your critique of my work, as a whole, mirrors my own reflections on what it is and what it lacks.
I'm planning on going pall-mall back into the DJ promotions, again soon, but I'd honestly hoped for a better result given my recent listens. That said, this track is what it is, the opening post attempted to do away with any pretense, otherwise, and your critique seems more aimed at my body of work opposing this example of it.
As for intent, be it a presumption to have it suited for a particular genre or for it to be "dance" material or otherwise: I'm not really thinking in that paradigm, at all. Do I want to create tension, drive and groove? Yes, definitely. But what those are and how they're achieved remain subjective and my target-market is slightly less substantiated than you seem to be giving me credit for.
At some point, I'd love to be able to know that you and I were speaking to the same aspects, let alone hearing the same elements and themes, and trust me when I tell you that I consider it a worthwhile ambition. What is utterly clear is that I'm hearing what you're not but that I would also say the same things you've said of some of my earlier work, as well.
Anyhow, thanks for listening and your honesty. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by EddieZilker
As for intent, be it a presumption to have it suited for a particular genre or for it to be "dance" material or otherwise: I'm not really thinking in that paradigm, at all. Do I want to create tension, drive and groove? Yes, definitely. But what those are and how they're achieved remain subjective and my target-market is slightly less substantiated than you seem to be giving me credit for. |
Your problem is you're not really thinking in any paradigm at all. You seem to be confusing creative freedom with a lack of focus. You don't need to substantiate your "target-market". It sounds to me like you're being facetious and implying I'm thinking too much about how this track can sell copies. This is a defence mechanism - you're telling yourself that you are thinking creatively rather than commercially, which is why it doesn't matter that your track doesn't fit a functional paradigm. That's not what I mean. What I'm telling you is that you don't have a clear idea what this track is meant to do, and so too many elements sound either superfluous or rote. And I get this impression repeatedly from your work.
It's a different art-form, but something I take into everything artistic I do, from a short story to a DJ mix, is advice from Edgar Allen Poe's essay Philosophy Of Composition:
| quote: | | I prefer commencing with the consideration of an effect. Keeping originality always in view- for he is false to himself who ventures to dispense with so obvious and so easily attainable a source of interest- I say to myself, in the first place, "Of the innumerable effects, or impressions, of which the heart, the intellect, or (more generally) the soul is susceptible, what one shall I, on the present occasion, select?" |
Poe argues that the artist should begin by deciding on which effect he/she wants to create with the work, and every other decision, from genre and form downwards, should be informed by this initial decision and aim to facilitate the chosen effect. I think your music generally lacks strong controlling ideas. And I know you come up with fancy little concepts for your albums, but when Poe talks about "effect" he's not talking about structural games, he's talking about the emotional punch of your work.
And please, don't pull this subjective card on me. I know what it's like to make something and have people find things in it you never intended to be there. I've been in a workshop where 15 different people have given me feedback on something I've written, and everyone has failed to understand a different part of it. Your bottom ends are atrocious, and claiming that's my subjective opinion is only papering over the most serious weakness in your craft. |
|
|
| Omega_Blue |
i rarely comment on other people's work, but i felt like i had to say something after reading system-j's candid critique-
while it lacks an organized structure which could perhaps equate into what he had mentioned about (iirc) a "central idea" or whatever, i don't think this production is bad, or at least as bad as he implies. jack, i thought your critique was quite a bit harsh, but that's me. it's definitely not the direction i would've taken with it, and again it lacks organization and recognizable phrasing (the perc's being a major culprit, imo) but you've polished its soundscape nicely and i enjoyed listening through it. in particular i liked what you did with the vocals, especially in regards to the looping/reverb "sweeping" effects and using them as an ambience/headroom filler to give an ethereal, dark feel throughout the track..
i wasn't feeling the bassline either, did you purposely create that loop in a different key to add tension to the track or give it a darker feel? it's a common practice in tech-house and techno, but not so much in vocal house..
that's all i have to say. let the heated discussion continue. lol |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Your problem is you're not really thinking in any paradigm at all. You seem to be confusing creative freedom with a lack of focus. You don't need to substantiate your "target-market". It sounds to me like you're being facetious and implying I'm thinking too much about how this track can sell copies. This is a defence mechanism - you're telling yourself that you are thinking creatively rather than commercially, which is why it doesn't matter that your track doesn't fit a functional paradigm. That's not what I mean. What I'm telling you is that you don't have a clear idea what this track is meant to do, and so too many elements sound either superfluous or rote. And I get this impression repeatedly from your work.
It's a different art-form, but something I take into everything artistic I do, from a short story to a DJ mix, is advice from Edgar Allen Poe's essay Philosophy Of Composition:
Poe argues that the artist should begin by deciding on which effect he/she wants to create with the work, and every other decision, from genre and form downwards, should be informed by this initial decision and aim to facilitate the chosen effect. I think your music generally lacks strong controlling ideas. And I know you come up with fancy little concepts for your albums, but when Poe talks about "effect" he's not talking about structural games, he's talking about the emotional punch of your work.
And please, don't pull this subjective card on me. I know what it's like to make something and have people find things in it you never intended to be there. I've been in a workshop where 15 different people have given me feedback on something I've written, and everyone has failed to understand a different part of it. Your bottom ends are atrocious, and claiming that's my subjective opinion is only papering over the most serious weakness in your craft. |
When I'm bringing up subjectivity it's from a belief that, when you get into an argument with someone, you and that other person can be speaking to two distinctly different aspects. I've seen it happen in MD between you and nefardec, countless times, and it seems to stem from a failure on the participant's parts to fully understand what the other person is referring to.
When you're referring to my low-end being atrocious: that's obvious if not already covered, somewhat, in this thread. I know exactly what you're talking about, there. I can't say, oh, well that's just SYSTEM-J being ignorant, because that would be utter bull. It's obvious my ability to properly calibrate my low-end is utterly ed.
That's assuming you're referring to the amount of bass in the low end and not the inter-relation between the bass-line and the kick-drum (which you made mention of in your erstwhile post). The fact is that I don't have a common set of reference points with you. It's not because I don't trust your judgement. I don't even think it's because you're unfamiliar with technical gobbledygook gook.
It's because we don't have a common and substantiated understanding of what you're referring to when you're using words like drive, groove, structure, tension et al, let alone, a common understanding of what constitutes those things. When you're telling me that I don't have enough groove, is it because I could have, as a possible remedy, offset the cowbell to create a more elaborate polyrhythm over a longer pattern than is there, currently? Is it something that would be obtained by emphasizing a chord every downbeat on the second of every four measures?
All of those things fit under the umbrella of "groove".
I've got to go to sleep but I'll come back tomorrow on the rest of a reply regarding your points about Poe and intent.
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_Blue
i rarely comment on other people's work, but i felt like i had to say something after reading system-j's candid critique-
while it lacks an organized structure which could perhaps equate into what he had mentioned about (iirc) a "central idea" or whatever, i don't think this production is bad, or at least as bad as he implies. jack, i thought your critique was quite a bit harsh, but that's me. it's definitely not the direction i would've taken with it, and again it lacks organization and recognizable phrasing (the perc's being a major culprit, imo) but you've polished its soundscape nicely and i enjoyed listening through it. in particular i liked what you did with the vocals, especially in regards to the looping/reverb "sweeping" effects and using them as an ambience/headroom filler to give an ethereal, dark feel throughout the track..
i wasn't feeling the bassline either, did you purposely create that loop in a different key to add tension to the track or give it a darker feel? it's a common practice in tech-house and techno, but not so much in vocal house..
that's all i have to say. let the heated discussion continue. lol |
Oh, but I've been more brutal. ;) (Well, I have.)
And thanks. I'll keep the remarks about the bass-line, in mind. It is in there but I seem to have reverted to keeping a very understated one with a lot of heavy bleeding that gets absorbed in the vocal fragment loop. I might have been able to fix it with a lower sub-bass to accent it along with a sine-wave layer and I'm beginning to regret the decision not to.
And no, I think the different keys were occurring as a result of how the vocal loop related with the delay for kind of a switching effect. I liked it so I kept it, but it was every bit a happy accident. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
I'm trying to come up with two possibilities for why you've included such poor beats and bass. One is that you weren't really interested in how danceable this track is, which is where the Poe would come in. Because if this isn't really about being danceable, why is the kick drum the first and most prominent sound on the track? How does the percussion in this track accentuate the overall effect? Is the percussion really interesting and engaging enough to justify its constant presence in the track?
The other possibility is you just can't really put together a funky groove. Just turn it up nice and loud and consider whether it makes you want to dance. There's a complete lack of bassline, which sucks the energy out of the track (meaning it lacks aforementioned drive) and denies you a key musical element the dancer responds to. I can sort of hearing it coming through early on in the track but it's still not any kind of bassline that makes me want to bob my head. I don't think you're so completely lacking in da funk that you'd seriously think this is an acceptable dancefloor bottom end.
I had a similar issue with Superstition. I was going to ask why you'd bothered putting a constant bassline in, when the bass was so perfunctory and secondary. You seem to have a taste for tracks that comprise shuffly, vague breakbeat patterns and muddy or extremely uninteresting basslines, above which you have many more subtle and interesting elements trickling past, generating muted atmospheres that slowly evolve over the course of the track. I'm just struggling to figure out whether you just don't have any intrinsic sense of rhythm or whether you're putting these pointless rhythmic elements in for their own sake. |
|
|
|
|
