Originally Posted By: Matt Finley
That’s good about the Wharfdale monitors. The link went somewhere else though.


The link should have been a picture of my desk.

Quote:
Can you identify what about your mixes is most problematic?


Great example is the song I just wrote and am working with Rog on a master. When I listen to it on my music room computer in RB, it is fine. When I rendered it to a wav it still sounded good up there. When I came downstairs I also used Audition to make it an mp3. Now I expect the compression will take some luster off it, but what happened was that a backing horn section part is now suddenly WAY out front. So to experiment, I connected by bluetooth to my Bose speaker in the living room and played all 3, the SEQ, the wav, and the mp3. I never heard 3 more different outputs in my life. Now if I was a paying customer, I would be upset that the CD I just bought doesn't sound the same everywhere I play it. Someone else mentioned making it dead flat and then adjusting tone when I play it. No, that is absolutely unacceptable to me, because I don't want to have to boost treble for one song, then have to flatten the treble and boost bass for the next one. They should all be pretty much the same. Of course there are professional people who do that every day for a living so I don't have to, but man, we are fighting with this song to keep the tracks level with each other.

This song has been a battle because I have a sound in my head and I am trying to convey the sound using words. 5 different people may interpret words like "rich", "lush', "lavish", "tinny", "distant", "boxy", different. It's like trying to make someone who has never been able to see understand what red is using words. "Red. Like an apple." Well, he's never seen an apple....

Last edited by eddie1261; 12/31/17 08:22 AM.