<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>09-30-2017<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Bob,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Unfortunately, I am not the person to go into technical details about mixing. I know some of the basic concepts, but other than pan and volume, I have not used the other techniques.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Check out the Internet for sound mixing groups. At one time, I was working with Linux systems for music (personal pleasure use at home), and followed the Linux Audio group. I still do follow that group.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>To post to that group, I use <a href="mailto:linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org">linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>There should be other Internet groups around. The people at the Linux audio group include mixing professionals. They should be able to listen and give suggestions on how to adjust your mix. The group is for people using digital audio workstations (DAW) running under Linux and Linux mixing tools. So some of their suggestions may only apply to Linux programs/tools.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>But they are very helpful in listening to work and making suggestions. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I would think there are professionals who use the DAW and tools that you are using. Find the groups when they hang out. Mention your hearing issues. At the Linux audio group, there are blind people using command line Linux DAWs and tools for their mixing. As you are probably aware, musicians are very generous with their time and talents.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Good Luck,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Stephen.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Bob Ebdon [mailto:r.ebdon@ntlworld.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Saturday, September 30, 2017 7:54 AM<br><b>To:</b> Stephen Stubbs <fartreader@gmail.com><br><b>Cc:</b> Bob Ebdon <r.ebdon@ntlworld.com><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [CP] KISS or Complex?<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks Stephen. Just back on home computer after a few days away, so sorry for not getting back sooner. I needed to check a few things with my recording. As always, I value your comments.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>One thing that worried me was your comments about panning the instruments. They are panned. I have two guitars panned 66R and L, fiddle is 33R, bass and lead vocal central. Autoharp mic and DI are 10L and 10R, vocal harmonies are 33L and R. Maybe this spread isn’t far enough? Maybe push the fiddle wider, it is in the same space as one of the harmony vocals at present? I have real problems with stereo placement as I am basically mono - totally deaf in one ear! This is why I had to come back to the recording and check that I had actually exported a stereo version, I could not tell just by listening whether it is stereo or mono, the only way I can check is if it sounds different when I swap the headphones round - and it does. I also have faders way down on the instruments relative to the vocals, and have written volume for the autoharp to bring it up as fills.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I appreciate your comments about reverb and compression. I have not yet discovered how to make my voice sound natural! I have on it some EQ, some compression (set at ratio 4.2 - too high?), a vocal rider and a C6 multi band compressor set to give a treble boost. Looks like this is all too much?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>For reverb, I use Spaces. I have two, one set at about 2sec, the other at 6sec, and I use about -10dB of the first and -30dB of the second. Again - too much?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Any advice you can give is much appreciated.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black'>Bob Ebdon<br><a href="http://www.facebook.com/AutoharpBob">www.facebook.com/AutoharpBob</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 28 Sep 2017, at 14:11, Stephen Stubbs <<a href="mailto:fartreader@gmail.com">fartreader@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Why not do both?<br><br>Start out with the vocal and autoharp. Then start adding the other<br>instruments through the course of the song, to end up with everything<br>at the last.<br><br>On a mixing level, I prefer less reverb and compression. Why not pan<br>the backup instruments to different locations, and use volume to get<br>the depth of field? Go for the feeling that you and the autoharp at<br>the microphone, while the backup instruments are behind and around<br>you. I think it would give you more of a live performance sound.<br><br>For What It's Worth,<br>Stephen.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>