I prefer the Mick Guzauski mix, solely because the bass sounds like a bass guitar and not a clipped out rendition.

Cheers and thanks for the post

 

I like Fab Dupont's mix the best, especially considering the song. It fits it IMO. However, I also find it a little bit too dry. I like it the best nevertheless.
Mick Guzauski's mix is quite close to what I think this song should sound like, but there's something bothering me with his mix, I can't say what exactly. In conclusion, I think Dupont's mix could use a *bit* of Guzauski's wetness [I also like the bass], and a *bit* of CLA's sparkle.

 

Didn't get it. The point is to compare the mixes from great mixers, at least one part of it. Isn't that awesome?

 

I'm just glad CLA lowered the out-of-tune thingy in the chorus. But CLA's mix is still very CLA (how surpricing).

 

this, CLA version only sounded like a credible song

 

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

 

@Banz Compare ? To what ? What is the metric here ?
All I see is people giving their opinion about each of the mixes. (which is fine by the way)
Does it matter that someone thinks the CLA mix is bright, Fab's mix is dark and Mick's mix is [insert another buzzword here that probably helps "Artists communicate with the engineers" because like ain't no "artist" got time to learn the spectrogram (or spectrograph depending on your nationality) or what an equalizer or compressor does to a track despite the only 2 resources I found on the internet]

And "great mixer" really ? What's the metric to judge which mixer is great and which mixer is shit ?

 

I like the drums, highs and stereo field on CLA's, love how tight the snare is. I think it fits the song well and takes it to a new level, but I'd dial down the verb a bit and bring the drums and that guitar on the down beat a bit up front.

Fab's mix is a bit too dark for my taste, but I do like the contrast between those atmospheric instruments in the chorus and the rest.

Overall I think Mick's mix is the most balanced in terms of processing vs natural sound.

Hard to pick between Mick and CLA, it really depends on the context of the band.

 

Last edited: Jan 15, 2019

Yeah but for me its mix would be more pleasant with more "air",i find the lyrics and the snare too dark.I find also the snare too compressed.

 

Last edited: Jan 15, 2019

We can say a mix is "great" when most of people like it.But it's subjective,i agree with you.

 

IMO :
CLA : too much "engineering hyped", like "I will put my special mark on this music"
Dupont & Mick : better, but it lacks details and spatializations (they could have 3D spatialized more the guitar arpeggio within the chorus). Nevertheless they are more respectful about the music, they don't try to put themselves in the frontplace like CLA does.

 

To be quite honest, if you're hiring CLA, you probably know what you'll get and you want exactly this. He won't skip any chance to make the song rockin' and you want that "special mark".

 

IMO:
- Mick mix is the best...
- CLA is "overprocessed" for this kind of music
- Fab's mix sounds like a rough mix to me, but nowadays the musicians wants that final mix sounds as close to the demo, so if that's what they requested than is ok, but to me on Fabs mix the drums sound honky, giving it an overall honky feel to the song.

 

Come on, you're not that boring...

''And "great mixer" really ? What's the metric to judge which mixer is great and which mixer is shit ?''

I feel like I'm not going to change your mindset with any answer, but a great resource (especially in this case) to evaluate a great mixer is the amount of grammy that this mixer has (in case you do not know who chooses the winner of a grammy are the mixers themselves).

Is that enough to you? Great mixers do a great job, is that simple, don't over complicate things dude.

 

@Banz They were questions. I just wanted to know your take, no beef. Your assumption that I have an immutable perspective is quite telling.
I just wanted to share my thoughts about the music industry but I guess you are drowned too deep in your fandom to see that aspect.