Violin in a recorded mix (evaluation)
I have recently recorded a set of tunes from my home country with my band. We have received a first sample of the mix and I have mixed feelings on the subject of violin sound and placement in the mix.
I'd like to ask members of this forum to have a listen at the mix and perhaps give me some feedback. i believe i was too involved with the music to have a clear unbiased opinion on this.
I deliberately withed details on the studio setup, microphones etc... because - this might influence listener's assessment.
Thank you very much.
The mix in itself sounds good to me, Tony. Nice playing! Just a small hint to work on that fourth finger vibrato :-)
Nice song -- I think the violin is mixed too far back. I feel it needs to come out more to the fore.
I agree that the violin sounds like it is mixed too low, and also sounds a bit "dull" to me. Could be the mic choice or mic placement. The rest of the band sounds very "up front" while the violin sounds "recessed".
Not acoustically educated enough to comment on the mixing, but the violin sounds glorious - I was also wanting to hear more. Is that the enchanted violin of which you spoke?
I listened through phone (with excellent speaker) and a laptop. I'm used to these, so they are a sort of reference for me.
Thank you very much for your responses.
Aside recording in a bigger space, you can try different playing position relative to the microphone (if you use 1 only).
I like the type of repertoire you are talking about. I'm, myself, not a classical player at all ...... :)
Some good feedback already. The drum is what bothers me most. If it were me I'd cut it right out, but I don't like drums in general.
For unevenness across strings you can use multi-band compression.
@Tony. In fact the violin in the video is not bad at all. Not warm though. So maybe it could be a characteristic of that Beyer mic (that i never used).
Which Beyerdynamic was that?
M 160. It sounded phenomenal in one studio and lifeless in an other (not the exact same mic, different M 160.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.