Can you help me decide which mix is better?

[tonstwo]

I've been practicing mixing, but I only have headphones available to mix and an untreated room and no high quality monitors. Would appreciate your opinions.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-2NF9JF...sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5V6coC...sp=sharing

[Harvey.Stuart]

Of course only a personal bias but I find version B is full of crickets and I can't listen to it longer than one minute before it wakes up my tinnitus, that was on simple hifi room listening and it went even worse/faster with an akgK702 or a BD-DT770pro.
Version B didn't trigger my hypeacousis/tinnitus so it's better to me though I feel it's lacking some umpf in the "separation" between the voice and the rest, my personal "might try first" would be some tricks with different mixbus using different placement/reverbs/predelay for voice // rythm // harmony. In homeopathic dose! since your mix is already nearly there
(side dish I quite enjoyed the piece though it's not my main course  )

[tonstwo]

Of course only a personal bias but I find version B is full of crickets and I can't listen to it longer than one minute before it wakes up my tinnitus, that was on simple hifi room listening and it went even worse/faster with an akgK702 or a BD-DT770pro.
Version B didn't trigger my hypeacousis/tinnitus so it's better to me though I feel it's lacking some umpf in the "separation" between the voice and the rest, my personal "might try first" would be some tricks with different mixbus using different placement/reverbs/predelay for voice // rythm // harmony. In homeopathic dose! since your mix is already nearly there
(side dish I quite enjoyed the piece though it's not my main course  )

By the way you mentioned version B in both cases so I can't be sure which one you're talking about.

[Tassy]

Such question is simple to answer since now we compare an apple to pearl. So the answer is: "I cannot tell"
For comparing we need the same format, and the same dynamic range (nowadays called loudness, that is foolish).
A wave and an mp3 make different sounds.
Now:
I call A the wave mix
I call B the mp3 mix.

For comparing I had to resample both to the same CD format because some comparing plugins cannot be used for mp3.
it takes time, so not everybody has time to do all these conversions to start comparing at all.

The first thing is the dynamic range DR (nowadays there is a mess of it since there are 20 so called "standards" I call all shit, since destroy the VALUE that is being done to be forgotten in everything...

A has DR 8, B has DR7. 8 is on the edge of the ears to bear, 7 is overcompressed!
This is another reson they cannot be told which is "better". "
"the louder is better" is the first feeling of anybody who is not a real expert audio engineer.

For example, the sidestick sound sounds better in version B but no one can guess whether it is due to some tweaks you made differently or because of the more compression......

If I had only one choice on Earth, my life depending on it, I would say A is "better" (but the vox is a bit muffled, not bacause it is weaker in volume, it sits well)

The overal sound of instruments and the mix is going to be fine with some little tweaks on version A.
best
Tassy

[Harvey.Stuart]

Of course only a personal bias but I find version B is full of crickets and I can't listen to it longer than one minute before it wakes up my tinnitus, that was on simple hifi room listening and it went even worse/faster with an akgK702 or a BD-DT770pro.
Version B didn't trigger my hypeacousis/tinnitus so it's better to me though I feel it's lacking some umpf in the "separation" between the voice and the rest, my personal "might try first" would be some tricks with different mixbus using different placement/reverbs/predelay for voice // rythm // harmony. In homeopathic dose! since your mix is already nearly there
(side dish I quite enjoyed the piece though it's not my main course  )

By the way you mentioned version B in both cases so I can't be sure which one you're talking about.

Oups, that was a glitch I mad a re-edit on but it seems didn't went well! Sorry.
The version B (the mp3) is the one full of cicadas and the version A (the wav one) was the one I said could be fine with a few tweaks re the voice

[Nathan@Harrison]

I've been practicing mixing, but I only have headphones available to mix and an untreated room and no high quality monitors. Would appreciate your opinions.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-2NF9JF...sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5V6coC...sp=sharing

B Mix sounds more sculpted and has good separation.  B mix can go on a record.  Thankfully you are working with really good tracks so most of the work is already done for you.  That is the mixing secret of the professionals.

[PBuryk]

First off -
Mucho compliments to the performers and recording engineer!
The singer, keyboard player and drummer, obviously being the featured players in the song did a great job, and were recorded very well!
This, of course, does not slight the other players, who have also provided great support on the song.
Next, I really liked the arrangement. The  "cameo appearances" of the guitar, organ, orchestrations, bells, etc worked well.
Overall, it seems that both versions could have been heard, as is, over the airwaves a couple years ago when the style of the arrangement and
sound of the singer was more sought after as presented.

As far as comparison between the two, I perceive A to be a bit warmer and smoother. B is pretty dang good for an MP3 and it seemed to be
a bit brighter over all. I did catch some MP3 related artifacting on the BG vocals, organ and orchestration but that was to be expected.
I did not hear much in the way of A or B being louder than one another, again because of one being a WAV and the other being an MP3
and the resulting tonal changes tend to fool the ear.
Getting picky, I must agree with Tassy about things being a bit "muffled". That is, I don't hear the "sheen and sparkle" that is so sought after in today's mixes.
And, yes, I might prefer a little less compression on the singer, but I did NOT consider this to be an issue as is because his performance never left its place in the mix.
I certainly didn't hear any of the "crickets" that Harvey heard.

Please note: I did NOT listen to these over speakers. I used a pair of more "common place" headphones in order to hear what most listeners would use today.
Also, I wanted to get closer to what YOU heard because that is how you did your mix and mastering (ie., you used headphones and not speakers).
I would certainly recommend that you continue to pursue that "bit of sparkle" in another mix as an improvement.
Otherwise, both A & B sound good enough as far as how most people listen to music today - again, using headphones and ear buds.

Damn good song! I'd certainly add it to my play rotation.

Cheers!
Patrick

[tonstwo]

I want to thank everyone for your comments! I just want to point out that the multitracks are from Produce Like A Pro, produced and recorded by Marc Daniel Nelson.

By the way, I did not realize I uploaded one of them as mp3 lol. That was a mistake on my part. Both mixes hit around -12 or -11 LUFS integrated with only minimal limiting but a lot of hard clipping for the drum transients on the master track. Well in any case today's music is loud and honestly that is also what I aim for, to make it sound as good as I can at -8 maximum without having to compromise too much with regards to compression and limiting.

@Harvey.Stuart I can totally now hear what you mean with the crickets. I use dSoniq Realphones software with Samson SR950 headphones and on some presets (I use mostly near, middle and far) it didn't seem to be a problem but when I switched to the hifi preset I could tell there were some really boosted high end on that mix with the vocals, hats and overheads. It's also apparent when I solo the highs.

I have Melda MCompare as well but didn't use it when mixing these. Shortsighted on my part.

For context, A is the Mixbus32c mix, while B is a Reaper mix of course using the tools I know and am more familiar with, API 550 eq with the addition of Airwindows Console8Lite. On both mixes I used the API to pull down 300hz on bass, just an example of how much I rely on that eq. Definitely learned (at least for me) that there is a learning curve to Harrison Mixbus (the whole sound of it, the eq, the compressors, etc.). So I definitely have to learn how to use the 32c eq. I really like the workflow of Mixbus when it comes to recording, mixing and with the buses all ready to go. And the optimize polarity feature is just great.

I think what I need to do is just more listening, but I wonder if y'all have some tips for the muffled issue (frequencies to focus on, maybe?). I find it more difficult with Mixbus tbh as it does have a darker sound and it does sound (to me) muffled when I test the track in my car.

[tonstwo]

Okay so I put the Mixbus track in Reaper and using PSP MasterQ2 and MCompare (with Steely Dan's Do It Again, though I could have chosen any track) I realized that the tonality was totally different. I was missing a lot from the high mids and there was too much information in the low and low mids. I think I'll start my mixes in the future with that, a bit of top down shaping EQ and referencing.

[rwil]

Nice song !!
Thanks to share!

Edit: sorry for the early typo, for the 2 interrogation points, I meant exclamation ones ! It is a very nice song and mix !