The Guest House: Soundtrack Suite

Hi guys, this is my latest work for the supernatural thriller "The Guest House" by TahaIsmailTV. Hope you like it and I would be glad if you could give me some feedback.
Hope you'll be thrilled, Roland
https://youtu.be/NiT7wHZ_TOk

(the link to the movie is in the video description)

Without seeing the picture it's accompanying, it's impossible to judge/comment on how effective your composition actually is aesthetically.

On a technical level I have a few comments/observations though: 1. There is a great deal of very low frequency content in your mix, which could be problematic depending on the type of distribution you've designed your mix for. 2. The stereo positioning/imaging is quite weird/unusual. For example, the piano is wider than the entire orchestra and the positioning of some of the instruments is not in accordance with the layout of an orchestra. 3. Some of the instruments could do with a little more attention to the EQ/processing to make them sound a little more like real instruments and a little less like orchestral samples. 4. At the very end there appears to be a glitch with the ending of the cello note and a glitch in the decay of the piano chord.

It's certainly not a bad effort and there were elements of your mix/production I particularly liked, the processing/effects on the bass drum hits for example.

G

AudioPostExpert said:

1. There is a great deal of very low frequency content in your mix, which could be problematic depending on the type of distribution you've designed your mix for.

Click to expand...

I agree with APE here. One of the pitfalls I have fallen into in my mixes from time to time, is wanting them to sound rich and full, by adding too much bass to everything, to the detriment of the mix. Your instruments aren't separated enough. Try boosting each instrument in different places on the EQ frequency spectrum to get separation, and use your HP filter to begin rolling off the bass beginning anywhere around 200Hz to 80Hz depending on the instrument, when the instrument doesn't require bass. This will give you more separation between the instruments which require more bass to create fullness (Cellos, basses, timpani's, bass drum), and the instruments which should just have a normal bass level (Pianos, trumpets, violins, violas.)

AudioPostExpert said:

3. Some of the instruments could do with a little more attention to the EQ/processing to make them sound a little more like real instruments and a little less like orchestral samples.

Click to expand...

Once again, I agree with APE, loath as I am to say it. Read above about using your EQ to boost the instruments in separate places around the same frequencies. For instance, you may boost the trumpets around 5024Hz, with a narrow Q, and then boost the Violins around 5250Hz... This is just a for instance, and you would really need to listen to verify that these frequencies work for the instruments in question. But you get the idea right? Anyways, this will help your instruments sound better than just "out of the box" samples.

Your music is good! Definitely love the style and suspense you've created.

Oh, and one more thing. This track doesn't sound mastered. You really need someone who is good at mastering to add the final polish to it.

jrusso: I commend your efforts to be civil when you reference me/my posts. Unfortunately though, the advice you are providing is still incorrect/misleading:

When composing/producing music for film/TV, the composer should NEVER have their music mastered, they shouldn't even apply any master-buss compression/limiting themselves! Doing so reduces the Re-recording Mixer's options and makes the music far more difficult to work with and integrate with the rest of the film. If any "polish" is required, this must be left to the Re-recording Mixer rather than pre-applied.

Also, I'm not quite sure why you've suggested boosting just the harmonics of both the trumpet and violin, with a narrow Q and at almost the same pitch. If anything, I would recommend a slight boost with a normal Q, actually within the pitch ranges of the respective instruments and separated by considerably more than a semi-tone, rather than less.

G

First of all: Thanks a lot for the replies and the great feedback

I think that I can learn a lot, especially about mixing, eq etc, from your posts. I also know, that this is a thing I have to improve.

I will take your constructive suggestions into account and will work on it (even if your opinions seems to be a bit different)

MGroland said:

First of all: Thanks a lot for the replies and the great feedback

I think that I can learn a lot, especially about mixing, eq etc, from your posts. I also know, that this is a thing I have to improve.

I will take your constructive suggestions into account and will work on it (even if your opinions seems to be a bit different)

Click to expand...

Best of luck to ya.

APE is correct, here; score is NOT mastered for films and TV. In fact, the rerecording mixer(s) usually get instrumental stems from the composer/conductor/score recording team with a solid, basic mix for reference.

It is extremely difficult to mix compressed music with the rest of the soundtrack. It's like all of the audio pieces are threads to weave into a seamless sonic tapestry, and then they hand you a brick (compressed audio) to weave into the threads of the tapestry.

JR - you're coming from a music background, and sound-for-picture requires a radical change in approaches and thinking. I spent number of years as a recording engineer prior to migrating to audio post, so I've had to make those adjustments.

Alcove Audio said:

APE is correct, here; score is NOT mastered for films and TV. In fact, the rerecording mixer(s) usually get instrumental stems from the composer/conductor/score recording team with a solid, basic mix for reference.

Click to expand...

Okay, I can buy this, however, the reference mix is bounced to a "master" track and there is some level of compression applied to that master track, correct? If so, then I am partially correct. Because I would imagine if the OP of this thread was intending for us to listen to this mix with objectivity, he/she would want to provide the reference track with some level of mastering applied.

Again, that's the disconnect between sound-for-picture and music. No, the uncompressed mix is the final mix. (Film is one of the last bastions of dynamic range in the entertainment biz.) This is probably why you run afoul of APE so often; you're not speaking the same language. BTW, APE and I are quite "Old School;" we both remember when music wasn't compressed to death during the mix nor the mastering.

I'll avoid the myriad of technicalities of how the transfers and matings take place (and risk a scolding from APE), but, at it's essence, when the uncompressed mix is completed on the dub stage and signed off upon by all concerned parties that uncompressed mix is mated with the completed picture. This is now the MASTER PRINT from which all copies will be made. The audio person responsible for seeing that the audio is properly mated with the picture is the Audio Mastering Engineer. S/he does not change the audio in any way, they work with the picture department to insure that all of the channels are properly assigned, the levels are correct, etc., etc., etc.


Now, this is not to say that compression is not used during the audio post process. Compression can be used on sound effects to give them more "apparent" loudness without large amounts of volume. Some rerecording mixers like a very light compressor on the dialog stem. So, as you see, compression is judiciously used, but never on the entire final mix.

JR-

You should spend some time digging into audio history. Yeah, it can be a it boring and technical, but it also provides insight into the craft.

It can also be fun. You know "Cut" and "Paste" in your DAW or NLE? Graphic artists (my wife is one) used to literally Cut out words, pictures, whatever and Paste them on the piece of paper.

In the 1950's computers occupied rooms upon rooms of vacuum tubes and other electronic components. Insects would crawl into the system causing short circuits and other problems. So when the system wasn't performing properly a tech was sent into those rooms to remove any vermin that had crawled into the tubes and circuitry; hence the term "de-bugging the system."

I already mentioned that APE and I come from the really old school where the only time the entire track was compressed was by the radio stations for broadcast. In fact, some bands used to do a "radio mix" where they would mix through a broadcast compression chain - but print the mix WITHOUT the compression chain engaged - so the mix would sound "correct" when broadcast (compressed) over the airwaves.

If you have not already you should spend A LOT of time at FilmSound.org. This should give you a start on discovering the discrepancies between music engineering/recording/mixing and sound-for-picture. You can get started here:

http://www.filmsound.org/film-sound-history/


Just the difference in your ages makes for a big disconnect between yourself and APE. Your ignorance of sound-for-picture, where many terms, procedures and applications are radically different than the music scene, makes for more disconnects. So both of you stop the wrangling; it's getting on my nerves.