Aleksi Perala is more lush than the Aphex Twin

  On 1/22/2014 at 8:54 PM, Chris Toffer said:

Give some examples of poorly mixed aphex. And no the tuss isn't poorly mixed

A lot of the high frequencies and their levels in this song drive me nuts.

In fact while I appreciate Ventolin's abrasiveness (and I love Caustic Window for the same grittiness), but overall ICBYD is not up there for me because of the mixing, even though the above track and Alberto Balsalm are two of his best compositions.

I love the tape warmth vibe on SAWI and SAWII though.

ICBYD is really dirty sounding. It's great.

This is lush.

This is not lush

Both are beautiful, but one is more lush than the other.

I would argue that aphex's music sounds more like the first picture than the second one.

  On 1/22/2014 at 10:03 PM, Friendly Foil said:

ICBYD is really dirty sounding. It's great.

It is, when it works, it works great, but for me it's a bit too abrasive and literally hurts my ears. SAW I & II are wonderfully imperfect imo and don't have that problem.

Isn't it (in this case) less about mastering and more about having started off with cleaner (and more basic) synth noises and sparser mixes (less notes and instruments and effects), leading to the illusion of a cleaner overall sound (to some ears).

I agree.

  On 1/22/2014 at 10:17 PM, Deer said:

I would argue that aphex's music sounds more like the first picture than the second one.

Depends on what work you looking at I think. Within his total output there are a range of styles.

  On 1/22/2014 at 11:06 PM, delet... said:

Isn't it (in this case) less about mastering and more about having started off with cleaner (and more basic) synth noises and sparser mixes (less notes and instruments and effects), leading to the illusion of a cleaner overall sound (to some ears).

Maybe to a degree. If you have less elements obviously you can get things to stand out more and give them more range. I would say Aleksi's style of mixing is really nice. I couldn't really comment on what he does specifically in that sense. Something about his stuff that just seems super crisp all the time compared to all my other favorite braindancers.

  On 1/22/2014 at 8:54 PM, Chris Toffer said:

Give some examples of poorly mixed aphex. And no the tuss isn't poorly mixed

This sounds like it was mixed on headphones. The synth leads are buried in the background instead of being in the foreground.

I guess everybody hated that door slaming on ICBYD

  On 1/22/2014 at 9:19 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

sound quality

what's that?

btw people commenting on the noisy mixing on ICBYD - you should remember that he's influenced by experimental/noisey music, I'm pretty sure the dirty noisy mixing is deliberate, and I love how it sounds whether it's deliberate or not

you can't really say that drukqs is poorly mixed can you

oh god what am I doing in this thread..

It's alright hoggy you're helping the cause. So it was worth sullying your typing fingers posting down in the murky depths of watmm.

  On 1/22/2014 at 9:48 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/12/21/heres-why-you-should-convert-your-music-to-432hz/

Oh god, what a load of crap. I can see the reasoning behind using various tunings such as just intonation versus equal temperament, going by the actual differences in intervals and chords on oscilloscopes, but this is completely ridiculous. It's on par with the Spinal Tap saying "D is the saddest of all keys".

  On 1/25/2014 at 12:58 PM, chim said:

 

  On 1/22/2014 at 9:48 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/12/21/heres-why-you-should-convert-your-music-to-432hz/

Oh god, what a load of crap. I can see the reasoning behind using various tunings such as just intonation versus equal temperament, going by the actual differences in intervals and chords on oscilloscopes, but this is completely ridiculous. It's on par with the Spinal Tap saying "D is the saddest of all keys".

 

As soon as "water memory" was mentioned it lost all credibility.

It lost all credibility if you watch the video with the guitar, they seem to switch part way through between the 'tunings'. I think the page is a psyche.

i don't care who is better but ever since i get onclements when it came out i have enjoyed his music ever since.

maybe he has the time to make his stuff more 'lush' simply because he doesn't push himself as hard as Aphex to try new territory constantly. Learning a craft on how to make a specific style of music takes a long time and obviously Aleksi has done that, but I think there is something to be said about challenging yourself, taking yourself out of a comfort zone and nailing a new or different genre ie: Drukqs . I don't see Aleksi placing the bar as high as far as this is concerned. He's a great musician, i love his stuff.. but for me there is absolutely no comparison to the genius of Aphex

  On 1/25/2014 at 10:57 AM, hoggy said:

btw people commenting on the noisy mixing on ICBYD - you should remember that he's influenced by experimental/noisey music, I'm pretty sure the dirty noisy mixing is deliberate, and I love how it sounds whether it's deliberate or not

 

you can't really say that drukqs is poorly mixed can you

 

 

 

oh god what am I doing in this thread..

it's pretty silly for anyone to complain about Aphex's mixing abilities honestly, it's not very hard to keep using the same sound pallette over and over again and get really good at mixing those elements. It's much harder though to keep changing your sound palette and style up repeatedly and to make the mixes sound amazing every time. For me it's much more about the ridiculous creativity RDJ has that can be heard spewing out of mostly every song he makes, especially in the 2nd half of his career.

  On 1/23/2014 at 5:00 PM, paranerd said:

 

  On 1/22/2014 at 8:54 PM, Chris Toffer said:

Give some examples of poorly mixed aphex. And no the tuss isn't poorly mixed

This sounds like it was mixed on headphones. The synth leads are buried in the background instead of being in the foreground.

 

 

im 100% sure the lead synths were buried like that intentionally.. i just think you don't have brilliant ears and very sophisticated (and often avante garde) production/mixing techniques and make a "mistake" like that... pretty sure almost everything rdj does musically is intentional (experimenting/improv aside of course). burying what are typically thought of as lead elements in music, behind the other elements, can sometimes make for a surreal/atmospheric feel, where the lead voice is secondary to the textures/groove/environment, creating a unique space. it's actually a cool trick which I personally want to do more often in my own music.

I certainly don't think the mix is wrong and I don't think there are any rules on mixing anything really, but, on a purely technical standpoint and to my tastes, I would bring the lead melodies more up front. I don't think RDJ is infallible and I don't think every single mix he's ever done is perfectly conceived from start to finish. He might or might not listen back to every mix he's ever done and think they are all perfectly mixed, but it doesn't matter. To me, Wabby Legs just sounds like it was mixed on headphones instead of on monitors since the high frequencies of the leads can trick you to think they are louder than they actually are. I still think it's a nice track though.

the synth is quiet for a reason - it gives it a more withdrawn personality, to go with the unsteady/nervous feeling you get from the vibrato and the relatively high, thin melody, and a more quiet, domestic feeling

characteristically weak/feeble/insipid vibes are a common theme in aphex's music I think

  On 1/30/2014 at 2:50 AM, paranerd said:

I certainly don't think the mix is wrong and I don't think there are any rules on mixing anything really, but, on a purely technical standpoint and to my tastes, I would bring the lead melodies more up front. I don't think RDJ is infallible and I don't think every single mix he's ever done is perfectly conceived from start to finish. He might or might not listen back to every mix he's ever done and think they are all perfectly mixed, but it doesn't matter. To me, Wabby Legs just sounds like it was mixed on headphones instead of on monitors since the high frequencies of the leads can trick you to think they are louder than they actually are. I still think it's a nice track though.

it's a weird criticism though because of a lot of electronic music from this same era or a little before it were also 'badly mixed', mixing hadn't become a standard yet in electronic music until arguably the late 90s, before that most people were still experimenting with different ways of mixing. I seems like a criticism born out of a lack of musical vocabulary of electronic music before 95. And doubly weird to criticize the mix of someone who essentially invented drill and bass with a showcase of amazing songs on Hangable autobulb, i mean the guy was doing something totally new.