I guess that’s done:
Kick sucks
edit:
final version:
The kick doesn’t suck imho, it’s just a little, how to say, “conservative”, but it fits to the “conservative” Electro that you’ve created here. Just check the volumes of the percussions and lasers again. The click that comes 5 times in a row every 16 positions is softer than the sticks, and the bigger “zap” is louder than the smaller “laser”. Have you checked through speakers? What I don’t like is the low pass filtering at 2:50 within the break and the vocal sample in the last minute. This track could still use some more groove, it’s pretty “straight” or let’s say “linear”. It’s not the typical Electro stuff and there are some “trancish” elements, but nevertheless it’s a good approach for the first time in this genre. This is your first Electro track,isn’t it? Anyway, well done, keep it up!
1 Like
Thanks for listening again. I mixed on speaker and will check the levels of the additional percussion. I don’t think it’s a problem if some elements are louder than other though… Would you look at the peak level in the Renoise meter for this or check the integrated LUFS levels? I did some electroish tracks before but they always went into another direction.
Kick is fine, yes. I would decrease the volume a bit and increase the bass volume instead.
No, I always check by ears through speakers. Especially percussions like clicks and sticks sound way louder through speakers in comparison to headphones. And yes, it doesn’t matter if the loudness differs as long as it doesn’t affect instruments that are important for the rhythm respectively the beat. If these percussions fill the gaps between kick and snare, they should have an equal loudness. There’s only one thing that I check in terms of short term LUFS, and that’s an Acid bass. The higher the frequency, the louder the Acid bass. Too loud in many cases, that’s why I automate its loudness according to its frequency. But that’s an exception. Usually all you need is rested ears. 
2 Likes
It’s extremely difficult to get the volume of such percussive elements balanced and what helped now was to listen through speaker, but at a VERY LOW VOLUME. When something stands out you immediately recognize it.
You should ALWAYS mix at low volume (preferably through speakers) first. Check point 8 of my hints. 
So I was checking my vault on sunday and I’ve rediscovered another old track (created around 7-8 years ago) that was finished, but somehow sucked. I changed the kick in terms of the beat and I’ve adapted the mixing a little to my today’s standards. It still sucks mixing-wise (for instance, the TP value should be -1, but instead it’s -1.8 without any apparent reason, so I should recheck and most likely redo the mixing from scratch) and composition-wise (especially the beginning of the song respectively the buildup needs to be redone, but also the second half of the song). This is what it currently sounds like:
It was intended to be an Electro track, but it turned into an Electronic piece while composing.
What do you think?
3 Likes
Sounds great, really good so far; I guess, to me, the Big-Bass sounds like its for a different song.
1 Like
Yes, the bass is probably most suitable for Synthwave. I always associate those kind of basses with Miami Vice style or some slower, deeper 80s Synth stuff in general. But I wanted to combine this type of sound with Electro, I remember that was my intention when I started composing. When you say it sounds good so far, are you referring to the mix or to the composition? Btw, I just found the culprit of the false TP value, the ISP limiter was simply at the wrong position in the mastering chain. Nevertheless everything needs some more work, the mix as well as the composition.
Enjoy the composition and timbre, the song starts out with a real breakin vibe and gets into the future gently, moving the genere into new territories; dig that.
To me, the bass seems too technical and too present, perhaps push it back some.
Otherwise, the volumes and separation are really good in the mix, but perhaps needs more dynamics,
some panning, or widening/phase techniques, for the strings towards the end could be interesting here.
Glad you pointed out your displeasure with -1.8 something to think about, I rarely nail -1dBTp exactly.
1 Like
Yessir, I agree, the stereo image wasn’t good enough. Of course panning and stereo expansion was already done, but obviously too soft. So I doubled the values and I also “stereorized” some more elements by applying more width. Furthermore I decreased the volume of the bass by 2 dB, which was also necessary after shifting a couple of elements away from the center more to the left and right. I still wonder what you mean when you say the bass seems to be “too technical”. Currently I’m working on the middle part, that needs to be shortened. I dropped two similar sounding pads from that part, instead I would like to add another new instrument that also supports the last part with some slight variations in comparison to the first part. And the mastering needs to be improved a little. A TP of -1 is a must, but it shouldn’t be even softer than that, otherwise the song would become way too soft. Anyway, thanks for your opinion! 
Right on looking forward to hearing it again!
Hmm ‘too technical’ i guess, too analog, too expensive sounding, too ‘wobbly and long’.
Listen to Newcleus bass, very similar tone, but is much shorter, more digital sounding.
Thanks for the true peak tips!
It’s good, but I would shorten it strongly to ~4 minutes as it becomes a bit boring towards the end. I wonder how it would sound with a faster bass line instead of the rather slow bass. Maybe just keep it as it is and don’t fiddle too long with it. In my experience it becomes worse or a completely different track.
TP is is 0 dB here. Did you change it? Mix could be a bit wider imo.
Guys, this track only exists JUST BECAUSE of this bass. 
As I said, the idea was to combine this kind of bass with Electro stuff, and I like the resulting mood. Newcleus creates oldschool 80s Electro that’s also a little funky, so their bass meets different requirements to achieve the goals. And I think the sound of their bass is a different story in comparison. It’s not just shorter, it’s also less “airy” and feels more compressed.
Absolutely! Maybe not 4 minutes, but at least around 5 minutes. As I said, the second half needs to be redone. The middle part was too long and boring and the last part is pretty much the same as the first part, so at least slight variations are stringently required. That’s what I’m currently working on. And I won’t fiddle too long. Remember, I kept this track for years untouched on my drive.
No, I’ve uploaded the WIP only once, and that was before I continued to work on the track. Youlean told me TP was -1.8. I don’t know, but perhaps you’re measuring a different value now because Soundcloud changes the sound. You’ll never get the same sound that you’re uploading, even if you’re providing a download as MP3 it’s not the same MP3 that you’ve uploaded. What meter are you using to measure sound outside of a DAW? I’m interested in getting a standalone loudness meter and spectrum analyzer to measure stuff “what you hear” in general. regardless of the sound source.
Would you check the current TP value on SC? This is what I’ve uploaded:
As you can see it’s even less than -1, which is something that I don’t get. The TP limiter is the last device in the chain, so the value should be always exactly -1, but instead it’s often -0.9 if I pushed the volume to -9 LUFS or louder before the signal reaches the TP limiter. Weird. It would be interesting to see if it’s the same value on SC now. Here’s the current state of the track:
It still needs another new element in the second half.
1 Like
Longterm LUFS are over the -14 that SC asks for
6 times Over the short term SC limit of -10LUFS
The LUFS range is really small
dBTP is over -1dBTP
2 Likes
Thanks, that’s interesting. The LU range doesn’t surprise me and is pretty common for my (dance) music, just like in Hip Hop its average is always between -3 and -4.5. And that’s not only because I always push the loudness. So that value didn’t change on SC, but it’s surprising that SC obviously increased the loudness from -9 to -8, despite the fact that -14 is their target value. And TP somehow has also increased from -0.9 to -0.6, good to know. As long as it doesn’t get over -0.5 I’m ok with it, but I still wonder why this happens.
Isn’t this +0.6?
I get also +0.6 dBTP. As long it doesn’t clip I don’t think that’s a problem . Many CDs are a lot above 0 dBTP.
1 Like
Ah yes, you’re right, it’s 0.6. Even though I’m still not used to it, I should get other glasses. Anyway, this made me curious, so I grabbed a standalone version of Youlean and checked several songs from my favorites (MP3 and Bandcamp). The average integrated LUFS value is -9, which is not surprising. But a TP value between 0.8 and 2.5 surprises me just as much as a loudness range between 0.5 LU (yes indeed, zero point five) and 4 LU. I just have found one single song that has a bigger range than that. So according to that the values of my WIP seem to be pretty good, right? 
Shouldn’t be the target -14 LUFS? Why so loud?
1 Like
Because I don’t create music just to post it on Soundcloud or elsewhere. A value between -7 and -9 LUFS is common for dance music that is supposed to be played in a club or at home. And I as a non-professional refuse to master my stuff for every platform individually, not only because there’s no reward. Furthermore I think the stuff sounds good in general, regardless of the platform.
3 Likes