Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
As above.
In my view, they have taken a potentially amazing track, which sounded fantastic both live and as an instrumental, and completely messed up the single mix in an almost amateurish and hopelessly self-defeating manner.
I rank it as one of their biggest errors, because it was so easy to avoid. You really have to try very hard to ruin a track like Vocal.
In my view, they have taken a potentially amazing track, which sounded fantastic both live and as an instrumental, and completely messed up the single mix in an almost amateurish and hopelessly self-defeating manner.
I rank it as one of their biggest errors, because it was so easy to avoid. You really have to try very hard to ruin a track like Vocal.
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
I'm still waiting for the propper studio mix and not the one from the radio but at the moment I'm definitely also leaning towards "ruined".
Firing verbal shots like a tommy gun
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
The question in the poll is not correct in my opinion - should be "Has the vocal ruined Vocal" I'd like to hear different vocal mix on the album version, but this is not likely to happen. Shame, because I started to love this track. It's so powerful and danceable - just listen to this on your earphones.
I've been around the world for a number of reasons. I've seen it all the change of seasons, and I, my lord, may I say nothing?
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
Yaa! It sounds almost fan made, like "I love robot" where Neil's voice was sampled from various sources. It deserves some more work, tweaking and repairing, it's a good song really. I'm starting to like it.
- West End Boy
- Posts: 545
- Joined: Wed 17 Jun 2009, 3:51 pm
- Contact:
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
It certainly didn't ruin the song for me, but I have to admit I was quite underwhelmed when I heard the single mix, especially compared to the fabulous live version. It lacks energy and comes across as somewhat generic.
From summer warmth to sudden cold
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
This radio edit is like so many "radio edits" as opposed to "single versions" - a hatchet job that uses Polyfilla to paper over the cracks and holes.
I think Tenlow said in another thread that this radio edit was shorter than anything on Discography. That's a reflection of the shorter attention-span of today's idiocracy. We're now losing something like 25% of a single's running time just to have it serviced to radio at all.
It should still have been possible to do a better job than this, though.
Drico.
I think Tenlow said in another thread that this radio edit was shorter than anything on Discography. That's a reflection of the shorter attention-span of today's idiocracy. We're now losing something like 25% of a single's running time just to have it serviced to radio at all.
It should still have been possible to do a better job than this, though.
Drico.
The pale kid that hides in the attic behind his PC...
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
That's basically correct, yes. However, even today, a song doesn't have to be that short in order to get played on the radio. The radio mix of "Get lucky" for example is 4:07 mins long and not an exception, although obviously radio tracks have become shorter on average.Drico One wrote:I think Tenlow said in another thread that this radio edit was shorter than anything on Discography. That's a reflection of the shorter attention-span of today's idiocracy. We're now losing something like 25% of a single's running time just to have it serviced to radio at all.Drico.
I just think 3:20 mins is too short for "Vocal". Despite all the controversy about the mixing etc.
Firing verbal shots like a tommy gun
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
I agree - it should have been at least 30 seconds longer. That said, if this track has any appeal to dance music DJs, the radio edit probably won't matter. They'll probably play the longer versions as a matter of course. Armin van Buuren, for example, played the Stuart Price mix which was at least a minute longer.
Drico.
Drico.
The pale kid that hides in the attic behind his PC...
- glennjridge
- Posts: 8101
- Joined: Sat 01 Nov 2003, 9:28 pm
- Contact:
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
When it first started up I was kinda liking it...the dryness of Neil's voice and when the drums kicked in with the bouncy bass I thought it reminded me of "its alright " and I felt like it was sort of the calm before the ravey storm was about to hit but when the ravey part came it seemed muted somehow....and that percussive synth part sounded kinda cheap and chintzy .
there should have been some big background vocals also IMO and maybe swirling strings. But this what I was saying before....this is the danger of hearing songs live first...because audience members are recording something dead loud it sounds massive...and then when you hear the studio,it pales immediately.
there should have been some big background vocals also IMO and maybe swirling strings. But this what I was saying before....this is the danger of hearing songs live first...because audience members are recording something dead loud it sounds massive...and then when you hear the studio,it pales immediately.
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
Totally agree. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be having this conversation if people hadn't heard two alternate versions before the final studio mix. Though my point about the heavy FM radio compression still stands - I don't think this is what the single edit actually sounds like.glennjridge wrote:But this what I was saying before....this is the danger of hearing songs live first...because audience members are recording something dead loud it sounds massive...and then when you hear the studio,it pales immediately.
I must disengage your recreational music.
- Undertaker
- Posts: 8947
- Joined: Thu 30 Oct 2003, 8:16 pm
- Contact:
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
Vocal single edit is alright. Not as good as the live version sounded but opinions are swayed too easily when the single edit isn't heard first.
End of the day, it's a dance record. It's not really going to be about the lyrics/vocal.
A similar comparision can be made about the single edits of Introspective. None as good as the album versions but maybe that opinion wold have been different if we heard the single edits first.
End of the day, it's a dance record. It's not really going to be about the lyrics/vocal.
A similar comparision can be made about the single edits of Introspective. None as good as the album versions but maybe that opinion wold have been different if we heard the single edits first.
- Undertaker
- Posts: 8947
- Joined: Thu 30 Oct 2003, 8:16 pm
- Contact:
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
I voted No. It's not as good as the live version and I really hope the live version is the album version but this is a dance track and edited for radio for the general buying publics benefit, not ours. Fairs fair.
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
Undertaker wrote:I voted No. It's not as good as the live version and I really hope the live version is the album version but this is a dance track and edited for radio for the general buying publics benefit, not ours. Fairs fair.
I agree with this, the radio edit serves its purpose.
Listen without prejudice
Re: Poll: Has the single mix ruined "Vocal"?
I was holding so much hope for the vocal mix of Vocal only to have it ruined by the poor mixing/mastering. I'm still of course holding out hope that the album version of the track will sound much better. Considering that both Axis and Fluorescent have Neil's vocals balanced well in the mix, I'm thinking that the version of Vocal played on the radio is either a special mix made especially for the radio or a pre final mix/mastered version.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests