When I started preparing this project, I was using a lot of convolution/impulse response effects in places where EQ and reverb are typically used. I wanted to give the impression that all of the sounds are devices making a sound in the listener's room, the sound moving through the air and then captured, not just a direct signal to the effects and then the mix. The consequence of this was the generation of some odd artifacts that would normally be removed from a mix, that I want to leave in to maintain that impression of things in a room. It also made the overall sound quieter, and since I also decided I wanted the dynamic levels to be more than simply "pushing hard against the limiter" and "not pushing the limiter," the whole album is intentionally soft.

I considered two references that I thought had a similar variety of sounds captured and mixed precisely, using as much of the dynamic range of digital media as one can get away with:


I'm not sure YouTube's playback can do either any real justice; in fact, I hear the dynamics farting out badly as I test listen to P.G. - US, and I realize that ReplayGain and a number of other limitations and decimations alter the way people will listen to my mix.

I know I can't start a "quiet" or retro-mixing trend all by myself, but I want to push back against flat and loud, at least a little bit.

Related Posts


I wish I could find the article or blog entry I read in the past that explained how the difference between poor urban upbringing includes different standards fo...