Just pulled this one out for the first time in ages. It sounds nice, but I never thought the surround mix was particularly impressive.
I just looked at the waveforms for this track and found it's of those mixes where there actually is discrete info, but the rears and center are mastered at way too low a volume. Rob Thomas' Something To Be is another example of this and I'm sure there are others. I know some may think it's against the intent of the mixer to alter the levels on a surround mix and that's understandable, but I think playing with this in audacity actually improves it quite a bit.
Here's "Bang A Gong" both before and after tweaking it. I lowered the fronts -1 dB, raised the center +4 db (the center has the dry vocal track, similar to how SW uses the center in a lot of his mixes), and raised the rears +6 dB. The rears do kind of mirror the info in the fronts but there are some subtle vocal harmonies and violins back there. You can see the rears spike during the chorus in the waveform. Personally, I think it's much more balanced this way.
Original:
New:
I just looked at the waveforms for this track and found it's of those mixes where there actually is discrete info, but the rears and center are mastered at way too low a volume. Rob Thomas' Something To Be is another example of this and I'm sure there are others. I know some may think it's against the intent of the mixer to alter the levels on a surround mix and that's understandable, but I think playing with this in audacity actually improves it quite a bit.
Here's "Bang A Gong" both before and after tweaking it. I lowered the fronts -1 dB, raised the center +4 db (the center has the dry vocal track, similar to how SW uses the center in a lot of his mixes), and raised the rears +6 dB. The rears do kind of mirror the info in the fronts but there are some subtle vocal harmonies and violins back there. You can see the rears spike during the chorus in the waveform. Personally, I think it's much more balanced this way.
Original:
New:
Last edited: