# Tonal Balance Control, spectrograms & Billie Eilish



## NekujaK (May 13, 2020)

My media player (VLC) displays a simple spectrogram as a visualization for music. I don't know how accurate it is, but it seems to reasonably reflect the frequency content of whatever track is playing. Most pop songs generally look something like these two random examples:






So the other day, a Billie Eilish song popped up on my MP3 rotation, and the spectrogram profile instantly caught my eye - it was an almost perfectly smooth slope. So I tried a few more Billie Eilish tunes, and most have the same smooth profile. Here are spectrograms for Bad Guy, Bellyache, Bury A Friend, and No Time To Die:






I'm no expert, but I'm assuming these smooth profiles are due in part to using a pure sine wave for bass, which is often the predominant instrument in Billie's music. However, when I loaded up other pop and hip hop songs, none of their spectrograms looked like Billie's. Even if the VLC spectrogram is not very accurate, there's still a distinct difference between Billie's songs and the majority of other music out there.

Just for fun, I ran a few of Billie's songs into Izotope's Tonal Balance Control. Here's Bad Guy:






and Bury A Friend:






On some of her songs, the Tonal Balance Control profile varies wildly (a complete flip) between different song sections, but the above two examples are fairly indictative of the entire song. I've seen discussions about how unconventional Billie's mixes are and how they break standard rules of mixing, and I suppose the above examples support that to some degree.

I guess one important takeaway from all this is that you don't need to conform to conventional standards to make good music or good mixes. There's always room to innovate!


----------



## tav.one (May 14, 2020)

NekujaK said:


> you don't need to conform to conventional standards to make good music or good mixes. There's always room to innovate!


----------



## NekujaK (May 14, 2020)

Following on from my initial post, here's an interesting video of Matt Weiss analyzing some of the unconventional mixing choices made in Billie Eilish's Bury A Friend.

Rob Kinelski is the mix engineer on Billie's project, and definitely deserves all the credit he's gotten, but in an interview on Pensado's Place, Kinelski stated his main job on this project was to basically "stay out of the way". He said Finneas and Billie delivered tracks to him that were extremely well thought out and each song's intention was very clear. This project was clearly a perfect team effort between an excellent engineer, brilliant producer, great songwriting, and impeccable performances. As it should be!


----------



## MauroPantin (May 14, 2020)

Interesting stuff. It caught my eye that, at least visually, those spectrograms look like a sloped X-Curve. Or am I seeing things? I haven't listened to enough Billie Eilish to know if this is consistent. But what I've heard has a lot of character, which is always nice.


----------



## Alex Fraser (May 14, 2020)

If you have it, the latest Logic 10.5 comes with the session file for “Ocean Eyes”


----------



## Allen Constantine (May 14, 2020)

As long as Billie's parents had the $$$ and the influence to put around her, that's enough!
RE mixing technique Finneas uses, it's the "magician's way"!

He just masks what Billie's asking and make it sound good enough for the average listener! 

Just my 2 cents, here!


----------



## NekujaK (May 14, 2020)

AllenConstantine said:


> He just masks what Billie's asking and make it sound good enough for the average listener!


Regardless of what anyone thinks about Finneas and Billie's music and success, the one thing I know is that the "average listener" is my favorite audience - they're the ones who ultimately pay the bills and create demand for more music. I love making them happy 😍


----------



## sostenuto (May 14, 2020)

Just made cool Billie Eilish - Tidal Playlist and listening 'carefully' ....


----------



## Richard Wilkinson (May 14, 2020)

AllenConstantine said:


> As long as Billie's parents had the $$$ and the influence to put around her, that's enough!


This is a weird thing to say, given her parents had very pedestrian middle-class jobs and virtually no 'influence' in the industry, as far as I know.


----------



## brenneisen (May 14, 2020)

Richard Wilkinson said:


> given her parents had very pedestrian middle-class jobs



two actors


----------



## NekujaK (May 14, 2020)

What Finneas and Billie's parents did do is strongly encourage them to be creative throughout their entire childhood, including home schooling. My favorite story that Billie conveyed to James Corden was that there was a standing rule in the house when they were growing up, that if Billie and her brother were playing music at night, they didn't have to go to bed. That's absolutely brilliant - and what a way to give your kids a musical head start without being pushy about it!


----------



## rhizomusicosmos (May 14, 2020)

Is it possible that the smooth FFTs are simply the result of putting an adaptive EQ in the master bus and using pink noise as the target curve?


----------



## Richard Wilkinson (May 14, 2020)

brenneisen said:


> two actors



Part-time. The vast majority of actors are not rich or influential:

_"We didn’t have a lot. Finneas got his singing lessons because I would go cook for his singing teacher while he had a lesson. Or we bartered for gymnastics lessons for Billie by Patrick doing handyman work. They wanted to do something and maybe we didn’t have the money, so we found a way to make it happen. And they worked hard, also. Billie wanted to ride horses, and it was definitely something we could not afford. We saved up, and we got her one week of a rec center horse camp, and then the people there said that if she came and worked at the camp, doing birthday parties or cleaning the stables, she could get lessons in exchange. So she basically paid for her own horseback riding lessons for two years by working at the stable and doing birthday parties."_


----------



## José Herring (May 14, 2020)

brenneisen said:


> two actors


Two actors just barely getting by. They didn't have much and her parents aren't that influential.

What Billie and Finneas do have? An ability to connect with an audience.

Look at the faces of these crying lip syncing teens and you'll know exactly why they're successful. They found their audience. Money can't buy you an audience.


----------



## MauroPantin (May 14, 2020)

Even if their parents were rich and well connected (which apparently they are not) what does that have to do with their music production and mixing? If their parents are rich, then there's no lesson or interesting things to learn from that curious EQ curve? I don't think so. There's clearly something unique going on, take advantage and try to learn instead of dismissing it.


----------



## Allen Constantine (May 14, 2020)

MauroPantin said:


> Even if their parents were rich and well connected (which apparently they are not) what does that have to do with their music production and mixing? If their parents are rich, then there's no lesson or interesting things to learn from that curious EQ curve? I don't think so. There's clearly something unique going on, take advantage and try to learn instead of dismissing it.



I will say No to my fellow comrades in the music business! 

It's all about a good, not sayyin at least very very good marketing strategy. The one that Britney Spears stood on, Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift, etc. Are you trying to be the unconscious fans out there idolizing their music just to the simple fact that you ain't had the oportunity to seize everything you wanted and didn't turned out to be? 

That "one moment" in which you would just "capture it and let it slip"? 

It's not about that!

Good marketing is always good marketing!

Good advertising is always on the run!

The more you are showing the world that everything is easy, the more, the sheeps are inclined to follow you! Same as "fabulous brands and icons you all dare to dream of"! 

Not saying any names as I did get a lot of exposure around the forum and from my honest point of view, well, I don't really give an F word!


----------



## NekujaK (May 14, 2020)

AllenConstantine said:


> I will say No to my fellow comrades in the music business!
> 
> It's all about a good, not sayyin at least very very good marketing strategy. The one that Britney Spears stood on, Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift, etc. Are you trying to be the unconscious fans out there idolizing their music just to the simple fact that you ain't had the oportunity to seize everything you wanted and didn't turned out to be?
> 
> ...


Of course marketing is involved. That's why it's called the "music business". But... just because an artist is heavily marketed doesn't automatically guarantee success. If an artist doesn't have the talent and the chops, and can't connect with an audience, marketing can only take them so far. Historically, record companies have blown hundreds of millions of dollars marketing artists who couldn't deliver the goods.

I'm glad Billie's music is being marketed, because quite honestly, I would've otherwise missed out on it. After she won her Grammys, I became curious and took a listen, and the more I listened, the more I liked. Nobody twisted my arm or fed me a bunch of hype to lead me to that conclusion.

Billie Eilish may not be everyone's cup of tea, and that's perfectly fine, but to simply dismiss her creativity and accomplishments because a record company decided to promote her art is more than a little shortsighted.


----------



## MauroPantin (May 14, 2020)

Almost every single artist out there that you've ever heard of was marketed in some way to you unless you went to a Tool gig in some humid basement in LA back in '92 and discovered them on your own or something like that. Yes. Connections are a part of success in ANY business. Yes. Marketing is, too. Who cares? What does marketing have to do with mixing and music production? How is it that songs are better or worse because of their marketing or any of this borderline gossip trivia of who their parents are and how much money they have? I'm genuinely curious.


----------



## Allen Constantine (May 15, 2020)

Stephen Limbaugh said:


> Marketing has nothing to do with it. _Budget_ though provides a legion of staff engineers, studio time, market testing, rentals, ghost writers for the topline, multiple mix engineers, and multiple mastering rounds, just to name a few.



+1!


----------



## patrick76 (May 15, 2020)

What is it about Billie Eilish that evokes such heated responses and conspiracy theories? If you want to view what this thread could deteriorate into, check out the Billie thread on gearslutz. Wow. It's pretty much like discussing politics.


----------



## Nils Neumann (May 15, 2020)

patrick76 said:


> What is it about Billie Eilish that evokes such heated responses and conspiracy theories? If you want to view what this thread could deteriorate into, check out the Billie thread on gearslutz. Wow. It's pretty much like discussing politics.


I guess it is enough to be young and to be the hottest act in the world, but nothing new that these artist get a lot of heat. I don't care about all that stuff, I heard something new an interesting in her songs, that’s enough for me to enjoy her music.


----------



## tav.one (May 15, 2020)

I don't like most music that is in the Top50/Charts but her music connects to me. I don't care about her back-end marketing, label or anything.
I just love her music and happy that I discovered her.
She & Finneas inspired me me to actually start recording with my sister, who is a great singer but got into other jobs, so those young artists producing in their bedrooms are not just talented they're inspirational too.


----------



## patrick76 (May 15, 2020)

Nils Neumann said:


> I guess it is enough to be young and to be the hottest act in the world, but nothing new that these artist get a lot of heat. I don't care about all that stuff, I heard something new an interesting in her songs, that’s enough for me to enjoy her music.


I enjoy her work also. I think her and her brother are creative and I'm glad they are doing well.


----------



## ghobii (May 15, 2020)

Most artists are terrible at self-promotion and business. There are many talented people out there that no one will ever no about because no one is selling them.


----------



## peladio (May 15, 2020)

Great post Nekujak..their music isn't my cup of tea but respect to them..very talented for sure. This video shows that you don't have to spend 1000s of dollars to create hit songs..


----------



## Henu (May 15, 2020)

rhizomusicosmos said:


> Is it possible that the smooth FFTs are simply the result of putting an adaptive EQ in the master bus and using pink noise as the target curve?



It certainly looks like it, and in fact I felt _horrified _when I saw those EQ curves. If this is the future of music, please kill me already. Remember when digital limiters hit big and we got loudness war? Just wait until the new "frequency war" starts.


----------



## patrick76 (May 15, 2020)

Stephen Limbaugh said:


> Does it _really_ need to be explained why Finneas and Eilish evoke the rancor of struggling musicians on Gearsluts?
> 
> Does it need to be explained why _any_ musician evokes the rancor of struggling musicians on Gearsluts?
> 
> Also, let's not descend into delusions about "hit song making for only $1,000." The sober view of their success is equal parts artist tenacity and budget.


I didn't mention "struggling" musicians. Anyway, it really doesn't matter I suppose. It just surprises me when people get so bent out of shape about her success.


----------



## John Longley (May 15, 2020)

There has been much more money spent, on all sides, to make MUCH worse pop. Let them have it, however they got there.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 15, 2020)

Fantastic OP, thanks. Freakish graphs, great work.


----------



## sumskilz (May 16, 2020)

Henu said:


> It certainly looks like it, and in fact I felt _horrified _when I saw those EQ curves. If this is the future of music, please kill me already. Remember when digital limiters hit big and we got loudness war? Just wait until the new "frequency war" starts.


This may be the same thing with a different target. It looks like the mastering is a deliberate effort to game the volume normalization on streaming services.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 16, 2020)

sumskilz said:


> This may be the same thing with a different target. It looks like the mastering is a deliberate effort to game the volume normalization on streaming services.



Maaaaaybe, but surely Tonal Balance wouldn't be wildly out of whack if that were the case?

It's genuinely intriguing.


----------



## sumskilz (May 16, 2020)

Guy Rowland said:


> Maaaaaybe, but surely Tonal Balance wouldn't be wildly out of whack if that were the case?


Tonal Balance is based on what is typical (or has been) of the contour of commercial mixes, but having a contour similar to pink noise should maximize the overall volume across the frequency range relative to other mixes in the system since volume normalization is weighted by the contour of typical human hearing. For example, a hyped top end such as has been typical in commercial mixes since the advent of digital media, would just cause the whole mix to be turned down by the volume normalization.


----------



## John Longley (May 16, 2020)

sumskilz said:


> This may be the same thing with a different target. It looks like the mastering is a deliberate effort to game the volume normalization on streaming services.


How so? The normalization algos are all quite different between platforms, with some being average level using LUFS or RMS and some being a black box using Replay gain and their own target gathered from track peak data. Interested to hear your thoughts on how this would work.

Although LUFS is similar to Weighted RMS, or K weighted RMS-- certain EQ characteristics don't inherently mean anything regarding "loudness". Of course what this graph may show is very managed transients and very tightly controlled dynamics resulting in better crest factor. (Clipping, multiband and saturation could all play a hand).I think ultimately it's probably the arrangement itself. Maybe the OP feels like posting the waveform?

What I agree with in general, is that when you have normalized "loudness", you will see people go for different EQ and dynamic choices to try and stand out from a psycho-acoustic perspective and we could end up with the brightness wars next.


----------



## sumskilz (May 16, 2020)

John Longley said:


> How so? The normalization algos are all quite different between platforms, with some being average level using LUFS or RMS and some being a black box using Replay gain and their own target gathered from track peak data. Interested to hear your thoughts on how this would work.
> 
> Although LUFS is similar to Weighted RMS, or K weighted RMS-- certain EQ characteristics don't inherently mean anything regarding "loudness". Of course what this graph may show is very managed transients and very tightly controlled dynamics resulting in better crest factor. (Clipping, multiband and saturation could all play a hand).I think ultimately it's probably the arrangement itself. Maybe the OP feels like posting the waveform?


Any weighting that takes into account the different perceived loudness of different frequencies at the same amplitude should have a similar result. If you generate a sine wave at a low frequency and then shift the pitch upwards without raising the amplitude, it will start to measure louder on the LUFS scale (as I'm sure you know). For the same reason, any normalization algo that uses a similar measure should turn down the whole mix with a disproportionate amount of high end more compared to one with proportionately less high end. It looks to me like there are tightly controlled dynamics (as you point out) along a curve that appears to be inverse to something like K weighting.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 16, 2020)

AllenConstantine said:


> I will say No to my fellow comrades in the music business!
> 
> It's all about a good, not sayyin at least very very good marketing strategy. The one that Britney Spears stood on, Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift, etc. Are you trying to be the unconscious fans out there idolizing their music just to the simple fact that you ain't had the oportunity to seize everything you wanted and didn't turned out to be?
> 
> ...



Good marketing won’t sell an unattractive product. Whether it is or isn’t to any specific person’s taste, it’s a good product.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 16, 2020)

sumskilz said:


> Tonal Balance is based on what is typical (or has been) of the contour of commercial mixes, but having a contour similar to pink noise should maximize the overall volume across the frequency range relative to other mixes in the system since volume normalization is weighted by the contour of typical human hearing. For example, a hyped top end such as has been typical in commercial mixes since the advent of digital media, would just cause the whole mix to be turned down by the volume normalization.



It's a sort of interesting theory but I'm not quite buying it just yet. I don't see how you can generate a contour "just like pink noise" out of a complete mix for one thing. Not saying it's impossible, but just don't yet see it. How exactly does one turn a mix into a contour just like pink noise to produce a graph like shown in the OP, even if one wanted to?

I suppose what would help settle this is if someone could take a normal mix - either their own or anyone else's track for these purposes really - apply some magic pink noise contour processing and make it a) sound like a Billie Eilish mix and b) have a super smooth curve as shown in the OP.

(BTW, sorry to sound my age, but try as I might I can't find anything to like in Eilish's music, despite repeated attempts on my part and 10 trillion plays on YouTube. I wanna like her, I love the DIY aesthetic and I like plenty of electronica and pop. I guess I'm finally just too darn old, so probably all as it should be).


----------



## NekujaK (May 16, 2020)

After thinking about this for a while, and reading all the interesting posts above (about the mix, not the marketing... sheesh), I thought I'd try a very crude little experiment to see if I could get results that are somewhat close to the spectral profiles in Billie Eilish's songs. Here's what I did:

1. I took a popular hip-hop song by 50 Cent from a few years back called In Da Club. Here's a snapshot of its spectral profile in my VLC media player - as you can see, it's typical of most pop songs:






2. Next, I applied a great little plugin called Soniformer by Voxengo to the 50 Cent track. About 10 years ago, Soniformer was the backbone of my mastering chain. I've since moved on to other tools, but I still occasionally rely on Soniformer. It's basically a 32-band compressor, so you can get very precise with compression behavior across the frequency spectrum. I quickly applied a very rough compression curve that sort of approximates what I see in Billie's songs. Mind you, I spent about 15 seconds doing this. I wasn't going for precision, I just wanted to get a rough overall profile, and used some pretty extreme settings. So here's my threshold curve with In Da Club being played through Soniformer (I also made some crude adjustments to the Ratio and Release curves as well, which are not shown here):






3. I exported the result, and here's what In Da Club now looks like in VLC's spectrogram:






It's obviously not as smooth as the curves in Billie's songs, but for just 15 seconds of rough adjustments, the result is getting very close. With further refinement, and maybe even more than 32 bands, It seems like a smooth curve might be achievable. Draw your own conclusions.

----

@John Longley here's the waveform you requested from a short section of Billie Eilish's Bad Guy. Hope this is what you were looking for:


----------



## sumskilz (May 16, 2020)

Guy Rowland said:


> It's a sort of interesting theory but I'm not quite buying it just yet. I don't see how you can generate a contour "just like pink noise" out of a complete mix for one thing. Not saying it's impossible, but just don't yet see it. How exactly does one turn a mix into a contour just like pink noise to produce a graph like shown in the OP, even if one wanted to?
> 
> I suppose what would help settle this is if someone could take a normal mix - either their own or anyone else's track for these purposes really - apply some magic pink noise contour processing and make it a) sound like a Billie Eilish mix and b) have a super smooth curve as shown in the OP.


I was thinking along the same lines as what NekujaK did, but maybe multiband compression and limiting in series. Using multiple limiters in series isn't that uncommon during mastering.


----------



## John Longley (May 16, 2020)

sulz said:


> I was thinking along the same lines as what NekujaK did, but maybe multiband compression and limiting in series. Using multiple limiters in series isn't that uncommon during mastering.


You could probably do this with just Limitless if you wanted to.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 16, 2020)

Good sleuthing NekujaK (and other comments above).

Do you think that process achieves anything useful audibly? Is there any reason for making pretty graphs from a producer's perspective? With maximising back in the day, you sounded louder. What does this achieve?


----------



## Polkasound (May 16, 2020)

Guy Rowland said:


> BTW, sorry to sound my age, but try as I might I can't find anything to like in Eilish's music, despite repeated attempts on my part and 10 trillion plays on YouTube. I wanna like her, I love the DIY aesthetic and I like plenty of electronica and pop. I guess I'm finally just too darn old, so probably all as it should be.



That's nothing to be sorry about. I also cannot feel anything in her music, and that's expected. I wrote an article on my blog about this phenomenon a few months ago. Contemporary music continually changes to appeal to the needs and desires of each new generation.

What I've read is that her music connects with teenagers on a fundamental level. Her lyrics can be enjoyed by many, but teenagers can especially feel their weight. Her non-conformist image has a lot to do with it, too.

I can appreciate the ideas and talent both she and Finneas have, but to me, her music is pretty much the same as the unlimited numbers of obscure sound-alike artists out there.




Guy Rowland said:


> Do you think that process achieves anything useful audibly? Is there any reason for making pretty graphs from a producer's perspective?



In regard to the spectral profile of her album, if there's one way to describe it, it would be non-conformist. It defies the convention of pop music. I believe it adds to the appeal of her music. A lot of her young listeners probably can't place their finger on why it sounds different. They just know it does, and they like it, because it fits with her image.


----------



## John Longley (May 16, 2020)

Wait until you see that Aphex Twin track with his face lol


----------



## NekujaK (May 16, 2020)

Guy Rowland said:


> (BTW, sorry to sound my age, but try as I might I can't find anything to like in Eilish's music, despite repeated attempts on my part and 10 trillion plays on YouTube. I wanna like her, I love the DIY aesthetic and I like plenty of electronica and pop. I guess I'm finally just too darn old, so probably all as it should be).


Don't know if this will help you find a window into her music, but try listening to other people covering her songs. On YouTube, there are some compilation videos of contestants on The Voice singing Billie Eilish songs. I already liked Billie's music, but watching these videos really made me appreciate the brilliance of her and Finneas' writing.



Guy Rowland said:


> Do you think that process achieves anything useful audibly? Is there any reason for making pretty graphs from a producer's perspective? With maximising back in the day, you sounded louder. What does this achieve?


Well, not surprisingly, it definitely made the sound much darker. Most of Billie's songs have a very dark sound, much more so than typical pop. Whether it's "better" is a subjective judgment. As Matt Weiss said in the video I posted above, mixing should be about the individual needs and intention of the song. I imagine Finneas and Billie deliberately wanted a darker sound, and it turned out to be a good choice in this instance.


----------



## Joël Dollié (May 16, 2020)

I think the mixes are great for the style. The frequency curves make a ton of sense when we look at the sound design that was chosen.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (May 16, 2020)

I for one am pretty amazed by the fact that grown ups are seriously debating Billie Eilish in any sort of capacity.


----------



## MauroPantin (May 16, 2020)

Guy Rowland said:


> It's a sort of interesting theory but I'm not quite buying it just yet. I don't see how you can generate a contour "just like pink noise" out of a complete mix for one thing. Not saying it's impossible, but just don't yet see it. How exactly does one turn a mix into a contour just like pink noise to produce a graph like shown in the OP, even if one wanted to?



Of the top of my head the first idea would be to sidechain pink noise into an EQ-matching plugin that has dynamic capabilities (FabFilter Pro-Q comes to mind). Not sure if the outcome would be the desired one, though, I haven't tried it.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (May 17, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> Good marketing won’t sell an unattractive product.



Well, I'm not sure it's quite like that. In very many cases, it's precisely the marketing that makes a product attractive in the first place. There's a reason why so much money and ressources is pumped in marketing all over the place. The whole concept of it is to create needs and wants and then satisfy them. People always go on about supply and demand, but it's often forgotten that first you create the demand, then you handle the supply.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 17, 2020)

NekujaK said:


> Most of Billie's songs have a very dark sound, much more so than typical pop. Whether it's "better" is a subjective judgment. As Matt Weiss said in the video I posted above, mixing should be about the individual needs and intention of the song. I imagine Finneas and Billie deliberately wanted a darker sound, and it turned out to be a good choice in this instance.



That sounds right. My hunch (nothing more obvs) is that there hasn't been a deliberate attempt to maximise anything, that this is just the sound they ended up with, likely working in complete isolation and away from pro mixers, studios and mastering engineers. Fans liked it just as it was. And it produces these weird effects on spectragrams, and gets severely told off by Tonal Balance.

Wonder if iZotope will update the profiles in Tonal Balance to have a Billie Eilish one? Yes I know anyone can do that right now, but what I mean is - will this now be a sound so distinctive it will be a new genre-normal?

*guy remembers he got an email saying tonal balance has had an update this week*
EDIT - slightly off topic, but a nice Tonal Balance update, considerably snappier with the metering.


----------



## sumskilz (May 17, 2020)

Guy Rowland said:


> That sounds right. My hunch (nothing more obvs) is that there hasn't been a deliberate attempt to maximise anything, that this is just the sound they ended up with, likely working in complete isolation and away from pro mixers, studios and mastering engineers.


The mix engineer and mastering engineer are both big time professionals. You can check out their credits on the Allmusic website:

Rob Kinelski (mix engineer)








Rob Kinelski Songs, Albums, Reviews, Bio & More | AllMusic


Explore Rob Kinelski's discography including top tracks, albums, and reviews. Learn all about Rob Kinelski on AllMusic.




www.allmusic.com





John Greenham (mastering engineer)








John Greenham Songs, Albums, Reviews, Bio & More | AllMusic


Explore John Greenham's discography including top tracks, albums, and reviews. Learn all about John Greenham on AllMusic.




www.allmusic.com





More interesting, you can listen to some of their other recent work there to hear if it has a similar aesthetic. I checked out a few, I'd say some yes, some no.


----------



## patrick76 (May 17, 2020)

Here's Rob Kinelski on Pensado's Place for anyone who is interested.


----------



## SupremeFist (May 17, 2020)

I don't seek out Billie Eilish's music to listen to personally, but I am quite militant about the principle that if you think some music that is extremely popular is "bad", you need to spend more time trying to figure out what there is about it that touches so many people.


----------



## Allen Constantine (May 17, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> Good marketing won’t sell an unattractive product. Whether it is or isn’t to any specific person’s taste, it’s a good product.



It will and it has been done for years! You need to take a look around in the world.

And of course, it's how you *see* marketing. If you are seeing it just marketing through the keyhole, or are you seeing it, doors wide open!





Stephen Limbaugh said:


> Does it _really_ need to be explained why Finneas and Eilish evoke the rancor of struggling musicians on Gearsluts?
> 
> Does it need to be explained why _any_ musician evokes the rancor of struggling musicians on Gearsluts?
> 
> Also, let's not descend into delusions about "hit song making for only $1,000." The sober view of their success is equal parts artist tenacity and budget.



+1 again,Stephen!


----------



## Joël Dollié (May 17, 2020)

Tonal balance isn't everything. It can sure help find issues, but relying too much on it is a huge mistake imo. All you need is a trailer low boom during an intro to throw it off completely. If the Billie Eilish tracks didn't have that bass boosted feel, they wouldn't feel nearly the same, especially "Bury a friend" which is supposed to sound claustrophobic almost.


----------



## NekujaK (May 17, 2020)

Joël Dollié said:


> Tonal balance isn't everything. It can sure help find issues, but relying too much on it is a huge mistake imo. All you need is a trailer low boom during an intro to throw it off completely.


In general I agree. But to be fair, trailer music is not the same as a pop song, in that trailer music is often a combination of music plus hyped up sound effects (like booms, braams, risers, stingers, etc.). Most of these elements are meant to prominently stand out, so naturally, they will skew any frequency analysis tool.

But Izotope's value proposition behind TBC is that it will compare a single piece of music against thousands of analyzed tracks within a specific category. So evaluating a Billie Eilish song against TBC's Pop or Hip-Hop profile should be a valid comparison. And as it turns out, it's a very interesting one (at least to me) because Eilish's tracks don't fit within any of Izotope's profiles.

Which brings me back to the main point of my original post at the top of this thread: you don't need to conform to accepted standards to make good music or a good mix. There's always room to innovate.

So in that sense, yes, take Tonal Balance Control with a grain of salt, and go be creative!

P.S. Interestingly enough, the one TBC profile that most closely matches Eilish's music is the Orchestral profile. There might be something to learn from that...


----------



## rhizomusicosmos (May 17, 2020)

John Longley said:


> . . . Of course what this graph may show is very managed transients and very tightly controlled dynamics resulting in better crest factor. (Clipping, multiband and saturation could all play a hand).I think ultimately it's probably the arrangement itself.



Yes, I would say "micro-managed" which is why I think it may be an automatic tool with a target curve. Using a tool like this would perhaps give some sonic consistency between tracks that were mixed in a more "experimental" vein. So, transient shaping plus dynamics or EQ processing with a target curve? This may be someone's secret sauce.

When you say "better crest factor" do you mean a lower one?

I listened to a couple of tracks and was really expecting more sustained sounds to give a smooth curve result like that. But I do notice quite a bit of feature repetition in the waveform that @NekujaK posted. The elements may sound disparate but be spectrally similar if averaged over a long enough window. What is the averaging in the FFT display in VLC?


----------



## rhizomusicosmos (May 17, 2020)

If there is a target curve, it is closer to Brown than Pink:





This is an FFT of ten seconds of Bad Guy vs brown and pink noise using Sound Forge.

[EDIT] - So I had a look at the spectrum display for Bad Guy in VLC. The smooth spectrum is not constant but is mainly due to the bass and the kick along with the fairly slow decay of the visualisation. As you can see from the FFT above, the bass is rather overwhelming so it dominates the spectral profile.

Here is a grab from the acapella section in the VLC Spectrum visualisation:





Here is a grab from one of the verses with bass, kick and voice:





Here is the bass decaying by itself:


----------



## NekujaK (May 18, 2020)

Yup, the smooth curve isn't constant in Bad Guy. In my original post I speculated it might be due to a pure bass patch, since it seems to be associated with the presence of the bass.

But still, I find it curious that I've never seen a smooth curve like this on any other songs.


----------

