Forums | Search | Archives

All Forums  Cool Edit  Mixing tips

Author	Topic
ducktape2003 Posts: 6	Posted - Fri Aug 01, 2003 9:39 pm  Just out of curiosity, what are some tips for good mixing? thanx
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Fri Aug 01, 2003 9:55 pm  www.studiocovers.com ;) It is a pretty good tip! _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
William Rose Location: USA Posts: 467	Posted - Fri Aug 01, 2003 10:00 pm  Rules of thumb ? Common procedures ? Tricks of the Trade ? Standard methods ? Secrets ? Magic spells ? Uh, that's a pretty general question. And it's one that the pros around here have been reluctant to answer when it's put directly to them like that. But that's probably because your question is similar to the phrase "A brief history of time."
ducktape2003 Posts: 6	Posted - Fri Aug 01, 2003 10:43 pm  "a brief history of time" ???
jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901	Posted - Fri Aug 01, 2003 10:49 pm  I'm afraid that when you get right down to it, the whole of these Syntrillium/Adobe forums are, in themselves, a brief history of time (at least, in their own way). Voodoo's tip is good stuff... And you could certainly do worse than just searching/reading through these forums for things that pique your interest. ;) Best... -Jon _________________
William Rose Location: USA Posts: 467	Posted - Fri Aug 01, 2003 10:56 pm  Yeah, bad example. I just meant that the you're asking for some general tips on an incredibly expansive and dynamic subject. The situation often defines the approach that is taken. Do a search for "Mixing Primer" here on the forum, and you'll see some of what I'm talking about. A Brief History Of Time ? It was the title of a book written about fifteen years ago by Stephen Hawking. I thought it was a clever title.
ducktape2003 Posts: 6	Posted - Fri Aug 01, 2003 10:58 pm  ya, very helpful site Voodoo. thanx As for that last reply, I'm more even more confused... Sorry, I must be stupid
ducktape2003 Posts: 6	Posted - Fri Aug 01, 2003 11:02 pm  Ohh, thanks. I get it now. The "Last reply" I was referring to wasn't William's. Ok, I'm not confused anymore:)
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Sat Aug 02, 2003 6:00 am  Although it might seem like a short answer to a multi-faceted question..... www.studiocovers really has tons of useful information. And, while I'll be the first to point out it's not the "know all/end all" source, it has proven immeasureable for those seeking generalized (and some more indepth) answers. But most importantly... it's saved me a BUNCH of typing!! _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Sat Aug 02, 2003 8:19 am  William Rose wrote: Do a search for "Mixing Primer" here on the forum, and you'll see some of what I'm talking about. No, I don't quite understand the 'Brief History of Time' reference either, but I can tell you where the 'Bunch of questions' is - it's half-way through this thread. _________________
William Rose Location: USA Posts: 467	Posted - Sat Aug 02, 2003 8:36 am  I doesn't really matter if you understand it or not Steve. I wasn't talking to you when I wrote it. But I kind of thought that asking for some quick "tips for good mixing" was a little like asking for a "brief" account of the history of time. Maybe difficult to accomplish in a post or two. But I guess he didn't say "quick" did he ? Nor did he ask for a complete How-To guide. So, as I said, it wasn't a perfect reference, but it wasn't exactly pulled from thin air either. Do you think ?
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Sat Aug 02, 2003 8:51 am  William Rose wrote: I doesn't really matter if you understand it or not Steve. I wasn't talking to you when I wrote it. But I kind of thought that asking for some quick "tips for good mixing" was a little like asking for a "brief" account of the history of time. Maybe difficult to accomplish in a post or two. But I guess he didn't say "quick" did he ? Nor did he ask for a complete How-To guide. So, as I said, it wasn't a perfect reference, but it wasn't exactly pulled from thin air either. Do you think ? Don't shoot me! I was merely sympathising with his predicament in view of his original request, which as you now observe, didn't have the word 'quick' in it at all... hence the confusion, I think. _________________
William Rose Location: USA Posts: 467	Posted - Sat Aug 02, 2003 8:59 am
bonnder Posts: 215	Posted - Sat Aug 02, 2003 9:51 am  William Rose wrote: I doesn't really matter if you understand it or not Steve. I wasn't talking to you when I wrote it. My goodness!! He's bored and rude. Did you go to bed last night William??;) 'I Can't Start Up Cool Edit!!!'
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Sat Aug 02, 2003 11:03 am  _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
William Rose Location: USA Posts: 467	Posted - Sat Aug 02, 2003 7:39 pm  Good Lord, Voodoo !
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Sun Aug 03, 2003 1:58 pm  Mixing Secrets ??-- Mix one track at a time, make each one sound good, then blend them all together, come back in a few days and do it again, and keep doing that until it sounds great. Don't be surprised if it takes you a month or two for each song, to get it to sound perfect. This is what my college teacher used to do, and his final mixes sounded fantastic. You may also want to get a lava lamp, for something to watch, while your listening to the music.
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Sun Aug 03, 2003 2:40 pm  While I DO agree that sometimes it takes alot of effort (days, weeks) to get something your happy with. However, I don't subscribe to the "individual" track method. My experience is that if I spend alot of time and effort making each individual track sound great, then when I try to mix tracks together, there's no room for things to breathe. Granted, I do believe you should get a good, clean signal but things like E.Q., I like to work in the context of the entire mix. YMMV _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Sun Aug 03, 2003 4:58 pm  That's not what my teacher at the college did. He'd spend hours on refining each track, then come back to them and do them again. Then see how well they blended and see what needed to be changed, in the event there were any harmonic conflics. Even setting up a drum set he spent about 2-3 hours trying out different mic placemements to get the best sound, and I have to admit the drum tracks he got sounded great, and everything sounded they way it should on the recording. Watching him and the other students running back and forth between the control room, and the drum set got to be really boring after a while, but the end result was very good sound. He went over the drums with a fine tooth comb, requesting the drums to be tuned, taped, muffled ect.. things like that to so the snares wouldn't rattle at the wrong time..ect...each track he recorded was the same story.. everything had to be precisely just right, before recording.
jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901	Posted - Sun Aug 03, 2003 5:39 pm  I think there's some conflicting misinformation going on here, so let's clear it up now... Quote: originally posted by djwayne... Mix one track at a time.... First, how do you accomplish that? You don't "mix" one track. Quote: originally posted by VoodooRadio... I like to work in the context of the entire mix. Quote: originally posted by djwayne... That's not what my teacher at the college did. He'd spend hours on refining each track, then come back to them and do them again.. Now, if you wish to say "refine" (as you subsequently did), that's okay - but what, exactly was your instructor doing to these tracks? Cleaning them up? That certainly makes some sense if the recordings were inferior, of course. Then again, garbage in, garbage out, and Voodoo's first rule of noise reduction applies. Quote: originally posted by djwayne... Then see how well they blended and see what needed to be changed, in the event there were any harmonic conflics. There is no way in hell you can play with a track's EQ settings individually out of context and expect it to ultimately sit with the other tracks... Which is what Voodoo was saying, and I whole-heartedly agree. Of course, some cleaning, topping and tailing of tracks is par for the course. Just remember that you can "Pro-Tool" or "Cool-Edit" something absolutely to death before you mix it if you want to, but by definition, the life will disappear right out of your tracks. But there's just no way to tell what you need to do to your tracks individually (apart from some degree of dynamics compensation and cleanup, de-essing, etc.) to get them to actually sit in a mix. You have to work in the context of that mix. Soloing tracks is really only for finding specific problems. And now, as to these harmonic conflict problems you referred to... Granted, these things do occur. Of course, they can't be found by listening to the individual tracks, either. You have to listen to everything together to identify that there even are problems. So, I guess I'd like to see you clarify what your instructor was actually doing to these tracks, prior to mixing - And if he did anything at all to the EQ, on an individual basis, he'd have been chasing his tail (I'm not referring to EQ'ing sources that haven't yet been recorded). That's like heaving a pile of rocks over your shoulder at a flock of birds, one at a time, then turning around each time to see if you've hit one. :D I just think some clarification is in order, so we're all on the same page. You subsequently went into how this instructor meticulously recorded individual instruments, which is an entirely different issue that really needs to be separated. I'm also of a mind to get good source material. Without further clarification, I'd say one large difference between myself and your instructor is that I always have some idea of how the end product can come together - usually several different scenarios - and work toward that. For someone who tracks and subsequently must mix those tracks, having the "big picture" is half the battle, really. 8) Best... -Jon _________________
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Sun Aug 03, 2003 6:07 pm  Calm down !!.. He would take each track as an individual little project and ask what can I do to make this track sound great, a little EQ ?, Do I want a little reverb on it ??, okay what reverb setting would sound best ?? would that other reverb unit I have sound better ?? Let's try it and see !! or would a little delay sound better ??, light delay ?? heavy delay, a stereo delay..hmmm...try it and see... Too bassey ?? Too Bright ?? Do the cymbals sizzle ?? Do they die out too soon ?? Does it need to be compressed ?? How about a little sonic maximizer ?? The list goes on and on....Then he'd see how it would sound with the other tracks. To be able to get a good sounding mix, you first have to have a good sounding recording, or else it'll come back and haunt you while you're trying to mix it later, so the main recording is the first step in getting a good mix. Mixing is an art, and each artist has their own style. Nobody says you have to do it this way, but that's the way he did it, and that's the way I think makes a certain amount of sense, to find out what's not quite right in a mix.
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Sun Aug 03, 2003 6:32 pm  The final test for the course consisted of our own individual mixes of the main recording session. We were all given a master recording and had about 3 hours to mix it the way we wanted to. The next week he played all the various mixes to see how they sounded for the whole class, against his mix. It was a series of A/B tests, and after hearing the test mixes, it was quite obvious why he was the teacher and we were the students !!! :) All of us wanted to make changes to our mixes, but at least we learned what we needed to look for in the mixing process.
jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901	Posted - Sun Aug 03, 2003 8:53 pm  Ummm... "Calm down"? :shy: Hmm. Okay... Sorry if you took offense at my articulated request for better info. Perhaps I wasn't clear. :D But it's still not quite evident whether you meant (in your first reply) that each of your instructor's tracks was constructed from the microphone to the final mix, but I'll let it pass and assume that's the case, since you've detailed your class doing that in later posts. It just didn't quite jibe with your later comments, and I couldn't tell whether you were deviating from the idea of mixing pre-recorded tracks or not. Now, I can safely assume that you were. Perhaps I misconstrued Voodoo's reply also, but I got the impression he was talking about actually mixing tracks that were already recorded, except as alluded to in his final comments. ;) And, I apologize, but I'm afraid I must admit that I'm still chuckling over the "Mix one track at a time" reference... Heh! Best... -Jon _________________
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 4:42 am  One track at a time. Yep that's the way he would do it. Each track is a different project, yet important to the entire mix. Let's say everything was fine except the vocal track is really screachy, you want to fix that, or let's say the bass was really muddy, and not punchy, and punchy was what you were looking for. He'd take the song apart one track at a time to refine each track, then see how it sounded all together. How about if a snare drum track sounded really good except for a couple on hits that were just a little too hard ?? Or a missed beat or a chord on the guitar track ?? That would have to be re-recorded, these kind of things is what he was looking for and wanted the best recording possible to work with in the final mix. There was a lot of trial and error going on, and experimenting with different things, such as various mic, speaker cabinets, he even had an old Leslie cabinet there at the studio. No we weren't working with pre-recorded stuff. We brought in a local folk band with two guitars, bass, drums, and a female singer, who wrote and sang her own music, and this was her back-up band. (Similar to a Sheryl Crow or Stevie Nicks type band) We did all the recording from scratch, and it was a great learning experience for all. Like I said, the mixing started before the tape recorder was even turned on, with numerous sound checks, not only on the drums but also with the bass, the guitars and vocals. We recorded a click track on which the band was told to play to in the event anything had to be over-dubbed. This all had to be set up right before the recording would start, then the band had to play their parts perfectly before the session would end, regardless of the time. We even did a little punching in a few parts, to clean up some of the playing. The drum set needed a lot of fine tuning as at first it sounded like a bunch of thuds and rattles, instead of a drum set, which became obvious when recording mics were set up near the set. The recording mics amplify those little nuances, so these things had to be dealt with before the recording, or else you's have those thuds and rattles on you final mix. On my intitial mix for the test, at the time, I thought it sounded great, but when compared to the teacher's mix, I could plainly see what wasn't right. It needed some EQ adjustment made to one of the tracks. I hadn't noticed the problem earlier, as it was a minor adjustment, but even still, I would change it, after hearing it a week later, in the A/B test with the teacher's mix.
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 7:19 am  djwayne wrote: One track at a time. Yep that's the way he would do it. Each track is a different project, yet important to the entire mix. Let's say everything was fine except the vocal track is really screachy, you want to fix that, or let's say the bass was really muddy, and not punchy, and punchy was what you were looking for. He'd take the song apart one track at a time to refine each track, then see how it sounded all together. How about if a snare drum track sounded really good except for a couple on hits that were just a little too hard ?? Or a missed beat or a chord on the guitar track ?? That would have to be re-recorded, these kind of things is what he was looking for and wanted the best recording possible to work with in the final mix. There was a lot of trial and error going on, and experimenting with different things, such as various mic, speaker cabinets, he even had an old Leslie cabinet there at the studio. I can see this in a teaching context, to a degree, but in the real world this guy wouldn't last five minutes with just that approach. I hope that he managed to get some common ground out of this - eg you make the best recording of individual tracks that you can at the outset (as in the 'String Line Mix' primer), and that preparation is important, etc because the reality is that a lot of these little individual 'fluffs', if you like, are what actually makes a good recording - just as Jon says. It still has to sound 'real', and if you make everything as perfect as you can, that's just the quality that you lose. If you record and polish tracks in isolation, then that's just what you are going to achieve - a lack of 'coherence' in your mix. There is no way that I'm going to fix individual snare hits outside of the context of the track as a whole, for instance. The normal way to achieve a mix is to identify the bits of it that don't work, and work on those sections - but in reference to the mix. Sure, you have to listen out at recording time for things that you really don't want in your final production, and certainly in an educational way, I can see the value of finding things that don't work in a mix, and then going back to the source to identify the reasons for this - but within the proviso of making the best recording that you can at the time, I'll opt for an approach that says that source tracks are only 'broken' in relation to the mix as a whole, not as individual tracks. _________________
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:00 am  Last I heard, he was doing fine and in demand, in the real world. Here again, mixing is an art, and each person's mix is a different thing. If one artist uses a 2" brush, and another uses a 2.5" brush, does that make one artist superior to the other ?? No, it depends on what you do with the sound, in that particular application, and even then it's subjective to other people's opinion, on what sounds good to them. The snare rattles on the drum set every time the kick drum was hit, did not sound good, and he did not want to deal with that later on in the mix. The drummmer couldn't hear this, as it was drowned out with his playing, but in the control room, the mic picked it up, and it was an obvious thing nobody wanted. So that was one of many things he did to polish/clean up the mix, before it was even recorded. I would also say the drummer learned a little bit about tuning his drum heads that day. Was the final product too polished?? No, it sounded very natural, and was a good representation of how the band wanted to sound like live, and showed off their music, the best way possible. They were quite happy with the final mix, as I remember. They had recorded at other places as well, and had varying opinions on each place, but really like his mix.
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 9:42 am  Here's another example of cleaning up the mix. I was recording myself playing the acoustic guitar. I had practiced the song and could play it with no problem, it sounded good to me, and I had all the mics and recording equipment setup just right. I made the recording and had this God awful clicking sound thru-out the recording. Upon close examination, what was happening was, as I was strumming the guitar, occasionally my pick would hit the pick guard, and cause the clicking sound, the mic was picking up. It was so faint I couldn't hear it while I was playing, but the recording mic and pick-up, recorded it. So I taped a small piece of foam onto the pick guard where I was hitting it, and the clicking on the next recording stopped.
SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 12:30 pm  djwayne wrote: Here's another example of cleaning up the mix. I was recording myself playing the acoustic guitar. I had practiced the song and could play it with no problem, it sounded good to me, and I had all the mics and recording equipment setup just right. I made the recording and had this God awful clicking sound thru-out the recording. Upon close examination, what was happening was, as I was strumming the guitar, occasionally my pick would hit the pick guard, and cause the clicking sound, the mic was picking up. It was so faint I couldn't hear it while I was playing, but the recording mic and pick-up, recorded it. So I taped a small piece of foam onto the pick guard where I was hitting it, and the clicking on the next recording stopped. Er, this isn't cleaning up the mix at all, is it? This is getting the recording right in the first place - like we've said all along... _________________
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 1:04 pm  Ya whatever, but I still say it's like laying the foundation for a good mix. The mixing starts before the tape is rolling, but if you really want to make a federal case about it, the mixing doesn't start until you're completely done with the master recording, happy ?? Seperating the two makes no sense to me, as it's all a part of making a total recording. Sort of like playing pool or checkers, you always try to setup your next shot or move, so you can glide into a successful conclusion. Start to finish, always think about how you're going to finalize it. My teacher had enough experience and expertize, to know that you have to get a good sounding recording to work with. You can't always "fix it in the mix" after the band has gone home, or the next day. He knew beforehand what the band wanted, and was trying to accomplish that goal, as well as show us how it's done, in his circle. He didn't seperate the two. The master recordings we got to work with, were already very good sounding tracks, that basically, just needed to be blended together. We didn't need to do much EQ'ing or add much effects, as it was already sounding very much like what the band wanted.
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 3:04 pm  Quote: djwayne Posted ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ...the mixing doesn't start until you're completely done with the master recording... Now that one went totally by me. Course, I'm probably not the brightest bulb on the tree! _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 3:31 pm  I don't know where you found that quote, but it was probably referring to a final mix. Excuuuuuusssseee me for trying to add some construcive input to the forums. Why the hell should I bother ??
DeluXMan Location: Canada Posts: 330	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 4:46 pm  Thanks for your input djwayne. And your courage to hold an alternative viewpoint, but i don't think it is alternative at all. I can see the other viewpoints are valid too. I'm sure all of the final track tweeks were done within the context of the full mix. I have a feeling that if you tried to mix pre-recorded tracks without ever hearing an individual track, even with carefully picked mic. placements, it would at least slow down the track tweeking process in some places, and you may never be able to identify certain problems. I use the solo button on/off button a fair bit. Is this bad? :D On the other hand, if it is it better to tweek your tracks with all tracks up, wouldn't it also be better to choose all your mic. placements and instrument adjustments within the full mix too? If that were so i would be willing to do this, but will the whole band be willing to play while i move mic.s and instruemnts around.
djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583	Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 5:27 pm  DeluXMan wrote: Thanks for your input djwayne. And your courage to hold an alternative viewpoint, but i don't think it is alternative at all. I can see the other viewpoints are valid too. I'm sure all of the final track tweeks were done within the context of the full mix. Of course they were, how could you mix something, without doing that ?? Yes it was a back and forth type process, polishing one track at a time. I have a feeling that if you tried to mix pre-recorded tracks without ever hearing an individual track, even with carefully picked mic. placements, it would at least slow down the track tweeking process in some places, and you may never be able to identify certain problems. Exactly correct. You could also listen to the track for any missed beats, chords, overly or underly played parts volume wise, ect..... I use the solo button on/off button a fair bit. Is this bad? :D No that's what it's there for, for you to use, at your discretion. On the other hand, if it is it better to tweek your tracks with all tracks up, wouldn't it also be better to choose all your mic. placements and instrument adjustments within the full mix too? You could, but you'd wouldn't be able to hear anything, that could be adding to basic stage noise. If that were so i would be willing to do this, but will the whole band be willing to play while i move mic.s and instruemnts around. Very doubtful, we were lucky these guys showed up at all, in fact, as I remember the drummer was about an hour late, and the session ran late into the night. For some odd reason, some musicians, don't understand what sound checks are for--To make their music sound better, -- or know how to tell time. They were given a free recording time (about a $1,200 value package deal) in a great studio, and plenty of time to plan their schedules...you'd think they would show up early to set up ?? naaaaaaaa...... another duo we scheduled to record showed up 2 hours late, and were mad because they didn't get recorded at all. Timing is everything. jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901 Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:04 pm  Yes, timing can be everything... Sometimes you just get a mix dropped into your lap. It's more of a challenge, I think. Anyway... I've just recently lost a friend, who was recording a project at his home studio. His significant other and his colleagues want to finish the project and release it to their friends in memoriam. The project actually had tracks recorded for all the tunes, including all of his tracks (that's the fortunate part). There were some things that really needed to be re-recorded, though (the unfortunate part!) - But obviously this will not be happening, and I've been tapped to mix the project, as it stands. I guess this is what I meant when I mentioned mixing pre-recorded tracks, above - Tracks that you had absolutely nothing to do with the recording of. And unfortunately, the engineer who did record all of this stuff was with him at the time... Tag on all of the circumstantial and emotional aspects, and this will be one very interesting project, indeed... Anyway, I guess my vote is hereby cast for mixing my own recording work! 8) Best... -Jon _________________ djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:40 pm  Ahhh okay, now that makes sense. That would be a project. I have a similar project with the band I used to work for around 1975-76. I recorded them, but never released a final mix of the recordings, due to a sudden death in the band. The other band members just didn't want to even hear it. So I've kept it in storage until someday maybe they do want to hear it. I also prefer to work on my own stuff. My experiences with working with other local musicians has been far from good. I went out and did a single act for awhile and did much better than I ever dreamed possible, but lost interest because I didn't like my voice or my songs anymore. So I wanted to write new stuff. In some regards, my voice is getting better, but I'm getting older, and don't have the energy or stamina to perform like I used to. The last time I was on stage performing, it was with The Chieftains & Eileen Ivers. They invited any local players to perform with them on their grand finalie jam at their concert on the "Tears Of Stone" Tour. It was great fun, and I may just leave it at that. Even though I now have the equipment I always wanted, I had to work like a dog to pay for it, and that took a toll. We'll see how things go......I've been there and done it, may do it again, may not.....who knows ?... jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901 Posted - Mon Aug 04, 2003 10:16 pm  Cool.... But just to be clear, I didn't mean to say I only wanted to mix my own material - only that I would really prefer to mix things I've at least had a hand in recording. Heh-heh! A mix dropped into the lap seems more difficult for me, in that I never know what I'll be getting, or its quality - and many times, the producing person has some... er.... shall we say, "interesting" (?) ideas about where the project is to end up! Oddly enough, this has been happening more and more frequently around here - must be my karma catching up with my dogma, maybe? Heh! 8) Best... -Jon _________________ motorhead6 Posts: 193 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 12:24 am  Make everything louder than everything else. SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 4:47 am  motorhead6 wrote: Make everything louder than everything else. I seem to recall that this was the instruction that Richie Blackmore gave to the FOH crew on Deep Purple's 'Made In Japan', wasn't it? _________________ tbridge Location: United Kingdom Posts: 1 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 8:23 am  SteveG wrote: motorhead6 wrote: Make everything louder than everything else. I seem to recall that this was the instruction that Richie Blackmore gave to the FOH crew on Deep Purple's 'Made In Japan', wasn't it? I had a client some yearsa go whose first instruction, before hearing anything in my room (I'm a Mastering Engineer, by the way...)said, 'Boost the Bass frequencies...'. Obviously, I went my own way, boosting or cutting as required, then he said 'Boost the High frequencies...'. After a while, he said, 'Boost the Middle frequencies...' and of course, the final really lateral command - 'Boost at all frequencies!':???: As for the whole mixing thing... I speak as someone who started when two track was Multitrack, and the idea then was to get the guys to play it right in the studio - our job as studio engineeers was to get on tape just what they were playing, so the trick was to get the musos playing right, then get the correct mic in the correct place. Norman Smith, the first Beatles engineeer, told me that he tried to envisage the sound as an armchair... a bizarre concept, maybe, but he meant that the rhythm section kind of supported the other instruments - nowadays, I suppose you'd call that 'putting air around the recording'. In the 70s and 80s, producers (at least on orchestral/vocal' recordings) seemed to be obsessed with getting everything as loud as possible. I'd put this down largely to insecurity... but I'd say that UK producers were much more guilty of this than those in the States. Listen if you can to some of the early Sinatra recording on Reprise - his voice was up front, and the orchestra was like a shimmering curtain behind him, with the acoustic guitar, particularly, making the odd punctuation to his singing. Nothing was 'in competition' with anything else, and the end result was so relaxing and easy on the ear... I haven't heard them since then, and I wouldn't be surpreised if some engineer had got hold of them and thought 'this all needs beefing up...':S Many years later, I worked in Record Plant NYC and used to sneak into the studio to see what the engineers were doing on recording, what sort of mics they used, what eq on the channels and so on. Shelly Yakus was the Chief Engineer at that time*, and the faders on his desk were more or less set at zero, with minimum eq on the fader strips, very little outboard stuff going on - mic placement and great musicians were the key. I realise we don't all the luxury of top-flight pros, but that's stayed with me ever since. As I said, I'm a mastering engineer rather thean studio engineer, but I have made a few recordings and everyone has said that they are the best they've heard - I wouldn't touch Finalizer, for example, and Normalizing is the spawn of the Devil in my eyes. Slavish attention to the tiniest detail of every track is a definite killer of spontaneity, and a real sign that the song (remember that?) is not up to scratch. I used to have my alarm radio tuned into Capital Radio (non UK readers: this is a music/DJ-orientated station in London, now I tend to listen to BBC Radio 3 - intelligent classical or BBC Radio 4, discussions/interviews on the news items of the day) and one day, after 40 minutes of the latest bland pop c**p, on came 'Heartbreak Hotel'. That got me out of bed !! Probably done in one take, straight to mono, but the excitement of the record was spellbinding! Tony (cynical mode off now - for a few minutes!...) *He was great entrepeneur, and had a range of Tshirts, one of which sported one of the first instances of the immortal line 'We'll fix it when we Mix it', which demostrated, I think. what he thought about it...:) VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 8:36 am  FWIW, I had a project brought to me last year that "only needed mastering". It was horrid. Not only was the mix bad, but some of the tracks were pretty bad in and of themselves. These guys thought it was good! I did alot of "re-amping" (guitar and bass tracks), and alot of moving drums beats around to tighten up bass and drums. I re-mixed 2 tracks "non-gratis" and then after hearing them, they paid for a total overhaul of the project. I near bit off more than I wanted to chew with the whole lot! I did finish it, they were happy, I got paid, and.... I learned a very valuable lesson in the process! I too prefer to work on tracks that I'VE recorded. _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 8:54 am  Yep, ain't nothing better than recording great music that you like, and nothing worse that doing a session of stuff you hate !! An interesting, well written song is the main ingredient. I have one tape I recorded in mono, it was an old friend playing "Sunshine" on the harmonica. He was in his late 60's or 70's when we recorded it. He's passed away a few years ago, but the recording is pricless !! VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 9:10 am  Quote: djwayne Posted ---------------------------------------------------------------------- He was in his late 60's or 70's when we recorded it. He's passed away a few years ago, but the recording is pricless !! I had the good fortune a couple of years ago to mix a similiar project. A fellow that I worked with had a couple of 4 track R-to-R tapes of HIS father doing "Front Porch" bluegrass jams. His dad was a guitar player, but the tapes had everything from additional guitars to fiddle, mandolin, stand-up bass, banjo and the occasional spoons, washboards and whoop'n and holler'n! The tapes were in really bad shape and required "re-hydration". The end result was nice (far from perfect), but the entire project was a complete GAS to work on! _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 9:21 am  Yes this guy was one of my best friend's dad. We had all gone on a 10-day fishing trip to Canada. I brought along a good quality cassette stereo casstte recorder and a couple of mics, in case I felt like doing any writing while there. He got interested in recording and we decided to record some harmonica songs. They're very rough, and a little slow, and you can hear his foot tappin. The recording would make a great intro for somthing.... motorhead6 Posts: 193 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 1:18 pm  {Make everything louder than everything else.} Ive heard a lot of people say it but the earliest I am aware of was one of the Beatles. Sounded like John Lennon. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- motorhead6 Posts: 193 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 1:23 pm  Give a man a burger and you can sell him one tomorrow. Teach him how to catch burgers and you will ruin your business. Is that right? SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 2:41 pm  motorhead6 wrote: Give a man a burger and you can sell him one tomorrow. Teach him how to catch burgers and you will ruin your business. Is that right? How about 'Give a man a burger - you've fed him for the day. Teach a man how to catch burgers - well, at least he's got a hobby...' Hey, Tony, I wake up to Radio 3 as well! _________________ jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 3:06 pm  The only problem is, if you try to teach them to catch their own burgers, it will take you forever - and most can't seem to grasp the concept of the animated form that the burger was originally in... Perfect analogy for teaching anything about mixing to the punters. Heh-heh! Best... -Jon _________________ djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 4:26 pm  Mixing tips- learn how to cook, so you can afford to buy gear. Speaking of which, I struck gold at the thrift stores !! I found a set of learning video's, 8 in all, from the premiere cooking school in Paris, France, Le Cordon Bleu. Each video contains three sets of complete cooking instructions for preparing super high class entres'. This ain't no tv dinner dudes !! This is the stuff Kings and Queens would feast on !!! It took me two days just to watch the video's quickly one time. It's comparable to getting 24 cooking classes from the best chefs in Paris, aaaaand they're on video tape !!!!!!! So I's can watch dem over anda over !!!!! VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971 Posted - Tue Aug 05, 2003 5:20 pm  Quote: jonrose Posted ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ..it will take you forever - and most can't seem to grasp the concept of the animated form that the burger was originally in... Perfect analogy for teaching anything about mixing to the punters. Well, in that case... we get SteveG to explain to them sound wave diffusion properties of the Cow! _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 10:41 am  No, I'm not doing the cow again - you can look for it yourself! God help us, it's still there somewhere... But the comparison of audio mixing and preparing food is quite well made, I think. There are a remarkable number of similarities. But somebody else can list them all - it's too hot here, and stuff is overheating, so I'm going to have a cool-down and my evening meal now, I think. No, it's not cordon bleu... _________________ djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 11:18 am  Yes music production is a lot like baking a cake. First you must have quality ingredients, using one bad ingredient would ruin the whole cake. Let's say you used sour milk, or rotten eggs in the mix, would it come out okay because everything else was good ?? NO !! Same thing with each track, they all have to be good, and looked at, one at a time. Just as cooks differ in their skills, so do mixing technicians. They both have good days and bad days, and each project's merits, are different on a case by case basis. A good cook can make a lousy meal, and a bad cook can make a good meal once in awhile. The same holds true with mixing, A good producer can really turn out a bad mix, and a newbie can turn out a good mix, depending on the amount of effort put forth. Same thing with equipment, you'd have a hard time preparing a gourmet meal on a propane stove, but if the cook has talent, it can be done. But some one without any skill, could ruin hundreds of dollars of food and equipment, by not using it properly. By all means though, keep the food and recording equipment seperate, spilling coffee or a beer on your mixing board, will ruin you day. Sounds silly, but it happens occasionally. Spaghetti or BBQ sauce on DAT tape will result in blank spots, Potato chip crumbs in the keyboard, may result in keys that don't work properly, and never, ever spray whip cream into a DA-88 tape slot. jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 3:31 pm  djwayne wrote: By all means though, keep the food and recording equipment seperate, spilling coffee or a beer on your mixing board, will ruin you day. To which, Voodoo can attest.... Quote: ...and never, ever spray whip cream into a DA-88 tape slot. I'm not even going to ask.... Heh! :D Best... -Jon _________________ VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 5:40 pm  Quote: jonrose Posted --------------------------------------------------------------------- To which, Voodoo can attest.... Yes... I DID have a Mackie board with a drinking problem....... What's worse is he had BAD taste in beer.... _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo nathan Location: Australia Posts: 263 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 6:34 pm  ..dude..i am a absent minded professor so my order may not be easy reading ..( plus there may be typos ..hahahah) ..but start with tidyness Tidy your tracks to eliminate noise both hiss and background ..use the ..remove background noise feature...etc..u need to actually silence out passages of bumps etc in the edit view rather than trying to let the compressor do all the work... -the following is to be taken with a grain of salt Next ...ignore the each track on its own 'edited'...what a load of total edited ..i mean pls ...time wasting in the extreme ..i mean why call it 'mixing' ? -end salt The 'real audio compander' setting is way cool if you are just staring out in compressor techniques. This is what i do ..cos i go for a mix that will pump and still remain clear at high volume ( not that i like high volumes ) ... ok ..Using FFT filter i roll off lows on all tracks except bass instruments ...eg bass guitar and kick and also guitars that take on a bass role( i mean destructive edit ..so make a copy )..using a 110Hz or a 130Hz Butterworth Highpass with order at 18....(dont worry audiophiles it dont sound tinny..thats why the FFT settings )..you can hear what you are cutting outta your mix by previewing these settings on lowpass ...you will hear a lotta mud and boom in tracks u didnt think would be there... ok ..so now u tidied ..u can play around..either way wen u mix this down ..normalise and hard limit ..u will have a mix that pumps at any level and is clear ...this is a common dance mixing technique..it translates well to all speakers... For mastering ,download an Ozone demo..run some familiar mixdowns thru it at different settings and learn from there... ..all the best .... i help cos i care ...i really do i mean that ..i love everything in this world ..even beetles...hahaha:blush: ...recently stuck this in the wrong spot ....jeez i am a spaz _________________ i am a rockstar! AND u gotta shift dirt to find diamonds djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 6:48 pm  Next ...ignore the each track on its own 'crap'...what a load of total **** ..i mean pls ...time wasting in the extreme ..i mean why call it 'mixing' ? And where did you learn so much about mixing at, eh rock star ?? I wouldn't let you near my studio or music, and I don't care who you are, or who you think you are. Are you a legend in your own basement ?? To each his own. nathan Location: Australia Posts: 263 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 7:02 pm  djwayne wrote: Next ...ignore the each track on its own 'crap'...what a load of total **** ..i mean pls ...time wasting in the extreme ..i mean why call it 'mixing' ? And where did you learn so much about mixing at, eh rock star ?? I wouldn't let you near my studio or music, and I don't care who you are, or who you think you are. Are you a legend in your own basement ?? To each his own. ..yeah ..my language a little strong ...will edit..i have gotten tips off Paul Gomersall..and others ..mainly from own research and experience...it makes sense for a business to make profit..and for big business to keep money 'in-house' so i feel there is a lot of downtime\dragged out time that is paid for by the client ( i can attest to this) ...some of this wasted time can be attributed to 'gear awe' etc and espesh inapproriate use of the solo button..dont get me wrong ..i use it to hone ...but not to make precious...care to hear a sample of my stuff?..email me .. _________________ i am a rockstar! AND u gotta shift dirt to find diamonds djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 7:11 pm  nathan wrote: djwayne wrote: Next ...ignore the each track on its own 'crap'...what a load of total **** ..i mean pls ...time wasting in the extreme ..i mean why call it 'mixing' ? And where did you learn so much about mixing at, eh rock star ?? I wouldn't let you near my studio or music, and I don't care who you are, or who you think you are. Are you a legend in your own basement ?? To each his own. ..yeah ..my language a little strong ...will edit..i have gotten tips off Paul Gomersall..and others ..mainly from own research and experience...it makes sense for a business to make profit..and for big business to keep money 'in-house' so i feel there is a lot of downtime\dragged out time that is paid for by the client ( i can attest to this) ...some of this wasted time can be attributed to 'gear awe' etc and espesh inapproriate use of the solo button..dont get me wrong ..i use it to hone ...but not to make precious...care to hear a sample of my stuff?..email me .. Nope. You're too cool for me. I am my own client and I'll take all the time I want mixing my stuff, and every artist I've worked with, is very particular on each track recorded. nathan Location: Australia Posts: 263 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 7:56 pm  geez dude ..u remind me of myself b4 i got given the book "how to win friends and influence people"..i must remember to read it-- you read it?..most people here have... btw ..i made the offer to for you to hear my work and u declined with a lame comment....go figure...i would love to hear your stuff _________________ i am a rockstar! AND u gotta shift dirt to find diamonds djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 8:00 pm  Oh is that where you learned how to insult people, like you did with your post about mixing ?? Sorry, I've been too busy listen to Kasey Chamber's CD, to read that book. jonrose Location: USA Posts: 2901 Posted - Wed Aug 06, 2003 9:16 pm  Easy guys... This topic is likely to get locked if this degenerates into verbal abuse (and I know I don't want to have to sort through it, either!) ;) Best... -Jon _________________ post78 Location: USA Posts: 2887 Posted - Thu Aug 07, 2003 12:04 am  Now I'm a bagel. _________________ Answer = 1. Probably. motorhead6 Posts: 193 Posted - Thu Aug 07, 2003 5:07 am  I have to admit Rock Star has a point. Time is money and if it takes less time you can make more money. I wont be recording in his studio though. SteveG Location: United Kingdom Posts: 6695 Posted - Thu Aug 07, 2003 6:54 am  Quote: Spaghetti or BBQ sauce on DAT tape will result in blank spots... ROTFLMAO! I've had the benefit of listening critically to one of Nathan's mixes not that long ago, and actually, it wasn't technically as bad as you might think it could be from some of the things he says. But I am very suspicious of this whole business of offering specific advice about how to go about this in any given situation without hearing the tracks first, and it's common knowledge that I'm right off presets in mixes, regardless, because all mixes are different. The mix primer has only ever been meant to be about an approach to a specific problem - mainly that of maximising the apparent 'isolation' of individual instruments within a mix, and it's by no means the only way to approach mixing. For instance, I don't think that Phil Spector would go about it quite this way... So if you are going to come up with alternative approaches, that's fine - as long as you can explain why you've done it the way you have. Then perhaps people won't feel quite so insulted, and it may be possible to explore a few of these ideas in a relatively constructive way. _________________ nathan Location: Australia Posts: 263 Posted - Thu Aug 07, 2003 8:05 am  well SteveG has spoken and once again demonstrated a maturity and restraint only attritutable to the British ..( nah , he's just a genuine cool dude).8) I make the habit of typing wen i shouldnt..i've got some realworld feedback lately that i am a bit of a provocateur ( Graeme -spelling ?)..blah blah ... any way mixing is 'subjective' ..i could talk for ages (and i might wen i get my new pc)..i have done so much research on it and hands on ...that i almost know what i am doing... Ductape is a noobie and wanted instant answers ..i gave them ..once again mixing is subjective ..i dont know why i am even having to say this.. ---"great art isnt finished its abandoned" there are so many people on my 'bash' list now that i will have to enlist help..oh maybe 'teflon'? The Art of Mixing: A Visual Guide to Recording, Engineering, and Production http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0918371171/qid=1060268381/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-5355116-7811013?v=glance&s=books Ducky..this is a great book ..will really give you some help btw people I dont mix like that anymore ..only for dance ..it is harsh after repeated listens..it sure helped my ISIS card trick a few professionals !!!( not you SteveG ..some locals) Now i have dropped outta InfoTech i am bak on the rampage and cant wait to show all the doubting thomas's what i will do( oh yeah ..strictly in a music sense !!) say what u want people ..i am bulletproof..( rant-rant)>:K _________________ i am a rockstar! AND u gotta shift dirt to find diamonds djwayne Location: USA Posts: 583 Posted - Thu Aug 07, 2003 10:17 am  Time is money, Okay, let's go back to the cake analogy, Let's say the recipe calls for baking the cake for 45 minutes, but in your infinite wisdom, you decide if you only bake the cake for 30 minutes, you can bake more cakes and make more money. The quality of the cake suffers and sooner or later, people will stop buying them, cause they don't taste quite right, and your customers will buy the cakes from the guy down the street, who does spend the 45 minutes baking time. The sad reality is that many companies DO, do this at the expense of losing quality. It is all subject to opinion anyhow. It's your studio, your music, your mixing board, your solo button, your effects rack, your clients, ect..ect.. do as YOU see fit in your studio. In my studio, I listen to all the tracks one at a time, just like checking all the ingredients in the cake, before I mix it. You might be surprised what you might find. You may not notice the little bugs crawling around in the flour, unless you do it right, and sift it first. In which case, you'd have little bugs baked into your cake !! The same thing holds true in music. One person singing off key or a guitar player playing out of tune, or a drummer missing a beat, maybe you can bury it in the mix, but it would be better if you knew this before releasing the final mix. And that does look like a good book on mixing. I might pick it up for reference. Pro_Support Posts: 85 Posted - Thu Aug 07, 2003 10:39 am  jonrose wrote: Easy guys... This topic is likely to get locked if this degenerates into verbal abuse (and I know I don't want to have to sort through it, either!) Yes, it was very close to being locked near the top of page 2, but the tone changed for the better. Let's keep it professional. _________________ -Pro Support Adobe Systems Inc. MusicConductor Location: USA Posts: 1524 Posted - Thu Aug 07, 2003 3:02 pm  nathan wrote: ---"great art isnt finished its abandoned" Interesting quote! From whom did you borrow it? (Kinda sums up how I compose, mix, etc.)    Topic

Page: