do you care?

dobro

dobro

Well-known member
I heard this from a mastering engineer in a promo video from Ozone: "You wanna make sure your clients' music is competitive and contemporary."

Okay, so here's me in the cheap seats responding to this with 'I don't care whether my mixes sound competitive and contemporary. It's not a competition. I'm just making my mixes sound as good and as alive as I can. Screw what anybody else is doing.'

Do you try to make your mixes sound like commercial stuff you admire or think is worthy of emulation?
 
How much money do you make from your music?
If the answer is "not enough to survive on", then no.
I create my music for myself. Half my soundcloud plays are me listening to my own music.

If you were truly intent on making your entire living off of your music, it would be a competition. It's a buyer's market and your product is by default almost worthless. You're going to have to impress really, really hard to sell.
 
It's called 'marketing'. Remote controls and volume controls - two saving graces for me so that I never put up with commercials!
 
dobro said:
I Do you try to make your mixes sound like commercial stuff you admire or think is worthy of emulation?
Click to expand...

I do........it never quite happens........but they get a little bit better every time and that makes me happy. I can't imagine what my mixes would be like if I gave up when I first thought I couldn't do any better.
 
dobro said:
I heard this from a mastering engineer in a promo video from Ozone: "You wanna make sure your clients' music is competitive and contemporary."

Okay, so here's me in the cheap seats responding to this with 'I don't care whether my mixes sound competitive and contemporary. It's not a competition. I'm just making my mixes sound as good and as alive as I can. Screw what anybody else is doing.'

Do you try to make your mixes sound like commercial stuff you admire or think is worthy of emulation?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Though 99% of what I do is for clients who pay me to do such.

It is what any individual expects for themselves that is most important.

I can't think of anyone ever who didn't want to sound as good as possible.

I think the wording of the 'Ozone quote' was not necessarily the terms I would use. I would maybe say "You wanna make sure your clients' music is comparable and of similar quality to that which potential listeners of any particular genre expect to hear".

Though the fact that the quote is out of context I probably shouldn't judge. Just my thoughts on what you posted.

Good question. :)
 
jimmys69 said:
I can't think of anyone ever who didn't want to sound as good as possible.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. I'm obsessed with every one of my songs sounding as good as it can sound. I want it sound "pro", as vague a word as that is. I strive for perfection, which means I'm always frustrated.

I've never done something and then put it aside because it's "good enough". I've said this before, but I'll repeat it here. I'm fully aware that less than 30 people will ever hear any of my music. But, to me, being as good as you can be shouldn't be about how popular, or how much money you're going to make. If you have a love and a passion for something, that should be motivation enough. A person who loves to paint, or write poetry, or does artistic dance, or anything artistic, shouldn't have money and popularity as motivation. So, nothing matters to me other than satisfying myself by knowing that every song I write and record is a little better than the last one.

So...YES. It matters to me. More than anything else in my life. It's pretty much the only thing that matters to me, other than my family, and even then it's a toss up. :eek:
 
Okay, let's try again. The question wasn't a simple 'Do you try to make your mixes sound as good as you can?'

It was 'Do you try to make your mixes sound as good as contemporary commercial stuff?' Do you see yourself trying to compete with or live up to the sound of contemporary mixes? For example, if you were working on a mix and it came off sounding like something you might hear from Hank Williams or early Elvis, would you trash it or keep it? Or, a more likely example: if on Tuesday night you put so much reverb on a mix that it sounded like something from the eighties, would you, when you listened to it on Wednesday morning and realized what you'd done, leave it that way because it sounded good to your ears or would you back off on the verb because you wanted it to sound contemporary, because you didn't want to be accused of coming up with a retro sound?
 
passion is what drives me, like rami I am obsessed, that is what drives me, and I am critical of sound, you can't be happy with everything you hear and be passionate, you can't be too settled and think 'ah that sounds good' we are programmed that way but our ears never lie, we have to learn to be subjective and critical and overcome our own biases to be great engineers and be the best we can possbily be, it more than money.
 
The answer is still YES.

If I was trying to sound like the 80's, I'd keep the cheesy 80's reverb. If I wasn't trying to sound like that, then I'd use another reverb, but I'd still try to make it sound pro quality. I don't want an Elvis sound on my recording, but I still want to sound as pro as possible.

It seems like no matter how I answer this, you might re-phrase the question.

Chances are, the answer is still yes.
 
My mixes sound better than pretty much all of the stuff I listen to or am inspired by, so no, I don't compete with them. I've already beaten them. It's not that hard to make a mix sound better than a Misfits or Stooges record. But my songs suck compared to theirs.
 
Ok, so maybe I mis-understood the question. If so, sorry Dobro.

I certainly don't "compete" or strive for a modern sounding mix....mainly because I don't even know what a "modern mix" is. In fact, I can't even think of a true modern rock band. Are there any? I'm only now really discovering a lot of Nirvana, and that's at least 20 years old.

I guess my point was that I do care if my songs are as good (I used the word "pro") as they can be. That might not have even been the question.

Whether my mixes and songs are as good as they can be, I don't know. I think I lack consistency. I can put something out that everyone, including myself, thinks is awesome...and then I can turn around and put out a "what were you thinking?".

But the answer is still yes. :D
 
dobro said:
Okay, let's try again. The question wasn't a simple 'Do you try to make your mixes sound as good as you can?'

It was 'Do you try to make your mixes sound as good as contemporary commercial stuff?' Do you see yourself trying to compete with or live up to the sound of contemporary mixes? For example, if you were working on a mix and it came off sounding like something you might hear from Hank Williams or early Elvis, would you trash it or keep it? Or, a more likely example: if on Tuesday night you put so much reverb on a mix that it sounded like something from the eighties, would you, when you listened to it on Wednesday morning and realized what you'd done, leave it that way because it sounded good to your ears or would you back off on the verb because you wanted it to sound contemporary, because you didn't want to be accused of coming up with a retro sound?
Click to expand...


I will quote myself:

"You wanna make sure your clients' music is comparable and of similar quality to that which potential listeners of any particular genre expect to hear".


Your quote; "sounding like something you might hear from Hank Williams or early Elvis" is exactly what I mean by my quote above.


No, I wouldn't try to mix something to sound like anything other than it is meant to sound like. It is for you to decide what sounds good. Competing with the sound of a contemporary genre with material that is not would be silly.


I am not sure what you are asking. There is no competition if you are not competing. Some are, you are not.

And that is absolutely acceptable and cool actually. :)

Not quite sure why this is a question you would ask to be honest..
 
dobro said:
I heard this from a mastering engineer in a promo video from Ozone: "You wanna make sure your clients' music is competitive and contemporary."

Okay, so here's me in the cheap seats responding to this with 'I don't care whether my mixes sound competitive and contemporary. It's not a competition. I'm just making my mixes sound as good and as alive as I can. Screw what anybody else is doing.'

Do you try to make your mixes sound like commercial stuff you admire or think is worthy of emulation?
Click to expand...

When I first got my hands on Ozone I totally butchered my mixes, convincing myself that all that sizzle, harmonic distortion and enhancement just HAD to make things sound expensive. Now Im almost embarrassed to play some of these "masters" back. Ouch, the tops would take your head off.

Currently, I just test run a mixdown through Image Lines - Maximus on the "Transparent" setting. Full and loud with no tone altering. Crisp, clean and commercial ? Who knows ? It's certainly not slammed like Nickelback, more like a Taylor Swift. Lol.

Wait until it's on special. Think I got it for $79 or $99

Maximus
 
I'm in the middle of trying to mix one of my friend's "commercial" tracks for mix practice. He gets a fair bit of mixing/mastering work and has some very nice high-end outboard gear. I can't stand it. It's melodyned to fuck and every guitar, synth pad, vocal line and drum sound is in triplicate. 70 tracks of unlistenable shite. I don't want my music to sound like that, thanks.
 
If your mixes sound close to how you intended, you've already taken care of how "commercial" (or whatever other term you'd like to use) you need it to be.
 
When we are doing songs for ourselves (either as Defibrillators or Raine & Wageman) there is often an idea at the start of how we want to the song to sound. During the course of tracking and exploring ideas, more often than not the song takes on its own life and pushes us in a direction we hadn't originally thought of.

I rarely listen to contemporary mainstream music, so there is definitely no attempt to emulate its sound. Because I do my own mastering (probably not the wisest option), it consists mainly of getting consistent and credible levels across a suite of tracks, and making sure the starts and finishes are right. There's no point in me EQing anything, because the EQ of the final mix is what I figured was the best I could get anyway.

There are things that I do place great importance on, but they happen during performing and tracking: making sure instruments are in tune; making sure the playing is tight and absent of timing tension. Making sure the full audio spectrum is represented; making sure there is dynamic change and an interesting sonic landscape throughout a song, and so on. None of us are musical prodigies, so we accept the limitations imposed by our abilities as part of the deal. But for all that, we do strive to get the best sound we can.
 
Massive Master said:
If your mixes sound close to how you intended, you've already taken care of how "commercial" (or whatever other term you'd like to use) you need it to be.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that's just it, see? If your intention is completely conditioned by a belief in the value of contemporary tastes in mixing, you're a slave of fashion. Sweet and simple. Nothing more to be said.

My original question aimed at finding out whether anybody here was as impatient with that original Ozone quote as I was. I'm completely dismissive of it. I don't give a fuck whether my stuff sounds like Richard Thompson or Bahamas or Kate Bush or George Bush. See, I thought people on this site, because we're 99% amateur, would be less likely than pro ME's to try to make our stuff sound like the stuff that's coming out of today's mastering houses.

And of course the reason why I care about this is because I'm about to go into the previously uncharted territory of comparing my mixes to commercial mixes. :)

For better or for worse, I mean.
 
gecko zzed said:
When we are doing songs for ourselves (either as Defibrillators or Raine & Wageman) there is often an idea at the start of how we want to the song to sound. During the course of tracking and exploring ideas, more often than not the song takes on its own life and pushes us in a direction we hadn't originally thought of.
Click to expand...

That's how it is with me. That's how it's always been with me.

gecko zzed said:
I rarely listen to contemporary mainstream music, so there is definitely no attempt to emulate its sound. Because I do my own mastering (probably not the wisest option), it consists mainly of getting consistent and credible levels across a suite of tracks, and making sure the starts and finishes are right. There's no point in me EQing anything, because the EQ of the final mix is what I figured was the best I could get anyway.
Click to expand...

We're almost in agreement here, too. I EQ the master buss after I'm done mixing however, because I can hear how the overall mix needs a nudge here or there, and I can't be bothered going back to the individual tracks and doing the multiple donkey work to make it happen. It's valid to do it on the master buss at that point.

gecko zzed said:
But for all that, we do strive to get the best sound we can.
Click to expand...

Me too. But I don't try to sound like Paul Simon's last record when I do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top