Having trouble getting the mix just right!

Hey guys. To start, this is a fantastic thread with some of you asking really great, insightful questions, and some of you responding with really helpful and practical advice. Great stuff.

I've been doing the home thing for a while and have worked in a couple studios as well, and I just wanted to throw in a couple cents and try to cover some stuff that pertains to mixing that hasn't really been covered yet.

The first is this: you get out what you put in. If you're grabbing an MP3 for backing tracks and then recording everything else direct, it's going to sound like a backing track and a bunch of direct instruments.

Kewlpack: when you plug into your VOX and then A/B it against the Line Out, you're not hearing the "Valvetronics" being disengaged; you're hearing speakers moving air, which will ALWAYS sound better than going direct. And you'll notice if you just stick a 57 on the cone of one of those speakers, it will instantly sound better, show more clarity, and sit better in the mix without you having to perform any magic. It's how almost ALL of your favorite guitar tones have been recorded, I would bet. Same with acoustics, basses (although basses can sound WONDERFUL direct) and just about anything, really.

Also keep in mind that if you track something well, you simply CANNOT fuck it up. If you have a great player playing a great guitar throught a great amp, IT WILL ALWAYS SOUND GREAT. It doesn't matter if you have your pet rhesus monkey engineer it, it will sound great. Same with drummers: a drummer that hits his drums well and consistently will always get good drum tones. No EQ or even compression is neccessary sometimes to mix a great drummer's tracks. Just think about John Bonham recording with only two mics. A drummer that hits his drums like shit and makes poor decisions musically will (almost) always sound like shit. So there again: the more time and thought you put into tracking, the more the tune will practically mix itself.

Another thing is called "Depth of Field." When you listen to any Phil Spector recording, why does it sound so HUGE in MONO??? It's how it was tracked. Back in those days (before the advent of multitrack systems) you just put everyone in a room and then determined the mix by positioning those people in relation to the microphone. And it works.

Try this: record a lead vocal and a backing vocal using the same mic and compressor settings. Try to get the backing vocal to sit "behind" the lead vocal in the right way. Now try track the backing vocal again, having the singer stand at least twice as far away from the microphone as he/she was before. Hear that? You just made your mix that much easier, because that vocal will automaticall sit behind the lead. Or try this: Mic all of your rythm guitars from at least a foot away and then track your leads from directly on the cone of the speaker (or your favorite close-mic postion). There! You just helped yourself mix the tune by tracking it with the mix in mind. And you won't have to use any corrective EQ or any tricks that can make your mixes sonically confusing, if you're lucky.

Also, CloneBoy has had some absolutely invaluable things to say about EQ and frequencies clashing. Always keep that in mind when you're TRACKING, not just mixing. Where is the life of a guitar track? It's typically in the mids somewhere. I mean, a good tight bottom end and sparkly highs are crucial, but the range that separates mice from men (for me, at least) is in the midrange. The lead guitar in the track you posted has scooped mids and buzzy top end, and so it was destined to be slightly muddy and interfere with the hi-hat from the moment you tracked it. Do you know what I mean? I don't even know if I'm making any sense, but it's the same concept that CloneBoy was speaking of in reference to mixing, just applied to tracking. If you were to EQ the guitar ON THE AMP with the tune in mind, you could TRACK the guitar in a way that helped it sit where it needs to. Typically with guitars, I tend to get the amp where I like it in the room, and then add mids and decrease gain. For some reason that tends to improve clarity and it ends up sounding on tape how I liked it in the room.

And then also, sometimes doing things that seem stupid will actually work. Always experiment. I tend to agree with CloneBoy's compression post without fail, but sometimes a threshhold of -30, a ratio of 12:1, and a really quick release is just what a track needs to really accomplish what it's trying to in the mix. Some of my favorite producers and engineers have essentially used compression as an effect, and I think it sounds classic and wonderful.

Also panning: Sir George Martin (Beatles' producer and uber-genius engineer) once said (and I'm paraphrasing) that the only places anything should ever sit in a mix is either 100% right, dead center, or 100% left. Now, while that's a bit extreme, it certainly worked for him and I've used that philosophy on entire records to great effect. So experiment with that as well: see what kinds of sonic textures you can create with hard-panning. And if you have double-mic'd something - maybe a a guitar with a close and a room mic - try putting the close mic in one part of the stereo field and the room in another to create a texture.

Ok, sorry I'm being so goddamned long-winded, just one more little tidbit:

So Kewlpack, here's what I would reccommend: If you enjoy this recording thing and you're serious about it (sounds like you are, your enthusiasm is wonderful), get as many 57's as you can afford- the greatest mics ever invented - and a decent 2-channel mic pre and go nuts. Two mics, a pre, and a compressor can record just about any sound you can think of, and if you're careful about how you track it, your mixes will shoot straight through the roof before you even knew what hit you.

I hope some of that helps, thanks guys.
 
Shit, I'm sorry I almost forgot: Always have your monitors as far away from each other as they are from your head, and directly at your ear level when you're sitting upright. Ok, that's all.
 
Wow guys - lots of new, good information.

I can't afford a mic or pre right now. :(

I have to ask our church if they have a spare they'd sell (they have a billion mic's), and then find a preamp I can use...

I have so much to learn. This is really cool though, and engaging - yikes where do the hours go?! :D

I'll ping ya when I get a chance to work on this some more.
~A~
 
JohnnyMan said:
Another issue I have been concerned with is “what effects should be/can be applied to lead vocals”.

Really anything. Standard is compression, eq and reverb. Anything past that is definately for EFFECT. Experiment. Finding new vocal effects (especially subtle ones) can be the thing that sets a track apart from everything else out there.

JohnnyMan said:
how do you decide reverb amounts to lead vocals and once you have made that decision how much reverb do you apply to the rest of the tracks in the mix so that everything seems to be in the same space or do we really want that?

My rule on reverb is that I want things to sound like they are being played in the same room/hall/whatever. I will use the same settings on everything that gets reverb in a given song--only varying the amounts. Sometimes I will set up an aux buss and buss tracks to that and mix it in. I always allow the vocal to recieve its OWN reverb, however.

Note that this is just how I do things. Individual tastes may vary. Some people like the vocals to have a different reverb. Myself, I like my recordings semi-dry and natural sounding.

JohnnyMan said:
Do lead vocals usually get a plate or hall reverb and if so how wet? I have found any more than 30% and the vocal becomes too blurred. (I’m using Sonar 3 with plugins.)

I like dry recordings so my idea of a wet vocal is 17%. Typically I will put about 8-11% wet on ANY reverb effect. I just like a dash of reverb to add some space. For the most part I like tight, defined but with a hint of ambiance.

Recently I've been getting into LIVE reverb--using big rooms with lots of reverb, especially on drums.
 
YOU aren't gonna believe it... LOL

I was puzzling over what to do... and I really wanted to jam... so...

I dug around in my closet and found an old Boom-style PC microphone ($25 best buy)... I figured - eh... why not?! So I plugged it in and recorded acoustic and lead (awful LOL) scratch tracks with it... This is really thrown together in like 20 minutes or something. I had to play everything whisper quiet because everyone is in bed! So all things considered - I was suprised! The sound is actually FINE for what I had! LOL

Applied a little mixing from your methods and voila!

Check it out - what do you think of the overall sound? REmember just an old cheapo boom mic (teeny thing).



pardon the playing, i was really just throwing it down improv and rough.
~A~
 
Cloneboy Studio said:
Recently I've been getting into LIVE reverb--using big rooms with lots of reverb, especially on drums.

Cloneboy, Thank you for the tips.

In the above statement are you applying a big room reverb on the drums and then a different reverb on the vocal and then another on the entire mix?


John
 
JohnnyMan said:
In the above statement are you applying a big room reverb on the drums and then a different reverb on the vocal and then another on the entire mix?

No, same reverb with same identical parameters.

I'm not a fan of mixing and matching reverbs... to me it sounds like "Clash of the Reverbs." I think that is the reason Metallica's "Master of Puppets" always sounded funny to me... it sounds like there is a different reverb on almost everything.

Differing reverbs just lends the idea that things weren't recorded together, which is an illusion I strive for in my work.

Only exception I can think of is a warm plate or EMT style reverb on the vocal. But then again, vocals are special and should stand out a little bit. They are, after all, the meat of the matter.
 
Cloneboy Studio said:
Differing reverbs just lends the idea that things weren't recorded together, which is an illusion I strive for in my work.

Only exception I can think of is a warm plate or EMT style reverb on the vocal. But then again, vocals are special and should stand out a little bit. They are, after all, the meat of the matter.
So would you recommend "only" adding reverb to a Lead solo or "whatever the main melodic instrument is" in the song? Or apply reverb to all tracks? Or just the whole mixdown at the end?

Reverb can make a mush I'm discovering. Too much of a good thing. :D

BTW - just had a chance to play my new sound clip (see my last post) on my home theater and car radios. Yeowza what a difference even a small mic can make versus line-out! Still gotta work out the lead tone. It's better, but I think the little mic was too close to the amp and clipping a bit.

~A~
 
Kewlpack said:
So would you recommend "only" adding reverb to a Lead solo or "whatever the main melodic instrument is" in the song? Or apply reverb to all tracks? Or just the whole mixdown at the end?

My trick is getting a spacious sound using reverb on as little as possible. For example: when I my drums I usually only put reverb on the OVERHEADS. Everything else remains dry. Sometimes I may put it on the snare close mic to get better blend.

Then I'll put some on the vocal.

Maybe some might end up on a lead voice, or piano, or other element. But after that everything else may be dry. The selective reverb on a few elements can give the impression that the entire track has reverb on it, but a tight and controlled echo.

NEVER EVER put reverb on an entire mixdown. Be extremely careful about putting reverb on bassy stuff like kick drums, bass guitar, Minimooog bass lines, etc....

Kewlpack said:
Reverb can make a mush I'm discovering. Too much of a good thing. :D

That's why I usually tailor the EQ to not reverberate anything below 400hz, and carefully tailor the early reflections.
 
Re-recorded and Remixed

Okay

I messed up the original song pretty bad... I figured out how to rerecord all the components of the song (except for the piano/drum backing track mp3) with my little microphone. I tweaked and mixed the entire thing and (I think) it turned out better. :confused:

Have a listen to the NEW IMPROVED VERSION:


For a frame of reference, here's the old version:


I kinda got whacky with the wah... because I could, I guess... :D

What do you think of the mix overall and the tones? Improved? Nevermind the lead. :rolleyes:
~A~
 
Back
Top