Mixing in mono...it always sounds like crap

[TylerDrums109]

I have been told to always mix my songs in mono then move them into stereo to truely get the most out of my recordings...but when i mix music in mono things tend to clash horrible...the guitars sound muddled and it's just horrible...what should i be doing?

[jimmi]

I was taught to do things that way too - The thinking behind it was "you have to think about the guy listening on the single speaker clock radio". Nothing I do will ever be listened to on a clock radio so I dont bother. I can see the sense in flicking to mono to check for phase cancelation and so forth...but I wouldn't lock myself into mixing something in mono, especially because I track things with an idea where I want them in the stereo field - for example a double tracked guitar is only of any use to me with the separation of stereo.

[G-Jay]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

I have been told to always mix my songs in mono then move them into stereo to truely get the most out of my recordings...but when i mix music in mono things tend to clash horrible...the guitars sound muddled and it's just horrible...what should i be doing?

I'm no expert, that's for sure. but I think 'things tend to clash horrible' is the point of mono mixing. If you can EQ each instrument so it has it's own sonic space and doesn't clash majorly with any other instrument in mono, then you're mix will really be working for you.

The sense of space and definition will increase when you pan the inidividual elements in the stereo field and make your mono mix stereo.

[mixsit]

Originally Posted by G-Jay

I'm no expert, that's for sure. but I think 'things tend to clash horrible' is the point of mono mixing. If you can EQ each instrument so it has it's own sonic space and doesn't clash majorly with any other instrument in mono, then you're mix will really be working for you.

The sense of space and definition will increase when you pan the inidividual elements in the stereo field and make your mono mix stereo.

Yes this is my take on it too, (but then I honestly don't do it much.
But then when you hear some of those fantastically dense -but clear old mono tracks.. the clue is there.

[Massive Master]

Exactly the point. If things are clashing sonically in mono, they will also clash sonically in stereo - although they won't seem to "as much" as they're coming from two different points in space. Don't worry about "spaciousness" right off the bat - Worry about clarity and focus.

If you tackle that right off the bat and then pan to your heart's desire, you'll notice a much more spacious and clear sounding mix when those sounds are coming from two points in space.

[dementedchord]

i wonder if part of it is'nt from things you tracked as stereo and then mono sum it... that's one reason people track in mono and then pan it...

[Jaticus]

Iv always gone by rule dont over do it. Some of my stuff has recently grown and so such iv started adding in more stuff. Violins, flutes, synth, various tracks of drums etc and after a while it all just gets too much for me to mix sucessfully. Dont get me wrong when it goes well its great but i think some things just dont work.

Im crap at explaining things so heres an example of when an artist didnt keep things simply and went overboard, resulting in one of the worst song iv ever heard:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPOCRRJw4gs

Its just a mess of drums. I guess if you feel you can mix it then do it, nothing wrong with 20 tracks, nothing wrong with 50 tracks. But one of the best songs i ever did was only 4 and people liked it.

[bkkornaker]

of course things will clash when mixing in mono. Its the same thing as mixing with everything panned dead center! its all gonna clash! You can EQ all instruments so they all have thier own "Sonic space" or own "designated frequencies".....but when you flip the switch to stereo youll find all that did was thin things out tooo much.

ill mix in stereo, and "CHECK" the mix in mono. find a balance between both stereo and mono. trying to get the mix perfect in both worlds will make all your hair fall out.....

...cause youll be pulling your hair out in the process....

[Seafroggys]

My old audio engineering prof said get your EQ done in mono, make sure nothing clashes, then do your panning, giving you that much extra space.

And it also helps for listening on mono as well.

[bigtoe]

i only bring one monitor to remote tracking jobs. try it. you'd think it would be a hinderence/ like fighting with one arm tied behind your back. far from it. really helpful way to work in the long run...check the overheads and anything stereo in the phones to get the balance right...

Mike

[SonicAlbert]

Originally Posted by bkkornaker

of course things will clash when mixing in mono. Its the same thing as mixing with everything panned dead center! its all gonna clash! You can EQ all instruments so they all have thier own "Sonic space" or own "designated frequencies".....but when you flip the switch to stereo youll find all that did was thin things out tooo much.

ill mix in stereo, and "CHECK" the mix in mono. find a balance between both stereo and mono. trying to get the mix perfect in both worlds will make all your hair fall out.....

...cause youll be pulling your hair out in the process....

100% right on, great advice.

Do the bulk of your work in stereo from the beginning, then check in mono and make adjustments as needed. But then go back and see what it did to the stereo mix and make further adjustments.

[MCI2424]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

I have been told to always mix my songs in mono then move them into stereo to truely get the most out of my recordings...but when i mix music in mono things tend to clash horrible...the guitars sound muddled and it's just horrible...what should i be doing?

THAT is the main thing about being a good recording engineer. The experience in mixing gets you to the point of being able to take a stab at mic placement. The mixing process is one of fitting each part in a sonic space. There are only so many frequencies that can be occupied by sounds. Take some tracks you want to mix. Start with the bass and EQ it like a bass. Cut any frequencies above 500 hz. Now put the guitars in there and EQ it like a guitar would sound. High bass at 800Hz and limit anything above 3-4K. Add drums and cut somwhere around 1-2K a bit. Listen in mono. You should have a seperated mix. Keep playing around with the EQ to spread out the instruments keeping them in their respective space. If you see that you are EQ with extreme settings, you have learned that you either:
1. Have a mixing and/or recording room that needs sound treatment or
2. You have to work on mic placement more knowing the approximate range of the instrument recorded.

But, I would guess that both are the problem here.

To check:
Use a drum machine, a DI bass and DI guitars. Take the recording room out of the equation. Mix these and see if you have the same problem. If you do, fix the mixing room/speakers. If you have good control and you can get a decent mix, record an amp and see how it does. You need a process of elimination to solve your problem. Mixing in mono is the best way to get a balance. Stereo is just a way of making a soundstage out of the mix and NOT to get the proper balances.

Good Luck.

[legionserial]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

I have been told to always mix my songs in mono then move them into stereo to truely get the most out of my recordings...but when i mix music in mono things tend to clash horrible...the guitars sound muddled and it's just horrible...what should i be doing?

Like a good set of monitors, the aim isn't for you to be able to hear it sounding nice, it's to help pick out the flaws easier. If the clashes become more apparent than when you're mixing in stereo, then mixing in mono is working as intended.

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I personally find it hard to believe there are so many experienced engineers her who still need to mix in mono. With the exception of certain particularly tricky potential phase contention situations, most of the things that one can check for in mono one should be able to hear without checking on mono after just a little experience. And even those phase issues can usually be ID'd by simply muting/un-muting the potential offending track and listening o it's effect on the stereo mix without having to collapse the whole thing to mono.

For those with less-experienced ears I'd consider it practically mandatory to check a mix in mono regularly during the process. I'm kind of on the fence about mixing in mono, because I can see that as inadvertently crippling what one eventually decides to do with the soundstage, but if they are not going to do anything with the soundstage anyway other than the generic hard rock LCR scheme, then I guess it doesn't much matter.

But IMHO there does come a time - hopefully sooner than later - when one should start weaning themselves off of mono checking as anything other than a final belt-and-suspenders check to make sure you didn't miss something, and start mentally listening for issues in your head without needing to actually do an A/B check every time you add an instrument.

What difference does it make other than bragging rights?

Otherwise mono mixing/checking can kind of become a crutch for the ear, and one winds up with a "fix in the mix" kind of attitude, except in this case it's "fix in the mono". And that can become extra work versus nipping it in the bud. At D-Vision I used to work with a guy who seemed like he was deaf until he switched to mono. Here is a conversation that happened more than once:

"Um, Dave, that rhythm guitar is phasing."

"Sounds fine to me. Besides, if it's phasing, we'll hear it in mono and fix it then."

"You mean you can't hear it now? Or the fact that the keyboard is going to mask the pre-delay verb effect from the lead git?"

And he'd move on and when he got to the mono check it sounded lousy; sure enough the rhy gits were stomping all over each other and the all-important stereo delay on the lead git almost disappeared under the keyboards. The problem with waiting on it is that fixing it at that point led to some actual mix decision changes, causing him to have to undo half of the mix work he had done. If he actually paid attention to what he was doing, and listened closely to the stereo mix, OTOH, he'd have fairly easily known he was painting himself into a corner and could have made the changes early on and not painted himself into that mix corner, saving himself extra work down the line.

Use mono checking, absolutely. It's a great tool. But as you use it, try to teach yourself how not to need it as much and don't let it become an automatic crutch, IMHO. It can actually limit your eventual soundstage choices if you mix only on mono, IMHO, and give you extra work down the line if you can't hear problems without it.

I look at mono checking in that way kind of like I look at mastering. You'll get the most out of it by working as though it's not an available option.

Just one non-PC opinion. Everybody else's mileage will probably vary.

G.

[NYMorningstar]

Originally Posted by MCI2424

Start with the bass and EQ it like a bass. Cut any frequencies above 500 hz. .

My bass player would literally shoot me if I tried that

[bigtoe]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

I personally find it hard to believe there are so many experienced engineers her who still need to mix in mono. With the exception of certain particularly tricky potential phase contention situations, most of the things that one can check for in mono one should be able to hear without checking on mono after just a little experience. And even those phase issues can usually be ID'd by simply muting/un-muting the potential offending track and listening o it's effect on the stereo mix without having to collapse the whole thing to mono.

For those with less-experienced ears I'd consider it practically mandatory to check a mix in mono regularly during the process. I'm kind of on the fence about mixing in mono, because I can see that as inadvertently crippling what one eventually decides to do with the soundstage, but if they are not going to do anything with the soundstage anyway other than the generic hard rock LCR scheme, then I guess it doesn't much matter.

But IMHO there does come a time - hopefully sooner than later - when one should start weaning themselves off of mono checking as anything other than a final belt-and-suspenders check to make sure you didn't miss something, and start mentally listening for issues in your head without needing to actually do an A/B check every time you add an instrument.

What difference does it make other than bragging rights?

Otherwise mono mixing/checking can kind of become a crutch for the ear, and one winds up with a "fix in the mix" kind of attitude, except in this case it's "fix in the mono". And that can become extra work versus nipping it in the bud. At D-Vision I used to work with a guy who seemed like he was deaf until he switched to mono. Here is a conversation that happened more than once:

"Um, Dave, that rhythm guitar is phasing."

"Sounds fine to me. Besides, if it's phasing, we'll hear it in mono and fix it then."

"You mean you can't hear it now? Or the fact that the keyboard is going to mask the pre-delay verb effect from the lead git?"

And he'd move on and when he got to the mono check it sounded lousy; sure enough the rhy gits were stomping all over each other and the all-important stereo delay on the lead git almost disappeared under the keyboards. The problem with waiting on it is that fixing it at that point led to some actual mix decision changes, causing him to have to undo half of the mix work he had done. If he actually paid attention to what he was doing, and listened closely to the stereo mix, OTOH, he'd have fairly easily known he was painting himself into a corner and could have made the changes early on and not painted himself into that mix corner, saving himself extra work down the line.

Use mono checking, absolutely. It's a great tool. But as you use it, try to teach yourself how not to need it as much and don't let it become an automatic crutch, IMHO. It can actually limit your eventual soundstage choices if you mix only on mono, IMHO, and give you extra work down the line if you can't hear problems without it.

I look at mono checking in that way kind of like I look at mastering. You'll get the most out of it by working as though it's not an available option.

Just one non-PC opinion. Everybody else's mileage will probably vary.

G.

never...ever...EVER....wear a belt and suspenders at the same time.

Mike

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by bigtoe

never...ever...EVER....wear a belt and suspenders at the same time.

LOL, good point, Mike OK, remove that phrase from what I said.

G.

[ermghoti]

Originally Posted by NYMorningstar

My bass player would literally shoot me if I tried that

As well he should.

[Slowjett]

Is there anyway to 'Flip to mono' on the masterbuss in Cubase sx3?

[Jammer429]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

I have been told to always mix my songs in mono then move them into stereo to truely get the most out of my recordings...but when i mix music in mono things tend to clash horrible...the guitars sound muddled and it's just horrible...what should i be doing?

it is hard to tell what exactly your problem is with out watching you..but are you also recording in mono?I used to record in stereo and everyone kept telling me to do it in mono..so I started tracking and mixing in mono..ever since I did that I have gained more control over my mixes and the overall mix sounds alot better..either you are not tracking right..or you aren't doing something right in the mixing process. if you guitars sound to muddy then cut some lows. use a parametric eq on them and sweep across the diagram until you get the sound you want. and the you can open the q to try and clean up the sound..

[Monkey Allen]

How do you check your mix in mono? Pan everything dead centre? Turn off one speaker and pan everything to the other speaker?

[Massive Master]

Most programs have a "Mono" switch somewhere... If they don't, there are about 40,000 plugs that have it.

As a follow-up to SSG's post - I agree with the phasing issue thing -- I can't fathom how some people can't hear that certain elements in a mix are cranking their heads sideways. But my point to starting a mix in mono isn't for potential phase issues as much as just finding sounds that are going to "argue" with each other fighting for space. Not that I let it "rule" over what I'd want in the mix (as a biker, I also tend to "dress for the ride" as opposed to "dress for the crash") - But I find it a much quicker and effective process to find that 'sonic space' for everything before I reach for the pan controls. If there's clarity and focus in mono, that's going to almost universally translate to stereo - But not necessarily the other way around...

[rayc]

Somebody doesn't like any definition or directional cues for bass guitar.
I'm of limited gear and even more limited ability. I track in mono so I begin to mix in mono. I'm steeped in the preconceptions that a sound stage is a representation of a stage set up where the sounds are coming from the musicians rather than mono ed in the PA so once I have addressed major EQ clashes I begin to set up a stereo image to meet my preconceptions.
So, my limited setup & tracking process lead me toward or reinforce a mono beginning.
If mono is god am I monotheistic?

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by rayc

If mono is god am I monotheistic?

Oooohhh, I like that; that jives with me as a pantheist!

Originally Posted by Massive Master

But my point to starting a mix in mono isn't for potential phase issues as much as just finding sounds that are going to "argue" with each other fighting for space.

I agree completely. But again, don't you find, John, that your ability to be able to find or avoid such clashes before even checking in mono has gotten better with practice/experience? I'm just saying that the more one can avoid such problems out of the gate, perhaps as early as tracking or even composition, but certainly at faders up, the more potentially productive their mix sessions will be.

The alternative trap that I've seen happen is that some people become so dependent upon the mono check that two things can happen: first is that they don't bother trying to anticipate the potential problems, they just wait to "fix it in mono", which can often involve a lot more work, and second - which I admit kinda bugs me as a pet peeve - that when they switch to stereo that all ability on their part to hear such conflicts virtually disappears in kind of a Pablovian response. It's not the fault of the test itself; I support the test. I'm just saying that it seems like some can become over-dependent on it.

You don't need to wait until you get on your bike and start riding to tell whether you'll need to put the liner in your leather jacket to stay warm enough on any given day, do you?

G.

[Massive Master]

Without question. I still just bring everything up in mono as a starting point anyway... Some people pan right off the bat, I EQ right off the bat.

Eh... On the jacket thing... Sometimes I know. Other times, I'm pulling over less than a mile from home putting on the sweatshirt I keep in one of my saddlebags. Wind chill changes everything...