Compression... and/or equalizing..?

[danny.solo]

Hi

Thanks for taking the time to read my post.

I've been home recording for about 5 years... with an 'that'll do' attitude.
I'm now thriving for a clear, punchy and bass-y (commercial!!!) sound.

My latest track has electronic drums, acoustic guitar, electric guitar, bass and vocals.
All the tracks, separately, sound fantastic - lovely and clear, high quality (using an external usb audio interface).

However when I start to mix down, the track as a whole sounds so shoddy.
I've been told the best way to get a clear track is to compress each individual track and then mix down.

I'm now told to use an equalizer...


Basically, I'm quite confused, but without trying to be too awkward... how can I mix down 10+ audio tracks, without it making muddy, too bassy, unclear.. even though the tracks sound fantastic themselves..

Thank you

 

[NL5]

.. even though the tracks sound fantastic themselves..

Mixing has NOTHING to do with how tracks sound by themselves. You should RECORD them the best that you can, but once it gets to the mixing stage, it only matters what comes out of the two bus.

 

[danny.solo]

Mixing has NOTHING to do with how tracks sound by themselves. You should RECORD them the best that you can, but once it gets to the mixing stage, it only matters what comes out of the two bus.

I guess this is where I fall short with severe lack of knowledge on my part.

..two bus..?

thanks for the reply

 

[The Cancers]

two bus = two stereo tracks representing your whole mix.
The problem with each track sounding great on it's own is that they won't be playing on their own when people are listening to the song. So, once you start adding eq, compression, and other stuff to individual tracks, you wanna do it in the context of the other tracks, not on it's own. Search out a post by Southside Glen and click on his signature to go to his homepage. He has some great primers on both compression and EQ that'll help a lot.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

However when I start to mix down, the track as a whole sounds so shoddy.
I've been told the best way to get a clear track is to compress each individual track and then mix down.

I'm now told to use an equalizer...

Do NOT just automatically compress anything. In fact, don't just automatically EQ anything, either (but especially the compression thing.) Compressors and EQs and all other such audio processors are tools to be used to perform certain functions, just like saws and hammer are carpentry tools used to perform certain functions.

If I were to say , "I have all these lovely pieces of wood, but when I put them together it looks shoddy", you wouldn't simply tell me that I have to saw or hammer each piece of wood the same way first before I put them together, would you?

Probably what you'd first ask is, "What are you trying to build?", followed by "Let's see your plans". Then you'd suggest that I look at the plans and decide just what kind and how much wood I need to build my little bird feeder, and compare that against what I have now. Some of it, like that 6x6 cedar beam, may not be appropriate. And for what is appropriate, make a decision about just what what you need to do to turn your wood into a feeder. Some things may need to be sawed, but a certain way only, and only after that would you use a hammer with the proper kind of nail to put them together. Even then, you wouldn't want to hammer the glass part of the feeder.

And so the initial question here is, "What do you want your song to sound like?". And incorporated with that, "What is your arrangement, and how do you want the instruments to fit together?". And finally, then "What do you need to do to your tracks to get you there?"

You can't answer that third question until you have good answers to the first two.

Like NL5 said, what's important is how the tracks sound when they are brought together; sounding sweet soloed is not necessarily an indication that they'll work together. The question is not whether the solo track sound sweet, but does it sound like what it needs to sound like in the mix. Only your ears and your mental image of the final mix can tell you that and tell you what you need to do to get from here to there.

G.

 

[danny.solo]

Do NOT just automatically compress anything. In fact, don't just automatically EQ anything, either (but especially the compression thing.) Compressors and EQs and all other such audio processors are tools to be used to perform certain functions, just like saws and hammer are carpentry tools used to perform certain functions.

...

Like NL5 said, what's important is how the tracks sound when they are brought together; sounding sweet soloed is not necessarily an indication that they'll work together. The question is not whether the solo track sound sweet, but does it sound like what it needs to sound like in the mix. Only your ears and your mental image of the final mix can tell you that and tell you what you need to do to get from here to there.

G.

Hi Glen

Thanks for the reply, in most respects, that is helpful and gives me a new view on recording tracks.

I guess the problem I have now is, what (main) steps am I missing?
This could be a huge, open ended question however.


So, I record my tracks, arrange them as necessary, layer any effects as necessary, compress/equalize as necessary...

then what?

Is there a simple route from being happy with your tracks/sounds to mixing it down?
Apologies ... this is really newb-ish...

thank you

 

[NL5]

Hi Glen

Thanks for the reply, in most respects, that is helpful and gives me a new view on recording tracks.

I guess the problem I have now is, what (main) steps am I missing?
This could be a huge, open ended question however.


So, I record my tracks, arrange them as necessary, layer any effects as necessary, compress/equalize as necessary...

then what?

Is there a simple route from being happy with your tracks/sounds to mixing it down?
Apologies ... this is really newb-ish...

thank you

Sounds like you have the gist of it.

Unfortunately, there is no simple answer. It's kind of like asking how to remove a brain tumor on on internet forum.

The simple answer is take out the bad stuff, and leave the good stuff. Works for mixing too. Cut out, or de-emphasis what's not needed, and emphasis the good stuff.

Most people think that mixing should be easy for them, because "they know what sounds good". LOL. Those people are generally the ones that solo each part, and get it sounding fricken fantastic, then wonder why their mixes "don't sound commercial".

It's a long slow process to learn. You just got a HUGE insight on the process. I'd start with mixing something with the new approach in mind, and go from there. Also, the MP3 clinic is a FANTASTIC place to develop your mixing skills.

Good Luck!

 

[danny.solo]

Most people think that mixing should be easy for them, because "they know what sounds good". LOL. Those people are generally the ones that solo each part, and get it sounding fricken fantastic, then wonder why their mixes "don't sound commercial".

Haha! Sounds like me!

Nah you're right - I've got a lot of learning to do.
I'll do some more research.. thank you!!!

 

[NL5]

I'll do some more research..

The best research you can do is more mixing. Just keep at it, and post your work in the MP3 clinic. You'll get shit-tons of help.......

 

[RAMI]

I can see how it can get confusing to someone starting out.

We say "Get it to sound as good as possible during tracking".

Then we say "It doesn't matter how it sounds by itself. It has to sound good in the mix".

Hehe....my bwain hurts.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I can see how it can get confusing to someone starting out.

We say "Get it to sound as good as possible during tracking".

Then we say "It doesn't matter how it sounds by itself. It has to sound good in the mix".

That's a good point, Rami. I think we make some assumptions when we talk about the good tracking, that we mean that it sounds good in relation to what we need or expect it to sound like. A big beefy kick can sound great, but that doesn't mean that's what the mix wants.

So much of what is discussed in these forums seems to come back in one way or another to planning ahead.

G.

 

[miroslav]

So much of what is discussed in these forums seems to come back in one way or another to planning ahead.

Yeah...pre-production goes a long way toward making the mixing stage work easy...or hard.

 

[NL5]

A big beefy kick can sound great, but that doesn't mean that's what the mix wants.

At the same time, if you can get a big beefy kick straight to tape, it will be MUCH easier to tone it back (if the mix needs it), than try and take a poorly recorded kick and make it big and beefy. I will agree though, that the better I get at this, the more I already have in mind how I want the instruments to sound TOGETHER, before I start recording - and try to get them to tape already sounding very close to how they will be in the mix.

It's hard to get musicians to accept this fact though, and they want to hear how their instrument sounds solo'd. I try and explain that it really doesn't matter if they sound a bit off when in solo, it just matters how they sound in the mix. It's quite frustrating....... (I have a great quote regarding exactly this, but I'll refrain for now....)

 

[miroslav]

At the same time, if you can get a big beefy kick straight to tape, it will be MUCH easier to tone it back (if the mix needs it), than try and take a poorly recorded kick and make it big and beefy.

Absolutely!

I find the same holds true with EQ...that's it's much easier/better when you have to cut than it is when you have to boost...like when you already have "enough" of something, rather than expect the EQ to make it up for you.

Maybe it's not quite the perfect analogy...but I found that to be the case almost always.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

At the same time, if you can get a big beefy kick straight to tape, it will be MUCH easier to tone it back (if the mix needs it), than try and take a poorly recorded kick and make it big and beefy.

Also very true. My analogy was less than perfect; I had just come from the kick drum thread and had that on my mind. Of course, some tracks will be easier to "modify to fit" than others. In general I guess it's easier to make a good-sounding track sound crappy than to get a crappy track to sound good.

It's hard to get musicians to accept this fact though, and they want to hear how their instrument sounds solo'd. I try and explain that it really doesn't matter if they sound a bit off when in solo, it just matters how they sound in the mix. It's quite frustrating....... (I have a great quote regarding exactly this, but I'll refrain for now....)

Awwww, I wanna hear the quote! Another thing that make that situation difficult is many of the musicians don't yet get that in reality very little on a recording really does sound the same as it does live on stage; that there's an automatic "suspension of disbelief" on the part of a listener that automatically bridges the gap between real life and recorded playback. This bridge is not there in the same way when one is listening to the sound of their recording critically; they expect the recording to sound exactly like it sounds when they're standing in front of their amp, and that's almost always not going to be the case - nor should it be (usually). It's a very difficult concept to convince people of.

I find the same holds true with EQ...that's it's much easier/better when you have to cut than it is when you have to boost...like when you already have "enough" of something, rather than expect the EQ to make it up for you.

There's an old truism that says use EQ boost to make things sound different; use EQ cut to make things sound better.

Like all such truisms, there will always be exceptions, but it's a good thing to keep in mind when EQing.

G.

 

[danny.solo]

Also very true. My analogy was less than perfect; I had just come from the kick drum thread and had that on my mind. Of course, some tracks will be easier to "modify to fit" than others. In general I guess it's easier to make a good-sounding track sound crappy than to get a crappy track to sound good.

Awwww, I wanna hear the quote! Another thing that make that situation difficult is many of the musicians don't yet get that in reality very little on a recording really does sound the same as it does live on stage; that there's an automatic "suspension of disbelief" on the part of a listener that automatically bridges the gap between real life and recorded playback. This bridge is not there in the same way when one is listening to the sound of their recording critically; they expect the recording to sound exactly like it sounds when they're standing in front of their amp, and that's almost always not going to be the case - nor should it be (usually). It's a very difficult concept to convince people of.There's an old truism that says use EQ boost to make things sound different; use EQ cut to make things sound better.

Like all such truisms, there will always be exceptions, but it's a good thing to keep in mind when EQing.

G.

Reading all this is helping a lot.

Quick question...

I have a few options of what (i'm guessing) my output can be.
Currently, all my audio tracks go to 'Master'. However I have a choice of Bus (A/b/c/d/etc)
Should I be using similar busses to push similar tracks together (such as drums on Bus A, Guitar on Bus B, for example)?

 

[greyharmonix]

putting the drums on a separate buss is a good idea. That should actually be what you mix first and then put everything else in to fit the drums. At least that's how i usually do it. if there's drums being played throughout the entire song.

 

[danny.solo]

putting the drums on a separate buss is a good idea. That should actually be what you mix first and then put everything else in to fit the drums. At least that's how i usually do it. if there's drums being played throughout the entire song.

hey there

again, sorry for the lack of knowledge - but what do you mean mix the drums first?
i'm under the impression that mixing is the final stage, of everything (which is what makes the mp3/wav etc, for listening)

thank you

 

[Seafroggys]

That's mastering....

...mixing is taking your recorded tracks and making a mix that sounds how you want it to sound.

 

[glynb]

hey there

again, sorry for the lack of knowledge - but what do you mean mix the drums first?
i'm under the impression that mixing is the final stage, of everything (which is what makes the mp3/wav etc, for listening)

thank you

When you're mixing you don't bring all the instruments in straight off. you first listen to the dums with the other instruments out/muted. Once the drums sound right bring in the bass guitar, twek it as necessary. Once the bass guitar and drums sit nicely together...add the next, maybe guitar... tweak until that sits nice with the drums and bass. And so on.

A 'muddy' mix could be the fault of the guitar, if it's too bassy, remove some bass, try again in the mix... and so on. trial and error until you find what works with your setup.

When you're recording record a sample of the instrument in question as a test, and play it back over the other instruments previously recorded. See if the sound is already good and sits nicely with them, or is it already 'muddy' at tracking time. Get it right then, and come mix time you won't have to fiddle about too much adjusting things!

You need to learn which range of frequencies are occupied by which instruments, it clarifies where clashes are likely to be, for example guitar and vocals can occupy similar frequencies.