average mix time

[jmorris]

I'll just give you an example of what happened last week. We recorded a song, 15 tracks and in the mixing, the acoustic guitar (which was a great sounding track BTW) would not fit into the mix. On its own, it was a perfect sounding track. Noithing at all wrong with it. In the mix, it needed like all the bass cut and too much boost in the highs to even come close to sitting in the mix. I changed mics from a royer ribbon to a U87 with the same placement and it worked perfect in the mix. So, in the end the track was recorded wrong for this particular song and mix. Like I said before, professional mix houses cannot re-track a track and they work the SSL's compressors, EQs, pads and everyother imaginable tool to make a good mix. If a band has a good producer and they will oversee the tracking, and mixing (most great producers do) then they make the artist re-record tracks that just need too much work. A good video is Joe Satriani's studio video. Glynn Johns made him re-take every guitar track performed exactly the same while he was working along. He tracks and mixes along the way and stops when there is a problem. Not everyone will do this but it is the right way to do it if you have the $$$ (or time for the homereccer).

Find the interview with RUSH. It is interesting because they scrapped the album and started new because of lousy mixes happening.

And in the end, we all do it our own way. I would rather re-track than put all three of my racks of tools to fix a track that does not fit into a mix.

BTW, my new project has some songs that were totally re-recorded up to 5 times (all except the drums). After all is done, I listen days later to the first mix and the last mix (re-recorded tracks) and the difference is amazing.

Hum! Interesting I'll check out the Rush thing and the Satriani. I guess the thing Im getting hung up on is the term "incorrectly". If a recording,say acoustic guitar,sounds great while listening to it solo'd on playback, then it was not recorded incorrectly. BUT,I do understand your point you are making. The other thing with regard to the term " correctly recorded" I cant imagine telling a client after days or months of tracking,and in the middle of mixing that we need to re-record some tracks as they were not "recorded correctly" and then charge them for it.You take that approach and you'll be in a bad position.

 

[bigtoe]

The other thing with regard to the term " correctly recorded" I cant imagine telling a client after days or months of tracking,and in the middle of mixing that we need to re-record some tracks as they were not "recorded correctly" and then charge them for it.You take that approach and you'll be in a bad position.

i admit to doing this with bands that track their own stuff or that just don't have the greatest chops. it's very difficult to make the guitar player play the same thing over and over and over and over the same "not right" way and keep his spirits up to do more overdubbing...eventually we say "that might work" or "maybe it will grow on us"...when we hit the mix i try to get them to do it again if they want it up in the mix if it isn't flying. often i'll get them to see it might not be best - just as often they want it as is.

i completely agree it should all be taken care of in tracking...with the more experienced bands - it just isn't a problem. with some of the "weekend warriors" or even with a lot of indie rock guys who like to do their own thing on the fly whether i'm recording it or they're doing it...it happens a few times a year with me. i am honored to work with a lot of weirdos though!

Mike

 

[jmorris]

bigtoe,
yes I agree you with.If a band tracks themselves then ,hey,if the tracks suck your not the engineer so you are not to blame and YOU did not INCORRECTLY RECORD them.( not meaning to scream) But to record tracks yourself,enter the mixing stage and days later say to band'you know, some of these tracks were not recorded correctly,we need to re track them and Im going to charge you" does not fly. Yes, inexperienced band you may have to track many times. But, that is not a "incorrectly recorded" thing.
Jim

 

[iownrocknroll]

I'm a big fan of tracking like sounds.
One reason alot of mixes don't sound right is that the sounds being tracked will never mesh.
Imagine if Dave Grhol recorded his drums on a slingerland, kurt's DS-1 through a marshell ear screeching sound would have never fit.

Good solid matched sounds, good performance, proper tuning, good edits...and I still think it takes a day.


BTW, I'm new to this forum, and I TOTALLY LOVE IT!!!

 

[bigtoe]

ok. i suppose anything past plugging a mic in and getting a signal doesn't count then? i was thinking of the many times i've just heard people flat out suck and blame the engineer. or when the engineer goes out on a limb and it doesn't work so well...

i dunno - to me recording is collaborative on a lot of projects. i'm not the producer. i'm working WITH the band to get what they want. in your case the live stuff could be a little less like that as yeah you're representing what is going on. if the band says "do this" i do it. they are more than welcome to make their sonic decisions with me (how it's recorded - low long - how much they spend) and i'll give my opinion (sometimes strongly). if they end up sucking later on...yep - they're paying for em...and nope - it sure as heck ain't me.

i totally dig where yer coming from as well...

Mike