C
CyanJaguar
New member
many times we dont really hear the quality of a mix for some simple reasons:
+there is either too much mental noise from the song being so catchy,
+mental numbness from the disgust associated with bad songs
+ we are more concerned with the musician's mastery of his instrument
+ we are resigned to the fact that most listeners dont listen to the mix so why should we. They prefer to listen to the music.
Sometimes, though, concentration on a mix is necessary and that is when critical listening comes into play.
To me, critical listening is the act of breaking down a mix into several different sonic components then defining and analysing those components in an attempt to creating a sonically balanced and ultimately polished sounding mix.
let me say here that I listened to a mix competition from 14 different sources about a month ago, and it made me realize that the art of mixing is greatly over-emphasised. I think that the tracking is ten times more important and given a good multitrack, the song basically mixes itself, since there is little that the engineer can do to make it stand out after tracking from other mixes of the same song.
ok, back to critical listening. I think the most important thing is to be able to define whats going on in the different frequencies and how they affect the sound of the instrument.
for example, when we are talking about low end, we can characterize it as:
powerful
ballsy
heavy
fat
thick
warm
robust
full
or on the negative side, we could characterise it as
muddy
tubby
thumpy
boomy
barelly
woody
being able to define what something sounds like goes a long way to achieving a good mix.
other frequencies:
Low frequency roll off:
clean
negatives: thin, cold, tinny, anemic.
Midfrequency boost(500hz to 7 khz)
plus: present, punchy, clear, defined, forward,
minus: hollow, puffy, telephonelike, nasal, hard, metallic, twangy
high frequency boost(above 7khz)
plus:bright, crisp, articulate, hot, sizzly
minus: glassy, edgy, sibilant, steely, string noise,
on the subject of frequency, others that need definition are:
flat, extended frequencies
flat midfrequencies
midfrequency dip
flat, extended high frequencies
high frequency roll-off
for more definitions of these , refer to "practical recording techniques" by Bruce and Jenny Bartlett
Another aspect of the mix to critically listen to is the panning:
are the left and right channels balanced?
Can you picture the soundstage?
Are the instruments panned like they would be in a live setting?
the third aspect of critical listening is depth and relative loudness
Are the players balanced?
does the mix put you in a good seat in the auditorium?
Is there a sense of ambience to the instruments?
what kind of room are the players in?
Is the mix too dry or too wet?
Can you pinpoint each instuments position on the stage or in the room?
Is there a focal point?
Is a certain instrument upfront or distant
is it dominating? is it lost?
and finally, when listening to a mix, one has to think about the overall response:
is it natural
is it vintage?
tapey?
musical?
transparent?
fluid?
or is it ?
dull
rough
peaky
flat
phasey
I think that one is on the way to turning out a good mix when one can correctly identify these parts and have the know-how to fix any flaws in the mix.
Funk on!
reference: practical recording techniques. Bruce and Jenny Bartlett.
+there is either too much mental noise from the song being so catchy,
+mental numbness from the disgust associated with bad songs
+ we are more concerned with the musician's mastery of his instrument
+ we are resigned to the fact that most listeners dont listen to the mix so why should we. They prefer to listen to the music.
Sometimes, though, concentration on a mix is necessary and that is when critical listening comes into play.
To me, critical listening is the act of breaking down a mix into several different sonic components then defining and analysing those components in an attempt to creating a sonically balanced and ultimately polished sounding mix.
let me say here that I listened to a mix competition from 14 different sources about a month ago, and it made me realize that the art of mixing is greatly over-emphasised. I think that the tracking is ten times more important and given a good multitrack, the song basically mixes itself, since there is little that the engineer can do to make it stand out after tracking from other mixes of the same song.
ok, back to critical listening. I think the most important thing is to be able to define whats going on in the different frequencies and how they affect the sound of the instrument.
for example, when we are talking about low end, we can characterize it as:
powerful
ballsy
heavy
fat
thick
warm
robust
full
or on the negative side, we could characterise it as
muddy
tubby
thumpy
boomy
barelly
woody
being able to define what something sounds like goes a long way to achieving a good mix.
other frequencies:
Low frequency roll off:
clean
negatives: thin, cold, tinny, anemic.
Midfrequency boost(500hz to 7 khz)
plus: present, punchy, clear, defined, forward,
minus: hollow, puffy, telephonelike, nasal, hard, metallic, twangy
high frequency boost(above 7khz)
plus:bright, crisp, articulate, hot, sizzly
minus: glassy, edgy, sibilant, steely, string noise,
on the subject of frequency, others that need definition are:
flat, extended frequencies
flat midfrequencies
midfrequency dip
flat, extended high frequencies
high frequency roll-off
for more definitions of these , refer to "practical recording techniques" by Bruce and Jenny Bartlett
Another aspect of the mix to critically listen to is the panning:
are the left and right channels balanced?
Can you picture the soundstage?
Are the instruments panned like they would be in a live setting?
the third aspect of critical listening is depth and relative loudness
Are the players balanced?
does the mix put you in a good seat in the auditorium?
Is there a sense of ambience to the instruments?
what kind of room are the players in?
Is the mix too dry or too wet?
Can you pinpoint each instuments position on the stage or in the room?
Is there a focal point?
Is a certain instrument upfront or distant
is it dominating? is it lost?
and finally, when listening to a mix, one has to think about the overall response:
is it natural
is it vintage?
tapey?
musical?
transparent?
fluid?
or is it ?
dull
rough
peaky
flat
phasey
I think that one is on the way to turning out a good mix when one can correctly identify these parts and have the know-how to fix any flaws in the mix.
Funk on!
reference: practical recording techniques. Bruce and Jenny Bartlett.
