final mix before mastering

  • Thread starter Thread starter tone_aot
  • Start date Start date
masteringhouse said:
Leave people always wanting more
Click to expand...

I've said this for years! I've worked for bandleaders who don't like to take breaks; my argument is that the audience needs breaks as much as the performers do.
 
Several people brought up "density" as an important factor, and I agree 100%. But to me, "density" is a factor of arrangement during the mixdown.

Let's say you've decided on all the tracks you're gonna use in your mix. You DON'T need to start the song with ALL the tracks up; bring some of them in at the chorus, or second verse, or at the end of the song. It can help build drama in the mix.

If you start with everything, you have no place left to go. For a brilliant use of this, listen to Lorrie Morgan's "I'm Looking For Something In Red". The song starts out simply and builds dramatically, as additional instruments are added on each verse.
 
Harvey Gerst said:
If you start with everything, you have no place left to go. For a brilliant use of this, listen to Lorrie Morgan's "I'm Looking For Something In Red". The song starts out simply and builds dramatically, as additional instruments are added on each verse.
Click to expand...
That's exactly why I prefer to look at it as the dimension of "drama" instead of "density". Drama is the dynamic use over the course of the song of not only density, but levels and mix arrangement as well to create movement and emotion in the mix.

G.
 
I actually did something like this a while back to help people listen to arrangements and visualize what was happening. I had them chart arrangements, using some forms I created.
 

Attachments

  • arrange.webp
    arrange.webp
    7.4 KB · Views: 229
  • arrange1.webp
    arrange1.webp
    13.8 KB · Views: 216
Harvey Gerst said:
I actually did something like this a while back to help people listen to arrangements and visualize what was happening. I had them chart arrangements, using some forms I created.
Click to expand...
That's a pretty cool idea, Harvey!

I hope you don't mind if I try data mining you brain and experience a liitle bit more on this topic with a couple of followup questions...

Would/do you use this to "map" the arrangement as the composer has created it, or is this more of a "mix map" of how you'd like to arrange the mix itself?

And how much do those two differ? I know that probably changes from artist to artist and what kind of relationship you have set with them in the studio, and from song to song. What I'm driving at here I guess is how you view that interesting line between mix engineer and producer.

G.
 
Glen, I primarily use it as a guide to help new recordists understand how arranging works. It should be a big part of the producer's role, but all too often, I find myself acting as a "quasi-producer" for bands that just play everything all the time and wonder why their songs don't have enough emotional impact.

When I have them chart a song by a popular artist, it opens their eyes as to how a good arrangement works to enhance the dynamics of a song. It then makes it a lot easier to suggest that "maybe we shouldn't have all 12 guitar parts playing during the whole song".

Most of the time I just engineer, but if people ask my opinion, I'll point out various arrangement possibilities, but they hafta make the final call.

I'll point that out to them by saying something like, "Here's a possible problem, here are some possible solutions, but if you like it this way, tell me to 'shut the hell up', and it won't hurt my feelings one bit. They're your songs and you know them best. I'll continue to point out any possible problems I hear and suggest solutions, but it's always gotta be your call."

Most bands appreciate my involvement, but I hafta walk a fine line and really try to understand what they want and what they're doing, otherwise, I'm just trying to impose my personal tastes on their music. If I don't "get their music", then I keep my mouth shut. Most of the time, I do "get it".
 
Harvey Gerst said:
Glen, I primarily use it as a guide to help new recordists understand how arranging works.
Click to expand...
Ooooohh...I like that idea. A nice sneaky way of getting *someone* on that side of the glass to at least look at the production/arrangement end of it. Especially the part about having them chart someone else's production. It's amazing how often the artist does not realize some of the attention to detail that has gone into the final mix of the artist the're trying to emulate.
Harvey Gerst said:
It should be a big part of the producer's role, but all too often, I find myself acting as a "quasi-producer" for bands that just play everything all the time and wonder why their songs don't have enough emotional impact.
Click to expand...
I definetly hear ya on that one. The more experienced the artist, the more they can self-produce, but the rookies are either, as you say, everything all the time, or they just don't have the "ear" for dramatic arrangements and follow some basic static formula of use this for verses and that for choruses, that gets stale by the time you cross the bridge :).

The hard part still for me is just "shutting up and mixing" when there is someone else holding tight the producer's reins, yet who has all the artistic vision of Larry the Lounge Lizard. I mean, I can take direction and do my job just fine, but controlling the urge to go back in after hours and make a "mixing engineer's cut" just for myself is one that I still have to consciously battle :o .

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
The hard part still for me is just "shutting up and mixing" when there is someone else holding tight the producer's reins, yet who has all the artistic vision of Larry the Lounge Lizard. I mean, I can take direction and do my job just fine, but controlling the urge to go back in after hours and make a "mixing engineer's cut" just for myself is one that I still have to consciously battle :o .

G.
Click to expand...
It helps to make any suggestions to the producer outside of earshot of the band. That way, it comes from him and makes him look good. It doesn't bother me if he gets credit if we all wind up with a better record, and that makes me look good, too.
 
Harvey Gerst said:
It helps to make any suggestions to the producer outside of earshot of the band. That way, it comes from him and makes him look good. It doesn't bother me if he gets credit if we all wind up with a better record, and that makes me look good, too.
Click to expand...
Excellent point. :)

I'd give you rep for this thread if the BBS software wasn't so damn insistant upon democratic quotas ;) (Not that you need any artificial rep; your real rep is more than enough. But I did try. :))

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Excellent point. :)

I'd give you rep for this thread if the BBS software wasn't so damn insistant upon democratic quotas ;) (Not that you need any artificial rep; your real rep is more than enough. But I did try. :))

G.
Click to expand...
No big deal. I'll never get into the high rep count that some people here have accumulated. If my advice is helpful to somebody, that's good enough for me.
 
AGCurry said:
I'd add this:

In my opinion, the long-playing vinyl record imposed the optimum time constraint on an album. I have many CDs which use all the available time (70-80 minutes), and I suffer listening fatigue before they're done. No matter how good the music, I'm ready for something else after 35 minutes.
Click to expand...

Good point, but I wonder if it is the length of the record, the quality of the songs, or the possible slamming of the track that causes fatigue.

I only ask because there are plenty of older albums that do a good job with two full LP's like The White Album and London Calling. I can listen to both of those albums from start to finish without fatigue. Wilco's 'Being There' is another.

I notice that one of the albums I played bass on which comes in at 40 minutes has me tired after about 5-6 songs.

Just a thought.
 
Harvey Gerst said:
I actually did something like this a while back to help people listen to arrangements and visualize what was happening. I had them chart arrangements, using some forms I created.
Click to expand...
I found charts like these were really useful for 4-track work so that I could figure out the tracking/bouncing sequence and what instruments could share tracks. I like to make similar charts when I'm mixing other people's work and I put stars wherever there's a cool fill to bring out.
 
Thanks Harvey! This thread is one of the first ones I read in 09' when it got bumped then. And of course I just read the whole thing again, as if I was watching a favorite movie. I just couldn't get enough of it.









:cool:
 
Trumpspade said:
I can tell you one thing I heard Tone and that is NOT to use any mastering effects in your mix at all...................
Click to expand...
What is a "mastering effect"?

Do anything and everything to get the sound you want while mixing. Be warned that a high RMS is not the same as loud since everybody owns a volume knob and real headroom and dynamics can impart a ton of power. With that warning in mind, have at it. Make what you want to make.
 
this is quiet possibly the best thread I have read to date! thanks guys!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top