Getting that "polished sound" mixing question?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DizziDevereux
  • Start date Start date
what does it mean that we record in less than ideal rooms? it means our mixes can benefit from eq

it seems really funny that all you dudes are basically telling him not to do any eq at all

:rolleyes:
 
jeap said:
what does it mean that we record in less than ideal rooms? it means our mixes can benefit from eq

it seems really funny that all you dudes are basically telling him not to do any eq at all

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

We're not saying that at all. What we're saying is that if you want to get a "polished sound" get the best source possible, put it through the best chain possible, and try not to f**k with it as much as possible.

EQ has several uses in the mix process, but it's not a band-aid for poor recording skills.

You are correct in that one has to deal with the recorded tracks, but if they aren't up to a professional or semi-pro level to begin with no amount of EQ or magic fairy dust is going to make them sound "polished". Just submit to the fact that they are what they are.

BTW -

I listened to the tracks of the poster on my space, they ain't bad (at least on computer speakers). Just needs a bit of clean-up. That's what mastering is for. As long as the poster feels that it's the best he can do in regards to mixing the individual tracks, job done.
 
masteringhouse said:
We're not saying that at all. What we're saying is that if you want to get a "polished sound" get the best source possible, put it through the best chain possible, and try not to f**k with it as much as possible.

EQ has several uses in the mix process, but it's not a band-aid for poor recording skills.

You are correct in that one has to deal with the recorded tracks, but if they aren't up to a professional or semi-pro level to begin with no amount of EQ or magic fairy dust is going to make them sound "polished". Just submit to the fact that they are what they are.
Click to expand...
Well said, and I agree 100%, Tom!

I've encountered this guy on other forums and for whatever reason, Jeap here has a hard-on for poo-poo'ing professional advice on recording techniques. Whatever makes him happy, I guess....
 
masteringhouse said:
You are correct in that one has to deal with the recorded tracks, but if they aren't up to a professional or semi-pro level to begin with no amount of EQ or magic fairy dust is going to make them sound "polished". Just submit to the fact that they are what they are.
Click to expand...

ok but why bother to have it mastered professionally in that case?

i am trying to point the guy in the direction of mixing eq advice that is pretty simple and straightforward. some of the guys at the other forum are raving about it.

plus there are links to articles in sound on sound with other interesting strategies


it seemed to me that thats exactly what the guy was asking for
 
jeap said:
ok but why bother to have it mastered professionally in that case?

i am trying to point the guy in the direction of mixing eq advice that is pretty simple and straightforward. some of the guys at the other forum are raving about it.

plus there are links to articles in sound on sound with other interesting strategies


it seemed to me that thats exactly what the guy was asking for
Click to expand...

Hey I'm not chastising you for submitting info on EQ, sharing info is a good thing. But I think where the irritation is that you told Kevin his "answer sucked" when in fact it's the correct one if you're trying to achieve a truly "polished sound" with mixing alone.

EQ is like makeup. On an ugly chick it can make her look better if not done to excess, but won't make her look like a million bucks. On a better looking chick she may need none at all to look great, or may look even more glamorous with it.

Trying to think of an analogy with plastic surgery, but I'm too tired at the moment ...
 
I would have to agree with Kevin here. The biggest difference I hear between my mixes and the mixes that I want to emulate is the way the frequencies blend together. The fine-tuning eq that Kevin mentioned is something I'm still very far away from getting a hold on.

I have learned that you have to track things as close to the way you want them to sound as possible. I now fear the words, "We can fix it later..." and all of the variations on that horrible sentence.
 
jeap said:
and lets not forget that this is a home recording board

;)
Click to expand...

And I am a home recordist. I am no pro (i'm very far from it in fact). I don't have the means, talent experience etc to get professional sounding recordings but I like to think I do the best I can with what I have.

I don't see why others wouldn't want to do the same.
 
the theory behind the strategy is that there are excess low frequencies that build up in the inaudible range and ranges below the fundamentals of the sources

these can be cut out with hipass (lo-cut) filters

then there is what is called the mud frequencies which can be anywhere from 100 - 500hz and can really build up in the 300 - 400hz range

by selectively making cuts on individual tracks with a parametric eq in these ranges some of the mud is scooped out and the result can be a tighter brighter clearer and more polished mix

thats the basic theory


so many guys here are recording in living rooms and even apartment bedrooms

effective bass traps are very large and/or expensive so its unlikely that a guy with wife and kids is going to effectively treat the living room

if he then records multiple sources in the untreated room using mics then its probable he will get a buildup of low frequency energy



thats about as simple as i can make it as far as what it is and why

i stumbled on a pro forum last night and looked at mixing eq threads and it seemed like every single one of the posters there uses eq in a similar fashion
 
jeap said:
i stumbled on a pro forum last night and looked at mixing eq threads and it seemed like every single one of the posters there uses eq in a similar fashion
Click to expand...

Ok, so where was it? I need all the help I can get! :)
 
7string said:
Ok, so where was it? I need all the help I can get! :)
Click to expand...

in one of my previous posts at the top theres the word link which is a hyperlink to the recording website froum which has details and things to try.
 
Blue Bear Sound said:
Which means WHAT, exactly??? You'd prefer the pros leave so the rest can argue over which works better in a bad room - Radio Shack or Behringer???? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...



remember, only radio shack has mixers AND TVs at discount friendly prices. ;)
 
This is homerecording.com right? If I was able to afford $4000 mic's and other people to place them for me, I wouln't be asking any of you for help. I would pay you for it. The tracking process is smooth, as I am confident in my current knowledge of engineering at this point. While I might not be a "pro" I make good use of the Equipment I described above.

I talked with a friend of mine who suggested dialing in the vocals first then forming the instruments around the vocals. Do any of you have similar knowledge? Also I track 6 or eight guitar tracks using different guitars and amps. My friend suggested that equilizing the guitars in different ways can make a bigger guitar sound. Can any of you validate that?

I usually create multiple master copies of the projects. When we send the mix to the ME, it is completely dry. I only want to do as much as I can on this end to make his job a little easier. I do also send a Composite of what we are thinking the mix should sound like along with some copies of our favorite mixes. Did any one listen to the tracks on our MySpace page? "Break" is the most recent track that was sent from the ME. www.myspace.com/devereuxband

All of the instrument tracking was done in my HOME studio, and the drums in a treated room. Thank you all for your input, I appreciate you taking time out of your day to comment. ----------- Dizzi
 
DizziDevereux said:
This is homerecording.com right? If I was able to afford $4000 mic's and other people to place them for me, I wouln't be asking any of you for help. I would pay you for it.
Click to expand...

Where in this thread has it been suggested that you need to upgrade gear and employ people to set up your mics for you? :confused:

Move them yourself, I do and I've got a dodgy back.
 
It sounds like a demo..... you'd do well to listen to the advice you were given regarding tracking - that's where it all starts!
 
Dizzi, I listened to your song, Break, but maybe I forgot to leave you a review. I loved it. Sounds very cool, well written, and recorded. Vocals are really out front, but that's not a bad thing, as they are good. I don't know that I would suggest changing anything. You could always play around with it, if something isn't how you thought you wanted, but I think it's a well done performance. I am partial to this genre of music, so tend to like anything somewhat hard, with good tempo changes, and lots of mood.

Take this as only my opinion, but good song.
Ed
 
DizziDevereux said:
This is homerecording.com right? If I was able to afford $4000 mic's and other people to place them for me, I wouln't be asking any of you for help. I would pay you for it. The tracking process is smooth, as I am confident in my current knowledge of engineering at this point. While I might not be a "pro" I make good use of the Equipment I described above.

I talked with a friend of mine who suggested dialing in the vocals first then forming the instruments around the vocals. Do any of you have similar knowledge? Also I track 6 or eight guitar tracks using different guitars and amps. My friend suggested that equilizing the guitars in different ways can make a bigger guitar sound. Can any of you validate that?

I usually create multiple master copies of the projects. When we send the mix to the ME, it is completely dry. I only want to do as much as I can on this end to make his job a little easier. I do also send a Composite of what we are thinking the mix should sound like along with some copies of our favorite mixes. Did any one listen to the tracks on our MySpace page? "Break" is the most recent track that was sent from the ME. www.myspace.com/devereuxband

All of the instrument tracking was done in my HOME studio, and the drums in a treated room. Thank you all for your input, I appreciate you taking time out of your day to comment. ----------- Dizzi
Click to expand...

We're all aware that this is a home recording site and that everyone (including pros) have budget limitiations. After answering similar posts many, many times you have to realize that some of us get a bit cranky when yet another thread comes up asking how they can make a prosumer situation sound like it was recorded in a multi-million dollar studio. The answer is, you probably can't. Particularly if you're not well-grounded in essential audio engineering skills like EQ, mic technique, signal routing, and others.

To answer your question, some people like to approach a mix by using the vocals first ans wrapping the rest around. Geoff Emerick (Beatles) used to use frequencies as a guide and start with mid-range instruments, then add drums, vocals, and finally bass guitar. Some people (like myself) approach the mix as if it were a live concert with all of the elements interacting at once and then hone down the individual tracks where needed.

In regards to EQing guitars differently do a search on complimentary EQ to see some recommendations.
 
Awesome! Thankyou very much. Sorry to get frustrated with anyone, I appreciate all your input. -- dizzi
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top