Heres the ONE definitive secret to getting a professional mix...

  • Thread starter Thread starter tubedude
  • Start date Start date
sjoko 2,

I believe you hit on something very important.

The A/B process.

I find that with EQ, if I don't constantly A/B my EQ'd mix with the mix without EQ, that I am more prone to push it to far in the wrong direction.

I have a feeling that this is the same with all proccesors. It's very easy to push them past the point of diminishing returns.

I think constant A/b between clean and proccesed is of utmost importance, to make sure you are actually improving the sound.
 
GT, those are some VERY valid remarks. They hold not only for EQ, but all processing.

That is why tracking is so importand - get your sounds right there, and don't be happy until it is right. If you have to spend days on getting your drum sound right, so what, do it. At least then you will have the right material to work with.
Same with all other instruments. Learn to recognise frequencies, so you will know immediately if one thing is in exactly the same fiels as something else. Make adjustments, spend time, and when it comes to mixing you have all the ingredients sounding good and fitting together, each one clearly audible.
This goes for a song with a clean sound, as well as for stuff that is very processed with effects. I think Radiohead's OK Computer is a good example of a heavily processed, but extremely well tracked and mixed album. For a good "clean" example, listen to Zap Mama's A Ma Zone, to my ears technically one of the best albums of the last years. In both cases, all sound is coherent and precicely placed
 
guys..i think it may be misunderstood that
I am a fan of compression...this is not the case
at all....in fact the only time I use it is during
the tracking phase..and I dont have a probem
overcompressing there because I can hear
what I doing and if its not right it doesnt go
to HD..im not compressing during the mix or
on the final mix...

I feel my mixes sound great..and are getting
better ....but just as you have said Sonusman
its all gonna come to a point..when and if im
ready to take it to the next level..and compete
with whats on Radio..which is where I intend to
go ..I have to do what is already being done..
Whether I like it or not...

I suppose it would me feasible to have the songs mastered for Radio and the same songs mastered
sensibly for the sake of easy listening.

I put a "Todays" recorded CD in my CD player
and ran it to my console..and the levels were unbelievable!!!
How are they doing this?..if you guys know
please let us know..I cant seem to even get
close to what they are doing...

Thanks for all the great information!
 
oh man please someone tell me what A/B is.

sorry i'm new here

eddie


GT said:
sjoko 2,

I believe you hit on something very important.

The A/B process.

I find that with EQ, if I don't constantly A/B my EQ'd mix with the mix without EQ, that I am more prone to push it to far in the wrong direction.

I have a feeling that this is the same with all proccesors. It's very easy to push them past the point of diminishing returns.

I think constant A/b between clean and proccesed is of utmost importance, to make sure you are actually improving the sound.
Click to expand...
 
MegaGoo said:
oh man please someone tell me what A/B is.

sorry i'm new here

eddie
Click to expand...

A/B = to compare one thing to another

For example, when you apply an effect, you use the bypass switch to A/B the signal with the effect in and the effect out.

Bruce
 
In response to the above things - we're hitting on some invaluable bits of information regarding mixing here.

Something I have found with a lot of people, both pro's and non-pro's. Also - in my opinion the cause for the often heard remark "the demo, or rough mix, sounded better". Over processing!!!

You start a mix - you add a bit of this, then because of this, you need to add a bit of that to the other - and so on. Before you know, you have introduced so many extra elements that you are really pushing it - and have to start cutting frequencies etc in order to avoid "mush".
Another resulting effect, your song starts, rolls and finishes, everything at one level, dynamics gone.

How do you solve that problem?

First of all, track a sound the way you'd want to hear it on a recording, and spend time doing it. If it is not exactly how you wish to hear it - there IS something wrong. The best recordings require NO processing, they are easy to mix and are transparent.
Its all about you input chain, microphone placement etc.

If you think about it in logical terms, all processing equipment is designed originally to either add stuff that should have been there in the first place (in an ideal world), or to correct / take out mistakes.

So, place a great deal of care. time and emphasis on tracking. The term "we'll fix it in the mix" is the most often heard piece of bullshit - it you have to fix something in the mix, that means you screwed up whilst tracking. It often better to re-do something like that the way it should have been done in the first place, than to try and fix it with extreme processing and / or EQ applications.
Secondly, take great care in applying processing. I have seen so many instances where processing is just fighting to be heard.
Example:
This is a nice reverb, I'll put a bit of it on this (so now you've added the sound of the reverb on your recording). This reverb is so cool, I'll add a bit of it on this and this as well (now you've got three same reverbs fighting for space). Hey! Now I can't hear the first verb all that well, I'll boost it a bit (cool, the fight continues). Ehhhh, 'coz I've boosted the first verb, all the things I've put the verb on sound like they are competing in the same frequency bands - I'll add some EQ.
See what I mean? I know 99.9% of you do this, realize it or not. If you had not been such an idle bastard and made sure your sounds each had their own space to start off with, or spend time designing a verb for each track individually, you would have required much less reverb, much less EQ

Just something to think about when you're mixing
 
Let me add this to sjoko's excellent post...

- Read the previous post once more....

- Read the previous post once again.........

- Read the previous post one more time just to be sure it sinks in!!!

That advice alone can fix 99.01157% of the problems novices encounter during mixing.... it takes a long time to learn that lesson on your own, and sjoko just saved everyone who reads it YEARS off their learning curve!!

Bruce

PS... same goes for sjoko's post following this one too! :)
 
Last edited:
Just to add something:

I often heard the remark; "Yeah right, its ok for you guys, you've got the money to spend months in the studio". Actually, I'm still hearing it often.

I've got 2 answers to the above remark:

1) The reason more and more pro's have home studios is cost / time. The reason you guys have home studios is exactly the same - cost vs possible time spend in a studio. Now you've got a studio - spend time on your music.

2) If I choose to spend 3 days tracking a couple of drum and bass tracks, or two days just tuning and "getting sounds" on drums. I do it for good reason. The reason being - it will sound bloody good - it will save me days in mixing.

Then why, why, why do I spend so much time on things - and most of you do it in 10 percent of the time? After all. I'm a pro - I should be able to do it quicker!

there is another answer - if I could do it quicker I would, but I do it right. The logic in this is - don't moan at me that you cannot get the same results - if I can get a good sound in a day, it might take you 2 or 3 days, but you have your own studio, so spend 2 or 3 days, and come up with something good.
 
I feel like I've been pointed in the right direction......

Thanks for your sharing your experience guys

Zeke
 
I agree with sojko2 and Bruce.

And I am by no means an "expert". :)

But...

If you take the time to make/record your music in the correct manner, then you will not have to "over-process" your music with F/X's.

Example...

It will take me forever and a day to "sonically" fix the mistakes my associate makes, when he constructs dance music on his ASR X PRO.

Because he does not take the time to record his sh*t properly (and he assumes I can fix it on the computer) (which I can, but... :D ).

So, it takes (a lot) time for me to try to fix the mistakes he made in recordings, when the time comes for me to dump his tracks into my PC.

(I know this is a very small assimilation...but you all get the point :) ).

Make sure the music sounds the way you want it to sound ( so you don't have to "super" process it).

My 2 cents...

spin
 
toejtw

Damn, MegaGoo is driving some of my old skeltons outta the closet! ;)
I had forgotten all about this post. Maybe some more good stuff will keep landing here. :)
Paul
 
the better i play the better i track

the better i play the better i track... herein lies the rub.

i'm a pretty decent guitar player. i know how to control my picking so that my notes are consistent. even when strumming chords on the chorus and picking during the verse (r&b/reggae) i can keep things in their proper range. therefore i use compression less as a cure and more for effect.

i'm a pretty crappy bass player. i can't control my 3rd and 4th fingers (i'm trying to learn to finger with all 5 fingers) worth a darn. when i do the walking bass style instead of the spider bass style of fingering, i'm not as bad, but still not PRO. so, i use compression as a cure for out of range notes that result from my weak fingers.
 
dude

holy shit Shailat, that small bit you made on what you do for what problem, really really helps me. Dude wow. I dunno why, man give me some other problems you have and what you do Ex. Bass compression whatever. Cause i have no clue what i'm doing with effects. And holy shit blue bear sound, where did Catch22 come from?? lol they're awsome, i saw em live twice, check out Finger Eleven ......they're what i call an amazing band.
 
BRAVO! BRAVO!! & BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!

I love any set of post that 1) Go against the MAINSTREAM. 2) Talk about bad
& GOOD SOUND!

YEA BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Love
Sean
 
HUH???

Most of what has been posted here is about proper recording practices and techniques.... how is that "going against the MAINSTREAM????"

:confused:

Bruce
 
How 'bout this question:

When I'm tracking individual instruments, I usually take my time and, at least, think I'm getting the sound I want.

However, when mixing time comes, I've found that I do quite a lot of cut eq on most instruments. I don't so much do it as a cure for a poorly recorded sound as I imagine I'm trimming the sonic fat off of the sounds to clear space in the mix. I figure that everytime I use a mic, it's picking up some amount of information through its entire capable frequency range. So I cut to eliminate the extraneous information. Otherwise, when the instruments are brought together, I find a build up anywhere from about 200Hz to 2K.

I'm not going to tell you what I usually use for monitoring, as I suspect that is where some of the misdirection is coming from, but I've begun cutting as a fairly standard mixing practice. I can't think of a way to correct it in tracking.
 
123

I've heard of alot of people shelving certain instruments during tracking, most commonly on snare and hats. I think alot of people tend to use a low shelf of about 60-80hz ( i think) on guitars. I have notes on alot of this, but not with me.
Paul
 
Of all "unwanted" noise while tracking, most of it will be in the lower frequency ranges - which does not mean there is no such noise in the higher ranges.

There are a number of things into consideration while you are tracking.
First:
A full frequency spectrum recording allows for maximum flexibility at later stage (in mixing).
You cannot add a frequency that wasn't there to start with.
Second:
It is no use recording frequencies you will definately never use, unless you wish to doso for effect.

Some notes to the second part. Where to draw the line is a question of experience, trial and error. There are NO set rules, it all depends on what exactly you want to hear in your mix.

Some examples of do's and don't:

If you mike cymbals you should cut your lower frequencies, as cymbals don't generate them and it will avoid having drums bleeding into your cymbal mics. - Unless you place your cymbal mics in such a way that they can double as overheads.............

You can shelve the bass drum and bass guitar's high mid- and high frequencies - unless you need them for a bit of attack.

In other words, there is a 'yes' and a 'no' for every option.

As a general rule I will record everything at a pretty full range, but I will seek to eliminate those frequencies which capture noise rather than an instrument generated sound.
 
Definately good advice coming along here.

Another good reason to "get rid of some of the fat" while tracking, especially in the lower frequencies is that you can print a hotter signal to tape in many situations.

Low frequencies account for over 75% of the total volume, and leaving really low freq's that you don't need on a track mean less overall level on the track for the important stuff. Especially in digital (and yes, even at 24 bit!) a good hot signal will generate the best results in the end.

Ed
 
That is EXACTLY what I'm looking for.

I noticed that low frequencies eat up all my headroom during mixdowns, but I hadn't made the connection that they'd do the same at the tracking stage. Here's to cleaner, hotter signals in my future!

Thanks for the excellent advice!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top