i think i broke my ears.....

[freakkguitarist]

does anyone have those mixes.... that they just CANT get right? everything sounds good, ill sleep on it, sounds ooook the next day, make some improve ments, sleep on it, then it sounds still ooooook, but never is done. what do you guys do to help mixers block? for me its a friends band that i really care about, they are all paid up and i just want to give them the best mix i can do. ive been mixing for 4 years on KRK rp8s in a semi treated room (6 big basstraps on the rear studio wall 4'' off the wall, and 4 behind my monitors/LCD in a l=l kinda shape. maybe its time for better monitors now that im starting to actually hear the sloppy imaging in my KRKs?

 

[Dogbreath]

What is it that's not right? Is it in the EQ settings? Dynamics?

One of the things I still fight with a bit is the lo-mid mud. Usually I can get it in the first mixdown but some days......

 

[freakkguitarist]

i find that with these mixes that take a long time, its a balance thing, i cant seem to get everything to glue together, alot of times in the low mids and lows it just kinda turns to a blur. i dunno, its wierd

 

[giraffe]

just start cutting low mids and lows.
some time it will sound like there's a fight between the bass and the git, and you think the bass is the problem.

but some times your wrong, and the prob is in the git.

if your really stuck, save the mix u have, then start again from scratch.

be a bastard on the new one, eq and compress the hell out of it, whatever the hell you feel like doing, just do it.
gut the fucker.
probably, you won't end up with the mix you want here, but the fresh approach will probably teach you something you can use, and in the least give you a fresh prospective on something you're burned out on.

go full tilt, gut the fucker like a fish, there's no need to keep any thing you do.
beat your head on a different wall for a while........

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

The longer it takes to get a mix "right" (I'm not talking about building a big production, just getting the tracks to play nice with each other), the worse the tracking that one is dealing with.

If you have to struggle and fight with a mix to get it to cooperate, and if after a few hours (and at least one night of sleep) you still don't feel it's finished, you have two options: re-track until you get source tracks that practically mix themselves, or accept the fact that it's just never going to get perfect, accept the best mix you got so far, and move on to the next project.

And remember, if you have someone else master that mix, they may just polish off enough of the rough edges to make things OK, both because of their fresh ears and different gear.

G.

 

[mixsit]

..If you have to struggle and fight with a mix to get it to cooperate, and if after a few hours (and at least one night of sleep) you still don't feel it's finished, you have two options: re-track until you get source tracks that practically mix themselves, or accept the fact that it's just never going to get perfect, accept the best mix you got so far, and move on to the next project.
G.

That's something I'm struggling to accept, apply, and paying the price for. There always seems to be 'a fix' (or series of fixes) beckoning.

Part of it also plays -rightfully, to one's relative experience; There's at the very least a lot of good productive discovery going on in the process.. And in two of my recent projects the band/artists specifically wanted to go down that fix it' path for their own experience.

How about this though (-has this happened to anyone else?
I've revisited a few projects that relied on said 'endless tweaks and refinements' - say hearing it after a year or two, thinking 'I can fix that now! -only to open it up and find (remember-!) all the very real reasons I was forced to make those 'poor decisions' in the first place?
You couldn't lay it out.. and didn't lay it out -'cause the track didn't lay it down.

Simple.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

How about this though (-has this happened to anyone else?
I've revisited a few projects that relied on said 'endless tweaks and refinements' - say hearing it after a year or two, thinking 'I can fix that now! -only to open it up and find (remember-!) all the very real reasons I was forced to make those 'poor decisions' in the first place?
You couldn't lay it out.. and didn't lay it out -'cause the track didn't lay it down.

Yep, I know that syndrome well.

I *still* have tracks that I got from a musician friend of mine for mixing some 10 years ago or so. He recorded them on an old Otari 8-track open reel tape with heads that had seen better days, and drum tracks of dubious quality. But it was one of those projects where performance lightning was caught in a bottle on the guitar tracks. There's moments in that song that just come together like magic. Even though the overall tracking quality is not quite there, I have hung on to those tracks all this time because the content is so damn promising.

I have on a couple of different occasions in my spare time over the years gone back to those tracks and tried re-mixing them, applying some new tricks and techniques that I have learned since then, using fresh ears, and also newer, higher-quality gear and plugs that I didn't have 10 years ago. Every re-mix I tried either failed miserably compared to the original, or came out *different* than the original mix, but not really all that much better to justify the extra hours I had put into it.

It turned out that my instincts were pretty much on target the first time around, but there just wasn't really that much more blood that could be squeezed out of the tracks I had to work with.

You're right, it's very tough lesson to learn, and you're even righter in that much of it does have to do with one's experience level at the time. Working on a mix over and over for hours and days indicates on a less-than-obvious level a lack of confidence on the part of the engineer. They just keep thinking "this HAS to sound better than this, there just must be something *I'M* missing or doing wrong.

Sometimes they might be partially right, but they are almost never completely right when they think that, IMHO. Sure, sometimes all it takes is a parametric sweep technique on one track that the newb hasn't learned yet in order for the mix to jump from "mediocre" to "pretty good", but rarely, if ever, will that be "the missing ingredient" that takes it from "pretty good" to "THAT"S what I'm talking about!" .

But the more experience one has, and the more confidence they have - sometimes it only takes one great-sounding mix to give it to them - the easier it is to recognize and admit that sometimes the tracks just do not and will not sound the way we would like them to, no matter how we try to cajole them.

G.

 

[Daisy]

What I would generally recommend doing in this kind of situation or similar ...

... would be to go through the mix, and just start muting each track, individually, and listen to what happens. When I was in a similar situation as yourself about a few months ago ... I tried muting each element, one by one. Nothing really changed dramatically, until I did the guitars.

After muting the guitars, everything else just kind of opened right up. The vocals sounded powerful and clear, the bass was tight, and the drums were pretty slammin.' Everything just seemed right. Then, I unmute the guitar, and then everything goes to hell again. Vocals just not quite there, the bass sounded kind of muffled, and the drums lost some of their lustre.

What I wound up doing is calling in the guitar player and demonstrated this with him in my mixing chair ... and we both agreed that we needed to re-track the guitars. Only this time, the arrangement was much more subtle and low-key. We listened back and both agreed it was far better. And the rest of the band agreed there was something was working with it that just wasn't quite working before, and the mix was much better.

Whatever it is that you mute / unmute during this process, that has the largest impact, positively or negatively, on the other elements ... that's your problem track, and that's likely what needs addressing.

 

[chazba]

Rant!!!!!

When I have trouble getting a mix to come together its most often because the instruments just don't sound all that great. I'm currently trying to finish up a 5 song project for friends and its one of those situations where I can't just say...know what???You need a new rhythm player or whatever! The only solution I see is to get them ALL into the studio and endure the "moremeeee" for a couple of hours and be done with it. Next time I do a project for friends I'm gonna get a wad of cash up front and a written agreement that they have to do everything I say regarding amp choices and settings, not to mention arrangements. Bad arrangements are reason #2 for a problematic mix. There is no way to fix a crappy song or a crappy arrangement of a decent song. Did I hear someone say "How can you charge your friends???" Because your enemies won't use your studio!! And onother thing!!!!Last week I recorded a Quartet. When they heard the first playback the session was over. They were a long way from being ready to record. If they say..." yeah but its only for family so it don't have to be perfect"...WRONG!!! Then it has to be ABSOLUTELY PERFECT because they will be living with it for generations and , like it or not, the grandkids can tell the difference.
I feel better now...rant is finished.

chazba


chazba

 

[mixsit]

... situations where I can't just say...know what???You need a new rhythm player or whatever! The only solution I see is to get them ALL into the studio and endure the "moremeeee" for a couple of hours and be done with it..
chazba

... Or cut to the chase. All (or the key ones) sitting there; Solo drum & bass sub, Solo bass & rhythm sub, etc. Cold but real sometimes.
Then- "This is why."

Rant on bro.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Bad arrangements are reason #2 for a problematic mix.

Amen. Often times it's not a bad arrangement, but a lack of any formal arrangement whatsoever.

There is no way to fix a crappy song or a crappy arrangement of a decent song.

Automating the channel mute buttons can go a long way in helping with that.

Problem is, the artist(s) - and I use the term loosely - in such a case usually are not actually interested in recording music; they're interested in recording themselves. They want the mix as full of them as they are of themselves.

The answer to that: "You guys are playing your parts like a basketball team where nobody passes the ball and everybody wants to take every shot. Keep that up and you'll never score more than 20 points a game, no matter how good of a shot each of you may be."

G.

 

[chazba]

hmmmmmmm

SSG...Thanks for the tip.....Hmmmmm...automate the mute buttons....hmmmm
I'm just a guy with a recording setup in his basement. I don't think I could survive very long trying to satisfy people who aren't ready to record and make mony at it.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I don't think I could survive very long trying to satisfy people who aren't ready to record and make mony at it.

I'd rather drink lava from a plastic glass than try and do that myself. Not only would I be afraid that doing it for any extended period would cause me to think that heading up to the school bell tower with a sniper's rifle might be a relaxing pastime, but those most not ready yet to record seem to usually be those with the least amount of money to pay.

That's the funny thing about being a musician; it's a lot easier to have money to record if you're talented and know how to check your ego at the green room door . Hell, the best ones get the studios to PAY THEM to sit in on recording sessions, not vice versa .

G.

 

[mixsit]

...Automating the channel mute buttons can go a long way in helping with that..

And Dasy..

After muting the guitars, everything else just kind of opened right up. The vocals sounded powerful and clear, the bass was tight, and the drums were pretty slammin.' Everything just seemed right. Then, I unmute the guitar, and then everything goes to hell again. Vocals just not quite there, the bass sounded kind of muffled, and the drums lost some of their lustre.

This has been a reocurring subject (in another thread as well IIRC..)
Mute is a powerfull 'window. One of my most satisfying and instructional projects envolved a whole lot of stacking cool layers, instruments and candy, building it up and up on a few of the songs in particular. It was working', but you know what- it didn't really take off untill we came back around and started pulling things down, out etc.
Real eye opener.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

One of my most satisfying and instructional projects envolved a whole lot of stacking cool layers, instruments and candy, building it up and up on a few of the songs in particular. It was working', but you know what- it didn't really take off untill we came back around and started pulling things down, out etc.
Real eye opener.

I guy I know composes new songs by coming up with an interesting chord progression or riff (or both) on guitar or keyboard - though he's a guitarist first and foremost. He then builds a backbeat/rhythm for it with drum sample loops and adds bass direct.

Then he spends the next week or two just adding instruments. Piano, organ, horns, synths, extra guitar parts, etc. He really doesn't have any formal arrangement in mind, if at all; he just starts riffing on the central theme with the different instruments without a whole great deal of regard to arrangement at that time. Just layers upon layers of instrument lines and fills. He typically winds up with some 25-35 tracks when he's done.

He then passes these tracks to me and lets me play producer/arranger/mix engineer at the same time with them, letting me put together a good mix from the building blocks he has given me. I always ask him what he has in mind, and he always replies, nothing special, really, just do your thang with it. I love it when that happens; I find it extremely fun to arrange the tracks like that with my own freedom of interpretation of where to take the song.

The initial fader-up on all tracks sounds pretty awful - it's not really meant to sound otherwise, there is no arrangement per se yet. One quickly learns how less can be much more; rarely are there more than 8-10 of the 30 tracks that wind up being major tracks used for anything more than an occasional accent or fill, the rest of them being muted either entirely and never used, or kept quiet with automation 80% of the time until I can plug it into the mix at just the right place and time.

The only significant difference between what we do there and the kind of gig that Chazba is talking about, is that the kind of clients he's describing think that the initial faders-up mix is supposed to - and actually does - sound good, and is not just raw tracking from which to build a dynamic mix.

G.