T
tonyA
New member
Some people's writing needs improvement, but others - whew...need READING improvement - read the TITLE! Talk about the point and being off tangent....
Qwerty
New member
Have you read the first page? "I will finally share some secrets about mixing" and then some mixing tips follow.
Who gives a proverbial what the writing style is like?
Go to Borders and buy a book.
Q.
Who gives a proverbial what the writing style is like?
Go to Borders and buy a book.
Q.
A
absense
New member
nice info here.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
OH GEEZUS! KILL THIS THREAD, AND EVERYONE WHO POSTED ON IT!!!!!
D
Digidude824
New member
fast attack on compressing a kick not all that great i think. I get better results with having a slower attack with a faster release. When using a faster attack on a kick the compression kicks in so fast that the initial transients are lost.....the high end "slap" or beater noise is lost............not cool.
R
rib
New member
~~"The idea in recording is to get as close to the sound you want while tracking. "~~
- that is the best piece of advice i have ever heard as far as recording goes.....
thank you for posting that Ed
- that is the best piece of advice i have ever heard as far as recording goes.....
thank you for posting that Ed
DAFFYDRUNK
New member
Wait a minute... huh? This thread started 3 1/2 years ago?.. or do I finally need glasses to read this computer screen?
tanlith
King of the Wicker People
DAFFYDRUNK said:
Shhhhhh! They'll find out man....
*takes a hit then passes the bong to DAFFYDRUNK*
- Tanlith -
P.S. - Don't knock it peeps... good info is good info... no matter how old it is!
F
foreverdown
New member
and bump for other's benefit great thread.
great thread.
ecktronic
Mixing and Mastering.
Ed that is quite a crafty way of getting round the problem of adding reverb to the snare. The pre delay might be a fraction off though as the snare mic is closer to the snare than the OHs. Not a huge problem atall though, maybe not even an issue!!
My problem with mixing i think is the EQ and compression settings, and i have learnt a wee bit from your posts, cheers. I just aint exact enough with my EQ and compression settings. I mean i would leave the attak at around 10ms for everything! out of shear laziness. And when Eqing, i would be looking at the curve and not really even trying to listen to the changes as much as i should be!
My problem with mixing i think is the EQ and compression settings, and i have learnt a wee bit from your posts, cheers. I just aint exact enough with my EQ and compression settings. I mean i would leave the attak at around 10ms for everything! out of shear laziness. And when Eqing, i would be looking at the curve and not really even trying to listen to the changes as much as i should be!
L
LRosario
New member
One thing that caught my attention....
1- From listening to many home recorded songs, I have come to the conclusion that many are monitoring at levels far too low to mix effectively. There may be issues involved with turning it up a bit, so it is not that I am without sympathy for those reasons, but mixing at low volumes means you will have the tendency to mix too much low end into your mix. Equalizing the monitoring system is not going to solve this problem. Turn those puppies up!
The usual decible range for monitoring is going to be around 85-90db. Thats about the same loudness as a child screaming. But it helps to understand the principles behind loudness in terms of monitoring.
There's something most engineers are introduced to called 'The Equalness Curve'. What this curve basically explains is how frequencies respond at certain SPL levels. This is based off the average listening ability of the human ear. The reason we monitor at 85-90db is because this gives us the most even and truest form of EQ response in the mix.
By nature, when you mix with low volumes, yours ears can't distinguish low end as well; therefore you over compensate for the low end. The result- a bass heavy song.
However, low volume monitoring does come in handy. Listening at a really low level can help you find out what elements are the loudest in your song. High levels are better to find out good placement.
Also, something to watch for is Frequency Masking. This one won't have much to do with frequencies, but more with loudness. Louder sounds will always mask lower ones. This is some of the basic essencials to good mixing.
My two cents
1- From listening to many home recorded songs, I have come to the conclusion that many are monitoring at levels far too low to mix effectively. There may be issues involved with turning it up a bit, so it is not that I am without sympathy for those reasons, but mixing at low volumes means you will have the tendency to mix too much low end into your mix. Equalizing the monitoring system is not going to solve this problem. Turn those puppies up!
The usual decible range for monitoring is going to be around 85-90db. Thats about the same loudness as a child screaming. But it helps to understand the principles behind loudness in terms of monitoring.
There's something most engineers are introduced to called 'The Equalness Curve'. What this curve basically explains is how frequencies respond at certain SPL levels. This is based off the average listening ability of the human ear. The reason we monitor at 85-90db is because this gives us the most even and truest form of EQ response in the mix.
By nature, when you mix with low volumes, yours ears can't distinguish low end as well; therefore you over compensate for the low end. The result- a bass heavy song.
However, low volume monitoring does come in handy. Listening at a really low level can help you find out what elements are the loudest in your song. High levels are better to find out good placement.
Also, something to watch for is Frequency Masking. This one won't have much to do with frequencies, but more with loudness. Louder sounds will always mask lower ones. This is some of the basic essencials to good mixing.
My two cents
