If you run out of gain mixing tracks , should you compress it for more volume?

TimOD

Member
In all honesty, what others have said is true. That mix you posted does not sound good, and you seem to be obsessed with technical stuff that ultimately doesn't mean anything as far as a good mix goes. You're going way overboard with EQ. It's always best to use as little EQ as possible, and massive roll-offs at either end invite trouble.
"Is this so bad? A couple months ago I could NOT make 5 tracks line up in the DAW. Now they are within two milliseconds."
What does that mean? Why would they not line up, and how is it that they're now "within 2 milliseconds?" Do you mean your timing whilst playing was bad, and is now good? Or was some strange technical thing going on in the DAW whereby tracks were not lining up (I had that happen due to a firmware problem with the interface)?
 

LazerBeakShiek

AKA Optimus Prime LEGO Vampire
10 ms latency is extremely noticeable track to track. Where'd that chorus come from , my guitars are clean..... Using higher bitrates, and correct settings, it has been reduced to less than 2 ms.

My playing or hearing should not questioned. I can play at the elite level.
 
Last edited:

LazerBeakShiek

AKA Optimus Prime LEGO Vampire
Why don't you download that O scope VST , and scope a few songs on a purchased CD. See what a song looks like in real time. Then compare that to your own recordings.

What differences did you notice? use your ears too.
 

LazerBeakShiek

AKA Optimus Prime LEGO Vampire
One more.

Record a bass track wide open not filters or EQ. Then record a bass track with a 40-4000 LPF HPF. Which sounds better?

Record a guitar widec open. Then record same guitar filtered 80-8000 what sounds better.

I mean it sounds better when layered in instruments. To me the filter set gets rid of the artifact. I hear it and see it.
 
Last edited:

rob aylestone

Well-known member
Do you know any musician able to play with this level of accuracy, in fact, this is what makes the good ones great! If you strum a chord with a pick then the two E notes might be more than 10mS apart. If a pianist plays a chord exactly the same happens. A violin player might start a quiet note very early. You’ve got this mechanical thing in your head. You’ve also misunderstood the data on the pitches of instruments, because you’ve not considered overtones at all! A soprano sax sounds different to an alto not because of the extra 7 notes, but because of the overtones. My guess is lots of the nasty distortion we are hearing is because the harmonics are too dense, and EQing these still leaves the excess of harmonics there, but quieter.

incidentally, do the maths on milliseconds and distance. Playing folk music on a festival size stage can add more delay than you are blaming on your hardware. Tightness is not measured in milliseconds, it’s measured in musical ability. Video people slip and slide audio to sync. In a 25 FPS timeline, and multiple camera it’s common for you to get one track that can either be early, or late and a fiftieth of a second wrong. Your eye and ears accept this. You could put the audio into an audio editor and fix it but there’s no need.

you need to have a total rethink. You’ve developed a simply crazy system but you can’t see it. You’re now trying to fix your flawed system. We are all saying one thing. Mix with your ears. Who cares what it looks like, or what numbers are dialled in? Train your ears, trust the force.
 

LazerBeakShiek

AKA Optimus Prime LEGO Vampire
Do you know any musician able to play with this level of accuracy,
Me.
incidentally, do the maths on milliseconds and distance.
That is different.
you need to have a total rethink. You’ve developed a simply crazy system
Using the tools in the Reaper tool kit is hardly anything unusual. Plug in the Gonimeter. Have a ponder what that's all about. Somebody might look at it and find meaning.
 

mjbphotos

What?!?
You know of a measurable way to do that, that doesn't involve visualizations?

What is better?

A-
https://soundcloud.com/mark-c-746521042%2Finstrumental-of-it
B-

https://soundcloud.com/mark-c-746521042%2Ftrimmed-up-with-filters

It's got NOTHING to do with 'MEASURING'. You seemed obsessed with visual analysis of the mix.

A or B? Is this even the same set of tracks? A has this godawful fizzy guitar part and the main arpeggiated rhythm guitar buried under it. You don't use EQ to make a track work, you use it to make it fit in better with the rest of the tracks. You don't use a limiter to tame loud drum hits, you use automation (or in the case of EZDrummer, going into the MIDI track to reduce the velocity).

Look, everyone here keeps telling you the same things over and over, you just don't want to hear it - why are you even bothering to ask?
 

mjbphotos

What?!?
Why don't you download that O scope VST , and scope a few songs on a purchased CD. See what a song looks like in real time. Then compare that to your own recordings.

What differences did you notice? use your ears too.
When I have my mixes in a good place - done with my ears - I use a Spectrum Analyzer, Voxengo Span in 'Stereo Mastering' mode. I look for areas in the frequency spectrum that are low or high (bulges down or up in the curve). I've done this with pro mixes, and its incredible how even these are across the whole frequency range for the whole song.
Then its a matter of fixing those 'bulges'. Sometimes its a matter of a little EQ on the stereo master track, sometimes its going back into the mix and EQing particular tracks (for example 'the guitars are too loud in the 400-800Hz range', or 'the bass guitar is boomy at less than 80Hz'.
 

Farview

Well-known member
Comparing your mix with a finished master is comparing apples and oranges. Mixes don't necessarily sound like masters, there is another level of processing that happens after the mix. During mastering, the overall tonal content of the mix is balanced and the compression and limiting will also tend to even out the spectrum.

That happens in a separate process, not during the mix.
 

LazerBeakShiek

AKA Optimus Prime LEGO Vampire
Mixes don't necessarily sound like masters
Happen to know an example of this in this style of music?

I have LP's Meteora unmastered. It is close to the CD.

Why cant a bedroom recorder throw a master limiter on the mains and call it a day? The volume will slightly increase when you turn up the threshold.
 
Last edited:

LazerBeakShiek

AKA Optimus Prime LEGO Vampire
This has been altered by youtubes limits. The tracks unmastered are available for download.

Have you dragged them into the DAW and analyzed them ? Its more than -16 LUFs. Like -4. Check out the wave form. Huge waves. Both mastered and unmastered.

I need to know what you are talking about. Exactly what levels change. The amplitude of the waves is very close in size. Freeze frame and superimpose.

I am sticking with amplitude over time. That is a fucking win every time. My bass line. Look at this beautiful bastard!
Screenshot 2021-09-22 122658.jpg


Rob , don't hit yourself or admitt you do. That means you are mentally ill. Maintain. Control. Use drugs to overcome all. Fear is an illusion.
 
Last edited:

Farview

Well-known member
Happen to know an example of this in this style of music?

I have LP's Meteora unmastered. It is close to the CD.

Why cant a bedroom recorder throw a master limiter on the mains and call it a day? The volume will slightly increase when you turn up the threshold.
I will have to get off work to pull up some raw mixes and the mastered versions. I will probably have to post except, since I don't own the rights to distribute my clients work. But you should get the idea.

There is no such thing as an unmastered LP. Cutting the master disc that will be used for manufacturing is where the term came from.
 

LazerBeakShiek

AKA Optimus Prime LEGO Vampire
I will have to get off work to pull up some raw mixes and the mastered versions. I will probably have to post except, since I don't own the rights to distribute my clients work
Please .

If it helps, only use 30 seconds to demonstrate. That way it is a sample.
 
Top