Master fader level rising

[Gtoboy]

Yes this whole thing is tricky . A ton of trial and error going on . I try extra loud and extra quiet to identify anything poking out in the mix . In effect I've established in my mind that reducing one component then alters (increase) what else in the mix is coming through . Ultimately it's a compromise. Arguably if one component is very slightly proud in the mix it might be best to leave it rather than throw out the whole balance . This I think is partly where the whole repeat climb down in levels comes from in my case . Unless further eq might solve that it I guess . Have made fair improvements in any event .

You haven't mentioned it yet so maybe you are already are doing "dynamic" balancing.

If you don't already know, dynamic balancing is using automation to feature different parts at different parts of a song. Volume, pan, eq, and compression changes to highlight different things using automation

 

[maxman65]

This i won't be able to do (ie automated at least ) . As far as possible I try to generate as much dynamic in the composition itself such that an average position for any given track will have natural peaks and troughs. I think in the old days they used to ride the faders manually? . A worthy thought . Many thanks

 

[TimOD]

Turning down the elements that are too loud is a much better habit to get into rather than turning up things that are too quiet. Most newbie mixes end up with the faders close to max and the output clipped because they haven't discovered the master fader. I wouldn't start on eq until you have a good feel for mixing levels but when you do eq I would suggest using cuts in preference to boosts.

Yeah, exactly. That used to happen to me a lot. The EQ advice is good too. Now, I hardly even have to think about balancing; it just seems to get there, but I'm nipping stuff in the bud early on. Also, the OP is going to have a more difficult time than your average DAW user as he is using that Zoom standalone recorder/mixer.