Mixing: The science of actually not being a science.

[morejaylesswar]

Hi, how are you?

I've introduced myself to the forums a while back, but I feel like another introduction is in order: I'm Jay. I'm a musician and amateur recording engineer from Detroit, Michigan. I deal primarily in Hip-Hop music when it comes to engineering. I haven't really gotten many clients from other genres. Honestly, I wouldn't know what to do. I'm having a hard enough time in Hip-Hop. I recently did an acoustic song and I loved every moment of mixing that. It was my first time recording live instruments.

I'm actually just writing here for any tips or anything when it comes to mixing. Every answer I've gotten is that "There is no science to mixing." I'm not satisfied with that answer; although I'm well aware that there is really no definite way of doing it. I'm in college right now, working on my degree for this, but nothing is better than a real world experience. Especially since I took a semester off due to financial reasons.

Here are a list of questions I have:

1. How do I get a vocal take to stand out over everything and be strong?
- Most of the vocals I record seem pretty frail after EQing. It seems thin and cold. No warmth or presence in them. They sometimes get lost in the music. I listen to songs everyday and try to emulate what they're doing, but I don't know the process or what frequencies to cut to get my desired sound. What to boost, etc.

4. How do I get a smoother sounding vocal?
- I know of a few other engineers in my area who work from home with pretty much the same equipment that I have and their client's vocals seem to sound really smooth and into the record. Mine always sound a bit rough. I can't explain how I see it in my head and make it make sense to you, but I just know that their's sound a lot smoother than mine. What am I doing wrong or what can I be doing better to achieve that?

3. What exactly is compression and how do I use it to my advantage?
- I can sit and play with knobs all day in these plug-ins, but I won't know anything until I figure out what I'm doing and what knobs do what. I've been googling for months on how to get a smooth sounding vocal and the best answer I've gotten was that it's done in compression. What is the science of compression? What does it really do?

4. What is meant by "finding the frequencies where everything fits"?
- I've been told to make a pocket in the music for the vocals to sit into when I'm EQing, but I don't know what they mean by that and how to do it. If I'm cutting mud from my vocals and the other instruments, it's the Low-mid-range, right? So wouldn't that make them all sit in that same frequency of not having any LMR?

I've started an online portfolio of some of my mixes as I go along. I'd like any of you to take a listen and let me know what you think can be improved. All criticism is welcomed.

Click here, it's a SoundCloud link.

Thanks in advance to anyone with productive answers.

 

[diggy_dude]

Welcome, Jay. Cool moniker!

There is most definitely a science to mixing. All those electronic devices operate on signals according to known scientific principles. The room you mix in should be designed according to the findings of acoustical science. And so forth. What they mean when they tell you there's no science to it is, your own ears are the final authority.

 

[diggy_dude]

Not to be glib, but when I read your questions, the best answer I can think of for most of them is to read a book on mixing. Understanding how compressors and other gear work under the hood is crucial to using them effectively. If you're EQing your vocals excessively to make them stand out, you're doing it backwards. You need to EQ everything in the mix that competes with the vocals to "make the pocket". To put it simply, every instrument, including vocals, has a known frequency range. You need to reduce the bandwidth of some instruments to make room for others. It's a balancing act. I'll catch hell from the "use your ears" gurus around here for saying this, but there are charts that can show you where the spectra of various instruments overlap. As I said, your ears are the final judge, but I don't believe there's anything wrong with using a crutch or two at first until everything "clicks" in your head and you gain enough experience to do it by ear.

 

[PDP]

You need to EQ everything in the mix that competes with the vocals to "make the pocket". To put it simply, every instrument, including vocals, has a known frequency range. .

I agree, there are simple charts that display frequency ranges.

I listened to your first mix, sounds OK to me.

 

[morejaylesswar]

Welcome, Jay. Cool moniker!

There is most definitely a science to mixing. All those electronic devices operate on signals according to known scientific principles. The room you mix in should be designed according to the findings of acoustical science. And so forth. What they mean when they tell you there's no science to it is, your own ears are the final authority.

LOL! Thank you!

When people tell me that there is no science to mixing, I think about what my degree is in. Then I feel like someone is lying to me, lol. Either it's the school or these engineers. I think the best advice that I've heard that mixing is like cooking. There is no definite recipe, you add what your taste buds (or ears) tell you to. You figure out what works and what doesn't. That made it a lot simpler for me. Now I feel like a chef of sorts.

 

[diggy_dude]

LOL! Thank you!

When people tell me that there is no science to mixing, I think about what my degree is in. Then I feel like someone is lying to me, lol. Either it's the school or these engineers. I think the best advice that I've heard that mixing is like cooking. There is no definite recipe, you add what your taste buds (or ears) tell you to. You figure out what works and what doesn't. That made it a lot simpler for me. Now I feel like a chef of sorts.

Interesting you should mention cooking. A friend of mine, a dyed-in-the-wool empiricist, once told me about a book called The Science of Cooking that she swears by.

 

[morejaylesswar]

Not to be glib, but when I read your questions, the best answer I can think of for most of them is to read a book on mixing. Understanding how compressors and other gear work under the hood is crucial to using them effectively. If you're EQing your vocals excessively to make them stand out, you're doing it backwards. You need to EQ everything in the mix that competes with the vocals to "make the pocket". To put it simply, every instrument, including vocals, has a known frequency range. You need to reduce the bandwidth of some instruments to make room for others. It's a balancing act. I'll catch hell from the "use your ears" gurus around here for saying this, but there are charts that can show you where the spectra of various instruments overlap. As I said, your ears are the final judge, but I don't believe there's anything wrong with using a crutch or two at first until everything "clicks" in your head and you gain enough experience to do it by ear.

Thank you.

I definitely appreciate your reply. Do you know any great books that simplify mixing to a novice? I'm really interested in learning everything I possibly can. I absolutely love mixing. I think I'd have a lot more fun if I knew what the hell I was doing. LOL. I have a basic understanding, but most of the times I get lucky or get stuck with something that I truly don't know.

As well, what do you mean by reduce the bandwidth? I'm unfamiliar with that. Also, are those charts found in plug ins, or are there actual paper charts that I can study from?

 

[morejaylesswar]

Interesting you should mention cooking. A friend of mine, a dyed-in-the-wool empiricist, once told me about a book called The Science of Cooking that she swears by.

That's quite possibly the best oxymoron I've ever heard in my life.

 

[phriq]

Not to be glib, but when I read your questions, the best answer I can think of for most of them is to read a book on mixing. Understanding how compressors and other gear work under the hood is crucial to using them effectively. .

Agreed. And I don't think that makes you sound glib, glab, glob, or glub (I have no idea what glib means ) but I think this is always good advice. Seems so often that people (and I am not implying you, morejaylesswar. I am just say in general), that many people hear whats often what I think to be over preached "Now with how cheap sound equiptment is, you can record great recordings just at home that sound just as good as the rest!". But what they ALWAYS fail to mention is that this still requires ALOT of knowledge before hand. If you dont understand your equiptment, how sound functions, and the science of audio, all the nice home recording gear in the world will not produce anything worth listening to..

 

[diggy_dude]

Do you know any great books that simplify mixing to a novice?

Mixing Audio: Concepts, Practices, and Tools by Roey Izhaki is quite thorough.

As well, what do you mean by reduce the bandwidth? I'm unfamiliar with that. Also, are those charts found in plug ins, or are there actual paper charts that I can study from?

The guy who made this chart posts here on HR:

Interactive Frequency Chart - Independent Recording Network

He hates the chart because he feels people depend on it too much as a crutch instead of using their ears. But it illustrates what I'm talking about. Notice how the instruments' frequency ranges overlap? When the ranges of two instruments in a mix overlap, they compete with each other. As a result, neither one stands out very well. When I say reduce the bandwidth of an instrument, what I mean is to reduce its frequency range with EQ so that it doesn't overlap another instrument's range as much.

 

[diggy_dude]

That's quite possibly the best oxymoron I've ever heard in my life.

I'm inclined to agree, but my friend swears her dishes always come out perfect.

 

[diggy_dude]

But what they ALWAYS fail to mention is that this still requires ALOT of knowledge before hand. If you dont understand your equiptment, how sound functions, and the science of audio, all the nice home recording gear in the world will not produce anything worth listening to..

Excellent point. There is no preset or "trick" to getting instant results. The best gear in the world is useless if you don't know what you're doing.

 

[mixsit]

The guy who made this chart posts here on HR:

Interactive Frequency Chart - Independent Recording Network

He hates the chart because he feels people depend on it too much as a crutch instead of using their ears. But it illustrates what I'm talking about. Notice how the instruments' frequency ranges overlap? When the ranges of two instruments in a mix overlap, they compete with each other. As a result, neither one stands out very well. When I say reduce the bandwidth of an instrument, what I mean is to reduce its frequency range with EQ so that it doesn't overlap another instrument's range as much.

I would actually caution to not go overboard with focusing on overlap. A lot of what we're doing is best guess a tracking as to appropriate size and tone, then refining that at mix. That could mean aggressive cuts to make things fit, but just as well might be very minor changes needed- where lots of overlap is the natural state. How much and what you're trying fit –and the desired density of the mix could have a huge bearing on it.
It's entirely possible to pare everything down –per 'the theory, everything cleared out' and audible ..and have a perfectly un-fun mix.

 

[diggy_dude]

It's entirely possible to pare everything down –per 'the theory, everything cleared out' and audible ..and have a perfectly un-fun mix.

Absolutely. Izhaki makes that point in his book as well, if I remember correctly.

 

[mixsit]

..1. How do I get a vocal take to stand out over everything and be strong?
- Most of the vocals I record seem pretty frail after EQing. It seems thin and cold. No warmth or presence in them. They sometimes get lost in the music..

...4. What is meant by "finding the frequencies where everything fits"?
- I've been told to make a pocket in the music for the vocals to sit into when I'm EQing, but I don't know what they mean by that and how to do it.

Along those same lines try (as an approach
Dump all your eq.

Now mix with levels, and pan.

..And sometimes ..as odd as it might seem someone will be surprised to find that our levels have to change throughout the mix. Really.
Often a lot of rather very small moves- down to the line/phrase/lick' once it's getting dialed in. (Automation/envelopes..? (or a shit load of marker tapes' next to the faders/knobs

Along the way you'll begin to find certain instruments sounding out of place in ways level doesn't fix. Go after the worst most obvious offenders first, but perhaps go err' on the side of least eq possible –'least harm' (for now.

If I'm cutting mud from my vocals and the other instruments, it's the Low-mid-range, right? So wouldn't that make them all sit in that same frequency of not having any LMR

Yeah, but you're cutting/removing or often just minimizing a little where it's needed- and in the shape and amount it's needed based on the content of it and the other things around it.
Never (too strong?) by other reasons.

 

[grimtraveller]

(I have no idea what glib means )

"Glib" means "fluent and easy, often in an insincere or deceptive way", you know, kind of offhand.
By the way, another good book is "The mix engineer's handbook" by Bobby Owsinski.

 

[morejaylesswar]

Mixing Audio: Concepts, Practices, and Tools by Roey Izhaki is quite thorough.



The guy who made this chart posts here on HR:

Interactive Frequency Chart - Independent Recording Network

He hates the chart because he feels people depend on it too much as a crutch instead of using their ears. But it illustrates what I'm talking about. Notice how the instruments' frequency ranges overlap? When the ranges of two instruments in a mix overlap, they compete with each other. As a result, neither one stands out very well. When I say reduce the bandwidth of an instrument, what I mean is to reduce its frequency range with EQ so that it doesn't overlap another instrument's range as much.

So in reducing the bandwidth, I'd cut frequencies up until the next instrument's frequency range starts? I'm so confused right now. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if I do a high-pass filter on a male vocal and boost a bit of the high end to add air, would I then cut the highs out another instrument that exists in the high range that I raised in my male vocal?

Thank you for the book reference. I'm going to order it from Amazon.

 

[morejaylesswar]

I would actually caution to not go overboard with focusing on overlap. A lot of what we're doing is best guess a tracking as to appropriate size and tone, then refining that at mix. That could mean aggressive cuts to make things fit, but just as well might be very minor changes needed- where lots of overlap is the natural state. How much and what you're trying fit –and the desired density of the mix could have a huge bearing on it.
It's entirely possible to pare everything down –per 'the theory, everything cleared out' and audible ..and have a perfectly un-fun mix.

See, that confuses me somewhat. I'm really interested in knowing everything I possibly can about frequencies and what comes along with mixing. This is something that I'm very intrigued by. It can be a bit frustrating, but I just chalk that up to being a beginner. I'm thankful for you, and everyone else, who are imparting the knowledge that you have upon me. I hope to do the same with other people when I know exactly what I'm doing.

 

[diggy_dude]

So in reducing the bandwidth, I'd cut frequencies up until the next instrument's frequency range starts? I'm so confused right now. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if I do a high-pass filter on a male vocal and boost a bit of the high end to add air, would I then cut the highs out another instrument that exists in the high range that I raised in my male vocal?

That's the general idea, but as mixsit said, you don't have to chop it up so that one and only one instrument occupies each section of the spectrum. You have to listen and determine whether one instrument is really undermining the other.

 

[morejaylesswar]

Along those same lines try (as an approach
Dump all your eq.

Now mix with levels, and pan.

..And sometimes ..as odd as it might seem someone will be surprised to find that our levels have to change throughout the mix. Really.
Often a lot of rather very small moves- down to the line/phrase/lick' once it's getting dialed in. (Automation/envelopes..? (or a shit load of marker tapes' next to the faders/knobs

Along the way you'll begin to find certain instruments sounding out of place in ways level doesn't fix. Go after the worst most obvious offenders first, but perhaps go err' on the side of least eq possible –'least harm' (for now.


Yeah, but you're cutting/removing or often just minimizing a little where it's needed- and in the shape and amount it's needed based on the content of it and the other things around it.
Never (too strong?) by other reasons.

When I first started recording people, I learned that panning doubled vocals makes a big difference in sound quality. I'm not sure why I never applied that same logic to mixing the instruments in the music. I believe you about the EQing. I recently recorded and mixed a song for one of my clients and I got soooooo frustrated! (Partly because he didn't come with a tracked out beat and the quality of the instrumental sucked!) During the mix I gave up on it once or twice, then I decided that I can't give up because I'd never know. I went back into it and I didn't do ANY EQ. That came out as my best mix for that song.