mixing while recording or after all tracks are recorded?

  • Thread starter Thread starter borednbuzzed
  • Start date Start date
B

borednbuzzed

New member
I was just wondering if its a good idea to mix your song as you go along or to record all tracks dead center, no fx, no eq's etc... I assume its a personal choice but was just wondering if mixing after everything is recorded has advantages or ways to give you a better overall sound.. Thanks for any input.

Scott
 
How will you know where a track will sit in a mix if all the tracks aren't recorded yet? Mix after everything has been tracked..
 
scottboyher said:
How will you know where a track will sit in a mix if all the tracks aren't recorded yet? Mix after everything has been tracked..
Click to expand...

I agree, unless you are using something like a 4-track recorder where you have to continually mix in in the tracks to free up another track to record.
 
It depends greatly on the style of music, the gear available, the space available, the budget, and many other factors, including the engineer and producers preference. Some projects will be best if they are recorded using 48 tracks, and mixing everything only right at the end. Other projects are best if they are recorded live to two track. Most projects fall somewhere in the middle.

For myself, I HATE the whole concept of "fixing it in the mix." The way I see it, I have a limited capacity for making decisions at any one time. If I spread the decisions out over a longer period of time, I can make better decisions. I am constantly mixing. That is the way I work. Besides, how will I know how what I am doing is going to fit in with what is there if it does not sound the way it will sound. In time, you find your own way to work. The best way to do anything is what ever works for you. The end result matters, the process does not.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
HAVE YOU GONE MAD?!?!?!? (just kidding :D )

Bottom line: Mix AFTER the recording. Record everything FLAT (unless you can't apply compression later) because, if your listening to a song that you mixed while recording, and you hear something that you don't like, you won't be able to take it out without recording again.


Good luck.

Z
 
ZEKE SAYER said:
Record everything FLAT
Click to expand...
I disagree - record it the way you want it to sound in the mix.... preferably getting the sound captured correctly right at the source using mic selection/placement, and a good room.

If you capture it the way you want it to sound, then any overdubs that are done, are done in the context of the previous elements whose sound you've already captured. In a sense, it is actually mixing as you go, because you're selecting tones/sounds as you WANT them to be heard, based on previously-decided-upon mix elements. (Mixing-as-go in this case has nothing to do with final levels or panning -- those are mix decisions that have no bearing at the tracking stage)
 
What i mean is, wouldn't it be better to record flat and then do your processing? Like if we have some guy that doesn't know what he's doing and he eqs a kick drum track the way he thinks it sounds good and then he records it. But when he plays it back, the bass guitar and the kick are fighting over the low freq? You can do too much about it then. You can cut some low-end from one of the tracks, but wouldn't it be better to just do it flat and eq later?
 
well, you have to mix as you go to some extent, if you're doubling a guitar track, it makes sense to pan them 100 percent left and right to get an idea of how they will sound. I'm not talking about percision .5db cuts at 2632.4353hz to make room for the snare drum, but more of a basic layout of how the tracks will go.

When it's time for vocals you definitely need a pretty solid mix so that the vocalist can feel less like he's recording and more like he's singing in a band, even if that vocal mix doesnt resemble the final product at all

thats how i do it at least. plus if you have pretty quickly put together but organized mix in the tracking stage, you can double back to fill in some weak spots so that you won't have to fix it in the mix
 
I definitely want to mix as I go. Sometimes it's called a monitor mix, but how could you pass up a chance not to keep it up to date, and see where you're at. Then the next day you get to hear it with fresh ears ...and attitude!:D
Wayne
 
When I was at Berklee, the head of the Music Production and Engineering was Eddie Kramer's (Jimi Hendrix's engineer, in case you didn't know) brother in law. Obviously, they got Eddie to come and do an artist in residence. While he was micing everything up, he was talking about the importance of mic placement, and a source which sounded like you wanted the final product to sound. He took his time with mic placement, and yet the first thing he did when he got behind the board was reach for the EQ and the compression.

There is absolutely no reason to record everything flat. I also do the vast majority of the compression I do while tracking. Compression was originally created as a way to keep the dynamic range of a signal within a useful range for the format being used, and this is still its primary use for most professional engineers. Most, (though not all by any stretch) of the "color" compression I do is during the mix, but dynamics control is almost always done during tracking.

I have always believed in making choices as I go. Being decisive saves time, money, and forces you to pay more attention to what you are doing. Get it right in the first place, and you don't have to worry about fixing it later.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
Light said:
When I was at Berklee, the head of the Music Production and Engineering was Eddie Kramer's (Jimi Hendrix's engineer, in case you didn't know) brother in law. Obviously, they got Eddie to come and do an artist in residence. While he was micing everything up, he was talking about the importance of mic placement, and a source which sounded like you wanted the final product to sound. He took his time with mic placement, and yet the first thing he did when he got behind the board was reach for the EQ and the compression.

There is absolutely no reason to record everything flat. I also do the vast majority of the compression I do while tracking. Compression was originally created as a way to keep the dynamic range of a signal within a useful range for the format being used, and this is still its primary use for most professional engineers. Most, (though not all by any stretch) of the "color" compression I do is during the mix, but dynamics control is almost always done during tracking.

I have always believed in making choices as I go. Being decisive saves time, money, and forces you to pay more attention to what you are doing. Get it right in the first place, and you don't have to worry a
Click to expand...
That's EXACTLY what I was getting at - only you said it better... and you included a high-profile industry name... and your grammar was better.... and you probably typed-it faster too.......! Show-off!!!!!!! :p

;)
 
So, what I'm hearing is do what sounds the best?... or personal instinct? There's no right or wrong way of recording and mixing as long as the final product comes out good? Everyone thats posted here I'd consider a forum vet that knows there shit.

If the system that I'm using makes a difference I'll tell ya that info. It's a protools system on a nice XP computer... For all my recording and editing I use the plugins after getting the sound I want before recording (mic or line input, fx, distortion on guitar tracks...) I seem to go about it in a track by track fashion (including different pannings and volumes) and just was thinking if this is the best way to do it or just fuck the plug ins and pannings until I get to mixing the sound as a whole.

I really appreciate all of the input.
Thanks,
Scott
 
Blue Bear Sound said:
That's EXACTLY what I was getting at - only you said it better... and you included a high-profile industry name... and your grammar was better.... and you probably typed-it faster too.......! Show-off!!!!!!! :p

;)
Click to expand...


I used THREE high profile industy names, Berklee, Jimi Hendrix, and Eddie Kramer. What is the use of droping names if you are not even gonna catch them all!!!

:p :p :p :p :p


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
High!

Being the most amateurish amteur among all other guys writing here :D, I think I can point out two sides:

If you are not at a mature state of mixing knowledge / technique / musicality / imagination, I assume it is best to record stuff almost flat. Only then you have the possibility of experimenting alot.

If you REALLY know what you want and have an idea of your mix, and have the know-how to do it, you will be getting a much better sound if you record like you want it to sound. You prolly won't use EQ - but mic placement. I tried it once with a song I had a very detailed idea of how to do it. The quality was a lot better than that of my other songs... But I simply don't get it in songs with a little more tracks (the one was just two guitars, drums vocals and bass).

Since then I understand what the wise guys around here mean when they say "don't use EQ". If you know what you want and place your mics right, you won't need EQ. But that'S still a long way for me...

aXel
 
I would not say DON'T use EQ, I would say place your mic right first, then you will (hopefully) only need small adjustments to the EQ, and it is best if they are only cuts.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
when you say FLAT, you really mean DRY.

as in no effects.

compression and eq for the purpose of getting a clear and clean track are not what i consider to be effects. if you turn on the low-cut switch on your microphone you shouldn't consider that to be an 'effect'.
 
If you know your effects well enough to apply just the right amount during recording without having to think twice during mixing, then I think that applying effects during tracking is ideal. An example of this would be applying compression as an effect because you like how the compression sounds when applied to a particular instrument. The benefit of this, besides saving time during mixing, is that you can make the best decision for how the instruments surrounding that effect will sound during tracking. However, if you have any reservation about how to apply an effect during tracking, then don't do it.

My personal approach is record a rough version of the song with all the instruments without any compression or eq. From this I am able to determine what should basically stay and what should be replaced. I work with the drums and bass to use as a foundation to figure out how the guitars should sound and do mixes for each track I add afterwards. I have noticed that doing it this way has yielded two major benefits 1) Whatever eq needs to be done during the rough mixes is minor and is almost always a cut instead of a boost, and 2) I don't really need any of the effects I originally intended to apply. Sometimes it just sounds better with nothing else added.

Cy
 
I always record my drums with compression because I know how I want my sound before I mix. I get the snare, kick, and toms set the way I want them while I'm recording and it sounds great in the headphones.

Effects and EQ can be done later in my opinion.
 
Depends on experience...

For a beginner, recording everything dry would be sensible IMHO. Leaving the possibility to make corrections &/or experiment with finding the best sound later.

For the experienced there is no reason why they can't save time by using compression, etc at the time of recording. One less thing to have to do in the mix.

If you always record an acoustic guitar in the same room with the same compression settings and always get a great sound, then you might as well do it that way straight off rather than waiting to the mixing stage.

Thats my 2 pennies.
 
as a computer geek i only can add one wisdome:

Never ever apply digital effects in your signal chain while recording. They produce latency which brings your band into timinig troubles while recording more than one track at the same time.

Pro systems like my tc3000 reverb unit have latency way lower than 5 ms, but in my opinion thats also too much for tight timing.
At least use an analog routing for monitoring the artists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top