Reference CD's in Mixing

  • Thread starter Thread starter dwillis45
  • Start date Start date
dwillis45

dwillis45

Número sesenta nueve
I need some help clearing up an issue regarding the use of reference CD's. It occurs to me that virtually any CD you might pick as a reference point will have been mastered. And even with proper mixing techniques, good equipment, and experience, your mix will most likely lack the character of a well-mastered CD. If unmastered mixes were released by studios this would solve the issue, but that's not likely to happen. So, is there a solution or am I overthinking or misconceptualizing the role of the reference CD in mixing?

PS: After reading Bob Katz's book I visited his web site and ran across the "CD Honor Role," which is his list of well mastered CD's.

http://www.digido.com/
 
You're over-thinking it... the idea is to provide a sonic reference to balance your ears.... you should still choose a sonci balance that is appropriate to the song at hand, and not necessarily copy another song's sound.
 
It's just a reference.

dwillis45 try not to be to hung up on the "reference" term. It's just a guild to keep you on the right track. Another thing is that when a mix is really done well the "mastering" is just the polishing up of the songs and making sure all the songs on the CD sound like they belong together.

When choosing a reference CD I'd suggest picking a CD that was recorded, mixed and mastered from well known and respected engineers. That way you can be sure the quality of the music was taken care of right from the start.

later,
sonicpaint
 
To use an analogy, the reference CD is similar to stretching before exercise or or perhaps a vocal warmup before singing. The ears need a sonic stretch before going to work and there is no sense in stretching unless you do it properly.
 
Huh, dwillis45??? You answering your own question?????

:confused:
 
What??

Hmmmm....oooooooooooook?:confused: Sorry dude but I have no idea what you mean by that.

sonicpaint
 
Blue Bear (or is it Bruce), It's a clarification in response to your post! One clue might be the chronological difference between my original post, your rejoinder, and my second post!

SonicPaint: It's an analogy, a different way of saying the same thing using an alternate reference point.

Guys, take some time off and go to Florida! It sounds like the cold is starting to get to you up there!
 
heh-heh.... it's just the way you worded it, it sounded like you were answering your own post!
 
dwillis45 said:
SonicPaint: It's an analogy, a different way of saying the same thing using an alternate reference point.

I know what you were trying to say but I don't think it's a correct analogy.

When using a reference CD it's basically to know where your mixes stand next to what is being commercially available. Though this is the case it's not done (at least I don't) before each recording session to "stretch" as you put it. Once your learned your monitors by using reference CD's you shouldn't have to keep reminding yourself what commercial stuff sounds like through your monitors.

Just a little note. It's not all that cold "up here" yet, though it will be in the months to come. :D Great suggestion on the Florida thing tough!

later,
sonicpaint
Click to expand...
 
So we aren't trying to copy the tone then? We are listening to does my bass have to much low end. Are my guitars muddy or too bright? Do my vocals sit well. Do they have too much reverb?

that type of stuff?
 
keano said:
So we aren't trying to copy the tone then? We are listening to does my bass have to much low end. Are my guitars muddy or too bright? Do my vocals sit well. Do they have too much reverb?

that type of stuff?
Click to expand...

This thread is 5 years old! :p
 
keano said:
So we aren't trying to copy the tone then? We are listening to does my bass have to much low end. Are my guitars muddy or too bright? Do my vocals sit well. Do they have too much reverb?

that type of stuff?
Click to expand...
If you're trying to "copy the tone" or the groove or whatever, you should start loooooong before the first tracking session. When you're mixing, you can "nudge" the mix where it might not want to go - But in the end, you have to serve the mix. Using a reference usually ends up with a frustrated mixing engineer running around in circles while the local garage band is wondering why their $500 recording doesn't quite sound like the "Black" album.
 
I have an entirely different concept for the use of reference CDs myself. The whole idea for me is to use reference CDs to check the monitoring chain, not to provide material to try to copy.

Temperature, humidity, ear fatigue, general physical condition, etc. all change how things sound from one session to the next, especially in home studios that usually do not have the same level of environmental control as many big box CRs (even there, one's ears and fatigue levels still vary).

Though I don't use them that often, when I do, I use familiar reference CDs to get a gauge of just how I'm hearing things for that session, so that I know I'm getting the proper translation of what's coming out of the monitors.

But as far as getting my mixes to sound like someone else, I just don't see the point, for most of the reasons given already. Personal production value and mix/arrangement content should IMHO be the driving force as to what the mix should sound like, not what some other engineer did with some other band on some other song in some other studio at some other time. It makes no sense.

Sure you can use someone else's work to get production ideas, but once you're actually working on the mix, it's a little late for that.

G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top