was: 'Mixing/Mastering at the same time' -- Dachay2tnr, hope ya' don't mind...

[mixsit]

Another part of mastering - at least when dealing with an entire album - is an attempt to make the work cohesive. To hear the project as a whole, as well as to deal with the transitions from song to song.

Which leads me to a question that's been bumping around here in my little hole-in-the-wall world.

As I mix someone's album/demo project, try as I might, I almost never feel like I have nailed the mixes =untill= I start to assemble them and hear them in the context of it being "An Album". It is at this point where I see clearly what is right and wrong with my mixes. I want to have the time -the time to do this, and the time it takes to be able to step away long enough to have a fresh perspective, before I feel I can say I've done my best.

So many times I hear people say this may not happen in 'pro' and 'semi-pro' situations. (budgets, etc.?)

I've come to believe that (with what ever it might tke you as the mixer) to get to that point, is the way to go. (Unless of course, slapping compression and eq on to make them all sound the same is what passes for "mastering".

How do you get there? (sorry, don't mean to point just at you Dach!
Do you have the time? Do you need this extra step?

Wayne

 

[mixmkr]

I agree that compiling a couple songs together helps to make decisions on whether you did a decent enough mix or not of a particular song. I also find the difference between 3 seconds of silence VS 5 seconds of silence between successive songs can make a big difference too. Songs that are more dissimilar, a couple seconds more between songs can help out immensely to make them flow together better, in my opinion. This is why burning a couple of [finished mixed?] songs on a CD and packing it around on your Walkman or car stereo can be a great idea.

 

[mixsit]

I was wondering if people in commercial operations applied this as a method or would even want to if they could. But then without total recall, it's not an option anyway is it?

 

[TexRoadkill]

I could see that being on issue with projets tracked over a long period of time. Most low budget commercial projects are usually tracked over a few days. I find the challenge to be getting a good range of tones and not having everything sound the same.

Are you guys saying the songs don't sound like they fit together on the same album? Is this because of vast differences in tones on the same instruments or because of an eclectic collection of songs?

 

[mixsit]

... I find the challenge to be getting a good range of tones and not having everything sound the same.

Are you guys saying the songs don't sound like they fit together on the same album? Is this because of vast differences in tones on the same instruments or because of an eclectic collection of songs?

You brought in some very different perspective, for me at least.
Yes some of my projects have been very extended.
I mix in the box so each song is started on a relatively blank template set. On a typical analog-mix setup, once it's set, it is easier to roll along.

Then again, there's the fact that you can get 90% 'there' with the first 20% of the work. (You know how good the roughs can be.)
It's the last 10%. How do you keep the whole thing in sight? Doesn't you're perspective change from day to day? Doesn't your vision as to where the mixes can go evolve as the project progresses?
Also, this is simply bringing some of mastering philosophy to the mix stage where I believe it most effective.