The 5 Pass Mixdown

[Brendo]

I don't know where i saved this from, possibly the REP, but I found this just now in my "archive" of old crap:

1) First Pass:
-Do patching of any outboard gear to be used while dividing the song into
several sections in your mind (ie. learn the song):
Lead Vocal Primary
Bkg Vocals Secondary
Instrumental soloists.
Rhythm, etc.

2) Second Pass:
- Get O level on lead vocal only (or slightly less)
- Bring in backing vocals in proportion
- Solo kick drum - tighten with kepex, add eq
- Solo bass - kepex it or eq
- Sub-mix and blend kick and bass, first together, then with vocals (Not
too
loud)

3) Third Pass:
- Bring in other instruments to a balance. (again, not too loud)
- Add remaining drums ( fairly low)

4) Fourth Pass:
(While rewinding, do the number system balance (ie. pan the tracks to the
five positions; we have been in MONO to this point)
- Try sweeteners, such as echo and adjust any sub-mixes in the overall
mix.

5) Fifth Pass:
- Rehearse dynamics changes, or simply roll the two track and go for a
master.

Anyone ever heard of/tried this before?

[Starfucker]

Who would even want to mix like that??

Where in those 5 steps do you actually listen to the song to come up with something creative???

This reads like a manual for those poor women Slipperman hires in his Chinese free trade zone studio.

[Brendo]

I assume it's more for doing roughs, where you already know the song since you've been tracking it all day... or when you have limited studio time to bang out far too many mixes. That's what, a half hour per song?

It puzzles me too - that's why I posted it.

[weedywet]

there are only 3 worthwhile pan positions.

and that's too much gating.

what if I no longer own a Kepex?

does that ruin everything?

[Brendo]

You'd go out and buy a Kepex.

Tell me I'm mad, but the... Kepex II's, i think... are the best gates i've used.

[weedywet]

I think you need to buy my 4 Record Plant Quad Eight gates then.

for the once a year i use a gate, I don't need them.

[Brendo]

Haha. Somewhat out of my price range I believe.

I dunno... I mean, we put the Kepex's in Studio 2, where the second semester guys can use them... whereas Studio 4 is stuck with ITB gating... and all you hear the second year guys saying is "I wish we had those kepex's in here".

I think the brand of gate is irrelevant in this case, though... clearly it was just written at a time when Kepex had just been invented and everyone called it that instead of a gate.

I use gates all the time. What kind of music do you record?

[weedywet]

Rock, pop-rock

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:8zjxlf0egcqu~T4

[Brendo]

Ahh, wwitman, so you wandered over from the REP!

This was actually posted over there. I think Terry had something to do with it, or commented on it. You should pull him over here...

[weedywet]

Terry and I almost never disagree about anything,
You don't NEED both.


As I said to Kenny Gioia today, I was Googling Vulva and Womb came up by mistake, so here I am...


On Her Majesty's Secret Cervix.
God Shave the Queen.

[Brendo]

haha. awesome.

[malice]

I think you need to buy my 4 Record Plant Quad Eight gates then.



Haaaaaa, a Quad 8 fan, like me ...

You have other Q8 in your rack ?

malice

[Barish]

I rather adopted Mixerman's method.



I push the faders up and turn the knobs until it sounds good.




















If it doesn't, then I move on to the next song.

B.

[Brendo]

Fair enough. So nobody sees any merit in this method at all? Even, say, as a "force yourself out of a mix slump" tool? I can't say I've tried it yet, it just seems... odd.

[weedywet]

Haaaaaa, a Quad 8 fan, like me ...

You have other Q8 in your rack ?

malice

I'm actually NOT.
in truth, the Record Plant thought that the QE gates had better sounding line amps in them than the Kepex (which was the competition at that time), and they were probably right.
But the QEs were a lot less flexible, so RPS modded them to add mor control.
And that's what I have, 4 in a box (like a lunchbox) with the 4 gates on one side and the panel with the extra controls on the other side.

But I'm NOT much of a QE fan.
I never liked the desks much.
They always sounded a bit like the poor man's API to me.

another thing (Electrodyne also comes to mind) that most people I know weren't keen on at the time that only in retrospect, in the vinatge craze, have achieved a kind of cult status it never enjoyed in its day.

[malice]

But I'm NOT much of a QE fan.
I never liked the desks much.
They always sounded a bit like the poor man's API to me.




hmmm,

I wonder if you know the really good stuff about them.

Some of their console were horid. Some sounded more like, huh ...

Some make API sound like a poor man's Q8

But I might be wrong ...

What console you disliked ?

malice

[Cheech]

Fair enough. So nobody sees any merit in this method at all? Even, say, as a "force yourself out of a mix slump" tool? I can't say I've tried it yet, it just seems... odd.


Hell Brendo I'll give it a shot, Im gonna print your instructions now, and give it a whirl...... Um I dont know about ll the kepex ing though.... I may have to skip that part :very happy:

[Brendo]

Hell Brendo I'll give it a shot, Im gonna print your instructions now, and give it a whirl...... Um I dont know about ll the kepex ing though.... I may have to skip that part :very happy:

Gating!

It seems to me like its very mix-by-numbers but it may be exactly what some of my students need to get started... they see 30 tracks in front of them and shit their pants.

[Cheech]

Ok I got the Kepexing thing.... I just dont kepex a lot... Just to stir my own pot a little I want to give this method a go, and see what happens. I may stray a bit, because I usually listen to all the tracks and get a good idea of where I want things and stuff, but I feel I am in a bit of a rut as of late. So as soon as I can get round to it Im gonna give it a go.

[malice]

btw,

I think the kepex is to gates what dbx 160X is to comps :

cheap
efficient
no brainer
work on about everything
underrated

malice

[Brendo]

btw,

I think the kepex is
underrated

malice

For sure.

[weedywet]

you're right about one thing,
both the Kepex II and the DBX are based on VCA's... and in both cases you have to be willing to degrade your signal by introducing that extra VCA in the chain.

I'm usually not.

the Allison EGC VCA sounded a LOT better than the DBX, to me.

[malice]

you're right about one thing,
both the Kepex II and the DBX are based on VCA's... and in both cases you have to be willing to degrade your signal by introducing that extra VCA in the chain.

I'm usually not.

the Allison EGC VCA sounded a LOT better than the DBX, to me.

Yeah, I know it degrades the sound a little.

So are the SSL VCAs, right ?

SO is their infamous Master fader VCA, right ?

still it's manageable, and on some of the tracks, I don't mind using the 160x. I quite like what it does to bass, even if it sucks a bit of hi end ...

You have to cope with the little interactions generated by putting gear in any signl path.

btw, I have a pair of VCA based 302 ADM limiters here, it's the cleanest limiter you could think of.

The only thing is that he has a very slow release, but I'm working on it to mod the bastard.

does wonders on snare and kik for some reasons.

malice

[malice]

btw William, you don't like Q8, you don't like 160x, you don't like 57s.

you're not fun at all, dude :D

malice

[weedywet]

Yeah, I know it degrades the sound a little.

So are the SSL VCAs, right ?

SO is their infamous Master fader VCA, right ?
...

yes, PART of the reason I've always avoided mixing on SSL's and part of the reason that, under pressure and after years of dissing moving-fader competitors, SSL developed "ultimation"


I like the DBX160vu on bass guitar sometimes.

not a fan of the 160x though.

[Brendo]

Is the 160vu the two high half wide one, or the one high one wide one?

[jfee]

160VU half wide 2 high

162 full wide 2 high

[Brendo]

i'm guessing the 160x is a full wide 1 high unit then?

I know we have the VU and the X at JMC, I just forget which is which.

[Faderbaby]

Wow -- I can't believe this old thing I wrote has resurfaced, but I Google'd it for fun and here it is! I'll have to read the whole thread, but I originally authored this on rec.audio.pro. For your interest, here's the original word.doc that gives the proper credits and backstory:

The Five-Pass Mixdown
By Jack Littleton (as originally taught by Ben Jordan)


This mixdown technique was taught by Ben Jordan (250 gold records and co-holder of patents on stereophonic sound) for Sherwood Oaks Experimental College (record engineering college) in Hollywood in 1982. The class took place at Original Sound on Sunset, a studio that did a lot of overflow work for nearby A&M Records, and it gives a Carpenters-style radio-ready pop mix that can be achieved quickly. The concept was to mix down a tune during five passes (playbacks) of the multitrack master. To keep it authentic I’m using the original terminology directly from my class notes. Here's how it went:

1) First Pass:
-Do patching of any outboard gear to be used while dividing the song into
several sections in your mind (ie. learn the song):
Lead Vocal Primary
Bkg Vocals Secondary
Instrumental soloists.
Rhythm, etc.

2) Second Pass:
- Get O level on lead vocal only (or slightly less)
- Bring in backing vocals in proportion
- Solo kick drum - tighten with kepex, add eq
- Solo bass - kepex it or eq
- Sub-mix and blend kick and bass, first together, then with vocals (Not too
loud)

3) Third Pass:
- Bring in other instruments to a balance. (again, not too loud)
- Add remaining drums ( fairly low)

4) Fourth Pass:
(While rewinding, do the number system balance (ie. pan the tracks to the
five positions; we have been in MONO to this point)
- Try sweeteners, such as echo and adjust any sub-mixes in the overall mix.

5) Fifth Pass:
- Rehearse dynamics changes, or simply roll the two track and go for a
master.



Jack Littleton
faderbaby@yahoo.com

(originally posted on rec.audio.pro). I should also say that I was looking for some information on Ben Jordan (but all his work was pre-internet) when I found this. He was a true engineer, who had built his own consoles while doing sessions going back to the Big Band era. The death of Larry Levine made me think of this. I know the technique sounds "formulaic", but it produced lots of hit records. Original Sound was a very dry room (popular in that period) with a Quad Eight console and the old Altec Big Reds (dual 15s with a coax hf driver). The sound was quite nice. The other teaching engineer was Doc Siegel.

Original Sound was owned at that time (if my memory is correct and I think it is) by the guy that created the Kepex (can't think of his name), and his company was called Allison Research. I may not have this perfectly accurate, but there was a direct affiliation with Allison and Original Sound. I think it's safe to assume that the amazing kick/bass sounds of The Carpenters were created in this manner and using this gear. Original Sound also had a radio transmitter so that mixes could be listened to in your car, just as did A&M Recording Studio across the street.

Someone said that it might not seem like a "creative" way to mix. Different era. Unless you were a major artist, you were quite lucky to get a Ben Jordan to mix your tracks (with this technique, which is a methodology and NOT as dogmatic as it might appear in abbreviated notes). It creates a proper musical balance for a pop/rock record.

[Brendo]

Holy thread resurrection, batman!

Crazy that you would end up finding this, but then the internet is a strange beast. I embedded the phrase "bad fucking mustard" in the Slipperman thread, so that whenever I search for "bad fucking mustard slipperman" in google, I can find the Slipperman page on Bad Mucking Fastard...

[weedywet]

I'm amused that there is allegedly such as thing as "a proper musical balance for a pop/rock record."

[Faderbaby]

I'm amused that there is allegedly such as thing as "a proper musical balance for a pop/rock record."

Yes, it's true. You may have also noticed that the mix remained in MONO until the very end. Geoff Emerick also mixed in this manner so that the instruments would BLEND. It was a different era. All the automation was in the engineers hands. I recall Ben Jordan had an amazing memory for nuance. He almost played the console as a musical instrument. It was very cool.

Anyway, I just thought you all might all enjoy a little recording history :). Thanks!

[Brendo]

weedy - maybe he means "proper" as in, "sounds good" - not as in, "mixes must all sound like this"?

[otek]

I'm amused that there is allegedly such as thing as "a proper musical balance for a pop/rock record."


Or, more to the point, that someone would want to adhere to it.


otek

[Faderbaby]

A couple of things:

Back then, the term "kepex" was used a verb. It wasn't just some old piece of gear that one or two people still remember.

The other thing is that the Five Pass Mixdown was the final exam of this recording college. You had to be able to produce, in five passes, a mix that would sound good on the radio. There were no home studios where one could spend days "being creative". This was label work and the labels (unless they were indulging a major artist) wanted good-sounding mixes quickly. You needed to have that kind of skill to be employed in that era. Today anything goes.

[otek]

You had to be able to produce, in five passes, a mix that would sound good on the radio. There were no home studios where one could spend days "being creative".

It should be added that this is really only possible with top-notch musicians playing the tune.

If you have a bunch of hacks behind the glass, not even five hundred passes would necessarily suffice.


otek

[Bob Olhsson]

Top musicians, no headphones and a live recording.

[nobby]

160VU half wide 2 high

162 full wide 2 high

Also, 161 (unbalanced 160VU) half wide 2 high

165 full wide 2 high

[nobby]

If you have a bunch of hacks behind the glass, not even five hundred passes would necessarily suffice.


otek

:lol: