So I just read Hard Disk Life

[jdier]

I was actually going to post on the other thread from Princess, but it seems that has degenerated into something other than originally intended.

In doing some research and general reading on mixing I wound up reading a bunch of the Hard Disk Life stuff. What great stuff! Thanks a million for posting something that useful for free. I really appreciate it.

However, I wound up with some questions similar to what Princess asked and thought I would pose them here in a fresh thread.

Disclaimer first: Your stuff sounds killer and produces grammy's so I certainly am not trying to be critical, just inquiring.

I was shocked by the number of plugs used per channel but that is obviously a matter of taste, reaction to source material and knowledge of the person using the plugs.

The part that still has me off guard and confused is all of the stuff on the 2 buss. Again, I am new to this, and just trying to learn, but it seems to me that those types of effects and processes could be added by the mastering enginer.

I read clearly that you do not do anything that you would consider mastering (with what you do on the 2 buss) but still, would it not be possible for all of those things to be added at the mastering stage?

I guess I am just not clear on what the advantage is for you to be doing it prior to mastering... It would seem that you would be limiting the options for the mastering engineer.

You state that when you take this stuff off the 2 buss the mix falls apart. (Again, I do not mean to offend) but isn't that a sign of some type of weakness in the mix? Maybe I am making my life too hard, but I am trying to get the mix to gel and come together without anything on the 2 buss so when it goes to mastering the ME can concentrate on finer tweaks.

What am I missing? Are the 2 buss effects that you use things that a mastering engineer would not be able to apply, or not have access to? I have stuff on the 2 buss that I use just to show someone what a mix might sound like, but I have never thought to leave any of that stuff on there when printing a final mix.

Hope these questions are not out of line. I understand that there is not one right way and that everyone might approach differently. I am just trying to understand why one successful guy has chose to do things the way he has.

Jim

[idaguide]

I wouldn't dare to speak for Charles, but I can give you an answer as to what I THINK he's doing. If you're sending the two-track to the ME, then what you've inserted on the 2-buss will be printed to two-track before it gets to the ME. Do I have that right? If so, I think what Charles MIGHT say is that he's looking for a particular sound, and that sound is not there if he doesn't have, say, AC1 inserted on the 2-buss. So if he can't get that sound that he wants any other way, he has to do it this way.

Seems from what I've read that the real problem for ME's is heavy compression/limiting on the mix buss. Charles has stated elsewhere that he doesn't consider that what he's doing.

In other words, it's about the sound that he sends...of course, some people now send the whole mix to the ME, as some of them feel they can do a better job that way...don't know if Charles does that or not. My guess is he doesn't.

Charles?

[Charles Dye]

GO SCREW YOURSELF, JIM!!!!!

:Mad: :Mad: :Mad: :Mad: :Mad:

How dare you question me!!
__________________
Project Studio Network (http://www.harddisklife.com/PSN.html) – This Is A Faux Signature
Mix It Like A Record (http://www.likearecord.com) – "But if you're not paying attention." You'd (think it was...)
Hard Disk Life (http://www.harddisklife.com) – ... the end of my post.
Recent Projects (http://www.charlesdye.com/music/) – Gotcha!!!






















KIDDING!!

Can't post answer just yet, but those are all really great questions that I'd love to answer, Jim. :Thumbsup: :Thumbsup:

Just the kind I'm sure many readers think to themselves. I'll be back to answer them soon.


:runningalarmclock: :runningalarmclock: :runningalarmclock:


Best,
C

This iz my real sig...

[MacGregor]

The part that still has me off guard and confused is all of the stuff on the 2 buss. Again, I am new to this, and just trying to learn, but it seems to me that those types of effects and processes could be added by the mastering enginer.



I'm not Chaz, either, but my general rule is
anything on the 2 buss to make it louder: EVIL (*)
anything on the 2 buss to make it sound the way I want: good(*) If the artist wants a preview in a 'competitive' loudness I'll do that of course

Mac

[Scratchy Potts]

I
I seems to me that those types of effects and processes could be added by the mastering enginer.
Jim

He`s just using most of those processors to assimalate a board buss though ,,,,thats my take anyhoo??,,and warm the mix
in doing so it influences his mix decisions,cant see how a ME would be able to achieve this???...........mind!...I know noffing??

[Tim Armstrong]

Yeah, he's aiming for a stereo mix that sounds as close to exactly right as he can make it.

...which should be the goal of all mixing engineers, IMO. The mastering engineer isn't supposed to do anything but apply a nice, lightly buffed gloss finish on things, make the recording work in situations like radio, etc., and provide a new set of ears to nudge any funky frequencies that result from the mixer's particular hearing loss problems and/or monitoring weirdness (neither being particularly likely with a pro like Charles, but a lot MORE likely with all of us minor league semi-pros!)...

Cheers, Tim

[PSN Big Al]

I don't want to steal any thunder here, but I will say that the
warmth and analog saturation plugz have to be there from
the beginning as they then influence every decision you make
in the mix; you have to mix through them.

If you were to get the mix sounding as best you can and then
throw the plugz on at mastering, you would not recieve the
same net result.

[PSN Big Al]

...to assimalate a board buss though

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE! YOUR BOARD BUSS WILL BE ASSIMILATED! :lol:

[EricTheKid]

I was shocked by the number of plugs used per channel but that is obviously a matter of taste, reaction to source material and knowledge of the person using the plugs.


I'd just like to add that this is a common "knock" attributed to mixing in the box. I don't think Jim is the first (or the last person) to ask... why so many plugs??? ...Is that REALLY necessary???

I believe this would have been questioned much less in the analog mixing world. If a guy asked you how you got such a "killer vocal sound", and you told him that you sent the signal through a Drawmer gate, then through a Fairchild compressor and then through an API EQ , a DBX 902 deesser, then 3 consectutive Tube-Tech's...etc...etc.... Most people would simply respond with a WHOA! :icon_eek: or AWESOME! :Surprised:

(insert your own "that blows me away" reaction, here)

I may be exagerating a bit (or am I?), but I think you get my point. In general, we use signal processing to enhance/fix a sound that needs it. Some need more, some less.

If you have tons of great outboard gear, you'll probably use them. If you have a monster Pro Tools HD rig, you'll be using your best plug-ins. Numbers matter not.

As you pointed out Jim, it's really a matter of preference. But hey man, I say smoke 'em if you got 'em!

...PLUG AWAY!!! :Coolio:

ETK

[jfee]

Disclaimer: I'm not Charles Dye, nor do I play him on TV.

I mix with a compressor and eq on the buss from the beginning.

Here's why for the compressor:

If you add more than a minimal amount of buss compression to a finished mix it will change the balances among the instruments...usually not a good thing. Also, if you sit in with great mastering engineer's you'll find that they use a very minimal amount of compression. A lot of the time their compressors 'gr' meters will barely budge.

I personally like the sound of an SSL type compressor on rock stuff doing 4-6dB of gain reduction...it just sounds really exciting and agressive to me. That's why I mix with it on from the beginning.

Here's why for the eq:

To save time and outboard.

Records these days are pretty bright, I'll toss an eq on the buss at the start of the mix, I'll leave it flat. I'll play one pass of the song and get a rough balance, then I'll go to the eq and dial in a bit of top end so that it's in the same brightness as similar material out there.

I used to not do this and let the mastering engineer make it brighter. But when the mastering engineer did this it always changed the balances a bit. Things like shakers and hi hats got too loud. Guitar parts might start to sound harsh, that sort of thing.

The other thing is..if I didn't have an eq on the buss making things brighter I would probably have an eq on every individual track making them brighter. Having an eq on each individual track is expensive DSP wise.

These days only thing I leave for the mastering engineer is getting the level up. If he does nothing but turn the mixes without fucking them up I'm usually happy. Fortunately he's usually able to do minute amounts of eq and compression to further enhance the mixes.

[Charles Dye]

In doing some research and general reading on mixing I wound up reading a bunch of the Hard Disk Life stuff. What great stuff! Thanks a million for posting something that useful for free. I really appreciate it.

Thanks, Jim. You're very welcome.

I was shocked by the number of plugs used per channel but that is obviously a matter of taste, reaction to source material and knowledge of the person using the plugs.

No kidding. Wow... you're the first guy to ever tell me that. :)

Seriously tho, you're in good company. Pretty much everyone thinks I'm nuts for using so much crap. Even I do sometimes. I've always questioned my process. On every single mixing platform I've ever worked on... analog or digital. And the bottom line is always, is this process (whatever it is @ the moment) making this instrument sound better? Do I need to do what I'm doing? When the answer is yes, it stays. When no, I yank it.

And if I talked about it in HdL or MiLaR, then that means the question was "yes" on that instrument.

Now, let's look @ your question in a different light. (IOW, allow me to rationalize my insanity further...) I sometimes use as many as 5 plugz on an instrument. 3 of them for example may be a comp, a gate, + an eq. Now, every single channel of an SSL has that, so obviously that's not what you're asking me about. Compression, gating, + eq have been staples of record making since waayyy b4 I started mixing. That's just how ya do it.

That leaves DUY's Valve + Tape. Now, in both HdL + MiLaR they were rock songs originally recorded straight to hard disk. The unprocessed tracks sounded a little "lite" + unpunchie. So, I used a tape saturation plug-in to add warmth + punch them up a bit. But recording rock drums, bass + gtr to analog tape is pretty common place (+ for the exact same reason). So, using a tape plug on rock tracks seems to make a fair amount of sense. I'm not saying I use it instead of recording to analog tape, but if something wasn't recorded to tape in the first place + it could benefit from tape saturation, then I try it thru Tape to hear how it sounds.

So, that leaves DUY's Valve. This is a tube saturation plug. And right here is where you caught me. This plug is just my guilty pleasure. It does some pretty amazing things to the sound of instruments. It does a kind of compression, but in a very non-linear way to the frequency spectrum. It also re-organizes the upper harmonics in a pretty way, clearly adding some even-orders. It can add a thickness, or a puchiness, or a phatness. You see, I don't use Valve, because the tracks weren't recorded thru tubes. I use it, simply because it can make some tracks really sound great. And in the end that is THE ONLY litmus test that counts.

But it needs to be said, that I don't use tube + tape saturation on all my tracks. I hear people say, "he uses those things on everything." But that's simply not true. I don't even use them on all my drum tracks, which is a freedom you don't have when you record drums to analog tape. Either all the tracks get tape saturation, or none of them, cuz ya can't pick + choose. And I definitely don't use them on all my gtrs. I only use them when an instrument sounds like it could benefit from the warmth, phatness + punch that only saturation can give.

I hope this helps, Jim. And I'll come back to answer your 2-buss question.

BTW, really great answers everyone!

[Mikey MTC]

I guess I am just not clear on what the advantage is for you to be doing it prior to mastering... It would seem that you would be limiting the options for the mastering engineer.
Jim


Just to reiterate what some of the others have said:
IMHO, the goal of the mix engineer is to make it sound as close to a finished record as it can sound EXCEPT for the "crushed to oblivion and now it sounds like crap" part. We can add that for client reference copies on request! It's counter-intuitive for a mixer to not make it sound as finished as he/she can on the premise that someone else is going to do something later. Just leave the mastering guy some room to work but do the absolute best you can do prior to that.

In the perfect world, the mastering guy pushes the level up a bit so you sound like today, and that's all she wrote. In the real world, mastering's a chance to get the objective trusted second opinion.

Mixers look after the trees and mastering guys look after the forest.

[Scratchy Potts]

Charles
Do you think the likes of, PT,Cubase,sonar etc,etc will impliment
tube and tape saturation on there channel strips as standard in the not to distant future??

[Scratchy Potts]

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE! YOUR BOARD BUSS WILL BE ASSIMILATED! :lol:

:Redface: "Doh"!!!

[Charles Dye]

But wait! There's more...

One of the cool things about using saturation plugz iz the way you can cherry pick the perfect saturation for a result that's not really possible in "the former more analog way of doing things" (©2006 Mixerman), aka TFMAWODT (©2007 Charles Dye).

For example, I can layout my saturation on the drums like this: Kick – tube, but no tape; Snare – tube + 80's tape @ 30ips; Hi-Hat – no tube or tape; Toms – no tube, but 70's tape @ 15ips; Overheads – no tube or tape. This way each drum can have just the saturation that iz perfect for just that drum, + I'm not limited by having to use all the same kind of tape saturation on every drum like I would with analog tape, just because I like the way it makes my snare sound.

I find that many times the hat + OHs often (tho not always) sound better w/o any saturation. They sound cleaner + more open, which is the sound I'm usually looking for with cymbals. OTOH, tube + tape saturation on the snare + toms give them power + impact that I just can't get from anywhere else. And lastly, the kick can often sound less punchy + almost rubber-like w/ tape saturation, so I will sometimes leave it off + only use the tube saturation, which gives it a real power + beefiness. Together this entire combination of different types of saturation give me a sound on the drum kit that matches perfectly the sound in my head.

To be clear, these plugz are NOT cure-alls. They don't work in every situation + I never use them to replace the real thing. If I'm recording an artist, + recording them to analog tape is the sound I want, then that is exactly what I do. And if I want a warmer, more tube-like sound on an instrument, then I record it using a tube mic, mic pre, eq, comp, or some combination.

But when I use saturation plugz I'm mixing, not recording, + @ the same time the original tracks were usually recorded straight to digital + they're lacking some warmth. So, I use saturation plugz to give me the sound I feel the tracks need.

[jdier]

Thanks for taking the time to reply. As a guy who has been involved in music and recording from the other side of the desk, I am still learning.

Thanks again!

Jim

But wait! There's more...

One of the cool things about using saturation plugz iz the way you can cherry pick the perfect saturation for a result that's not really possible in "the former more analog way of doing things" (©2006 Mixerman), aka TFMAWODT (©2007 Charles Dye).

For example, I can layout my saturation on the drums like this: Kick – tube, but no tape; Snare – tube + 80's tape @ 30ips; Hi-Hat – no tube or tape; Toms – no tube, but 70's tape @ 15ips; Overheads – no tube or tape. This way each drum can have just the saturation that iz perfect for just that drum, + I'm not limited by having to use all the same kind of tape saturation on every drum, just because I like the way it makes my snare sound.

I find that many times the hat + OHs often (tho not always) sound better w/o any saturation. They sound cleaner + more open, which is the sound I'm usually looking for with cymbals. OTOH, tube + tape saturation on the snare + toms give them power + impact that I just can't get from anywhere else. And lastly, the kick can often sound less punchy + almost rubber-like w/ tape saturation, so I will sometimes leave it off + only use the tube saturation, which gives it a real power + beefiness. Together this entire combination of different types of saturation give me a sound on the drum kit that matches perfectly the sound in my head.

To be clear, these plugz are NOT cure-alls. They don't work in every situation + I never use them to replace the real thing. If I'm recording an artist, + recording them to analog tape is the sound I want, then that is exactly what I do. And if I want a warmer, more tube-like sound on an instrument, then I record it using a tube mic, mic pre, eq, comp, or some combination. But when I use saturation plugz I'm mixing, not recording, + @ the same time the original tracks were usually recorded straight to digital + they're lacking some warmth. So, I use saturation plugz to give me the sound I feel the tracks need.

[idaguide]

Charles,
I'm still wondering about an earlier question:

Do you always send two-tracks to the ME or do you sometimes send stems or even the entire mix?

[EricTheKid]

But wait! There's more...

One of the cool things about using saturation plugz iz the way you can cherry pick the perfect saturation for a result that's not really possible in "the former more analog way of doing things" (©2006 Mixerman), aka TFMAWODT (©2007 Charles Dye).

For example, I can layout my saturation on the drums like this: Kick – tube, but no tape; Snare – tube + 80's tape @ 30ips; Hi-Hat – no tube or tape; Toms – no tube, but 70's tape @ 15ips; Overheads – no tube or tape. This way each drum can have just the saturation that iz perfect for just that drum, + I'm not limited by having to use all the same kind of tape saturation on every drum like I would with analog tape, just because I like the way it makes my snare sound.


"I don't know man...sounds like a lot of WORK!"

- Stifler

American Pie (c) 2000




C'mon man, can't I just close my eyes and *wish* myself back in time to when recording was SO much easier and sounded SO much better??? I mean, these days...the computer should just magically craft up *perfect* sounds FOR ME, right? :Confused:






:very happy: Ha ha...It's cherry pickin' time! (Acutally...in a way, I think "cherry pickin" is pretty old skool...)

Good stuff Charles, thanks for the tip. :Thumbsup:

Eric

[Charles Dye]

Act now and you'll also receive...

I've said this elsewhere, but as ETK pointed out, there is a double standard applied by some regarding using a lot of processing to get the sound you're after.

When using plugz, there seems to be an audio purist mentality taken, as in "the less the better." But when using analog gear, if it takes 2 compressors, a reamp job, a mutron bi-phase 3XJ, and daking turdstomper to make it sing like a stuck pig... then rock on baby!

And that's just dim-witted.

There is an incorrect belief propagated way too often that plugz are a semi-necessary evil, but you should try to avoid them as much as you can, or if you use them @ least don't make them do too much, or only use them for attenuating, but don't use them for boost.

Quite seriously... this is stupid.


Basically put, there are bad + good plug-ins.

Use bad ones... and they will crap up your sound.

Use good ones... and they will give you great results.


But a blanket indictment of all plugz is simply baseless.

[Charles Dye]

The part that still has me off guard and confused is all of the stuff on the 2 buss. Again, I am new to this, and just trying to learn, but it seems to me that those types of effects and processes could be added by the mastering enginer.

I read clearly that you do not do anything that you would consider mastering (with what you do on the 2 buss) but still, would it not be possible for all of those things to be added at the mastering stage?

I guess I am just not clear on what the advantage is for you to be doing it prior to mastering... It would seem that you would be limiting the options for the mastering engineer.

You state that when you take this stuff off the 2 buss the mix falls apart. (Again, I do not mean to offend) but isn't that a sign of some type of weakness in the mix? Maybe I am making my life too hard, but I am trying to get the mix to gel and come together without anything on the 2 buss so when it goes to mastering the ME can concentrate on finer tweaks.

What am I missing? Are the 2 buss effects that you use things that a mastering engineer would not be able to apply, or not have access to? I have stuff on the 2 buss that I use just to show someone what a mix might sound like, but I have never thought to leave any of that stuff on there when printing a final mix.

All the other answers to this question are very much in line with my thinking.

I understand your POV on this, Jim. I too was of exactly the same opinion @ 1 X. I thought that I should get the mix sounding the absolute best I could @ first + then apply any stuff that I might want across the stereo buss afterwards. But I came to realize I was mixing the song twice.

I first would mix it to sound great w/o the stuff. Then I would put the stuff on...

And let's take a moment to list the plugz I use on the buss:

Solid-state analog saturation

Compression

Extremely subtle EQ

Tape Saturation

Stereo Widening
And after putting on these plugz I had to make so many changes to make the mix sound good again, that it just didn't make any sense to me. So, I started mixing thru the solid-state saturation effect + the compressor. And my mixes came together much faster, with much less effort.

There is also nothing new or different about using these processes during mixing. All of them have equivalents that are often used by mixers on analog consoles. As others have said, it is the limiting that is seen by many (MEs included) as the process that is saved for mastering. But saturation, compression + widening are all very valid techniques applied during the mixing phase.

So, to answer your direct question, could these things be added @ the mastering stage? Absolutely. But would I want to wait until mastering to add them? Definitely not. I want my mix to sound like a record when it goes to the artist + the tools I use are all apart of the mixing engineers standard toolbox.

I'm not "limiting" the options for the mastering engineer. A mixing engineer can tie the hands of the ME by sqishing the life out of a mix with over-compression or limiting. But not with a few dB of compression, or subtle saturation. And that's pretty much what any ME will tell you.

Personally, I think you ARE making your life too hard. Try mixing thru saturation or compression + see how it affects your mixes. If it makes them sound better, + makes your job easier, then there is no reason I can think of not to use them.

[Charles Dye]

Do you always send two-tracks to the ME or do you sometimes send stems or even the entire mix?

Yes, I always send the finished stereo mix. Not a big fan of commitment procrastination. I like to get it the way I like it + let the ME just do eq tweaks to the mix + limiting if necessary.

[Charles Dye]

Do you think the likes of, PT,Cubase,sonar etc,etc will impliment tube and tape saturation on there channel strips as standard in the not to distant future??

I don't think so. There are too many choices with saturation. I like the fact that 3rd party companies are always coming up with new variations. I'd prefer to have them as plugz.

Really, I simply see saturation as 1 tool among many that we can use during mixing. Just like compression, eq, verb, delay, harmonizers, + modulation. To be clear, saturation is no more or less important than any of the other tools.

In fact, I don't see it's use as mandatory or essential. I have heard, + expect to hear even more, records that are very clean + nearly saturation free. Saturation is simply one of the colors that we have to choose from on our audio palette.

[Stick]

When I watched MiLAR, I was stoked to see that I wasn't off the deep end as I tend to use a lot of plugs too. I routinely find myself bussing a lead vocal over to an aux so I can slap on another de-esser or Inflator or something.

I've never owned the DUY stuff, but love Phoenix and/or Inflator for that "extra love".

[EricTheKid]

daking turdstomper to make it sing like a stuck pig... then rock on baby!

DUDE, I thought I was the only guy out there using the TURDSTOMPER!!! I've found it's the only unit that can effectively "polish a turd"... Anybody know where I can find a British version with the discontinued brown faceplate??? ... :Roll eyes:

Seriously though, a brother's workin' hard... ripping out 4 posts in a row, here!! :Thumbsup:

Cheers,

ETK

[PSN Big Al]

I prefer the classier (and smoother-sounding) XL Excrement Trampler by SSL.

Of course, if that's too pricey you can get your feet wet with a
free plug-in that sort of does the same thing. Over at KVR
you can get the Crap Crusher by Pheeseez Ltd. It's got
limited controls, but it's bucket-loads of fun! :very happy:


.

[EricTheKid]

I prefer the classier (and smoother-sounding) XL Excrement Trampler by SSL.

:Thumbsup: :grin:

And the bathroom humor prevails among the audio-types (never fails, it seems)! Oh well, (we) boys will be boys...

Say, weren't we talking about something pertinent and audio-related...aw sh!t...I forget...

Hey! Who took my tuner...I know I left my guitar tuner around here somewhere...anybody seen my tuner??


OH well...heh heh heh

Stay classy,

ETK


P.S. I swear I'm going to do something productive now and record some guitars... :Razz:

[nobby]

DUDE, I thought I was the only guy out there using the TURDSTOMPER!!! I've found it's the only unit that can effectively "polish a turd"... Anybody know where I can find a British version with the discontinued brown faceplate??? ... :Roll eyes:

If you do obtain a brownface Turdstomper, don't press all the ratio buttons in at once or your studio will smell like a pig farm.
.