Thread: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

Results 21 to 40 of 121

  1. #21
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Posts 3,546
    Rep Power 2500000000

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    Questions questions - the vocals...

    1) Did you remove specific breath noises? I notice that they come and go (in the right places) depending on the section of the song in the mix versus the raw tracks. I'm impressed with the level of attention to every single detail.
    I removed what bothered me, and kept what I liked. Nothing is left or taken away by accident. If they are, then it's on purpose. That may seem like a Yogi Bera kind of thing to say, but we operate creatively on two levels. The conscious and the sub-conscious. I never really understood how important a role the sub-conscious played until I started writing. Now I recognize how powerful it is in all creative endeavors, and I don't question it.

    So, yes, there is great attention to detail. But I don't sweat the small stuff to the point that I'm removing all the vibe. There are imperfections in any mix I do, including this one. I can hear them myself. But that's what makes the mix alive. Mixing isn't about perfect balance at all times. It's about accentuating a song's natural power to push a listener forward, and causing the proper physical reaction to the song through pulling out the full emotional impact. It's not about a missed (or left) breath here or there.

    Some of these statements may seem contradictory in nature, but such is the creative process.

    2) What sort of processing was used on the vocal during the mix stage? I ended up having quite a chain (albeit with small amounts of each processor) to get an approximation to your vocal sound but I have a feeling that I'm making it harder than it should be. I was running a little bit of limiting, and some small 400-500, 1k, and 3k notches to try and take the emotion of the vocal up another step (whether I succeeded or not is a different story ), some de-essing and then a "tube" plug-in.
    Probably and 1176, a Pultec EQP1a and a dbx 902 de-esser. I'll EQ a little into the limiter, (I often like to put low end into the limiter), and then some brightening with the Pultec, and then de-essing.

    There is no such thing as a "tube" plug-in, that actually does what a Pultec EQP1a does. They are the best EQs ever made, and they were made 50 years ago. No one has even matched it on a hardware level, I wouldn't hold my breath on it being replicated on a software one. Plug-ins are designed to sway you by how they look. Not by how they sound. Obviously, there is attention paid to the look of hardware gear too, but I find the graphics to be far more mesmerizing, for whatever reason.

    The Bombfactory 1176 and La2a are classic examples of this. Those limiters sound IDENTICAL. And La2a and an 1176 don't sound identical in real life.

    re. tambourine elimination... I agree the mix works without it, and I had difficulty fitting it into my mix. Supposing you had, as producer, sent the tracks off for one of us to mix, along with a big fee... as producer, would you have been upset if we returned a mix that was missing one of the 21 or so elements that you gave us? As outside mixers, should we have phoned you first to discuss the tambourine, given you a mix with and without, or just knuckled down and MADE the tambourine work in our mixes?
    It's called underdubbing, and it's a critical part of mixing. There is a HUGE difference between adding something as a mixer, and taking something away. Adding elements is a bit brazen as a mixer, taking them away is part of your job.

    In my case, because I was a straight for-hire mixer for so long, I participate in the underdubbing process as I go along. The only tracks that end up at mix, are tracks that I haven't made a concrete decision on. In this particular case, that was the tambourine. But for other producers, there can be a whole host of tracks that need removal. Sometimes, people get confused in the tracking process, and you can actually "see" (in a hearing sort of way) the confusion, like it's a story. In those cases, it's the mixers job, as fresh ears, to select the best road for the production. That's when mixing is at it's best.

    re. the stereo image of hard lefts and rights - it certainly simplifies the arrangement and explains how the hammond/guitar/rhodes can all exist at competing frequencies, and as you say, gives space for the vocals to sit low, and the bass to drive the song. I can see it is also central to this mix design - however, I think I prefer some of the more complex stereo presentations, because they seperate the guitar parts into more than one part, and because they do give more of a wall-of-sound, less seperated presentation of the music. Guess that comes down to taste? Or maybe I'm just wrong...
    There is only one legitimate reason not to use the full stereo field in your mixing. And that's so you can make your record exceptionally loud. There is an enormous amount of precedent, for hard-panning, and any one individual's discomfort with that doesn't change the facts. The best mixes use the full panorama. It is one of our tools for making space, and creating the illusion of space. Would you purposely limit the frequencies you would use for an entire mix? That would be the same thing. Frequency is one of our tools for creating the illusion of space from the top down. In my view, it is a mistake to limit yourself where panning is concerned. It weakens your mix. I read about so many people that are queasy about hard panning. Don't be. It's critical to good mixing.

    I have one question, MM. Do you bring any element for reference changing rooms like you do? Like a golden pair of cans or such? Pair of speakers? Room measuring tools?

    Be well - Pär
    My ears and some reference material. Mostly mixes I've done, because I'm intimately familiar to how they react in many locations, and because they actually have some bottom end.

    If it's the Amek out at Total Access, it's a G2520. I have no personal history with this board, but that facility looks like a real fun place to work, so I've had my eye on it. Also, the Meyer HD-1 monitors were my first love in non-ns10 nearfields back in the day. Expensive, though, which I imagine was a large reason they never really seemed to get the play I thought they deserved. Anyway, back to the mix.
    It was Total Access. I love the Meyer HD-1s. They REALLY show the warts (much like NS10s do), and I can mix entirely on them, without checking any other speakers. I quite enjoy mixing at Total Access. It's where I mixed the Mixerman Radio Show Theme, and several other albums.

    I, like CaptainHook, would love to understand what you didn't like about your first mix. I personally am never satisfied with anything I do, but then again I'm not nearly as accomplished an artist, so that makes sense. I'm still tinkering with tunes I co-wrote 20 years ago. Knowing when you have it right must be a skill a busy working professional must develop, I imagine.
    It is always hardest to mix when you are the producer and/or tracking engineer on a project. There are two reasons for this. First, I no longer have a fresh perspective. Second, as a mixer for hire, I tend to be quite aggressive, as a producer/mixer, I've already been aggressive in the tracking process, and there is no room to be aggressive at the mix stage. Resisting the urge to be aggressive in the mix stage is nothing short of a challenge. Yes, I know in my head, I've already done the work to make the mix come together. But I'm still resisting a natural instinct. I have found the best way to combat this, is some time.

    In the case of this album, I made the mistake of trying to mix it immediately after wrapping up our vocal sessions. I mixed 5 of the songs at a studio, I didn't particularly like, and told Ryan, that I needed time. We kept three of the mixes (which turned out quite well), but two of them weren't up to par with the work I was doing at Total Access. I made the decision to remix when I had a basis of comparison. I knew they could be better, because they weren't as good as my other mixes. So, I redid them.

    Frankly, I probably could have kept the original mix, and just had it EQed. But I prefer not to do that if I can avoid it. It's always best to get it right in the first place, and it's probably a better mix overall, and not just more on target sonically.

    I think the most important part of mixing is learning to let go. I'm sure you could improve a mix that you did 20 years ago, but that's a snapshot in time. So, really, your work on it now has no relevance. Redo the entire song if you must (so long as there is some definitive purpose for the redo), but mixing it again and again serves no purpose. It's a piece of music. A work. Let that work stand as it is, for what it is. Once you allow yourself to let go, and to accept your work at any given point in your life for what it is, you will be able to move forward and progress. You'll move forward as a mixer, writer, and producer. Take new snapshots in time, and recognize that you are a different person now than you were then. You know more. You're deeper. Leave that old Calvin behind. Celebrate it, and discover the new Calvin.

    I'm certain this sounds somewhat corny. But I have no other way of expressing it that might make sense or have any kind of impact. It's critical that you let go, and accept your work for what it is, and what it was. If you don't, you'll never have any artistic sanity, and you are preventing yourself from progressing.

    My best friend in music college had a great anecdote on silk-screened on a T-shirt. "I progress, therefore I am."

    It's only now that I realize how fucking true that is.

    What are your references?
    Especially for bottom end/bass guitar.
    I fear I cannot reveal that without revealing my identity.

    Enjoy,

    Mixerman
    #Mixerman and the Billionheir Apparent - A satire of the modern day music business


  2. #22
    Join Date Jan 2007
    Location Monument, Colorado
    Posts 420
    Rep Power 536871050

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I fear I cannot reveal that without revealing my identity.

    Mixerman
    Again.....
    QUE: "Empirial March"

    Only the select few know this...... or figured it out.

    QUE: "heavy breathing"

    The secret lies with "Charlotte"

    Doc
    MONUMENT SOUND

    MONUMENT SOUND ON REVERBNATION

    Monument Sound Fan Page

    "Changing how people hear music one track at a time"
  3. #23
    In a world of ones and zeros...this one's the latter. Breast reduction surgery candidate
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Oblivion
    Posts 555
    Rep Power 536871056

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    Leave that old Calvin behind. Celebrate it, and discover the new Calvin.

    I'm certain this sounds somewhat corny. But I have no other way of expressing it that might make sense or have any kind of impact. It's critical that you let go, and accept your work for what it is, and what it was. If you don't, you'll never have any artistic sanity, and you are preventing yourself from progressing.

    My best friend in music college had a great anecdote on silk-screened on a T-shirt. "I progress, therefore I am."

    It's only now that I realize how fucking true that is.
    I agree whole-heartedly. I find it difficult to leave the past behind, because the past is when I was completely immersed in the music biz, whereas today I'm strictly part-time (dare I say hobbiest?). So, I have a nostalgic, very emotional connection to my past work. It's an unhealthy attachment, and I know it is, but breaking free hasn't been easy for me. Working on it, though. One thing I do know, not only with art but in any endeavor, is that if one is not moving forward, one is moving backward.

    Hmmm, time for a new sig line.


    Cal


    "My experience has been that people who perceive a conflict between science and spirituality generally know very little about one or the other. Often they know very little about both." - Bob Ohlsson

    "Real men do hard things." - Anonymous - Don't know who said it first, but I like it.
  4. #24
    wardrobe malfunction investigator 329 M/S Hen=Mock Chicken!
    Join Date Apr 2007
    Location New Zealand
    Posts 39
    Rep Power 65094569

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I removed what bothered me, and kept what I liked. Nothing is left or taken away by accident. If they are, then it's on purpose. That may seem like a Yogi Bera kind of thing to say, but we operate creatively on two levels. The conscious and the sub-conscious. I never really understood how important a role the sub-conscious played until I started writing. Now I recognize how powerful it is in all creative endeavors, and I don't question it.
    Thanks for the detailed reply. Couldn't agree more with the statement above.

    I have some more questions if it's not too much trouble

    Guitars

    Was there any different processing happening from section to section (different EQ?) or was it purely a function of balance? They seem to have bite when it's needed, yet still have power without getting in the way when they're secondary to the listener's focus.


    The Business

    Often I will mix a track and even though the clients seem happy (stop the clock - it sounds done) there are things which I want to enhance or know I could improve on. For that personal satisfaction I want to go that little extra even if it means turning into unbillable work.

    When redoing the mixes that you weren't happy with was it a case of the artist being happy and you weren't? What approach would you even take in a situation like that?

    Was the second mix billable? And to follow on from that, do you prefer to work on a flat-fee or hourly rate for your mixing?

    I understand that these can often be sensitive questions so I'm not expecting an answer.

    Many thanks in advance.
  5. #25
    once played a seventh chord in a folk song Utterly Superior Cocksmanship
    Join Date Feb 2007
    Location UK
    Posts 198
    Rep Power 22767265

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I think I do suffer from 'avoiding placing things hard left or right (except where I have something to balance them with on the other side)... but this was not the main thing that struck me about the use of stereo here.

    The thing which surprised me about the stereo mix was not that some things were hard left and right, but that there seemed to be ONLY 3 stereo positions - hard left, hard right or dead centre. Is this approach common - where you could just abandon having pan pots and instead decide whether to send each instrument to buss L, buss R or both?

    It did work with this song - I am just curious as whether using only these positions is common.

    I don't mean this as a criticism - but where I have listened to my favourite bands with an ear for the stereo, I have noticed more of the positions in the stereo field being utilised.



    Oh - and thanks very much for the reply about cutting stuff out, and the stuff on stereo positioning.
    Last edited by DaveC; May 9th, 2008 at 10:48 PM. Reason: forgot to have the kiss-ass stuff in my post first time around
  6. #26
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location 10.1.1.3
    Posts 2,173
    Rep Power 494928057

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    there seemed to be ONLY 3 stereo positions - hard left, hard right or dead centre. Is this approach common - where you could just abandon having pan pots and instead decide whether to send each instrument to buss L, buss R or both?
    Ask WetWilly.

    I had never really noticed until he verbalized it, but i had been
    pretty much doing that for a while now. Even tom spot mics
    panned hard L/C/R, HH, whatever.

    It's probably more common than people realize.
    "Art is the expression of imagination, not the reproduction of reality." - Henry Moore

    >> York St Recording Studios <<
  7. #27
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location 10.1.1.3
    Posts 2,173
    Rep Power 494928057

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I fear I cannot reveal that without revealing my identity.
    Okay, anything that isn't your own work then?

    (Although if you HAD listed some references without
    mentioning some was your own work, i would've been surprised
    if people who hadn't worked it out yet would have even picked
    up on it..)
    "Art is the expression of imagination, not the reproduction of reality." - Henry Moore

    >> York St Recording Studios <<
  8. #28
    Frustrated Chick Rock singer...now doing jazz standards poorly! Confused by Rosie O's attraction to Tom Cruise
    Join Date Oct 2007
    Posts 467
    Rep Power 536871042

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    Mixerman, (and Strange Faces)

    This is more of a tracking question than a mix question...

    Very much enjoyed the album, even the mp3 versions (from Myspace) sound very good. As a guitarist, I really enjoyed a lot of the tones you guys achieved...they all sound very large, round, full, and clear - unless it was an obvious conscious decision to go a different direction.

    I have a difficult time getting those types of sounds consistently - if at all - and sometimes have to rely on pretty drastic EQ come mix time. I know it's not gear issues (Vox AC30, Fender Deluxe Reverb, Royer R121, the usual dynamics, Seventh Circle Audio preamps) so it's gotta be something with my technique.

    I'd love to hear more specifics on how you got those sounds, and specifically how to achieve fullness and clarity - without fizziness - at the same time. Do you compress/EQ to tape? And a specific question: how often, if ever, do you find yourself using tools besides the amp's knobs + mic placement to avoid fizziness?

    EDIT: I've spent the last 30 minutes trying to match that EMT reverb sound. Similar to my question above, I find the EMT file is much "larger" sounding than the original file (Gtr Ryan I think it's called). The closest I can come in approximating is a plate impulse response reverb with a pre-effect EQ that includes a low pass somewhere between 6k & 9k...is that just the sound of guitar through the plate, or was other processing included?
    Last edited by Strat+AC30; May 10th, 2008 at 01:21 AM.
  9. #29
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts 11,544
    Rep Power 536871422

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    Fantastic mix and account of the processes (tracking and mixing).

    I'm glad I didn't hear your final mix until now. That forced me to reach deep and work harder.

    I realize that with so many mixes there won't be a recall thread, but I'm recalling mine for the practice.

    For one thing, I want to see if I can get the toms into the ballpark of where yours are -- I have an idea of how... I just didn't have a target before.

    Etc.

    And I'd pan my Rhodes to the right so I can use the EMT -- that thang sounds awesome!
    Man! You have GOT to try a hit of this RANGE SUNSHINE!

    IMTBO = In My Thoroughly Biased Opinion
    CMIIW = Correct Me If I'm Wrong
    Never underestimate the amount of contempt a failed musician has for those of us who are still trying.
    If the party's good enough, you can actually suck to a remarkable degree.

    Greedle
  10. #30
    Quantum Psychic Passed out in public restroom
    Join Date Dec 2006
    Location California. by the bay
    Posts 242
    Rep Power 117335

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I have to ask, what did you do to the bass track?

    Was it really just blending the amp and the di track? Because I tried that, and I couldn't get it anywhere near as loud as in your mix without it overpowering and murking everything else. Or is it just a matter of it all hitting the 2-buss compressor just right?
  11. #31
    Join Date Dec 2007
    Location Chile
    Posts 102
    Rep Power 58838691

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    There’s only one thing I’m not convinced about the pan. Every time I pan hard anything I think, ummm what if someone has only 1 speaker or 2 people shares headphones?

    I know is kind stupid , but probably someone has seen it
  12. #32
    Hates these rank titles! Wife left with tractor salesman...got John Deere letter
    Join Date Aug 2007
    Location Australia
    Posts 202
    Rep Power 322830834

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    Ya..... kind of stupid .

    if your thinking about how it will sound on headphones during the mixing stage why not just mix through some of those crappy little ipod ear buds and appease a generation of tone deaf tinnitus ridden twats........ like myself.
  13. #33
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Posts 3,546
    Rep Power 2500000000

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman


    Guitars

    Was there any different processing happening from section to section (different EQ?) or was it purely a function of balance? They seem to have bite when it's needed, yet still have power without getting in the way when they're secondary to the listener's focus.
    There's four guitars. The Ryan Guitar, which is the big guitar that comes in halfway through the song, and which gets the EMT Plate treatment. There's the Rake Guitar, which rakes chords through a tremelo at the beginning of the song. And there's the Proggressive Delay Guitar, which happens in what I call the "Progressive" sections. Hence the name. The drummer used to play those sections straight, and I took a page out of Bill Bruford's playbook, and asked him to play the beat to go with the bass part, which then made it progressive. Lastly, there's the Feedack Guitar, which is basically just feedback.

    As far as treatment throughout the song, no, I did nothing different to any single guitar. I don't believe I compressed any of them during mixdown. The only difference that might occur in sections would be level. I doubt I even rode the EMT return, although it's possible.


    The Business

    Often I will mix a track and even though the clients seem happy (stop the clock - it sounds done) there are things which I want to enhance or know I could improve on. For that personal satisfaction I want to go that little extra even if it means turning into unbillable work.

    When redoing the mixes that you weren't happy with was it a case of the artist being happy and you weren't? What approach would you even take in a situation like that?
    I didn't decide to remix that song until I had finished mixing the second half of the album. At that point, I listened to the other mixes, and decided to remix. I also tried to remix two other songs, and I abandoned them once I realized I wasn't going to beat what I had. In the case of Aren't you Proud, I beat it rather quickly.

    I never even asked if Ryan or the boys were happy with the mix. It turns out they were glad I remixed it, and they were hoping I would. But they allowed me to come to that decision independently before bringing it up to me.

    Was the second mix billable? And to follow on from that, do you prefer to work on a flat-fee or hourly rate for your mixing?
    I was the producer of the album. I made the album for a set price. It's to my benefit for the album to be as great as it can be. If the band had asked me remix, and I didn't agree with it, they would have to explain to me what it was they wanted different, and I'd have to understand it. Otherwise, what would be the point?

    I think I do suffer from 'avoiding placing things hard left or right (except where I have something to balance them with on the other side)... but this was not the main thing that struck me about the use of stereo here.

    The thing which surprised me about the stereo mix was not that some things were hard left and right, but that there seemed to be ONLY 3 stereo positions - hard left, hard right or dead centre. Is this approach common - where you could just abandon having pan pots and instead decide whether to send each instrument to buss L, buss R or both?
    If a mix is particularly dense, and there is plenty going on, sure, I'll place instruments soft-left and soft-right, and even slightly off-center. But on less dense mixes, there are only three positions. Left, right and center. It's not uncommon for me to put the bg's at 3:00 and 9:00. So, I don't ONLY use hard panning. It just depends on the circumstance. But I'm also not going to shy away from putting one instrument in the right speaker, and allow for there to be some asymmetry. Symmetry is overrated.

    It did work with this song - I am just curious as whether using only these positions is common.
    It seems quite common to me.

    I don't mean this as a criticism - but where I have listened to my favourite bands with an ear for the stereo, I have noticed more of the positions in the stereo field being utilised.
    Again, it's just a matter of how much is going on in the mix. I certainly don't want to place three things on the far left and three things on the far right. If I'm going to use the full panorama, then I'll need to use some other positions. But it's not uncommon to use hard panning and center only.

    Also, let's not forget. The drums fill the entire space, because they are recorded with stereo pairs of microphones. The B3 also fills the entire space. The Ryan Guitar EMT Plate fills the entire space. They aren't directional. Panning hard left and right, lets those instruments actually fill the entire stereo field. This makes the space seem big. I think it's a mistake to only half-pan the stereo image of the drums or a B3, except in unusual circumstances.

    Mixerman, (and Strange Faces)

    This is more of a tracking question than a mix question...

    Very much enjoyed the album, even the mp3 versions (from Myspace) sound very good. As a guitarist, I really enjoyed a lot of the tones you guys achieved...they all sound very large, round, full, and clear - unless it was an obvious conscious decision to go a different direction.

    I have a difficult time getting those types of sounds consistently - if at all - and sometimes have to rely on pretty drastic EQ come mix time. I know it's not gear issues (Vox AC30, Fender Deluxe Reverb, Royer R121, the usual dynamics, Seventh Circle Audio preamps) so it's gotta be something with my technique.

    I'd love to hear more specifics on how you got those sounds, and specifically how to achieve fullness and clarity - without fizziness - at the same time. Do you compress/EQ to tape? And a specific question: how often, if ever, do you find yourself using tools besides the amp's knobs + mic placement to avoid fizziness?
    Well, for starters, Ryan is a talented guitar player and musician. He gets good tone. We also had some incredible amps at our disposal. The Gibson GA79 that they have at Echo Mountain is awesome. Same with the Supro. And Ryan has some nice axes to boot.

    The best guitar tones I've gotten in my career have been with the best guitarists. There's no way around that. For a chain, we used Royer 121s, and 57s, and mostly the Chandler EMI mic pres. When I compressed, which we did on occasion, I used the UA175b. I had a Pultec EQP1a strapped after the pre, so that I could add top or bottom when I needed to.

    EDIT: I've spent the last 30 minutes trying to match that EMT reverb sound. Similar to my question above, I find the EMT file is much "larger" sounding than the original file (Gtr Ryan I think it's called). The closest I can come in approximating is a plate impulse response reverb with a pre-effect EQ that includes a low pass somewhere between 6k & 9k...is that just the sound of guitar through the plate, or was other processing included?
    That's just the return of the guitar through the plate. No processing at all.

    I have to ask, what did you do to the bass track?

    Was it really just blending the amp and the di track? Because I tried that, and I couldn't get it anywhere near as loud as in your mix without it overpowering and murking everything else. Or is it just a matter of it all hitting the 2-buss compressor just right?
    I see you mixed this on PTLE. I'm assuming in the box?

    I just blended the amp with the Di and EQed them a little. I might have run them through an La2a. Some of the mixes I did, some I didn't. Surely the SSL does plenty to clamp down on the bass, but the difference could be external summing. It really makes a big difference. I DID mix this on a console. I know people think that I say it's easier ONLY because that's how I prefer to work. But the fact of the matter is, I prefer it, because it's easier in many ways.

    I also see that you gated the drums. I've muted toms on occasion in my mixing career (between tom hits). But I've rarely actually gated drums (unless there was a serious problem that needed addressing). What would be the reason for gating drums when the Rooms are letting it all hang out like that? Not criticizing you. Just pointing out, that some people don't actually gate drums. Like me.

    There’s only one thing I’m not convinced about the pan. Every time I pan hard anything I think, ummm what if someone has only 1 speaker or 2 people shares headphones?
    Some people have their speakers wired out of phase. Should I invert one side of the final mix, so that those people can hear what the mix is supposed to sound like?

    We've had stereo available for well over 40 years. I'm not going to start mixing for numskulls that don't understand how it works yet, and are willing to listen to half a mix. Besides, the vocal is in the middle. If they can still sing the song, I've done my job.

    Mixerman
    #Mixerman and the Billionheir Apparent - A satire of the modern day music business


  14. #34
    wardrobe malfunction investigator 329 M/S Hen=Mock Chicken!
    Join Date Apr 2007
    Location New Zealand
    Posts 39
    Rep Power 65094569

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    Many thanks MM - the replies cleared up some of the fog for me
  15. #35
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts 11,544
    Rep Power 536871422

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I also see that you gated the drums. I've muted toms on occasion in my mixing career (between tom hits). But I've rarely actually gated drums (unless there was a serious problem that needed addressing). What would be the reason for gating drums when the Rooms are letting it all hang out like that? Not criticizing you. Just pointing out, that some people don't actually gate drums. Like me.
    That's interesting. I gated the toms, but I almost didn't because it didn't seem to make much difference, and because I liked the overall drums sound just bringing up the faders.

    Basically in the past I'd gate drums if there was an unpleasant sympathetic ringing in the rack toms from the kik or snare, which wasn't the case this time. There was a ton of bleed on the toms tracks, but it was not unpleasant bleed. Maybe I should trust my ears more in the future.

    It just occurred to me that toms are the only things I gate; with automation, the mute button becomes my gate for anything non-percussive.

    I think this (analog) recording caught some people off guard, but the tape hiss on the vocal in the quiet parts at the beginning and ending was the only hiss I found to be really audible and I muted it out.

    I was thinking, this would make a really good reality show. You could wear a Kenny Gioia mask to conceal your identity.
    Man! You have GOT to try a hit of this RANGE SUNSHINE!

    IMTBO = In My Thoroughly Biased Opinion
    CMIIW = Correct Me If I'm Wrong
    Never underestimate the amount of contempt a failed musician has for those of us who are still trying.
    If the party's good enough, you can actually suck to a remarkable degree.

    Greedle
  16. #36
    Junior assistant coffee maker trainee ACME recording engineer...just add water.
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Surrounded by morons
    Posts 850
    Rep Power 536871066

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I didn't gate the toms. I HATE gating toms because when I have to, it's typically an indication of problems with the tracking. Either the drummer just isn't hitting the toms with some intention, or the toms are so badly tuned that they resonate in a detrimental way, or both.

    The sounds that toms make in between actually being struck are what make a drumset come to life. Especially if you're working in a dead room. On my set, if I remove the floor tom from the equation, the kick drum loses a LOT of bloom - at least right there in the drummer's seat.

    I'm really surprised by how many people felt the need to sample replace, gate or process those drums heavily to get a sound. That gives me an idea.

    dik
  17. #37
    once played a seventh chord in a folk song Utterly Superior Cocksmanship
    Join Date Feb 2007
    Location UK
    Posts 198
    Rep Power 22767265

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    Thanks again for the further details and answers, I think I've learned something through all this! Also have a new line of research to do in terms of listening and analysing other mixes I like.
  18. #38
    Junior assistant coffee maker trainee ACME recording engineer...just add water.
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Surrounded by morons
    Posts 850
    Rep Power 536871066

    Default MiX iT! 3d: The Faders-only ITB mix

    All the discussion about what additional processing people did to the drums (samples, gating, crazy compression), to the vocals (all KINDA stuff and efx and verb and trash), to the bass(odd resonances? drastic eq? compression?) got me to thinking...



    WHY?????



    Here's a 10 minute re-mix using nothing but faders. I set up the song with no eq or processing on ANY of the tracks, flipped phase on some of the drum tracks, did some volume automation on the vocals, the B3 and the guitar. Send that to subgroups, out thru RenComp on the master out at 2.6:1 and ran it a bit hot to lop off the tops of peaks.

    Nothing else whatsoever... Oh yeah. L1 for a bit of level, but it only knocks off about 1.5 db on the loudest snare hits.


    All that wrestling and problems and "I can't get stuff to work together" and belly-aching and headscratching, when the song works fine even without any reverb!!!

    Good Song
    Good Arrangement and instrumentation
    Good Performance
    Good Tracking

    In that order.

    That's the takeaway from this episode of the MiXiT event. If you got out the machete and sledgehammer to make this mix work, you didn't listen to what you had... or your monitor system (including your room and your ears) isn't giving you what you need.

    dik
    Attached Files
  19. #39
    Ducked in here to avoid the paparazzi Slippy's codpiece...ewwww.
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Posts 18
    Rep Power 129

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I just blended the amp with the Di and EQed them a little. I might have run them through an La2a. Some of the mixes I did, some I didn't. Surely the SSL does plenty to clamp down on the bass, but the difference could be external summing. It really makes a big difference. I DID mix this on a console. I know people think that I say it's easier ONLY because that's how I prefer to work. But the fact of the matter is, I prefer it, because it's easier in many ways.
    Mixerman
    this perhaps answers a question i had about using a fast attack time on the ssl. i was wondering how you set the attack on the 2 bus compressor to achieve the result that you want without sacrificing the low end, but are you actually counting on the bus comp to shape the low end of the track? if anything like this is happening, it definatley makes sense to have it in the chain at the earliest possible point (tracking).

    thanks for sharing your skills and knowledge here. i've learnt so much from listening to everybody's mixes - i reckon this experience has been far more educational than going to a modern 'Audio School'
  20. #40
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts 11,544
    Rep Power 536871422

    Default Re: MiX iT! 3d - Discuss It: Mixerman

    I didn't gate the toms. I HATE gating toms because when I have to, it's typically an indication of problems with the tracking. Either the drummer just isn't hitting the toms with some intention, or the toms are so badly tuned that they resonate in a detrimental way, or both.
    Or someone put batter heads on the bottom of the rack toms instead of resonant heads
    Man! You have GOT to try a hit of this RANGE SUNSHINE!

    IMTBO = In My Thoroughly Biased Opinion
    CMIIW = Correct Me If I'm Wrong
    Never underestimate the amount of contempt a failed musician has for those of us who are still trying.
    If the party's good enough, you can actually suck to a remarkable degree.

    Greedle

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts