Mixing

[jgrooms]

I thought I'd ask this out here to get some opinions.

I have a pertty solid background in recording but am still a amatuer by any sense and have always struggled with mixing. My mixes just don't seem to come together as I like and I think its becuase I really don't have a plan to start from and my mixes end up being, what I call, loose rather than tight & cohesive.

I know mixing is as much art as it is science but was wondering where do you all start from with a mix and are there any things that you always do to set a framework up for your mix to build from? Any other tips you want to share?

A little background as I know some will mention/ask this, I am monitoring on Event SP'8s in a 10X10 room which I have treated with 2" Sonex Acoustical Foam, so I have tried to create an enivroment that is suitable for mixing given space I have to work with.

[albee1952]

A 10x10 room is going to have some serious low end issues so bass trapping should be high on your list of things to address. As for mixing, its a HUGE subject that would take pages to cover so let me toss you things to consider. What style of music? Assuming pop/rock/country, the rhythm section needs to be tight. That may mean using Elastic Audio to tighten the bass to the kit (or vice versa). It may also mean EQ on the kick and bass so they are not fighting for the same "space". Lead vocal is crucial so I tend to level out gross volume changes with Audiosuite(GAIN plugin), then add light compression(BF76@ 4:1). Then EQ out any nasty frequencies(sweep a narrow boost around and when you hear "ugly" jump out at you, cut that frequency). I may follow up with another compressor(I like SMACK! for this). Then a Pultec EQ to put some "air" back on top(+3 or 4 at 10K). BTW, all these numbers are simply suggestions and starting points. I spread the rest of the instruments across the stereo field like an imaginary stage(one guitar on the right, other on the left, etc). Stereo keyboards may get panned hard, but they may NOT(its not natural anyway) so I may pan a piano to 10 and 4(o'clock) to place the piano off to one side of the "stage". EQ so the instruments don't fight each other or the vocal(IOW, it doesn't matter what an instrument sounds like by itself as it has to live WITH the other instruments). Hope this helps steer you. Its not about telling you what to do, but getting you to think about WHY you do each thing in the mix process. Good luck:D

[jgrooms]

A 10x10 room is going to have some serious low end issues so bass trapping should be high on your list of things to address. As for mixing, its a HUGE subject that would take pages to cover so let me toss you things to consider. What style of music? Assuming pop/rock/country, the rhythm section needs to be tight. That may mean using Elastic Audio to tighten the bass to the kit (or vice versa). It may also mean EQ on the kick and bass so they are not fighting for the same "space". Lead vocal is crucial so I tend to level out gross volume changes with Audiosuite(GAIN plugin), then add light compression(BF76@ 4:1). Then EQ out any nasty frequencies(sweep a narrow boost around and when you hear "ugly" jump out at you, cut that frequency). I may follow up with another compressor(I like SMACK! for this). Then a Pultec EQ to put some "air" back on top(+3 or 4 at 10K). BTW, all these numbers are simply suggestions and starting points. I spread the rest of the instruments across the stereo field like an imaginary stage(one guitar on the right, other on the left, etc). Stereo keyboards may get panned hard, but they may NOT(its not natural anyway) so I may pan a piano to 10 and 4(o'clock) to place the piano off to one side of the "stage". EQ so the instruments don't fight each other or the vocal(IOW, it doesn't matter what an instrument sounds like by itself as it has to live WITH the other instruments). Hope this helps steer you. Its not about telling you what to do, but getting you to think about WHY you do each thing in the mix process. Good luck:D

Thanks for the reply. I totally understand its impossible to tell someone "how" to mix a song. I really am interested in hearing about how others attack a mix, particularly in the beginning.

Most of what I am doing is rock or derivitive of rock so nothing too far out there.

And yes, I have noticed low end problems. Unfortunately it seems from the mix position the bass is out of phase so it makes things difficult.

[cneal92]

How I start a mix is often the same (I generally don't record, just get involved in the mix stage), push up the faders and see what I've got. Where I start or go from there depends on where I want to go, which is determined by the song (as I'm not Bob Clearmountain, Chris Lord-Alge, JJP, etc., I still struggle with this one from time to time). What problems do I need to address (phase issues, pitch problems, etc.)? What is the "special" thing about the song that excites me and I want to emphasize? I always want a lyric sheet so I can try and figure out what the song is about and/or is trying to convey. I then try and figure out what I can do to support the song and it's subject with what I do engineering wise. For instance is the subject matter dark, hopeful, sad, etc.

Advice I often give to my students in my engineering classes, is to find a song that is similar and mixed by one of the top mix engineers and do your best to copy it sonic-ally (where applicable, anyway). You're not "stealing" from them, as 1) you probably have no idea how they achieved that sound, 2) you probably don't have the same equipment if you did, 3) even if you did the source is different so you'll get a different sound, 4) you probably don't have the technical skill to match it (don't get discouraged by this), etc. This is just a good exercise to try and get you to focus your work.

For me this tactic is similar to a guitarist learning another guitarists riffs. You learn them to improve your technique, etc. and eventually (if your going to go anywhere) you will find your own voice. Just as a guitarist won't get very far in this pursuit if he doesn't know his scales, modes, etc., as an engineer you need to know your tools and how to use them.

Also, study other engineers, take note of how they approached something and think about why you think they did it. Listen to their different approaches to mixes; how they mixed the drums, the guitars; how the instruments interact; how are things panned; how does the mix evolve and change over time; what are the dynamic differences in the verses/choruses/etc.; how are they achieving depth verb or delay; how are they using effects?

Also, listen to their mixes (and mixes you really "know") in your mixing environment. Once you really "learn" your acoustic environment it will help you to work better in it.

I hope something here helps.

[jgrooms]

How I start a mix is often the same (I generally don't record, just get involved in the mix stage), push up the faders and see what I've got. Where I start or go from there depends on where I want to go, which is determined by the song (as I'm not Bob Clearmountain, Chris Lord-Alge, JJP, etc., I still struggle with this one from time to time). What problems do I need to address (phase issues, pitch problems, etc.)? What is the "special" thing about the song that excites me and I want to emphasize? I always want a lyric sheet so I can try and figure out what the song is about and/or is trying to convey. I then try and figure out what I can do to support the song and it's subject with what I do engineering wise. For instance is the subject matter dark, hopeful, sad, etc.

Advice I often give to my students in my engineering classes, is to find a song that is similar and mixed by one of the top mix engineers and do your best to copy it sonic-ally (where applicable, anyway). You're not "stealing" from them, as 1) you probably have no idea how they achieved that sound, 2) you probably don't have the same equipment if you did, 3) even if you did the source is different so you'll get a different sound, 4) you probably don't have the technical skill to match it (don't get discouraged by this), etc. This is just a good exercise to try and get you to focus your work.

For me this tactic is similar to a guitarist learning another guitarists riffs. You learn them to improve your technique, etc. and eventually (if your going to go anywhere) you will find your own voice. Just as a guitarist won't get very far in this pursuit if he doesn't know his scales, modes, etc., as an engineer you need to know your tools and how to use them.

Also, study other engineers, take note of how they approached something and think about why you think they did it. Listen to their different approaches to mixes; how they mixed the drums, the guitars; how the instruments interact; how are things panned; how does the mix evolve and change over time; what are the dynamic differences in the verses/choruses/etc.; how are they achieving depth verb or delay; how are they using effects?

Also, listen to their mixes (and mixes you really "know") in your mixing environment. Once you really "learn" your acoustic environment it will help you to work better in it.

I hope something here helps.

thanks for the reply!

I am sitting here listening to various music and mixes and something that is grabbing me is that in professional mixes all the instruments have their place, down to the bell on the ride cymbol. How is this clarity and defintition acheived? I think that is what i meant by my mixes being loose. Pro mixes everything is clear and "in its place".. im missing something.

[Kinh]

I am sitting here listening to various music and mixes and something that is grabbing me is that in professional mixes all the instruments have their place, down to the bell on the ride cymbol. How is this clarity and defintition acheived? I think that is what i meant by my mixes being loose. Pro mixes everything is clear and "in its place".. im missing something.
I havent been mixing long but have been arranging music for a while and when I was studying sound engineering a common phrase used was "its no use polishing a turd". Listen to something by Mutt Lange, Timbaland or even Brian Wilson; those who have a natural sense of instrumentalization. THings are in place for a reason. I know some people will always blame the mix without even contemplating the possiblity of a bad arrangement. But in reality, in most cases lack of clarity is the result of a unplanned, adverage arrangements. Always start there. That is the very essence of what you hear. As you said "all instruments have their place".
And I am the Kinh..

[nst7]

I'm not sure if you're mixing someone else's stuff or your own, but I wanted to point out that it helps to have things recorded properly. You can't mix what's not there. One of the standard things in rock is to double track the rhythm guitar. You play it once, then play it again, trying to match it closely, then pan them hard left and hard right. You're simulating 2 guitarists playing for a nice wide sound. If there's a guitar solo, do it on another track in put it right in the center. A lot of modern rock has a lot more guitar layering going on also. You may already know this, but generally kick drum, snare drum, bass guitar and lead vocal go in the center. Other things can be panned elsewhere in the stereo field. Also, it's common for lead vocals to be double tracked (or even more) at least in the choruses for a bigger sound.

I mention all this layering because it's part of the modern sound. But if it wasn't recorded in the first place, you can't mix it.

Also, try using delay rather than reverb on things like vocals. There can be ways to use it so it's not obvious delay but just gives a sense of space and doesn't muddy up like reverb sometimes can. Rhythm guitars often don't need reverb or delay and seem to function better dry.

The other important thing is that mixers usually use high pass filters (the lows are cut out) on most things other than the bass guitar and kick drum (though even those sometimes too). This gets a lot of the low end mud out of the way and helps the bass and kick poke through better. You can use your Digi EQ for this, but you might get better results with some 3rd party plugs.

[aus scott]

A 10x10 room is going to have some serious low end issues so bass trapping should be high on your list of things to address.

+100 - I've been fighting hard to get good mixes in a small room - I spent $250 on some rockwool and calico etc.(took the DIY road) and now I'm getting mixes that are a LOT better (I'm still no Lord Alge!) However, my mixes now transfer well and are doing what I think they should.

If you can't hear it properly, you can't mix it properly.

Just my 2c

Cheers,

Scott

[themadarchitect]

Damn everybody took the good stuff//Great points worth reiterating:

- You can't mix what you can't hear. At the very least, a treated room with A LOT of bass trapping for your space will be necessary. Broadband will work best to eat up some of those high frequency reflections. Get a ribbon mic and a program like Room EQ to measure your room's frequency response. Correct any issues you find with nulls or excessive spikes. Next you are gonna need some good monitors. That is a topic all in itself, but look around. Most ppl at the entry level seem to be happy with Adam 7's, KRK Rokits or NS10's. These are a FEW models that tend to not exaggerate or under exaggerate any particular frequency.

- When you have your room under control spend a GOOD amount of time listening to professionally recorded CD's (NOT MP3'S!) that you know well. Also listen to those same CD's outside the room. Learn the characteristics (esp. shortcomings of your room.) Unless it is a professionally designed space, there are shortcomings.

- Learn your gear. Read the manuals. If you are a plug-in freak, read the manuals to those. Learn how they all sound as well.. 20 compressors have 20 different colors.

- Learn what EQ, Compression, Delay/Reverb do. Almost every fancy thing you see used to mix is a combination of one of these things.

- Critical hearing is very important. You have to develop that skill in order to mix. Learn the frequencies of instruments. Not only by number, but what those frequencies SOUND like. Mixing by numbers is a recipe for disaster.

- Forget everything everyone ever told you about mixing and music. At the end of the day, there are many ways to skin a cat. Your way will be the best way for you.

- Your mix can only be good as what is recorded. Get the best possible source as close to the final sound as possible. The best mixes IMO have the least amount of processing.

- Panning and volume/fader riding should be like 97% of getting your separation and space between all the elements of your sound. After you do this, then EQ and compress to further address problem areas.

MOST IMPORTANTLY. DON'T JUST DO THINGS TO DO IT. KNOW THE ISSUE, AND KNOW HOW TO SOLVE IT. RANDOM FADER PUSHING AND PROCESSING IS A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME.

[spidey01]

Great Stuff here, Excellent pointers

[obiwan177]

Also, take all the so-called "rules" you've learned, and do the opposite. Explore your options. Mixing is an art, and most famous art wasn't created by following the rules. Try taking a vocal track and putting a plug in on there you would never think of putting on a vocal.

But on the other hand like cneal said, if you have a place to start, once you've learned the tools and figured out how other engineers get their sound, you can figure out what you like and your own tricks.

[youngas75]

Basically echo-ing what's been said. Sort your room out best you can and listen to other people's work. As far as the mixing goes, Albee said it; the rhythm section is your foundation in rock music, get that all wrong and 'flappy' and your mix will fall apart. Source material is vital, drum replacement can help but can also bring with it a world of issues. Be careful when panning that you dont spread stuff too far and end up with a 'hole' in the middle of your stereo field, very easily done and try not to have one instrument take over the whole field. A common mistake is to hard pan your drum overheads, doing that doesn't leave a lot of room for other stuff! Just get in as much practice as you can, remember it's also still supposed to be fun so don't get obsessed by endlessly tweaking just because you can. Play it, mix it, leave it :)

[1ace1]

don't get obsessed by endlessly tweaking just because you can. Play it, mix it, leave it :)

Now that is GOOD advice. Print it.... NOW. Before your tired mind and ears make sound like a .......... ;):D!

A:)

[jgrooms]

Thanks to everyone who replied!

[Doug Ring]

[QUOTE= don't get obsessed by endlessly tweaking just because you can. Play it, mix it, leave it :)[/QUOTE]

Amen to that.

I often liken mixing to painting a picture: you never really finish it - you just stop.

[themadarchitect]

Amen to that.

I often liken mixing to painting a picture: you never really finish it - you just stop.

Beautiful quote..But there is also one that says:

Beauty is the sum of all parts working together in ratio to its juxtaposed and its whole, where nothing needs to be added or taken away..

That is the point I think every artist wants to reach..if you merely stop, you will never be as good as the person who doesn't stop until he has something beautiful.

Dave Pensado said it best.: What separates good mixing engineers from great mixing engineers is that great mixing engineers do not settle for good mixes. They don't sleep until they have a great one.

So don't stop till you have something beautiful that is a true representation of what you are hearing in your head. Anything short of that is giving up.

THERE IS SOMETHING THAT NO ONE HAS MENTIONED YET I THINK WORTH MENTIONING. Knowing eeffect, plugs, breaking rules, getting good sources..all great..but actually know how each instrument you are mixing works is a priceless tool. I was never a drum player, and until I started learning about and playing the drums, my mixes were never that great. Now that I understand what drums do and how they are played...its been an invaluable tool.

[1ace1]

Beauty is the sum of all parts working together in ratio to its juxtaposed and its whole, where nothing needs to be added or taken away..



Wow!

That is every troubled artists utopian dream. It is more the ears/eyes of the viewer that this state occurs in rather than the conscious effort of the artist.

I kind of agree with Doug Ring on that one. You just need to stop at some point. And going full circle the 'best engineers' must also know this. But ultimately that quote lies with the responsibility of the audience does it not?


THERE IS SOMETHING THAT NO ONE HAS MENTIONED YET I THINK WORTH MENTIONING. Knowing eeffect, plugs, breaking rules, getting good sources..all great..but actually know how each instrument you are mixing works is a priceless tool. I was never a drum player, and until I started learning about and playing the drums, my mixes were never that great. Now that I understand what drums do and how they are played...its been an invaluable tool.

This is true IMHO. Even when recording an instrument to know of history, uses, construction, playing styles etc.... massively dictates mic selection and placement (although I always allow room for experimentation). The same is also true of mixing.

A:)

[themadarchitect]

Wow!
That is every troubled artists utopian dream. It is more the ears/eyes of the viewer that this state occurs in rather than the conscious effort of the artist.

I kind of agree with Doug Ring on that one. You just need to stop at some point. And going full circle the 'best engineers' must also know this. But ultimately that quote lies with the responsibility of the audience does it not?
A:)
I tend to disagree a little, even though I completely understand where both you and Doug are coming from. The average listener knows nothing about mixing, the recording process or anything in between. All they know is they like something.

Lets take an example. I have an acoustic guitar in a track where it is barely audible on a lo-fi system, mildly present on a hi-fi system, and just enough in a studio setup. What's the difference to the average person who hears it for the first time on either system..Absolutely nothing. They get the gist of the song, minus the presence of one guitar. They will think the song is correct.

But we as the artists know its missing. Its up to us to make that final presentation to the audience and tell them exactly what we want them to hear. When it is perfect to our ears, and by perfect I mean there is NOTHING ELSE YOU CAN POSSIBLY DO TO THE MIX OF THE SONG TO IMPROVE IT IN ANYWAY, AND NOTHING ELSE YOU CAN HEAR IN YOUR HEAD AS AN IDEA TO TRY AND EXECUTE ON YOUR MIX...then you are finished. Then and only then is it a beautiful mix IMHO

[1ace1]

and by perfect I mean there is NOTHING ELSE YOU CAN POSSIBLY DO TO THE MIX OF THE SONG TO IMPROVE IT IN ANYWAY, AND NOTHING ELSE YOU CAN HEAR IN YOUR HEAD AS AN IDEA TO TRY AND EXECUTE ON YOUR MIX...then you are finished. Then and only then is it a beautiful mix IMHO

There is ALWAYS room for improvement.

As I said. A utopian dream!:-):-)

As a listener you do not need to understand how something is created to appriciate it in all its entirety. In fact almost all music listeners have no concept of time sig, key change, tonality etc....

All very interesting stuff. I spose It all comes down to subjectivity and reality being the individuals perception blah blah.;)

A:)

[themadarchitect]

There is ALWAYS room for improvement.

As I said. A utopian dream!:-):-)

As a listener you do not need to understand how something is created to appriciate it in all its entirety. In fact almost all music listeners have no concept of time sig, key change, tonality etc....

All very interesting stuff. I spose It all comes down to subjectivity and reality being the individuals perception blah blah.;)

A:)
'xactly. Just gotta do all you can do to present the listener with a true representation of your artistic rendition..or some $h*t like that. :cool:

[obiwan177]

So don't stop till you have something beautiful that is a true representation of what you are hearing in your head. Anything short of that is giving up.

I agree. Another question to ask yourself then is can you live with knowing you could've made it better? Knowing there was a problem but ignoring it because the majority of listeners wouldn't hear it? I personally couldn't live with that.

[dave911]

Unless you are in a room designed as a studio you are going to have a bumpy room response with trouble at the low end and you'll probably be monitoring on a single pair of "almost pro" monitors.
Lots of great advice here.
I would just add that listening to great pro. mixes in you mix position and then in all the other places you normally listem to music will help you calibrate your ears so your mixes sound good on anything from ipod earbuds to top end systems. It's got to sound good on a stock car system.

[1ace1]

I agree. Another question to ask yourself then is can you live with knowing you could've made it better? Knowing there was a problem but ignoring it because the majority of listeners wouldn't hear it? I personally couldn't live with that.


I used to procrastinate teribly over my mixes and compositions spending hours moving a snare a tiny amount one way then back the other way.

As time has progressed I have become less fussy. The snare is where the snare is!

A:)