Mixing Tips Needed

[TC_TC_TC]

Dear Moderators & all concerned. Great to know you have all this experience & are having so many Projects. Hopefully we can all benefit Form your vast knowledge. I'm New to the Forum, but I have been using PT5 & upgraded each time to PT8 with Waves Diamond & now upgrading to PT11. I believe Pro Tools is the Grestest. Compared to spending Thousands of Dollars in the Studio, I can do it at Home. Sure there have been ups & downs, but that has been my Learning Curve. Once I learned from my Mistakes - All is Well. That is why I am reluctant to upgrade too soon. My question (finally), like most, I make several mixes. I noticed the mixes I like best are not anything like the mixes on the radio or the ones I use as a Baseline. For example, Cold Play, Food Fighters, etc. I can get a sound comparably close. But compared to what I like, they sound very Compressed & not Natural. And they are a lot more Compressed (little by little) than the Natural Sound I like. Is this just the way the Industry Standards are recorded nowadays ??? Or does very from Genre to Genre ??? Just looking for a little Direction. Thanks in Advance ...tc

[Brent Lind]

It varies a great deal by genre. Import some jazz or classical into your daw and compare it to the latest Coldplay. You will see a world of difference in dynamic range. Read up on the "loudness wars" and consider the approach popular for material destined for radio or the iTunes Store. If you are mixing pop professionally for radio you will likely have no choice but to play the game, but if you are working on an amateur or semi-pro basis you may have more freedom to leave things less uncompressed. Try exploring some older reference material and I think you'll find it wasn't always this way. If this is a business you'll want to to be able to compete with your peers, otherwise, go with your gut.

[DC-Choppah]

Loudness wars!

People figured out that they wanted to be the loudest in terms of RMS level to sound loud on the radio dial.

Compressors can up the RMS level and bring this RMS level up close to the peak, so the music has no dynamic range.

It sounds like crap. Everybody knows it. All squashed and no life. Things will change because of producers like you.

[albee1952]

What he said^^^ Comparing your stuff to anything heard on any radio is a bad comparison. Between the mastering for loudness, AND the radio limiters crushing the dynamic range, its best to leave the volume down(the radio volume) and treat that like audio wallpaper To make a fair(and sensible) comparison, you should rip some commercial releases into wave files(44.1K/16 bit, with no data compression at all) and import into your session(if you are trying to mix AND master at the same time), or open in your mastering program(Wavelab is my choice) and compare "apples to apples"

[Carl Kolchak]

Originally Posted by TC_TC_TC

Food Fighters

Their last album sounded like a dog's dinner to me

[TC_TC_TC]

Thanks everyone Appreciate the input. I did some comparisons & Jazz is definitely Nice. Also, some older songs like Cat Stevens Ballads, Yesterday (Beatles), Nat King Cole, Jimmy Spheeris (Isle of View), Monkees, Stevie Wonder, Cars, & others. Big Difference. Everything today is Squashed compared to those recordings. After reading about "loudness wars" - it's today's sound. I did notice Country Music seems to differ & so does some Alternative. Thanks again.

[shtik]

Even though lack of dynamic range does harm the music in terms of the sound quality, I've noticed that it is still has a relatively minor effect on the overall impression of it.

A "good" mix or a "bad" one is a very subjective term. I, personally, love some music that is mixed to "perfection" (if a perfect mix ever existed, then music mixing would have been perceived as science rather than art), and some music that some would say "sounds like a dog's dinner" (like the "Foo(d)" Fighters).

I love them equally well, and that's because of the musical content and the emotional impact it has on me.

Mixing, as well as just "making a track sound good", involves a good deal of musicality, EXPERIENCE and taste in order to imply a unique sonic signature. Not to mention the unique sonic signature that is naturally inherent in the music. And that is a big subject by itself...

To make it short for now: the music (and mixes) you like to listen to were crafted by a team of people that dedicated their life to do that. They did not compromise on the songwriting or the performances, not on the quality of the recording and not on the tools they were using (yeah, you can make a record with a 2 channel Behringer mixer and an SM57, but the result WILL be different than if you have better mics and pres).

To sum it up, here's what you need to get better mixes:

- EXPERIENCE (none of us can have just enough of it).

- well written and performed music (I've noticed that the best mixes I've done were not only recorded well, but were also written and performed very well. This has diminished the fact that no overly expansive equipment was used on the recording).

- a good capture of the music - i.e. a good recording. Decent quality Budget equipment can also work if you have the 2 mentioned above...

- a good listening room (your monitors are not enough - you should be able to critically listen to what you're doing. And that's incredibly hard if you have a problem hearing a certain frequency range or telling where the center of image is).

- EXPERIENCE (not a mistake)

And this is just the tip of the iceberg... IMO, this is way more important than which plugins you should use or how to use them. Art is a subjective matter. Listen to your favorite music all the time. Take notes on what you like. Learn your tools (in today's virtual "school", it's not hard to find information). Then realize that it's not enough. Repeat.

Remember - the music itself matters more than compressors and EQ's (and we all know that compressors and EQ's really matter....)

Hope that helps.

[Kinh]

Originally Posted by TC_TC_TC

For example, Cold Play, Food Fighters, etc. I can get a sound comparably close. But compared to what I like, they sound very Compressed & not Natural. And they are a lot more Compressed (little by little) than the Natural Sound I like. Is this just the way the Industry Standards are recorded nowadays ??? Or does very from Genre to Genre ??? Just looking for a little Direction. Thanks in Advance ...tc

My theory is there are more competing frequencies in mixes today and by the time you've cut them so other tracks can breathe you end up with a more compressed sounding mix. When you take out most of the low end of a kick (and everyone does it these days) you end up with a much harder, punchier sound over all. This is especially true with electro but also rock.

[waltz mastering]

Originally Posted by TC_TC_TC

My question (finally), like most, I make several mixes. I noticed the mixes I like best are not anything like the mixes on the radio or the ones I use as a Baseline. For example, Cold Play, Food Fighters, etc. I can get a sound comparably close. But compared to what I like, they sound very Compressed & not Natural. And they are a lot more Compressed (little by little) than the Natural Sound I like. Is this just the way the Industry Standards are recorded nowadays ??? Or does very from Genre to Genre ??? Just looking for a little Direction. Thanks in Advance ...tc

Out of curiosity, what are current albums and or songs in rotation that you do like?

[TC_TC_TC]

I for one love all the Foo Fighters Album. My Favorite being the 2nd Album. Up until that 2nd album I thought Rock was lost forever. I have a hard time finding music that I really like on the radio. And when I do I can't remember the Artist name because they're not that known. But I like Green Day, Cold Play, Lady Antebellum, Maroon 5, Weezer, the New Stevie Nicks, Taylor Swift, Bruno Mars, Katy Perry, Florida Georgia Line, are current Acts that I like their styles & production. But there are a lot of alternative music that I like better. Simply because they are more Creative. Which is subjective as shtik pointed out. I loved the Rolling Stones because of their Awesome Creativity & Unique Sound that came from being Unconventional. Although, I enjoy listening to the less compressed songs of old, I don't miss the fact that technology has brought us some Wonderful Sounds Now & as time goes on. I also concur with Kinh, Competing frequencies are part of the New Compressed Sounds of today. Technology today has given unlimited resources. In my Propellerhead Reason alone I have over 5000 different sounds available to chose from. Sounds that are Incredible & could never have been created in the 1900's. Things like Parliament Funk, Kraftwerk, Cars, Jimmy Spheeris, Foo Fighters and others we're all uniquely different from what was going on when they 1st appeared & later became standard. I enjoy all that variety & more. Music is the Most Wonderful gift we have to Unite us. I love Salsa, Andes Music, World Music. Humans are so Creative and expressive. I listen to songs from Brazil & not knowing a word that is said I enjoy the music. I can listen to songs in any language and derive much pleasure from them. And today I can almost say John Phillips Sousa, never sounded better because of today's technology. I agree with shtik, when he says music is subjective and it has an EMOTIONAL IMPACT on us all. That's what makes it so Wonderful & I am very Thankful for all the Music in the World. Thanks for your responses. I made my comments because I was very content with my mixes but felt in order to compete I had to compress everything to sound like the rest. But I'm going to leave my mixes as a "Unique Sonic Signature".