AN 879 Analyzer - Help to control what cant be heard

Need help understanding what Im looking at or doing. Im getting feedback that the bass is a little heavy in some mixes and I dont have a sub to hear. Im mixing with Roland DS8 monitors and a set of cans. Can and/or how do I use the AN879 for this. 
 I have made some adjustments to this mix which was a 1 Take Live recording from band practice in the barn using PG56s on drums and cabinets, a D112 and an I5 on the lead cabinet. 
 
Here is the song after a few adjustments
http://soundcloud.com/digi2ns/bonnie-clyde-x1-trng
 
 Thanks in advance for help and advise (Sorry picture is small-captures both running dual monitors)
 

Thanks for the input Mike

Still learning what/how I need to do analyzing and have been researching the info and product you mentioned. Probably need to find some youtube info so I can see exactly how/when to use it in my process.  Its wonderful being in the beginning learning stages 

Span is great, and it's free, but the type of display shown below seems, to me, to offer insights more intuitively. Here's the Adobe version



Here's the Nugen style:



I like the Nugen one because it scrolls and you can learn to see the patterns of what you are hearing and you can use it as a "meter" of sorts as you try fine tuning a mix.


best regards,
mike

One reason I enjoy the spectral style is that you can see if things like the bass drum are taking the form of a sharp pulse or if the result is a big blurry wash. This isn't as easy to discern with a display such as SPAN.

best regards,
mike

The most important thing is to learn how to associate the meters to what you are hearing.

The cumulative graph will be the hardest to relate to because it doesn't represent what you are hearing at any particular instant.

I enjoy using SPAN at high detail settings with very fast response. I like to see the graph dance vibrantly with the music so that it really seems to represent what I'm hearing.

Then I try to relate what I am hearing to what I am seeing and I compare both of those things to what I hope to hear. After a while you can learn to anticipate what a character that you wish to hear should look like.



If you take it a step further and use the sprectral tool I am saying that I prefer... well you can get to the point where you can actually see every little ping on the ride and each string attack on the bass guitar becomes really evident. If you do a good job with the kick it will have a different shaped blob than the bass guitar and you'll be able to see how the two are over lapping or remaining separate. None of this replaces careful listening and a keen sense of intent but the visual tools will really help you maintain consistency from day to day and it will help you deviate with intention when you take on a project that needs to sound different from your normal comfort zone.



One other thing you mentioned is that you work hard on the seperate tracks before you mix or balance... why not try doing a little bit of this then a little bit of that.

I usually take several passes of cleaning up and balancing. I focus on working on the most obvious stuff and looking for the balance early on then repeating the process until I can't think of much else to do.

After a while the process will get sort of routine.

FWIW, I like the song and your treatment of it quite a bit, don't be so hard on yourself.

best regards,
mike

Forget about peaks. Averages are what you're interested in.

Hi Mike,

Just to add a bit to the great advice you've already received....one thing you don't want to focus on too much is attempting to mix by looking at an analyzer. I know lots of guys that rely on this so much, they start dropping instances of these analyzers in several tracks. It's not the right way to do it in my opinion.

The main thing is, you have to make sure what you are seeing is what you are hearing. If your room or monitors are jacked up, you're not going to be able to make the right calls anyway...no matter what you see or how close you wind up adjusting to what the graph says. So make sure what you hear out of your monitors is as accurate as possible.

The next thing to keep in mind is, I have seen some incredible looking scopes yet the music was horrible. I've seen some dismal looking scopes, yet the music sounded terrific. The only time I use a scope is when I have a problem area that I just can't figure out. Most times, I'll check out a kick drum and a bass guitar and see where something may not be jiving. Or, when I master something I always keep my analyzers up just to see what changes I make using my ears...not so much to look at what it's reading before I touch something.

So just keep some of this stuff in mind. The last thing you want to do is rely too much on an analyzer to where you spend more time looking at it while trying to tweak than using your ears. For example, if we took one of your mixes and used a program like HAR-BAL and purposedly flattened out your eq curve to see how straight line-like we could get it without peaks, you'd probably get pretty sick to your stomach if you heard it. But, the curve sure would look impressive. LOL! So try to use it more for helping you with problem areas. The key there is...to be able to hear the problem areas the way the graph is reporting or the graph is basically not helping.

It's kinda like mixing in your room until you get it right...then you burn a CD and go out to your car with a pen and paper. You write down all the things you want to change yet when you get back inside and listen again to make those changes, you can't hear them. This situation is definitely a monitor/room correction thing if you ever experience it. Or, sometimes people put too much stock in their car stereo too.

Listening to your mix, first off it sounds mono to me...so you may want to check that and re-upload. But to my ears, I literally hear what your graph is reporting. You need some good bottom and good mids. Curb a little of the high end in the cymbals from 8-12k with a shelf or just experiment with what works best for starters. But we definitely need some good lows in the areas bit mentioned. Preferbly 50-about 70 Hz for your kick drum...depending on where you want the pump to be. 75 to 90Hz on your bass depending on where you want the low end to "ooom" on it. Adjust anywhere from 550-900 hz for the warmth and thickness of your guitars...2-5 khz for guitar presence...stuff like that is where I'd start. Also, it appears to me you're a cutter not a booster. This is a good sign. Always cut when you can, boost when you need to. In your situation here....you need some boosting in the lows and some cutting in the highs....tweak the mids with both cut and boost to taste.

Anyway, best of luck with everything and I hope some of this helps.

-Danny

Hey Mike,
 Quick question, how many tracks are you getting from these live sessions?
 

 best,
mike

Right now, what I can do is 6 in on the MAudio FTU on a live take/recording.
 I run Direct in mic'ing-
Channel 1-Vox
Channel 2 Bass
Channel 3 Guitar
Channel 4 Gutiar
on 5&6 I sub mix Drums Pan Kick to Channel 5 and the rest of the kit to channel 6 so I can play with it a little bit on mixing.

I think its the best I can get with the FTU but I can get it clean enough where if we want to we can take out the individual tracks and redo at anytime.

Ill post an A/B so you can hear the initial recording and then where you guys have gotten me to after at this time playing with it.

The stuff on SoundCloud is outdated and as to where I am with it now LOL

Gotta get back to my honey-do list first though-nice out and good time to get the yard work started

Before and After of "Back for More"-Still working on it but ya get the idea of where I am in the learning curve.

Before mixing-
http://soundcloud.com/digi2ns/back-for-more-before-sonar-x1

After working in Sonar X1-
http://soundcloud.com/digi2ns/back-for-more-after-sonar-x1