Collaborative mixing - A viable business model?

Over the years I have been something of a jack of all trades, master of none, musically speaking.  I find myself having some depth in a variety of areas.  I have been getting more and more requests for these various services, and I have addressed them informally on a one-off basis.  I have probably asked a lot less money than the services are actually worth.
 
So for the new year, I am working on organizing this as a business that will do a combination of live sound (for small shows), live recording, mixing-mastering, music arranging & engraving, and musician contracting.  In each of these areas (except arranging/engraving), there are established local companies that do a great job.  I am not trying to compete with them, but rather trying to address the needs of individuals and groups that don't need or can't afford the bigger companies.
 
I have started to organize this into a website that is not complete:
http://sonocrafters.com/index.html
 
With that background out of the way, my question really relates to mixing services.  I know many of you view mixing in the traditional way -- where there is a controlled studio environment and the mixing process is somewhat intertwined in the tracking process.  In my case, I envision most of these projects to consist of tracking a live show (12 - 24 channels typically,) and then do a mix completely offline.  I had a meeting today with a large music store chain that may be interested in teaming up in support of some local bands that deserve exposure, but can't really afford the full studio experience yet.
 
This got me thinking that if the mixing job is entirely offline, then there is no reason I have to do that, and no reason it couldn't be done by someone halfway around the world.  I bet the majority of people here are more capable than me at mixing, and I bet there are at least a few who would be interested in doing some of these mixing projects, assuming there was a fair amount of pay for it.
 
My question becomes one of process.  If I farmed this out, I would want the project to be returned as a SONAR project I could open and make any final refinements the client might ask for.  I am wondering if anybody has done collaborative work with SONAR.  Obviously we would have to agree on the VSTs that could be used.  And we would need to be at roughly the same software levels.  I'd assume everyone would be relatively current with SPlat.  Are there other considerations I am overlooking?
 
Does such a venture make sense to anybody?

You've got an interesting idea here!  I'd be interested in doing some mixes for you.  Since moving across the country I haven't yet had time to develop a local client base so this might suit me well in the current timeframe.  PM me if you'd like to discuss further......  Best of luck with Sonocrafters!
 
Dave

For whatever it's worth, which may not be much, I think you have a brilliant idea here.  I wish you much success.

cparmerlee
Does such a venture make sense to anybody?

All of it except the last part where you want the mixes returned in Sonar format so you can tweak. That last requirement adds a metric sh*t ton of complexity and a lot of limitation to the endeavor. So the question becomes is that added complexity and limitation worth the reward of being able to tweak for the client. I would argue it is not.

I mean what you're proposing here is a low cost but otherwise viable alternative for struggling artists a recording of their work. Low cost for this sort of thing by definition then means low margin. IOW ain't no one ever gonna git rich off what you're proposing. To hand anyone beyond the person doing the mix in that scenario the ability to say 'well this is good but lets tweak that and lets change this and lets dial that up a bit while we push that further left' is akin to handing a loaded ak47 to a drunk monkey as far as profit goes. 

There are many people already doing something very similar to what you propose quite profitably in the form of online mastering. Ask yourself why people choose to use online mastering, or any other outsourced mastering solution. They do it because it gives them access to someone with good ears and (generally speaking) great tools. If you get your music back and something isn't right, you contact the mastering vendor and say great job but could you tweak this and change that and the vendor sends another copy. It works just fine for outsourced mastering. Why wouldn't that work for outsourced mixing?

Then you have the advantage of allowing the selected mix engineer to use any and all tools he or she has available. More importantly, you then allow the selected mix engineer to use the particular set of tools he or she is most comfortable working with. And if you or the client wants something tweaks, you shoot and email and they run the changes and you get what you get. Remember, this is a low cost alternative. If the client wants more control, they client is more than welcome to go book time in a full blown studio and do their project there at 10x the price. 

That's my opinion on it. I sense your focus on this is more for benefit to the artist community than to create any kind of winning business model. But if the business model isn't good, it won't fly. And if it doesn't fly, no one in the artist community will benefit. And in my opinion, taking out the requirement to return projects in sonar format using only common plugs from a pre-defined list is a much more viable business model. 

I think your business venture would be far more profitable to both you and the local bands by: 1) recording stems and a rough stereo mix at the live venue, 2) offer the rough stereo mix on a memory stick for sale during the set or concert and 3) offer the band a final mix for them to sell through a website or present to prospective venues.

I just wanted to say I am reading every response and definitely appreciate all the different insights, opinions, and ideas.  I don't know where this may lead -- possibly nowhere.  But I can have a much more intelligent conversation about it now.
 
Thanks, all.

I've never liked the idea of a flat rate for services. Most everyone around here charges by the hour. 
If I fuss about learning how to do something new, I don't charge for that, But I've never had a problem cranking out completed albums or one offs charging per hour. 
I often wondered about working remotely for clients. But then I figure the wide world of the internet is overloaded with similar services so it would be impossible to get a foot in the door. 

HI:)
 
What I can best, is classical stuff, especially voices, unplugged instruments and old school Rock/Jazz. Techno or other music like that is not my world, I'm a mixer since 1986.....so If you need someone for this kind of music, we can try:)
 
Greetz;)
Bassman.
 

Wouldn't it be simpler and more efficient just to forward on the change request to the person who did the mix? They did the mix, they know the mix. They would be the best person available to make any changes to said mix.

cparmerlee
 
Possibly, but the client might want to be present for the final edits.

Then the client is more than welcome to do their project in a studio that is setup with the proper facilities, equipment, paid staff, liability insurance and business licenses to handle that sort of thing. And they are more than welcome to pay the rate which generally goes along with having all that stuff.
 
You're trying to offer a low cost alternative for bands and artists who could not otherwise afford to produce quality recordings of their music correct? Go to a soup kitchen and ask them how often they have filet minion on the menu.

No lack of respect toward anyone was implied nor is any required. Soup kitchens don't serve filet minion because they can't afford to do that and stay on budget. Doesn't mean they don't want to serve it, I'm sure most would love to if they could. Business is business. Like I said earlier, its great that you want to help the community by offering a low cost alternative. But if your business model isn't sustainable, the business goes away. And if the business goes away, no one benefits.

IMHO you're adding a lot of complexity and inviting a ton of head aches and extra time investment to something you're designing to be a low budget, low margin product. I'm not saying its impossible to do that profitably, but it certainly does add some extra challenge. I'm just big on simplifying things like that I guess. I wish you best of luck with it though. It could be a terrific thing if you can make it fly.

All of tlw's comments reflect my own experience working with young/inexperienced musicians and bands. In their head, they sound awesome. And garbage in, garbage out is the last thing they want to hear when they complain that you didn't make their drummer's $39 snare with heads that haven't been changed since 1971 sound as good as the snare Bonham played on Zeppelin III.
 
A quick and dirty (but otherwise clean and decent sounding) live recording was the proposed premise in the first post. You want the bass and kick a little less in your face because that's your perception of how your band is supposed to sound? No prob, email the mix engineer and revised copy will be delivered in a day or two. 

But invite them in for the final mix session and next thing you know, you're spending 45 minutes with drum replacer because the kick and snare are ok but I'd like it better if the kick had more slap and if the snare was deeper, and oh can we pull the acoustic back a bit during the first verse but make it just a tad more up front during the chorus and then can you pan the rhythm guitar more toward center during the intro and solo, but not dead center, just closer to the center yada yada yada. IMO that's not what was originally proposed and its also why recording studios cost what they cost.
 
It'd be great to be able to offer that level of service to everyone for pennies on the dollar. But if you do, you'll either end up operating at a loss or you'll end up using mix engineers who are worth only what you can afford to pay them. 

There's a sign that hangs in the lobby where I work. Good Fast Cheap, pick any two. When it comes to certain things these days, it really ought to read pick any one.

tlw does have a point. I have been involved in both live album releases that were not *cough* true to the original live recordings and have also been involved where the studio mix engineer had only sat through one live gig and created a sound a million miles away from the raw energy of the live set.
To deliver an economical service, it would help to have some guidance as to what the end product should resemble as long as turd polishing is not expected. and as posted above, tweak requests (if reasonable) could be fed back to whoever is mixing. Having musicians in the studio when not charging an hourly rate is a loss maker for sure.

What are you thinking as far as prices go?