Beeps: Just read your last long post. Well said. Just remember, this stuff will always be subjective once you get the blatant issues out of the way. It's ok to be you and do what you feel is best. This is why we have mixes from people that sound so different. It's good you want grit in your mixes. However, the idea should be to try and get things clear first...then add the grit. And once you get a handle on everything, you might even add the grit destructively to your mixes...which is ok too as long as you know how to handle it. Like I said...crawl before you run brother.
 
This low end mud you're referring to on drums and guitars....you have to know where the mud is. Just high passing can sometimes hurt you as it can take out the GOOD stuff too if you're not careful. You need to first determine if there is mud and then find out where it is. Most times with samples, you can high pass selectively and then pull out some of the other nasty stuff if need be. But it's always different and depends on the kit you use. Personally, I think this layering thing is where the problem may be.
 
Try working with one good drum kit, 2 rhythm guitars and a lead guitar. Go for less is more and see what you can do there. See man, the key with layering is...you MUST gear the instruments to be orchestration pieces. Meaning, if you use 4-6 guitars, they all have to be eq'd differently to support each other and they can't be clones. They must be physically played or all you do is add to the mayhem of noise...in a bad way. I say keep it simple and lets learn how to deal with this stuff and do some "sound identifying". This will be much easier with less instrumentation. Once you learn what constitutes a good, solid sound, then you play with the orchestration pieces.
 
For example, an old song here...but check out Creed's "Overcome" when you get a minute. What I like about that song is how controlled the low end is as well as how the guitars are layered and it has a really good drum sound. When the middle of the song comes about and there are just two guitars, you hear how much the layering has made a difference. I hate that middle section guitar tone. It's so thin, raspy and uggh...but man, when the others hit in the chorus, it sounds amazing and full. So the key with layers is you have to be able to eq each part to make a difference for the better.
 
You also want to use a totally different sound too so it adds to the layer. Again, no cloning. As soon as you clone parts, you're out of the layer mode because it's the same exact part being played unless you time adjust it or move it a few ticks etc. Even there, the layered effect is much more dominant when you physically play the parts as opposed to cloning.
 
With your drums, you can get away with layering and hybridding. BUT...like the guitars, try to stay away from that for right now. Let's get a good mix up in its infant stage so we can check it out further and see what you're getting out of the gate. With drums, I like to layer when I hear something in a drum instrument that is a one trick pony. Meaning, some kick drums just have this awesome thud to them. No matter what you do, you can't get the right beater attack out of them...so heck, you just add another that DOES have some beater attack, and you mix the two together. Same with snares. You may get a snare that has a big sound, but it just doesn't crack hard enough nor does it have enough sustain. So you add in a pic snare or something with a bit of "ting" and resonance to the big snare, and you're golden.
 
A note on cymbals: Remember that they are percussive instruments...they should never dominate. Our ears gravitate towards bass and high end at times. Thus, you sometimes have a lot of bass in a mix or excessive highs while stripping out mids because we think we are cleaning up the mix. The mids make it big and have body...as long as we don't over-do it and congest the mix with mids.
 
But cymbals should just be heard enough to where you never question "did I hear that?" as long as they don't dominate. Hats will always be the loudest of the cymbal family, but you have to be careful there because the last thing you want is tssssss tssssss tsssss all over the song. The most important part to remember about cymbals, is the opposite of what we do with bass. I'll explain...
 
There are times when you may need more high end in the cymbals. When that's the case, you always pull down the fader when increasing any high end. You have to determine whether or not to raise the fader, lower the fader, raise the high end or lower the high end. This is as difficult as raising the low on a bass, or removing some low end and just dropping the bass fader. Most times, the best choice is to lower the eq you are questioning and raise the fader because little things like that (which can become big annoying things if you're not careful) can actually be fixed via mastering if they aren't too jacked up.
 
You made a mention about your faders nearly being all the way up or something? Before I mix something, I zero everything out to off and start instrument at a time. When I do this, my instrument levels start out at about -10 dB peak per instrument and my faders are usually under unity/0/center position. If you find you are way low when you are at unity (in the center of the fader) you probably need more level from the drum sampler output. Anything I record audio wise goes in at -6 dB peak so I'm usually in good shape there. But if you are seeing low levels, you probably need to make adjustments in your drum program.
 
For drums I like to use a little template that sort of makes me do what a live soundman would do. For example, I create this little project one time that has 8 kick hits, 8 snare hits, etc until all the drums are done. Then I play the entire kit. When I know what drum module I am going to use for a project, I create it in this little project and then set up all the levels in the drum program as well as fader levels and gains, pans etc. When this is done, I save the drum template for that drum module. So when I go back into the real project that needs drums, I bring that drum instrument template in, and I have a good starting point. Once you do this one time for each module, you can just bring the drum modules of your choice into ANY project and you're already in good shape with only subtle tweaks to make.
 
Anyway, keep some of this in mind and know that I'm really proud of you for taking this as far as you have. It only gets better from here brother. And nothing you've done should ever be considered "Stupid". We all learn every day. We try things....that's the fun of it...trial and error. I'm all about that. I can't even tell you what some of the theory in recording is called. If you put me up against a new Full Sail grad and we get quizzed on terms, I lose hands down. I'm talking obliterated. LOL! If you put me up against that person in a mix situation, I'm either right with them or teach them something about being in the field for the years I've been at it...so trial and error is great. We just have to make sure we truly learn from the trial as well as the error. :) I'll be looking for more stuff from you. Got the pm also...thanks man.
 
-Danny
 

Danny Danzi
Beeps: Just read your last long post. Well said. Just remember, this stuff will always be subjective once you get the blatant issues out of the way. It's ok to be you and do what you feel is best. This is why we have mixes from people that sound so different. It's good you want grit in your mixes. However, the idea should be to try and get things clear first...then add the grit. And once you get a handle on everything, you might even add the grit destructively to your mixes...which is ok too as long as you know how to handle it. Like I said...crawl before you run brother.
 
This low end mud you're referring to on drums and guitars....you have to know where the mud is. Just high passing can sometimes hurt you as it can take out the GOOD stuff too if you're not careful. You need to first determine if there is mud and then find out where it is. Most times with samples, you can high pass selectively and then pull out some of the other nasty stuff if need be. But it's always different and depends on the kit you use. Personally, I think this layering thing is where the problem may be.
 
Try working with one good drum kit, 2 rhythm guitars and a lead guitar. Go for less is more and see what you can do there. See man, the key with layering is...you MUST gear the instruments to be orchestration pieces. Meaning, if you use 4-6 guitars, they all have to be eq'd differently to support each other and they can't be clones. They must be physically played or all you do is add to the mayhem of noise...in a bad way. I say keep it simple and lets learn how to deal with this stuff and do some "sound identifying". This will be much easier with less instrumentation. Once you learn what constitutes a good, solid sound, then you play with the orchestration pieces.
 
For example, an old song here...but check out Creed's "Overcome" when you get a minute. What I like about that song is how controlled the low end is as well as how the guitars are layered and it has a really good drum sound. When the middle of the song comes about and there are just two guitars, you hear how much the layering has made a difference. I hate that middle section guitar tone. It's so thin, raspy and uggh...but man, when the others hit in the chorus, it sounds amazing and full. So the key with layers is you have to be able to eq each part to make a difference for the better.
 
You also want to use a totally different sound too so it adds to the layer. Again, no cloning. As soon as you clone parts, you're out of the layer mode because it's the same exact part being played unless you time adjust it or move it a few ticks etc. Even there, the layered effect is much more dominant when you physically play the parts as opposed to cloning.
 
With your drums, you can get away with layering and hybridding. BUT...like the guitars, try to stay away from that for right now. Let's get a good mix up in its infant stage so we can check it out further and see what you're getting out of the gate. With drums, I like to layer when I hear something in a drum instrument that is a one trick pony. Meaning, some kick drums just have this awesome thud to them. No matter what you do, you can't get the right beater attack out of them...so heck, you just add another that DOES have some beater attack, and you mix the two together. Same with snares. You may get a snare that has a big sound, but it just doesn't crack hard enough nor does it have enough sustain. So you add in a pic snare or something with a bit of "ting" and resonance to the big snare, and you're golden.
 
A note on cymbals: Remember that they are percussive instruments...they should never dominate. Our ears gravitate towards bass and high end at times. Thus, you sometimes have a lot of bass in a mix or excessive highs while stripping out mids because we think we are cleaning up the mix. The mids make it big and have body...as long as we don't over-do it and congest the mix with mids.
 
But cymbals should just be heard enough to where you never question "did I hear that?" as long as they don't dominate. Hats will always be the loudest of the cymbal family, but you have to be careful there because the last thing you want is tssssss tssssss tsssss all over the song. The most important part to remember about cymbals, is the opposite of what we do with bass. I'll explain...
 
There are times when you may need more high end in the cymbals. When that's the case, you always pull down the fader when increasing any high end. You have to determine whether or not to raise the fader, lower the fader, raise the high end or lower the high end. This is as difficult as raising the low on a bass, or removing some low end and just dropping the bass fader. Most times, the best choice is to lower the eq you are questioning and raise the fader because little things like that (which can become big annoying things if you're not careful) can actually be fixed via mastering if they aren't too jacked up.
 
You made a mention about your faders nearly being all the way up or something? Before I mix something, I zero everything out to off and start instrument at a time. When I do this, my instrument levels start out at about -10 dB peak per instrument and my faders are usually under unity/0/center position. If you find you are way low when you are at unity (in the center of the fader) you probably need more level from the drum sampler output. Anything I record audio wise goes in at -6 dB peak so I'm usually in good shape there. But if you are seeing low levels, you probably need to make adjustments in your drum program.
 
For drums I like to use a little template that sort of makes me do what a live soundman would do. For example, I create this little project one time that has 8 kick hits, 8 snare hits, etc until all the drums are done. Then I play the entire kit. When I know what drum module I am going to use for a project, I create it in this little project and then set up all the levels in the drum program as well as fader levels and gains, pans etc. When this is done, I save the drum template for that drum module. So when I go back into the real project that needs drums, I bring that drum instrument template in, and I have a good starting point. Once you do this one time for each module, you can just bring the drum modules of your choice into ANY project and you're already in good shape with only subtle tweaks to make.
 
Anyway, keep some of this in mind and know that I'm really proud of you for taking this as far as you have. It only gets better from here brother. And nothing you've done should ever be considered "Stupid". We all learn every day. We try things....that's the fun of it...trial and error. I'm all about that. I can't even tell you what some of the theory in recording is called. If you put me up against a new Full Sail grad and we get quizzed on terms, I lose hands down. I'm talking obliterated. LOL! If you put me up against that person in a mix situation, I'm either right with them or teach them something about being in the field for the years I've been at it...so trial and error is great. We just have to make sure we truly learn from the trial as well as the error. :) I'll be looking for more stuff from you. Got the pm also...thanks man.
 
-Danny
 

I've only read the first quarter of this Danny but I just wanted quickly say this is PERFECT and exactly what I was looking for. You have already confirmed a whole pile of stuff that had been eating at my brain and I am glad that I wasn't just spinning my own wheels.
 
This track will get one more go through to do things I stated but you are right that it is time to move on and make sense form the START of the recording. This was mess before it got out of the gate and I know that now and suspected it back then. There is already a new tune in the works but I just have to wait for my finger to heal because I have been spending too much time in front of the computer and not enough time playing. I wore off a chunk of my finger writing one of my slippery rhythms. lol
 
Anyway... I'm just gonna keep reading everything that's been said here and stop posting epic rants because I think I've got it now (well the beginnings of it all).
 
Definitely baby steps. I'll do you proud man. You'll see.
 
Also I will definitely be trying to put together some more of that other stuff as I've cracked the codes to the remaining diatonics and have some(hopefully) helpful additions to what I have already sent you. It will take some time to put together though. Cheers and thanks again.

Beepster

Danny Danzi
Beeps: Just read your last long post. Well said. Just remember, this stuff will always be subjective once you get the blatant issues out of the way. It's ok to be you and do what you feel is best. This is why we have mixes from people that sound so different. It's good you want grit in your mixes. However, the idea should be to try and get things clear first...then add the grit. And once you get a handle on everything, you might even add the grit destructively to your mixes...which is ok too as long as you know how to handle it. Like I said...crawl before you run brother.
 
This low end mud you're referring to on drums and guitars....you have to know where the mud is. Just high passing can sometimes hurt you as it can take out the GOOD stuff too if you're not careful. You need to first determine if there is mud and then find out where it is. Most times with samples, you can high pass selectively and then pull out some of the other nasty stuff if need be. But it's always different and depends on the kit you use. Personally, I think this layering thing is where the problem may be.
 
Try working with one good drum kit, 2 rhythm guitars and a lead guitar. Go for less is more and see what you can do there. See man, the key with layering is...you MUST gear the instruments to be orchestration pieces. Meaning, if you use 4-6 guitars, they all have to be eq'd differently to support each other and they can't be clones. They must be physically played or all you do is add to the mayhem of noise...in a bad way. I say keep it simple and lets learn how to deal with this stuff and do some "sound identifying". This will be much easier with less instrumentation. Once you learn what constitutes a good, solid sound, then you play with the orchestration pieces.
 
For example, an old song here...but check out Creed's "Overcome" when you get a minute. What I like about that song is how controlled the low end is as well as how the guitars are layered and it has a really good drum sound. When the middle of the song comes about and there are just two guitars, you hear how much the layering has made a difference. I hate that middle section guitar tone. It's so thin, raspy and uggh...but man, when the others hit in the chorus, it sounds amazing and full. So the key with layers is you have to be able to eq each part to make a difference for the better.
 
You also want to use a totally different sound too so it adds to the layer. Again, no cloning. As soon as you clone parts, you're out of the layer mode because it's the same exact part being played unless you time adjust it or move it a few ticks etc. Even there, the layered effect is much more dominant when you physically play the parts as opposed to cloning.
 
With your drums, you can get away with layering and hybridding. BUT...like the guitars, try to stay away from that for right now. Let's get a good mix up in its infant stage so we can check it out further and see what you're getting out of the gate. With drums, I like to layer when I hear something in a drum instrument that is a one trick pony. Meaning, some kick drums just have this awesome thud to them. No matter what you do, you can't get the right beater attack out of them...so heck, you just add another that DOES have some beater attack, and you mix the two together. Same with snares. You may get a snare that has a big sound, but it just doesn't crack hard enough nor does it have enough sustain. So you add in a pic snare or something with a bit of "ting" and resonance to the big snare, and you're golden.
 
A note on cymbals: Remember that they are percussive instruments...they should never dominate. Our ears gravitate towards bass and high end at times. Thus, you sometimes have a lot of bass in a mix or excessive highs while stripping out mids because we think we are cleaning up the mix. The mids make it big and have body...as long as we don't over-do it and congest the mix with mids.
 
But cymbals should just be heard enough to where you never question "did I hear that?" as long as they don't dominate. Hats will always be the loudest of the cymbal family, but you have to be careful there because the last thing you want is tssssss tssssss tsssss all over the song. The most important part to remember about cymbals, is the opposite of what we do with bass. I'll explain...
 
There are times when you may need more high end in the cymbals. When that's the case, you always pull down the fader when increasing any high end. You have to determine whether or not to raise the fader, lower the fader, raise the high end or lower the high end. This is as difficult as raising the low on a bass, or removing some low end and just dropping the bass fader. Most times, the best choice is to lower the eq you are questioning and raise the fader because little things like that (which can become big annoying things if you're not careful) can actually be fixed via mastering if they aren't too jacked up.
 
You made a mention about your faders nearly being all the way up or something? Before I mix something, I zero everything out to off and start instrument at a time. When I do this, my instrument levels start out at about -10 dB peak per instrument and my faders are usually under unity/0/center position. If you find you are way low when you are at unity (in the center of the fader) you probably need more level from the drum sampler output. Anything I record audio wise goes in at -6 dB peak so I'm usually in good shape there. But if you are seeing low levels, you probably need to make adjustments in your drum program.
 
For drums I like to use a little template that sort of makes me do what a live soundman would do. For example, I create this little project one time that has 8 kick hits, 8 snare hits, etc until all the drums are done. Then I play the entire kit. When I know what drum module I am going to use for a project, I create it in this little project and then set up all the levels in the drum program as well as fader levels and gains, pans etc. When this is done, I save the drum template for that drum module. So when I go back into the real project that needs drums, I bring that drum instrument template in, and I have a good starting point. Once you do this one time for each module, you can just bring the drum modules of your choice into ANY project and you're already in good shape with only subtle tweaks to make.
 
Anyway, keep some of this in mind and know that I'm really proud of you for taking this as far as you have. It only gets better from here brother. And nothing you've done should ever be considered "Stupid". We all learn every day. We try things....that's the fun of it...trial and error. I'm all about that. I can't even tell you what some of the theory in recording is called. If you put me up against a new Full Sail grad and we get quizzed on terms, I lose hands down. I'm talking obliterated. LOL! If you put me up against that person in a mix situation, I'm either right with them or teach them something about being in the field for the years I've been at it...so trial and error is great. We just have to make sure we truly learn from the trial as well as the error. :) I'll be looking for more stuff from you. Got the pm also...thanks man.
 
-Danny
 

I've only read the first quarter of this Danny but I just wanted quickly say this is PERFECT and exactly what I was looking for. You have already confirmed a whole pile of stuff that had been eating at my brain and I am glad that I wasn't just spinning my own wheels.
 
This track will get one more go through to do things I stated but you are right that it is time to move on and make sense form the START of the recording. This was mess before it got out of the gate and I know that now and suspected it back then. There is already a new tune in the works but I just have to wait for my finger to heal because I have been spending too much time in front of the computer and not enough time playing. I wore off a chunk of my finger writing one of my slippery rhythms. lol
 
Anyway... I'm just gonna keep reading everything that's been said here and stop posting epic rants because I think I've got it now (well the beginnings of it all).
 
Definitely baby steps. I'll do you proud man. You'll see.
 
Also I will definitely be trying to put together some more of that other stuff as I've cracked the codes to the remaining diatonics and have some(hopefully) helpful additions to what I have already sent you. It will take some time to put together though. Cheers and thanks again.

Way to go Beeps...not a doubt in my mind. Yeah I knew about the money thing...which I'm really sorry to hear once again. Unfortunately, some of this stuff is money based that helps with the end result. Who knows, maybe ole Obi will see this and send you a Christmas present behind the scenes. Wishful thinking I know. :) Yeah, I should probably shut up too as I've went pretty nuts with novels as well. Then again, that's what this is for brother. We're using Sonar, we're talking shop, we're helping each other and were bonding as friends. Those that want to read will read, those that don't will just move on. :) I'm gonna go grab a power nap...long night ahead. Catch up with you (and everyone else!) soon. This has been a blast of a thread for me....glad you started it beeps. And thanks for the theory stuff. :)
 
-Danny

You have to keep a constant eye out for VRM Boxes on sale Beeps...I've seen them reduced a few times. Someone posted that they were on sale for $50 recently but when I clicked on the link the offer was over...too bad I couldn't have given you a heads up on that one in time! Ah well, no doubt somewhere will have them on sale again sometime. I've got one and it makes a real difference if you're in a mainly-headphones situation like me (when they renovated my apartment they appear to have taken all of the insulation out of the walls or something - cheap ass cowboys my landlord works with). Obviously nothing's going to be a substitute for a treated room, but hey I've heard some people say a set of good cans and a VRM box is better than good monitors in a problem room. For me, the best thing about them is being able to hear my mix in a number of different situations at the click of a mouse.

Well that was longer than intended. Whoops.
 
That'll get a lol...
 
lol
 

Sorry to jump on this thread on the tail end (been following along...), but I am intrigued and totally shocked at the VRM that has been mentioned...what ELSE is out there that I know nothing about???
 
It's taken a while for me to learn my (pretty-poorly-treated) 12x11' home studio room going through pre-lawsuit Behringer Truth monitors, and I've been relying on graphical analyzers and lots of car listens to get my mixes better.
 
On a scale of 1 to I NEED TO OWN THIS...how highly recommended do VRM users rate the product?  The reviews seem awesome...and gearslutz has its normal share of skeptics.  I trust my Sonar peeps...  ;)
 
Thanks for any opinions!
 
p.s. That Greg Howe tune (and the singer) are TOTALLY RAD!!!

caminitic
Sorry to jump on this thread on the tail end (been following along...), but I am intrigued and totally shocked at the VRM that has been mentioned...what ELSE is out there that I know nothing about???
 
It's taken a while for me to learn my (pretty-poorly-treated) 12x11' home studio room going through pre-lawsuit Behringer Truth monitors, and I've been relying on graphical analyzers and lots of car listens to get my mixes better.
 
On a scale of 1 to I NEED TO OWN THIS...how highly recommended do VRM users rate the product?  The reviews seem awesome...and gearslutz has its normal share of skeptics.  I trust my Sonar peeps...  ;)
 
Thanks for any opinions!
 
p.s. That Greg Howe tune (and the singer) are TOTALLY RAD!!!

 
I think the thing to remember about the VRM box is that it's not a miracle solution, and you shouldn't expect it to be. I don't think it accurately recreates the experience of listening on real speakers, but it's a hell of a lot more like listening on real speakers than listening on headphones, put it that way. Basically you have three rooms to choose from with a selection of speakers in each. So you have a treated studio with various high end monitor simulations (including an Auratone simulation) , then you have a bedroom with various consumer speakers (including crappy laptop speakers) and a living room with hi-fi speakers, TV speakers etc. 
 
What it's good for is checking your mix in a wide variety of situations and speaker types. You're not going to do any detailed listening on them (might as well just use straight cans for that), but from listening to the mix on a selection of different speakers you can quickly hear and identify potential problems with it, particularly things like muddy low-mids and boomy basses. The theory being, if you can remove these problems on all of the speaker simulations, there's a good chance that the mix is going to translate well to real world speakers. Not a credible substitute for good monitors in a well treated room of course, but a hell of a lot better than just mixing in cans, and even if you do have good monitors and a good room, it can't hurt to listen through the VRM box to get a ballpark idea of what it's going to sound like on other systems without having to burn CD's and drive to your friend's house etc. 

Hey Beepster... I wanted to wait for you and Danny to interact here before throwing this in... and your interaction will help others a LOT. And folks like sharke chiming in is even more helpful (especially to folks like me who are trying to learn). I first want to thank all of you for allowing the rest of us to read this... this is truly invaluable!
 
I really wish I could search these forums better to find this post... but a while ago, I contested Beepster's comment on classifying himself as a "beginner/intermediate"... and got the reply of (paraphrasing)... "If you have finished anything in the past year, then you have done more than I." The fact is, I haven't!! And the "mixing conundrum" is a big part of this....
 
(Unfortunately,) my "career" has sent me down a path which has made music (always) take a sideline to "life," yet my passion (through and through) has always been music. As I have evolved, I will default to rhythm guitar and vocals, which I have often considered a "dime a dozen," and even when I am complimented, I often shrug it off and walk away... even simple things like doing karaoke, I will often not participate because I can do "at home" as I please... and a local pub owner chased me into the parking lot one night asking me to sing, I told him this and he replied "But when you sing this place is packed... they come here to see YOU." Even when I have done "open mic" nights, I often "fade away" but ran into a guy who used to run them one day and he said "Yeah, this guy needs to perform some more."
 
Enough BS about me... I just wanted to interject a few quick points:
 
1) I very much respect the aspect of learning, and this post has impressed me a lot... you are learning, and courageous enough to learn even more by sharing... NEVER be intimidated by this
2) I feel you have learned far more than I... I read/understand, and screw around with "concepts" but do not feel I understand the application
3) The benefit to everyone reading this post is invaluable... for ME, Danny taking the time to post the detail that he did is impressive... I think many would agree here... anything he has to say I will read and try to understand well (as will a LOT of the regulars here)
 
Bottom line... you are learning, when many of us are trying to, but not delivering.... which brings a comment I say often to others into sharp focus... "Those who try and fail, learn, and persist, will often overshadow those who shy away from the 'spotlight.' That unto itself demands respect, and will earn it."
 
Just so that is clear... I wanted to interject into this thread that your "learning" benefits us ALL.... no "rant required"... those of us who do not learn are only crippling ourselves!

Everything just sounds sooo much crisper and defined.  This is also a reminder for me that my guitar playing sucks!

Thanks, dub. I really was mostly trying to get some clarity and separation happening but pushed things a little too far. Just taking a second look at the project now. I have the "mastered" imported with the level adjusted to match the master bus levels in the project to try and hear how much the "mastering" job destroyed things.
 
@sven... I'll take a look. Seems to me that most of the work being done by the VRM is with its VST. Not sure how necessary the box actually is if you already have a good interface.

I have updated this so you guys can check out the premaster version of this. Here it is...
 
https://soundcloud.com/user432042324/beeps-creep-remix-premaster
 
I really REALLY screwed up with the master. I still think that many of the points made still apply and will give it another crack but this should be far less abrasive. I have not done ANYTHING to this (not even a limter/maximizer). This is the pure mix before I "mastered" it.
 
I am sorry for wasting so much of everyone's time with that monstrosity I posted. I really am not sure what I was thinking.
 
Cheers.

mettelus
Being premastered, the tracks sound good just being exported for the most part. The cymbals still dominate, and in some passages the lead guitar is being overshadowed by the rest of the mix (~1:15 area).
 
I think to clarify the "babbling" out of my earlier point might be better stated with, "This thread is of interest to many folks as it goes beyond the "nuts and bolts" of X3 and more into "application" of X3. Many of the threads here are more technical, and less "art" so this one attracts attention (for good reasons)."
 
What would be most interesting to me would be to have Danny do a simple master of this and walk us through the "how and why." (Of course that is far-fetched and presumptuous, but would help many). Actually to that same point, Craig's thread about doing a video may run down this same path (I am hoping anyway).

If I mastered it, I'd still fail. Could I make it better? Yeah, but Beeps would make it even better if the mix is handled the right way. We have compression on the entire mix making the cymbals last longer than they should and this is a no no to me.
 
Next, if I low passed the entire mix to try and take some of the sssssssss out, though it would make a major difference for the better, our snare drum loses all its crack as it has none as is and is very dull and boxy, our bass guitar will turn to "more felt than heard", the guitars may get too boxy.....there are just a whole slew of things that get jacked by trying to fix a bad mix. I can't uncompress regardless of what some of those tools claim they can do....and I don't have any control over the instrumentation.
 
So I'd not fair well here and Craig creating a video doesn't help either. As much as we all love and respect the guy for all that he has given us past and present, the benefit of a video from him would show people "you can master in Sonar" and would show others "here are are a few ways to go about it."
 
What that DOESN'T do for the people that shouldn't even be watching a mastering video at this point.....is it doesn't tell them "your mix needs work, stay away from mastering right now. Learn how to mix, use the tools you have and learn how to create music that doesn't need to rely on anything before you decide to dive into the mastering realm."
 
That would be my advice to anyone and everyone. If you can't mix a song that sounds good everywhere without attempting to master it, work on your mixing skills. My little Evergreen clip could use mastering, but it doesn't cry for it if I'm a bedroom recording guy just trying to have fun making music. In beeps case, mastering ruined his mix further and wasted more of his time. That is not a cut on beeps or anyone in his position.
 
What that tells us is....people are running and jumping around too fast and miss the obvious. I hear songs on the songs forum everyday that are ruined because people are just trying too hard to master them and make them loud. They are bringing in artifacts, bad distortion, clipping artifacts that may not trip off their meters, dulling of the material due to buying into these analog gizmo's that sound like @ss and other things that are just degrading music way more than people can believe.
 
If I shared some of my personal stuff with you guys and showed you my templates as well as the effects I use, I think you'd be pretty surprised at how little can give you an acceptable sound. Mind you, I'm NOT any great engineer nor am I getting major label quality and I'm harder on myself than you can believe. But I'm consistent and put out acceptable material whether it be on a stock Dell using a Realtek and ASIO4ALL drivers, or my full recording rig at my studio. This is where we all need to be for starters. To be able to put out acceptable material that does not have blatant errors. No one has to rival a major label. When we can say something subjective about a mix, that means the mix is good. Saying "I don't like that guitar sound" or "your drum sound is not to my liking" isn't a bad thing if the mix is presentable, see my point?
 
When we get into subjective verses blatantly obvious and annoying, subjective means "pass" no matter what to me. I can't stomach some of the old YES mixes. I love the guys, love their playing...but man, some of those Steve Howe guitar tones are like nails on a chalk-board with the dirtier stuff. That doesn't mean it's bad and I may be the only person alive to feel that way. It's subjective, yet sort of blatantly obvious to my sensitive ears. But that still doesn't make it bad.
 
Now if a majority of people all report the same thing, there is cause for investigation at all times even if you may not agree with what was said. This is when the person being critiqued may need to be taught what to listen for. Even if we can tell/show them why something may annoy us. They may not realize it...yet once they do, they learn. I had a guy for the longest time confuse high end in a guitar sound for distortion. He just didn't know that there was a difference between distortion sizzle and high end sizzle.
 
So anyway, I think it will always be in the best interest of this forum on the whole, to always go after the best mix possible before they consider any mastering. 9 out of 10 times, the mastering people are doing around here is killing their material. I keep on saying....when you export a song that is a finished mix, how do you even know what to do to master it? What do you do, look at a graph and try to make it look nice? This is where everyone is missing the boat with mastering.
 
I'm not saying it can't and shouldn't be done. I'm saying, 95% of the DIY's don't know how to tell what to master and how much to master it. If the song needed work, would you press the export button?
 
"Well, ok smart guy, how do YOU know what you need Danny? You listen to the same song 3000 times like the rest of us...you recorded and mixed on the same speakers....when you have that export in your hands, where do you start?"
 
I hate when you guys question me....grrr! LOL!!! :) The truth there is....
 
1. I'd most likely never master my own material that will be for sale.
 
2. When I master my own stuff, I do NOT listen to it on the monitors it was recorded and mixed on. You have no idea how much of a difference this can make for the better. As a matter of fact, sometimes I master at my studio if I have recorded something at my house and vice versa. The other set of monitors I master on are as good as the ones I recorded and mixed on and every bit as accurate. This is huge at determining what you may need.
 
3. I get my mix to the point of being so close to what I want, the little bit of eq, compression and limiting I put on my own stuff is so minimal, the only difference you might notice on one of my songs from pre to post would be a little more low end, a slight sparkle of highs and a bit more volume. I go for a neutral mix so when I master my stuff, it's like using the fine tuners on a Floyd Rose. You know....you tune a guitar with the tuning pegs as close as you can, then you lock the Floyd nut, then the fine tuners take over. That's how I look at my mixes and masters. For clients, it depends on what I hear when they send them to me. But I never use the same rack of mastering tools. I base my decisions on what they have given me.
 
To Beeps: in a sense, you're getting an old sound with all the high end. That's not a bad thing...but low passing cures this mix right up due to the cymbals. BUT...low passing will affect the cut of the snare and the guitars. Meaning, the snare will be too flat sounding and boxy...which is what may happen to the guitars. So my advice would be to try lowering the cymbals a bit, low pass the cymbals a bit....try working on the snare by removing some mids or adding a little high end depending on what sounds better so the snare doesn't go all boxy....low pass the guitars and they should be fine. The kick could use a little more thump, but that will depend on what you want your bass to do.
 
If you want a clicky kick, you can have a bass with more low end push in it. If you want a more percussive bass with a bit more high end clack, you can go with a kick that has more low end thump. You'll need to decide where you want the thump frequencies to be on those instruments. Other than that, do away with the pumping on the mix. Even though the pump isn't too bad, the compression or whatever that is...is making the cymbals resonate longer than they should. This is one of the artifacts of parallel compression over-use which makes me hate that technique so bad in the wrong hands. I'm not saying you p-comped, I'm saying this is one of the artifacts people get if they use too much of it.
 
Hope some of this helps....keep at it and don't be hard on yourself. We all have to learn....props to you for putting your stuff out there to create a discussion such as this. This thread alone is worth some big bucks if you look at all the info everyone has given from a consulting stand-point. Proof of how great this forum and it's members are. :)
 
-Danny

This is much better. The drums could come up about 3db, maybe less. The snare could come up a bit more than the rest of the kit. Try the snare first. You may find that bringing the guitars, not the leads, down a bit can help rather than bringing up the drums. It's all confusing to me as well. I've been going through this as well so I know what your going through. The good news is we're getting better and this entry is much better than the first two.
 
When I make guitar parts like this, or similar since I don't usually play this style, I don't add reverb to the guitars or a miniscule amount. I'll have to post one for you to check out. I have a few before and afters.

Remember that you don't have to compress everything.
 
One way of working is to attempt to get a static fader mix, and listen for which instruments are still making you reach for the faders toturn up and down, and then compress those.
 
It's worth a try.

Yeah, there were things I left the compressors off of but I really needed some face time with compression because I had never really used them before. They did indeed help most of what I put them on but the cymbals were not done right. Honestly I was kind of at a loss as to HOW to compress cymbals. Everything else I had an equation for and knew what to listen for but I was kind of stabbing in the dark on that one. They at the very least need to be eased up on but I'll try just removing the compressors completely on the cymbals and let the compressor on the drum bus handle them. That is of course if I can get them to decay properly.
 
These are BFD/Platinum Samples/Gen 16 samples so they went into the project totally dry/unprocessed.