Visual Mixiing - No Sound

No, as you probably noticed if you cut -6db's at 250 in a track, it will not show up as that in the frequency analyzer. You need to mix with your ears and not eyes. Also, all genre's and all songs in genre's can have a different frequency spectrum field.
you use your ears to listen and your eyes to see. Were not making a picture, where making music. You could design a nice CD cover....
...

I knew I was asking for trouble on this one ! Please forget I even brought it up.

C'mon! Let's keep our eyes open. Of course you can fix your EQ-curves just basing on visual info, why not?! The result, of course, is different from the traditional methods.
Why not sculpt the curve to something funny and the try how it actually sounds.

Articles on creative composing have suggested methods like composing a MIDI-track in PRV only concentrating on how symmetric / asymmetric / beautiful the note patterns look in the piano roll. Weird and "unorthodox" methods are often the way to new, fresh ideas.

I certainly would not mix exclusively using only my eyes, but I certainly use them a lot. Seeing the wave form is essential for a lot of things. There are times when the sound is only a time key, and the visual outputs are the important part of the process.

So like everything in life, its not fully one or the other, although I suspect a blind man would do a better job of mixing than a deaf one.

I use Voxengo's SPAN to make sure my low-end is within proportions. My room is is largely untreated, and I've measured some pretty severe cancellations at 80hZ, 100Hz, and at least the 1st order harmonics above them.

Since 200 Hz falls into this trouble zone, I tend to build up in that area if I fail to visually check that energy distribution.

Until my time & budget allow for some proper room treatment, I use the spectrum analyzer to minimize those issues.

I learned this from a musician friend who records his band. As a lifelong rocker, who "hoped he'd die before he got old", he's pretty much fried most of his hearing above 2kHz. He mixes 'visually' without assistance, and his records sounds great. He could probably mix a record without monitors at all with the right meters & scopes.

I don't think its fari to completely dismiss that approach, I've seen it work. But I've also mixed in a properly tuned room, and I have to agree that whenever possible this is the way to go.

Thanks for the info, I'll give it a look.
Much appreciated.

After some time with Analyst, try the Nugen Audio 'Visualizer' and 'stereoizer' plugins for a wonderful suite of information (V) and application (S) tools. I could watch the stereo information from these two plugins all day long! Extremely helpful to analyse your reference CDs too.  

Seems ludicrous.  Like taking pictures using your sense of smell.

"that sushi sure did LOOK good......."

Everything happen in the brain , you mix in fact with your brain , the tools is your hear but your brain make a visual representation of what you hear (like mono , in the center for example) so your question is far for being stupid ....

If you're refering to mix usin anotha tool than your hear like plugins for exemple ....well it can help corallate a decision or for example compensate the humain hear limitation (low under30 noise artifact in sounds ....but never it can be the only thing , but one thing in a whole process ....