Making a mix good enough...

I find that it is very important to have a few variables in terms of monitors and phones etc. Firstly I get a good mix happening on my main speakers. But in addition to those I believe you need something else. I use a small mono speaker about the size of an Auratone. It is fed from both sides of the stereo mix and through an amp.

I spend quite a bit of time on the speaker and to be honest I would not know how to mix without it.  And turn it down too while you are listening. It shows up the critical balance of your mix. It just allows you to reset things so now you can hear things nice and evenly in the small speaker. When you switch back to your main monitors, the mix has not changed that much but now it satisfies both speakers. I find that headphones are good for hearing reverb detail and can keep you from over doing things in that area too.

Yamaha NS 10's are also great for translating out into the world too.

A good mix is something that transcends all the speakers and monitors it is being played on. If your mix varies a bit too much over different speakers then you have not got the mix right yet and you need to keep working on it. But eventually you will arrive there and it will start to sound good in many places and that is a good feeling.

Another good thing is to have great reference commercial material in the same genre as what you are working on so you can switch to it quickly and easily. And also make any reference material the same level as your mix so you are not tempted to push your mix to sound loud. (Calibrated monitor gain here) When you start comparing  your mix and commercial mixes, the speakers sort of disappear and become irrelevent.

A bunch of factors go into mixing - as the answers above show.

Translation.  Learn your main speakers and how they translate to other systems.  Having a 2nd set of speakers is critical - even a boom box works.  They don't even have to be in your mix room (tho that helps) - CDs are cheap and you can burn a copy of a mix.  Take it to the car, your home system, etc.  You'll figure out what sounds good on your main system that works on most other systems.  The kitchen rule works too.  Listen to your mix from another room and see if you can hear the lyrics, the lead, etc.

@

Jeff Evans


I find that it is very important to have a few variables in terms of monitors and phones etc. Firstly I get a good mix happening on my main speakers. But in addition to those I believe you need something else. I use a small mono speaker about the size of an Auratone. It is fed from both sides of the stereo mix and through an amp.

I spend quite a bit of time on the speaker and to be honest I would not know how to mix without it.  And turn it down too while you are listening. It shows up the critical balance of your mix. It just allows you to reset things so now you can hear things nice and evenly in the small speaker. When you switch back to your main monitors, the mix has not changed that much but now it satisfies both speakers. I find that headphones are good for hearing reverb detail and can keep you from over doing things in that area too.

Yamaha NS 10's are also great for translating out into the world too.

A good mix is something that transcends all the speakers and monitors it is being played on. If your mix varies a bit too much over different speakers then you have not got the mix right yet and you need to keep working on it. But eventually you will arrive there and it will start to sound good in many places and that is a good feeling.

Another good thing is to have great reference commercial material in the same genre as what you are working on so you can switch to it quickly and easily. And also make any reference material the same level as your mix so you are not tempted to push your mix to sound loud. (Calibrated monitor gain here) When you start comparing  your mix and commercial mixes, the speakers sort of disappear and become irrelevent.

Well said ;)

As I try to better myself at mixing, the one thing that comes through loud and clear to me is that acoustical recordings have a very different set of guidelines for mixing than soft synths/samplers, etc.
 
I'm by no means really good as I want to be yet, but I have noticed the more I focus on getting rid of the extremes (very lows, too much mids, very highs) the better things sound - and the more toward those commercial references they sound.
 
Those so-called "magic frequencies", while only guidelines for sure, are one of the most important aspects to be aware of.
 
Assuming one has proper monitoring facilities, tuned as best one can, the rest really is in learning about EQ and compression.    Tricks come in handy, yeah - but that's not going to be the crux of a mix.   So really honing one's skills at EQ and compression is the big deal I think.
 
As someone said to me, and I say often:  We have to fit a whole lot of frequencies in those little speakers (and earphones, etc).  Less really is more.
 
 

Guitarhacker


My thought is you want it as good as possible so that on the best speaker system it will sound really nice. You sure don't want to try to mix for a "sub par" listening experience.

If it sounds good on a nice system , while listening on a "cheap" system or mp3 ear buds..... it should still sound awesome.

If the bass is flabby on the cheap speakers, it is likely not sounding too good on the good system either.

I agree, but only when the mix is right.

I sadly learned the opposite the last three days of tenacious checking...When the mix was good on my bad headphones, the mix sounded very good on my main system, and on my better headphones (AKG 240 studio).

I suppose, though, that with much more experience, one can mix in good quality sound and it will be ok on any thing.

Thanks G.H.

gamblerschoice


When you start comparing  your mix and commercial mixes, the speakers sort of disappear and become irrelevant.

I think this is a very important observation.

Actually, the post title is deceptive in a way, since for most of us the mix is never "good enough". We throw everything in our arsenal at each song and, in the end, shrug our shoulders and admit that it is "as good as it gets". Then we post in the songs forum and get comments that suggest we missed the goal again, but only by "this much".

Just because you are playing through "cheap" or inferior speakers does not mean that the mix will sound weak or bad. Kinda like the discussion about the instrument quality as opposed to the talent of the musician. A gifted musician can turn a $29.99,  3/4 size starter guitar with year old strings into an ultra-expensive sounding hand-made piece made of the finest woods, simply by his expert handling and ability to pull the most out of the instrument in experienced hands.

When the mix is approached properly, and the attention to detail in all aspects becomes evident through the inaudible components of the true art of mixing and mastering, the speakers, bit rate, youtube/soundclick compression programs, all become irrelevant.

The mix is not dependant on the speakers, the speakers will translate the best of mixes to the best of their ability. They will also point out the obvious problems with the mediocre, or less than optimum mix.

Later
Albert

Thanks GamblersChoice,

Pure gold in what you say... I'll put something up as soon as I figure out how, for the good people in this forum to point things out.

I am not after the best either, I just want to get as close as possible to my own limitations.

ba_midi


As I try to better myself at mixing, the one thing that comes through loud and clear to me is that acoustical recordings have a very different set of guidelines for mixing than soft synths/samplers, etc.
 
I'm by no means really good as I want to be yet, but I have noticed the more I focus on getting rid of the extremes (very lows, too much mids, very highs) the better things sound - and the more toward those commercial references they sound.
 
Those so-called "magic frequencies", while only guidelines for sure, are one of the most important aspects to be aware of.
 
Assuming one has proper monitoring facilities, tuned as best one can, the rest really is in learning about EQ and compression.    Tricks come in handy, yeah - but that's not going to be the crux of a mix.   So really honing one's skills at EQ and compression is the big deal I think.
 
As someone said to me, and I say often:  We have to fit a whole lot of frequencies in those little speakers (and earphones, etc).  Less really is more.
 
 

Thanks ba_midi..

I believe that your comment is very significant and valuable. I am totally barefooted on EQ and Compression (and similar things)...I do have tried a few things and I do notice differences, but I am not able to see through those things yet...Audio is not my field at all...I like music and playing a lot...

On plugins I am to a minimum till I learn more on them..This post and the things I've done, though very much relate to VST's, just as you say.

Hello all,
 
This is my M.O. for mixing:
 
I do the best job I can on my main monitors.  As stated earlier, I reference simular proffesional material to give me something to shoot for.  Once I am satisfied with the mix on my main monitors, I burn a CD and listen to it in my car.  I take notes on things like, "turn bass down 1.5 db" or "snare drum is dull, add 3 db at 7k".  Then I listen to it on my boom box and do the same thing.  When done, I compare my notes.  If both notes say turn down the bass a certain amount, I average that amount and turn down the bass.  If one says turn down the bass and the other says turn up the bass, then I leave it where it is.  You get the picture.  By doing this, I get the best "common ground" mix I can on three very different systems and in three very different listening environments.
 
Sometimes I may have to go through the process a few times.
 
Good luck, work hard and happy mixing!
 
P.S.  In my opinion, a "good mix" is one that does not distract the listener from listening to "the song" as opposed to "the mix".
 
P.P.S.  Peter Gabrial was once asked if he ever listened to his worked and wished he had done things differently.  His reply was, and I paraphrase here, "When I am lying on my deathbed, I will not be thinking about...Oh, I wish I had used a different treatment on the bass in that tune...Instead I will be thinking about the people I love."

I sort of feel like I'm in a whole other camp.

No matter what you do, the balance of a mix will sound different on EVERY system you play them on....different in EVERY room...different in EVERY car.....in EVERY set of headphones.....

EVERYONE has an equalizer swept every way from Sunday, or a bass-boost, or a "sound maximizer", or a "3D Sound" button pushed on their stereo or iPod.  Ok...not everyone, but most "normal" people do.  Heck....it's disturbing to see devices now days with no manual EQ whatsoever...just some pre-fabbed presets labled with words like "rock", or "dance", or "jazz", or "enhance"....and none of them sound right.  But I digress....

There is absolutely no way your mix will sound the same in all of those environments.  And even if it DOES, you'll never please everyone.  The best you can hope for really is that the low end is right so that your bass and kick drums aren't distorting half of the playback devices out there.  The rest of it sort of becomes what it becomes based on the frequency responses of each particular speaker system....as hyped or as deficient as they may be.

So I say, stop beating your head against your mixes.  The only way to stop wondering or chasing your tail is to get a GOOD monitor system and treat your room properly.  If you don't, you'll almost always be second-guessing yourself - no matter how talented you are.

I believe that it's usually true that a guy can't BUY himself to the next level with gear.  A great preamp or pro converters will not necessarily fix all of a guy's problems, because when it comes mix time, things are what they are.  You have to deal with what's there.  But when it comes to monitoring during a mix, if a guy has any talent for it at all, he absolutely CAN buy himself to the next level with pro monitors in a well treated room.
 
I don't really have any arguement with "checking a mix" on a crappy speaker.  I don't do it personally.  But I do fire up a sub when I think I'm done to be sure that something in the low end didn't get by me.  I don't check the balance between instruments with the sub on...I just double check that the low end energy is not over powering everything else.
 
Then...I'm done.  Right or wrong, that's just the way I work these days.  It seems to be right for me.  I certainly don't chase my own tail like I used to, and I burn a whole lot fewer CDR's. 

I think I read you play real instruments mainly, so I am sure acoustical treatments and physical space are a must.

Actually, I am 95% ITB. Aside from vocals and acoustic guitar, everything I do is a digital fabrication. That definitely simplifies things acoustically. No need for a lively space in which to let drums breathe when your drums are sampled.

But acoustical treatments aren't just for creating a nice-sounding tracking room. What I'm talking about are treatments meant to flatten the frequency response of the room for listening.

The room adds far more spectral coloration than your speakers do. Even if you spend thousands on high-end reference monitors, the room itself will significantly alter the way you perceive their output. What do I mean by "significant"? I'm talking about frequencies that are boosted by 20-30db while others disappear altogether! And the response changes when you simply lean back in your chair. That's what your room does to the sound, and it makes subjective EQ decisions next to impossible.

Legion


The most important thing is to know you speakers and listening environment. You can have the best treated room in the world and totally flat speakers but if you don't know how songs you like sound on them it wont help at all. Listen a lot to reference songs and do it in the same environment as you mix in, then you can translate the sound and make the edits you want to create your own.

Hi Legion.

I get it. And this checks with my limited work on this....I believe what you say about learning the environment and then learn to translate it is akin to having a home reference, as for so many things.

I suppose once one learns to swim well in a swimming pool, the chance of swimming in a river or in the ocean are so much better.

Thanks.

Thanks for your comments Skullsession.

Yes. It is hard to please others. But sometimes it's even harder to please oneself.

So, here we are learning on how things are done. I think as one moves on, much of what you say will be more evident to me. Some things I just can not verify right away, specially room treatment, though.

Thanks for your good poins!

Nokey,

the louder you listen to music, the more reflections you produce from your walls, etc.  Nearfield minimizes these reflections, since the speakers should be closer to you than the walls.  The exception is reflections from anything between you and the speakers - computer monitors, shelves they are sitting on, your synth keyboard, etc.

Many home studios are set up in bedrooms, etc. with soft furniture and bookcases that break up these reflections somewhat.  That is better than an empty, untreated room.

The Focusrite effects seem to be like running your montiors through an graphic Eq which was trending many years ago.  Seems rather the wrong way to go about it to me.  My opinion - take it for what you are paying for it.

@

Can I offer a suggestion? Let me first explain that this is not an attempt to get business from you or an effort to get you to completely forget the idea of mixing your own material, simply a suggestion based on personal experience.

I am in the process of mixing one of several cd's for a friend. He is a prolific song writer, we have already published six cd's, we are done with number seven, just need to get the cover art and liner notes finished, and there is enough bundle files on my computer to create another full cd plus at least half of number nine. None of his songs are "filler" material, all "side A" cuts, and all original, with the exception of a cover or two along the way, which are fully augmented and arranged in a way that lends his unique style to a "standard", taking the song far beyond its original format.

For all of the writing that he does, his technical ability is at a level that is just enough to get the recording done, the live acoustic or drums are well recorded, but they always need a certain amount of "doctoring' to get them up to cd quality. He has a good midi keyboard, and dabbles in strings, horns, woodwinds, the whole orchestra. But he will call on occasion to ask why this is not working right, or why he can't get things to do what he wants, "It didn't do this the last time..." He has absolutely no knowledge of mixing, and has no intention of learning this aspect of recording. He wants to write, record and then send them off for mixing and editing.

On the other hand, I have almost no creative abilities. I am the "King Of The First Verse", seldom do I reach the point of two good verses and a chorus that make sense. I can play guitar, bass, keyboards, most anything that I get my hands on can be coaxed to make some musical sounds. I can play by ear, or read music, but writing something original is not happening. But I love mixing, taking raw tracks and developing a song into a piece of artwork, using all of his (or someone elses) creativity and forming the structure of something not evident in the bundle when it was first opened.

At present, I am doing this work for free, using the effort as a building block for my talents, learning the tools and tricks, and keeping in mind that if something actually gets heard by the "powers that be", we already have a written contract that reimburses me at a percentage of any future profits.

I also do mixing for a fee for other people, it is not like I am giving away the whole candy store, just that I have a relationship with this one person who has become a friend instead of a client.

Not knowing your personal situation I can only suggest that you might find some one who would work with you on a "commission" basis, you would send this person a bundle, they would mix it and send the stereo wave file back to you, and you could write out suggestions and time stamps to adjust that mix to your expectations.

This would free you up to  do what you do best, write. Mixing is not magic, but it is not something that everyone can do. Not only the equipment, but the ear, the hands, the ability to make decisions and choices on the fly and be correct in a high percentage of those decisions.

Again, just a thought. After all, if you are in a creative flow, maybe even a quick pay out of $20 per song would be enough to get a song mixed to a degree that you might struggle to accomplish, while freeing you to write the next. Could be more productive than spending hours learning things you don't really need to know. Writers should write, techies should tweak.

Later
Albert

Thank you Gamblerschoice, for the suggestion...All considered.

And thanks everyone also for the additional clarifications.