Mixing lessons w/ Bobby Owsinski

Thought I'd pass this along...

Bobby Owsinski (author of the the Mix Engineer Handbook, the Mastering Engineer Handbook, Mixing and Mastering w/ T-Racks, and many others) has a 9 hours audio mixing course called Audio Mixing Bootcamp, available on Lynda.com.

The cool thing is that, Lynda.com offers free one week trials. So if you have time to kill at work or something... ;)

If you need the basics covered, this is a very nice series of vids - nothing esoteric, just the basics - prepping the mix, creating your balance, using compression, eq, how to set up reverb, delay, and such... 

BTW - If you think that your mixes suck just because you don't have a UAD card or Waves plug-ins, these will show you otherwise and may help you save some money or at least, spend it more wisely.... ;) He uses nothing but the basic Pro Tools plug-ins. 

Lynda.com also has some pretty cool tutorials for a lot of things, from Photoshop to Pro Tools. Nothing about Sonar, but still  - may be of interest...

Nice heads up. Thanks. I've talked to Bobby on a couple of occassions and suggested some new ideas for some books, as if he needs them. He is a great and personable fellow. My first mixing book was V1 of his MEH book.

Danny Danzi

Rain


Thought I'd pass this along...

Bobby Owsinski (author of the the Mix Engineer Handbook, the Mastering Engineer Handbook, Mixing and Mastering w/ T-Racks, and many others) has a 9 hours audio mixing course called Audio Mixing Bootcamp, available on Lynda.com.

The cool thing is that, Lynda.com offers free one week trials. So if you have time to kill at work or something... ;)

If you need the basics covered, this is a very nice series of vids - nothing esoteric, just the basics - prepping the mix, creating your balance, using compression, eq, how to set up reverb, delay, and such... 

BTW - If you think that your mixes suck just because you don't have a UAD card or Waves plug-ins, these will show you otherwise and may help you save some money or at least, spend it more wisely.... ;) He uses nothing but the basic Pro Tools plug-ins. 

Lynda.com also has some pretty cool tutorials for a lot of things, from Photoshop to Pro Tools. Nothing about Sonar, but still  - may be of interest...

*Shameless plug* And for those that DO have Sonar, you have me to create custom videos for you. :) I'm no Bobby Owsinski, but I pretty much do the same things. Save people money, show that you don't need massive amounts of gear to get good results, and most importantly, how to listen to things correctly and make the right calls. So Sonar users have options too....they just gotta deal with my accent. :)
 
-Danny

You have a YouTube channel or something Danny? I've seen you "distributing" your vids in context of specific convesations here, but I didn't know whether you had them all somewhere online. I seem to recall that they were in a proprietary Windows format though, so I don't think I could check them out.

I sure would appreciate - I do have a few excerpts from your posts pasted into notes on my laptop for quick reference. ;)

Danny Danzi

Rain
You have a YouTube channel or something Danny? I've seen you "distributing" your vids in context of specific convesations here, but I didn't know whether you had them all somewhere online. I seem to recall that they were in a proprietary Windows format though, so I don't think I could check them out. I sure would appreciate - I do have a few excerpts from your posts pasted into notes on my laptop for quick reference. ;)

 
I do have a Youtube channel, but no Rain, unfortunately brother, I don't offer them online. All the video's I do these days are for clients that have contacted me about specific techniques or full mixes where I run video while I mix their song.
 
I have about 30 that I've done for fun over the years, but nothing that anyone would take serious because most times I have a bit too much fun in those situations. LOL! But the vids I do now are custom made to a persons needs.
 
I have several students (as well as clients) that send me entire mixes via bundle files or wave files if they use another DAW other than Sonar. I load them up and show them how to fix them instrument at a time...what to listen for, why I use certain things, what to do, what not to do, where they did good, where they failed, why something sounds bad etc etc...it's pretty intense.
 
I cover anything and everthing. Compression, effects, busses, parallel compression, imaging, eq, tricks I use personally...stuff like that. Some of the videos may be 6 chapters. Drums alone usually is a video all in itself.
 
It's like....imagine sending one of your mixes to someone to where you could sit with them and watch them do the entire mix from the ground up while asking questions. Of course "the questions" usually come after they see the video, but I try my best to answer whatever they may ask during the video so they ask less questions through mail or on the phone. That's the best way I can explain it really. :) What's good is, the stuff I teach will work on any DAW. I just use Sonar as my weapon of choice and often times use the plugs that are supplied with it unless someone calls for something like UAD or they say "hey Danny, mix it the way YOU would mix it". Then I have some fun. :)
 
-Danny

Wow, that sounds like an awesome approach, man!

I can't wait to see what you do with one of my songs when it's ready to be mixed!

Quick question. Do the majority of your clients finish a mix and then send you what they have done so you can analyse what they did and how to fix it? Or do you get a lot of raw, unmixed tracks, some sort of direction and the instructions to just 'mix it and make it sound good and teach me along the way'. I'm guessing the first would probably be the most valuable learning experience but the second would put a different spin on things and help you learn things a different way.

Maybe when I book in for your services I'll give you two songs, one mixed showing the direction I'm going and you can fix it, and the second one for you to just do whatever the hell you want to do with it. Best of both worlds!

Sounds good mate. I like the idea of you saying what artistic decisions you would have made when mixing it and not just the technical fixing side of things. A mix can have so many different visions to see it through and other ideas are always great.

Matt
Sounds good mate. I like the idea of you saying what artistic decisions you would have made when mixing it and not just the technical fixing side of things. A mix can have so many different visions to see it through and other ideas are always great.

Yeah, see that's the thing where I feel a lot of these video lessons and books sort of fail. Ok, fail is a huge word...but let's just say I don't think they are as helpful as people may think. The reason being...they most times are not using your gear or your sound capabilities. We can learn from the best engineers in the world and fail miserably if our sounds don't stack up. Sometimes you're stuck with what you're stuck with due to lack of funds etc. So you need to know how to utilize what you have until you can invest in other stuff.

When you see someone tweak your mix using your sounds, your DAW, your plugs on your material, it opens up an entirely new world really. The other side of the coin there is, it's also nice to have both situations. For example, a video I just did for a client had some drums that were not quite up to par. Instead of just saying "well, these were not really good sound choices" I showed them how to best utlilize these drums as far as I could take them which turned out great. Then, I told them and showed them why I felt the drums they chose might not have been the best choice. I replaced a few samples using what I felt was better for the song. So they got the fixed version and an enhanced version. There have been times where I've even played instruments on student material to further drive a point home just so they can literally hear what *I* would call better instrumentation for their song. So it can really help and open up a world of "wow!". :)

Rain
You can "hi-jack" any of my threads, Danny. Your input is always welcome.

Thanks my brother....and feel free to do the same to any of mine as your input is most welcome also. :)

-Danny

godino


 just watched this video(well most of it), it was very good but I'm a little confused about compression now!! On the video Bobby started with the attack very high and lowered it until he heard a change in dynamics then raised it a little - so that the dynamic was preserved. He ended up with quite a high attack setting say 130 milliseconds. I have never used such a slow attack on my guitar parts just wondered what the rest of you used?? he used the slow attack on a clean, acoustic and a distored lead. thanks

Hi Gordo,
 
The thing to keep in mind which is where I find issues watching videos of this stuff is, it's tough to learn certain aspects in this field when the instruments that are being used are not yours or instruments you have recorded. Next, each compressor reacts differently. I haven't had a chance to watch the video, but the particular comp he used may have been a bit more sensitive in the attack area.
 
Another thing to keep in mind, threshold and ratio values will determine how much attack you need to use on an instrument as well as how the actual instrument is reacting to that particular compressor. If you used higher thresholds and ratios, rest assured you'd have to use a higher/slower attack time or the compressor would start to pump. Sometimes we want the initial transient to NOT be softened by the attack time function. However, we may want to use a decent amount of compression via threshold and ratio so that it keeps the sound tight as well. The attack time in a situation like that is going to clamp down on the compressor too fast if you don't relax it and you'll get artifacts, understand? Hope this helps clear up any confusion. :)
 
-Danny

No problem. :) Let me ask you, what type of guitar sound are you trying to compress? Like what would you best compare it to? Some clean sounds with heavier picks may bring on that pop thing you're talking about.

I notice in your signature that you mention Guitar Rig 5 and Amplitube Fender...are you using any compression inside the sound itself? If so...try backing that down a bit or cutting it out completely if you can just to see if it makes a difference in how the compressor you're using in your DAW works.

Another thing...and this to me is really important. If you ARE using those programs for your guitar sound, you should always compress the clean sound going to disc to condition it just a bit using a decent hardware compressor. I've done quite a lot of work and research for Acme Bar Gig, which is a company that does guitar plugs. In my testing, I have found that whenever I work with guitar sims that it improved my finalt outcome ten-fold by using a little compression going in.

I too would get a pop with my DI sound, but none of that seemed to ever transfer into the sim I used. But looking at my wave form of the DI, it would be spikey and even clip once in a while without the compressor going in. I have also found that hotter levels (at least -6dB) have been helpful as well with any type of guitar sim I use. Some guys use -10 or higher....I get a bit more sound going on with -6dB. But the pop thing only happens to me when I don't compress my DI a little bit. When I say a little bit, I'm talking -8 to -10 threshold, 1:5 to 2:1 ratio just to keep the signal a bit more in control. Just so it keeps me consistently at -6dB.

When I record a real amp or use my guitar tube pre-amp, I compress going in as well. It just keeps the signal consistent. Again though, nothing too strong.

So see if some of that helps. If by chance you are using a dirty sound, do you notice the pop thing more when you play certain chords/notes, or is it there no matter what? I think it's in your clean DI personally. Do you still get the pop using a real amp? If so...now I'm worried. LOL! :)

-Danny 

You mean 1.5:1 to 2:1, don't you Danny ;) You said 1:5 which is obviously NOT what we want here hehe

I love working at super low ratios like that. Low threshold and low ratio. Great on vox for smoothing things out. Even as high as 2:1 can start to be quite strong sometimes. I was a bit sad to see the ProChannel only goes as low as a 4:1 when I got it. I'll experiment with it on vox, but I'm scared that kind of serious compression might sound a bit too audible. Fortunately we have other options in X1 for super low ratios.

I guess the use of compression all depends on what you want from the piece. He talks a lot about finding the grooving element of a song and emphasising that. I have not listened to this vid, but I imagine maybe he's thinking about if you had exactly the same sounding guitar part but in one instance you wanted it to hold the groove and rhythm and feel, you would compress one way, and if you wanted to to simple fill in a space and sit very statically, not pumping with the music at all, you would compress in a completely opposite way. The role of the instrument in the song can dictate how we might want to compress it. For a catchy rthym part, you might want to add to the attack and get it pumping and swelling in time with the music, but for a more pad type feel, you might want to cut out all the attack except for just a little sparkle to let it be heard in the mix, and then flatten it out so as to not draw any attention to it. So many options...

Which hardware compressors have ratios as gentle as 1.5:1 or 2:1?

Many of the good sounding ones have stuff like 4:1, 8:1, 12:1, even 20:1. Some of the "classics" have a sweet 12:1 with super gentle slopes.







I'll start;

The Distressor has a 1:1 and a 2:1.


Anything else?

godino


Thanks again Danny
 
I'm reasonably happy with my sound, its just that the video threw me a bit -as you mention I
suppose you have to be careful learning from videos/books
 
Currently I am using a strat with a very clean sound, infact its one of the old squier originals strat copies from 82/83
which I always find a nice guitar to play
 
I've already dusted down my old behringer hardware compressor to add a little compression before DI'ing
I'll do a bit of testing and see what difference it makes 
I take it I dial a fast attack time?
 
Rain - Yes you are right danny's posts are also informative and well worth reading(perhaps cakewalk should pay him a retainer LOL!)
 

You're quite welcome. Yeah try that Behringer. Believe it or not, that's exactly what I use in my home studio. People laugh at me when they see it, but it's a perfect little "conditioner" compressor for going to disc. I have the MDX 2400 multi-com....4 comps in one. Nothing special, but it's perfect for that little bit of conditioning.
 
LOL Cakewalk hates me....I couldn't sell them on a free "made for them" guitar sim plug that blows Guitar Rig 4 out of the water imho. LOL! Thanks for the kind thoughts though....you and Rain are making my morning...thanks guys! :)
 
Matt: LOL good catch brother...yes, my bad, I meant 1.5:1. I always forget that "point" and have said this wrong so many times, I can't even begin to count. To be honest, I don't think I have EVER put the point in there while talking about that ratio. I promise to start though...thanks for the heads up. :)
 
-Danny

Well, passed that initial transient which goes through uncompressed, the remaining portion of the signal you're compressing can be made a bit more even so that, as a result, when you crank the make up gain, will also be made louder. 

So you don't lose the punch but you can make the sustain/decay part of the signal more even and then louder.

Rain


Well, passed that initial transient which goes through uncompressed, the remaining portion of the signal you're compressing can be made a bit more even so that, as a result, when you crank the make up gain, will also be made louder. 

So you don't lose the punch but you can make the sustain/decay part of the signal more even and then louder.

If you let the peak through what is the make up gain for? Doesn't the peak get sort of loud? Maybe too loud?










I think a lot of old timers like to use the make up gain stage to squash the peaks, that sneak past the slow attack, up against the driver in the output section so that they can get some really sweet harmonic distortion and compression going on AFTER the compression stage.

That's what makes an 1176 sound like an "1176"... banging the output section so it gets thick and sweet!!! 
This was a bad example; The 1176 has such a fast attack range that it isn't a good example for a discussion about slow attack times.

replaced with: That's what makes an LA2A sound like an "LA2A"... banging the output section so it gets thick and sweet!!! 

Tricks like that are common with old time hardware guys... and they/we developed habits that make good sound but don't necessarily make a lot of sense if you think you have some "idea" of how a compressor works.




In the world of dsp, a compressor can be used more literally. The signal can be specifically compressed with great detail and the make up gain up can occur without distortion. There is a greater opportunity now, than ever before, to learn about what your compressor is doing and how it relates to what you think you are hearing.



best regards,
mike







  edit

mike_mccue

Rain


Well, passed that initial transient which goes through uncompressed, the remaining portion of the signal you're compressing can be made a bit more even so that, as a result, when you crank the make up gain, will also be made louder. 

So you don't lose the punch but you can make the sustain/decay part of the signal more even and then louder.

If you let the peak through what is the make up gain for? Doesn't the peak get sort of loud? Maybe too loud?










I think a lot of old timers like to use the make up gain stage to squash the peaks, that sneak past the slow attack, up against the driver in the output section so that they can get some really sweet harmonic distortion and compression going on AFTER the compression stage.

That's what makes an 1176 sound like an "1176"... banging the output section so it gets thick and sweet!!! 
This was a bad example; The 1176 has such a fast attack range that it isn't a good example for a discussion about slow attack times.

replaced with: That's what makes an LA2A sound like an "LA2A"... banging the output section so it gets thick and sweet!!! 

Tricks like that are common with old time hardware guys... and they/we developed habits that make good sound but don't necessarily make a lot of sense if you think you have some "idea" of how a compressor works.




In the world of dsp, a compressor can be used more literally. The signal can be specifically compressed with great detail and the make up gain up can occur without distortion. There is a greater opportunity now, than ever before, to learn about what your compressor is doing and how it relates to what you think you are hearing.



best regards,
mike







edit

If we start w/ a signal that already peaks near 0db, of course there's not much we can do unless we tame those peaks/transients too - but, unless you set the attack time to 0, something will get through, no? I think Owsinski assumes that you're working on material that still leaves you a bit of headroom to push the volume. 

I don't know, really, that's how I understood what he meant.