Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 06:47:33
(permalink)
trimph1
OK....now a question.
EQ ITB or outboard?
Or should that even be considered as important?
It's a matter of personal preference, trimph. Me personally? ITB at all times unless something adds a flavor OTB that I absolutely cannot get ITB. This is rare as I can just about always cop something and get close enough to where I'd not have to do anything destructively OTB. With the tools we have today, you should be able to come so close to something outboard that only you would notice. Whatever works for a person is what they should use. If I didn't have the UAD stuff I use, I would say it would be harder for me to come close to the outboard sound characteristics. Even some of the Waves stuff allows for really close sounds that will definitely work. :) But there are guys that are hell-bent on a certain sound or a characteristic that is a necessity for them. So they need to use that outboard gear at all times. 7 out of 10 times, they will be the only one's that will notice this just like a guy that may be able to tell a difference between using and installing different guitar pups in his guitar through the same amp. We may notice a little something as he changes pups pups and provides examples, but not enough to where we may say "that's the one you need to use!" He, on the other hand, since he lives with this sound day in and day out, notices things that we may not. There are sometimes little subtle differences in outboard gear that can really sway someone. This is totally credible and acceptable, but one has to weigh whether or not those differences are worth the extra coin you have to pay for that stuff. At the end of the day bro, if the difference you hear using outboard gear is for the better to you only, you go with it. :) These choices we make are what makes us....us. :) -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 07:14:10
(permalink)
Jonbouy
some of these guys don't need to worry about post-eqing because they get the parts down just so during tracking.
Of course a good recording is a major part. But it goes without saying a good capture is by it's very nature mean you've got more than you actually need in the context of a mix alongside other instruments.
Agreed. Those that have heard it will know that my pal Larry captures a beautiful sound from his Taylor acoustic, but it's very rare that I don't do some eq on it once the other instruments are in place. For me, the top 3 would be eq, panning and fader levels/volume automation. I want to hear everything in the mix sitting in it's own pocket before I start adding reverb, delay etc.
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|
mattplaysguitar
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1992
- Joined: 2006/01/02 00:27:42
- Location: Gold Coast, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 07:27:54
(permalink)
Danny, I'd say definitely keep your posts as long as you feel they need to be to get your point across. I much prefer to read a good, meaty reply than a quick one sentence one which doesn't really capture all that's needed.
|
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3902
- Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 07:37:32
(permalink)
mattplaysguitar
John T
That thing of "record it right in the first place and it won't need EQ" is, I think, something of a fringe case, at best. It applies *occasionally* to *certain* kinds of material. But actually almost never applies to the majority of material. Try making even the simplest four piece rock band record that way, and you'll be pretty hosed. Anything with any electronic aspects, you're equally sunk. There are no silver bullets here. Yes, you have to record well. And then yes, you also have to mix well.
Agreed. Try and get that classic heavy thumping kick sound with a tight high end snap and no boxiness with just kick selection, tuning, mic selection and mic placement. Sure, you might get it sounding pretty nice and suitable for plenty of genres, but if you're going for that commercial processed sound, it just ain't gonna happen. These things will only get you so far and eq can take you those last few yards.
I was trying to post a picture of a different way of organising that I'm trying to do, but it wasn't working, so take 2. I did a quick sketch of where I'm trying to put everything at the moment. I've missed snare but the general layout I'm working on is below. First is verse, section is chorus. Anyone else work with this type of method?
Matt, First up, in regards to the Kick; not all kicks are equal and some are most definitely 'sampled' Seriously, I use at least two kicks; one that is a size 12 foot beating the heck out that poor VR skin, the other is the shell and honestly I do not use EQ at all on the kick or should I say.... kick s
About the Pan; It would be best to hear, to get a better perspective otherwise you might end up with half-arsed advise. Also, are those instruments (R/Guitar and Keys or synth) in the center playing all the time or have you arranged them so they occasionally fill in for vocal breaks/pauses? Point is and importantly; is the "Lead Vocal" (center), don't crowd it with keys and rhythm guitar if so? you may need to EQ/cut the guitar (rough guess; 1KHz to 5KHz) to make the L vocals clearer. EQ is especially needed when the 'SONG' become crowded and if so? some instruments either need a cut (EQ) or that instrument removed completely. But with clever instrumentation-arrangements, panning along with good performances and sounds that work well together then EQ is not required so much. As I explained, unless I actually 'hear' then please take all that I said about EQ with a grain of salt and possibly some hot chili peppers hahahaha (sorry man, I'm in a medicated state, actually you may want to discard my post and pretend you didn't see it)!
|
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6348
- Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
- Location: London ON
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 08:00:01
(permalink)
 I know medicated states...what you posted makes sense still... ............................................................. A question, I have an idea of recording my wife doing a version of Gaudette ( as in a church ) .... if one was to use a reverb which reverb would be a good one for that?
The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate. Bushpianos
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 08:03:14
(permalink)
mattplaysguitar
Danny, I'd say definitely keep your posts as long as you feel they need to be to get your point across. I much prefer to read a good, meaty reply than a quick one sentence one which doesn't really capture all that's needed.
It's great you feel that way Matt...thanks. I know my posts are long, but always with the best of intentions and as thorough as possible. I know some people will definitely get a few things out of them. I also never hold it against anyone that doesn't care to read me. :)
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 08:10:53
(permalink)
mattplaysguitar
Has anyone else used a similar method to drawing things up like this? I'm sure the triangle shape at the lower end is obviously due to lower frequencies not having much need for panning.
http://free-picture-hosting.net/?di=0MNP
Matt, I meant to address this before and totally forgot. I don't do things like the sketch you drew, but I DO create sound stages that allow me to shoot for how things may be panned. If you're interested, I have no problems sharing one of my main illustrations I use in my teaching as well as providing an in depth explanation as to what it means and how I use it. It may be a long post though which I know you don't have a problem with, but...just letting you know any way. :) Maybe others would be interested in it as well? -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3902
- Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 08:11:36
(permalink)
Oops! Sorry, unintentional Post! Dang it, either I'm having forum format issues or Danny has slipped me a blue pill. I need to have a nap! Have a great week everyone :)
post edited by SongCraft - 2012/05/28 08:15:48
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 08:31:34
(permalink)
SongCraft
Oops! Sorry, unintentional Post!
Dang it, either I'm having forum format issues or Danny has slipped me a blue pill.
I need to have a nap!
Have a great week everyone :)
Ah might as well blame me...it's ok, I got big shoulders for a lil guy. :)  LOL! :) -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
mattplaysguitar
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1992
- Joined: 2006/01/02 00:27:42
- Location: Gold Coast, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 08:34:01
(permalink)
Danny Danzi
mattplaysguitar
Has anyone else used a similar method to drawing things up like this? I'm sure the triangle shape at the lower end is obviously due to lower frequencies not having much need for panning.
http://free-picture-hosting.net/?di=0MNP
Matt, I meant to address this before and totally forgot. I don't do things like the sketch you drew, but I DO create sound stages that allow me to shoot for how things may be panned. If you're interested, I have no problems sharing one of my main illustrations I use in my teaching as well as providing an in depth explanation as to what it means and how I use it. It may be a long post though which I know you don't have a problem with, but...just letting you know any way. :) Maybe others would be interested in it as well?
-Danny
Yeah man, that would be brilliant to see when you get a chance. I like this idea of having some sort of planned soundscape and having a few options to choose from and see what works best for me would be great! I did have a bit more of a play around today really carving things out a lot. Keeping in mind I'm still working with scratch recordings, it really helps me see a lot more how I need to record them to get them to fit in better. Trying to fit things in too I'm seeing what I can squeeze in and what is starting to get a little too cramped. It's really allowing my to kick things up a notch and start to get the sound I'm going for. Certainly going to take a bit of practise to really be able to hear what needs to be done, but it doesn't really seem like it's too hard with a bit of practise. It's amazing how you can pretty much highpass AND lowpass almost an entire instrument leaving a VERY SMALL narrow band and then it just sits in the mix so much better and sounds almost bigger than before cause you can turn it up more without it clouding everything else! SongCraft - Some of those parts included in the image are infact only very short temporary fills in between the vocals to fill in the gaps. As there is a slight overlap with them starting and the end of the vocals, I feel they work best to eq away from the vocal, but maybe even volume and/or eq automation could let them sit in line with the vocal area to give them more prominence and play their part as a fill but without getting in the way of the vocal at any point - but now we are starting to get pretty technical. My drums are also BFD (played on a MIDI kit but with a real set of cymbals for realism) and I have not made a decision yet on the snare and kick sounds I'm going to use so plenty of room to play around with that yet! But yeah, you're right, sampling in some synth kicks over real kicks I believe is pretty common practice these days. So many things you can do. One thing I did once which I really liked was to make a white noise track and trigger it to play with every snare hit. Adding it lightly creates this nice crunch sound without actually sounding electronic at all. Interesting one to try if your snare lacks a little spice.
|
mattplaysguitar
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1992
- Joined: 2006/01/02 00:27:42
- Location: Gold Coast, Australia
- Status: offline
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 08:40:21
(permalink)
mattplaysguitar
Danny Danzi
SongCraft
Oops! Sorry, unintentional Post!
Dang it, either I'm having forum format issues or Danny has slipped me a blue pill.
I need to have a nap!
Have a great week everyone :)
Ah might as well blame me...it's ok, I got big shoulders for a lil guy. :)
LOL! :)
-Danny
Ooo don't mess with the guns!!!
LOL look at you! You got me smoked there buddy! Hahahahahaha! One of your arms is two of mine...no fair!!! :-Þ
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
Guitarhacker
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 24398
- Joined: 2007/12/07 12:51:18
- Location: NC
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 09:10:18
(permalink)
First.... I didn't read all the posts word for word.... I skimmed a few then skipped others.
So this may have been covered...or not.
While EQ, compression and reverb are important, they are not all that is required to get that full, wide, professional sounding mix. I'm still working towards that myself so I consider myself to be a student of the audio arts..... still learning.
Obviously a great tracking session yields tracks that require a minimum of EQ and compression as someone else has said. I agree. Great tracks make the mixing easy. I still find that I will often need EQ and compression on some of them... depending mostly on the song, more than anything else.
Proper EQ on a track allows the various instruments to set properly in the mix, in their own space and not interfering with each other. Solo, they may not actually sound their very best, but they sound superb in the mix and in context with everything around them.
Compression.... I use this sparingly to keep the peaks down to some degree, and add some punch in the music..... I use the multi-band quite often, and sometimes a cake default on a guitar...if I need it, and only if I need it.
Reverb.... many times my tracks are dry.... even the vocals. I place the reverb in the vocal buss and generally have it cracked just enough to add some ambiance. I believe generally that you should not be aware of the reverb .... just the feeling of the space. My practice is generally... add the verb, select the preset starting point, turn it up until I hear it clearly (solo the track) then back it off until it's not obvious.... or slightly less than obvious. The point is I don't want to hear the reverb, I want to feel it or sense it.
On guitars, reverb is often an essential part. So I do use verb on the guitars... sometimes in the tracks and sometimes in the buss with multiple guitars. And on this, the rules are different.... add to taste.
I have also noticed with reverb that having a slightly heavier guitar verb will impart the sense of reverb to the vocals without the need to put verb on the vocals. It's subtle and sometimes it works well.
Panning..... I believe is critical to a mix. Putting everything down the center or randomly in the stereo field is often not the way to do things. I try to balance the mix. Each mix is different.
Experience: the most important part of the equation. Knowing what to do, how to do it, how musch reverb, EQ, and compression to add, when, where, and WHY...... well, only experience can tell you the specifics on this.
One thing Ben pointed out..... mix the music at a low volume. Fletcher-Munson plays a factor in the mix as well.... music sounds better loud, but... if you can get the mix to sound really professional at a low level, when it gets cranked, it usually only sounds better...... but the reverse is NOT true. I only crank the levels when I am very, very close to finished, and only one time through...then it's back down. Just to check the mix at volume.
Danny should really consider writing a book with his knowledge and ability to write on subjects in depth, explaining things.......
My website & music: www.herbhartley.com MC4/5/6/X1e.c, on a Custom DAW Focusrite Firewire Saffire Interface BMI/NSAI "Just as the blade chooses the warrior, so too, the song chooses the writer "
|
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6348
- Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
- Location: London ON
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 09:36:14
(permalink)
What I'd love to see is a weekly posting from Danny about certain aspects of recording...he does have a book in him!!
The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate. Bushpianos
|
Jonbouy
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 22562
- Joined: 2008/04/14 13:47:39
- Location: England's Sunshine South Coast
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 09:54:58
(permalink)
Oh no! I'm gonna have to refer to Matt as Popeye from now on, hyuk hyuk. I'm gonna revert back to my Wimpey self and say, "I'll gladly pay you on Tuesday"... 
"We can't do anything to change the world until capitalism crumbles. In the meantime we should all go shopping to console ourselves" - Banksy
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 09:59:22
(permalink)
Yeah man, that would be brilliant to see when you get a chance. I like this idea of having some sort of planned soundscape and having a few options to choose from and see what works best for me would be great!
You got it brother! :) Ok, this sort of thing isn't for everyone, but it's something I always try to do as I'm reviewing a mix and getting my ducks in a row as I am also getting familiar with the mix. Creating a sound space is important to me. Even if I'm the only one that feels that way, it has helped me loads with controlling mixes. The illustration I'm going to share with you was a rock mix I did for a client. Of course this stuff changes from mix to mix, but in this particular example, I felt it was the best way to go and we came out with fantastic results. I'll post the illustration and then explain it all. Better image: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4909348/DanziLandMusicSoundStage12.jpg  What you are seeing here is a basic sound stage using pictures of instruments and how they are panned. If you were sitting in the audience this should be what you are hearing as well. Though most sound systems are mono at clubs, in a real concert situation or in a theater hosting a pro band, you'll more than likely get stereo. The line running through with the arrows represents our pan field. The imager stuff I will explain more about later in this message. Drums: Let's start with the drums as they always seem to take the most time and are discussed quite a bit in terms of engineering. I'm one that doesn't like extreme drum pans in my mixes unless the mix calls for it. I see no reason to go further than 50% in panning or the drums become disconnected. What you see is just that. An illustration using Superior as my subject because the client used that exact kit. As you can see, we never go out of the 50 % pan field on the drums, therefore keeping them tight and not all over the place with tom pans and cymbals hitting all over the place. Sometimes I may go out to a 75% pan on the drum kit, other times a 40% pan. It depends on the mix, the genre, the kit being used as well as the other instruments supporting the mix. By the time we add some room to the kick and snare and then process the snare with a bit of verb, they no longer occupy a basic, centered pan field. They too reach out beyond the center to an extent. A verb on a snare should not be a stereo verb that allows that snare to crack from 100 to 100. The snare is behing the kit. The snare should stay between the floor tom and the hats or go no wider than the hats and the ride cymbal. Sonitus Phase and plugs like it are your friend when controlling the width of effects. Or you use the width controls in the Sonitus plugs or any other plugs that offer that feature. But don't forget to do it because effect panning and eq is as important as instrument panning and eq. Guitars: The guitars you see are 4 layers. The 2 main guitars that drive the song are panned at 85 L/R. The ones at 60% L/R are supporting layers that come in during chorus parts. The space they take up during that time was essential to this mix having the modern rock impact it needed. You should eq these differently and can also effect these supporting guitars with a bit of chorus just to make them a little thicker. Their volume, however, should be supportive, not as loud as your main guitars. Bass: The bass is self explanitory of course. :) Though some people like to slightly pan their kick, snare and bass, it's not someting I feel needs to be done for the simple fact of what Shad mentioned about reverb. This is where you can make a bit of a difference eventhough something may be panned center...and this is what my "imager" diagram is all about which I will share with you now. But as far as bass goes, unless I add a slight bass chorus or a layered, hybrid bass sound, this is the only instrument that maintains a solid, centered pan. Vocals, back ups and imaging: When we place something in a pan field, we can literally stretch it out to be something it really isn't by way if imaging. The imager relies on a stereo effect before it and can only be used AFTER that effect. For example, let's look at the lead vocal. It is centered. However, with a slight doubling effect using the Vocal plug offered in Sonar or a slight chorus or a verb, and we can literally stretch that vocal out to where it can sound like the size of it is going from 50L to 50R. The imager you use will dictate how wide you can notice the differences. We can use a Sonitus Phase plug or a Waves S-1 to handle this. However, a PSP Stereo Enhancement plug will do something completely different to the vocal in question. It depends what you use and what effects you have before it. You can process on the vocal track itself or use a bus if you want. We could also use a HAAS effect on instruments and then run another instance reversing the HAAS to the other side for some cool effects. There are so many ways you can do this stuff, it's insane really. But once you create the texture, you have to know how to control it or you get a mix full of thick mud that doesn't have any impact. The same with back up vocals. In the diagram, we are looking at two stacks of vocals that were sent to an instrument bus. One stack was panned 40%L, the other 40%R. Once in the instrument bus, we can process effects on them as an entity and literally make them sound like they are stretching out to the 60% L/R pan field. This also fills up the space in between and we are not walking over top of anything. Let's revert back to the support guitars that are panned at 60L/R. We have choices here to where we can create a room sim, compress it and then control how that room sim spreads on those guitars. In this example we want those guitars to go from 60 to 85 and stop right where the main guitars are hitting. We want the main guitars to spread from 85 to 100 so we are filling up the space and leaving no gaps. This is how modern sounding stuff fills out the spectrum. Our back up vocals stop right where those support guitars stop and if we have to slightly pan our effects spread to 55 instead of 60, we can do that if we notice anything walking on top. Your next question may be "why don't you use any wide pans Danny?" The reason being, I like to keep them for special effects that leap out to a listener. When you hit them with a wide pan, it sticks out because we haven't used it to the extreme anywhere. This is great for vocal effects, special processing effects and anything else that you need to fly in as an impact type of thing. To me, when people hard pan, it can fatigue a listening experience as well as sound too disconnected. It only sounds good in headphones and usually sounds too separated in real monitors or in a car. There are no rules of course, but these are the things I have followed that allow me to keep everything in check. If you want tight mixes with impact, keep your pans tighter. If you want a disconnected Beatles mix, pan everything to the extreme. I love the Beatles but I was not down with some of their decisions regardless of how famous they are. I can throw up listening to a drum kit that is hard panned for the sake of being hard panned. But that's just me....no one else has to think, act or engineer as I do. A note about thick/big sounds: The imaging stuff can be useful for lots of things. But make no mistake, nothing touches a sound that is recorded "big". We can simulate, stretch, widen, enhance, it is not the same as purposely recording a big sound. To do that, you need a big sound to begin with, several mics, a good room and the know-how to pull it all together. In most home studios, people don't have this luxury so they are left with imagers and the like. You just have to stay focused and not over-use any of this stuff because you can disconnect the mix, add artifacts and bring on synthetic phasing that just sounds bad. So just be careful...and whatever you do, don't etch ANY decisions using imaging in stone while listening on headphones. I don't care how good they are or who recommended them....don't do it man. It won't be a very nice outcome. Anyway, I hope some of this helps you Matt as well as others who may be reading my long winded posts. These are some of the things I teach here that keep people coming back for more. I also apply everything I talk about to my own mixes at all times and have made a really good business with this stuff. If it doesn't work for you or anyone else, my sincere apologies. But it has worked for me and I felt it was worth sharing to the extent in which I have. Thanks for reading. :) -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
foxwolfen
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8256
- Joined: 2008/03/29 23:41:47
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 10:31:30
(permalink)
Danny Danzi
foxwolfen
Danny, one of the virtues taught to us in university was a concept called succinctness. I think you give some great advice, but bro, I just cant wade through all you write.
So, perhaps you addressed this already, and if you did, I apologize, but... Reverb is perhaps THE most critical part of a mix, whether you use a little or a lot. Reverb defines our world. Reverb is how we judge space and depth. Reverb should be the single most important thought in an engineer's mind. Reverb also defines many other aspects of music other than space... it defines style, it defines generation.
With a well recorded source, you can do with out EQ, without compression.... but no reverb (which includes the sound of the recording environment) and the mix will be flat and lifeless... always.
Just my 2C
Shad
With all due respect Shad, the difference between your posts in this field and my long posts (if you someday bother to read them) is you leave someone that is in need in this field, still in need. You talk of reverb but do not explain ANYTHING about it. If you read the op's question, and then his reply comment to me, he literally asked me questions. I answered them, provided scenarios as well as a technique and what has worked for me. The post is long but the post is thorough and accurate while sharing a bit of my personality in it as I write. It's quite alright that it may not be to your liking or may be too long. It wasn't intended for you if you take that stance and I don't mean any of this with any hostility. But there are those who want to learn and to learn, we must share.
If people want to learn about this stuff and enjoy a read, this is why I post here. One line answers will not answer most questions due to the infinite possibilities in this field. I offer some of those possibilities up for the price of logging in. To help, inspire and share things that have worked both in my world and the worlds of others. If succinctness is all you care about in a field that has so many variables it can blow a persons head off and totally lose those that are new in this field, then you are the man they should be listening to instead of me. Please continue to share.
You also need to re-read Jon's post without any hostility because it was spot on. We live in a world of samples, beats, grooves and simulations that need no reverb to make a mix sound good. And also, the man that buys into something not needing any eq at all....is the man that needs to post mixes of this brilliance to claim such a thing while teaching us exactly how these mixes were achieved if they really want to teach and hold some credibility here. It's not easy to capture a sound that may need little eq vs a sound that needs lots of eq. You gotta either use a sample or know what you are doing to achieve these "no eq" results. Trying to convey that to someone in search of answers without explaining it in depth does them an injustice.
That said, I will peacefully disagree with the comment about reverb being as important as you have made it out to be. To focus on, or claim reverb is the most important factor in mixing = a bad final result and a cover-up masking the truth in verb. I'll take a well eq'd mix with all the right stuff without any verb before I'll even waste any time messing with reverb or holding it in as high a regard as you have. It's icing on the cake, not a necessity. But that's just me.
-Danny
Danny, I stand by what I said. You can selectively (as Jon likes to do) discount parts of what I said to reinforce your position all you want, it does change the facts of what I said. The OP asked if the three most important aspects of a good mix were EQ, Compression, and Reverb as a WHOLE (his emphasis, not mine). The answer is yes. I clearly stated why reverb was important. I do not need to write a book here about it. The information is very easily found if people want to learn about how our ears work. As you yourself state, you like a "dry mix" (which actually means "unprocessed", including EQ by the way. Don't take my word for it, look it up). That is fine. I am not saying it's wrong. I am also not discounting the value of EQ and compression. But, I'm pretty sure 99% of the people mixing music here in THIS forum are also recording it. I was pointing out why reverb is a factor in the mix, whether we like it or not. We control reverb, not eliminate it, be it natural or artificial. It is something that must be understood. And thats what somebody who is inexperienced and wants to learn should be taking away from this.
A scientist knows more & more about less & less till he knows everything about nothing, while a philosopher knows less & less about more & more till he knows nothing about everything. Composers Forum
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 10:32:03
(permalink)
Herb Danny should really consider writing a book with his knowledge and ability to write on subjects in depth, explaining things trimph What I'd love to see is a weekly posting from Danny about certain aspects of recording...he does have a book in him!! Hahaha you guys are too kind..ty. :) I do sort of have an e-book in the works but just for my own head as well as my students as a hand-book so to speak. You guys would be sick of me if I posted more novels! LOL! Trust me, I wish there was a shorter easy way to explain this stuff. The only other way to explain it is by voice and if I started posting up sound clips, it would be pure comedy once you heard my accent. There would be nothing more to read though. LOL!! I write a column for Wusik online that you might enjoy and there are quite a few pieces on my own forum that may keep you busy. Some you may have read since I've shared some of our conversations here, others I'm sure you may not have seen. I'll try to share a little more here as long as I know people are interested. :) -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 10:45:10
(permalink)
foxwolfen
Danny Danzi
foxwolfen
Danny, one of the virtues taught to us in university was a concept called succinctness. I think you give some great advice, but bro, I just cant wade through all you write.
So, perhaps you addressed this already, and if you did, I apologize, but... Reverb is perhaps THE most critical part of a mix, whether you use a little or a lot. Reverb defines our world. Reverb is how we judge space and depth. Reverb should be the single most important thought in an engineer's mind. Reverb also defines many other aspects of music other than space... it defines style, it defines generation.
With a well recorded source, you can do with out EQ, without compression.... but no reverb (which includes the sound of the recording environment) and the mix will be flat and lifeless... always.
Just my 2C
Shad
With all due respect Shad, the difference between your posts in this field and my long posts (if you someday bother to read them) is you leave someone that is in need in this field, still in need. You talk of reverb but do not explain ANYTHING about it. If you read the op's question, and then his reply comment to me, he literally asked me questions. I answered them, provided scenarios as well as a technique and what has worked for me. The post is long but the post is thorough and accurate while sharing a bit of my personality in it as I write. It's quite alright that it may not be to your liking or may be too long. It wasn't intended for you if you take that stance and I don't mean any of this with any hostility. But there are those who want to learn and to learn, we must share.
If people want to learn about this stuff and enjoy a read, this is why I post here. One line answers will not answer most questions due to the infinite possibilities in this field. I offer some of those possibilities up for the price of logging in. To help, inspire and share things that have worked both in my world and the worlds of others. If succinctness is all you care about in a field that has so many variables it can blow a persons head off and totally lose those that are new in this field, then you are the man they should be listening to instead of me. Please continue to share.
You also need to re-read Jon's post without any hostility because it was spot on. We live in a world of samples, beats, grooves and simulations that need no reverb to make a mix sound good. And also, the man that buys into something not needing any eq at all....is the man that needs to post mixes of this brilliance to claim such a thing while teaching us exactly how these mixes were achieved if they really want to teach and hold some credibility here. It's not easy to capture a sound that may need little eq vs a sound that needs lots of eq. You gotta either use a sample or know what you are doing to achieve these "no eq" results. Trying to convey that to someone in search of answers without explaining it in depth does them an injustice.
That said, I will peacefully disagree with the comment about reverb being as important as you have made it out to be. To focus on, or claim reverb is the most important factor in mixing = a bad final result and a cover-up masking the truth in verb. I'll take a well eq'd mix with all the right stuff without any verb before I'll even waste any time messing with reverb or holding it in as high a regard as you have. It's icing on the cake, not a necessity. But that's just me.
-Danny
Danny, I stand by what I said. You can selectively (as Jon likes to do) discount parts of what I said to reinforce your position all you want, it does change the facts of what I said.
The OP asked if the three most important aspects of a good mix were EQ, Compression, and Reverb as a WHOLE (his emphasis, not mine). The answer is yes. I clearly stated why reverb was important. I do not need to write a book here about it. The information is very easily found if people want to learn about how our ears work.
As you yourself state, you like a "dry mix" (which actually means "unprocessed", including EQ by the way. Don't take my word for it, look it up). That is fine. I am not saying it's wrong. I am also not discounting the value of EQ and compression. But, I'm pretty sure 99% of the people mixing music here in THIS forum are also recording it. I was pointing out why reverb is a factor in the mix, whether we like it or not. We control reverb, not eliminate it, be it natural or artificial. It is something that must be understood. And thats what somebody who is inexperienced and wants to learn should be taking away from this.
I'm not discounting anything Shad nor am I trying to be controversial with you. I'm simply stating that reverb is not something someone should hold as high a priority as you are making it out to be. Listen to your own creations man. They are mostly sampled sounds and synth type arrangments (which are quite good by the way!) that really don't require reverb to sound good in a mix. You can't confuse enhancement with necessity. How many of those sounds are you mic'ing? Even if you mic'd a sound, the room in that sound is going to give it a personality. With samples, some are VERY direct and raw. Verb can play a role in how they are enhanced and it WILL make an incredible difference. Some have effects on them purposely out of the box...therefore, someone can literally use them as is. But if you were mic'ing your drums, your guitars, and anything else....you would notice that reverb is icing on the cake...not something anyone trying to achieve a solid mix should worry about or think of as "necessity" or the number one priority in the mixing realm. I would also be willing to bet that you may be the only engineer that feels this way....and that's quite ok really. You also have to keep in mind...you said "reverb". You didn't say "sound space via mic's". Totally different animal there really when you are creating your own sounds over using sampled sounds, wouldn't you say? I just think your placement of where you've put reverb as a priority is well...a bit like putting the horse after the carriage. But hey man, whatever works for you is what you should use. It's just not something I'd ever press to anyone, that's all. In my realm, verb enhances....it doesn't dictate. With dry, raw sounds, it can make them come to life and make a dry, in your face and raw sound, have a personality. But that mix should STILL be able to stand on it's own without reverb. You know how to mix...some do not. So throwing reverb into the equasion could really be a problem for people at an early stage of the game, wouldn't you agree? This is all I'm trying to convey. -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
guitartrek
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2842
- Joined: 2006/02/26 12:37:57
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 10:56:31
(permalink)
Matt - It looks like an interesting approach. I don't do anything like that now on paper. At first I didn't get it, but now I see it. It's a panning diagram right? The kick and bass are totally centered and not spread at all, thus they are at the bottom of the triangle. Vocals are in the middle but a little more spread? Rhythm guitar is spread but not out to the very edges. That's a great way of planning things out. I'm paying much more attention to panning these days.
|
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6348
- Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
- Location: London ON
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 11:00:18
(permalink)
I'm trying for an effect like Audrey is singing in a cathedral hall, so to speak.
And I'm doing this in a squashed room...
Reverb?
The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate. Bushpianos
|
guitartrek
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2842
- Joined: 2006/02/26 12:37:57
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 11:24:16
(permalink)
I would have to rank EQ, Compression and Reverb in the following order:
1) EQ - to get all the instruments working together in a mix you need to make sure they are EQ'd so that each of the instruments frequency "sweet spots" are represented, and those freqencies that have to overlap may have to be attenuated to eliminate a build up. EQ helps to lay out the instruments horizontally in the Frequency spectrum. The EQ strategy forms the basis of the mix - it is the ground floor. It is essential to get this right.
2) Compression - It is a tool to control volumes and transients - vertically along the "amplitude spectrum." A transient shaper is a type of compressor. Compressors can be used to shape the sounds and add color. I've found I've totally overused and abused compression in the past. Too fast of attack on a snare drum, for example, can kill the snare, which was one of my mistakes. I used to think that every instrument needs a compression strategy (just like EQ) but many times compression is not needed at all, or just a very slight compression is needed.
3) Reverb - helps define the room or space that the mix and gives depth. It is important for sure, but you have to have the EQ working properly before you add reverb to anything. Otherwise you just create mud. And as Danny said, you need to EQ your reverb too.
|
droddey
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5147
- Joined: 2007/02/09 03:44:49
- Location: Mountain View, CA
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 15:09:46
(permalink)
Well, I think that the 'record it right' thing really means get it as close as you can naturally, then apply compression and EQ on the way in so that it's very close to the way it should sound as recorded, and will require minimal adjustment in the mix. It doesn't mean you can't process it on the way in. You could modify it to mean 'print it as it should sound', if that makes more sense. Though this concept is dying fast these days, because fewer and fewer bands can really play, less and less money to give them the time to get it right as recorded, mroe and more bands having to record in studios without much outboard gear to print it processed or people running them with the extensive experience to do it anyway probably if they did, massive DIYer influx almost none of whom have the experience or gear to do it. And of course a huge thing in the DIYer crowd is that they are very much more just about putting out songs, not about mastering any craft. So if it requires ten X more time editing it than playing it, then whatever, just delete the bad parts, copy and paste in from somewhere else, throw a hundred plugins on it, massively automate it, and get it out there.
post edited by droddey - 2012/05/28 15:13:27
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 15:43:54
(permalink)
droddey
Well, I think that the 'record it right' thing really means get it as close as you can naturally, then apply compression and EQ on the way in so that it's very close to the way it should sound as recorded, and will require minimal adjustment in the mix. It doesn't mean you can't process it on the way in. You could modify it to mean 'print it as it should sound', if that makes more sense.
I'm not sure I'm getting this Dean..if every instrument is recorded and 'printed' as it should sound, what happens if there is frequency masking? You've still got to do the eq work in the mix, right? I know in the past I've come up with what I think is a great guitar tone in isolation, but I just can't get it sit right with other instruments in the mix without a whole lot of carving. Am I misunderstanding your meaning?
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6348
- Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
- Location: London ON
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 16:00:15
(permalink)
How does one unmask two frequencies if they coincide?
The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate. Bushpianos
|
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3902
- Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 16:16:37
(permalink)
Danny: Ah might as well blame me...it's ok, I got big shoulders for a lil guy. :) LOL!! I was sitting here listening to an arrangement when all of a sudden BOOF that left hook hit me. +1 to what others said; go write that book and don't forget to autograph it ;) Matt, Sounds like you have it under control. I'm sure everything will turn out fine ;) Interesting concept about the white noise, I guess that would add dirt to the snare; emphasizing the actual snare 'wires' to help it cut thru the mix. So I guess the consensus is; start with a dry mix, get it sounding best as possible and 'then' if need be do the finer tweaks and processing on the tracks, be subtle, oh and watch out for those guns they pack a mean punch! LOL!! . Good luck with the album, wish you great success :) .
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 16:21:22
(permalink)
trimph1
A question, I have an idea of recording my wife doing a version of Gaudette ( as in a church ) .... if one was to use a reverb which reverb would be a good one for that?
Do you have Perfect Space, Barry? Some nice church & cathedral impulses in the presets.
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 16:23:56
(permalink)
trimph1
How does one unmask two frequencies if they coincide?
If two instruments are sharing the same frequency range, and you've identified where they clash, then it's a matter of carving a 'notch' in one to reveal the other (simplistically speaking).
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|
droddey
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5147
- Joined: 2007/02/09 03:44:49
- Location: Mountain View, CA
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 16:44:47
(permalink)
jamesg1213
I'm not sure I'm getting this Dean..if every instrument is recorded and 'printed' as it should sound, what happens if there is frequency masking? You've still got to do the eq work in the mix, right?
I know in the past I've come up with what I think is a great guitar tone in isolation, but I just can't get it sit right with other instruments in the mix without a whole lot of carving.
Am I misunderstanding your meaning?
But sounding like it should sound means how it should ultimately sound in the end, not that it sounds good in isolation. You should know what you want and get it like that up front, as close as you can. It's an experience thing obviously, and something that you can only continue to work forever to improve presumably. But every time at bat should be used to learn where you got it wrong and do better next time. I mean, ultimately, there are a reasonably small number of combinations of how bass and guitars fit together, for instance. Decide up front what type of mix you want and try to make it so as printed. If you get it wrong and have to adjust, figure out why and try not to make that mistake next time. Recording it like it should sound is really equivalent to 'mixing it as you record', you are mixing it effectively on the way in, not after the fact (again, to the degree you can realistically do so, which is WAY more than most folks even attempt to.) I think that the biggest single problem is that you always want to give each individual instrument more frequency space than it can ultimately own, often way, way more. It makes it sound nice and fat and nice. Trying to learn what the appropriate frequency restriction needs to be for a given instrument in a given type of arrangement is the trick. If you do, then you can get it that way up front, even though it sounds a little wierd out of context. And the other big benfefit is that, since each part is going down as it should sound and balanced correctly before moving on, for each new part you can hear it in the context of what is effectively a pretty good mix. And this isn't a radical idea, given that it's exactly what an engineer would do if recording a real band, except that he can do it all once, not one track at a time. He's not sitting there making every instrument sound optimal on its own, he's making it sound good as a whole, then it's recorded. I'm not saying any of this because I've mastered the art, not remotely. But I have figured out enough to know that this should be the goal to be working towards mastering, if you want to be a good recording engineer and I think that anyone recording themselves should be WAY more interested in that than in learning how to do heroic retroactive correction in the mix.
post edited by droddey - 2012/05/28 16:58:33
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re:The three most important elements of mixing - Compression, EQ and Reverb. Yes?
2012/05/28 17:11:13
(permalink)
Ok, I get what you're saying, and I can see how working towards that goal would be useful.
It becomes much more difficult to do that though, if you're working with collaborative partners, as a lot of us are these days, and if you're using instruments outside the familiar guitar, bass & drums format. For example, in any given mix I can be working with mic-ed acoustic and mandolin , electric guitar recorded through pre-amp/amp sim, sampled percussion, loops, mic-ed ethnic percussion, plus electric bass, synths, real world samples..and the kitchen sink.
I realize I'm just talking about my own particular scenario, but I really don't *know* what kind of a mix I want until I have all the instruments tracked and laid out, therefore I don't know what any instrument *should* sound like in the end, until I start to mix.
I can see that the approach you're describing would work if I used all the raw tracks as scratch tracks/guides then re-tracked them as necessary, but that somehow seems to defeat the object. A mix to me is always like a blurry picture, slowly coming into focus.
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|