Time...

I know that the guru's here? The mix-masters have knowledge, templates, practiced techniques? And I really look up to a lot of people here.
 
Then there are others who are really pretty good?
 
Then there are most people?
 
And then? There's me...
 
My goal is to rise to the level of "pretty good." But the time involved? The time is like a job? I put one up recently, it was "OK" I tweaked it quite a bit, it's better, but it's still OK.
 
I've taken some advice from some people I respect, and had to go back in and re-do some things... And listen, and redo some things, and listen, etc... It's taken a week, and I'm probably 1/2 way there? My problem previously (and still) is that I'm an artist 1st. I record, I track, and when I'm done? I do a quick mix, and try to improve it based on feedback. But what I want to do is put out a 1st mix where people listen and say, "hey that's pretty good!" I have a lot of the performance aspect down. I fight with the mix... But it seems like, if you slow down? If you listen to each track, and listen objectivly, and see what needs an envelop, what needs EQ, and what needs to be "re-recorded?"
 
I think this is what the people who are really good at it do. Like sniffing a carton of milk to see if it's off? They just have really well trained noses/ears. You can hide a bunch of "crap" in the mix, with compressors, and limiters, etc... But another thing that the people who do this "really well" do, is they separate the wheat from the chaff.. On the way in, before the mixing/mastering.
 
I still don't understand it "well." But I am trying hard... My next remix, I want a few folks in particular to stand up and take notice. But it takes "hours", "days", "weeks..." I think people who do it quickly are especially gifted.

bandontherun19


I know that the guru's here? The mix-masters have knowledge, templates, practiced techniques? And I really look up to a lot of people here.
 
Then there are others who are really pretty good?
 
Then there are most people?
 
And then? There's me...
 
My goal is to rise to the level of "pretty good." But the time involved? The time is like a job? I put one up recently, it was "OK" I tweaked it quite a bit, it's better, but it's still OK.
 
I've taken some advice from some people I respect, and had to go back in and re-do some things... And listen, and redo some things, and listen, etc... It's taken a week, and I'm probably 1/2 way there? My problem previously (and still) is that I'm an artist 1st. I record, I track, and when I'm done? I do a quick mix, and try to improve it based on feedback. But what I want to do is put out a 1st mix where people listen and say, "hey that's pretty good!" I have a lot of the performance aspect down. I fight with the mix... But it seems like, if you slow down? If you listen to each track, and listen objectivly, and see what needs an envelop, what needs EQ, and what needs to be "re-recorded?"
 
I think this is what the people who are really good at it do. Like sniffing a carton of milk to see if it's off? They just have really well trained noses/ears. You can hide a bunch of "crap" in the mix, with compressors, and limiters, etc... But another thing that the people who do this "really well" do, is they separate the wheat from the chaff.. On the way in, before the mixing/mastering.
 
I still don't understand it "well." But I am trying hard... My next remix, I want a few folks in particular to stand up and take notice. But it takes "hours", "days", "weeks..." I think people who do it quickly are especially gifted.

I've been seeing you make a mention of this for quite some time now in bits and pieces in various threads. It's obvious that it must be really bothering you. Can I be honest with you? I mean brutally honest? This won't make me any friends on here, but to be honest, I'm not in the friend business when it comes to this forum any more. So you can take this for what it's worth. But if you really want to learn and be done with this once and for all, here's what I'd do.
 
Before I go there, I've heard your mixes and they aren't bad at all. Decent quality for a hobbyist and you do what you do very well. If that sort of quality isn't enough for you and you want to take things truly to the next level, here are my suggestions. (and where this may get ugly) The first 2 sentences in #1 are all that applies to you. The rest of that is for those that will forever remain clueless and pollute these forums. You can move onto the bold, black 2.
 
1. Stop listening to people on this forum that talk a good game that don't post songs with the quality that you want yourself. The more you listen to friends that are supposedly "in the know" the more you sit there and spin your wheels.
 
The rest of this is not directed at anyone in particular, but if the shoe fits, wear it with pride, report me, ignore me, come get me or do whatever makes you happy.
 
I've watched several arm-chair know-it-alls post bogus crap on these forums in hopes of either sounding like they knew what they were talking about, or they were sincerely trying to help while not realizing they were/are hurting people that may be really trying to learn. Then there are a few on here that go all out like they are something special...then you listen to their material and their credibility disappears. Need I say more?
 
For those that think they are teachers on here all of a sudden that fit the above bill:
 
Rule of thumb 1: If you don't know how to teach and aren't getting good results yourself, don't try and teach another person. You're killing them and this forum with fallacy and are misleading people that do not yet know how this stuff really works. Mods should ban you before they ban someone for mentioning they use "the competition" or because of their discrepancies due to some of the apparent flaws in Cakewalk software.
 
Rule of thumb 2: If you can't go into detail to tell someone how, when, or why to fix something while having the right recipe that REALLY works, have the ability to deliver the right description while in the right frame of mind like a normal human being with a pulse and a sense of compassion, do us all a favor and don't post anything negative. Actually, don't post anything at all...especially if someone is really crying out and trying to learn. All you'll do is further confuse them with your infinite...ummm...whatever you want to call it but make no mistake, it is NOT wisdom. Mods should ban you for drama and for being an attention prostitute that doesn't care for anyone but themselves packing this forum with garbage...post after post.
 
Sharing links on the subject further confuses people. If you can't tell it in your own words in a language that an unexperiencied person can understand, don't bother wasting the space. If you do this and then try to be intimidating on top of it, how about just don't? I have a degree in hearing. The scope of my hearing test says "you suck and quite well I might add...so well in fact, you are nearly at the engulf stage".
 
I can explain something in one long post that *most* people will understand way better than your stupid, boring, cop of another persons findings that sound spoken in a language other than English. In school that was known as "Cribbing". Don't let the net fool you, you're still not a good engineer no matter how good your search engine leads you to believe. 
 
The day your friends start telling the truth is the day they really become your friends. We got enough sugar coating and horsesh!t around here to create our own Candy Land board game. There's nothing wrong with being nice, but for heaven sakes, when someone delivers something that sounds bad and is a Richard Cranium on top of it, don't feed their ego because they are your friend or you feel sorry for them. Just think, if everyone were more honest, we'd not have the creature known as "he whos name we shall not mention". You guys built him, now the rest of us are stuck with him. Thanks.
 
(Ok, rant over. I actually feel better now. Not that it will do a thing or solve anything, but it sure does feel good to say it and read it.)
 
2. If you want to learn this stuff bandontherun, it's best to have someone literally teach you. You can sit here listening to 10 different people telling you what's wrong with your mix. That does nothing for you if you yourself do not know what to listen for on your own. It can actually confuse you because you are getting too many people telling you things. That said, you CAN be taught. I had to be taught certain things and I'm not ashamed to admit that. 
 
You mention: "I think this is what the people who are really good at it do. Like sniffing a carton of milk to see if it's off? They just have really well trained noses/ears."
 
That's exactly right! And guess what? You don't even have to be really good. I know guys that can't mix to save their lives, yet for some odd reason, they can tell me things about my own stuff that need work and they are spot on. Kinda like a music teacher that may not know how to really play an instrument too well that may have the teaching/theory part down. But again, you have to know when to take this stuff as "gospel" and when to take it as a load of crap or for the sake of a voice.
 
In my realm, life has taught me to listen to those who can put up as opposed to those who put up nothing and should shut up. Do you chance having a house built by the guy that has never shown you a beautiful house he's built himself or he may have built a fair/below average house yet talks a great ball game? Or do you trust the guy that built the mansion down the street that makes you drool every time you see it that also talks a good ball game and can back it up? Ok, so you're not into mansions, the dude with the "fair" build may be your man then. Whatever works. I prefer the polished mansion. It's like singing, you learn the right way to sing first, then you can degrade your voice with rasp or strain if/when you need to. Build the mix the right way the best that you can, then go for a dirty analog sound or something if you want down the road.
 
When someone has a good set of trained ears as well as the right listening environment to make the right calls, there is no thinking/guess work of any kind. You don't listen to something and say "hmm, I wonder what could be wrong with this mix? Let me open up 9 different scopes and check it out." Mixes also take way less time. Anything over 2 days and you got a problem. 2 days is too much for me.
 
When you know what to listen for, it leaps out at you. A mix tells a trained set of ears what is wrong with it on its own, the flaws show themselves and they are easily heard. You have to learn how and what to listen for first and foremost. When you accomplish this, it's like smelling that carton of milk. You usually don't have to sniff twice because you know on the first sniff that there is a problem or there isn't.
 
However.....have you ever had an iffy carton of milk? One you weren't sure of, so you may have smelled it 5 or more times or maybe had to taste it? LOL! We sometimes DO have these types of issues in the audio field. Sometimes what you think you hear may not be the problem. So you either have to "taste it" and experiment a bit with an eq, or check it out with an analyzer.
 
3. If you're so tight you squeak money-wise, can't put in the time due to family or job etc, make excuses that have excuses, nothing is ever going to change. I can't tell you how many dudes have come begging me to help them with recording lessons only to cry about my prices, say they can't put in the time, this and that got in the way or they didn't have the money yet buy every plugin that comes out. 
 
Guess what...I don't want people like that. If I needed the money I wouldn't want people like that. I want people that want to learn that will do some work too. Not people that expect me to do everything for them to where I become their tech support. I'm not in the tech support field for cryin' out loud. 
 
Things in life cost money, they can take time and sometimes they need to be lived and experienced. If you have neither the time, the money nor the patience, you'll have to make due with what you have and just suck it up while understanding that you're not going to grow as fast. I can mix the same song 300 times. If I don't know what I'm doing, one of those times I may get lucky...but I could be doing this for 2 years before the right mix luckily comes from it.
 
Tip of the day: Don't ever fall into the trap like "those that shall remain nameless and clueless". If you ever don't know something, say you don't know. The people that act like they know everything would be way cooler and welcomed with open arms if they just fessed up that they didn't really know much at all. Instead, we are left with...well, you know the deal there. 
 
4. There is no science in the part of this field where YOU need work in my opinion. Try not to listen to those parts until you get an idea on how to make things work first and get involved with the science part later on if you wish. I assure you, knowing what to listen for goes further than any scientific offering in this field. Ask a real producer/engineer to listen to a mix on any set of monitors and he'll be able to instruct you on what HE would do. There's no science involved other than "The science of knowing what the hell you're talking about". The problem is explaining the things your ears hear in a language that you/another person can understand which could be considered "science" but other than that, stay away from it for now. Trust me. Then again, if one of the science guys we all love and respect happens to come on here and offer advice on this, it's always best to listen and give them the benefit of the doubt if it makes sense to you.
 
5. I notice you have massive respect for Yoyo. Why not try to make it worth his while and have him take you under his wing? If that's the quality you want, that's the man to talk to in depth. Any time you get someone you truly respect to comment on your stuff, take it seriously and try your best to do what they tell you. You won't get what they get if you don't listen. Then again, you need to be able to apply what they tell you. If you can't do this, the information provided will not help. That said, the information provided is only as good as the messenger that delivered it. Was he/she in depth? Did they explain things right, or were you lost? That's like saying "fix my car" without telling the mechanic what's wrong with it.
 
6. Most importantly, if you do not like the quality of material and/or information I have shared during my entire time on this forum, please accept my apology, totally ignore this post and disregard it. Do the same with any other post you read on this forum from anyone else that doesn't lead or show by example. The sooner you stop listening to those that are considered "realistically clueless", the sooner you just may get this stuff down. Good luck.
 
-Danny

Great stuff Danny!

This is an awesome topic, and as much as I love everything Danny mentioned, there is one problem:  for those Hobbiest among us, often the only voices and opinions we DO have are those on the forum!  If it were not for the advice, both good and bad, I have read over the years and applied only to realize it sucks, I would literally have learned nothing.

We can't ignore the voices on this forum.  In my case, I have no friends who are into recording.  I have no contacts.  I have me, and I have this forum, and have the internet, and I have my hobby.   As much as I would love to know when to listen, and to whom I should listen, I don't.  So I listen to everyone, try everything, and then through a very imperfect and aggravating system of trial and error, improve at a snail's pace.  But it is improvement.

The good news is that eventually I will achieve my perfect mix.  The bad news is by the time I do, I may be too hobbled by age and alcoholism to view the piano roll.

Such is the life of a hobbiest.  

You only need to read the posts by the thread starter "Yep", who is a former member of this place.

To clarify why I posted that; the OP asks about how much time is involved in getting good at mixing. And the honest answer is "a lot". However, you could spend a lot of time really ineffectively and still not be any good. As Danny says, the quality of advice on the internet is 1/ variable and 2/ clustered around the low end of the spectrum. That thread is literally the best free mixing education resource on the internet I have ever encountered, and should save any sensible person a *lot* of time.

Good info from Danny. 

I agree 100% on the armchair quarterback issue. Don't listen to people who talk a good game and know the buzz words but never post any work from their studio that proves they know how to apply it.  To me it's a case of put up or shut up when it come to advice. I use this as a measure of whose advice I listen to and whose advice I totally discount.

I was going to suggest the same thing DD did. You obviously know whose mixes you admire, so PM them and see which of them will share their mixing secrets and working paths and methods with you. Perhaps even working with you on a mix.

I also agree that if...when I start on a mix... in the final mixdown stages... all the tracking is done.... time to get it ready to export.... if I spend more than a day on it, I actually begin to over think it and ruin it.  When this begins to occur, I shut off or remove all the plugs and re-evaluate everything in it starting at square one.  Do I have the enveloping right? Now... add plugs one by one as needed. Rebuild the project FX and don't over do it this time. Stop when it sounds great. 

Usually, by doing the "back to square one" I can get the mix ready in an hour or two. The temptation to tweek the mix, with a little more of this cause it sounded good the first time around, and a little of that, and yeah lets throw this plug on the master to widen the whole thing like a football field at the 50 yard line..... is a hard temptation to over come. BUT.... like Clint Eastwood says..... "A man's got to know his limitations" and when to stop mixing and call it done is part of that "knowing". It will never be perfect. I'll bet Bob Katz even has those "Doh" moments every now and then after hearing a mix on the radio.... then again... maybe not.  

My mixing process is simple: Use only what is absolutely needed and error on the side of not enough. 

Most of my tracks are dry (except guitars) and I add verb in the busses for multiple vocal tracks. It would probably surprise a bunch of people here if they could look over my shoulder as I record and mix.... with what I do and do not have in the FX bins. There are of course exceptions, but many of the projects I do have very few FX in them....and I tend to use the same ones every time. 


I think too, that while this is a topic on mixing.... you can not get a good mix no matter what you do, if the tracks are not properly recorded. The tracks are the foundation of the mix. If the tracks are weak or eq'd wrong and printed.... you will pull your hair out trying to "fix it in the mix". 

Working on the final mix starts with the first track that gets recorded. Remember that, and work toward that goal and your mixing will be pretty much effortless and a breeze. 

I hope this was useful. 

+1 Danny

Your right on target!

Clifford

Like I said...Danny has a BOOK in there!!!

+ 1 to Danny as well.  That is just about the funniest rant that I have read on these forums.  Why, because it is 100% true!!  

My first year at a couple of different forum sites was exactly as described, I listened to everything, everyone had to say, thinking they were experts on the subject.  One guy would tell me it was too much bass, so I would turn it down.  The next guy would come along and say the bass was too low, so I would turn it back up.  Round and round I went.  The straw that broke the camels back for me was when one guy told me that there was no low end in the recording and when I questioned him further, it was not coming across on his laptop speakers, therefore my mix was wrong.  


It took a while, but I learned who's opinions to trust and also learned to trust myself.  I don't knee jerk reaction to any opinion these days. Instead, I often go to the site of the adviser and check out their music and mixes.  As Danny said above, if their work is good, their opinions probably are more weighted.

Danny Danzi said .....
 
Stop listening to people on this forum that talk a good game that don't post songs with the quality that you want yourself.

 
That is one of the best lines I have read in the past year on these forums. Well said Danny!

Here's the problem with Danny's approach. He doesn't live on the West Coast so I can hang out with him.

Words of wisdom there my friend. I can't tell you how many times I have heard diatribes from an "expert" on the internet here and over at GS, then listen to their tracks and realize they haven't got a clue.

I would add some free advice for the OP. Go to Youtube and type in "Pensado's Place". If you have the time listen to all 60+ episodes which are a master class in mixing. If you don't have the time, as they are 1 hour each, go to his site and just review the ITL (Into the Lair) outtakes from the videos. Those are the best sources of mixing information anywhere and they are free. Clearing the middle of the mix is one of his classics.

Know that, mixing is what you do with the tracks in front of you. If you don't have good tracks, you can end up chasing your tail. I would charge you with learning how to capture the source well. If it sounds good after tracking, the mixing process becomes an artistic endeavor versus a mercy mission. Many times a new learner will be challenged with poorly recorded tracks (wrong space, wrong mic, unfocused performance) and then move to mixing while learning all the tools. The chances of success or satisfaction will be very low and your frustration high. Teaching your ear to understand when you have a good sounding track vs an amateur sounding track is important.
 
As makeshift points out. Half the opinions you will get from people on the internet are guys listening on their laptop or earbuds. Mix opinions can be all over the map based on this alone.

Great genuine wisdom Danny, please don't stop posting here because some of the members are more interested in playing virtual king of the hill and spend most of their spare time on here quibbling over semantics when they should be in the wood shed practicing their skills.
 I share the same concerns regarding new members leaving here with the wrong message but I think the great majority of us hobbyist know when they're getting the genuine article when hearing from the top producers like you.
 The forums are not the same when you're not here. Your wisdom and generous nature will always be loved here brother. 

 Thanks for the link JohnT, I have some of his old posts saved as a text file
It's good  to see you here more often, I've heard a mix you did with a female singer that was splendid if I'm not mistaken. To my ears it sounded like a pro did it. Just wanted to let you know there are folks interested here in what the real pros have to say so if you ever want to share, I'm all eyes

 Robby, I always thought of your mixes as much more than a hobbiest. Some of your arrangements have many timbres and layers, different instruments and such. I think in a way you give yourself a much tougher job to do to get that perfect mix. I think if you put a bit of time in between when you record and when you mix, like a week or so to give yourself a chance to defrag you may nail that home run mix easier with a fresh perspective. JMO. Im any case the performance and capture are always spot on to my ears. 
 I look forward to catching up with what I missed from you.

mattplaysguitar


Very interesting point here made about the quality of the tracks that are used for mixing. Funny thing is, this is two very typical scenarios:

1 - Amateur mixing engineer is given or records low quality tracks at which to work with. Thus it's hard to create a great sounding mix. All the time is spent trying to fix the problems with recording and no room is then given for any artistic enhancements. They are fighting an uphill battle. They read information on mixing from the pros. It doesn't work. Nothing works.

2 - Professional is given or records high/higher quality mixes with which to work with. Mixing is a breeze. It sounds great automatically. Then they are free to use their already superior skills on a superior track to make it sound amazing. They then publish their techniques to mixing an amazing track. The amateur reads these techniques and wonders why it doesn't sound as good as the pro mix.


Thus the degree of separation between pro an amateur is increased. Give both guys the SAME mix, and you may find that the hobby guy is better than you realised and the pro is not as good as you first thought.


Obviously the true pro (a true pro) can still do amazing things with sub-quality recordings, but you get my point.


This just reiterates the importance of getting good tracks in the recording!


Don't even get started on the importance of adequate composition to making a mix sound good.. Bad composition and choice of instruments can make life exceedingly difficult and hard to mix. It can easily make or break the perception of a great mix.

+1
 
Also, consider, the Op himself has done mostly covers these last couple years.  That kind of emulation is extremely difficult and tricky.  Few persons here can exceed another master's masterpiece.
 
Its hard to talk about mixing covers, which the Op has struggled with.
 
IMHO, the Ops greatest cover success occurred when he sang and mixed "He Ain't Heavy He's My Brother".  In fact, I felt it was mixed and sung at least as well as the original !!!!!!
 
I seriously hope the Op would finally cover one of my (Philip's) songs and/or mix it.

I think that's really pertinent. There's a lot you could read about this subject that suggests you're waiting for a magical moment when it all clicks and you're a mix wizard all of a sudden. And somehow you'll get there by twisting knobs and "using your ears" (lamest non-advice ever, of course you're using your ears).

The reality is more mundane. Like any craft, there's a whole bunch of stuff to learn, and you can just start picking these things off one by one, just as Danny describes above.

As to Danny's point about a lot of big name tutorial stuff not being pertinent, I'd agree. In fact, I'd go further and say that the majority of what you can find on the web and in books about mixing is not going to be all that relevant to you. Listening to a couple of your mixes, you're already pretty good. So that cuts out the 70% or so of this stuff that's re-iterating beginner-level issues, as well as the high end stuff Danny refers to.

A much, much better source than most of that is Mike Senior's regular Mix Rescue column in Sound On Sound, which is deliberately always done using reader-submitted tracks on off-the-shelf hardware and software. Most of the time he restricts himself to bundled plug ins too. So that's a guy with a very credible CV as a mix engineer, working with the kind of tools and materials that guys like us have. Such an obvious idea, it's kind of amazing that you don't see it elsewhere.

Mix Rescues are online for free three months after they're in print, and they have before and after audio examples, and sometimes individual tracks and snippets showing different approaches and methods that have been tried along the way.