Just having a late night muse here...
 
I'm currently having a somewhat frustrating experience with a band I'm recording. I love them, great band. Crazy-as-all-hell spiky mad prog music, but done in a really ragged punky way. Live shows are fantastic.
 
But they're obsessed with Lo Fi in a way I just cannot wrap my head around. They're not happy with a mix until everything is squashed, fizzy, and smothered in so much delay it sounds like it's happening at the other end of a tunnel.
 
Now, I take the view, in production / mixing terms, that we're making their record, not mine. But I just can't make sense of what they seem to be asking for. It's like they're afraid of sounding good, because that wouldn't be cool.
 
Anyone ever grappled with this kind of thing?

This is why musicians should not produce their own stuff. Lack of objectivity, lack of self-confidence, too worried about what their friends will think. Are you getting paid? If so, let it go. If not, sit them down and explain why you'd rather your name be left off the credits.

That is a tricky one. I think it all starts when you start meeting with the band and they should be telling you all this before you even record anything. Then you have at least got the option of deciding whether to do it or not. If I feel like they are going to want the whole mix to sound Lo Hi but Hi Fi mixes are my thing then I don't do it. It is not worth the agony. (BTW this obsession with making everything sound retro and like it was 40 years ago is BS as well. Everything sounds way better now and we should use the current technology to get the best possible result, now)
 
But you can always learn too. Sometimes combining Hi Fi aspects of a mix with Lo Fi things can work out really great. I have had some of my ideas changed on this and been pleasantly surprised too at the outcome. But overall I still have to feel that I want things to sound a certain way at the end of the day.
 
Usually a band or artist has picked me because they heard something I did and it blew them away. Then when we get into it and they start taking over the production process.  I then have to remind of why they chose me in the first place. I tell them to bugger off about that point and go away.
 
If you have to leave your name out of any credits then you should have not done the job in the first place. How ridiculous, you do all the work and do the job but cant have your name in the credits. No I would rather be real proud of what I have done and have my name in the credits. It is the much better route. For professionals it means turning things away.
 
It also depends on how professional the whole situation is. If you are not earning huge amounts John T from this and just helping them out then yes do it because you will probably learn a lot in the process. At least you will know how to make Lo Fi mixes for example. But if you are being paid well to do a job then in my case I do it the way it needs to be done and my way and I make that very clear right from the start.
 
Danny might have some interesting things to say about this too.

bitflipper
This is why musicians should not produce their own stuff. Lack of objectivity, lack of self-confidence, too worried about what their friends will think. Are you getting paid? If so, let it go. If not, sit them down and explain why you'd rather your name be left off the credits.

I see what you're saying. But I'm not so fussed about my name being on it or not, it's more that I think what's on the hard drive is the bare bones of a great EP, and the way they want it mixed is going to turn it into a lame EP.

It's no skin off my nose, ultimately, tomorrow's another day and all that. It just seems a shame. I feel a bit like I want to save them from themselves on this one, though of course, there's a limit to how long I'll pursue that for.

Jeff, you're absolutely right in terms of treating it as a learning experience, and I do think a big part of my job here is to allow for the possibility that they've got an insight that I don't have. It's certainly not to tell them how to sound.

To give a bit more detail, we've made four tracks. There's one of the four that both I and the band love, and it kind of falls between my audio geek desire to make everything sound punchy and their punkoid desire to make everythign sound fuzzy. It's powerful and dynamic, but still scuzzy as hell. It's great; not how I'd mix left to my own devices, but really good.

I want them all to be like that, but the main chief of the band isn't biting. I can tell the bass player is on my side, but I know better than to start playing around with internal band politics.
 
Hmm, probably I should just say to them what I've said in that last paragraph but one.

John what I sometimes do in situations like this is do their mix but do my mix on the side and not tell them about it at first. Then you get them in there and play one after the other. I have seen a few jaws drop when this happens. Sort of sounds pretty obvious and then they realise how stupid they were wanting it their way.
 
And even if they want it their way when it comes to putting any of that music on my own demo I will use my own mix. Not theirs. They cannot stop you from doing that either. Or I make it clear to them that I may use some of the music for demo purposes but I control how the demo is mixed.
 
 

Regarding the pay question: there's no upfront, but there is back end. If there was up front, it'd be easier to take the money and walk away. Since it's all back end, if it sucks, there won't be any money.

Though to be clear about this, I'm not that fussed about the money. There won't be a lot any which way, though there'll be enough for me to feel like I got paid ok. It just bugs me to let something go out of the door below par.
 
 

Jeff Evans
John what I sometimes do in situations like this is do their mix but do my mix on the side and not tell them about it at first. Then you get them in there and play one after the other. I have seen a few jaws drop when this happens. Sort of sounds pretty obvious and then they realise how stupid they were wanting it their way.
 

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking of doing. If I can find the time before the deadline, I think I'll spend a day on it, to at least show them there's another approach.

And in fairness, I've no right to say "your way sucks" if I've not got something else to play them.

Jeff Evans
And even if they want it their way when it comes to putting any of that music on my own demo I will use my own mix. Not theirs.

Heh, done that before. Not so much with mixes, but definitely with cheap-ass mix-killing bad mastering jobs. I'm no mastering engineer, but I'm a lot better than any of those $10 a track internet mastering guys.

I've had a very schizophrenic week this week. Working on this, where everyone just wants to put everything in the red and sling it up on bandcamp, and working on a remix for a big artist, where the mastering guy has come back with notes, and we're tweaking back and forth between us to make it as good as possible.

The thing that's a shame, to me, is that this is all happening using the same gear. I can make the low budget act sound just as good as the bug budget act, if they'll let me. Know what I mean?