caminitic
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 151
- Joined: 2012/05/28 16:46:22
- Status: offline
mixing hit songs (is easy)
So...a studio buddy of mine here in Nashville has DVDs of multitrack releases to hit songs, including some by Queen and Michael Jackson. I was amazed at how "perfect" the songs were with absolutely NO mixing. For example, "Billie Jean" sounded nearly finished after importing the 30-40 tracks and making a few simple volume and panning adjustments. The tracks were dry with no effects on them. You even hear MJ snapping in the vocal booth while he's singing. Here I am cutting, boosting, carving, sidechaining, layering, parallel compressing, saturating, doubling, etc, etc. Such a loaded question, but why does theirs sound amazing with nothing, and my normal mixes sound marginal with all the fixins?? I swear I'd be a better mixer/producer if I had that same source material...lol Humbled, Rizzo
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 14:32:50
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby cparmerlee 2017/10/08 04:59:53
Talented performers, and fantastic takes captured perfectly with high end gear, by engineers who know their craft - I would say
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|
Cactus Music
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8424
- Joined: 2004/02/09 21:34:04
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 14:34:09
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby bapu 2017/10/07 15:00:03
Congratulation, You just "got it" Only record real good stuff and record it so it sounds as good as it's every going to sound. Don't hit that button until the part sounds right and can be played or sung at it's best. It will mix it self if all the levels were set properly too. I think a huge problem with unlimited tracking is people just record garbage and then try and make it sound good after the fact. It's why I don't even use Guitar sims. I get the guitar part to sound the way I want to fit the song,,, then I hit the button.. and I play my part all the way through if at all possible.
|
jamesg1213
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21760
- Joined: 2006/04/18 14:42:48
- Location: SW Scotland
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 14:38:07
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby bapu 2017/10/07 14:58:12
Cactus Music It's why I don't even use Guitar sims. I get the guitar part to sound the way I want to fit the song,,, then I hit the button.. and I play my part all the way through if at all possible.
Me too. The sound going in has to be just right, otherwise it changes how and what I play.
Jyemz Thrombold's Patented Brisk Weather Pantaloonettes with Inclementometer
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 14:57:10
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby John 2017/10/07 18:13:40
Back then it was all about "Do it now" Vs. "Do it later". Most of the time EQ, Compression and even Reverb/Delay FX were printed right to tape. That was what I did and many, many others did as well. Matter of fact when I first started using Sonar I used this approach and used it for many years. It's a double edged sword as you can either capture lightening in a bottle or capture something that can never be changed. that is the sword of destructive recording. There is something to be said about this way of working. you are left with data that is, in many ways un-editable. Every mistake, every little nuance caught on tape in the moment. Joe Walsh has been a big promoter on this method of recording. His stories of how the album "Hotel California" was recorded really zooms in on this way of recording. There are only so many "Do overs" you can get before it sounds too polished and over done. Sometimes those little mistakes add up to become collective work of art. A good example would be to compare it to classic paintings done in, for example; 1600's thru 1800's. An artist used a brush to capture his visions. I believe this is still the best way to work Vs. using Photoshop to fix little mistakes and add vibrance. There are and will be many different opinions on the craft and how to work using both methods (early and present). There is no debate though because everyone works in different ways and I could never argue anyone's opinion no matter how bizarre because they are artists and we should respect that. Face it, the best art has been born out of experiment, accident or breaking through the barriers of logic. Which one will you use ?
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 15:00:52
(permalink)
jamesg1213
Cactus Music It's why I don't even use Guitar sims. I get the guitar part to sound the way I want to fit the song,,, then I hit the button.. and I play my part all the way through if at all possible.
Me too. The sound going in has to be just right, otherwise it changes how and what I play.
Good points from both of you. I do use guitar Sims out of necessity. rough drafting a song late at night or when a guitar amp is not feasible. But a real amp has always been my number one choice. James is right, a guitar sound will change the way you play something. And what Johnny mentioned about playing his parts all the way through was exactly what I was touching on in my previous post.
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
THambrecht
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 867
- Joined: 2010/12/10 06:42:03
- Location: Germany
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 15:17:56
(permalink)
Old school composing and recording. In the times we had only tapes, we could nothing "edit". The song had to be perfect BEFORE we began to record it. Mostly Compressors, Limiters, effects are done during recording. The band could also play it live perfect.
We digitize tapes, vinyl, dat, md ... in broadcast and studio quality for publishers, public institutions and individuals.4 x Intel Quad-CPU, 4GHz Sonar Platinum (Windows 10 - 64Bit) and 14 computers for recording tapes, vinyl ... 4 x RME Fireface 800, 2 x Roland Octa Capture and 4 x Roland Quad Capture, Focusrite .... Studer A80, RP99, EMT948 ... (Germany) http://www.hambrecht.de
|
pwalpwal
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3249
- Joined: 2015/01/17 03:52:50
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 15:31:11
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby chuckebaby 2017/10/07 16:26:22
"the studio" (ie, daw) has become instrument-like itself, with all the knock-on that implies - popsters these days are using their computer as the gateway to making music rather than a guitar or piano, possibly because of accessibility but maybe because of convenience... in order to get the tones on the way in, one has to have acce$$ to the required hardware
|
35mm
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1105
- Joined: 2008/12/09 08:21:44
- Location: Devon, UK
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 16:19:36
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby pwalpwal 2017/10/07 16:39:04
The digital realm has changed the way we work. As others have alluded to, working with tape, analog mixing desks and hardware outboard gear was a very different process that had many more limitations. Back then the time and effort used to go into capturing the perfect sound to tape, processing each sound as it was recorded to get as close as possible to the final sound. This was done for several reasons but the main one being the limited supply of hardware processors available even in a high-end studio. Working in the box with digital, the time and effort is spent in post recording - we tend to record unprocessed sound and then process it in the mix simply because we can as we have an unlimited supply of any one processor. In essence, the amount of effort is the same but happens at a different stage, so while mixing from tape seems easy, it's because most of the processing has already done in getting the sound to the tape in the first place - premixing. The final mix will just involve balancing and tweaking and the processors you used during recording are now freed up again for finalizing the mix. The above is the basic answer, but there are a few other factors too. It's easy to over complicate stuff in a DAW. The old adage "less is more" is worth remembering. There are also many more things we can do in a DAW to improve the mix beyond what we could have ever done before.
Splat, Win 10 64bit and all sorts of musical odds and sods collected over the years, but still missing a lot of my old analogue stuff I sold off years ago.
|
Cactus Music
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8424
- Joined: 2004/02/09 21:34:04
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 16:32:20
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby pwalpwal 2017/10/07 16:40:31
in order to get the tones on the way in, one has to have acce$$ to the required hardware I agree to this as it is correct that possibly a majority of just starting out DAW users only have the basics on hand. They may not have made the investment in a good guitar or bass rig, or even got their singing chops yet. But then when those folks wonder why their recording still don't sound like a hit record after they have created a monster with 1,000 loops, 86 audio tracks, 96 midi tracks and effects on everything up the wazoo the answer is going to always be - garbage in garbage out. Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly no purist and certainly "cheat" a little from time to time. I'll admit to punching in, did that with tape too, but often I just hit the big W_ R and go at it again because I'll get pizzed at myself for making a mistake. But if I record let say a guitar track and I'm not happy with the way it sounds,,, I'm more likely to re do it and try a different guitar or amp setting than reach for the digital toolbox. Me too. The sound going in has to be just right, otherwise it changes how and what I play. +100
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 17:19:48
(permalink)
Time investment in composition, practice, and performance outweighs time editing. The market is flooded with editing tools, and people seem to be more attracted to editing possibilities than the composition. Some DAWs lack rudimentary composition tools, and focus marketing to editing.. and some consumers scarf that up hook, line, and sinker.
Many one-album bands found this out the hard way. Some spent years performing and perfecting that first album, so album 2 in six months didn't make it. A take is quick, but editing is not... an entire album is less than an hour to play through on one instrument.
A friend of mine still does most of his work on a 4-track since it forces the "one-take concept" as well as "have the piece pretty well composed before you ever hit any record button." Ironically that mindset reinforces performance versus editing technique.
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|
stickman393
Max Output Level: -60 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1528
- Joined: 2003/11/07 18:35:26
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 17:23:04
(permalink)
In addition to what everyone else has said, my guess is that also the multi-tracks don't include all the stuff they didn't use in the final mix. Including dead space between sections in one track.
|
MarioD
Max Output Level: -72 dBFS
- Total Posts : 901
- Joined: 2006/04/15 15:59:50
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/07 20:19:01
(permalink)
mettelus Time investment in composition, practice, and performance outweighs time editing. The market is flooded with editing tools, and people seem to be more attracted to editing possibilities than the composition...........................
This hits the nail right on the head. Great tracks equal easy mixing. To many of us, including myself at times, try to take a mediocre track and polish it to a great track. Most of the time it ain't gonna happen. I use amp sims because I don't have all of the amps in a sim and I have to be careful about the volume levels. Many times I will record the guitar straight into Sonar then add either a sim or an effect. The advantage is that I can try different amps, amp settings and/or effects without re-recording. I know that this is a very subjective matter to some so YMMV.
The reason people say the vinyl sounds better is because the music was better. Sonar Platinum, Intel i7 –2600 CPU @ 3.2 GHz, 16 GB ram, 2x2TB internal drives and 1 1TB internal drive, Radeon HD 5570 video card, HP 25" monitor, Roland Octa Capture, MOTU Midi Express 128, Win 10 Pro www.soundcloud.com/Mario_Guitar
|
randyman
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2005/05/17 20:44:11
- Location: ga
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 01:49:58
(permalink)
I'll add (though it is a little off topic), that being a primarily keyboardist, there was a time (in the 80's) that I had to have every new keyboard, rack module, et al., that came around (some of which I still have today - Emu EMax HD anyone?) and then I realized I was only chasing a quick fix for 'that' sound or something. Then I got serious and got rid of most things and decided to really take that time to learn what say, my Roland D-50 could do (all those parameters, envelopes, etc.) and exploit it to the max. Admittedly, I learned a LOT. Then I also went to work for Chrysalis records for a couple of years too back then as a hired hand. Nothing like working with those that have their 10,000+ hours doing their craft. It really is like magic. (and sadly, I don't think I retained any of that magic after my stroke - but that's another story) Like others have already mentioned, it pays to capture the best version of the track you can - you will never be able to 'really' fix it in the mix. I recall telling the singer to 'do it again' through this particular passage - like 20 times and they were not happy. In the end, the song won an award for the vocalist and production. They forgot about the amount of time it took. >>> Time investment in composition, practice, and performance outweighs time editing <<< says it all. Good luck and enjoy the journey!
A rack of noisemakers is not a definitive substitute for creativity. (though it does seem to help) what I spend my lunch time doing: (don't laugh - its just for fun!) www.soundclick.com/rnewburn
|
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13933
- Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 02:03:20
(permalink)
Well I guess this all hinges on whether or not what Chuck said about FX being printed to tape is true in this case. Because if it is, then the stems in question aren't "unmixed." How much do you know about the source of those stems and what state they were in? I sometimes do all of my EQ and compression (and other effects) in Sonar, and then export the stems with FX included to import them into Mixbus to get some Harrison color & analog summing. If someone were to take those stems and put them together without adding any effects themselves, they might well think "wow these sound decent and I haven't added a single EQ." I've heard a few songs in multitrack format (for example, Rosanna by Toto) and they most certainly had some effects printed with them, for example reverb on the vocals.
JamesWindows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 02:10:31
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Dickie Fredericks 2017/10/08 11:40:33
Cactus Music It's why I don't even use Guitar sims. I get the guitar part to sound the way I want to fit the song,,, then I hit the button.. and I play my part all the way through if at all possible.
You can do the same thing with amp sims, I get the sound I want with the amp sim and it doesn't change. The main reason I use amp sims is because I can get exactly the sound I want.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 02:13:43
(permalink)
sharke Well I guess this all hinges on whether or not what Chuck said about FX being printed to tape is true in this case.
This was a very common practice. Remember, it was in the days of hardware...if you wanted an LA-2A on 16 tracks, you needed 16 LA-2As, you couldn't just insert the same plug-in 16 times. Also, tracks were bounced a lot. Because you couldn't retrieve the original tracks for the bounce (except from safeties, which due to sync and such was a whole other can of worms), you tried to get the bounces as close as possible to finished. But getting back to the premise, yes, it's great when songs just mix themselves.
|
Cactus Music
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8424
- Joined: 2004/02/09 21:34:04
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 02:14:05
(permalink)
I don't print effects to "tape" and never did even before DAW's. Sure, my guitar I'll run through my stomp boxes, but vocals as far I know are now and have always been recorded dry. I'm sure the people who recorded those tracks didn't either. Obviously the tracks have possibly been enhanced before releasing to the public.
|
cparmerlee
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1153
- Joined: 2013/06/25 22:14:42
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 05:09:33
(permalink)
jamesg1213 Talented performers
I think many people under-appreciate that many of the most successful performers are truly talented. We have all seen the parade of no-talents that get propped up to sing the National Anthem at the Super Bowl and such. But there really are some great talents out there who approach their art as perfectionists and work very hard at it. Back in the day, I played in a band that warmed up for The Spinners a few times. They were extremely impressive. They did the same show every night, yet the afternoon of the show, they would have a heavy rehearsal to make sure they still had all the choreography working perfectly. I have heard that Johnny Mathis did most of his songs on one take because the record company wanted to keep the budget low. Yet his phrasing and intonation are impeccable every time -- without Autotune or Melodyne. I play in an instrumental quartet with really solid players. We did a recording session last week to produce some fresh demo material. It is really a humbling experience because, even though it sounds OK, it is far from perfect and not nearly up to the standards of the best players. Yes, I can use the studio tools to make it sound just fine for demo material, but it really makes me appreciate just how good the best musicians are.
DAW: SONAR Platinum Audio I/F: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 gen2 OS: Windows 10 64-bit CPU: Haswell 4790 4.0 GHz, 4 core, 8 thread Memory: 16 GB Video: GTX-760Ti Storage: Sandisk SSD 500GB for active projects. ReadyNAS 20 TB for long-term storagesonocrafters.com
|
noynekker
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1235
- Joined: 2012/01/12 01:09:45
- Location: POCO, by the river, Canada
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 05:51:57
(permalink)
Music that is really well recorded tends to mix itself. Simple, just adjust the levels of the tracks. Arrangements that are really well conceived also mix themselves, everything recorded will just occupy it's own space and not interfere too much with anything else. Everything else, like compression, EQ, limiting, stereo imaging, and reverb / room ambience are just compensating for inadequate recording and arranging techniques. Talent just makes the whole process smoother.
Cakewalk by Bandlab, Cubase, RME Babyface Pro, Intel i7 3770K @3.5Ghz, Asus P8Z77-VPro/Thunderbolt, 32GB DDR3 RAM, GeForce GTX 660 Ti, 250 GB OS SSD, 2TB HDD samples, Win 10 Pro 64 bit, backed up by Macrium Reflect, Novation Impulse 61 Midi Key Controller, Tannoy Active Near Field Monitors, Guitars by Vantage, Gibson, Yamaki and Ovation.
|
Songroom
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 174
- Joined: 2013/09/19 02:18:32
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 09:41:36
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby cparmerlee 2017/10/08 15:44:44
There's no doubt that great performances are vital, but it's also worth mentioning that many of the publicly available multitrack masters are actually stems. For example, the original recording of Queen's 'Bohemian Rhapsody' includes 180 tracks, the majority of which were used for the vocals. To accommodate this, several 24 track machines were chained together and later mixed down to a 'more manageable' set of stems for mixing purposes. I know this is an extreme example, but many of the available 'multitrack masters' have been through a similar process. Brian May goes into detail in the following video... Mixing Bohemian Rhapsody
post edited by Songroom - 2017/10/08 11:34:19
Sonar Platinum - BandLab Cakewalk - Presonus 16.0.2 - Tannoys - Lava BandLamp ?
|
cparmerlee
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1153
- Joined: 2013/06/25 22:14:42
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 15:24:55
(permalink)
noynekker Arrangements that are really well conceived also mix themselves,
I think this is a really important point. I have arranged for jazz bands and pop/funk bands for decades. Through most of that time, my attention was mostly on the music theory and making the musical lines sound hip. I spent relatively little time thinking about the "mix" per se. I have been work with ("tinkering with" is probably more accurate) SONAR and related technologies for the past 8 years or so. After about 6 months I had an epiphany that mixing and arrangement are (or should be) almost the same thing. Both are all about letting the music be heard in its best context. I'm not a great sound engineer at this stage. But I am a 100% better arranger for having this engineering experience. The best arrangers (people like Sammy Nestico, Dave Wolpe, and Mike Tomarro in the big band jazz space) and the best orchestrators (Maurice Ravel, Warren Barker, Danny Elfman et al) seem to understand these concepts intuitively, whereas people like John Williams tend to just pound the drums harder when they want more emotion.
DAW: SONAR Platinum Audio I/F: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 gen2 OS: Windows 10 64-bit CPU: Haswell 4790 4.0 GHz, 4 core, 8 thread Memory: 16 GB Video: GTX-760Ti Storage: Sandisk SSD 500GB for active projects. ReadyNAS 20 TB for long-term storagesonocrafters.com
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 16:02:58
(permalink)
Cactus Music I don't print effects to "tape" and never did even before DAW's. Sure, my guitar I'll run through my stomp boxes, but vocals as far I know are now and have always been recorded dry.
Well, there are different shades of "dry." Although you didn't do things like print reverb with vocals (at least I didn't, and vocals were often one of the tracks for which you reserved your hardware processors during mixdown), you were typically using one of dozens of carefully chosen mics whose frequency response matched the vocalist best, running through a well-maintained tube preamp, and then going to the tape via a channel strip with just a touch of EQ and maybe a limiter to catch the very highest peaks "just in case"...with tape adding a hint of harmonic distortion as soon as the signal got over -20. Anyone who recorded to tape was processing the signal whether they wanted to or not. As to the guitar example, "back in the day" the intention in the studio was often to capture the live sound of a band. A lot of those musicians had effects they used onstage, they brought them into the studio, and recorded the resulting sounds. So while technically speaking processing may not have been added from the studio's backline, the tracks were still being printed with processing. Also with something like drums, the room itself added processing, and engineers took advantage of that "effect" with mic placement. So the bottom line was that a lot of the work required to get the sounds people wanted occurred before the signal hit the tape, and while the signal hit the tape. Although it's not "processing" the way we think of it today, it served the same purpose. Many of the plug-ins sold by people like Waves, UA, and of course the console stuff in SONAR are intended to recreate this processing.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 16:21:35
(permalink)
Here's a good example of using of printing with effects. I've recorded a lot of classical guitar projects, and one guitarist in particular had a gorgeous guitar that projected like crazy on stage because of a massive resonance (around 200 Hz IIRC). Setting record levels to accommodate the peaks at this frequency meant everything else had to be quite low, and of course, tape hiss was an issue with classical guitar. So I cut around 200 Hz on the way in. If I needed to restore that a bit on playback - although I seldom did, because I wanted the sound to be more balanced - I could increase the bass in just that range. If I had cut it while mixing, the hiss from the low level signals would have still been present...actually, more prominent because then I would have needed to raise the overall guitar level somewhat.
|
rscain
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 784
- Joined: 2004/03/23 09:52:29
- Location: Kentucky
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 17:31:19
(permalink)
Let's also don't forget that in most cases (I'd venture almost surely on the stems the OP describes) the musicians themselves are supremely talented. The "A List" studio guys have a knack for playing just the right parts in just the right way, that's why they're A Listers. I recall watching a video of Fagen and Becker talking about recording "Kid Charlemagne". They tried a bunch of different guitarists for the solo and none of them could get just the right feel. Then they called Larry Carlton and he came in and nailed it in one take. Imagine that; an iconic, killer solo completely off the cuff, one take and see you later, put the check in the mail. Maybe a once in a lifetime for most of us, business as usual for those guys. The same applies to the engineers that record those performances. Usually they're the tops in the field and have access to great equipment and spaces that most of us can only dream about. This is absolutely not a knock on anybody around here, we have some amazing talent on these pages. But let's face it, those guys are in another league.
My Tunes On SoundClick AMD FX9350 @4 gHz, 16 gb ram, 240 gb SSD, 2 1Tb SS/Hybrid HDs, 1 Tb Fantom External HD, Windows 10 64 bit, Sonar Platinum 64 bit, Studio One 4 Pro, Harrison Mixbus, Izotope Neutron 2 Advanced and Ozone 8 Advanced, ARC 2, NI Komplete 11 Ultimate, TC-Helicon VoiceLive 3, Focusrite Saffire Pro 24 DSP, Focusrite Octopre MkII, KRK Rokit 8 monitors, Sennheiser HD 280 pro headphones, MidiMan Oxygen 8, Behringer X-Touch, guitars and stuff
|
pwalpwal
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3249
- Joined: 2015/01/17 03:52:50
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/08 17:56:43
(permalink)
i think we all agree that great performers performing a great arrangement leads to an easy and probably great mix, but which plugins should i be using!?
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/09 00:52:11
(permalink)
Anderton As to the guitar example, "back in the day" the intention in the studio was often to capture the live sound of a band. A lot of those musicians had effects they used onstage, they brought them into the studio, and recorded the resulting sounds. So while technically speaking processing may not have been added from the studio's backline, the tracks were still being printed with processing. Also with something like drums, the room itself added processing, and engineers took advantage of that "effect" with mic placement. So the bottom line was that a lot of the work required to get the sounds people wanted occurred before the signal hit the tape, and while the signal hit the tape. Although it's not "processing" the way we think of it today, it served the same purpose. Many of the plug-ins sold by people like Waves, UA, and of course the console stuff in SONAR are intended to recreate this processing.
+1 I really couldn't have said this better myself Craig and I know you lived through it that's why you understand it very well. I know that people have a hard time believing it But trust me, things have changed a lot since then. A good example is Aerosmith's "Toys in the attic". Almost everything you hear was printed right to tape. As was the follow up "Rocks". which was recorded with the rolling stones mobile in Waltham, Ma. Toys was mixed and recorded at the Record plant by Jack Douglas (and Jay Messina) Jay still mixes now. you can find him online and his rates are reasonable. If you really want to know what it was like recording and mixing a classic album back in the day, this is a great inside look. http://www.aerosmithtemple.com/latest/how-the-bad-boys-from-boston-recorded-their-finest-albums What reverbs did you have at the time of recording Toys in the attic ? "They had some really cool EMT plates, and a spring reverb. Most of the reverb you hear—like on “Sweet Emotion”—was the EMTs. If we had a cool reverb sound going, we just printed it to tape."
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
caminitic
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 151
- Joined: 2012/05/28 16:46:22
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/09 04:59:46
(permalink)
Incredible insight on here from everyone. I'm just sitting back and getting educated. Most of the music circles around here (Nashville) are looking for the guys -- ahem -- one guy -- who can do it all...write, sing, produce, mix...the works. From a computer. So...that's what I'm trying to get better at. I'll never be a Larry Carlton or Quincy Jones anyway, so it works out...lol This video of Charlie Puth is pretty unreal...say what you will about pop music, but this kid is a prodigy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU8BEMi8UyM
|
Audioicon
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 349
- Joined: 2016/06/13 23:25:25
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/09 05:18:25
(permalink)
This thread should be a sticky. One of the best threads I have read on these forums:
Great contribution and reference.
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: mixing hit songs (is easy)
2017/10/09 05:59:52
(permalink)
"One guy who can do it all" is the exception rather than the norm, and "from a computer" sort of pushes the editing tools. The DAW/app industry banks on people striving for the one guy aspect. Overdubbing and live performance are different beasts, although there are some bands that were formed to perform one person's work.
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|