|
|
Post by lcr on Mar 20, 2014 6:21:44 GMT -6
Many discussions regarding mixing tips to improve the quality of your mixes, which is great. But what about techniques/workflows that help complete a mix FASTER. The first thing I think of that speeded up my mixes is building a static balance of levels at the peak of energy/loudness of the song with all faders in DAW at 0, using the trim plugin in the last insert of the tracks and/or busses, usually the last chorus of the song. This is my starting point for all automation with faders at 0. For me, it's a cleaner more organized way of looking at automation and level changes in sections of the song. I then automate faders from this section to the end of song. Then I automate the previous section up to this last chorus making sure the balance/energy works as the sections flow into each other. This continues until I get to the beginning of the song, basically mixing the song backwards. This helps tremendously with headroom, avoiding hitting any 2 buss processing to hard(if you use any). Im sure this technique is nothing new, it has drastically improved my efficiency. Please share anything that help you complete a mix faster.
|
|
|
|
Post by henge on Mar 20, 2014 6:47:37 GMT -6
Many discussions regarding mixing tips to improve the quality of your mixes, which is great. But what about techniques/workflows that help complete a mix FASTER. The first thing I think of that speeded up my mixes is building a static balance of levels at the peak of energy/loudness of the song with all faders in DAW at 0, using the trim plugin in the last insert of the tracks and/or busses, usually the last chorus of the song. This is my starting point for all automation with faders at 0. For me, it's a cleaner more organized way of looking at automation and level changes in sections of the song. I then automate faders from this section to the end of song. Then I automate the previous section up to this last chorus making sure the balance/energy works as the sections flow into each other. This continues until I get to the beginning of the song, basically mixing the song backwards. This helps tremendously with headroom, avoiding hitting any 2 buss processing to hard(if you use any). Im sure this technique is nothing new, it has drastically improved my efficiency. Please share anything that help you complete a mix faster. Yup I do this as well but you described it way better than I could! Also mixing quietly works for me. and liberal use of preset track templates that were made from experience. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 20, 2014 7:06:23 GMT -6
I use the same gear on the same channels, set very similar. Most of those settings on the outboard gear are for effect anyway, and the channel EQ is generally to make things fit together a bit better, so I tend to use common frequencies.
I also use track and routing templates so I always start out with the most useful DAW setup.
I figure that people want me to record them because they like the sound I get, so why should I change it by swapping around a bunch of gear each session?
As for mixing the song, I take the Andy Wallace approach and find the most "happening" part of the song and get that sounding good. That not only sets my expectation for the rest, but also sets my optimal levels as well as gets me excited for the song.
|
|
|
|
Post by lcr on Mar 20, 2014 7:57:46 GMT -6
Many discussions regarding mixing tips to improve the quality of your mixes, which is great. But what about techniques/workflows that help complete a mix FASTER. The first thing I think of that speeded up my mixes is building a static balance of levels at the peak of energy/loudness of the song with all faders in DAW at 0, using the trim plugin in the last insert of the tracks and/or busses, usually the last chorus of the song. This is my starting point for all automation with faders at 0. For me, it's a cleaner more organized way of looking at automation and level changes in sections of the song. I then automate faders from this section to the end of song. Then I automate the previous section up to this last chorus making sure the balance/energy works as the sections flow into each other. This continues until I get to the beginning of the song, basically mixing the song backwards. This helps tremendously with headroom, avoiding hitting any 2 buss processing to hard(if you use any). Im sure this technique is nothing new, it has drastically improved my efficiency. Please share anything that help you complete a mix faster. Yup I do this as well but you described it way better than I could! Also mixing quietly works for me. and liberal use of preset track templates that were made from experience. Yep, CLA talking about monitoring levels(the king of fast mixing!) says he monitors a majority of the time so low he can hear his assistants typing in the background and its sometimes distracting! His philosophy is if its exciting at low levels it will always work loud, and also you don't wear out your ears for the day. I will say I try to keep it low volume, and recently I've been checking levels(only) on headphones. Building the mix on mains always, really everything on mains, but I check my balance of levels on headphones. I may do a slight adjustment on the headphones to levels then A/B that adjustment back on the mains and usually like what the headphones told me. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 20, 2014 8:01:46 GMT -6
Another thing I'll do is if the mix isn't working, I'll switch to the auratones and just do the mix on those. Once I get it sounding good there, it'll sound huge on the big monitors. The only thing left is work on the bass region with the big monitors.
|
|
|
|
Post by lcr on Mar 20, 2014 8:02:28 GMT -6
I use the same gear on the same channels, set very similar. Most of those settings on the outboard gear are for effect anyway, and the channel EQ is generally to make things fit together a bit better, so I tend to use common frequencies. I also use track and routing templates so I always start out with the most useful DAW setup. I figure that people want me to record them because they like the sound I get, so why should I change it by swapping around a bunch of gear each session? As for mixing the song, I take the Andy Wallace approach and find the most "happening" part of the song and get that sounding good. That not only sets my expectation for the rest, but also sets my optimal levels as well as gets me excited for the song. I've somewhat limited myself to a few eq's and compressors. Really trying to learn them. As far as having "a sound", I think everyone does wether they want to or not. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Mar 20, 2014 8:21:49 GMT -6
Templates work for me. Just a couple of days ago, I reset two of my favorite templates, adjusting for some newer plugs and instruments I find I use all the time, like tambourine and shaker.
One thing that slows me down is my being dishonest with myself. Example, I needed a Wav file mix of a track I'd finished a long time back, as I only had an mp3. So, I brought up the old mix to run it again. I noticed a few places I could improve on, because I did this long before I had certain plugs I have now. In the breakdown, I noticed an acoustic guitar was too low, so instead of automating the part, I was being lazy, and just raised the acoustic guitar level a little, telling myself it was OK. Listening to the mix hours later, the acoustic is now too loud in the main part of the song, of course. My point? do it right the first time, even if it takes a few minutes longer.
Also, I tend to use reverb in a old school way, perhaps because I don't know any better. I bus one reverb and use the same setting on almost all the tracks, sometimes I use one verb for instruments, one for vocals, but I always keep like parts together, as if they're in the same room, playing together, perhaps a point or two different amount of verb, to simulate being a couple of feet forward or back, trying to create a realistic soundstage.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 20, 2014 16:12:15 GMT -6
Track what you meant. Top and tail as you go. As soon as you've got "the take" of something--get the noise gone beginning and end. What is everyone spending so much time mixing on their own work? You might need to fire your tracking engineer.  I mean, I might spend 6-8hours mixing someone else's work..,but, at LEAST 2 or that is organization/levels setting**/plumbing that's simply done as you go if you're tracking. And 2 more is fixing things they can't hear (apparently) with their monitoring...again-not applicable to anything I track. DAWs in the hands of musicians is making the scope creep on "mixing" insane, IMO. **meaning whatever you want to call channel input/tape return "base" level setting, not relative fader levels |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2014 16:58:22 GMT -6
Maybe it is more "mixing 101", but maybe it is still useful in this context...
Does the order of leveling and equing instruments fit in this thread?
May sound trivial, but first thing to get sound right - snare. Then kick. Both together. Rest of the drum kit. Bass. Bass + Kick together. Bass + drums together....
Whenever i proceed without getting the max out of this, i have to go back to it later, definitely, often beginning from scratch, losing time.
Also - if i want results quicker, i have to force myself to not beeing afraid of beginning from scratch in favor of trying to fix a non-working mix.
I try to imagine a live-mixing/FoH situation for faster mixing. Where you have to make the fundamental mixing decisions quick, and try to make things "just work" without losing focus. If it doesn't work, start over without hesitating, avoiding long discussions how to rescue it.
Setting deadlines for a working mix and avoiding "open end" sessions by any means, where i might finish work but become highly ineffective and make more wrong decisions along the way because i lose concentration and because of ear fatigue...
Whenever i lose concentration on sound work, getting ear fatigue, etc... i do editing, track organisation, basic stuff, to utilize the time i need for recovery to get my ears back to 'specs'...
Hm, hope it's useful in this discussion....dunno...
|
|
|
|
Post by lcr on Mar 20, 2014 17:19:31 GMT -6
Maybe it is more "mixing 101", but maybe it is still useful in this context... Does the order of leveling and equing instruments fit in this thread? May sound trivial, but first thing to get sound right - snare. Then kick. Both together. Rest of the drum kit. Bass. Bass + Kick together. Bass + drums together.... Whenever i proceed without getting the max out of this, i have to go back to it later, definitely, often beginning from scratch, losing time. Also - if i want results quicker, i have to force myself to not beeing afraid of beginning from scratch in favor of trying to fix a non-working mix. I try to imagine a live-mixing/FoH situation for faster mixing. Where you have to make the fundamental mixing decisions quick, and try to make things "just work" without losing focus. If it doesn't work, start over without hesitating, avoiding long discussions how to rescue it. Setting deadlines for a working mix and avoiding "open end" sessions by any means, where i might finish work but become highly ineffective and make more wrong decisions along the way because i lose concentration and because of ear fatigue... Whenever i lose concentration on sound work, getting ear fatigue, etc... i do editing, track organisation, basic stuff, to utilize the time i need for recovery to get my ears back to 'specs'... Hm, hope it's useful in this discussion....dunno... Great Suggestions. I used to start with (drum) room, Overheads, then drop snare in, Kick, Toms, etc. But when I focused on your suggestion of Snare and kick first, things happen better & faster. I usually start with kick, then snare, I should try starting with the snare. Good idea with using your time wisely to rest your ears. Question, Do you typically eq and compress the snare right off the bat, or do you get the whole kit working then start the eqing and compressing? And If you get a static kit mix first, do you process in the same order or different? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2014 17:52:30 GMT -6
Well, lcr, i got the idea to start mixing with snare instead of kick (while the obvious "scribble strip standard" starts with kick...) one day because snare, in every mix with a rhythm (  i ever liked, is the most important "intrument" and has to succeed beeing heard under all circumstances, on all consumer devices, in all volumes... I have the impression that, when i want to work quicker, starting with snare forces me to get very focused right from the start, without "warm up". OK, it is a bit hardcore, but i can relax ears a bit from the snare aggression, when it comes to the kick... I start with 'level and EQ only' until it goes to the full drum set. Then i try to get away with drum bus compression only + verb. Then i come to dynamics *if* it is needed or brings a benefit. Like getting the snare snappier, compressing room&OH etc., depending on what i want to achieve... Sometimes it is obvious i will not get away with bus compression only, and i absolutely have to use dynamics to get e.g. snare or kick right anyhow, then i do it right away on the single instrument, but always after i tried everything with level and EQ to get away without it. Most non-optimal mixes i decided to do it in another way and regret it at some point... |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Mar 20, 2014 20:21:35 GMT -6
I suppose this one won't be too popular, but it seems to work for many.
Caring less.
Speeds up the workflow dramatically.
|
|
|
|
Post by lolo on Mar 21, 2014 3:02:23 GMT -6
I suppose this one won't be too popular, but it seems to work for many. Caring less. Speeds up the workflow dramatically. Unless it is your own stuff  |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 21, 2014 6:53:17 GMT -6
I suppose the biggest determination, for me, whether a mix takes a long time or a short time, is if I record it or not. If I do, it takes a much shorter time than if someone else records it.
|
|
|
|
Post by wreck on Mar 21, 2014 14:30:48 GMT -6
I'm pretty much the opposite. If it's someone else's work I mix it fast because it's fresh and I know what needs to happen. When it's mine, I fiddle forever. I get too familiar with it at tracking and it's hard to imagine where it can go. I don't really have any outboard gear anymore so tracking is simply the best I can get with the source, mic and pre. When it comes to drums, that's never close to final. Guitars and bass never need much. But drums and vocals take time. I guess it's also the production part of my own stuff that is harder. I instantly know what I don't like about other peoples work and that's often not the case with my own work. But, more on point, I have recently discovered mixing on headphones first helps me zero in quicker, then finalize with monitors. I know that is also very unacceptable to most. Works for me though.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 21, 2014 14:34:35 GMT -6
Oh, when it's my own music, it can take forever, but I'm speaking entirely of someone else's music. If someone else records it, it's rarely up to my standards that I set for my own tracking. I try to get everything as close to how I want it, including effects and everything. I know the mics and preamps and the positioning of everything, whereas when someone else does it, I can tell immediately if they knew what they were doing or they simply put a mic up and thought that was enough. Rarely to I find that someone else has met my expectations unfortunately, which makes my mixing more like "fixing".
|
|
|
|
Post by jimwilliams on Mar 25, 2014 9:32:57 GMT -6
Shut off the PC or MAC, hide the mouse and mix on an analog console with hardwired outboard. You will work very fast that way when you don't need to look at a screen all day.
|
|
|
|
Post by nico on Mar 26, 2014 10:48:07 GMT -6
some great tips, nice thread! * lead vocals : listen to them solo before you start your mix, or dim all the other tracks way back, listen a few times until the sound and the song sticks in your head : the balance you will make after this by bringing up all the other tracks ( I'd start with kick and bass or whatever other rythmic foundation is there ) will be spontaneously and pretty rapidly close to "there". What helps as well when you do the vocal solo listen is to already shape the vocal tone you want, and building the rest around it. For EDM or urban music : you can do the same with the kick as a lead, or the hook, synth, sample...whatever is lead: stick it in your ears and go from there. * for EQ related to all the tracks in 1 song : until a few years ago I noticed that I liked to take almost the same mud-frequency areas out, boost similar high frequencies for air, boost similar sub/bass frequencies for weight, cut similar highmid frequencies for sweeter sound etc... on a majority of the song's tracks. Well, if you take care right away of individual tracks problems ( if any, like annoying peaking snare resonance, overly muddy kick...anything really standing out ), then you listen to the song with your basic volume/pan balance done to hear if you would like the whole song to be brighter, punchier, darker.....then send all your tracks to a stereo eq ( ideally the best that you have, here it is Chandler Curve Bender ) and apply a bass-boost, low-mid cut, treble boost...whatever= this will save you a lot of time as you will be closer to the overall color of sound you're after from the getgo. From there : if you find the drum tracks too bright : add a lowpass filter on them, if the bass boost brings rumble and plosives up in your vocal tracks: add a hipass filter on them etc...pretty easy and fast If you don't want one/several tracks in the stereo eq, just bus them elsewhere and treat them how you want I find this technique to ease the workflow and letting you be free-er as you're not dealing with the " damn I changed the eq on this track and love it, but other tracks don't work well anymore "- individual-track-eq'ing that is a lot harder for the majority of people working with DAWs/Hybrid setups ( including me ) and not with a console ( which still is number 1 regarding spontaneous/fast/at-arms-reach eq-ing by ear....) * keeping your track's levels post-fx hitting your target rms/peak level-zone at the mixbus consistently is crucial not to have to redo your levels after each process because "oh this compressor sounds nice" while most of the time it is also louder....( well with a lot of plugins watch out for the default setting which will most likely be louder to give us the "better"-impulse in our fancy-gui-addicted brains..., you can override any defaultsetting by your own custom settings which you can program to be closer to the source volume postcomp btw.... Plugins like Waves API 2500, PSP Mastercomp etc... have automatic gain compensation which can help here! they might not be the tools you want, but this function saves time. keeping those levels in check at all times will save you time, with a bit of practice it will become integrated in your workflow and help delivering a result with more consistency across mixes, which will make the mastering guy happy as it will save him some time so he can focus on your music as opposed to your levels * DAW templates : huge time saver : track names, colors, routing, preloaded aux sends with your fav reverbs/fx, hipass active on all channels, busses preloaded with several comps/eqs ( in bypass ) with custom default settings to easily chose a direction or just leave them bypassed, as mentioned before : trims on all channels to bring everything down if hitting daw engine too hard * have a good talk with the band/artist on the direction of the mix + reference songs if they really want : will save you time you would lose by having to do extra hours of re-do's ( it also helps putting an agreement on paper/email of the direction of the mix + saying clearly in advance that if the tracking has been done poorly, or the performance is sketchy, good results might be compromised ) * imposing oneself a deadline for the mix is also key to saving time, as a great mixer told me: a mix is only finished when you leave it be. accepting your limitations of today by stopping the mixtweaking in a masterchef-finale-fashion, makes room for improvement on the next mix tomorrow * if you are also tracking before the mix : sometimes it is better to have the band/artist redo a take of a track/section of the song, than falling for the " oh but you can fix that later, right? " it is your time after all, and if you will spend more time editing/correcting than actually mixing, either you are paid by the hour or day in which case it is the bands money and not your concern, or your mix time got eaten up you'll have to do the mix in your own time and that's tricky business, so aiming for the best sourcematerial if you can help it : big time saver .....and now back to mixing yay  best Nico |
|
i ever liked, is the most important "intrument" and has to succeed beeing heard under all circumstances, on all consumer devices, in all volumes...
