recording or mixing ?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I usually am very happy with my recording, but once I mix them it's
not so good.
Do you always use e.q and compression when mixing even if the
recording is good on each track ?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 05:02:47 -0700, seb wrote:

> I usually am very happy with my recording, but once I mix them it's
> not so good.
> Do you always use e.q and compression when mixing even if the
> recording is good on each track ?

Yes. You have to get the sounds to fit together. Sometimes that can mean
making a nice fat recorded sound thin and squashed to allow space for
other sounds.

I would not use them just because they are there though...

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:26:56 GMT, philicorda
<philicorda@novocon.plig.org> wrote:

>Yes. You have to get the sounds to fit together. Sometimes that can mean
>making a nice fat recorded sound thin and squashed to allow space for
>other sounds.

So why use this over-fat sound in the first place?

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <f5b305fe.0408160402.68cb62a4@posting.google.com> seb37000@yahoo.fr writes:

> I usually am very happy with my recording, but once I mix them it's
> not so good.

In that case, you should be less happy with your recording. Good
tracks almost mix themselves. The engineer can add artistic and
creative touches, but if you can't just push up the faders and hear a
good representation of what you expect, your tracks aren't in good
shape yet.

> Do you always use e.q and compression when mixing even if the
> recording is good on each track ?

Not necessarily. All too often beginners try to cram too much into a
mix, not realizing that many tracks take up the same portion of the
frequency spectrum. Certain frequencies build up more than they
should, making an unbalanced mix. You can use equalization to narrow
down the bandwidth of tracks that are otherwise competing for space,
but this will seem contrary to tracks that sound good on their own.
They won't, but they'll fit together better.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:12:51 -0400, Mike Rivers wrote:

>
> In article <pan.2004.08.21.06.59.28.418246@azriel.tydrwg.org> philicorda@azriel.tydrwg.org writes:
>
>> First, you don't necessarily know all the other overdubs and changes that
>> are going to be made while you are putting down the initial tracks.
>
> This is the problem with music production these days. You SHOULD know.
> Maybe not exactly, but you should have a very good idea of what you're
> trying to achieve. If you just start recording stuff and sort it out
> later, you'll have a lot of sorting to do, and you'll hate to throw
> anything away.
>
> I assure you - real producers (the kind that you wish your recordings
> sounded like except for the overcompression) know where they're going
> and they line up the right musicians and equipment to get them there.

I'm not so sure.. I've known producers to make quite drastic changes to
tracks, or even dump the lot and start again from scratch if it's not
working. Then again, I've never worked with a top producer on a really big
record, so I'm quite prepared to accept that some people can nail
it the first time.

Personally it tends to go different ways on different projects. Some
bands and their producer are pretty clear where the sound is going,
and any session musicians are booked well in advance. Others, more
experimental, self produced or rap/techno etc the production and much of
the parts tend to get created in the studio. Neither method guarantees
success.

Anyway, making space in the mixes via eq/compression is something I always
seem to end up doing, even when the production angle is fairly clear.
Another ten years and it may be a different story, but not yet.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <pan.2004.08.16.23.02.36.518125@novocon.plig.org> philicorda@novocon.plig.org writes:

> I've known producers to make quite drastic changes to
> tracks, or even dump the lot and start again from scratch if it's not
> working.

Times have changed. ProTools lests you make something totally
different from a pile of scrap, and yesterday's budgets allowed a
project to be re-started. But the key is that "it's not working." The
producer sees that and changes the direction while the project is in
progress if he can, or else constructs something that the musicians
never played during what's humorously called "mixing."

> Then again, I've never worked with a top producer on a really big
> record, so I'm quite prepared to accept that some people can nail
> it the first time.

They don't all do that, either, but they do keep a project on a course
that won't lead them to a fishing expediction in the track junkpile
unless they see that this is the only way to get the project finished.
One characteristic of a successful producer is that they DO get the
project finished and at least SOMEBODY is satisfied with the results.
The band may not like it but the label execs think they can sell it.
The band may love it, but the label decides that they should bury it.
Or everyone might be happy. You do what you have to in order to make a
living.

> Personally it tends to go different ways on different projects. Some
> bands and their producer are pretty clear where the sound is going,
> and any session musicians are booked well in advance. Others, more
> experimental, self produced or rap/techno etc the production and much of
> the parts tend to get created in the studio. Neither method guarantees
> success.

True. But this thread started with what sounds like a self-recorded,
self-produced, and unsuccessfully self-mixed home project by a person
without a lot of experience (elsewise he'd recognize what's wrong even
if he didn't see it when it was happening). All you can do in that
case is try to get rid of what's making the mix difficult. If there's
too much missing, it might be salvagable with some EQ, or it may
require some new recordings - not necessarily (usually not at all) the
exact same thing with a different mic or different compressor, but a
new part that fits bettter with what you decided has to be kept in
order to preserve the essense of the song.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo