Quote:
Originally posted by doorknocker
I'd say a lot of time you need 'degradation' to make a mix work. Let's say I'm tracking electric guitar, naturally I will try to think ahead and capture a sound that sonically doesn't carry too much excess baggage, but then again I will leave all the options open. I see it as 'trimming the fat' in most cases, get a sound that is great but probably slightly too big in context. Mostly it will mean cutting some midrange or perhaps adding a bit of shelving EQ, what's wrong with that?
Just yesterday at a band rehearsal the drummer suggested I should use a cleaner sound on a certain rhythm part, I stepped on my Boss DS-1, slightly turned down the volume on the guitar and that was it. The sound WAS much better in context, adding a bit of distortion made it 'cleaner' i.e made it work in the whole picture. Mixing is the same to me, don't fix it when it ain't broken but please don't be so precious about the source.
 Andi
www.doorknocker.ch |
In the first example (tracking), you're using a processor (EQ) to compensate for using another processor (summing). If it works, it works!
I don't own an EQ myself, so I don't have that option. The only EQ that I've used that does minimal damage to the sound is a GML, and that's pretty spendy for a tool I don't need, if only I plan well. I've found that when the sounds are really tracked all at once, to the same mic(s), and well, I don't need or want an EQ. Maybe at some point I'll provide for getting myself in a jam and get a GML- maybe not!
In the second example, you're tailoring the source as a source to work with the ensemble. I'm all for it! That's the approach I always take.
It's been years since I've done an overdub, but I'm thinking strongly of taking up that black art again- requires some serious expenditures and choices even to be able to overdub, not including EQ's and compressors and other things that start to seem necessary in such a jam. We'll see what happens!