Here's New Mix using Charles' suggestions

[Pete Weaver]

Hey Gang,

For anyone who's interested, here's a new mix I just finished,
where I employed many of the methods and plugins Charles
discussed in the Hard Disk Life Mixing series in Digizine on the
Digidesign website.

The mix is at the following address:

www.halftheworld.cc/time.mp3

I play in an unsigned band called Half The World. We were recently
approached by an entertainment attorney who wants to shop
us to labels. We have been in the process of making an album
and a new demo. We have been shooting for as close to a major
label sound as possible, so this was one of my goals in
approaching this mix.

In particular, I was focused on warming up and losing that digital
coldness that can occur in Pro Tools. I was really pleased with the
effect DUY Dadvalve, McDsp AC1 and AC2, Ren Compressor and
Ren EQ had on our mix. The tracking and mixing for this session was done in Pro Tools LE on a Digi 001 system.

We're really happy with the results we're getting.

However, I would love to talk shop about this mix.
On the overall mix, I used some gentle Ren Compressor and
Waves Linear Phase Multiband to boost the low end a bit.
Let me know if it sounds like it was boosted too much.
Also, are there any experts here on the use of DUY Wide?
I used it on the overall mix and this is one of the most
difficult plugins to understand. I don't really know if I used it right.
I simply turned up the Amount slider to 20%. All the other sliders
and buttons on this plug made the mix sound very weird.
How do you use it Charles? What settings do you use as a rule?
Also, Charles, you mentioned that you use A little Ren Compressor
on your stereo master fader . . . do you "mix into it" like you do
with AC1 or do you put Ren Compressor on at the end like you
do with DUY Wide? Also if you could go into more specific detail on
exactly what you dial in with DUY Wide that would be very helpful
to me.

Finally, Charles and anyone and everyone who has a potential
answer for me on this final question . . . when I A / B this mix
with other major label albums like, Saliva, Puddle of Mud, I notice
that I'm lacking a clarity that they have. It's not eq nor distortion,
but clearness . . . possibly due to a higher sample rate? I used
44.1 khz at 24 bits . . . I used great mics and pres . . . or is it possibly due to the mastering process they used?
It's almost like my mix sounds just a tad blurry or fuzzy in comparison . . . it's not distortion . . . I wasn't red lining any meters.

Let me know your thoughts!

Pete
www.halftheworld.cc

[sheep dispatch]

Hi Pete,

I think the DUY wide thread has a little more info on settings etc:

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showt...&threadid=1321

I was kind of interested in hearing a 'before' and 'after'... Do you have an earlier version as well?

-cal

[Pete Weaver]

Unfortunately I don't really have before / after versions of this mix
because this one was done after I studied Charles' hard disk life
series.

However, I will have another mix I need to do within the next 2
weeks which I will have before and after versions.

[Mike Jasper]

when I A / B this mix
with other major label albums like, Saliva, Puddle of Mud, I notice
that I'm lacking a clarity that they have. It's not eq nor distortion,
but clearness . . . possibly due to a higher sample rate?

I hear that, Pete. That's my number one problem too. My guess is that there are many factors affecting clarity, but like you, I have the preamps, converters and mics going in. I'm just not getting the clarity I want coming out.

I'm almost at the point of giving up on the notion and going for a retro Phil Spectorish wall of sound.

Jasper

[blackcatdigi]

Guys remember when you're A/B'ing your work to these records, that they have all been mastered (and usually by the top guys)... Could this be the difference?

Also, as Jules always says, it is imperative that you use the same dacs and set the output levels (relative loudness) as close as possible to make accurate assesments.

Cheers

[Mike Jasper]

Guys remember when you're A/B'ing your work to these records, that they have all been mastered (and usually by the top guys)... Could this be the difference?

I've thought about that, but can clarity really be fixed in the master? I don't know. And by that, I mean... I really don't know.

BTW, damn good recording, Weaver. You got my ass beat on clarity, that's for sure.

Jasper
PS -- I do get great clarity on acoustic-guitar, singer-songwriter projects, but then they're usually only 8 tracks or less.

[doug_hti]

addressing the Clarity issue:

how much of this "clairty" issue can you blame either your room or speakers.

I think people underestimate the importance of a treated room and proper room shape (including myself)....as well as having accurate monitors, placed in a good position.

What about EQ, are you dialing out what needs to be to create space for other stuff. Don't be afraid of high and low pass filters...as some of the synths, guitars are taking up subsonic space that we can't accurately hear.
Remember tape starts dropping off rapidly around 40Hz (where most nearfields aren't producing anymore).

Are you overcompressing things, which brings everything up front and creates a wall of mush.

Don't be afraid to bump up a little 10k shelving (even to the point of being a bit extreme) on the vocals or the overall mix (but be careful of guitars turning harsh or thin). Because by the time the track is normalized/mastered, whatever, you will find that a lot of the compression will be biting off the high end (unless you use multibands) and you'll lose the harshness of the air bands and will sound about right when it gets to the CD...
Are you dithering properly??

And about losing the coldness don't just put plugs on things if they don't need it. I think it's best to start off with a little and add to what needs to be added to. Don't just assume you have to put a comp or EQ on something.
There are a few guys out there that can process everything to death and come out with an amazing mix (Tom Lord Alge, probably Charles Dye) and that's an art within an art....but they have access to any worldclass tool they need.

Good Luck!!

[Mike Jasper]

Doug --

Thanks for the suggestions. I think all of them apply to me. Fortunately, I've been in the process of upgrading my room, my monitors (from Alesis to Haflers) and converters the past two months.

Jasper

[groundcontrol]

In my experience, the main difference between top productions and the rest lies in the ears of the guy that's mixing. Of course having access to an almost unlimited supply of great sounding outboard doesn't hurt! However the real difference is in the way top mix engineers (and I don't put myself in that category...) eq/compress the instruments to create little pockets for every instrument in the track. Being able to accurately and effectively sculpt the mid frequencies is where it's at. And it takes years of experience (and/or an amazing natural gift for that) to master this art. Great mastering effectively enhance what's there but doesn't create it. (Unfortunately!)

[jon]

Hi Pete,

My experience -- which is not necessarily that of others -- has been that the issue you bring up has a lot to do with mixing within PT. You can create a functional, listenable mix that may well sell records if the music's good ... but you will not get the sound of the specific analog desks that were used to mix the productions you are referencing to. PT mixing does not sound like them. It sounds different. In short, it's not necessarily an engineering or front end issue, nor a mastering issue; a good mix requires little or no sonic correction at mastering. All best,

Jon

[Jax]

Pete,

Anywhere I can d-load the whole file? It doesn't stream into my media player without buffering, so I only hear it it little chunks every 30 seconds.

BTW, you're singer... how can I say this politely (in case she's your lady)? She's uh, quite good looking!