Major Label Singles Mixed In The Box(ITB)! List Them Here!!!

[davidwilson]

WOW.

Rob it looks like you have posted on the compleatly wrong forum if your wanting an informed and intelligent response from your question.
If any of those guys earlier who said 50% or more I like them to list 5 in the current top 10 with documented proof. Thats if they actually know what ITB means.

Some good responses from others though.

I don't think iv'e read so much garbage on a forum before.

[Riad]

I would find it hard to believe that a major record label would mix completely in the box.

I'm a tiny studio and I go out my HD2 Accel into a Dangerous 2 Bus... if I could afford an SSL I most certainly would.

Maybe the exception would be dance music, some hip hop. I think the last Beastie Boys CD was mixed ITB. To me that music has different dynamics that rock, jazz, blues, and is perhaps better suited for ITB.

Rob

[Silver Sonya]

I still find it completely baffling that people think "major label" means high standards of sound quality. Apparently, in 2006, some people still believe in the phrase "major label quality"!!! I mean, come on, how many Brooklyn Bridges do you have to buy before you realize the deed's a hoax?

I couldn't care less about the actual "ITB" topic, I just find it disturbing that there are people out there "aspiring" to emulate the audio practices of major labels!! I couldn't feel more diametrically opposed to this sentiment. More and more, a major label logo on a record has come to be a convenient index of suspicion. (i.e. "Stay away, this music is probably awful, inconsequential, recorded terribly and mastered very bright and very loud. And no one will remember it three years from now.")

- c

[blackcatdigi]

Didn't Mike Shipley mix "Photograph" in the box using just plugs? Although to be fair, I believe he is summing with a Folcrom and CraneSong pres...

Whatever he used, it sounds fantastic IMHO. Just goes to show...

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by blackcatdigi

Although to be fair, I believe he is summing with a Folcrom and CraneSong pres...

...

Than this wouldn't support the question.



He wants songs mixed totally ITB.


There must be a lot right now.


Especially in the Hiphop/R&B,Reggaeton,pop and electronica market.


Basically any music driven by synths and samples.


For Rock the majority of the the top mixers all still mix on SSL.

[blackcatdigi]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Than this wouldn't support the question.

Of course you're right.

Technically, mixed in the box [but] not summed in the box... Semantics?

Uh, Charles Dye mixing anything these days? Mixboy Bob, got anything cooking out in Nashvegas? GM?

Poof-

[GearGeek]

I was very curious about this myself so recently I put it to a test. I took a song I had finished producing (Salsa/latin song) and had my mix engineer mix it both ways. We first took it to his home studio where he had a very nice Mix Plus system and a lot of nice plug ins. He mixed it there and we got a very good sounding mix.

Then we took it over to Paramount, Hollywood and mixed the same song again, with the same engineer but this time on a SSL with lots of outboard gear. GUYS DON"T FOOL YOURSELVES. The SSL mix was WAY better than the ITB mix.

Don't get me wrong, my engineer is a great mixer and his ITB mix sounded very, very good. But the SSL mix was noticably better. So much better that I took both mixes to my client (a singer), didn't tell him which one was which and asked him which mix he liked better. He instantly said the SSL mix.

While ITB mixing might be good for some things, for other things it's clearly a night and day difference. Just my expierence.

[Almost Human]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I still find it completely baffling that people think "major label" means high standards of sound quality. Apparently, in 2006, some people still believe in the phrase "major label quality"!!! I mean, come on, how many Brooklyn Bridges do you have to buy before you realize the deed's a hoax?

I couldn't care less about the actual "ITB" topic, I just find it disturbing that there are people out there "aspiring" to emulate the audio practices of major labels!! I couldn't feel more diametrically opposed to this sentiment. More and more, a major label logo on a record has come to be a convenient index of suspicion. (i.e. "Stay away, this music is probably awful, inconsequential, recorded terribly and mastered very bright and very loud. And no one will remember it three years from now.")

- c

While you may not think that "major label" is equal to quality, I don't mean this to sound rude, but...your opinion simply doesn't matter to the folks here looking for work. That is, unless you're a potential paying customer to one of these folks here on the board. The opinion that matters to them is that of their potential paying customers. It's a good majority of those artists/bands that use major label releases as a benchmark for quality and what they expect to get out of a recording. When they hear that things are mixed on a lot of outboard gear, SSL consoles, etc...that's what they tend to look for because they associate those things with a particular sound and quality they want. So, for smaller scale studio, producers/engineers, etc...it would be nice to have some additional major label releases as reference points to tell others to show that you can still acheive a quality recording by mixing "in the box."

CUSTOMER: "Yeah, we're similar to Pop Star X...blah, blah...Oh, you mix in the box? We were hoping to have everything mixed a little differently."

STUDIO: "Well, although Pop Star X was done like that, did you know that Pop Star Y and Z were mixed in the box?"

Quite a generic and over-simplified scenario, but you get my point...

[dougb415]

Originally Posted by robmix

It's not a stupid question at all, it was just worded improperly. "Recorded ITB" to most people means tracked ITB. Now if you had said what tracks were recorded and mixed completely ITB at the start it would have been clear to everyone. Thanks for clarifying. As far as I know most major label projects use a combination of outboard and plug-in's. The only one I can think of that was completely ITB is "La Vida Loca".

Rob

Maybe I'm not seeing straight, but this is his 1st post:

Major Label Singles Mixed Completely In The Box(ITB)! List Them Here!!!

Says nothing about recorded ITB....

[dougb415]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I'm not talking about process, I'm talking about values. Why would you care what major labels are doing at all? Why would you be interested?

Have some dignity, man.

- C

I am alternating between shaking my head and LMAO at some of these responses. The guy asks simply "How many major label singles have been mixed ITB?" and we get responses like this one.

How about this - if you don't know the answer, DON'T REPLY! tutt

[dreamsongs]

This is probably the end of this discussion but...

I suppose you mean tracked, mixed and summed ITB right ? If you do all that but added a little outboard gear in the mix process, does that make it OTB ?

By the way, there is no comparison (unless you've been mixing songs too loud for too long) that the same mix, song with all the same settings sound better on a SSL console. A shitty consumer console is another matter...

As far as Major Releases... yes, they sound better than any bedroom or small studio recording regardless of the mixer. What Silver Sonya was referring to probably is the quality of the songs of some major releases but that's another subject. Surely your ears can discern the quality of the final product.

By the way, listen to Eric Clapton's latest album. It has a beautiful sound and vibe to it. You can't get that without a large console. That's how I want my songs to sound...

[Rob G]

Bang,

Interesting observations.

Rob G..

[BevvyB]

Haven't seen anyone answer the frikkin question yet!

Honestly, it's like a gaggle of toothless moaning women in here sometimes...

[djui5]

Originally Posted by BevvyB

Haven't seen anyone answer the frikkin question yet!

I don't think anyone knows.

[Riad]

Originally Posted by djui5

I don't think anyone knows.

Unless you actually mixed a project for a major release, you don't know. And my guess is that those who do are not quick to answer... I know I wouldn't.

[Almost Human]

I forgot to mention...if you're a metal fan, Andy Sneap mixes in the box. So, listen to some of the stuff he's done...Nevermore, Arch Enemy, Opeth, Killswitch Engage, etc.

[JDN]

Originally Posted by Riad

I would find it hard to believe that a major record label would mix completely in the box.

Rob

I agree with what another poster said, don't think that "major label" actually means quality and attention to detail.

I know for a fact of a very successful major label r&b CD that came out last year that was mixed entirely in the box, no outboard gear, no console.

[alnico]

I can't answer the original question either BUT I feel that it's a down right handicap game to try to do ITB mixes compared to doing it on the SSL where I do 99% of all work. I get a pain in my stomach thinking about having to do it that way. It's possible and I did it a few times with a Pro Control but it was nowhere near as gratifying or sweet on my ears...

[Rob G]

davidwilson,




Quote:"Rob it looks like you have posted on the compleatly wrong forum if your wanting an informed and intelligent response from your question.
If any of those guys earlier who said 50% or more I like them to list 5 in the current top 10 with documented proof. Thats if they actually know what ITB means.
Some good responses from others though. I don't think iv'e read so much garbage on a forum before."

-davidwilson

You know you might be right.

Rob G..

[six_wax]

Originally Posted by BevvyB

Honestly, it's like a gaggle of toothless moaning women in here sometimes...

at least those come in handy sometimes...

sorry, couldn't resist further reducing the signal-to-noise ratio.

I, for one, would love to see more examples. Ole' Kelly C picked up a couple Grammophones last night... If some of that record --which I will begrudgingly admit is actually pretty frickin' well done-- was ITB, it's got to be good enough for me...

"Please drive through..."

[jamesblond]

Originally Posted by confooshus

I know this thread has died by now, but I just ran across it. I can't believe how riled up people got over this thread. It sounds like people justifying the high cost of all their outboard gear. Anyway, I think it's a very relevent issue.

I just found out that Serban Ghenea mixes ITB exclusively. Check him out on allmusic.com, he's mixed a ton of heavyweight stuff, including Kelly Clarkson ("Since U Been Gone"), Britney Spears ("Slave 4 U"), Faith Evans, Ice Cube, NSYNC, Justin Timberlake, N.E.R.D., Destinys Child, R. Kelly.... and the list goes on.

It matters because there's a threshold of quality that's acceptable to the masses, and it's much lower than the engineers want to believe. Can you get enough quality out of an ITB mix to translate the emotion of the song? That's all that matters (to the general public). Engineers want to argue about whose d*ck has the most bandwidth. Who cares? People just want to feel something when they hear the music.

This kind of worries me. Of course it's a mixture of things. Such as developments in technology and the fact that there is less money available then say - 20 years ago. But the fact that "the masses" don't really care how a record sounds as long as they can "feel" it... I think it's a waste. Good engineering is an art in my opinion. And that art is beiing taken for granted by "the masses". I find that disturbing. A few people work really hard to get the most out of a song - the sound and treatment it deserves. Yet the masses don't care, because they'll just download the MP3, which was encoded with a crappy encoder and they listen to it on their pc with shitty speakers or mp3-players of even worse quality. So what the hell are we working for anyway??

Personally, I think that is a lack of respect for our work. We work hard to give the people good songs, good sounding music, but they don't care. They don't hear the extra effort anyway. Our passion for our work is not being recognised.

Don't hesitate to tell me if I'm sounding overly bitter, or take thing too personally, but I'm afraid an awesome profession, no - art, is about to dissapear unvoluntarily. On top of that, the magic of working in a studio full of shitloads of expensive equipment might dissapear. And that magic is what makes a top-end studio so special to many people. That vibe can really add to the magic of a good recording, I think.

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by six_wax

I, for one, would love to see more examples. Ole' Kelly C picked up a couple Grammophones last night... If some of that record --which I will begrudgingly admit is actually pretty frickin' well done-- was ITB, it's got to be good enough for me...

Mixing ITB in a pro studio with great acoustics and great monitors is very different from mixing ITB at home in a square room, low end monitoring (etc).

I don't have a hug problem with ITB really, although I prefer the sound and workflow of big consoles.

I am starting to have a problem with people getting the idea that ITB/OTB is a worthwhile argument.
I must of read 5 separate threads about this today.
Really people, it isn't really about ITB or OUT- there are so many more variables, not the least of which the skill of the person IFOTB (in front of the box).

Acoustics also are such a big deal here, but people don't like to deal with acoustic problems due to the huge cost that is sometimes involved.

[vixapphire]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I guess the thing that irks me is this whole "Major Label" interest, as if that's any kind of standard for quality. Does anybody believe the phrase "Major Label Quality" anymore? How could anyone wish to aspire to emulate major label practices in audio in 2005?

I mean, you have noticed that Major Label records are mastered brutally, in the interest of competitive loudness, right? Ground into a fine, undifferentiated paste. Take a file from almost any major label rock record of the last three years and load it as an aiff into a digital audio editor. You will see a solid brick. Does that inspire you and make you wish to emulate it?

Don't be a zombie.

- C

My guess is, in this context "major label quality" means "major label budget"... circa 1989.

[vixapphire]

Originally Posted by Chrisac

This is true for the majority of electronica. Thats mainly what I write and everyone I know that does similiar music writes/mixes/edits all in the box and more often than not without any outboard whatsoever.


I did a little research because of this thread and everytime I got close I found out there was a a high end console lurking nearby. Acts like the Chemical brothers/Prodigy write and record in the box, but guess what, An SSL or Neve is wheeled in for the mixing duties. Liam Howlett (prodigy) made a big thing in interviews saying his album was written using only Reason software. The impression I got from his interviews is that he did the whole thing in Reason from start to finish. Of course I knew there would be a catch and right enough it turns out the last album was written with reason, recorded to pro tools, and mixed on a Neve with lots of tasty outboard. It turns out the big dance acts Leftfield/Chemicals/Underworld/Oakenfold etc all mix on high end consoles. However, there have been a number of hits in the UK from dance acts that have mixed entirely ITB, but these are mostly one hit wonders/lucky hits/bedroom producer.


Then I looked at the pop side of things and couldnt find any recent hit song that was mixed entirley ITB. We all know Charles Dyes Livin Da Loca track, but surely there must be others. ?

i agree. these high-end acts chatting about their entire albums being done in reason or whatever is a little silly, especially when upon a not-too-close listen you can usually spot a "real" (not "virtual") analog synth line or two in there. some things can't be faked yet, particularly not "in the box". i've got a host of very nice virtual analog synths, and i hafta say the waldorf Q, nord 3, and that new virus do pretty convincing analog synth bits, but when recently (finally) added a super jupiter to my rig, the difference was so obvious it was embarrassing. and the V.A. synths still blow the living crap out of every ITB "softsynth" out there (although some softsynths have interesting character of their own (e.g. FM7), and others are getting very good (e.g. minimoog arturia).

what i find interesting is the way dance music production and sound has changed in the past 5-6 years with the technology. imho, it's probably the most technology-driven music genre out there, so that should be no surprise, but it's a trip to listen to a compilation from '99/'00 and hear a bunch of VA's arpeggiating the hell out of themselves with the requisite filter sweeping modulation thrown in by hand to liven things up, and how that's slowly given way to tracks made up of little more than sound effects created with the ITB dynamics and reverbs -- still very cool, but very different!!! i think in some cases, dance music has really moved away from "musicality" and much deeper into non-drum-driven rhythmic sonics. the move away from tonal music is especially noticeable when you go to a big club to see a big name DJ spin. some of the stuff i heard at the dave seaman show in LA late last year was incredible. complete blowaway massive dynamic sound with big emotional impact ... but next-to-no melodic content. it's interesting, from an anthropological standpoint. fortunately, when well done, it can still sound pretty good, too.

[vixapphire]

Originally Posted by jamesblond

This kind of worries me. Of course it's a mixture of things. Such as developments in technology and the fact that there is less money available then say - 20 years ago. But the fact that "the masses" don't really care how a record sounds as long as they can "feel" it... I think it's a waste. Good engineering is an art in my opinion. And that art is beiing taken for granted by "the masses". I find that disturbing. A few people work really hard to get the most out of a song - the sound and treatment it deserves. Yet the masses don't care, because they'll just download the MP3, which was encoded with a crappy encoder and they listen to it on their pc with shitty speakers or mp3-players of even worse quality. So what the hell are we working for anyway??

Personally, I think that is a lack of respect for our work. We work hard to give the people good songs, good sounding music, but they don't care. They don't hear the extra effort anyway. Our passion for our work is not being recognised.

Don't hesitate to tell me if I'm sounding overly bitter, or take thing too personally, but I'm afraid an awesome profession, no - art, is about to dissapear unvoluntarily. On top of that, the magic of working in a studio full of shitloads of expensive equipment might dissapear. And that magic is what makes a top-end studio so special to many people. That vibe can really add to the magic of a good recording, I think.

ok, i won't hesitate. compare an mp3 of whatever current shite song on someone's ipod to some of the crap-assed recordings from the late 60's and early 70's that are now hallowed as classics (and no, i don't mean to insult anyone's classic rock articles of faith here, so relax). when you look at the frequency content of a lot of that old stuff that still moves the hell out of people, and you consider that it was probably originally sold to them via AM radio, is it so horrible that some people are interested in creating something decent, but not sweating the doctorate in recording engineering to get a finished product? most of the beach boys catalog isn't exactly ass-pounding stellar recording quality, but their material is timeless and remains wonderfully enjoyable to almost anyone young or old to this day. there are plenty of exceedingly well-recorded records of the past few years done in lab-quality $6000/day studios that will either be ripped off to mp3-land, hyper-compressed out to FM-radioland, or more likely forgotten before anyone cares to think about the spectral detail of the recording.

nonetheless, it's hard not to get misty over the idea of great album-making recording sessions in big studios on killer equipment with endless budgets becoming a thing of the past...

but don't kid yourself into believing that it's all mp3's fault. 45's sounded like shit and deteriorated quickly too. they were made that way using crud vinyl. still, the idea came across in a good record. that's all that really counts anyway; serve the song with your engineering and production and it will be communicated well regardless of the transmission medium.

ok, enough rambling...

[Nigel Jopson]

Originally Posted by Rob G

All,

Major Label Singles Mixed Completely In The Box(ITB)! List Them Here!!!

Rob G..

- Franz Ferdinand their 2004 debut album, including the singles 'Take Me Out' and 'Matinee' was mixed completely ITB by producer Tore Johansson. He uses an Apogee Trak 2 with Pro Tools and a pair of shitty old speakers he bought in a flea market called "Epicure" to mix on. Of course he's also produced Suede, Tom Jones, Sophie Ellis Bextor and The Cardigans. He uses a track ball with a pool ball replacing the stock plastic thing. I know him.

- A guy called Bob Kraushaar mixed Liberty X and Andy Bell's single ... he always mixes ITB. There's a video of him discussing it at www.recordproduction.com.

I know some other chart albums that were mixed ITB by quite famous guys, but I'd have to ask them first ...

If somebody else is paying, we'll use the biggest bit of kit we can find. But if it might be re-couped from our own advances, we just sneak home and fire up the M-Box

[Geert van den Berg]

Originally Posted by Nigel Jopson

Tore Johansson. He uses a track ball with a pool ball replacing the stock plastic thing.

Aha, the key to good sound, the mighty pool ball! thumbsup

And the king of RSI, probably too.

[beechstudio]

Originally Posted by Almost Human

I forgot to mention...if you're a metal fan, Andy Sneap mixes in the box. So, listen to some of the stuff he's done...Nevermore, Arch Enemy, Opeth, Killswitch Engage, etc.

Don't forget Triviums 'Accendancy'........Awesome record! ITB

Andy used to post here on GS. Haven't seen him on here in a while though. He has his own forum at Ultimatemetal.com

His site is here: www.Andysneap.com

Great guy!

[Mark Ettel]

Does this help?

http://www.digidesign.com/news/credits/ (2004)
http://www.digidesign.com/news/credi.../2003/2003.cfm
http://www.digidesign.com/news/credi.../2002/2002.cfm
http://www.digidesign.com/news/credi.../2001/2001.cfm
http://www.digidesign.com/news/credi.../2000/2000.cfm

[stereotype]

Originally Posted by Mark Ettel

Does this help?

http://www.digidesign.com/news/credits/ (2004)
http://www.digidesign.com/news/credi.../2003/2003.cfm
http://www.digidesign.com/news/credi.../2002/2002.cfm
http://www.digidesign.com/news/credi.../2001/2001.cfm
http://www.digidesign.com/news/credi.../2000/2000.cfm

if you look at the entire set of lists, you'll notice that only a few have Pro Control or C24 listed as console. The rest have been left blank for the "console" column.

And I know for a fact, that much of the Nashville stuff listed had PT patched through analog desks and the mixing and automation was done on the desk; not the computer.