Blunt Mixing Question

[robdarling]

"With enough time and good gear I could get there."

sort of. I'm of the view that great music makes great engineers. Any big improvement in my work has come with a big improvement in the quality of what I was working on. Working with better musicians on better arrangements of better songs has consistently been the thing that made me a better engineer, even when going back to lesser music.

[7rojo7]

fronto

[tee boy]

Originally posted by Teacher
Am I the only one who thought he meant what weed mix is the best?

I personally like Haze and Hash

Hehe, no mate Im taking audio only. I do have one or two thc related tricks, but they are for professionals only. I fear if they got into the wrong hands we may be left with people looking like this wee fella

[Dave Pensado]

Man, you guys are giving me that carpal tunnel thing! One thing I have noticed about me (and other mixers I admire) is the WILL to make something sound great. The skill is one thing, but I have noticed that some of the staff (newer engineers) at the studios I work at, give up too quick. People ask me about width, clarity, lo end, etc. That's just the way I have always heard music, and will stay here 10 days if necesssary, until my mix sounds the way I hear it in my head. Wow does that ever sound egotistical (sic), but bear with me. Today I am working on a mix in which ALL the music is on two tracks. This mix should take about 3 hours. I am into hour 13. I have taken and placed snare and kik samples by hand for each and every kik and snare in the 2-track instrumental. This has taken me and Ariel about 5 hours. I have tried about 25 things on it from Trans X to TC Master X to Neves, Pultecs, 1070's, etc., and didn't like any of them, except the TransX. I split the stereo track to 5 pairs of faders. One I rolled off all lo end, one is just for lo with a DBX 120x on it. One has the snot compressed out of it (DBX160XT), for midrange, and then I combine all these to get the final sound I am hearing in my head. If I can't make it sound great, it aint leaving here. So, what I am trying to add here, is WANTING it to sound good is the one single thing all top mixers have in common. Also, anything you do for 10-20 years, you should be good at! Well, I guess that isn't always the case, just listen to the radio! I will expound on this more, because I think it ties into the "cliff diving" thread. Once again, let me say, you guys make me feel pretty special, and I thank you for that. But ALL of you have the ability to do UNIQUE things. That's all I do, is sell my uniqueness.

[Alécio Costa]

Hi, Dave!
A 2 track mix... IS this a single remix?
Thanks

[thethrillfactor]

Originally posted by Alécio Costa
Hi, Dave!
A 2 track mix... IS this a single remix?
Thanks

Probably a hiphop/R&B track.

Music on 2 tracks with lots of vocals around it.

Dave i hear ya.

Its not egotistical at all.

I think to be excellent you have to have an internal pride that sometimes borders on arrogance.

Hey Michael Jordan had it.

When mixing these kinds of tracks its always tricky to find that fine line when doing so much to the 2 track is making it either better or worse.

It almost feels like mastering.

[pentajigga]

why would a label give you a two-track instead of a multi-track session?

[Oldone]

Originally posted by pentajigga
why would a label give you a two-track instead of a multi-track session?

Possibly to save it from oblivion.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally posted by pentajigga
why would a label give you a two-track instead of a multi-track session?

Sometimes the track comes directly from the producer.

2 tracks of music and the artist lays the vocals down.

Why would they do it?

Sometimes its the budget.

Said signed artists has blown their advance already and they are buying "beats" or tracks from different producers.

With the 2 track they save money on the mixing.

Also if there is a deadline.

The track has been remixed buy some new hotshot producer. The track needs to be in the clubs now, so give the artist 2 tracks,they drop their vocals,mix voila its on the street.

This is very common in the hiphop world.

I've mixed songs where the 2 tracks came from a cassette or MP3's.

Hey believe me it happens.

With todays home studios, small budgets and even smaller deadlines, its become a common thing.

[pentajigga]

well i trust that you know your shit thrill. to me it sounds crazy that someones paying dave, and other $$ mixers, for the extra hours that a 2-track mix can cause one to need. the money might have been better spent gettin the multi-track together.

but i guess im not surprised... the hilarious idiosyncracies of the industry around us. makes for good engineer discussion-- mixing the 2-track must be like punchin the rock, kung-fu training style.

[Alécio Costa]

I am not a fan of RAP but interestingly a few times I also received the 2 track mix. Funnybut one of the songs I ended up mixing and mastering got airplay at mtv, totally budget limited and without any wishes to become a success.
Lots of "producers" mix the BG(here we call it playback) and send it to the artist so they end up recording vocals wherever they feel more comfortable and if they trust, have someone to mix/master.

[Gregg Sartiano]

If the mixer has the "whatever it takes" attitude as well as the leeway from the producers to pump up kicks & snares (or other perc.), then anything's possible! By the time the editing & sample additions are done, the track is basically a 2 track, kick, snare, (other perc?), and a bunch of vocals. And what if the arrangement of the 2-track allows you to edit it INTO a multitrack: i.e.: the intro has the piano and the breakdown has the bassline, and if you swap 'em and cut & paste, then BINGO! You have a multitrack...that represents a lot of mixability, especially assuming that the 2-track pre-mix is good.

I asked a lot of these questions in my "2-Track Nation" thread in this forum which has yet to really see some action...

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showt...threadid=20313

I'm gonna go on a tangent but bear with me. Michael cheated often just this week I was watching classic footage and I could see that alot of his steals were fouls and that he often pushed off to get space for open shots. He used to literally slap bulls players around if they didnt do what he wanted in practice (with the exception of Cartwright who brought a bat to practice and said he'd break both of mike's arms if he slapped him)

I dont wanna be like mike

But now that that is over

I find reading what dave's settings are or what someone else did to save a sound helps me as a starting point when all else fails. i'm beginning to think there is light at the end of the tunnel once you know what it is you are after.

or in Dave's words Dont leave until u hear the mix sound like what's in your head

[Gregg Sartiano]

Originally posted by no ssl yet
I'm gonna go on a tangent but bear with me. Michael cheated often just this week I was watching classic footage and I could see that alot of his steals were fouls and that he often pushed off to get space for open shots.

1) Unless you have access to "footage," you were probably watching an edited segment -- the guy plays ball for so many years, let's find some blatant push-offs that he did...besides, pro-level sports is all about WINNING at any cost -- Ty Cobb used to sharpen his spikes to injure opposing players when he'd slide into base!

Music is not a sporting event. However, the music business resembles it at times. After all, it's show BUSINESS, not show FRIENDS.

If you wanna see a "Blatant" push off from Michael I suggest you watch the last game of his career against the Jazz He pushed Bryan Russel so that he could make the game winner. My problem is not with his talent but more his attitude For instance with all the money he has, he does not believe in tipping because It should be a priviledge for someone to be able to carry his bag. Dont take my word for it find anyone in any city that has ever had to serve him about Michael's attitude. Go back to the last time he played against Barkerley and you will hear Charles say to the reff" I know he is Michael Jordan, but that is a foul!!!
Think about it this way Mike would often steal the ball in the paint from big plaers who's hands were so big 2 of them would practically cover the ball, How is it possible for him to steal the ball with out slapping a wrist in the process?

[nicodemus]

Dave and Thrill,how do you feel about mixing credits for these 2trk music +vox mixes?
Are you ok with it or you insist your name stays out?
I almost always ask them to keep me out but sometimes the project and the artist are way too cool and you want to be part of it.
cheers

[thethrillfactor]

Originally posted by nicodemus
Dave and Thrill,how do you feel about mixing credits for these 2trk music +vox mixes?
Are you ok with it or you insist your name stays out?
I almost always ask them to keep me out but sometimes the project and the artist are way too cool and you want to be part of it.
cheers

A mix is a mix.

I am mixing a record right now from India and its all 2 tracks of music with vocals.

Am i happy with the sound of the 2 tracks?

Not really.

But hey they are paying me to make it work, so i will make it work somehow.

It just means that i have to make the vocals that much more interesting.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally posted by no ssl yet
I'm gonna go on a tangent but bear with me. Michael cheated often

So you are saying you don't cheat?

You don't use other people's samples in your productions?

You don't use the kicks and snares that some producer or engineer agonized to get it right of some record or CD?

You don't trade samples,copy or download samples from other people's libraries?


If you don't, more power to you.

If you do, technically this is cheating.

You could argue that technically a short sample fits into the guidelinesof sample copyright protection, but Michael could argue that Bryan Russell was going in that direction anyway and he just helped him along.

The refs didn't call it and he still made the shot.

He yelled and slapped his guys, so what?

Sometimes people are motivated by money.

Others are by fear or failure(Michael).

Others are just motivated by fear period and they need it to do their best.

[Teacher]

Originally posted by thethrillfactor
So you are saying you don't cheat?

You don't use other people's samples in your productions?

You don't use the kicks and snares that some producer or engineer agonized to get it right of some record or CD?

You don't trade samples,copy or download samples from other people's libraries?

TOUCHE no ssl, and i don't wanna hear you talk bad about Mike again!

I'm not saying Michael wasnt the best to ever play the game. He was. (He made the shots he pushed off to make and that took talent) I'm only saying that he isnt as great (mainly as a person) as people assume. OF course he worked harder (So did Dennis LOL people often overlook how he removed people like shaq from the game) I'm simply saying mike played extremely dirty as did Mike tyson throwing elbows in his prime. And there were alot of calls that were not made simply because he was Michael, so the arguement that the reff didn't call it is a moot point.

If you ever saw his attitude with servants you wouldn't have the same appreciation for him as a person. And if you rewind the tapes and watch the number of fouls, push offs and blatant carries of the ball that were not called you will see that Michael was treated differently because of what he meant to the league and the league's income. (The only reason he could slap players around is because they were affraid of what the organization would do to someone who retaliated against the "Great Michael")



Thrill,
I may use samples but I also tip well

[squizz]

Originally posted by no ssl yet
I'm not saying Michael wasnt the best to ever play the game. He was. (He made the shots he pushed off to make and that took talent) I'm only saying that he isnt as great (mainly as a person) as people assume. OF course he worked harder (So did Dennis LOL people often overlook how he removed people like shaq from the game) I'm simply saying mike played extremely dirty as did Mike tyson throwing elbows in his prime. And there were alot of calls that were not made simply because he was Michael, so the arguement that the reff didn't call it is a moot point.

If you ever saw his attitude with servants you wouldn't have the same appreciation for him as a person. And if you rewind the tapes and watch the number of fouls, push offs and blatant carries of the ball that were not called you will see that Michael was treated differently because of what he meant to the league and the league's income. (The only reason he could slap players around is because they were affraid of what the organization would do to someone who retaliated against the "Great Michael")



Thrill,
I may use samples but I also tip well

true but you dont get that respect unless you proved you were great. he got away with what he got away with because he proved he was great. he meant something to the league cause he proved he was great.

you have to earn the right to be treated differently. any one who proves he is great at something gets treated differently, thats part of the perks that come with working at your craft night and day to become the best

[Dave Pensado]

A lot of producers shop their tracks. Suddenly the track gets some attention, and they realize the old hard drive it was on no longer works, or they were in a hurry and forgot to write down settings, etc. Usually it is a fact that they can't find it.

Greg, I will try to answer your thread soon.

As to who should get mix credit, that is a tought question I had not given much thought to. I guess if all I did was "master" the mix, I shouldn't get credit. When you change it as much as I do, I consider it not a 2track mix, but 2 tracks I was given to mix. Nicodemus, what do you think?

Let me give you an example of one of the songs on Surviver by Destinys. Beyonce was given a CD of the demo track. She dumped it onto a ProTools rig and recorded the vocals, and did some edits to the track. I had to have the mix done in two days, because of deadlines. I get the vocals from NY, and the track from another part of the country. They don't match. Timing is different, and somehow, the pitch is off. Well after a lot of work it was a single! It took 48 straight hours. Fun. Job security. Oh and by the way (I hate BTW), I never told anyone, just did it.

[Extreme Mixing]

You are one talented guy, Dave. Probably nobody even noticed. That's really the best compliment you could get, but the hardest one to swallow when it was your 48 hours...

Steve

[nicodemus]

well...the trent i see lately in hiphop is to do whole alboums like that(2trk+vox)
not just the occasional song here and there.
I'm expected to deliver 3-4 mixes a day.Now imagine,every song in the alboum having a different producer,everyone's 2trk premix sounds different.
I may make the vox sound big and nice but the mix never feels that is completely there,feels more like a compromise,if you know what i mean.
Simply not enough time to fly new kicks and snares around.(Massive passive across the 2trk and give the vox more attention.The ssl stereo buss compressor can help immensely).
In the end these mixes sound close to mono.Of course you can dublicate the trk ans hi pass it to a nice verb or put the duy wide across and try one of the
Charles Dye settings but nothing like starting the mix fresh plus theres a need to move fast,people don't see why a mix can take more than 2-3 hours(which i hear was the case pre-automation!!!).
On the other hand they don't mind taking their time putting down the vox right.
A good vox sound is something that somehow they don't seem to get it right in a producer's home studio.
I guess it's a dilemma,when it comes to credits.Very few of us are mega hitters dealing with big budgets.Working fast,saving some money for our clients makes them comming back.
But in an industry that you're as good as your last work,can we afford to put out a product that we're not completely approve,something that the critical ear might say it sucks,therefore we suck?
Think about it.If you haven't dealt with this kind of mixing situation you might do sometime soon.
peace

[Gregg Sartiano]

Originally posted by nicodemus
IWorking fast,saving some money for our clients makes them comming back.
But in an industry that you're as good as your last work,can we afford to put out a product that we're not completely approve,something that the critical ear might say it sucks,therefore we suck?
Think about it.If you haven't dealt with this kind of mixing situation you might do sometime soon.
peace

Agreed. "I have spent so long doing so much with so little, that I am now completely qualified to do anything with nothing."

I mean, many of us make our living through those CD's we make for people. And we're on the spot to make a CD that sounds radio-ready...oh, yeah -- these clients pick us, not the other way around. They're paying us to whitewash their innaccuracies and weaknesses while building sounds that put them in the best possible light. And not all of these individuals are "artists" or "musicians" -- many are admitted amateurs who think that, since the floodgates of music industry commerce *seem* open to second-rate product, they have a chance if they work with somebody who is first-rate yet affordable -- after all, it's all in the production, right?

And, believe me, "going the extra mile" is a way of life for me. However, mixing, graphical auto-tuning, sample-replacing, and beat-detecting ("lining up") an entire album for $500 is not.

Going into a project, I almost always try to convince the artist to use the same budget but on fewer songs. If they wanna do more later, we can get the same sounds. But if we're too far downstream and paying clients are waiting for studio time/my time, then everybody is in a bad position. I have to compromise product, the client is unsure about whether his/her project will be release-ready (or shoppable), and the incoming client is also likely to pick up on the (albeit minor) stress and the assembly-line atmosphere, esp. if you're spending 20 hours a day in the same chair in order to give everyone the best product possible under their time, budget, and scheduling constraints -- you're not prioritizing one client over the other, you're prioritizing EVERYONE.

[butterfly]

much respect to all you guys. I don't think the average person who buys artist A's record or dances to artist b's record in the club realises, that often the vibe that they subconciously respond to is as much to do with the mix engineer as the producer or artist but of course it's the artist that gets the credit and hey thats probably fine 'cause you guys got paid right. I think it would be interesting, when you hear someone say " ..wasn't that little john beat awesome, guys a genius.." to let them hear the beat before the mix boys got a hold of it and see if he is still jumping around the club to it or more importantly buying it. No disrespect to little john, just first name that came to mind. Anyhow this is an issue I have been thinking about for a while the role of the mix engineer, even posted on a couple of other sites but had never got satisfactory answers probably cause it was full of producers who thought, they were the shit. So it's kindda good to know that what I suspected was true. Anayway sorry for rambling but the forum is great and You guys are my heroes, even if joe blggs thinks all you do is make the tea!

[Gregg Sartiano]

This is a question from the Two Track Nation thread:

***

6) This is an open-ended question, but do you think that, with production, digital mix/remix production, and mixing being more important to the marketplace viability of music than ever before, should there be a reevaluation of legal matters and income streams within the industry, particularly publishing income?

***

People who don't know the "rules of the road" with the $$$ in the industry are always surprised at how much consideration writers get vs. everybody else. And if the song is covered by another artist, the publishing income is the ONLY income which actually keeps coming to the original creators.

Oh, yeah -- and don't forget that TECHNICALLY a "song" publishing-wise is that which can be "sung" -- i.e.: if an artist comes to you with a melody and words and you put the BADDEST beat in HISTORY to it with the perfect chords, bassline, etc., that artist is still the "writer" -- not you! I mean, that intro instrumental hook melody might be the thing that the audience hums along with, but whoever created that is still not the "writer." Now, a lot of writers will work publishing income out with their producer/track-builder cohorts, but they are not obliged to. In fact, it's a point of negotiation -- "C'mon, mix the demo -- I'm letting you in on the writing!"

EXAMPLE: Let's cover "Like A Virgin" -- if we get a girl to do (basically) the same vocal Madonna did, and we add all the same beats & "licks" Nile Rodgers (producer) and his programming & instrumental compatriots added -- guess what: WE'RE the producers of the new version and WE get all of the income except the publishing, which goes to the writer (NOT Madonna, in case you didn't know)!!!

Score: Writer 10, us 5, original performer and producer (whose artistry & ideas MADE the song, IMO) zero!

Why do you think a lot of movie songs are "remakes?"