Something I Found While Listening To Mixes

[rallycapmusic]

I noticed something while listening to some commercial mixes. As more things are added to to the mix, I can STILL hear all the other instruments, vox, etc, VERY clear. It was like as if that 1 sound was there by itself or with 100 other things going on, it didnt matter, you could still here everything at same level.

And on MY mixes, lol!, the more things i add by pulling up faders, it seems like the less I hear the other sounds. Its like I play "fader wars" with sounds.

Is there some sort of term used or what is it called (besides being a good mix) when you can raise faders, add sounds to a track and STILL hear the previous sounds just as if they were there solo? Is this the role of good converters, able to keep the "picture" so to speak, real CLEAR?

[gorillainthemix]

Convertors might have something to do with it, but it's probably not the main reason.
Adding more and more elements and pushing faders up does not make sexy time in the digital world.
Turn the rest of your faders down. Try panning them harder. Create "space". Starting low in volume and keeping your peaks at a reasonable level won't hurt your mix. There is enough room down there
However, there is a limit to how loud you can go.
Leave loudness alone untill your mix is finished, or leave it up to a mastering engineer (but we don't want to have that discussion again).

[voicegenius]

Originally Posted by rallycapmusic

I noticed something while listening to some commercial mixes. As more things are added to to the mix, I can STILL hear all the other instruments, vox, etc, VERY clear. It was like as if that 1 sound was there by itself or with 100 other things going on, it didnt matter, you could still here everything at same level.

And on MY mixes, lol!, the more things i add by pulling up faders, it seems like the less I hear the other sounds. Its like I play "fader wars" with sounds.

Is there some sort of term used or what is it called (besides being a good mix) when you can raise faders, add sounds to a track and STILL hear the previous sounds just as if they were there solo? Is this the role of good converters, able to keep the "picture" so to speak, real CLEAR?

Yup... it's called "trial 'n error" or "years of experience"... Also, remember, panning is your friend...

Seriously, it's all about balance and how sounds play off each other.... Also remember that a great arrangement makes up 75% of the mix...

But what do I know... I'm no engineer.

[Storyville]

Originally Posted by rallycapmusic

I noticed something while listening to some commercial mixes. As more things are added to to the mix, I can STILL hear all the other instruments, vox, etc, VERY clear. It was like as if that 1 sound was there by itself or with 100 other things going on, it didnt matter, you could still here everything at same level.

And on MY mixes, lol!, the more things i add by pulling up faders, it seems like the less I hear the other sounds. Its like I play "fader wars" with sounds.

Is there some sort of term used or what is it called (besides being a good mix) when you can raise faders, add sounds to a track and STILL hear the previous sounds just as if they were there solo? Is this the role of good converters, able to keep the "picture" so to speak, real CLEAR?

Yes, there are a number of things at play here. The first is that the elements are mixed so that nothing "masks" anything else. That is, selective eq cuts are made to get one instrument out of the way of another. Another aspect is that the background elements are "open" and the main elements are "focused". These terms are semi ambiguous, but generally, open sounds feel very wide and tall in the speakers, allowing for a lot of illusory room for things with are tightly detailed to live within the space of the background sounds. And of course there is also the issue of arrangement. As different elements come in, they work around the other elements present so as everything is in it's own sonic space.

None of these are easy to capture. I'd say the most straightforward one is making sure nothing "masks" something else. But the open and tight sounds idea requires very thoughtful tracking and mixing, and the arrangement issue requires a lot of forsite - which all boils down to experience.

Be eazy.

[voicegenius]

Originally Posted by Storyville

Yes, there are a number of things at play here. The first is that the elements are mixed so that nothing "masks" anything else. That is, selective eq cuts are made to get one instrument out of the way of another. Another aspect is that the background elements are "open" and the main elements are "focused". These terms are semi ambiguous, but generally, open sounds feel very wide and tall in the speakers, allowing for a lot of illusory room for things with are tightly detailed to live within the space of the background sounds. And of course there is also the issue of arrangement. As different elements come in, they work around the other elements present so as everything is in it's own sonic space.

None of these are easy to capture. I'd say the most straightforward one is making sure nothing "masks" something else. But the open and tight sounds idea requires very thoughtful tracking and mixing, and the arrangement issue requires a lot of forsite - which all boils down to experience.

Be eazy.

thumbsup

EQ cuts are important... Like Storyville said, you have to create that space so everything WILL fit... but again., I'm no engineer...

[rallycapmusic]

Right on guys!

Well most of my production is hip hop where there isnt TOO MUCH going on as far as soundss so with "panning", I would pan things such as percussion. But mostly kick, snare, bass are usually dead center. I mean even tracks with just 6-8 things going on is still a fader war with me. Its like if i turn something up cause i cant hear it, i usually turn something else up because NOW i cant hear IT!, lol!

[Storyville]

Originally Posted by rallycapmusic

Right on guys!

Well most of my production is hip hop where there isnt TOO MUCH going on as far as soundss so with "panning", I would pan things such as percussion. But mostly kick, snare, bass are usually dead center. I mean even tracks with just 6-8 things going on is still a fader war with me. Its like if i turn something up cause i cant hear it, i usually turn something else up because NOW i cant hear IT!, lol!

That's definitely a masking issue. I'd need specific examples to properly explain what will make your mix more open - because it varies greatly. Sometimes masking is about eq, sometimes it's about compression, sometimes it's about side-chain multi-band contraceptives.

[rallycapmusic]

Originally Posted by Storyville

That's definitely a masking issue. I'd need specific examples to properly explain what will make your mix more open - because it varies greatly. Sometimes masking is about eq, sometimes it's about compression, sometimes it's about side-chain multi-band contraceptives.

It just seems like after things are tracked in and mixing starts, the more things i bring in, the less i get to hear everything else. Ive heard rock records with ALOT of stuff going on and you can CLEARLY hear everything, including every word the guy is saying in the song and no one sound is taking away from the others. I know my music isnt as elaborate as that so im wondering why I cant hear other things as faders are being raised. Its crazy, lol!

[gorillainthemix]

if your overall levels are too loud, EQ isn't going to solve anything.
Check the basic stuff first before you start getting surgical with eq's and compressors.

just my €0,02

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by rallycapmusic

It just seems like after things are tracked in and mixing starts, the more things i bring in, the less i get to hear everything else. Ive heard rock records with ALOT of stuff going on and you can CLEARLY hear everything, including every word the guy is saying in the song and no one sound is taking away from the others. I know my music isnt as elaborate as that so im wondering why I cant hear other things as faders are being raised. Its crazy, lol!

Again...it's a matter of EQ carving.

Those rock records you mention...things are often multed out so that if you hear a guitar part in solo (like in the intro where nothing else is playing) it's one sound, then in the chorus when there's a different, much more drastic EQ setting for it (you can achieve this ITB with different tracks or plugin automation.

Drum mults are used as well - for example, in the busier sections, a kick with more snap is added/raised in volume as the track gets denser so it still cuts through.

Vocals - lots of rides, to bring up the quieter words, sit in the louder ones... compression alone doesn't always work.

[sevendaysoff]

eq, ducking, and panning.

[phillysoulman]

What kind of gear are you using?
DAW,monitors,outboard.
Is your room treated?

Mix at relatively LOW levels so you can hear the detail more clearly.
Start with the VOCALS and then work the rest of the beat around them,,starting with the kick,snare,hat,bass,etc.
Practice working with eq correctly and study the frequency charts available on this site.
They are your friend.

[DAH]

It`s a good question. From what I have learned analyzing instrumentals / acapellas / solo drumbeats / solo instruments in the mix I can tell that it`s about building the spectral balance. For example, if you take a vox of any commercial pop mix - it basicaly is eqd to pink noise, the instrumental itself is pink noise. Add pink noise to pink noise - it stays the same pink noise.
I mean the two main elements - vox and drumbeat+bass are of the same spectral curve.
Anything else is cut-tailored to not fight dynamic- and frequencywise the main elements. That means cutting the low mids of piano/guitar/whatever musical parts, often cutting the highs in everything but the hats/snare/vocals. Cutting highs on the kick if there`s is too much of it. Cutting the boominess of the vocals (i guess most of the time when vocals is cut from a close distance, a lot of the low mids is cut during the mixing in commercial music)
Cutting everything that disturbes a clear and organic picture of the mix as A WHOLE.
I ve been learning this very for a long time given my (lack of) monitoring/skills and still my mixes suck modtly. But what matters is that I come with a more clear mix balance understanding every day I practice knob tweaking/fader pulling. That`s the joy for me.

[smoke]

Originally Posted by phillysoulman

What kind of gear are you using?
DAW,monitors,outboard.
Is your room treated?

Mix at relatively LOW levels so you can hear the detail more clearly.
Start with the VOCALS and then work the rest of the beat around them,,starting with the kick,snare,hat,bass,etc.
Practice working with eq correctly and study the frequency charts available on this site.
They are your friend.

This sounds like a case for your headphone trick as well

[phillysoulman]

Originally Posted by smoke

This sounds like a case for your headphone trick as well

Absolutely so..if they "get it".

[beat you down]

Originally Posted by rallycapmusic

...Its like I play "fader wars" with sounds...

...Is there some sort of term used or what is it called (besides being a good mix) when you can raise faders, add sounds to a track and STILL hear the previous sounds just as if they were there solo?...

imo this sounds more like a composition / arrangement / sound picking issue rather than a mixing issue.

[phillysoulman]

Originally Posted by beat you down

imo this sounds more like a composition / arrangement / sound picking issue rather than a mixing issue.

To me,its sounds like a lack of experience doing mixes.
He should practice,practice and keep at it until he "gets it"

[beat you down]

that too ofcourse.
but from my experience, hip hop dudes often feel like ok, i can just throw whatever stuff together like totally overlapping stuff with major masking going on and fix all of that during mixing.
just saying, THAT type of composing / arranging is not going to work, ever, nomatter how much mixing experience.

[Jonkr]

Eq can be a huge factor... but another thing is compression. You'd be amazed at how much difference attack and release times can make in getting a snare to sound distinct from a lead vocal

[tonymission]

It's called a good mix.

Yours are not obviously.

Mixing requires a lot more than moving faders around.

[pdiddy boy]

...ok heres my take on the matter of mixes through my own personal experiences. Before we talk about the physical act of mixing ( i.e. setting levels, compression, panning etc etc ) lets go back to the basics. GETTING A GOOD RECORDING !

There is a saying that goes junk in, junk out... in other words if you not recording sound correctly into your DAW your basically setting your self up for failure during the mixing stage.

From upgrading my home studio, 2 areas stood out as enhancing the quality of my recordings which translated into better mixes. Area one was having a good pre-amp and area two was good converters. A good pre-amp can be the difference between punchy, present well defined sound and a dull recording. Once I got myself a good pre-amp plug-ins started to come alive too. What mic pre-amp are you using ? Do you also use VST instruments or out board gear ? I found VST instruments gained extra definition when I mixed VST's out of my DAW and back through a good pre-amp. ...and yes finally good converters do help make everything you have "recorded well" sound and mix better.

[JCRockit]

Originally Posted by rallycapmusic

It just seems like after things are tracked in and mixing starts, the more things i bring in, the less i get to hear everything else. Ive heard rock records with ALOT of stuff going on and you can CLEARLY hear everything, including every word the guy is saying in the song and no one sound is taking away from the others. I know my music isnt as elaborate as that so im wondering why I cant hear other things as faders are being raised. Its crazy, lol!

I think one thing that may help you is experiment with stereo imaging. You say you automaticly pan certain things dead center. Try creating stereo images of those things and pan l/r in varying degrees instead. For instance play your snare track out soloed into you monitors and record that as an ambient track capturing room sound to taste. Then pan the direct snare say 3 o'clock right and the ambient snare L to taste. Play with this technique on other tracks, especially vocals and guitars until you get a 3d sense in your mix. Make sure your effect returns are properly panned as well. Some algorithims may give you more return on one side than the other. Use this to your advantage panning in different degrees to the dry/wet stereo image.

[XAXAU]

Originally Posted by rallycapmusic

I noticed something while listening to some commercial mixes. As more things are added to to the mix, I can STILL hear all the other instruments, vox, etc, VERY clear. It was like as if that 1 sound was there by itself or with 100 other things going on, it didnt matter, you could still here everything at same level.

Pros mix in true mono.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by phillysoulman

Mix at relatively LOW levels so you can hear the detail more clearly.

Yep. Yes. Uh-huh. Yeah...

And don't fiddle with the master level.

And if there are too many things in a song... maybe don't use all of it. (kitchen sink producer guys)

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by XAXAU

Pros mix in true mono.

I've actually never worked for a mix engineer who does this.

Check in mono, yes.

Actually mix in mono? never.

Not disagreeing with the principle, just the statement above.

[Chris Lago]

I am currently working on a mix for a release and I just realized that I had mixed most of it in Mono (for the most part), it's sounds pretty balanced though. The label liked it a lot. I kind of had to do it in mono because I want it to translate well on the Dancefloor (if that makes any sense to you guys). It is a dance song after all, in the style of Bodyrox.

[J CraQ]

i find that when i mix in stereo and then switch my mix to mono... the mono mix usually sounds like ass...

and the opposite happens if i mix in mono and then switch my mix to stereo.. i get it sounding great in mono and then in stereo it sounds even better..

mixing in mono =

[KRStudio]

Lots of good responses here, especialy EQing. I get lots of hip hop to master and I notice one thing over and over and over. Every sound is stereo. Keep a couple of tracks stereo but calapse everything else to mono and then pan.

Jeff

[rallycapmusic]

Well for the most part im using outboard gear as far as the music production. Most of my production is from the Roland MV-8800. I dont have any "high end" front end gear. I go from my Roland MV into my Presonus Firestudio XLR's into Cubase for the tracking. Once its "so-called" mixed, I buss the tracks as groups and route them out into my summing mixer to either my Alesis Masterlink or back into Cubase. I try to keep a real simple routing system.

I usually would mix out of a local studio here in my area so thats why I never been to high on getting high end gear in my own studio, just enough to get things tracked and take to the other studio. But now im trying to gain that. I know cats that have way less knowlege and less quality gear i have and are getting better mixes for some reason, lol! So thats why im like "ok, ahh what am I doing wrong here" Im about ready to start blaming the gear, lol! Because I was getting better mixes with less quality stuff a long time ago!

As far as plug-ins go, I try to use things less as possible and go with a more "natural" sound to the elements involved. Im not a real big fan on eq because most of the times i find it "changing" the natural sound you want in the 1st place. I use it on an "if needed" basis. If things are not agreeing, then I would use eq. I would use compression ONLY if im trying to bring something out of a mix.

[Chris Lago]

I think the Firestudio may be hurting your mixes.