Translation Hell: Any 3 out of 4

[Keyplayer]

I can get a decent mix and it sounds great on my mains (Mackie 824's), Headphones (AKG 270's), and car stereo (Infinity). But when I put it through my Roland MA-8's, which represents my boombox or PC speaker mix, the bottom drops out. If I mix on the MA-8's to get the bottom present, it's waay too heavy on the other playback scenarios.

How do I get my translations to go 4 out of 4?

[Teacher]

I had the exact opposite problem....when I put mixes on shitty speakers the bottom was too much and distorted like a mofo. So I had to cut more of the sub freq and bring up the low mid, mid freq to cut thru. So I think you need to bring up the 500hz-1khz range of your kick/bass so it can be audible on little speakers. I mult can do this nicely.

g'luck with it

[cgarges]

Good mastering.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

[RKrizman]

Lose the Mackies, check your room acoustics.

-R

[Keyplayer]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

Lose the Mackies, check your room acoustics.

-R

Keyplayer: What have you got against the 824's?

[swankdoc]

Hey,
I had the exact same problems with my Mackies. In retrospect, they are very very difficult to use. Check out an RTA with those things and you'll discover why. There's peaks and valleys all over the place. The low mids and even mids are what I would call veiled.
Yes, they sound great to listen to...in fact, I miss them for that reason. But as far as mixing on them goes, your tying both hands, both ears, and a nut behind your back.

[catfish11]

another, cheaper, option is a good spectrum analizer
the guys who make equim (very good eq)
offer one for free
check some refrenence cds you like and compare,
kinda of like a guitar tuner, it don't lie.

i mix into samplitude from protools, and after years
of having samplitude around
i just figured out that i can check my mixes in real time as
i am recording them into samplitude

another option is a new plug by voxendo
one of the eqs that analizes, still another, harbal eq
all good tools

got to luv having a pc around along w the protools hd/ mac trip

[Bob Olhsson]

Adding a pair of subs to the Mackies at 100Hz. helps. Getting the right relationship between bass and kick is real tricky involving careful eq. Mastering can fix some kinds of speaker problems but the real power to get it right lies in the mix. The lower midrange and low-end need to be matched up in a way that clarifies both the notes and the rhythm. For example you might cut 50 and boost 200 on the bass while doing the opposite to the kick.

[chriscoleman]

Originally Posted by swankdoc

Hey,
I had the exact same problems with my Mackies. In retrospect, they are very very difficult to use. Check out an RTA with those things and you'll discover why. There's peaks and valleys all over the place..

Not that the 824's are the pinnacle of monitoring technology, but where did you take these measurements? In an anechoic chamber? If not, then I'm not so sure I'd trust the results - the room will have a HUGE impact on simple frequency-related tests like this.

[swankdoc]

Originally Posted by chriscoleman

Not that the 824's are the pinnacle of monitoring technology, but where did you take these measurements? In an anechoic chamber? If not, then I'm not so sure I'd trust the results - the room will have a HUGE impact on simple frequency-related tests like this.

Sure.
But I did compare back to back with NS-10's and B&O's that I had there at the time, which were much much flatter. And I've since gotten ADAMs P11's which again are much flatter, same room, same gear.
One could also argue that my room and the Mackies just didnt agree, which is possible. As much tweeking as I could do with both the room and the gear, I just could never get comfy with the Mackies.
just my experience.

[NeoVXR]

I use also AKG K55, cheap and ugly, but they have enormous bass, and flat enough to discover problems that bother you in a difficult room acoustic.
the analyzer needs a bigger FFT window than usual in real-time, at least 8192, better 16k or 24k points. beware not to cancel the actual bass notes (e.g. the typical peak around 80 hz in traditional rock )
I watch the rt display and listen, so I see where the particular sounds are, then do a FFT through the whole song to get an idea of the whole balance.
the analyzer can help to find serious problems, but when it looks right (does it ever?!) still the ears can find much more detail and judgement. so it is a technical tool, not a musical one.
to me a slow 30band graph is of no use at all. I like the full detail.

[u b k]

#1 - solicit the service of a good mastering engineer. they can tell you what's what.

#2 - each of those monitoring tools is emphasizing a different 'zone' of the bass region. learn what part of the picture each is giving you, and work it accordingly.

for instance, my boombox is brutally honest about 80-100 hz, which in many cases is the marriage of kick and bass. but my jbl28p's focus includes plenty of 40-80, so a track can sound nice and weighty on them but light on the boombox. the ns-10's focus is closer to 250; they let me know how much bass is audible on systems that have no real bass. whump and honk of the moog, whack and click of the kick.

once i learned all that, i realized what specifically i needed to do if things sounded off on one but good on another. life got a lot easier. that's the whole point of having multiple refs.

in any case, your room has to be good to get the bass nailed, otherwise you'll chase your tail ad infinitum. don't do that. it's not fun.


gregoire
del ubik