Getting a mix to sound clear but not harsh loud

[ixnys]

I've noticed that on most rock songs, I can blast them as loud as I want and they don't sound harsh to the ears. I've noticed my mixes can sound rather harsh sometimes in the high end. If I bring down some of the high end boost in the vox and gtrs, the mix will sound more muddy and not as clear. Usually I tamper with overall EQ when mastering use multiband compression.

So any tips of how to have things stay clear and not sound harsh when played loud? I'm still learning, but whenever I get feedback from you guys it helps.

[doug_hti]

in the mix, watch out for buildup of low mids and mids on individual elements (i.e. 200-400 low mids and 650-850 mids) are starting areas for a notch here and there.
Don't shelf boost at too high of a frequency...(i.e. 10k or 12k), rather try down around 3k if the overall mix needs to be brighter...but be careful of esses and pinchiness from sources
it could also be a song arrangement problem with too many things competing in the same freq range.
Don't necessarily eq tracks by themselves, other then to check, but rather in the context of the song...
Try and mix at lower volumes, or just different volumes as well, this may reveal some issues as well

[Bob Olhsson]

Those low-mid "clouds" can also cover up mid-range harshness. It's often very tricky telling the difference between too many lows and not enough highs even when you have a lot of experience.

Different mikes can make a huge difference in the harshness level of a final mix even though the difference might not seem great flat and soloed. If you can't afford a high-end condenser, a dynamic often yields better final results than condensers do for the same price.

[ToddF]

Make sure that the different tracks aren't even across the freq spectrum. Distorted gtrs don't need much high end. Vocals don't need a lot of low end etc. What gear you are using can make a difference also. Crappy a/d converters can impart harshness. Check to make sure your monitoring is accurate in tracking and mixing. The room the drums are recorded in make a big difference. Just try to keep a check on harsh sounding individual tracks. A good mastering could help things out but I know you are asking how to fix it before that. Good Luck Todd F.

[ixnys]

Yeah the vocal can be hard to get right...cuz you want it to stick out in the mix, but you dont want it to start hurting your ears when people play it loud.

[edmann]

what are your tracking thru (A/D)?

[faeflora]

What are you using? Tell us EVERYTHING. guitar, cab, mic, pre, comp, eq, a/d, recording medium etc blah

[ixnys]

Pre-amps: Avalon AD2022, Millenia STT-1 Twin, Millenia HV-3 octo pre's
Compressors: LA2A, pair of Distressors
AD/DA: Apogee PSX 100SE, and HD 192 interface

As far as tracking goes:

DRUMS:
snare top and bottom: shure 57>Millenia HV-3's>LA2A sometimes>192 i/o
Toms: MD421's>Millenia HV-3's>192 i/o
Kick: Shure Beta52>Millenia HV-3 or STT-1>192 i/o
OH's: B.L.U.E. Blueberries>Millenia HV-3's>192 i/o
Room: Neuman M49>Millenia HV-3's>192 i/o
Hat & Ride: Neuman KM184's>hv-3's>192 i/o

GUITARS:Either a PRS,Gibson,Telecaster, or Strat>shure 57>Mesa Boogie or Marshall>Avalon AD2022>Distressor>192 i/o

Bass: Either a Fender P-Bass or Padulla 5 string DI goes through Stt-1 OR AD2022>distressor and amp is Neuman M49>STT-1 OR Distressor>LA2A

Vox: Either B.L.U.E. bottle with B6 capsule or Neuman M49>Millenia Stt-1>La2a>192 i.o

So those are usually the signal chains. I usually use only the HV-3's for drums since they are station right next to the kit and adjust mic gain. Though I could use my other pre's if I wanted to. I haven't been using my apogee cause it's been make sporatic clicks/pops for some reason...

[bassmac]

ixnys, those pres you have are very excellent for sure - but for the heavy-ass rock I'm pretty sure you’re into, you might want to check out some good rock and roll pre's if you get a chance - like Neve and/or API. Distorted guitar through Neve flavor is very smooth.

[doug_hti]

that gear list is just fine!!!

I really think that you can accomplish most needs, especially on the tracking with that.
How well are you hearing mids. I got new monitors and it made a huge difference...just make sure your monitors aren't too hyped and you can judge the mids.

And as far as vocals...don't get carried away with digging out lows and low mids on them, as they will get way to thin. Maybe a high pass is in order, but don't start robbing the the vocals primary octave too quick too much...

[edmann]

Great Gear! altho the Neve/API suggestion is a good one. The ART cheap little tube pre's produce surprising good results too. Where do your mixes sound harsh to you? If it is PB thru other systems maybe your monitors are not giving enough upper mids - and therefore you compensate for that with EQ and it comes back to bite you when played back on other systems? Just a guess. Get The Apogee Fixed and use that as much as possible too. I do not know the 192, just it's predecessors. But IME multiple MOTU tracks result in a less-than-well-defined final mix, and in my own case I found myself trying to make up for that with various plugs (Dynasone for ex) which kind of help but also have the potential to impart a harsh quality because in truth you can't fix what is not there to begin with. Many well respected people may disagree with me on the MOTU assesment - perhaps Slipperman for one.

[ixnys]

I'm just trying to get to the point where mixing REALLY starts to click with me and I start producing mixes that sound more commercial. I've got all the time in the world to practice mixing yet still I haven't reached my goals. I understand mixing is an artform of itself. I really think the best way to learn to mix is to observe others that you admire, but I don't have time to go out and do that. At least I feel though I'm improving everytime I mix a new song.

As far as monitors, I own Genelec 1031's and Event Studio Precision monitors.

I know a lot of times a goal of mine is to get things to sound big and exciting low and that's sometimes is hard. To get things to sound loud...yet not be playing loud. I always am tempted to raise the volume of my speakers quickly to feel that energy.

[DanV]

You mentioned you use eq and multiband on your master channel. What have you been using for that?

[ixnys]

Yeah mastering seems like it is really important and helpful. Um I have the waves plugins so I'll usually use C4 and L2 Ultramaximizer. Still getting the hang of C4 and I think that plugin can really help in shaping the overall sound and removing any harshness there could be. It really helps out in the low end to make things tighter and rounder sounding. Even though it's best to take care of these things in the mix, sometimes mastering can solve them. As long as I have everything balanced pretty well and EQ'd nicely I think mastering can take care of the rest...so share your mastering tips within pro tools.

[JohnnyTooLoud]

Originally posted by ixnys
Yeah mastering seems like it is really important and helpful. Um I have the waves plugins so I'll usually use C4 and L2 Ultramaximizer. Still getting the hang of C4 and I think that plugin can really help in shaping the overall sound and removing any harshness there could be. It really helps out in the low end to make things tighter and rounder sounding. Even though it's best to take care of these things in the mix, sometimes mastering can solve them. As long as I have everything balanced pretty well and EQ'd nicely I think mastering can take care of the rest...so share your mastering tips within pro tools.

ixnys,

Try this: Bring a mix up and the C4 and listen carefully to what each band is doing to the sound with your settings one band at a time. Listen for what it is doing that makes it sound "better". Then bypass it and go back to the mix and try to get the mix to sound like that without it. I'm not saying to not use the C4 but this can point you into the right direction of how to handle the individual tracks. Because sometimes it is build-up of a certain frequencies. I try to always cut what I don't need of individual tracks to clean up the mix.

Also, and you've probably already done this, A/B your mix to a commercial CD but really focus on each instrument and where they live in the frequency spectrum. Then transfer that to your mix. It really is about finding space for each instrument so they all occupy the same "volume" side by side rather than all over each other.

I'd listen to it if you post a link.

Good luck!

--JTL

[TML]

Get a Fatso!!
Sometimes....when mixing I find tracks that I eq'd improperly...or recorded poorly......it happens...somehow bad tracks can end up as anchor or foundation track that you build on. To tubby or harsh....you make other instruments sit on top of these....they have to have more bass...or be brighter....it's a vicious cycle. Sometimes you gotta take a 20 min break...put on some killer pro tracks..reset your head...seek and destroy the harsh stuff and start over. It could be the souce, the mic, the pre or the converter......or all the converters together. The Fatso, HEDD and DAC-1 has dramatically changed my studio. I think the idea from Johnny to loud is cool. I do the same think with outboard eq. I find what I'm cutting the most on a mix and go back in and find where the buildup is.........
Tim

[bassmac]

Yeah, what he said!

Get A Fatso!

[edmann]

Another things to absolutely try: clock your 192's to the Apogee. I think it is safe to assume that the Apogee's clock is better than the MOTU clock, as the Apogee clock is better than most manufacturer's clocks. This may give you clearer sonic results even recording thru the 192's

[ixnys]

Originally posted by bassmac
Yeah, what he said!

Get A Fatso!

Could you elaborate on this? I really have no idea about tampering with clocking and what it really does.

[edmann]

Originally posted by ixnys
Could you elaborate on this? I really have no idea about tampering with clocking and what it really does.

By having your system sync to the most accurate (jitter-free) clock available - the performance of all the converters will increase, usually quite significantly.

basically you want to have your apogee be the master clock and your 192 be the slave. the Apogee and Motu lit that came with those devices will explain the best way to do it given the devices that you have. Usually word clock sent via BNC - that cable connector looking thing - is very solid and reliable. Often people will sync via AES, S/PDIF or ADAT too. Read your manuals and it should become clear.

Others will be able to add more detail than I have - but overall it is very simple if you have a small setup.

good luck!

Ed

[salvator]

Hello ixnys,

That's funny because you've perfectly describe a felling I've known very well in my last few months...

For me, the responses has been :

1. good analog comp. Using sometimes heavy compression for rock. Try parralel processing or comps in chain...

2. Staying away from plug ins if you can (most EQ plug are harsh & muddy in the same time :-) ) Do you use DP ? If so, Imay have some trick for you...

3. Deesser + Exiter (!) during mastering (maybe the first point you can try) exiter/tape/tube harmonics really help.

4. Analog summing. I've made my own passive rack within 2 hours of work, and I'm a beginner.
In my experience, it has clearly removed a veil. I need less EQ to have space and air. And i use motu DA for driving the box ! I prefer that path to my digitally summed mix through TC6000 converters...go figure ...
Whatever one can tell/argue me, I will never work again without. NEVER.

4. Don't push too hard EQ during mixing

5. Tape tone and nice compression (give you weight and authority). Level are simpler.

I've buy a sintefex that had provided both good comps & EQ's, tape samples and many more...

Good luck ixnys,

Salvator

[edmann]

Originally posted by salvator


2.Do you use DP ? If so, Imay have some trick for you...

4. Analog summing. I've made my own passive rack within 2 hours of work, and I'm a beginner.

Salvator!

this is great. Please provide more detail on all points (above) if you care to

thanks!

Ed

[salvator]

Hi,

The DP trick I've mentionned in fact concern most native DAW.
It's related to altiverb.

I have a hudge collection of "gear snapshot" that I use in altiverb.(I've too sampled some of my harware EQ with "the most encountered settings ")
Since I've started "EQing" this way, I've stopped my quest of the "best EQ plug".
I tweak preset. Use
Sometime, just going through a particular "color" make the track sit nicely in the mix, without any real EQ.
For example, SPL tube vitalizer signal path help for vocal, or a studer tone for kick or bass, a Massive Passive low filter for snare, Avalon 737 for OH...

Of course it don't replace a parametric EQ but, when I've well tracked projects, I often end the mix with severals instances of altiverb per track, and any or few traditionnal EQ's. I've to say that I don't like common digital EQ (especially the harsh Hi End)
You can do about 10 instances of these short impulses on a G4 400Mhz.
Now I can't live without it.


Concerning the analog summing, I'm totally convinced after several blindtest done with/without friends in the studio.
My main ADA converters are the one of my TC6000.
They are very good I think. Maybe not totally great but still Hi End.
In the other hand, I have motu 1224 (those quite stinks I must had...)

On my digital board, I sum tracks on the LR bus (wich go to the TC DA's) and, in the mean time, I assign too my track to the 8 bus. drums goes to bus 1-2, bass to 3-4, GTR to 5-6 and vocals to 7-8 (for example). those 8 bus are outputed to the Motu 1224 wich drive the "summing box of my own". Then, I can compare digital/TC vs analog/Motu. I've made my choice.
Now, I've routed the TC too through the summing device for 10 channel annalog summing. I end up with better result working this way. Mix are shorter, less tweaking, more open and ... more fun !

The summing box is a basic soldering between multiple cable. (pin hot's together, pin cold together, ground together) I've transformed an old motu rack (midi mixer) in wich I have removed everything besides the TRS jack input.
It's better to put resistor to avoid severe level loss when plugging multiple input, buzz ...
Though I've not do that yet, workflow is hard to follow.
But even with no resistor for good impedance matching, I prefer the analog summing. My box isn't academic so I can't recommend the way I've done it. Though, It work for me.

I've used 1272 preamp in the past to compensate the level loss but now am after something way more transparent
I am looking too for a Motu HD 192, Digi 002 Rack, Lynx or rosetta 800 in order to replace the cheap 1224.

Excuse my French,

Salvator

[edmann]

Originally posted by salvator
I am looking too for a Motu HD 192, Digi 002 Rack, Lynx or rosetta 800 in order to replace the cheap 1224.

Greetings Salvator-

thanks for all the info !

regarding the above:

I believe you should consider apogee or linx or comparable quality other options (mytek etc) if you want truly great sound.

Motu-digi....a few steps below I think.

your English is much batter than my French!

thanks again

and best regards

Ed

[Absolute]

All that gear dont mean nothing if your tracks are not recorded right--and that is whats going on.

I bet your Guits are way too harsh with spikes everywhere. Mostly heard with Guitar simulators or poorly miked amps. Even if you listen to Metallica's guits you will hear there is pocket around them which no harshness escapes.

You should need no eq except a lowcut and a tinny bit of compression on Dist Guitars.

well recorded tracks will sound smooth when turned up with only a bit of compression--

-forget about looking elsewhere. .

[ixnys]

well I don't use guitar simulators. I mic either a mesa boogie triple rectifier or a marshall tsl 100 with a shure 57. Sometimes a seinheisser md421.

[edmann]

Originally posted by ixnys
well I don't use guitar simulators. I mic either a mesa boogie triple rectifier or a marshall tsl 100 with a shure 57. Sometimes a seinheisser md421.

keep the mic off-axis in relationship to the speaker - i.e. from the side of the speaker aimed at an angle toward the cone

etc

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally posted by JohnnyTooLoud
... Bring a mix up and the C4 and listen carefully to what each band is doing to the sound with your settings one band at a time. Listen for what it is doing that makes it sound "better". Then bypass it and go back to the mix and try to get the mix to sound like that without it.

This is some of the very best mixing advice I've seen here, a good way to trick your brain into listening and analyzing what's really going on. An amazing percentage of what we hear is fantasy, that old "twist the knob and hear it change only to discover later that it wasn't hooked up" syndrome. Objectivity is tough and you have to ruthlessly test for the effect of balance changes vs. tonal changes. This means matching levels and making sure our signal processing is really an improvement as opposed to sounding worse but louder.

Meanwhile we all have to be able to inspire the confidence of others as we sink further into the quicksand of judging by listening!

[edmann]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
An amazing percentage of what we hear is fantasy, that old "twist the knob and hear it change only to discover later that it wasn't hooked up" syndrome.

The FOH mixer for a very well known artist I played with briefly with had various non-routed faders and knobs on the console for when the leader-artist used to come out to the FOH console during sound check.

[Absolute]

Originally posted by ixnys
well I don't use guitar simulators. I mic either a mesa boogie triple rectifier or a marshall tsl 100 with a shure 57. Sometimes a seinheisser md421.

Well I know you dont--I told you I read your equip list and obviously it is not that--it is you. The problem is the tracks are not recorded right.

I have not even a 1/4 of what you have and my tracks are smooth enough to crank it without harshness(as you say)I know exactly what your going through because we've all been there--it the tracks.

ps the guits range drops off heavily at 4k and the speaker does not output past 8k--so if you not doing it--put a highcut there--AND any where else to find the culprit--then fix it