Protecting your "tricks" when returning the hard drive back to the client?!?

[stan li]

Recently I had a few situations where I mixed a record for a band, give them their hard drive back, and then the one guy in the band with the "recording interest" goes through everything at home and does detective work on the mixes. You know, making notes of bussing/compression techniques, eq and comp. tricks, etc.

It would seem harmless except in one instance the drive made it's way to a "competing" studio/engineer and they copped my tricks, man! In another instance, the band didn't want to spend money on having me mix the next project because "we can just copy what you did on the last one ourselves"... and you know what? It actually sounded pretty good! ****!

So it sounds a little underhanded, but is anybody doing things in their PT sessions after a mix is completed to prevent this type of thing from going on? Such as doing a "save as" where everything is zeroed out and then hiding the final session file somewhere?

I'm all for the spirit of education and passing knowledge down, but to potentially lose work from it is something else!

Stan

[shaneoconnor]

here are some things that would help.

protools HD + tdm plugs. let them try to align everything with LE.... it sucks.

outboard processing.

an analog console.

i have had this sort of thing pulled on me as well.

[RTR]

Check and see if the plugs you use are available in the audio suite (PT) and use that..they will not even know what plugs you used!!

[roostert]

This has been a concern for quite some time now. Do some research online and look up Roger Nichols copyright concerns for Mix engineers.

Without getting into all of that, simply do this:

Bounce down any processing you use....outboard, plugin, etc...

Simplifiy the mixes to stems, but leave them (client) the raw tracks at the top or bottom of the edit page. That way they can recover your mix if they need to, but can get all freaky with the original tracks.

My method with labels is to print my outboard onto new tracks and bounce certain "secret" methods I may have for processing. I generally leave all of my crazy routing in place and just assign my bounced tracks to the same routing. I keep a "current" session on my backup drives, and give the label / client the updated session. Everyone is happy.

However, this still does not get you away from the copyright concerns....which is a bummer...but hey, sometimes a man's just gotta work.

On a side note. Anyone who is willing to try and do what you do, steal your methods, etc.....isn't interested in working with you long term anyway. Just lick your wounds and move on to another client. Eventually you'll have a plethora of clients that come back to you, love what you do, and are willing to pay for it. YMMV

[davedarling]

I don't have any tricks that other people don't know, and I like to think that my mixes sound the way they do mainly because of my perspective, and choices.
So I send everything in the final mix session if it's ITB, and all mix/recall
notes if it's OTB.

I had one artist take a stab at replicating a mix with my plug in settings from another song - it didn't work very well.
Being an artist that moved into production and mixing, I'm sort of down with passing on knowledge. I have a career today because some producers, and engineers were generous and shared their "tricks"

best dd

[The Byre]

Originally Posted by stan li

So it sounds a little underhanded, but is anybody doing things in their PT sessions after a mix is completed to prevent this type of thing from going on? Such as doing a "save as" where everything is zeroed out and then hiding the final session file somewhere?

We print out and export WAV files only. Partially, this is because we also use Radar and therefore I can only guarantee WAVs.

But also, the various methods used are not really a part of the mix, but based on macros and complex set-ups written by the engineer in his own time. In other words, they are software and as such, need to be protected, just like any other software.

Just because the software involved is a series of lines, settings, routings, assigned plug-ins and God-knows what else, and can be seen as a series of commands within a DAW that someone else may be able to copy, in no way means that anyone has a right to be able to copy them.

Most engineers have a series of set-ups that they take with them from gig to gig and DAW to DAW. It is rather difficult to tell a customer that you are going to 'hide' how you work, so the easy answer is to print the tracks as WAVs and just give them that.

[ChampionAudio]

So what's the consensus, then? If you don't want your techniques to be used against you, do you supply a blank session with raw audio tracks, or export tracks with processing so they have the finished mix with none of the plugin settings?

[stan li]

Well, what happens sometimes is that a recall needs to be made after the fact and if you zero everything out and strip it down, how you gonna to the recall when they bring the drive back?

Here's what I'm thinking: On the house hard drive, keep a little organized folder with PT session files only and don't provide this when you turn the band's drive over to them. If they need a recall, open it up with the vaulted session file and problem solved.

I keep drum samples and such on a folder on my internal drive and the disk allocation for each tune is set so that if a sample is used, it looks at this folder instead of making a copy of the sample in the song's Audio Files folder. That way at least they can't steal my samples!

[ElMosca]

I haven't felt the need to do this, since I'm not exactly Eddie Kramer, but the way I would do it is as follows:

1) Create a PT session folder/files the usual way for your tracking dates. When all the tracking is done...

2) Use "Save as..." to create a second PT session file for the mixing work. However, save this PT file (I mean the .pts or .ptf file) on your drive. The audio files, fades, etc. remain in their drive, in the original folder created in step 1. The PT session file merely refers to these audio files anyway.

Give them their drive with the tracking session file and the audio/fade files, and keep your mixing secrets in your disk.

I usually work in this way (minus the save on a separate volume). Once I stop working on the tracking, I will use "save as" to create a mixing session with my grouping, fader levels, plugs, stems, parallel comp/verb auxes, etc.

Hope this helps,
++aldo

P.S. You may also want to disable autosave once you start mixing.

[RCM - Ronan]

Since 90% of my processing is outboard I do not have the problem but...

Unless you have an agreement that states you are going to hand over complete re-callable mix sessions, when you are done mixing, save the sessions to your own back up drive in case you need to do a recall. Then strip all of the plug ins off of the pro tools session, trash the autosave files and hand then back the disc.

Unless stated in a specific agreement, they have no right to your plug in settings and you are keeping a full recall safety for them as a courtesy.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by stan li

Recently I had a few situations where I mixed a record for a band, give them their hard drive back, and then the one guy in the band with the "recording interest" goes through everything at home and does detective work on the mixes. You know, making notes of bussing/compression techniques, eq and comp. tricks, etc.

It would seem harmless except in one instance the drive made it's way to a "competing" studio/engineer and they copped my tricks, man! In another instance, the band didn't want to spend money on having me mix the next project because "we can just copy what you did on the last one ourselves"... and you know what? It actually sounded pretty good! ****!

So it sounds a little underhanded, but is anybody doing things in their PT sessions after a mix is completed to prevent this type of thing from going on? Such as doing a "save as" where everything is zeroed out and then hiding the final session file somewhere?

I'm all for the spirit of education and passing knowledge down, but to potentially lose work from it is something else!

Stan

um yeah. They dont get PT session with all the plugins in - not that it'd make much difference because most of the work is on the console !!. If they want stem prints - they can have them. Even track prints.... but they dont get a mix break down etc etc etc....ever.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by stan li

Well, what happens sometimes is that a recall needs to be made after the fact and if you zero everything out and strip it down, how you gonna to the recall when they bring the drive back?

You dont use their drive. I've kept every session I've ever done - yes even tapes. Dupes are your ally.

[IntelDoc]

I am with Ronan on this. I use a lot of outboard too

I provide a session with A STEREO wave and the session data. NO PLUGS. I keep a backup for my own use if they come back 2 years from now.

Definitely do not give it all

Doc

[MarkRB]

This kind of thing annoys me no-end.

Seriously, what kind of tricks do you have that we haven't heard of?
Just print them if you don't want us to know "How It Was Done".

Full recall documentation and data were delivery requirements not so very long ago.

[Jack Ruston]

Yeah, in everything we do our judgement is really the product. If you mix a track it's not about the fact that you used a compressed mult of the vocal (for example) but how much you used, when and how it sat in the track. The knowledge of what you did to create a mix is relatively useless because it's entirely dependant on how you felt and what you heard at the time. If people want tricks they can read about them on Gearslutz. Share that stuff. Spread the love.

A different issue is whether you're concerned that they're going to use your mix as it is. If that's the case just remove plug ins and automation and set everything to zero. I always do a major clean up of everything when I'm sending stuff to another mix engineer just out of courtesy.

[steveWall]

@MarkRB: The first post describes specifically how this was a big deal and burned him. How can you refute that? I can't speak for him but, in my humble opinion, if this was how you paid for your child's diapers and food (as I do) I think you'd have a different opinion. It's not so you don't know "How It Was Done," it's more so you can't just lift hard-earned intellectual capital.

In true GS fashion (because I can't resist), Here's a quick parallel:
I started in finance before audio. Luckily I survived (eek! almost off'd myself quite a few times to escape the Excel torture...). In the financial markets, it's all just buying and selling using easily learned financial instruments. Yet, some advisors in hedge funds get people FREAKING RICH, and some people lose their shirts. Hmm... I wonder why...

Let's say my advisor made me some cash by simply buying and selling things. Hey, I can do that! Would it then be fair for me to ask him to hand over his trading algorithms and arbitrage spotting software that he spent years developing? Or perhaps paid a large sum of money to have developed for him?

My answer is a resounding NO. The people here for the most part work hard, and try hard at what they do, regardless of their "opinions" on gear or methods. To ask people to be "OK" with getting ripped off any further than they already are by labels and scumbag clients is outrageous.

I work as HARD AS I CAN for EVERY CLIENT because I care about my business. Deeply. There is real emotion invested in these mixes and to have someone throw it back in your face is heart wrenching.

Oh, and @Jack Ruston, "The knowledge of what you did to create a mix is relatively useless because it's entirely dependant on how you felt and what you heard at the time." is possibly the outtest thing I've ever read on these forums.

Whatever, I need a scotch.

[steveWall]

All that being said, It's tough (or just annoying) to do anything about it. In all honesty, I'm usually very open with how I work and what I'm doing. And, I've been lucky to have been shown valuable lessons from some of my favorite engineers, but people shouldn't have the freakin' balls to openly insult and devalue your experience and hard work.

Print your tracks. Deliver just the stereo files when you can. Or even consolidate regions and send a session with just those files. Just as if you're sending reels of tape. Most experienced engineers are going to actually want things this way so they don't have to waste time stripping away your mix when they get it.

[MarkRB]

Originally Posted by steveWall

@MarkRB: The first post describes specifically how this was a big deal and burned him. How can you refute that? I can't speak for him but, in my humble opinion, if this was how you paid for your child's diapers and food (as I do) I think you'd have a different opinion. It's not so you don't know "How It Was Done," it's more so you can't just lift hard-earned intellectual capital.

Steve, this has been my job for nigh on 20 years. When working on consoles and outboard full recall sheets and the automation data were the norm, and a required part of delivery specs.

But the idea that someone can analyse your work and suddenly be able to mix like you is laughable.

Of course it's unfortunate when a mix you did goes to someone else, but that's the nature of this job and learning from those occasions is valuable to me.

Obviously if you really feel you have developed a great new trick that you don't want to share then print it. And keep copies of all your work.

[steveWall]

Mark, I'm not saying they could "mix like you" as much as they THINK they can "mix like you." Which is just as bad, and perhaps MORE frustrating because we all know they can't. But, that doesn't stop them from thinking they can cop your mixes and taking their business elsewhere, or home. Most amateurs wouldn't know where to start when reading an 80 track recall sheet. But all of them can double click a Pro Tools session file icon. Many people are working with mid/low-level acts that want to save cash and guitar center tells them its as easy as an MBox and a good computer. If they take their business home and it sucks, you still lost potential money ($500 here, $300 there, $1000 here...) And when you're working day to day to pay rent, this can be a significant blow.

Sorry all for taking this thought maybe too far and straying a bit from the OP. Rock.

Steve

[ChampionAudio]

Originally Posted by steveWall

Mark, I'm not saying they could "mix like you" as much as they THINK they can "mix like you." Which is just as bad, and perhaps MORE frustrating because we all know they can't. But, that doesn't stop them from thinking they can cop your mixes and taking their business elsewhere, or home. Most amateurs wouldn't know where to start when reading an 80 track recall sheet. But all of them can double click a Pro Tools session file icon. Many people are working with mid/low-level acts that want to save cash and guitar center tells them its as easy as an MBox and a good computer. If they take their business home and it sucks, you still lost potential money ($500 here, $300 there, $1000 here...) And when you're working day to day to pay rent, that is can be a significant blow.

Sorry all for taking this thought maybe too far and straying a bit from the OP. Rock.

Steve

+1 The whole time I've been reading this thread since my earlier post, I've been thinking exactly what you just posted. You beat me to it!

[steveWall]

Andy,

WORD.

-sw

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by MarkRB

This kind of thing annoys me no-end.

Seriously, what kind of tricks do you have that we haven't heard of?
Just print them if you don't want us to know "How It Was Done".

Full recall documentation and data were delivery requirements not so very long ago.

never been the case in any work i've done. Recall docs were for me!!

[cajonezzz]

Pretty simple:

I get the client drive, transfer to my work drive. Client drive gets put on the shelf.

Mix that sucka. Turn in your mixes. Get accolades, huge paycheck and props from the music community at large.

Have assistant do stem mixes: drums,bass,guitars,vox etc. and put in folder.

Put stems back on client drive.

Give drive back to client.

if recalls needed, encourage client to use stems, or pay me to recall.

( btw, print all my outboard, which these days, is less and less)

I never give my PT session mix doc, not because I'm afraid of them copping my "skillz" but because they'll figure out that I don't know what the F*ck I'm doing when they look at my convoluted sessions.

[C.Judd Karn]

Exactly what cajonezzz said is what I do.

But remember, if a trick or technique does slip out...
"It's the indian not the arrow"

I've sat in on a few CLA mix sessions, went home to replicate it with the few outboard I have and it's not quite it (just talking about an electric gtr tone).
Same tracks, same la3a, same eq, I'm not him...

and they are not you

Chris

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by C.Judd Karn

Exactly what cajonezzz said is what I do.

But remember, if a trick or technique does slip out...
"It's the indian not the arrow"

I've sat in on a few CLA mix sessions, went home to replicate it with the few outboard I have and it's not quite it (just talking about an electric gtr tone).
Same tracks, same la3a, same eq, I'm not him...

and they are not you

Chris

I do remember giving out ADAT tapes years ago with my drum samples (before sample replacement was widely known amongst the great masses of studio out there).... getting loads of comments about "my great drums sounds" but then being given less credit when the great unwashed heard a track of samples !!

[clearwave]

Nope.
1. My "tricks" are done in tracking.
2. The settings I end up using in a mix WILL NOT work in another mix.
3. The next project I mix will be the best one I've ever done. Past mixes are worthless to me. (at least thats what I tell myself)

[blackcatdigi]

Hey guys this has come up before and I've made extensive comments so I'll be brief:

I could not care less about my mix 'secrets'... I don't have any and I'll explain everything I'm doing and show you how, but at the end of the day-...

The audio files are yours. The mix files are mine. You cannot take my work, reverse pan the hihat and tamb and put your name on it (True story). Sorry.

Here are your audio files. Do with them what you want. Call if you want me to reverse the HHs or mix it yourself!

[therealbigd]

I work in Logic.

To protect my work, once I've finished mixing and return the drive to somebody, I bounce the tracks (using bounce in place) to concrete any fx / eq / comps etc onto the tracks.

preferably though, I don't send the session files back at all. nothing worse than somebody making some 'tweaks' to make it 'better' then either:

1) messing it up, yet branding it as your mix, OR
2) saying 'oh I changed it a little so it's my mix now' and not crediting you at all.

my Ts and Cs say 'I'm a mix engineer you send me 40 mono tracks, I send you 1 stereo track. end of.'

[TRANQUILO]

Im not one who gives a damn. It is too subjective to even matter. Shure people can copy my tricks, see my filters etc... but each track is always so different, you never know the entire process unless you are the creator. You cant use the same eq filter and the same compressor settings on every session for every track, you have to treat it as a unique track each time and adjust each plug-in accordingly, those parameters are for the reason of dynamics within the processing of that instrument. You might as well use presets because its the same thing at that point. If anything it may be a learning method. I use an anlalog mixer and some analog outboard gear for creating stereo masters, this is the one advantage I have over in the box type stuff. I wouldnt worrie. The one thing you cant steal or copy is experience!

[The MPCist]

I give the client a PT session of all tracks used for the mix. All faders at zero, no automation, no plugins, no aux/fx settings. Just the raw tracks.

I also give them Mix/MMO/MMA, vocal submix (dry & with fx), BV submix, and a few other submixes that might be useful for a remix if they so wanted.

That's it.