Coming from you i'll take this as a compliment.

Here's a question (from the original poster).

Will a mix engineer take time to listen to a mix of the song that I have done? This may give him a better concept of what I'm after than me describing it in words to him. I assume as long as it's my money paying per hour, he/she should have no problem with that. Funny thing is, my only fear with this is I'd also almost like to hear what the mixer does without any of my input, and see what he can do from his own creativity.

Then again I just auditioned professional session percussionists, and I recorded a quick track of several different people to determine which one I liked. And I realized that with any of them (including the one I picked), that I'm going to have to guide them a bit as they didn't (nor could) know the song like I did (who wrote every single part of it, know intimately how every verse may have a slightly different accent).

Ok, this is confusing. You are a mix engineer yourself ? and want to show another mix guy a mix , to tell him what direction he should go ? WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT FOR ??? Wouldn't it be better to mix it yourself and save some $$ ?

The whole poing of sending something out to mixing/mastering, is because you trust that specific engineer's vision. You have to trust him, or else don't do it. Give him a example of previous work he has done.. and tell him, "I like what you did for them, that's the direction I want you to take my song" that should be enough comunication between the 2" the rest is trust.

Most will say yes.

I know i would.

I've had enough bad experiences not listening to the roughs. heh

If they're any good and interested in having the record sound good, then they should definatly listen to your mixes. I like to hear them so I can get a sense of where the music is going or not going, what the problems are or aren't and about a bajillion other things. Not only that but sometimes I'll hear things in the original mixes that I wouldn't have thought of on my own and it'll push me in different direction, the result being a better record.

I mean, if I'm going to be mixing the music then I should hear the music first. I'll get to know the form of the song and what should be where in the song and the mix. Plus in these days of DAW it's all too easy to mix a song with 40-50+ tracks and leave out a crucial one by accident.

I am not a mix engineer by profession. I am a songwriter/musician who records his own stuff. I am looking for someone who is a better mixer than I am.

Thrill and Jay (and everyone else, thanks for all the great info and responses), much appreciated. Actually, as long as a mixer listened to my rough and got a good feel, I'd be more than happy to leave the room and let them do their work unless they didn't mind me sitting there (then perhaps later it would be great if they explained how much reverb/compression/eq they used on different tracks!)

That sounds like a nightmare!

What if they just used what - 'felt good at the time' ?

Would you want to book and pay for and extra half day for the mixers - 'explain what I did" time?

How do you mean explain 'how much reverb/compression/eq they used'? Tell you the send levels in db or solo it and demontrate it with & without? With compression - without compresssion - with EQ - Without EQ?

That would take quite a while on a 50-60 track session

(I ask these questions in good humor, and don't mean to 'challange you' in a nasty way... )

Personally, I ban folks from the start of the session and let em in about 7pm - that is when I am mixing Noon - 11pm - one song. I will listen to rough mixes, I explain my methods before taking on a project, if they want to be in from the start of the mix - I don't accept the job. From 7pm I welcome their input and work with them to complete the mix.

As they listen to it for the first time I insist (like a school teacher) that the band (& manager if they are to have input) write down a list of comments about how they want the mix to be changed. I play the track several times on two systems - main monitors and a portable hifi / boogie box so they can generate a list of things they are unsure of or want changed.

What is written down gets openly discusssed... so I can gauge the bands level of opinion or passion behind the suggested changes...

Then, I simply.... WORK THROUGH THE LIST.... (with the band present)

(BTW - NO ONE is allowed to say 'and another thing' (and bring up an additional mix issue / suggestion) while we are working through the changes on the list tutt tutt tutt tutt , If a band member DOES have a NEW comment, they have to discuss it within the band, and agree it should go down on the list. it goes on the list and joins the que of things we we have to fix)

Untill there is nothing on the list..

And it is 'finished'

Hello Jules and thanks for your comments
Yes, this is originally why I would just want to sit and observe AS they do it.

My songs are typically from 8 to 14 tracks maximum (my machine is only 16 tracks). I don't plan on scrutinizing every single move or db, just a general sense of whether they used any compression, eq or reverb on tracks. I can explain in about 10 minutes on my 11 tracks how much I used. Example - I just finished a song - has 12 tracks - 3 acoustic guitars (double tracked), an electric bass, one vocal, three tracks of percussion.
There is no band - I am the band. There is no manager or producer - I am both.

only proves my point.... which is sad really.

That sounds like something that can work very well. Although a little different, I also ask artists to make notes and once we agree about the mix, I give them the opportunity to listen in their own environment and make notes OF ONLY VOLUME CHANGES . No new effects, no different panning, just a touch up or down of some parts and I explain very clearly that too big a change might cause the mix to "fall apart" so we shoudn't be changing more than 1dB or so...
Works fine sofar.

Greetings,
Dirk

being able to recall instantly and perfectly back to where i was i just burn em a copy, let em listen around on it for a bit and come back with anything.... they can then tweak to their hearts content. i get paid hourly so the more they tweak the more i get paid.... of course sometimes you have to step in and filter some things which are destructive to the vibe at times, but usually the money runs out before then.

Well for me, you either, come in at 7pm like everyone else or mix at another studio.

Working from 11am to 7 pm on a song with 12 to 16 tracks seems a bit much. But really, I really don't mind having people there when I'm mixing. That's the way it always used to be, and sometimes it can make sure that artist's vibe is in the mix.

On the other hand, I don't really want to be quizzed about every decision I'm making, as I make it. Mixing is really a process of discovery and I try to just follow my heart and be in the moment. I don't even take the time to reason out why I'm doing things in the mix. It's like a great musician who plays a great first pass, but can't really remember exactly what they played. It's really a stream of conciousness, a process of making several thousand decisions that lead to the finished mix. If you take time to analyse every move, you ruin the flow.

Steve

I ask people to give me some time alone. How long depends on the budget, complexity of the song and how many tracks.

But I don't mix a song and say, "Ok here it is".

If I'm goignt o spend a whole day mixign a song, I usually have it dialled in within 4 hours, and then have the client come in. And we'll fien tune.
I do have cases where a song is delivered, and I need to pull a song out of a bazzillion tracks, becasue of bad production. And that take smore time of course.
Also, cases wher things have toi be fixed, like out of tune vocals etc.

nice thread ... cool opinions ... thumbsup

i really like what thrill is saying ... ( will he ever say something i dont like ? ) heh

on the other side , IF nobody ever would have shared his ideas , thoughts & secrets ... we all would be MORONS ( prolly we are anyway ) ,
on the other hand , those zillion IDEA sucking flys are just too much .

if your presence FEELs alright to work with , you can come in ,
if not ?


YOUR OUT !

this is not only true, but an excellent quip to make to anyone you do not want at the mixdown. i'll try to keep it in my sonic arsenal

I had no idea you were still alive. I assumed someone would have done you in by now.

I don't come here much anymore, because I decided to be happy instead. It's bad enough I have to continue making a living in this ridiculous business. The last thing I want to do is talk about it on my down time. (This ain't the ONLY thing in the world you know, this business) I figure after being in it for 30 something years, the last thing I want to do is talk about which plug in someone used on some rap records's high hat sound. I see you still find that kind of talk facinating. (Actually, if I never saw the word "plug in" again for the rest of my life, I would be happy) Either that, or you just like the sound and smell of your typed words. :P

Still loving the smell of 2" tape in the morning!

Thats EXACTLY the reason most music guys I know give when asked why they don't do post or jingle work. Like most things in life, that way of workign isnt for everybody.

If you are doing work in that situation and dealing with a major label/artist/purchasing department/etc.... you should already be charging more than you do for indie work....

That's me. UGH. Jingles are a pain in the booty. I will say, it sure thickened my skin for putting up with flakey, overbearing artists, and being ok with scrapping a lot of work because the clueless A&R guy "doesn't feel it".

It's all good... better than a real job anyday.

I'd much rather have the artists input on a mixing session than on a mastering session. Preferably just one or two people helping...not the session with 5 guys all saying different things.


Mix session: Me: "Think the snare is loud enough?"

Artist: "Could be a little louder"

...okay simple enough


Mastering session: Me "Think we should do mid side...or do you like the low mids dipped by -1db or -2db, this Q or that Q better, yada, yada..."

That's the kind of decision you make yourself as a mastering engineer and get the artists approval for when tentatively completed (and mastering is extremely subjective no matter what anyone says IMO...send your master to 5 of the top guys and get it back, I'll bet a fiver they all sound different).

Nevermind mixing and mastering; there are times it would have been better had the tracking session been unattended!

hahahaa awesome!

Thank you Jay...

I was waiting for that...

i thought that was the major label de facto standard...

I'm they exact same way.

Uuuh isnt that what I said?

For me, the biggest problem with artists present during the mixing phase is that they seem to be concerned with only their part, and not the whole song. I don't know how many times I've seen this but the first thing a member of the group seems to be interested in is "where is my track?".

I've actually caught people cranking up their fader (when I turned to make an adjustment on something in the equipment rack) - and then deny it when I call them on it. Some people in a group have hidden agendas that come oout if they're present at a mix session. (The guitar player is thinking about leaving the group, and wants this album to be a demo of his playing skills; the hell with the singer or the song.)

"I can't hear this or that", and pretty soon, it's gone from 85dB in the control room to around 105dB for the average level, as they turn everything up, one track at a time, destroying the mix.

I'd prefer to have one person at the mix (who is concerned with the song, not just their part). Groups are always amazed when I listen to a group's home efforts and I tell them who did the mix (since the mixer's part is almost always the loudest track).

Sorry about the rant, but I just came off a three song mixing session last night, with three of the group present during the mix. It took twice as long as it should have.

i dont think i have had that problem in a LONG time... so long i cant remember when. the biggest thing that i think has helped me in that respect is gaining the respect of all the players [by playing all their instruments knowing their headspace, so its not like IM a guitarist making a guitar record]... so they all tend to know i am lookin after each of their best interests. i ask myself while mixing often, how does this mix feel as the drummer, as the guitarist, as the singer.... in fact, i have had mor eproblem of late with singers wanting me to TURN DOWN their vox and bury it more than any "more me" comments.

i feel for you however having to just go through that.... while i cant recall my last experience with that situation, i do recall the battles when it did happen. by mix time i usually have everyone in the bands psychological profile locked on and know exactly where they are coming from.


i have mentioned it in another thread... but there is a "design" book called MITV [making the invisible visible] which has a chapter on bringing in the creative efforts of a team and acting as the liason of reason within the project to create a project that meets the demands of most. its worth the read even if you just go to Barnes and Noble and sit there and read it [its just a chapter, but the whole book is worth it.... good chapter on justification as well that can apply to audio so you dont pile up a hundred tracks of crap]

Ahh me.... Is that love beating me over the head with a pipe...?

HOHOHO.

Best to ya Knox.

Glad yer still swinging the chain.

Yer Pal,

Slippy