The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Inside The Mix: Red Hot Chili Peppers w/Andrew Scheps Dynamics Plugins
Old 23rd November 2017
  #1
Advanced Audio Tutorials
 
puremix.net's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Inside The Mix: Red Hot Chili Peppers w/Andrew Scheps



This is your chance to see how Grammy-winning engineer/producer Andrew Scheps mixed the legendary rock band Red Hot Chili Peppers' song Pink as Floyd.

Hear how he captured the band’s characteristically funky and energetic vibe then translated that into a punchy and finished mix. Andrew teaches you how he applies and adapts his mix template to craft the mix quickly with dynamics and vibe.

Pick up dozens of tips and tricks from Andrew's decades of experience and learn the process and mixing system he uses on one of the most successful bands ever.

BONUS: Download the exercise files and practice mixing the song for yourself! The artist and their label were gracious enough to allow pureMixers the chance to try their hand at mixing a portion of the song using the same raw multitrack stems Andrew mixed. Put your skills to the test and apply some of your new found techniques.

Old 23rd November 2017
  #2
Gear Maniac
 

This is a little OT but is relevant to the the OP! With the release of and numerous threads & posts on the various EL8 Distressor plugin emulations at the front of my mind i found something very interesting when i visited the site and looked at the software & hardware Andrew Scheps used on the above red hot chilli peppers song.What fascinated me the most was he used the Waves CLA-76 & CLA-2A despite the fact he could have used ANY 1176 & LA2A plugin including the new UAD MKll version and the new Slate version of the plugins in question! The reason this fascinates me is fact that SO MANY people on Gearslut pro & hobbyists alike say the new UAD & Slate emulations are light years ahead in faithfulness and real world usage in comparison to the over 5 year old Waves versions,but yet the Grammy award winning world class mix engineer Andrew Scheps uses the Waves versions despite the fact he could have used ANY other version including UAD or Slate's! I come to Gearsluts for many different reasons including to get other people's views/opinions on new & old software alike and as much as i try not to these views/opinions DO play a part in what i use & buy,which i hate to admit!
BUT? this has really opened my eyes and ears that in the future i will be taking people's opinions with a pinch of salt and ultimately using what I think is best for the task in hand and NOT what other people think is better! So with all that said i would love to hear people opinions on this? which i will take as a pinch of salt of course lol
Old 23rd November 2017
  #3
Lives for gear
 
JulenJVM's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-Fidelity View Post
This is a little OT but is relevant to the the OP! With the release of and numerous threads & posts on the various EL8 Distressor plugin emulations at the front of my mind i found something very interesting when i visited the site and looked at the software & hardware Andrew Scheps used on the above red hot chilli peppers song.What fascinated me the most was he used the Waves CLA-76 & CLA-2A despite the fact he could have used ANY 1176 & LA2A plugin including the new UAD MKll version and the new Slate version of the plugins in question! The reason this fascinates me is fact that SO MANY people on Gearslut pro & hobbyists alike say the new UAD & Slate emulations are light years ahead in faithfulness and real world usage in comparison to the over 5 year old Waves versions,but yet the Grammy award winning world class mix engineer Andrew Scheps uses the Waves versions despite the fact he could have used ANY other version including UAD or Slate's! I come to Gearsluts for many different reasons including to get other people's views/opinions on new & old software alike and as much as i try not to these views/opinions DO play a part in what i use & buy,which i hate to admit!
BUT? this has really opened my eyes and ears that in the future i will be taking people's opinions with a pinch of salt and ultimately using what I think is best for the task in hand and NOT what other people think is better! So with all that said i would love to hear people opinions on this? which i will take as a pinch of salt of course lol
Just how much marketing do you think was put in the choice of plugins? IMHO, if there's something to be taken with a pinch of salt, it's this kind of courses.
Old 23rd November 2017
  #4
Lives for gear
 

Andrew is known to use plugins and in general be 100% ITB.. his choices of plugin are most likely simply due to comfort. He knows the sound of them inside out and thus can apply them at 100% ability. In the case of the waves plugins used, I'm almost certain he didn't pick them just for marketing alone, though that is indeed possible, but rather due to comfort (they have been around a while).

What we "laymen" always have problems understanding is that it's not the tools, it's how you use them that matters. This has been proven over and over again. The only thing that matters is the end result and there are infinite ways to get there. A rich amateur who has all the best tools in the world will make a vastly inferior mix when compared with one of these masters using only basic tools.

@Hi-Fidelity: You should _always_ take other peoples opinion with a pinch of salt. In the end all of this is based on subjective opinion and the only thing that ever matters is the end result. Nobody cares how you got to the end result (except us geeks).

Having said that, it's also incredibly important to understand that the end result does indeed differ depending on the tools you use but this does not mean that one end result is better than the other. That is in the ear of the beholder.
Old 23rd November 2017
  #5
I listened to the finished track and it's harsh and heavily distorted, I'm not sure I want to learn that
Old 23rd November 2017
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Mercado_Negro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic View Post
Andrew is known to use plugins and in general be 100% ITB.. his choices of plugin are most likely simply due to comfort. He knows the sound of them inside out and thus can apply them at 100% ability. In the case of the waves plugins used, I'm almost certain he didn't pick them just for marketing alone, though that is indeed possible, but rather due to comfort (they have been around a while).

What we "laymen" always have problems understanding is that it's not the tools, it's how you use them that matters. This has been proven over and over again. The only thing that matters is the end result and there are infinite ways to get there. A rich amateur who has all the best tools in the world will make a vastly inferior mix when compared with one of these masters using only basic tools.

@Hi-Fidelity: You should _always_ take other peoples opinion with a pinch of salt. In the end all of this is based on subjective opinion and the only thing that ever matters is the end result. Nobody cares how you got to the end result (except us geeks).

Having said that, it's also incredibly important to understand that the end result does indeed differ depending on the tools you use but this does not mean that one end result is better than the other. That is in the ear of the beholder.

Well said.

I think the key word there is "comfort". You never change a formula that works unless you have time enough to experiment. Sometimes those experiments give you new ways to get the same results and faster than before but you don't jump blindly, you take your time to alter the formula.
Old 23rd November 2017
  #7
Lives for gear
 
Owen L T's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JulenJVM View Post
Just how much marketing do you think was put in the choice of plugins? IMHO, if there's something to be taken with a pinch of salt, it's this kind of courses.
Just how much do you think an A-list mixing engineer would use plug-ins he knows to sound inferior on a mix for a globally known band? That's the kind of thing that would kill a career. Yes, it's good to be sceptical, and some of the tutorials on that site do have product tie-ins - like to Plug & Mix. But the notion that puremix influenced Andrew Scheps to use specific waves plug-ins on a high-profile mix just doesn't add up, to me.

If you've watched enough of his stuff, in particular, he'll also explain that in many sessions he'll get tracks with old, stock effects on them, which everyone on ProTools has, and he'll often just leave them in. My impression - and it is only an impression - is that it's people like me who tend to get more caught up in which plug-in is the absolute, most "authentic" emulation, while pros like Andrew who have used everything, know when they can get exactly what they want from older, familiar technology, and when to get excited by something new. Do the waves compressors do what he needs them to? Has he used them on 500 mixes? Yes and, probably, yes again.
Old 23rd November 2017
  #8
Lives for gear
 
JulenJVM's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Owen L T View Post
Just how much do you think an A-list mixing engineer would use plug-ins he knows to sound inferior on a mix for a globally known band? That's the kind of thing that would kill a career. Yes, it's good to be sceptical, and some of the tutorials on that site do have product tie-ins - like to Plug & Mix. But the notion that puremix influenced Andrew Scheps to use specific waves plug-ins on a high-profile mix just doesn't add up, to me.

If you've watched enough of his stuff, in particular, he'll also explain that in many sessions he'll get tracks with old, stock effects on them, which everyone on ProTools has, and he'll often just leave them in. My impression - and it is only an impression - is that it's people like me who tend to get more caught up in which plug-in is the absolute, most "authentic" emulation, while pros like Andrew who have used everything, know when they can get exactly what they want from older, familiar technology, and when to get excited by something new. Do the waves compressors do what he needs them to? Has he used them on 500 mixes? Yes and, probably, yes again.
That´s some good points, and you´re probably right, and I´m being too skeptical. It´s just that I doubt that those are the real final mixes as delivered to the label when I see pics like this:



Link to pic

I only see one LA-2A in there, so you´re probably right, but my conspiranoic disorder lends me to think that Waves might be involved financially on this project.

On a second thought, if he uses all that stuff on the way in, then all the mojo is already in there at the beginning of the mix, which explains why so many algos on the mix. But that doesn´t mean that plugins alone will get you Mr Schepp´s results
Old 23rd November 2017
  #9
Lives for gear
 
doom64's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic View Post
Andrew is known to use plugins and in general be 100% ITB.. his choices of plugin are most likely simply due to comfort. He knows the sound of them inside out and thus can apply them at 100% ability. In the case of the waves plugins used, I'm almost certain he didn't pick them just for marketing alone, though that is indeed possible, but rather due to comfort (they have been around a while).

What we "laymen" always have problems understanding is that it's not the tools, it's how you use them that matters. This has been proven over and over again. The only thing that matters is the end result and there are infinite ways to get there. A rich amateur who has all the best tools in the world will make a vastly inferior mix when compared with one of these masters using only basic tools.

@Hi-Fidelity: You should _always_ take other peoples opinion with a pinch of salt. In the end all of this is based on subjective opinion and the only thing that ever matters is the end result. Nobody cares how you got to the end result (except us geeks).

Having said that, it's also incredibly important to understand that the end result does indeed differ depending on the tools you use but this does not mean that one end result is better than the other. That is in the ear of the beholder.
Tools are half of it. The other half is how they are used. Instrument quality and room acoustics are apart of the tools equation. I finally bought high end EQs and compressors this year. They are used during tracking. Mixes are much easier now thanks to those tools that "don't matter."

Last edited by doom64; 23rd November 2017 at 08:09 PM..
Old 23rd November 2017
  #10
Gear Nut
 

The Waves CLA are great plugins, and if you can't get a good mix from them than it's on you. It's always amusing to see hobbyists on forums bash certain plugins, but then I go around to pro-studios and see engineers using said plugins in all their sessions
Old 23rd November 2017
  #11
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubLifeSD View Post
The Waves CLA are great plugins, and if you can't get a good mix from them than it's on you. It's always amusing to see hobbyists on forums bash certain plugins, but then I go around to pro-studios and see engineers using said plugins in all their sessions
Sure, but there's another trap, just because someone famous uses some piece of gear or software, doesn't automatically mean it is better than the other one, or it even sound good at all. It's like the famous SM58 and Bono combination, yes, he used this microphone on many hits, but it doesn't sound all that good, his songs are not about the fidelity of recording of his voice anyway.

Last edited by cyjanopan; 23rd November 2017 at 10:51 PM..
Old 24th November 2017
  #12
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doom64 View Post
Tools are half of it. The other half is how they are used. Instrument quality and room acoustics are apart of the tools equation. I finally bought high end EQs and compressors this year. They are used during tracking. Mixes are much easier now thanks to those tools that "don't matter."
You'd be surprised at just how many iconic mixes have been made with rather basic or even inferior tools.

If you have the skill and experience (as Andrew does) you can use any tools and get a mix going that would satisfy the masses. Would it satisfy you to use any tools available? Probably not (I know for a fact I wouldn't be satisfied.. I'm very particular about my tools) but the "pro" arena is very different to the "amateur" arena that we occupy (these words simply used here to differentiate the dude who mixes hundreds of records per yer vs most of us here who may do a bit less).
Old 24th November 2017
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyjanopan View Post
Sure, but there's another trap, just because someone famous uses some piece of gear or software, doesn't automatically mean it is better than the other one, or it even sound good at all. It's like the famous SM58 and Bono combination, yes, he used this microphone on many hits, but it doesn't sound all that good, his songs are not about the fidelity of recording of his voice anyway.
That's the thing though.. "Good" is a subjective word in this case. If something sounds good or not is entirely in the eye of the beholder. (ear of the listener?)

Using something "technically superior" may in fact not have satisfied the final result they were going for. This is what makes all of these discussions so tricky. There is no truth to anything at all. It's ALL subjective in the end, like it or not.

Nickelback isn't bad nor good.. it's all subjective.

EDIT: This however doesn't mean you can't use the words good/bad to form your own opinion. On the contrary, that's exactly what one should be doing on public forums.. in my opinion.
Old 24th November 2017
  #14
TZk
Gear Maniac
 

If Andrew can’t get a decent mix with stock plugins, waves, uad or any other...he’s not doing his job. Andrew is the mix not waves. Ofcourse he has favorites which rotate and if I remember correctly he tries to use different plugins to keep the sound diverse (not the same eq on everything) or was that Tchad Blake?

Listen to what he says not what he uses.

Ofcourse possible that he was asked to use more waves plugins on this mix because they buy ads on this or that tutorial site.
Old 24th November 2017
  #15
Gear Maniac
 

Some really really good points guys,i think what i take away from this thread and what i generally know anyway is that it really is the the quality of the artist being recorded,how good the recording was and the skill of the engineers mixing & mastering,the plugins OR hardware is the means to the end and that's all that matters is the end product and how you got there doesn't really matter,as long as you got there and you and the artist/client is happy.
Old 24th November 2017
  #16
Old 24th November 2017
  #17

What could a famed mixer like cyjanopan possibly learn from a no-name hack like Andy Sheps?
Old 24th November 2017
  #18
Be honest with yourself and at least try to see further than big names, did you listen to the track and thought it sound good? Because I didn't like it (am I allowed to?), so why should I pay for knowledge about something I don't think sound good? Also did I say anywhere that he's a hack or a no name or I'm famed or even aspire to it? What's your problem (not that I care, just food for thought)?
Old 24th November 2017
  #19
Not only did I listen to the mix, I actually watched the video, and I took a great deal away from it. I think your attitude misses a crucial point about the learning process: you don't have to think everything sounds great in a particular production to learn a great deal from the process that realized it. When I was working as an intern and as an assistant, I didn't agree with every decision made by the producers and engineers I was learning from. I didn't think everything they did sounded amazing. But I learned something from each and every session, just as I continue to learn something on each and every session to this day. Thus, I consider ANY insight into ANY session a learning opportunity, and that opportunity is greatly amplified when it involves an engineer as skilled and experienced as Andy Sheps working on a record for a band as well-known and wide-reaching as RHCP.

With that said, I didn't love the mix either, and furthermore, i don't count myself an RHCP fan. But I feel like I gained a great deal of insight by watching that video. I'm not looking to replicate that particular mix by any means (again, I think that represents a fundamental misunderstanding about the learning process, but i digress), but hearing Andy go into detail about his philosophy and reasoning behind the decisions he makes, and how he went about solving problems he faced (both musical and technical) were well worth the viewing.

Writing off his work as harsh and heavily distorted, and as simply unworthy of your time represents a level of arrogance that I found extremely distasteful. I suppose "my problem" in this case is probably similar to whatever it was that compelled you to publicly slag off another engineer's work in a self-aggrandizing and arrogant way.

Not that you care.
Old 24th November 2017
  #20
Now that's funny! On one hand you kind of agree with me on the sound of the mix, but on the other hand try to publicly shame me for the same reason and try to put words in my mouth, but that is not self-aggrandizing, arrogant and extremely distasteful just because you do it. Please (dad?) don't reply, it's not the right place for our moaning, you're on my ignore list from now on anyway, please do the same so you don't have to see my extremely distasteful arrogant slagging self-aggrandizing posts (hint: maybe try to look into the definition of the overreaction)
Old 24th November 2017
  #21
Lives for gear
 
doom64's Avatar
Well this thread unnecessarily escalated quickly!
Old 29th November 2017
  #22
Lives for gear
 

Well, having now seen the video I have to agree with the people who critiqued the mix. It's rather poor. Distorted and brittle. Not sure how it relates to the actual final mix (you can easily find it on youtube in various formats).. the final mastered mix sounds a lot better.. like _a lot_ better.

Not sure what my takeaway on this is. I guess I was expecting a bit more from mr Scheps. Oh well.
Old 29th November 2017
  #23
Gear Nut
yes the youtube version is by far professional. This is what I have been talking about. This mixing tutorial don't show the real secret they just do f***ing rough mix and call it finished. I sometimes wonder what the hell they are trying to teach. I usually listen the finished mix before I go and see tutorial and now this one. What in a hell is going on. seriously, That vocal need multi band compressor around 4k it is extremely piercing. You can easily get a tinnitus with such a mix. Why not showing how to make it sound like this YouTube
Old 29th November 2017
  #24
I will just add two cents to what has been said already. I didnt watch this video but previously bought luca protolesi mixing edm track. The same rule applied in his video. Quick job with mediocre finish but when you listen to what he has done in the original mix makes me wonder what's the point of those videos. Its just better to not to do it on the fly but just to show the original session and do some proper explanation on the go...
Old 30th November 2017
  #25
Lives for gear
 
doom64's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio Saturn View Post
yes the youtube version is by far professional. This is what I have been talking about. This mixing tutorial don't show the real secret they just do f***ing rough mix and call it finished. I sometimes wonder what the hell they are trying to teach. I usually listen the finished mix before I go and see tutorial and now this one. What in a hell is going on. seriously, That vocal need multi band compressor around 4k it is extremely piercing. You can easily get a tinnitus with such a mix. Why not showing how to make it sound like this YouTube
Well to be fair the track you linked to is off the vinyl release. Anyone who has produced for vinyl knows that you need to be really careful in the sibilance frequencies. So my guess is the mastering engineer fixed those mistakes.
Old 30th November 2017
  #26
Lives for gear
 
bgood's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic View Post
That's the thing though.. "Good" is a subjective word in this case. If something sounds good or not is entirely in the eye of the beholder. (ear of the listener?)

Using something "technically superior" may in fact not have satisfied the final result they were going for. This is what makes all of these discussions so tricky. There is no truth to anything at all. It's ALL subjective in the end, like it or not.

Nickelback isn't bad nor good.. it's all subjective.

EDIT: This however doesn't mean you can't use the words good/bad to form your own opinion. On the contrary, that's exactly what one should be doing on public forums.. in my opinion.
You ruined a perfectly good analogy by centering it around Nuckleback
Old 30th November 2017
  #27
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic View Post
Nickelback isn't bad nor good.. it's all subjective.
My head has been hurting for days after reading this escher-esque paradox.
I'm pretty sure you broke something in there bmanic!!
Old 30th November 2017
  #28
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bgood View Post
You ruined a perfectly good analogy by centering it around Nuckleback
Haha yeah I probably did.
Old 30th November 2017
  #29
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by JulenJVM View Post
That´s some good points, and you´re probably right, and I´m being too skeptical. It´s just that I doubt that those are the real final mixes as delivered to the label when I see pics like this:



Link to pic

I only see one LA-2A in there, so you´re probably right, but my conspiranoic disorder lends me to think that Waves might be involved financially on this project.

On a second thought, if he uses all that stuff on the way in, then all the mojo is already in there at the beginning of the mix, which explains why so many algos on the mix. But that doesn´t mean that plugins alone will get you Mr Schepp´s results
My friend... Andrew Scheps is entirely in the box and has been for ages. That gear is not used by him anymore to mix.
Old 30th November 2017
  #30
Lives for gear
 
JulenJVM's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moondog007 View Post
My friend... Andrew Scheps is entirely in the box and has been for ages. That gear is not used by him anymore to mix.
The question in this debate is whether you think or not that the course advertised in this thread is the real one, the one that shows what Andrew Scheps is able to do.
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump