View Single Post
Old 8th May 2003
  #17
urumita
 
7rojo7's Avatar
 
hey! I voted for option 3 because I really didn't understand WTF it meant.
let's take 2 classic examples of great music and compare the processes.
what's goin' on Marvin Gaye, sounds like it was written, recorded and mixed on the same day, and I can listen to it over and over and over.
the white album or revolver fab four couldn't have possibly been done like this and I can and do listen again and again.

every project has its own dynamic. why not mix the song while you record it, has anyone tried that? I used to be paid to do just that.
or, mix each song after the overdubs are done while the flame for the song is still on, while you're still singing it in your head and then adjust for the next song (?culture club, beatles?)
and there must be other options. why not?
I prefer to work how my artists feel comfortable working and not impose any restrictions based on my lazy ass personality.
some want to play and play, thus all tracking and no play, and some would like to concentrate on their sound and emotional space for the particular tune. I always keep my self flexible to change any plan I've made because it tends to help the artist remain in a creative mood.
these days you can do a mix right away and at the end of the project you can touch it up.
I've had rough mixes beat out the album mixes a few times.
one never knows, do one?