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
When is too much (artist changing mix)? Dynamics Plugins
Old 23rd December 2010
  #31
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellyd View Post
The artist's perspective is not always they best. I find many players in bands are more concerned about how loud their instruments are versus how good the song sounds. Guitarists want guitars louder, bassists want their bass louder and so on. Also now that every musician is a so called engineer it can be difficult. They feel they really know what's up. Some do, most don't. The trick here is not to let their shortcomings as an engineer define the engineering on the mix.
With that said, never let your own ego get in the way of staying open minded. It's a tough dance we dance.
See: My first rule (back a couple posts)
Old 23rd December 2010
  #32
If the band isn't 99% happy after thier 1st revision, I gotta figure I must be the wrong dude for the job. At that point I'm more than happy to hand them a disc of stems and be done with it (if the balance is paid). I've been lucky that most of the bands I work with have been relatively easy to please.
Old 23rd December 2010
  #33
Lives for gear
 
weezul's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLUElightCory View Post
My three rules for clients regarding mixing - these rules have saved me from TONS of these sorts of problems:

1. No one can ask for changes to their own instrument - i.e. guitar player can't ask for more guitar, drummer can't ask for more snare, etc. This keeps everyone listening to the "big picture."

2. If you don't hear a problem the first one or two times you listen to the mix, there is no problem. This keeps bands from listening to the mix 300 times, looking for things to change.

3. The entire band must agree on all changes prior to doing any tweaking/recalls, and bring in a single, unified list of changes. This keeps me from getting texts/calls/emails from different band members asking for changes.

Now, if someone has an issue I will always hear them out and try out any changes they want, but these three rules make the process much smoother for me, and no one has complained about them so far.
This is genius. I wish I could remember to lay out great rules like this. My limit is usually three revisions. Just finished mixing a 10 track folk album in just under a week, and that took three two-page word documents of revisions and then a sit in session to get it just how the guy wanted. I did not mind, the guy's a musical genius and he has a clear vision. Its when people can't explain what they want changing that things get cumbersome.
Old 23rd December 2010
  #34
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
See: My first rule (back a couple posts)
I try not to use the word can't in most circumstances.
Old 23rd December 2010
  #35
Lives for gear
 
kennybro's Avatar
Guess it depends on circumstances for me.
-If I'm working for a producer, producer has final say. Arguments are between producer and artist, not me.
-If the artist is paying me to produce, I have final say. If things get ugly, I'll hand them files and exercise my option to quit.
The artist signs an agreement to all of this.
-If it's an act that hired me by the hour, I'll do what they ask. I'll offer the best advice I have, and if they refuse it, the final product is their responsibility, not mine. I'm clear about this up front. I'll ask that they Alan Smithee my engineering credit if it comes out terrible. They agree to this possibility up front.

I lay out all three scenarios for an artist at first meet. This has worked out well. I find that people get comfortable when the outcomes are clearly defined. If we can't come to these agreements up front, I don't want it.
Old 23rd December 2010
  #36
Registered User
 

I mix the way they want then save the session and mix it right and later rub it in there face when there crappy mix sounds like crap in the car I'm like here listen to this this is how your track could of sounded have a nice day.
Old 23rd December 2010
  #37
Just point to the gold on the wall.

That usually shuts them up.
Old 23rd December 2010
  #38
Lives for gear
 

When is too much (artist changing mix)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sigma
i gotta tell you that the biggest peeve i hear from the kids i work with are about engineers who tell them how their record should sound even after the band has made it's decisions
+1000000000000000000^10000000
Old 24th December 2010
  #39
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
That said, the "HH down 1dB" comment is called "band member needs to justify themselves to other band members and to hired engineer". Otherwise they'd just have said "HH is a bit loud"...
.
oh man, I am usually a very mellow guy, but does that ever wind me up!

I agree that it is the engineer's job to do what the 'producer' wants, BUT when I hear a comment like that, in the form of an 'order', something stiffens up inside, and I think "oh no you didn't" tutt


someone can make a complaint about an element of the mix in 'artistic terms' and I will take care of it, but it has to be up to me HOW I will take care of it, or they can just mix it themselves.

Maybe I'd drop the hi-hat fader, but I might roll off some HF EQ, or fiddle with the overheads or gate the snare. I see my job as making the changes requested without the mix falling apart, not to be some MBox-owning wannabee's pair of Robot Hands.
Old 24th December 2010
  #40
Lives for gear
[QUOTE=Sigma;6141981]the CLIENT has the final say..i do my mix..get feedback, tweak then give them 1 more shot ..after that it's by the hr..before that flat fee


I like this method. If I just charged by the hour tracking sometimes I could lose money. Where it all comes in is in mixing where by the hour turns into something great or a nightmare. 9 times out of 10 its the artist who says I love the sound and clarity, but I want another shot to sing it or play it better, sometimes write something else and that can be insane at some stages. The idea of the flat fee to draw the client in but being fare, mix,feedback,tweak 1 shot then by the hour charges is just what i need to do.

By the hour works some places, but sometimes it can go wrong in my situation where I have a specific quota to pay bills and need a deposit. I could only see doing hour for extra mixing and commercial studio type work with local and demo bands or where there are a lot of clients coming in and out on a regular basis like that. need 350 more to pay the rent next job is 600..350 upfront bills payed another month fought and now i can take in more clients and do what i love.

I find it's good to build the best relationship with the artist to where they really trust you. Otherwise even if something is really good they will keep listening to it all the time then txting back to make more corrections 7 months after you gave it to them and drive you mad! I've almost been driven over that edge! I can usually tell during tracking how it will be...

If I hit my marks,the band is good and the tracking sounds pretty much most of the way there it's going to be great and mixing will go great because it's already great. If someone has to say oh man i know it sounds bad and it will sound better once it's mixed you're in for a bumpy ride!
Old 24th December 2010
  #41
Lives for gear
 
kennybro's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
someone can make a complaint about an element of the mix in 'artistic terms' and I will take care of it, but it has to be up to me HOW I will take care of it, or they can just mix it themselves.
+1. If I'm building a house and paying an architectural consultant and engineers to get it right, I like to think I'd be smart enough to let them do their jobs, and trust them to interpret and implement my input in the most intelligent and efficient manner.

If I could do it better, I really should do it myself. Saves a bundle, and makes good sense too!
Old 24th December 2010
  #42
Lives for gear
 
evangelista's Avatar
 

Making a record is a collaborative process between an artist, producer and engineer. If there isn't enough trust/respect going around to allow everyone to deliver within his area of expertise, a **** record is likely being made.

It's true, the person paying has the veto power. In my world, that power gets exercised very rarely.
Old 24th December 2010
  #43
Here for the gear
 

Dude just tell him you changed the stuff and mix it the way you want...he probably wont even notice! If he does notice the 1 db difference in the hi hat then maybe you should listen to him...
Old 24th December 2010
  #44
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by evangelista View Post
Making a record is a collaborative process between an artist, producer and engineer. If there isn't enough trust/respect going around to allow everyone to deliver within his area of expertise, a **** record is likely being made.

It's true, the person paying has the veto power. In my world, that power gets exercised very rarely.
I agree adn would like to add (from the other side of the fence). We would choose specific people to mix because of their ability and place a ton of trust in them, however, if we felt we wanted the solo to be ridiculously loud, then we would expect a pass with the solo ripping our faces off.
Old 24th December 2010
  #45
I'm with Mike Tarsia, at the end of everything it's the clients project, they have to be happy. If I really feel strongly about something I'll print a version of that, but even if I think they're wrong, they get what they want. Sometimes I think our self-importance can get in they way of what it's all really about. Even the
best mixers have had changes, that should tell you something.
Old 25th December 2010
  #46
Gear Guru
 
u b k's Avatar
 

<gingerly steps in>

In my completely baseless opinion, if you feel you ought to have more ownership and say over the sound of an artist's music than the artist does, you need to be focusing more on making music of your own.

<gingerly slips away>


Gregory Scott - ubk
Old 25th December 2010
  #47
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post
<gingerly steps in>

In my completely baseless opinion, if you feel you ought to have more ownership and say over the sound of an artist's music than the artist does, you need to be focusing more on making music of your own.

<gingerly slips away>


Gregory Scott - ubk
Haha yeh...i think it just gets confusing when you can't really distinguish where the roles of the artist, producer and engineer start and end...

Luckily most of the guys i've recorded just trust what i'm doing...however a lot of the time they've even got me playing on it...so we kind of agree where the sound is gonna go before hand and just try and achieve that in the mix. I guess it all depends who's taking on the role of the producer, again this is usually decided before hand...

Generally a talk with the artist beforehand about where they want things to go, along with mentioning where you see it all going yourself will clear up whether you're really the right person for the job...sometimes i'm not...at which point i'll point them in the direction of one of my more experienced mates...
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Rev. Robb / Mastering forum
11
Jules / So much gear, so little time
40

Forum Jump
Forum Jump