Ableton Forum

Excluding Robert's article which is very cool btw, I don't know why we don't see more threads on mixing. It is much more difficult and much more critical to the final product than mastering by a loooong shot. There is very little discussion by comparison. Way too much emphasis is put on mastering imho. I'm not trying to diminish it, and by all means discuss, it's just a curious observation is all.

knotkranky wrote:Excluding Robert's article which is very cool btw, I don't know why we don't see more threads on mixing. It is much more difficult and much more critical to the final product than mastering by a loooong shot. There is very little discussion by comparison. Way too much emphasis is put on mastering imho. I'm not trying to diminish it, and by all means discuss, it's just a curious observation is all.

+1!!!

What are the most common mistakes of your customers? What are things people do because they are inexperienced, and which makes your life harder, or the result musically miserable?
If you talk about real mistakes, I'd say most mistakes are really related to limiting. Second most mistakes are related to compression, and thats about it. Mistakes - there are a lot of things I have to cope with, which derive from being uneducated or inexperienced, like for example people keep sculpting their sound by boosting frequencies if they feel an element is not prominent enough in the mix. Lets boost it! If it has not enough bass or not enough high end - lets boost!!!

Instead I try to educate my customers to think the other way round: Scrutinize every singal for consistency, check for what disturbs it, and try to remove that, and not primarily check the signal for what's too little...
I always think negative. I know this is much less fun actually, but the results will be much more consistent and also louder. People try to achieve loudness by saturating media and thats just the wrong way, its the other way round! Saturation can be done at the very very end. If you saturate your medium from step one on, you will have music which will have a constant high level but will not sound loud.

The basic mistake is that people compress or limit without a musical vision.
They compress or limit because they feel it should be louder, and they do not do proper AB comparisons ... thats the thing you have to learn - making correct AB comparisons. Its absolutely not easy and it takes several years of practice.

Proper AB comparison means that you listen to the your music on your workstation with the limiter and compressor versus the unlimited uncompressed signal and you make sure that the volume between the compressed and uncompressed signal is in a relationship so that you are not tricked by the fact that one is louder?
Yes, but it is more complex than that. Briefly, you should always do different stages of comparison, you should compare whilst not looking at any meter, you pick one element, which might be the most prominent or most important one, or even the least prominent or the least important one, you don't look at any meters and set both signals to a volume so that this element has the same prominence in both versions. Be very careful about that, if it really has same prominence, and not just closely the same. Then see how the rest of the track wraps around this element in the uncompressed version and in the compressed version. Now look at the meters and set both versions to the same peak level and compare, most of the time compressed singal will probably win. If you on the other hand set them both to similar RMS or average level and compare, there is a good chance the uncompressed version will win in that case.




This is interesting. the whole atricle is in fact, but this raises a question for me. You always hear Mastering engineers bark about no limiting, and it's always relatice to the master buss. I never use compression/EQ/ or limiting on the master buss, but whast about limiting on individual channels? I use plently of limiting on individual tracks...

Thanks
MR

Ok, that's gold right there, great quote up top.

This guy I know was looking to buy a stereo and was going on about why so many "only" had a bass and treble control. He couldn't believe that some of these reputable companies were missing a mid-range control. I had him look at my stereo which also only had bass and high eq. I turned "both" bass and highs down and turned up the master a bit, "There ya go, more mid-range"

Thanks Robert!

Is it possible to achieve a mid/side signal process/recording via Live? The summing/decoding thing throws me for a loop minus the brace.

If not, how can we achieve that side/middle routing/processing/recording via different software. I use Adobe 3.0 to mix and master in. Would that work or does a person require a separate plugin?

That was a fascinating and inspiring article Robert. One can "tell" that Rashad Becker has that certain something genius going. It's like the guy *is* what he's doing and doesn't mind passing it along.

Thanks!

morerecords wrote:
What are the most common mistakes of your customers? What are things people do because they are inexperienced, and which makes your life harder, or the result musically miserable?
If you talk about real mistakes, I'd say most mistakes are really related to limiting. Second most mistakes are related to compression, and thats about it. Mistakes - there are a lot of things I have to cope with, which derive from being uneducated or inexperienced, like for example people keep sculpting their sound by boosting frequencies if they feel an element is not prominent enough in the mix. Lets boost it! If it has not enough bass or not enough high end - lets boost!!!

Instead I try to educate my customers to think the other way round: Scrutinize every singal for consistency, check for what disturbs it, and try to remove that, and not primarily check the signal for what's too little...
I always think negative. I know this is much less fun actually, but the results will be much more consistent and also louder. People try to achieve loudness by saturating media and thats just the wrong way, its the other way round! Saturation can be done at the very very end. If you saturate your medium from step one on, you will have music which will have a constant high level but will not sound loud.

The basic mistake is that people compress or limit without a musical vision.
They compress or limit because they feel it should be louder, and they do not do proper AB comparisons ... thats the thing you have to learn - making correct AB comparisons. Its absolutely not easy and it takes several years of practice.

Proper AB comparison means that you listen to the your music on your workstation with the limiter and compressor versus the unlimited uncompressed signal and you make sure that the volume between the compressed and uncompressed signal is in a relationship so that you are not tricked by the fact that one is louder?
Yes, but it is more complex than that. Briefly, you should always do different stages of comparison, you should compare whilst not looking at any meter, you pick one element, which might be the most prominent or most important one, or even the least prominent or the least important one, you don't look at any meters and set both signals to a volume so that this element has the same prominence in both versions. Be very careful about that, if it really has same prominence, and not just closely the same. Then see how the rest of the track wraps around this element in the uncompressed version and in the compressed version. Now look at the meters and set both versions to the same peak level and compare, most of the time compressed singal will probably win. If you on the other hand set them both to similar RMS or average level and compare, there is a good chance the uncompressed version will win in that case.




This is interesting. the whole atricle is in fact, but this raises a question for me. You always hear Mastering engineers bark about no limiting, and it's always relatice to the master buss. I never use compression/EQ/ or limiting on the master buss, but whast about limiting on individual channels? I use plently of limiting on individual tracks...

Thanks
MR

1) in dance music there is most certainly a place for master channel compression, there's specific techniques which require you to mix into a compressor

2) the article said limiting on individual channels to get rid of certain spikes is OK

^ Agrees with SJ

One trick that always works for me is to mix into the main buss mastering plugins from the start. C4 > L2. I set those up first. That way after a hard fought mix you don't throw that stuff on and suddenly have a different mix. Basically, my mastering plugins are always on and that way you're only mixing, mastering is already done so to speak. ITB mixers who do these in separate steps don't realize they're still mixing/mastering in the old console mix style. That one's on the house.

knotkranky wrote:^ Agrees with SJ

One trick that always works for me is to mix into the main buss mastering plugins from the start. C4 > L2. I set those up first. That way after a hard fought mix you don't throw that stuff on and suddenly have a different mix. Basically, my mastering plugins are always on and that way you're only mixing, mastering is already done so to speak. ITB mixers who do these in separate steps don't realize they're still mixing/mastering in the old console mix style. That one's on the house.

I've tried this method, but I find that if I do this too soon (meaning before I've recorded all my parts) then I'm making adjustments without any bearing. For example, if I have a limiter on the master chain, and then I realize I need to add more guitar or vocal parts, then to issues occur:

1. My recording mix isn't accuracte because I'm hearing it through the limiter, and
2. Most likely, the limiter adds some plugin latency, which is messing with my timing.

I agree that this isn't a bad way to mix, but I wouldn't add mastering plugs in the Master channel until you're about 80-90% done with your mix, and you're just putting in finishing touches.

But that's just my method - you're could easily be better for you.

nebulae wrote:

knotkranky wrote:^ Agrees with SJ

One trick that always works for me is to mix into the main buss mastering plugins from the start. C4 > L2. I set those up first. That way after a hard fought mix you don't throw that stuff on and suddenly have a different mix. Basically, my mastering plugins are always on and that way you're only mixing, mastering is already done so to speak. ITB mixers who do these in separate steps don't realize they're still mixing/mastering in the old console mix style. That one's on the house.

I've tried this method, but I find that if I do this too soon (meaning before I've recorded all my parts) then I'm making adjustments without any bearing. For example, if I have a limiter on the master chain, and then I realize I need to add more guitar or vocal parts, then to issues occur:

1. My recording mix isn't accuracte because I'm hearing it through the limiter, and
2. Most likely, the limiter adds some plugin latency, which is messing with my timing.

I agree that this isn't a bad way to mix, but I wouldn't add mastering plugs in the Master channel until you're about 80-90% done with your mix, and you're just putting in finishing touches.

But that's just my method - you're could easily be better for you.

No argument there, it takes practice and confidence. I've been mixing ITB for 6 years now. 15 years on consoles before that.

But that said, I don't use the method during the writing/recording process, only the mix process, although I have no problem with latency with recording or new OD's during the mix since i'm on TDM. Actually, I don't use Eq or Compression during tracking for the reasons you've mentioned among others. If you make a beautiful dry recording, it mixes like butter. Anyway, do anything enough and you'll know what to expect. Unless women are involved.

But know this, I'm not crushing my mix the minute I throw the kick drum up. The mix slowly creeps into them (plugins) as i continually adjust and finesse the main buss plugs. The multitrack and mastering plugs both work from each end to the middle or final mix. I usually end up with less plugs on my individual tracks. It's kind of more complicated to do but makes for simpler processing if that makes sense. On my site I have some live broadcast shows I mixed with a similar setup. All that stuff is the actual live feed. I only had about 90 minutes to get sound-check together and the mastering plugs on the two buss method made it possible. I was merely mixing records really fast so to speak.

Hey neb, can I put your response on my site blog? or anyone else for that matter. I'm looking to beef up the tutorial side of my site. I would appreciate it bro's. You cats get me going, thanx for that. Pardon the hijack Robert, cheers mate.

^ all going points.

And I'd be honored to be quoted. Thanks. Just post a hyperlinkage back to www.nebulae.com

nebulae wrote:^ all going points.

And I'd be honored to be quoted. Thanks. Just post a hyperlinkage back to www.nebulae.com

Thanks for transcribing the interview -- can't wait to read it

As someone who has a big interest in mastering, done mastering courses and a disciple of the Bob Katz movement, I always enjoy reading articles like this.

Knotkranky is right though. Mastering can smooth out a song and polish it up a bit, but only if you are presented with a great quality mix in the first place, or at least sent you the stems (not just the stereo mix) so you can seperate the sounds for better processing. Otherwise, the phrase 'polishing a turd' comes to mind. And of course, doing the fades, edits, sequencing tracks and making the master disc with PQ codes etc are a lot less fun but equally essential parts.

I am working on mastering an album for a group who are friends of mine and are using some pretty lofi gear which is a part of their sound, but you know, there's a difference between controlled lofi and just plain bad audio recordings. I have polished it up a bit while trying to avoid the 'over polished' sound they want to avoid. So far, so good, they are liking it.

I would definately like to see more articles on good recording and mixing practices by the pros too.

nebulae wrote:

knotkranky wrote:^ Agrees with SJ

One trick that always works for me is to mix into the main buss mastering plugins from the start. C4 > L2. I set those up first. That way after a hard fought mix you don't throw that stuff on and suddenly have a different mix. Basically, my mastering plugins are always on and that way you're only mixing, mastering is already done so to speak. ITB mixers who do these in separate steps don't realize they're still mixing/mastering in the old console mix style. That one's on the house.

I've tried this method, but I find that if I do this too soon (meaning before I've recorded all my parts) then I'm making adjustments without any bearing. For example, if I have a limiter on the master chain, and then I realize I need to add more guitar or vocal parts, then to issues occur:

1. My recording mix isn't accuracte because I'm hearing it through the limiter, and
2. Most likely, the limiter adds some plugin latency, which is messing with my timing.

I agree that this isn't a bad way to mix, but I wouldn't add mastering plugs in the Master channel until you're about 80-90% done with your mix, and you're just putting in finishing touches.

But that's just my method - you're could easily be better for you.

I stopped using C4 completely a couple of years ago - I just started to find that I preferred the sound by mixing better, and now days I use a limiter pretty much exclusively to catch momentary overs. IMO if you are feeling the need to start 'maximising' with L1/2 then there's a good chance it could just be mixed a bit better. I use EQ almost always to cut, so invariably I end up with more headroom on everything, then I follow EQ on most tracks with compression, sometimes extreme as an effect but mostly subtle, so I tend to find things are plenty loud enough

so I totally agree with KKs point about mixing being more important - although saying that I'm sure any good mastering engineer would still make a big difference to anything i mix - if only because I have only NS1os.

Interestingly going to the mastering suite when one of my tracks was mastered for vinyl a few years ago and picking the brains of the engineer and just being there and hearing my mix translated onto their gear probably made quite a difference to my mixing

leedsquietman wrote: I would definately like to see more articles on good recording and mixing practices by the pros too.

A good book there worth checking out is "the mixing Engineer's Handbook" by Bobby Owsinski - apart from being a generally good read, a big part of the book is made up by interviews with quite a list of big name mixing engineers and he's quoted relevant bits of the interviews in line with the points throughout the chapters so you get to see their take in context. Highly recommend it