A fundamental truth

Ermz

¯\(°_o)/¯
Apr 5, 2002
20,370
32
38
37
Melbourne, Australia
www.myspace.com
I can't remember the amount of times I heard the saying 'you can't polish a turd' going through audio school, and after. You take it to heart and do your very best to keep the quality bar high from start to end, but on some level these things never truly sink in until you experience why they are so true for yourself.

Recently I've been doing a project that has been shaping up to be my worst mix yet. It's been pretty depressing considering the very last two things I did were quite possibly the best of my whole career so far. This project was tracked pretty shoddily. Just about everything is DI'd... poorly right into a Fireface, noisy lines, flabby bass, flat guitars, MIDI drums, the works.

In a way to rationalize to myself that I'm still a decent mix engineer, I decided to tackle one of my first ever projects again. Pulled up the tracks, cleaned, routed, and sorted everything. After maybe 3 or 4 hours of mixing I exported a rough and eagerly compared to my old version.

Now honestly both kinda work in their own way. The new one is naturally cleaner and clearer, as I have better monitoring, better tools and a better ear for what's needed. The old is kinda demo-ish sounding but it has a certain vibe that works for it. The new one oddly sounds kinda 'pushed', or like I tried ot get EQ to take it somewhere it didn't want to go. Comparing it back to professional stuff, and my last great work, it didn't really hold a candle.

Reason is that the tracking job on this first project is decent, but in many ways rough. Harsh overheads, harsh/distorted vocals, really flabby badly played bass. It dawned on me that with a roughly proportionate amount of 'mixing' on my last project, and actually on a current tracking mix on a full length I'm doing, I got a better sound. The reason is simply that the raw tracks are closer to where they need to be.

The lesson I learned is that no matter how hard you try to mix, you will always be left with the characteristics of the raw tracks, and ultimately all you can try to do is hide them to the detriment of the overall sound. My last two projects sounded good because I was able to get them sounding that way with a minimum of fuss. There is no understating the importance of good tracking. Compressors, EQs, mixing etc. is all secondary.
 
Yep. If its not sounding decent within the first five minutes of mixing (after setting up buses, etc.), then its probably never going to sound great. Might be able to get it sounding 'good', with lots of work.
 
I completely agree with you. I think this concept also shows that having good gear is important, or at least it makes the mixing a lot easier.

Since I started doing audio engineering and recording my own songs, I only had a sm58 and a 3035 for vocals. I had to do a ton of eqing to make it sound good, especially when I was recording growls/screams/etc. A couple of months ago I bought a sm7b. I finally tried with a band last month, and the only eq I did on it to fit in the mix and sound good was an hi-pass filter and a small boost a 3k. I was shocked at how much it was easier to mix the tracks just by using better gear. I think one of the biggest mistakes people make when they're starting ( and I used to do it), is to put way too much plug-ins on their tracks, especially eq.
 
so true!
I've just finished one of my shittiest mixes ever....the supplied ingrediens were the same as for one of my best mixes ever....just the recording quality was really different.
A good recording IMO mixes itself, I just pull up the faders and am 80% there....then I tweak in the mix...
with shitty recordings I find myself soloing thing much more often, trying to fix the shortcomings of the individual tracks.

also agree on the use of EQ...
I often put an EQ on some of the tracks just to feel good...cause subconciously I'm like "I'm mixing, there needs to be some EQ SOMEWHERE" and then I just do a .5dB boost at 3k on the vox or so ;)

I'm really hardly using any EQ in my mixes at all usually (except on Bass, kickdrum and toms)...IMO often it's just not necessary with a good recording
 
Now honestly both kinda work in their own way. The new one is naturally cleaner and clearer, as I have better monitoring, better tools and a better ear for what's needed. The old is kinda demo-ish sounding but it has a certain vibe that works for it. The new one oddly sounds kinda 'pushed', or like I tried ot get EQ to take it somewhere it didn't want to go. Comparing it back to professional stuff, and my last great work, it didn't really hold a candle.

I look at different mixes the same way as I look at Takes.
It's always interesting to see the different vibes of a mix without necessarily having one sounding better than the other.
And TRUE: the limit is the source.
 
also agree on the use of EQ...
I often put an EQ on some of the tracks just to feel good...cause subconciously I'm like "I'm mixing, there needs to be some EQ SOMEWHERE" and then I just do a .5dB boost at 3k on the vox or so ;)

That's something I often find myself guilty of. If a project's tracks actually sound good when just pulling the faders up and panning, I somehow feel like I'm not doing my job unless I do SOMETHING. "Yeah, these guitar tracks are perfect, but I'll still just throw a LPF in there..." No audible difference whatsoever, but I still feel better. I've been trying to get rid of the habit, but I guess it'll take some more years of experience or a genius shrink :lol:
 
SHIT IN SHIT OUT!!!!
And yeah I´m fighting at the moment with OH L/R takes which dont have a stereo image......

I've got a mixing session booked for January and it just turned out the band tracked the drums with a kick mic and one overhead. I'm in for trouble. Of course that technique can work wonders for some stuff, but for big-ass power metal? :erk: