DISCUSSION: Is there too much of a focus on mixing in 2016?

[Machinated]

Just something I've been thinking about recently. I subscribe to a number of great educational resources online - largely offering access to workflow's of top level producers and mixers that was never previously available.

It seems a growing trend online (be it on forums/youtube/blogs/educational sites) to offer ways of miraculously turning average tracks to high quality recordings through SECRETS and unconventional tricks. I'm certainly not questioning the validity of these and there most definitely is a time and a place for it.

But largely, the way to get great results is to have a great song, a great arrangement, great performances and a great studio/knowhow. My favourite mixes by the top engineers are almost exclusively on projects that have been IMMACULATELY recorded, and so much of what I like about the actual mix is down to the choice of parts, the sounds, and how they relate to each other - all of which happens WAY before the mix does. I'd personally love to see more of an emphasis on the writing/production/arrangement side - its something I've been working very hard at over the last year and its something I've generally worked on through careful listening and analysis rather than via social means.

So much emphasis is placed on mixing now, which can largely give the impression that THE MIX is the time when the magic happens. I've seen numerous tracking sessions of high profile artists that really have been captured pretty poorly and it feels as though the art of making a great production from the ground upwards is getting lost somewhat. Looking at the "rate my mix" section of the forum as an example, there are numerous "Mix Practice" sessions with MIDI drums, DI guitars, extremely basic arrangements with little commitment to capturing GREAT sounds there and then. The same goes for many Facebook groups and even production websites offering pretty poorly recorded/arranged multitracks.

There's a time for cutting corners, compromise, saving money etc, but I can't help but feel the cart is largely pushing the horse.

 

[H-evolve]

Well, as this is a discussion, I'll jump in and say that I don't know how you could teach someone how to write music and arrangements. I mean, the basis behind all of this is just music theory. Once you know that, if you still can't write good music, it's just that you don't have it in you. As you say, there is a shit ton of material, just on youtube, on how to record, mix, etc. I don't quite see how it would be possible to have a youtube channel that teaches how to write music.

It's basically just going to be a channel on music theory. Things like Modes, Chords, Key Signatures, etc.

Once you know music theory, good production/writing/arrangement, I think, is a question of 2 things :
-You have it in you or you don't.
-How much time/work are you willing to put in it (creating nice arrangements is a lot of work).

An album with a nice production/writing/arrangement is not sell well if it sounds like crap.

But, on the other hand, a nice sounding album with a bad production might not sell very well either.

All that makes me think about Arch Enemy. Every time I got tricked and bought one of their album, the first few days I am thinking "Man this sounds good", but after a couple of days I get bored quickly, realizing the album is "good" mostly because of its sound, and perhaps not that much because of the writing. (Don't get me wrong, they are great musicians, but they seem to get caught in that same pattern every album. Ultra quick and agressive verse, slow melodic chorus. On every song)

 

[MrBongo]

Looking at the "rate my mix" section of the forum as an example, there are numerous "Mix Practice" sessions with MIDI drums, DI guitars, extremely basic arrangements with little commitment to capturing GREAT sounds there and then. The same goes for many Facebook groups and even production websites offering pretty poorly recorded/arranged multitracks.

yup. I´ve been telling this for quite a while, this is not mixing, it´s creating the record in its entirety. The engineer has ultimate control, can toss around MIDI messages all over the place, timewarp and cut DI guitars turning them into something completely different than what they were before.
Worst case is the band not being able to actually play their songs well, when you see them on stage. Quite common thing, sadly, because the drumming machines are everywhere and editing DI tracks to hell and back is too easy.

Next thing is the complete lack of any sounds given by the band. The engineer decides. Don´t the musicians have any idea of what it´s supposed to sound like?

This is what I need: www.dropbox.com/s/njya6is3dw85581/20160608_171233.jpg?dl=0
Wow, I mean, I really felt like I was the only one around who´s playing in a band that actually records mith microphones. A recording that doesn´t melt your brain, because it´s got some sort of groove that can´t be achieved with quantizing to grid. A performance that´s been played by humans, and is alive by itself.

 

[Pxz]

This is a very interesing subject and im 100% with Machinated. At the end of the day is all about the song.

 

[H-evolve]

A recording that doesn´t melt your brain, because it´s got some sort of groove that can´t be achieved with quantizing to grid. A performance that´s been played by humans, and is alive by itself.

Agreed. As a rule of thumb, if you can't play your own song from A to Z in one take, then keep practicing until you can. THEN and only THEN should you consider recording it. That's what we apply in my band and I can't see how one could do otherwise. It's almost like you don't respect your own songs! :|

 

[Machinated]

I'll jump in and say that I don't know how you could teach someone how to write music and arrangements. I mean, the basis behind all of this is just music theory. Once you know that, if you still can't write good music, it's just that you don't have it in you. As you say, there is a shit ton of material, just on youtube, on how to record, mix, etc. I don't quite see how it would be possible to have a youtube channel that teaches how to write music.

I agree that music theory knowledge is really important, but equally, if you asked me what defines a great song, I can't imagine any situation I'd say its solely down to somebodies grasp on theory.

Admittedly, metal as a genre is pretty difficult to get interesting with arrangement wise, based on how many notes a lot of instruments tend to play, and things being fairly fixed in how they're expected to sound. I've learned SO much about arrangement studying guys like Butch Walker, John Feldmann, David Bendeth, Michael Beinhorn, Matt Squire etc. IMO, what makes a great song/recording is going to depend on a shitload of factors - all of which need to at least be up to a certain standard. The song, vocal, arrangement, production, mix, performance etc all need to be pulling their weight - a great mix will never make up for the rest of it. I'll save some of my arrangement tricks/tips for another thread so this discussion doesn't get derailed, but I think arranging parts is only loosely related to music theory - often to fit in a song there's not the scope to do extremely complex parts, otherwise they can become distracting. Sure it helps if you're adding a string arrangement or if the song is calling for something a bit different, but often very simple layers work for most pop songs. Likewise, for example, to condense a song and make the lyrics more focussed/direct and ensuring the song flows up and down with good tension and release isn't too dependent on theory. It's obviously great to have a wealth of theory knowledge, and it 100% helps to make you more adaptable to more situations.

Theres so many guys who fall into this category, but take Greg Kurstin who's writing a LOT of pop hits right now: has a background in jazz, yet is often writing simple 4 chord pop songs. He's clearly able to bust out some more complicated things if it calls for it but its not essential to make a killer song.

 

[Phil_ocean]

I agree with you on the production and arrangement side of things. Last years I see more bands with mediocre production getting popularity easily on the internet (this usually doesnt translate equivalently to live attendance), a wide percentage of people doesnt seem to care that much. I also believe that the role of producer has been downgraded and the "mixing role" is considered the most important. I know friendly bands that dont even care for a decent mastering, a post mixing process covers them usually. From the other hand, I think the focus is beind drifted more towards the music (or maybe to the hooky moments of the song) than the quality of the sounds and I think that benefits musicians who couldnt afford a decent recording/mixing/mastering before. Personally, I always loved (and still do) great sounding records and I have experienced the same thing with Hugues Berger, I used to listen to albums almost exclusively for their sound quality even though i was getting bored quickly sometimes and I couldnt undertand why I was keep coming back to listen 1-2 songs from the record. In conclusion, I believe that there are 2 sides on the subject, one benefiting the talented musicians (who can learn or already know how to arrange a song) who can now get their music easily recorded/mixed etc and released at minimal cost (even at low quality) and the other, slowly but steadily degrading the sonic quality of the song.

 

[Phil_ocean]

I agree that music theory knowledge is really important, but equally, if you asked me what defines a great song, I can't imagine any situation I'd say its solely down to somebodies grasp on theory.

Admittedly, metal as a genre is pretty difficult to get interesting with arrangement wise, based on how many notes a lot of instruments tend to play, and things being fairly fixed in how they're expected to sound. I've learned SO much about arrangement studying guys like Butch Walker, John Feldmann, David Bendeth, Michael Beinhorn, Matt Squire etc. IMO, what makes a great song/recording is going to depend on a shitload of factors - all of which need to at least be up to a certain standard. The song, vocal, arrangement, production, mix, performance etc all need to be pulling their weight - a great mix will never make up for the rest of it. I'll save some of my arrangement tricks/tips for another thread so this discussion doesn't get derailed, but I think arranging parts is only loosely related to music theory - often to fit in a song there's not the scope to do extremely complex parts, otherwise they can become distracting. Sure it helps if you're adding a string arrangement or if the song is calling for something a bit different, but often very simple layers work for most pop songs. Likewise, for example, to condense a song and make the lyrics more focussed/direct and ensuring the song flows up and down with good tension and release isn't too dependent on theory. It's obviously great to have a wealth of theory knowledge, and it 100% helps to make you more adaptable to more situations.

Theres so many guys who fall into this category, but take Greg Kurstin who's writing a LOT of pop hits right now: has a background in jazz, yet is often writing simple 4 chord pop songs. He's clearly able to bust out some more complicated things if it calls for it but its not essential to make a killer song.

Yea, i believe that music theory can definitely help but it is certainly not a crucial factor to good arrangements-production

 

[H-evolve]

I agree that music theory knowledge is really important, but equally, if you asked me what defines a great song, I can't imagine any situation I'd say its solely down to somebodies grasp on theory..

Yea, i believe that music theory can definitely help but it is certainly not a crucial factor to good arrangements-production

Yes, that was my point exactly. That is: While you can teach someone how to mix (up to a certain degree), and you can teach them music theory, you can't really teach them how to write music/include good arrangements, etc. So, even if you are taught music theory, doesn't mean you'll be able to write music, produce music or write arrangement for music.

And then, to come back to the original thread topic, though it would be great to have more content on music production and arrangements on the internet, I don't think it is easily done... One could show examples and explain his thinking process when he achieved X arrangement, but more than that.

I've listened to Joe Satriani explaining what he had in mind when writing X of his songs. Yet I still can't write music as good as his!

 

[Phil_ocean]

Yes, that was my point exactly. That is: While you can teach someone how to mix (up to a certain degree), and you can teach them music theory, you can't really teach them how to write music/include good arrangements, etc. So, even if you are taught music theory, doesn't mean you'll be able to write music, produce music or write arrangement for music.

And then, to come back to the original thread topic, though it would be great to have more content on music production and arrangements on the internet, I don't think it is easily done... One could show examples and explain his thinking process when he achieved X arrangement, but more than that.

I've listened to Joe Satriani explaining what he had in mind when writing X of his songs. Yet I still can't write music as good as his!

Well, arrangements are contributing to the song like many other factors. Noone can teach how to form the basic ideas for a song, but I believe arrangements can be taught. You can have an example song and explain why there are more musical things on the second verse rather than the first, or why this specific instrument was used at this point of the song. I think it would really help but as it was mentioned above nowadays many metal fans dont care about arrangements that much. Maybe, though, if someone starts something like this people may be drawned to it and we may have a new rise of production in metal, who knows

 

[Beauburchell]

I agree. There is way too much focus on the last 20% of making a record rather than the most important initial 80%.