First mix on an SSL6000E as lead mix engineer

Jordon

Jordon

Member
Sep 14, 2008
1,006
3
38
Chicago
So, I was called in to the Chicago Recording Company to "get a feel" for their SSL room. Equipped with an SSL6056E with a G computer and a 4000 mod (a mod to the A, B and C busses) and a plethora of the nicest outboard you heart could desire, I brought a song in that I actually just finished mixing this past Sunday.

Here they are--If you guys want AIFF's instead of MP3's, just let me know.

This is the one done at my studio, entirely ITB:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3463841/CRC SESSION/FADE GWPI.mp3

And here's the one done through the CRC SSL:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3463841/CRC SESSION/FADE CRC MASTER.mp3

Both are sent through the same mastering chain to see the differences in how they react. Both mixes were peaking at -6 on the Waves Dorroughs.

I used the quad buss compressor on the 6000, and the Waves SSL Compressor on the mix done at my studio.


Here are my thoughts-
- I prefer the main snare sound on the mix done at my studio. The one done at CRC just doesn't do it for me, for whatever reason.
- The snare/tom verb is a bit "toasty" in the top end, and it's more than a touch loud.
- I think the guitars in the CRC SSL mix could be a touch thicker.
- The CRC mix definitely clips and pumps through the mastering chain, but the pumping works for me, for some reason.


Still, for basically winging it on a console I have ZERO experience with, not too bad.

By the way, Pultecs on the OH tracks = money.

Oh, and I can't wait to work on their Neve VR72 with Flying Faders. Oh my, yes.
 
I like the SSL mix more. The high mids of the guitars are sitting much better, the mix as a whole is much more glued together. Vocals are way too quiet for this kinda thing though. For that last reason alone, I almost prefer the in the box mix.
 
I much prefer the SSL mix including the snare- it seems to have a bit more 150-200Hz 'smack' to it.

And some more low mids/more vocals in general wouldn't - good job!
 
Thanks guys. Yea, those vocals could come up for sure. I started feeling like when they came up any more than where they're at now, it started to "unglue" from the mix. The monitoring environment is drastically different than what I'm used to. They have custom TAD mains, Genelec 1031's and NS10's in a properly, professionally built and treated room. I stayed mainly on my NS10's as they were the closest to what I am familiar with. I mix with HS80m's and a sub at my place in a room that's as treated as I can get it without ripping the walls out and starting from the ground up.

It passed the test, I woke up this morning and didn't hate the mix, though I still cannot stand the reverb that I used on the snare.

Also, I fucked up. I had a bunch of PCM42's and didn't try the ol' Staub trick with one of them.
 
They both sound good, i tried to keep things blind here so i didn't know what version i was hearing before listening. Swapping between them on the fly in Reaper and going over different sections of the song. I like both mixes, but the vocals being low in one section on the SSL version would make me choose the ITB version if I HAD TO CHOOSE A VERSION RIGHT NOW. But if you brought the vox up on the SSL version, it definitely has a bit more clarity and 'pop', but i don't think there is enough of a difference that a casual listener would notice - they both sound good to me. Listening on HS80M's in a pretty much untreated room here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Splat88
VST compressor with mix control
Replies
1
Views
798
Backline
MarcusD777
M
LSD-Studio
bought Cubase4 and MH-CS, need good 2bus comp
Replies
11
Views
565
Backline
CJWall
C
acappa
Looking for an "all around" 2ch compressor
Replies
16
Views
2K
Backline
jauernis
J
M
Recommendations for tracking with comps on SSL6000E series...
Replies
3
Views
630
F.O.H.
MarcusD777
M
Aaron Smith
Stereo mix compressors
Replies
8
Views
1K
Backline
metalkingdom
M
Top Bottom
Back