Grrrr!!!!

[rabies]

I am not happy.

So the story goes like this. I burned a CD full of all our MP3s for my new MP3-enabled head unit in my car. I am rolling down the highway listening to our tunes. Many I have heard this way before. (btw. MusicMatch has an option to burn mp3 CDs..and it handles autoleveling all the songs for you. Great feature.) So no big surprise. I was even pleased with some I had not listened to in this fashion (7th son, etc). Then I get to Where Eagles Dare. It sounded like crap. Complete crap. Which upset me greatly because I thought it sounded aces on my headphones during mixing. The overall bass level was way too high..making it all sound like those guys driving down the street with the thousands invested in their car stereo so their rap music will shake windows as they go. It was not quite that bad..but you get the idea. The bass levels were way too high.

I don't get it. I'll probably be re-mixing that song. I can't stand it as it is.

Enough venting. Do any of the mixers here every use spectrum analysis tools when mixing? Or is there some other useful tool that can tell you overall levels of song via a visual display? Apparently, my ears are not good enough...or at least the monitors I am using is not the best solution. I need something more impartial.

 

[Mr. Hyde]

I know that the speakers I use with my pc suck, and so do my headphones. Every mix I try to do is a guess. If I listen to a studio cd over my pc speakers I usually can't hear any of the kick drum and barely any bass so I usually try to mix my stuff with that in mind. My headphones have very little high end above about 12k so I have to watch the level of the cymbals when I'm monitoring with them. I compare the mix between the headphones and speakers and try for a compromise that sounds ok. I haven't listened to my mixes on a good system but I bet the bass is probably cranked because I usually can hear it good on these crappy speakers.

Spectrum analysis software would be killer.

 

[rabies]

I have spectrum analysis tools..One comes in soundforge 5.0. However, I have no clue how to use it. Online help is not very helpful either. I was hoping one of you would have a clue..and point me in the right direction.

 

[Mr. Hyde]

I don't have Soundforge :-(

 

[rabies]

How about Cool Edit? I believe that has one as well.

 

[Mr. Hyde]

No, I don't have cool edit either. :-(

 

[Eddies cellmate]

It's very hard sometimes to do, but I think that one of the big tricks to a great production is to make a mix that sounds good on many different types of systems, from little tiny radios to big expensive systems.

I could write entire essays of thoughts on how to do it, but in a nutshell I think the trick is to be sure that the frequencies you want are present, but not neccessarily powerful. It's a hard balance to strike, and again I think you could write entire encyclopedias of opinions on the subject, but I think that being smart about the overall spectrum of frequencies and finding just the right balance is key to a good mix.

I like to think of it in terms of a good chef. He/she knows just the right amount of garlic to add to make it tasty without overpowering the whole dish. I think it's a matter of tasteful restraint.

But again, it's damn hard to do....

 

[7thSon]

Originally posted by Mr. Hyde
No, I don't have cool edit either. :-(

COOL EDIT

or try this goodie

this one looks cool

 

[rabies]

Originally posted by Eddies cellmate
It's very hard sometimes to do, but I think that one of the big tricks to a great production is to make a mix that sounds good on many different types of systems, from little tiny radios to big expensive systems.

I could write entire essays of thoughts on how to do it, but in a nutshell I think the trick is to be sure that the frequencies you want are present, but not neccessarily powerful. It's a hard balance to strike, and again I think you could write entire encyclopedias of opinions on the subject, but I think that being smart about the overall spectrum of frequencies and finding just the right balance is key to a good mix.

I like to think of it in terms of a good chef. He/she knows just the right amount of garlic to add to make it tasty without overpowering the whole dish. I think it's a matter of tasteful restraint.

But again, it's damn hard to do....

yes..but HOW do you find the right balance without actually having the luxury of testing it on a bunch of systems? How do you make sure the frequncies you want are there, but not powerful? Spectrum Analysis? Winging it?

 

[Eddies cellmate]

Originally posted by rabies



yes..but HOW do you find the right balance without actually having the luxury of testing it on a bunch of systems? How do you make sure the frequncies you want are there, but not powerful? Spectrum Analysis? Winging it?

Well, again there could be entire libraries written on this subject and if you ever discover the exact secret, call up Atlantic records and get yourself a good job!

I think the best place to start is to trim the ends off of the spectrum. Very few systems can accurately reproduce frequencies down to say, 30Hz so start by being sure that you haven't emphasized that. If you have, any system without good powerful subs will only produce a "farty" sound when trying to make that frequency. Same goes for the highest highs. Most humans lose the ability to hear much above 16KHz or so in adulthood, and very few systems will reproduce that cleanly anyway, so make sure that your mix isn't using much of that frequency.

Now again, you will want those freq. to be present, just not emphasized.

This leads into another sticky question regarding mixes, and one I've often thought about in regards to our recordings....

How much can you count on your listener to use his/her own EQ to "tweak" the mix as played on thier system?

See, again I think this is why it's important to make sure that there are no frequencies totally missing because a listener may want them. For example, a person may have a killer system in thier car, and like to feel the bass. If 30Hz is totally missing, they'll be disappointed. They'll crank up 30 Hz on thier EQ and get nothing.

On the flip side, a person might have a crappy system that can't handle much low end. If you've boosted 30Hz in your mix a lot, they won't be able to use thier EQ to cut it down. They'll crank down 30Hz, and still be left with a lot of low end.

These are simple examples, and I guess it's more complex than just that, but I think it shows why it's important to keep a mix fairly even across the spectrum, allowing your listener some room to tweak it for themselves.

 

[Mr. Hyde]

Another good topic to talk about.

I agree with most of what you say Ec but I do think our opinions might differ on a couple of points.

The frequencies below about 80 hz are usually felt not heard and I agree that anything above about 16k isn't usually heard by most people but I think those frequencies are a necessary part of the musical content. Even if you can't actually hear them, they change the way frequencies you can hear behave. I agree with you that those frequencies should be present just not emphasized.
Where I think our opinions might differ is when you say that it's important to make sure no frequencies are missing. I think this holds true for the overall mix, but as far as individual tracks are concerned, I think it's very important to make sure that some frequencies are cut out of the individual tracks (not necessarily total cut out) in order to allow each instrument it's own musical space. For instance, when there are two heavy guitars you might roll off the high end above 10k by about -3db cut the mids at 2.2k -3bd and lows at 300hz -3 and then for the other guitar cut slightly different freqs. so that each guitar is more prominent in different freqs. Then you (theoretically) do the same with the rest of the instruments so that they all have a range of frequencies where they don't have to compete or fight with the other instruments.

What I know about professional recording (with limited experience) is that they have studio monitors that are tuned specifically for that room. They also have a controlled temperature environment, because temperature greatly affects frequency response. Mixes are usually done at a consistent volume level because the ear's response to different frequencies changes with volume. They usually have more than one set of monitors, usually some massive giant speakers created by the gods and some smaller one's that are meant to simulate speakers regular people might actually own. So you can switch between them.
The pro's also have noise gates, and compressor's that can be set to trigger only if a certain range of frequencies exceed their threshold. That allows them to really crank up the volume in their mixes and still keep things under control.
Also, mixing with headphones exclusively doesn't provide an accurate stereo image because there isn't any room for the sound to interact with the environment. The sound is directly injected into the ears 180 degrees apart. When you listen to a stereo there usually isn't that kind of separation (unless you listen to your stereo in some weird position's lol) because the signal, even if it's panned hard left or right, still reaches the other ear.
I think that listening to studio cd's we like on different systems and comparing what we hear can help to get a more accurate idea of what something really sounds like.
Maybe the key is figuring out what it is that we actually hear compared to what we "think" we hear.
I'll stop now...can you tell I like talking about this stuff?

 

[rabies]

wow guys.

The more you talk about this..the better. talk away! You guys know tons more than me!

I am going to go back and try to apply a bunch of this! These are the kind of EQing guidelines i need. Certainly this will help me with our vocal/guitar and bass tracks. So you guys think that below 80..there should just be no signal from the guitar tracks? just leave that to the bass/bass drum?

I only wish we had the luxury of having our drum tracks in seperate filies like the pros. The ability to eq/or change volume of individual drums in a kit must be nice.

Are these special compressors/noise gates that are so granular?

Can you guys recommend any books on all this? It is a lot to absorb. How much does the average soundguy make? Maybe i'll quite my day job and apply at Atlantic!

 

[rabies]

Oh.and what is a good consistant volume for listeneing back? Speaking voice level? lower? Significantly higher?

I myself have noticed that I adjust the EQ when I listen to playback at different levels...because suddenty certain parts of a mix will but through more at certain volumes.

 

[Mr. Hyde]

I have a lot of books on the subject. Two that I think you might be interested in are "The Musician's Guide to Home Recording" and "Using Your Portable Studio". These books don't have some of the more in depth discussions of theory that some of my older books have but I've found them useful.

I think that mixing volume is really up to you. Just be aware of how things sound at that volume level. Listen to a cd you like and set a comfortable volume and really listen to what you can hear and what you can't and try to duplicate that kind of mix.
I've never been able to accomplish it yet, but that's the only thing I can try to do because I don't have any hope of having a good set of accurate speakers to listen to.

Another thing to consider;
The distance it takes certain frequencies to fully develop. For instance, high frequencies develop and run their cycle quickly and are easily heard up close but low frequencies can take 20 to 30 feet or more to fully develop making it hard to hear them accurately up close. A good example is, if you've ever stood close to a drum kit while the drummer did what they usually do when you are trying to tune you might notice that the drums sound like they don't have a lot of bass in them. The low is there but we are too close to hear some of it accurately and we are more perceptive to the high's that occur quickly.
I wouldn't mind if we keep talking about this kind of stuff.
I don't know what soundmen make who run the large systems but I can tell you that the guy for the Scorpions shouldn't be making more than 3$ a night. Ok, well maybe he had a bad night.

 

[Mr. Hyde]

Oh, and about the guitar freq's. It depends on you. What do you want to hear or feel in that area? If you want the guitar there, and the kick, and the bass...well you can see what's going to happen. You'll boost the guitar to hear/feel it's low, then you won't be able to hear/feel the low of the bass, you boost the bass, it buries the kick etc...etc...
Somehow great producers like Lang and Birch find a way to get everything to fit. There is only so much sonic space to go around.

 

[Eddies cellmate]

I think that the most important thing to remember in regards to a mix's "volume" (which is really "level" perceived as volume) is the relationship between the EQ's level and the overall mix's level.

If too much of your mix's level is made up of EQ level, then a listener will have a hard time cranking up your recording and listening to it loud. We have this problem with our recordings sometimes, I think.

On the other hand, if your mix has not enough EQ level, then at lower volumes it will sound flat and bland.

Again, it's a question of striking a balance and trusting your listener to make the appropriate adjustments. If a listener wants to play your recording at a low volume, they should have the good sense to boost thier own system's EQ to compensate. Or conversely, if they want to hear it loud they should have the good sense to reduce thier system's EQ settings accordingly.

As a soundman, it's your job I think to provide a mix that can thrive in either case. That's why I say that it's important to keep a somewhat even spectrum (taking into account the sound that you're after, type of music, etc) and give your listener the choices that he/she might want.

I think that many of our mixes are way too EQ heavy. I'm certainly guilty of it myself, but I think that we need to flatten out our mixes a bit, and strive to make them "smoother". I think we can do this by trying to produce mixes that will allow a listener to manipulate them according to thier system and preferences. I think we have a tendency (myself included) to try to produce mixes that sound good right off of the board. That's ok, but if a listener throws some EQ on it, or wants to make adjustments, they'll have a hard time with it. Like you mentioned about your Eagles mix Rabs, it's bass heavy and "rumbley". That may sound good on our computers using flat EQs (or none at all), but when run through a typical listening system (like your car stereo), the rumble becomes persistent, and I'd be willing to bet that your car stereo would have a hard time trying to EQ the rumble out. Now, had the low end in the mix been a little flatter, your car stereo would be able to either EQ in the low end, or EQ it out, depending on your preference/volume level, etc.

Does that make any sense? I'm not sure if it's the right approach to take, but that's what's been on my mind.

 

[Eddies cellmate]

Mr. Hyde, I really don't see anywhere there where we disagree, you only took the idea a step or two farther than I did, that's all.

You are of course right to say that a mix shouldn't be totally full across the whole spectrum. What I mean when I say that is that there shouldn't be ranges of frequencies missing, unless that's what you want for artistic purposes.

I mentioned once before about the "BBE Sonic Maximizer". It's one of the best rackmount units ever made for sound. What it does is it knocks out a number of frequencies across the spectrum to add presence to a mix. Basically, instead of a soundman trying to go through a ton of EQing trying to decide where to knock out frequencies, it does it for you. It doesn't alter the sound too much (unless you tell it to) but it really cleans up a signal.

Anyway, the BBE unit pretty much does exactly as you've described, and you're right to say that a mix needs to have "space" in it to really "breathe" and sound good.

As for EQing space in for the different instruments, again you're correct. In my post I wanted to keep it simple, and really what you're describing is "Step 2" in the concept, I think. The ideas I desribed are just the basics and like all rules, they're made to be broken, but it's still important to start there, and then build upon the idea. That's when mixing really becomes facinating, all of the different things that can be done...

 

[Mr. Hyde]

Darn it, I lost my post. It was good too.

I think we do agree Ec, and you made a really good point about Eq.

When you have a simple 3 band shelving type Eq and you boost highs, lows and mids by 3db, for example, you are actually just turning the track volume up. Sure it changes the tone a little, but it might be better to cut something a little bit and turn up the tracks volume to get the tone you are after than to keep boosting the Eq.

 

[Mr. Hyde]

In my previous post where I say: "For instance, when there are two heavy guitars you might roll off the high end above 10k by about -3db cut the mids at 2.2k -3bd and lows at 300hz -3 and then for the other guitar cut slightly different freqs" I should have mentioned that I meant using a combination parametric/shelving Eq. That way you are only affecting a very narrow range of frequencies, so if you wanted to drop 2.2k a little you could without bringing down 1k and 3k with it. You can use the shelving Eq to roll off the highs above 10k. Sorry about that, I realized my mistake after my last post when I talked about using a 3 band shelving type Eq.

Usually I use a parametric/shelving 4 band Eq plugin so I have my choice of what freq's I want to work with. Plus I can use up to three of them at a time on one track If I need to create a band pass filter or something.

 

[Eddies cellmate]

Have you ever checked out a BBE Sonic Maximizer, Mr. Hyde?

The reason that I ask is that it's really been a revolution in sound engineering. Instead of having to do endless amounts of precise EQ adjustments, soundmen now have the capability to let a rackmount unit do it for them. It's like a calculator is to a physicist what the BBE unit is to a soundman. It bypasses alot of the legwork, and let's them get right to the heart of what they're trying to do.

I've yet to find a Direct X plug-in that'll do the same thing, but the search continues.... (Though, I'll probably hoard it to myself when I find one, so I'll look like an expert! )

Anyway, check one out here.

They're awesome!