Quote: |
1. assuming that enginner is a technical thing, artist is artistic, and producer is marrying the two, and bringing third party focus. what would your ideal blend of a mixer look like (i. e. one part engineer, one part artist, two parts producer) |
Quote: |
2. as a mixer, is it better to go into a mix completely cold (never hearing the song or having artist input) or going in with a lot of input from the client? |
Quote: |
3. as a mixer, is it better to work alone, or with clients in the room while you mix? |
Quote: |
4. assuming you have free reign on a mix, is it appropriate to add tracks should you feel it really makes a difference? |
Quote: |
5. if you were to listen to your work as a third person, how would you describe your style as a mixer? |
Quote: |
6. how do you, yourself, describe your style as a mixer? |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 21:04 |
1. assuming that enginner is a technical thing, artist is artistic, and producer is marrying the two, and bringing third party focus. what would your ideal blend of a mixer look like (i. e. one part engineer, one part artist, two parts producer) |
Quote: |
2. as a mixer, is it better to go into a mix completely cold (never hearing the song or having artist input) or going in with a lot of input from the client? |
Quote: |
3. as a mixer, is it better to work alone, or with clients in the room while you mix? |
Quote: |
4. assuming you have free reign on a mix, is it appropriate to add tracks should you feel it really makes a difference? |
Quote: |
5. if you were to listen to your work as a third person, how would you describe your style as a mixer? |
Quote: |
6. how do you, yourself, describe your style as a mixer? |
Quote: |
1. assuming that enginner is a technical thing, artist is artistic, and producer is marrying the two, and bringing third party focus. what would your ideal blend of a mixer look like (i. e. one part engineer, one part artist, two parts producer) |
Quote: |
2. as a mixer, is it better to go into a mix completely cold (never hearing the song or having artist input) or going in with a lot of input from the client? |
Quote: |
3. as a mixer, is it better to work alone, or with clients in the room while you mix? |
Quote: |
4. assuming you have free reign on a mix, is it appropriate to add tracks should you feel it really makes a difference? |
Quote: |
5. if you were to listen to your work as a third person, how would you describe your style as a mixer? |
Quote: |
6. how do you, yourself, describe your style as a mixer? |
Quote: |
A mixer is first of all someone who knows how to materialize a vision into a great sound. |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 14:04 |
1. assuming that enginner is a technical thing, artist is artistic, and producer is marrying the two, and bringing third party focus. what would your ideal blend of a mixer look like (i. e. one part engineer, one part artist, two parts producer) |
Quote: |
2. as a mixer, is it better to go into a mix completely cold (never hearing the song or having artist input) or going in with a lot of input from the client? |
Quote: |
3. as a mixer, is it better to work alone, or with clients in the room while you mix? |
Quote: |
4. assuming you have free reign on a mix, is it appropriate to add tracks should you feel it really makes a difference? |
Quote: |
5. if you were to listen to your work as a third person, how would you describe your style as a mixer? |
Quote: |
6. how do you, yourself, describe your style as a mixer? |
j.hall wrote on Wed, 20 June 2007 18:06 |
however, ATOR, TomC and Maxim, you guys would honestly sit down with a guitar and play a part? what about vocals, would you cut some back grounds? this is a kiss of death for a mixer, IMO. |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 15:04 |
1. assuming that enginner is a technical thing, artist is artistic, and producer is marrying the two, and bringing third party focus. what would your ideal blend of a mixer look like (i. e. one part engineer, one part artist, two parts producer) |
Quote: |
2. as a mixer, is it better to go into a mix completely cold (never hearing the song or having artist input) or going in with a lot of input from the client? |
Quote: |
3. as a mixer, is it better to work alone, or with clients in the room while you mix? |
Quote: |
4. assuming you have free reign on a mix, is it appropriate to add tracks should you feel it really makes a difference? |
Quote: |
5. if you were to listen to your work as a third person, how would you describe your style as a mixer? |
Quote: |
6. how do you, yourself, describe your style as a mixer? |
Iain Graham wrote on Wed, 20 June 2007 11:21 |
J, what did you think of most people not wanting to hear the track before getting into the mix? I find it quite hard to get the vibe of the piece if I've never heard it before and like to get a plan ready for how I'm gonna get the vibe of the tune right before I go into the mix. That plan is mainly for the technical approach, but it's so I don't get particularly stuck on that while I'm actually mixing the thing. It allows me to get a basic shape together fairly quickly too. |
Iain Graham wrote on Wed, 20 June 2007 13:33 |
When you go in cold, do you stick the faders up and have a listen back? |
j.hall wrote on Wed, 20 June 2007 14:58 | ||
nope, i just start working. |
Quote: |
grant, 2 parts engineer, 4 parts producer???????? you either need to work with better tracks, or you have an over inflated view of your job as a mixer. shouldn't the actual producer (the band or a third party producer) take the 4 parts role? it would seem that putting too much emphasis on producing while mixing leaves you over looking details that shouldn't be over looked. like over compressing the buss........... |
j.hall wrote on Wed, 20 June 2007 18:06 |
however, ATOR, TomC and Maxim, you guys would honestly sit down with a guitar and play a part? what about vocals, would you cut some back grounds? this is a kiss of death for a mixer. |
ATOR wrote on Thu, 21 June 2007 06:00 |
I completely see where you're coming from J-Texas. Rerecording a basspart was the most extreme I got and I don't think I'll do that again. Mostly because I've gotten better and faster at editing and making a sound. But adjusting the timing and replacing the sound of the drums with samples is exactly the same thing and is pretty mainstream right now. Some people say that tuning vocals is unethical. It's a thin line. I don't think anyone plays crappy on purpose and if I can improve the groove, sound and tuning I usually do so. What I always do is make a good faders up mix, bounce it and place it on a separate track. It gives me a reference to check if I don't lose the original vibe and energy. Not all 'improvements' make a song better. |
Quote: |
I know what you mean about the mandolin, and I kind of was on the fence about it. The songs sound great Kevin! The only thing I hear is maybe raising the lead vocal just a hair on xxxxxx, and "wetting" it a touch more. And I don't mean the "xxxxxxxxxxxx" part, just the first two stanzas. I think you've done a kickass job! Hell. I'll get you that beer, plus a stripper or two. Oh wait, you're married, and so am I. I'm glad I trusted my instincts to trust your instincts. Have a great day! I'll call you. |
Fibes wrote on Thu, 21 June 2007 09:17 |
I'm still going to do a mix with the mandolin part in it. For me. |
grant richard wrote on Wed, 20 June 2007 17:46 |
coincidentally, that's the same ratio as you had as an example when asking the question (1 part engineer, 2 parts producer). i didn't realize it at the time, but find it funny now . |
Quote: |
It's the latest in a long running series of fads. Like Tubes, ribbon mics, etc. All great tools when used in the right (or wrong) way. |
j.hall wrote on Thu, 21 June 2007 13:01 |
replacement might be out of hand.....but keep in mind that drum replacement is nothing new, and has been on TONS of huge records since the 80's. the introduction of software to replace sounds with samples just makes like easier............... |
grant richard wrote on Thu, 21 June 2007 13:31 | ||
i don't know that TUBES were ever a fad.....but i see your point. |
Fibes wrote on Thu, 21 June 2007 14:00 |
It makes it OK for use to go for hyper-reality. |
Fibes wrote on Fri, 22 June 2007 05:00 |
i'm old, out of touch and don't understand the "kids today." I cling onto those ideals where the interaction between the musicians is where i find the bliss, where the sparks fly and all of this happens in real time and the sum is greater than its parts. |
mcsnare wrote on Sat, 23 June 2007 07:04 |
The engineer that has rarely or never gotten great drum sounds on the recording, and 'defaults' to samples, is the guy that won't know how to make samples work as elegantly as the pro, so whats the difference whether he/she ends up with shitty 'real' drums or bush league sampled drums? |
Iain Graham wrote on Sun, 24 June 2007 05:48 |
Ok then, how about this.....If that involves tuning, replacing, reamping, whatever because it was recorded badly, or played by a poor muso, then so be it. |
J-Texas wrote on Sun, 24 June 2007 21:53 |
Where is the line drawn between using the available tools and abusing the available tools? |
ATOR wrote on Sun, 24 June 2007 15:55 |
It's music man, there is no line |
J. Hall |
the mixer's job is not to produce the record, but to fine tune the production. |
Fibes |
It's about giving the right people the right tools and the trust/motivation to exceed expectations. How many of us were given so many parameters and orders that they closed focus on the big picture? |
J. Hall |
the introduction of software to replace sounds with samples just makes life easier. auto tune, meoldyne, sound replacer.......these are tools. and like any tool, it can be used to make life easier, and it can also be abused. there is no accounting for taste... |
Iain |
Is replacement out of hand or is the advertising for it creating the impression... great tools when used in the right (or wrong) way. |
Fibes |
... more and more hacks are using magic bullets because they didn't learn what poor technique is; they just learned poor techniques... Then they hear the big guys are doing the SR thing and they hear immediate results. It's not about augmenting an already great sound or creating an amazingingly whacked out texture, instead it's about instant gratification... |
Matt Carter |
...to me, it all sounds like gimmicky ear candy and trying to make the song something it isn't. |
McSnare |
The engineer that has rarely or never gotten great drum sounds on the recording, and 'defaults' to samples, is the guy that won't know how to make samples work as elegantly as the pro... |
Maxim |
... the entry level into engineering and production has dropped SIGNIFICANTLY... previously, before one could produce a record of ANY sort, one had to have been a teaboy for a few eons, observing the process and rewinding tapes ("mad scientist makes a studio in his garage" sorts excepted) |
Iain |
If done correctly, the samples or whatever don't change the artistic direction, they just make the recording sound better. If you make that radical a change, you've missed the point. |
ATOR wrote on Sun, 24 June 2007 15:55 | ||
It's music man, there is no line |
j.hall wrote on Sun, 24 June 2007 22:21 |
that's crap. there is clearly a line. and the line is when your use of the tools either overshadows the band (hey guys, check out my sweet mix skills), or, your use of the tools, simply doesn't work... this is why i keep stressing the importance of being an artist while you mix. |
j.hall wrote on Mon, 25 June 2007 05:21 | ||||
that's crap. there is clearly a line. and the line is when your use of the tools either overshadows the band (hey guys, check out my sweet mix skills), or, your use of the tools, simply doesn't work. you think nora jones would sound awesome auto tuned like blink 182? that would CLEARLY be a case of abused tools. this is why i keep stressing the importance of being an artist while you mix. BTW, Frengers was made by Rich Costey. a producer/mixer in my top 3 favorite mixers. i STRONGLY advise all of you to get many of his records and listen. the man has an insanely unique ear from pushing a song forward, and for INSANE sonic vibe. Muse Absolution is a master piece of making things sound wrong and having them be so right. few guys do this as well as Rich. |
ATOR wrote on Mon, 25 June 2007 05:28 |
We would have missed out on a lot of great sounding records if mixing engineers wouldn't have abused their tools. |
Maxim wrote on Sun, 24 June 2007 23:17 |
jason screamed: "DON'T USE IT JUST TO USE IT" |
Maxim wrote on Sun, 24 June 2007 23:17 |
if you don't use it, you lose it... |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 19 June 2007 14:04 |
bring your strongest opinion on these subjects, i want to go to the mat on some of this. 1. assuming that enginner is a technical thing, artist is artistic, and producer is marrying the two, and bringing third party focus. what would your ideal blend of a mixer look like (i. e. one part engineer, one part artist, two parts producer) |
j.hall |
2. as a mixer, is it better to go into a mix completely cold (never hearing the song or having artist input) or going in with a lot of input from the client? |
j.hall |
3. as a mixer, is it better to work alone, or with clients in the room while you mix? |
j.hall |
4. assuming you have free reign on a mix, is it appropriate to add tracks should you feel it really makes a difference? |
j.hall |
5. if you were to listen to your work as a third person, how would you describe your style as a mixer? |
j.hall |
6. how do you, yourself, describe your style as a mixer? |
spoon wrote on Mon, 25 June 2007 12:16 |
and not my cup of tea (Earl Grey, thanks). |
mcsnare wrote on Sat, 23 June 2007 08:04 |
I don't think that quality at the pro level has suffered all that much in recent times. but I'd rather get down to business and keep the flow going, knowing that I can tweak the drums later. It makes the recording process a lot less stressful for me. I don't consider this attitude to be 'throwing in the towel' or delaying the decision as far as getting good sounding drums. |
CHANCE wrote on Mon, 25 June 2007 20:23 |
Perhaps it would be interesting for an IMP to have input, the kind we would get from a paying client. That would take away some of the colorful mixes/ideas/creativity, but would be interesting to see the different paths we take to hopefully acheive the goal that the client is looking for. |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 26 June 2007 18:57 |
while that has it's positives, it simply doesn't support what IMP is attempting to teach. at it's core, IMP is all about instincts. mixing completely blind, helps you to better understand your own instincts, and how to capitalize on them. thus far, i think it's really working for a lot of people. AND.......i set up IMP to most closely resemble a real world situation, which for me (and that's all i know for real world) is a band delivering tracks and saying "make it rock". |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 26 June 2007 21:57 |
AND.......i set up IMP to most closely resemble a real world situation, which for me (and that's all i know for real world) is a band delivering tracks and saying "make it rock". |
Iain Graham wrote on Sun, 24 June 2007 20:21 |
If done correctly, the samples or whatever don't change the artistic direction, they just make the recording sound better. |
j.hall wrote on Wed, 27 June 2007 16:48 |
seems like you are skating around some albini-isms, which is not something i have ever associated with you. |
rankus wrote on Wed, 27 June 2007 17:26 |
in fact on this project I actually picked out my samples as part of my pre-pro so that I could track the other instruments to "fit" the samples... |
Quote: |
Sure, I'm hip to the fun of science experiments in the studio during the overdubbing phase of some projects but I've never heard the WOW factor surpass people playing togther and really freaking nailing it. |
pg666 wrote on Thu, 28 June 2007 11:57 | ||
exactly. i really appreciate your posts on this thread. i understand the need to fix things.. or more side-steppingly put, "build on what the artist intended to do", but those aren't the type of records i go home and get excited about listening to. i think engineer-type people can lose sight of what people are actually listening for. |
J-Texas wrote on Wed, 27 June 2007 17:01 | ||
Now this I really don't understand. If you know what kind of sound you're looking for going into it, and samples are just someone else's technique, then why wouldn't you try to emulate that with your own style? Help me on this. This is exactly what I've been talking about. |
rankus wrote on Thu, 28 June 2007 13:16 |
...this is a boat that I designed... |