Creating a clean and well separated mix

tacoMusic said

Out of interest, and this is a question for everyone who has contributed to this post not just Gareth, would anyone mind if I did package this up into a tutorial? That would include adding the different mixes by the way.

No problem at all..

Hello guys! This is my first post in the forums and I though I could contribute here I’ve been mixing for about almost 20 years now and I can tell I’m still learning. Mixing starts in my opinion with composition itself withith a good arrangement regarding the frequency balance of instruments used, and your ears instinct is very important.

Also is fundamental to have a flat response hearing system within a flat response acoustic enviroment. If this is not possible you can listen to your favorite records in the enviroment and listening position you are going to mix and learn by heart how they sound in that enviroment. While mixing always make an A B comparison between your work and any reference record you really like. Monitor your final mixes in different sound systems. Always helps a lot to listen to your final mixes in very cheap loudspeakers…you’ll be amazed how many mistakes you can spot that way in your mixes.

Loudness balance of instruments is important as well. You have to find the perfect volume level so don’t mix too loud or too quiet. For anyone interested you can take a look at Flectcher-Munson curves theory. Give a rest to your ears evey hour or so and then come back to your mix…sometime you want to start from 0 again

Regarding loudness and balance, compression and limiting are very important but don’t abuse them. Nowadays we listen to a lot of commercial mixes going into a loudness war very annoying to the ear but it depends on what sonic sensation you want to achieve and the style of music you are working on.

Reverb is nice but use carefully because a little too much can clutter your mixes!

There are lots of websites and magazines very practical for home studio mixers. Personally my favorite is Sound On Sound magazine with very practical production tips and tutorials. Some articles are kind of difficult to read if you are not an audio engineer but others are amazingly simple and practical,

I’m not what I would call a good mixer but always try to improve in one way or another listening to the most awfull and strange tips you get from engineers sometimes ,

Probably all those aspects have been mentioned before but these are my two cents!

I think of mixing like tight-rope walking. Everything has to be balanced or it will fall.

garethcoker said
To expand on this and your statement of ‘no hard/fast rules’, that’s also a bit like saying there are an unlimited number of ways to set up microphones to record an orchestra. That’s true, but most of them will sound terrible – UNLESS – you are going for a certain effect, in which case, the only limit is your imagination.

I’m only really going to address this.

I used to own around about 100 classical cds from various venues, labels and dates covering locations all across the world with performances from a litany of symphonies, quartets and chamber groups. More than half of these recordings sounded god-awful and thin beyond belief with a ton of noise. A select few of them sounded warm and wonderfully engaging with incredible detail and nuance and a very black background (virtually no noise). I’m sure the engineers behind all of the recordings (and some of these performances are very well respected) got paid about the same amount. A majority (sadly) of them sucked really hard.

Whatever those particular engineers behind the awful recordings were doing may be “the right way” to do it but it didn’t change that the end product was often completely atrocious. The common way of recording orchestras definitely does suck to be honest. Sorry. Just my opinion.

joshhunsaker said

garethcoker said
To expand on this and your statement of ‘no hard/fast rules’, that’s also a bit like saying there are an unlimited number of ways to set up microphones to record an orchestra. That’s true, but most of them will sound terrible – UNLESS – you are going for a certain effect, in which case, the only limit is your imagination.

I’m only really going to address this.

I used to own around about 100 classical cds from various venues, labels and dates covering locations all across the world with performances from a litany of symphonies, quartets and chamber groups. More than half of these recordings sounded god-awful and thin beyond belief with a ton of noise. A select few of them sounded warm and wonderfully engaging with incredible detail and nuance and a very black background (virtually no noise). I’m sure the engineers behind all of the recordings (and some of these performances are very well respected) got paid about the same amount. A majority (sadly) of them sucked really hard.

Whatever those particular engineers behind the awful recordings were doing may be “the right way” to do it but it didn’t change that the end product was often completely atrocious. The common way of recording orchestras definitely does suck to be honest. Sorry. Just my opinion.

I should have been more specific. I was not at all talking about live classical orchestra recordings, I’m talking about studio (film orchestra) recordings – i.e. how the vast majority of live film scores are recorded – in a studio/scoring stage (occasionally a concert hall) – with no audience. These are almost always recorded to an exceptionally high level. There’s usually a ton of mics, stage, room, and close – going into a great sounding mix board. It already sounds great when it gets into the mixing desk, and then after everything is recorded, it gets mixed again in fine detail.

I’ve been to enough orchestral recording sessions now to know that I’ve seen the same setup time and time again, and it sounds great.

What I suspect you are talking about, is someone just sticking an XY stereo pair or a decca tree in a concert hall, hanging it from the ceiling or setting it up on a stand in the room, and pressing record. This method can work if you have a great room and great microphones (and a quiet audience!) – but there are just way too many variables. Often, even for respected engineers that may have been working on these CDs, the facilities available to them might just not be good enough. Like I said, too many variables and not enough things that they can control. Every venue is different (some are very ‘live’, some are ‘dead’). The CDs you had, were the engineers respected? Who were they? Or were they the house engineer? Just too many variables.

My point being that recording an orchestra in the setting I think you’re talking about is pretty much the opposite of recording a studio orchestra in what is a heavily controlled (but not totally perfect) environment.

In that case, there simply are tried and tested methods that do work in the studio environment, and I’d be pretty shocked (and would ask for examples) if you could find a poorly recorded orchestral film-score that doesn’t have a miniscule budget. Heck, even live scores with relatively small budgets have been recorded well (e.g. Battlestar Galactica Season 1).

Of course, you may think that the way film scores are recorded sucks too, I’m not sure.

But yes, I’ll agree with your sentiment that many classical recordings suck really hard, but I’m not sure it’s entirely due to the methodology, and more the nature of randomness that can occur during any performance at any venue. If there was a better way to do it, it probably would have been done by now.

garethcoker said
Of course, you may think that the way film scores are recorded sucks too, I’m not sure.

Oh no… lol I’m actually a huge fan of most film scores. I was assuming you were talking about classical music recording in general. Film music is definitely where I’ve heard the most impressive examples of the utmost control and consistency in quality in recordings.

Scoring stage/sound stage recordings are always quite nice. I have the same experience as you in that regard. I think we’re totally on the same page in general.

Always keep in mind that every element in your mix is coloring a certain frequency. If you pile to much of the same frequency on top of each other the level of those frequency start to have more energy and literally tire the listeners ears. To achieve clarity every instrument needs to have it’s space. Try to cut frequencies completely out of instrument in the areas they shouldn’t be heard. Usually people tend to want to add more bass when it lacks definition. Thats not a good idea. Most everyone, i’m guessing, on AJ try to tackle mastering the track themselves. This consists of EQ, compression, and limiting. I would try setting up an effects chain on your stereo out and experiment. If you have a multi band compressor definitely use it. you can compress individual frequencies of the overall mix and not all of them together. increase the output of the compressor so your levels are close to 0 db. Set your limiter so it wont allow anything over 0db to pass and keep your stereo out level on 0db. That should give you maximum output without clipping and getting digital distortion. Be careful with how you use the compressor though, too much can slam your mix into a mudpie. Also if you have a frequency analyzer on your final EQ use it as a reference. It helps also to listen to the song on different devices like headphones and in your car. It should sound balanced on everything if its mixed well. Also remember people are usually applying EQ, whether they know it or not, in their cars or home stereos so try to mix flat. I’m still learning myself, but these tips have helped me. I hope the help you.

Thought I’d just mention this plug in, it’s a good free tool for help in finding unwanted frequencies.