The Mix Genii Materclass Suggestion Thread

[SARcazm]

I'm sure I'm not alone in spending too much time to do things that many of you can do blindfolded (or rather deaf-folded ). Such things as eqing individual drums, compressing, etc. I appreciate that much of this comes from experience, but what I think would really help is if there was a way to do some "homework" which is evaluated by you guys.

For example, you could post a dry snare drum, and tell those of us who wish to participate, to EQ it and repost back into the thread. You could then evaluate our submissions and let us know where we are going wrong (or even getting it just right).

I know I'm asking alot in terms of time spent, and you'll probably not get much except our appreciation, but if there is someone(s) willing to spend the time, it could become an important feature of KvR.

Anyway, tx for reading,

S

EDIT: Title changed..

[ckatrun411]

Yep, but the first problem is..............


Eq depends on the " mix "

so

unless you are going for a sound design vibe, eq'ing a dry snare isn't really going to help a great deal.


For example, you have a track filled with pads..... you might cut some frequencies ( if you have to ) from the low mids of the pads to bring the snare out a little more and give it room to breathe.

[Kim Lajoie]

Good idea.

Two concerns:
1) As ckatrun411 wrote, mix decisions depend entirely on the whole mix. It doesn't make sense to process sounds in isolation. So any master class or workshop would have to be a whole mix.

2) Production values and personal taste play a large role in mixing. In a workshop, not only would each participant have their own ideas for how the mix should sound, but the facilitator would also have a prefence for a certain style of mixing.

So, I have an idea.

I could post unprocessed tracks from one of my songs, and I could walk participants though my mixing process. Of course, it'd just be my own way of working - I wouldn't be pretending that THIS IS HOW EVERYONE SHOULD MIX. It'd just be a bit of practice in applying some of the ideas and techniques I've been writing about.

To give it some structure, we'd do it bit by bit. Maybe something like this:
Week 1: Vocals
Week 2: Snare
Week 3: Kick and bass
Week 4: Background instruments
Week 5: Effects and automation
Week 6: Panning and reverb
Week 7: Mastering

Maybe at the start of the week we'd begin a discussion of what we're trying to do, and throughout the week people can post their attempts and write a bit about what they did. Then I (and anyone else, of course) would be able to comment on the attempts in the context of our stated aims.

What do you guys think? Would anyone actually participate? I don't mind doing this if there are enough people taking part. I imagine there will be a lot of people who are happy to watch (and listen) but can't be bothered actually having a go at mixing it for themselves. This kind of thing really only works with participants though - otherwise it'll effectively be just another production diary or tutorial.

Thoughts?

-Kim.

[shogger]

Yes Kim,

that could be interesting.

Shogger

[A.M. Gold]

I'd tune in.

[docdued]

I'd love this!

[SARcazm]

Sounds great! I'm in.

[No_Use]

Cool idea. I'm also in.

One additional suggestion:
Over the time I'm doing music production I could gather some experience in mixing given material and I get along quite ok but I still suck at sound design (that is creating and adding synthesized sounds to a song from scratch).
So Kim, assuming your song examples don't contain only acoustic instruments but also synth sounds maybe you could give us (besides from your mixing strategies) also some info on how and why you created particular sounds.

[GeckoEE]

100% count me in! +1

[ckatrun411]

I think mixing a track and sound design are two separate topics. I also think that if you are making every single sound in your track from ground up, it is going to have a massive effect on how you are mixing. I think Kim has the right idea, i.e. it is best to learn how to mix by mixing other tracks, and having the road paved by somebody who knows what they want, and what they are doing.

I also think, the key concepts behind mixing and sound design are quite simple. Surely over the course of the years a lot of techniques, "tricks," have been developed. When your trying to mix a track, you are indeed trying to accomplish an impossible task. Why? The perfect mix is often described as a balance of music where each instrument is sitting in its own space. For example, a force field would surround your vocals, and they would never touch the kick. A great mix, "defies," the laws of physics. So once we accept that, it is just wrapping our heads around some very simple concepts. The role of a compressor, and eq, how reverb interacts, things of this nature. Then it comes down to practice. And although simple in its ideas, it can really take quite a bit of practice to get a tight mix.

As far as sound design goes. This is also a bunch of really simple concepts, usually laid out on very complicated instruments. You can totally learn all the key concepts of sound design in like two weeks.

Flamesuite? Perhaps!! LOL


What is an LFO, Filter, Modulator, Waveform.... etc...

However, it will still take years to figure out your own sound design vibe, style. etc

Same thing for a mix, the concepts are easy, but take tons of practice. On my most recent work from a few months back, I design all my sounds from ground up, and at the end of the day it totally effects my mix. Everything is designed together, therefore take the average amount of compressing, panning, volume balance, and eq. However, I do know, that if I started making a tribal song today, and I was going to use tribal samples from ???? Storm drum or something, that I would be ready to use a lot of eq....

Actually, depend on sample. I have rm4.. so if I was going to explore what is in there, then yea... TONS OF EQ... LOL.. maybe with a better higher quality sample sounds, you don't need so much eq.

Least to say, you will find that when you design all your sound together, htz, clap, kick, you are eqing a lot in the sound design process. So, now in a mix your pieces are sitting together fairly well.

Actually if you are using Docdued's IIeq, your sounds are sitting like a dream.

Even though I am sound designing my bass as well, that still makes a lot of eq in the mix. Usually I use a mix " guideline " on my bass. What does this mean? Well, I was writing about guidelines earlier in the paragraph, and basically... Bass is traditionally cut around 500.. ?

Well, it kind makes sense... Somewhere around the 500 htz, could be 550? could be 680 if you felt like it... You would use a hard cut to remove all the frequencies above.

Anyways, so yes... When you are making all the sounds in a track you will find that eq plays a massive role, but in a totally different way. Your kik will be eq'd before the mix, so you probably wont need to do it again.... ( for example )

There doesn't seem to be enough information on sound design and mixing out there. The dance music manual is terrible, imho, it is the authors mixing and producing style written out as if it were law. The concepts in that book wont work for everybody. And often times will work against you. Like removing low frequencies from anything that isn't bass.

But the concepts of mixing and sound design are easy. The key concepts, can be picked up in a very short time. Despite the fact that it will take years and so to really develop your own sound and style.

[jdtrbn]

Even though I am sound designing my bass as well, that still makes a lot of eq in the mix. Usually I use a mix " guideline " on my bass. What does this mean? Well, I was writing about guidelines earlier in the paragraph, and basically... Bass is traditionally cut around 500.. ?

Well, it kind makes sense... Somewhere around the 500 htz, could be 550? could be 680 if you felt like it... You would use a hard cut to remove all the frequencies above.

Man, I have trouble following your thoughts.
I've never had the problem of bass having too much higher frequencies, and I never use guidelines while mixing. Also, you seem to take for granted that you use EQ on pretty much everything, which I don't do unless all my samples have problems.

I disagree about that developing a style takes years too. You can probably find a style you like very quickly, although getting it as good as you want will take time.

[ckatrun411]

You never use " guidelines " while mixing? Than you are better than I suppose?

Mixing music is an art as well as a science. If you don't want to go at all by " what is done " to mix a track, than...

What is the point of the thread?

Just mix. Don't ask how, if you don't want guidelines, and ideas, and rules, just do it.

It takes years for an artist to develop his own style, and frankly.... It is rarely done. Otherwise every artist would have their own vibe and style.

Furthermore, I learned from other producers. I think what was explained to me, is awesome. And I couldn't care less at this point how anybody else is producing.

Why? Cause every time I try to add some thoughts, there is always one person who wants to imply that my thoughts have little value.


If you don't want to follow " guidelines, ideas, techniques " than the whole thread is useless.


Cause if we go the other, just eq any old thing, or not, and do it for no apparent reason as well.

[Chopper]

as long as you see "guidelines" as a starting point, rather than the point to reach, then it's ok.

[jdtrbn]

You never use " guidelines " while mixing? Than you are better than I suppose?

Mixing music is an art as well as a science. If you don't want to go at all by " what is done " to mix a track, than...

What is the point of the thread?

I may use stuff I've heard as a reference, like "I want to get a sound like that", but how could there be general guidelines that would help me? When EQing, when you get to the correct octave, it's best to just sweep frequencies with a narrow boost. Compressors are more vague, because they can sound so different with same settings and reverb presets for a mix are a joke to me.

It takes years for an artist to develop his own style, and frankly.... It is rarely done. Otherwise every artist would have their own vibe and style.

We simply disagree here. I think finding the thing you like doesn't mean it has to be different from what everybody else does.

If you don't want to follow " guidelines, ideas, techniques " than the whole thread is useless.

I think guidelines are far from my thought of ideas. I can hear of new ideas and think "that was cool" or "that was so out of place" and get something out of it. But guidelines are something more general by definition, in my opinion. As for techniques, you have already pointed out, the basic stuff can be learned quite quickly and I don't consider them that interesting.

Anyway, I didn't want anyone to get an idea that it was normal to mix with some kind of "how to mix" -guidelines. One reason is that I've made the mistake of following some people's style and later found out that it was just a matter of style. For example, using a compressor on 2-bus (eg. Alan Parsons never does this) and cutting the sub-bass routinely.

Kim's idea sounds really good. It would be interesting to see what kind of ideas people have. I can't participate this month though.

[synaesthesia]

The idea of someone giving a bit of a masterclass is a good idea, I'd be interested as I'm new to computer music. I don't want to copy anyone but I'm sure such a thing would fill in some knowledge gaps and allow me to develop my own techniques from there. I'm with Chopper on this one.

If the mastering one works and is popular then maybe a synthesis one would be good as a follow up but, I'd say they are two separate things and would detract from each other if you tried to cover them both in one go.

Kim, be our guest, it would be fascinating. As you've so kindly volunteered, you go ahead and proceed in the way that suits you best and we'll help as we can.

Quickly though... before this thread becomes just another KVR disagreement-fest!

Cheers.