Why Do My Mixes Sound Awful?

[Benedict]

This should not be an argument about musik-ians playing or not playing together. There are plenty of amazing programmed records from ZZ Top and Billy Idol to Pete Namlook and The Prodigy. Just as there are lots of amazing loosey-goosey like Boz Scaggs and Jackson Browne, oh and that Bob Dildo bloke too hihi

But there are also, especially nowadays, plenty of played acts that would be just as irrelevant if they were presets from a Unison MIDI Pack extra-qualtized in Abledum.

It is very true tho that if the core material is broken, no mix, even with a thousand Tipz n Trix from Tutz can ever actually fix that. This is the mindset that is most needed, not more Tipz n Trix. Listen to demos and home recordings, or even self-funded studio session from the pre-DAW era and they should feel*
https://thebmg.bandcamp.com/album/post-no-bills

I knew these people and they scraped together coins to go into a semi-professional studio for a day or so. They came out with this cassette of six unique and very cool songs. The playing may not be perfectly gridded but the passion is. This is why Post No Bills, for the short time they existed, still cast ripples today. And why most of what is coming out of DAWville is not - and won't mix nicely, which is the sign it won't cast ripples.

A good example of the opposite is this I had put in my feed yesterday. It seems like it should be a second coming of The Cult's "Love Removal Machine" or Motorhead. But I cannot see it as anything but a calculated piss-take. Not a piss-take like Sigue Sigue Sputnik, but a collection of cliches that don't really hang together. This is really a pile of loops where the maker doesn't realize, or worse even care, that a piece should have a tonic to feel satisfying - note how as each loop ends the piece flops, covered only by the next cliché loop hammering in. It is all just posing - made LOUD (so YT halved the level). I turned it off for wasting my life. Lemmy would spit on it, as Alice did with Wolfmother (who I sold a car to a year or so after), and I agree. This cannot mix, only be made overLOUD.


*note I said "Feel" not sound exactly like this genre or some hair-splitting technicality

[lfm]

This should not be an argument about musik-ians playing or not playing together. There are plenty of amazing programmed records from ZZ Top and Billy Idol to Pete Namlook and The Prodigy. Just as there are lots of amazing loosey-goosey like Boz Scaggs and Jackson Browne, oh and that Bob Dildo bloke too hihi

It's very well an argument IMO.
In general studio albums are a bit "stiff" when not doing sessions as the foundation.
And it's not about if record is good, it can very well be.
- it's about the performance something "more" is communicated

In the Dave Grohl film "Soundcity", about the studio back in the day. Tom Petty says they probably did 50 takes on the "Refugee" song. Dedicated to bring that extra vibe.

In the Bukovac talk about slide work I put in the Guitar forum, they talked about the sessions they had the other day. Drummer said, another hour and I would have lost it.
- they exhaust themselves bringing "that extra"
- it's what they live for

Some communications is going on between musicians playing together that is lost otherwise.
- add an audience can also bring an extra "notch" to performance

If there are live albums I pick them instead where magic may happen.
- my favourite part start after 10:00 or so, but magic intro is never heard in a studio that I've heard


So have in the range 200+ DVD's with live concerts. And they often pick songs from different cities from a tour, when there is a special "vibe" going on. And it's fun to look at gear used etc.

The rehearsals for the George Harrison memorial

[Benedict]

This should not be an argument about musik-ians playing or not playing together.

In general studio albums are a bit "stiff" when not doing sessions as the foundation.
---
- it's about the performance something "more" is communicated
---
- they exhaust themselves bringing "that extra"
- it's what they live for

Some communications is going on between musicians playing together that is lost otherwise.
- add an audience can also bring an extra "notch" to performance

We are talking about the same thing. A commitment to: the Moment, Being Engaged, the Scene & Story of the Song Leading.

Some bands have definitely found their stride in the live sphere. It used to be the metric, as bands rarely went from their bedrooms to TOTP. There was at least a season of audience work.

Some live shows are indeed amazing: Iron Maiden "Flight 666", Manfred Mann "Live in Budapest", Gary Numan "White Noise", George Strait "Astrodome 'closing the old dome down'", Boz Scaggs, Garth Brooks...

But I am more of a studio album guy, which is a personal choice, as it is a special kind of manifesto that is different from the live moment. Especially seeing live is 'nightly', whereas the record of the time, which is a studio album, is a very finite thing. And particularly that it is a manifesto, sometimes of the band itself eg Spice Girls & Adam Ant records, or others are an actual narrative of sorts, Meatloaf "Bat Out Of Hell" and A Flock Of Seagulls "Story of a Young Heart".

None of this really fires until the act is far more 'in the moment' (than obsessed with their geetar, or compressinator settings for the consendation mic they wrapped in a shield coz they saw a (c)Rapper affiliate linking one in a thinly veiled tut).

[_al_]

Hi All!

So I decided to make an electronic genre I think I can make without too much trouble. I decided on Tech House (my normal genre is old skool house). Listened to a few tracks and thought they don't sound too difficult although not exactly dead easy but I have studied music production at college and uni so should be able to create a half decent track and I'm a good musician, have a good ear for music (play guitar, write songs etc).

I start by setting up a folder with a software drum machine in it and assign each drum to a separate track. I go through some kicks (these were Vengeance House house kicks but some sounded suitable.) I get a kick that I think suits tech house, hard-ish but not too bad. I boost a part (as I was trying to remove a kind of fade out hiss at the end of the kick originally) and was scanning to find it, anyway, the boost sounded goodin the low end so kept it. Then time to remove that hiss, trying to remove the hiss also changed the kick sound to something I didn't like and couldn't stop that no matter how steep a slope I used etc so ended up leaving the hiss in.

Anyway, I now think the kick sounds awful and wanna scrap it.

I just don't get it, I've done 3 years at college doing music tech and a year at uni and know all about frequencies, how sound works, all about filters, compression etc etc but can't make a decent sounding track save my life. I just don't know why I can't make a decent track. What's people's thoughts?

Thanks!

And welcome to the next 5+ years of your life

There are delicate balances that make these dance genres sound like they do, and that has to be tackled AFTER you've learnt all the universal mixing stuff.

Channel balance, EQ, compression, all equally important, and even a couple of decibels change can make a good kick sound clumsy.
This takes time to learn.

Oh, and I hope you're aware of the importance of monitors (speakers or headphones)
If you can spend two or three hundred on some speakers, it will be harder to make something that sounds shit on other speakers or headphones.
A brutal truth

[Zeisner]

And welcome to the next 5+ years of your life

More like 20-30 years (realistically). You can start with the best gear and room, but it takes many years of practice and ear development to be able to make a good mix...

[Benedict]

And welcome to the next 5+ years of your life

More like 20-30 years (realistically). You can start with the best gear and room, but it takes many years of practice and ear development to be able to make a good mix...

True in that we should never stop learning and we should move through phases like Picasso did.
The big issue these days is that people end up taking waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay longer, having more stress, which embeds in their choons, by insisting on doing it wrong from the beginning. 90% of what is put forward in places like this and on YooBoob Tutz is, if not totally wrong, effectively wrong because it is not about what matters, but about technical stuff that is garbage when the purpose is not understood, ie not related to this story. You don't need a flat room, or flat speakers... You need to ask Why? What is the Scene & Story of this Song? Do that and only that.

This video is good and lays out the right mindset:

Music is philosophy in action. Most never learn to hear what is coming off tape. They leap straight to making moves based on rulez (out of fear) in an attempt to feel profully producery. Therefore, a) never understand what is happening in the song, so b) they are brutalizing rather than trusting. I commonly have a feeling to do something that seems odd or even wrong but it works perfectly for the song on my deck when I trust and just follow the feeling with trust and experience - which only comes when you do this without forcing things.

I trust because I follow the Scene & Story of the Song. What does it need to work better for that and only that? I never go, "I want it to be [insert sub-sub-sub-genre]; therefore, I must a, b, c...z 9" and kill it in the process, no matter how perfected I think I got the Tipz n Trix. That I refer to as trying to be the God of the Song rather than following the Song Gods. My job is to Serve the Song, not make the song serve me.

I learned this the hard way decades ago and if I had not, I would probably have given up (or been stuck).

[_al_]

More like 20-30 years (realistically). You can start with the best gear and room, but it takes many years of practice and ear development to be able to make a good mix...

Yeah... I cut him some slack because he's new. I'd probably give him two years before he either slaps Ozone's Stabiliser / Match EQ on the master, or just gives up.

Everyone expects a quick fix these days, and companies like iZotope are getting pretty damn good at giving them that fix.
There's always a workaround

[Zeisner]

because it is not about what matters, but about technical stuff that is garbage when the purpose is not understood, ie not related to this story. You don't need a flat room, or flat speakers...

"You don't need strings on your guitar, it's all in the performance!" You're doing the exact same thing as all the "Gear is everything" people, just the other way around. And you're just as wrong as them.

It's impossible to get even an okayish mix in a crappy room, thanks to phenomenons like room modes which swallow whole notes (and boost others up to +6 dB). It's impossible to get the mid section right with your speakers standing on your desk, acting as a reflector. It's impossible to get the stereo image right if your room is asymmetrical. It's impossible to judge the reverberation in a mix correctly if it gets overpowered by the reverberation of your room. Everything matters because everything is part of the process. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, with acoustics being almost always the weakest link by far. Heck, even the light influences how sound is perceived. The smallest things can (and do) change the whole story.

And what's about that weird writing all the time ("Rulez", "Tipz n Trix")? Are you trying to be Upgrayedd from Idiocracy?

[Zeisner]

Yeah... I cut him some slack because he's new.

And most of those audio-related workshops/courses/schools are useless as well.

I'd probably give him two years before he either slaps Ozone's Stabiliser / Match EQ on the master, or just gives up.

Those are unfortunately the most likely outcomes. I'm not sure which is worse.

Everyone expects a quick fix these days, and companies like iZotope are getting pretty damn good at giving them that fix.

The irony is that you can fix things quite fast later on if you take your time and learn how things work first. And the result will be much better too, at a fraction of the cost - leaving more money for things which don't allow workarounds (like acoustics). Talking about "Room Correction Software"...

[BertKoor]

The OP left KvrAudio at Mon Jan 19, 2026 22:10, merely hours after posting this topic.
Have a nice conversation argument.

[jamcat]

Perhaps he finally figured out that KVR is only good for learning how to make bad music even worse.

[Benedict]

because it is not about what matters, but about technical stuff that is garbage when the purpose is not understood, ie not related to this story. You don't need a flat room, or flat speakers...

"You don't need strings on your guitar, it's all in the performance!"

And what's about that weird writing all the time ("Rulez", "Tipz n Trix")? Are you trying to be Upgrayedd from Idiocracy?

So I should quote you then say you said something else and go off on a tangent saying what a toss you are for saying what you never said, meaning what was clearly never meant, or intended.

If you don't understand why, there is no sense in wasting more time, as you will only twist that to mean something that gaslights the wider community for your personal malfeasance so...

[Zeisner]

Don't get me wrong, of course does story & scene matter. That's why you need proper speakers and acoustics. At least if you're planning to ever play your music to other people on other devices in other listening environments. If you only make music and mix for yourself in your bedroom like you do, then it doesn't matter.

[ghettosynth]

The OP left KvrAudio at Mon Jan 19, 2026 22:10, merely hours after posting this topic.
Have a nice conversation argument.