help.. I'm the worlds worst "over-mixer"

[stillshaded]

Lately I'm realizing that over mixing is my most serious hinderence to producing good completed tracks. I want those types of mixes where everything sounds like it has it's own space carved out perfectly, so I get pretty brutal with the eq's early on in the production process, however, I usually end up losing momentum because I'll be screwing with the snare for 30 minutes and then at the end of this It doesn't even sound good. I also like the sound of layered drums that have lots of organic and subtle modulation to them (idm kind of stuff), but im left scratching my head at how to get that sound with losing momentum. Here are some questions that come into my head.

-How often do you find yourself boosting or cuttin by more than 6 db?

- What part of the production process do you apply most of your eq and compression? What about bus routing and sends?

- Is it totally pointless that I sometimes end up with really long effect chains? (like 6+ effects)


One other thing I''m confused about. I always read articles about having everything eq'd to have its own place I the mix, but how much is too much? It's confusing to me because Ive listened to many classic jazz recordings that sound so great and I'm guessing thy didn't eq at all. Also, I'll run contemporary electronic songs thru a band pass filter and I hear the snare and kick and bass throughout the entire frequency spectrum! Louder in some parts to be sure, but It's hard for
e to understand how seperated things should be, and how much of the 'secondary' freqs should be heard. I think I over eq a lot, because things often end up sounding harsh.

Ok thanks for reading, any help would be greatly appreciated, I'm a little disheartened atm.

[Doug1978]

I'm sure you'll get quite a few excellent mixing tips from others here shortly.

Because you are using way too much EQ and then can't see the woods for the trees, my advice would be to set yourself a different task (it will help you, trust me):

Make a song where you can use NO equalisation (I'll let you use compression and maybe some simple effects!).
The key to this is the arrangement.

Make the best arrangement you can with well separated and contrasting instruments first.
Make some instruments play legato and others staccato. Invent poly-rhythms for percussion.
Limit each octave to only one element, but fill all the octaves from 0 to 7.
Choose a different octave to set your kick and bass drum.
If an instrument is not fulfilling a clear, effective and different role from the others, cut it.


Arrangement is key to a good mix. Get better at it and you'll find your mixing and EQ-ing a hell of a lot easier in future songs.

Better arrangement will mean that you don't have to chop +/- 6db etc with EQ which, tbh, in most situations is crazy and smacks of a poor arrangement.

If you need any further advice, I'd recommend picking up this book second-hand if you can:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Arranging-Techn ... 761&sr=8-2

[Bronto Scorpio]

Many people seem to have that problem.

You really don't need that much EQ, compression and so on to get a nice mix. Clever sound design and, even more important, arrangement will save you a lot of trouble. Synthetic sounds almost never have content below their fundamental so even the famous low cut is unnecessary in many cases.

The only advice I can give you is to stop reading/watching tutorials. They almost never help since they can only tell you theoretical things. It's better to learn the stuff yourself (At least that's what works best for me).
You'll get to the point when you only use things bcause you NEED them and not because you read about them somewhere or because you want to make some sound magically "better".
You'll simply go "That snare clashes with my kick...I'll need to make a small cut at ~260hz" because you HEAR it.

A quick example: http://soundcloud.com/bronto-scorpio/infection-demo
All sounds in that track come straight out of Bazille (Which has no internal effects).
I haven't used any EQs, reverbs, compressors and so on except for a tiny bit of BaxterEQ on the master (That thing just sounds so fu*king great).
The mix may not be the best on earth but you get the idea.

I hope this helps somehow!

(@other KVR members....so for posting that track agin.....it just seemed to be a good example...).

Edit: Doug1978 was faster and put the same thing in way better words

Cheers
Dennis

[stillshaded]

Thanks you guys so much. I think this is just what I needed to hear. I'm starting a track right now, and I already feel liberated. Woohoo

[Doug1978]

Thanks Dennis

And honestly, progressing with the art of arrangement itself in a somewhat single-minded fashion is a wonderful, classical task that is very enjoyable too.

[No_Use]

I think the problem is not only about the mixing process itself.

so I get pretty brutal with the eq's early on in the production process, however, I usually end up losing momentum because I'll be screwing with the snare for 30 minutes

I know this too good and my 'solution' (rather approach) is to force myself to work more horizontally instead of vertically (as I call it).
Meaning when building a new track, only doing a rough on-the-fly mixing process so the sounds become listenable/useable and I get a feeling for them. Trying not to get lost in hours and hours of layering and sound tweaking in this stage - looperitis !

Instead trying to force myself to work on the arrangement ie building the song itself because I know this is my weak point (similar to what Doug1978 is saying).
After the song arrangement is done (more or less) I can enter the in-depth mixing stage.

[penguinfromdeep]

I hear you my friend! I had the same problem, I was over-producing my stuff, equalizing frantically everything, low cutting, compressing etc ... My music was losing it's soul!!! Ok, everything sounded crystal clear and all that but it was missing something, it didn't sound good even like that.

Just recently I then thought my mixing process over. I started by trying to use as little processing as possible. First get the arrangement down, levels ok and then see if it needs something. If a sound doesn't work, change it instead of adding truckload of effects. I don't even use the much revered low-cut technique anymore, I prefer to leave some rumble there, warmth! I feel that equalizing often changes the sound too much, in a bad way. I seem to prefer the oldskool sound now anyway, the modern hyped sounds gets on my nerves (and ears!). I feel that my tracks sound more open and warm as a result of my new mixing technique...
I still use some effects here and there, even equalizing of course but only if it adds truly something. Not automatically like every tutorial says that you should but a low-cut eq on every channel of your mix. Screw that...

I make electronic music btw.

[stillshaded]

Thanks again guys. This is causing a real shift in the way I think about mixing

[creaze]

-How often do you find yourself boosting or cuttin by more than 6 db?

About every third or fourth eq point (i only use parametric) has this magnitude or a higher one.

- What part of the production process do you apply most of your eq and compression?

well, i take care of the sound at the end, when i'm done with recording and composing all parts. The mixing alone can take more time than all previous stages together.

Note that it took Tchaikovsky 28 days to compose his 6th symphony. The next five months he spent orchestrating it (there were no mixers back then).

What about bus routing and sends?

I don't use much of them, although i should use more. I use to make just one 'non vocal' subgroup where i make a gentle cut around 600 Hz; if its techno, i compress that group with the bass drum on side chain. I also use dedicated groups to channels, which i need to automate their volume. And that's it.

- Is it totally pointless that I sometimes end up with really long effect chains? (like 6+ effects)

Not at all, if your computer can afford that load.

It's confusing to me because Ive listened to many classic jazz recordings that sound so great and I'm guessing thy didn't eq at all.

Most likely your guess is true.

Generally, i think you just need to calm down ;o) and patiently work on. I know your frustration, it will pass with more experience. I'm perhaps a little ahead of you (or maybe not, maybe even behind), and here's how i'm doing: http://creaze.ru/. So work more, pay attention and gradually you'll be making less and less 'chemistry' over your sound while it will become more and more grown up.

I want those types of mixes where everything sounds like it has it's own space carved out perfectly

Trust me those producers are extremely experienced and know thousands of tricks, most of which are even hard to explain in words.

Google for a guy called Andy Vax, he has made two video tutorials that were pretty helpful to me. See that you download the English versions (they're in russian originally).

[David Else]

it is going to take years of solid work to get good at mixing. if you enjoy it, then have fun, if you would rather spend those years on writing music, then pay someone else to do it!

if you want to learn then i suggest you pick a good book and stick with it, i personally think "Mixing Audio: Concepts, Practices and Tools":

http://www.mixingaudio.com/book/toc.php

is the most in depth and excellent one!

also "Mixing Secrets For The Small Studio":

http://www.cambridge-mt.com/MixingSecrets.htm

is really great for the way it explains in a friendly not too technical way.

if you study and practice both of those for 6 months you will be the one giving advice on this forum!!

[Trakstar]

If i have a weak sound, as in a good sample but not enough power to it, Ill reach for a good EQ and boost the fundamental frequency to give it character and depth. For instance, some times, when I start with a kick and snare loop for a vintage style drum break the samples are loose and the freq range unbalanced with overly sharp transients all over the spectral content. I will get a good EQ that boosts the freq by a few db and adds a little soft saturation to the entire sample. I am careful not to overcook the bass or whatever the sample is, if its a snare that I want to be clear in the mix I will add a little boost at 200htz for the impact and add a little body at 700htz to 1khtz and finally perhaps a little air at the top. This adds depth and character to an otherwise digitally cold sample and levels the content out. A pulteq emulation usually suffices, when I listen to the sample with the eq on and then off, i listen carefully to see how the sample sounds and make sure i am not just boosting levels for the sake of trying to make things louder. Sometimes if its a sample thats been mixed with others i will eq the problematic freq's that add noise rather than character with a proper analyzer
and do the same. If you like to EQ things like I do, Learn the EQs you like best and which are the best quality and add the best character to your mix. When you work like this always demo the sound with EQ and without, just to make sure that the process you are applying benefits the mix rather than subtracting from it. Space in a mix is what defines a good mix from a bad mix, a good mix having a good arrangement, as said above, with each instrument having its own defined freq range and stereo space. A bad mix will always sound cluttered with the instruments always fighting for the room to breathe.
Learn to be extremely accurate with what boosts and cuts you apply as this will always have a knock on effect with the other areas of your mix. I read a while back someone had mixed their kickdrum as loud as possible set to 0db and the master at 0db and couldnt work out why none of the other elements of the mix wouldnt match the loudness of the kick no matter how much boosting he did.
Working out how much dynamic range, frequency range and stereo panorama each individual element of your mix will recieve is a good foundation to work from when building your mix from the ground up. As you work you will indeed notice how different EQs work and which ones dont, thats why many mix and mastering engineers swear by certain EQ's. The thing about lo cut is that it removes unwanted freq content from where ever so you will be able to use the volume attenuated elsewhere in the mix. Another classic example of an over cluttered mix is, when you listen the drivers of your speakers will be bellowing back and forth trying to take on the mush of overloaded freq content with no dynamic range whatsoever.A well balanced mix will allow the speaker cones to move about in a consistent way not fighting the audio, rather moving back and forwards musically and in good rhythm. Well, thats how I understand it anyway.

[highkoo]

Well dont let me muddy any inspiration, but
It might help to think about segregating the workflows in your mind.

I am very much prone to doing what you describe (tweaking a snare for 30 mins, etc), and I embrace it. Its just how I am. I am super picky, and not in a hurry. I couldnt really work without working that way.
But what I learned is that for me that kind of insane attention to detail needs to be kept as a part of the sound design and arrangement process only, though. If I get that picky/tweaky with the end mix, I will be lost and on revision sixteen before Im "done", and the sixteen mixes will sound basically the same...

One big question to ask yourself- Does it help? If you skip the tweaking, are you unhappy (or unhappier) with the mix?

Maybe more importantly, is all the tweaking teaching you things?
I wouldnt know shit if I didnt allow myself to charge down the rabbit hole on a whim...
I mean, this might be minority opinion, but there is a chance you might be better off tweaking in some ways.

Anyway, once I convince myself that the arrangement is "done", Ive already got a rough mix going on just through regular working. Once its honed in and things are routed to mixer channels the goal is that Im done going back in to do +/- .5db on a snare.
At least, thats the workflow I try to stick to. I sort of act like theres a tape somewhere. A 'mistake' has to pass a certain threshold for me to get into gritty details on individual sounds and "re record".

[stillshaded]

I think tweaking has taught me a lot. I just think that for a long time I've placed too much of an emphasize on eq'ing instead of arrangement and sound design/selection. It just seems to me that fleshing out the song first should be my first priority, then tweaking the arrangement and sound selection, and then eq'ing and compression.

I think part of the reason for this is I'm into more complex music structurally (my favorite music is coltrane, miles davis, and other jazz stuff), so if I start off by finding THE PERFECT SNARE SOUNDD.. I feel discouraged because I've actually done nothing towards writing an actual tune. So now I've been focusing on arranging and writing on the front end. I'm focusing on trying to write better arranged music, and programming more precise velocities and modulations etc. With only minimal effects throughout this part of the process Let these make it sound good.. and then at the end, I'll try to make it sound even better. I haven't fleshed out an entire song in this fashion yet, but I really think it's going to have good results.

thanks again for all the advice

[kg2600]

[quote="stillshaded"]Lately I'm realizing that over mixing is my most serious hinderence to producing good completed tracks. I want those types of mixes where everything sounds like it has it's own space carved out perfectly, so I get pretty brutal with the eq's early on in the production process, however, I usually end up losing momentum because I'll be screwing with the snare for 30 minutes and then at the end of this It doesn't even sound good.

so you dont lose you mommentum you should do what avicii does in his future music thing he worrys about the arrangement first and then when he has everything down an he finished all the stuff like that he goes in and fine tunes everything in the mixdown. thats just my tip that you can use to keep yourself rolling

[Trakstar]

keep this in mind, when your mixing arrange the levels the best you can with eq and whatever and give yourself a break. Take a walk, watch a film, whatever to give your mind a rest to stop getting into the mind frame which stifles all your creativity and you end up repeating all the same old methodical routines that gets you to where you have described above. When you come back to your mix(with a fresh set of ears, relaxed and focused attention) pull all your faders down and start the fader levels all over again. Star from your low frequency end and work your way up. As you bring each element up, listen to what the audio does to the mix, is it adding mud, is it too weak, is it clashing with with the other contents. as you listen and familiarize yourself with each track independently, you will find it a lot easier to notice the problems with each area instead of trying to listen to the whole mix and focus in on the problems from there. Its as simple as breaking it down into its smaller parts rather than trying to bite off more than you can chew. It also adds order as you work from the low end up as the problematic low frequencies become immediately obvious. When your low end kick and bass are overpowering and dynamically pumping through compressors and what not they tend to drown out all the other elements and so your focus is always being driven to the loudest parts and certain confusions can arise, you eq this, then eq that, while all the time it is the most obvious of things that are causing all the trouble.