Mixing Discussion

[Mark Richards]

We each have our own approach to creating music, based on numerous variables.
Following up on my prior post, this is my hybrid process.

Recording: Tracking is done using a TASCAM DP-24 Portastudio.
Reasons
For me, fast; efficient; ease of use for setup, overdubs, bouncing, editing; ability to focus on music creation.

Objective
Create each track with the approximate dynamic range and level required for the final mix.

Outcome
Placing all faders at unity gain should result in a rough mix approximating the desired final stereo mix. Assess the rough mix for any issues, and correct the individual tracks by overdubbing or recording new takes using Virtual Tracks. Once satisfied with the rough mix, use the Mixdown module to print a stereo working mix to help plan the mixing phase. This might also include using the Master module to print a rough master to help identify possible mastering considerations to be taken into account when creating the final stereo mix. The last step is to export the individual tracks from the DP-24 for import to a D.A.W. for mixdown.

Mixing: My mixdowns are done using a D.A.W. (Harrison's Mixbus7).
Reasons for Using a D.A.W.
Ability to automate the final mix; availability of a wide range of tools (plug-ins) to help polish and shape the final mix; availability of multiple buses for creating sub-mixes and applying dedicated FX.

Objective
A polished final stereo mix that requires only minor tweaking in the mastering stage.

Outcome
EQ, FX, compression, and limiting are applied only to the individual tracks or the sub-mix buses. In creating the final mix, I don't use any EQ, FX, compression, or limiting on the stereo master bus other than perhaps subtle reverb if needed to augment the overall sound of the final mix. The final stereo mix is then exported for mastering.

Caveat
I keep the stereo master bus clean for mixdowns. IMO, one of the most critical mistakes when using a D.A.W. is to think of the stereo master bus literally as the "Master Bus" rather than the "Final Stereo Mix Bus", and load up the stereo master bus with mastering tools. Doing this, IMO, makes it difficult, and in the hands of the less experienced impossible, to create a product polished enough for distribution. This is because the balance (mix) engineer is now working at cross purpose in trying to simultaneously create the best mix possible (a micro/track-focused process) while also doing the job of the mastering engineer, which is to provide the best overall listening experience (an holistic, macro process). So my advice is: Always keep those two processes separate.

Mastering: There are three ways I can master my final stereo mix.
(A) I can import the final mix back into a stereo track of my DP-24, run the track through the Mixdown module, then use the Mastering module’s tools to create the master song.

(B) I can use a stand-alone mastering program. Depending on the song, either TC-Electronic's Finalizer or IK Multimedia's Lurssen Mastering Console. The final stereo mix is imported, mastering tools are applied, and then I print the master.

(C) I can create a new D.A.W. mastering project, import the final stereo mix, and master it by applying various mastering tools on the stereo master bus. This can be particularly useful if mastering a set of songs that require homogeneous characteristics. In Mixbus for example, I mute all the imported songs initially. Each song in turn is unmuted, mastered using the same chain of tools, and saved as its own sub-project (in Mixbus, these are called "Snapshots"). In the snapshot, only the chosen mastered song and its mastering tweaks appear as unmuted. To create each song's master, I activate the relevant snapshot, and print the master.

 

[Mark Richards]

This sticky thread has been quiet for a while, so I thought y'all might be interested in the mixing and mastering process for a project I just finished.

The task was to re-mix and re-master in stereo a verrry old four track multi-track session tape.

Long and short of it, I took up the challenge and the client was happy with the result, so I thought I'd share the process I went through. Not that y'all may come across such an old tape anytime soon; but rather that you might be able to apply some of the things I did to your own projects.

You can read the project plan here; and listen to the outcome here.

If you own a portastudio that has virtual tracks, a similar construction of a "perfect" song using copy/past is also possible, no D.A.W. required. The methodology can be found in the "Production Tips" sticky thread of the "2488/DP-24/32/SD" forum (look in the first post index for the tips on using virtual tracks).

 

[-mjk-]

I'm no CLA but was rather surprised hearing him say a lot of things that I have said over the years and using some of the same techniques that I've come to understand and use in my own mixing workflow. Recently there has been some forum discussion on depth and soundscape and this series by Chris L0rd-Alge is very worthwhile viewing:

 

[Mark Richards]

I'm a firm believer in his philosophy. I'm working on a remaster now for a client using a stereo final mix that's practically dry. If I have time tomorrow, maybe I'll put up a before/after clip just to show what a difference creative use of delay and reverb can make to the excitement of a song.

I chuckled when he called out descriptors like "organic", "natural", "warm", "analog" as stupid, boring "BS". He sure isn't shy with his opinions.

Rule #1: Bust down the rules and barriers and just make your mix sound cool.
Rule #2: Always follow rule #1.

Love it!

​

 

[-mjk-]

Lol, I know. It's because those terms didn't exist before the DAW revolution. Why would someone say, that a track needs to sound more analog, when it was done on analog tape on an analog console? Why would someone say it needs to sound more organic? The terms that I used to hear where if people thought something sounded too metallic or, artificial. I cannot ever recall in my career somebody talking about adding warmth to a sound.

Please do your demonstration clip for us.

 

[Mark Richards]

Please do your demonstration clip for us.

Here's the demo clip.
Video Delinquent
© Ron McClendon/Rhett Palmer. All Rights Reserved.
℗ (Remaster) Creekside Recording Studio. All Rights Reserved

Background
Part of a project to memorialize digitally the client’s catalog of songs created in the 1980s.
Artist: Rhett Palmer and Session Musicians.

Purpose
Demonstrate the impact of applying reverb and delay FX to add depth.

Source
1983 Client Master: 2-Track analog demo tape, 15 ips, no FX except for slight slapback on main vocal.

Process

• Convert 2-Track analog tape to digital stereo file at 16 bit/44.1 sample rate.
• Create a 1 minute DRY clip mastered to -12 LUFS.
• Apply reverb and delay FX.
• Create a 1 minute WET clip mastered to -12 LUFS.
• Create a combined 2 minute clip demonstrating the impact of adding the reverb and delay FX.

 

[-mjk-]

 

[-mjk-]

Here's the demo clip.

Massive difference!

 

[shredd]

Massive difference!

Totally.
As a rank amateur, I've always marveled at how just the right touch of reverb, delay, or other common FX, when used judiciously, can make a MOUNTAIN of difference!!!

 

[-mjk-]

This is insane! I had to post this for anyone who uses plug-ins.

I was interested in iZotope's Insight 2, which is a comprehensive metering plugin. Great for Mastering and also post-production of non-music projects. Regular cost is USD$199. iZotope emailed me a site-wide 50% off coupon "JOLLY50" (anyone can use) that takes 50% off everything store-wide. I was just about to pull the trigger and get Insight 2 for USD$99 when I saw this:

The iZotope Holiday Bundle

This bundle is USD$49 and includes Insight 2, plus perhaps one of the greatest reverbs ever made, Stratus by Exponential Audio.

The Holiday Bundle comes with 3 other plugs that you may find useful. Not so much for me but to get Insight 2 and Stratus for USD$49 is incredible. Stratus alone is normally USD$99.

Stratus is designed for creating soundscapes with uncanny realism and has been used on motion picture production to design spaces with very detailed control over the parameters. It is unbelievable for music production. I'm currently working on a project with orchestration and I put the entire orchestra in the best Chamber I have ever heard.

If you want this you'd better move fast!

 

[BDolzani]

Hi everyone, this is a great thread. I'm finally up and running in my small home studio with the DP24 and small but mighty front end: 3 channels: a UA 6176 strip, an LA-610 strip, and a BAE 1073 and ADL 1000 combo. Playing and recording all instruments myself one at a time (full folk/rock band).

I'm at mixing process decision time and thought I'd post here, following these techniques/tips listed:

@Mark Richards - do you mix completely in the box? I've downloaded Reaper and found it a good alternative to PT, as I have no audio interface (yet?). I'm wondering if I should try and use my outboard gear for mixing as well as tracking. I also have no patchbay, and also have 2 old Lexicon reverbs from 20-25 years ago that could be cool to use.

OR, I stick to in the box, buy a small but mighty handful of plug ins for mixing and just transfer files from the Tascam to Macbook and do modern DAW life (not against it but I love gear more than software).

Lastly, is there a good digital mixer option, such as the Tascam DM's which I don't think they are making anymore? Buying a fragile mixer like that on Reverb seems very risky.

I would love to have/use as much outboard or analog style (physical mixer) as possible, if possible without a lot of headaches.

Thanks for any suggestions in advance-
cheers
brian

 

[BDolzani]

Perhaps this forum is much like music in that 'it's all been said before' .

I think I'm leaning towards simple in the box mixing instead of pondering even more (beloved) gear, after reading this thread: https://www.tascamforums.com/threads/console-automation-systems.8535/

(edit: having said that, it seems a shame to let my great front end comps + EQ sit idle while looking to repurchase plug ins to do the same job as they could)...dangit.

My apologies for treading the same ground as others have covered. If anyone has any further thought I'll be listening.

brian

 

[-mjk-]

There is no reason why you can't mix ITB with outboard gear too.

I would be lost without my consoles (yes, plural). My X32 is my interface and I mix on it and record the mixdown track in the DAW. Presently I master ITB, however I am considering some hardware options.

Just do whatever you need to get the sound outcome you desire.

 

[BazzBass]

@BDolzani I'm in the same boat, I have a DP32SD and am debating mixing and mastering all on the one machine, or try to remember how to use Reaper on a new laptop I have...what to do , what to do?
I haven't used Reaper for 2 years and I will have to relearn all the right mouse clicks hehe

I could just use the DP to track everything then transfer into Reaper for editing/ mixing/mastering...

 

[-mjk-]

I could just use the DP to track everything then transfer into Reaper for editing/ mixing/mastering...

Many people - more than you know - are doing just that. If left permanently set up, the DP can be very fast for recording.

 

[BDolzani]

I've decided on getting a UA Volt1 interface just for my speakers, using the UA plug ins, and staying ITB. I did try Reaper and it's very light-load on the Mac, and easy to dump the files into, however I'm probably going to get an Artist Pro Tools subscription as I do find the PT interface to be very natural from my Digidesign 002 days (of which I still have the rack interface collecting dust).

cheers all, thanks.

 

[-mjk-]

Save yourself all that money and headache and just install a Reaper theme that matches the DAW that you're familiar with. Then you can enjoy the massive benefits using Reaper for 1/10th the cost.

 

[BazzBass]

here is the math from the Reaper forum

For those of you who may think that Reaper is overpriced - anyone?

LOL.

Just paid $400 for one year of Pro Tools Ultimate, to keep it up to date through the end of next year.

Let's do the math:

- Reaper:$60 for a non-commercial license that lasts around ten years. $0 for you cheap ass pirates.

- Pro Tools: $3000 for new license. $400 to renew support for one year. That's Ultimate, mind you, with full functionality.

Functionality - exactly the same! In fact Reaper had features years ago that PT only recently got. Unlimited tracks, grouping, and so on.

 

[BDolzani]

Save yourself all that money and headache and just install a Reaper theme that matches the DAW that you're familiar with. Then you can enjoy the massive benefits using Reaper for 1/10th the cost.

Maybe so...I haven't pulled the trigger on anything yet. With Reaper I can use my current 8gb RAM laptop...(I had Mac Mini in my sites, perhaps still will at some point). As PT needs 16GB. Not sure how much power I'll have/need for plug ins with 8GB and Reaper.

I definitely do not love bloated money grabbing systems, but another studio friend was saying bite the bullet and just get the industry standard PT to share sessions etc if I need to (with any/most studios say for mixing). However at the moment I'm excited to fully mix myself. My orig plan was in fact to only track at home.

I'm still arguing with myself over interface - do I get one with a bunch of I/O so I can integrate my outboard gear (pres and comps and a couple old Lexicon MPX 100's) - yet that would also require $200+ in cables and wrangling them 10 feet across my room. Or just get a simple interface that just drives my monitors and save a few hundred.

 

[BDolzani]

@BazzBass - it's definitely not overpriced! Only for people in the 'free only' life-mindset.

I think the PT Artist route is only $100 a year, no license or Carbon interface needed. But $50 iLok required.

I'm sure I could get used to the Reaper interface - and @-mjk- I'll have to look into the themes. At first glance I thought they only changed colors etc.