For me: Rap / R&b= 1 day (or less), Pop = 1 1/2 day Indie Rock = 1 day
I typically try to spit these into half days if possible so I can come in with fresh ears.

The only thing id say differs for me from Jay's is instead of 1 hours its 2 hours. Ill turn it down if i am only gonna have an hour a song.

For me, the first tune usually takes a day and a half. Sometimes more. That includes setup, getting my vibe with the room and style of music, ect. After I get past the first mix, about 1.5 to 2 mixes a day, which for me is about 12 hours. Occasionally, not just for the sake of speed, I'll get 4 in a day. I like to do em fairly quick and then go back and have a second look at the ones I may have not nailed the first time around. I have found that if I force myself not to labor too long and get micro picky, I end up with better results. I learned this after repeatedly using rough mixes on projects as opposed to the "final" mix. On 2 occasions I can think of, mixes were chosen as masters after I "rough" mixed 12 or more tunes in one long session. My advice is if you are the tracking engineer and will be mixing later, don't do endless roughs even if the band wants em, cause it's easy to spend your inspiration. If you must do roughs, maybe set things up a little and have somebody else in the project finish it. When you are done recording everything and you do make some roughs, work quickly but take the time to do a good job and print it to the highest quality format you have available. You might be surprised down the road.

I agree with McSnare.
The endless roughs as they come in and redo vocals and guitars kills any ideas for teh final mix.
It is hard to be objective after you have worked on the same song for a lot of sessions.
At the end you just do not know if your coming or going with the mix.

Depends....
Most of the time: 2 songs a day....

Some songs are fast like 3 hours and others take 1,5 days. I never take more than 2 days. It's better to do it once again from zero.
When I'm mixing a whole album I really like to take the time and do some songs again, when I'm thinking they don't suit the rest of the project. I always mix every song of the record and decide at the very end which song gets a second chance.

It really depends on the length of the songs, and the amount of tracks that need to be weeded out. A production can be 75 tracks, but be so well arranged that it comes together in no time flat. More common would be the 75 track production that I end up bringing down to 48 tracks. On projects like that it can take me a day a mix plus some, as I have to find the mix and the production.

On most Pop/rock productions I'll average 1.5 to 2 a day. Some songs take a whole day, some take 4 hours.

To me, the key is to mix as fast as possible, but take as long as you need.

Mixerman

I tell clients that I average 1-4 hours per mix. They often look at me as I have 3 heads. After they see what happens in mix-mode they cool off. If I was working with bigger budgets, and an "upscale" room I might take longer. I mostly work at night. I like to finish a mix and start the next, but not finish it. The next night I start where I left off. I will have the basic balance and panning maybe the main effect and a good idea of "Mix moves" before I leave.

I really agree with Mixerman, McSnare, Jo and others.

One big issue is the quality of the original recording, arrangement and performances. Some songs just mix themselves; others require a lot of shit-polishing to make them shine. FWIW I would love to see more of the former and fewer of the latter.

Another issue is editing. Quite often I receive tracks that are in dire need of it, with choruses yet to be copied, final structure and cuts yet to be finished, or BVs yet to be chosen, etc. Especially with rap/R&B tracks where it is not uncommon to have 24-48 vocal tracks to sort out.

In these cases you have to spend a few hours getting the tracks sorted out before the non-editing part of the mix can begin. Since I usually start mixes alone for the first hours, this process often requires a phone call or two to the artist or producer to touch base and get their feedback and input.

Jon

Since I started this thread I might as well put my 2 cents in. I'm taking about 3-4 hours per song. That's for a 16 or 24 track project that I've recorded. Usually I don't need to do that much cleanup work, maybe edit out or record over some noise on the multitrack if anything. I also don't have automation which I think helps me move faster. The times when I'm at other studios and I have it I tend to take longer and do things with it that I normally wouldn't.

If I'm mixing a pop rock gem four hours out of the box... If things are close to setup in the outboard realm and minor tweaks are in order, 3 songs in eight hours. If I have to weed through a bunch of shit and max out the sonic landfill it'll take two packs and 5 clips.
I tend to disagree about having problems mixing projects that I tracked because I like to make decisions while tracking. This usually gets to the point where a moderately panned unity mix doesn't suck. Sometimes it's all downhill from there.
I will gladly pay you tuesday for a mix today.

If the tracks are *clean* it takes me 1.5 to 2 days for the first mix (48 tracks). After that it's a song a day. I always leave a mix up on the board over night and listen to it first thing in the morning (before breakfast) make a fix-it list and stick to it. I normally don't mix for longer than 8 hours a day with lots of breaks in between.

Another question: how many of you mix with your clients present? Or do you do rough mixes then bring in the client to make changes/suggestions?

Attached files

How long it takes gets a bit blurry for me. I'm all in Pro Tools, so I like to finish them quickly then take another look in a day or two. It gives me a better perspective on the record as a whole. Like was said above, I like to move along as fast as I can on the basic sounds and FX. It comes out better when I'm not thinking too much. That part takes about 4-6 hours for 48 tracks or so. From then on, it takes how long it takes. Music happens when it's ready. So do Mixes. It can take a while to get something perfect, especially when it was never a performance in the first place. I keep going til I can let the whole song play without reaching for the stop button.

Steve

I cannot really say I have an average, it all depends on the material, and the quality of the material. I hardly ever manage more than 1 song per day, and I have spend over 2 weeks on one song in the past, with a couple of different artists.

Until they're done and still sound good the next day!

LOL SP - that's very true.
Altough - that was even more so in the '70's, when you could swwooooon over the prefect mix one late night and think you just did the ultimate, and come in the next day, push play in anticipation........... and think "what the hell?????"
I think it was those "prohibited substances"

I do a lot of demo/low budget stuff between the full albums I get to stretch out on, and on many of those an hour a song is a luxury.

In some ways, that's been good for me. I generally don't use any EQ, compression, or other effects on rough mixes- pan, level, dead fader. That can keep me on my toes in tracking, knowing someone is gonna take this sucker home for the night naked. This ends up helping in mixing.

Even when I use full automation, I rarely go over 3-5 hours a song, although I don't like doing 3 a day.

Of course, we'll see how that changes when the fully automated board goes out the door in a week and a half, and the completely non-automated board comes back in. No question of leaving it on the board if I'm close, for me- I have no problem remembering a decent number of fader moves when I'm mixing, but when I wake up the next morning, it's all gone.

I gotta start labeling things.

Originally posted by Jon Best:

Of course, we'll see how that changes when the fully automated board goes out the door in a week and a half, and the completely non-automated board comes back in. No question of leaving it on the board if I'm close, for me- I have no problem remembering a decent number of fader moves when I'm mixing, but when I wake up the next morning, it's all gone.

I gotta start labeling things.[/QB]

Welcome to the world of buying audio products backwards!

For contrast, I have no clients, I am a semi-professional project studio recordist, and I have taken up to 40 hours to mix a single track.

I am either insane, or I enjoy noodling with minute details, perhaps as a learning experience.

Sometimes, also, its just plain fun to see how shiny you can make a turd.

What about the other question: are the clients with you while you're mixing?
For my part I like to mix alone and come into the vibe of the song, which isn't always easy, but when I'm done the client is mostly happy (only very minor tweaks).
But when I don't get the feel (because there is no feel in the song ;) )it can be very difficult for both.

The budget usually dictates the mix time as well the complexity of the tracks.
For a 24-track project a minimum of 2-3 hours a song for automated mixing.
I explain it to clients like this:
If you loop a 4 minuute song you can get 15 passes in an hour.
Are you going to be ready to commit that mix to eternity after 15 or 30 passes?
Can you listen continually for 2 hours without
discussing the mix?
It also depends on if I cut the tracks or not.
Cleaning up someone else's mess takes longer.Cleaning up my own mess takes time..
If the client fancy's himself a "Producer" and wants to experiment it will take longer.
I've spent 45 minutes on an automated master fade only to have the mastering engineer re-fade.
And then if you're in a DAW and want to edit and tune even longer.
I'm currently mixing a 13 song independant project. We have 4 days to mix.
Day one I set up,aligned the 2tk,got 3 in the can and one in the oven for next morning.
But we spent 2 days editing,comping,cleaning,tuning and tweaking.
If things go OK,we'll get 4 more on Day 2,then have 2 days for 5 more which means maybe we can go out to dinner on Day 3.
Day 4 we finish,render,back-up,clean up,and make copies.
I like the day and a half scene.Get in to the vibe of the song for the day,sleep on it,and put it to bed in the morning and get the next one going after lunch.
"Analysis Paralysis" is a potential threat and sometimes mixes done in the heat of the moment possess a quality that's impossible to duplicate.
A mix is somewhat like a massage, it can take more time and money for a "happy ending".

Originally posted by Austin Hudley:
The budget usually dictates the mix time as well the complexity of the tracks.
For a 24-track project a minimum of 2-3 hours a song for automated mixing.
I explain it to clients like this:
If you loop a 4 minuute song you can get 15 passes in an hour.
Are you going to be ready to commit that mix to eternity after 15 or 30 passes?
Can you listen continually for 2 hours without
discussing the mix?

That's a good way to put it. I hadn't ever thought of it like that. I usually get my album clients to buy 2" reels after explaining to them how much longer it takes to work on Adats because of waiting for them to lock. I've never had someone cutting 9-15 songs say "we'll go with Adats" after that talk. Now maybe I can spend more time mixing.

It depends on the band and the budget and whether or not I did the tracking. I'm a bottom feeder compared to most of you guys who have posted. I usually am tracking young bands who have never been in a studio and have no money. They want to come in and track 10 songs and walk out with a mix of those songs at the end of a session. When it comes time to pay I get a small pile of crumpled bills extracted from everyones pocket and I always feel that I'm taking their food money for the next week (sux to be me) If a guy has beer on his breath he won't have his share of the pile, but hey I digress.
I come from a live back ground and lately find myself disliking very much slick production, so by the time we cut the vocals I have a mix pretty much happening. I never have more than 24 tracks, what the fuck do you put on 75 tracks? I guess I have no imagination. So I figure that I get to spend about 20 minutes on a mix, but I'm mixing pretty much from the moment the first mic goes on the first amp, I can't really seperate the mixing from the tracking. If the dude can't play the freaking thing we move on to the next tune. And if the band has a strong vision of the tune that's better, but I have no trouble telling them what to play, if they don't or I don't like their direction, but I'm old and grumpy and seem to be able to pull it off, although some guys do react when I walk into the room and change the tone of their amp.
I found I had trouble with the mixfest thing 'cause I didn't do the tracking and there were a lot of things I would have done differently at the tracking stage. I think if the tune is tracked right and produced right at the beginning the mix is easy. But perhaps that's why I'm making zip these days and you guys are driving the Porches. take care Logan

Hey, don't get down on yourself man, there's nothing wrong with being punk.

I find that drinking beer really helps a mix along. After the 9th or 10th beer, the questions veer away from "hmm, is it really OK to cut 450Hz given that its a fundamental frequency, or should I remix?" and progress toward "AM I GONNA MIX THIS CRAP ALL NGIHT OR AM I GONNA GO PLaY IT FOR SOME CHICKS?!@#?"

ymmv

Hey guys -

Hey McSnare - still sporting the only true R&R haircut? How's NYC, or did you do that?

Anyway, my mixes run anywhere from a few minutes (film score) to 18 hours. The 18 will usually span a sleep period. I also start slow and accelerate through the project.

Oddly enough, after 20+ years I'm actually getting better at mixing, and faster too.

Also, if I'm by myself, meaning no other producer-types around (artist only) I go about twice as fast. And it sounds better.

But maybe I should just learn to play nice...

Happy New Year
JW

Hey, I'm a rec. arts student and find that with everything I do, I learn something new. That said, I recorded a 4 piece jazz band 2 weeks ago. Very tight players which was a pleasure to work with. Firstly, I found that micing them was a snap. We worked on a minimalist principal and kept the whole thing under 16 tracks, relying mainly on the ambience of the group as a whole. My comment is this... upon mixing the work, the band seemed uninterested in sticking around and told us that they'd be happy as long as it was a clean mix etc. We (fellow students) spent some time putting together what we pretty close to what seems to be the jazz norm. The prob. that we had was that being that they weren't there to give us input, after receiving it, there were certain things that they wanted done differently. (subtleties etc.) I now wonder if I should always insist on a member being there at some point to hear it before we bounce it all down to CD. Also, unlike other rock bands that I've recorded, I found that getting a mix up while recording the jazz band was really easy as we kept it so simple. Does anyone else find jazz an easier genre to work with for these reasons?
H new Y

Johnny Boy,
Good to see your post. New York is still the greatest city on Earth, and I'm loving being here.
Hope your holiday season has been good and have a great new year. Yep, still have the haircut.
Dave
ps the Islanders Rule

The beauty of working with acoustic jazz or classical projects is that once you get a good mix of the first tune, most of the rest of the CD will usually be 95% mixed as well. So you really can often get away with having the artists input on one "representative" song, and then use that sound as a standard for the rest of the project, with those mix settings as a starting point. Often mixing the rest of the CD is just a matter of doing a little clean up, goosing up solos, etc.

Originally posted by pandamonkey:
I now wonder if I should always insist on a member being there at some point to hear it before we bounce it all down to CD. Also, unlike other rock bands that I've recorded, I found that getting a mix up while recording the jazz band was really easy as we kept it so simple. Does anyone else find jazz an easier genre to work with for these reasons?

I almost always have someone from the band here when I mix. The few times I haven't it's come back to bite me. I find that good musicians are easy to record regardless of style. Usually jazz musicians are better players then the rock guys so it tends to be easier to record and mix.

I like to have the artist there too, but I also like to get a head start on the mix alone, unless the project is in a genre in which I have no experience. The "pre-artist" time can be useful and more efficient for setting up the basic plates, rooms, delays, etc. as well patching in processors and doing general clean-up. If I can get everything sounding in the ballpark, the artist can concentrate on the "artistic" elements of the mix - adjusting the balances, riding vocals, adding any special fx, muting superfluous elements, etc.

The added bonus is that if I've already done a lot of the grunt work and then had a nice break, when the artist comes in both of our minds and ears are fresher for fine tuning.

I am on a real bitch of a song now..

I am tweaking at it so it will have taken me 3 days I suppose.. in all. A lot of that is editing aranging and sheer dread of the task / slowness.
(it's a little like Heroes & Villans by the Beach Boys LOTS of harmonies / different sections)

I charge per track so it's up to me although there are usualy deadlines.

Clients turn up for the last 4 hours or so..

Usualy 1 or 1.5 days per track. Overnight review is good..

:)

Jules

I second the earlier post about vocals. If there are a lot of (uncomped) bg vox parts (many times in big R&B tracks), it takes a while to sort through and balance. I find this type of editing really saps my energy and vibe, so I always implore my clients to do their work first.

Having a producer or bandmember there is important. Normally, I have them come in later, after I have a picture to show them. If they start to micromanage the little stuff, it is probably not the right marrige- ok for a night, but real bad for everyone (and the music) for a whole album.