Any advice? Is it EQ? Am I just a suck engineer stuck in a profession that has lied to me for the past eigth years?

Most of the stuff I hear from users of poorfools has many mix issues. For seperation, eq is big part and most of it. But it is likely that part of your problem is that just because your tracks sound great by themselves is one thing but a much different thing is having great sounding tracks that also sound great when mixed together. Knowing how to choose gear and use it to blend in advance of mixing durring tracking is also a skill to be learned and mastered in addition to just mixing. 8-years is barely paying your dues in recording and mixing assuming they were 8-years of good experience and not just 8-years of hobby part time wanking. Not everyone is up to the task or will ever get good at it no matter how many years they put in, or how much gear they buy or use, or how easy and automated the hardware and software becomes.

You might want to try mixing with the least amount of tracks as you can get away with using nothing but simple eq and see if that helps. If and when you master that, then add the missing parts and/or play with dynamics and effects to try to take it to the next level.

I'm a home studio wanker, as AG put it. I just finished a project for a 5 song EP with a Punk/Alt rock band.

I did all the tracking myself and the tracks came out great. But at mix time I quickly realized that I didn't have the experience necessary to get all the elements up front at the same time. In essence, they wanted the guitars, drums and vocals in your face while still hearing the bass clearly.

I had a pro mixer come in and mix it. He's a great friend and agreed to do it on spec, as the EP is going to be paid for by a record company the band is negotiating with.

Man, did I learn a TON from watching and listening to his work on my equipment! I highly recommend this method of educating yourself.

Originally posted by Screws:
...as the EP is going to be paid for by a record company the band is negotiating with.

Check with a recording-industry attorney first!

Make sure you aren't giving away the rights to your material by having the studio fund the EP on speculation. My daughter's band is in LA the end of January for the final work on their EP, but we are paying the studio time to retain the rights.

As a "hack" mixer and someone who realizes that I'd NEVER want to be a mix engineer, I'd DEFINITELY look for someone to come in to mix for you. Other than that, I'd take a bit of the "reckless" approach. Throw up the faders, get a vibe based on levels only. Then, if the low-mids are muddy to your ear, begin to scope for the offender. Snare not grabbing you, mess with some compression, etc. Back down EQ before adding to others to make up the difference (I'm sure you and everyone else already knew that!!!!). I TOTALLY agree that things solo'd up may sound wonderful on their own, but you're not going for 4 or 5 mixes within the song, you're going for one great colaboration! Especially since you're working the rock thing, I'd give this approach a try and see if it works. Everyone has their way, and I've seen this approach work very successfully on more than one occasion.

Thanks AG,

I've paid my dues and I've worked for hard-asses like you so I'm not a 'home studio wanker' as you put it.

If anyone else could help me out with an actual answer to my question that would be great. I know how to mix and how to track, I'm just looking for little things that could help improve my game a little.

One thing that I have noticed is that when I was working on real desks with tape or RADAR in the past, I didn't have the kinds of seperation problems I'm running into now. Is this a common ProTools issue?

Thanks again,
Kevin

Which PT converters are you using, and what version of the program?

You should post an example of your work. That way we could hear the problems and comment on them specifically. Good luck. :c:

Thanks Levihoward,

I'm with you on all of what you said. I've worked with outside mixers and I've had great results. I also never want to be 'a mix engineer' exclusively. I just want to get better at it.

Kevin

Most of my projects I do the drums at another studio through 888/24's and then my home studio is just an LE system with an Apogee Rosetta for overdubs. My home studio is just temporary as I'm moving into a bigger commercial facility this spring.

I CAN tell you this.....

I had some of the PT stuff back in the 90's (oh so ancient ago!) and then moved over to the MOTU stuff due to programming so much and the MAS format, blah, blah, blah..... Then about 2 years ago made the change to RME converters and heard an immediate, ridiculously wonderful difference in the stereo image, sheen and tightness in the low end, etc. I know it's all subjective, but I've heard a lot of just so-so stuff on the PT converters. I know a lot of guys that run RADAR converters on their PT front ends for this very reason.

Sometimes when a mix gets stale, and I find myself in your situation, I will mix with all the pan pots centered. I try to get the best mix where I can hear everything clearly. THEN I will give every track its' own piece of real estate.
I discovered that mixing in mono, if there is a phaseing problem, you will know it

I second Chance's insight. I'm always back and forth from mono to stereo. Really shows phasing, too much/ too little eq, etc. Kind of like listening to a mix very quietly- if it sounds good that way, it'll definitely kick when it's loud! :D

post some samples.. i want to hear some indie rock baby!
also, what rme/hammerfall stuff are you speaking of?

Personally, I purchased the Multiface for my Powerbook setup for my production away from home. Was thrilled enough that I immediately purchased the PCI card and use it at home as well now. Very happy with it and plan to move up into some of their "higher end" converters soon. Everyone I know using them swears by them.

OF, I totally agree with Chance about checking things in mono. Also, whenever I start having imaging problems, it's usually because of reverb or effects return panning, as well as the low end nature of reverb muddying things up. Can you/do you EQ your verb? Try mixing things totally dry to start, and add reverb a track at a time from there. I have to include a quote from an intervue with Hugh Padgam (Sting mix engineer); Q: What makes a great mix? A: A great arrangement.

Many good things said here! One possible problem with mixes is the lack of definition even though each track sound great by themselves. One thing that could be a problem is the overuse of EQ that many of us is guilty of. We always try to find the right sound firstly by tweaking the EQs. EQs will always introduce phase-issues, and then when you add the tracks together the mix just tend to mud up. So it is a good thing to listen i mono, so that if there is some instrument that dissapears in the mix it will most likely be a phase-issue somewhere. Or perhaps get a phase-meter?

My suggestion is to use as little EQ's as possible and try to find the right sound allready in the recording phase with mic-positioning and choosing the right mic. It will make the mix clearer if done wisely. (Separate discussion) Also consider the mic characteristics such as omni (no phase problems off-axis), cardioid, eight and so on... The concept is to get it to sound as great as possible directly to tape (or HD) and then just "caress" the EQs in a subtle manner to heighten the sound. If at all! :D

First let me clarify, I am not a mix engineer, although I did that part of the process for a number of years.

I am a mastering engineer and I can tell you from painful experience that you need to get the best set of speakers you can afford and get a place to mix that is not full of acoustical problems.

We daily get mixes in that are mixed on inferior monitoring equipment and when the client brings it to us to master it has BIG problems. Biggest problems are lack of depth in the mix, overuse of EQ, overuse of processors, panning problems, and having a lot problems with high and low frequencies that are over done or underdone because the speakers that the person used for mixing were inadequate and fell off in level in the bass and the treble. They also have rooms that are not correctly setup and so you get people putting holes or mountains in the frequency response where they have acoustical nightmares in the their rooms.

To site a recent example.

Client brings in a project that was done in a commercial "basement studio" meaning the engineer got paid for doing the recording and mixing. The problem with the music was that it was over processed and was out of balance. I went to the studio at the request of the band to talk to the engineer. His two rooms are well done and his control room is very nice EXCEPT that it is about 20 feet long and 6 feet deep. One of his speaker is sitting about 2 feet from his left ear the other speaker is 10 feet away so the band who are sitting on a couch can here what he is doing. He also uses Sony ES equipment designed for the home. Everything sounds good on them. He also has an equalizer on the speakers which has a smiley EQ setting. He put the whole mix though a Behringer all in one do everything box and widened the stereo field plus did his eq'ing using the speaker setup he had. He thought he did a wonderful job with the mix but since he could not accurately hear what he was doing the whole mix sounded too wide and was badly eq'd.

Good mixing is an art. There are people that can do an excellent mix on AURATONES or NS-10s but they are USE to hearing things on these speakers. My advice is to do the mix in a good room with good speakers and good acoustics with top quality equipment and someone who knows what they are doing sitting in as producer or a second set of ears.

Hope this helps.

[ January 28, 2004, 10:55 AM: Message edited by: Thomas W. Bethel ]

Originally posted by Thomas W. Bethel:
To site a recent example.

Client brings in a project that was done in a commercial "basement studio" meaning the engineer got paid for doing the recording and mixing. The problem with the music was that it was over processed and was out of balance. I went to the studio at the request of the band to talk to the engineer. His two rooms are well done and his control room is very nice EXCEPT that it is about 20 feet long and 6 feet deep. One of his speaker is sitting about 2 feet from his left ear the other speaker is 10 feet away so the band who are sitting on a couch can here what he is doing. He also uses Sony ES equipment designed for the home. Everything sounds good on them. He also has an equalizer on the speakers which has a smiley EQ setting. He put the whole mix though a Behringer all in one do everything box and widened the stereo field plus did his eq'ing using the speaker setup he had. He thought he did a wonderful job with the mix but since he could not accurately hear what he was doing the whole mix sounded too wide and was badly eq'd.

Good mixing is an art. There are people that can do an excellent mix on AURATONES or NS-10s but they are USE to hearing things on these speakers. My advice is to do the mix in a good room with good speakers and good acoustics with top quality equipment and someone who knows what they are doing sitting in as producer or a second set of ears.

Hope this helps.

That guy is neither a professional nor is his studio a commercial studio...unless you take the literal meanings of "professional" & "commercial"; i.e. if you get paid you are "pro" etc.

My experience is that (as long as everything is decently tracked, which seems to be the case here) separation problems are an arrangement-issue. Often one guitar too much or that one magic overdub that makes the song, or at least you think so in the spur of the moment. That the song is totally dependent on that certain overdub, and when you mute it, by accident, the mix sounds great. My advise 1: Kill your darlings, mute one track at a time to see which instrument eats up the rest. When you find it, mute it, bring it down, pan it out, eq it. Whatever that solves the problem. No overdub is sacred. My advise 2: Make it sound as good as ever possible with only drums, bass, one harmony instrument and vocals. Then blend in the rest. After all the average music-consumer listens to the vocals and sometimes even feels a great swing or groove, and gets a sense of the mood in the song. The rest secondary.

OpenForum,
I am going to take a guess and say that your problem might have something to do with 100-400 Hz. That is an area where definition gets lost and mud builds up. The toms, electric guitars, bass, and kick all have a presence here and the trick is to utilize the freqs wisely. Cutting 100-400 Hz on some of the instruments will help the others to come through. Obviously there are no formulas that will work for all mixes, and the arrangement of each song, the timbre of each specific instrument in the mix, and the playing style will all make unique demands on what you do.
The best place to come to grips with these freqs is during tracking. Mic placement can help with getting some of it done, and I am not above EQing on the way to tape as most of my work stays in-house for the mix (not our current job, though). Compression can be your friend.
This may not be your problem at all, or you may be up to speed on this already, but this may be useful info for others.
YMMV, and just because this is the way I work doesn't mean it is the only way to do it. David

Originally posted by OpenForum:
Thanks AG,

I've paid my dues and I've worked for hard-asses like you so I'm not a 'home studio wanker' as you put it.

If anyone else could help me out with an actual answer to my question that would be great. I know how to mix and how to track, I'm just looking for little things that could help improve my game a little.

One thing that I have noticed is that when I was working on real desks with tape or RADAR in the past, I didn't have the kinds of seperation problems I'm running into now. Is this a common ProTools issue?

Thanks again,
Kevin

A lot of the mixes I get into master are done on Pro Tools. Many of them seem over processed (hey if I have 32 plugins I am going to use them on every channel) but some of them are VERY WELL DONE.

I have been at a few Pro Tools mixing sessions and the mix seems to get merky very quickly more so then if they were done on a "normal" console. They don't sound as clean nor as transparent.

Not sure the reason. Maybe the format. Or the converters. We had an Digi 002 in for trial and I did not like the converters. Then we tried the MBox and it sounded better to my ears.

Best of Luck!

[ January 29, 2004, 05:36 AM: Message edited by: Thomas W. Bethel ]

That guy is neither a professional nor is his studio a commercial studio...unless you take the literal meanings of "professional" & "commercial"; i.e. if you get paid you are "pro" etc. [/QB]

Yes I meant that he was a "professional" in the sense that he was getting paid for his time.

There are lots of studios around who are run by people who say they are audio engineers but they have neither the credentials nor the expertise to be called either an audio engineer or professional.

I guess they don't want to be called "knob twiddlers" or rip off artist so they call themselves Audio Engineers. This guy was one step ahead of them. At least he could hear what was wrong when he heard the CD on good equipment. He just couldn't hear it in his own studio.

Originally posted by Marcus Black:
My experience is that (as long as everything is decently tracked, which seems to be the case here) separation problems are an arrangement-issue. Often one guitar too much or that one magic overdub that makes the song, or at least you think so in the spur of the moment. That the song is totally dependent on that certain overdub, and when you mute it, by accident, the mix sounds great. My advise 1: Kill your darlings, mute one track at a time to see which instrument eats up the rest. When you find it, mute it, bring it down, pan it out, eq it. Whatever that solves the problem. No overdub is sacred. My advise 2: Make it sound as good as ever possible with only drums, bass, one harmony instrument and vocals. Then blend in the rest. After all the average music-consumer listens to the vocals and sometimes even feels a great swing or groove, and gets a sense of the mood in the song. The rest secondary.

excellent advise Marcus! :c:

I will take a stab at this. This is my first post here, and I am an old geezer who worked professionally for several years in Hollywood CA, mostly in analog 24-tracks. I was on staff at several Grammy winning studios in the 70s and 80s. Hence, I have never used pro-tools, but I have done a lot of mixing. Feel free to smirk at my dated terminology.

The most amazing separation can be heard on the original 60s LPs where they always monitored and recorded with mono in mind and the stereo mix was an afterthought. Listen to "Meet the Beatles" and you will hear all the drums far left, vocals in the middle, and bass far right. Somehow it worked.

Here is a step by step of what I would do:

Start by listening to each track flat and dry. Not in "solo", mute the other tracks so you still have access to send/returns, etc. Get each track to sound good on its own. Do not over-EQ. One thing I learned the hard way is that if you are using EQ to get your "sound" you are doing something else wrong - settings on instrument, mic placement, etc. ALWAYS strive to get the perfect sound with NO EQ when recording tracks. Analogue recordists understand that EQ wreaks havoc with your sound integrity by introducing phase anomalies.

The goal should be that once you have the sound you want for each instrument you will not change it after you add the other instruments to the mix.

Since we are keeping separation in mind, you may need to use individual effects units for each instrument. Try to avoid making every sound "stereo" with a stereo chorus or other effect, Some instruments sound great that way, but if they all have it then you have mud.

Panning: Panning was always a big deal for me, and as I studied what other producers do I noticed that there is a standard for panning that almost all the pros use. Think of your stereo spectrum as a stage. You are in the audience watching the performance from the front row center. Where would all the instruments be?

Drums: if you are looking at a drummer, pan your set exactly like you see it; kick and snare in the middle, hi-hat slightly to the right, toms going high to low right to left, cymbals spread l/r at the end of the toms. Most mixes use full left/right spreads on stereo drums, but if clarity in separation is your goal you might trying limiting your drum spread between left/center and right/center. That way if you put a guitar hard left it will truly stand on its own.

Next: build your mix the standard way, add bass in the center by getting it tight with the kick.

Put up the rhythm instruments one at a time. Put a guitar far left or right, and a keyboard on the opposite side. If you have a stereo piano try putting the guitar on the left and spreading the two piano track between center and right.

Put the vocal in the middle. b/u vocals I usually record in double and split them hard l/r. You can accomplish the same with a digital delay.

For clarity in a mix avoid over-processing, especially using something like a stereo chorus on a send from all channels.

Another problem could definitely be the 'verb. I strive for a clean reverb sound, no wispy high freq or muddy low-mid repeating tails that never go away. Avoid tunnel or tube effects and/or flange effects in your reverb. It should be clean clean clean. Try A/Bing your mix with the echo and see how clean you can make the echo. Run it through faders you can EQ if you have to and roll off the high highs and low lows. For clarity in a mix try seeing how dry you can make it. Sometimes a track with almost no echo at all can sound pretty good.

Another factor: too much going on. Years of experience has taught me that the toughest decision a producer has to make is what NOT to throw into the mix. Sparcity, economy, brevity of sound gives your mix a chance to grow, to get bigger. Start small, get big.

Going back to the stage metaphor - your mix is your show. Like all good drama it need many elements - exposition, pacing, development.

cruisemates, that was a great post!! lots of info
:c:

Cruisemates, ditto on such a nice post. This post was a great summary of a book that I've found to be quite excellent:
The Mix Engineer's Handbook

What makes this book great is that the author does both a synthesis of interviews with many famous engineers, so that you get an overall feel of the process, like Cruisemates gave us, and then he publishes the interviews on a per-engineer basis. So you can see, in context, how George Massenburg or Bruce Swedien answer questions about EQ, compression, etc.

I try to read through at least some of this book every 3-6 months, and since I'm learning, I appreciate new aspects of what they're saying.

Minimal use of effects will be a great starting place to clear up any issues with muddy instruments.I personally mix with almost no echo,reverb, or any device which tends to lengthen the natural decay of the instrumental sections.I reserve the spatial effects for backing vocals,feature instrumental leads and a touch on the primary voice.Everything else thats the supporting infrastructure stays dry and is able to support clearly and cleanly in this way.

And it was said earlier and it bears repeating....NO PART IS SACRED...The arrangement can simply overpower the clarity of the instruments and even get in the way of the primary voice.Even though I am the primary overdubber on most of our recordings, I have no problem at all leaving chunks of my instrumental talent on the cutting room floor.When it comes to the mix, a lack of ego is always a good thing for the whole of the project.

I view the mix in three dimensions with the panning being the right to left aspect and the EQ and volume being front to back.Everything else is color and flash.

mixing is an artform all to itself.....proper use of eq's is essential. use effects and compressors sparingly as you will quickly start to squash the whole thing and lose seperation. if your mixing on protools, start with using no plug-in's and slowly start to bring them in as needed. less is more most of the time and keep in mind it will be further compressed in the mastering stage. try to keep things clear and your levels consistent.

Originally posted by cruisemates:
Start by listening to each track flat and dry. Not in "solo", mute the other tracks so you still have access to send/returns, etc. Get each track to sound good on its own. Do not over-EQ.

Cruisemates,

I am curious about this comment. I have often been advised not to EQ a track by itself as it should be heard in the context of the mix, with the other tracks, before you decide if you need to cut any frequencies and what frequencies those might be. I am wondering what you would have to say about this advice? Or perhaps i have misunderstood your comment?

Thanks for you helpful info.
Greg

This is kind of the same subject so here goes.
How do you get a sterio reverb not to collapse when auditioned in mono? or not as much.
I

Ron, Do you have the mix function on reverb unit at 100%? If not, then you have phasing going on between dry and wet signals, which will diminish the wet signal in mono.

Many reverbs will cancel out when combined or collapsed to mono, due out of phase info. One way to remedy this is to pan the reverb returns in at 9 and 3 o'clock instead of hard left right.

Thanks!

Originally posted by Chance:
I will mix with all the pan pots centered. I try to get the best mix where I can hear everything clearly. THEN I will give every track its' own piece of real estate.

I am brand new to mixing but got similar advise from an older pro when I started. He told me to mix dry and mono to start... the only thing I pan out are the drum overheads (after checking phase.)

It is funny, but if you cannot make it sound pretty darn good mono with no EQ or effects, it doesn't seem to get much better when you throw that stuff in.

One other thing I try to do is NOT solo instruments during initial mix. My tendency WAS to solo and tweak everything... Now I start with everything up and centered, automate my mutes for anything that just does not work/belong, resist soloing and make my initial tweeks with everything up. Once that is sounding pretty good I go back in to start spreading out the EQ, Reverb and Stereo spectrum.

Again, I am 100% home studio wanker, but these few things have helped me organize my time and improve my mixes.

Jim

How about this if it sounds better rough leave it alone do your mutes and rides and do not solo unless your setting up a gate or a ducker then go into a faux "over" mastering mode compress EQ and brickwall the master bus.
then work the eq and panning for specific tracks for while
and finally start working backwards taking things off the master bus.
It sometimes helps taking a mix to the final process too early
cheers

Mixing in mono first is good advice and can be very helpful in defining what the most important elements for the particular song are that you want or need to focus on. Very often I will print a mono mix and use it as a reference before I even worry about stereo mixing. Nothing wrong to solo an instrument and listen it's character or even tweak/process it as long as you know and understand that it is going to sound different in solo mode and that how is sounds in the mix is the more important thing to focus on and make adjustments for.

Kurt brings up a good point about how reverb can cancel if used in full L/R panning. In fact there are times when you can use that as a way to de-intensify a reverb. At times I will use a reverb with one half of it being mixing at different levels or just use half of the stereo reverb by it's self. Or even using one half of two different reverb types/units to further define a unique space or un-natural reverb effect. In these days where the vocals and other instruments tend to be more dry, these are methods that can be used to allow you to add reverb effects that are subtle and yet still appear mostly dry sounding until you really focus and listen for them.

Kevin, in your original post you said this was indie rock that you are trying to separate more in the mix. May I speculate that there is a lot of big guitars, perhaps power chords, or at least messy overdriven guitar sounds providing some of the main body of instrumentation and rhythm.

These kind of sounds can be a nightmare to mix, because they occupy so much `room' in the mix and clutter everything up. Also, they do not suit being subtle background colour, their very purpose is to be driving the song. You want the guitars to be really loud, but for the drums to simultaneously be really loud too. First tip; eq your snare drum really high, away from the guitars, you don't want some deep frequencies thudding through constantly, which can drown everything out but at the same time are not really heard in themselves, it seems that these low snare frequencies just impact on other parts of the mix without adding anything constructive.

With the guitars, often it's the high frequencies generated by overdrive pedals or high gain amp channels that can confuse a mix. These high freqs don't really contribute much to the tone, power or impact of a guitar overdrive sound, they are mere by-products of the wonderful distortion process. You could throw in a high shelf and maybe reduce everything from 3KHz and upwards by anything from 3 to 8 Db. Another option if you want to maintain a little air but reduce the harshest buzzy freqs is to just cut a lot around 4KHz or wherever the sore spot is.