Mike Senior - Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio

Jeff White · Post by **Jeff White** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:12 pm

I decided that my New Year's resolution #1 is continued education in audio/recording/mixing/mastering as well as studio space redevelopment and treatment. I bought Bob Katz's Mastering Audio last week, but I also picked up Mike Senior's Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio.

http://www.amazon.com/Mixing-Secrets-sm ... 078&sr=8-1

I just had to pass this on. Excellent book for anyone who owns a small studio, whether it is in your house, garage, rented space... from acoustic treatment to a simple step by step guide to mixing. I'm 3/4 of the way through on my first read and planning some extensive studio reconfiguring. Just bought a saw to cut frames for more 703, etc. It's gonna be a DIY kind of winter. Treating this book as gospel right now.

Just thought that I would pass it on!

Jeff

percussion boy · Post by **percussion boy** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:45 pm

Just got that book as well.

If you like that, you will probably also find his SOUND ON SOUND column interesting, where he does a mix every month of a song that's been submitted to him.

He's definitely one of those "Everything is permitted" kind of mixers -- changes the timing of notes, replays parts himself, etc.. I'm not sure I like that degree of messing with someone's music, but it's always been part of the business.

Have you downloaded all the audio file for the book yet?

vvv · Post by **vvv** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 3:37 pm

Terrific book, very informative.

He ran a contest at mixoff.org a cuppla months ago; I learned a lot.

Beat Poet · Post by **Beat Poet** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:24 pm

Might pick this up, cheers for the tip!

standup · Post by **standup** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:44 pm

So this guy, as a mixer, might come back to the artist and say 'Your guitar tone sucked, so I redid the part on my Motif keyboard?' just letting my imagination roam, but that doesn't sound good...?

percussion boy · Post by **percussion boy** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 7:01 pm

standup wrote:So this guy, as a mixer, might come back to the artist and say 'Your guitar tone sucked, so I redid the part on my Motif keyboard?' just letting my imagination roam, but that doesn't sound good...?

More like, "Your guitar tone sucked, so I doubled it with my Motif keyboard. Your timing sucked too, so I chopped certain notes out of your guitar part and moved them til they sounded in time to me."

A lot of people do this stuff nowadays, but it creeps me out to hear about it. What if the mixer is sometimes WRONG about what's good tone, good timing, etc.? Oops, too late, your music's been "improved."

The book seems very good, better than many others on the same subject.

Jeff White · Post by **Jeff White** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:52 pm

I'm 3/4 of the way through it. It's excellent, even for someone who has been doing this stuff 17 years in.

cgarges · Post by **cgarges** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:12 am

percussion boy wrote:More like, "Your guitar tone sucked, so I doubled it with my Motif keyboard. Your timing sucked too, so I chopped certain notes out of your guitar part and moved them til they sounded in time to me."

A lot of people do this stuff nowadays, but it creeps me out to hear about it. What if the mixer is sometimes WRONG about what's good tone, good timing, etc.? Oops, too late, your music's been "improved."

Yeah, I can't get behind doing that kind of thing without the band's consent.

I also get a little turned-off by books that claim to be giving away "secrets," but I'm sure it's a cool read.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

standup · Post by **standup** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:43 am

And who knows, this guy's way of working may not be obnoxious as I imagine. I guess if the artist gives him the title "Producer" and knows he'll mold the music to fit his tastes, then it's all good.

At the level I work at, it's more like documenting what the artist walks in the door with, and giving them an opening for what they hear in their head.

If we get into any micro-timing edits it's because the guy/gal who wrote the song is asking me to move something around because it bothers them. And I usually suggest we just re-record the part anyway.

cgarges · Post by **cgarges** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:48 am

I'm not opposed to working that way at all. I'm just opposed to someone going ahead and doing what they think is necessary and then presenting it to the band as "finished." I've seen a lot of guys NOT get repeat business as a result of doing that.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

Gregg Juke · Post by **Gregg Juke** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 11:47 am

>>>>A lot of people do this stuff nowadays, but it creeps me out to hear about it. What if the mixer is sometimes WRONG about what's good tone, good timing, etc.? Oops, too late, your music's been "improved."<<<<

++++And who knows, this guy's way of working may not be obnoxious as I imagine. I guess if the artist gives him the title "Producer" and knows he'll mold the music to fit his tastes, then it's all good.++++

^^^^I'm not opposed to working that way at all. I'm just opposed to someone going ahead and doing what they think is necessary and then presenting it to the band as "finished." I've seen a lot of guys NOT get repeat business as a result of doing that.^^^^

That's the thing-- I think roles are changing/adapting/moving considerably in the "new" music business. This would have been unthinkable in the past (at least unthinkable to make it public common knowledge). But "The Mixer" is now becoming the Uber-Producer; empowered to make any and all aesthetic decisions (based on track record, but as books like this come out, we all know poop rolls down hill), trumping producer, artist, A&R (because they're often chosen by A&R), and mastering engineer (at least by way of giving them a too-messed-up mix to begin with).

I remember reading a story from Tony Visconti (and this was _years_ ago, before Johnny Two-Buss Compression was the be all and end all) in which he explained that he was discussing a project he was working on with the record company that the artist was signed with. "It's coming along nicely," or some such pleasantries. The rep asked "Who's going to mix it?" TV responds "What the....? _I'm_ going to mix it, of course!" But by then, the assumption was already in-place that it wasn't a proper record without someone outside of the initial production team doing the mixing.

Over the years, the expectations of, and therefore the intrusiveness of, the discrete mixing engineer's heavy hand have only increased exponentially.

...From what I've seen and heard, anyway. What do I know? It's all self-contained low budget/no budget indie projects for me, where I, or myself and my partner have been the producer, engineer, studio musician, promo consultant, janitor, chief cook and bottle-washer...

GJ

joelpatterson · Post by **joelpatterson** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:45 pm

Welllllll... there ought to be some phase-change factor at play in all this... your mixer needs these God-like powers and permissions to transform the raw materials of the band's playing into the unearthly essence of something amazingly magnificent. Let him be the magician he (or she!) should be... the most horrendous possible scenario would be a mix by committee, everyone voting on what EQ to apply and then averaging all the answers. You never get to the supreme heights of ecstasy that way.

Buuuuuuuuuuuuut-- the results do have to speak for themselves. If the band hears the results and is not overwhelmed-- then something is amiss, either the mixer's judgement or the band's ears.

percussion boy · Post by **percussion boy** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:54 pm

Clarification:

Mike Senior's "Mix Rescue" column in SOUND ON SOUND is based on bands sending him mixes of their stuff that the band doesn't like -- they'll often point out specific wishes and complaints about the mix they want repaired in Senior's new mix.

At this point, Senior goes ahead, using every trick he knows , to try to arrive at a mix the band likes better. I think he sometimes does it more than once, based on the responose the band gives to his first try.

Senior DOESN'T mention asking permission to edit parts or play in new background parts himself, but it's no secret -- he talks about doing this in the column. Since everything is DAW, he isn't erasing any of the band's tracks to make room for his revisions.

It's all done on behalf of the band, in a non-destructive wqy. Some bands expect to have their tracks rescued nowadays. The whole idea still bothers me, but that's just me and I'm not making a living at this.

Sorry for the long post -- just felt like maybe I had misrepresented Senior's work somehow.

MicrophoneMark · Post by **MicrophoneMark** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:56 pm

>Buuuuuuuuuuuuut-- the results do have to speak for themselves. If the band hears the results and is not overwhelmed-- then something is amiss, either the mixer's judgement or the band's ears.

LOVE the interviews with Andy Wallace where he says things like "if the band thinks substantial changes need to be made I step back and say 'hey - maybe I'm not the mixer for the job""

I'm paraphrasing grossly, but yknow... then he gives them their thosands and thousands of dollars back? Pick your mixer wisely.

vvv · Post by **vvv** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:13 pm

These issues were actually directly raised with him, mostly in the context of auto-tune and cut-n-paste re-arrangement.

His response is available in various places in this thread.

Not to speak for him, but my impression is he takes the position that he is mixing a commercial product, and will do about anything to make it "better" in the sense of commercial. And, "commercial" could simply be read as "professional" - he doesn't mean, necessarily like any other artist's work. He does, however, look for/at "in tune", "in time", "dynamics", "progression", "story", "melody", "harmony" - that kind of stuff (quotes and labels mine.) And he will seemingly edit at will by such means as creating artificial backing vocals, adding a chorus, cutting a guitar, using drum samples, etc.

Also on the possibly aesthetically negative side, he apparently auto-tunes as he sees fit, time aligns, etc.

That said, he asks for references from bands he is mixing for, and does try to obtain similar results, ex., "big guitars", or whatever.

I'm going on memory here because I read that 32 page thread, and his book, a cuppla months ago, but I think I have the jist of it, and I apologize for any inaccuracies/misquotes, etc.

Finally, I do highly recommend the book, and that thread, and I'm not even high.

Message Board

Mike Senior - Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio

Mike Senior - Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio

Who is online