Stop me before I mix again!!!

[waitingroom]

I think it'd be wise to let other people listen to it and give their opinion, before you like go crazy or something

[stevebozz]

I just think.. does it do more good sitting in my apartment or actually putting it out there? I like putting out pre-releases (see my website) and telling people about it. If in that time I hear something I don't like, I change it, mix it down again then throw it up! If someone gets their hands on the old recording, they'll have something not many people have.

Carpe diem man, you could be dead tomorrow.

[timbaier]

You have lost all objectivity, so hand the project over to someone else that you trust. HAve them do the mix and just sit in the background making "level adjustments". When this person thinks its done, its done.

Mixing yourself the material that you yourself recorded (and probablly wrote) sucks. Then again, if you take 2 or 3 years (!) to mix a handful of songs, you're putting WAY too much time into the wrong end of the process, and that totally sucks. I see this more and more now, especially with the proliferation of computer based systems and unlimited plug-in effects. The lack of limitations has become crippling for some.

I've always maintained that if it takes more than 2 hours to mix a song, then its probablly not good enough and you should either re-write it or scrap it. That time limit may change from person to person depending upon the pace at which you work, but its a good idea to have a rule of thumb like that. I hate to minimize the importance of a good mix, but on my list of important things about a song, making sure that the vocals have the perfect frequency cut and compression is near the bottom.

[GLEA]

I have mixed most of our stuff. For one album I had someone come in and do it. I learned a lot watching him, and applied it to the next which I wasn't happy about. I think some of the problems were technical, my monitor amp was dying and wouldn't power the new speakers I'd bought. I finally just stopped and put it out. A lot of people liked it. I'd like to remix about half of it some day.

For the next one, I just didn't stress about it. I probably had done some projects inbetween and got a new power amp.

I just went through and mixed the whole thing. I ran it past the band, took some comments, and then took it on a road trip. I think I remixed two and parts of a third. Done. It sounded good and I didn't flip out.


Right now I'm mixing our newest. It think eight of the 14 songs are done. I've started moving at a good pace. One thing I did learn with Ken Stringfellow was don't save a load of different mixes. If it doesn't work for you erase it. He said one of the producers the Posies worked with only kept one mix per song. I've done three of one song, just to try some different bass sounds.

This is the first album of ours I've done the mixes off the computer. That has made it a lot easier, even though there are unlimited choices. I'm just using DP4 like a tape deck. I have taken advantages of some of the "in the box" options, but most of the work is at the board with my favorite out board gear. One I realized that it was going to sound good, I've been able to concentrate on making the most of the songs.

Again, I ran some things past the band, and the comments were all positive, so I feel like I can go ahead with what I've been doing. Lord knows, none of those guys would last but ten minutes in the studio when mixing starts.

[Knights Who Say Neve]

This sounds like a case of not knowing what you want. Cue up a song, walk into another room, and figure out what you're going after on that song. Boil down your anwser to a single sentance. Than walk back in and go for it. Keep repeating the sentance to yourself if you must- but don't change your mind. When you get as close as you can in, say, an hour, stop. Put it away, cue up the next song, and repeat.

[awolski]

I think part of my problem was when I did the initial tracking I knew much less then I know now about getting things to sound good initially, and I tracked exclusively with headphones, and I got a lot of shit tracks down. So there's some bad sounding drums, phase issues, misuse of compression, a lot of tracking without a final sonic goal in mind, some distortion, etc. I keep thinking "if anyone who records hears this they're going to think I really suck at tracking" when actually I've learned a lot since then.

I guess what I am trying to get at is how do you develop a sense of what turds to polish and which ones to leave alone. I guess the answer is to get the drums to sound as good as possible and let everything else fall as it may, but the big picture is hard to grasp at the same time.

I guess that's why people get paid hundreds of dollars a year to do this stuff.

[drumsound]

I had a long talk at TapeOpCon about this type of situation. A solo artist who had been working on a record over three years on a couple different systems. Then he mixed each song a number of times and still was not happy.

He ended up sending me the tracks and I mixed the record and he is happier than he would have been using his mixes.

So my answer is, send the record to me...Or someone else who does this for a living, who's worked on tons of projects, who can hear with fresh ears.

Good Luck.

[Rigsby]

I don't mind mixing some of my own stuff, the quick things i try to get involved in usually pretty much get mixed as i record them so i can hear the total sound and think 'okay, what's next?' (often i write overdub parts as i record too, especially with the quicker things, so i need to hear exactly what i have). My record though will be mixed by two of my friends. I don't really want to go near it, i think fresh ears will be a godsend, then they'll hand it back over and i'll make any slight adjustments based on what they've done (if any are needed). With long term projects i think it's too easy to become over familiar with one or more of the aspects of the music and that plays with your perspective. Fresh ears are really important, so if you can't bare to take weeks out then definately get it mixed by someone else.

[awolski]

The problem, for me, with sending it to a professional would be that I would have to spend money to do so. And that's the whole point of this home recording thing for me, to not have to spend all this money going to a real studio. For the money I spent getting it mixed I could buy another mic or whatever. And that would be gear I could keep and use over and over again rather than just spending money on getting 1 CD done. I think trust is another issue, there is only one other bandmate that does any recording and I don't know if I'd feel good about him taking over the mixing as we have sort of very different approaches to recording (I'm a lot more anal, hence the 3 or 4 year plan).

I have some time off for the holidays. I think I'm going to jump back into that unfinished project and try to do some mixing with specific goals and a specific time limit in mind, and see how things come out.

I love tracking and feel like it's the really creative part of the process. Mixing to me is the tedious hard work portion of the process. But if it doesn't get done, the tracking is all for nothing.

[radiantbrian]

i think being honest with yourself about what is and isn't possible with what mixing can do is important. not to target anyone specifically here because your recordings might be the greatest things ever, but generally, something recorded with the typical limitations of the DIY recording world isn't gonna sound like 'Dark Side of the Moon', ya know? (and this isn't limited to basement studios obviously)

I'd suggest cutting a mix with no additional effects, EQ, compression, nothing. Take your time getting the levels and panning where you want and burn a cdr. Really try to focus on the records built-in charms, ya know? Listen to the qualities that made you record those songs in the first place. THEN, listen to the problems you know you can fix fairly transparently; cutting a db or 2 of low-midrange here and there, compressing something to make it not pop-out as much, use effects that actually add something to the song, etc.

I woke up at 3am this morning panicing about a record i just sent off to get mastered. It was tracked on an old 2" 16 track with no automation, and i was sitting there in the middle of the night thinking of all the track bleed i needed to edit out (in a DAW), all of this drastic EQing i could have done, all this compressing i needed to do, even though these things went in direct opposition to the approach i initially commited to (a Neil Young-ish, 'raw' recording). but then i woke up later and actually listened to what WAS there and really appreciated its obviously 'not beat to fucking death with digital editing' charm and realized that i love listening to records like that. other people do too, but i still understand the apprehension of not wanting to put out a record that isn't 'perfect in every way'.

so yeah, stick with what you initially commited to, fix only things that NEED to be fixed, and send it off to a good mastering engineer! hehe

[vvv]

Az a DIY bedroom recording guy, I pretty much mix a song until I think it's right. Then I move on to the next.

I then attempt a half-arsed sequencing and mastering job; the big flaws really show up.

This is a continuous process as I amass songs and want them on a test CD to try in the truck, the office, etc....
I use CEP which, like Pro Fools and other progs, allows for the preservation of a "session," which means that you can recall the entire mix as you left it.

In this way, over the months that I record an "album," (two, this year, two last) I take care of little problems like out of time delays, EQ adjustments, stray percussion hits, and might even adjust things like the lead vocal level by 1/2 dB increments while changing the insert and buss FX.

By the time I get to the final mix, the song is often 90% or more mixed.

Although, about 1 out of 10 still gets completely trashed and started over.

[wedge]

Awesome, guys... what a lot of great advice! At least I realize that I'm not alone as a compulsive mixer... But I also realize that I have to calm down a bit. I get really excited about my band's CD and my mixing when I think how it compares nicely (in my mind, anyhow) to old-school late-50's early-60's style mixes, which is what I'm shooting for and why my setup is as it is. However, I can't help but think about the clarity of modern mixes, from Dark Side of the Moon onward, and when I come at it from that point of view, I get discouraged. I guess I have to keep repeating this mantra to keep from losing my mind: indi-retro... indi-retro... indi-retro...

[radiantbrian]

I get really excited about my band's CD and my mixing when I think how it compares nicely (in my mind, anyhow) to old-school late-50's early-60's style mixes, which is what I'm shooting for and why my setup is as it is. However, I can't help but think about the clarity of modern mixes, from Dark Side of the Moon onward, and when I come at it from that point of view, I get discouraged.

this is really easy to fall into and i do it all the time! i'll do a recording i'm really happy with and has a certain aesthetic that fits appropriately, then i'll pop on a recording by Mark Trombino/D. Sardy/GGGarth etc. and i'll get all depressed that mine isn't crystal clear and punchy like that. but then again, when's the last time you've been truly MOVED by a record like that?

after all the self-critiquing, remixing, frustration, and all that fun stuff, i feel better ending up with a record that sounds closer to 'Tonight's the Night' than.. uh, 'Bleed American'..

[NewAndImprov]

On the CD I mixed for my previous band, I had all the time in the world to mix, and it took my a little over 2 years to finish mixing. This was on material that we tracked in 5 days. I'd take 2 weeks to mix a song, then take a month off, pretty much. Of course, I was doing other projects in between. I'm really proud of how the disc came out, every song has it's own unique sonic character. I think it's about the best thing I've done. However, by the time I was done, I was totally SICK of the material. And, the band lost whatever momentum we had in the meantime, and we pretty much broke up after the CD release party.

For the CD I did with my current band, after we finished tracking, over the course of 2 weekends about a month apart, I had a month to mix the disc. I was between jobs at the time, so I could dedicate all my time to mixing. I was happy with the results,. and it was really good for my sanity and the band's general health to have a deadline.

For our next CD, I'm also scheduling a month to finish mixing. We're already booking a tour for the spring, and we want to have CD's by then. Deadlines can be good things for productivity.

[trodden]

I keep telling my band I shouldn't be recording us, but to them, all they see is FREE studio time. Duh.

Mike

I hear ya...
I wouldn't mind doing overdubs and other fun creative additions.. but i'm less stressful having someone doing the basic tracking and then the final mixing when it comes to the band i play in... me assisting is cool as well.