Concerning folks who "Mix" their own stuff...

12 posts / 0 new
Last post

... how do you listen to you your tracks as you decide they are "done"? (They're never done, are they Lol )

-- Ear bud
-- PC speakers
-- Cell phone speaker
-- iPad
-- Headphones
-- Headphones Studio Monitor Grade (does not "color", add Bass, etc... it is what it is, in theory)
-- Studio Monitor External Speakers
-- Generic Stereo Speakers
-- 1969 Chevy Chevelle at 11 on the vol dial
-- Send to friends and "ask 'em how it sounds on what they got"
-- Bluetooth to your HD TV Speaker
-- 1969 Black and White TV Dad never threw out with that "bitchen" 6 in oval speaker behind the woodsim-plastic-grill ...
-- other?

ME:
PC speaker
iPad
Studio Monitor Grade Headphones
Cell phone speaker
Bluetooth to a "high-end" generic stereo
(occassionally an audiophile grade ear-bud, but rarely since they all tend to bal toward bass, and I think are unhealthy to use Lol )
-- And if I ever burn a CD, --a rolling $35K stereo -- a lovely stereo conveniently outfitted with wheels and engine. I guess I could just BT to it. Modern conveniences!

Other:
I can listen to a song on an AM radio broadcast to a 1965 3in Ford PU Dash Speaker and know if it "like" it... so this is purely about a "Mix"
I usually listen to "you's guys" stuff on Studio Monitor Headphones, --fyi Smile

Obviously everybody here mixes their own stuff....

I listen on "studio monitors" and a pair of Sony headphones that are often found in studios, but not super-high-end. I also listen on a small pair of plastic computer speakers that I can switch to to hear something with no high end, no low end and prominent mids.

During FAWM or 50/90 I don't agonize over mixes, it's about speed. But I will take something upstairs to the living room to listen on the stereo if I'm trying to get a mix that's a bit more finished.

I try to use speakers. Mixes on speakers sound less weird. Mixes I do on headphones are a coin toss and are often a bit weird.

I want quality studio monitors, but I mostly use 'Generic Stereo Speakers' --- in my case some little table top speakers from my 1993 Panasonic dorm room stereo system. I'm convinced this is the weakest part of my current set-up. I also do some preliminary mixing with some low-end studio headphones. I'm aware of a ton of problems with my mixes, but I never seem to go back and re-mix or re-record. I might try to do some of this for the album production challenge by December 1st. I think my speakers boost the low ends (probably for sales reasons) and this leaves my recordings a bit thin because I'm constantly trimming low frequencies that I might leave in if I used more accurate monitors. Also, I usually mix quite quietly because my ears get tired so fast. I really a lot on stereo panning for separation, but I'm learning to use the frequency spectrum to do this as well. Another reason for high(er) fidelity.

Still--- what would I rather purchase, a couple of speakers or an alto saxophone ? or an accordion?? or french horn??? or a vibraphone????

Hey @izaak your mixes don't sound thin, not to me. However, they do sound distinctive (in a good way).

For me how I got a "permenant" EQ setting (my setup with "this" does not change so can do a generic "mix" within minutes, just to get it out/up)... anyway, I listened to a few tracks, same ones on a Car Stereo (for mud) and Cell Phone for zero trace of Bass.

What finally got me more comfortable with overall output was the Studio Monitor Headphones, a dB meter and a Headphone Preamp. The preamps are tiny, inline and commodity based and usually all good, -- mine CC sized, USB pwr/chrg, and lasts forever on a charge or can stay plugged in.

The dB meter (measure inside HP Cup levels for ear fatigue... so learned what 80-85 db Average sounded like and don't work longer than an hour (anyway).

The SM HP's were quite "affordable"... (I think an Amazon special, or usual price these days, -- Audio Technica ATH-M40x. Now --any equipment specific comment can be/is a "loaded" thing, so am just saying what I "hear" and feel on my head. (I say that for the wise guys, not you Smile ) There are audiophile cork sniffers everywhere. (One of the greatest HP's that I used for years was a major chain store brand, now gone brand from back in the 80's prior to "brand-shaming" Lol ) One has to listen to stuff as "regular" folks may and use the "Tools" to reach that point. When I hear folks complaining what they hear or don't hear, well, one of the first things told to me when I walked into a recording studio was, "well, if you don't hear the lights, you probably need to leave now".

Anyway, I don't think your tracks would take "much" to add the spectrum your speaking of. I actually do only listen to tracks for the overall song. Yes I do use decent equipment, but I am not listening for "that". I'd have to, for e.g. bluetooth it to my other speakers and etc., -- no I don't do that.

Actually for "here", -- I am inspired when I hear someone, completely off key singing away to demo their song... really. I make an extra effort to read every word of notes, lyric, analyse the syntactic rhythm of the spoken word rhythm, musical melody and any sub-melody. The really "polished" stuff tends to sound over engineered, auto-tuned and usually in a "chest" voice safe range with no "push" in the canned music or "vocals". I also find those lyrics the most generic and top-40 safe.

--- So, for me here, I am truly inspired by the souls of artistry and jamming-hearts!

I was listening to a major artist interview the other day, and could really relate to them saying, "I know in 30 secs if I like a song", and as I say, it can be an AM Radio broadcast on a 3" dash board speaker Smile . It's how I hard many a new songs ala 95.5FM Radio circa 1970 ish... Hahhh...

Hey @standup -- sounds like you really have your process down. That's great!

Yes, I agree, Speakers are the way to go for a good listen.

I find your PC speaker setup interesting. For "me", I don't switch out any EQ, I listen for how "that" speaker, as-is affects the mix as sent. But, it is an interesting thing to see, to do, -- I can easily solder in a low/hi pass filter switch. I think what it would do is "validate" what's being "cut". But, as we do, we compromise... I expect a, e.g. PC speaker, unless a Boss System, to filter Hi/Lo and hope as a mids-mix it doesn't sound silly... but, oh well. Again, an interesting idea to use a hi/lo pass filter to hear affect.
- How many times can you tell someone to put on their HP's or ear-buds. (It's almost a good reason to limit the vol, to force the HP use Lol )

But, it happens to everyone... I had a friend who previewed a rough bounce and commented; and I had to immediately remind him to NOT listen on his Cell Phone even with an earbud ... OMG! (And, if your ear-bud has earth shaking Bass, you won't be hearing much, for much longer Wink )

-- So, derUgo... another day in audio-fun-fun-fun!

It's all very interesting!

"mix" or mix? Is there a nuance that I'm failing to understand?

Studio Monitors: My monitors are fairly flat Kenwood shelf speakers from... oh decaces ago it looks like. I've learned to use them so they work for me.

re: Think - Izaak - I had a cool, actually scary, experience in 50/90. There were two separate weeks when I couldn't hear very well. Wax buildup and inflammation in the ear canal was putting pressure on my eardrums. So one of the songs I recorded while having this issue received a comment about a good mix. I think sometimes using inferior listening devices to mix on (not just to test on) will result in a better mix (in at least one aspect) because you have to compensate for the limitations. For instance, when my ears were drowning in mud, my mix became clearer as a result. I have gotten comments in the past about mixes being sparkly in the high range... I"m sure that's due to tinnitus and my overcompensating my own lack of hearing.

re: cell phone and earbuds... If you can identify a song you like on an AM radio in the 1960's (as you stated above) then surely someone can identify if they like something on earbuds? I think you'd get more valuable information from someone listening through inferior speakers than someone that says it sounds good in the best playback situation.

I have a pair of JBL LSR305's that are probably great, but my room is terrible. I picked up a pair of Sennheiser HD 280 Pro's that, to my ears, totally poop on the whole "Don't mix in your headphones." thing. I can record and mix a whole song in those cans, take them off and listen in the monitors and be completely satisfied. Then there's the car test and Grado SR80's test. If everything's good in all that, I'm cool.

Hey @L.H.Cisco -- it's so cool when that happens! Smile

back in the day when i was making studio recordings with bands, what we would do ater mixing was to go over to all of our friends houses and play a cassette dub on their various systems, and from this we got a pretty good idea of how different people were going to hear ir, and if bo crummy system could destroy the recording, we would consider the mix finished. but if something stuck out as sounding bad, we would go back to the studio, listen to it though the monitors, and decide if it neeeded fixing. as for the mixing itself, always headphones,

Yes, ~~ above ~~, and... other ?:
What I ironically had hopped was the folks who seemed to comment that there was nothing around (here?) for the absolute "beginner", "class 101" -- recording and mixing and not at some online bloated curriculum possibly selling stuff would feel comfortable asking/saying, "here", somewhere "here", --"hey, so do I mix my single sound source, raw, dry track itself, or is that a-notha step in the process?" Lol

Many who have done this a long time, --forget. They forget what is automatic to them. And a real pro can "get" a not so well formed statement, question, from longitudinal experience with the peer "here", (if they care/try), somewhere and say, "oh, I know what you "mean", and hey, do this with this, --it's really that easy".

I think if anyone, any level can understand why (why, "why", why? Smile ...) they hear what they hear, the physics of it, --then can then better understand what Hz to up/down, AND, without a $200 software package to do so.

So, for the less deductive communicators..., -- I think a "point" to listening to a Track on a 3mm electronic device speaker and NOT "Mixing" to it, rather, -- knowing, "hey, well, it's got "presence" and decent volume and is not muddy in my '67 Chevy $1500 Stereo while going down the freeway, and in the Studio Monitor device of your choice (with normal? hearing range?), --I can live with the, e.g. reduced Bass, or bit-to-much Treble; moreover, to know WHY (really know why), they make those choices, -- those folks greatly benefit. Telling them to get the supercalophrashalistic latest plug in, while may solve a problem does not help them with the magic of catching their own dinner, and not having to eat out (give a man a fishing pole, thing-y not just one hearty meal), how to "do it" on their own.

Look at a DAW.

What does it "Image"?
-- (?) A "Tape" machine, analogue stuff they may have never touched and associate with a process.

I've seen folks shell out thousands on an amazing machine they then ask someone to "figure out" for them. And I ask them why they just didn't get a nice Revox (OMG! remember those... Smile ) , or even a Tascam Cassette and start that way, (wow, listen to Bills stuff!). Anyway, then digitise it and etcetera ...

The source of information "here" available to "beginners", may not be leveragable for them for a number of reasons.

Anyone in this thread, certainly is not participating to learn, -- anything. But, the lurking "beginners" should feel enabled to speak up and ask " * stupid questions, stupidly * ". Maybe that could be engaged a bit. Or, maybe it can't Lol Hahhh...

-- SoDerUgo!

I don't no, what i don't no, so I write, right, rite allot about a lot! Hahhh Dirol

4 track analog cassette tape was such a pain. I might still have a couple masters from the "dark ages" before digital.
I mix on a pair of Radio Shack headphones unless I'm working somewhere with Sony monitor headphones. Or my wife's Bose. Then, when I have a rough mix I'll run it through computer speakers, maybe some JBL studio speakers, and burn a cd for the car.

Nutation - So you're "Martial Art" now? Smile

Hey @iveg -- glad to see you're still around!

No, it translates to "a gathering of warriors". So I comment in the profile here, the home page we get, in this context, ... --musicians.

I was playing with "album" art and words and photos I had taken last week at the water... budokai came up. Too long for hair to explain Wink

From what I could find, -- there is no direct "translation" back to front and back again Smile [The "internet" translations are sketchy, it seems?]

However, I did explore the etymology as far as "I" could. It may say "onion soup" for all I know, but don't think so.

I think there are "modern" associations, missing cultural depth, meaning, with the characters that folks assign as "English". But agian, I am out of my depth in that.
-- Whenever I had a meeting in "business" I always took the time to learn something and fully realize chinese, japanese, korean, et al. are truly an art form. I understand japanese and chinese characters get "munged" a bit like English, like, e.g., "Oki doki" -- where the hell did that ever come from Lol ... .

If we could post pictures here, I'd load the 5x5 "album" art I did... --it's budokai a the top, my b&w photo at the water and those characters at the bottom. I looks kinda cool. I like it.

"A gathering of warriors" ... if one considers the songs I may pick, R&B as I do... it seems to make sense. Well, to me it does.

*So what happened "here" is... I wondered if I could use those as clear text ascii, the ID, and it worked! It'll be fun until I lock myself out? Hahhh... I need to keep them on hand to sign in... so may change it to -- budokai. Every year I change it, but do map it back. The clear text here get's indexed so prolifically across the net, well, I enjoy messing with search engines and the affect. But, that's another forum entirely Lol