MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

Analog Mix Down Help
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Production Techniques Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Author Analog Mix Down Help
tragedybysyntax
Okay so... my album is done but I"m sitting here trying to scrape money together to pay for mixing and it's pissing me off. The more I think about it.... my mixes sound pretty fucking good I think, maybe a lil polishing but overall... nice. So there is a local place that rents some badass gear.

www.auraphic.com

Might just rent an entire mixdown setup for 4 or 5 days and just do it myself. Question is.... Stems. Anybody have tricks for mixing down to analog? I'd ask mr. parasitk but he's on tour. I'm just kinda lost on what to group with with for submixing... or tricks. Thanks guys! Most likely be bouncing down to a CDR.
tuj
What exactly are your questions? What kind of music?

Usually your submixes will be drums for sure, and maybe a couple others depending on your type of music. Probably some type of 'up front' group that would represent the vocals or main synth line.

Getting the mix right is important, because there is only so much you can do with mastering. That said, if your mix is sounding good, especially if you are demo'ing it on A LOT of different equipment (hi-end, car stereos, computer speakers, headphones), then you might not need much more.
criticalmonkey
stems for mixes are generally done in 2 fashions
1 is family - i.e drums and percussion
2 is freq dependent, and or attack transient dependent - pending the musical styles -
and generally keeping important lead parts isolated

primarily for the purpose of grouping things that will require similar dynamic or eq processing and spatial placement, depth of field etc.

if your daw mix is pretty good - maybe you should have a mastering engineer take a shot at a track and see if that will get you where you want to be
proper mastering can do a lot for a good mix and generally not that expensive
tragedybysyntax
Well... I could rent ALOT of gear for about $450 for 4 days vs. go to a studio up north and drop about 200 for roughly each song which equals out to.... 1500$ ish if all the tracks take the same amount to mix up there. I think I could polish off everything at my house by pulling off a hard long weekend.

Just trying to figure out what to buss out in groups and etc.... Also trying to decide if I want to just mix down to stereo via CD-R or a 2nd Computer.

I think my low end could use some tightening up and glue. More character on a few things like percussion and guitars. Add some hair!

Neve 8816 would be the summing mixer and an Apogee DA16x for the converter along with my benchmark DAC1.
tuj
glue? hair? That sounds like compressors and limiters and eq to me (ie. mastering).
tragedybysyntax
tuj, exactly. But on individual tracks.... One thing I need first is a few more bass traps for damn sure, lol.
tuj
Well if it helps, I tend to submix to three groups; a main which is all the up-front elements of the track, usually that are not playing at the same time, a second group for more background elements, and a third group for the drums. On the drums group I will *always* strap some kind of compressor over the submix. Usually I will do the same with the other groups as well, so each one has a different compressor with appropriate settings. Then I strap another compressor across the entire mix for 'glue' along with a brickwall limiter at the end of the chain. I usually keep EQ at the individual track level with maybe a touch over the whole mix. With drums, is usually important to keep your bass-heavy elements in the center of the sound-stage. You can use reverb to enhance the stereo spread still keeping the bass-heavy center-stage.
parasitk
I haven't left yet!

Stems are different from submix busses. I'm assuming you don't actually want to mix stems. You're mixing to stereo, and providing the mastering engineer with a stereo mix, correct?

You'll probably want a at least drum buss, maybe one for guitars, background/stacked vocals... whatever helps organize your mix or what you'd want to compress together. I tend to organize by family, but sometimes I will do additional busses that are more frequency dependent.

Seriously it depends on the song, the instruments used, etc etc - it's almost impossible to "sum up" or put into bite size instructions.

Also, unless you're mixing to tape, I'd highly recommend mixing into a second computer at either 88.2 or 96k + 24 bit. Capture everything the analog mix is giving you and let the mastering engineer dither/SRC it down to mere 44.1/16 bit.

I'd recommend using a mix buss compressor, but if you've never done it, go easy. Don't use it as a faux mastering limiter!

It's too late to fix it in tracking, so fix it in the mix. DON'T rely on the mastering engineer to fix, just enhance and polish - nips and tucks that tie the entire album together. Get your mix sounding the best you possibly can, even if it kills you. Dead Banana
tuj
parasitk wrote:
Stems are different from submix busses.


How-so?
parasitk
Well at least in the circles I run, stems refer to multiple bounced out files. Yeah, they tend to be submixes, and they are usually bounced out from busses.

Here, wikipedia actually articulates it better than I can:

wikipedia wrote:
Stems are the individual components of a mix, separately saved (usually to disc) for the purposes of use in a remix. Related stems are typically bounced from the same origination location (i.e. "zero").
tuj
Right, I mean, it makes the most sense (at least to me) to mix via groups (submixes) to a final two-track mix, and then if you have a need to save the separate sub-mix (ie. the stem at that point), use the respective group and record it.

Also from da wiki: "Stems are also sometimes referred to as submixes, subgroups, or busses." hmmm.....

Anyway, it doesn't matter, what matters is that you want to group individual tracks, process those groups. Then I'm not sure if the OP wants to record the 'stems' or the whole two-track mix.

My larger point is always make sure if you are mixing a submix that you constantly keep checking it in the context of the main mix.
parasitk
Well I don't want to get caught up too much in semantics (I know I brought it up), but I consider stems an end result, and not something that occurs during mixing - those I'd call submixes, subgroups, or busses. MY ASS IS BLEEDING

Also I'd say mixing stems for a mastering engineer is a bad idea. Blurs the line between mixing and mastering in a bad way, IMO.
tuj
parasitk wrote:
Also I'd say mixing stems for a mastering engineer is a bad idea. Blurs the line between mixing and mastering in a bad way, IMO.


I agree! Unless you think there is value in having someone mix the stems to two-track and then go to someone else for mastering.... But if you can mix the stems, you *should* be able to mix a good two-track master. Then let someone master that.
Babaluma
i agree with most of what's being said here. try to do the mixing yourself, you'll gain experience and save money. make it sound the best you can and then pass it on to the mastering engineer for the cherry on top. i love working on mixes that already sound amazing, and i hate having to do "salvage jobs".

i have one client who likes to send me stems, but to be honest, i much prefer working on a stereo mix, for the reasons quoted by parasitk above.
Arturo00
Dang. I'd love to help you out. As in, I'd love to mix your album. Or at least help...
tragedybysyntax
As far as what to run it in as to the 2nd computer... how is it that if I have a 48k session... that going to 88 or 96k would help? It's not going to add bits that weren't recorded right? I talked to a mastering engineer and he told me 48k is fine to dither from. Opinions? hmmm.....
tuj
tragedybysyntax wrote:
As far as what to run it in as to the 2nd computer... how is it that if I have a 48k session... that going to 88 or 96k would help? It's not going to add bits that weren't recorded right? I talked to a mastering engineer and he told me 48k is fine to dither from. Opinions? hmmm.....


If the engineer asked for 48k, its best to record at that (and whatever bit depth he suggested, I'm guessing 32 bit since he said he would do the dithering?). Dithering is a lossy operation, so you want to do it as few times as possible. Same thing with down-sampling.

In theory recording your new mix from 48k -> analogue gear -> 96k will add sound quality, but the problem is that you'll lose something when you have to down-sample.
mojopin
If you are happy with the mixes then just get someone to master it. Why not post a clip and let us decide for you? I personally master my own material. Everything is overrated these days. diy for me.
mojopin
tragedybysyntax wrote:
As far as what to run it in as to the 2nd computer... how is it that if I have a 48k session... that going to 88 or 96k would help? It's not going to add bits that weren't recorded right? I talked to a mastering engineer and he told me 48k is fine to dither from. Opinions? hmmm.....


The reference was recording your analog mix at 2496 which i concur with. It is a new recording so doesn't matter what the old session was. Dither refers to bitrate and we are talking about samplerate. You want 96k if you can do it.
Babaluma
just try and keep to the original sample rate you started with. it doesn't matter so much what that sample rate is (as long as it's at least 44kHz), more that you SRC as little as possible.

the best sounding mixes i receive for mastering have been tracked and mixed at 32bit floating point, 96kHz. most of the mixes i get are 24 bit 44kHz, this is fine for mastering too.

if you finish a mix to your satisfaction, i'd be happy to master it for free, so you could see if it's worth it for you?
el clon
Babaluma wrote:
the best sounding mixes i receive for mastering have been tracked and mixed at 32bit floating point, 96kHz. most of the mixes i get are 24 bit 44kHz, this is fine for mastering too.


is there a DAW that renders 32-bit files? i use Logic and it doesn't bounce more than 24-bits.

(i don't mean to hijack the thread!! sorry...)
Babaluma
hm, i may have made a mistake, when i open things in Audition it automatically converts everything to 32bit floating point for further work, so the mixes are probably actually arriving at 24bit 96kHz, i should go and check...
el clon
that's what i always thought, too, that it was upsampled internally. i think Logic does it that way...
loudone
The slightest amount on reverb on certain tracks and groups will go along way to glue the sound as well i have found. You don't even need to notice the reverb, just places parts in a environment together.
petejm
Live 8 can render to 32bits, 96kHz.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Production Techniques Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group