Old 05-10-2013, 10:01 PM   #1
donchilcott
Human being with feelings
 
donchilcott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, Ca
Posts: 480
Default Static Balance

I am reading "Mixing secrets for the small studio" I Love the book and am learning a lot. There is a constant emphasis on getting a "Static balance", the idea is I should focus on balancing all tracks without having to "ride" faders to accomplish this... I accept the importance of knowing how to do this. By using compression, EQ, side chaining etc etc it seems this can be done. My question is... What's wrong with riding faders? with automation so well implemented do I really absolutely have to obtain my balance without riding faders? why? I would appreciate your answers :-)
donchilcott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 12:19 AM   #2
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Static balance is the fader positions where the mix is closest to balance without riding. It assumes that during tracking, the various elements were played at sympathetic levels to the arrangement, both in instrumental intensity and in tracking level.

This might sound a bit obvious, but in practice it often doesn't happen.

EQ and compression can be used to smooth the deviations and nudge the recording closer to balance, but the amounts needed will often not be ideal to the sounds if the sole aim is levelling. A good exercise in compression parameter choice though, makes you really listen and work the timing (attack and release) for transparent results

Some rough levelling can be achieved by splitting and trimming non-continuous parts, and in fact that is one of the first things I would do to a project before applying EQ and compression.

Don't get too hung-up on static balance, it's a good starting point, but most projects need a degree of automation, some quite a lot, especially on vocals.

Even Mike will agree that careful, skillfull automation can be more sympathetic to a track than the automatron of compression. Don't forget automation of compression parameters, either...

(sorry Mike)


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 12:39 AM   #3
Stu
Human being with feelings
 
Stu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 1,007
Default

I usually start balancing a mix by trying to find a section of the song where I can find a static balance, even if its just one chorus or verse or whatever. I can usually locate at least one point where this can happen, and find it makes the rest of the mix easier when automation all relates to this single point. I should point out that this almost never includes the vocal track, I always consider that a moving target.
Stu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 07:20 AM   #4
Bristol Posse
Human being with feelings
 
Bristol Posse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Southern California
Posts: 642
Default

Having read Mike Seniors book, I don't believe that anywhere he says that fader riding or automation is bad or to be avoided.

Static balance is a starting point. the mix is reasonably balanced and is now the canvas upon which you can paint your automation to build your dynamics changes, emphasis, etc.

Last edited by Bristol Posse; 05-11-2013 at 07:47 AM.
Bristol Posse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 07:34 AM   #5
Geoff Waddington
Human being with feelings
 
Geoff Waddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Posts: 11,184
Default

The idea of static balance as a starting point comes from the simple idea that when you find that spot you have located the sonic place where the writing / arranging / performance / sonics are most "naturally and neutrally" melded together before processing -- Heck of a great place to start IMHO
__________________
To install you need the CSI Software and Support Files
For installation instructions and documentation see the Wiki
Donate -- via PayPal to waddingtongeoff@gmail.com
Geoff Waddington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 03:37 PM   #6
donchilcott
Human being with feelings
 
donchilcott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, Ca
Posts: 480
Default Static Balance

Thank you for the responses. I should have mentioned I am half way through Mikes book so I am sure he includes "fader riding" an a legit option. As I haven't got that far I was beginning to wonder if he has a problem with pushing/automating faders. The book and this forum are appreciated. Now if I may.... I moved my cool/bi amped speakers and put in near field monitors... OMG , really? This is what I have to listen too? Another very counterintuitive aspect of mixing/mastering.
I spent a lot of time in the studio as a young guitar player. It was magical. Of course my favorite part was getting high in the control room listening to our newly created rough mix in the treated room with the state of the art JBL monitors cranked up. It was like heaven, patting ourselves (and the engineer) on the back as we listened to our newly created masterpiece.
One late night I came in to do guitar overdubs and spent several hours alone with the engineer. I vividly remember him constantly switching over to these horrible cracker box sounding speakers,(some crappy looking things with the name Auratone) I was annoyed. I finally asked, "why are we listening to these crappy little speakers when the one's mounted in the wall sound so great" ??? He replied, those are for the clients, so they feel good right away and trust me to mix/master. I didn't really get it any more than wondering why he didn't smoke weed with me while he was working. I get it now...
Thank you
donchilcott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 06:31 AM   #7
martifingers
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,695
Default

Great studio story...

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post

Some rough levelling can be achieved by splitting and trimming non-continuous parts, and in fact that is one of the first things I would do to a project before applying EQ and compression.


>
To be clear: would you use automation of level on these split parts first or compression first? (To be honest, some of us are not yet at the stage of being able to think about automating parameters yet... or maybe that's just me...)
martifingers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 07:47 AM   #8
Ken Morgan
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midland TX
Posts: 42
Default

I've mixed this way for a long time, but instead of using things like EQ or compression, just use clips... as you know, compression and EQ are pretty interactive, and each will change the other's characteristics; modifying the levels of clips or sections of tunes just seems to work well (for me), and translates exceptionally well regardless if I'm working completely inside DAW, using a summing mixer, of a full blown console.

Just an idea.
Ken Morgan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 08:18 AM   #9
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

I find that (generally speaking) it's often really hard to get a really good static balance that works for an entire song which is why I usually mix song sections one at a time. My static balance is usually only good for the intro and first verse.

After that, automation kicks in more, easy manual tweaks to adjust the balance of the next section before writing more detailed automation for that section.

I work through each song section like that, one at a time until the end and then circle back and write trim automation.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 10:01 AM   #10
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

I'd split and trim first. Its like one stage beyond static mixing and gives you a multi stage static mix before you dig in with the processing.

Generally finer automation will take place at a later point in the workflow, but it levels the playing field somewhat for starting to pull the mix together.


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.