I think I've noticed my monitoring being a little midrangy but my room is pretty decently treated and my monitors don't suck per se - Adam A7x and DynAudio LYD-48 3-ways with bass traps/panels from GK Acoustics.
I 'think' I've noticed that even reference mixes have the same basic sound. Thusly, when I've mixed I've sort of readjusted to this and even though there are differences between my mixes and the reference ones I listen to, those differences are more purposeful, and not necessarily related to this problem best I can tell. However... I keep hearing what I think I'm hearing..
On a whim I opened the last REW plot I did back in October (when my DynAudios arrived) and noticed two things I had forgotten about.
1. A ~5dB dip centered around 80 Hz, it isn't too narrow so seems correctable with EQ at first glance.
2. A long gentle ~5 dB rolloff starting from about 3.5k ending around 20k (this could be due to my potentially over treating the room).
Hmmm. That looks on paper much like what my ears are hearing. So, I did a broad, not exact boost @80 Hz and a similar boost (3dB) shelf on the high end from about 4k to 20k to my monitoring. So that does sound more like what I expect to hear based on what I know about the audio itself and see on the analyzers in the DAW.
But... Those are the exact areas that would sound hyped if boosted on a flat response/mix. Using loopback I recorded an EQ'd and "flat" version. So what I need is for a few to listen in their treated rooms with good monitoring and let me know the following:
1. Does the EQ'd rough mix (EQ.MP3) sound more hyped or more all round expected.
2. Does the untouched rough mix (NOEQ.mp3) sound like you expect or does it sound a little midrangish.
Yes, it can be subjective but I think this can be handled objectively because those boosts will make the kick and bass too loud and the high shelf will make things like cymbals and sibilance poke out. I'm confident once I get a couple responses from those with proper listening environments, I can work out where known good lives in my environment.
my kit: avantone mixcubes in my almost ready new space, well treated.
rme totalmix is boosting lows starting at 135 by 11 to counter roll off of mixcubes (works well).
me - could be deaf by now.
EQ'd sounds a 'bit too harshy - example clip doesn't help at start as those little snare rolls sound like distortion at first glance, but after that much easier to tell.
been listening alot to all kinds of stuff to see if my treatment is in the right place and although mixcubes reveal gravel for fun & some famous tracks are fatiguing, the best mixed ones don't, this but could be tipping towards fatigueing - but talking smidgens imo.
not got the confidence in setup to comment reliably on lows as i'm compensating.
edit: guestimate the low eq boost was db or 2 too much.
my kit: avantone mixcubes in my almost ready new space, well treated.
rme totalmix is boosting lows starting at 135 by 11 to counter roll off of mixcubes (works well).
me - could be deaf by now.
EQ'd sounds a 'bit too harshy - example clip doesn't help at start as those little snare rolls sound like distortion at first glance, but after that much easier to tell.
been listening alot to all kinds of stuff to see if my treatment is in the right place and although mixcubes reveal gravel for fun & some famous tracks are fatiguing, the best mixed ones don't, this but could be tipping towards fatigueing - but talking smidgens imo.
not got the confidence in setup to comment reliably on lows as i'm compensating.
edit: guestimate the low eq boost was db or 2 too much.
hope you get good 'data'.
Excellent, one down a few to go so thanks! Especially the 2dB or so part, because it aligns with a previous thought. Outside the room in other environments, I remember things sounding mostly fine but I'd like the correction in the mixroom if it isn't simply due to bias - those are highly suspect frequencies for "sounds better". AKA, I don't want to fix what isn't broken but if it is broken I might try - If it holds I might split the difference between the two and try that.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 12-10-2017 at 04:58 PM.
1. Does the EQ'd rough mix (EQ.MP3) sound more hyped or more all round expected.
2. Does the untouched rough mix (NOEQ.mp3) sound like you expect or does it sound a little midrangish.
The EQ'd mix doesn't have any frequencies jumping out and sounding harsh or hyped on my system. I'm using small Yamaha near fields with a Yamaha sub in a room treated with a lot of Sonex foam panels.
The non EQ'd mix lacked some detail on my monitors, where the EQ'd version seemed like it had the "air" or "openness" about it that the other one was missing.
I always check my mixes on a pair of Sony MDV6 phones (which always sound overly bright), and also burn a CD right out of REAPER for checking it on the car stereo, which is mid-scooped. I figger if a mix translates on those three things, it's at least in the ball park.
Edit: Upon second listen, the EQ'd one is maybe pushed a bit too far, but I still like the more open and airy sound of it. Maybe just less of it.
__________________
Glennbo
Hear My Music - Click Me!!!
--
The EQ'd mix doesn't have any frequencies jumping out and sounding harsh or hyped on my system. I'm using small Yamaha near fields with a Yamaha sub in a room treated with a lot of Sonex foam panels.
The non EQ'd mix lacked some detail on my monitors, where the EQ'd version seemed like it had the "air" or "openness" about it that the other one was missing.
Thanks Glennbo!
Quote:
I always check my mixes on a pair of Sony MDV6 phones (which always sound overly bright), and also burn a CD right out of REAPER for checking it on the car stereo, which is mid-scooped. I figger if a mix translates on those three things, it's at least in the ball park.
Same here as far as car etc. I've sent various mixes to several people I trust and the band gets a "daily build" with no complaints but seeing that plot and how it aligned with my perception made me want to at least look into it.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
REW says:
With 1/3 octave smoothing +/- 2db 20 - 20,000
With 1/12 octave smoothing +/- 5 db 20 - 20,000
RT 60 starts at about 0.2 at 60 Hz and very slowly and linearly rises to about 0.4 by 8000 Hz.
Monitors:
KH310 with KH810 sub
I/O Apollo to Dangerous DBox, monitoring through the DBox converters.
I woiuld agree the EQ'd clip is about 2-3 db heavy, centered somewhere around 60-80 Hz.
The overall drum balance is better on the untouched, but I would split the difference and boost slightly, say about 1/3 - 1/2 of what you have there now.
The mids are much better presented in the untouched version, at least on my system.
The EQ'd version has that strange, "I've been fvcked with" sound, but it is bit hard to judge because the tune is a bit ethereal / spacey especially in the vocals, and it's hard to know what you had in mind, production wise.
My 2c from the peanut gallery
__________________
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
REW says:
With 1/3 octave smoothing +/- 2db 20 - 20,000
With 1/12 octave smoothing +/- 5 db 20 - 20,000
RT 60 starts at about 0.2 at 60 Hz and very slowly and linearly rises to about 0.4 by 8000 Hz.
Monitors:
KH310 with KH810 sub
I/O Apollo to Dangerous DBox, monitoring through the DBox converters.
I woiuld agree the EQ'd clip is about 2-3 db heavy, centered somewhere around 60-80 Hz.
The overall drum balance is better on the untouched, but I would split the difference and boost slightly, say about 1/3 - 1/2 of what you have there now.
The mids are much better presented in the untouched version, at least on my system.
The EQ'd version has that strange, "I've been fvcked with" sound, but it is bit hard to judge because the tune is a bit ethereal / spacey especially in the vocals, and it's hard to know what you had in mind, production wise.
My 2c from the peanut gallery
Hoping you would pop in... Thank you sir!
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
don't suppose you could listen to say Prince Sexy m.f ? and how that compares to what you're used to? is one of my go to's and is definitely not harsh here, my guess is that on many systems it may seem a fraction dull, e.g in vocals, but brass etc. do stick through
could help us both out..
This is how I hear it Karbo, the first one is quite muddy, no mids.
The 2nd one sounds much better, not bad really, but is a bit edgy. I didn't look at it with any spectrum analysers and you know my high end, but the 2nd is way better.
EDIT: On relistening, the 2nd is rather boomy, but it has the mids so it's clearer, I'd have to look at it to see what's really going on.
don't suppose you could listen to say Prince Sexy m.f ? and how that compares to what you're used to? is one of my go to's and is definitely not harsh here, my guess is that on many systems it may seem a fraction dull, e.g in vocals, but brass etc. do stick through
could help us both out..
Don't know if you meant me or Karbo, just listened to that Prince track, it was killin' it here
Yeah, it doesn't have that midrange right up in your face sound of many productions, very nice sonic balance, but still definitely not polite, it's kickin' it heavy !!
__________________
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
This is how I hear it Karbo, the first one is quite muddy, no mids.
The 2nd one sounds much better, not bad really, but is a bit edgy. I didn't look at it with any spectrum analysers and you know my high end, but the 2nd is way better.
EDIT: On relistening, the 2nd is rather boomy, but it has the mids so it's clearer, I'd have to look at it to see what's really going on.
Thanks Tod. That helps a lot. So far it's leaning towards my monitors being closer to fine based on what I know about my room, my monitors, the material and of course me and my own subjective listening preferences in general.
Also to everyone, the uncorrected sample (noeq.mp3 aka #2) isn't necessarily a demonstration of what I think a perfect mix for this song is, it would be close though since it's in the state it was where I left it a week ago. That's kind of why I blindly chose it that way, I didn't want to be second guessing while creating the samples. It'll surely get massaged some before I finish up but thanks for all the comments.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
don't suppose you could listen to say Prince Sexy m.f ? and how that compares to what you're used to? is one of my go to's and is definitely not harsh here, my guess is that on many systems it may seem a fraction dull, e.g in vocals, but brass etc. do stick through
could help us both out..
I can, I'm familiar enough with it. Will report back once I do. I used to play that tune in some band years ago (I suppose who didn't) so I should be somewhat familiar.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Don't know if you meant me or Karbo, just listened to that Prince track, it was killin' it here
Yeah, it doesn't have that midrange right up in your face sound of many productions, very nice sonic balance, but still definitely not polite, it's kickin' it heavy !!
yeh well anyone really, good to get a reference across all the various systems and humans.
glad its doing it for you.
first track in my 'reference tunes' playlist, always impresses as has all the buzzwords we like: dynamic, fat, smooth punch, space etc. the inapropriateness just adds to the fun..
I think I hear the 80Hz dip in the mix position here. Knowing that song I expected a little more in that range. On a side note, one of the things that makes that mix sound so good is the lack of distortion in general whether that be from not over limiting and/or not having things like distorted guitars in their to soften things up (OK Prince gets honorable mention ). Looking at the YT stats for nerds data, they had to turn it up a couple dB to get it to their LUFS standard which is good.
I may try splitting the difference as a correction, then pull up a tune and make adjustments, then make a copy of that and the non-corrected result for the car tomorrow.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Wish I could help, Karbo, but even though I have probably better monitors than 99% on here in a well treated room, I am also getting more and more deaf. Good luck!
Getting old sucks.
All subjective first impressions.
Clarity doesn't suffer with either mix, whatsoever. Neither is harsh.
Via speakers EQ'd mix sounds drier and tighter but actually worse for it, thinner, flat, less musical, less involving.
In the "As is" mix I found myself listening to instruments individually and the vocal was more inviting.
Playback at the moment was at fairly low volume.
Neither sound harsh on first acquaintance.
I then put some cans on for louder playback:
Via the cans the second "As is" again sounds better to me. Warmer, more punchy, the vocal draws you in, the drums pop out in a good way.
Sorry, not liking the EQ version as much here.
3rd and 4th listen via HD800 cans - not so sure now. Bass guitar sounds better on the EQ mix. Suggest another mix with elements of the two. Not so much the EQ on the master but on individual tracks. First impressions probably more important, gut reaction, less analysis, I prefer straight un-EQ'd mix. I would tweak elements of that. I like the focus on the midrange of the "As-is" mix.
OK here we go, for the sake of accountability :-) well treated room, approx. 16x12x8', Genelec 8030A monitors in midfield. REW gives +-6dB throughout full range at 1/12 octave smoothing. No room correction, although I do apply a gentle HF rollof as a "House Curve"*.
I normalised both to -23 LUFS and listened blind on the Genelecs and also an Avantone mixcube in mono.
eq.mp3: slighty too much bass, bass intruding into low mids a bit? Hats a bit too hyped , mids (esp vox & snare) more balanced.
noeq.mp3: hats more natural, bass more fitting, mids worse.
Only a very overall opinion because the program material and therefore effect of the EQ varies a lot throughout.
eq.mp3 tends to win on the Mixcube, especially about 30s in.
*The aforementioned house curve, I applied because as I added more treatment to the room, and the frequency response got flatter, my mixes became duller on normal systems. After applying the house curve in the monitor FX, the mixes translate well. Seems like this is a real thing observed many, many years ago - for various reasons real rooms attenuate HF more than a well treated room. Have a search for Bruel and Kjaer house curve.
Location: Adelaide, South Australia (originally from Geelong)
Posts: 5,598
I've just had a listen in my studio on my main monitors and cans with the same impression.
Cans are Beyerdynamic DT1990 Pro through Beyerdynamic A20 headphone amp. I absolutely LOVE these cans. They give me a totally trustworthy picture of how good or bad a mix sounds.
Main monitors are Ambisonic cube array of eight Auratone 5C cubes and four EV DL15W subs (rescued from a Village Roadshow cinema). Room is well treated 10m x 4.5m x 3.5m.
The whole setup is calibrated with Sonarworks Reference 4 Studio Edition. Overall response at mix position is +-1dB from 50Hz to 13KHz and +-3dB from 27Hz to 16KHz. The top end rolls off gently to 20KHz due to the fact that the Auratones don't have tweeters.
Sonarworks is REALLY good at what it does. I purchased it recently during the Black Friday sale and my main monitors now sound very close to the 1990s.
Everything is fed from RME Fireface UFX and REAPER.
OK. On to my impressions.
The no eq mix sounds far more open, detailed and balanced spectrum wise. The eq version by comparison, sounds scooped and somewhat smeared.
The low end on the no eq version sounds far more balanced. The eq version sounds wooly in the 80Hz region.
Midrange on the no eq version is much more natural. Top end is clean and open. On the eq version, it sounds thin and fizzy.
I'm going to hazard a guess that you've grown to know your room and have learned to mix well there despite what the REW plots show you.
Regarding the mix, I realise it isn't finished but it sounds good here. Am I hearing the results of your recent lunchbox purchases here?
One thing I did notice though is what sounds like clipping on the kick in the left channel in some places (particularly at just after 34 seconds). It isn't the kick itself because the right channel is fine. That might be just a result of this not being a final mix though.
I particularly like the overall vibe you've created with this track. Everything fits nicely in its own space spectrally and stereo image wise.
OK. On to my impressions.
The no eq mix sounds far more open, detailed and balanced spectrum wise. The eq version by comparison, sounds scooped and somewhat smeared.
The low end on the no eq version sounds far more balanced. The eq version sounds wooly in the 80Hz region.
Midrange on the no eq version is much more natural. Top end is clean and open. On the eq version, it sounds thin and fizzy.
I'm going to hazard a guess that you've grown to know your room and have learned to mix well there despite what the REW plots show you.
You guys really do rock. ^That is part of the don't fix what isn't broken part. I'm just coming off being severely burned out and on some subsequent listens last night I'm likely going to keep what I have but may occasionally turn on the correction EQ (about 1 dB on both ends) just to hear it. I may spend a few hours mixing with that just to see but based on the replies, I probably don't need to. Especially, since I have all this information I'm not sharing and your comments align to various things I know about my environment. I "might" move a couple panels/traps around just to see what difference shows up in REW but I should finish this project before I make changes!
Quote:
Regarding the mix, I realise it isn't finished but it sounds good here. Am I hearing the results of your recent lunchbox purchases here?
You are, I can't remember if you saw the thread - that mix is from this project so yes, the lunchbox is involved.
Quote:
One thing I did notice though is what sounds like clipping on the kick in the left channel in some places (particularly at just after 34 seconds). It isn't the kick itself because the right channel is fine. That might be just a result of this not being a final mix though.
Will check thanks! I'm in that near-final, mostly done, get all the little annoyances phase which tends to be the most aggravating to me. You know where you hear that one thing that needs to be fixed, then because you fixed it another slightly smaller one pops up. I'm down to .3 dB adjustments so I know it's getting close to time to call it done.
Quote:
I particularly like the overall vibe you've created with this track. Everything fits nicely in its own space spectrally and stereo image wise.
Thanks for that, with two guitarists, bass, drums, keyboards and three of us composing, writing and singing, I warned everyone that mixes have finite space and it might be tough fitting everyone's favorite parts in every spot; they have been gracious enough to let me run with that keeping me from being too stuck with a part that doesn't make the song better because it would hurt someone's feelings to tuck or mute it.
It's a 12 song project, I'll be done in the next week or two but will take another month to get artwork and distribution ready so hopefully, January will be release date.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 12-11-2017 at 07:05 AM.
Just had another go.
Playing it fairly loud through big monitors just now. At higher volume (not painful - I don't like typical rock concert volume) I still prefer the non EQ mix.
Bass sounds more powerful on the EQ'd mix but the track is just rendered less exciting. In a Porcupine Tree style rock track such as this drive and energy is more important than absolute clarity methinks (so long as clarity is good and distortion is low).
Swapping to the non EQ version at high volume (I thought the EQ'd mix was better in one respect. Non EQ not being mid forward lacked a slight nasal quality at the loudest point which I thought I noticed on monitors played loud via "As is") This would obviously be good. However -
Upon returning to the non EQ "As is" mix I didn't really hear a pushy mid, it was just more forward and exciting.
I think there is room to get the best of both, erring on the side of the non EQ version.
Correcting my worms:
Last edited by Softsynth; 12-11-2017 at 07:35 AM.
Reason: Correcting my worms.
Thanks SoftSynth, I'm about to get in the car to head to work and see how things sound - it's been a week since I did that. It's a 17 speaker surround system with subs so it's a great sounding but completely different environment to listen in.
Historically, these mixes have been fine on various other systems including my car but it's near the end and paranoia is setting in, hence the sanity checks. The other band members ecstatic but I don't trust the client.
I'd post more but hoping to just post it all when done. The only thing that's a bit of a bummer is I have very light tinnitus (high pitched ring up in the air frequencies) and once in awhile I can hear very high frequencies in the music intermodulating with it. I get around it but I did happen to notice last night when I was playing with boosts in that area.
I do sincerely appreciate all the comments and listening, it's really is a huge help.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 12-11-2017 at 07:31 AM.
Location: Adelaide, South Australia (originally from Geelong)
Posts: 5,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic
You guys really do rock. ^That is part of the don't fix what isn't broken part. I'm just coming off being severely burned out and on some subsequent listens last night I'm likely going to keep what I have but may occasionally turn on the correction EQ (about 1 dB on both ends) just to hear it. I may spend a few hours mixing with that just to see but based on the replies, I probably don't need to. Especially, since I have all this information I'm not sharing and your comments align to various things I know about my environment. I "might" move a couple panels/traps around just to see what difference shows up in REW but I should finish this project before I make changes!
Going by what I've heard here, I'm definitely with you on waiting until you've completed this album before tweaking your room.
Keep in mind too that REW readings can be deceiving. You really need to take many measurements near your mix position and average them. Sonarworks does this REALLY well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic
You are, I can't remember if you saw the thread - that mix is from this project so yes, the lunchbox is involved.
I have indeed seen that thread pop up and I had a look a while ago but didn't link that with what you've posted here.
I've been trying to avoid that thread......
Don't shoot me! I'm not avoiding you!! I have very limited Internet data allowance right now and I know if I visit there, I'll be too tempted to use a lot of data!!!
I'm hoping to get a good fixed Internet connection soon though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic
Will check thanks! I'm in that near-final, mostly done, get all the little annoyances phase which tends to be the most aggravating to me. You know where you hear that one thing that needs to be fixed, then because you fixed it another slightly smaller one pops up. I'm down to .3 dB adjustments so I know it's getting close to time to call it done.
I know that process only too well! In fact, I'm working on a new album right now too and am at that point with some of my tracks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic
Thanks for that, with two guitarists, bass, drums, keyboards and three of us composing, writing and singing, I warned everyone that mixes have finite space and it might be tough fitting everyone's favorite parts in every spot; they have been gracious enough to let me run with that keeping me from being too stuck with a part that doesn't make the song better because it would hurt someone's feelings to tuck or mute it.
It's a 12 song project, I'll be done in the next week or two but will take another month to get artwork and distribution ready so hopefully, January will be release date.
Sounds like you guys have a good working relationship. That's a difficult thing to balance in many cases. It's good to have each member seeing what is best for the overall picture but in the real world, that is a rare thing.
Thanks SoftSynth, I'm about to get in the car to head to work and see how things sound - it's been a week since I did that. It's a 17 speaker surround system with subs so it's a great sounding but completely different environment to listen in.
Historically, these mixes have been fine on various other systems including my car but it's near the end and paranoia is setting in, hence the sanity checks. The other band members ecstatic but I don't trust the client.
I'd post more but hoping to just post it all when done. The only thing that's a bit of a bummer is I have very light tinnitus (high pitched ring up in the air frequencies) and once in awhile I can hear very high frequencies in the music intermodulating with it. I get around it but I did happen to notice last night when I was playing with boosts in that area.
I do sincerely appreciate all the comments and listening, it's really is a huge help.
No worries, I have a high pitched hiss too, mild though. I keep headphone listening to a minimum because of it. I miss inky black silences (you're never alone with tinnitus).
I corrected my last post. Hopefully it makes more sense now.
Sounds like you guys have a good working relationship. That's a difficult thing to balance in many cases. It's good to have each member seeing what is best for the overall picture but in the real world, that is a rare thing.
They are great guys, two of them I go back 25 years with in bands etc. and the other two are new to me. I was concerned there would be potential ego problems with a member producing/mixing (we all have them) so I worked hard up front to see if I could win them over before that happened which seems to have worked. Will explain how I did that at a later time but I ultimately owe them a big thanks for letting me run with it unabated.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Non-EQ mix here as well.
I would suggest that the snare sound is the decisive element here (as with most pop/rock music). I feel it's too tubby and doesn't really sit in the overall picture, so it might have influenced all your further mix decisions.
Maybe have another listen to the 400Hz area, the top end and the compression/saturation? Then hihat and so on. My 2€ct.
__________________ Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.3.8 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x "If I can hear well, then everything I do is right" (Allen Sides)
Non-EQ mix here as well.
I would suggest that the snare sound is the decisive element here (as with most pop/rock music). I feel it's too tubby and doesn't really sit in the overall picture, so it might have influenced all your further mix decisions.
Maybe have another listen to the 400Hz area, the top end and the compression/saturation? Then hihat and so on. My 2€ct.
Thanks sir! It's a piccolo believe it or not but not concerned about it per se other than it can be a bit loud and difficult to tame volume wise (have 'most' of that sorted at this point). The thing I was exploring was across 12 songs or more based on something I though I heard that roughly matched a previous waterfall plot - the example I included was just the song I had up at the time. I was also hearing it in commercial mixes which prompted looking further so not really about the mix itself but frequency ranges and my monitoring in general.
Also for anyone interested, I don't tend to chase commercial mixes - that doesn't make mine better (probably worse) - what I'm saying is there is a certain way I like to mix certain music and it doesn't bother me if the commercial kids aren't doing it that way.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
The bass boost is definitely too much over here. It might just have been because I was missing the bass when I listened to the non-EQ'd version, but a boost of 1dB might be the sweet spot.
The HF boost I could take or leave. The boost wasn't scratchy.
Difficult to know without being able to hear what you're shooting for! Maybe an old finished mix of yours to compare with?
NB. This is without either treatment nor quality monitors!
Thanks SoftSynth, I'm about to get in the car to head to work and see how things sound - it's been a week since I did that.
I did just that and think I should stay as I am or potentially make that ~1dB boost/house curve on those two ranges but not much. It was pretty close to what I'd expect which also matches most of the comments I'm seeing.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
The bass boost is definitely too much over here. It might just have been because I was missing the bass when I listened to the non-EQ'd version, but a boost of 1dB might be the sweet spot.
The HF boost I could take or leave. The boost wasn't scratchy.
Difficult to know without being able to hear what you're shooting for! Maybe an old finished mix of yours to compare with?
NB. This is without either treatment nor quality monitors!
Thanks, glad you showed up to the party. I agree with your assessments after listening to the normal version (non-eq) in the car this morning. To be clear to everyone, 'non-eq' is the official mix as far as where it is, the eq'd one was only a test concerning my monitoring setup.
I can't tell you what I'm shooting for - every mix/project sort of tells me what it wants and I do that. I'm very fine with all of these mixes overall - I've had these DynAudio 3-way monitors for a couple months now, tbh it's looking like they are doing their job well and I'm just in that hyper sensitive phase because I know I'm going to have to call it done soon.
Being able to say - "this is a rough mix so don't judge" can be a bit of a tempting crutch when approaching the point where you have to officially say "It is done" So I do appreciate the input, there are a myriad of things that only I know about my environment etc. and even reading subjective responses are a massive help.
Forgot to add, I sat down last night and listened on my headphones, and they were fine as far as what I want/expect there too other than I think a much smaller correction will do the trick.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 12-11-2017 at 10:12 AM.
It's also hard to judge the high end, because there are some boxy mids in the drums, and if they are dipped a bit then the highs might start to shine because of the relative frequency balance. I think that was what beingmf was getting at.
I think the bass could do with a little low mids/high bass dip too, to get a bit of boominess out of the equation.
It's such a juggling act with so many moving parts that absolute judgements are hard to make!
Even though my room isn't treated, it doesn't have any drastic problems at the mix position, and even though I don't have near-field monitors, I do have quality bi-wired speakers and an amp with EQ bypass.
It's also hard to judge the high end, because there are some boxy mids in the drums, and if they are dipped a bit then the highs might start to shine because of the relative frequency balance. I think that was what beingmf was getting at.
I think the bass could do with a little low mids/high bass dip too, to get a bit of boominess out of the equation.
It's such a juggling act with so many moving parts that absolute judgements are hard to make!
Even though my room isn't treated, it doesn't have any drastic problems at the mix position, and even though I don't have near-field monitors, I do have quality bi-wired speakers and an amp with EQ bypass.
OK cool, that's where this started, a tad heavier than I want in the low-mids but since these mixes aren't the only place I hear it, I became hesitant to cut much until I knew more. I might make a cut in that area and post later though just for kicks but I already know I don't want much gone or it will get to "artificially hi-fi sounding" and less organic which I don't want.
I'll also go back and confirm that isn't the only place I hear it. Chances are it isn't but still different by a small margin.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Yeah, this is where taste comes into it and technical stuff goes out the window
Some people can't stand anything outside of the scooped hi-fi sound, and some people like the natural mids sound.
Yes you are very correct - That's why I was somewhat careful in how I presented - Generally and outside of nitpicks like "crap that single kick hit is too pokey" or that "'ka' sound at the start of the vocal is summing with the crack of the snare" or "that one track needs a little more automation" or "dammit, he farked that one note" - I'm near perfectly happy with the mixes.
One thing that is important is that mixes in general are hugely dependent on the content/players/tones/arrangement being mixed, and the better result is usually about bringing out what is good and deemphasizing what isn't so good - far more than making it sound like something else IMHO.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Need a few ears with well-treated rooms...
And thanks btw!
). Looking at the YT stats for nerds data, they had to turn it up a couple dB to get it to their LUFS standard which is good.
Linear Mode
