mix mistakes

7/30/2019 Mix Mistakes

1/17

Mix MistakesBuy PDF

FeaturePublished in SOS September 2011Printer-friendly version

Technique : Mixing

We explore some of the most common causes of mix failure wevetackled in our monthly Mix Rescue column. Banish these demonsand youre most of the way to a devilishly good mix!Mike Senior

Over the years, Ive listened to piles and piles of amateur mixes from home studios, including

thousands of productions submitted by SOS readers to Mix Rescue, Studio SOS, Demo Doctor (the

predecessor of the current Playback column), and the My Sound Files section of the SOS forum. On

top of that lot, Ive heard almost as many mixes again from students and teachers working in small

college studios. What Ive learnt from all these mixes is that some problems crop up much more

often than others.

What really crystalised this opinion for me recently was listening to over 100 mixes of the same raw

multitrack files in order to adjudicate a recent mix-off contest. Because everyone had worked from

identical source material, the submissions clearly demonstrated that the same issues were

undermining peoples final results time and time again.

The purpose of this article, then, is to reveal the most common of these recurring mix nightmares

and thereby help you to avoid them in your own projects. Theres only so much that text can tell you

about mixing, though, so to make things clearer Im going to refer to the aforementioned competition

mixes by way of real-world audio illustration see the One Song, 100 Mixes! box for details of

where you can listen to them. Ive actually just completed my own mix of that track, which will appear

as a forthcoming Mix Rescue feature so watch this space if youre keen to know how
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/articles/mix-mistakes.htm?print=yeshttp://www.soundonsound.com/Contents.php?Month=9&Year=2011http://www.soundonsound.com/shop/xt_AddItem.php?ProdID=91014205http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_00_header.jpghttp://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/articles/mix-mistakes.htm?print=yeshttp://www.soundonsound.com/Contents.php?Month=9&Year=2011http://www.soundonsound.com/shop/xt_AddItem.php?ProdID=91014205


2/17

I approached the track myself! Ive also trawled through various articles in the SOS archives at

www.soundonsound.com to create an on-line list of useful further reading, including several past

Mix Rescues, which offer copious example files, as well as links to useful software resources. See

the Further Reading box for details. But now, without further ado, lets reveal and rectify the most

common rookie mistakes...

1: Dodgy Timing/Tuning

Heres the waveform from a live drummers kick-drum mic. Even though the part was recorded to a click track,you can see that it naturally (and desirably!) deviates a little from the metric grid.

This is probably the single most common weakness of home-brew mixes. Like it or not, the public

these days are used to unnaturally tight tuning and timing. A genuinely laid-back feel is one thing,

but sloppiness in this department is one of the quickest ways to make your mix sound like a demo.

Unfortunately, a good 90 percent of the amateur mixes I hear fall at this hurdle, simply because too

little care has been taken over such matters during rehearsals, tracking, overdubbing, and editing.

Furthermore, of those home recordists who do actually apply some serious elbow grease here at

the edit/mix stage, only a small proportion actually end up with really decent results, simply because

its so easy to mishandle the available tools.

Now, I realise that some people take a pretty strong stance against the use of corrective measures

like these, and probably the most frequent complaint is that such tactics kill the emotion in the music.

My response is that good corrective processing shouldnt do that, as it will only target the

inaccuracies that undermine the music, while leaving alone those that support it. To put it another

way: just because a few nutters go round stabbing people, it doesnt mean we should ban knives

entirely! Clearly, you need to be careful not to push your corrective mix procedures too far, but my

own experience suggests that the vast majority of home-brew productions are in absolutely no

danger of straying over that line. Here are some tips and tricks to help you get things right:

Here you can see a small section of the lead vocal part from SOS January 2011s Mix Rescue mix, inCelemonys Melodyne Editor pitch/time-processing software. Although notes look out of tune, you can listen tothe remix to confirm that they dont sound that way in the context of the track.

Timing correction isnt about quantising everything to your sequencers bars-and-beats grid.Its more about tightening up disagreements between the available parts in your arrangement.As such, your drum waveforms are usually a better visual guide for editing purposes thansoftware bar/beat lines.

Fully automatic pitch-correction will almost never achieve an acceptable combination of tuningaccuracy and musicality, so be prepared to spend some time manually finessing the action ofany pitch-correction utilities you choose to employ.For timing purposes, the end-point of a note can be almost important as where it begins,especially when youre dealing with bass lines.Whether youre adjusting timing or tuning, avoid the powerful temptation to trust your eyes overyour ears. Although looking at software waveforms and pitch displays can help speed upcorrective editing, its not at all uncommon for them to show some notes as correct evenwhen theyre still audibly awry, and vice versa.Its particularly easy to lose perspective while editing timing and tuning, so take frequent
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_02_VoxTuning.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_01_KickTiming.jpghttp://www.soundonsound.com/


3/17

breaks and make sure to listen to the track at least once all the way through (preferably withoutlooking at your computer screen) before signing off your edits.

Example Mixes: Although a majority of the contest submissions leave tuning pretty much untouched,

there are nonetheless some mixes (17, 20 and 39, for instance) that make a pretty respectable job

of it. None of the mixes quite tightens the timing enough for me, though, which underlines how few

small-studio mix engineers realise the importance of this, for rock productions in particular.

2: Mix Tonality Misjudgements

Dont compare the overall tonality of different mixes at just one volume level. Give that monitor level controlsome exercise to get a more informed perspective.

Plug-ins such as Meldas MAutoEqualizer can measure the overall frequency response of your whole mix, andthen compare it with that of any commercial release. Although you must always carefully evaluate the results ofany such software analysis by ear, it can be a useful reality check.

Anyone whos ever had their portable music player in shuffle mode should be aware that theres no

standardised quantity of lows, mids, or highs in a commercial mix. That said, though, its rarely

sensible to endow your own production with an overall tonality that makes it feel out of place

alongside comparable commercial tracks. As such, its as well to do at least some comparative

checks against stylistically similar releases during the mixing stage to avoid any obvious tonal

mismatch, even if you have the luxury of a good mastering engineer to refine this aspect of the

sonics post-mixdown you dont really want them applying drastic master EQ, simply because it

will almost certainly upset your carefully crafted instrument balances.

Although I dont consider what Ive just written to be tremendously contentious, it still surprises me

how often home mixers allow overall tonality problems to stymie their efforts. To some degree

I suppose its understandable, given that both the vagaries of low-budget monitoring and the

real-time adaptability of the human hearing system can heavily disguise a skewed frequency
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_04b_CurveEQ.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_04a_MAutoEqualizer.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_03_Volume.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix39http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix20http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix17


4/17

response, preventing it from reaching the forefront of your attention. Those seem like flimsy excuses

to me when there are so many cheap and easy remedies on hand. Here are some useful pointers:Import several commercial mixes into a fresh project in your sequencer alongside a stereobounce-down of your own mix, and then switch between them instantaneously using the tracksolo buttons, so that you throw the tonal differences into starkest relief. Use the track faders tocompensate for loudness differences between the tracks.Compare mixes on more than one listening system, if possible, and at different playbackvolumes, to lay bare as many different tonal facets as possible.Get hold of some kind of high-resolution frequency-analysis tool to provide you with extrainformation about the frequency spectrum. Voxengos SPAN provides decent free spectrum-analysis in plug-in form, but if youve got any budget available at all, Id certainly recommendinvestigating some of the more sophisticated tools that allow you to capture a tonal fingerprintaveraged over the whole track tools like the Melda MAutoEqualiser and Voxengo Curve EQplug-ins, or the off-line Har-Bal software. Whatever any software tells you, though, be very waryif it contradicts the evidence of your own ears.Fixing a broad tonal imbalance in your mix can be as simple as inserting a high-quality EQplug-in on your master channel. However, if you find yourself using more than three or four EQbands, applying more than 3-4dB of gain per band, or using narrow filters (Q>1), its more thanlikely that your per-channel EQ settings need some reassessment too.

Example Mixes: There is a huge tonal range to the competition mixes, despite the band having

provided a detailed list of commercial reference productions. Compare the HF crispiness of mix 43with the stifled highs of mixes 35 or58, for example, or line up the powerful low end of mix 32 with

the slimline low frequencies in mixes 23 and 29. Mixes such as 19 and 43 have over-prominent

mid-range, while others, such as 12 and 48, are recessed in that region. All that said, its worth

pointing out that even the mixes that feel most successful to me in this respect (mixes 04, 20, 31, 61

and 63, for instance) there is still a good degree of tonal variation every mix doesnt have to

sound exactly the same to tick this particular box, and theres certainly some room for personal

preference.

3: Phase Misalignment

If you use more than one mic to record any instrument, theres always the danger that minute

time-delays between the recorded signals will cause a type of frequency cancellation called

comb-filtering when the mics are combined at mixdown. Similar difficulties can also arise when

combining mics with DI signals; when summing stereo mic pairs or send effects to mono; and when

triggering samples alongside live parts. Most home-studio folk underestimate the importance of

dealing with phase mismatches, leading to mixes with hollowed-out sounds and poor mono

compatibility. However, there are now so many ways to address phase issues in a typical MIDI +Audio sequencer fine delays, audio editing, polarity inversion, all-pass filtering, phase rotation

that theres really no need for comb-filtering to rain on your parade. For better results, try these tools

and techniques:Listening to your mix in mono is a quick way to check if any stereo signal in your mix harboursphase problems. Although summing the left and right stereo channels of a mix will alwayscause a certain degree of tonal change, you need to be on the lookout for any dramaticalterations that stand to make a nonsense of your mix balance. If you do find phase gremlins,try applying phase-adjustment techniques to one side of the offending stereo channel toimprove the situation.
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_04c_Harbal.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix63http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix61http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix31http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix20http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix04http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix48http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix12http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix19http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix29http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix23http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix32http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix58http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix35http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix43


5/17

The simple act of switching your monitoring to mono can reveal all sorts of hidden phase conflicts in a stereomix.

There are a number of dedicated phase-adjustment plug-ins worth investigating, includingcommercial products such as Audiocations Phase, Voxengos PHA-979 or Littlelabs IBPWorkstation (for the UAD2 platform), as well as freeware such as Betabugs Phasebug andVariety Of Sounds new preFIX.Be careful when layering several bass parts or low drum sounds within a single arrangement.

Allowing such layers to slip in and out of phase with each other is a recipe for frustration,because itll cause the combined tone to change sporadically throughout the timeline in a waythats almost impossible to fix with normal mix processing.

Example Mixes: The multi-miked guitar parts in the competition multitracks caught out a lot of

contestants, who chose to pan the individual mic signals across the stereo field without

phase-aligning them first compare mixes 36, 43, 58 and 59 in stereo and mono, for example, to

hear what I mean. Phase cancellation between the left and right overhead mics caused

mono-compatibility problems too, as in mixes 33, 56 and 61.

4: Mix Mud

There are several great plug-ins for adjusting phase relationships, so theres really no excuse for lettingcomb filtering wreck your sonics

The lower half of the mix is frequently something of a battle zone. Pretty much any track can

contribute low-end energy, but unless youre careful about which tracks you allow through in this

range, its very easy to end up with a gloopy-sounding mess that blurs the definition of your bass

parts. The widespread use of close-miking techniques is partly to blame for this common problem,

because of the artificial bass boost (called the proximity effect) that most directional microphones

impose under such circumstances. However, many synthetic sounds and samples often containmuch more LF than is actually required in a mix, too, so programmed arrangements are no safer

from this pitfall than live recordings. Try some of these tricks and see if things improve:Apply high-pass filtering to any instrument that doesnt actually require low end for musicalreasons. This will ensure that DC noise, traffic rumble, mic-handling noise, and any otherlow-octave rubbish doesnt interfere with your main bass parts.When setting filter frequencies, make sure to listen within the context of the mix. You might besurprised by how far up the spectrum you can go before the sound starts to lose warmth incontext. Be careful with percussive sounds, though, as these can lose subjective punch wellbefore overall tone seems to change.
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_06c_PHA979.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_06b_Phase.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_06a_IBP.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix61http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix56http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix33http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix59http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix58http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix43http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix36


6/17

Try to funnel your different bass instruments into different frequency regions using pitch andEQ controls. The more these parts have to fight for the same space, the trickier itll be to avoidmurkiness.Be wary of delay or reverb effects that take ages to decay at the low end, because they canquickly make an unpalatably thick soup of your sonics. In typical pop, rock and electronicawork, you can usually afford to high-pass filter most effect returns well above 100Hz, as well asapplying additional LF shelving or peaking cuts in the couple of octaves above that.

One of the most powerful weapons in the fight against muddy mixes is also one of the simplest: high-passfiltering.

Example Mixes: Although mix muddiness tends to be associated with a mix tonality thats heavy in

the low-mid range, as in contest submissions 09, 54 and 58, say, brighter mixes such as 21, 22 and36 are by no means immune to the same kind of clarity problem. Compare these to mixes such as

20, 31, 51 and 63, which handle this area of the spectrum much more effectively.

5: Unhelpful ArrangementThe roots of many a mix problem can be traced back to the musical arrangement, and this simple

fact renders many of the budget productions I hear effectively unmixable. If your songs verse has

more guitar or percussion layers than its chorus, youre likely to face an uphill struggle if you want

the chorus to arrive with a bang. Likewise, theres no sense in having different guitar and keyboard

sounds competing in the same pitch register if you want to keep any separation between them in the

mix. And unless you create some sense of build-up in the arrangement itself, its unlikely that youll

hold the listeners attention all the way to your final chorus. Here are some quick ways to make

improvements:Try to avoid simply replicating the same arrangement for any similar sections of your track.Dropping a couple of parts from the first verse, for example, can help make the second versefeel a lot fresher and more engaging when it arrives.If youre having trouble disentangling parts in your mix, try altering MIDI parts to different chordinversions or pitch-shifting audio parts to different octave registers, to give each a bit of clearspace in the frequency spectrum. Alternatively, put one parts notes in the time-gaps leftbetween the another parts notes.

Rich reverb decays can quickly swamp your mix, especially in modern upfront chart styles, so try shorteningthe effects decay time if your mix is beginning to feel undesirably murky.Sometimes adding surreptitious overdubs or samples at the mixdown stage (or even editingout whole sections of the song!) is the best way to remedy an arrangement problem, so dontrule out this kind of tactic at the mixdown stage.

Example Mixes

Although a lot of people did stick within the parameters of the multitracks provided, there were many

instances where contestants applied creative rearrangement techniques to tackle the mixing

challenges presented by the supplied multitracks. Some mixers (most notably 03, 22, 27, 39 and 42)

wielded the razor blade to increase the overall pace of development and to bring in the vocals
http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix42http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix39http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix27http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix03http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_08_ReverbShortening.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix63http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix51http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix31http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix20http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix36http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix22http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix21http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix58http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix54http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix09http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_07_HPF.jpg


7/17

earlier. Mixes 18 and 52 wheel out a variety of more extrovert mix effects as ear candy, while mixes

03, 18, 56, 59 and 61 make use of additional synth/sample textures to fill out the chorus texture or

add extra atmosphere during the verses. Vocals were frequently flown around to other parts of the

mix and treated with pitch-shifting to generate synthetic harmony parts, as you can hear in mixes 05,

26 and 40, for instance, plus there are some interesting larger-scale arrangement drops

showcased in mixes 27, 28 and 56. The most successful combination of all these different

approaches for me, though, can be heard in mix 20 a version that only just missed winning thecontest outright.

6: The Wrong Reverb

If the layout of audio in your DAWs main window looks anything like this, with lots of simple repetition ofarrangement textures, then youll almost certainly struggle to build up a sense of tension or momentum in the

mix.Reverb can do so many things in a mix: gelling sounds, changing timbres, simulating an acoustic

environment, lengthening note decay. As such, one of the important tricks to using reverb

successfully at mixdown is to concentrate on preventing it from doing things you dont actually want!

Most home-grown mixes have difficulties with this to some extent, with the result that too much or too

little reverb is typically applied. After all, it stands to reason that if you try to blend a sound into the

mix with a reverb thats not good at blending things, say, then either youre going to stop short of the

amount of blending you need, or youre going to turn the effect up to a point where its sound

becomes overbearing in other ways. The following tips provide a useful guide to getting your

reverbs right:

To give you a little more perspective on your effects settings during the final stages of a mix, try muting eacheffect return for a few seconds before returning it to the balance. Once your ear has got used to the mix withoutthe effect, its a lot easier to judge whether its actually optimised for its purpose.

Natural-sounding reverbs will tend to be better for blending sounds together and giving thema sense of space. Unnatural-sounding reverbs (such as plates, springs and quirky algorithmicdigital devices), on the other hand, will tend to offer more scope for creative enhancement ofinstrument timbres.Bright effects usually sound more obvious at a lower level, so be prepared to roll off the highfrequencies of effect returns if you want your reverbs to keep a lower profile.The length and level settings of a reverb are interdependent. If you misjudge one of them, youllstruggle to find a satisfactory setting for the other.When youre close to completing your mix, bypass each return for a few seconds duringplayback. This can really help you to gauge whether each effect is set up right, especially in

terms of overall tone, level and decay time.If youre looking for a more up-front sound, using heavier compression or adding in things likesynth pads can both reduce the need for reverbs in a mix. Tempo-synced delay effects canalso provide a more transparent substitute for reverb in a lot of cases.

If your EQ settings look anything like the ones from this Mix Rescue submission, your mix is very likely to sufferfrom the same harshness problems, because of the repeated emphasis on the 2-5kHz region using
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_13_HarshEQ.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_12_EffectsBypass.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_09_ArrangementRepetition.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix20http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix56http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix28http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix27http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix40http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix26http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix05http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix61http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix59http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix56http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix18http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix03http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix52http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix18


8/17

comparatively CPU-light processing.

Example Mixes: Mixes 17, 23 and 27 all have long reverb treatments that are rather too prominent in

the balance, presumably in an attempt to gel the instruments and vocals together a task thats

usually more successful carried out with shorter, ambience-style patches. (The reverb tails are also

quite bright in these three mixes, which only reinforces the sense that the effects are being artificially

generated.) Mix 16, on the other hand, has the opposite problem, in that its using too much short

reverb to try to enhance instrument sustain and to create the illusion of a larger space. Here, a fewlonger delays or reverbs would have been more effective, allowing the blending treatment to

assume a more natural-sounding background role. Mixes 06, 10 and 23 also use too much reverb

for me, and I think that stronger use of compression would have been a better alternative, not least

in fattening the drums and keeping the mix as a whole clearer and more upfront.

7: Harshness

Every home studio should have at least one dedicated transient processor, if only because they can deal withoverly spiky acoustic recordings so transparently. There are now plenty of plug-in options to choose from,

including SPL Transient Designer, Stillwell Audio Transient Monster, and Voxengo TransGainer shown here.Any part of your mix thats rich in the 2-5kHz frequencies will normally sound closer to the listener,

not least because the human hearing system is most sensitive to information in that region. Little

surprise, then, that so many home recordists pile masses of 2-5kHz on everything vocals, guitars,

drums, cymbals with the result that the mix as a whole ends up sounding harsh. However, its not

just frequency response that can make a mix feel abrasive, because untamed high-frequency

transients can be another crucial factor too. Here are some easy ways to avoid harshness in your

mix:Try to avoid boosting in the 2-5kHz region, especially with CPU-light digital equalisers, whichcan occasionally sound a bit crunchy up top. If a given instrument isnt coming through well inthat spectral area, apply some cuts to competing channels instead.Avoid EQing in solo, because most people instinctively try to give every track a forwardsound if they work like that. Its what your tracks sound like in the context of the mix that really

counts.If you want to move synth or electric-guitar rhythm parts out of the harshness zone, try usingpitch-shifting or distortion to move some frequencies into a different part of the audiospectrum.Be careful with the Attack Time control if youre compressing percussive material heavily,because slower settings can allow high-level transients through the processing before the gainreduction has the chance to take hold.
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_14a_TransientDesigner.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix23http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix10http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix06http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix16http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix27http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix23http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix17


9/17

To tone down overly spiky piano or acoustic-guitar tracks, experiment with some of thededicated transient processors now available, such as SPLs Transient Designer, StillwellAudios Transient Monster, Sonnox Transient Modulator and Voxengos Transgainer. Because

these dont rely on a threshold system to work, they tend to deal with the problem moremusically than traditional dynamics units.

Example Mixes: Given that the competition multitrack combined thrashy drums and heavily

overdriven electric guitars, its little surprise that many of the submitted mixes suffer from harshness

problems. Take mixes such as 13, 27 and 54, for instance: despite the considerable variance in

their overall mix tonalities, they all share the kind of upper mid-range emphasis that quickly

becomes a bit grating on the ear, especially when the extra guitar layers hit during the middle

section. Overly sharp snare transients are also a bit hard on the ear in mixes such as 24, 34 and 56.

8: Buried Details

Even in cases where the mix tone is free of muddiness and send effects have been applied

appropriately, musicians who mix at home rarely present their material in the best light, simply

because they dont actively direct the listener towards the musics most appealing aspects from

moment to moment. Yes, the bass part might be dull as ditchwater most of the time, but that doesnt

mean you cant push up the fader for its one little fill if theres nothing else more thrilling happening

at that time. Any and all parts can benefit from micro-level fader rides like this, but few tracks more

so than lead vocals, where riding up the details can mean the difference between the listener

understanding the lyrics and not. Here are some useful tricks to focus on all those lovely littledetails:Whether the main part in your mix is a lead vocal, instrumental solo, or some other hook, itsnot unusual for it to have the odd lull a comparatively featureless sustained note, say, ora gap between phrases. Whenever you hear one of these, have a quick hunt amongst the restof the backing tracks to see if theres anything else that might briefly poke out of the texture toprovide some welcome diversion.Turning down a couple of backing parts underneath a lead vocal line can help reveal more ofthe singers subtle vocal inflections without recourse to nuclear-grade vocal compression.Its standard practice on a professional level to carefully automate lead vocals in order tomaximise the intelligibility of the lyrics, so dont forget to give that process the time it needs.While youre at it, try fading up the ends of some of the note tails youd be surprised howoften they contain characterful little bits of hidden phrasing that can really make a performanceseem more emotional.

Here you can see a section of the Mix Rescue remix project from August 2009. Notice how the piano (blue)backing level is being faded up between the vocal phrases (red) to help direct the listeners ear in that directionwhenever the vocal interest wanes.
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_15_DetailedRides.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_14c_TransGainer.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix56http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix34http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix24http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix54http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix27http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix13http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_14b_TransientMonster.jpg


10/17

Example Mixes: When someones using detailed automation carefully, its usually tricky to hear

whats going on in absolute terms in other words, you shouldnt get an active sense of faders

being waggled about if the engineer knows what theyre doing! What you should get, though, is

a sense of the music being easier to follow and more engaging from moment to moment, something

which is most apparent in mixes 20, 31 and 63, all of which made my own shortlist. However, to be

honest, none of the competition entries really shone in this area, which only serves to highlight how

commonly the importance of micro-level automation is underestimated.9: Weak Payoffs

These two screens show the level of detail that goes into vocal automation on todays commercial chartproductions. The lower, right-hand screen is from Fraser T Smiths mix of Tynchy Stryders Number One, and

the upper one from Greg Kurstins mix of Lily Allens The Fear. Thats what youre up against!

Any important instrumental or vocal part in your mix may well require different mix treatment to cater for thebalance demands of different sections of the musical arrangement. If so, then multing the recording, by editingsections of it to separate tracks in your DAW (as shown here), is a simple way to manage the practicalities.

Anyone whos ever mixed a song will at some time have come up against the problem that their

choruses sound underwhelming compared with their verses or, to put it in more general terms,

that some section of the arrangement isnt delivering the required emotional payoff. There can be

lots of reasons for this kind of long-term dynamics problem, but the most fundamental one is failing

to pace the mixs build-up correctly, such that the sonics peak too early. In this situation, the

temptation is always to try to push the subjective size of a mixs climaxes beyond the point where

they sound their best, thereby introducing all sorts of potentially unmusical processing and distortion

side-effects. Here are some ideas to help you achieve the impact you want from a tune:If you feel that a section of your song is still failing to deliver the goods, even after youve taken

its sonics as far as you reasonably can, why not try working backwards? See if you can makethe previous section smaller-sounding, in some way, than it currently is.Remember that different songs, and different mix sections within a song, may demand differentsounds from the same instrument. A ballads solo piano introduction, for example, will probablyrequire a much fuller sound than the piano vamping tucked into a full-band rock rhythmworkout. Splitting your recordings across different tracks with audio editing (sometimesreferred to as multing) is a simple way of implementing this idea, as you dont need to automateall the processing, simply exercise the mutes!
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_17_VoxMulting.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_16b.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_16a.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix63http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix31http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix20


11/17

Although applying low midrange boost to a lead vocal, as in this screenshot, can give it a warm and intimatecharacter, the danger is that it can also make the rest of the backing track sound small, so any such boostneeds to be handled with care.

Both the level and the timbre of your lead vocals will be critical to the perceived power of thebacking arrangement. In particular, if you fade the vocal too high up in the balance, or give it toomuch lower mid-range, the chances are that it will start to make the rest of the productionsound small.

Example Mixes: Managing the long-term dynamics of this particular mix was probably the greatestchallenge presented by the competition multitracks, the crux of the matter being that the middle

section, with its strident additional guitar overdubs, tended to make the onset of the subsequent final

chorus feel like something of a letdown as in mixes 21 and 64, for instance. Increasing the chorus

vocal levels is the tactic taken by mixes 17 and 28, but this isnt actually that successful, as it makes

the band sound rather small by comparison with the singer. Mixes 22 and 33 thicken the chorus

texture using additional distortion and widening effects respectively, but fall slightly foul of

harshness and mono incompatibility into the bargain. More successful, to my ears, are mixes such

as 38 and 46, which seemed to deliberately restrain the middle-sections guitars (so that the chorus

can still trump them in some way) or those which surreptitiously inflate the final chorus with extra

textural layers mixes 03, 07, or20, for instance. There is also some excellent lateral-thinking from

mixes 20 (in its second version), 27, and 58, all of which use edited-together arrangement drops as

a means of partially side-stepping the whole issue.

10: Inappropriate Processing On The Mix Bus

Its tempting to try to improve your sound by applying mastering-style processes, such as multi-band dynamicsor loudness maximisation, to your output bus during mixdown, but its seldom a good idea in practice! This kind

of processing usually confuses most mix decisions completely, and you end up chasing your tail so whiletheyre useful tools, its better to leave them alone until youve finished the mix!

This one is a bit of a tightrope, because there are two different ways you can come a cropper. On the

one hand, it can be impossible to achieve the necessary degree of mix glue and/or aggression in

certain modern styles without a generous helping of dynamics processing over your master

channel; but on the other hand, you can get into all sorts of difficulties if you effectively try to master

your production while youre still mixing it. Follow this advice and you should get better results:Try to get the overall balance of your track working before you start applying mix-buscompression. Although you may subsequently need to adjust some faders in response to thebus dynamics, in my experience its easier to do this than to have the compressors
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_19_Mastering.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix58http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix27http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix20http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix20http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix07http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix03http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix46http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix38http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix33http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix22http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix28http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix17http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix64http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix21http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_18_VoxLowMidrange.jpg


12/17

gain-reduction action interfering with all your initial balancing decisions.Steer clear of using multi-band dynamics processors or dedicated loudness maximisers overyour main outputs during mixdown. Although these can be useful as part of a separatemastering stage, they do make it very difficult to judge whats going on when judging levelbalances, channel processing, and effects settings.If youre deliberately driving a full-band compressor hard to generate obvious gain-pumpingeffects, consider using a processor with a wet/dry mix control so that you have the option to

reduce any transient-smoothing side-effects of such heavy treatment.

Where youre using buss compression to achieve more aggressive effects, then try one which has a built-inparallel processing option or wet/dry mix control itll often let you get more obvious gain pumping with fewernegative side-effects as far as the fidelity of powerful kick/snare mix transients is concerned.

If youre in any way uncertain about the validity of the master-bus processing youve applied,do make sure you bounce down a version of your final mix without it, to hedge your bets.

Example Mixes: Many of the competition mixes didnt seem to use enough bus compression to suit

the aggressive musical style mixes 05 and 30, for instance, or even the overall contest winner,

mix 63. In the circumstances, something more along the lines of mix 31 or33 feels about right to me.

There were also inevitably people who drove their master processing considerably harder, though,

such as in mixes 26 and 52, both of which feel rather overbearing as far as level pumping is

concerned, while introducing undesirable transient side-effects and distortion products. Mixes 50

and 58 are also over-compressed, for me, because their fast-attack processing irons out much of the

short-term dynamics excitement and dulls the transient definition. Mix 42 is pretty much ruined by its

heavy-handed multi-band dynamics, which is a shame, as it turns out that the unprocessed version

subsequently submitted has a lot to recommend it.

0

One Song, 100 Mixes!
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_21_SoundFilesSite.jpghttp://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix42http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix58http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix50http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix52http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix26http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix33http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix31http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix63http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix30http://www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm#Mix05http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_20b_ConsoleStripPro.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_20a_Bombardier.jpg


13/17

The competition mixes Ive used as audio illustrations in this article were carried out in March andApril this year for a contest at www.Mixoff.org, a site thats home to a family of mixing collaborationforums. The song Blood To Bone, by a talented alt-rock band called Young Griffo, was provided inraw multitrack form for anyone on the forum to download, and I agreed to provide a detailed critiqueof any mix submitted within the first couple of weeks. In the end, more than 100 mixes weresupplied, of which I critiqued around 60, and Ive since consolidated them all to a dedicated webpage, so that its easy to listen to any of them and read the critiques alongside. You can even still

download the raw multitracks if you fancy having a crack at them yourself!www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm.

Monitoring

A specialised single-driver mixing speaker, such as Pyramids Triple-P shown here, is one of the bestequipment investments you can make if youre mixing at home or in a small college studio.

One of the most powerful mixing tools available may already be sitting on your shelf!

Monitoring is a big issue when it comes to mixing, which is fair enough you can only really mixwhat you can hear. That said, its perfectly possible to create decent-quality mixes on comparativelymodest equipment if you play your cards right. First of all, whatever you plan to spend on monitorspeakers, I think you should try to plough the same amount of money into acoustic treatment tomake the investment worthwhile. If you need suggestions for acoustic treatment, check out the website archive of Studio SOS columns, which offer dozens of real-world examples of affordablespeaker and acoustics setups.My second suggestion is to get hold of a small, single-driver mixing speaker (such as AvantonesMix Cube, pictured, or Pyramids Triple-P), and use it to listen to your mix in mono. The additionalinsight into your mix balance this kind of monitoring provides in home-studio environments isextraordinary, and well worth the additional outlay, especially if you dont have the budget for propernearfields and are thus obliged to carry out your mixing work primarily on headphones.As far as monitoring technique is concerned, the main thing to remember is to listen at a variety ofdifferent monitoring levels, and to take regular breaks to keep your ears as fresh as you can.

Switching between different monitoring systems while working can help improve your objectivity too.

Mix ReferencingOne of the best mixing aids is probably already sitting on your shelf: your own record collection.About the cheapest way to improve your mixing is to take the time to line up your favouritecommercial productions against your own work (matching the loudness if necessary, to enablea reasonable comparison). What amazes me, though, is how few home mixers take the time to dothis in anything more than a cursory manner. I dedicated a whole article to this subject back in SOSSeptember 2008 (www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep08/articles/referencecd.htm ), but the most
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep08/articles/referencecd.htmhttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_23_CDRack.jpghttp://media.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/images/TT_22.jpghttp://opensite%28%27www.cambridge-mt.com/YoungGriffoCompetition.htm.')http://opensite%28%27www.mixoff.org%27%29/


14/17

important thing to remember is just to take your time selecting suitable reference tracks, so that youset yourself the most challenging goal. Although the reality of continually struggling to reach sucha high benchmark may feel a bit depressing at times, theres nothing to beat it when it comes toensuring that you always achieve a solid quality level.

Further Reading

Theres only so much I can cram into an article like this, so on the SOS web site Ive placed a list ofuseful SOS articles that go into much more detail about how to tackle the 10 mistakes describedhere. This includes a number of Mix Rescue features, complete with audio examples.www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/articles/mixmistakesreadinglist.htm">www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/articles/mixmistakesreadinglist.htm

Published in SOS September 2011

Home | Search | News | Current Issue | Digital Editions |Articles | Forum | Subscribe | Shop |Readers Ads

Advertise | Information | Links | Privacy Policy | Support

In this article:1: Dodgy Timing/Tuning2: Mix Tonality Misjudgements3: Phase Misalignment4: Mix Mud5: Unhelpful Arrangement6: The Wrong Reverb7: Harshness8: Buried Details9: Weak Payoffs10: Inappropriate Processing On The Mix BusOne Song, 100 Mixes!MonitoringMix ReferencingFurther Reading

DAW Tips from SOS100s of great articles!CubaseDigital PerformerLiveLogicPro ToolsReaperReason

Sonar

Email: Contact SOS

Telephone: +44 (0)1954 789888

Fax: +44 (0)1954 789895

Registered Office: Media House, Trafalgar Way, Bar Hill, Cambridge, CB23 8SQ, United Kingdom.

Sound On Sound Ltd is registered in England and Wales.
http://www.soundonsound.com/information/Contact.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/http://www.soundonsound.com/sonarhttp://www.soundonsound.com/reasonhttp://www.soundonsound.com/reaperhttp://www.soundonsound.com/protoolshttp://www.soundonsound.com/logichttp://www.soundonsound.com/livehttp://www.soundonsound.com/digitalperformerhttp://www.soundonsound.com/cubasehttp://showlink%2814%29/http://showlink%2813%29/http://showlink%2812%29/http://showlink%2811%29/http://showlink%2810%29/http://showlink%289%29/http://showlink%288%29/http://showlink%287%29/http://showlink%286%29/http://showlink%285%29/http://showlink%284%29/http://showlink%283%29/http://showlink%282%29/http://showlink%281%29/http://www.soundonsound.com/supporthttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/SOSPrivacyPolicy.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/forum/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=Linkshttp://www.soundonsound.com/informationhttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/PrintAds.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/readersadshttp://www.soundonsound.com/shophttp://www.soundonsound.com/subshttp://www.soundonsound.com/forumhttp://www.soundonsound.com/articleshttp://digital.soundonsound.com/http://www.soundonsound.com/Contents.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/newshttp://www.soundonsound.com/searchhttp://www.soundonsound.com//http://www.soundonsound.com/Contents.php?Month=9&Year=2011http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/articles/mixmistakesreadinglist.htmhttp://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/articles/mixmistakesreadinglist.htmhttp://opensite%28%27%3Ca%20href%3D%27%29/http://opensite%28%27%3Ca%20href%3D%27%29/


15/17

Company number: 3015516 VAT number: GB 638 5307 26

Current Magazine

eSub Edition

Buy PDF articles

Magazine Feedback

Digital Editions

UK edition

USA digital edition

Podcasts

Competitions

Subscribe

Subscribe Now

eSub FAQs

Home

News

Search

New Search

Forum Search

Search Tips

Articles

Reviews

Technique

Sound Advice

People

Glossary

SoundBank

Help + Support

Forum

Today's Hot Topics

Forum Channel List

Forum Search

My Forum Home
http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/login.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/forum/search.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/forumhttp://www.soundonsound.com/forum/dosearch.php?Cat=&Forum=All_Forums&Words=&daterange=1&newertype=d&newerval=1&Limit=25&fromsearch=1http://www.soundonsound.com/forumhttp://www.soundonsound.com/supporthttp://www.soundonsound.com/soundbankhttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/Glossary.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/articles/People.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/articles/SoundAdvice.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/articles/Technique.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/articles/Reviews.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/articleshttp://www.soundonsound.com/search#tipshttp://www.soundonsound.com/forum/search.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/searchhttp://www.soundonsound.com/searchhttp://www.soundonsound.com/newshttp://www.soundonsound.com/http://www.soundonsound.com/subs/eSubFAQ.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/shop/Dept.php?DeptID=1http://www.soundonsound.com/subscribehttp://www.soundonsound.com/competitionshttp://www.soundonsound.com/podcasthttp://usdigital.soundonsound.com/http://ukdigital.soundonsound.com/http://digital.soundonsound.com/http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=MagFeedhttp://www.soundonsound.com/search?url=%2Fsearch&Keyword=&Year=+&Month=+&CB=1&Words=All&Summary=No&Section=0&Subject=0&ShowResults=yeshttp://www.soundonsound.com/Contents.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/Contents.phphttp://soundcloud.com/soundonsoundhttp://gplus.to/sospublicationshttp://www.twitter.com/sospublicationshttp://www.facebook.com/sospublicationshttp://www.soundonsound.com/rss.php


16/17

My Forum Settings

My Private Messages

Forum Rules & Etiquette

SOS TV

Watch exhibition videos, tutorials,interviews, masterclasses

Readers Classifieds

Submit New Adverts

View My Adverts

SOS Directory

My SOS

Change Password

Change My Email

Change My Address

My Subscription

My eNewsletters

My Downloads

My Goodies

Information

About SOS

Contact SOS Staff

Advertising

Licensing Enquiries

Magazine On-sale Dates

SOS Logos & Graphics

SOS Site Analytics

Privacy Policy

All contents copyright SOS Publications Group and/or its licensors, 1985-2013. All rights reserved.

The contents of this article are subject to worldwide copyright protection and reproduction in whole or

part, whether mechanical or electronic, is expressly forbidden without the prior written consent of the

Publishers. Great care has been taken to ensure accuracy in the preparation of this article but neither

Sound On Sound Limited nor the publishers can be held responsible for its contents. The views

expressed are those of the contributors and not necessarily those of the publishers.

Web site designed & maintained by PB Associates | SOS | Relative Media

Home | Digital Mags | Podcasts | WIN Prizes | Subscribe | Advertise | About SOS | HelpThu 4 Apr 2013Search SOS
http://gosearch%28%29/http://www.soundonsound.com/supporthttp://www.soundonsound.com/informationhttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/PrintAds.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/shop/Dept.php?DeptID=1http://www.soundonsound.com/competitionshttp://www.soundonsound.com/podcasthttp://digital.soundonsound.com/http://www.soundonsound.com/http://www.soundonsound.com/information/SOSPrivacyPolicy.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/WebStats.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/SOSMedia.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/UKOnSaleDates.phpmailto:[email protected]://www.soundonsound.com/information/PrintAds.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/Contact.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/informationhttp://www.soundonsound.com/informationhttps://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/Goodies.phphttps://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/Downloads.phphttps://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/Newsletters.phphttps://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/Subscription.phphttps://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/ContactDetails.phphttps://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/Newsletters.phphttps://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/Password.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/UserDetails.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/directoryhttp://www.soundonsound.com/readersads/AdList.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/readersads/AdDetails.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/readersadshttp://www.soundonsound.com/videohttp://www.soundonsound.com/videohttp://www.soundonsound.com/videohttp://www.soundonsound.com/information/ForumRules.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/forum/viewmessages.php?Cat=&box=receivedhttp://www.soundonsound.com/forum/editdisplay.php?Cat=


17/17

Have an account? Log in orRegister for free

Sound On Sound : Est. 1985

SearchNewsArticlesForumSOS TVSubscribeShopDirectoryReaders' AdvertsInformationBlog

LOADING...
http://www.soundonsound.com/engineers-diaryhttp://www.soundonsound.com/informationhttp://www.soundonsound.com/readersadshttp://www.soundonsound.com/directoryhttp://www.soundonsound.com/shophttp://www.soundonsound.com/videohttp://www.soundonsound.com/forumhttp://www.soundonsound.com/articleshttp://www.soundonsound.com/newshttp://www.soundonsound.com/searchhttp://www.soundonsound.com/https://www.soundonsound.com/UserAccount/NewUser.phphttp://www.soundonsound.com/Login.php

mix mistakes

Documents