- This topic has 3 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by Jeff Macdonald.
March 16, 2017 at 6:53 am #23557auntiebeebParticipant
I just watched a great video by Izotope about tips for creating better mixes and the guy talked about assessing how a song makes you feel in order to decide where you might want to take a mix to convey the intention of the artist or producer. It's remembering what we do is art as well as technical ability.
I found it really interesting and would like some of this sort of content in PLAPA because, not all of us are musicians or songwriters or even consider themselves producers (me). I'm really, just an audiophile with a little guitar playing experience but have an ear for mixing. Some insight into the thought process of songwriting and the intended emotional journey would be really useful and fun.
Here's a link to the video and its tip no1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Gtbt2oxso
Sara.March 16, 2017 at 11:13 am #23584KipParticipant
tobi had told me about a free distortion plugin isotope had so i signed up to the newsletter ...so i was watching these as they came out.
i think this is a great idea ..even if warren doesnt have lessons on this i would hope maybe some others could drop us a few hints...March 26, 2017 at 1:11 am #24275Guido tum SudenKeymaster
we could also discuss this on the forum. (Mixing Technics maybe?).
For me it would be a little bit too much in one go.
Maybe you could make several threads:
- Accessing the intention of the song
- Starting a new song
- Composing and Songwriting
- Choosing instruments for a new song
I just watched part of the video you mentioned and would never want to approach a song like that. But I would do the same thing analytical.
An example: We sometimes get songs from Warren where the vocals in the chorus have more words than in the verses and are sung at the same height, which IMHO makes them verses with identical lyrics. So we have to solve that problem by making the chorus sound like a chorus through mixing.
GuidoMarch 27, 2017 at 6:38 am #24355Jeff MacdonaldModerator
I'll jump on board with this as well. I think this could create an excellent lesson, but more importantly lots of discussion, as I feel there will be many different opinions on the matter.
I have been musing about the subject a lot lately and considerably more after both watching that series with Enrique and funny enough reading the Daily Adventures of Mixerman (which, if you haven't read I would highly suggest).
I'd be really interested in hearing from Warren about how much 'name' mixers have effected the Radio-rock scene. It really appears from both reading accounts of it and listing to top-40 rock radio there is a relatively homogeneous 'rock-sound' and 'county-sound'. From some accounts I have come across is supposedly very far from what is delivered to the mixer. From this particular account the claim was made that regardless of what is present to some mixers it is treated in a fashion that allows the mixer to put a sonic stamp on it, which is understandable, because I can't see the point of paying someone A-List Mixer rates to push faders around to automate a song that was recorded as it was intended to be released.
With that said, I wonder which path many producers are taking, are they committing more sounds to tape to tie the hands of the mixer so their sound makes it to master, or are they just worrying about performance and song structure to allow the mixer free reign on the sound of the record through sample replacement and augmentation? Or are they recording albums with the knowledge of who might mix it and are providing them something that will fit their style really well?
Anyhow, sorry for the small rant, but I would absolutely love to dive deeper into this topic as it truly fascinates me.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.