gain structure and mixing aka THE MONEYSHOT THREAD

[macc]

P.S. any required edits/unclear points, let me know

[ehbes]

[didi]

Just finished reading the thread. Fucking big ups. Unbelievably helpful.

So I have a question and a contribution.

Q. At everyone saying you should only send to an ME if it's between 3 and 6 dbfs, surely the ME can just turn it down? or turn it up? Surely there's no difference between me pushing my master fader up or down 1 or 2 dbs and the ME using their equipment to do the same?

Contribution: My take on the thread.

Importing parts straight into the mixer, can leave you fighting a battle with the channel faders to keep things from clipping, and leaves you with a mix that looks (and sounds) very different from a mix you did last month, or last year.

But if you set the levels approximately right at the source (gain structure) you're mix is pretty much sorted level wise, and your channel faders move very little, on any mix you do. Repeatability. Consistency.

+ you know that it's not going to clip but peak somewhere very nicely between -8 and -1 dbfs. Every time.

So with gain structuring you become a better mixer. It's a skill that you can add to your production arsenal, not just a way of getting any individual mix big.


anyway cheers to all that contributed.

[macc]

Q. At everyone saying you should only send to an ME if it's between 3 and 6 dbfs, surely the ME can just turn it down? or turn it up? Surely there's no difference between me pushing my master fader up or down 1 or 2 dbs and the ME using their equipment to do the same?

Assuming they do it digitally then that's correct * , but there are other ways of doing it.

The compressor make-up gain (chunky) on my Avalon 747 sounds different to the main output (classy), which sounds different to the MLA-3 (clean as f#ck), which sounds different to the API 2500 make-up (errr, API-sounding, 'magic'), blah blah. Add those together in different combinations, bearing in mind how hot you are hitting the next piece down the chain, etc, and there are a lot of different ways to change the sound while only changing the gain by a dB or two.

So, yes, but no.

But whatever the case, whether there's 1dB headroom or 24dB, the cake hasn't been baked. Smash that sh1t with a limiter or clip the balls off it and the info is gone, end of.


I'm not one for worrying about different DAWs sounding different when they do gain and all that stuff... I have actual work to do, in the real world

[JesseG]

Smash that sh1t with a limiter or clip the balls off it and the info is gone, end of.

As someone with exclusive access to technology that - to a certain degree - invalidates Macc's comment about the inability to remove distortion and "regenerate" dynamics & detail... I'll still agree with him 110%. Once the detail is gone, it's gone, and even the most bleeding edge private-stock trickery can't always bring something back close to what was once originally un-destroyed. This starts at the mics and pre-amp gain!!!! It's not just limiters that can effect the loss of detail during recording. It's everything, every "device", and how you use them... every step of the way. But limiters and clippers (and even fast or deep compression) are definitely thee most abused point where detail is lost today.

By the way... unlimited tracks with around 15-20 dB crest sound best in proper clubs & large-scale PAs, and make the smacked stuff sound lame by comparison. "real-club-loudness-0db banger" is an oxymoron, and the DJ sets the fader for the real-life loudness he wants, not the signal level of the recording. So when you smack it, all you're doing is removing detail and REAL ACTUAL punch. the same is true of most listeners, and the loudness balancing stuff found in iPods and a growing number of software players now.

---

And then there's the problems with mixing into fast dynamics processing effecting your natural compensation for the inaccuracies of your monitoring/room/position/etc... in a way can totally screw up the frequency/crest relationship across the spectrum. Docc, what percentage of D&B/dub/etc tracks would you say you get with the treble WAY too squished, but open mids and lows?

The problem there is even more fun, because most limiters make an effort to not IMD or hole-punch the highs, but when corrected, you get an un-detailed treble that doesn't fit the lows or mids, and sounds like an uncomfortable busyness that can even lower the threshold of pain point ala SPL. And you can also end up un-masking low/mid frequency IMD caused by the highs.

---

The "can get loud" advice from Macc is good. If you're worried about your mastering engineer not getting the idea about the place near where you want to end up, PLEASE also send them a reference track that you brought up to the SOUND of the peak limiting you want to get. Not the signal hotness you want to get (i'm careful not to misuse the term "loudness" without a standard to reference). That way your engineer can make it as hot a signal as they can, without sounding worse than what you've done.

With any luck, you're working with a guy/girl that can get you to levels that compete fairly with other HOT yet acceptable sounding stuff, but sounding a lot LESS peak limited than what you sent as a reference.

[DubMikey]

My bad mixing skills has really begun to piss me off lately.. I even cry myself to sleep trying to figure out this riddle.

I was wondering if anyone could give some good tips on how I can practice my mixing, as I don't want to make a WHOLE tune and then start mixing. Don't anyone have some fancy tips or anything? I am desperate as you may have figured.

[Ldizzy]

My bad mixing skills has really begun to piss me off lately.. I even cry myself to sleep trying to figure out this riddle.

I was wondering if anyone could give some good tips on how I can practice my mixing, as I don't want to make a WHOLE tune and then start mixing. Don't anyone have some fancy tips or anything? I am desperate as you may have figured.

find stems on the internet and mix them, try to learn what the knobs do... really what we're doing all day around here

[Electric_Head]

My bad mixing skills has really begun to piss me off lately.. I even cry myself to sleep trying to figure out this riddle.

I was wondering if anyone could give some good tips on how I can practice my mixing, as I don't want to make a WHOLE tune and then start mixing. Don't anyone have some fancy tips or anything? I am desperate as you may have figured.

do a search for mixing project tutorials
you`ll receive all the stems and step by step instructions on the mixing process

[mikeyp]

i either do it all wrong or it's just one of those things i get, mixing is (mostly) easy for me

anybody else ever felt like this?

[Ldizzy]

i either do it all wrong or it's just one of those things i get, mixing is (mostly) easy for me

anybody else ever felt like this?

tough luv but from a technical standpoint ur tracks have severe dynamics issues... altho aesthetically that might be just what you're after

tough luv.. no harsh feelings bro

[mikeyp]

i either do it all wrong or it's just one of those things i get, mixing is (mostly) easy for me

anybody else ever felt like this?

tough luv but from a technical standpoint ur tracks have severe dynamics issues... altho aesthetically that might be just what you're after

tough luv.. no harsh feelings bro

care to elaborate?

[Ldizzy]

i either do it all wrong or it's just one of those things i get, mixing is (mostly) easy for me

anybody else ever felt like this?

tough luv but from a technical standpoint ur tracks have severe dynamics issues... altho aesthetically that might be just what you're after

tough luv.. no harsh feelings bro

care to elaborate?

snares dont hit. dynamic margin sounds like your drums lack impact power

yet the mix sounds pretty clean... anyone on this or am i really bad at hearing dynamics? and btw i love the tunes themselves!!!!! just wanted to stress the fact that a very very very few people can actually say mixing is something they dont need to improve on...

[Perfecture]

Something that still iludes me is where to have the master fader at before mastering/during mixdown.

Should I mix everything with the master fader at 0 and the track peaking at 0 and then bring the master fader down so that its peaking at -4 etc before mastering, OR should I mix everything to -4 so that the master fader stays at 0 and I don't have to pull it down before mastering.

help is much appreciated.

[macc]

Ideally you don't need to move the master fader at all.

Look at your question again - you're making yourself do an extra step that you don't need to do if you simply start lower in the first place.

Ok, so moving the master fader is hardly a big deal, but the 'hidden' benefit of never moving it is that you will find a repeatable approach to gain structure that will help you improve consistency in your mixes.

In addition; As you have it, on one track you might have to drop the master by 4dB, on another it might be 6dB, on another 10dB (hopefully not!). When mixing, before moving the master fader, the tracks are all at different levels (to your ear). You're basically mixing at different levels each time, which affects how you hear things, which affects your judgements, etc etc. That's only one aspect of it, there are plenty more reasons to keep it simple and not being giving with one hand and taking with the other.

[Perfecture]

Ideally you don't need to move the master fader at all.

Look at your question again - you're making yourself do an extra step that you don't need to do if you simply start lower in the first place.

Ok, so moving the master fader is hardly a big deal, but the 'hidden' benefit of never moving it is that you will find a repeatable approach to gain structure that will help you improve consistency in your mixes.

In addition; As you have it, on one track you might have to drop the master by 4dB, on another it might be 6dB, on another 10dB (hopefully not!). When mixing, before moving the master fader, the tracks are all at different levels (to your ear). You're basically mixing at different levels each time, which affects how you hear things, which affects your judgements, etc etc. That's only one aspect of it, there are plenty more reasons to keep it simple and not being giving with one hand and taking with the other.

I see what your saying man, thanks for the advice, so in essence you are saying there is no difference between mixing as close to 0 as you can and then pulling the master fader down to -4 OR mixing to -4 and leaving the master fader where it is?

Also is it common to have slight spikes every now and then. The track i am working on peaks consistantly at -0.6db, but every now and then it will spike up for less than a second to like +0.9db or +0.6db, so in essence hitting the red for like half a second. is this bad or a common thing?

Thanks for your help so far, really appreciated man.

[skimpi]

Ideally you don't need to move the master fader at all.

Look at your question again - you're making yourself do an extra step that you don't need to do if you simply start lower in the first place.

Ok, so moving the master fader is hardly a big deal, but the 'hidden' benefit of never moving it is that you will find a repeatable approach to gain structure that will help you improve consistency in your mixes.

In addition; As you have it, on one track you might have to drop the master by 4dB, on another it might be 6dB, on another 10dB (hopefully not!). When mixing, before moving the master fader, the tracks are all at different levels (to your ear). You're basically mixing at different levels each time, which affects how you hear things, which affects your judgements, etc etc. That's only one aspect of it, there are plenty more reasons to keep it simple and not being giving with one hand and taking with the other.

I see what your saying man, thanks for the advice, so in essence you are saying there is no difference between mixing as close to 0 as you can and then pulling the master fader down to -4 OR mixing to -4 and leaving the master fader where it is?

Also is it common to have slight spikes every now and then. The track i am working on peaks consistantly at -0.6db, but every now and then it will spike up for less than a second to like +0.9db or +0.6db, so in essence hitting the red for like half a second. is this bad or a common thing?

Thanks for your help so far, really appreciated man.

I don't know what is 'right' but like i normally try and get like around -3db and below headroom, but if there is like a few peaks that go over that, I don't really mind. However, if it is a certain peak, pushing it into the read, well then that is clipping for that moment in time, probably not audible but still. Try and get it so the track never goes into the red.

[safeandsound]

but every now and then it will spike up for less than a second to like +0.9db or +0.6db

It is bad in the sense that you have exceeded digital zero, 0dBFS. Above this point the
finite numbers have run out and you are recording a flat line as opposed to "information"
present in your musics transients.

The entirety of the thread has explained the method of avoiding this from happening in the
vast majority of mix downs. (with the exception of avant garde, free jazz wig outs with glass and metal clashes, lol)

i.e. leave lots of headroom on your mix channels.

[Perfecture]

but every now and then it will spike up for less than a second to like +0.9db or +0.6db

It is bad in the sense that you have exceeded digital zero, 0dBFS. Above this point the
finite numbers have run out and you are recording a flat line as opposed to "information"
present in your musics transients.

The entirety of the thread has explained the method of avoiding this from happening in the
vast majority of mix downs. (with the exception of avant garde, free jazz wig outs with glass and metal clashes, lol)

i.e. leave lots of headroom on your mix channels.

Well what I did today is turned every bus down by 1 db and now it hits exactly at 0db consistantly. Is this a 'cheating' method or is this wise and correct?

Many Thanks to all you guys for your help.

[macc]

I see what your saying man, thanks for the advice, so in essence you are saying there is no difference between mixing as close to 0 as you can and then pulling the master fader down to -4 OR mixing to -4 and leaving the master fader where it is?

There's no mathematical difference. There are numerous other reasons to do it though - workflow, efficiency, repeatability between mixes, just not running the risk of clipping your track, learning how to maximise impact and power without just mashing shit against zero, working to a consistent ear level, blah blah...

Answer me this;

Why do you need to mix as close to 0 as you can?

[didi]

but every now and then it will spike up for less than a second to like +0.9db or +0.6db

It is bad in the sense that you have exceeded digital zero, 0dBFS. Above this point the
finite numbers have run out and you are recording a flat line as opposed to "information"
present in your musics transients.

The entirety of the thread has explained the method of avoiding this from happening in the
vast majority of mix downs. (with the exception of avant garde, free jazz wig outs with glass and metal clashes, lol)

i.e. leave lots of headroom on your mix channels.

Well what I did today is turned every bus down by 1 db and now it hits exactly at 0db consistantly. Is this a 'cheating' method or is this wise and correct?

Many Thanks to all you guys for your help.

imo, this thread isn't about any individual track it's about not putting yourself in that situation in the first place.

Yeah, if that works, then it's all well and good, but you will get better, repeatable mixes if you get things right so early that you don't even have to worry about peaking. Prevention is better than cure yada yada.