mix brighness and snap

i57dwun4yb1pt8

All, if anyone has some tips id be grateful .

when I do a test mix , then render it , and play it compared to a commercial tune of similar style
( actually most commercial tunes )

the commercial ones all seem to have a brightness and snap to the overall sound that my mixes do not .

to me it appears some radical eqing appears to be happening on commercial overall mixes ?

this is in my project room as well as on outside devices.
so its occuring on my monitors as well , something im lacking in my mix skills
seems to be at fault here.

when i play a commercial mix , they all sound very bright and lively , where as mine sound a little dull and cloudy , as if looking through slightly steamed window.its nearly there , but just missing that 'fizz ' or clarity in the uper mid to high end .

i cant see how these mixes can be achieved using individual track eqing , surely an overall master eqing must be occuring

yes, i know tunes get mastered , but does mastering inlude overall mix eqing , as it seems quite a bit of it would be needed.

mattfender

I assume its in the mastering process that the bright frequencies are boosted a little.

PaulBrewer

Certainly adding a bit of top would be common enough in mastering, but having taken the journey myself many times, I'm inclined to think that the sheen and shine you require comes from the extra 10% that top gear gives that unfortunately costs 90% more to get !

i57dwun4yb1pt8

what if that top gear is in a mastering guys studio ?

PaulBrewer

DaDumTish wrote: »

what if that top gear is in a mastering guys studio ?

Doesn't work like that I'm afraid ...

mattfender

I attemped mastering tracks of mine before and it ended up being too toppy and sounded like an over produced song on the radio:o

Rockshamrover

DaDumTish wrote: »

All, if anyone has some tips id be grateful .

when I do a test mix , then render it , and play it compared to a commercial tune of similar style
( actually most commercial tunes )

the commercial ones all seem to have a brightness and snap to the overall sound that my mixes do not .

to me it appears some radical eqing appears to be happening on commercial overall mixes ?

this is in my project room as well as on outside devices.
so its occuring on my monitors as well , something im lacking in my mix skills
seems to be at fault here.

when i play a commercial mix , they all sound very bright and lively , where as mine sound a little dull and cloudy , as if looking through slightly steamed window.its nearly there , but just missing that 'fizz ' or clarity in the uper mid to high end .

i cant see how these mixes can be achieved using individual track eqing , surely an overall master eqing must be occuring

yes, i know tunes get mastered , but does mastering inlude overall mix eqing , as it seems quite a bit of it would be needed.

Have you thought about letting someone else mix your songs on your gear? They might see/hear something that you are missing.

madtheory

There are a lot of possible causes of this problem.

1. You tend to mix with a low and/ or inconsistent monitor level. Try calibrating your monitors to 79dBSPL C weighted, using an SPL meter at you usual mix position. Mark that off on your volume control, and take SPL readings often.
2. The room acoustics need looking at- how are your mirror points? Do you have as much bass trapping in there as you can? What's the room's RT60?
3. For something as broad as "top end" I think it's safe to say that it's not a problem caused by lack of good gear, with the possible exception of monitor speakers. I assume you're using something fairly decent?

i57dwun4yb1pt8

i have done room tests when i was treating the room and setting up the monitors , and its flat within +- 8 db from 40 hz to 10 k at the seat

cant measure after 10k on my meter mic .

i have room well treated , and the reflection points etc.

i think you may have something about monitoring too low though ,
( focal solo 6's )

I dont turn up , and I i tried it tonight and the test mix came out alot better
mixing with a bit more welly on the volume .

why would this be the case though - is it due to hearing reponse ?
( which in my case is worse than ****e )

PaulBrewer

DaDumTish wrote: »

i have done room tests when i was treating the room and setting up the monitors , and its flat within +- 8 db from 40 hz to 10 k at the seat

cant measure after 10k on my meter mic .

i have room well treated , and the reflection points etc.

i think you may have something about monitoring too low though ,
( focal solo 6's )

I dont turn up , and I i tried it tonight and the test mix came out alot better
mixing with a bit more welly on the volume .

why would this be the case though - is it due to hearing reponse ?
( which in my case is worse than ****e )

If you're Mutt and Jeff then the opposite should be the problem i.e. your mixes should be too bright.

ogy

why would this be the case though - is it due to hearing reponse ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher%E2%80%93Munson_curves

i57dwun4yb1pt8

Doh , now it makes sense

thanks !

crocko996

1. Have you tried to save your mix in an higher quality uncompressed format (48k-96k.wav) first and then recompress? or
2. If your mix sounds good in the pre-rendering stage why don't you try to record it on a different machine (PC, DAT, Cd recorder etc.)? in my experrience, different Daw's sounds different when rendering mixes. "What u hear" is not always "what U get" in the saved file
3. in the processors/effects chain, high-pass filter at 32Hz, always use a decent limiter to boost the loudness arround -8 dB headroom, make sure sound tops at -0.2 dB in the digital

trackmixstudio

I have said it here many times before.
200-500 hertz will make or break a mix.
These are the "muddy" frequencies.
If you cut tracks in this area (solo them and find the muddy area) your mixes will sound much louder and brighter. This area will eat a lot of headroom and cutting it a bit works much better (IME) than boosting highs.
EQ generally works much better when you cut rather than boost.
Also hi pass EVERYTHING by sweeping up until you can hear it affecting the track then go back down slightly. This will kill lots of rumble and let the kick and bass through without having to boost low end on them.

When I am mixing I always bring a reference track in on a stereo track and put it after the song I am mixing on the time line so I can instantly A/B with the reference track at any time. Logic's match eq is very handy because it will tell you straight away where you are at frequency wise compared to the reference track.
If you are finding your mixes dull compared to commercial tracks you should certainly try mixing to a similar sounding reference track.

As Paul says, top quality gear will get you clarity in the high mids that prosumer gear won't get you.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

I dont think the DAW makes a difference to mixes .

I do think the 200 - 500 area s could be an issue - should i high pass even the kick and bass ?

then seperate them a bit more ?

i try to use as little eq as possible particulalry on toms / overheads .
and guitars.

but maybe these need a bit more either cut or boost.


the weak link in my chain is the AD/DA converter ( tc electronic studio konnekt 48 )
but i still should be able to get a good commercial mix out of it .
commercial music sounds superb through my setup , fast , detailed and full .
just alot brighter and clearer than my mixes.

pres , monitors , mics , daw are all pro level.

im sure its my own lack of skills thats causing this , in terms of eq and possibly mastering .

i also assumed as Paul said - my deaf ears would cause overbrightness, but I seem to be going the opposite for some reason .
to be honest , when i listen to one of mine , then put on a commercial mix , I find the commerical ones almost WAYY to bright - mp3 / wav / cd , doesnt matter .

PaulBrewer

DaDumTish wrote: »

I find the commerical ones almost WAYY to bright - mp3 / wav / cd , doesnt matter .

Doesn't that then suggest the monitoring chain if what you know (expect) to be correct sounds too bright ?

PMI

Transient Designers

What are you listening on?

i57dwun4yb1pt8

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Doesn't that then suggest the monitoring chain if what you know (expect) to be correct sounds too bright ?

well, its only after ive been working on my own stuff , and compare right after.

if i just go in one day and in the space of 2 hours
1/ play normal music , it sounds great , dont notice any undue brightness

then

2/ i play my own, sounds dull and cloudy ,

then 3/ play normal - again - now sounds over bright .

but , I also brought the recordings out to other systems , and the same issue occurs - my mix dull, real mix -bright .

so at least my mix is consistent ( its translating as dull no matter where i go :_) )


monitors are focal solo 6be - main outs from the TC card

http://www.mercenary.com/fosobemopa.html

http://www.tcelectronic.com/StudioKonnekt48.asp

henessjon

a very helpful discussion

thanks

could this be a monitor problem?

i bounce my mixes and play over my stereo system to compare Im edging ever closer slowly but never can reach comaprison to pro music

Seziertisch

In my experience a good hardware eq can be opened up much more than a software eq (although there are some newer soft eqs which are supposedly excellent). This might be part of what you are hearing.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

I get confused with all talk of eq I must say

some say only cut !
some say whack it up all the way !
some say use none if you can

to me playing the raw mix with no eq sounds nice , but appera to need a touch of low end or sparkle in most cases

so i tend to eq kick, snare , bass ,and guitars and vocals .
mainly just using presets ( ie kick 1 in what ever vst im using , then slightly adjust it ) or vocal 3 etc until they sound like i reckon they should all together- sounds good to me at the time .

but after this - and comparing mixes, mine are falling short and im trying to figure why .

im using high quality sources

what step am i messing up on ?

PaulBrewer

DaDumTish wrote: »

well, its only after ive been working on my own stuff , and compare right after.

if i just go in one day and in the space of 2 hours
1/ play normal music , it sounds great , dont notice any undue brightness

then

2/ i play my own, sounds dull and cloudy ,

then 3/ play normal - again - now sounds over bright .

but , I also brought the recordings out to other systems , and the same issue occurs - my mix dull, real mix -bright .

so at least my mix is consistent ( its translating as dull no matter where i go :_) )


monitors are focal solo 6be - main outs from the TC card

http://www.mercenary.com/fosobemopa.html

http://www.tcelectronic.com/StudioKonnekt48.asp

I still think, from my experience, my initial observation is correct.

However to reduce variables (YOU!) why not have a similarish vibed commercial track on hand to compare whilst your mixing ?

The other thing you might try is reducing the top end on your monitors listening to commercial material til it sounds 'right' to you.

(I know the twins can do that so I guess the 6s can too?)

Then attempt a mix on your own stuff....

PMI

Im from the GIAFI era of EQ.... so I will eq it as much as I want until I get it sounding the way I want it within the mix.

I dont listen to anyone about eq and compression as there aint no rules....

Seziertisch

DaDumTish wrote: »

I get confused with all talk of eq I must say

some say only cut !
some say whack it up all the way !
some say use none if you can

to me playing the raw mix with no eq sounds nice , but appera to need a touch of low end or sparkle in most cases

so i tend to eq kick, snare , bass ,and guitars and vocals .
mainly just using presets ( ie kick 1 in what ever vst im using , then slightly adjust it ) or vocal 3 etc until they sound like i reckon they should all together- sounds good to me at the time .

but after this - and comparing mixes, mine are falling short and im trying to figure why .

im using high quality sources

what step am i messing up on ?

There are no rules, but a good hardware eq will do so much more for the sound, allowing you to do boosts and cuts in a much more musical fashion, whereas using plug-ins you might prefer the sound uneqed.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

HMMM.

I think Paul may have the answer there .

I may use the tweeter contours until commercials sound normal ,
I was not able to measure the room above 9 or 10 k or so
and i have a sneaky memory / feeling i may have the tweeter contours set quite high already .


so if i then know that the average record sound good and not too bright , I can aim my mixes at this bar.

then remix and see how that goes


will try this an report back , thanks for the tips and time .

gawd , all i want to do is make music !

* crys into hands *

PaulBrewer

DaDumTish wrote: »

HMMM.

i may have the tweeter contours set quite high already .


*

EEjit!

i57dwun4yb1pt8

ok, the tweeters were in fact at 0db ,
so i dropped them down to maximum cut
( which is i think - 3db )

and low and behold , the music sounds much more normal ,

so I remixed using this setup and comparing to the normal music ,
and did have to eq boost a tad on the drums high end - but just a tad.


i also took the trackmix advice and did a good bit of high passing on stuff.
this meant i didnt have to eq the low end stuff at all , just cut some stuff.

and i got the db meter out and monitored at around 80 to 85 db
did what madtheory said to try.


sounds a ****eload better.

way way way better - more real, lively , brighter and airier .

so I again owe people pints.

I should have the track up in few weeks for your critque ,


lessons learned

1/ monitor at a reasonable level - not quiet.
2/ high pass what you dont need in the low end on each track.
3/ get the monitor balance correct with good commercial mixes to test how it sounds.


thank god for you lot .

PaulBrewer

DaDumTish wrote: »

ok, the tweeters were in fact at 0db ,
so i dropped them down to maximum cut
( which is i think - 3db )

and low and behold , the music sounds much more normal ,

so I remixed using this setup and comparing to the normal music ,
and did have to eq boost a tad on the drums high end - but just a tad.


i also took the trackmix advice and did a good bit of high passing on stuff.
this meant i didnt have to eq the low end stuff at all , just cut some stuff.

and i got the db meter out and monitored at around 80 to 85 db
snf did what madtheory siad to try.


sounds a ****eload better.

way way way better - more real, lively , brighter and airier .

so I again owe people pints.

I should have the track up in few weeks for your critque ,


lessons learned

1/ monitor at a reasonable level - not quiet.
2/ high pass what you dont need in the low end on each track.
3/ get the monitor balance correct with good commercial mixes to test how it sounds.


thank god for you lot .

Actually a lot of mixers do mix at very low level. The most obvious reason is to avoid fatigue.

When I visited Cenzo Towshend who was mixing The Pigeon Detectives in Olympic the volume was very low.(that may have been because they were shyte)

Similarly Mick Glossop in British Grove was mixing a Russian Choir ... at talkable above volume.

You may also have seen the RecordProduction.com video interview with Chris Lord-Alge who also mixes very low.
In fact he described the volumes as so low that his assistant typing was a source of annoyance.

I do think a reference level could be of use - but so too is mixing quietly.

madtheory

Good stuff!

Kinda pointless now, but I was wondering what music you listen to DaDumTish. A lot of things sound too bright. For example, U2's Joshua Tree sounds "dull" (including remaster) but only when on iPod shuffle. As an album it sounds great.

The 200Hz to 500Hz area should not be cut as a rule, without considering what it is. That's where the warmth is. It's also the chest area of the voice. There's a lot of subliminal emotion in that area, particularly for a vocal, so be very careful with it.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

oh, i basically just took out anything below 100 or so on the main guitars , took out a shave around 300 - 600 on the overall drums


anything below 50 on the toms , vocals , snare , 300 on the hats and ride

seems to have cleaned it up alot - but the higher monitoring level for eq decisions and the tweeter tweak has helped alot

i listen to lots of stuff, alot of 70s stuff sounds duller than 80s and 90s stuff , but they all still have space and clarity i was lacking .

mainly anything with drums in it - this can be disco to metal middle ground would be bowie i guess,
at the moment im basing decisions on porcupine trees tunes .

I never have , nor ever will be a huge fan of the acoustic singer songwriter as a listener ;-)

i think im on a better path now thanks to the tips - the tweeter one and the monitoring level has defo been the major revelations for me.

at least I now know the room is is a pretty good state for mixing , if not perfect - its as good as I can get .

madtheory

Do you have "Mixing with your mind"? Very nice emotional rather than technical approach.

I find it also helps a lot to use a spectrum analyzer at times. Filtering out the noise is always good, but always check the result with the oul ears!

PaulBrewer

I think you should just filter off everything below 22kHz ...

i57dwun4yb1pt8

yeah Paul , music for bats , thats gona be a winner

Dravokivich

DaDumTish wrote: »

yeah Paul , music for bats , thats gona be a winner

ey.. no need to limit yer potential market...

i57dwun4yb1pt8

just bought mixing with your mind , await its delivery !