TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- lack of space in contemporary mixing
Pages (2): [1] 2 »


Posted by nefardec on Apr-27-2008 04:31:

lack of space in contemporary mixing

listening today to a lot of music old and new, i found myself noticing something very difficult for me to describe...

basically the conteporary maximization mixing culture seems to create a lot of really really flat mixes that we call 'professional'. everything has its place in the front line of the mix. there's little noise or (sur)realistic reverberation that implies a virtual space in which the music exists or was recorded. obviously producers have mostly done this in order to make tracks sound loud on a club system.

there's something about this kind of mix that feels like putting walls up around the track, whereas with more dynamic tracks allow you to drift in and out of it freely.. I don't know how to describe it other than I think ears have some sort of focus like eyes, and contemporary production is like a constant focus very close, like the experience of being embedded in a metropolis - no sense of distance, constant congestion, relentless action and intensity... i want to hear more music with some sort of deep space that allows my ears and mind to focus far out into the virtual space they create. (does this make sense to anyone)


a lot of older tracks I listen to seem to have a lot more dynamics and space in the mix, which makes it a lot easier for me to become lost within it. Sven Vath - Ritual of Life, FUSE - dimension intrusion, are some examples.

I'm sure some people would complain about these as being amateurly mastered or something, but I really really appreciate the space and dynamic contrast in the recording.

Especially when there is a reverb that convincingly simulates a space of a certain dimension and character.

For me it's like the difference between seeing a photo or rendering of a space and actually being there (or feeling like one is there)

trance is hardly the only plastic sounding music these days

what artists remain out there that care about dynamics and space? (There are some guys in the netlabel scene and dub techno scene that have some sort of dynamic and spatial sensibility)

ill end this with a plea:

bring back dimensions! bring back quietness to coexist with loudness!


edit - i think im beginning to read like '********'


Posted by iammesol on Apr-27-2008 04:43:

Re: lack of space in contemporary mixing

quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
edit - i think im beginning to read like '********'


lol

And I'm really interested in what you're talking about. Could you give us some examples of some tracks that DON'T have space?


Posted by LionsLair on Apr-27-2008 04:56:

I dont think its an artistic, practice, or talent limitation, rather a hardware and financial limitation that is giving birth to today's spaceless and stripped of dynamics music. Music of the 50s 60s 70s 80s up till the 90s were high in dynamics and space because they used organic instruments, actual hardware, analogue, tape to record their music. Today's producers use dynamics stripping software compressors and EQ's, software emulation of hardware synths. There is a loss in translation at every level.

Edit: personally i try to spend a lot of time thinking about dynamics when creating sounds, and have to avoid certain sounds because I would have to strip it of its dynamics in order to actually use it without the sound being lost in the mix. Usually sounds that give power to the groove can be expendable, but sounds that incite emotion have to be tweaked with procurement of dyanmics in mind.


Posted by LionsLair on Apr-27-2008 05:09:

Also 80% of the music you hear on beatport is made by people who have invested very little money on actual sound creating and mixing hardware, most are making music in the least time consuming ways possible, with minimal expense as possible. And we can take this on another tangent and explain why we have a lot of formula driven music...back in the pre-DAW day, saving presets was a pain in the ass, saving a whole template to work off again was unheared of, especially when they were working entirely in Audio.

Now producers like Deadmaus5 (and hundreds of others) for example, can load up the Faxing Berlin template, move the notes around a bit, right click the synth channels and replace with another synth, or use that same synthesizer track and change/tweak the preset. If you listen to Faxing Berlin and Jaded...you have a prime example. A lot of it has to do with the mixing and the time it takes to make a good mix, the templates help in not having to create a new drum machine, and then create a new compressor,eq,reverb, and the settings for each instrument down the line. So I cant hate on producers for using templates, it streamlines production/engineering and sometimes gives birth to greater music because more time can be spent on the actual music.


Posted by Sykonee on Apr-27-2008 05:10:

This has been a common complaint of audiophiles for the last decade, a byproduct of the Loudness Wars. There's tons of articles on it.

So, yes, you aren't alone in this line of thinking. EQ'd-to-the-max production has been plaguing music for some time now, but when the average music listener isn't going to be listening to it on anything better than a laptop speaker, cell-phone ring-tone, or iPod earbud, such concerns over things like sonic-space tend to be ignored.


Posted by LionsLair on Apr-27-2008 05:27:

quote:
Originally posted by Sykonee
This has been a common complaint of audiophiles for the last decade, a byproduct of the Loudness Wars. There's tons of articles on it.

So, yes, you aren't alone in this line of thinking. EQ'd-to-the-max production has been plaguing music for some time now, but when the average music listener isn't going to be listening to it on anything better than a laptop speaker, cell-phone ring-tone, or iPod earbud, such concerns over things like sonic-space tend to be ignored.


Yup...a crap sounding mix can sound good in the 128kbps era of streaming online music and IPOD headphones. Its part of the reason why the band and producer population has exploded, crap doesnt sound like crap on the things consumers are using to listen to the crap. Personally I cant listen to too much digitally created music for a long period of time (including my own), because of the fatigue, I can listen to hardware based recordings all day without getting sick or tired. ::Need to save up more money for more Hardware::


Posted by m1kest4r on Apr-27-2008 05:29:

I'm a big fan of songs that have more "space" or atmosphere in them. depth in synths and things always sounds great. i'm also partial to the crazy weird noises that sort of add to the atmosphere, the crazy noises in 'park it in the shade'. creates a depth opposed to the bassline.


Posted by Darkarbiter on Apr-27-2008 05:57:

quote:
Originally posted by m1kest4r
I'm a big fan of songs that have more "space" or atmosphere in them. depth in synths and things always sounds great. i'm also partial to the crazy weird noises that sort of add to the atmosphere, the crazy noises in 'park it in the shade'. creates a depth opposed to the bassline.

Indeed... listen to better music. Duh


Posted by Project-K on Apr-27-2008 06:59:

People keep talking about how mastering techniques have supposedly improved - yet I listen to recordings from the 60s and 70s and they sound so much better than anything released today.


Posted by LionsLair on Apr-27-2008 07:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Project-K
People keep talking about how mastering techniques have supposedly improved - yet I listen to recordings from the 60s and 70s and they sound so much better than anything released today.


the 80s-90s = Golden Age of sound engineering/mastering


Posted by bubbleguuum on Apr-27-2008 09:06:

As said above, all of this is due mostly to the loudness war and current use of technology.

Today, most tracks are made so every sound is crisp and loud - this is very tiring and probably not what works best with how the ear and the mind perceive music.

Even if there has been advance is mixing and mastering since the '90s it doesn't mean today is the holy grail or even that it should be the standard everything should be judged - far from it. There's indeed older records that sound very good in their own way (even if they don't have that professional sound of today - fuck professional sound) and that have this extra "space" missing in most of todays records. Classical and Jazz still have the best sound IMHO as far as dynamics are concerned.

In the meantime, to lessen the listening fatigue and add some space, I'm using the Izotope Ozone plugin for winamp (works also with foobar2000 which I use), using the "subtle analog modeling" preset (all other preset are over the top IMHO). It works quite well on most tracks, softening the mix by adding slight reverb and equing. And I can tell you in general I'm not too keen on DSPs...


Posted by Sykonee on Apr-27-2008 09:15:

quote:
Originally posted by LionsLair
the 80s-90s = Golden Age of sound engineering/mastering

Actually, the 80s saw some of the worst production ever. 'Tin-can' drum sets, hideously flat masters... It worked great for techno, mind, just because it actually added to the whole 'emotionaless futurism' angle. But a lot of classic rock musicians came away sounding awful.


Posted by LionsLair on Apr-27-2008 12:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Sykonee
Actually, the 80s saw some of the worst production ever. 'Tin-can' drum sets, hideously flat masters... It worked great for techno, mind, just because it actually added to the whole 'emotionaless futurism' angle. But a lot of classic rock musicians came away sounding awful.


What 80s music are you listening to? Actually one of the main reasons why the 80s remain vital today is because of very high quality engineering and mixing that helped create the sounds that are timeless from a space and dynamics standpoint. Starting in the 80s, the craft was at a technique/knowledge base high and a hardware equipment high, right before heavy PC's usage in sound design hit and watered everything down.


One of the reasons why this song is so good is the excellent dynamics of the guitars, warmth of the pad, and the warmth of the vocals without having to abuse the raspy vocal frequencies that 90% of the music we hear today abuse...without the strong dynamics and space musically its nothing special.

The Police/Sting - Ill Be Watching You (1983)


Michael Jackson - Billie Jean (1983)


Posted by Vortex_SA on Apr-27-2008 12:37:

Is abuse of compression ur main concern? im sick of simple lead-bass-beat productions... the abuse of compression and eliminating all dynamics is caused imo because u cant make such dynamics with 4 instruments playing... most irritating example is that "bennasy" sound... offcourse you wont hear dynamics when u got only a kick and a bass playing thru an abused compressor...

dynamics can be achievd thru use of a variety of instruments... but thats one kind of dynamics... the other one, a single instrument dynamics, used in classical music and jazz etc. (which you didnt wrote you miss on contemporary mixes...) is very hard to immitate thru a synth, and the stuff ive heard that try to immitate this were lame at the most... one solution i can offer is... play it... on an instrument...

aand it has no relation with hardware/software... its more like hard work/easy work...


Posted by MrJiveBoJingles on Apr-27-2008 13:49:

Re: lack of space in contemporary mixing

quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
listening today to a lot of music old and new, i found myself noticing something very difficult for me to describe...

basically the conteporary maximization mixing culture seems to create a lot of really really flat mixes that we call 'professional'. everything has its place in the front line of the mix. there's little noise or (sur)realistic reverberation that implies a virtual space in which the music exists or was recorded. obviously producers have mostly done this in order to make tracks sound loud on a club system.

there's something about this kind of mix that feels like putting walls up around the track, whereas with more dynamic tracks allow you to drift in and out of it freely.. I don't know how to describe it other than I think ears have some sort of focus like eyes, and contemporary production is like a constant focus very close, like the experience of being embedded in a metropolis - no sense of distance, constant congestion, relentless action and intensity... i want to hear more music with some sort of deep space that allows my ears and mind to focus far out into the virtual space they create. (does this make sense to anyone)

Great post.

In some ways a lot of EDM exists at two extremes -- you have the super-mega-delay-reverb kind of tracks (e.g. Deadmau5 - "Jaded") and then the ones where producers cut out any kind of reverb at all in order to make their tracks sound "electro."

I think this is one reason I like listening to a lot of old EDM -- it seems like producers were less afraid to leave just a few elements running at a time *without* pushing all of them to the absolute max volume in order to give listeners an impression of "fullness." See Orbital's Brown Album, for one example that has a good sense of "space."

Some production techniques are less about making good music than simply a cheap way of inducing a physiological excitation response, and this "maximize every element" thing is one of them.


Posted by SYSTEM-J on Apr-27-2008 14:14:

Re: lack of space in contemporary mixing

quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
Sven Vath - Ritual of Life


That probably sounds like it was recorded in a real space because Vath will have sampled all those "ethnic" instruments that actually were, once.


Posted by Sykonee on Apr-27-2008 15:42:

quote:
Originally posted by LionsLair
What 80s music are you listening to? Actually one of the main reasons why the 80s remain vital today is because of very high quality engineering and mixing that helped create the sounds that are timeless from a space and dynamics standpoint. Starting in the 80s, the craft was at a technique/knowledge base high and a hardware equipment high, right before heavy PC's usage in sound design hit and watered everything down.

Well, sure the top-end of the music spectrum got the best studio technicians to work their magic, but it wasn't a smooth transition for many. When you compare the sound quality of 70s albums to their 80s albums from acts like Rolling Stones, Yes, Genesis, Bob Dylan, and Neil Young, the difference is striking (it didn't help many of them were in a musical funk either). Now, they DID eventually work it all out, but it was quite an initial stumble as they struggled to make heads-or-tails out of all this new-fangled digital technology.


And almost all the punk albums of the time sounded atrocious, but that's just due to the DIY ethic they all had.


Posted by nefardec on Apr-27-2008 17:06:

Re: Re: lack of space in contemporary mixing

quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
That probably sounds like it was recorded in a real space because Vath will have sampled all those "ethnic" instruments that actually were, once.


no doubt. but the total effect of the mixing has something to do with it too IMO




some one-dimensional tracks (at least to my ears) (non-trance)

and let it be known i mostly like these tracks and own all of them

DJ Pippi & Willi Graff - Hyperspace
Redshape - What's On A Moog's Mind
SLAM - Azure (Samuel L Session Remix)
Kerri Chandler - Vector Graphics
Marko Furstenberg - Strackebrot
Taho - The Elegant Universe
Joris Voorn - Minor
Stryke - I Dreamt Of You Again
Justin Martin - Nightowl (Manoo & Francois A Remix)
Dirt Crew - Deep (We Are) (Francois Dubois Remix)
Andy Cato - Cosmic Force (Soul Minority Remix)
Francois Dubois - I Try (Jamie Anderson Remix/Nic Fanciulli Remix)
a lot of Pryda

nice examples of space/dynamics to my ears

Redshape - Pain
Jori Hulkkonnen - Latin Taiga
Jori Hulkkonnen - Aairirajoilla
Lee Van Dowski & Dachsund - So What
Sven Weisemann - Slices
Staffan Linzatti - Quibble (Efdemin Remix)
Trus Me - Working Nights



i don't know i'm having a hard time separating the psychological effect of the music from the actual mixing so i'm going to stop here


Posted by PETRAN on Apr-27-2008 17:25:

Nefardec, by reading your first post i thought that you were talking about how modern productions are very "clinical" and "overproduced", leading to a loss of interest. But reading again and trying to understand the semi-abstract (lol) nature of your post, i see that by "space" you mean a specific use of reverb or delay effects? That is, you like reverb or delay to not be over-used but neither under-used or something? If you don't like a lot of reverb, never listen to Shoegaze, My Bloody Valentine and Slowdive heh (or Ulrich Schnauss or some trance for that matter...)I personally love the Soundscapes created by the "wall-of-sound" effect.


Posted by nefardec on Apr-27-2008 17:55:

Petran,

no, I am a huge proponent of reverb. if anything I think we need more if it!

Your initial reaction was closer to the point of my post, which was more about a 'flat', 'dimensionless', 'plastic', 'clinical' sound quality.


i think if you want to characterize my position, it is anti-compression, (or anti-overcompression)

there were basically two things I was protesting:

- flat, sterile mixes

- lack of quietness in dance music


Posted by PETRAN on Apr-27-2008 18:16:

quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
Petran,

no, I am a huge proponent of reverb. if anything I think we need more if it!

Your initial reaction was closer to the point of my post, which was more about a 'flat', 'dimensionless', 'plastic', 'clinical' sound quality.


i think if you want to characterize my position, it is anti-compression, (or anti-overcompression)

there were basically two things I was protesting:

- flat, sterile mixes

- lack of quietness in dance music



Oh ok, well yes, if you like Dub Techno and stuff you probably like the extensive use of such effects since these genres are based almost entirely on these effects.


I was confused because "a lack of quietness" could relate to the extensive use of reveb and/or delay, since such effects would tend to create a continuous sound, no?


Posted by nefardec on Apr-27-2008 18:47:

quote:
Originally posted by PETRAN
Oh ok, well yes, if you like Dub Techno and stuff you probably like the extensive use of such effects since these genres are based almost entirely on these effects.


I was confused because "a lack of quietness" could relate to the extensive use of reveb and/or delay, since such effects would tend to create a continuous sound, no?


well, it depends on the levels..


Posted by d-miurge on Apr-27-2008 18:47:

quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
Petran,

no, I am a huge proponent of reverb. if anything I think we need more if it!

Your initial reaction was closer to the point of my post, which was more about a 'flat', 'dimensionless', 'plastic', 'clinical' sound quality.


i think if you want to characterize my position, it is anti-compression, (or anti-overcompression)

there were basically two things I was protesting:

- flat, sterile mixes

- lack of quietness in dance music


It sounds sterile or flat because they prefer to see the waves of a spectrum analyzer perfectly balanced. The perfect counter example is Trentemoller. His tracks are perfectly mastered but it sounds true (emotionally & technically). Same things apply to Apparat too.

As a producer, I never give my tracks to a sound engineer. I prefer to release an "organic" track (even if it is only made with softwares), which means with some insignificant defaults, than a "perfect", "robotic", soulless track.

It's funny how bedroom producers think it's better to have a 8000$ setup to make good tracks. They purchase 10 000 Vsts that they will never use, they want the best (and more expensive) pair of monitors, etc.

I was discussing with the sound engineer of Daft Punk lately, he told me that they mastered Discovery with a ghetto blaster, a fucking ghetto blaster! It's way more important to focus on originality and creativity than on how professional the tracks sound.


Posted by nefardec on Apr-27-2008 18:55:

i think in general there is too much a focus on the produced wav file as a 'final result' and the only reason for producing.


The methods of making music these days cater to control freaks and meticulous manipulation of detail rather than to musicians, expression, and creative experimentation.


As vortex mentioned, this has a lot to do with labels having corporate responsibility and needing to keep the floor filled


anyways i think it's more interesting to make something as an experiment, letting it develop its own way without this incessant desire to perfect it, and to give it a life of its own by moving on to the next

im really into method and experimental method ever since i took some classes in college on electroacoustics. we had to do things like make tape pieces ala musique concrete, people made beachballs filled with motion sensors that acted as MIDI controls, laser harps - i did a algorithmic granular resynthesizer that used audio from earlier in the concert in which the actual piece was performed.

i don't know it's gotten to the point where dance music is like thousands of kids who buy guitars and play smoke on the water


Posted by PETRAN on Apr-27-2008 18:59:

quote:
Originally posted by d-miurge


I was discussing with the sound engineer of Daft Punk lately, he told me that they mastered Discovery with a ghetto blaster, a fucking ghetto blaster! It's way more important to focus on originality and creativity than on how professional the tracks sound.




Hmm, i would say that some musical genres, sound better through some "specific production-techniques" in comparison to the usual crystal-clear balanced and polished "clinical" production. For example Daft Punk have a kind-of retro 70s Funk/Disco sound so i thing that they actually sound better and more organic through this specific Ghetto-Blaster production technique.


Another example would be the 90s Shoegaze-Rock scene which used the effects of reverb in extremes, resulting in "eccentric wall-of-sounds results" i would say. The productions were IMO in no-way "balanced", but this eccentricity made the sound of Shoegaze distinct. A dreamy, droned-in-sound result.


My Bloody Valentine- "To Here Knows When"





Slowdive- "Shine"


Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.