TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Tips & Tricks That Helped Me - Mix Balance (+ Feedback from A&B, Cramp, Matt Lange)

Tips & Tricks That Helped Me - Mix Balance (+ Feedback from A&B, Cramp, Matt Lange)

I wrote the following article yesterday outlining some of the things I've noticed and learned.

Tips & Tricks That Helped Me - Mix Balance

I've included feedback it received from Matt Lange, Jono Grant and Cramp.

Waiting for some opinions from Steve Duda, Dennis Ferrer and Andrew Bayer.

Well written.

I don't necessarily however agree with the everything in your face approach. Of course for drums and the bass you'd want that, but there are times when a "drowned" out lead sound can be used effectively.

you should be mixing for earbuds, not stadiums. The ipod is the new final format. Everybody but dance artists seem to know this.

quote:

Originally posted by Looney4Clooney you should be mixing for earbuds, not stadiums. The ipod is the new final format. Everybody but dance artists seem to know this.

Personally, I think we should be mixing for both earbuds/home listening systems and stadiums. It'd be ideal to build an original mix that's mixed for home listening and a club mix that's built for stadiums. Dance music is routinely finding itself at festivals and in stadiums - perhaps more than any other genre at the moment - and as such there's a need to ensure the music can be heard in these environments.

I remember asking Laidback Luke if producers ever mixed a separate copy of a track for the bigger PA systems at festivals. He said it was rare, but he knows Tiesto has done it before.

quote:

Originally posted by J.L. Well written. I don't necessarily however agree with the everything in your face approach. Of course for drums and the bass you'd want that, but there are times when a "drowned" out lead sound can be used effectively.

I'm admittedly not a big fan of the in your face approach either - especially when listening at home - but it certainly works best in an indoor arena/stadium etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Mimieux Personally, I think we should be mixing for both earbuds/home listening systems and stadiums. It'd be ideal to build an original mix that's mixed for home listening and a club mix that's built for stadiums. Dance music is routinely finding itself at festivals and in stadiums - perhaps more than any other genre at the moment - and as such there's a need to ensure the music can be heard in these environments. I remember asking Laidback Luke if producers ever mixed a separate copy of a track for the bigger PA systems at festivals. He said it was rare, but he knows Tiesto has done it before.

What percentage of all EDM do you think is played in a stadium vs everywhere else,. Not very big., Why concern yourself with the exceptions. The whole concept of mastering is so that it sounds good on average. A stadium is not in that spectrum of averages.

mixing for stadiums is pointless imo,

every stadium will sound differently depending on how the sound is tuned, the stadium size, and if the stadium is treated well.

it actually makes more sense (even though i dont condone it) to mix for ipod earbuds, as thats the medium most people will be listneing in this age. or some kind of ear buds. because who sits in stadium all day listneing to music constantly? probably no one, especially at those levels of loudness

another way to go about it is to make as balanced of a mixdown as you can then find track(s) you like how they sounded in a stadium (as you've done), and learn how to match your track's tonal balance to those, without the use of master channel effects.

I just want to go on record as objecting to mixing for earbuds. I think this is a really bad idea.

remember that idea you thought was a bad idea with the tranny , the boflex exercise machine and that crate of pickled tuna ? Remember who was begging for a certain someone to get more tuna.

the point i think i was trying to make is that your end audience is more than likely going to be using their ipods. You can keep a somewhat compatible mix in terms of say something that will work on most systems but ignoring the number one format is a little silly.

For example, people that talked about LCR panning. Well this works great for some things but doesn't work so well when listening on headphones. Things like this are important to keep in mind.

I think that any "exclusion" is completely unnecessary. I never really understood the whole "big room" mixing/mastering-treatment concept. And I had serious reservations about the tranny because she was comatose; not because I'm afraid of a little pre-op strange.







I'm a quality over quantity type of man.

You say that but I'm pretty sure you are not mixing in 5.1. The reason having much to do with why the iPod as your final format makes a lot more sense. By choosing stereo, you've already placed yoursel in the consumer level format. Consumers are using earbuds.

Point taken. Truthfully, I was thinking in terms of stereo quality vs. a somewhat restricted spectrum offered by most consumer ear-buds. And you were the one who kept raising the issue of 5 on 1 with the tranny.








Thank God for that vial of Narcan.

I believe this topic has been taken upon with the incorrect view. As fellow producers, we are well aware that multiple files and projects may be created. Take advantage of this opportunity to maximize your audio potential. A true production can always fit the audience for best results whether it is a circus, dance routine, or a musical production, it just depends on how you present each production. Make various mixes of your production to suite these needs.

Great job on presenting your insight on the subject Mr. Anders. It is always beneficial to hear another person's opinion and it is very much appreciated for sharing it with us.

quote:

Originally posted by Looney4Clooney you should be mixing for earbuds, not stadiums. The ipod is the new final format. Everybody but dance artists seem to know this.

ID - ID (Earbud Version)
ID - ID (Stadium mix)

lol..

Having to master for averages upsets me in a way. I wish an ideal solution existed so that everyone could hear our tracks exactly as intended. People can't even listen to music as loud as they'd like in some places at certain times, and currently, it would be too costly and difficult for most people to soundproof their rooms or homes. It would be worth it, but it's unrealistic for now. Sound has so many problems, and very few people have ever heard a great set-up, and even if they have, it's not something they can enjoy regularly. With light and color, you can be as bright as you'd like in the privacy of your own home when the rest of the neighborhood is sleeping.

I understand that you want to engineer the best possible sound for consumer set-ups, but I hate the fact that this has to be done. Even if you achieve popularity and have financial success, you have to sacrifice your true sound and artistic vision, and that takes away so much from the outcome. It's too much of a competition and a business for me.

Maybe I'm an elitist snob, but I'd rather market music to audiophiles who strive to listen to music in the most objective possible environment. That way, I wouldn't have to master for the averages, I could focus on making the best possible sound and releasing it as is. I hope that there will be some breakthrough in the future allowing the masses to enjoy the exact musical experience the creator(s) intended, nothing less.

Does your average person want to spend more than 100$ on a listening setup? Except for your beats by dre kiddies, the answer is no.

I mean, in the same way, different people simply have their own ways where they want to spend their money.

Unless you are in some position of influence (ie Dr. dre), you are in no position to make a dent in the average population's listening habits.

quote:

Originally posted by J.L. Does your average person want to spend more than 100$ on a listening setup? Except for your beats by dre kiddies, the answer is no. I mean, in the same way, different people simply have their own ways where they want to spend their money. Unless you are in some position of influence (ie Dr. dre), you are in no position to make a dent in the average population's listening habits.

Agreed. I understand the situation fully, but I don't want to accept it. Yes, it's unfeasible to improve the listening experience for most people, barring some ingenious killer app (which doesn't seem likely anytime soon). Unfortunately, while the laws of nature allow us to easily enjoy light and color entertainment cheaply and whenever we'd please, we just can't enjoy sound to the fullest without great cost or being a nuisance to others. It's so unfair how I can load up any number of stunning visualizations and movies and see them in all their glory, while I've yet to listen to most of my music library in optimum conditions. That fact, which I hate so much, is precisely what makes me sigh about the way things are and daydream of a better world.

Ubiquitous, high quality sound is a fantasy that I desperately, passionately wish was a reality for myself and others. I love music and wish I could live in a recording studio away from society, never having to deal with reasonable volumes and listening times. I think many of you here can understand where I'm coming from with this sentiment.

One sort of obvious sounding thing that I definitely see as true is the massive sound aspect. The tracks that really grab my attention and seem to do well are the ones with huge sound.

It's obvious like what Sun Tzu says about war but then again, how often is advice like that ignored? My most difficult struggle is actually creating that powerful sound.

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