|
Re: Bouncing stems. The most effecient way for my mixing engineer?
I will preface my answers by saying I'm a mix engineer by trade, and although my main area is score, music is the same, if anything slightly simpler.
| quote: | Originally posted by bouncecouncil
Im new to house and sending out stems for mixing engineers. For the life of me, I can't mix synths, so I'm going to be contracting outside mixing engineers to do the dirty. Now, before I print each track lane, I have a few questions for mixing engineers in hopes to optimize the time it takes one to mix down my songs:
1) Side chain compression synths: for the pumping synths activated by the kick, should I apply the SCC to each synth and print each on its own stem or should I leave their levels unaffected and let the engineer have at it?
|
As derail mentioned, sidechain can affect the grove and feel of the syncopation which is technically getting away from engineering, and in to the realm of producing. Many mix engineers still "produce" when working on other's tracks - it really comes down to if you want to keep that the same as you had intended or if you're happy/trust them enough to get that aspect right. Bear in mind, no mix engineer should ever be making major changes to the composition or arrangement so it really comes down to how much a control freak you are and whether you trust them to enhance it in the way you like.
There is however another more polarized school of thought on this process which i'll get to later.....
| quote: | Originally posted by bouncecouncil
2) Daft punk band pass, hpf, and lpf effects:
During intros and bridges, ill bandpass, lp, or, hp a synth (similar to daft punk's Ino Silver Club)). Will applying this technique to my stems affect a mixing engineer's ability to eq said tracks?
|
Short answer yes and if anything it will limit them. If you give an engineer with any FX printed, that not only means they are limited to work with that but it also sets the tone (excuse the pun) for what you're looking for. Producers that have a really definite sense of what they want on those specific pieces can leave them in there so it specifically does not get changed and all the mix engineer is then doing is a little bit of subtractive/additive EQ and balancing of levels and pan etc. Having said that, any decent engineer should be able to make the most out of whatever you give them, assuming it's decent (i.e. well recorded, can;r polish a turd etc) in the first place.
Again, i will get to what I find best practice at the end of these questions.
| quote: | Originally posted by bouncecouncil
3) Reverb - Wet in, Dry out:
Avicii and similar "good feeling house" producers use a technique where just before a phrase-change or at the end of a buildup, they'll lower the volume of a synth's dry while raising its reverb. It gives off the effect that a synth is moving deeper/ farther away into it's reverb. Is it better to send the wet stem and dry stem separately or combine them for an overall eq'ng to be done by mixing engineer.
|
Yes (which i'll get to later) but again, they should be able to work with what you've got.
| quote: | Originally posted by bouncecouncil
And finally
4) Shared reverbs, shared delays, shared doubler sends... and their stems:
If I use one reverb plugin to create subtle ambience reverb for gelling together my percussions, is it better to A) print stems for each instrument, then a reverb stem for each instrument; or B) print stems for each instrument, then print one reverb stem containing all the percussions' rvb send.
And if a synth pluck has a delay track, do I print both as one stem. Or do I print wet and dry separately (i ask this, thinking the engineer may later need to chop up the delay stem to maybe adjust their pan widths)
Very creative with the language of music. Very noob with the science of mixing. Appreciate your wisdoms. |
OK, so here's why I was waiting until the end:
The best possible way to deliver to a mix engineer is in as much detail as possible but along with that, your "temp" bounce of your mix.
That means every single track printed dry, then all the fx tracks printed separately etc.
Here's how we do it for score.
Composer delivers (well, actually his sunlight and sustenance deprived minion does) the master project file with all tracks individually bounced to audio.
This means dry (with exception to synth tracks where the synth itself has the FX on it) and the FX tracks (aux etc) are also sent.
The project is usally composed in logic or cubase but the tracks will be rebuilt in protools.
A bounce of the master output is also included from the composer.
Firstly everything is engineered in terms of clocking - by that I mean that all the files line up, all the zero cross points match and all the timings are on.
The temp is laid on a audio track that can be referenced at any point to hear what the composer intended.
Now many people will rely on the engineer to make all sound better and that includes the reverbs, delays etc. In this case it's useful to have the wet fx printed separately for a reference for them.
Many engineers will use their own reverb, own delays, own filters etc to mimic and improve on what was intended.
The bottom line is control. The more parts you give to the engineer, the more they are going to be able to do with it. The engineer should be able to completely reconstruct the tracks, their automation, their FX just from dry and wet source tracks and a temp.
Now there are some people that have what they want but just want a slightly better balance, and in those cases, you just give stems, with the FX broken down in to their relative stems.
Personally, when I'm working on EDM, I'll ask for the project file in the DAW it was made in. That way I have access to everything form the automation, to the EQ to audio source files. It's a little extreme for most and it gets a little complex when people are using rare plugins but it really gives the most control.
|