|
Mixing while arranging (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Chronosis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Diginerd
To mix I track evrything into ProTools as audio and start from scratch. All new FX, EQ and such. |
I have often done this, but everytime I feel something needs to be changed or added. So it's switching back and forth with the original project file and mixing file. Which is very annoying and time consuming. |
|
|
| Akazi |
| quote: | Originally posted by Diginerd
I'm a pro Tools slut, but I hear Adobe Audition is prety good, as is Bias Peak. Make sure you don't use the buiilt in EQs and compressors though. |
you can just start a new project again in cubase with the audio files.
or just deactivate the midi parts within the same project and add audio tracks with the audio tracks, and that way if you want to make a somekinda change, you just reactivate your midi part (vsT) and change it a bounce it down to audio, at least thats how i do it.
:) |
|
|
| Drik |
I have a couple of buses setup for different eq settings fx etc. Everything is basically already finished from get go in a template that I have created for my gear, so basically I start the music idea, route the different elements to different buses, then when Im finished with the arrangement I do the last eq tweaks and fx tweaks so that it all mixes well.
Basically, it's worth setting up a template for your kind of sound, so you can concentrate on the arrangement instead of worrying on drums sounding fat enough. Also, decide which drums you are going to use, don't change between different tracks. Then save those drums with your template with a couple of midi tracks setup for them. That way you have percussion ready too. Try getting the tedious parts done in a template so that you can get going faster, that way you don't loose any creativity :) |
|
|
| messytechie |
| quote: | Originally posted by Chronosis
I have often done this, but everytime I feel something needs to be changed or added. So it's switching back and forth with the original project file and mixing file. Which is very annoying and time consuming. |
Yeah i do this too. I'm normally changing bits of my track right down to the final bounce.
Saying that, I do like this idea of bouncing everything dry and mixing it from scratch, I'm going to def give it a go (but will probably get annoyed i cant change anything!)
I think this "tranditional" method of writing first and then mixing/mastering later can't really be applied so directly to trance/EDM. Yeah it works fine for band music ect. but when producing EDM it seems far too restricting. Unless of course you can write an amazing tune in one fell swoop...... |
|
|
| MaxC |
| quote: | Originally posted by Diginerd
1. A couple of sessions screwing with sounds
2. A couple of sessions seeing how thos sounds fit together, and maybe screwing with some loop ideas.
Rinse and repeast 1 & 2 until you have a solid amount of material for a track (or possibly even a couple)
3. Arrange and get a rough mix going.
4. Really concentrate on the mix and mix alone
5. Mastering |
I just happened to use this process on my last song and I must say it worked quite well for me. I'm notorious for not finishing songs and I think breaking the process down into discrete phases like this really gave me a sense of progress as I moved from stage to stage. I think the most important part (for me anyway) was to keep at the "rinse and repeat" stage until I had plenty of material I was happy with. Sometimes it's tempting to settle for sounds that don't work quite as well as originally anticipated, and having an abundance of alternative material can be a real lifesaver once an idea has exhausted its potential. I would recommend at least trying it to see how the process feels for you. |
|
|
| DJREMIDI |
I'm glad other people share my opinion in this regard - I was beginning to think that I was the only one finding this approach logical.
Every time I sit down to work on a project I get easily sidetracked and spend HOURS trying to mix (mostly EQing) existing elements instead of focusing on the creative aspect of the production and finishing the arrangement. Thus, I end up with a ton of unfinished projects simply because I stalled my inspiration and creative thought process by engaging my mind in something as technical as mixing.
Every book and article about mixing I've read said that before you proceed to mix a project it should "work" on its own. If you've spent time designing the right sounds, programming melodic parts that compliment each other and creating a cohesive arrangement, your project will pretty much mix itself; all you will have to do is make some final adjustments and add polishing touches. I strongly believe that if I heard any of the well produced tracks completely un-mixed they would still sound great due to excellent arrangement.
I'm not saying this approach will work for everyone, but the more I think about it, the more I realize that it will most likely work for me. I believe breaking up the production process in these two separate phases and focusing on one at a time will speed things up for me considerably.
Thank you for all your feedback! |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Thois
I think they both need to be done at the same time, because you need to hear/feel what it is going to be like in the end, to really get into your track and to 'feel' what comes next.
I think you get more inspiration when you do both at the same time.
But that's just me, it's all about your personal preference |
+1
Perhaps the suggestion to mix after arranging was given by someone in a different era?
In 2006, if you buy a new PC, you can even MASTER while arranging! |
|
|
| Four_On_Four-er |
| quote: | Originally posted by Diginerd
Sorry Guys I hate to do this but I strongly disagree.
Writing and structuring is very much a "Right brain" process. Mixing is very much more of a "Left Brain" process. That alone is enough to tie me up in knots if I try and do both at the same time.
|
This sounds very logical... it's a good hypothesis for my many periods of unfinished loop-projects.
It would seem that I spend alot more time at a piano thinking of my ideas anymore. If that works, I'll try to incorperate my melodies and moods onto synths, but often I'll end up focusing on the wrong tasks. |
|
|
| Diginerd |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
+1
Perhaps the suggestion to mix after arranging was given by someone in a different era?
In 2006, if you buy a new PC, you can even MASTER while arranging! |
It's an old (if you count old as around 60 years) philosophy, but still very valid. Think how many people used to be involved in the production of a record. Now it's usually just one person when producing "Electronica"...
I hate that term by the way, but it does cover an entire spectrum of music, not just trance.
There are two main approaches to working in this area.
Since you're a one man band, do you act like this:-
And try and do averything at once...
Badly.
Or do you plan ahead, use some real talent and focus on each part / task separately and deliver a solid performance.
yes, he played everything himself recorded and mixed most of his output too accross multiple albums. Many without a computer, but when sequencing became viable he embraced it.
He didn't master any of it though..
If you want to hear what a serious musician does, listen to Tubular Bells, (Recorded on a 4 track, in the seventies, when he was 17), then to hear what impact a producer can make listen to Tubular Bells 2. Trevor Horn's sonic signature is all over it, even if you don't like what he does you have to admire it technically.
Finally Tubular Bells 2003 is a rerecording of the original Seventies record, again solo, but this time with state of the art technology.
That said, we will not speak of Tubular Bells 3, as it is heretic and should be burned from everyone's mind..
Anyway..
Same artist, essentially the same piece of music, 30 year span.
Finally, if one more person tells me you can master when you're mixing I think I'm going to puke. If you really understand what mastering is then you wouldn't dream of saying things like that...
Sorry, a little flamey but really understand what you are saying before shooting your mouth off about Super Duper 2006 PC technology being better than the last 40-50 years of recording wisdom, and certainly the last 30 years of how to successfully put together multi-million selling records on your own.
Engage Brain before opening mouth (Our typing merrilly) |
|
|
| Diginerd |
Just to clarify, what got my goat was the mastering comment..
Either aproach can work, it's just the logical planned method has a far better track record.. |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Diginerd
Finally, if one more person tells me you can master when you're mixing I think I'm going to puke. If you really understand what mastering is then you wouldn't dream of saying things like that...
|
:D Yes.
You CAN'T actually master while you do your track; it's generally understood that mastering plugins use huge amounts of processing power, and I was just making an analogy to that to point out that if you prefer to mix as you go along, it's no strain these days.
Sorry if I raised your blood pressure with my non-specifics. :toothless
PS: I prefer to mix as I go, and at the end before mastering; there's a lot of dynamics going on that constitute making all the busy-ness of modern music fit snugly into the limited spectrum we have to work with, and for me, personally, if I don't notch certain frequencies and set up my initial instrument parameters from the word go, then it often becomes a veeeeeery daunting and unmanageable sea of confusion to patch up at the last minute.
:toocool: |
|
|
| DJSentinel |
All that matters is the product, so if the product sounds good, who give a flying fck what you did or how you did it or what you did it with.
Just my 0.02
Pce,
DJS |
|
|
|
|
