Help needed

[Roy]

I like your food-production-analogy. You are correct, you don't hear the chef using the quality of ingredients as an excuse. You do, however, hear him bitch about it

I do agree that you have to cook with whatever's in the fridge and make a fine meal out of it. For me, I prefer to fill my frigde with ... maybe not foie gras and black truffle, but stuff of a decent quality and then cook with that. It has it's obvious down sides, but ... well, it's working for me.

I genuinely believe that the single stroke of genius in bar 78 should come from the artist and not the mixer. Of course, the mixer should be able to honor this in a proper way, but it starts with the band. I have a producer type in my network, who's also a crazy talented musician. More often than not does he choose to re-record an instrument, where he plays, because the guitarist played a bad note in a solo, the drummer missed a ghost or the bass player wasn't consistent enough. He does it so well that even the bands themselves can't tell the difference. I acutally don't believe that any of them are aware of it. My point being, a mixer can do a whole lot of magic in whatever DAW they're using, and obviously you have to do what's best for any given song, but where's the line? For me that line is the recording, because what's on the tape, can I only assume, is ... ehm, the boundries for the artist's abilities. Would it be "etichally correct" for a mix engineer to make the band sound better than they acutally do?

I get it. In the end your can never mix nor cook out of spite. What may make me a quality engineer or chef (I proclaim neither) is that regardless of what I have to work with you will be satisfied. [no jokes] I'd love quality elements to work with. But that's not the job. Not everything you're given is gold. Time is a factor. Talent is a factor. Budget is a factor. Ego is a factor. Stupidity is a factor. It all distills down to what a mixer has to work with.

Never think a step behind. It's all in the past.

As for the stroke of geniuses, yes it's all from the band (mostly) but it's also on us to know when to high light something that was genius but done in passing. Or is more genius based on the structure of the mix that's been created. I've automated string noise to accentuate some humanity or whatever. It was an affectation of the player but isn't so obvious in the canvas of a mix. So we have to do what we can't to point the listener to it.

A mixer always has to do what's best for the song not the band. Under most circumstances we support both but our ears and fingers and that one time tongue should be on the band. Sorry. We didn't have automation on that mix.

in the end with most of these mixes we have no contact wit the band/artist so we're more lenient with our interpretations. There are tracks where the artist is also a part of the forum and they post some feedback and then that's a tother level of mixing. Adapting to what the artist needs. Or also trying to convince them that they're mistaken. Blitzzz is a clear example of someone who's posted the tracks and has a clear vision. If I did a mix of one of his songs I'd defer to his vision. But not every artist is so clear or knows what they want. Sometimes it's on the mixer to step up and tell them.

Sorry to rant. I think I've digressed. I'll stop for now.

[I lied. I suppose one thing to keep in mind about mixing isn't just the tracks or numbers or frequencies or thresholds. It's maintaining the human aspects. It's knowing what the listener wants and what the artist wants and what all the band wants and what the label wants and all that. That's mixing. Or at least an aspect of it. It's getting a killer snare and a loud mix and great vocals etc. It's not just an artistic decision. If I mixed for art a lot of my mixes would be different. Sorry I might be old and jaded. I'm not a big deal at all and my credits aren't notable but I've done this longer than most.]

[[E2: Also: Always think a step above you not behind. If you're the mixer think like the producer/band/label. Never complain about what you're given. Tracks can be...tricky. But never show that weakness. Everything you mix is gold. Never give an excuse. Because then you're just trying to explain away why you did a bad job. It never matters at the level above. By the point you're mixing there is not other option so disparaging what you're given just (unfortunately) applies to you. If you say it sounds bad because of the tracks you're saying what you're presenting sounds bad. When in doubt, lie. "Here you go, I think I nailed this mix... Make them second guess themselves as opposed to going in assuming it's a bad mix. Honestly, I'll admit to downplaying all of my mixes but that's just depression and anxiety. In reality always tell your listener that they're getting the best. Regardless of any compression technique that's the best advice. If you don't agree than why are you presenting it to them? I get it. Here is the place to question and find some perspective. But with anyone else never let your goddamn guard down.

Cheers!]]