22-07-2014, 05:56 PM
Interesting and difficult topic. Here's my unstructured and unstable opinions. I may have a different opinion tomorrow. I'm sorry for not having any clear answers.
About bmullen's mix: I agree there is some fatique causing harshness in this mix's top end, mainly caused by hi-hat, but overall sound is still very smooth and balanced. To me the hi-hat problem is quite small. So, I think it's pretty good mix. Well, at least to my damaged ears.
About brightness and fatique in general: I've been thinking this problem every now and then. To me this brightness issue is somewhat similar than the question of loudness. Personally I prefer softer and dynamic sound, but if one wants to be competitive, there's a certain demand for brightness and loudness. So, normally I try to do smooth and dynamic mix, but I don't like the way it sounds for example in a car. It just don't cut through in noisy environments unless I turn up the volume quite a bit to the level where it disturbs conversation.
My guess is that 99% of music is listened in noisy environments: cars, markets, kitchens etc. Even I agree that in those cases loud and bright music seems to "work" better. But in my mixing room I would never say that. There I just don't like loud and bright music. So is the taste of 99% of music consumers bad if their listening environment is almost always noisy?
In a sense as mixers we have to each time make a decision is the mix targeted for a larger public, or for a closed elitist circle. Most of the time I tend to lean more towards elitist sound. Then I pick up my references for example from Bob Katz's list (I love it). But sometimes I try to rehears more competitive sounds. Then I pick my references from latest grammy winning mixes (which I quite often don't like at all). Luckily I don't have to make my living out of music.
About bmullen's mix: I agree there is some fatique causing harshness in this mix's top end, mainly caused by hi-hat, but overall sound is still very smooth and balanced. To me the hi-hat problem is quite small. So, I think it's pretty good mix. Well, at least to my damaged ears.
About brightness and fatique in general: I've been thinking this problem every now and then. To me this brightness issue is somewhat similar than the question of loudness. Personally I prefer softer and dynamic sound, but if one wants to be competitive, there's a certain demand for brightness and loudness. So, normally I try to do smooth and dynamic mix, but I don't like the way it sounds for example in a car. It just don't cut through in noisy environments unless I turn up the volume quite a bit to the level where it disturbs conversation.
My guess is that 99% of music is listened in noisy environments: cars, markets, kitchens etc. Even I agree that in those cases loud and bright music seems to "work" better. But in my mixing room I would never say that. There I just don't like loud and bright music. So is the taste of 99% of music consumers bad if their listening environment is almost always noisy?
In a sense as mixers we have to each time make a decision is the mix targeted for a larger public, or for a closed elitist circle. Most of the time I tend to lean more towards elitist sound. Then I pick up my references for example from Bob Katz's list (I love it). But sometimes I try to rehears more competitive sounds. Then I pick my references from latest grammy winning mixes (which I quite often don't like at all). Luckily I don't have to make my living out of music.