06-06-2023, 07:45 PM
Except often they do send you stuff they didn't intend to be in the mix.
Sometimes by accident. Sometimes people 'over-record' to have extra options when it comes to a mix. Sometimes it's a 'utility' track like a guitar DI that may or not be used to be reamped. An untuned vocal provided if you think you can tune it better or hear an artifact of tuning. Sometimes it's the count off into the song. Sometimes a part is printed with effects and I curse them because it may have worked at the time but later on just clashes or the balance is off. Sometimes the effect is printed on another but just sucks and I threw it out and never once feared for my life. Sometimes the artist just didn't know better.
I don't really see how it's complicated. Vovolan removed the strings because he didn't think they benefited the song and mixed the song in one direction. You think the strings add value so you kept them in. It's two different ways of doing it and not a problem. It's the mixer's decision the band can argue about it afterwards if they'd like. They probably will regardless. But the intent is to provide the best mix possible with fresh ears and fresh perspective.
I simply don't see it as a sign of disrespect. It's respecting the song which is most important. Some bands are really bands and artists hands on and need to be there every step of the way. That's fine. Some need to have their work worked on by an outside mixer who can take their tracks and make a coherent mix and package for their songs.
If someone is having someone mix their work it's because the assumption is the mixer knows better what to do. I hire a plumber because he knows better than me. I don't like mastering mixes because mastering engineers know better than me. I put some faith in professionals.
Nothing is set in stone, especially these days. One still should have the files when all is said and done. Recalls can be made. It's almost no different at this point than if you present a mix where the band thinks the vocals are too loud. Ok, you made a choice and felt they were better up but you can always bring them back.
As far as what is better, I don't think it's worth getting into a discussion about aesthetics. A 'better' mix supports the song. It can depend on the song and genre and mood and almost anything. But it's something fueled by personal experience.
Again, this is all my opinion and experience. You can disagree with the methodology but it's something that I've done personally as well as a number of other mixers. It's not a problem to be solved. It's just a way of achieving a goal. You can choose to not work that way and that's totally fine too.
Anyway. Apologies. I think we're hijacking the thread.
Sometimes by accident. Sometimes people 'over-record' to have extra options when it comes to a mix. Sometimes it's a 'utility' track like a guitar DI that may or not be used to be reamped. An untuned vocal provided if you think you can tune it better or hear an artifact of tuning. Sometimes it's the count off into the song. Sometimes a part is printed with effects and I curse them because it may have worked at the time but later on just clashes or the balance is off. Sometimes the effect is printed on another but just sucks and I threw it out and never once feared for my life. Sometimes the artist just didn't know better.
I don't really see how it's complicated. Vovolan removed the strings because he didn't think they benefited the song and mixed the song in one direction. You think the strings add value so you kept them in. It's two different ways of doing it and not a problem. It's the mixer's decision the band can argue about it afterwards if they'd like. They probably will regardless. But the intent is to provide the best mix possible with fresh ears and fresh perspective.
I simply don't see it as a sign of disrespect. It's respecting the song which is most important. Some bands are really bands and artists hands on and need to be there every step of the way. That's fine. Some need to have their work worked on by an outside mixer who can take their tracks and make a coherent mix and package for their songs.
If someone is having someone mix their work it's because the assumption is the mixer knows better what to do. I hire a plumber because he knows better than me. I don't like mastering mixes because mastering engineers know better than me. I put some faith in professionals.
Nothing is set in stone, especially these days. One still should have the files when all is said and done. Recalls can be made. It's almost no different at this point than if you present a mix where the band thinks the vocals are too loud. Ok, you made a choice and felt they were better up but you can always bring them back.
As far as what is better, I don't think it's worth getting into a discussion about aesthetics. A 'better' mix supports the song. It can depend on the song and genre and mood and almost anything. But it's something fueled by personal experience.
Again, this is all my opinion and experience. You can disagree with the methodology but it's something that I've done personally as well as a number of other mixers. It's not a problem to be solved. It's just a way of achieving a goal. You can choose to not work that way and that's totally fine too.
Anyway. Apologies. I think we're hijacking the thread.