The Metallurgist does µ's -Too Bright

[The_Metallurgist]

I'm sorry I offended you, it wasn't my intention in the slightest... my understanding was that you found any alternative perspective to be worthwhile feedback. If having a different opinion means that my feedback doesn't have value to you and expressing said opinion is going to make you upset, I won't bother you with it anymore. My mix of this sucked horribly and I've acknowledged that without reservation, so maybe that does make my opinion worthless.

This forum is either a learning resource or a playground, depending on the mix engineer and his skill level... and yes, I'm a novice, so I'm filed under the former. But I never said anything hurtful and tried to be clear that nothing hurtful was intended, but evidently I've failed to relate that much as I've failed to understand your vision. Keep doing what you're doing and taking pride in it... I've always respected that.

It's safe to say that most multitracks that arrive in the library are not of commercial quality i.e. they've not had the benefit of undergoing impartial assessment right from the start e.g. critical assessment of song length, song structure, consideration to the effectiveness of the melody, rhythm section, lyrics, density of the arrangement, instrumentation and their effective and appropriate notation (which also minimises masking issues later on etc), performance of each instrument including the vocals, critically and crucially the recording environment and signal chain which includes the appropriate choice of microphone....to mention a mere few! Some are doing it for fun and for their own personal enjoyment/satisfaction, so are not overly concerned about quality issues that would need to be addressed in order to maximise their audience and number of adoring fans along with their potential income opportunities. These most likely have a day job so it's not a life or death situation. A simple non-statistical glimpse at the minimal internet presence these artists have and poor play rates (ignoring those that have already rolled over) supports my judgement about commerciality. But this can also mask another issue....that the Artist lacks competent Marketing skills. A quick press of the play button clears that up.

So, by definition then, any attempt at mixing songs with one or more of the above mentioned defects inherent in a library multi will in the main, be unfixable without someone having to invest a lot of their time and energy doing a total remix (but that's not a guarantee). Read that last sentence again, and especially the word “unfixable”. While I might have a bash doing the impossible by fixing the unfixable through artistry and occasional flamboyant creativity, it will rarely address the core issue....because music and audio/sound quality is too complicated which is why a wise or talented artist would employ the benefits of a third party professional in the shape of a Producer to help them address potential problems early on – leaving it to the mixing stage is fraught with issues e.g. "Hello wrong mic on the vocal", so the points mentioned in the first paragraph are absolutely minimised or preferably totally eradicated.

So, what i'm doing here in the forum with my mixes, is playing the combined role of Gestapo Producer and mixing engineer. Gestapo in the sense that i'm initiating my own Producer game plan without having to be accountable or have to agree anything with the artist – I have total creative freedom to play and explore. NOTE WELL: most home/DIY musicians don't have the luxury of affording a Producer at any stage of the process, so it's often down to their mixing engineer to fulfil this role. If it's their mate, they won't get the impartial advice and ideas so those 12 guitar tracks will have to be mixed, even though it's only a 3-man band (Forkupines - Semantics comes to mind here...their engineer clearly had a gun at his head!)....and if it's a person who can't do the creative stuff, or knows instinctively when it's best to mute an instrument for the benefit of the song and the audience (i.e The Market), then it will suck even more and they will be contributing indirectly by default, to the artist's failure to connect.

You mix vanilla style (my term to describe basic fundamental mixing craft of panning, EQ, ambiance, levels etc), don't apply creative processes to your mixes and i've yet to hear you mute anything. Your mind-set is at a complete tangent to mine and it severely affects your ability to offer impartial judgement; my mix of Amber Sky's song Howlin being a case in point.

Working in an untreated room as you do, especially a small one where every time-delay arriving at your ears 30ms (or less) than the direct sound will create comb-filtering (ironic, given that you found my creative application of comb-filtering in the vocal delay a “distraction”), your EQ and mix decisions will be significantly constrained, affecting your mix decisions. Headphones are not a panacea, as fools believe, but merely bring other issues which many musicians are unaware of. Using consumer speakers also has it's inherent issues which you have yet to be alive to. Your speakers are skewed heavily towards a bright presentation and over-emphasise treble...and I won't talk about bass. Furthermore, if you can't calibrate your monitors (useless anyway in an untreated room), then your subjective judgements about EQ and compression will be not much more than a guessing game because you are hearing your room and not the mix! I suggest this is why your mix of Too Bright was all over the place. A "suitable" critical listening environment would have made your decisions more accurate and representative of the needs in the multi. You have yet to appreciate the benefits of gear (which includes a treated room). We listen, make a mix decision on what parameters need implementing to fix the issue(s), then we dial the parameters in. Not much good though if your room and monitoring is a mess, eh?

Which leads me to one final point. A DAW is a creative tool and so far i've yet to hear you engage the creative opportunities they afford beyond the process of 'simple' vanilla mixing. Basic studio tracking is...basic. We use a DAW because it enables us to add value to the studio tracking. If you can only do vanilla, then your work/skill/talent is limited and if you don't know when it feels right and appropriate to mute an instrument, you will be unable to offer impartial mixing advice beyond the craft of musicianship.

Was I offended by your feedback? Nope....we create our own emotional response and you are not responsible for my emotions. But hopefully I haven't been wasting my time with this post and that you can take something away from it and build upon it. If you only take one thing, that is progress and I applaud any progress because I know how difficult it can be to achieve. But i'm all too aware that while we can lead a horse to water, we can't make it drink. People are inherently resistant to change and I think your constrained mixing craft might be a reflection of that...along with your resistance to engage the need for decent gear and a good room. Mixing in a poor environment doesn't help facilitate self-development, it merely compounds and perpetuates bad habits. You need to break the loop but if you can't hear your mix because your room and monitoring is getting in the way of judgements, then it will hold you back...and this includes your ability to provide accurate objective assessments of other's mixes.

Do yourself a favour and instead of giving people feedback and mixing, run a frequency response analysis of your room at the monitoring position. If the results don't scare you into addressing the issues tomorrow, nothing will.

For critical listening, we need a critical listening environment.