24-09-2016, 01:34 PM
(24-09-2016, 07:40 AM)Olli H Wrote: I think the version 2 is better, especially in choruses one can hear the difference.
But on the otherhand I feel the low end is a bit unclear now. I think I like the thiner low-end of the first version more. But the low end is an area where each of us are struggling, and my opinions about it are about to change after each 10 minutes. But as we all like to develop as mixers, I think it’s not right way to cut the bass away. Pro mixes always have healthy low end.
For those of us who cannot afford to have a million dollar room, personnally I think it’s a good to have best possible a 300 dollar mixing headphones around, to check some issues that are masked by our cheap rooms. Speakers are always better for balancing etc, but it’s invaluable also hear some things without the coloring made by our room. So good headphones can give us some information that we are not able to otherwise get.
Essential with mixing headphones is that they should be open and have as flat as possible frequency curve. Good mixing headphones are not necesserily those which ”sound best”.
This made me laugh a bit. A case of being over reactive to comments without investigating the problem fully. I just boosted the kick and bass in #2, thus the unclear boom. Monitoring sure is challenging in this area. I have got some pro headphones but find them still quite limited to highlighting any issues in the low sub frequencies. My best bet is still testing the mix around the house on different systems big and small and seeing how it translates. Quite a time consuming process. I have also got some cheap Samson headphones that don't sound particularly pleasant but I do find these to be quite revealing and very good at emphasising frequency build ups throughout the spectrum. A case of finding what works. To succeed, improvisation has to be part of the process.
Thanks Olli,