Joe's Bar

[SonicTramp]

What happened to this mix is simple: the phase on the kicks is completely 180 off but sounded much better than when in phase (I could see it; I did it myself). I was confused bc it was contrary to what I know and learned. But following what you guys keep saying: if it's good, keep it. Well, if I flipped the polarity to get it completely out of phase I got the kick back (which I did and kept), however, if I kept it "normal" then I have no kick (I purposely kept the 2 mixes almost the same for record keeping. Have a listen to both, I am sure you can hear the kick's difference). That is the only thing I did that is major. Small little fiddling w/EQ didn't matter that much. So...

1. Why did it do that?
2. Should I put it back to "normal" phase while, clearly, the kicks are better when out of phase. But it would violate the mantra "if it sounds good, keep it"
3. I still don't hear the damage done by flipping the phase (still trying). At what place or what instrument you hear the most damage? (this would help me identify it the next time)

Here is for me to learn. Here is for me to redo without real consequences, no money or job is on the line. Here is for me to learn my mistakes and...phase, let's not forget that. And here is for me to test all "theories" and see for myself. So yeah, help me out, man.

To Roy: it is very kind and considerate of you to take one's fragmented knowledge and education in consideration. You are right. We don't start at the same starting line, and we don't know equally. You can blast my mix and I don't mind bc I know it's done with...love (what a beautiful word). I am surprised you even listen to my mixes. And yeah, most of my mixes are experimental, the heuristic way. Thanks.

To Mixinginthecloud: I am not sure about "if it sounds good keep it" anymore. So what do I do? I chose to keep the kicks bc it sounded better, but look at what happened to the mix, according to both of you. Which one should I violate bc it seems to me it's either one or the other.

Phase is super interesting to me. Yeah, I like the boring stuffs. And I think it matters in mixing. I read a bunch of stuffs about it and kinda understand theoretically, but in real life it's entirely different. I have nothing better to do nowadays anyway. I just want to put 2 and 2 together for my own sake. I can just make a brand new redo on this song, but that is not the point. I want to learn new things.

Well, thanks both for spending the time. But I will be much more thankful if either of you, or anybody, can shed some light into it.

[Roy]

I'll get back to this when I can but, checking the session now, the kicks are as in phase as two kick mics can be. Also, they're samples, probably from the session and edited and arranged but they aren't just straight kick tracks in an acoustic session where the phase of the kick signals might be more important to the other drum mics. Or any open mics in the session for that matter.

I get it, it's something to think about and ponder. In the end, my advice is to not worry about it too much. Check phases, whatever has more low end move on. Have some faith in the professional and artists before you and they probably were fine with how the mics were at the recording and get with mixing. If you get comfortable enough and have an ear for phasing then you can mess about and see what works best. Less is also more. Worrying about the phase of 4 guitar mics? Go with one and phase isn't an issue! Maybe just go with one kick mic. Etc.

[mikej]

Hi,

Interesting question.

Does this help?

I've done this quite quickly. It's a bit rough and ready, but I'm sure you'll correct me if I've made any mistakes.  The kick in/out mics look to be in phase to me (see screen shot).  I've created some test audio files where I have inverted the phase of one mic (kick in / kick out / OH ) in turn.

Well, that's the techincal side.  The artistic side is up to you really. I have my favourite. Which do you prefer though?

Cheers!

[SonicTramp]

I do have faith in the pros; I look to them as guiding light. What happened was accidental. I didn't mean to flip the kick, for there was no reason to; they were in phase. All I wanted to do was to clean some of the mud I heard on previous mix.

Could it be the beater is left there bc there was nothing to cancel it out?

Think about it. The kickin obviously has more top end in it, the kickout less so. The key take away that I (and perhaps we) missed entirely is: they are not identical. When one of them is flipped whatever they have in common (whatever frequency the shared) will cancel out. It makes sense that the beater is the only thing left. And that was what I heard.

I was curious as to what you guys think and myself try to come up with answer. What do I do with it? I actually don't know. All I know is I am no longer curious as to why that happens. Unless any of you can come up with a better explanation. I am all ears, literally.

[mikej]

Yeah you are thinking along the right lines. It's interesting if you actually listen to the kick in and out mics individually and look at the frequency content of each on an analyser.

[SonicTramp]

Coming from my speakers:
1&4 sound similar, beefy with slight sub, more so in 4 than 1
2 is thinner less beefy but more defined
I would choose 2 bc I can always get help from the bass

[mikej]

Just been checking out mixes 4 and 5.

Well, the instruments in mix 5 are a touch more separated and cleaner than 4, and it sounds more mid forward. I think it's the vocals that are standing out a little more? Mix 4 sounds a bit smoother, a little warmer and a touch more glued perhaps. For me, if you add a db or 2 at around 250 to mix 5 to balance out the forwardness, you might get the best of both worlds?

Talking of mix bus eq - I was watching this video the other day. Although it's basically an advert for a load of analog gear, I thought it showed the difference a little mix bus eq and compression can make to a mix quite nicely. (I try to shoot for similar effect.....)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1-NcqXvOks&t=973s

You mentioned "Sounds good to me now but tomorrow is another entirely different day" in an earlier post. I feel this is quite important. I find that it can be a good idea to let a mix 'rest' for a day or so and check it again with fresh ears before posting. Also well worth checking it against commercial mixes too. Putting a mix in the middle of a playlist of commercial tracks can help put things in perspective.

Anyway, just a couple of things I thought might be worth mentioning here.

Cheers!

[mikej]

Coming from my speakers:
1&4 sound similar, beefy with slight sub, more so in 4 than 1
2 is thinner less beefy but more defined

Yeah, I would agree with that.

I would choose 2 bc I can always get help from the bass

I would go for 1 or 4. I also usually use the sub of the kick for the bottom end of my mixes (not the bass).

So we agree on the science, but perhaps not on the artistic side, which is probably fair enough in my book .

Anyway, I feel you've maybe got enough info between Roy and myself to get the hang of it now?

Cheers!

[SonicTramp]

Dude, I want more! but sure, that's enough for me to chew on. I can never thank you guys enough, so why try, right?

Let me guess the reason you use the sub for bottom, bc it's steadier than the bass? Bass has more notes and dynamics range is wider. It does make some sense. I'll try it next time.

[Roy]

The sub is important because it's 'exciting' or at least interesting in whatever primal capacity.

The parts of the fundamental notes exist down there and are subject to the same dynamics as the note that's been played. The subs aren't anymore steady.