"Learning to Let Go"

[Anderton]

Sarah Jones, EM's editor, wrote this editorial and I thought it was worth some discussion here...I asked her if I could reprint it, and she said yes, so...

 

We've talked about this sort of thing before, but never really tied confidence into it. After reading Nads' posts, it seemed there was some kind of connection. How much do personality traits influence the music-making process? Hmmm...

 

LEARNING TO LET GO

 

How many of you are guilty of over-mixing? You know the drill: You

[MikeRivers]

I would have read the editorial if my subscription hadn't gone away with the Mix/EQ merger. Applied on line, and nothing.

 

But, yeah, a lot of people don't have confidence in their ability to make a decision, or to believe what they hear. I see it with gear as well as mixes. People want to know, and agonize over, which of three pieces that are essentially comparable is best. They don't listen and decide if it's what they want. At best, they only want to get someone else's opinion of an A/B test, in hopes that someone else has made the choice they're trying to make.

 

As I see it, they're afraid that they will do something or buy something that sounds OK to them, but there will be something "wrong" that someone else will hear. You don't want someone to listen to your mix and say "oh, you should have tried the Fipplefinger plug-in on the bass in the third bridge" and forever thereafter be branded as a clueless newbie.

[realtrance]

Confidence comes with experience. As the old joke goes, "how do you get to Symphony Hall?...." "Practice!" The Grateful Dead, whose live sets I've been listening to recently, strike me as the epitome (in popular music, jazz is even more the case) of a group who played together so much they were basically, as I'd call it, "free from the neurosis of perfectionism." Meaning not that they were sloppy, but that they could very much be in the moment of the music during a performance, and consider that enough. Their engineers got to the same point. It became a way of living, not just of playing.

 

Ditto Art Ensemble of Chicago, the jazz parallel in some ways with The Grateful Dead. Their getting together sounds/seems casual and entirely improvisatory, but it's improvisation at an extremely high level of mastery, understanding, listening to each other, and very much in the music, living in the moment of the performance.

 

I think all the tools and techniques and the ability to go as deep in "editing" your performance as is possible now represent the other end of the spectrum; you can be lazy, unsure, undisciplined, careless, uninformed, casual with your initial performance of any track, because there's the insurance of being able to go back in and re-edit every detail down to how you think it should go after the fact. That's always a much more cerebral practice, and in my opinion at least, rapidly loses the gestural power and performance flow you get when you're doing something live.

 

The excitement of a live environment is that every moment is your only chance to "get it right," so you better be paying attention! I think, regardless of venue, that that is something completely lost, more often than not, in the current technology environment.

[russrags]

I Never simply let go, until I'm completely satisfied, it's not that I'm over mixing, it's just easier to be done than it is to be satisfied. I'll mix on a song for 40 or 50 hours if I have too, and it's not just because I can, I never do anything just because I can, I do it like my next breath of air depends on it. Of course I'm usually dealing with 100 - 300 tracks of audio. Would a person rush Da Vinci just because he took too long, Michelangelo, Bruce Swedien??? In taking my time, I find the song will never need remixing again, it will still sound great years from now. Trust me, "Dark Side of the Moon," did not sound that way as soon as the musicians came back into the control room. A mixer should do their mixing alone, a GTR player is going to get impatient hanging around a mix session, so they need to go write another song or do something else. If I'm not better at what I do than anyone else, my career is over, that doesn't come easy, you've got to put in the time, and mix like the music matters.

 

Russ

Nashville

[roomjello]

 

I Never simply let go, until I'm completely satisfied, it's not that I'm over mixing, it's just easier to be done than it is to be satisfied. I'll mix on a song for 40 or 50 hours if I have too, and it's not just because I can, I never do anything just because I can, I do it like my next breath of air depends on it. Of course I'm usually dealing with 100 - 300 tracks of audio. Would a person rush Da Vinci just because he took too long, Michelangelo, Bruce Swedien??? In taking my time, I find the song will never need remixing again, it will still sound great years from now. Trust me, "Dark Side of the Moon," did not sound that way as soon as the musicians came back into the control room. A mixer should do their mixing alone, a GTR player is going to get impatient hanging around a mix session, so they need to go write another song or do something else. If I'm not better at what I do than anyone else, my career is over, that doesn't come easy, you've got to put in the time, and mix like the music matters. Russ Nashville

 

 

Nicely said.

How do you deal with a situation for example where you know the extra hours will make the tune, but you know the client doesn't have the dough for the extra hours?

A compromise with them would be obvious but how inclined are you to throw in free time on a mix?

 

I always end up taking it there anyway and then feeling like i shouldn't charge for all the time as some of it was me experimenting and learning.

But i don't think that ever really just stops happening, so i wonder is it a mistake to misguide the client base by charging 6-9 hours per mix when it is actually taking 12-14 hours to get it to where it is presented.

It's a battle i seem to face each project.

One solution i have found is to make sure they understand editing is a different process which is not part of mixing.

It's easy to slide a few hours into there as there is always more editing to do.

But again, the money is rarely there and i need to turn the stuff out at a certain level to feel satisfied for myself.

[temnov]

 

you've got to put in the time, and mix like the music matters.

 

 

That's how I work.

 

I deal with different clients - great musicians and not so great. I'll try to get the best I can from their tunes, sometimes overtime, sometimes no "dough for the extra hours".

 

Funny, my clients will stop me and tell hey, I'm happy with it, don't spend more time. And by the way, I switched to "by project" fees, it gives me more freedom and clients are happy. Per hour rates go away, I think.

[Ernest Buckley]

There is a inner sense now when something is done or if I need to fix it. I don`t know how this came to be, maybe just spending lots of time on my craft and knowing my limitations. Years ago I would sit there, banging my head on a performance or mix, now its more about doing what I do and getting out of the way, just letting the music flow. Then when I`m done, if I know I can do better, I do it. If not, I walk away.

 

If there is something I know I cannot do, I get someone else to do it. Maybe its maturity as well and accepting my limitations?

[JeffLearman]

In my experience as a hobbyist, a project is never quite done, I just get sick of it and call it quits.

 

My critical ability exceeds my skill, so I can always hear things that could be improved. I have a sneaky suspicion this is true of many pros, too.

[ggm1960]

I don't have much problem letting go, I'm writing/recording simply for my own benefit and no one is waiting for my next big release. Having said that however, I do hope that my skills are improving because there's a good chance I may take on clients after I get moved into a better location.

 

I have several of the best known DAW/recording programs and I'd like to be able to sit down and use them all competently so I switch it up as I go along. I'm back to working with Digital Performer right now, the last song was done completely in Reason 5/Record 1.5, before that I did a couple with Logic.

 

The only problem with my method is that it can get expensive! I'm still on version 6 of DP and I haven't upgraded Sonar from ver. 7 yet.

[Philter]

Sometimes you can hear how you want it to hear in your mind's ear, but it's not there yet. It can take years to get it there.

[Anderton]

 

That's exactly what happens to me, whether you're talking music, videos, or even editing an article. There's some obvious point where I know it's done.

 

This is most dramatic for me with videos, because of the audio/video combination. Sometimes I'll be at the 95% point and not know it, thinking that I'm only halfway through. And then all of a sudden -click- done.

 

I think Sarah isn't referring to a pro like Russ, who knows the path he's walking, but the person who keeps thinking "if I just do this one more tweak..." and then finding out that "one more tweak" isn't the problem. At some point, you have to ask yourself "will anyone even notice?"

 

I knew the guy who produced "Sally Go Round the Roses" by the Jaynettes. At one point he became obsessed with the mastering and did something like 70 different masters. Then he had to go away for two weeks. When he came back, he couldn't the tell the difference between any of them

[Anderton]

 

In my experience as a hobbyist, a project is never quite done, I just get sick of it and call it quits.

 

 

You're in good company:

 

[Geoff Grace]

Making music for money can be good for your discipline. If you don't let go and decide it's finished at some point, you don't get paid. And when there are deadlines and you don't finish on time, there could be serious consequences.

 

Of course, nothing is worse than releasing a shoddy product; so there's that factor pushing you to do your very best in the allotted time. But somehow, you must learn to strike a balance if you plan to make a career of it.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[russrags]

I often find this same situation with GTR players trying to get the right sound. I've had them come to me saying man I've got thousands of dollars invested trying to get the right sound, I've got all these pedals and processing gear, it still not the sound I'm looking for.

 

I've then taken their chord and plugged one end into their GTR and the other end in their amp, and said, have you ever tried this sound before???

 

 

Russ

Nashville

[Anderton]

I've then taken their chord and plugged one end into their GTR and the other end in their amp, and said, have you ever tried this sound before???

 

Wow Russ, that's pretty radical! I've never heard of anyone doing that before, but I tried it with a Peavey Windsor, and...it works!

[144dB]

Hi Craig,

 

A few things come to mind on this topic...

 

Art and music are subjective, so the ability to declare a project done is much more difficult than an objective exercise. If I'm designing a mechanical component to meet certain specifications, then it's easy to determine whether those specifications are met. Music is on the totally opposite side of the spectrum. Not only is it difficult to judge whether the "specifications are met", but two people can vehemently disagree on what the final goals and specifications are. Music is a completely subjective exercise.

 

Your thread also reminds me of some advice that Brian Transeau (a.k.a. "BT") gave at the end of an interview in Keyboard magazine. When asked what advice he would give to beginners, he said "you have to finish". In other words, you only get better by finishing projects and taking on more projects. The proverbial "never ending projects" won't lead to growth and maturity in music.

 

In terms of technology, I do think that our tools can make us reluctant to "cut and run". In the old days of live recording and/or minimal multi-tracking, you had to commit to certain decisions. You mixed on the fly. There wasn't an alternative. And it made the musicians better performers, because there was an urgency to get the take right from the outset.

 

I am guilty of the "never finishing" syndrome with music, but I'm learning to move past it. Part of it is letting go of self-importance and fear of judgment.

 

I have some other thoughts on this topic, but for right now, I'll "cut and run"...

[Anderton]

I just received a song to remix that had 82 tracks. There was nothing wrong with it per se, and a lot of the tracks were just little ear candy things, but I started by taking just one composite vocal track and making it as good as it could possibly be, then reducing the number of background vocals and panning them leftish and rightish to fill out the main vocal. Now the vocals sound really strong...it's not just a question of knowing when to stop, but knowing when to back up when you've gone too far. I've often said my favorite button on the console is "mute."

[Anderton]

 

A few things come to mind on this topic...

 

 

...and they're all good ones. I will say that one of the things I do in the spirit of commitment is although I often use amp sims, I almost never change the sound from the one I used during tracking. If something was cut with an AC30 sound, then by golly, the track wants an AC30 sound and will adapt itself to that. If I were to switch to a Marshall, the track goes out the window.

 

The only exception is if there's a minimal complement of instruments, like only one guitar. Sometimes I'll add a second cabinet or even amp/cabinet to create a stereo image, but even then, it doesn't stray too much from the original sound.

[Geoff Grace]

I just received a song to remix that had 82 tracks. There was nothing wrong with it per se, and a lot of the tracks were just little ear candy things, but I started by taking just one composite vocal track and making it as good as it could possibly be, then reducing the number of background vocals and panning them leftish and rightish to fill out the main vocal. Now the vocals sound really strong...it's not just a question of knowing when to stop, but knowing when to back up when you've gone too far. I've often said my favorite button on the console is "mute."

That's a good point, Craig. Often, less is more.

 

And yet, there are times when too much can be a good thing. For example, back when I used to work as an arranger, I would often create and track a few extra parts to give the artist, producer, and/or mixer some options as to what to keep or lose for the final mix.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[Philter]

 

...and they're all good ones. I will say that one of the things I do in the spirit of commitment is although I often use amp sims, I almost never change the sound from the one I used during tracking. If something was cut with an AC30 sound, then by golly, the track wants an AC30 sound and will adapt itself to that. If I were to switch to a Marshall, the track goes out the window. The only exception is if there's a minimal complement of instruments, like only one guitar. Sometimes I'll add a second cabinet or even amp/cabinet to create a stereo image, but even then, it doesn't stray too much from the original sound.

 

 

I don't even record the dry guitar signal. That's a can of worms that I avoid opening. I also print MIDI parts immediately after writing them. If I want to change the part, well then by god I'm going to have the do the whole thing over. Kind of booby-trapping yourself like that, throwing out little roadblocks to easy twiddling, can help down the line with that issue of deciding what really needs to be changed.

[144dB]

As a person who struggles with finishing music projects, I'll comment on another road block. It's been my experience that the average person thinks that you hit a button and music is created. They think that technology has come far enough that the the producer, engineer, and musician have very little to do with the finished product. Nothing could be further from the truth. Making music is hard, and it doesn't matter if it's simple pop or a classical symphony. For my own projects, I'm lucky if I can get something done in 40 to 50 hours (that's recording, mixing, and mastering combined). And given that I don't do this professionally, it's hard to find that 40 or 50 hours. It might be weeks before something surfaces.

 

So before I play a track for someone, I feel these expectations on my shoulders... They know I've been working hard for weeks, and I feel like they expect it to sound like a professional production. But it falls short, and I know it. Again, it's very hard work, and the amazing pieces of work that great musicians and great engineers produce take years of practice and experience. The tools have far less to do with it, but the media has convinced some of the public that there is an "easy" button.

 

It's my own mental road block, but it's an obstacle that I face when trying to finish a project, or share the results with someone...

[groovezilla]

When I find myself in the never ending polish routine, it always turns out that the smudge I'm trying to wipe away is on the other side of the window - either in the tracking or the song itself. A great song, properly recorded stands on it's own and doesn't need much production. This is the reoccurring theme of the book "Behind the Glass", a must read for any producer.

 

However, don't confuse obsessive polishing with the times when true muse hits the mixing/producing process. You'll know the difference by significant changes between sessions as compared to pushing the same fade up, then down, then up again and so on.

 

groovezilla

www.groovezoo.com

[Ronan Murphy]

I am actually fairly good at feeling like something is done and moving on and not getting too wrapped up in the minutia, but as a guy that does this stuff for other artists 95% of the time, my single biggest challenge is dealing with how musicians have shifted over the last decade to an M.O. of not being able to let something be done. Its frustrating as a guy running a business of doing this stuff, but its also a bit heart breaking to see musicians get caught in that trap.

[Anderton]

Hey Ronan - I almost have your Italian odyssey edited. But I can't seem to let go of deciding which pictures to use

[Anderton]

It's been my experience that the average person thinks that you hit a button and music is created.

 

Well, that's what I do. Doesn't everyone? My DAW has a button called "Hit" and I just click on it