Most common rookie mistake when mixing?

[shniggens]

Will you do it all for the rookie?

 

For you pros, and competent production people -

 

What is the most common mistakes or flaws that you hear in recordings that tip you off that it was done by an amateur hack (such as myself)?

 

What do us rookies like to do too much of, or too little of that keeps our mixes substandard?

 

Just curious.

 

[where02190]

Not paying attention to or thinking the mix levels need to be as close to 0dbfs as they can possibly get. Basically, not understanding the level concepts of the digital domain.

[UstadKhanAli]

Too much reverb.

 

Not carving out enough of the low mids (muddy mixes).

 

A lot of overlapping frequencies masking each other.

 

Boosting too many frequencies instead of cutting them.

 

Thuddy low end (most likely a result of inadequate monitoring and poor acoustic treatment).

 

Harsh high end (especially cymbals).

 

Overloading the mix buss.

 

Poor arrangement (which can alleviate much of the above even if one is not good at mixing - it's sort of like having the band "mix" itself).

[shniggens]

 

Not paying attention to or thinking the mix levels need to be as close to 0dbfs as they can possibly get. Basically, not understanding the level concepts of the digital domain.

 

 

Please explain.

[Ed A.]

 

What is the most common mistakes or flaws that you hear in recordings that tip you off that it was done by an amateur hack (such as myself)?

 

 

Rookies mix through headphones instead of a good pair of monitors. Yes, you can hear it in the recording.

[mobobog]

Not paying attention to or thinking the mix levels need to be as close to 0dbfs as they can possibly get. Basically, not understanding the level concepts of the digital domain.

 

+1

 

I was one of those. I learned the bit i know reading magazines through the internet, videos, this forums, etc... and i always read "you should be as close to 0 dBFS as you can without clipping", and then they give you reasonable answers like "you need it, so your signal is way above the noise", and "you should use the most of the 24 bit available, if you dont you are wasting bits"...so what??? bits are free

 

Then after some explanation by where I stopped making my life miserable trying to get as close to 0 dBFS as I could.

 

Recording at lower levels makes your AD/DA converter sound better, and makes mixing a lot easier, because you wont hit the buss to clipping point and you wont have to make adjustments in your mix just to avoid distortion.

 

I guess the logic of recording as loud as you can is from the tape days, but it really makes no sense in the digital (now i realize). This "technique " supposed to avoid noise, put you in real trouble trying to avoid buss clipping.

 

my 0.00002 cents

[Lee Knight]

Turning up the bass frequencies. Just turn up the bass guitar. Think of the bass instruments as your low end control. It's much more organic than "boosting lowend".

 

Using reverb too much.

 

Not capturing and using natural ambience.

 

Being afraid to MUTE. The mute button's your last chance at getting the arrangement right.

[D Charles]

Music covering up vocals.

 

Too much reverb.

 

Bass and Kick fighting each other.

 

Weird rumbles from kicking the mic stand etc.

 

Vocals with sssssey S's, P and B bumps and cracklin' consonants.

 

Guitar wiping out the whole mix (when the lead player mixes).

[blue2blue]

 

Rookies mix through headphones instead of a good pair of monitors. Yes, you can hear it in the recording.

 

 

I'd generalize this even more: too many people try to mix in poor monitoring environments. WAY too many of us (and I include myself in this) think we can "think" our way out of a compromised listening environment, when in reality, the problems tend to invest themselves in the mix.

 

 

Lots of good suggestions above, BTW. I like the reminder about MUTEs... and in addition to judicious use of the mute button (or slip editing tracks, etc) I would say that some folks should probably rely less on trying to compress/limit dynamically uneven tracks and just jump in there and automate some fader riding (or DIY, if you work from tape or mix OTB and have no automation at your disposal or prefer to keep your fader-riding out of the box).

 

 

Another thing I hear in many compromised mixes is various EQ points, FX, etc, "stacking" in the mix. This is perhaps more prevalent with people mixing on analog boards with fixed EQ points -- or those who (over-)use favorite presets. But it can also happen with overused, heavily characterful mics and preamps/channel strips. I've heard -- and read complaints by others -- about even the phenomenon of "over-Neving" -- using those highly characterful pres/channel strips (or similar clones) on every track of a mix and having that sonic signature lay what some may perceive as too heavy a hand on the mix.

[Gus Lozada]

+1 I guess the logic of recording as loud as you can is from the tape days, but it really makes no sense in the digital (now i realize). This "technique " supposed to avoid noise, put you in real trouble trying to avoid buss clipping. my 0.00002 cents

 

Yeah.

That is only true when recording at 24 bits.

[mobobog]

Yeah. That is only true when recording at 24 bits.

 

I am using 24 bits, and now that i aim -18 dBFS RMS in the loudest parts, i dont have audible noise in the quieter parts, and i dont have clipping problems neither.

 

[UstadKhanAli]

 

T Being afraid to MUTE. The mute button's your last chance at getting the arrangement right.

 

 

This deserves a repeat. Arrangements are key to great mixes. Let the ego go and mute things if it makes the song better.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Vocals buried in the mix.

[UstadKhanAli]

 

+1 Recording at lower levels makes your AD/DA converter sound better, and makes mixing a lot easier, because you wont hit the buss to clipping point and you wont have to make adjustments in your mix just to avoid distortion.

 

 

I agree with the latter point, but not with the first point: recording at lower levels does NOT make your A/D converter sound better. If anything, recording at too low of a level would make your converter sound worse (although these days, you'd have to have a really low level to make that happen).

 

I'm not sure why you're mentioning the D/A converter, but at any rate, low output levels coming out your D/A converter to either your monitors or other outputs are not going to make your converter sound better either.

[where02190]

Targeting the 0dbu reference point of your converter for the nominal recording levels it crutial. So many people, and not just amateurs, still pound into their converters like it's analog tape, and end up with tracks that all peaks stupidly close to 0dbfs. Then, to compound insult to injury, they shove all the track faders to 0, and massively overload the mix buss. What they end up with is an inferior sounding mix, which they try to compensate for wtih eq and abuse of dynamics. Leave the damned master fader at 0, keep the plugins of the master fader, and adjust the track levels so the mix buss' nominal level is also that of the 0dbu reference of your converters.

 

The sonic difference will amaze you I guarantee.

[mobobog]

I agree with the latter point, but not with the first point: recording at lower levels does NOT make your A/D converter sound better. If anything, recording at too low of a level would make your converter sound worse (although these days, you'd have to have a really low level to make that happen). I'm not sure why you're mentioning the D/A converter, but at any rate, low output levels coming out your D/A converter to either your monitors or other outputs are not going to make your converter sound better either.

 

Where said:

 

Leave the damned master fader at 0, keep the plugins of the master fader, and adjust the track levels so the mix buss' nominal level is also that of the 0dbu reference of your converters.

 

The sonic difference will amaze you I guarantee.

 

And that is what i mean... of course i am not talking about recording at -45 RMS or something like that... but for me -18 works wonders. Apart from noise i think that recording at to low levels gives you a more stepped "less true" digitalization, but i am not sure about that. I dont know if it has to do with some specs of the converters, or it is just the fact that i am not clipping at all, but i feel (and many people think the same) my recordings started sounding better when I started doing this. I have heard that a converter should be considered an analog device for the most part... then it makes sense that it sounds better at its nominal level.

 

recording at the converter nominal level is about AD. And targeting the nominal level while mixing is about DA, that is why I mentioned it.

 

Regards

[Anderton]

The main musical problems I hear are:

 

Overly-cluttered arrangements

Solos that should be cut in half

Lack of dynamics and modulation (going up a half step can be very cool!)

Lyrical cliches

Trying to sound like another band instead of creating a unique sound

[UstadKhanAli]

Mobobog:

 

Yes, but to clarify, this doesn't have anything to do with the converters sounding better, it has to do with the mix buss, y'see what I mean? The converter is going to sound like the converter at any reasonable level - it's not going to sound better or worse. What you and Where are discussing have to do with the mix buss.

[Extreme Mixing]

I actually think that your A/D and D/A converters will sound better when they are not pushed right to the edge all the time. Most of the gear we use to record was designed to operate best at 0VU and not 0dbfs. That really includes the analog section of your converters, too. Unless you think your M-Audio converters have more headroom than a Neve console, I would advise against tracking and mixing so hot. Leave it to the mastering slutz to turn your mix up, or wait and do it as a separate step in the process. It's easier to get musical balances when the converters aren't barking at you. In any 24 bit recording, there is plenty of room to fill a 16 bit CD.

 

Steve

[Anderton]

Also remember that the meters are measuring individual samples, not the result of reconstructing the samples. Therefore, it's possible for the signal to distort, but you wouldn't know it from watching the meter.

[UstadKhanAli]

 

I actually think that your A/D and D/A converters will sound better when they are not pushed right to the edge all the time.

 

 

Definitely, I couldn't agree more. But I was just trying to clarify the other statement since he was actually talking about the mix buss.

[rasputin1963]

 

Craig, you mean you'd find fault with my latest lyric??? Here it is:

 

I LOVE YOU

 

I woke up this mornin'

Rememberin' all we'd said last night

You said you'd found another and we must part

It cut like a knife when you broke my heart

Girl, you've touched my very soul...

Now I've got to swallow my foolish pride...

 

Just give me one more night

Just a chance to make things right

And I know the lovelight will come shinin' through,

And two hearts will beat as one.

 

'Cause, girl, you know tomorrow

We'll both feel pain and sorrow...

 

(Chorus) 'Cause I LOVE YOU, I LOVE YOU, I LOVE YOU...

Yeah, I LOVE YOU, I LOVE YOU, I LOVE YOU,

Hey girl, I LOVE YOU, I LOVE YOU, I LOVE YOU

 

Until the end of time.

 

:D

[Kendrix]

And that is what i mean... of course i am not talking about recording at -45 RMS or something like that... but for me -18 works wonders. Apart from noise i think that recording at to low levels gives you a more stepped "less true" digitalization, but i am not sure about that. Regards

 

 

There is absolutely no truth behind the idea that recording at lower levels somehow prduces a grainier waveform. NOT TRUE. Digital sampling theory says otherwise. After reconstruction/filtering the waveform loses NO fidelity at all because it was converted at a low versus high level . The only thing you lose is dymanic range. However, you have way more dynamic range than you need in a 24 bit digital system.

 

---------------

The other thing that rookies have a hard time with is Bass. Many of us hobbiests have inadequate monitors/monitoring environments to be able to consistently get the bass just right.

 

The lists offered above are good ones IMHO.

[audioicon]

These are my "self imposed mixing guidlines." If it sounds good, leave the damn song/track alone. If you hear the compression it is too much, try to get the best sounding tracks with little or no used of FX/plugs accept were the song calls for it.

 

I would say the biggest error rookies commit is the use of too many things on the tracks. I'm a rookie but I seriously try not to add anything on the tracks if it already sounds good.

 

For a rookie knowing when to stop f---ink with the song can be the difference between a good/great mix or the sound of a damn power saw.

 

Hope I make sense this time around.

 

Audioicon

[echoshock]

My master fader in Sonar is at 0. But levels on the faders can go up to 6db before clipping. Peaks should still not go above zero though right?

[shniggens]

 

For a rookie knowing when to stop f---ink with the song can be the difference between a good/great mix or the sound of a damn power saw. Audioicon

 

 

Yeah, I think I'm guilty of that.

 

I think I'm also guilty of using too much reverb. How do you know when there is enough? What instruments do you avoid using reverb on (for a typical rock arrangement)?