![]() So in my job, my only real concern is the quality of the mix.ĭoes it meet the technical requirements appropriate to its final format ie vinyl, cassette etc. I just realised you were talking about this from a receiving from a mastering engineer perspective. Well, that's not strictly true, once I take it into the mastering room it generally needs a little cleanup, but perfect mixes are rare. ![]() Though even then, I never EQ, but I mix in to my processing from the beginning, so it generally doesn't need EQ on the master buss to get it balanced. If most people saw my mixbus chain they would probably call me a fuckwit, as I do some ludicrous things. I generally prefer to teach best practice. I mean you can literally just apply that as a blanket philosophy for any part of the mix process. If you understand them and how to compensate and avoid (or make use of) then yeah, go ahead. I tend to approach most mixing problems from a mastering mindset.īe aware of the problems you are introducing. It's generally why, in mastering, you usually want to do the minimal amount of distortion/processing you can (when considering all changes to a full mix as distortion), to achieve a balanced mix. ![]() ![]() I would also say that a common return to sender issue I have with mixes in the mastering room, is phase issues, transient smearing, resonance and harshness, and pre ringing, usually as a result of EQ on the master buss, as even the smallest change to a full mix can have all kinds of implications. There is a difference between tone and shaping, of course. Like I said, sure, fine, EQ your master buss. No matter what you do to the mix you won't get the same results. My point is there are lots of hardware eqs used to change the tone of (or even color) an entire mix. It is mono! To find two vintage pultec eqs which would match adequately for master bus processing would be nigh on impossible. Would you be annoyed if you received a mix that had already been processed in this sort of way? Any particular things to avoid or watch out for? Besides the obvious things that have been repeated ad nauseam like excessively wonky stereo shit that kills translate-ability and so on I'm now generally less afraid to do some saturating, a more EQ, some Airwindows stuff like Channel 9, etc. It's related to how I've lately been less afraid to do mix bus processing in the mixing stage, stepping out of my comfort zone since I feel I've recently made significant steps toward making mixes I'm happy with at the level of individual tracks and group buses. Obviously I would want to apply it very carefully and subtly, and I realize it mostly comes down to whether the mixing decisions actually make it better or make a mess, but I'm interested more in the "best practices" in terms of professionalism and being a good client. I was looking at the TDR SlickEQ Mastering edition and was considering picking it up because I use a few other TDR plugins and like them a lot, and this one has some nice features.īut then I got to thinking about whether applying some of the processing it can do (especially stuff like the per-band stereo control) at the mixing stage would be inconsiderate of the mastering engineer, like jumping the gun and doing something that they should be doing or might prefer just to communicate with me about and apply themselves. I have a question for any mastering engineers or other wise sages
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |