# My interview with scoring mixer John Rodd for Film Music Magazine is up.



## Ashermusic (Nov 6, 2010)

I hope you all will find it interesting.

http://www.filmmusicmag.com/?p=6429


----------



## Hannes_F (Nov 6, 2010)

Hmm ...

I dare to think John Rodd could teach us much more than that. Two thirds or more of the article were an operating procedure for clients (now turn your FX off already) which would have an appropriate place in a PDF that John should eventually send out after the contract is signed.

Jay, if you happen to do a second part of the interview then you could eventually steer to questions more on the border between artistical and engineering decisions. For example: What would he say is the essence of his personal mixing philosophy? How did his mixing art develop? Why is he mixing orchestral music at all? What have been his mixing engineer role models if any? In which way can the mixing engineer be an indispensable partner to the composer? When will he mix a big, when a small sound? When more to the front, when more back? Are there fashion trends in orchestral mixing? Eventually differences between Hollywood vs. Europe? Classical orchestra sound vs. film orchestra? Loudness war in orchestral music too, lately? Brightness war? Does he feel working with samples is compromising/changing the sound expectations of composers over time? Typical incidents of first time mixer clients? How can a composer know he needs a mixing engineer? How does typically a project proceed (turnaround time, is more of discussion involved or does he work silently and send the finished product, typical cost frame) etc.


----------



## madbulk (Nov 6, 2010)

Enjoyed that immensely, Jay.


----------



## Andreas Moisa (Nov 7, 2010)

Jay, thanks for sharing!


----------



## Hannesdm (Nov 7, 2010)

Great article, Jay! Thanks for that!


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (Nov 7, 2010)

Nice interview Jay.

I would probably agree with Hannes F in that a part 2 would be in need and more interesting for me as well.

I believe John Rodd is on this forum now, maybe ne could chime in and answer some of these questions........... that would be extremely insightful for many of us here.

John..........?

Mr A


----------



## dannthr (Nov 7, 2010)

Hannes_F @ Sat Nov 06 said:


> Hmm ...
> 
> I dare to think John Rodd could teach us much more than that. Two thirds or more of the article were an operating procedure for clients (now turn your FX off already) which would have an appropriate place in a PDF that John should eventually send out after the contract is signed.
> 
> Jay, if you happen to do a second part of the interview then you could eventually steer to questions more on the border between artistical and engineering decisions. For example: What would he say is the essence of his personal mixing philosophy? How did his mixing art develop? Why is he mixing orchestral music at all? What have been his mixing engineer role models if any? In which way can the mixing engineer be an indispensable partner to the composer? When will he mix a big, when a small sound? When more to the front, when more back? Are there fashion trends in orchestral mixing? Eventually differences between Hollywood vs. Europe? Classical orchestra sound vs. film orchestra? Loudness war in orchestral music too, lately? Brightness war? Does he feel working with samples is compromising/changing the sound expectations of composers over time? Typical incidents of first time mixer clients? How can a composer know he needs a mixing engineer? How does typically a project proceed (turnaround time, is more of discussion involved or does he work silently and send the finished product, typical cost frame) etc.



+1

John is a tome of information!

I feel like I get schooled every time I talk to him.


----------



## David Story (Nov 8, 2010)

Another good interview Jay! Thanks.

You got more from John than I usually do.






The EQ question is a tough one to get any expert help. I think that engineers are doing this by trail and error, but with precise tools and lots of experience.

I wish you could interview another top engineer about the great questions Hannes asks.


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (Nov 26, 2010)

Let's get John Rodd to comment a bit more here.

Oh John...........................


----------



## John Rodd (Nov 26, 2010)

Hi everybody!

8) 

I didn't know that Jay had started this thread here.... it was just last night I posted the same link on a new thread.

But here I am.  (somebody showed me this thread)

Thanks everybody for the kind words. Jay did a really good job with the interview.....

I've made a note to come back in the next few days (or next week) to address some of the questions here. In the meantime - feel free to post other questions as well. 

Happy Thanksgiving to all the Americans on the forum here..... 

and... best regards to all

John


----------



## John Rodd (Dec 2, 2010)

Hi Hannes

Thanks for all the good questions. I’ll do my best to give you a concise answer to all of them. A lot of them merit a much longer discussion, over a beer or three, but unfortunately that isn’t possible at this moment. :wink: 



Hannes_F @ Sat Nov 06 said:


> What would (John Rodd) say is the essence of his personal mixing philosophy?



I always want to serve the composer that hired me, but at the same time i want to serve the project. What I mean is that my recording, mixing and/or mastering has to make the composer happy, but also work well within the context of the project.

I’m constantly listening to a very wide range of music when I’m not working (and that sometimes drives my wife a bit nuts….. :shock: ) so I am always thinking about production style and the sound of music - no matter what the genre.

The bottom line is that there are many ways to achieve a good sound, and there are many ‘good sounds’ for a project. I keep an open mind, and I always keep a very positive attitude.



Hannes_F said:


> How did (John Rodd’s) mixing art develop?



I’ve recorded + mixed many projects, and much, much earlier in my career I worked with a lot of very good recording and mixing engineers. I’ve also worked with a ton of great composers and bands.
I learned a lot from all of them - - - what to do…… (and occasionally what NOT to do)

I also think my love of so many different genres of music has influenced my working style.



Hannes_F said:


> Why is (John Rodd) mixing orchestral music at all?



When I started my career (more than 20 years ago) I was working at a studio that had a very large recording room (and five different recording/mixing studios in one big building) and I was immediately drawn to recording and mixing orchestras. I was also drawn to rock, jazz, classical, electronica, country, punk …… basically all kinds of music. This is why film (and gaming, and CD) projects are what I do - as they are not always orchestral. 

I recently mixed a 100% ‘electronica’ film score for my client Cliff Martinez, (he composed ‘Traffic’, ‘Solaris’, etc) for example. I’ve done a bunch of projects with him over the past years, and his projects always sound different from one to another, and are never 100% orchestral, for example.



Hannes_F said:


> What have been (John Rodd’s) mixing engineer role models if any?



Too many to mention…. but my first (and most significant) role model was Gary Gray. A fantastic recording and mixing engineer. We’re great friends to this day.



Hannes_F said:


> In which way can the mixing engineer be an indispensable partner to the composer?



As a recording & mixing engineer I always have the composers best interests at heart. For example - I’m extremely detail oriented, and I do my best to foresee any possible engineering or mix issues, and “head them off at the pass” as they say. I always leave lots of options open, and I work very hard to make my composer client’s life as easy as possible. I also keep out of the way, and I keep my mouth shut as much as possible. 8) 



Hannes_F said:


> When will (John Rodd) mix a big, when a small sound?



The project (and the composer’s wishes) dictate the sound I get. The budget will also determine a few things that I cannot control. For example - if the budget is for a 20 pc orchestra…. I cannot make it sound exactly like 110 live players, all together, in a top scoring stage. No matter how many virtual instruments we have, I cannot achieve the impossible. 

Generally speaking though, I do try to make things sound big, epic and spacious.



Hannes_F said:


> When more to the front, when more back?



I just try to make the mix sound good. Every project is different.



Hannes_F said:


> Are there fashion trends in orchestral mixing?



For the sort of projects that I do…. not really….. none come to mind…… there are different styles… but I wouldn’t say “ fashion trends”



Hannes_F said:


> Eventually differences between Hollywood vs. Europe?



I would say (very generally speaking) that there is a ‘Hollywood’ film score sound…. but there are a lot of variations to it. Big Hollywood films often tend to have much larger budgets for scoring than big European films…. so the productions can be a lot more ‘epic’.




Hannes_F said:


> Classical orchestra sound vs. film orchestra?



Film scores are designed to work within the context of the film… so they have to work with dialog and sound effects. 

A classical CD obviously does not.

This leads to different production styles.



Hannes_F said:


> Loudness war in orchestral music too, lately?



I do find that in some of my work - the clients want the stereo mixes (for CD, or for gaming) to be VERY loud. Many people mistake compression & peak limiting for ‘punch’ when in fact….. peak limiting is removing ‘punch’. 
The ear always prefers the louder sound… even if it is less good, quality wise.

I do whatever my client requests, but I also strive for the best in quality at the same time. Luckily I have really great analog compressors and digital peak limiting tools to be able to get loud, great sounding mixes. As one example - my TC Electronic Mastering 6000 hardware processor sounds absolutely amazing. (It should for $11,000! >8o )



Hannes_F said:


> Brightness war?



My clients tend to like a balanced sound overall, so I don’t see this as an issue for me. 

Furthermore - I own many great sounding hardware EQs, so when I crank up the top end… at least it is gorgeous, open and smooth sounding. One example would be the A-Designs Hammer EQ - the 10k boost on it is completely unique sounding, and it is often one of the boxes I use for top end boosts. 



Hannes_F said:


> Does (John Rodd) feel working with samples is compromising/changing the sound expectations of composers over time?



That is a hard question to answer… and I’m not sure how to answer it…

I would sayò  Ž   Ìx  Ž   Ìx  Ž   Ì|  Ž   Ì|V  Ž   Ì}  Ž   Ì}¦  Ž   Ì~:  Ž   Ì~_  Ž   Ì€3  Ž   Ì€a  Ž   Ì€¾  Ž   Ì€ê  Ž   Ì|  Ž   Ì±  Ž   Ì‚¶  Ž   Ì‚ù  Ž   ÌƒÏ  Ž   ÌƒÚ  Ž   Ì„Ž  Ž   Ì„í  Ž   Ì…}  Ž   Ì…ô  Ž   Ì‹  Ž   Ì‹_  Ž   Ì‘w  Ž   Ì‘É  Ž   Ì’:  Ž   Ì’w  Ž   Ì“Ú  Ž   Ì”D  Ž   Ì–c  Ž   Ì–å  Ž   Ìš÷  Ž   Ì›F  Ž   Ì¢g  Ž   Ì¢Ë  Ž   Ì¦¬  Ž   Ì¦Â  Ž   Ì±a  Ž   Ì±”  Ž   Ì±ó  Ž   Ì²]  Ž   Ì³Ù  Ž   Ì´  Ž   Ì´ï  Ž   Ìµ}  Ž   Ì¶S  Ž   Ì¶  Ž   Ì¼3  Ž   Ì¼N  Ž   Ì¼Ö  Ž   Ì½R  Ž   Ì½¬  Ž   Ì¾  Ž   ÌÉÍ  Ž   ÌÊ  Ž   ÌÌ~  Ž   ÌÌÂ  Ž   ÌÐÜ  Ž   ÌÑ¾  Ž   ÌÔr  Ž   ÌÔ  Ž   ÌÖæ  Ž   Ì×¨  Ž   Ìåí  Ž   Ìåó  Ž   Ìæ—  Ž   Ìó*  Ž   Ìóh  Ž   Ì÷  Ž   Ì÷e  Ž   ÌúŒ  Ž   Ìúš  Ž   ÌýM  Ž   ÌýÅ  Ž   Íj  Ž   Í¹  Ž   Í6  Ž   Í@  Ž   ÍR  Ž   Í~  Ž   Í·  Ž   Í¼  Ž   Í
!  Ž   Í
b  Ž   Í$3  Ž   Í[email protected]  Ž   Í,‚  Ž   Í,“  Ž   Í.¼  Ž   Í/&  Ž   Í5µ  Ž   Í6  Ž   Í8‹  Ž   Í8é  Ž   Í@6  Ž   Í@†  Ž   ÍC>  Ž   ÍC  Ž   ÍGÚ  Ž   ÍH­  Ž   ÍI|  Ž   ÍI  Ž   ÍIÐ  Ž   ÍJ=  Ž   ÍJ]  Ž   ÍJd  Ž   ÍJl  Ž   ÍJ‰  Ž   ÍS	  Ž   ÍSá  Ž   ÍU¯              ò  Ž   Í\ž  Ž   Í\Ù  Ž   Í]7  Ž   Ífo  Ž   Ífƒ  Ž   Íh  Ž   Íh(  Ž   Íjõ  Ž   ÍkQ  Ž   Ílt  Ž   Ílš  Ž   Ío¶  Ž   ÍoÂ  Ž   Íp  Ž   Ípr  Ž   ÍpÊ  Ž   Ípë  Ž   Í{×  Ž   Í|"  Ž   Í~  Ž   Í~­  Ž   Í   Ž   ÍÙ  Ž   Í†F  Ž   Í†î  Ž   ÍŠ6  Ž   ÍŠQ  Ž   Í‹`  Ž   Í‹³  Ž   Í‹ò  Ž   ÍŒµ  Ž   Í˜œ  Ž   Í˜Û  Ž   Í6  Ž   ÍJ  Ž   Í“  Ž   Í¥  Ž   Í¥@  Ž   Í¥…  Ž   Í¥à  Ž   Í¦W  Ž   Í·Ä  Ž   Í¸B  Ž   ÍÅ  Ž   ÍÅL  Ž   ÍÉ  Ž   ÍÉ'  Ž   ÍË›  Ž   ÍÌm  Ž   ÍÓP  Ž   ÍÓ_  Ž   ÍÔæ  Ž   ÍÕ	  Ž   ÍÚ   Ž   ÍÛQ  Ž   Íà“  Ž   ÍàÄ  Ž   Íá  Ž   Íá9  Ž   Íì3  Ž   Íì‹  Ž   Íõý  Ž   Íö´  Ž   Î^  Ž   Î‡  Ž   Îc  Ž   Îy  Ž   Î   Ž   Î  Ž   Î³  Ž   Î  Ž   Î£  Ž   ÎÒ  Ž   Îr  Ž   Î|  Ž   ÎÄ  Ž   Î	  Ž   Î)l  Ž   Î)†  Ž   Î-’  Ž   Î-­  Ž   Î


----------



## John Rodd (Dec 9, 2010)

*any other questions from anyone?*

any other questions from anyone?


----------



## midphase (Dec 9, 2010)

John,

Could you discuss the importance (or not) of a quality Master Clock in one's studio? I have heard from other mixers who swear up and down on the importance of having a quality Master Clock such as the Apogee Big Ben to reduce jitter, and tighten up the bottom end.

Do you have any thoughts on the matter? Do you use a Master Clock in your own setup?


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (Dec 10, 2010)

Hey John,

I've been doing sample based scores for the past 10 years. All but one of them I have mixed myself, with a serious room full of gear, a nice listening environment and years of being with, around and studying some of the best engineers. I've been very lucky.
I also bring my stuff to the dubs and get nothing but raves about the mixes, and the realism, so I am not affecting my product in any negative way by doing it "myself".

If there is one thing that I sometimes wonder about, it's what would my scores sound like if a pro scoring mixer had a whack at it. I welcome the results, but the time and means to have someone be able to come in at the end and start a mix always seems so daunting. The prep involved in breaking down the mix, recording all the separate elements instead of stems of the groups, turning off the reverbs and ERs, thus changing the balances, all of this at the very end of a project! And I don't think an engineer wants to really "inherit" my mix and just tweak some verbs and re-balance a hand full of stems.

You must have clients in a similar position; how do they deal with this situation. I know this is entirely subjective, the "it will sound x% better" part of it. 

So maybe you could just explain how you would come in and mix a sample based, polished orchestral project. What kind of splits, how many tracks, print the verbs, etc. etc.

And I assume you would do this in your room, correct? 

I'm thinking this is a good question for you on this forum.

Thanks,

Mr A


----------



## midphase (Dec 10, 2010)

Thanks guys.

I still would like to have John's opinion as well on this Master Clock issue since he might have a different perspective.

John? You still around?


----------



## John Rodd (Dec 10, 2010)

*


midphase @ Thu Dec 09 said:



John,

Could you discuss the importance (or not) of a quality Master Clock in one's studio? I have heard from other mixers who swear up and down on the importance of having a quality Master Clock such as the Apogee Big Ben to reduce jitter, and tighten up the bottom end.

Do you have any thoughts on the matter? Do you use a Master Clock in your own setup?

Click to expand...

*
Hi Kays

Ah yes - the good old "master clock" debate…..

things I do know:

- if you have numerous A->D and D->A interfaces in your studio ... and are running digital audio around between multiple boxes or computers - having one master word clock for everything properly wired in should reduce (should eliminate) digital clicks and pops....

- a better clock will only change how A->D and D->A conversions sound... it has NOTHING to do with how audio mixed all in the DAW sounds. (in other words - a better clock will only affect the sound going to your speakers, or how good your converters are sounding when you're recording something (going from A-> D).

- whether a better clock will benefit a composers rig depends on many things - how much A->D and D->A conversion they are doing, the quality of the clock in their interface…. the budget for gear…. etc.

- I’m a realist when it comes to gear purchases…..

as an example:
- if a composer owns only an Apogee Ensemble (good converters, good clock) and no other interfaces…. and didn’t own a huge collection of sample libraries, and didn’t have any bass traps in their listening environment… I’d say forget adding a Big Ben - spend the $ on sample libraries and bass traps!!!!!! :wink: 

- however if a composer only owns a really crappy sounding interface (no names) - don’t buy a Big Ben, but put that $ towards a better interface. (at the same time, considering sample libraries and bass traps)

- and if a composer had a bunch of computers and interfaces… and was plagued by digital clicks and pops - by all means get a Big Ben and clock everything to that one clock.

In my studio I own ProTools HD & a bunch of different interfaces…. including some (modified) Apogee 16x converters. (They are early ‘case studies’ for the current Symphony IO converters) I use one of my 16x as clock master, as it has the same clock as the Big Ben.

*(you) I have heard from other mixers who swear up and down on the importance of having a quality Master Clock such as the Apogee Big Ben to reduce jitter, and tighten up the bottom end.*

When I was on staff at 20th Century Fox scoring stage many years back… we did a test where we had a bunch of Digi 192 interfaces…. playing back a big live orchestral multitrack recording analog - and we did a careful test (listening thru the analog SSL J9096 console) where we compared (blind, level matched) to the stack of 192 interfaces running on their own clocks (loop sync) and then having them all clocked to a Big Ben. (We actually recorded the differently clocked mixes onto a separate digital mix recorder, with timecode - and could switch to hearing the mix clocked both ways after the fact, in perfect sync.)

No question - the Big Ben clocked rig sounded SIGNIFICANTLY better to me. 

People will debate this back and forth…. but as long as you can do blind, level matched comparisons…. just use your own ears to help you decide what sounds better.

Does that help? 

John


----------



## John Rodd (Dec 10, 2010)

Mr. Anxiety @ Fri Dec 10 said:


> Hey John,
> 
> I've been doing sample based scores for the past 10 years. All but one of them I have mixed myself, with a serious room full of gear, a nice listening environment and years of being with, around and studying some of the best engineers. I've been very lucky.
> I also bring my stuff to the dubs and get nothing but raves about the mixes, and the realism, so I am not affecting my product in any negative way by doing it "myself".
> ...



Hi “Mr A.”

I’ll try to be concise with my answers: :wink: 

- if you’re curious as to what a good mixer could bring to the mix of one of your projects…. all you need is a project has the time and the budget to bring one in. 

- unfortunately yes it does take a long time to print a multitrack for a music mixer. Some solutions I see are a) having an assistant do it b) having a second DAW always wired in to speed up the process.

- you can read the excellent Jay Asher interview with me for more info (or you may have already) - but balances should not change if the multitrack is properly prepared. Yes additional reverb does go away…. but trust me - a really good mixer such as myself will have racks and racks of awesome hardware reverbs that are (arguably) better than any plugin.

- a really good mixer will bring years of experience, and a fresh perspective to the mix…. plus hopefully a bunch of awesome sound sculpting tools to turn a good mix into a world class one.

- I do most of my mixing in my studio - but I do mix in other commercial facilities. 

(I also do recording sessions as well, of course) /\~O o/~ 

- each project is different…. no way to speak about a usual multitrack layout. 

Does that answer your questions?  

John


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (Dec 10, 2010)

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, it makes sense.

I will just have to bite the bullet and do this sometime. 

The other thought is to hire someone like yourself to do a few cues, with the proper track splits as per your request, and see how it goes. Maybe a trailer or some short form project will come by to try this on.

Mr A


----------



## John Rodd (Dec 10, 2010)

Mr. Anxiety @ Fri Dec 10 said:


> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> Yes, it makes sense.
> 
> ...



You mentioned 'trailer' and that made me think.... some of my film trailer clients want the mix very compressed and peak-limited (but still sounding good) ..... this is a perfect example of how a (well equipped) good mixer can really help out. I own a bunch of great sounding hardware compressors... and 'top-shelf' peak limiters... and when used skillfully can create a LOUD, but punchy sounding mix.

Software compressors are often really inferior sounding, in my opinion......

~o)


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 10, 2010)

Everything we learn or do happens in steps. I mean, we come back to the same points again and again but every time we understand more, know more, have better means and therefore get better results (hopefully).

Easy examples are: Categories of sample libraries, categories of monitoring situations, categories of room tuning, computer generations, etc.

Whenever we have stabily established on one level we will say to ourselves that we don't ever want to go back, no way. We would not want to miss it, the difference between what we have now and what we had then (and what others might still have to work with) is clear to us as night and day.

But when we look up to the next step we frequently ask ourselves:

"Hmm, I wonder: Will it really be worth it? What I have is already so good ... well I doubt it can get better."

I strongly guess having an experienced engineer work at our music is one of the steps up that we need to experience in order to know the difference.


----------



## midphase (Dec 10, 2010)

[quote:5020daffb6="John Rodd @ Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:18 am"]
No question - the Big Ben clocked rig sounded SIGNò  ¿   îuÃ  ¿   îxè  ¿   îy0  ¿   îzQ  ¿   îz¸  ¿   î|$  ¿   î|ï  ¿   î}ƒ  ¿   î}¼  ¿   îW  ¿   îÃ  ¿   îâ  ¿   îé  ¿   î€™  ¿   î<  ¿   î„õ  ¿   î…$  ¿   î‡   ¿   î‡`  ¿   îˆ  ¿   îˆ6  ¿   îˆZ  ¿   îˆŒ  ¿   îˆ÷  ¿   î‰  ¿   î‹  ¿   î‹  ¿   î\  ¿   î  ¿   îŠ  ¿   î¬  ¿   îÐ  ¿   îñ  ¿   î“B  ¿   î“S  ¿   î•  ¿   î•z  ¿   î–Ÿ  ¿   î—  ¿   î—Ú  ¿   î˜R  ¿   î˜Ê  ¿   î™B  ¿   î›c  ¿   î›u  ¿   îžž  ¿   îžµ  ¿   î }  ¿   î »  ¿   î¡g  ¿   î¡™  ¿   î£¹  ¿   î£Ü  ¿   î¤  ¿   î¤/  ¿   î¦Ê  ¿   î§  ¿   î¨¦  ¿   î¨È  ¿   î«/  ¿   î«w  ¿   î­   ¿


----------



## John Rodd (Jan 23, 2011)

dannthr @ Sun Nov 07 said:


> +1
> 
> John is a tome of information!
> 
> I feel like I get schooled every time I talk to him.



Yo Dan

It is my pleasure to share my knowledge with anyone...... especially cool people such as yourself!



Hope to bump into you sometime soon......

cheers

John


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 24, 2011)

Thanks John and Jay for your generosity in sharing this so very useful information!


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 24, 2011)

Thanks John and Jay for your generosity in sharing this so very useful information!


----------



## Mahlon (Jan 24, 2011)

Just now saw the article.

Yes, thanks very much, John, for your knowledge and thank you, Jay, for writing the article. It was excellent, and I appreciate the 'nuts and bolts' questions -- the same I would have wanted to ask -- and the informative, detailed answers.


Mahlon


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 24, 2011)

Thanks for the kind words, guys. I so enjoy doing these as I learn a lot as well.


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 24, 2011)

Excellent Jay - I read every word.


----------



## John Rodd (Mar 17, 2011)

Mahlon @ Mon Jan 24 said:


> Just now saw the article.
> 
> Yes, thanks very much, John, for your knowledge and thank you, Jay, for writing the article. It was excellent, and I appreciate the 'nuts and bolts' questions -- the same I would have wanted to ask -- and the informative, detailed answers.
> 
> ...



you're welcome!

:D


----------

