# I just can't "get" mixing and mastering



## AKR (May 17, 2015)

I've done tons of reading; I've watched a lot of youtube tutorials, but I continue to struggle with the mixing and mastering stages, even though I've done it for a few years now. I always hear people say to take it easy on compression, but then I see people talking about how they master their mixes to -9 or -10db RMS, and any time I do that, my loudest sections of the wave become a freaking brick and it doesn't sound that great. Which means I have to compress even more during the mixing stage, so I'm still going to have to compress the hell out of things to get there. I roll off the bottoms and/or tops and try to carve out unnecessary frequencies of each instrument and still have trouble. 

I just don't get it and I can't freaking stand this stage of the art and I have no idea where to go from here without paying someone else and that's not an option at this point. 

But maybe I'm just seeing two different sides of the issue. I see some people talking about how they hardly even compress things for mastering, so maybe I'm just seeing two opposing groups - one group compresses like hell for the perceived loudness factor and makes a brick out of their waves, and others hardly compress because they don't care how loud it sounds. Please help me. I'm going insane.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (May 17, 2015)

Well... There's no 'one' way to mix and master. If i'm writing a hybrid trailer i'm more than likely going to compress the crap out of it. If i'm writing a delicate oboe flute and piano trio, my approach will be vastly different. I've said this in another thread and I'll say it again - once you understand the reason for the tools (compressor, EQ etc) you wont have to consult the "ultimate guide to mixing anything" bible because you'll know what you are trying to achieve and have a full understanding of how to get there (regardless of the situation). Obviously there will always be new tips and tricks to learn though. 

What kind of music are you mixing?


----------



## Martin K (May 17, 2015)

I think it comes down to just keep doing it  

Use commercial releases, that you like the sound of, as references when you mix/master and with time and experience you'll get better and better at it.

best,
Martin


----------



## ThomasL (May 17, 2015)

I recognise the feeling, been there.

First, decide if you want loud or if you want dynamics. You can't have both, there is a trade off.

Second, I'm kind of guessing here, your likeliest trouble is sharp spikes in the transient domain which gets reacted upon in a not so nice way when compressing/limiting. Try to get something like Sonnox Inflator. It's great at "soft clipping" those small peaks and can give a loudness boost without too much dynamic loss.

But first decide what the end result needs to be.


----------



## TheUnfinished (May 17, 2015)

Mixing and mastering' always a bastard.

You'll have people praise a mix of yours and you've no idea what you did right. Then they'll slag off another mix and you'll be pretty sure you did the same things as the good mix.

I've found recently that one of the main problems was that I wasn't trying hard enough. I wasn't applying enough attention to detail. Doing this has brought about improvements. I used to often select EQ/compression/reverb/etc. presets and tweak to taste. Now I start everything from scratch.

I now bounce all my stems to audio before mixing (although I will do a certain amount of 'balance' mixing during the writing process). So, I pretty much don't do any EQing, compression, reverb, whatever, until everything's bounced to audio. In some ways this has helped simply through making sure I'm ONLY focused on mixing.

One other thing... I'm finding it very difficult to screw anythng up with the UAD Neve 1073 EQ - that thing is just magic.

There are few foolproof plans other than "keep at it". But there's no question that the more effort you put in, the better your results are.

Also... as a last boring point to my monologue... I think it's too easy to get het up with what other people are doing. I agree that listening to mixes you dig can help you on your own, but I think there's often a failure to be creative with a mix. Sometimes doing things a way that is against the grain or perhaps meets disapproval from some others, is worth it when searching for your own vibe/sound - especially if you like how it sounds!


----------



## patrick76 (May 17, 2015)

I know the feeling as I am most insecure about my mixing and mastering skills because they have come about way later than my composition abilities. However, I have noticed that when I do have a problem that I think is mixing/Eq related about 50% of the time I end up changing the orchestration or composition to fix it and not the mix.

I think what works the best for me is to find a professionally done piece in the style of that which I am working on and compare the two a lot and tweak as I go. Sometimes it can be overwhelming though considering that even in the same style there can be a great difference in the mixing.... that's why I try to choose just one piece to model my sound after if possible. Good luck!


----------



## Resoded (May 17, 2015)

I'm feeling the exact same way. Mixing and mastering is so important, and when you can't do it well it sort of ruins the music a bit. I've been frustrated about this for years now but there is progress, it's just slow.

Half of the times you have no idea what's wrong, and half the times you think you know what the problem is and try to fix it, but it turns out you have no idea. Then by some magic epiphany you realize that the thing you were doing 6 months ago wasn't so bad after all, which leads to some new developments that aren't too shabby. You keep those epihpanys in mind and then half of those epihpanys turns out to be crap after some new developments. Or are they...?

The ultimate mindf*** is in the listening environment itself. If the room isn't properly treated it's difficult to make proper judgements. And if you use headphones, usually the bass is difficult to get right.

Personally I used to watch a lot of tutorials and read books and articles and whatnot, but I realized that it's pretty much useless for most of my very specific mixing issues. The only thing that I've noticed works for me is to learn what the tools can do, and keep coming up with new ideas for ways to use those tools to deal with whatever problem I have. 60 % of the ideas will turn out bad, 35 % of the ideas will seem great at first but later on turn to be dead ends, and 5 % of the ideas are great and lasting.

The one mistake I keep doing though is to buy new stuff and hope that some new plugin or library will solve the problem. Sometimes it actually does, but most of the times it doesn't. I don't think there are any shortcuts. Only hair loss.

Regarding loudness, I think apparent loudness is so much more difficult than actual loudness. Having tight instruments right in your face can sound so much louder than washy reverby equally loud (in db) instruments. Even if both mixes are maximized and highly compressed.

edit: But I should point out that mixing isn't only frustrating. When things works out it's very satisfying.


----------



## gsilbers (May 17, 2015)

AKR @ Sun May 17 said:


> I've done tons of reading; I've watched a lot of youtube tutorials, but I continue to struggle with the mixing and mastering stages, even though I've done it for a few years now. I always hear people say to take it easy on compression, but then I see people talking about how they master their mixes to -9 or -10db RMS, and any time I do that, my loudest sections of the wave become a freaking brick and it doesn't sound that great. Which means I have to compress even more during the mixing stage, so I'm still going to have to compress the hell out of things to get there. I roll off the bottoms and/or tops and try to carve out unnecessary frequencies of each instrument and still have trouble.
> 
> I just don't get it and I can't freaking stand this stage of the art and I have no idea where to go from here without paying someone else and that's not an option at this point.
> 
> But maybe I'm just seeing two different sides of the issue. I see some people talking about how they hardly even compress things for mastering, so maybe I'm just seeing two opposing groups - one group compresses like hell for the perceived loudness factor and makes a brick out of their waves, and others hardly compress because they don't care how loud it sounds. Please help me. I'm going insane.




one trick is to mix with a limiter/ maximizer plugin on the output bus but leave bypass. 
once done mixing, listen to it with the maximizer plugin on - get that -10db gain reduction - and listen for areas were the mix needs fixing and then bypass again and compare both versions until you reach a good middle ground. 
it also varies with source material of course.


----------



## gsilbers (May 17, 2015)

Resoded @ Sun May 17 said:


> I'
> 
> Regarding loudness, I think apparent loudness is so much more difficult than actual loudness. Having tight instruments right in your face can sound so much louder than washy reverby equally loud (in db) instruments. Even if both mixes are maximized and highly compressed.



the ik multimedia meter3 plugin has a cool music music loudness meter. its similar to those LU meters but not quiet. very useful imo.


----------



## Madrigal (May 17, 2015)

Going through that process is certainly frustrating. However, like others have said, you have to keep doing it in order to learn. The important part is training your ears to understand what sounds good and what doesn't and that takes time and practice. It's a little like ear training but for mixing. 

You want to keep doing it because there's an amazing freedom that comes from being able to mix and master your own stuff. It's an essential skill to have nowadays, so don't give up. 

Important points: 

- Don't worry about loudness too much at first, use a lot of reference tracks and bring their volume down if you need to for comparison. 

- If you can't figure out what sounds good and what doesn't, your mixing environment and monitors might not be good enough. My mixing skills got A LOT better when I invested in some great monitors. Can't fix what you can't hear. 

- Most of the time, compression is not the issue, EQ is. With the right EQ curves during mastering, you can manage to bring loudness up without compressing much. To be able to adjust the EQ accordingly, you need good ears, good reference tracks and good monitors. Most of the time, it's about bringing down the mids with clever eq in the low-middle range. Spend more time on EQ than compression. 

Hope this helps!


----------



## gsilbers (May 17, 2015)

forgot to mention Sample Magic A/b plugin. very good for mixing and mastering.


----------



## R. Soul (May 17, 2015)

I don't know why I always hear that one should get some musical theory and composition education but when it comes to mixing, it's all just 'just keep trying'. Makes no sense to me.

I recommend doing a class on mixing or at least watch some mixing tutorials videos on eg. groove3.dom . Or even better, get someone who knows what they are doing to sit down and mix your project along with you.


----------



## Matt Hawken (May 17, 2015)

Madrigal @ Sun May 17 said:


> - Don't worry about loudness too much at first, use a lot of reference tracks and bring their volume down if you need to for comparison.
> 
> - If you can't figure out what sounds good and what doesn't, your mixing environment and monitors might not be good enough. My mixing skills got A LOT better when I invested in some great monitors. Can't fix what you can't hear.
> 
> ...



Quality advice here! The bit about the EQ is so important. 

I'm sorry you're feeling frustrated - mixing/mastering is pretty much everyone's least favourite part of the process. It is also a bottomless pit of mystery and there is a reason why the mastering wizards command high prices for their services! I suck at it, but over time I've been sucking less - if that's any hope for you!

I would really encourage you to chill out and trust your ears, not the waveform. The process is just like cooking - there's no right way of doing it, just different tastes. Some people would tell you never to put ketchup on a steak, when other people love doing just that. Some people mix with everything slammed into the limiter, others never let it peak above -8db. Different flavours for different folks/situations. 

OK, parts of your track looking like a 'brick' might not be that classy, but if it sounds nice to you in your monitors, headphones & laptop speakers, then the track works. It's fine! I ate Michelin-starred food once and the amount of salt in the sauce was insane. Not classy, not healthy - but man, it was good!

My humble (talking out of my rear end) advice is to not to make compression the main thing. I do orchestral stuff and usually have a multi-band compressor on the main bus, gently dipping the mids. That's it. Everything else is levelled by channel/bus EQ and by beginning with the gain at -5 on each track. That stops everything building up into a cacophony that I have to wrestle back into shape. I play the whole track through, check the peaks, then raise the gains until I'm hitting the level I want. This is what works for me, your approach might be different. I find it's easier to make things louder by using a compressor than to make things softer. Squashing your track starts to cause other issues. So all my tracks start out pretty quiet and get boosted at the end.

Good luck, and please enjoy your experiments. It's all just a matter of taste and it sounds like you've got a good sonic palette.


----------



## wst3 (May 17, 2015)

I'm probably going to sound negative (at best) or just plain contrary, but I don't know if mixing and mastering mean the same thing to everyone here, and I think that's a big part of the problem.

Specifically, I think the term mastering is misused a lot. And (definitely in the minority here) I don't think people should master their own material. But that's a different rant.

Producing a musical recording, from an engineering perspective, has three stages:

STEP ONE: TRACKING
now being a certified curmudgeon I have to make the standard disclaimer that when I started out 8 tape tracks was a luxury (I thought I was so much cooler than guys who worked with three tracks - but not as cool as guys that worked with 16<G>). Further, processing was always at a premium.

So out of necessity I learned to develop an idea of what the mix would sound like from the first track, and I used microphone selection and placement to get as close to that as possible, so that a "faders up" mix would sound decent.

In spite of all the tools and tracks we have at our disposal today I still think that is a good approach. Except of course you might not be selecting a microphone - you are probably selecting a sample library. If you need an aggressive string section choose a library that can do that without any other help. If you need really smooth winds use a library that does that. And so on.

Tracking is where it starts, and if the tracks themselves are not strong then the mix won't be either. (NB - yes, I am purposely skipping the composition and arrangement, since I think they fall outside the realm of engineering. One can make the contrary argument easily, the the OP specifically mentioned mixing and mastering.)

One of the things I did when I first migrated to a computer was find great tracks - sometimes with an example mix - and just practiced mixing them. There are lots of places to find such things today.

The beauty of starting with good tracks is that it removes a variable. You know that the tracks can stand on their own, and that a good/great mix is possible. This is a fantastic way to teach yourself how to mix!

First, just try to reproduce the original mix. Then try to remix it - using only the original tracks - to pull out or feature different elements.

Now one thing I do NOT miss is limited channels of effects. While I suppose one can make the same argument about basic processing, I find that having 23 delays and 15 reverbs in my mix to be kind of liberating.

STEP TWO: MIXING
As mentioned above, I have adjusted my methods a little bit, I generally save effects for the mixing phase, unless a specific effect is crucial for a specific track. And that does happen, a LOT. I'll often record my guitar tracks with effects because, well, because that's how I hear them.

But I do have a very specific approach to mixing that I'll try to describe...

First up is balance - that's levels mostly, but it could be EQ to remove part of a track so there is room for other tracks. It is seldom if ever an EQ boost. Mostly that's because I don't seem to get good results that way - I am certain others do.

But balance is key - and balance means not just hearing all the parts, but hearing them as intended. If I want the solo trumpet to stand out in the second verse I have to adjust the balance to get there.

So balance is a LOT of things:
- relative levels between tracks or stems
- differences in dynamic range between tracks
- differences in spectral balance between tracks
- relative positions of specific tracks

Because absolutely the placement in space of any given track will have a HUGE impact on balance!

Here's a really cool experiment - take a basic project, some small number of tracks, and pan them all to the center, and turn off any reverb, delay or any other goody that might affect the placement in space of each track. Probably sounds pretty darned muddy eh?

Now randomly pan every track either hard left or hard right. Amazing what a difference even this little step makes eh?

Now pan the tracks across the range from hard left to hard right, and apply some logic to your choices, specifically try to put your main instrument in the center, also center any low frequency tracks (e.g. bass, bass drum)

Now what do you think? Unless it is a really odd project I'd wager it'll sound like it came to life. I'll also wager that the levels you set before this stage are close, but require some attention<G>!

And that's a big part of the puzzle that is mixing. For every change you make, every effect or processing stage you add you have to go back to the beginning and check everything.

I think most folks, after mixing a lot of projects, start to develop a sort of intuition - if I add a delay to this track and pan it over here I'll need to reduce the level here... and so on. But you still have to do it!

I think that a compressor on the 2-mix can add some glue to a project, and I think a lot of projects can benefit from a gentle reverb also applied to the entire mix, either as an insert on the 2-mix or as a separate send, but it needs to include everything.

But that's pretty much it. Mixing - by my definition anyway - ought too leave the 2-mix alone. It needs to focus on the relationship between the individual tracks.

If you are working specifically on the stereo mix then I believe you have jumped to the third phase, and I think you've done so too early in the game.

STEP THREE: MASTERING
Ignoring for the moment the wisdom of mastering your own projects, I believe mastering refers to the process of working on the stereo mix of one or more pieces. And at the highest level, it is the process of managing the relationship between the different pieces.

When I think of mastering I think of applying multi-band dynamics and very specific filters to a stereo mix. And while any modern DAW has the horsepower to do this well today, I always take my final mix, bounced to the appropriate file, and work within an audio editor such as Wavelab or Sound Forge.

Mostly I do this to remind myself that I am working in a different domain. Might be silly, but it works for me.

I don't consider it mastering, per se, but I often need to make changes (hopefully subtle) to a piece so that it sounds good in a specific venue. That is not unlike preparing a piece for iTunes, or CD, or high definition distribution.

If your tracks are up to snuff, and especially if they aren't, try mixing someone else's tracks, especially if you can find tracks that have been mixed, and you like the mix.

When mixing focus on the balance between the elements. And don't be afraid to automate everything. Man I can't tell you how much I would have liked automation before it was readily available! Automate levels, automate compression thresholds or release times, automate delay times and send levels and return pans and... automate everything.

If you need to reach for a compressor or equalizer think about why you are reaching for them. Another luxury we have today is the ability to substitute one track for another. Strings are too strident - try replacing that with a library that isn't - might mean some MIDI editing - might mean a LOT of MIDI editing (could also mean none), but if it works it works, and 9 times out of 10 it will work better than EQ.

By the same token, don't be afraid to apply subtle EQ, especially cuts, to help things fit together better. That's an entirely different thing that massive EQ to fix an individual track. I hope that makes sense.

Same goes for dynamics processing. If you need it to make the track sound good by itself there may be bigger problems. If you need it to help tracks sound good together then use it.

Mixing is, above all else, about working multiple tracks.

Use the tools you have available - don't skip over them just because some curmudgeon didn't have them when he was starting out!

OK, that's enough typing for one day!


----------



## Luca Capozzi (May 17, 2015)

My 2 cents...

Unfortunately Mastering is not a strict synonym of final dynamic processing. This is an important final stage where the best equipment are the expertise and ears of the professional figure you're lending. Focus on doing a great mix, peaking at -6dB... focus on space and balance. Then find a good mastering engineer to get your tracks prepared for distribution.

Cheers,
Luca


----------



## bbunker (May 17, 2015)

I second Bill's advice to practice with recorded tracks that aren't your own. I also think orchestrating other people's compositions is important to develop a skill as an "orchestrator" (as opposed to composer) but that's another story.

Anyway, I found this website that Mike Senior runs a while back that's pretty fit to purpose: lots of multitrack recordings, in pretty divergent styles, with reference mixes, a number of them having detailed descriptions of a pro's approach to mixing the tracks. Here's the website: http://www.cambridge-mt.com/ms-mtk.htm

Just the act of mixing, making decisions, and then hearing how those decisions affect not only the quality but the identity of the final mix in comparison to the reference is fantastically educational!


----------



## AKR (May 19, 2015)

Thanks for the replies, everyone (especially, wst3's long ass post). I'm reading and considering them all, even if I don't reply to them all. Sorta overwhelmed with the amount of things I'm doing, but wanted to stop back in and check on the thread. 




SimonCharlesHanna @ Sun May 17 said:


> Well... There's no 'one' way to mix and master. If i'm writing a hybrid trailer i'm more than likely going to compress the crap out of it. If i'm writing a delicate oboe flute and piano trio, my approach will be vastly different. I've said this in another thread and I'll say it again - once you understand the reason for the tools (compressor, EQ etc) you wont have to consult the "ultimate guide to mixing anything" bible because you'll know what you are trying to achieve and have a full understanding of how to get there (regardless of the situation). Obviously there will always be new tips and tricks to learn though.
> 
> What kind of music are you mixing?





Currently, trailer music. I also do other cinematic stuff and indie electronic/pop.


----------



## Vin (May 19, 2015)

I know the feeling.

However, Mike Senior's Mixing Secrets for the small studios helped me so much. For that theorethical part I'd get that book and read it few times.

For the practical part, use reference mixes and be prepared to spend many, many hours and sweat.


----------



## wst3 (May 20, 2015)

Vin @ Tue May 19 said:


> I know the feeling.
> For the practical part, use reference mixes and be prepared to spend many, many hours and sweat.



Great advice!


----------



## gsilbers (May 20, 2015)

AKR @ Tue May 19 said:


> Thanks for the replies, everyone (especially, wst3's long ass post). I'm reading and considering them all, even if I don't reply to them all. Sorta overwhelmed with the amount of things I'm doing, but wanted to stop back in and check on the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



there was a good video that help me out. it was called how to mix rock music with pro tools. i use logic and don't do rock but the basics were so good i was able to do these basic steps for any genre. 

at the most basic, mixing is what it says. its mixing in volume different instruments. 
then there are eq and compression for specific tasks if needed. 
check out that video and similar ones, a big thing on mixing is simple organization. 
if you do cinematic or produce daw centric music then you might have way to much in the day, and going everywhere etc. so a lot of these videos/way people mix is getting organized. like bouncing the audio files and work on new sessions. (unless you have a very good template). also grouping similar elements etc. 

then the question is not you are not getting mixing and mastering but its how to get it to sound like "that"?! aka: as a commercial music. 

also, maybe pay a good engineer to mix some tracks and sit with him to see what he does. some engineers are cool with that.


----------



## AKR (May 23, 2015)

gsilbers @ Wed May 20 said:


> there was a good video that help me out. it was called how to mix rock music with pro tools. i use logic and don't do rock but the basics were so good i was able to do these basic steps for any genre.
> 
> at the most basic, mixing is what it says. its mixing in volume different instruments.
> then there are eq and compression for specific tasks if needed.
> ...



Thanks, I'll check out that video. I don't even live in an area where there are any recording studios or any pros, but when I head down to the LA area, I definitely want to sit in on a mixing and mastering of a track of mine and see how everything is handled.


----------



## valyogennoff (Jun 17, 2015)

It freaks me out, too.... But I've just signed up for this short video course here
http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=45733
I dunno... Looks promising... I'll see what happens. Hopefully, I'll be able to give some super wise pieces of advice on mixing and mastering afterwards, haha... :lol: 
Cheers,
Valyo


AKR @ Sun 17 May said:


> I've done tons of reading; I've watched a lot of youtube tutorials, but I continue to struggle with the mixing and mastering stages, even though I've done it for a few years now. I always hear people say to take it easy on compression, but then I see people talking about how they master their mixes to -9 or -10db RMS, and any time I do that, my loudest sections of the wave become a freaking brick and it doesn't sound that great. Which means I have to compress even more during the mixing stage, so I'm still going to have to compress the hell out of things to get there. I roll off the bottoms and/or tops and try to carve out unnecessary frequencies of each instrument and still have trouble.
> 
> I just don't get it and I can't freaking stand this stage of the art and I have no idea where to go from here without paying someone else and that's not an option at this point.
> 
> But maybe I'm just seeing two different sides of the issue. I see some people talking about how they hardly even compress things for mastering, so maybe I'm just seeing two opposing groups - one group compresses like hell for the perceived loudness factor and makes a brick out of their waves, and others hardly compress because they don't care how loud it sounds. Please help me. I'm going insane.


----------



## waveheavy (Jun 28, 2015)

I studied mixing (Pop, Rock, Blues, Gospel, Big Band, Folk, Country) with a two-time Dove award winning mix engineer for a couple of years (Kevin Ward). He has recorded and mixed Willie Nelson and Dolly Parton. 

I'm going to put up a post covering the subject for those interested. I'll cover enough of the points to get anyone serious 'over the hump' with it. Continuing to develop your mixing skills will up to each person.

Dave


----------

