Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Mixing in the stereo field

dpasdernick

dpasdernick

Senior Member
Guys and Gals,

I have been struggling with getting "clarity and definition" in my mixes. I don't write music like a lot of people on this forum meaning I don't use a typical orchestral palette. I am currently writing some "Pink Floyd-ish" music with vocals, guitars and synths but do include a lot of orchestral sounds like Forzo, the Arks, EW Gold and VSL. Lots of layers and dynamic range.

I recently read about a guy who mixed pop and said he pans one guitars left one right, puts the kick, snare and lead vocal in the center and ends up with everything sitting in its own "space".

Sounds easy if that's your palette but what about a guitar with a stereo chorus effect. Surely you cannot pan that hard left or right as you would lose the effect of the stereo chorus. What about a song that has Forzo Horns blasting away and large contra basses along with multiple synths all fighting for some air?

How do some of you pros separate a wall of sound and still have room for vocals, guitars etc?

Any insight would be appreciated.

All the very best,

Darren
Click to read more...
 
I think a common mistake is not knowing where things are supposed to sit. It's really hard to figure out on your own because there are so many options. (Should you dip the bass at 300 Hz or 500 Hz? At what freq should you hi-cut the pads? ... etc)

What works for me is to do remakes. I remake pop songs as close as possible. Just 4 bars. It's usually enough to get my ears back into shape.

Then I move on-to mixing my client's tracks. That takes 1 hour or so. Everything should be obvious. Make decisions fast. Tunnel vision is the enemy. If I spend more than 5 min on an instrument, I usually delete or replace the sample.



EDIT: I mixed/produced this "Teen Pop" track recently (8M views). I don't know if it's considered "wall of sound" but it's quite dense.
  • First of all, each part has unique function spatially, rhythmically, timber-ly and harmonically. So they naturally don't clash.
  • Mix wise, I mainly dipped the mids on most tonal instruments. Then I made the deliberate choice to put: drum, bass, vocal, and brass in front (louder and dryer).
  • All the pads, guitars, glock, metals are ornaments just adding polish in the back.
  • The lower the instrument, the more sidechain compression.
  • A lot of silence between notes. Allows the ear to breathe a little.
  • At the end of the song, I progressively dried the brass. Helps understand how much reverb contributes to the "expensiveness" haha.
  • Lastly, get good drums. Here I used my recordings that are now released under AVA - PRISM. (shameless plug)


​

Can you link a wall of sound you like @dpasdernick ?​
 
Last edited:
Are you recording your guitar in true stereo? Is the chorus effect a plugin that you are using? Or are you recording it live with the guitar?
 
karelpsota said:
I think a common mistake is not knowing where things are supposed to sit. It's really hard to figure out on your own because there are so many options. (Should you dip the bass at 300 Hz or 500 Hz? At what freq should you hi-cut the pads? ... etc)

What works for me is to do remakes. I remake pop songs as close as possible. Just 4 bars. It's usually enough to get my ears back into shape.

Then I move on-to mixing my client's tracks. That takes 1 hour or so. Everything should be obvious. Make decisions fast. Tunnel vision is the enemy. If I spend more than 5 min on an instrument, I usually delete or replace the sample.



EDIT: I mixed/produced this "Teen Pop" track recently (8M views). I don't know if it's considered "wall of sound" but it's quite dense.
  • First of all, each part has unique function spatially, rhythmically, timber-ly and harmonically. So they naturally don't clash.
  • Mix wise, I mainly dipped the mids on most tonal instruments. Then I made the deliberate choice to put: drum, bass, vocal, and brass in front (louder and dryer).
  • All the pads, guitars, glock, metals are ornaments just adding polish in the back.
  • The lower the instrument, the more sidechain compression.
  • A lot of silence between notes. Allows the ear to breathe a little.
  • At the end of the song, I progressively dried the brass. Helps understand how much reverb contributes to the "expensiveness" haha.


​

Can you link a wall of soundtrack you like @dpasdernick ?​
Click to expand...


Wow! That sounds so damn good. I am nowhere in this league. Kudos Karel! What an incredible mix.

ALl the very best,

Darren

PS I'll PM you.
 
Mike Fox said:
Are you recording your guitar in true stereo? Is the chorus effect a plugin that you are using? Or are you recording it live with the guitar?
Click to expand...

Mike,

I use Chris Lord-Alge's Guitar plugin from waves and sometimes guitar rig. I record the guitar in mono and then bus it to a stereo group channel in cubase.

All the very best,

Darren
 
Look up the "Haas effect." Hans' mixer Alan Meyerson uses it a lot. He discusses it a lot on Mix with the Masters but I wasn't able to find anything on YouTube from him after a quick search. Basically by delaying one side of a stereo signal you can position it in the mix without the "smalling" effect that can happen with panning.
 
The Haas-effect (also known as "precedence panning") is effective, but problematic in any kind of mix that will get listened to in mono, potentially.
 
And when used wrong, sounds like utter shit, I might add. It's really one of those "with great power comes great responsibility"- kind of tricks. Be sure to put a little less than little too much.
 
dpasdernick said:
Guys and Gals,

I have been struggling with getting "clarity and definition" in my mixes... Any insight would be appreciated.

All the very best,

Darren
Click to expand...
Hi Darren
An issue that is often underestimated when mixing audio is the possibility of "mixing into the depth" as well not only from left to right. However, care should be taken that the front instruments do not cover the frequencies of the rear. And if you have the possibility of arranging (if you compose yourself it is fortunately it is the case): Have the courage to compose "slim arrangements". Finally, you should make a clear distinction between "who plays the chords, who plays the rhythm, who plays the melody". If you use all these things in a perfect way then a transparent mix is guaranteed.
I produced some videos on https://www.beat-kaufmann.com/mixing-an-orchestra/about-the-tutorial/mixing-videos/index.php (different mixing topics) (have a special look at "A transparent Mix").
Also listen to this mix from "Celtic Woman". It applies all the mixing- and room- possibilities nicely. No problem to keep the mix transparent with solists, solo instruments, a large choir and a symphony orchestra at any time... Not least thanks to the exploitation of extreme differences in depth...

All the best
Beat
 
Beat makes a good point. When I was starting out, a difficult mix usually meant I had arrangement issues. Once I got better at arranging, mixing became much less of a chore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom