Headphones for Mixing and Mastering

[Whoops]

But ending up with only one mix/master? Which one? The one that sounds good on headphones or the one that sound good on speakers?

One that sounds good in both, at least on average. I can do it all the time with great results.
Can mix on my speakers, then check on my reference headphones, do some small touches, listen back in the main monitors maybe do also some small touches. After that I bounce the mix and to me it sounds pretty good on speakers or headphones. I might also listen to it in my car before I send it to the client.
I can also do the opposite mix primarily on headphones if I work outside the studio and then do some small touches in the end on the main speakers.
I’m as happy with the result as I’m happy when I do it on speakers.

I also have the Auratone to give me another type of reference, butt I will probably change those for a Small common Bluetooth speaker, it makes more sense to me at the present.

People have been mixing for different playback systems forever, you can’t control or imagine all the different ways people listen to music, but you can achieve a mix that sounds good on your prefered main speakers, and just reference in other playback systems to know more about the average it will sound in the real world.
When I finish a mix, Im normally happy how it sounds in consumer playback systems.

IMO issuing only one mix/master for both makes as little sense as using the same master for both AND vinyl.

That I really don’t think it makes any sense.
Vinyl has so many limitations that you need to change the digital master to prepare it so it can be actually cut on your plastic. Otherwise mechanically it can’t be cut, or you end up with something that reproduces an horror story,

Actually there are a lot of Bluetooth speakers that sound good, actually better than most of cheap/crappy consumer hi-fi systems of the 80s/90s.
I find that a good mix/master will sound also good in a good portable Bluetooth speaker.

Of course, but the typical scooped sound with over-inflated bass is dominant. Should we mix for those?

Not my favorite choice or prefered choice for sure, but each person should use what they think
Works for them.
Everyone works differently and have different personal monitoring choices, and a lot of people are getting good results. So what works well for you it’s fine

I would never ever mix on NS10, the lack the last 2 lower octaves and the last upper octave, to me they sound horrendous and don’t offer me any help in mixing.
Saying this I listened to so many great sounding records mixed on NS10, do I completely respect people that choose to monitor on them

If you work differently than me that’s completely fine. But what I wrote is what I find to be useful and my personal advise

 

[Gold]

So do I, too.

Then do you agree that listening on earbuds is a "degraded mode" ?

Yes. I rarely get surprised listening to my masters on different playback systems.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

People have been mixing for different playback systems forever,

True, but in the 70's and 80's, people who cared about sound quality had a decently installed stereo, so the decisions made on speakers were consistent.
Radio and victrola were essentially mono and lo-fi, so it was normally accepted that it was degraded mode listening.
Walkman unveiled some of the flaws of uncontrolled stereo.

you can’t control or imagine all the different ways people listen to music, but you can achieve a mix that sounds good on your prefered main speakers, and just reference in other playback systems to know more about the average it will sound in the real world.
When I finish a mix, Im normally happy how it sounds in consumer playback systems.

I don't really care about how it sounds on current consumer systems. If the system is well-installed and of decent quality, it should translate well. But most of the times they are set-up hapazardly under domestic convenience pressure.
What I question is the compatibility between speakers and headphones, which I reasonably assume both are of good quality.

Vinyl has so many limitations that you need to change the digital master to prepare it so it can be actually cut on your plastic. Otherwise mechanically it can’t be cut, or you end up with something that reproduces an horror story,

Believe me, I know very much what vinyl mastering is about.
And the reason why there are different mix/masters for CD and vinyl. Actually there are different mix/masters for DJ pressings. And of course there are ATMOS mixes. So would having masters for headphone listening be silly?

Actually there are a lot of Bluetooth speakers that sound good, actually better than most of cheap/crappy consumer hi-fi systems of the 80s/90s.

Indeed, but many of them are so poorly installed, like one in a corner on the floor and the other on a bookshelf, or three scattered in the room.

I find that a good mix/master will sound also good in a good portable Bluetooth speaker.

In mono?

Everyone works differently and have different personal monitoring choices, and a lot of people are getting good results. So what works well for you it’s fine

Sure.

I would never ever mix on NS10,

I never suggested that.

If you work differently than me that’s completely fine. But what I wrote is what I find to be useful and my personal advise

Of course. I don't want to convince anyone that my MO is the best. I just question a very basic issue. For me there is more difference between listening on speakers vs. headphones than between a CD and its vinyl version.
Is there some signal processing in iPhones that implements some kind of HRTF?

 

[Gold]

I’d point our that a vinyl sequence doesn’t count as a master. It’s a pre master. The master is the lacquer master. The files generated for streaming are masters because they are what is distributed.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I’d point our that a vinyl sequence doesn’t count as a master. It’s a pre master. The master is the lacquer master. The files generated for streaming are masters because they are what is distributed.

That's correct. However the job you do is called "mastering", isn't it? Although you don't actually produce the master.
We're reaching the limits of language.

 

[Gold]

That's correct. However the job you do is called "mastering", isn't it? Although you don't actually produce the master.
We're reaching the limits of language.

I meant that the digital vinyl sequence is not distributed to the public like streaming files. It is an interim file not meant for public consumption.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I meant that the digital vinyl sequence is not distributed to the public like streaming files. It is an interim file not meant for public consumption.

I believe we are on the same level of understanding. What you call the "digital vinyl sequence" is the audio file that's used to produce the lacquer, which involves another step of analog processing (excursion limiter, HF limiter, elliptic filter,...). Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Gold]

I believe we are on the same level of understanding. What you call the "digital vinyl sequence" is the audio file that's used to produce the lacquer, which involves another step of analog processing (excursion limiter, HF limiter, elliptic filter,...). Correct me if I'm wrong.

You are correct.

 

[kags]

Mixing on headphones has proved to be disastrous for me. The increased perception acuteness results, for me, in accepting terrible balance choices, and the much increased apparent spatial separation leads me to produce mixes that lack openness.

At the start of Covid I was forced to mix from home using headphones. It was a difficult transition, after working mainly on speakers for 2 decades. It took a few weeks and a handful of projects but I got the knack of headphone mixing/mastering. I do use SoundID Reference along with Canopener when using phones ( HD650s), but it works for me.

I would probably make some different choices on speakers vs. phones, but my choice of breakfast also affects my mix decisions. In the end, I can create excellent results on either system.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I do use SoundID Reference along with Canopener when using phones ( HD650s), but it works for me.

So, don't you think headphone listeners should have this type of processing at their end? Maybe they unknowingly do...

I would probably make some different choices on speakers vs. phones, but my choice of breakfast also affects my mix decisions. In the end, I can create excellent results on either system.

I don't doubt it, and you have undoubtedly evaluated the difficulties and taken the necessary steps.

 

[Brian Roth]

This is slightly off topic, but my 2 cents. In the early 1980's I worked as the primary mix engineer at a studio which mainly did advertising tracks. It was a Real Studio (2" 24 track) and not a "garage wannabe". At that time, much of our product was for television which then was mono and typically heard on a small crappy single speaker on a TV set. But, in the control room we had "thunder box" UREI 813's in the soffit, various (different models over time) nearfields on pedestals behind the desk, Horrortones (lol) on the meterbridge.....and a custom mod I did to the desk. It was the smallest, crappy 3" speaker I found at Radio Shack and mounted into the meterbridge, driven by an Opamp Labs octal "power amp". That was our last checkpoint for mixes; the label on the monitor selector for that was "shitcan"...lol!

Fast forward decades. 2015 (?) I was building out a new "real deal" studio and something caught my attention: the 20 and 30-something-year old folks around that project were constantly sharing songs with each other via their Iphones/Androids and the built in speaker(s?). Back To Mono Again.

In 2023, my best friend and I often play Yahtzee or dominos at the dining table. He will set his Android on a "prop" at the table while playing tunes we select via the internet. Back To Mono Again!

As for me, I still use a flip phone. No decent audio.

Shrug.....

Bri

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Do you suggest issuing iPhone-ready mixes?

 

[FIX]

Try the Slate VSX.. If you laugh, you are blind. Give them a try and if you don't like them don't use them.

Before you make cracks and comments, try them first. You can't form an opinion until you do. I helped design them, and several of my best mixes were using them 100%.

 

[Brian Roth]

Do you suggest issuing iPhone-ready mixes?

LOL....I was just musing about how a "mono" speaker is still in common usage.

We used to mix jingles in both stereo and mono. However, it was fun to listen to the stereo version thundering from the pair of UREI's in the soffit....

Bri

 

[mhelin]

Regarding headphones choice I would pick up phones with a response curve near Harman curve. However, we all have different heads and ears and ear canal resonance frequencies etc. so unless you are very lucky you have to EQ the response a little bit. ATH-M50x are very good phones for tracking and could be used for mixing as well, but the Sennheisers mentioned and the ones like Audeze LCD-2 or even cheap Hifiman HE-400i's (replaced the pads in mine) could work with a little EQ.
E: Also consider the headphone amp, can make a huge difference...

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Try the Slate VSX.. If you laugh, you are blind. Give them a try and if you don't like them don't use them.

Before you make cracks and comments, try them first. You can't form an opinion until you do. I helped design them, and several of my best mixes were using them 100%.

Did someone step on your tail?
VSX is an ecosystem that includes software destined to resolve the deficiencies of headphone listening, in particular the absence of intrinsic cross-talk and room effects. That is precisely the subject of this thread.
I suggest that a mix done with that kind of monitoring should be listened to with a similar set-up, should the listener want to use headphones.

 

[MicMaven]

musing about how a "mono" speaker is still in common usage.

Convenience, perhaps.

Consumers accept low-fi sound for convenience and simply listen to the music, often in a non-critical way, and are generally unconcerned with sound quality. They just hear the music, even lousy music (and much of it is.) They sing, hum or whistle along with the music and care more about hearing the latest ditty that sounds too much like last week's favorite ditty, and are oblivious to how well it was recorded. Shoot, my Mom repeatedly declined my offers to get her a "decent" small stereo system because she was happy with a cheapo clock radio or a modest carry-around boom box. It was awful. She would listen to lovely recordings of Chopin or Satie on it for hours without suffering for moment. It was killing me.

Consumers are also, by and large, ignorant and swayed by audacious marketing claims of quality and performance. By way of analogy, car companies add a pin stripe and ersatz ground effects to the body, and stiffen the suspension underneath a regular model, and call it a "sport" model, and get away with it. That does not make for a real sports car. Shameful, but true - consumers follow marketing - they no longer drive the market.

And so it goes with consumer audio. I think. / James

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Regarding headphones choice I would pick up phones with a response curve near Harman curve.

I see a serious problem with this Harman curve. It creates a signature that people get more and more used to, so they end up wanting more of it, so the "slightly elevated bass and treble" (sic) becomes insufficient and they want for more.
Looking at the evolution of the Harman curve shows that boost is constantly increasing year after year; what's really a concern is that HF treble boost is increasing in a way that suggests significant hearing loss of teh targetted population.
It's just the same old story as people engaged the "physio/loudness" switch even when playing at elevated level. Vivious circle.
Mind you, it's the same in concert sound, where SE's pile up bass and treble boost on systems that are already heavy on bass (subwoofers) and treble.

However, we all have different heads and ears and ear canal resonance frequencies etc. so unless you are very lucky you have to EQ the response a little bit. ATH-M50x are very good phones for tracking and could be used for mixing as well, but the Sennheisers mentioned and the ones like Audeze LCD-2 or even cheap Hifiman HE-400i's (replaced the pads in mine) could work with a little EQ.

The problem here is how to set the EQ. It's too easy to get caught in the spiral. I would bet that less than 0.1% of the people who listen critically/professonally via headphones don't have access to resources that allows to calibrate them objectively.

E: Also consider the headphone amp, can make a huge difference...

In the case of smartphones, I wouldn't be surprized if they were found to be heavily processed.

 

[Gold]

In the case of smartphones, I wouldn't be surprized if they were found to be heavily processed.

I am very rarely surprised at what I hear out if my iphone 11 speakers. Same with the previous iphone 7. I’m sure they are processed but the overall presentation is pretty accurate. I can hear more detail than I expect to hear.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I am very rarely surprised at what I hear out if my iphone 11 speakers. Same with the previous iphone 7. I’m sure they are processed but the overall presentation is pretty accurate. I can hear more detail than I expect to hear.

I have absolutely no doubt that smartphones speakers need processing ; it's a physical necessity. I was concerned with headphones output.