What rack gear could you not live without in your mixes?
- Thread starter FarisElek
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
skipwave
Well-known member
To revisit the point that started the tangent discussion about overuse, @12AX7 suggested that plugins are more likely to be used to excess. I assumed they were referring to an engineer using a plugin on more tracks within a session than is needed and also asking for too much impact from a given plugin. I‘ve certainly been guilty of both.
To tie this in with the discussion of processing during tracking, I think it is much easier to use plugins tastefully when you were able to use hardware processing in tracking. [thanks @Whoops for the detailed rundown!] Starting to mix with tracks that already sound “finished” is a huge advantage. I assume that some engineers are now achieving this same advantage using plugins during tracking. Is anyone here doing that? How does your setup enable that flow?
The challenge I often face is that the bands I record have wild dynamic shifts within their songs that require changes in settings. For example if I dial in an 1176-RevD clone on the snare drum in the quiet verse it will be pushed into bad distortion on the loud chorus. Add to that the fact that I’m often playing in the same room with the band. The times when I have been able to play in the control room while the rest of the band is in the live room have felt awkward and I think the basic tracking didn’t turn out as well as if I had been in the room with my bandmates.
To tie this in with the discussion of processing during tracking, I think it is much easier to use plugins tastefully when you were able to use hardware processing in tracking. [thanks @Whoops for the detailed rundown!] Starting to mix with tracks that already sound “finished” is a huge advantage. I assume that some engineers are now achieving this same advantage using plugins during tracking. Is anyone here doing that? How does your setup enable that flow?
The challenge I often face is that the bands I record have wild dynamic shifts within their songs that require changes in settings. For example if I dial in an 1176-RevD clone on the snare drum in the quiet verse it will be pushed into bad distortion on the loud chorus. Add to that the fact that I’m often playing in the same room with the band. The times when I have been able to play in the control room while the rest of the band is in the live room have felt awkward and I think the basic tracking didn’t turn out as well as if I had been in the room with my bandmates.
soapfoot
Well-known member
There are two broad reasons to use dynamics processing and EQ "to tape"
The first, and most obvious in 2023, is to get it "sounding like a record" as early as possible. As a performer/producer I always appreciate this, because everyone working on the project is constantly reacting to what we hear. This feedback informs every decision and every bit of inspiration. It almost goes without saying that if we're responding to something that sounds like a reasonable facsimile of the finished record, our responses and decisions will be better-informed.
But there's a more basic, technical reason that's really only salient if working in the analog domain: noise floor management.
If I know I'm going to be compressing the quiet acoustic guitar anyway, might as well do so on the way in to help me get a few more dB level to tape in order to "beat" the noise floor of the medium (rather than having the compressor bring up the tape hiss at mix). And if I know I'm going to be lifting the top end of (for example) a pair of Coles overheads a fair bit, also better to do that on the way in. That way, I'm adding top to the cymbals (instead of making the tape hiss more prominent by brightening it later).
On the other hand, if I know I'm going to be rolling a lot of top end off, might as well do that only on the monitor side and wait to low-pass the recorded track at mix. That way I get a "free" benefit of losing a lot of top-end from the hiss as well.
For whatever reason, the goals of the second concern dovetail quite well, typically, with the first set of goals--even if tape isn't the medium and hiss isn't a concern.
The first, and most obvious in 2023, is to get it "sounding like a record" as early as possible. As a performer/producer I always appreciate this, because everyone working on the project is constantly reacting to what we hear. This feedback informs every decision and every bit of inspiration. It almost goes without saying that if we're responding to something that sounds like a reasonable facsimile of the finished record, our responses and decisions will be better-informed.
But there's a more basic, technical reason that's really only salient if working in the analog domain: noise floor management.
If I know I'm going to be compressing the quiet acoustic guitar anyway, might as well do so on the way in to help me get a few more dB level to tape in order to "beat" the noise floor of the medium (rather than having the compressor bring up the tape hiss at mix). And if I know I'm going to be lifting the top end of (for example) a pair of Coles overheads a fair bit, also better to do that on the way in. That way, I'm adding top to the cymbals (instead of making the tape hiss more prominent by brightening it later).
On the other hand, if I know I'm going to be rolling a lot of top end off, might as well do that only on the monitor side and wait to low-pass the recorded track at mix. That way I get a "free" benefit of losing a lot of top-end from the hiss as well.
For whatever reason, the goals of the second concern dovetail quite well, typically, with the first set of goals--even if tape isn't the medium and hiss isn't a concern.
For sure, couldn't agree more.
I corrected a few misspellings, so hopefully my post is a bit more clear(soapfoot does a better job though we're not saying the exact same thing). I get called a romantic(accurately), but my points are based on science. If you haven't already, you might be interested reading Daniel Levitin's "This Is Your Brain On Music". The bit I mentioned about ear fatigue comes from an interview I heard with Susan Rogers. "Behave" by Robert Sapolsky is less on-topic, but explains in detail how everything we experience is significantly influenced by prior conditions.
To your point, I realize this was a long post, but I already edited out other points I could've made that I thought were less interesting and potentially contentious(like ROI and privilege for instance). I also didn't expect a response, but I am interested in knowing what mix Whoops couldn't allow her/himself to use the best of not 2, but 4 Fairchild comps.
I admit, location mixing is the most appealing part of your stance. However, I'm skeptical of anyone who claims that they've worked at Abbey Road, has access to multiple Fairchild comps but prefers the plugin version, and chooses to mix on headphones only to take breaks to drink and flush your ear canals in seawater...? I think you like Mojitos on the beach more than you like pluginsYou also never saw anyone in a mixing at a console in a studio getting Vitamin D while chilling out drinking a Mojito and Sangria in a sunny Beach like me when I'm mixing with my laptop, I even go surfing and enjoy the waves in the mixing breaks.
You can be sure that you will feel this enjoyment and enlightenment in the mixes.
Newmarket
Well-known member
I admit, location mixing is the most appealing part of your stance. However, I'm skeptical of anyone who claims that they've worked at Abbey Road, has access to multiple Fairchild comps but prefers the plugin version, and chooses to mix on headphones only to take breaks to drink and flush your ear canals in seawater...? I think you like Mojitos on the beach more than you like plugins
Why the scepticism? Lots of producers / mixers opt to use a plug in rather than an available hardware original. Sometimes for the perfect recall, the workflow, the sonics or a combination of all of that.
I have a personal studio has more than a dozen channels of outboard comps and EQs, including real Fairchild, Manley, GML, Sontec, Pultec, etc... and other stuff DIY stuff and tons of guitar pedals. I also have daily access to a few large SSL rooms with tons of vintage and modern gear. I use all that stuff while recording, but I have only used plugins for at least 6 years when mixing and mastering. I tend to work on several projects simultaneously, with several mixes, masters, and productions needing to be opened, tweaked, and sent off on any given day. Outboard gear doesn't afford this speed and I don't miss the sonics for mixing.I admit, location mixing is the most appealing part of your stance. However, I'm skeptical of anyone who claims that they've worked at Abbey Road, has access to multiple Fairchild comps but prefers the plugin version, and chooses to mix on headphones only to take breaks to drink and flush your ear canals in seawater...? I think you like Mojitos on the beach more than you like plugins
The exceptions are guitar pedals, which allow me to "play" effects live more effectively than automating several parameters in a plugin and rock vocals sometimes get re-printed through some kind of 1176 or Vac Rac limiter because those just work better for "stun" than any combinations of plugins. Plugins really work well and there are enough options to get extremely musical and effective results.
I'm a "his" not an "her"
What you are interested in knowing? if you rephrase what you're curious about I will have no problem in replying
The sessions at Abbey Road were tracking, then the record was mixed in Portugal by me.
The Fairchild compressors at Abbey Road were not in top shape and well maintained, the sound would cut in an out when you turned the knobs, that alone makes you confused when you are trying to dial the sound you want, it's a big bummer. Then I was not able to achieve the sound I wanted form the Fairchild, I've used Fairchilds before going to Abbey Road and loved the Punch I was able to give to a Kick drum and also loved it to crush the Room mics, that's why I used more than 2. This was a record from a rock band and we were looking for a raw, roomy and dirty sound.
The Sound I was looking after I was able to get from Fairchild units before and I could also get it with Fairchild plugin emulations, so that's what I used in the end and was very happy with it. It was 10 years ago.
By then I had tried all the hardware I wanted and had dreamed to try, and realized there's no magical box, there's no Faries coming out of it, it's just good gear and just tools, I realized I was able to get the same tools in another type of format and achieve what I wanted. I like all of it but don't miss any.
Hardware needs constant maintenance, specially very old vintage gear, so that's a big factor also to consider, not only no 2 vintage units sound the same but also you never have all the hardware in your studio working perfectly, there's always something needing maintenance and repair.
Plugins don't need maintenance and always provide the same performance day after day, that's a big advantage.
These are some video reports of out stay in Abbey Road:
It's me at 2:35min
another one, there's glances of the Fairchild comps and the EMI TG console that I mainly used in the recording:
_____________________________________________________________________________
I found a Magazine article from that time, they did a report on the production of the record and interviewed me.
You can see the photos of the Fairchild units in the report , the 4th Fairchild was returned in the first day since it was worse than the others, so I stayed with 3.
There's the detailed channel list of the drums setup.
Last edited:
What are you skeptical about?
Are you doubting me or calling me a liar?
My credits are extensive and my name appears easily on the web
They invented devices to protect from that many years ago
I never ever refrain from protecting my ears, being it Loud sound sources
or other intrusive elements.
I think you like Mojitos on the beach more than you like plugins
What I like the most are Women and love.
Plugins are just very useful tools for my line of work and Mojitos are a great add on.
Last edited:
The only question I had was what record you decided was too good to use the best of 4 Fairchild compressors on. Assuming these videos/article is about the record you were referencing in your response to my first post, then you answered my question. However now it seems like you picked the plugin over several BROKEN Fairchild comps, though you may have used one that functioned properly at some time, but later decided the plugin was better...this is unclear to me. I also mistook your time at Abbey Road to mean you worked for Abbey Road, but from your last comment it seems like you either booked time there or were hired for a session there(sorry, I don't speak Portuguese). I'm not saying you aren't a respected professional in your field, but I'm sure you'll agree working out of a studio is very different than being an in-house engineer.
The mojito comment was meant to be funny, mostly. The skepticism comes from the fact that you're an engineer who's set foot in a world renowned studio, had access to some of the most coveted pieces of hardware known to man, and yet, thinks that mixing on headphones and a laptop outside isn't only just as good, but better.
The bit about you not responding to my post wasn't about answering a question, but how you didn't address any point I brought up after promptly disagreeing with my initial comment accompanied with your resume. Then again, maybe I just didn't write clearly enough or bring up anything that interests you. If so, fair enough.
Last edited:
Why the skepticism?^^^see above
Lots of producers...
Convenience and laziness. Lots of producers/engineers that are popular are shit imo. Pop music today(I realize this is an overgeneralization) is mostly shit imo and I wouldn't do anything those people are doing if you want to make good music. It's a dunning kruger effect. People that listen to it simply don't care or don't know how to take the time to understand and appreciate a good song so why put in the effort? Who am I? No one, so take it for what it's worth, but the problem should be evident to anyone that is passionate about music or any art for that matter. To be an engineer/producer for a living is increasingly difficult. You need to sell more records with less budget so you are forced to sacrifice experience and artistic integrity for maximum efficiency. To sell more records requires you to appeal to a wider base. The more people you have to appeal to the more watered down and digestible your music has to be. It seems to me, people are confused that because there are occasionally good artists that become popular, that being popular means an artist is good. This couldn't be more wrong imo. Is McDonald's the best burger you've ever had? Doja Cat "moo" sounds like it was written by a 4 yr old. I was reading Tape Op the other day...that F'n Crash Test Dummies song sold 7 million records! How do you go from playing in the Talking Heads to producing the Crash Test Dummies? By sacrificing your integrity, that's how. Bands used to fly around in their own jets. Now people are mixing records on headphones and a laptop in unfurnished, closet-sized apartments, and not only people don't seem to care, but they're convinced they like it better! Because instant recall! Or unlimited plugins! Maximum efficiency! My friend just told me yesterday he's had 17million streams in the last year worldwide. He only makes 1k for every million streams and you've never heard of him(and his music isn't any good for that matter).
I'm not saying we should all still be splicing tape or if you have any sort of following then your music must suck. I agree a lot of good records done today are done on laptops, but I'd argue that's because musician's can't afford anything better and the good record done on the laptop probably would've been better had the artist had access to the same tools, studio time, or the Muscle Shoals Rhythm Section(and not have to work 3 jobs on the side). Again, I make electronic music and come from the post-punk scene; I use a computer minimally and I'm not saying you need expensive gear to make good music. I also like that plugins have provided musicians that wouldn't have otherwise been able to put out a record, now can. But there's a lot more crap to sift through...
I choose the plugin compared to 4 Fairchild compressors, if they are better or worse on average than all other Fairchilds in the World no one knows.
I choose also what provided me what I wanted and what I was looking after.
Yes for sure you did as I never said that I worked for Abbey Road, neither I would ever want that
That's irrelevant as I never said I worked for Abbey Road.
I was In-house Engineer for some years in one of the Main studios in Portugal, but that was 11 or 12 years ago.
You are talking about Andrew Scheps right?
You made a correct description of him. I like his work and he seems like an happy guy.
My career is insignificant compared to his.
As for me,
I showed works that I mixed around 80% on the Beach, I still like to finish and re-touch mixes in my studio and monitors.
Working/mixing outside works for me, and works better for me than being stuck inside any studio (all day, all week, all the time), being it well a known studio or not.
I do what works for me and what makes me happy and I had no problems in showing my work.
Do whatever you think works for you, it doesn't affect me in any way as my honesty seems to affect you.
In not the only one choosing and feeling happy about a new different way of working, and few have the guts to admit it.
Would be great also that you share your work with us, it's always good to learn with other members and check out what they're doing,
otherwise it may seem that you are just a "Random Nelson" that decided to waste his only 7 posts in this forum trying to be a jerk and start personal fights, and if that's the case then conversation with you is over.
Last edited:
I'm sorry, I don't mean offense by anything I'm posting. I'm not trying to pick on anyone, I just disagree; I'm passionate about music and I have strong opinions. You disagreed with my post, then followed with your list and Abbey Road reference. I took that as you saying that your experience gave your opinion more legitimacy and I was curious about the details to see if it would change my mind.
You are talking about Andrew Scheps right?
No, but I don't like Andrew Scheps; Anyone that helped Red Hot Chili Peppers and Limp Bizkit release records should be held in solitary confinement.
With that said, I learned while in school for AE that I didn't want to be an engineer because it meant working with artists whose music I don't like. I couldn't look past what I think is a bad song(imo) and just "do my job", and I can't help but worry that listening to a bad song over and over 200 times while mixing would infect my own taste and perspective. I want to make music that I think is good, but more importantly I want to get the most pleasure out of the experience while doing it. Where's the fun in working on something for years only to have it show up on someone's feed so they can listen to it for 30 seconds and then go "meh"? Susan Rogers talks about three kinds of musicians:Those who write for fans, those whose write for critics, and those that write for other musicians. I'm the fourth kind: I write for myself...then maybe the other three things in reverse order. Sure, I'll press 100 LPs so I can have it on vinyl because I like physical things. I want people to hear it or I wouldn't release it, but I want the people to hear it whose opinion I value. What's the good of a compliment from someone about your music that knows nothing about music?
Do whatever you think works for you, it doesn't affect me in any way as my honesty seems to affect you.
Again, I'm just having a disagreement/discussion.
In not the only one choosing and feeling happy about a new different way of working, and few have the guts to admit it.
I'm glad you're happy. I'm happy too. I don't think it takes guts to hold the popular opinion.
Would be great also that you share your work with us, it's always good to learn with other members and check out what they're doing...
If you like Andrew Scheps then I hope you don't like it
I have a debut solo record coming out in May so I don't have anything finished I can share and don't want to post anything from it. I'll bounce a few rough sketches of some things I'm working on.
You made the right decision. No professional audio engineer could work with that outlook.
I like interior design. I have firm opinions on what I like and what I don’t like. I would be useless as a professional because I could never meet a broad range of expectations. I can do things that please me but that’s a low bar.
Newmarket
Well-known member
tbh if you start labelling people as lazy etc based on their working practices then it's clearly offensive. I know this seems like "Management Speak' - You seem to prioritise process over outcome'.
Mmmm...you have a point wrt RHCP and LB there tbh
Although I'm not clear on the timeline. I mean Andy Gill produced their debut (I believe there were 'disageements').If you like Andrew Scheps then I hope you don't like it
There you just being rude again for no good reason. You might think it's humorous. fwiw it's just not.
Didn’t realize I was at a cock fight. I’m going to bring it back to the topic: if I’m able to mix analog, I do a hybrid -large brushstrokes with OB, and fine tuned needs are taken care of ITB. Large brushstrokes include API 2448, pultecs, 1176, CL-1B, 160VU, EL-8. I also use eurorack & gtr pedal fx, but commit them as a performance. If I’m mixing ITB, I may process through OB gear too, rather than HW insert. OB I can’t mix without: gtr fx & eurorack.
I totally understand that you are not an Engineer, that have no experience whatsoever in this area , and also that you have no work or works that you can show/share.
It's clear that you have nothing useful to provide to this thread
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
EZ1084EQ NEW BATCH COMING - SEE MY MARCH 27 COMMENT ON PAGE 38- Latest: innercityman
