Mastering Engineers Discuss Dynamics in Mixing

Topic: major dynamic swings on pre-master
From: Marshall Simmons Date: Thursday, July 31, 2003 05:14 AM

Hello–I’m about to send out some mixes to be mastered on a project that has quite a bit of promise… I’ve recorded everything with very little compression to the daw, and i’m finding that as i’m finishing up the mixes, i realize that i’m not using very much compression in the daw. It sounds pretty small at a 75db refrence
level, but bring it up to 95db refrence level and its HUGE. Dynamic impact and lots of space around all the instruments. Just so you know, this is more of a Emo–somewhat space-rock style of music. The difference between peaks and RMS right now is about 15 db. My question is this: Is this ok? I know we have all talked about the lack of dynamic range in recordings nowadays, and thats what i want to avoid, but i’m afraid i’m leaving the mastering engineer too much dynamic range. How i mixed is that i set levels without any compression or eq, listened, and then looked for instruments that poked out to much on transients, or got buried in soft parts… I just used enough compression on those instruments orvocals to keep them from poking out too much or not dissapearing without changing my overall balance. No compressor or limiter on the 2buss.. I guess its late and i’m rambling…I just got back from the session and this is the first group that i’ve done that has a chance of going somewhere…Thoughts and opinions would be greatly appreciated.

Marsh
________________________________________________________________
From: Andreas Balaskas
Date: Thursday, July 31, 2003 05:59 AM
Marshall, there’s never too much dynamic range to have (we can always squash it to death ;-)) Sounds as one of us is going to have fun mastering it! masterlab mastering studios

andreas balaskas
________________________________________________________________
From: Ronny Morris
Date: Thursday, July 31, 2003 07:29 AM

Emo must sound something Eno than.
> My question is this: Is this ok? I know we have all talked about the lack
> of dynamic range in recordings nowadays, and thats what i want to avoid,
> but i’m afraid i’m leaving the mastering engineer too much dynamic range.
I see some rock with -20dB RMS average and orchestra around -25dB or more once in awhile. Lot’s of music at -15dB. There really isn’t a standard on using RMS for perceived levels, as all music is different from one song to the next. Things like dead air breaks, fade ins/outs, long decay sections etc. can give you a lower RMS reading on a song that sounds louder, than one with higher RMS.A fade in from black to -3dB, that occurs in a fast crescendo, will sound louder than a gradual rise in gain from -15 to -3dB. Even though the peaks are thesame and the RMS average is louder on the -15dB to -3dB section.
> How i mixed is that i set levels without any compression or eq, listened,
> and then looked for instruments that poked out to much on transients, or
> got buried in soft parts… I just used enough compression on those
> instruments or vocals to keep them from poking out too much or not
> dissapearing without changing my overall balance.
> No compressor or limiter on the 2buss…
Sounds like you’ve got it sounding good to you. That’s what counts and speaking for myself, it’s by far better to leave “too much dynamic range” in, when going to mastering than not leaving enough. Many will agree that most of the problems come from not having enough dynamic range, these days and wish more people
mixed at your dynamic level. I’m not sure if there is really a thing called “too much dynamic range”, unless you are trying to compete in a genre market and IMHO, that falls under perceived leveling and is best left at the mastering stage.

Ronny Morris RoMo Recording Studios Brunswick, Ga. USA
________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Schmidt
Date: Thursday, July 31, 2003 07:48 AM

I agree with all of the above. Assuming that you can pass on high resolution material, you can never have enough dynamic range in the mix. I’ve had source files come in that had a measured RMS of less than -30 dB (well, on jazz and classical, that is) and there is really no reason against it. An RMS level of -15db is absolutely OK, even if you can only pass on a 16 bit mix.

Robin Schmidt 24-96 Mastering
________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Olhsson
Date: Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:55 PM

On 7/31/03 5:14:11 AM, Marshall Simmons wrote:
>How i mixed is that i set levels without any compression or eq, listened, and then
>looked for instruments that poked out to much on transients, or got buried in soft parts…
>I just used enough compression on those instruments or vocals tokeep them from
>poking out too much or not dissapearing without changing myoverall balance.
The next step is riding the gain in those spots rather than using a compressor. Of course then it’ll sound “vintage” in addition to sounding huge! It’s too bad more people aren’t taking the time to mix the way you just did. In addition to sounding huge, it’ll also
sound the same almost anywhere it gets played.
________________________________________________________________
From: Paul Gold
Date: Thursday, July 31, 2003 10:01 PM

On 7/31/03 12:55:00 PM, Bob Olhsson wrote:
>The next step is riding the gain in those spots rather than using a compressor.
My, my. Spending the time to do it right. What will they think of next. That’s one reason I enjoy live mixing of large and/or acoustic groups. I always ride faders and almost never use compressors. It can sound huge with a powerful high headroom system.

Paul Gold
________________________________________________________________
From: Marshall Simmons
Date: Friday, August 01, 2003 02:19 AM

Thank you all for you wonderful comments… I will definitelytry the hand riding of the levels instead of compressing. So far the only thing really needing compression is the bass and the vocals. I’ve been recording at 24b/44.1k and trying to use minimal and distant miking for almost everything. Drum overheads were a pair of schoeps omnis and and audix d4 for kick. Distorted and clean
guitars were through a AEA r84 ribbon mic and a shure ksm32 ontwo different amps (panned l and r–double tracked) spacey guitar was with a AB schoeps omni setup about 5 feet away from the stereo amp array acoustic guitar was with the R84 about 6 feet back and the vocals were through the R84 preamps were ward beck 460A and a benchmark 400 preamp. I monitor in the farfield with
Paradigm studio reference 40’s (i love those speakers) I don’t have alot of equipment and the DAW definitely leaves something to be desired (M audio delta 66 into nuendo) but i figured that i’d try to keep it simple all the way through to get the best sound i could. I never liked nearfieldmonitoring, and the audio fool in me is used to listening in the far field, so thats what i do when i mix Sorry to ramble again. If yall are interested, when I’m finished I’ll try to
find a place to upload some examples. I could definitely use the advice.

Thanks again Marsh
________________________________________________________________
Conf: GEAR-WHAT’S HOT!/WHAT’S NOT!
From: Robin Schmidt
Date: Friday, August 01, 2003 06:03 AM

And I’d definitely like to hear it … interesting miking… I didn’t know Schoeps were used much in rock music. Please do let me know when it’s finished.

Robin Schmidt 24-96 Mastering
________________________________________________________________

Topic: Monitor Madness!!!!
Conf: GEAR-WHAT’S HOT!/WHAT’S NOT!
From: Aron Gillman
Date: Monday, August 04, 2003 09:24 AM

Now, I do not expect anyone to tell me how to tighten up the bass or how to deal with a compressed stereo mix. But I do have one incredibly hard question which is very daunting… On a scale of one to ten, how much can one fix an unbalanced mix where there is no kick, or the vocal is so sibilant than de-essing ends up removing all the highs along with the top of the snare. When the kick and snare peak 6db with every hit and the low end pumps the woofers before I even touch anything. Will that mix always sound like that mix, only more balanced? It seems that even when I try to use a technique like Bob Katz’s for setting up the compressor to react to those instruments or ranges, it still sounds very similar to me. Don’t get me wrong there is a big overall improvement in the smoothness, but they still sound like they control the dynamic range. It just leaves me feeling like I could have done some thing to fix that.( Do remember I approach a lot of what I do with some of my idiosyncrasies of my mixing background, I’m trying to let some of them go) Is the mix what it is at it’s root??? I only ask
because I do believe that the majority of those who may read this post could probably make some sense of this with a number between 1-10. I knowit most likely depends on whose working on the mastering, but it would very much help me set a standard for myself and what I can expect to achieve. I hope that all makes sense in a way. I feel pretty bad lately for all the mastering
engineers who had to work on some of my mixes before I gained some knowledge as to what I was doing behind a board… I used to compressmy stereo buss like a brick wall… Karma huh???

Thanx again Aron
________________________________________________________________

Topic: that monitor thing…
Conf: GEAR-WHAT’S HOT!/WHAT’S NOT!
From: Bob Katz Date: Monday, August 04, 2003 10:32 AM

Hi, Aron. The art of it is knowing when a mix is so bad that it really can’t be “fixed,” and that anything you do would be a bandaid or make other things much worse, exactly as you have described! I know it’s impossible to describe how to know
in words, and only experience will tell, but I will say that in myyears, if a recording does not sound pretty good to begin with, then any tomfoolery you try will probably result in a tomfooled master. I said “probably” because improbably, once in a while, using tricks such as M/S splits and multiband dynamics processing, it has been possible to turn a sow’s ear into a respectable purse. But don’t expect those kind of magic tricks to work and waste your time over it except as an exercise to learn what you can’t do. We may try to do this, for example, in the context of a “historic” recording that has to be included on an album. Yet there are some
amazing “miracles” you can accomplish. Bass problems, such as a bass sound that is too fat and thick and unclear, can often be improved without hurting the other instruments too much, using M/S and other techniques. A vocalthat is just a little bit under can be brought out, and vice versa. But the overall recording has to have some sonic merit underneath its defects, or it is probably fruitless to proceed.

Bob Katz
________________________________________________________________
Topic: Monitor Madness!!!!
Conf: GEAR-WHAT’S HOT!/WHAT’S NOT!
From: Lynn Fuston Date: Monday, August 04, 2003 11:27 AM

On 8/4/03 9:24:00 AM, Aron Gillman wrote:
>On a scale of one to ten, how much can one fix an unbalanced mix where there………
I have always maintained that a well-balanced mix I can take anywhere. You can do just about anything with it. For instance, I just had mix come in that had substantial low end (80 Hz on down), a big bump in the low mids (3 dB too much in the 175-250
region) and was enormously soft on top (probably about a 6 dB deficiency from 8K on up). But the balance, the mix, was great. I spoke at length with the new client, telling him he obviously was very talented but I thought these universal characteristics of all his mixes seemed to indicate that there were severe issues with his monitoring. I was able to fix the problems and the mixes held up very well. So a well balanced mix with issues is far desirable to a good mix with fatal-flaw problems. The bass/kick ratio is one of those, though that is occasionally remediable with multiband compression. The “no music” syndrome is another, where the rhythm and vocals are hitting hard but the mids, all the music-the keys, guitars, strings- are sucked out. That one is a non starter.

Lynn Fuston 3D Audio Inc
Music Mastering and Mixing
On a scenic hilltop outside of historic Franklin, Tennessee
________________________________________________________________

Also see Mixing Tips and Tricks by Bob Katz