| Author
|
The Mother of all Mixing Techniques Thread
|
HaKa
HaKa
Started Topics :
106
Posts :
269
Posted : May 19, 2008 17:15:59
|
so here all the tecniques, but im talking of mixing a final track, not to dj!
  Searching for new Sounds
www.myspace.com/hakastyle |
|
|
|
Tomos
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
84
Posts :
981
Posted : May 19, 2008 18:04
|
After learning the essential mixing tools (Eq, compression, reverb etc.) and your basic mixing methods (pan, voume) there is nothing left to do except practice.
When you are learning to beatmatch, one day it just mentally 'clicks' and you can hear which song is too slow or too fast in different ears. You are training your brain with a new skill.
The same applies in mixing, even if you know what you're doing, you will still improve over time because you learn to better understand what to change and what you want to achieve.
That's the way I see it. Everyone has their own individual technique they develop. Formulas and tutorials about about 10% of the method. The only thing that works to improve is practice. |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : May 19, 2008 18:23
|
http://members.tripod.com/~Pullpud/mixing.html
Just googel´d that one! you can find lots of info on mixing on the net..
a good book could be
"The art of mixing"
I got a question for you, Do you normalize all your tracks after you exported them? i have began to do that and i find it to be good, gives more room to mix with the faders.. any inputs on this? |
|
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : May 19, 2008 20:14
|
|
see things like the track should not need a mixing at the end or just for fixing few things ,not really a good advice but it can help . |
|
|
|
dendy(ray_subject)
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
19
Posted : May 19, 2008 22:42
|
|
Alex Roudos
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
411
Posted : May 19, 2008 22:57
|
Quote:
|
I got a question for you, Do you normalize all your tracks after you exported them? i have began to do that and i find it to be good, gives more room to mix with the faders.. any inputs on this?
|
|
Hey Freeflow, can you make it a bit clearer? What do you mean by "more room to mix with the faders"? I can only think of Dj mixing from the way you put it. But i don't get the "more room" thingy....
A friend told me once that the biggest mistake we make is that we believe we live, when in reality we are sleeping in the waiting room of life. |
|
|
|
Psytracked
Inactive User
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
424
Posted : May 20, 2008 09:20
|
|
If you normalize you are effectively removing headroom from your mix session and adding a layer of unnecessary processing.
http://www.whatacunt.co.uk/ |
|
|
|
dendy(ray_subject)
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
19
Posted : May 20, 2008 11:01
|
normalizing is good.. because when you put your music to 16bit/44khz (cd quality), and you have for example the highest peak at -5db (because it's not normalised), then effective bitrate of you track will less than 16bit.. plus 16bit sampling is not linear, so at upper levels of gain (near 0dB) are density of quantisation higher than on lower.. in onther words, not-normalised track in quiet parts (for example parts with only some pads, fx, without beat and bassline), is then running effectively for example only at 10bits ..
that's the one of main reason why is important normalize finalised track to 0db (or better to -0.3dB based on redbook standard) - to use maximum of bitrate bandwich of CD quality ...
nomalising is not important only during you are running on 24bit (or 32bit).. but when we going down to 16bit, normalising is VERY important thing... so best is make all processing/mastering at 24/32bit, then normalise it to max, then resample it to 16bit ...
--
my music ::: http://raysubject.dendy.sk :::
--
ON_BOARD ::: SNOW/BLOFELD/NORDRACK2/DSI_EVOLVER
-- |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : May 20, 2008 11:22
|
Hello guys!
Alex Roudos -
Im talking about when you export singel tracks like, baseline, pads, leads, ect ect...
i normalize them to get more room to make fader adjustments, instead of having to pull the faders in the roof i can now use them to mix with. in another case maybe the recorded/exported audio file is very low in volume then all i can do with the fader is to pull it up, or put a limiter on it and boost the signal, what i wonderd was if it was a better idea to normalize to get a stronger signal?
of course i could see that the singel tracks are recorded as hot as possible and then maybe not have to normalize, but as i talk about computer made sounds i wont introduce more noise as i would with mic recorded sounds, in the later case its more important to record hot..
Dendy - okej, good to know, should i normalize before processing with EQ, compressors, stereo widers and limiter? or do you mean after all processing?
Psytracked - im talking about singel tracks, not a complete track.. but now Dendy told us that its wise to do it on a final track...
|
|
|
|
Alex Roudos
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
411
Posted : May 20, 2008 11:30
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-20 11:01, dendy(ray_subject) wrote:
normalizing is good.. because when you put your music to 16bit/44khz (cd quality), and you have for example the highest peak at -5db (because it's not normalised), then effective bitrate of you track will less than 16bit.. plus 16bit sampling is not linear, so at upper levels of gain (near 0dB) are density of quantisation higher than on lower.. in onther words, not-normalised track in quiet parts (for example parts with only some pads, fx, without beat and bassline), is then running effectively for example only at 10bits ..
that's the one of main reason why is important normalize finalised track to 0db (or better to -0.3dB based on redbook standard) - to use maximum of bitrate bandwich of CD quality ...
nomalising is not important only during you are running on 24bit (or 32bit).. but when we going down to 16bit, normalising is VERY important thing... so best is make all processing/mastering at 24/32bit, then normalise it to max, then resample it to 16bit ...
|
|
Hey dendy you are totally confused here  What you talk about is called dithering and not normalizing. Normalizing has absolutely nothing to do with the bit-depth.
Personally, i see no reason for normalizing a bounced stereo mix unless someone wants to increase just the volume of the track. And again if that's the objective the best way would be to just add some gain/volume which would be applied equally all over the track.
I was using the normalize function only to bring up the volume of individual rendered tracks after bouncing them into the project i was working. I have stopped using it and recommending it as i wasn't getting an even increase on volume. Using the change gain/volume function is far more efficient for me.
A friend told me once that the biggest mistake we make is that we believe we live, when in reality we are sleeping in the waiting room of life. |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : May 20, 2008 11:48
|
Okej! Maybe gain would work just as good or better.
i will try to gain each individual tracks now instead of normalize and see if it works well..
Thanks
|
|
|
|
dendy(ray_subject)
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
19
Posted : May 20, 2008 11:56
|
freelow: after all, but before downsampling to 16bit.. and to the individual tracks - if you bounce some track to 16bit wav and you have max peak on this track for example at -6dB, then it doesn't matter if you normalize it or if you move slider at mix - result is same .. better is set track settings BEFORE bouncing that you after bouncing get wav file with highest possible peak withou clipping ..
...of course if you're working at 24bit resolution and youre bouncing track to 24bit wav, you absolutely doesn't need take a care about level, if it's not -40dB and so on ;-) because at 24 but is quantisation density high enough
alex: i know what is dithering and what is normalizing... normalizing has not diretly something with bit dept but indirectly yes...
check this image
http://grahammitchell.com/writings/digital_wave.png
when we are in 16 bit, we have 2^16 (from 32767 to -32768) sample points at vertical axis... each this points represents some volume value, from -oo to 0dB... highest or lowest point means 0dB ... but when you track isn't normalised, when for example highest peak is at -4dB, the sample points used for you track are for example only from 24000 to -24000 ... so effectively your track is using only for exampple 14 bits out of maximum 16 bit sampling area ...
what is important is, that on lower sampling bites is higher "hole" between them, so there is also higher quantisation error ...
dithering is something other - dithering is method to remove quatisation noise... but normalising is method to get your track using maximum posible dynamic range of 16 bit sampling area...
other thing - try make 128bit mp3 from two wavs - one normalised at 0dB and one with peak for example at -6dB... then play them so they will sounds same volume - you will see even more mp3 artifacts and distortions on wav which was at -6dB .. believe me or try it ;-)
--
my music ::: http://raysubject.dendy.sk :::
--
ON_BOARD ::: SNOW/BLOFELD/NORDRACK2/DSI_EVOLVER
-- |
|
|
|
Alex Roudos
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
411
Posted : May 20, 2008 12:17
|
Ok fair enough, but i have to admit that i've never heard or read anything about any association between normalizing and bit depth, direct or indirect.
Why anyone would bounce a single track that's 16bit native to 24bit? 24bit depth resolution is associated with recording only as this is the maximum resolution that hardware can support, thus giving maximum recording quality.
Exporting the final mix in 32bit float is another thing as it gives almost infinite headroom while it preserves all the details and dynamics processing by the vst fx used on the project, which is most important for the mastering stage.
In any case, i don't see normalize anywhere in the process, but that's my way of doing things.
A friend told me once that the biggest mistake we make is that we believe we live, when in reality we are sleeping in the waiting room of life. |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : May 20, 2008 12:22
|
|
Dendy - nice music man, i checked your homepage!
|
|
|
|
dendy(ray_subject)
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
19
Posted : May 20, 2008 14:19
|
|
