mixing to master?
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:05 pm
Hello,
I have a question that has bugged me for a very long time (well 2 questions really)
The other day I part finished a mix I was working on for a blues/contemporary song. I wanted to check the mix on other sources so I took it round to a friends house who has a reasonable stereo to listen on. On first listen I was quite disapointed with what I heard, no mid range and sizzling highs, Nothing like what HARBAL 'looked' like or how it sounded on my monitors. (common problem I know) I then realised he had his stereo set on a preset EQ commonly called 'Rock' and upon inspection I saw what I was hearing in the EQ from the stereo, scooped mids and boosted lows and highs. I then changed to a preset called 'blues' and all of a sudden the mix sounded just as I intended, clear and crisp.
So first question, should I take a stereos preset eq's into account when checking mixes on other sources or should it sound ok no matter what the setting? It feels like I am trying to make it sound good when I fiddle with eq on a stereo, if this makes sence.
The other question is all together different.
I have been reading and watching countless amounts of interviews from famous producers, mix engineers and mastering engineers alike over the last few years and there is always a major dissagreement between mix engineers and mastering engineers concering master stereo buss proccessing during mix down. Countless world famous mix engineers say the use both stereo compression and eq on the final stereo buss, and swear by it, whereas mastering engineers tell us to avoid it like the plauge.
I do understand why they say not to as it limits what they can ultimately achieve in mastering, but if it is used sparingly and tastefully to help achieve a balance in the mix without compromising dynamic range is it really such a sin?
Thanks,
nigel.
I have a question that has bugged me for a very long time (well 2 questions really)
The other day I part finished a mix I was working on for a blues/contemporary song. I wanted to check the mix on other sources so I took it round to a friends house who has a reasonable stereo to listen on. On first listen I was quite disapointed with what I heard, no mid range and sizzling highs, Nothing like what HARBAL 'looked' like or how it sounded on my monitors. (common problem I know) I then realised he had his stereo set on a preset EQ commonly called 'Rock' and upon inspection I saw what I was hearing in the EQ from the stereo, scooped mids and boosted lows and highs. I then changed to a preset called 'blues' and all of a sudden the mix sounded just as I intended, clear and crisp.
So first question, should I take a stereos preset eq's into account when checking mixes on other sources or should it sound ok no matter what the setting? It feels like I am trying to make it sound good when I fiddle with eq on a stereo, if this makes sence.
The other question is all together different.
I have been reading and watching countless amounts of interviews from famous producers, mix engineers and mastering engineers alike over the last few years and there is always a major dissagreement between mix engineers and mastering engineers concering master stereo buss proccessing during mix down. Countless world famous mix engineers say the use both stereo compression and eq on the final stereo buss, and swear by it, whereas mastering engineers tell us to avoid it like the plauge.
I do understand why they say not to as it limits what they can ultimately achieve in mastering, but if it is used sparingly and tastefully to help achieve a balance in the mix without compromising dynamic range is it really such a sin?
Thanks,
nigel.