1) Get something like ApQualizr2, Kirchoff or Pro-Q3.
2) Learn frequencies.
3) Practice, practice, practice.
4) ????????????????????
5) PROFIT!!!1!!!

 

Last edited: Jul 20, 2024 at 12:12 PM

Oh, Claro is not an AI. It's just a very fast "produce" workflow that can stay out of your way while you are working on the production stages of your track. It's a simple 3 band eq when you want it to be. For me, that translates to keeping the flow going, and then the more detailed work when "inspiration" is gone. That price tag would look nicer with 1 less zero on it.

 

The problem is, these settings depend on the genre, the original sound and its context.

Take for instance a pad. It's basically an imitation of an orchestral string section, maybe including woodwinds, depending on the purpose even including brass. It can go from 30Hz to above 13kHz. It can fill any frequency gap but it can also collide with every other instrument.

Impact is mainly a question of dynamics, compressor, limiter, clipper.

A lead synth benefits from a larger freq range when the arrangement is sparse and needs way less when it's fuller. A boost depends on the basic sound and the pitch it's playing in.

A kick may needs a boost at 40Hz and an attenuation at 80Hz or the other way around. Again source-dependend.

You may find specific settings for specific sounds in a specific context, but you'd need to use the exact same sounds in the exact same context to copy and paste these settings.

 

I wonder if that might be my best solution, keeping a lot of the sounds?

I was making dance music for a while and was building on 'evolving templates' that everyone uses in that broad genre. It works for them as a general setup to make small changes... I think that if I've got a bass sound and it works, it probably doesn't need to change much in my synth song sound because that's not the focus. Its the Lead Synths and Vocals really. Its all about the song really and catchiness, so it feels a bit pointless making new sounds every time.

Really interesting observation you made there about the difference in focus between the EQ of other sounds and the dynamic aspect of an Impact.

I think its possible somehow to set these things (I've conquered every other aspect of my disorders with workflow) and I just remembered one outlook that worked for me. I was building 'dimensions' rather than EQ. Somehow that helps to position sounds using EQ. I can focus on position and proximity for some reason...

I wonder if I can hack that to get a balanced mid? My template is already set up off the back of that thinking so that pads sit at the top of the screen to feel the farthest away but I stopped working that way for some reason. Rolling off on that buss will make it always feel distant in the mix as well so I think it can even be set in advance.

 

Yes. If you're for instance using the same kick and the same bass (in (almost) the same key/pitch) it would make it much easier to copy working settings from one song to another.
But you'd also need to use the same amount of sounds, so there won't be a gap suddenly, very similar arrangements and tempo. With higher tempo you not only need to adjust reverb length (delay can be set to tempo) but also EQ (especially for the low end) and compressor timings.
The good thing is, most bands/artists have these so this is not really an obstacle.

 

Then rather than thinking about pre-made EQ templates you should concentrate on arrangement.

A good arrangement tells you where to boost, where to cut, and where to run wild with artistic expression.

 

i can literally hear your ADHD in your songs

 

1. "Boxy" or "air" are the same for all situations and contexts. This is the point. That's why it works.

2. The ability to listen to a mix as a whole is very, very important. The ability to listen to a "zone" of a mix is important in the same extent. They are both important. Don't listen to a mix in whole all the time. Switch from one "regime" of listening to another one and vice versa. When you need it. Learn to make this switch intentionally. "Now I'm doing this".

3. Stop thinking about your brain. Start thinking about music you make.

4. Creativity is partly a tedious technical work. Inspiration is important, especially for the start, but the tediuos technical work is unavoidable.

5. Find a mixing engineer who will make this work for you? Pay him/her and let yourself be completely creative. You don't have to do all this work yourself. May be, you really aren't able to make it yourself. Make only the things you are able to do.

6. Don't overestimate the mixing. There are no perfect mixes. They all are bad in some extent. Even in a good mix you'll find "mistakes" if you want to find them (and if you are searching for them you'll find them even if they don't exist, yes). The question is when to stop. When we listen to music (as just listeners) we don't search for "mistakes". We search for a melody, groove, cool sounds, emotions etc. You listen to your music to find "mistakes" exclusively.

 

Last edited: Jul 20, 2024 at 9:34 AM

@reziduchamp

You defenitely work with arrangement and mixing simultaneously. Try different approach. Make an arrangement, find sounds, create melodies and harmonies, drum parts etc., then export all these to audio stems and start construct your track from them layer by layer. From scaratch.

When you cope with all instruments all the time your troubles are unavoidable.

Or another approach. Mute all instruments and start to unmute them. For example, unmute the kick and the bass, make them sound together as you want. Then unmute the snare. Make the kick, the bass and the snare coherent. Then unmute something else and repeat it until all the parts are unmuted. Unmute first more important parts.

Sometimes it makes sense to delete some parts of an arrangement as they create chaos and make complete mess from the mix. Sometimes less is really better.

 

Lots of people with ADHD make music.

It either all sounds similar (because following templates) or it's pretty unique. Or in between.

I have ADHD. My music is extremely unique. Too unique. It's the kind of music that doesn't make much sense once it gets out of my brain

 

This is hard to explain if you never came across these conditions. I could make a video showing it in action, because quite uniquely I'm a typist with dyslexia, so the words that I type get mixed up in real time and I see something that 50 years ago would be branded as schizophrenia. Its literally one word going into my brain, like CPU level, and by the time it hits either my mouth or my fingers as I'm typing, a different word comes out, completely unrelated...

So what you aren't understanding is how this shit gets mixed up and becomes impossible to work with. If I think about some mess in the mix I might call it all mud, because I can't put my finger on what I'm hearing. It just sounds muddy somehow and I'll use that word across everything. If the clash is actually in the boxy region I've fucked up already.

So the words are useless in practice for me. In some regards I have a high IQ, but in this case, identifying what is mud and what is boxy I'm severely retarded. My IQ is below 70 in some respects... So I'm this fuck up of both intelligent and stupid in parallel... And most people don't believe that this can be possible, so you get all kinds of branding off the back of it. I'm used to it now.

There will be many other people in this forum who have similar issues but haven't identified this yet. I'm a long way down this path of solving this shit. i've put many processes in place to tackle it and this is the one major flaw that I can't tackle in a normal way. 'Just do this' etc, it doesn't work. I'm not being a dick or awkward, this is just a part of my brain that cannot function in a normal way as you expect... So it needs a different way of thinking.

I know this from the experience of setting up my full workflow. The way I see things, if I describe all of it to you, you will tell me that I'm doing everything wrong. 'I need to start with the Drums' or something. It took a LOT of work tackling that shit and its addressed now. My template and my workflow would probably turn your mind inside out trying to rationalize it and you would be adamant that its all wrong. But the facts are that it works for me.

So we're at this point where 'common sense' isn't the answer. It needs a very different way of thinking... I think that general EQ isn't going to work for me. I think that thinking in dimensions is going to be the only solution that will let me balance EQ. As No Avenger said I don't think I can set things in advance from an EQ perspective, but I think I can go back to include part of my old template approach and push things around the mix instead.

I'm guessing you want an explanation for this to rationalize why it works... Instead of focusing on 'mud' where I already know how my brain reacts to that, it gets as ridiculous as changing words to make sure that I'm always on track. The wrong wording for groups in my Template will send me on the wrong path, whereas the right words will not interrupt the flow state and guide my thinking. Its crazy, it probably seems insignificant to you, but its a fact.

So to try and understand how this works, when I focus on the position of a sound, its kind of hacking the system, so that I'm naturally focused on the balance of the mix in relation to that sound. I'm not focused on the 'mud' aspect, I'm focused on its position. I know that cutting highs will push it deeper. Add some reverb, remove the transient, it sits deeper...

I don't know exactly why that works and why all of my disorders don't interfere in the same way. At times we get 'hyper-focus' as opposed to absence of any focus at all. When we get this hyper focus its like 'flow state' but probably on steroids, but you have to find ways to hack that shit.

I was talking about this dimension stuff in a different forum a few years ago, before Dolby came along. I was pretty much told that it wasn't possible to set up 'single Macros' that push things around the mix, but somehow somebody figured that shit out and made it a thing.

I think the questions at this point have to revolve around how to understand the mid stuff and make that sit properly. I seem to have a decent grasp of pushing things around the dimensions (which I'd forgotten was a skill that I have) by abusing transients and EQ, so it makes sense to use what tools I have. The question is how to sit the mid range stuff properly. What tweaks I'll have to make to remove the mud, without referring to it as mud and boxy. 'Box' might work in some respects if I can identify that 'space' (dimension) as being a box, and therefore clashing with the room I want to put it in...

Does that make sense? Its seriously fucked up, but it is what it is and I can only use the tools that I've been given in life. So why not hack the whole system and turn it into a positive somehow?

This is where I say that shouting louder doesn't work. You have to listen to what I'm saying and understand the fucked-uppery to analyze it and find solutions.

I appreciate the effort in helping, but its off track in my case... What you suggest in zoning into certain aspects is written into my process in different ways. I've separated 'Canvas' elements into a single session, because its a different state of mind. I find that if I try to make melodies at the same time the whole thing goes down rabbit holes... So this comes to 'thinking about my brain. That shit has to be tackled in an 'admin' session, then set up in advance so that I do exactly this. Every tool has to be ready to roll in the most efficient way. This stops me losing 'flow state'. If i have to go too deep into a menu I'll spot something else and that's game over... I can't explain how delicate the process is and as soon as I get over confident and think I've got this shit nailed and I can drop the formula shit goes wrong... And the only way to address it is to stop, take reflection and figure out where it went wrong, then write something into the process that tackles it... So this is the thinking for setting up EQ in advance, so that I can't go off the rails... But if that's not going to work, it needs a different solution. Dimensions might be the only thing that works for me.

Yeah even the tedious stuff, Its all separated. I have sessions that are admin, but they are isolated. I've addressed all of this into a system that just works for me. Its tailored to me uniquely. Session 5 is Drums, after doing Melodics and even Canvas stuff. I've identified why it sits here for various reasons.

You can't fix an autistic brain, you just have to accept where it fails and work around it. But step one is to listen to the brain, understand where it fails, why it fails and put processes in place to tackle it. You're kind of on the right lines in your thinking in some ways and I've already put those steps in place.

I think what I might have to do is tweak everything to sit EQ and transient shaping into everything at synth level, then when I add a sound I'll have to shape it into position.

This probably means having a 'Transient Position' Macro ready to turn without thinking, along with an EQ that is labelled for 'Depth'. Its these little trigger words that make all the difference. Then I might need to get deeper into the EQ to shape its position (which means somehow addressing 'mud' without ever referring to it that way). I think this all means that I'm filling up the mix dimensions from the start, whilst not overdoing it as well.

I appreciate all the advice. Some of it might work when balancing the mix, but I think that the solution is to fix it on the way in. If I'm doing some EQ it has to be as little as possible. I'm just not capable of mixing in the traditional way.

 

Ha cheers. Yeah my track about having a way of operating was a load of noises hitting the 4/4 while I set up the mix balance in dimensions, but it was also about having a proper process to tackle the ADHD etc.

Yeah that's why i built my system to tackle that shit. Its not about controlling creativity, its actually about freeing it up. Once you have every tool ready to go and you stick to guidelines that actually work it harnesses the carnage. People will probably tell you that you can't work this way for this and that reason, but you have to understand how your own brain works before you can address what's going wrong. Its just putting steps in place so that when you're jumping around with ideas they get captured, instead of dropping into 'Admin Mode' for 30 minutes while you search for a plate reverb, then spot a flanger that you haven't used for a while, put that on a different sound, two hours later decide that its worse and never come back to looking for the plate that the sound needed... When you know how your brain is going to work you can minimize that shit with systems and menus. If you have 10 Plates installed you need that narrowed down visually to be focused on the most important one or two, to remove choices and keep focus. Then you can ironically completely lose focus and be creative. It sounds backwards to anybody normal but from the inside it makes total sense in my experience.

My 'Structure' session comes after Theme Gen. Its dead simple. Its the most important part of the track, so Lead Synths and Vocals. Its a rough guide of A to B. As long as I keep to that I'm not really overdoing things. Temptation is to start adding things, but it needs saving as 'Session 2 Structure' complete, before saving as 'Session 3 Melodics' and working on those elements. Those small shifts in mindset make a huge difference for me... Even the word isn't a real word, it probably should be 'Melodies' but for some fucked up reason this works for me.

 

My friend, you're waaaaaay overthinking this (and as a neurodivergent person, I completely empathize).

The truth is, all those terms are completely arbitrary. There is some consensus, but still.

For instance, a couple of months ago I attended a workshop with a mastering engineer in one of the biggest mastering studios of France. He said he didn't like to use "scientific" terms when speaking of audio so he used a lot of adjectives and the like.

Here's the problem : even though I've lived in France for almost 20 years now, and speak perfect French, I've learned everything about sound in English. So I was completely clueless every time he used qualitative terms, to the point where he'd say one thing and I'd try to deduce the meaning, only to realize it was the exact opposite of what he meant lol.

If you're not familiar with Dan Worrall, he's an excellent audio teacher on youtube, and he's recently launched an ear training course. It doesn't cost much, and based on the two episodes published so far (including the introduction one) it's not only completely different from anything else available on the market, it seems really promising.

I highly suggest you invest a few bucks per month into his course, and take the time to train your ears. There is no shortcut for becoming good at mixing. While it is possible to produce good sounding tracks with only following templates, they will never be original, and you'll always be stuck with what's readily available, and unable to make informed decisions.

Here's a link :

Good luck

 

Appreciate it, but I've tried ear training before. Doesn't work for me. I could completely nail that after 5 years or whatever but I'd become an engineer, not a songwriter, and end up focused on being anal instead of creative... Its why I separate these processes so that I can snap out of it once the work is done. Anything 'admin' needs isolating...

And then there's the insignificant aspect of learning engineering at this point. AI is pretty much gonna destroy the need to mix our tracks pretty soon. I reckon in 5 years everything I've learned will be worthless ;) Its the wrong move for me.

I set up a load of Macros to do the ear training thing. That got dropped for a reason, no idea what that was, but its probably related to not being able to identify mud, as I explained already.

 

I agree, but do you really think it will only apply to mixing?
Most popular stuff is just people using templates they've seen on tutorials. In my work I often meet young aspiring producers who at 18-19 are able to produce professional sounding house, techno, trap etc. tracks. But they all sound exactly the same because they're just following tutorials and templates.
In 5 years (which is an eternity in AI time) it will be just a matter of typing a word and voila, an entire album or even discography.

So the question is, why bother making anything?

Professional musicians are already losing gigs because young people who don't know shit about music but can use AI are accepting 1/10th of their salary.

People who have the money don't care about human emotions or whatever abstract concept we tell ourselves will never be replicated by AI. They care about maximum profits.

Why would you wanna continue to produce music given the inevitable future ?

Whatever your answer might be, mine is : I do this for me first and foremost. And I wanna learn everything I can about the craft.

 

I just want to complete that tracks that I've already half started to a higher standard now. I hit a standard that I'm happy with for my own taste and now I want that more complete sound.

I think beyond that civilization is fake at this point so fake music will fit perfectly, along with people pretending that they created it (when they hit that 'make me a hit' button)

Yeah I have a back catalogue that I want to finish generally and I want to at least finish a few tracks to a high standard. I don't care about doing all the work. If its a collab I don't care, I just want to hit that general standard. I put enough work in and it feels like there's something there and I can't get it to that standard where I've ever been fully happy.

I'm exhausted at this point. I probably should just quit already.

 

Pretty sure I have ADHD too, I'm hoping to get diagnosed. My brain is too hyperactive to take in and retain knowledge in the present but strangely I find I can recall what I've learned sometimes years later despite not being attentive when I learned it. It's getting worse as I get older, I can barely read books anymore because I forget what I read almost instantly. I really want to try Ritalin or whatever they're using these days.

 

We have local support groups that are voluntary and free. I went a couple of years ago and you just know by chatting to people, listening and seeing where you have the same issues. Its in weird things where people think you're normal but there's clues in there. Its hard to summarize but you just kind of know from that.

Alternatively taking the meds will let you know straight away if you're making music. When mine kicked in the first time I got a tunnel vision and it was hurting my head to do its usual scatty thing. I had no idea I had it. I went for the autism diagnosis, not ADHD and took the meds just to prove it really, so when the tunnel kicked in it was a shock. It kind of nails your focus in place. All the things I can't do with engineering here, I can do that on meds, but the price to health isn't worth it. Taking them as a test probably is if its very limited.

I think the learning is connected to anchoring. With ADHD if you're focused on something else it kind of helps you to learn. So like if there's something on in the background, like gaming, you can listen to something with a much better focus. If you're in a certain part of that game, relevant information seems to get anchored to that location in the game. That's how I experience it and others have similar experiences... But we seem to vary quite a lot. I think personality plays a huge role in that.

For reading books, audiobooks are best for me. I can't read them at all. I've got decent at reading online for some reason. Books don't go in. Audiobooks I can do something else and then I can hear most of the book. I never hear all of it. Stuff like YouTube I'll rewind 5 times and then I can't watch it any more. I get little chunks before my attention drifts and have to rewind the right amount and pick up.

 

Yes man, to me it feels like is mostly a mixing problem. Nothing too serious.
Too much focus everywhere.

IDK if you're into AI, but i think izotope neutron could really help you improve your songs. Mostly level wise, but also EQ wise, and unmasking instruments.
Or you could hire a mixer if you have some money to spare.
Or you could keep working on your mixing skills and asking questions, like you're doing right now.

They are all viable options. You pick what you think is best for you.
cheers!!

 

It's not about notions. It's not words themselves with their notions. It's about feelings and experience. Sensory memory.

So, you may call "red" any thing regardless of its colour? Or you may name a "song" any thing? A refrigerator? A cloud? (I don't mean a metaphor.)

I doubt. Yes, your verbal production is affluent. But it is not schizophrenia. From all that you wrote I clearly see that a song is a song for you. You're not so disordered as you used to think. Even more, we all suffer from something similar from time to time. We all.

You just overthinking it. You "drown" in your mind and loose contact with real things. It's absolutely possible to tame it a bit. Absolutely. Yes, it will require time and efforts. Try to keep silence, free your mind from words. And try to live without them from time to time. Words aren't the reality.

Learn to think about order rather than disorder. Learn to think about health rather than illness. For me, this helps.