Hello everyone, i need your opinion about this issue i'm struggling with. low-mid range frequencies are unique and pain in the ass at the same time, more than any frequency range.

I want to keep warmth feeling on my mixes and trying to run from harshness. Basically, I am trying to maintain balance on each elements but in the end, I can't observe the mix as objective ears. It sounds warm and balanced but boxy at the same time. I do not know why it is happening. Maybe I made too many harsh mixes or my room acoustic treated like crap or anything else.

Anyway, Is there any moves you do keep balance and clarity?


Ps: If you want to hear what i'm trying to say, i'm dropping the example i've made.

https://clyp.it/epn1odn1

 

Thank you I will try that

 

Huh? Regardless on the material this is your recipe? Jesus christ.

 

I would add one thing: trying about 1 octave cut between 250-500Hz first. That's where the boxiness sound lies. Not by much, just between -1 to -3dB would usually do the trick. The problem is it could be tricky to get that region and lower right in an untreated room.

Oh, and 1 octave slight boost around 2.5kHz on vocals can make them sound more clear + reduce 2kHz on snare = win. This should be done to guitars, or any other sharp sounds in 2kHz region to make vocals more clear and stand out.

 

I have no problems with his post as it is pretty much universal and works great for most of the genres. However, you should try to interpret his advice [and mine] as just a general rule. The actual frequencies could vary a bit indeed, and that's where your ears come into play.

 

i dont think this is bad just try adding more width and n bright n u are fine.

which daw are u using

 

Thank you for your advice. I will try that too. Honestly, I was trying to set frequencies according the fletcher-munson curve. Trying to fix due to hearing thing. It could be frequency collapse i'll try to fix it.

Thank you very much! I am practising by different perspectives. I think hearing sensivity range between frequencies is more important than i thought. I am using Pro Tools 12 btw

 

That is why it sounds so boxy and no shine at all! if i boost after 10k with high q bell it ll be exact be perfect. There is huge difference between robinson-dadson and fletcher-munson around 10k+. This is it i got my answer man thanks!


Actually, I tried a 'good mix' balanced on spectrum meter as close as equal loudness curve. And overall loudness on pro tools meters are goes down through important elements to the less valuable one. Such as Vocal-Drums-Guitars-Synths-Basses (Sorry Bass players). And each individual elements same thing on their own bus too Kick to snare etc.


My scientific-experimental approach to the mix is pretty accurate i think . I will try same aproach with updated loudness curve again tonight and i'll compare it with professional one.

 

Your approach to mixing is interesting. I rather simply trust my ears, comparison with other mixes that I know well, and Voxengo SPAN on default settings. On default settings [and slow] the mix should look relatively flat.

 

I've listened to it and it's actually not bad at all ...really the main thing I note is that the vocals, which is the most important aspect of the song, gets lost in the mix quite easily and almost throughout the whole song

the guitar (and sometimes the epiano) is masking the vox a lot .. in general sounds like it has too much mid freq content.
the first thing id try is panning instruments to broaden and vary the sound stage..
a low shelf to lower that would help vox come out more or getting the guitar to the side instead of mid could also work

also the track lacks a feeling of ambience. right now, it feels like the band is playing in a closet.. it should feel like theyre playing on a sound stage. additional ambience or small room reverb would go a long way towards that.

these should all be subtle changes because the tone of the track is already balanced.. but basically get that separation of vox with the rest of the track to get it to pop out more

 

Bingo.

I respect the countless hours of research put into creating those aforementioned standards (and I will use them, as references), but taking them as gospel just feels wrong to me. We are artists, not scientists. Do what sounds good, even if it feels wrong or a book told you not to do it. Okay, rant over. If you want my advice, I usually get problems in my low mids when my tracks aren't panned well enough. Too many sources occupy those frequencies and if they aren't separated enough they can stack inharmoniously. If you MUST be mono-compatible, use the modern tools that we have at our disposal now such as track un-masking in Neutron and Trackshaper.

Keep it 100 my friends

 

I heard SPAN, it is wonderful spectrum analyzer and i think it is free. I've got the iZotope's Tonal Balance Control. I am checking balance through it with reference mix.


About ear thing; yes, today i will try same song with some console emulation (or something without visual information). Than I will compare two approach together.

Thank you for your sincere comment! Yes a lot of space conflict in some space. I will try your suggestion immediately. I considered SC compression or volume automation during the verses but honestly automation is not my strong suit. Maybe automation gonna effect my work ten times better rather than eq but i feel too lazy for it somehow. But I will rip that off the laziness thing as soon as possible.

I am afraid about too much panning because losing mono compatibility. But i will try your suggested plug-ins as my guidence. It'd be great if you give me your review or opinion about Neutron. I've heard about it but have some doubts about lack of character. iZotope got amazing transperent mastering tools. But i think mixing stage a bit more about adding character to sound. If Neutron ok with adding character, i wil get it asap.

 

For checking for mono compatibility you can also use Voxengo SPAN, or if you like more visual representation Voxengo MSED - it's got a stereo vector scope. In general, keep everything betwen 0-1 in correlometer [0 being pure mono sound]. or within 180 degrees in vector-scope. If some background sounds, like wide strings sometimes go a little above 180 degrees, it doesn't matter. For stereo image correction he's got a Stereo Touch plugin.

btw. these are all free plugins. Aleksey's great gift to us.

 

Last edited: Aug 22, 2020

Perfect! I will download it asap.

 

Sorry, I wrote Stereo Touch instead of MSED, so I edited it, but Stereo Touch goes hand in hand with MSED and SPAN anyway.

Cheers!

 

Here is the update, I read all of your advices one more time and i corrected whole song from scratch. But i have commited one sin; I used Transient Shaper to Bring dynamics instead of compressor. I used compressor when i need to tame too much dynamic range. And I've tried to master it this time with some vintage eq's (like pultec emulations and neve emulations no manley cuz i don't have uad dsp yet)

I used my ears more then visual information (still checked PAZ analyzer few times but not often like i did before.)
I liked it very much, more than first version. I think winner is always ears, not values. (even in distortion sometimes.)

Thank you all for your humility. You are sharing your experiences with people who needs help, like me.

PS: I liked Transient shaper's logic about reverse compression and specially 'sustain' button. It is cleaning out squashed parts like deep noise or unwanted stuff. You can focus on transients much better.

and here is the version 2: https://clyp.it/zs1yddcr

 

What's the blue knob on the waves ssl channel set to by default, 500 Hz? I usually turn this or 250 down for less boxiness.