Muff's Modules & More

[tragedybysyntax]

Okay so... my album is done but I"m sitting here trying to scrape money together to pay for mixing and it's pissing me off. The more I think about it.... my mixes sound pretty fucking good I think, maybe a lil polishing but overall... nice. So there is a local place that rents some badass gear.

www.auraphic.com

Might just rent an entire mixdown setup for 4 or 5 days and just do it myself. Question is.... Stems. Anybody have tricks for mixing down to analog? I'd ask mr. parasitk but he's on tour. I'm just kinda lost on what to group with with for submixing... or tricks. Thanks guys! Most likely be bouncing down to a CDR.

[tuj]

What exactly are your questions? What kind of music?

Usually your submixes will be drums for sure, and maybe a couple others depending on your type of music. Probably some type of 'up front' group that would represent the vocals or main synth line.

Getting the mix right is important, because there is only so much you can do with mastering. That said, if your mix is sounding good, especially if you are demo'ing it on A LOT of different equipment (hi-end, car stereos, computer speakers, headphones), then you might not need much more.

[criticalmonkey]

stems for mixes are generally done in 2 fashions
1 is family - i.e drums and percussion
2 is freq dependent, and or attack transient dependent - pending the musical styles -
and generally keeping important lead parts isolated

primarily for the purpose of grouping things that will require similar dynamic or eq processing and spatial placement, depth of field etc.

if your daw mix is pretty good - maybe you should have a mastering engineer take a shot at a track and see if that will get you where you want to be
proper mastering can do a lot for a good mix and generally not that expensive

[tragedybysyntax]

Well... I could rent ALOT of gear for about $450 for 4 days vs. go to a studio up north and drop about 200 for roughly each song which equals out to.... 1500$ ish if all the tracks take the same amount to mix up there. I think I could polish off everything at my house by pulling off a hard long weekend.

Just trying to figure out what to buss out in groups and etc.... Also trying to decide if I want to just mix down to stereo via CD-R or a 2nd Computer.

I think my low end could use some tightening up and glue. More character on a few things like percussion and guitars. Add some hair!

Neve 8816 would be the summing mixer and an Apogee DA16x for the converter along with my benchmark DAC1.

[tuj]

glue? hair? That sounds like compressors and limiters and eq to me (ie. mastering).

[tragedybysyntax]

tuj, exactly. But on individual tracks.... One thing I need first is a few more bass traps for damn sure, lol.

[tuj]

Well if it helps, I tend to submix to three groups; a main which is all the up-front elements of the track, usually that are not playing at the same time, a second group for more background elements, and a third group for the drums. On the drums group I will *always* strap some kind of compressor over the submix. Usually I will do the same with the other groups as well, so each one has a different compressor with appropriate settings. Then I strap another compressor across the entire mix for 'glue' along with a brickwall limiter at the end of the chain. I usually keep EQ at the individual track level with maybe a touch over the whole mix. With drums, is usually important to keep your bass-heavy elements in the center of the sound-stage. You can use reverb to enhance the stereo spread still keeping the bass-heavy center-stage.

[parasitk]

I haven't left yet!

Stems are different from submix busses. I'm assuming you don't actually want to mix stems. You're mixing to stereo, and providing the mastering engineer with a stereo mix, correct?

You'll probably want a at least drum buss, maybe one for guitars, background/stacked vocals... whatever helps organize your mix or what you'd want to compress together. I tend to organize by family, but sometimes I will do additional busses that are more frequency dependent.

Seriously it depends on the song, the instruments used, etc etc - it's almost impossible to "sum up" or put into bite size instructions.

Also, unless you're mixing to tape, I'd highly recommend mixing into a second computer at either 88.2 or 96k + 24 bit. Capture everything the analog mix is giving you and let the mastering engineer dither/SRC it down to mere 44.1/16 bit.

I'd recommend using a mix buss compressor, but if you've never done it, go easy. Don't use it as a faux mastering limiter!

It's too late to fix it in tracking, so fix it in the mix. DON'T rely on the mastering engineer to fix, just enhance and polish - nips and tucks that tie the entire album together. Get your mix sounding the best you possibly can, even if it kills you.

[tuj]

[parasitk]

Well at least in the circles I run, stems refer to multiple bounced out files. Yeah, they tend to be submixes, and they are usually bounced out from busses.

Here, wikipedia actually articulates it better than I can:

[tuj]

Right, I mean, it makes the most sense (at least to me) to mix via groups (submixes) to a final two-track mix, and then if you have a need to save the separate sub-mix (ie. the stem at that point), use the respective group and record it.

Also from da wiki: "Stems are also sometimes referred to as submixes, subgroups, or busses."

Anyway, it doesn't matter, what matters is that you want to group individual tracks, process those groups. Then I'm not sure if the OP wants to record the 'stems' or the whole two-track mix.

My larger point is always make sure if you are mixing a submix that you constantly keep checking it in the context of the main mix.

[parasitk]

Well I don't want to get caught up too much in semantics (I know I brought it up), but I consider stems an end result, and not something that occurs during mixing - those I'd call submixes, subgroups, or busses.

Also I'd say mixing stems for a mastering engineer is a bad idea. Blurs the line between mixing and mastering in a bad way, IMO.

[tuj]

[Babaluma]

i agree with most of what's being said here. try to do the mixing yourself, you'll gain experience and save money. make it sound the best you can and then pass it on to the mastering engineer for the cherry on top. i love working on mixes that already sound amazing, and i hate having to do "salvage jobs".

i have one client who likes to send me stems, but to be honest, i much prefer working on a stereo mix, for the reasons quoted by parasitk above.

[Arturo00]

Dang. I'd love to help you out. As in, I'd love to mix your album. Or at least help...

[tragedybysyntax]

As far as what to run it in as to the 2nd computer... how is it that if I have a 48k session... that going to 88 or 96k would help? It's not going to add bits that weren't recorded right? I talked to a mastering engineer and he told me 48k is fine to dither from. Opinions?

[tuj]

[mojopin]

If you are happy with the mixes then just get someone to master it. Why not post a clip and let us decide for you? I personally master my own material. Everything is overrated these days. diy for me.

[mojopin]

[Babaluma]

just try and keep to the original sample rate you started with. it doesn't matter so much what that sample rate is (as long as it's at least 44kHz), more that you SRC as little as possible.

the best sounding mixes i receive for mastering have been tracked and mixed at 32bit floating point, 96kHz. most of the mixes i get are 24 bit 44kHz, this is fine for mastering too.

if you finish a mix to your satisfaction, i'd be happy to master it for free, so you could see if it's worth it for you?