The overriding factor I see that is consistent in all of Bruce's lessons so far is attention to detail. Working with some of the best musicians around certainly doesn't hurt, but whether everything that's recorded appears on the final product or not (and how each part fits into the whole) seems to be the basic message I get.

All too often, new recordists feel that if there is a part they recorded, it MUST be used. EVEN A GREAT PART MIGHT NOT ALWAYS BEST SERVE THE SONG.

My own personal style is to mute everything but the main vocal when mixing, then bring in the other stuff, one at a time, to see if it adds or takes away from the vocal. It often kills me to hafta mute a great part till later in the song, but sometimes, that's what it takes.

Bruce goes even further, making that great part outstanding.

Some people get so hung up on a part, the song suffers because of it. I hate having the band in during mixdown; the "More Me!!" syndrome takes hold, and the song becomes a collection of solos - during the vocals.

All of the above is meant for discussion.

Harvey,

You make some great points. In the near future I will be doing a mix for my friend's album. I'm playing engineer/producer and I recorded most of the parts for the song. Needless to say, I don't have anything resembling an impartial viewpoint on the song. I'll be rewatching those videos.

One trick is deciding what adds and what takes away. That sounds kind of silly, but in some of my mixing experience, I have found that a part might add some depth and strengthens the song rhythmically, but gets in the way because it is in the same range as another part. The simple solution in that case is to record a similar part in a different register, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that parts are multi-dimensional, and sometimes most of what a part is doing is positive, but one or more aspects of it are negative. How do you decide what to ditch, what to re-record (if possible), and what to try to salvage or fit in with processing (EQ, dynamics, etc.)?

As far as having the band in the studio, I agree that having them in the studio can be extremely difficult (and rarely productive in my experience). It invariably leads to long discussions what the mix should be like (usually with everyone taking the "more me" view). The very process that created the music during rehearsals just doesn't seem to work as well in the studio with the clock ticking and the expense building (maybe the money factor is part of what makes it so difficult).

However, it does seem to me that the band should have some say in what happens with the mix (they did create the music in the first place, after all). Since I'm not in a commercial facility, I have the luxury of getting rough mixes to everyone and getting their input. It's always critical to make sure everyone knows who has the final say, though, so that any conflicts between musician input can be resolved. Does anyone else have a better working method?

BTW, Harvey is a highly respected expert in the audio community. It's an honor to have him contributing to this forum.

quote:

Originally posted by James Jonasson:
BTW, Harvey is a highly respected expert in the audio community. It's an honor to have him contributing to this forum.

Naw,

Here, I'm just another one of Bruce's students, taking the course with everybody else.

harvey, you're the coolest!
I have wanted to drop by the ITR since I first found out that there was such a place near Denton. We recorded with a guy from Reeltime, who has since moved to California, and we were totally screwed. We were getting airplay on the Edge's Local Show with the rough mixes he gave us. He never finished our mixes, and to this day the EDGE only has those rough mixes. We've been slaving away in the year since then and we're finally making some good progress.

Bruce's courses are amazingly helpful. Until now, all i've had was recordingproject.com which is very helpful to a point, but many times the comments are vague and level of expertise is just not the same.

thanks to both of you.

Love it. And it is great to read so much from others with great industry experience. I have a great deal to learn and all of this helps. Thank you all.

James,

First of all, if important parts fight each other because they are in the same range you can pan them to different speakers and hear them clearly.

Secondly, having a band in the studio while mixing is similar to having a new producer in the room. Their input is vital because they KNOW the material, but their perspective may be severely limited. Inexperienced producers and musicians will want to use a sound they "know works" rather than explore other options of enhancing the feeling of a part. Musicians often listen only to themselves rather to how everything works.

Often inexperienced people will fight for themselves rather than for the SONG.

So what to do? I always make two takes. "Take one" gives the client what they want and then "take two" is where I try to give the song what IT wants. Sometimes I can go for "take two" right away, but if I am in a room with a band or producer I will usually NEED the security of knowing I gave them the job they wanted done before I can do my own thing.

I have a very funny story about this that I may turn into a unit for the course.

From what I`ve read of the course so far, this is a gold mine. I was considering taking the online courses at Berklee, but now I think I`m going to wait until I see how my sound will improve from trying out the stuff i pick up here.

And being in a discussion forum with the caliber of people that I´ve seen in here, is equally awesome.

I just discovered all this today, and now I`ve spent the entire day reading and watching.

Bruce, thanks.

Impact.

That great part gets pretty burned out unless its given the right place to stand out.

It really is delightful to work with a group that is song oriented- then I feel less like I have to offset the short-comings of the band's perspective and more like I can really throw down and make the recording the best it can be.

Even if the process from start to finish involves compromises the final product shouldn't sound like one.

I love the larger and different perspective that I'm getting from the BAM Audio Course. *Anything* that helps us (all of us) turn around the dumbing down of music is a good thing. I'm really enjoying it.

-Chris

I've been going to audio forums and websites now for several years to learn whatever I can that I can apply to recording and mixing.

I was pleased to see things at the BAM course that I haven't seen anywhere else. The video in which Bruce demonstrates his use of panning and fader moves for example I found particularly interesting.

Cool to see Harvey Gerst here too.

I am trying to gear the course in a slightly different direction from typical audio courses. I want to cover deliberate application of techniques in order to elicit specific emotional responses as well as where to put the mic.

Mixing is a very deep artform.